Title Strangely Changed!

That is all.

Rocque On!

Good Ladies and Gentlemen, I beseech thee to cease beating your oafish servants long enough to enjoy musical merriment beyond reckoning at the cultured hands of the greatest hard rocque band in the world...The Upper Crust!

Ideas Are Scary Things

Y'know, when the Nazis wanted to march in Skokie, I hated that there even WAS still such an abomination as that group in existence. But I believed that aside from them having the constitutional right to demonstrate, it was also the right thing to do if you're someone who opposes their brand of ignorance. The way to defeat evil is to bring it out from under its rock and let the light of truth get to it. I believed, and still do, that the hearts and minds of good men and women can see right through such hatred, and will reject it.

And when there was an effort in the 40s and 50s to ferret out the Communists in our society and silence them, that was simply wrong. There's probably no one in this country more anti-Communist than I am (they are, after all, possessed of one of the few mindsets that can actually be said to have caused the deaths of far more people than even the monstrous Third Reich), but again, I believe that the better angels of our nature will turn away from the Maos and Castros and Pol Pots of the world when we actually come face to face with their evil.

Y'see, folks, more than just about anything in the world, I believe in free speech. And no, I don't mean just the God-given right to speak ones mind; that's self-evident. No, I'm also talking about the belief that your own opinions have enough weight, substance, and truth to them that you have NO NEED to suppress the thoughts and ideas of your opponents.

I mention all this so that you have some context to the anecdote I'm about to relate.

Tonight I stopped in to our local Barnes and Noble bookstore to browse. While I was there, I walked by a display right up at the front of the store (in front of the info desk) marked "In the News." Ah, I thought, this sounds good. I'm all about topical issues and such. Let's see what they've got.

Well, gang, it's amazing what's in the news these days. There were approximately 45 non-fiction books on top of the table. They included books on how evil and/or incompetent George Bush is, why the war has been such a mistake and was tremendously mishandled, how capitalism is a bad idea, why man-made global warming is a FACT and anyone who says otherwise is either an idiot or a liar paid by corporations, why Barack Obama is the only choice for our next president, why the U.S. is more evil because of Abu Ghrab than islamic extremist are for beheading innocent people, and on and on.

Amazingly, almost everything in the news these days fits one political viewpoint! Imagine!

Of the books on the table, only three had any viewpoint that was not far left of center. One was by George Will. One was a biography of Ronald Reagan (although that was one of the few books on the table I haven't read any part of, so I guess it MIGHT have been critical of Reagan). The last one was a biography of Barry Goldwater (I assume that one was probably positive, as it was co-written by his son, although I guess if I made that same assumption about Mommy Dearest I'd be wrong).

Amazing. Out of 45 books on current politics, only three did not necessarily support a stereotypical liberal viewpoint. Wow, what are the odds, especially given the fact that according to the last couple of presidential elections and just about every poll taken in the last twenty years, this country is divided about 50/50 on almost every major issue.

Was this display a Barnes and Noble corporate decision? I assume not, since they DO carry books with dissenting opinions, and many of them sell VERY WELL. No, the judgment call to set up the display this way was obviously made by one (or maybe a few) of their employees.

So given everything I've said above, how little faith do you have to have in the strength of your beliefs that you are not willing to give the other viewpoints equal time? If, for example, man-made global warming is so obvious and "the debate is over" as Al Gore says, what's the harm in having even ONE book (out of the dozens and dozens in existence) that says the contrary right there alongside the half dozen that claim man-made global warming is a given?

And if you're someone who's reading this and you have the same beliefs as the authors of those 42 books on the table (and I probably agree with some of them, too), how do you feel when you read about something like this? Does it make you happy that folks who believe as you do are willing to stoop to things like this? Or does it make you as incensed as me? And if you had walked by that display tonight like I did, would you have even noticed the imbalance of opinions?

And if you do think it's ok, since it supports your views, ask yourself how you'd feel if it didn't. For example, what if you walked into a Walden Books or a Chapters and you saw a display that said "Opinions on Religion," and when you took a closer look, you realized that almost every book was about how Christianity is the only "correct" religion. Nothing there about Judaism, Islam, Wicca, agnosticism, atheism, nothing. Just "Jesus is the only way TO think" and that's it. You have a problem with that? I sure as hell would.

Ideas that have merit can stand or fall on their own. They should be given that chance, whatever they are. Only cowards need to literally or figuratively shout down their opponents, whether it's people trying to get "The Last Temptation of Christ" taken out of theaters, or college students not allowing a guest speaker to be heard.

Shame on them.

Let There Be Rock

Continuing in our vein of people whose death really pisses me off, I've been thinking a lot about Bon Scott recently (yesterday was his birthday, in fact). As many of you know, I consider Paul Rodgers the greatest rock vocalist of all time, and that's a given. But when it comes to blistering hard rock, no one has ever touched me like Bon. No offense to Brian Johnson, who is a talented man, but the early AC/DC albums are a thing of beauty and a joy forever. Bon, buddy, I loved you, but to hell with you (and I know you'd like that) for depriving us of a lot of years of balls-to-the-wall rockin'.

Here's a little bit of Bon and the boys. I picked this one specifically for Lea (even though she more than likely can't watch the video):

Are You Kids Scared Yet?

OK, I commented on the first episode of "Fear Itself" a while back. Since then there have been three more excursions into TV horror. Did it get any better? Well...

* "Spooked" - Eric Roberts stars as a dirty cop who gets haunted. There was some decent eerie imagery here, and truth be told, I've always kind of liked Roberts' performances (unlike his sis, he does have a lick of talent). But there was soooo much padding here, too. Look, folks, I'll say it again: a one-hour horror TV show is fine, but break it into shorter vignettes! Most of the plots you're dealing with here DO NOT need an hour to unfold. You end up stretching a 22 minute idea into 44, and it just tends to drag.

* "Family Man"- OK, this had a decent premise: a good father and husband is involved in a car crash with a serial killer, and their two souls trade bodies. Potentially suspenseful stuff, and there are a few decent moments. But the ending...sheesh. Newsflash: horror stories DO NOT have to end in a hopeless, nihilistic manner. That's not scary, just depressing.

* "In Sickness and In Health" - Probably the worst of the bunch so far, and almost totally because of the script. I think I've pointed out before that I'm not a plot guy, and Lea is very much the same. But five minutes into this, she turned to me and told me how it was going to end, and I said "Oh, if it does, man, am I going to be disappointed." And I was disappointed. Shame on you, Victor Salva, and not for your conviction of molesting (and videotaping) a twelve year-old boy (excuse me for sounding less than "progressive," but I can remember a time when sexually abusing a child might make folks in Hollywood a bit reluctant to hire you). No, shame on you because, criminal offenses aside, you have more talent than this crap. You made the truly scary Clownhouse, and the pretty darn good Jeepers Creepers movies (and the fairly craptastic Powder, actually). But this is the best you could do for your TV debut? Since the ENTIRETY of this piece hinged on the ending (a mistake), the worst thing you could have done was to make the conclusion easier to see coming than the Underdog balloon in the Macy's parade. And yet you did.

Sooooo...I'm not really digging this show so far. I'm pinning my hopes on tonight's episode, which is directed by Stuart Gordon (who, at the very least, directed a couple of movies twenty-odd years ago that I really dug). As Boris Karloff would say, only time will tell.