The Actor/Composer's Notebook

I MOVED!!

2012-01-13T12:23:00.000-08:00

Hey there people out in Internetlandia.

Just in case you've happened upon this site, only to find yourself disappointed that you can't find MORE wonderful news and happenings about myself, fear not!

I'm still blogging away at www.btryback.wordpress.com.

Come join me!

I Get No Kick On a Plane

2009-08-27T09:11:00.000-07:00

I'm usually very productive on planes. I read books. I do work on my laptop. I compose, I edit, I write, I play games. Or else I sleep.

Now, many airlines are offering WIFI on your flight. For example, Delta. Which I am currently on. In mid-air. Blogging.

I'm heading first to JFK and then on to Edinburgh. What amounts to something like 20 hours of air travel. Having wifi on a plane is awesome, and my only question is - what took them so long?

With the airline industry dying a slow, horrible death, this is one perk they got right. I wonder if JetBlue offers it?

What the Health?

2009-08-22T09:23:00.001-07:00

A MUST SEE interview from last Thursday's Daily Show.
Jon talks to Betsy McCaughey - the woman who brought to the forefront the so-called "Death Panels" in the Health Bill. Of course, as Jon explains, she didn't call them "death panels" that's just what they translate to in Alaskan.

This has to be the most civil, most to-the-source discussion over the Health Bill that has been put on television.

Money quote from the second part:

BETSY: "If you're seriously ill, the best place to be is in the United States..."
JON: "If you have the resources."

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Exclusive - Betsy McCaughey Extended Interview Pt. 1

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Political Humor

Healthcare Protests

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c

Exclusive - Betsy McCaughey Extended Interview Pt. 2

www.thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Political Humor

Healthcare Protests

Health of a Nation

2009-08-11T10:04:00.000-07:00

Shaking my head at this health care "debate."

It amazes me the things that people honestly believe will be allowed to happen in this country. Death Panels?? Euthanasia?? Forced Health Care Coverage??

Okay, so that last one will happen...I always laugh when people get upset about it, though. "You're going to MAKE me pay for Health Coverage??"

"Yes," I think to myself, "because if you don't, and you get into an accident, I'm the one paying for your ass." I wonder where conservatives are suddenly getting this idea of leaning on your fellow man? That's usually such a liberal idea.

In fact, there's been at least one other major switch with the ideologies, too. Democrats are discussing a public option, that will compete with health insurance companies in order to help drive costs down (for the record, my health insurance premium has more than doubled in the three years of having it.) So, essentially we're looking at a free-market recovery of a health commodity - except for one big thing, which is that the public option would be non-profit...i.e. money would not be the goal, HEALTH would be the goal. So then, what happened to the conservatives who wanted to do the same thing with the economy? "The Free-market," they cried, "will always prevail!" as they waved their real-America flags.

The death panel idea also makes me laugh. "We don't want the government to decide when we should die!" Yes, they want it the American Way - allowing the health insurance companies to decide that. The way our forefathers wanted it.

I don't believe that the government is proposing death panels, but then again I just read facts. Perhaps there's a piece of fiction out there that I'm missing. But I will say that, regarding the troublesome fact that they are proposing conversations between patients and their doctors about end of life care, Wisconsin is leading the way. According to ABC News:

"In La Crosse, Wisconsin, are already common because of a program put in place by a local hospital. As a result of these consultations, LaCrosse resident Ann Kottnaur said she now knows that her mother Margaret, who has Parkinson's Disease and Dementia, would rather die at home than in a nursing home."

And finally, as a bit of stepping back, looking at the bigger picture...Regardless of what you think of Obama and his policies...he made promises on the campaign trail, and for the most part, he's going through each one and getting them done. And THAT'S certainly a change from politics as usual.

Trouble on the Homefront 2

2009-07-10T16:37:00.001-07:00

This is a must read from fellow blogger Tony over at Tuesdaysblog.com if you're an artist, work in the arts, enjoy the arts, or have any interaction on any level with people who might be identified as "employees."

Be sure to check the comments as well.

In Other News...

2009-07-08T21:06:00.000-07:00

Michael Jackson is still dead.

But just in case you weren't sure, feel free to click on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, and your local news network. They're keeping tabs on him. Don't you worry.

I know this isn't going to be a popular post (2 out of the 6 people that read this may even comment in outrage), but I thought the memorial service at the Staples Center was bizarre, indulgent, and more than anything...incredibly disingenuous.

There I said it.

I can see a concert. I understand the fans (even the 15 year old boys who post vlogs of them crying their eyes out over the loss of whom I can only imagine was their close, personal friend, Michael) need to mourn. Collectively. And publically. On international television. Honestly, that makes tooooootal sense to me...

But the casket? The Family? The children?? It just felt wrong. Why couldn't it have been a completely private affair? Why couldn't they mourn him on their own? Why did it need to be a televised, money-maker? I mean, the DVD sales alone are going to be outrageous. And who gets that money? The kids? The estate? Or, more likely, the producers of the event? Overnight the media will turn Paris, Prince, and Blanket into Kennedys. Should we expect Brooke Shield's career to make a sudden rise? As it is with most funerals, this was not about Michael, this was about US. And that's where, for me, it gets overindulgent and disingenuous.

And Campbell Brown...tsk tsk tsk. Campbell, Campbell, Campbell... With stars (or were they dollar signs?) in her eyes, smiles and asks Larry King (who, himself, had just recently landed after circling the remains), in regards to the ensuing child custody and financial custody trials, "Does this mean...a whole YEAR of Michael Jackson!!??"

I think MJ was an incredible performing artist and singer and dancer and all the stuff that we saw him do. Personally? No clue. Other than to say that I don't believe you can dispute that he lead a bizarre life. And a tragic one. So let's let him rest in peace.

On the otherhand, after such a bizarre life, perhaps this was the most appropriate way to say goodbye.

I'm gonna go watch CNN to find out which it is...

The Getty, The Getty, The Getty's on Fire!

2009-07-08T21:02:00.000-07:00

Early reports had this fire, which slowed down traffic in the crucial-to-most-rush-hour-drivers Sepulveda pass, and subsequently every canyon route, and most surrounding surface streets thereafter, starting after 1pm.

But as the LA Times reports, it was sparked at 12:44pm, which was the exact time I was getting on the 405-North, and commented to my father on the phone, "Oh my god, the Getty's on fire!"

16-14 = 15

2009-07-05T10:43:00.000-07:00

Federer becomes number one, in the world, in history.

Trouble on the Homefront

2009-06-22T17:56:00.001-07:00

I've been following this for a while, but since I'm not in Milwaukee I feel a bit out of the swim blogging about it.

The Skylight Opera Theatre appears to be in a bad way.

Managing director, Eric Dillner, along with board president Suzanne Hefty, have apparently commandeered the skylight's board of directors, and used it's name to fire Artistic Director Bill Theisen, among others. This sudden restructuring of the Skylight was done without consent of the board, and, in some cases, without it's knowledge.

Needless to say, the arts community in Milwaukee is up in arms. The best places to follow the events so far (which are moving quite rapidly, including the firing of resident musical director Jamie Johns, daily protests outside the Skylight's space, and a demand by Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel writer Tom Strini for the resignation of Dillner) are on Tuesdays, Artsy Schmartsy, and Jamie John's new blog Delight and Amaze, including Strini's own blog.

I have worked at the Skylight twice in my career, first when I was eight years old, and then again just before I graduated high school. But more than just a means of employment, the skylight is a musical theatre center for Milwaukee, and has created inumerable means of creative outlet for me and so many fellow actors, many of whom are life-long friends. The outcry of support for Theisen, and the Skylight itself, is proof of the Milwaukee institution the Skylight is.

What affect this will have on it's upcoming 50th season remains to be seen. As Strini says, "the company will go into its 50th season with no artistic director and no resident music director. It will face the seething anger of almost everyone who's performed at the Skylight for the last five years. It will operate in the shadow of a familiar and popular [artistic director] who was rudely pushed out the door. Dillner, a relative newcomer and mystery man thrust into the role of Skylight figurehead, will stand directly in that shadow. What should be a big anniversary celebration is starting to look like a pit of poison."

And he concludes with, "Dillner, whatever talent and skills he might possess, is damaged goods and has to go, and soon."

Texts from Last Night

2009-06-17T09:43:00.000-07:00

From my new favorite website for wasting time...

(858): i mean you're really good at taking the morning after pill...so you could put that on your resume..
(720): yeah, i think fast in a bad sitatuion and am able to react with appropriate measures

Proud to be Young

2009-06-17T09:20:00.000-07:00

I can't help but feel proud that the voices of the Iranian reform party that continue to reach the international community are those of Iranian youth.

Twitter, youtube, and facebook - social networking groups that were created by my generation, and refined by the one after mine - are flooded with tweets, vids, and posts about what's really going on in Iran. They've become so important, that the U.S. State Department has requested that Twitter delay a scheduled update (which would temporarily shut down the site) to protect the interests of Iranian's using the site.

Andrew Sullivan, at the daily dish, is one of many bloggers doing his best to keep up with the influx of information coming from these sites (good luck finding anything nearly as extensive on the major news networks.)

From, The Daily Dish: a report from an Iranian born in 1984...
"My generation is tired of being disillusioned. We refuse to accept the status quo and we have risen up in defiance."

Rock on.

Tony, Tony, Tony 2

2009-06-10T10:46:00.000-07:00

The "secret" behind NPH's closing number of the Tony's is revealed by NYTimes.com, along with extra, discarded lyrics!

As anyone might have guessed, the writing team behind the number was Marc Shaiman and Scott Wittman - who wrote Hairspray!, Prop 8: The Musical, and the up-coming musical version of Catch Me If You Can!

When approached by Harris about writing the closing number, the pair was apprehensive
“'We did our best to tell him that once they announce best musical, no one’s going to want to stick around for a closing number,' Mr. Wittman said in an interview. 'But he had a youthful cockiness that was endearing. He said, ‘No I want to do it.’

Mr. Shaiman and Mr. Wittman spent the next few days composing verses that accounted for any number of possible Tony outcomes: What if Jane Fonda wins for “33 Variations”? What if “Billy Elliot” loses?"

See the truly entertaining number here.

Tony, Tony, Tony!

2009-06-07T20:51:00.000-07:00

Some real time thoughts about this years Tony Awards. I'm calling it first: Billy Elliot wins. Okay, here we go!
A 5,6,7,8...!

-And Elton John's mic is off. Love it. Great dress rehearsal everyone, see you at the show.
Will Aaron Tveit ever stop touching himself when he "acts"?
Liza made the high note. Didn't see that coming.
This was a great opening number. Love the HAIR ending, but not crazy about Gavin Creel's Hair.

-Neil Patrick Harris in a pleather suit. Can he please host everything? Oscars? Emmys? He's amazing.

-Angela Lansbury, such a gem. And truly touched. 5 Tonys and she's still caught off gaurd.

-Mamma Mia? Really? Again? Couldn't they have at least called Tony and Rob?

-Next To Normal - I didn't stand at the end, but total props to Kitt for a great score. Very deserved. Lyrics, however....
Why did they cut off Tom Kitt and Brian Yorkey? They let Roger Robinson go on and on.

-Is Lin Manuel Miranda gay? How did I miss that lisp during In The Heights?

-Liza, another gem. The shoulder shake reminds me of Ray Jivoff. They try to play Liza off, but she's not having any of it. She just uses the incidental music to build her speech all the way to the end. A true star.

-Oliver Platt tells us the plot of Guys and Dolls. Another minute that could have gone to Tom Kitt's acceptance speech.
Another mic not working. Who is running these mics??? Wow, that guy is, apparently.
Literally running.

-Quick story about Rock of Ages - I was there at the beginning of that show. The first workshop in LA? I played piano for the auditions. No joke. Had no clue it would go this far. Kudos.

-John Stamos in Bye, Bye Birdie?? Hmm...

-Oh my god...it's Jaba the Hut! No wait...I mean, Princess Leia. Yikes.

-Damn it. I didn't get Neil's sushi joke. I hate being out of the loop.

-Geoffrey Rush wins his first Tony award for EXIT THE KING. I so wish I could have seen this. Best speech so far.

-In Memoriam: What I Did For Love...totally gonna cry. Bea Arthur, ugh. Eartha Kitt. George Furth. Paul Newman. It's moments like this that I remember how much I love the theatre, and how nothing, truly nothing, comes close to the experience of being a part of a great play or musical, and to go out there night after night and try again and again to get it right, or as close to right as you can get it.

-What is Frank Langella doing? I'm sure this is funny to someone, but how self-indulgent.

-I really wish I could've gotten in to see Billy Elliot. Those kids...so much freakin' talent.

-Legally Blonde. I'm glad they're playing more songs from shows that didn't win Tonys. Yay.

-"They are the actor equivalent of Rodger Federer." Sadly, no one in the audience got the sports reference.

-Angela giving Jerry Herman his Tony. Talk about a gem. "It doesn't get any better than this." It doesn't get any better than him. I've been compared to Mr. Herman, but mostly in personality and, unfortunately, stature. I'm...honored?

-I love when Neil makes straight jokes. Anne Hathaway is apparently at a rave. "What's up RADIO CITY!!!"

-HAIR has got to be the most exciting revival broadway has seen in a while. Jay Johnson scored so big. And it just won a Tony. Rock out. "Peace Now. Freedom Now. Equality Now. Justice Forever." Beautiful.

-Hmm. Alice Ripley. Not sure about that.

-Oh, boy. The 3 Billy's are going to share a speech. Can't WAIT for this. They get laughs for all the sisters. Love it. Aww...I think they weren't finished, but at least they got the important thank you's out.

-And the Tony goes to....

BILLY ELLIOT: THE MUSICAL!

--Neil's closing number: icing on the cake. Love it. He's stupid awesome.

And goodnight.

Join the Banned

2009-06-03T11:53:00.001-07:00

Retro-trends are always coming back.
Everywhere you look - 80's sunglasses, 80's swimsuits, 80's-sounding music.

And there's this fashionable trend from, well, throughout history, really. Book banning. This time in West Bend, Wisconsin.

Ginny and Jim Maziarka believe that teens should not be exposed to sexuality at their local library. That's right, their library. This couple believes that the LIBRARY is the worst place that these kids could possibly get information about teen sexuality. Retro is SO in.

Their complaint was with topics they deemed to be pornographic, which according to Ginny Maziarka is defined as "any sexual activity that is spelled out explicitly, even crudely." So...my 5th grade family life book?

Three of the books in question to be moved, or removed, or whatever their current position is are Deal With It! A Whole New Approach to Your Body, Brain, and Life as a gURL, The Geography Club, and The Perks of Being a Wallflower. Basically a book about being a teenage girl, a book about being a teenage homosexual, and a book about being...well, a teenager.

The authors of Deal With It! (based on their website gURL.com) found that that today's teens have the same questions about sex, love, and growing up that they had as teens. "Hearing what they had to say convinced us that there was a need for a new kind of book about being a girl, one that's smart, funny, approachable, and tuned in to the things girls really want to know."

Well, they were wrong. If our parents didn't get real answers to their questions, then why should we?

From the book list review of The Geography Club: Russel is gay, and he knows he better keep it secret, or he'll be a total outcast in his small-town high school.

Guess he was right - he's still apparently an outcast in his small town library.

And from the main character in Perks of Being a Wallflower: "I walk around the school hallways and look at the people. I look at the teachers and wonder why they're here. If they like their jobs. Or us. And I wonder how smart they were when they were fifteen. Not in a mean way. In a curious way. It's like looking at all the students and wondering who's had their heart broken that day, and how they are able to cope with having three quizzes and a book report due on top of that. Or wondering who did the heart breaking. And wondering why."

Too bad, kid. You're just not meant to know.

The good news is, thanks to people like Maria Hanrahan who started West Bend Parents for Free Speech, the library board voted to keep the books. I guess they figured if books are outlawed, then only outlaws will own books.

Quick, kids! Put down your violent, over-sexualized video games, and websites and head to the library while you still can!

Quote of the Day

2009-05-17T09:33:00.001-07:00

Jon Stewart on the dismissal of Lt. Dan Choi, a combat veteran and one of only 45 officers who speak fluent Arabic, because Choi is gay.

"It was okay to waterboard a guy over 80 times, but GOD FORBID the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend. Waterboarding may make the prisoner talk....but it ain't gonna make him talk english."

Stand Up for Your Rights

2009-05-08T09:30:00.001-07:00

I recently returned from a trip to the big apple for a whirlwind weekend that ended in a blow-out concert at Joe's Pub.

While I was there, I took advantage of the opportunity to see a couple shows - both of which are nominated for a Tony Award - 33 Variations and Next to Normal.

Next to Normal, if you don't know, is somewhat of a sensation on the b'way, called "brave and breathtaking" by Ben Brantley of the New York Times, who compared the score to Spring Awakening.

So, I was all too willing to get to the theatre at 8 am and wait four hours in the rain and cold to get a front row ticket to see Aaron Tveit in nothing but his underwear.

Unfortunately, in the end, I didn't care for the show. In my opinion, Next to Normal was a so-so show with terrible direction (direction that is curiously absent-from-mention in the review...) (To be fair, I also thought 33 Variations, which I did care for, was a so-so show with WONDERFUL direction.)

Okay - so there I am, 2 hours later, not particularly impressed with the performances or the show in general, sitting in the front row, and the lights go down for the last time. The audience erupts with applause and jumps to its feet (remember, they've all been told by somebody that this is a b'way sensation!) I, being someone who takes his responsibility as an audience member very seriously, decide that this musical did not merit thunderous applause at full height. So I sat there, in the front row, smiling and applauding politely.

And my show companion, after we left the theatre, told me how embarrassed he was that I would humiliate myself by not standing. He also told me that my career in the theatre could potentially be hindered if anyone of any importance ever saw me not standing (when the majority of the audience stood.) Blacklisted, is essentially how he put it.

For what? For not enjoying a show? No, no - not even that - for NOT STANDING. He painted a scenario for me, in which, some fellow writer or actor would see me not standing, scoff and call me a jerk, and then proceed to call Hal Prince to complain that I was such a jack-off, after which Hal would refuse to work with me and my carreer would spiral downward from there, and all because I was being a pompous asshole.

I asked him what if I had sprained my ankle earlier that day, or seriously injured my knee? What if I had been moved to tears and couldn't force myself to move from my seat because of how overwhelmed I was by the emotional performances? Now who's the asshole? Me - or the fellow writer who thought it his place to call Hal Prince behind my back and spread unneccessarily bitter rumors?

For me - here's the bottom line: Apparently, according to my friend, in order to save face in this business, I'm not entitled to my own opinion. Regardless of how intelligently I can speak about what I did and did not enjoy, at the end of the show, I'd better be standing. Because...because why? It's broadway. It's a new show. People put in the time and effort to put it on. Ben Brantley said I should. I don't know, honestly.

Before, a "Standing O" was validation, a sign that the audience, each person individually, decided this was great. Now, it's a fiercely political move, that seems to have nothing at all to do with the show you just saw, but more to do with how you look having just watched the show you just saw - and if you find yourself in the audience, remember to simply follow suit, and check your bags, your coats, and your opinion at the door.

What the Favre?

2009-05-06T19:14:00.001-07:00

He's the Barbara Streisand of Football.

No, not gay athlete Esera Tuaolo.

Brett Favre - now in second retirement - with a possibility of an even more dramatic return to the NFL, this time for Green Bay Packers' rival: The Minnesota Vikings.

And the Tony for Most Melodramatic career goes to...

Civil Rights: Cut or Uncut?

2009-04-17T20:57:00.000-07:00

The conservative movement in this country is in a dire way.

They've been left behind by pretty much every other cultural movement, in particular the oh, so relevant pop-culture, complete with all its double-entendre.

First there was tea-bagging. And now this from Talking Points Memo:

"In an unintentional but hilarious nod to gay sex chatters everywhere, the National Organization for Marriage has dubbed their campaign "2 Million for Marriage". Or 2M4M."

Who's working for these people? The same team that vetted Sarah Palin? Is no research being done beforehand?

If you happen to support the further elimination of equal civil rights for all tax-paying, conscientious minded citizens of the land of the free, don't bother checking 2M4M.org. Apparently it's already been claimed by those damn liberals.

The Treaty of what now?

2009-04-14T17:41:00.000-07:00

I'm going to be honest here and say that I know I learned this in school, but it's extremely vague in my memory. It was probably important at the time, but...come on. It wasn't the American Revolution, it wasn't the Louisiana Purchase, and it wasn't even close to the Civil War. How the hell was I supposed to remember the Treaty of Tripoli?? Let alone know that the Senate's ratification of the treaty was only the third recorded unanimous vote of 339 taken.

But that's the funny thing about History. It's always there, and it never goes away.

So when Obama says that while we are a nation predominantly populated by Christians, America is not a Christian Nation, he's backed up by facts.

And here they are:

The most striking is the Treaty of Tripoli, ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1797. Article 11 states: "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility [sic], of Mussulmen [Muslims]; and, as the said States never have entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

That bears repeating: The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

That's not mincing words. And neither is this:

(hat tip: tuesdaysblog)

Tyranny = Losing

2009-04-08T11:24:00.000-07:00

Pardon me while I let Jon gloat...

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart

M - Th 11p / 10c

Baracknophobia - Obey

thedailyshow.com

Daily Show
Full Episodes

Economic Crisis

Political Humor

The Green State Goes Rainbow

2009-04-07T11:27:00.000-07:00

Vermont becomes the 4th state in the union to legalize gay marriage.

California remains the only state constitution ammended to include outright discrimination of a minority group. And my better sense tells me that's not going to change in the next few months.

Last night I caught Pat Robertson on CBN talking about Iowa's decision - rather, in his words, the decision of 4 or 5 radical, unelected judges - to change the cultural landscape of this country, despite the cries of the populous.

This argument always confuses me, since culture is descriptive, rather than prescriptive. And the legality of the civil rights in this situation has little to do with culture. After the courts have made their ruling, Pat Robertson and anyone else still has the freedom to hate gays, speak out against gay marriage, and continue living their homophobic lifestyles. No one wants to prevent that.

Certainly not Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Iowa, or Vermont.

Second Ammendment Blues

2009-04-04T10:21:00.000-07:00

As if we needed more, two more tragic reasons why we need to reexamine our gun control policies in this country.

How many more human lives need to go until people realize this isn't an assault on their right to hunt moose?

As California waits...

2009-04-03T09:23:00.000-07:00

Iowa has already bucked the trend.

This from a unanimous ruling by the Iowa Supreme Court, which upholds held that the Iowa statute limiting civil marriage to a union between a man and a woman violates the equal protection clause of the Iowa Constitution.

Quote of the day, addressing religious opposition to the statute:
Having addressed and rejected each specific interest articulated by the County, the court addressed one final ground believed to underlie the same-sex marriage debate—religious opposition.

Recognizing the sincere religious belief held by some that the “sanctity of marriage” would be undermined by the inclusion of gay and lesbian couples, the court nevertheless noted that such views are not the only religious views of marriage. Other, equally sincere groups have espoused strong religious views yielding the opposite conclusion. These contrasting opinions, the court finds, explain the absence of any religious-based rationale to test the constitutionality of Iowa’s same-sex marriage statute.

“Our constitution does not permit any branch of government to resolve these types of religious debates and entrusts to courts the task of ensuring government avoids them . . . . The statute at issue in this case does not prescribe a definition of marriage for religious institutions. Instead, the statute, declares, ‘Marriage is a civil contract’ and then regulates that civil contract . . . . Thus, in pursuing our task in this case, we proceed as civil judges, far removed from the theological debate of religious clerics, and focus only on the concept of civil marriage and the state licensing system that identifies a limited class of persons entitled to secular rights and benefits associated with marriage.”

(hat-tip Tony)

Hmmm...

2009-04-02T09:27:00.000-07:00

Smokers feeling abused as federal tax hike hits?

Or maybe it's just the smoking??

Obama and The Economy: Clash of the Titans

2009-03-30T10:54:00.000-07:00

South Parks sums up what the Economy (and God) really is, after we've ruined it by buying crap like Margaritaville mixers on payment plans.

And then there's this. Turning down a traditional $100,000 in federal funds allotted to the new first family to use in redecorating their already lavishly decorated new White House, the Obamas have decided to use their own money to do the redecorating. So, instead of taking money away from us, they've decided to...erm...live within their own means. Talk about walking the walk.

In a surprising turn of bi-partisanship, President Obama has also decided to maintain one of the former administrations foremost additions to the White House...the oval office rug. Former-President Bush replaced the blue rug from the Clinton Whitehouse with a $60,000 cream rug designed by former-first lady Laura Bush. I can imagine why getting rid of the rug in the oval office after Clinton's term would be such a necessity....ugly stains and all.

Fresh as a Daisey

2009-03-19T19:30:00.000-07:00

I'm not usually keen on plays or musicals about the theatre. But this is different.

Mike Daisey is a monologue-ist and story teller from northern Maine. You may have seen him on youtube, being protested during one of his shows at American Repertory Theatre.

Center Theatre Group is currently housing Daisey for only a few days at the Kirk Douglas Theatre as part of their new "Douglas Plus" programming. His show: How Theatre Failed America. A ferocious piece with a self-proclaimed terrible title.

Mostly hilarious, and at times incredibly dark, personal, and poignant, the piece is a must-see for anyone who works in theatre, just enjoys theatre, or in rare instances...both.

But here's the catch - you only have two more nights.

And while you're at it, come back to the douglas plus and see a little hip-hop musical I'll be doing called Venice.

Oscar Night (Part Two)

2009-02-23T09:12:00.000-08:00

Once again the Oscars have come and gone.

As I've said before, I'm a huge Oscar fan. There's very little they can do that will upset me. But this year managed to pull it off. I really did not like the broadcast this year - worst ever that I've seen, in fact.

Hugh Jackman was not a host, he was a side show - and a poorly put together one at that. The highlight of the presenters was undoubtedly Steve Martin and Tina Fey. The nominees may disagree with me, but the bringing out of all those people and having us sit and watch them while they "extemporize" about how wonderful everyone is was embarrassing to me at least.

And those musical numbers. Oh my god. What was Baz Luhrman THINKING!?? Not everything needs to be a medley, people. Really! And while I love John Legend, he just didn't sound right singing that Peter Garbriel song. Tsk tsk tsk. No, no, no.

I did appreciate the "grouping" this year - the design oscars being together, the sort of "story" it all told (i.e. "how a movie is made.") And the Best Picture montage may possibly have made up for the rest of them. Except...Good Will Hunting was in there, and that didn't win no best picture. Hm. Confused.

As far as the awards went, there weren't any major surprises, as far as I was concerned. I was thrilled for Penelope Cruz and Sean Penn (and Heath!), all of whom I picked to win. Slumdog seemed to sweep most of its categories, and rightfully so. Kate Winslet cannot be more glamorous and beautiful even if she tried. And yes, I will say it - Poor Merryl. Maybe 16's a charm.

The surprise of the night, for me was Dustin Lance Black. Personally, I wanted WALL-E to win for best original screenplay, but let me say two things:

-His speech was incredibly special and so worthwhile (Fey and Martin were awkward getting back into the humor after that.)

-And it occured to me, afterwards, that even though it may not have had the strongest character relationships, this script was so vitally important to our day and time; and perhaps the members of the academy saw that, too. And if that's true, then I am so happy, and I hope that the tide of history is truly turning in favor of equal human rights.

Either that, or the academy really just is, as Sean Penn put it, "A bunch of commie, homo-lovers."

Oscar Night

2009-02-22T23:03:00.001-08:00

Called it.

Disgusting

2009-02-21T22:25:00.000-08:00

Would this be considered political suicide? Or political murder?

Quote of the Day

2009-02-14T15:40:00.000-08:00

A valentine message from Rep. Zach Wamp to Democrats:

"Just because republicans spent too much money after September 11 and lost our way on financial matters doesn't mean the Democratic party should be allowed to wreck our ship of state."

Ship of state? Which ship would that be? Perhaps the bipartisan-ship?

Get on board, Wamp. You had your chance to fuck up. Don't bitch about the fact that America gave the power to the other team this time around. What's wrong? Afraid they might do better?

Stimul-US, or Stimul-NOT THEM?

2009-02-14T13:41:00.000-08:00

This whole thing over "bipartisanship" has got me all confused.

Chip Reid summed up the media's perspective in Obama's presidential press conference. "You, [Mr. President], have often said that bipartisanship is extraordinarily important overall, and in the stimulus package. But now when we ask your advisors about the lack of bipartisanship so far -- zero votes in the House, three in the Senate -- they say, well, it's not the number of votes that matters, it's the number of jobs that will be created."

Obama then went on (and on, and on...boy, all those thoughtful, well articulated answers are enough to drive someone to Bill O'Reilly level boredom) to explain how he made a series of Overtures to the Republicans, not just to get short-term votes, but to build up trust over time. And we all recall what W. did to build up trust, which was of course to take away our right to distrust him.

I don't understand why bipartisanship is being measured solely by Obama's obvious efforts to reach out to republicans. "Bi" still means two, right Jason Mraz? The GOP's new policy of "Nope" seems to be getting in the way here. They seem to think that an atmosphere of bitpartisanship means "we get our way, period!"

Obama, in my opinion, has done an incredible amount of work to delete pork spending in this bill, and include unprecedented accountability, putting the power of the government into the hands of the people (how's that for republican ideals???)

And yes, I agree with Obama's views on what will ulimately stimulate our economy in the long run (arts funding, green collar jobs, education, education, education!) and yes, you may disagree. You may disagree that the federal government has no business butting into affairs like energy, education, and health care. In fact, it seems that republicans of late believe the government should only be involved with war and foreign policy (and by foreign policy I mean war.) But as Obama so rightfully said in his inaugural address: "The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works."

I have been asked my thoughts on the "speed" at which Obama and Pelosi pushed the bill. I know that Bill O'Reilly is on record as having said that Pelosi hi-jacked the bill, but I have also heard it said that Obama has owned this bill, and I agree that he has, so let's put Pelosi aside.

CNN.com reported that "Some repulicans in the House expressed frustration over how little time they had to read the 1,000-plus-page bill, and others predicted ruin if it passed." Look, Republicans, I hated my english teacher Mr. Burke for assigning King Lear, Hamlet, and Othello over one weekend, but do what I did and bully some smaller senators into reading it out loud to you.

I, personally, think our government moves too slowly in general, but especially in this instance, I agree that swift action is entirely necessary. Not everybody I know is being immediately affected by this recession, but I am. I recently joined the daily growing number of Americans on unemployment, and I do not say that proudly, or self-righteously (as many artists do.) Looking at this, we see just how rapid this economic downturn is...well, downturning.

This is an image of the literal definition of "Off The F*cking Chart."

So, do I think that the extra waiting around, the back and forth about more tax cuts (as though there aren't ANY tax cuts) or less spending (is less spending reeeally going to get rid of the wolves at the door? and by wolves I mean state governments?) I am listening, and I hear Obama when he says that no plan is perfect. I also hear when Rahm Emmanuel says "you never let a good crisis go to waste." And so, while I will be watching recovery.gov very closely, I will also understand that we needed a BIG booster shot and we needed it four months ago (when there "was no recession.")

If my foot is about to fall off, and they pump me full of so many drugs that one of them covers my body in hair, but ultimately saves my foot - hey, no harm done, right? I can always shave the hair off, I can't always get a new foot. Okay, so maybe a bad example.

The point is it's not my foot, it's OUR foot. And it's not a foot at all. It's our jobs, our livelihoods, our futures, our whole damn country. We're in the middle of a big pile of shit and an even bigger shit storm is on the horizon. Whether we dig or whether we swim, we're still going to be eating shit. If we start start acting together now, and if we're lucky, we'll make it out in time.

If not...at least we know the "Number of Jobless Americans Chart Industry" will be booming!

"A.E. Housman, sir"

2009-02-06T22:24:00.000-08:00

Oh who is that young sinner with the handcuffs on his wrists?
And what has he been after that they groan and shake their fists?
And wherefore is he wearing such a conscience-stricken air?
Oh they're taking him to prison for the colour of his hair.

'Tis a shame to human nature, such a head of hair as his;
In the good old time 'twas hanging for the colour that it is;
Though hanging isn't bad enough and flaying would be fair
For the nameless and abominable colour of his hair.

Oh a deal of pains he's taken and a pretty price he's paid
To hide his poll or dye it of a mentionable shade;
But they've pulled the beggar's hat off for the world to see and stare,
And they're haling him to justice for the colour of his hair.

Now 'tis oakum for his fingers and the treadmill for his feet
And the quarry-gang on Portland in the cold and in the heat,
And between his spells of labour in the time he has to spare
He can curse the God that made him for the colour of his hair.

Robert Glibbs

2009-02-05T11:27:00.000-08:00

I understand that being the White House Press Secretary must be a very hard job, and I'm not versed enough to say who has best held that position recently. But I don't find Robert Gibbs particularly...good at it.

I feel like with an eloquent, articulate President like Obama should require an equally eloquent, articulate Press Secretary. Gibbs bumbles, is often glib, can sometimes be rude, and doesn't necessarily illuminate the obvious aspects of his talking points when responding to questions. And in some cases, he seems unprepared, or un-knowledgeable, about things like schedules, recent developments, and even major agenda points (perhaps, purposefully, so - plausible deniability and all that.)

Don't Divorce Us

2009-02-05T10:58:00.000-08:00

News broke this Tuesday, according to Courage Campaign, that the California supreme court will hear oral arguments on March 5, and will then make a decision within 90 days on the validity of Prop 8 and 18,000 American marriages.

Ken Star (yes, that Ken Star) has filed a legal brief that would FORCIBLY DIVORCE 18,000 American marriages. (Mr. Star apparently on a rampage to break up marriages, after failing to break up the Clintons'.)

Watch this video, and then please tell the supreme court not to divorce Americans.
Doesn't matter where you are, could be California, New York, or even...gulp...Wisconsin.

Quote of the Night

2009-02-04T23:41:00.000-08:00

Stephen Colbert on Pope Benedict rehabilitating Bishop Richard Williamson, a known holocaust denier:

"Apparently, Bishop Williamson has enough evidence that 2000 years ago a man rose from the dead, but not enough evidence that 60 years ago the Nazis were pretty bad."

Quote of the Day

2009-02-04T11:19:00.001-08:00

This, from the former VP of the Christian President who ran under the title "compassionate conservative":

"Protecting the country’s security is a tough, mean, dirty, nasty business. These are evil people. And we’re not going to win this fight by turning the other cheek."
~Dick Cheney

I wonder what Jesus would have to say about that. After he was finished eradicating all the gay people, I mean.

Words Matter

2009-02-04T10:35:00.000-08:00

In one of the best essays that I have ever read, George Orwell, in 1946 wrote, in Politics and the English Language:

"Now, it is clear that the decline of a language must ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not due simply to the bad influence of this or that individual writer. But an effect can become a cause, reinforcing the original cause and producing the same effect in an intensified form, and so on indefinitely. A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts. The point is that the process is reversible."

As an intellectual and a cultural elitist (that's right - get your rotten tomatoes ready) I feel Orwell's call to, essentially, pull our minds from the mud by way of our words. Even in my own career practice, acting, I've learned recently how using certain vocabulary belies a specific kind of understanding (or belies little understanding at all) of certain topics.

Susan Jacoby, who I've blogged about before, wrote a book called The Age of American Unreason. I have yet to read this book in its entirety, but the first chapter addresses the issue of language in our politics in very clear, easy to understand, AMERICAN terms. I highly reccomend you read it here.

She talks about Former President Bush's all-encompassing use of the word "folks." "Folks", Jacoby argues, as opposed to "Ladies and Gentlemen" or "The American People" degrades the American sense of self. I know, I know, look at me spouting off my grandiloquent and confusing intellectual, elitist philosophies here, but hang with me - I'll try my best not use too big of words (aside from grandiloquent.)

"The specific political use of folks as an exclusionary and inclusionary signal, designed to make the speaker sound like one of the boys or girls, is symptomatic of a debasement of public speech inseparable from a more general erosion of American cultural standards. Casual, colloquial language also conveys an implicit denial of the seriousness of whatever issue is being debated: talking about folks going off to war is the equivalent of describing rape victims as girls (unless the victims are, in fact, little girls and not grown women.)"

So, folks aside, let's move on to a few other political words that have become meaningless: democracy, liberal, conservative, and my personal favorite, and the point of this blog: terror - specifically The War on Terror.

How, pray tell, does one fight a War on Terror? And who can debate anyone the fact that Terror is bad and therefore we must fight said War on Terror? It can't be done, but the fact is, it is rhetorically empty and meaningless, which is exactly what our politicians would like, because then the War on Terror can be used to justify anything (Iraq, anyone?)

So you can understand how my intellectual, elitist heart jumped for joy when, while watching Anderson Cooper interview President Obama, they had this exchange:

ANDERSON: "I've noticed you don't use the term 'War on Terror.'...Is that conscience? Is there something about that term that you find objectionable or not useful?"

OBAMA: "Well, I think it is very important for us to recognize that we have a battle, or a war, against some terrorist organizations; but that those organizations aren't representative of a broader Arab community, Muslim community. Words matter in this situation because one of the ways we're going to win this struggle is through the battle of hearts and minds. What I want to do is make sure that I'm constantly talking about 'Al Queda' and other affliated organizations because we, I believe, can win over moderate Muslims, to recognize that that kind of destruction and nihilism ultimately leads to a dead end, and that we should be working together to make sure that everybody's got a better life."

If I wasn't already swooning over Cooper and Obama in the same room, then this really got me going. Orwell would be so proud. We should all be so proud.

Even if you don't quite understand it, that's okay - there's a good chance, now, that someday you will.

Growing Pains

2009-02-04T10:07:00.001-08:00

I'm confused as to why we're shaking our heads at Obama in utter disappointment over Daschle and Killefer.

Oh, wait...no I'm not. It's fun to create heroes and then knock them down.

I believe Obama when he says Daschle was the most qualified person for the job as head of HHS. Is it Obama's fault that Daschle has tax issues? Is it better for Obama to nominate a completely unqualified individual (or even a lesser qualified individual) just because that person has a clean tax record. No one tried to hide his tax evasion. It came up fairly quickly, and, I'm sure, would have been worked out just as quickly. Daschle, I assume, was vetted on his ability to run HHS, not his ability to pay taxes.

I understand Obama, too, when he says it can suggest a double standard. But a.) Washington can't be changed in 15 days, and b.) Change has to start SOMEWHERE. Obama can't change what Daschle did in the past, only what he will do from now on. And isn't that important, too?

And what's this about Daschle being a semi-lobbyist?? Because he worked for a law firm that did business on behalf of lobbyists? According to NPR last night, that makes half of Washington Lobbyists. All congresspeople and ex-congresspeople still have the phone numbers of their colleagues, and will still call them to...y'know...strategize, group, pitch, lobby for certain bills. So if that was the criteria, very few people in Washington would pass that litmus test.

The point is - that ISN'T the criteria. You must be a registered lobbyist and engage in "lobbying contacts" (okay, whatever...?) The critieria's strength, according to NPR, lies in its narrow defintion of LOBBYIST, covering only the most important part of what it is a lobbyist does - actual lobbying.

Not to mention (hat tip Tony) that Obama, not 4 hours after Daschle's announcement, was APOLOGIZING to the American public. Remind me again when Bush apologized for making the wrong appointment (let alone eating cake, while New Orleans drowned.)

We have an expectation that our Politicians are gods. If they make a mistake, we don't want to vote for them. Yet, if they make a mistake and try to talk their way around it, we see through it and we criticize them. Obama's approval rating has "shot down" (to an alarming 66%...66%!! More than twice what Bush spent his last year in office with) because he 'fessed up to a mistake.

We need to grow up.

For Timmy P

2009-02-01T22:42:00.000-08:00

THINK BEFORE YOU SPEAK!

Annoyed with Frustrated Attachments

2009-01-29T19:50:00.000-08:00

I'm watching CNN right now, and Anderson Cooper is discussing Ted Haggard's interview on Larry King.

Larry has so far asked such questions as:
Do you think this would have been different if Mike Jones had been Michelle Jones?
Do you consider yourself gay? Bi?

Haggard has said he's been to a couple counselors, who have defined his condition as Heterosexual with Homosexual Attachments (attachments? Like on a vacuum cleaner?)
He made the point that when a gay man has an affair with a woman, people don't demand that he admit he is heterosexual.

Am I the only one who thinks these are the wrong questions???

Who cares what Haggard calls himself? He has admitted that he doesn't feel like he fits in any of those boxes.
And, I'm sorry, but I can scarcely recall a gay man having an affair with a woman. Is Haggard really the victim here? Poor Ted, being asked to "come out."

To me, the question that needs to be asked is what kind of religion/society creates an environment that forces individuals to repress their sexual identities. Haggard is (was?) an outspoken homophobe, which clearly masked his true struggle. What was it that made it a struggle?

It actually pains me to watch him have to answer these questions and face these accusations, and I can only imagine what it must be to do this all so publicly. But this isn't helping anyone. We're only telling young boys and girls, who are experiencing the same things, that if you act on them, you're bad. Why aren't we telling them that if you REPRESS them, that is dangerous?

Larry King can be a moron sometimes, but Anderson Cooper...I would've expected more.

It's a New Dawn, It's a New Day, It's a New Life For Me...

2009-01-20T06:46:00.001-08:00

And I'm feelin' good.

The Closer

2009-01-04T08:55:00.000-08:00

A lot people that I grew up with will remain fairly unaffected by the current recession. I tease people saying that I will be unaffected, as well - "I was poor before, I'm poor now. What's the difference?"

The difference is this.

Today, Sunday January 4th, marks the beginning of a slew of closes on Broadway. More shows closing in one month than ever before in Broadway History.

Yesterday, I saw two of Broadway's strongest shows: All My Sons, and a rapturous Gypsy, starring the truly incomparable Patti LuPone. Both houses were packed full. I had to stand for All My Sons. Both of them close within the month.

The Tony Award for Best Musical is currently represented by 7 different shows, still playing. 4 of them - Hairpsray, Avenue Q, Spamalot, and Spring Awakening - will all close.

The Tony Award winner for best play and the Pulitzer Prize winner in 2008, August:Osage County - the most exciting new American drama Broadway has seen in a decade - will close.

As well as 13, The 39 Steps, Boeing, Boeing (Tony Winner for best play revival 2008), Dividing the Estate, Grease, Young Frankenstein, and Equus.

Compound that with two christmas shows that were always due to close (White Christmas, and Slava's Snowshow) and you've just closed 16 shows! With not so many left. Think of how many actors will be unemployed tomorrow.

Dark days lie ahead, and I don't just mean the marquis.

Happy New Year

2009-01-02T07:20:00.000-08:00

So it's here, and for some reason I have a feeling that 2009 is going to be a great year.

Not for you.
For me.
For all I know, this could be the worst year ever for you. I'm sorry about that. But that's just how these things fall.

First of all, in about two weeks, we're going to finally have a new president. That's very exciting.
Second of all, in about three weeks, my musical DARLING will premiere as a reading as Pace University in Manhattan - where I currently am.

Beyond that I got nothing. Nothing, but a good feeling.

I love New York a lot. Everytime I walk out of my friends' upper-west side apartment, I get a little jolt of excitement. I'm in New f*cking York!

I haven't done much, yet. I've been swamped in re-writes ever since I got here. But I finished those last night and I think tonight I'll finally start seeing some Broadway shows.

Lots of things are closing on Broadway, which I know scares some. But I'm a writer. And now there are a ton of dark theatres that need really great shows to premiere. Hellloooooo!

I think I'll go see The 39 Steps tonight. That will be the beginning of me spending lots and lots of money that I don't have. Ah, well. Write offs!

The Curious Case of Forest Gump...er...Benjamin Button

2008-12-25T21:13:00.000-08:00

I love really good ideas. I love them the first time someone does them. It's always best the first time.

Benjamin Button is a really good idea. I think ultimately we can credit Mark Twain with that (who gave the idea to F. Scott Fitzgerald, who then passed it along to Eric Roth, who subsequently kept it to himself and wrote The Curious Case of Benjamin Button instead.)

A man who is born an old man and dies a baby. Lives life in reverse.

What kills me, after nearly 3 hours, is that the most important relationship in the entire damn film finally comes in to play about 2 hours in, and then lasts all of 30 minutes. Gee, I sure hope somebody gave Eric Roth a pair of scissors for Christmas. Snip, snip.

Benjamin Button is a man who gets better with age physically, emotionally, mentally ('cept for the end.) One thing that doesn't get better with age, however, is a good idea. A good idea lasts an exceptionally short amount of time, before it gives way to a better idea.

Forest Gump was a GOOD idea! It sucks the second time around. There's a scene in the movie that I swear to god was literally copied, word for word, from Forest and Jenn-ay! A mother from the South with a big heart and a few catchy sayings, a childhood love that he is somehow destined to be with (although, that point was lost on me), even a boat that survives many a storm! Oh, and did I mention it's all told with a narration from a person living in the present about to embark on a very important journey. The only new thing was the idea of living from old age to youth. And Hurricane Katrina (which made a nice, if meaningless, cameo.)

Brad Pitt is up for a Golden Globe for best performance by an actor, though you could hardly call it a performance. The role is written so inactively, that the make-up department's special effects do most of the heavy lifting for him.

Hope

2008-12-17T22:15:00.000-08:00

I wish I could say Milk is the best film of the year.

But it isn't. Sean Penn's portrayal of Harvey Milk is nothing short of brilliant and inspiring. The script, however, is devastatingly lacking. Penn is surrounded by a very talented supporting cast that has absolutely nothing to do, and the relationships of those characters to Harvey are sadly non-existent.

But.
But.
But.

Go see this film. Just for Sean Penn and Harvey Milk. Go see this film.

'Tis the Season

2008-12-17T21:56:00.000-08:00

The Most Wonderful Time of the Year is upon us, indeed.

Deck the Halls, and Fa la la la la.

No, not christmakahwanza.

I'm talking Oscar Season.

And it begins with the announcement last thursday of this year's Golden Globes Nominees.
I'm already behind in my watching.

Some comments:

Meryl Streep with two nods, one for Doubt and the other for Mamma Mia! Now, if that isn't range, I don't know what is.

And how about 3 broadway shows on screen: Doubt, Mamma Mia!, and Frost/Nixon. All of them basically transplanted, not even adapted. Hmm.

The biggest surprise of the list: James Franco for (Milk, you ask? no...) Pineapple Express. I admit, I didn't see it. But the billboard with the beat up guys carrying sawed-off shot guns in a hazy mist of marijuana smoke touting "From the Guys who brought you Knocked Up" didn't really say Golden Globe to me.

I think The Curious Case of Benjamin Button gets the most nominated award, if my count is correct (note: I didn't actually count.) I'm excited to see it. But I honestly don't think anyone can beat Sean Penn in the best actor category. His turn as Harvey Milk is honest-to-god magic.

And what I wouldn't give to see Heath Ledger win for Dark Knight. God rest ya, Heath.

It Never Rains in Southern California...

2008-12-17T21:52:00.000-08:00

But baby when it does, it pours.

A page out of the actor/composer's diary.

Up for a great guest-star on BONES. Did really well at the audition and the callback, down to two people, and then lost it because they had to match mother and son characters and the other guy was a better match.

Then went in for a great part on GREEK, but of course that was silly because I leave town tomorrow and what did I expect would happen? Of course they want to have me read for director and producers...on friday.

Sigh.

Story of many people's lives, I suppose.

But on this rainy, cold, Los Angeles day, before I head home to snowy, wintery Wisconsin, I can't help but feel a little blue.

And when you can no longer speak...you sing.

2008-12-03T15:10:00.000-08:00

I don't get it - don't straight people LOVE Jack Black??

Honestly, what does it take!?

Anyway, here's a No on Prop 8 video that speaks to the actor/composer in me.

Are you ready for it?

"Prop 8 - the Musical"

See more Jack Black videos at Funny or Die

Up, Up, and Away...

2008-11-19T11:27:00.000-08:00

This year of my life, I made a promise to myself that I would concentrate on my writing.

I've certainly tried to do that, and I have thus far enjoyed some success.
For over a year now, my collaborator, Ryan Scott Oliver, and I have been working non-stop (read: with many, many stops) on a new musical called Darling.

This January, Darling will receive a fully-produced reading at Pace University.

We just finished casting the piece yesterday, and I am so freakin' excited. There are some talented kids at Pace, and it's going to be such a thrill to work on this piece with them. Not to mention that I'll be spending a month in New York. It's always a pleasure to be in New York when you have something to do.

This is hopefully the first stop of many on Darling's way to bigger things.
And as always, the most satisfying thing is to set a goal and then achieve it.

Now if I could only figure out how to make some money in the process....

Alex Brightman sings "Lost Boy" from DARLING.

The Revolutionary Costume for Today

2008-11-16T17:44:00.000-08:00

Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa....

As I was prepping to go and demonstrate in Los Angeles for the civil rights of a discriminated minority, I took stock for a moment and thought, "Wow...I am participating in my democracy."
And then I thought, "Oh my god, what the hell am I going to wear?"

And honestly, what does one wear to a gay protest? Does one put on a chicken suit, as so many did, to comment on the failure of prop 2 against the passing of prop 8 (Chickens, 1; Gays, 0). While the commentary and the comedy might be effective, this is LA in November during fires, so it was approximately 1 million degrees. Does one, perhaps, combine stripes and polka dots to exemplify the absurdity of separate but equal? While clever, one runs the risk of seeming like just a fashion idiot - this is a gay protest after all.

Finally, I decided on jeans, a t-shirt (nothing particularly radical, as I don't really own anything radical), and to top it off, a red bandanna on my head, to elicit Rosie the Riveter. I figured that was fitting.

And then I got back to thinking about democracy, when I read this reader dissent on Andrew Sullivan's blog:

"Yesterday my girl friend and I drove to downtown San Diego to attend the wine and food festival. We encountered much difficulty because of the No on 8 Marchers.

Efforts at mob rule have always worried me. This great democracy is fragile and I think we do not fully realize how very small numbers of people can cause great disorder. We had an election and the majority of Californians voted to preserve the thousands of years old institution of marriage. Demonstrations like the one I witnessed yesterday gain no sympathy from those of use who still believe the the rule of law and democratic process.

I am afraid we are going to lose this country."

Mob rule? Disorder? Preserving institutions? Democratic process?

I can't help but wonder who the "we" is in his final statement...

Let's do a little constitutional review, shall we?
From the Bill of Rights (that's civil rights...you remember those, right?)
1st Ammendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That last section is most relevant here (although that first part always needs reminding as well, it seems.)
So "mob rule" and "disorder" seem to be a most important part of our "democratic process." At least, according to our founding fathers. But what did they know?

And as for preserving institutions, let me remind you, and let me be clear:
People in California did not vote to preserve anything. The words "preserve" were not in the proposition at all. The words "Eliminate rights" were. This was not a vote to give gay people any rights. They already had them. This was a vote to take them away.

And with that, we go back to our constitution.
14th Amendment:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

A quick side note in case you forgot, this was the amendment that came out of the civil war. A civil war fought over the notion that a minority could not be oppressed by a majority.

So yet again, we see what our "democratic process" is really about. It isn't about putting civil rights at the ballot box and allowing a mere 500,000 votes to rule.

No, I don't believe that demonstrations like this will gain much sympathy from those that have nothing to lose, that have never experienced the sensation of having to fight for your rights. But that's okay. We don't want your sympathy. And while I deeply regret your not getting to the wine and food festival with ease, I don't regret you witnessing our democratic process in action.

See the thing is, we don't want to lose our country either.

JOIN THE IMPACT

2008-11-14T11:02:00.001-08:00

Act up.

One of the greatest powers in our democracy is civil disobedience.

If you care about YOUR human rights, act up.

This Saturday, November 15th, there is a nationwide protest against marriage discrimination.

Nation. Wide.

Every single state and Washington D.C. will be hosting protests.

This is not a religious fight. We are not protesting the practice of any religion in this country. We want you all to go to church, temple, mosque, what have you.

This is about civil rights.

Act up.

"As I've
Often stated,
It's intolerable
being tolerated."

Our Future Madame President

2008-11-07T15:51:00.000-08:00

I'm sorry, can we please talk about how cute my niece is?

This is the future of the world, people!!

And if you ask me, the future looks pretty damn adorable!

One Nation, Under Canada

2008-11-06T23:20:00.000-08:00

Re: Sarah Palin's apparent ignorance about the nations involved in NAFTA (that would be the ::ahem:: North American Free Trade Agreement.)

This link came off Andrew Sullivan's blog.

It seems The Weekly Standard defends Palin's obvious knowledge that Canada is apart of North America.

I don't doubt she does know that.

My guess is it's the part about Mexico also being part of North America that most likely escaped her.

As well as The Weekly Standard

November 5th, 2008

2008-11-05T09:20:00.000-08:00

Today is an historic and bittersweet day for democracy.

One civil rights battle has sustained a wonderful victory.
Another civil rights battle took a stunning defeat.

Barack Hussein Obama will be our 44th President with an overwhelming electoral win.
Proposition 8 was passed, Amending the California Constitution to eliminate the civil rights of gays and lesbians.

It's an ironic day.

When 70% of the nation's LGBT voted for an African-American President.
Yet, 70% of Californian African-Americans voted in favor of discrimination against LGBT.
"African-Americans, who voted overwhelmingly against extending to gay people the civil rights once denied them."

When 88% of the nations liberals and 60% of the nation's moderates vote for an African-American President.
Yet, California, the most liberal of states in the nation, votes against equality for all.

I was moved to tears when Obama spoke about the promise of our Founding Fathers coming true - All Men Are Created Equal. To have this insight and this ideal some 200-years-ago is truly marvelous. And yet, 200-years-later, it remains just an ideal.

Though Obama has won, there is still a civil rights battle in this country. When will the minority groups learn that apart, they are minorities, but together, they are majorities?

Prop 8 is a setback, but not the end of the war. Who will pick up the torch? Where are the gay civil rights leaders, marching, and demonstrating, and boycotting? Who will step forward and show the country that gay people have a voice? Where is the gay MLK, Ghandi, Obama?

We shall overcome. Yes, we can.

I Voted

2008-11-04T09:41:00.000-08:00

Today I was a true, patriotic American.

Today I came from Real America.

It didn't have to do with paying higher taxes, or waging war, or spreading the wealth.

Today I was Joe the American.

I participated in my government, in my democracy.

Proudly.

I voted.

And a Cup o' Jo

2008-11-02T09:41:00.000-08:00

As if you needed another reason to vote this Tuesday...

(thanks Joe!)

7 Days to Go

2008-10-28T10:51:00.000-07:00

My friend Tony posted this today, and it elicited a big response from me, which I wanted to further blog about. Read his post and click on the links. :

this is why some on the right are so angry. and this is why some on the left are. and this.

in my mind, it's what is wrong with us. we spend so much time hating the other side, deciding they are so different from us, that some people resort to disgusting behavior. thus, pushing the moderate folks further away from the center.

we have common ground. there is gray area. we can come together around difficult issues. there is definitely room for disagreement, and pushing back, and discussion. but when it's taken too far, we accomplish nothing.

What surprised me about myself, is that when I clicked on the first link, I thought "Heh, amusing. Practically harmless, somebody exercising their right to disagree without causing any real pain or offense." Then on the second link, I thought, "Well...I mean...I guess fair is fair. I'm sure Obama (or anyone in the public eye) expects this kind of reaction."
But then the third link finally made me go, "Oh...wait. This isn't good. How can anyone do this and not understand the implication it carries with it?"

So, three links later, I was offended - and mostly because it was suggesting that a Black Man should Hang. White Men Hanging - apparently not as offensive to me. Perhaps this is because in our history, white men don't typically hang. Unless they're gay. So, would I ever condone anyone hanging Matthew Shepherd in effigy? Not for a moment.

So Tony, you bring up a wonderful point, and one that I have found myself guilty of. We spend too much time hating the other side. But even more than that, we think that what the other side is doing is "HATE", but what we're doing is "JUST GOOD FUN" or "PART OF DEMOCRACY" or some other justification.

Here's the rub for me.

The other day I had drinks with an old friend who had early voted for McCain. He's Asian, he's going to grad school to be a Lawyer, he's a year younger than me, and he lives in Southern California - a rare McCain demographic I'm sure.

I was angry and frustrated and wanted to get at the root of WHY....WHY would he vote for McCain??

Now why couldn't I say "Well...it's your right to choose who you want"? Why couldn't I just agree to disagree without being disagreeable?

If someone likes chocolate ice cream, when I prefer vanilla. Who cares? If you want to go to temple and you want to go to church - c'est la vie!

But the leader of our country isn't ice cream or architecture. If McCain is elected, I believe my life will be affected negatively. I have a VESTED interest in Obama's success. I have something to lose.

So where is the middle ground? And when the middle ground is reached, through compromise and give and take, and discussion - at what point have you also compromised your values? If there's too much "Well, I guess you have a point", ultimately doesn't one person concede and the other win? Is there really a pure truth? A correct answer?

And if...IF there is. Then isn't it our politicians' fault for dividing us, for fooling us into believing there are multiple ways? Mutually exclusive ways? If there IS common ground, if there IS gray area, then why do we vote between two opposing candidates with two opposing parties?

With 7 days to go...I wonder why I feel so angry...

Superstar

2008-10-15T00:05:00.001-07:00

I'm very excited about this...

I have to be honest, this makes me feel a little like a superstar.

I haven't yet blogged about this, but I'm currently filming a webseries called The Resistance, a spin-off of the acclaimed series Lonelygirl15.

And they asked us to participate in the Get Out the Vote campaign and encourage our viewers to register to vote. The deadline in California is October 20th. So check out the video (and the show) and do, please, VOTE!

Actor/Composer/Politician?

2008-10-13T09:31:00.000-07:00

Back in July I revamped my effort to write more and stay on top of this blog. In doing that, I've unconsciously begun to shift my focus from Actor/Composer to Political Commentator. Watch out, Anderson Cooper!

Now look - I think it's the job of every American to be as up-to-date as possible when it comes to Politics. Politics shouldn't be the understanding of a few, but of all. It's OUR country...right? So I don't feel bad about commenting about Politics, but I do feel as though it has shifted my focus from things more important to my daily life.

Also in July I finally got a MacBook, which was great. But I haven't yet gotten the web programming software to continually update my personal website.

So I've decided to momentarily kill two birds with one stone. Except I don't condone killing animals for sport, so let's just say I plan to stun two birds with one stone. I'm going to report on my artistic, professional endeavors on my blog here and leave the political commentating to the experts - namely my good friend, Tony, who once wrote for his high school newspaper.

This all came about when my good friend Tim - who's getting married!...gee, getting married, I wonder what that would be like. Won't ever know unless you vote no on prop 8....

No! no...no political talk. Er...

So, I'm working on a show where I play a Canadian, and I often joke around about the accent, which sounds an awfully lot like Sarah Palin's....

Oops. There I go again.

Well, look I'll do my best to turnaround, get on the money, and keep it gay.

Hopefully it'll be a change we can all believe in.

A Lucky Kid

2008-10-09T22:26:00.000-07:00

A beautiful wedding story.

Vote No on Prop 8.

The Gospel According to Bill

2008-10-06T11:43:00.000-07:00

Last night I went to see Religulous. I was surprised to find that it received a 63% "fresh" rating from rottentomatoes.

In the film, political comedian Bill Maher makes commentary on the absurdity of different religions through various interviews with believers (and one or two non-believers, as well.)

In my opinion, this was a terrible film, and an even worse "documentary" - though to use that term, as Maher does, is to use it loosely.

I agree with Maher's position on religion. But what I expected to be a discussion about religion, it's creeds, as well as it's uses in society, turned out to be "Bill Maher's Right and You're Wrong." In essence, I felt that Maher did to the converted what Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly do to the liberals. There's no room for other opinions, but mine.

Again I say, I agree with Maher. I think religion is a detriment to society, and I think it's a very dangerous thing. Being able to say with utter certainty that "God is on my side" is to be drunk with unquestionable power and the utmost authority to do whatever you want.

But it exists. And so what does that mean? This movie was far less about opening a conversation and much more about convincing people - in essence apostatizing. And I always question when one person uses the tactics of another person to show that their tactics are wrong.

Do I think people should see this movie? Sadly, no. I feel very strongly that religion is something that needs to fade away, but the answer, I feel, is information and education. I don't think this movie provides much of that at all, and so I think that in attempting to help it, Maher has actually hurt his cause.

The Future of McCain

2008-10-06T11:29:00.001-07:00

Last Wednesday, the night before the VP debate, Stephen Colbert did a segment about how John McCain was not the candidate of tomorrow, but rather the candidate FROM tomorrow!

The piece was about John McCain's uncanny ability to report the facts before they actually exist, and how his VP pick, Gov. Palin, is able to see Russia AND the future.

Take a look:

Though it sounded funny, I wasn't quite sure what Stephen meant until the day AFTER the VP debate, Friday. In my mail box I received a letter from John McCain, along with this:

If you can't make out what the writing says on the bottom it reads thus:
"Dear Mr. Ryback, Thank you for your support and commitment to our Party and candidates," and then it has McCain's and Palin's autographs!

And look! John McCain is waving right at me!! Gov. Palin, of course, is waving to somebody above and behind me, perhaps it's Joe Six-Pack or some Hockey Mom from Main street.

In the letter it tells me: "I know that friends like you have been among our Party's most loyal and dedicated supporters throughout this unpredictable campaign. We owe you a great deal of thanks."

Now, I was immediately confused. I have never once in my life supported McCain, his campaign, or his party. And yet here it was: "Thank you for your support and commitment to our Party and candidates!" Then I looked at the date of the letter.

Just below John McCain's personal (and frankly uncreative) letterhead was the date he wrote this letter: Friday Morning. (That's actually what it said, Friday Morning. Even when he writes the DATE he avoids specifics.) I had recieved this letter Friday afternoon. I don't understand the mail all that well, but I know it takes at LEAST a day (sometimes a year, in Los Angeles) for a piece of mail to go around the block, let alone from Washington D.C. Which can only mean one thing...

JOHN MCCAIN WAS WRITING TO ME FROM THE FUTURE!

He dated it Friday morning, because it was Friday Morning when he wrote it, but in reality it was really only Thursday morning! Suddenly this changed everything. Maybe John McCain was thanking me for the support that I will give him in the future. Maybe he knew something I didn't know! (That I would, for example, actually desire an autographed picture of those two.)

It seems to me that this type of desperate pandering to people who have never committed to his campaign does show a bit of sight into the future. I have a very good feeling that John McCain knows exactly how this whole election is going to turn out.

And boy is he nervous.

Don't Vote!

2008-10-02T10:06:00.000-07:00

More reasons from the huffingtonpost.com
as to why you shouldn't vote....

November 4th, 2008

2008-10-02T09:35:00.000-07:00

Be sure to register to vote.

And while you're there...be careful!

Take a look at this eerie clip from the fuuuuture!

The Right to Choose

2008-09-30T10:37:00.000-07:00

Look.

The greatest gift democracy has to give us is the freedom of choice.

We choose who governs, we choose the laws, we choose the consequences. We choose where to go to church, we choose where to get a job, we choose where to go to school, what to learn, what music to listen to, what to wear everyday, what to throw away and what to recycle.

We the people have a right to choose, and that right is inalienable and it must be protected.

I will fight to the death for my neighbor's right to choose, even if his choice is different than mine and here's why: the minute I allow somebody else's right to choose to be taken away, I open the door for my OWN right to choose to be taken away.

Again:
When one person's right to choose is taken away, it automatically paves the way for other's right to choose to be taken away.

I don't care what you choose, so long as it doesn't impede MY right to choose.

You can go to church, and you can believe what you want to believe, but when you make a decision about a law in this land that inhibits another's right to choose, you are doing yourself, this country, and democracy as a principle an utter and complete disservice.

The first amendment states:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, etc. are all welcome, but they are all equal in that they are meaningless when it comes to the law.

When it comes to civil rights, history shows that the tide moves in one direction and one direction only - forward. So vote how you will, but understand that a step backward for one, is a step backward for all.

The Politics of "Someone Else"

2008-09-30T09:37:00.000-07:00

I was taken aback by a conversation I had yesterday with someone close to me who mentioned that he thought Sarah Palin was exactly what this country needed.

It really opened my eyes about something that I should have already known, but never really took the time to understand. I thought it was obvious that she was so incredibly unversed and unsophisticated enough about the important issues in this election - namely the economy (and alll that entails) and foreign policy (and subsequently homeland security, which makes me cringe to use that terminology.) To her credit, I do think she is a champion of conservative social issues and therefore, if you subscribe to them, she could be your gal.

But here it was before me: "I think Sarah Pain is exactly what this country needs." She's unconnected to the system, she's a small-town person, she's as corny as Kansas in August, she's as normal as blueberry pie.

This person was concerned with politicians. Said he doesn't trust them, never did. They make everything complicated and they're more concerned with getting elected than the well-being of the country.

Now, I must remind him and everyone else that, new to the game as she is, Sarah Palin's job depends on whether or not she is holding public office. It is in her greatest personal interest that she get elected.

But to move on from that, the point he brought up was more than valid. Politicians make everything complicated and they're more concerned with getting elected than the well-being of the country. How can that not be true? We ask so much of our elected officials, and the minute it became a job, and not a volunteer position, we gave up most all hope of someone acting for an interest beyond their own well-being.

But that's the point - WE did it. And there's a reason. It's the same reason we take our car to the mechanic, or the same reason we have maids clean our homes. It's the idea of "Let Someone Else Do It." I will make a smaller sacrifice (carpooling to work for a week, allowing a stranger into my home while I'm gone) in order for me to forego a bigger sacrifice (having to fix my own car, clean my own house).

So we elect people to do the dirty work for us. But then, on top of that, we expect that the dirty work we didn't want to do will ultimately be something we could have done ourselves.

When I go to the mechanic and he points out all the bells and whistles that are wrong with my car, I get angry. I get angry because I think he's trying to confuse me in order to rip me off. It can't be THAT complicated I think! It was just a "whrrring" noise. Just fix the "whrrring" noise!

And when the cleaning lady puts things in the wrong places and I think she stole them, but really they were just misplaced, I get angry. I get angry because if I'd done it, I'd know exactly where they were. Not that I have the time to do it.

And the same with our politicians.

But the thing is this: our world is increasingly complicated.

It bears repeating.

Our World Is Increasingly Complicated.

And if you want Someone Else to make it easy to swallow, someone who takes the complication, the gray, and turns it into straight-talking black-or-white, I understand. And I understand why that person would think Sarah Palin is exactly what this country needs.

But you also should understand that it isn't that simple, and in making it seem that way, she's leaving a lot of important things out.

And it's tough, but YOU are going to have to sit down and look at the facts and bone up on basic economics and figure out how Russia, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan are all related if you want things to be done right.

Because you can't just leave it to Someone Else. Because like you said - someone else doesn't care about you as much as you do.

Palin-tology

2008-09-15T07:28:00.000-07:00

You knew it the minute she walked up and stood next to McCain the Friday after the DNC. She was a smart ass with a sexy business skirt, a flirty hair bun, and...those glasses.
You knew it was going to be everything you wanted it to be.

You knew this because...she looked just like Tina Fey.

And then...it came....

Those Sexy Feminists

2008-09-10T07:57:00.000-07:00

As I listen to NPR and watch CNN, I often think about the well-balanced nature of my media. Of course, I believe that both of those outlets are giving me many sides of the issues and that the anchors are never bullying their own opinions on me.

But lately, especially in the wake of Sarah-"I don't come from no monkey"-Palin, I can't help but feel that ALL the media is liberally-bent. But then I wonder if we don't just have logic on our side.

Another very liberal source of information is of course the LA Times. On Sept. 4th, it posted an opinion article by everyone's favorite feminist Gloria Steinem. The article, chock full of logic, is just too damn good to not post in its entirety, so here's the link, and here's the article:

Palin: Wrong Woman, Wrong Message
Sarah Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Hillary Clinton. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.
By Gloria Steinem
September 4, 2008
(Links and italics added by BT)

Here's the good news: Women have become so politically powerful that even the anti-feminist right wing -- the folks with a headlock on the Republican Party -- are trying to appease the gender gap with a first-ever female vice president. We owe this to women -- and to many men too -- who have picketed, gone on hunger strikes or confronted violence at the polls so women can vote. We owe it to Shirley Chisholm, who first took the "white-male-only" sign off the White House, and to Hillary Rodham Clinton, who hung in there through ridicule and misogyny to win 18 million votes.

But here is even better news: It won't work. This isn't the first time a boss has picked an unqualified woman just because she agrees with him and opposes everything most other women want and need. Feminism has never been about getting a job for one woman. It's about making life more fair for women everywhere. It's not about a piece of the existing pie; there are too many of us for that. It's about baking a new pie.

Selecting Sarah Palin, who was touted all summer by Rush Limbaugh, is no way to attract most women, including die-hard Clinton supporters. Palin shares nothing but a chromosome with Clinton. Her down-home, divisive and deceptive speech did nothing to cosmeticize a Republican convention that has more than twice as many male delegates as female, a presidential candidate who is owned and operated by the right wing and a platform that opposes pretty much everything Clinton's candidacy stood for -- and that Barack Obama's still does. To vote in protest for McCain/Palin would be like saying, "Somebody stole my shoes, so I'll amputate my legs."

This is not to beat up on Palin. I defend her right to be wrong, even on issues that matter most to me. I regret that people say she can't do the job because she has children in need of care, especially if they wouldn't say the same about a father. I get no pleasure from imagining her in the spotlight on national and foreign policy issues about which she has zero background, with one month to learn to compete with Sen. Joe Biden's 37 years' experience.

Palin has been honest about what she doesn't know. When asked last month about the vice presidency, she said, "I still can't answer that question until someone answers for me: What is it exactly that the VP does every day?" When asked about Iraq, she said, "I haven't really focused much on the war in Iraq."

She was elected governor largely because the incumbent was unpopular, and she's won over Alaskans mostly by using unprecedented oil wealth to give a $1,200 rebate to every resident. Now she is being praised by McCain's campaign as a tax cutter, despite the fact that Alaska has no state income or sales tax. Perhaps McCain has opposed affirmative action for so long that he doesn't know it's about inviting more people to meet standards, not lowering them. Or perhaps McCain is following the Bush administration habit, as in the Justice Department, of putting a job candidate's views on "God, guns and gays" ahead of competence. The difference is that McCain is filling a job one 72-year-old heartbeat away from the presidency.

So let's be clear: The culprit is John McCain. He may have chosen Palin out of change-envy, or a belief that women can't tell the difference between form and content, but the main motive was to please right-wing ideologues; the same ones who nixed anyone who is now or ever has been a supporter of reproductive freedom. If that were not the case, McCain could have chosen a woman who knows what a vice president does and who has thought about Iraq; someone like Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine. McCain could have taken a baby step away from right-wing patriarchs who determine his actions, right down to opposing the Violence Against Women Act.

Palin's value to those patriarchs is clear: She opposes just about every issue that women support by a majority or plurality. She believes that creationism should be taught in public schools but disbelieves global warming; she opposes gun control but supports government control of women's wombs; she opposes stem cell research but approves "abstinence-only" programs, which increase unwanted births, sexually transmitted diseases and abortions; she tried to use taxpayers' millions for a state program to shoot wolves from the air but didn't spend enough money to fix a state school system with the lowest high-school graduation rate in the nation; she runs with a candidate who opposes the Fair Pay Act but supports $500 million in subsidies for a natural gas pipeline across Alaska; she supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve, though even McCain has opted for the lesser evil of offshore drilling. She is Phyllis Schlafly, only younger.

I don't doubt her sincerity. As a lifetime member of the National Rifle Assn., she doesn't just support killing animals from helicopters, she does it herself. She doesn't just talk about increasing the use of fossil fuels but puts a coal-burning power plant in her own small town. She doesn't just echo McCain's pledge to criminalize abortion by overturning Roe vs. Wade, she says that if one of her daughters were impregnated by rape or incest, she should bear the child. She not only opposes reproductive freedom as a human right but implies that it dictates abortion, without saying that it also protects the right to have a child.

So far, the major new McCain supporter that Palin has attracted is James Dobson of Focus on the Family. Of course, for Dobson, "women are merely waiting for their husbands to assume leadership," so he may be voting for Palin's husband.

Being a hope-a-holic, however, I can see two long-term bipartisan gains from this contest.
Republicans may learn they can't appeal to right-wing patriarchs and most women at the same time. A loss in November could cause the centrist majority of Republicans to take back their party, which was the first to support the Equal Rights Amendment and should be the last to want to invite government into the wombs of women.

And American women, who suffer more because of having two full-time jobs than from any other single injustice, finally have support on a national stage from male leaders who know that women can't be equal outside the home until men are equal in it. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are campaigning on their belief that men should be, can be and want to be at home for their children.

This could be huge.

America's Funny!

2008-09-09T11:19:00.000-07:00

I grew up buying the tapes (yes, cassette tapes) of stand-up comedians. Robin Williams, Jerry Seinfeld, later on Mitch Hedburg, Dane Cook (those were CDs, thank god.) I would memorize their routines. Funny stuff!

But the one, two, knock-em outs that Comedy Headliner Sarah Palin is laying on the American people truly can't be beat. Just watch her routine on Community Organizers! How DOES she come up with this stuff? Actual responsibilities! Haha...who needs a detailed explanation of what those responsibilities are with a punchline like that! ::wiping tear from eye::

I must have been laughing too hard, because I missed one of her best jabs at - get this - the American Constitution!

"Al-Qaeda terrorists still plot to inflict catastrophic harm on America and [Obama's] worried that someone won't read them their rights."

Hahahahaha! Their RIGHTS? LOSERS!

Of course that truly un-funny Obama had to go and squelch all the fun:

"If the government grabs you, then you have the right to at least ask, 'Why was I grabbed?' And say, 'Maybe you've got the wrong person.' We don't always catch the right person. We may think it's Mohammed the terrorist, but it might be Mohammed the cab driver. You might think it's Barack the bomb-thrower, but it might be Barack the guy running for president."

Is that last line supposed to be some kind of joke?? Keep trying! You've got ways to go before you're laying em in the aisles like Punchy-Palin!

And really...where does Obama get off talking about Constitutional law?? His only experience is as a community organizer. It's not like he taught Constitutional Law for over a decade at The University of Chicago!

Ahh....I'm laughing so hard it hurts.

Faster, Stronger, Federer

2008-09-08T08:03:00.000-07:00

Today will decide who wins the US Open Men's Final when Tennis superstar, and once GQ man-of-the-year, Roger Federer,

plays prop-comedy's stand-up king, Carrot Top.

Er...

I mean, young, Scotsman Andy Murray.

I'm new to the game of Tennis, which, to me, has too many numbers (40 points, per each game, 6 games per set, winning by two, deuces, 3 out of 5 sets to win the match...).
But watching Federer play tennis is like watching ballet - the strength, the grace, the seeming unpredictability and yet the obvious craft and skill.

Whereas watching Murray play is often like watching ME dance ballet - sometimes I get it right, but you'd never know how I pulled it off.
That isn't to say that Murray doesn't have clear skills, they just appear a bit erratic.

And I must admit I was hoping for a Rafa v. Roger match so that Federer could take revenge for Wimbledon. And also so that I could once again see those massive guns.

But with the hint of huge upset in the air, it's bound to be an exciting match. Almost as exciting as last night's when Serena became the #1 player in the world...again.

Lipstick

2008-09-08T07:57:00.000-07:00

Apparently lipstick covers a lot of things these days.

It's the witty, sarcastic answer to the question: "What's the difference between a Hockey Mom and a Pit Bull?", but also the answer to "What's the difference between Sarah Palin and George Bush?"

Lipstick is also a sneaky way to mask the supposed transparency of one of the allegedly most transparent governors in our nation. The Huffington Post reports that according to "Nicole Wallace of the McCain campaign, the American people don't care whether Sarah Palin can answer specific questions about foreign and domestic policy."

What do you think, American People?

Stewart Says

2008-09-04T09:42:00.000-07:00

I was pleased to see that Jon Stewart agrees with my on the issue of Palin's Baby Blues.

Watch:

Baby Blues

2008-09-02T09:11:00.000-07:00

Much has been made over Bristol Palin's soon-to-be-born baby.

Having just had a birth in my family, I know the feeling.

Some people are suggesting that this type of issue is not a public concern. Even opposing candidate Barack Obama says "that's off-limits." "How a family deals with issues and teenage children, that shouldn't be the topic of our politics."

But what about when your policies include things that are promoted as being designed to curb things like teenage pregnancies? What about when your party's platform includes (Judeo-Christian) Family Values? This suggests something very crucial about the follow-through not only of Palin's policies, but also of Palin's leadership abilities.

The Palins, for their part, are "proud of Bristol's decision to have her baby and even prouder to become grandparents." And about her decision to have an unwanted pregnancy? How do they feel about that?

My parents are both teachers. When delinquency happens in children, they are often apt to ask, "Where are the parents??" The (proud) parent, in this case, also happens to be a Vice Presidential nominee. What happens the next time we find ourselves asking, "Where was the Vice Presidential nominee?"

Much has also been made about Bristol's "decision" to keep the baby.
"The McCain aide emphasized that Bristol decided to keep the baby, a decision 'supported by her parents.'"

This fascinates me.
She decided to keep the baby.
So...there was a choice?
Like....
Pro-choice?

It All Adds Up

2008-09-01T22:32:00.000-07:00

Adamantly opposing pre-marital sex
+
Supporting abstinence-only education
+
Opposing sexual education in schools
=
Pregnant, unmarried 17 year-old daughter?

Black or White

2008-08-31T11:46:00.001-07:00

Social Issues are very complicated issues. They have a lot of nuance and subtlety built into their nature because you are dealing with very personal concerns. Most everyone (except the highest leaders in the land) can agree that the economy ain't so great at the moment. Most everyone can agree that health care should be easier to get. But we can't all seem to so easily agree on things like gun control, abortion, education, civil rights, etc. This is because these issues differ hugely from personal experience to personal experience, and subsequently any regulation on these issues will affect people greatly in a very personal way.

The Republican Machine understands something about the vast, majority American public - something crucially important. We enjoy remaining uneducated. It's too much talking head stuff, and we don't really have the time to discern the finer points. We live in an age where we want things boiled down to a status on Facebook. Afterall, we're too busy losing our jobs, trying to get healthcare, and worrying about where the next paycheck will come from to really listen and understand these issues. This the Republican Machine knows and knows well.

And so they help us. They give it to us in very basic, black-or-white, this-or-that ways.

Abortion:
Pro-Life or Baby-Killer

Gun Control:
Get to have guns or Don't get to have guns

Civil Rights:
Unsanctified marriage or Sanctified marriage.

and so on and so forth.

This way, we get to choose more easily. It's like being back in the middle school cafeteria where the options were PIZZA or MYSTERY MEAT. Who wasn't going to choose PIZZA!??

The truth is, though, that these issues are not that simple. At all. They never will be. They are very, very, complicated issues. And distilling them down to such ridiculous empirical either/or's is not only bullshit, but it's incredibly unfair to the American people.

I think John McCain, and the social conservatives in this country, are betting a lot on the American people's fear of all choices Black-or-White.

Time to Start Palin'

2008-08-31T10:49:00.000-07:00

Who is Sarah Palin?
And what the hell is she doing running for VP?

And why in God's name does John McCain think this was a good move? Does he not realize that is reeks of political strategy? There's not one ounce of genuine good intention behind this pick.
If John McCain were to die in the office, we would be left with a year and a half of gubernatorial experience running the most powerful nation in the world. Is this really putting country first?

According to Obama's sources, McCain met Sarah Palin once in a meeting, two years ago. He then phoned her up A WEEK AGO to discuss being Vice President before finally offering her the job. That puts them in the same room a total of once before she joined his ticket.

Does this suggest weeks, months of painstaking agonizing over one of the biggest decisions of his campaign? Carefully weighing options, pros, and cons, over and over in his mind? Or did he look at all the female republican senators and governors (all 7 of em!) and close his eyes and point?

America as a whole should be insulted that this lack of thought and preparation has gone into choosing a second in command.

And what sort of arsenal do they think they're stockpiling in Sarah Palin? Everytime I hear about her I hear the same things:

Five Children.
Fiercely Pro-Life.
One Son Going to Afghanistan.
One child with Downs Syndrome.
Hockey Mom.

Does this make her impervious to scrutiny? It's the same P.O.W. argument they use for McCain, assuming that nobody can touch a war hero. No one can touch a hockey mom who's willing to give up one of her five children to the country? Is that that idea?

Please Joe Biden, Please Barack Obama, Please Hillary Clinton - CALL THIS CANDIDATE OUT!

Bring on the Debates!

Let The Good Times Go

2008-08-14T11:34:00.001-07:00

I don't know about you, but I find comfort in hearing our president reassure his people with phrases like "Mission Accomplished" and "Weapons of Mass Destruction." In recent times, I've taken stock in knowing that "there is no recession" and "the economy is doing fine."

But then, just when you're not looking, it hits ya.
And it hits ya where it counts.

I'm not in financing. I don't own a home. I'm the epitome of "the little guy." And yet even an actor/composer's dream can be diminished by the shitty economy.

Case in point: There Is No 'GODSPELL'

I'm not sure what I'm going to do day by day.
When will god save the people??
We beseech thee! Hear us!

True Colors

2008-08-12T08:46:00.000-07:00

This crisis in Georgia has been called a Turning Point for Russia's relationship with the West. In my opinion, it is also a turning point for the West. How we react to this (given the tensions already built up by the lack of diplomacy in this current administration) will either lead us down a path of peaceful intervention, or could most certainly take us into "other" wars, namely WWIII.

When You're a Jet...

2008-08-09T09:55:00.000-07:00

Look, Brett.

I support your move to New York. I think it's probably going to allow you to revitalize your career and your excitement about the game. And I think that's great.

But Broadway?? BROADWAY??

I don't come on your turf and start throwing the football around, do I?

Let's leave 'Broadway Brett' to someone else, k?

Behind Enemy Lies

2008-08-08T10:45:00.000-07:00

Recently, I got something in my email box from a cousin back in Milwaukee. Let me say, I love Milwaukee, and I'm proud to be from there. But it is as "middle-America" as you might hope to get, and in the up-coming campaign, these are the people we must rely on to make a well-informed choice when it comes to voting. And sadly, there's a large portion of middle-America that isn't well-informed, nor looks to be well-informed.

Case in point: an email I received speculating that Senator Obama may not legally be able to run for president because he is not a legal citizen of the US. Now, it occurs to me that the reason we're questioning Obama's birthright has a little something to do with the fact that he don't look like the "rest" of us Americans. In fact, few Americans know that John McCain was not actually born on U.S. soil (which makes his own elligibility for Presidency more complicated than Obama's, although equally as valid.)
The truth of the Obama matter lies here. And for the especially doubting Thomas, a picture of his birth certificate lies here.

In the email, the article questioning Obama's elligibility was supposedly written by Thomas Sowell who, among his other credentials, is a black writer for Townhall.com - a conservative website/periodical. I contacted Mr. Sowell to bring his attention to the email, and he confirmed that he did NOT write it (it has also been attributed to Pat Shannon, asst. editor of "The American Free Press", though this is probably also false.)

It comes as no surprise to me that some anonymous person, from the right-side of things, circulates a speculative lie, without any question to its validity. It also, sadly, comes as no surprise that my cousin continues to circulate the email without any fact checking. This is how rumors become truth.

Because of my getting in contact with Mr. Sowell, I had to sign in to the Townhall website, and subsequently recieved a magazine from them in the mail. What hit me the most about the material was how sarcastic and belittling this conservative rag was toward democratic (or liberal) ideology. Now, don't get me wrong - the liberals do it JUST as much, though more generally in private. The republican, conservative machine seems to do it outright, and with no apology, indeed with righteousness. Clean campaigning my foot.

So I thought, "As important as it is for me to be educated about what I support, it's probably even MORE important that I be educated about what I DON'T support." And thus I signed on to Mr. McCain's website to see what I could see. (Browser Beware! You'll be bombarred by a barrage of fake smiling everywhere you turn!)

And now to the point of this posting. I leave this entirely up to discussion and debate, but I would like to point out one of my findings on McCain's website interested me, and hopefully will interest the average middle-american voter.

The McCain camp recently released an onslaught of anti-Obama ads, including this one aptly titled "Painful." I encourage you to go here and sift through the "fact-checking" and see what conclusions you can come to on your own (it seems that there is a debate about taxable income equalling $41,500 or the more probable $32,550, but it was a bit above my basic economic education.)

What DID catch my eye was the report that: "Barack Obama Has Called For Higher Income Taxes, Social Security Taxes, Capital Gains And Dividend Taxes, And Corporate Taxes, As Well As 'Massive New Domestic Spending.'"

A wide sweeping statement for sure. But examining the details you find:
"Obama's proposal ... would impose social security taxes on income above $250,000 per year. He would continue to exempt income between $102,000 and $250,000 from social security taxes."

To be even clearer, let's hear from the man himself:
Barack Obama Would Raise Income Taxes. Obama: "[I] would roll back the Bush tax cuts for those making over $250,000." (Sen. Barack Obama, CNN Democrat Presidential Candidate Debate, Manchester, NH, 6/3/07)

Now, if someone told me that there were going to be "HIGHER INCOME TAXES!" and "SOCIAL SECURITY TAXES!" and I was an independent artist, barely raking in under $35,000 a year, I'd be pretty damn nervous. Oh wait. I am

What they didn't tell me is that it applies only to those lucky individuals making over $250,000 a year. In other words, my taxes, my parents' taxes, the Mexican lady who works at Coffee Bean's taxes are not going to be affected. What it DOES mean, is that John McCain's taxes, President Bush's taxes, and yes, Senator Barack Obama's taxes WILL be affected. And though one's personal expenses are an entirely private affair, I can't imagine they wouldn't be able to afford it. Or that they might even have, god forbid, a responsibility to afford it.

Personally, I dream of being in the $250,000 a year tax bracket. My god, who wouldn't?

Hey Baby

2008-08-07T18:09:00.001-07:00

Check out this babe.

7 lbs. 4 oz.

2008-08-06T23:43:00.000-07:00

Kaiya means a type of Spear in Australian,
and in Japanese it means forgiveness.
To me, it means niece.

Kaiya Jo Kraner, welcome to the world.

I already love you so much.

Friday, August 1st, 2008

2008-07-31T22:46:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow is a big day.

My niece is due to arrive tomorrow. Tomorrow is "scheduled", as it were, to be her birth day.

My grandma, diagnosed a week ago with cancer, is scheduled to go into surgery tomorrow as well.

My job will end tomorrow, leaving me unemployed with currently no prospects of another job in sight - the first time in many years.

It goes without saying, I think, that my grandma concerns me the most right now.

Tomorrow is a big day.

I Feel The Earth Move...

2008-07-30T18:16:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday, just before noon, I experienced something that I had been wanting to experience since I first set foot in southern California. Not a celebrity encounter, not face lift.

I experienced an earthquake. My very first one. Either that or I fell madly in love. But I'm pretty sure it was an earthquake.

I seriously used to wonder if it would ever happen, if perhaps the last one had happened without me and now the ground beneath Los Angeles would be forever motionless. People would sit next to me on benches and I'd think "Earthquake!" only to be disappointed. But then it happened. A 5.4.

To be sure, the name says it all. The earth quakes. It's really nothing more than that. But it is a completely eerie feeling to have the terra firma become terra squishy on its own.

I'm proud to say I did not freak out. I merely looked around, confused, wondering how all 50 of the people I was around were going to fit under the 7 or so door frames. No one else seemed to move. I always thought southern californians prepared for these things, the way I used to have tornado drills in grade school. I was at the piano at the time, and I thought for a brief instance I might crawl under there. It seemed safe enough. After about 6 or 7 seconds the earthquake stopped and we all moved outside, so I didn't have time to find out.

The thing that freaked me out the most, was that, when I got outside, I tried to text my loved ones to let them know I was okay - and to check on them. Of course, so was everyone within a 70 mile radius. And I suddenly remembered "Live Free or Die Hard" - anyone see that? - I felt like we were warned that this would happen - the minute we actually needed our technology in a life or death situation was the one minute it would fail us completely. I couldn't make a call or text anyone for about an hour or so after the quake.

And that's when I started to freak. What if it had been serious? What if I was indeed stuck beneath my piano? What if, after being trapped under the piano for over an hour before I could reach somebody, I developed a severe phobia of pianos and suddenly brought to an end my very livlihood!?

It's moments like these I fear my life doesn't really exist. It exsists only in microwaves or in a virtual world - like this blog for example - and when that crashes (and it will) I will remain a mere shadow of a person. And where will Bruce Willis be to save me? Yippie-kay-ay.

Leavin' it to the Pros

2008-07-27T14:36:00.000-07:00

To continue the lament of Broadway put forth by my friend Tony, I offer this:

Joining the ranks of broadway superstars such as Max Crumm, Laura Osnes of Grease (were they the ones that you wanted?), Bailey Hanks of Legally Blonde, and who could forget Clay Aiken of Spamalot (me, for one) is that old stage veteran Katie Holmes.

Katie will be playing Ann Deever in the revival of Arthur Miller's 1947 Tony-Award winning drama All My Sons, alongside John Lithgow (practically a newbie next to Holmes). Look out, John!

The expertise she garnered in her last theatre role (playing Lola in her All-Girls Catholic High School production of Dang Yankees) will doubtless sparkle among the ranks of Mario Lopez of A Chorus Line and Fantasia Barrino of The Color Purple. It is rumored that her performance as Lola is where she earned the nickname Katie "Barrymore" Holmes. Named, of course, after Drew.

Lois Wheeler originally played Ann in the 1947 production with only a mere 3 broadway shows under her belt. Pssh. Get on it, Lois!

Well, Katie, we wish you the best. I'm sure Tom'll be able to take care of Suri on his own for a few what...months? weeks? days? (who's up for betting?)

I just hope it goes better for you than it did for that other stage veteran Claire Danes of the hit revival of Pygmalion.

Quarterback Again

2008-07-26T19:33:00.000-07:00

Brett Favre, what the hell is going on?

I feel like we're getting some mixed signals.
Is it us? Are we the problem? Do you not like Green Bay? I'd get that. There's not much going on up there.
But last year you wanted to leave. Then you didn't.
Then you did.
And now you're back. Only it's awkward.
Because when you went away, we all said really nice things about you, and moved on with our lives. But you want back in, except not with Green Bay.

So it is us.

We don't want to let you go. Don't you get it? Number 4 - we want it retired. We want your legacy to live entirely with us. We don't want you to go to the Vikings, or the Jets, or the Buccaneers and do something really big and important over there, we want you here. Except we don't. Cuz you retired.

John Clayton as ESPN.com said it best:
"In 2007, he's the king of Wisconsin again, coming off one of his best seasons. Now, he's like that unpopular relative who always threatened to show up at your house for the summer and then plops himself on the couch."

From one Brett to another...stay home and watch the game.

Back from the Dead

2008-07-26T19:14:00.001-07:00

Whoa!! What happened? Where am I? er...where was I?

No, I did not die. Instead, I turned 24.

Let me tell you something, which will annoy the heck out of people who are older than me...
23 was rough.
Not the year I spent being 23. That was fine. Lots of great things. In fact, 24 is already off to bad a start compared to 23.
For some reason, I could NOT remember the number 23. People would ask how old I was and I would go blank. And not on purpose! I wondered if it was because it was an odd number and somehow odd numbers are harder to remember than even ones...I'm sure I made that up.

But anyway, now that I'm 24, I can easily recall many things.
Like, for example, the fact that I once had a blog called The Actor/Composer's Notebook.

And so, memory refreshed, I've decided to get back into some swing of things. Especially since there's soo much to write about. And also, I've decided to make 24 a year for my writing. Hopefully the 'actor' part of me won't go belly up as I focus my concentration slightly elsewhere.

We'll see. Hope you (whomever you are..) will stick around for the ride.

NYC

2008-05-02T09:07:00.000-07:00

I'm just back from a trip to the big apple.
I like the city, I enjoy the people, I love me some broadway.

What I don't understand, however, is the need for New Yorkers to abbreviate words.
Now, I'm all for regionalisms. Boston has "wicked", Northern California has "hella", my homestate, Wisconsin, has "donchaknow!"

But this trip to New York I was introduced to "Totes!"
Totes.
Short for Totally.
Totes, which is 5 letters.
Down from the 7 lettered great-wall-of-china that is "Totally."

I believe that language is a living, breathing entity and should be changed and updated and used to benefit of the speaker or the writer, but this is ridiculous.
If you asked me it sounds unintelligent.
Certainly unintelligible.
When I first heard I thought the person said "Toast!" as in "Cheers!"
I like that much better. More affirming. Less "I don't have time to say an entire 7-letter word."

Don't you agree?
Totes.

Oh, Grow-up and Laugh!

2008-03-19T09:24:00.000-07:00

I sometimes wish I could be as cool as my friend Tony, who watches many different news programs ("cool?" you ask) including the ones that FOX calls news programs, but are really people yelling about how much they hate liberals.

Alas, I don't watch those shows. I get most of my news from antiquated sources: the LA Times, NPR, sometimes CNN.com. (I'm aware of the liberal nature of all these news sources, and no I don't have a problem with that.)

The news is often hard to bear. There's a lot of scary stuff out there. We're in a quagmire of a war in Iraq, we're in a quagmire of an economy, we're in a quagmire of a democratic primary. So often to get my news with a dose of laughter, I turn to Jon Stewart.

I've been made fun of for this, I know. I get why. It's a comedy show. I understand. But in the midst of being funny it is also extremely informative and, especially given recent interviews and events surrounding the show (Jon on Crossfire, Jon interviewing McCain in 2006, etc.) its easy to see how Stewart is not afraid to push hard questions, talk about interesting and important topics, and also be frank about his own feelings. And then, when that gets too uncomfortable, tell a joke. Cracking jokes when the news gets uncomfortable - that's what I want Jon Stewart to do.

Not our president.

Thank god for people in the media who will talk to us like adults.

A Life Examined

2008-03-19T09:16:00.000-07:00

Hello Blogosphere friends. Yes, that's right, I'm talking to all 3 of you.

Life has been crazy lately.
I finished a job out of town.
During which time I had to look for a new place to live.
During which time I also had to drive all over L.A. going to a myriad of auditions.
During which time I actually booked a job.
During which time I actually went to the wrong location and had to forfeit a job I very easily could have booked.

It can't be said I lead an uneventful life.
It's scary, it's insane, and then on the flip side it's incredibly rewarding and challenging and educational.

Someone recently said to me, "I could never be an actor. I really admire you guys."
And then the apparition disappeared.

No seriously, someone told me that. I looked at her like she was crazy. But then I thought about it a bit. As hard as my life gets (and anyone else's is just as hard if not harder) when everything works out and I get to be doing what I love to be doing, it's a very magical, lucky, and sweet event - I'm describing the situation here, not my acting ability...which is also magical and sweet, but anyway -

So I guess there is something admirable in that.
Unless I end up homeless in two weeks.
Then it's just crappy.

Haiku 1

2008-03-09T23:52:00.001-07:00

After calling friends
who never answer their phones,
I drive home lonely.

Passing it On...

2008-03-09T18:01:00.000-07:00

I've been behind on my own blogging.
But my friend Tony hasn't.

check this out.

From One Brett to Another

2008-03-05T10:36:00.000-08:00

When I was 9 years old, I was in a play production of WINNIE THE POOH, in which I played Christopher Robin. My colleague Bill Tyson played Winnie in a big Pooh suit, and I owned a picutre of the two of us on stage in costume.

My dad, who is a football coach at Pewaukee High School, had a friend who worked with the Green Bay Packers at the time. I don't even remember what he did. But it was 1993, and just the year before, the Pack had secured a young quarterback, with whom I shared a first name.

I was never a true follower of football, but my dad knew that this kid was going to be a star (something, he always thought and still thinks about me). So, he asked his friend for a favor. He asked for an autographed picture of Favre for his son. In exchange, he gave him a picture of me with a man in a big Bear suit, on which, in third-grader handwriting, was scribbled, "From one Brett to another - all the way to the superbowl."

I don't know if this is true or not...but my dad's friend swore that Favre kept that picture on his locker for the entirety of that season.

We'll miss ya, Brett.

Big Meal for Thought

2008-03-01T18:27:00.000-08:00

One of my New Year's resolutions was to become more politically conscious, and I'm proud to say I feel as though I have.

I came across some SNL-related back and forth about Hillary and Obama which got me thinking about a bunch of things.

Obama preaches a message of hope and change. The 'change' element reminds me of a children's piece I co-wrote in which a political party campaigns for a non-specific "change". I wonder if there isn't a democratic nation in the world in which a new candidate obliquely promoting change wouldn't be able to gather plenty of support. "Change", it seems, always has the conotation of "embetterment," and that's something that most people want. Obviously any of the candidates, if elected, would bring some degree of change.

But what Obama wants to change is not just what is being done, but also how it is being done. The system is flawed and though Sen. Clinton (and maybe even McCain) would doubtless do good for this country, she would do it within and by means of a flawed system of politics, one that I agree must change.

Obama's professional history reminds me a bit of my dad's personal history.

Growing up, whenever I did something bad or disrespectful, my dad would say "I never did that when I was a kid." After a while, I began doubting that he ever could have been such a golden child. So I asked my grandma, who confirmed his stories. "No," she told me, "your dad was pretty much a good kid." Well, I was stuck. I was held to the same impeccable standard at which my father lived his life, which was impossible, yes, but overall encouraging. Had my father been more slack as a child, I too would probably have not felt guilty about doing worse things. And the fact is, my father is still the honorable, respectful "golden child" he was in his youth. Generally, good people remain good people. Generally.

This is why I buy into Obama's rhetoric about the war in Iraq, about the way he runs a clean campaign, and why I don't buy those who say, "Sure, but once he gets into office, it'll just be politics as usual." It has never been politics as usual with him, so why should it ever be?

Finally, I hate to make this analogy (recovering Catholic as I am) but it occured to me today that religious conservatives might get something out of this argument (assuming, quite generously, of course, that religious conservatives are logical and intelligent people...) -- either that or they'll think this blasphemy:

There was another prominent, young figure who sought to change the system - who preached a message of hope, peace, and prosperity for the poorest among us. He was an outsider, a hippy, but also a popular "rockstar" of his day. And the system he fought against crucified him because of it. The same type of system that is now being run by his supposed "followers."

Anyway. Food for thought.

[Title of Post]

2008-03-01T10:48:00.000-08:00

My good friend Alex Brightman is a self-proclaimed “title snob” (actual title paraphrased). Being in the world of Theatre – often of the Musical persuasion - he encounters things like programs and original Broadway cast recordings. In these instances, it is the job of the title to give the listener an expectation. Often a song-title will be clever or witty…but usually only if those songs are called “Clever” or “Witty.”
A title wants to give some information, but leave enough mystery so that an audience member wants to hear more.

The same goes for any title-bearing works: books, movies, plays, businessmen. If I hear “Guy Who Organizes All the Companies Assets in Places Other Than the United States and Canada,” that’s neither clever nor witty, and you’ve given me too much information. But if I heard “Global Operations Director”, I want to know more. Okay, so the analogy doesn’t really work.

Here’s why I care.
There’s a movie coming out based on a book about Anne Boleyn and her sister.
“But wait,” you think to yourself, “I watch The Tudors on Showtime…I don’t remember Anne Boleyn having a sister!”
But she did. In fact, you could think of it this way: Anne was one Boleyn girl, and her sister was “The Other Boleyn Girl.” But you would be unimaginative. You would also be the author of the book “The Other Boleyn Girl”, upon which the movie, “The Other Boleyn Girl,” is based.

It makes the main character sound like the way most people probably think of Mary Boleyn, as that historical figure that no one really cares to remember, cuz she’s not really that important anyway. But this is your TITLE figure! Maybe if it was The REAL Boleyn Girl, or The FIRST Boleyn girl, then I’m intrigued. I want to know more.

But no. She’s just…you know…the other one.

Apparently the critics agree.

My apologies....

2008-02-28T10:22:00.001-08:00

I just sat down and overheard a businesswoman on her cell phone telling someone on the other end that "I'm going to do whatever I can to get local, regional, and international coverage and if that offends you I'M SORRY!"

I knew she was a businesswoman because of her terse tone of voice and because of such business keywords as "coverage" and "whatever."

What struck me was the "I'm Sorry." I thought to myself, "She's not really sorry at all."

Apologizing is very hard. I'm not the best at it myself. But many times I have recognized the importance of putting my own pride on the line to say full out "I'm sorry. I was wrong."

So often we want to say "I'm sorry, but!" or the accusatory "I'm sorry that you feel this way." Those are false apologies. Ellen DeGeneres does a bit about that in one of her stand-up routines. The eye-rolling "SO-rry" that people pull out when someone was offended cuz they can't take a stupid joke.

Looking at the way our "politic news" people in this country offend different groups on a daily basis, maybe we should take stock and really consider the humbling effects of taking the time to truly apologies to those we hurt.

And if you disagree....SO-rry!

Plug-time

2008-02-25T09:59:00.000-08:00

What else is this blog other than a cheap plug, right?

Here's some reviews that will probably persuade none of you to come see the show. But in case they might....

The LA TIMES lists us as Recommended! saying, "it's difficult to bemoan such a criminally satisfying escapist treat," and calls the cast "expert; fine-tuned; priceless; appealing; hilarious; and scene-stealing." (gee they must write for the oscars.)

VARIETY writes that "[DeeDee] Rescher and [Tom] Shelton handle the broadest comedy assignments with variety and panache, while young lovers Ryback and [Traci] Crouch transcend cliche to achieve some poignancy as their dilemmas deepen."

And then the OC WEEKLY said, "...not to imply the play doesn't work—just not as effectively as it wants to...But don't blame this production...The six-person cast is uniformly excellent"

So there you are.

Time to unplug.

Hello Gorgeous!

2008-02-24T23:23:00.000-08:00

There's no denying it. I love the Oscars. It doesn't matter how lame the host is or how many akward moments there are. I will always love them.

I especially love the Oscars when they get it right.

And of course by "right" I mean what I consider to be right. Which is sometimes wrong.

But I think overall it was a fair night.

After this writer's strike though...why were the intros still so poorly written? And on top of that poorly spoken? These people look like they're going to crap their pants. Why does every award introduction have to begin with "Since the beginning of time..." or just one-word sentences like "Courage. Dedication. Commitment. Botox. These are the makings of this year's Best Actress Nominees...." Come on people. Let's get up there and say something normal.

Poor John Stewart. I don't think he's going to get asked back again. I love him. He's funny and in my book he can do no wrong. But all things considered, he was lame this year.

The Cohen brothers aside it was quite a year for the Europeans, particularly the French. The oscars seem more and more dominated by the Europeans. I can't quite tell if this is a good or bad thing. Or why.

Anyway. Until next year....

The Fruits of Boredom

2008-02-19T10:58:00.000-08:00

Clearly I'm bored.
I have just "Revamped" the look of this blog.
To be honest, I'm not sure it was ever "vamped" in the first place.

But instead of preparing for what it is I'm really supposed to be doing today, I've decided to procrastinate and change my blog.
The other version was too dark, don't you think?
This one might be too bright.
Oh, Goldilocks where are you when I need you??

Having blogged about not being good about taking pictures, I've attempted to make a change about that and take more pictures in my life. (Wow...something good HAS come of this blog!)

So here are some "backstage" "behind the scenes" "in the dressing room" shots from the show.

!!SPOILER ALERT!!

(not really, I just thought it'd be cool to write that.)

(l-r) Tom Shelton, Brendan "What Show Are We Doing Tonight?" Ford

BT's "I'm Ready for Atonement 2!" Look

DeeDee Rescher shows me some loving.

The Cast on Opening Night, post-Hello Dolly descent down Spiral Staircase
(l-r) Kirsten Potter, Brendan Ford, Tom Shelton, DeeDee Rescher, BT, Traci Crouch

My New Buddy

2008-02-18T12:34:00.001-08:00

I haven't met him yet. But he's cute, cuddly, and finally no longer looks like a small fuzzy pile of poop.

He's the newest addition to the Family (which contains 2 children and 6...count 'em 6! labrador retrievers. 5 chocolates, 1 yellow.). The sole survivor of a litter of 3 (sad, right? Nature sucks!)

And his name is Buddy.
Look at him vogue!