Who to be Dr. Who?

Now that we know David Tennant will be regenerating into another Doctor at the end of 2009, the big question is who will become the new Dr. Who?

We can be sure of one thing, the actor will be British. So that narrows the field slightly. Going beyond that I feel pretty secure in also stating that the Doctor will be a man – though I’d put the chance of it being a woman at 1%. If such a thing were to happen it would end the series. Not because an actress is not capable, but because of the incredible lore that has been created up to this date.

So the Doctor will be a man, British, not ugly, about 30 – 35. The actor will have to be able to give credibility to being 900 some odd years old, wise, stupendously smart, a loner, and more than likely straight. These are all things we can be sure of as things the Doctor must convey.

Well here are some of the favorites from England via the Telegraph

David Morrissey - not a shot in the world. While the Doctor does not need, and often shouldn’t be famous (internationally at least) he does need a flair about him. I just don’t see the flair here. Plus he looks to effeminate (though initially the same might have been said about Tennant).

Robert Carlyle - a far better choice. I recall him in the movie Formula 51, with Samuel Jackson. Not the best movie but he does have a fun and vibrant style to him. He’s energetic and moderately charismatic. And he displays more than just a bit of darkness in him. A definite bonus in being the Doctor. Definitely in the running, in my opinion.

Patterson Joseph - a bold choice. Nothing says that the Doctor can’t be Black. It would definitely be a first, and ground breaking. Considering it’s the 21st century it’s not a terrible choice. And it opens up a host of new storylines that have yet to be covered. New ground is always interesting. Sadly, I don’t think the BBC is that strong willed though. Odds out, but worth a bet.

Catherine Tate - did I just mention the odds of a woman? Won’t happen. Again, not because of her talent. It just doesn’t fit the lore that has been created. Though it really throws up questions about what a Time Lord is, and about the children of the Doctor. But then again, she is human.

Rhys Ifans - Americans will recognize this guy as the field goal kicker in the movie The Replacements. I put him on the same level as Morrissey. He just doesn’t have the look. Not that there haven’t been lanky Doctors, but this guy just looks like he’d drop the first time a Dalek landed near him.

John Simm - hello! Well the British are known for being quirky, and having an unusual humor. I can’t see this. He was the Master after all. Does that mean that all Time Lords could have (or did) look exactly the same, just rotating through the different bodies at different times? I don’t buy it. Simm is a great choice, and had he not already been a Time Lord I’d think he could pull off the Doctor. But some changes are too bizarre even in the Doctor’s universe.

Though there is the possibility that the Master planned for the escape of the Doctor in Last of the Time Lords and did not die as he appeared to. He might have been the woman/wife that accompanied him (or at least his mind was) and thus escaped death and is now a woman. That might allow the Doctor to take his form – as a tribute to the only other Time Lord to survive the last great Time War. But I admit this is reaching a bit.

But if The Master can be The Doctor, then so can an American. And since this is impossible, I would love to see Robert Downey Jr. be the Doctor. He can be dark, does drama exceptionally well, isn’t bad at comedy, does accents better than average, and has the looks. And he’s done scifi well enough to have a blockbuster international hit. He’s just not British, nor available.

Another impossible choice would be Jamie Foxx. Ok, stop laughing. Yes I know Foxx is best known for more comedic roles. But as the up-coming The Soloist (with Downey) is yet another film in a string of far more dramatic and powerful roles for this talented actor. He has the bonus of being Black and thus the same new storylines as Joseph. So he can hit a balance on several levels. I don’t think he can do accents though. And again he is unavailable.

But for an American choice that is available, though still impossible I call on Terrence Howard. Having just been ejected from the Iron Man 2 movie he has time to fill. He can do a range of roles, though I don’t recall outright comedic ones. He has great looks – women will love him on the television every week. He also can fulfill the Joseph storylines. And he too has done scifi to exuberant levels (also with Downey).

So my 3 American choices won’t happen, without a Paradox Machine if you have one handy, so I have to say that of the above choices it will likely be Robert Carlyle. The BBC is just not bold enough for it to be any other choice, and Carlyle isn’t bad in any consideration anyway.

David Tennant, Who, no more

In over 45 years there has been one thing that is more consistent than Democrats raising taxes, Americans and Brits wondering why the other has such a funny accent, and William Shatner starring in something. The Doctor.

Now I know sci-fi fans (not the channel – ick) are right on point. The mere mention of The Doctor and they are thinking of a TARDIS and Daleks galore. But for those of you unfamiliar with Gallifrey, The Master, and Time Lords I’ll recap a bit.

The Doctor refers to Doctor Who. The show was started back in 1963 on the BBC. It has been on and off television there ever since. The show is now watched by millions across the globe in its current format, on the cable network channel BBC America, and occasionally rerun on the SciFi channel (amazing that they actually show a sci-fi show between the search for ghosts, and wrestling I know).

Doctor Who has a huge lore behind it, like the abovementioned Daleks (alien bad guys in metal shells that kill anything non-Dalek with particular glee/efficiency), The Master (mortal enemy of The Doctor), TARDIS (an acronym but basically the name of an old british phone booth that can travel time, and is enormously larger inside than out). But the show is viewer friendly and has added millions of fans over the years.

So far 10 people have played The Doctor (he has no known first or last name). This is not because it’s like a soap opera and different people just step in and shocking you one day. The Doctor can and does regenerate if he is killed, and thus becomes a new person with new personality and quirks. Thus there have been several beloved Doctors, and 1 or 2 that didn’t last so long. David Tennant has been the Doctor for 3 years and counting now. Sadly that countdown will be ending soon.

It has now been reported that Tennant will be leaving Dr. Who at the end of the 2009 series. This of course means that the Doctor will be regenerating into a new persona, but I must admit that I will miss his characterization. He’s done a great job bringing a wit and devil may care attitude to the Doctor that was firm and refreshing.

I don’t know how they will kill the Doctor this time, but I have to say that the end of the most recent season was a huge close to a story arc that was years, literally, in the making. The implications were devastating and impacting 3 separate television series – each a spinoff of Dr. Who. Plus it gives an insight to the mind and emotions of one of the most persistent scifi characters ever created.

The series won’t ever be the same. But then again, it rarely ever was. And that just one reason we love the Doctor.

(Does anyone think that Obama could be under the influence of The Master? Ok, low blow I know.)

MoveOn.org blames Michael Vass for President McCain win

I heard about this vide that was being sent across the net and I was just waiting to see how long it would be until I received it. I didn’t have to wait long.



Of course this is a video created by and circulated originally by my friends at MoveOn.org. What lovely people they are. But this video was sent to my by a reader I don’t know, Donna (last name withheld).

I’m happy to know that I have made an impact.

In all actuality I am amused that I received this video. But if you look at it closely you see it’s a bit insulting as well.

First off it equates a vote for Senator McCain as a non-vote. That’s a pretty high pedestal to be standing on, but considering that MoveOn has attacked the very military that protects its freedom to say what it does, I’m not surprised.

Be clear, a vote for Senator John McCain is no less a vote than for anyone else. And not voting for Obama does not make you a racist, if it is based on issues and not the fact that he is Black. Even if you are African American it’s ok to disagree with the bigger Government, spend today tax tomorrow, Government knows best policies of Democrats and Senator Obama. This is not akin to a mandate of your Blackness, its not part of the commoditization of Black culture.

But if I were to be the responsible party in a McCain vote, which by my numbers and expectations is a real potential, I would not be upset. I made my opinion clear, and my reasons. And I have yet to hear an argument, or policy, that gives me pause for that choice. (I would also love the attention and income that such responsibility would provide my blogs and company)

I love the way this video equates a loss for Obama as a national outrage. It completely ignores the fact that nearly ½ the nation (according to polls of committed voters, and who knows about the undecided votes) does not agree with Obama’s policies. If this video is conveying the outrage that might occur in San Francisco, Berkley, or Eugene, Oregon then I will sleep well at night.

In fact in looking over this video again I can see why MoveOn made it. It’s an attempt to scare, cajole, and/or shame voters to vote for Obama. It’s like high school cliques in video form. If you don’t do this you won’t be part of the massive crowd of kids that think they stand out and are different – even though they wear, speak and act exactly the same. How dare you have a brain, know the issues, and have an opinion they don’t like.

The fact that it goes so far as to use religion to slam home the thought that even God must like the politics of Obama. Please. It’s a bit hypocritical for an organization that would support the removal of all hint of religion from all aspects of the nation and public life, to use it as a selling point for their political views. God doesn’t care about politics, Moveon, unless every verse I’ve read in all religious tomes are wrong.

Some would say “Mike, this is just funny.”

No, it’s a targeted attempt to use subtlety and humor to force an opinion onto people. To give the impression that voters have an obligation, instead of a choice, on who to choose for President. It’s the classic move of some liberals and Democrats, to support freedom of speech until someone disagrees with your position. They then need to slam them hard and force them to change their mind to their side, or else. Kind of like what the Obama campaign did to Florida reporter Barbara West, among others.

The best part might just be the absurdity of the thought that McCain would bomb some ubiquitous goat herder. Though the counter thought of Obama sitting down with Iran’s President - to ask him to play nice with Israel, stop making nukes to bomb America, cease funding terrorist groups that plan to kill all Americans (including pacificst and Democrats), and if he is still listening maybe raise the cost of oil so Americans can’t afford it and be forced to use less energy until some new discovery makes an alternative to oil possible – that is terrifying and real.

Of Course MoveOn wants to really sell the Republicans are evil thought. And reinforces the thought that a vote for anyone beyond Obama, and democrats, is a non-vote. MoveOn has a personal gripe with President Bush, and so he is one of their biggest scare tactics. But be honest, to have ANY President mention your name in a positive manner while speaking to the nation is an honor. I wish I had that much influence. I may be a megalomaniac but I’m not insane. (Though I hope to get Bill O’Reilly to comment on a post or speak about me one day. It would be fantastic for my business.)

I will say this, if MoveOn.org is for Obama it is yet another reason not to vote for him. They are the most extreme far-left political group short of communists in China. Ok, that was a bit overstated – maybe the North Koreans and Castro. Of the political opinions they hold that I am aware of I know only 1 person out of about 10,000 in my life that agrees with them. Talk about outside the curve.

So the future I fear is an Obama win. His tax plans will hurt my business and the national economy. He will promote a healthcare plan that will make my health about as important, and as high a quality, as regular mail. He will endanger American lives, and lead us into a war within 5 – 7 years because of his weak stance on foreign policy. He intends to give more to those that do less. He is unbending on his views, and uncaring about other political opinions. He is duplicitous in what he will say to the nation to achieve his goals (though not as bad as Hillary Clinton). And all of that, if not quite a bit more, can all be found in following his campaign since his announcement to run for the Presidency – something I have followed virtually everyday.

I respect Senator Obama. My dislike of his policies is not personal. I admire the fact that he is a Black man that has overcome many obstacles to reach this point. I think he is an incredible orator. And I do not question his intelligence. But none of that is enough to cause me to vote for him.

Voting is always important. Choose who you think matches your hopes for the nation. There is no stigma, no social pariahs. You cannot be singled out, and all the bad jokes and peer pressure in the world will not make someone else’s opinion your vote.

A vote for McCain is as American as a vote for Obama. A vote for Republicans is as valid and honest as a vote for Democrats. A vote is your Right, exercise that Right. But don’t let stupid gimmicks disguised as a joke curb your opinion, nor limit your right to vote. Be informed – from both sides – then get out and make your voice heard.

Charles Barkley interviewed by Campbell Brown on CNN

Charles Barkley is a respected athlete that is known across the world. He is outspoken and opinionated, to say the least. He is rich by most any standard. And he is a supporter of Senator Obama.

None of those things are bad. But I say that to introduce an interview that Barkley has with CNN’s Campbell Brown recently. Part of what was said was very interesting. Part of it were things I completely disagree with. And since much of the conversation centered on the up-coming election, which will affect all of us in ways that few could ever imagine a year ago, I wanted to discuss his thoughts.



The big question everyone is wondering about is race. Will there be an effect for or against Senator Obama based on race. Charles Barkley is dead on when he says this is a real factor. If for no other reason than we know that those that have said that race will affect their vote, in polls going back to the Democratic Primaries, account for ~10% of all voters. And that is the people that have willingly said this in the face of ridicule and media denouncement of such thoughts. Imagine how many might hold those same feelings and would not vote for a Black man, or a woman for that matter.

I expect that many pundits, and those that feel racism does not exist, will be surprised when the election is over and they compare the polls and the actual results. Because this is not a Bradley effect. This is racism in action, calling it anything else is just soothing the feelings of those that choose a racist action.

But let me also state clearly, not voting for Obama is not inherently a racist action. The Obama campaign, supporters, and the major media in general make it seem as if that is the case. But there are strong reasons for anyone to not vote for Obama. The fact that will be shocking is not those that are in the margin of those expected to not vote for Obama, it’s the numbers that don’t vote for him and stated they would. IF Obama loses by a margin greater than 5% then I would say that every percentage above 5% was based on race – because polling data currently states that the race should easily be within 5% based on the issues.



I agree that if Obama were to win it would be a huge statement on the state of race relations in America. It would be a testament to how far we have come as a nation from the Jim Crow laws and segregation that existed just a generation ago. It would give hope that one day racism would be so isolated and repugnant an idea that only the most hateful and small minded would still maintain it.

That said, if Obama wins it does not mean that racism no longer exists. Obama being elected does not change the legal system or it’s preference to convict and overly punish African Americans and other minorities. Overnight we would not see police departments changing policies and active actions in regard to minorities. It would not suddenly balance the numbers of CEO’s and executives of color in business, nor in elected office. Inner city schools would not suddenly get new books and materials, neither would teachers suddenly become more proficient or dedicated (at least those that are currently sub-standard).

Obama is just one man, and would be a symbol of opportunity. He means that a door could now be open, but African Americans and others would still need to be able to get to the door and then go through it. Part of that is the responsibility of the Black community – abandoning the disrespect of those with knowledge, the need to and acceptance of commoditizing of Black culture, the glamorization of drug culture and the lifestyle of it as misrepresented by movies and music videos – but part of that also resides as the responsibility of White Americans and the culture of denial that currently exists (just look at all programs on television in any 1 hour on all channels to prove that thought).



Yes many Black people support Obama because he is Black, and because a huge number of Black people vote consistently Democratic. There are more African Americans involved today because of Obama, because he is inspiring. That inspiration has motivated Republicans, Whites, Asians, Hispanic/Latinos, independents, socialists and who knows what ever groups, each for their own reason.

Somehow I don’t think that the even larger number of Whites and other ethnic groups that support Obama are all doing so because of his tan. If that is even marginally true, then to say that those that are Black that support Obama are for just that one reason is just ignorant and a means to discredit both the voters and Obama.

At the same time I do not think the McCain campaign has used race as a issue. Some supporters of McCain have used race, as have untold numbers of Clinton supporters and the Clinton Campaign. But if we do not fault the campaigns for what their supporters do and say (with the exception of key individuals) we cannot fault McCain, lest we also fault Obama for outrages against women (and Gov. Sarah Palin) and various issues against McCain (like Code Pink) that his supporters have done as well.

As for “code words”, sometimes a word or concept is just that. Welfare is not a Black only Government entitlement. As Barkley correctly states there are, and have always been, more Whites on welfare than all other minorities combined. And without regard to who will receive the money that Obama’s tax plan will provide, many feel that providing money to people who have done nothing to earn it is welfare. For decades the welfare system has mandated that those who do little or nothing receive the most, and Obama’s tax plan will give the most to those in similar circumstances – fairly or not. So this is not a code word, but in my opinion accurate.

And to be accurate, Clinton and her campaign focused on Obama’s heritage, his associations, and his religion. It was Clinton campaigners that accused Obama of being a drug dealer, and were spreading emails that stated Obama was a Muslim and terrorist. While some McCain supporters have picked up on that same line, his campaign has not. And to question his association with a self-admitted terrorist is a politically fair question.

Also, if we are to look at the full 8 years of the Bush administration then we must give him credit for his actions in dealing with the internet bubble that the Clinton Administration created and fostered, as well as his initial actions dealing with the 9/11 attack. The repercussions of both have had far-reaching complications on the economy and nature of the nation today. So to say it’s just a Republican thing is unfair and a misstatement that borders on a lie.

And to say that the only way that McCain can win is to obfuscate and ignore fact. Millions disagree with the larger Government that Obama advocates. Millions doubt and debate the effects of an Obama tax and economic plan. Millions feel his views on a nationalized healthcare are less than beneficial. To say that the only way that Obama could lose is because of his race is to call half the nation racists, and that is racist in its implication.



Many people are against abortion, or gay marriage, or other issues. That is not absurd to them, and if they disagree with Charles Barkley they have that right. His statement otherwise is a minimalization of issues some feel strongly about. It is the purpose of an elected official to support and protect the citizens they represent. That is first and foremost. And occasionally it supersedes their own personal opinions.

But I agree that politicians should ensure a proper education for all. That is paramount for the health of the nation. That ensures ultimately that the economy will perform well, and that prosperity will increase. It will reduce crime and improve communities. It is an obligation we all owe to the youth.

I also agree about keeping the nation safe. But obviously there are many different ideas about how that is best done. But I think that empowering our enemies with retreat and conversations that lift their international presence without assurances does not fit that bill.

Similar arguments can be made about healthcare and the economy.

As for Gov. Sarah Palin, is not Charles Barkley doing her a disservice in stating that her being picked as Vice President running mate is only because of Hillary Clinton? Doesn’t the fact that she has served as a Mayor and Governor of a state worthy of recognition. And if that experience, as well as her reforms and work on energy, are not enough to justify her as VP how is Obama justified in running for President when he lacks even that much experience?

Though I have to note this. Gov. Palin has spoken to reporters and news organizations that are not friendly. They have asked her tough questions, and at times she has had bad answers. But at no time did the McCain campaign blacklist an organization or attack those asking her questions. Senator Biden has done so to Barbara West and her news station, because he didn’t like her questions. Senator Obama supporters have attacked the name of Joe the Plumber because they didn’t like the question asked of Obama (when the real issue should be Obama’s answer – which the news media avoids). And there are other organizations that the Obama campaign has rejected as well, and individuals too.



I do wish Barkley the best in his political attempts. But I do not believe that as many people as he thinks will be in favor of his ideals as he would need. Especially when he, like most wealthy Democrats, is in favor of wealth redistribution but have yet to voluntarily donate a single dollar to the Government. Private organizations yes, but not the Government (even under Democratic Presidents and Congress) which I assume is because they feel Government is a bad administrator of such funds.

I have covered a lot of what was said by Charles Barkley in his interview with CNN’s Campbell Brown. It is political, and it is important in that it deals with the Presidential election.

If you agree with Barkley, go vote. If you disagree, go vote. If you are unsure, go vote and make a gut decision. Because the most important thing you can do is vote, and the worst would be not to vote.

If you would like to know more on the election and Senator McCain or Senator Obama I offer my political blog – VASS. If nothing else it’s a place to start from in you decision making process.

From the dark depths to the silver screen - Villains

Ok, let’s be honest. If you had the choice of being Lex Luthor or Superman who would you choose? And when I say be them I mean you don’t get the just the power or just the money. You get the greed, obsession with power, murdering, and the insanity/genius or the must follow the law, universal boy scout, do good by all means life of either man. Think hard.

If you are like me, many will choose Lex Luthor. Or the Joker (not Heath Ledger or the movies but the comic book version), Magneto (ditto comics), the Juggernaught, Green Goblin, Obedia Stane, Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Hannibal Lecter, Dracula, the Kurgan, Stansfeild, John Ryder, Agent Smith, the T-1000, Pinhead, H.A.L., Alex (A Clockwork Orange), the Kingpin, Dr. Doom, Scorpius, the Daleks, Khan Noonien Singh and the list goes on and on. I doubt that anyone from the ages of 11 up to 65 doesn’t remember at least a few of the people on this list. [If you aren’t familiar with all of them just search the web and you’ll find plenty on them all.]

The point is that we all love the real bad guys. The ones with a brain and enough insanity to fill a psych ward. The guys that want power above anything and everything else. Because they all live. They have nothing holding them back, and nothing stands in their way. They are life spinning in chaos on the edge of a blackhole.

Without a real villain, the good guys are just boring losers that you wouldn’t notice if they were you looking in a mirror. (Not that anyone that reads my posts are losers, it’s just a metaphor)

Considering all this, and the fact that movies based on comic books are all the rage right now, how long did you think it would take for a movie to be made based on villains? If you thought 2010 you’d be just about right.

Viper Comics graphic novel Villains has just been picked up by Universal Pictures and will be made into a movie. This is a film from the bad guys point of view. It’s about the life that the good guys never see. The how and why of being evil.

If you read a synopsis of the graphic novel you get a basic story that reads like Apt Pupil.



Unlike Brad Renfro’s accidental discovery and curiosity gone wild, in Villains there is a willful desire to scour the depths of evil and become the object of fear and righteous crusades of superheroes.

This film, if done right will be unlike just about any other film I can name. And it should do well. But the big question is far darker.

If this film does well in movies, if you enjoy it, what does that say about the society and all of us in it? Are we like Renfro, curious and unknowingly opening Pandora’s Box – or are we celebrating a dark core that we desperately try to keep hidden while we routinely follow the monotony of our daily attempts at order and sanity?

If the film touches on that question, then this film will be a must see.

Copies and cop-outs on terlevision

I was speaking with a couple of friends today and I noticed 2 television commercials. The commercials were very different, dealing with separate networks and programs, but they had one thing in common. They both exemplified the fact that Hollywood is completely and utterly devoid of any ideas. It reminds me that the fact that there was a strike by screenwriters was utterly pointless, as they don’t deserve to be paid to rewrite ideas already created by someone else (and done better).

The first commercial is for the show Life on Mars. Now this is a good show. It’s unique and catches your attention. A cop may or may not be transported back to 1973 for a purpose that he is not sure of, but someone or something does. He has to learn the purpose in order to make it back to our time. The catch is the fact that the cop is in a coma in our time. So is it real or not?

Sound interesting? It should be. The show was a hit on the BBC a couple of years ago. If you want to know what will happen in the series just check here. The show is only 2 season long, but since broadcast television is enslaved by reality TV anything that has any intelligence is a welcome change. If you don’t get the BBC, I can tell you that the show is very good.

The American version will likely change the slang, and some of the situations. Expect a different take on racism, sexism, and the drug culture from England. But other than that, much like the Office and Coupling, this will likely be a virtual word for word copy. Invariably the British version is better.

The other commercial is for the new show on the Sci-Fi channel. Actually 2 as I have just seen. Chase and Estate of Panic. Both of these reality network rejects have nothing to do with science, though it’s full of fiction.

Since the Sci-fi channel was bought there has yet to be any original thoughts beyond Eureka! The channel is a waste of brain cells. They remake the oldest and worst science fiction movies and call them original. They thrive on the concept of the giant animal movie, ala 1950’s b-movies. They have covered every angle of nature gone mad films from the 1970’s, twice. It the execs on this channel had any original thoughts they would be dangerous.

Chase is just what it sounds like. A bunch of people run around a set while a bunch of people dress as Agents from the Matrix movies tries to catch them. The last one gets money. Even people who drive only with left turns, and those that watch them, will be bored to tears in the middle of the first episode. I hate to say it but American Idol (also a British transplant) is filled with more entertainment.

Estate of Panic is basically a remake of Fear Factor in a house. You go through rooms with challenges set to freak out the player and those watching. Hidden in the rooms is money. The more you collect the more you keep. If you freak out too much you can get out, but you lose the cash.

Now does any of this sound remotely like science fiction? The channel would be better off showing reruns of the Buster Keaton Flash Gordon series. The only real question I have is when will this channel completely fail so someone else can buy the name and get something even moderately bad, but in the genre, on the air.

And the real joy is that in January there will be 500 channels because of the forced move to HD television. That means even more opportunities to see this swill that is supposed to be entertainment. If these are the best that television can come up with I suggest reading a dictionary.

Go vote, it's your right

Once every 4 years millions gather and let their voices get heard. They celebrate one of the most powerful displays of democracy in action, peacefully electing a new leader of the most powerful nation on the planet. And once every 4 years other citizens of that same nation fail in exercising this same right.

This is not about those that choose to sit at home and either through apathy, ignorance, or willful disregard for the choices available. I am speaking about those that fail to have their vote counted for reasons that they feel are beyond them.

Some cast provisional ballots when they think they are casting early ballots. Provisional ballots are not always counted, and are not the same as a regular or early vote.

Some fail to bring ID with them to prove who they are. This reason seems the most dumb to me. Always carry a government issued ID. It will allow you to vote and may help in other circumstances.

For further clarification carry a piece of mail from a local agency, like the gas and electric company, that further proves your address and identity.

But prior to all this you have to register to vote. Without that the ID and options of early voting or provisional ballots is basically moot.

It costs nothing to register to vote. If you are a citizen, without a felony, it is a right that cannot be denied to you. Exercise that right. Make your voice be heard. Be involved with your Government, because your Government is involved with you.

“People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.” – from V for Vendetta

Dark times for punk music

If you are under 35 years old you don’t know what punk music is. If you are American and under 40 you probably think Green Day is the biggest punk band ever. And I would bet that if anyone called virtually all of my readers a punk, they would get hit.

But if you are in Florida, punk is an essential part of your aerobics workout. The Ramones are crying.

Seriously, there is an aerobics workout program, called Punk Rock Aerobics that is styled and includes punk music and themes because

“Even punk rockers can get flabby.”

Call me old but as I recall the point of punk was the anti-establishment attitude. The fact that everything that was corporate was wrong. It was so against the mainstream that several original punk bands broke up because they were too popular. (Most of them were British though)

The Clash were never into fiber and keeping their cardio up (without illegal supplements). The Sex Pistols were about as concerned with stretching as being pacifists (even though the move is called Slut Butts), unless that stretching involved members of the opposite sex and circumstances I won’t mention in this blog.

So understanding all that, and the fact that the big claim of this aerobics program is the fact that young adults with piercings and body art (this generations equivalent of smoking) get to workout in shabby clothes and some good music, I can’t call this punk. In fact I’d call it fake.

But this is the generation of ‘revisioned’ ideas. Why stick to ideas of the past when you can remake it to something more modern (ie easier) and personalized (ie mass produced and generic).

Do I like punk music? Definitely. Did I live the lifestyle? Nope, though a good part of my college classmates did fully. And is this idea good? Well if you are into keeping fit and music it could be. And if you are interested in how it looks you can see this video – where the concept started in Massachusetts home of the Pilgrims, the Boston Tea Party, Rob Zombie, New Edition, Godsmack, and the Neats – a mixed bag at best.



I just don't know what else to say.

Skinheads plan to decapitate Senator Obama and 102 school kids

I have spoken about racism a lot over the years. And one of the big comments I receive every time is that I should get over it, because it doesn’t exist anymore. Then there is news like this

“The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms said the plan was to kill the Democratic presidential candidate and shoot or decapitate 102 black people in a Tennessee murder spree.

In court records revealed today, agents said they disrupted plans to rob a gun store and target an unnamed but predominantly African-American high school by two neo-Nazi skinheads.”

So how am I supposed to get over that?

I don’t believe Senator Obama should be elected President. Not because of his race, but because of his economic plans. But I have to wonder what is so wrong in this country that the mere thought that a Black man is running for President could motivate some to plan the decapitation of 102 innocent school kids and the Democratic nominee.

Does this latest assasination plot mean that Obama should be elected? No. Not in my opinion based on his left wing liberal political views. But that does not make him unAmerican, nor does it mean that any Black person desevers to be killed. Aren’t we fighting 2 wars against people that plan these same kinds of events?

America needs to resolve the race issues that continue to plague us. Race is bigger than the economy, wars overseas, and almost anything else. This kind of division will destroy the nation faster than anything else. It is a festering sore that never heals, because some cannot accept the world as it is.

I really am disturbed by this news. Even without the election such a thought is terrifying. That so many still hold views that should have died in the middle ages with the bubonic plague makes me ill at ease. It reminds me that I still can wake up with a cross burning in my yard.

But I will not back down. Racism is still alive in this nation because too many want to hide behind the thought that because lynchings aren’t happening the world is fine. The thought that some believe racisim can’t exist since I and my family can sit anywhere on a bus or resturant keeps them from seeing the racial tones in the media and politics is not something I will abide by.

America, if we cannot be a nation of people instead of a nation of colors we will fall no matter who is at the helm. African Americans, Hispanic/Latinos, Asians, Native Indians and more all serve in our military and have bled to ensure the freedoms we all enjoy today. That does not mean Obama should win because he is Black. But it means even moreso that he should never lose because of it either; not as long as we want to continue to be a great nation.

Mini Cooper - classic and modern in one

Of the classic cars in the world on of the most loved is the Mini. The car is one of the most notable cars of the 1960’s and enjoyed success in England as well as in the U.S. along with the famous Volkswagen Beetle. The original line of the Mini cars was made consistently from 1959 up until 2000. These cars were hearty and capable, especially the Cooper “S” version which won the Monty Carlo Rally.

There is no surprise that these popular, stylish, and distinctive were picked up by BMW and are enjoying a surge in popularity once again. The new Mini is essentially the old models with new insides. They have been featured in several movies, most prominently in the remake The Italian Job.

But this classic car is really moving up to the 21st century in a way t