Thursday, March 21st, 2013

7. ... Is ALL boy

Thursday, March 21st, 2013 07:23 am
basildestiny: (Sheppard)
I find this statement silly. Because I find it is said when the baby is doing something non-gender specific. Like running around or exploring. There is nothing all boy or girl about exploring. That's all baby. And here's the thing. I was a tomboy. I had my baby dolls, but I also spent a lot of time playing in the dirt when I was growing up.

Secondly, I need to stop getting so caught up in other blogs and comments. This is likely not a reference to you if you are reading it. I get frustrated with illogical thought processes. How do they come to that conclusion? Or why are they so lazy to believe that? Also the idea that you read some trivia some place somewhere once upon a time and that makes you an expert on the subject. It's one thing to interject with "Well I heard ..." but don't come off as an expert when you're simply being contradictory. Too many people these days want to "debate" by being contradictory. They don't have any reason for why they believe what they believe. They couldn't take the opposing viewpoint as an intellectual exploration. Yet, they will argue for the last word, automatically gainsaying what the other is saying without even understanding what is being said. Or even worse, changing the subject to something else entirely because there's no way to win from the stance they have taken. I find that so frustrating. You can't debate with someone in an intellectual pursuit if the other person is changing the subject.

Unrelatedly, or perhaps relatedly, I cannot stand NewsRoom. Firstly, I feel like I've already seen this show. It was called Sports Night. Or, it was called The West Wing. I just find it so dishonest, so sanctimonious and so pompous. Aaron Sorkin is an excellent writer. He knows just how to put a show together. He gets the emotion, the music, the drama, the characters. It's perfect. I knew from the moment it started up and said Aaron Sorkin that I would like it. The format is addicting. But at it's core, it takes things that didn't happen and pretends that's how things are, keeping things as close to reality as possible except for some huge glaring detail and then wanting the audience to get on board with the greater thing in reality based on this fictional account.

For example, this (http://youtu.be/wTjMqda19wk) is the first episode of the show (and pardon the language. They gotta keep it real, ya know). It starts based on fact, but it quickly becomes skewed by emotion. In this case, the emotion that he's getting older and younger generations can't possibly understand what it is that he grew up appreciating. It's very "You whippersnappers" without the cane shaking, but lots of emotional music. It's such a globalist perspective to say we are not the greatest country anymore. And sure, it makes Australians upset when we say it. Canadians and Belgiums, too. But I don't care. If I were from Australia, maybe I'd have great pride in being Australian, but I'm not. And it's not wrong to have pride in your own country. Australians, Canadians and Belgiums, be proud of your heritage of being a free country! Yet he puts it out there. And it makes sense for his character because he is the one character in that universe who can make things right by standing up and becoming one of those great newscasters, but for the rest of us? Well, we're just the single most Worst. Generation. Ever.

The truth is that this scene would never take place because anyone is just going to take "the NY Mets" as an answer and move along. And maybe, unlike the entire setup leads us to believe, they are having a very serious discussion and his non-answer is completely unacceptable. Surely, his conciliatory answer about the Declaration of Independence would suffice. The other guy got off with the answer "freedom and freedom." It's a plot device.

Meanwhile, actual real news broadcasters on the mainstream media network CNN are doing things like this. http://www.glennbeck.com/2013/03/20/cnn%E2%80%99s-erin-burnett-destroys-her-last-shred-of-credibility-with-blatant-smear-of-glenn-beck/ And in case you don't feel like reading it, the cut and dry is that she took CNN owned footage of Glenn Beck when he worked for the network and chopped up one interview to make it look like it was from his time on Fox or recent footage from The Blaze. To make it look like he's said that Obama is the Anti-Christ or otherwise Satan on more than one serious occasion. Worse is that the footage is taken from an interview in which he is disagreeing that Obama is either of those. Isn't there other things to report? Aren't there plenty of other things to say about Glenn Beck that are true? Report on the number of times he cries on television. Or here's an idea, find something newsworthy that isn't a smear. But it's ok. You can't expect much from the Worst. Generation. Ever.

Ironically, I was going to write about how I don't think I can blog because I never have much to say on a topic!

October 2013

S M T W T F S
  12 345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags