in a few months from now, those of us who vote in the presidential election will have a great say in what direction this country should take in the coming years. contrary to bush's declaration of a mandate from the american people, he failed to acknowledge how difficult it is to change political course in the middle of a war. in the fall of '08, however, the nation will indeed be voicing their opinions about the direction of this country. while the country as a whole may still be 'moderate' (a term that has no true meaning, but can only be determined in context to the times), the public debates on issues such as health care, foreign policy, immigration and others are truly based on polar ideologies.
when it comes to health care, however, i believe there is one thing we should all agree upon. the dems may want to keep the standard employer-based public health care system, including medicare and medicaid. the government stays heavily involved and health care costs increase.
on the flip side, the neo-cons (i just enjoy that term, no idea what it means), may want to privatize health care, taking it out of the government's hands and putting it into the hands of the people. individuals will have great discretion in how they choose to spend their money, while still being protected in case of a serious illness. the plan hopes to increase efficiency and drive down the cost of health care to society in general.
i am not writing to comment on which system is 'right' or 'wrong' or which one would work better. the only thing i can say is that we shouldn't put it on the kids. if you believe in government involvement in health care, then create a system that protects all the children in this nation. just like medicare protects retirees and just like medicaid protects the indigent we could have a system called medikid. we strive to protect those that can't protect themselves and that includes the elderly, the poor and definitely the children.
if you desire to privatize health care, on the other hand, then i have some words for you as well. if you embrace privatization of social institutions, then it probably follows that you believe in the essence of capitalism, which is that people should reap the benefits of what they sow, that individuals should be free to do what they please with their money, and that market forces should rule. this is why they believe in low taxes because the government should not be taking the money that people have 'earned' out of their hands.
i can only respond by saying that children should not bear the burden of their parents' inabilities to provide for them. if parents have not been able to 'succeed' in society, then i can see how that is a reflection of their poor choices or their poor skills. i can also see why many people do not believe that society should care for these people. i do not agree with this point, but the argument has consistency and is at the very least logical if you start off with certain basic assumptions of humanity.
children, however, do not fall within this logic. they do not fail to provide anything substantial to society. they do not falter because of their bad choices. society does not allow children to provide to society nor to make bad choices. rather, society is designed to protect children. we have schools that educate kids, maternity leave so that mothers can be there for the kids right after they are born, statutory rape laws to protect kids from adults who can take advantage of them, and other laws that protect minors. we, as a society, deem children to be unable and unfit to participate in society completely.
if we view children this way and limit their means, then why do we punish them for our imposition of limitations. if we don't want to guarantee them health care, then maybe we should let them join the workforce, allow them to leave school early, because if their parents can't provide for them in this capitalist setting, shouldn't they be able to provide for themselves?
it makes no sense... do not treat them as kids (which they are) in almost every aspect of society (except murder perhaps), then turn around and punish them as adults. if capitalism is about the individual, then don't punish the child for a parent's shortcomings. the poor are poor because they have failed. old people should have saved more. fine, these statements can be defended, but children? where did they go wrong? are we punishing them because they happened to be born into the wrong family?
i pray that we do not employ this logic for much longer because how can we be proud of a nation that does not even care for their young...
Friday, November 30, 2007
Friday, November 23, 2007
it's not hbo, it's tv! (tell me you love me - a review)
so the first season of hbo's new show "tell me you love me" is over and since i've been talking about the show for months now trying to get people to watch, i figured i'd write a review of the its inaugural season.
the show revolves around four relationship dynamics. all of the characters are attractive (but not overly attractive), white, heterosexual and successful. in addition, they all have problems. first you have the young, pretty girl who can't seem to be alone and must resort to sex in order to cover up the problems in her relationship. second, you have the 30-something year old couple who have been married for a few years and are now trying very hard, but very unsuccessfully to have their first child. third, you have the middle-aged couple who are married with two kids and are trying to figure out where all the passion has gone. finally, you have the relationship therapist, an elderly woman, who all the other couples go to for advice, but is still dealing with her own issues of a past affair.
recently, over the last couple of years, hbo has seen many of its shows come to a conclusion either through cancellation of retirement... great shows like six feet under, the sopranos, deadwood and rome ended either because of production costs or simply to move on. other shows like carnivale and john from cincinnati just didn't have the viewers to justify more episodes. hbo was left with the wire and big love as the only hour-long dramas left on its schedule. this fall, however, hbo hit the jackpot with one of the most original shows to hit television in a long time - tell me you love me.
the producers of 'tell me you love me' started the season off with some of the more shocking things a person can see on television. let's just say that i've never seen a cumshot on camera before. the show comes at you fast and it doesn't apologize for any of it. if you're not ready for raw, real and therefore unattractive sex then change the channel. this is not porn... sex has never looked this bad. oh, and as a disclaimer, be prepared for old people doing things that you never wanted to think of old people doing.
but in the midst of all the sex (and there's a lot of sex) there's something incredibly engrossing about this show or i guess disturbing, depending on how you look at it. this show attempts to tackle the issues that come with intimacy. when you watch it you're either drawn in because it's so real or bothered by it because it's so real. either way, you've got to hand it to them, they've captured the craziness that is relationships. from the resentment issues to the lies to the things you can never take back, this show puts the viewer on center stage.
if you've ever been in a relationship, you've encountered many of the same problems. take, for example, the 30-something couple trying to have a baby. have you ever been in a relationship where people eventually want different things? the person you chose to be with in the beginning is no longer the person they are now. as a result you follow them down a path that leads to resentment which leads to emotional distance and eventually the intimacy you once had is now dead.
why do people watch tv shows... be it heroes or lost, curb or weeds, boston legal or law and order? there is always some sort of escape, be it a mere distraction or some fantasy world we can lose ourselves in. this escape, however, doesn't exist in hbo's new show... the problems are just too real and delve too deep into our own insecurities and our personal limitations.
i can tell you that i don't watch this show because it brings me any particular enjoyment. rather, it's more amazement than anything else. it's like watching a magic show and being like, 'wow, you got me'... 'now, how did you do that trick'. it's uncomfortable to watch. it's like when you watch a horror movie and scream at the main character not to go into the woods to check out that scary noise. you always say how you would never do that if you were in that situation. but when you watch 'tell me' you can't say these things because you've done them and you'll probably do them again.
i don't know why exactly i watch this show, but it definitely makes you confront your own issues at intimacy and that can be very scary at times. people like to ignore their limitations or insecurities, instead posing as models of perfection. in actuality, i think we're all a little neurotic and we all have the ability to be hurt and to hurt others. this show makes you take a look in the mirror and for those of us who can bear to look, it's a worthwhile hour of television. i mean, it's gotta be better than kid nation.
the show revolves around four relationship dynamics. all of the characters are attractive (but not overly attractive), white, heterosexual and successful. in addition, they all have problems. first you have the young, pretty girl who can't seem to be alone and must resort to sex in order to cover up the problems in her relationship. second, you have the 30-something year old couple who have been married for a few years and are now trying very hard, but very unsuccessfully to have their first child. third, you have the middle-aged couple who are married with two kids and are trying to figure out where all the passion has gone. finally, you have the relationship therapist, an elderly woman, who all the other couples go to for advice, but is still dealing with her own issues of a past affair.
recently, over the last couple of years, hbo has seen many of its shows come to a conclusion either through cancellation of retirement... great shows like six feet under, the sopranos, deadwood and rome ended either because of production costs or simply to move on. other shows like carnivale and john from cincinnati just didn't have the viewers to justify more episodes. hbo was left with the wire and big love as the only hour-long dramas left on its schedule. this fall, however, hbo hit the jackpot with one of the most original shows to hit television in a long time - tell me you love me.
the producers of 'tell me you love me' started the season off with some of the more shocking things a person can see on television. let's just say that i've never seen a cumshot on camera before. the show comes at you fast and it doesn't apologize for any of it. if you're not ready for raw, real and therefore unattractive sex then change the channel. this is not porn... sex has never looked this bad. oh, and as a disclaimer, be prepared for old people doing things that you never wanted to think of old people doing.
but in the midst of all the sex (and there's a lot of sex) there's something incredibly engrossing about this show or i guess disturbing, depending on how you look at it. this show attempts to tackle the issues that come with intimacy. when you watch it you're either drawn in because it's so real or bothered by it because it's so real. either way, you've got to hand it to them, they've captured the craziness that is relationships. from the resentment issues to the lies to the things you can never take back, this show puts the viewer on center stage.
if you've ever been in a relationship, you've encountered many of the same problems. take, for example, the 30-something couple trying to have a baby. have you ever been in a relationship where people eventually want different things? the person you chose to be with in the beginning is no longer the person they are now. as a result you follow them down a path that leads to resentment which leads to emotional distance and eventually the intimacy you once had is now dead.
why do people watch tv shows... be it heroes or lost, curb or weeds, boston legal or law and order? there is always some sort of escape, be it a mere distraction or some fantasy world we can lose ourselves in. this escape, however, doesn't exist in hbo's new show... the problems are just too real and delve too deep into our own insecurities and our personal limitations.
i can tell you that i don't watch this show because it brings me any particular enjoyment. rather, it's more amazement than anything else. it's like watching a magic show and being like, 'wow, you got me'... 'now, how did you do that trick'. it's uncomfortable to watch. it's like when you watch a horror movie and scream at the main character not to go into the woods to check out that scary noise. you always say how you would never do that if you were in that situation. but when you watch 'tell me' you can't say these things because you've done them and you'll probably do them again.
i don't know why exactly i watch this show, but it definitely makes you confront your own issues at intimacy and that can be very scary at times. people like to ignore their limitations or insecurities, instead posing as models of perfection. in actuality, i think we're all a little neurotic and we all have the ability to be hurt and to hurt others. this show makes you take a look in the mirror and for those of us who can bear to look, it's a worthwhile hour of television. i mean, it's gotta be better than kid nation.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
who has time for rational thoughts in times like these?
as i sit here and watch game 1 of the alds, red sox v. the los angeles angels of anaheim (i've grown to love it), i am reminded of a conversation i had earlier today that makes perfect sense, but i can't imagine ever agreeing with.
for my first entry into this new world of blogging, just another way for us all to think we can become famous, i thought that i would write about the mets. i mean, it is why i started this blog and it the source of my extreme pain these days. however, in light of my conversation this morning, the mets will only be the springboard.
the argument: because i am a mets fan, i should be rooting for the phillies to win the world series because then at least i could say we were bested by the world champs. i know that it's not like we lost to them in the alcs, which would provide a slightly better argument, but the essential ingredients are present. the argument uses the logic that if you are beaten by another, you should want them to be the best because then it's not as embarrassing to lose. however, if the victor went on to lose in the next round, your lose was even more indicative of how bad you are. in essence, these people want to be able to say that they were at least the third best team and not the 10th best team.
the counter-argument: here, i will be presenting a logical counter-argument before we get to the truth. i can see how it makes sense in a sport like college football where if your opponent does well, your rankings go up. but in other sports, let's say baseball, the mets last year aren't considered the third best team because they lost to the cardinals who went on to win the world series (tigers would be considered second and athletics fourth). and even if you wanted to make that argument, who would listen or let alone care. now, that makes for a good counter-argument, but here's the real truth.
FUCK THE PHILLIES! i hope that all the phillies get seriously ill from food prepared by jimmy rollins' wife and they have to spend 10 straight days living on a toilet. i hope they lose every single one of their playoff games by a combined score of one million to negative ten. i hope the lose so bad that any sweet taste they had after sunday turns into a combination of those bitter beer commercials and dogpoop.
i hate the phillies. that is the truth. i may not hate them in ten years, but as for today and for the foreseeable future, i hate 'em. you can use all the logic you want, try and convince me for lifetimes, but i'll never agree. i refuse to agree, it's unamerican. it's inhuman. there is no way you can convince me that the opponent that celebrates in light of your utter misery should be rewarded with your support.
now, as i read what i just wrote not 6 seconds ago, i realize that it sounds like a complete sore loser statement. i concur, there's no denying it. but fuck you too because you know it's true. i'm not saying that i want them to burn in hell or even that they don't deserve it. i applaud them, they won, they are "better" than us, but that's the extent of that. i hope the rockies crush their collective will to live.
people have to realize that this is survival. a playoff spot to the phillies for the most part means that no playoffs for the mets. there is no way to "increase the pie" so to speak. there's one pie and it's already been cut into 8 pieces. if you're starving, haven't eaten in years, and someone else takes the piece of pie you had your eye on for 6 months, i'd sock you if you wished him/her the best and hoped that they went on to great success in life.
the phillies ate our motherfuckin' slice of pie. we wanted it, felt like we deserved it, thought that if we ate the pie we could grow into a strong, healthy boy, fall in love with a supermodel and go onto fame/fortune. but all of that is lost now. thanks to the phillies. and people want me to hope they win the world series? i'm going to go to those people's houses, knock on their door, hit them over the head with a bat, steal their wives, steal the vette and i hope when i'm driving away with wife in hand i get a warm 'good luck to you' from them as they lie bloodied from my assult.
baseball is not for the sane of mind. let's face it. billie goats and babe ruth. clutchness and derek jeter. none of it makes sense. let's not try to makes sense of it when you're team loses a 7 game lead with 17 to go.
the bottom line: screw those who beat you and in the event that it happens, instead of rooting for their success, you should be spreading lies about their mothers and telling everyone that the person has an incurable STD (preferably not the big one cuz that's not nice, but herpes will do just fine).
for my first entry into this new world of blogging, just another way for us all to think we can become famous, i thought that i would write about the mets. i mean, it is why i started this blog and it the source of my extreme pain these days. however, in light of my conversation this morning, the mets will only be the springboard.
the argument: because i am a mets fan, i should be rooting for the phillies to win the world series because then at least i could say we were bested by the world champs. i know that it's not like we lost to them in the alcs, which would provide a slightly better argument, but the essential ingredients are present. the argument uses the logic that if you are beaten by another, you should want them to be the best because then it's not as embarrassing to lose. however, if the victor went on to lose in the next round, your lose was even more indicative of how bad you are. in essence, these people want to be able to say that they were at least the third best team and not the 10th best team.
the counter-argument: here, i will be presenting a logical counter-argument before we get to the truth. i can see how it makes sense in a sport like college football where if your opponent does well, your rankings go up. but in other sports, let's say baseball, the mets last year aren't considered the third best team because they lost to the cardinals who went on to win the world series (tigers would be considered second and athletics fourth). and even if you wanted to make that argument, who would listen or let alone care. now, that makes for a good counter-argument, but here's the real truth.
FUCK THE PHILLIES! i hope that all the phillies get seriously ill from food prepared by jimmy rollins' wife and they have to spend 10 straight days living on a toilet. i hope they lose every single one of their playoff games by a combined score of one million to negative ten. i hope the lose so bad that any sweet taste they had after sunday turns into a combination of those bitter beer commercials and dogpoop.
i hate the phillies. that is the truth. i may not hate them in ten years, but as for today and for the foreseeable future, i hate 'em. you can use all the logic you want, try and convince me for lifetimes, but i'll never agree. i refuse to agree, it's unamerican. it's inhuman. there is no way you can convince me that the opponent that celebrates in light of your utter misery should be rewarded with your support.
now, as i read what i just wrote not 6 seconds ago, i realize that it sounds like a complete sore loser statement. i concur, there's no denying it. but fuck you too because you know it's true. i'm not saying that i want them to burn in hell or even that they don't deserve it. i applaud them, they won, they are "better" than us, but that's the extent of that. i hope the rockies crush their collective will to live.
people have to realize that this is survival. a playoff spot to the phillies for the most part means that no playoffs for the mets. there is no way to "increase the pie" so to speak. there's one pie and it's already been cut into 8 pieces. if you're starving, haven't eaten in years, and someone else takes the piece of pie you had your eye on for 6 months, i'd sock you if you wished him/her the best and hoped that they went on to great success in life.
the phillies ate our motherfuckin' slice of pie. we wanted it, felt like we deserved it, thought that if we ate the pie we could grow into a strong, healthy boy, fall in love with a supermodel and go onto fame/fortune. but all of that is lost now. thanks to the phillies. and people want me to hope they win the world series? i'm going to go to those people's houses, knock on their door, hit them over the head with a bat, steal their wives, steal the vette and i hope when i'm driving away with wife in hand i get a warm 'good luck to you' from them as they lie bloodied from my assult.
baseball is not for the sane of mind. let's face it. billie goats and babe ruth. clutchness and derek jeter. none of it makes sense. let's not try to makes sense of it when you're team loses a 7 game lead with 17 to go.
the bottom line: screw those who beat you and in the event that it happens, instead of rooting for their success, you should be spreading lies about their mothers and telling everyone that the person has an incurable STD (preferably not the big one cuz that's not nice, but herpes will do just fine).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
