Because that's what FOX should change their name to. I am blaming this as the reason I cannot stop watching Moment of Truth. That show should just change its name to Divorce Court...or team up with it in a special "Where are they now?" follow-up episode to this week's Moment of Truth.
It was a special highly controversial episode "you weren't supposed to see" (ironic since it was its first night without the American Idol lead in). In fact, the episode was preceded by an announcement by host Mark Walberg, who said if he had a choice, he wouldn't have aired the episode. He also tells us that "the truth is often not pretty. So here it is." We are further enticed to stay tuned to this episode with the promise that Lauren will "take the truth too far" and "destroy her marriage," these quotes being repeated before every commercial break.
As we get to know her, we find out that she's been married to a cop for 2 years, and the questions are focused on her past deviant behavior, including stealing, flashing strangers just for fun, and how close she is with her family. And after about 20 minutes when she said "I don't care about the money. I really just feel better getting this off my chest" we really should have known that something was about to go down. These are the questions she answers "yes" to truthfully :
"Have you ever pretended to be asleep to avoid having sex with your husband?"
"Do you blame your husband for your lack of close friends?"
"Have you ever taken off your wedding ring to appear as if you were single?"
"Do you believe you might have been in love with a former boyfriend on your wedding day?"
(Special guest for the next two: her ex-boyfriend)
"If I told you I wanted to get back together with you, would you leave your husband?"
"Do you believe I'm the person you should be married to?"
"Since you've been married have you ever had sexual relations with anyone other than your husband?"
But here comes the kicker. After answering "yes" to all those questions, this comes up next:
"Do you think you're a good person?"
Again she answers yes. This time though, it's false. But the placement and the fact that the show knew she lied about this the first time, can really only lead to this conclusion:
FOX is an evil genius. It knows exactly what it's doing with every show it makes. I hate it for the evil, but I just can't help loving it for the genius.
Is it possible to feel schadenfreude for yourself?
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Monday, February 25, 2008
You can't pull this on me...I'm in law!
Ok, it's just media law, but we have the same Constitution printed in our book. And according to that, Amendment 24 to be exact, "The right of citizens to of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President...shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any toll or other tax."
Apparently, this only applies if you're voting in person. I just voted absentee in the Ohio primary, and this is what happened. First I paid $.41 to send in the application. Then, I paid another $.97 to send in my completed ballot. That's $1.38, friends. And I'll do it again in November, raising the total to $2.76. I realize this is not a lot, but it's the principle of the thing. As I live 9 hours away from home and want to stay a registered Ohio voter, I would have been denied the right to vote for failure to pay the postage toll, or, if I went the other way, the roughly $120 in gas money to go home and back.
It was my first primary vote as well as my first absentee vote. I love to vote and I love living in a state where the outcome really impacts the election. I feel like I should be able get reimbursed or something, even though I know this will never happen and I understand why. It just doesn't feel right. If you're going to let people vote absentee, they should get the same protection that in-person voters have from poll taxes, no matter what form they take.
Apparently, this only applies if you're voting in person. I just voted absentee in the Ohio primary, and this is what happened. First I paid $.41 to send in the application. Then, I paid another $.97 to send in my completed ballot. That's $1.38, friends. And I'll do it again in November, raising the total to $2.76. I realize this is not a lot, but it's the principle of the thing. As I live 9 hours away from home and want to stay a registered Ohio voter, I would have been denied the right to vote for failure to pay the postage toll, or, if I went the other way, the roughly $120 in gas money to go home and back.
It was my first primary vote as well as my first absentee vote. I love to vote and I love living in a state where the outcome really impacts the election. I feel like I should be able get reimbursed or something, even though I know this will never happen and I understand why. It just doesn't feel right. If you're going to let people vote absentee, they should get the same protection that in-person voters have from poll taxes, no matter what form they take.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
NBC, why are you trying to become Fox?
It's unnecessary. There's enough crap on TV, you don't need to add to it.
They have a new show called "My Dad's Better Than Your Dad." Since when did schoolyard taunts become topics for reality shows? I can't wait for "I'm Rubber and You're Glue" or maybe "Four-Square, the Ultimate Championships." Wow those are horrible ideas. They're stupid and ridiculous and trashy and wouldn't be run by any self-respecting network unless there was the smallest possibility of profit and...ummm, I have to go...I need to go call Fox.
They have a new show called "My Dad's Better Than Your Dad." Since when did schoolyard taunts become topics for reality shows? I can't wait for "I'm Rubber and You're Glue" or maybe "Four-Square, the Ultimate Championships." Wow those are horrible ideas. They're stupid and ridiculous and trashy and wouldn't be run by any self-respecting network unless there was the smallest possibility of profit and...ummm, I have to go...I need to go call Fox.
Mine are OK...
Alright, so this song has to be THE WORST thing to happen for women ever in the history of women, but i can't bring myself to be mean to it because it makes me laugh so hard.
However, here are a few of my favorite parts:
5)Just the title of the song
4)"Oh my god I just forgot the rest of this verse"
3)"My cup size and IQ work in harmony"
2)The dancing
1)The "Go Boobs" cheer
Religion + Snack Foods = Some Kind of Crazy
So I've really been in the mood to write lately, but nothing really gave me enough fuel to try anything clever or interesting...until CNN.com just now and this gem of a video. It's not a whole lot to go on, but it will fulfill my need to rant about ridiculous things. Watch it then come back and read the rest of the note.Ok.
1) How do people come up with this stuff? I don't know about you, but when I eat pretzels, I don't study them. I have enough studying to do without a thorough examination of my snack foods. When I want to have pretzels, I sit in front of the TV and eat them, sometimes several at a time. I'm not ashamed. That's how you eat junk food. If I happen to notice that one of my pretzels happens to look like something, I think, "Huh, that's neat." and then I eat it. I don't recall ever thinking, "Hey, maybe I'll put this on eBay and make a few grand." And I don't think it's really possible to put one pretzel aside and not eat it. It belongs in your stomach. That's what it was made to do. Relax. Eat your pretzels and don't try to make them into something they're not. That's what clouds are for.
2) Who decided this stuff was appropriate for eBay? I know you can find whatever you want on there, but is there a high demand for food items that look like religious figures? Alright, I take that back, I suppose there is considering people are willing to pay upwards of $10,000 for this crap. Who has $10,000 to spend of a fucking pretzel that you're never going to eat? If i had that kind of disposable income a) I would not waste it on a pretzel from eBay when I can go to the store and pretend my pretzels look like random stuff for 99 cents a bag, and b) I would be a jackass about it and take video of myself eating the damn thing and post that shit on youtube.
3) Does it really look like the Virgin Mary holding Jesus? I suppose it might because it's sitting next to the picture and the smaller top part looks like a head cocked sideways, but suggestion is a very powerful tool. Look at the closeup and tell me it doesn't also look like a snowman with a lasso, or a curled up snake, or, going out on a limb, maybe, just maybe, a deformed pretzel.
4) Does God have nothing better to do than make divine shaped food? "People seem to believe that the Virgin Mary is actually appearing before them." Really? In pretzels? Don't you think she'd take a classier route? Maybe, I don't know, in a church, to a religious person, or the good old days when she appeared before a scenic waterfall in Guadalupe? Are we in such bad shape in America that the only way the heavens can get our attention is through our snack food? I'd like to put a little more faith than that in humanity. But I suppose with the quote this winner gave, my faith is a bit overzealous: "This is authentic. Straight from the heavens, right on eBay."
Right.
If this was some kind of sign (other than the dollar type), it was clearly lost on these gentlemen.
Taking a Moment for the Truth...
Fox's Moment of Truth has to be the most ridiculous show on television. I know, I shouldn't be surprised. It is a Fox reality show, but even for them... I just can't get my head around this.
Just in case you don't know, here's the setup of the show. Some willing person (who is clearly already a little crazy for auditioning for any reality show with the name Fox tied to it) takes a polygraph before taping. They're then asked the same questions in front of cameras, and to win, they have to tell the truth.
Typical reality show premise: put people in potentially mortifying situations and watch them squirm for entertainment's sake. And the show consistently delivers, question after question. Take this week's episode for example. Ray is a cook, really relaxed, overweight guy, married for 30 years with a bunch of kids and some grandkids. He brings along his wife (of course), 2 of his daughters, and his mom. Good so far. He gets asked 3 pretty easy questions and passes with flying colors. Still fine. But that was just the warm-up.
"Do you ever worry about dying from being overweight?" "Yes," truth.
"Have you ever flirted with a woman at work?" "No," truth.
"Would you cheat on your wife if you knew you wouldn't be caught?" "No," truth.
"Have you ever looked at pornography without your wife's knowledge?" Shocker, he says yes. Shocker number 2, it's the truth.
"Would you donate an organ to save your mother's life?" "Yes, in a heartbeat," truth. His heart is probably not that healthy, but good for him.
"Do you resent your mother for treating your wife badly?" Hesitates, "yes," mother doesn't look surprised, neither does anyone who has heard a woman talk about her mother-in-law. Pointless.
But now things get interesting. "Do you resent your mother for wearing black to your wedding?" Ok, potentially interesting story there. Turns out he does, but it becomes a therapy session ending with an emotional reconciliation between mother and son. Tears are shed, people hug, now back to the game.
"Have you ever fantasized about having sex with a woman other than your wife?" "Yes," true. Not real surprising, but potentially hurtful since he has shown how much he loves his wife.
"Do you ever think your wife deserves someone more attractive than you?" "Yes," sad, but apparently true.
Somewhat emotional questions, but this isn't the most bizarre part. What I don't understand is the audience's reaction to each answer. I guess they're happy that he's being honest, but it just sounds so strange. I can understand cheering for him being faithful to his wife, and even what happened when he and his mom made up, but is it really appropriate for some of the other questions? "Yes I worry about dying from being overweight." Cheers! "Yes I resent my mother for not accepting my wife." Yay! "I don't feel worthy of my wife's affection." Hoorah!
"This show is only successful because Fox put it in the time slot after Idol." Truth.
Just in case you don't know, here's the setup of the show. Some willing person (who is clearly already a little crazy for auditioning for any reality show with the name Fox tied to it) takes a polygraph before taping. They're then asked the same questions in front of cameras, and to win, they have to tell the truth.
Typical reality show premise: put people in potentially mortifying situations and watch them squirm for entertainment's sake. And the show consistently delivers, question after question. Take this week's episode for example. Ray is a cook, really relaxed, overweight guy, married for 30 years with a bunch of kids and some grandkids. He brings along his wife (of course), 2 of his daughters, and his mom. Good so far. He gets asked 3 pretty easy questions and passes with flying colors. Still fine. But that was just the warm-up.
"Do you ever worry about dying from being overweight?" "Yes," truth.
"Have you ever flirted with a woman at work?" "No," truth.
"Would you cheat on your wife if you knew you wouldn't be caught?" "No," truth.
"Have you ever looked at pornography without your wife's knowledge?" Shocker, he says yes. Shocker number 2, it's the truth.
"Would you donate an organ to save your mother's life?" "Yes, in a heartbeat," truth. His heart is probably not that healthy, but good for him.
"Do you resent your mother for treating your wife badly?" Hesitates, "yes," mother doesn't look surprised, neither does anyone who has heard a woman talk about her mother-in-law. Pointless.
But now things get interesting. "Do you resent your mother for wearing black to your wedding?" Ok, potentially interesting story there. Turns out he does, but it becomes a therapy session ending with an emotional reconciliation between mother and son. Tears are shed, people hug, now back to the game.
"Have you ever fantasized about having sex with a woman other than your wife?" "Yes," true. Not real surprising, but potentially hurtful since he has shown how much he loves his wife.
"Do you ever think your wife deserves someone more attractive than you?" "Yes," sad, but apparently true.
Somewhat emotional questions, but this isn't the most bizarre part. What I don't understand is the audience's reaction to each answer. I guess they're happy that he's being honest, but it just sounds so strange. I can understand cheering for him being faithful to his wife, and even what happened when he and his mom made up, but is it really appropriate for some of the other questions? "Yes I worry about dying from being overweight." Cheers! "Yes I resent my mother for not accepting my wife." Yay! "I don't feel worthy of my wife's affection." Hoorah!
"This show is only successful because Fox put it in the time slot after Idol." Truth.
Religion + Movies = Some Kind of Crazy
Go to this website and read the story at the top.
Ok, you read it? Let's break this down.
First, let's have a look at the Catholic group that approves of this movie.
"The good news is that ... explicit references to this church" found in the book on which the movie is based "have been completely excised...This is not the blatant real-world anti-Catholicism of, say, the recent Elizabeth: The Golden Age or The Da Vinci Code. Religious elements, as such are practically nil."
Hurray! That is good news! Another movie has changed the original story in the book to make it more marketable. Lord knows there aren't enough of those out there. Amen, movie makers!
Next, why do Catholic organizations feel so threatened by movies? If movie critics don't like a movie, they just tell you it was bad. They're not going to tell you to boycott a movie just because they didn't like it. They'll warn you it is a waste of your time, a waste of money and a waste of celluloid, but they stop short of telling you it will make you stop believing in God. I'm pretty sure only the Catholic leaders make that leap. Gee that sounds familiar. Aren't they also the ones who jump straight from same-sex marriage to bestiality. Pretty sure that's not going to happen either.
Finally, let's look at what William Donohue, president of the Catholic League says about this movie (disregarding for the moment the fact that this was an interview on FOX News because, wow, what a shocker that one is):
"The idea is to sell the horrors of Catholicism and the virtues of atheism to youth," and has insisted that the movie will encourage young people to read the book.
I'm sorry, is that such a horrible thing? Ok, I guess from their point of view, any young person that reads any literature that remotely might damage their view of the Catholic Church should probably be burned at the stake along with their vile and sinful book. Couldn't we just celebrate for once that any movie without the words "Harry Potter" in the title is going to inspire kids to do something intellectually stimulating? Not that there's anything wrong with Harry Potter (unless you ask these guys)...it's just that I don't know of many kids who like to sit down and curl up with a good version of The Bible. If kids want to read, don't stop them.
And who is this group to talk? Have they not seen the news this week of the Catholic Church publishing coloring books to teach kids how to be safe around adults and not be molested by priests? I'm fairly certain I would be much more comfortable with my kids reading a book that might open their minds to differing viewpoints about religion than have them color pictures in "an abuse-themed coloring book," but that's just me. Guess I’m going to Hell.
Ok, you read it? Let's break this down.
First, let's have a look at the Catholic group that approves of this movie.
"The good news is that ... explicit references to this church" found in the book on which the movie is based "have been completely excised...This is not the blatant real-world anti-Catholicism of, say, the recent Elizabeth: The Golden Age or The Da Vinci Code. Religious elements, as such are practically nil."
Hurray! That is good news! Another movie has changed the original story in the book to make it more marketable. Lord knows there aren't enough of those out there. Amen, movie makers!
Next, why do Catholic organizations feel so threatened by movies? If movie critics don't like a movie, they just tell you it was bad. They're not going to tell you to boycott a movie just because they didn't like it. They'll warn you it is a waste of your time, a waste of money and a waste of celluloid, but they stop short of telling you it will make you stop believing in God. I'm pretty sure only the Catholic leaders make that leap. Gee that sounds familiar. Aren't they also the ones who jump straight from same-sex marriage to bestiality. Pretty sure that's not going to happen either.
Finally, let's look at what William Donohue, president of the Catholic League says about this movie (disregarding for the moment the fact that this was an interview on FOX News because, wow, what a shocker that one is):
"The idea is to sell the horrors of Catholicism and the virtues of atheism to youth," and has insisted that the movie will encourage young people to read the book.
I'm sorry, is that such a horrible thing? Ok, I guess from their point of view, any young person that reads any literature that remotely might damage their view of the Catholic Church should probably be burned at the stake along with their vile and sinful book. Couldn't we just celebrate for once that any movie without the words "Harry Potter" in the title is going to inspire kids to do something intellectually stimulating? Not that there's anything wrong with Harry Potter (unless you ask these guys)...it's just that I don't know of many kids who like to sit down and curl up with a good version of The Bible. If kids want to read, don't stop them.
And who is this group to talk? Have they not seen the news this week of the Catholic Church publishing coloring books to teach kids how to be safe around adults and not be molested by priests? I'm fairly certain I would be much more comfortable with my kids reading a book that might open their minds to differing viewpoints about religion than have them color pictures in "an abuse-themed coloring book," but that's just me. Guess I’m going to Hell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
