Here is our sad candy bowl at our front desk -



This is where I harass y'all from during the weekdays - and yes I tend to work with the natural light only.



Cheers mateys -

Joshy Wishy Washy

It really is that simple - if you read celeb magazines you are rotting your brain and are partially responsible for the death of Princess Diana, IMO. Quite literally, paparazzi and the photos that are the fuel for this lower rung on our social ladder are the death of people sometimes.

Yahoo has a celeb site called, hilariously enough, OMG! - omg.yahoo.com. Not that I'm advertising it or anything - you know better coming from me. The implication is that by reading this tripe you are attempting to live vicariously through these celebrities, or perhaps to simply trash the celebs out of jealousy or other petty bullshit. Or perhaps to get fashion tips. Here's a tip for you - oversized sunglasses are fucking ugly on chicks - don't wear them. We are suspicious that you are covering your face for, sadly, a good reason. Stop perpetuating this utterly sad reality... make friends, go get laid, have your own story for crying out loud. Its not that fucking hard!

Anyway, lets have some fun, shall we?

OMG! Here is Courtney Love, looking like a bag lady and bumming a light from, ironically enough, a paparazzo. Not that Courtney Love has *ever* looked like anything but a bag lady.



OMG! Its Justin Timberlake and he's about to pump his own gas!



OMG! Its Britney Spears and, like omg, isn't she so fat?



OMG! Its David Beckham, the single most recognizable face on earth, unless you live under a rock, waiting in line at a coffee shop! You mean to say that he doesn't have some lackey run in for his latte? Oh, and isn't he like, omg, steaming hot? (Tee Hee, forgive the atrocious coffee pun, but it fit in with the absurd nature of these photographs)



No wonder people stereotype Americans as bubbleheads, full of our own shit and know nothing (nor care much) about the world. Given the popularity of this kind of cultural dookie, how could we defend ourselves from such a comment?

Whats this - you didn't realize that there were a plethora of polls and debates going on for the presidential election next year? Don't worry - a vast majority of the nation is still asleep on this fact as well. I'm not particularly sure why polls and debates started so early this time around, and to be honest I don't really care. Ultimately, since this has been going on for months now, NONE of what has been going on politically has been compelling on any meaningful level. Democrats have been at this for several months, and nothing has changed. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have raised millions of dollars and in fact Democrats have outraised Republicans to the tune of $100 million - this to me is staggering and reflects the fact that a) Democrats are very committed to winning in '08, and b) Republicans are completely uninterested in the short list of candidates they are left with. Republicans have been left wanting - largely the party faithful has shown lukewarm interest in the candidates presented to them. I think the guy will be Fred Thompson and you'll see a massive numbers spike in polls and donations received.

A couple days ago CNN hosted a Democratic Party debate with the assistance of YouTube, which I think is an interesting spin on how to take questions. The cynical side of me cannot ignore that in the end these debates always end up the same - the questions are filtered, the candidates won't answer questions directly and as a result nobody learns anything new about the candidates that would help voters make a decision. I'm going to illustrate to you why these debates are useless regardless of the method of asking the question. Watch -



This is a textbook example of what I hate about politicians. When she is asked about the definition of liberal the first few words out of her mouth are straight up, unfiltered bullshit, like taking 3 warm shots of Crown Royal with no chaser. Mrs. Clinton is definitely not alone - all politicians do this regardless of party and I could have easily used a different example. What the fuck is she talking about - "liberal" used to mean the opposite of big government and individual freedom? Did she even think through what she was saying or does she actually believe that liberals used to be more like Republicans? In other words, she answered the question but in doing so used flowery and meaningless language. Following that, some guy with no chance in hell of winning takes a pot shot at Barack Obama, and Obama responds in kind.

I have to ask again - how does any of this help voters make a better decision about who to pick? How relevant of a question was this to ask anyway? This is probably the most important presidential election of the past 35-40 years and this is the type of question that CNN chose to ask the candidates? Another question that boggled my mind - are African Americans going to receive reparations for slavery? First of all, the answer to that question is obvious - no. Secondly, this sort of question is by no means representative of the most important issues of the day. By the way, it was noted that not ONE question regarding how to handle illegal immigration passed through CNN's filter. When the questions are atrocious and the answers are even worse, who cares how "innovative" the questions are delivered? Again, its because these debates are ultimately meaningless. What about asking Democratic candidates about the ramifications of pulling out of Iraq ASAP, something the influential activists and liberals everywhere are begging for? None of the Democrats will actually answer that question.

It is intriguing to me that in passing recently Mr. Edwards suggested cornering out the weaker opposition to Mrs. Clinton. Hey John, YOU are the weaker opposition. Mr. Edwards' main topic is poverty, aka the class divide known as "the two Americas" that most observers are very familiar with, since it was the exact same topic that lost him the nomination in '04. The problems Edwards faces are twofold - a) he's a fabulously rich guy talking about poverty, and b) his own vanity, which was best captured in the following video -

• in my best blatantly gay voice* - Just tease it a little, tease it!

Stuff like this is incredibly damaging to a politicians prospects. Coupled with the news about how much his haircuts cost, he has absolutely no credibility with the people he is trying to woo for votes. Granted, although rich people are completely oblivious to the needs of the poor, I don't think it should preclude them from shining a light on the issue. RFK and FDR are two examples of rich guys that had credibility with the poor. Unfortunately, John Edwards is no RFK or FDR. To his credit, as a wealthy liberal that lives an astoundingly wasteful lifestyle, he isn't preaching to us about lifestyle changes to curb global warming.

At the moment, Democratic politics are dominated by a cult of personality, obsession with polling results and the desire to see Bush out office, none of which make compelling reasons to vote for a candidate. At the moment, and I can't believe I'm saying this, the only Democrat making any sense at all is actually Joe Biden, one of the most entrenched blowhard Washington insiders in the Senate. Granted, all politicans are basically the same, but Biden, in my view, is the straightest talker and the most level headed. A few years ago Biden suggested what in essence would be a "United States of Iraq" with subregions created based on ethnicity. How badly he was poo-pooed at the time - as time passes by he is looking wiser and wiser.

Get involved - voter apathy, in my opinion anyway, is a mockery of a basic freedom that many in the world don't individually hold. Go get information on the candidates by checking out their web sites, reading their ideas, finding out how they vote on issues that are important to you. Just don't expect to learn much from debates until the nominees are chosen.

Here is a picture of me - complete with as close to aviators as the Simpson character generator gets.



Pale emo guy -



A couple goofy looking guys -





And my interpretation of Hillary Clinton!

Seriously - it can't get any better than this.





A puppy born with a patch of fur in the shape of a heart! This little fella is a baby chihuahua from northern Japan.

(e:imk2) loves hotel rooms so I wanted to post this for her, but I think this should get some general interest.

Do you ever feel the need to relive the heady, halcyon days of the German Democratic Republic and the Stasi? Have you ever wanted to sleep in a drab, suffocating, depressing and somewhat prisonlike room representative of typical late 80's East German apartments with portraits of guys such as this over your bed?



Erich Honecker, Grand Poobah of German Communists

Well, my friends, your dream can be a reality. The next time you stop in Berlin, stay at the Ostel hotel - - and you and your comrades will not be disappointed. East Germany had the biggest economy of the Warsaw Pact nations, which is sort of like saying that they were the biggest turd in a toilet full of shit. The typical accomodations were spartan (very polite way of putting it but accurate) at the time and have been lovingly recreated for your enjoyment. Check this out - there is something disturbing yet inherently awesome with this concept. There are more pictures at the Ostel website as well, if you're curiosity simply can't be contained.



For about $80 you can stay in the Stasi suite, which is complete with period bugging devices. I wonder if they artificially filter television broadcasts to eliminate "immoral and subversive" content to heighten the realism.



The outside of the hotel. You won't see Soviet-era block housing architecture this legit anywhere east of the Balkans - except for Berlin! My lord this picture is depressing.



For a little more than $50 a night you get something more like this.



Here is an example of a double bed (sort of, two small beds combined) in a brightly patterned room with a portrait of a former East German Prime Minister.



Examples of authentic commie goodies that the hotel supplies, just in case you miss that Soviet-imported fun when you were a kid.

Another room that the hotel supplies is known as the "Pioneer Camp" - it simply has to be seen to be believed and I'd recommend going to the website to see it, and more pictures of all of the rooms for that matter. Bunk beds, baby, in a communal style setting with bananas in the ashtray, similarly drab appointments and an artificial feeling that life will never get better. Only 9 euros per person - of course, this isn't really East Germany anymore so fully expect your typical European nickeling and diming with respect to linens, room cleaning and food charges. They love "the struggle" but not that much - no discounts or mercy for the proletariat.

I just found out that two friends of mine, formerly of L.A. but now of San Fransisco, will be in town this week! I'm really jazzed up and thrilled about this. They are both good souls, are really mellow and are very gracious and welcoming people. Jack Kerouac would have referred to them as "bhikkus." I spent the weekend with them at their apartment in L.A. last year and had a fabulous time smoking dope, checking out Malibu and Venice, visiting Amoeba Music and just generally catching up with an old friend and his other half. Now is my time to repay their kindness and I can't wait.

I know that this seems weird but I'm happy!

EDIT: I couldn't leave this one out. Have you ever wanted to disappear for a while? Why not participate in a simulated trip to Mars! Check out this article - its worth it.

I present to you the next big thing in the GOP, another member of the largest familial political dynasty since the Kennedys - George P. Bush.



No joking. He's half-Mexican, very handsome, connected (the son of Jeb, who most people consider to be the more capable Bush brother, which is a shame) and is the grandson of a migrant worker. This is the sort of candidate the Democrats would die to have in 10 years. At the moment George P. Bush is training as an intelligence officer in the Naval Reserve and has stated that he wants to wait 10 years before entering politics. When he does things will get interesting.

Presidential Politics - A Highly Scientific Statistical Analysis

For those of you who haven't been watching (and lets be honest, who is really watching these debates anyway) the two main political parties have been conducting debates over the past couple months. For most people this is extremely early to be thinking about debates... except for Democrats, for whom time until 1/20/09 moves as slow as molasses in a squeeze bottle.

The main candidates, or more accurately, the only ones that are going to even matter a year from now, are as follows. On the Democratic side you have Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards. On the GOP side you have Rudy Giuliani, John McCain and very soon, Fred Thompson. In the following paragraphs I'm going to share with you my pre-pre-pre-pre election analysis on the situation and how I think things are going to go for the various candidates. Keep in mind - Howard Dean was actually feasible for a while in '04 so anything could happen.

Generally speaking, Barack Obama has the support of what I call the "Volvo and Chardonnay" liberal elites, while in a fit of irony Hillary Clinton has the support of blacks and the Hollywood crowd... although Barack is whittling away at that. John Edwards is stuck, in all honesty, with taking votes away from the other two as a way of gaining ground and is still talking about his "two Americas" platform. Although its still a year and a half out, I don't see anyone knocking down the Clinton political machine. Take a guess where my vote won't be going!

On the GOP side, its a little more interesting because the hero to the conservative base hasn't even declared his candidacy yet. There are some rules within the GOP if you want to run for President - you must have the support of the conservatives and you must be against abortion. Without both you cannot get the nomination despite how strong you are on other issues. The conservatives have been waiting for somebody to get behind because frankly, Giuliani is too liberal on social issues and they are pissed at McCain for what they perceive as bad decision making and cooperating with "the enemy." This is why Fred Thompson is statistically tied with Giuliani despite not having declared yet. Fred Thompson is considered to be more reliably conservative, is well known because of his acting on Law and Order, has previous experience in the Senate, has consulted in the past and is a member of the influential Council on Foreign Relations. Another interesting twist - he used to be a lobbyist. In the end I believe that its a two-horse race between Thompson and Giuliani, and things aren't as clear cut on the GOP side so I wouldn't even begin to try to make a stab at who will win the nomination. I think it will depend heavily on whether or not Giuliani can placate enough conservatives and secure enough independant centrist types to make up the gap.

The Rating System

Putting it terribly simply, voters categorize candidates based on how close they align themselves with the candidates philospohy, how attractive a candidate is and where they stand on hot button issues. So, I went ahead and scaled things down a bit. After all, its still early.

The Infamous Gay-dar

Toleration of sexual preference is a litmus test. For the Dems, if you ain't lib then you are glib. For the GOP, stance on abortion really is the standard. Nevertheless, here is my analysis.



As you can see the Democrats are fabulous. John Edwards, in green, gets a little limp towards the end because he supports "civil unions" and not "marriage." What about the GOP?



Fred Thompson, in blue, is holding it down for the "reich" wing sexually, if you ask liberals. Both Giuliani and McCain are moderate and generally don't have a problem with gay people, but eventually diverge because Giuliani is considered to be somewhat fabulous.

The Sexy Factor

We are superficial - its part of the American mystique. How do the two parties stack up?



Hillary in silk make voters vomit, although considering how prolific Slick Willy is and was, I find it hard to believe that he would have married someone who didn't at least have a nice ass when she was younger. Still though, nothing can save Hillary from time, gravity and unfavorable stage lighting. As for Barack Obama and John Edwards - these are some attractive gentleman. Consider the perfect hair of John Edwards and tell me I'm wrong.



Fred Thompson, in blue, is in desperate need of political-strength Maxoderm. Giuliani and McCain are equally attractive, meaning that for politicians they look about what you would expect GOP front runners to look like. Both are also equally subject to caricature.

The Hot Button (El Botón Caliente)

Immigration is today's main hot button issue outside of the Iraq war. Immigration will be a focus point for the '08 election. Where do the candidates stand?



In Hillary Clinton's case even her ACCENT will change depending on who she is talking to, let alone her message. For those of you who don't get my clever reference, Hillary has been known to sound like a black Baptist when she is in Harlem, and a Dixie Chick when she is in the south. As for John Edwards and Barack Obama, they are fairly consistant in their belief that family ties (a common method for illegals is known as "anchor babies") should remain a consideration for illegal immigrants who wish to pursue a route to legality. No Democratic candidate is so far left wing on immigration as to state things like "there are no illegal immigrants, only immigrants" or "California used to be Mexico, thereby for some bizarre reason native Mexicans should be able to roam freely."



Fred Thompson supports your classic conservative viewpoint on immigration... at least that is what he is expected to support anyway! As for Giuliani (in green) he is a compassionate man and wants to help the illegals who are currently here but supports sharp, even draconian, measures to ensure that the flow of illegals stops. As for McCain - well, lets just say that in GOP circles nothing McCain does is right at the moment.

It turns out that for our birthday our father bought us tickets to go see the final round of the U.S. Open at Oakmont! I am thrilled about this!

For those of you who are completely unfamiliar with the world of golf, or sports in general for that matter, the U.S. Open is one of the world's greatest sporting events - it is the most difficult of all golf championships to win and as far as I'm concerned the most prestigious (although I wouldn't argue too much if someone suggested the British Open is more prestigious). Oakmont Country Club is one of the worlds most prestigious, famous and exclusive clubs, which to be honest is a typical set of traits that clubs have that get chosen for championships like these. Where is it located? Pittsburgh! So, off to Pittsburgh it is, with my dad and my brother.

Golf is one of the last bastions of inexplicable elitism left in America - besides Ivy League schools, of course - but one of the good things left over from this sort of elitism is the preservation of tradition. Such as, the tradition of money-grubbing social climbers trolling around the course hoping for a glimpse from a club member, or even better yet, one of the golfers themselves. I found this to be one of the more pathetic things I saw when we went to the PGA at Oak Hill in 2003, and I guarantee we'll be seeing it Sunday. Another great tradition at large scale major championships like this is the cigar hut. Golf and cigars are the 21st century PB&J, and this is a tradition I can get behind. Smokers legally are second class citizens, but not on a golf course!

Another somewhat unappreciated aspect of golf, from the perspective of people who aren't really into it, is that the sort of clubs that the USGA and PGA choose for their "major" championships boast course designs that are considered works of art in their own right.

Tournaments generally are fun and interesting to attend (and sort of expensive - our tickets cost $115 per) but going to see a "major" is something totally different. To be perfectly honest I'm looking forward to getting the fuck out of Buffalo for a little while. It looks like we are going to even take in a little MLB at PNC Park as well. Do the Pirates suck? GAWD yeah. Do they have one of the newest, most beautiful and intimate baseball stadiums on earth? Yep.

Its worth the bad baseball to see the Pittsburgh skyline behind the outfield. Plus, the tickets are so cheap that its almost a crime not to at least check it out.

Who says that geeks don't have a sense of humor?