random thoughts on the passing scene, or something like that

since i can't seem to formulate a singular, coherent thought today, i offer a few...

-i've always liked natalie portman. i guess you could say that i have a mini celebrity crush on her. i think she's adorable and that she'd fit quite nicely into my chest when we snuggled. i'm also told, through mutual friends that we share, that she's just a delightful person.

with that said, i've heard that, at some point, she dated moby. not that i have any huge thing against moby, but this sort of disturbed me. i used to live down the street from moby. i'd see him around the neighborhood all the time. something about him just creeped me out a bit.

now with that said, the fact that natalie dated moby didn't sully her in my eyes too much. after all, the term "dated" is rather broad. that could mean something as benign as they once went to the olive garden and caught a hugh grant flick afterwards. it certainly doesn't mean that they had sex, that's for sure.

but then i read a quote from moby in today's ny post page six column and everything was changed with 6 simple words.

"affair that i had with natalie."

now i don't know about you, but when someone characterizes a relationship as an "affair," that means that they banged. i think that i literally cringed when i read that.

i wonder what it's like to be seduced by moby? does he follow the "mystery method?" hell, maybe he's hung like a clydesdale and simply whips the thing out and plops it down on the table. no words needed.

further, i wonder what it's like to fuck moby? it can't be hot, right? he's so little that i kind of imagine him just sticking his entire little cube head into the girl's vagina. he head fucks her. shit, maybe he just slithers his entire torso in there and goes swimming around.


(via daily intel)

speaking of moby, anyone heard from eminem lately?

-there's something i've been actively thinking about but have dared not state publicly, until now. i feel almost ashamed to admit this, i really, really do, but it's born out of something i fear and that is this...

historically, agents of change have a habit of getting assassinated in this country. it's been quite a while since we've had one, bobby kennedy in 1968 i suppose is the last one. you know the storyline...young, eloquent candidate for office who has the country swept up by his charm, promising to institute radical changes in the way this country does things once he takes office, promising to get us out of an unpopular war immediately upon taking office, etc.

well, i've found myself actually speaking more openly to friends about this lately. i talked about it last night in fact. i wondered aloud how i would react if such a thing were to happen to barack obama. i, for one, would be crestfallen. completely devastated. i'd at least think about moving to someplace far, far away

my point in saying all of this is that i was taken aback by this story from today's ft. worth star telegram, an article titled "police concerned about order to stop weapons screening at obama rally." it reads...

Security details at Barack Obama's rally Wednesday stopped screening people for weapons at the front gates more than an hour before the Democratic presidential candidate took the stage at Reunion Arena.

The order to put down the metal detectors and stop checking purses and laptop bags came as a surprise to several Dallas police officers who said they believed it was a lapse in security.

Dallas Deputy Police Chief T.W. Lawrence, head of the Police Department's homeland security and special operations divisions, said the order -- apparently made by the U.S. Secret Service -- was meant to speed up the long lines outside and fill the arena's vacant seats before Obama came on.

The Secret Service did not return a call from the Star-Telegram seeking comment.

again, i feel dirty for even thinking about this. but it has happened before.

- in the midst of the entire ny times/john mccain debacle, i found myself thinking a lot about the four writers who were responsible for the piece and how frustrated they must have been over the past few months. as anyone who writes can attest to, there is nothing that makes you want to punch a baby more than when you write something that you're proud of and believe in only to have an editor/producer/studio executive/director rape or kill it.

and that's about all for my random thoughts today. below are some articles i found interesting...


the other big story in new york magazine this week

lost in all the hoopla of new york magazine's naked lindsay hohan pics, is one of the more even-handed, thoughtful examinations of the death of heath ledger that i've read.chris norris writes...

By Tuesday afternoon, we knew all about Heath Ledger. He’d been found in Mary-Kate Olsen’s apartment, naked on the floor, wreathed in pills, dead of apparent suicide. By Tuesday evening, he’d been found under the covers, in his own home, with the pills prescribed and in bottles. By Wednesday, he’d been alive until at least noon, when the maid heard him snoring. The masseuse who found him called Olsen once—no, three times—before dialing 911. Olsen’s bodyguards arrived before the EMTs. No, they arrived before the cops. A rolled-up $20 with drugs on it was by the bed. No, the bill was clean.

The sad, surreal story of Heath Ledger’s death was being written in real time, on a 24-hour news cycle, with digital cameras and RSS feeds. Television-news crews, online videographers, and cell-phone “citizen journalists” were participating in a dreamlike spectacle that was in its way more grotesque than the Hollywood Babylon tableau in Ledger’s apartment: Nearly 300 strangers on Broome Street, filming the removal of a body bag. One hundred more outside an Upper East Side funeral home, a scrum of cameras around a wooden box—all looking straight at each other.

read the entire piece here...

untitled heath ledger project


how's this for ironic?

the new york post lecturing the new york times about "journalistic standards." from their editorial page...

John McCain says he's "disappointed" with yesterday's front-page New York Times story alleging - with out offering an iota of proof, or even actually saying so - that he had an affair nearly a decade ago with a much-younger corporate lobbyist. Disappointed? Obviously, the de facto GOP presidential nominee believes the Times has high journalistic standards. He's wrong. This was no failure to live up to high standards. It was a drive-by shooting masquerading as a newspaper story. Indeed, the 3,000-word piece - written by a team of four reporters after months of "work" - was long on innuendo, thick with anonymous sources and shockingly short on substantive facts.

drive-by journalism

but the best times hit piece award from today's post goes to andrea peyser, who writes...

The New York Times is not an organ to pass up a chance to mug a Republican, disrespect a soldier, or destroy the lives of men born with white skin. Not when it suits its agenda.

This is the Times, a paper that holds Republicans in the esteem normally reserved for serial killers and flashers.

Failing to find a smoking bed, the paper trashed its presumably high standards for a "gotcha" piece of journalism better suited for the birdcage.

jesus, i normally love the post but this is borderline fucking retarded. YOU WRITE FOR THE NEW YORK POST ANDREA!

read her entire scathing article here...

all news fit to smear


george clooney in time magazine


(via time.com)

i've made no bones in the past about my mancrush on george clooney. yeah, i'd pretty much go all talented mr. ripley on him if given the chance. joel stein has a super piece on him in the current issue of time...

George Clooney wasn't supposed to say yes. A reporter interviews a movie star at a restaurant or a hotel lobby or an office, with his publicist lurking in the corner, ready to cut off any vaguely interesting questions. But to come over to my house for dinner? That's a trap no sucker has ever shoved a famous foot into. Partly because there are so many unknowns—you're stuck alone chatting up the family while the reporter cooks, you accidentally let slip a cruel joke about a wedding photo, you somehow use the bathroom wrong—and partly because who the hell wants to spend Saturday night stuck at some dork's house eating undercooked lamb? Would Gwyneth Paltrow come over? Johnny Depp? But George Clooney said yes, of course, why not, sounds fun.

yeah, george clooney went over to joel stein's house for dinner. fuck you joel stein! there's even video embedded in the article of clooney rummaging around in stein's crawl space. see for yourself...

the last movie star


"superstar" by lupe fiasco

yeah, i've been on a bit of a hip-hop kick lately. this song has been in my head all day today...




have a great weekend!