James Cameron to Ask Eywa About Oil Spill

In light of the immensity of the Charlie-Fox that is the Gulf oil spill, with nowhere/no one else to turn to the Feds have asked notable movie director, James Cameron for advice on the best way to um, terminate this titanic mess.

I lost all respect for Herr Cameron after reluctantly watching Titanic. When it came out and people around me were going to the theaters in droves, I steadfastly held out. This stubborn refusal to line Cameron’s pockets lasted for an entire year until one lazy Saturday afternoon when Cinemax ran it and I plopped down in front of the telly and watched.

Needless to say, the movie was everything I thought it would be: a sappy and trite “love” story not worthy of 3 seconds of my life, not to mention the 3 hours or so of it.  For a hilarious take on the Titanic character “Rose” (nauseously played by Kate Winslet) go all the way down the page in the following Camille Paglia op-ed:

Bow-ow-ow: Obama’s painful missteps

So when Cameron’s pantheistic Smurfest, Avatar, came out, I didn’t flock to the IMAX despite entreaties from several people. While I have watched the movie, albeit blasphemously, on DVD and on a non-flatscreen TV (the horror!), I remain one of the Luddites who has not had the life-changing 3D experience. Bah! Humbug!

To me “Pandora” will always be the 80s Mexican pop group (below) and not some idyllic living world which doesn’t take sides but does,

[Photo credit: Salva Vinilos’ Photostream]

While, I fervently hope that Cameron can provide a solution to widening mess in the Gulf, short of him having a queue which links him up to Zonama Sekot Gaia/Eywa, AND he gets her to take sides (like Jake Sully did) I don’t see the director na’vigating the feds, BP or Gulf Coast fisherman out of this mess.

Advertisements

The Mainstream Media: Biased?

There has been for quite some time now, from politically conservative circles a general disgust and discontent with the mainstream media (MSM).

The MSM being major newspapers and TV networks not named FoxNews.

Conservatives have soured on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN due to a perceived bias against conservative causes and the like.

MSM
Do I look biased to you?

I’ve asked people on the other side of the proverbial aisle about this bias and they merely chalk it up to the active imaginations of their conservative counterparts. Of course, much rougher language is hurled at those right-wing ______ (insert favorite pejorative here).

Reading Camille Paglia’s latest contribution for Salon, I realized Paglia, who is certainly not a conservative, also sees a bias. Here are the pertinent paragraphs (emphasis mine):

Whether Palin has a national future or not will depend on her willingness to hit the books at some point and absorb more information about international history and politics than she has needed to know in her role as governor. She also needs a shrewder, cooler take on the mainstream media, with its preening bullies, cackling witches, twisted cynics and pompous windbags. The Northeastern media establishment is in decline, and everyone knows it. Palin should not have gotten into a slanging match with David Letterman or anyone else who has been obsessively defaming her or her family. Let surrogates do that stuff.

The vicious double standard is pretty obvious. Only the tabloids, for example, ran the photos of a piss-drunk Chelsea Clinton, panties exposed, falling into her car outside London clubs a few years ago. If Chelsea had been the scion of Republican bigwigs, those tacky scenes would have been trumpeted from pillar to post in the U.S. as signals of parental failures or turmoil in clan Clinton. As a Democrat, I detest the partisan machinations that have become standard in Northeastern news management and that are detectable in editorial decisions at major metropolitan newspapers nationwide. It’s why I, like a host of others, have shifted my news gathering to the Web.

Is she the only non-conservative who sees it or who sees it and dares to voice their observations?

Camille Paglia digs Sarah Palin?

Today during lunch I had a conversation with a dear co-worker from the glorious nation of Kazakhstan, unlike Borat (below), she is actually from there.

She is a very kind hearted, elegant woman who is always good for a chat. The topic of Sarah Palin arose and my co-worker expressed her dislike for Mrs. Palin. She went as far as to call her an “extremist”.

I pressed her to explain to me what she meant by that. When we got down to the nuts and bolts of it, my co-worker just doesn’t like her because of her updo and rimless glasses. Reminding me once again how much of a student council election vibe a Presidential election can possess.

I’m not going to sit here and say that this perspective is representative of supporters of the Democratic ticket because it probably isn’t. Based on the following column by Professor Camille Paglia (self-professed Democrat, atheist, libertarian) it most definitely isn’t:

Fresh blood for the vampire

Paglia’s writing is excellent and her insight into the phenomenon that is Sarah Palin is surprisingly free of much of the animosity and vitriol that has been hurled the Gov’s way.

She even makes this bold statement,

Conservative though she may be, I felt that Palin represented an explosion of a brand new style of muscular American feminism. At her startling debut on that day, she was combining male and female qualities in ways that I have never seen before. And she was somehow able to seem simultaneously reassuringly traditional and gung-ho futurist. In terms of redefining the persona for female authority and leadership, Palin has made the biggest step forward in feminism since Madonna

Then on feminism she says this,

Feminism, which should be about equal rights and equal opportunity, should not be a closed club requiring an ideological litmus test for membership

While I could sit here and list quote after quote from this one piece, I thought this one particularly introspective towards Paglia’s preferred political party,

The witch-trial hysteria of the past two incendiary weeks unfortunately reveals a disturbing trend in the Democratic Party, which has worsened over the past decade. Democrats are quick to attack the religiosity of Republicans, but Democratic ideology itself seems to have become a secular substitute religion. Since when did Democrats become so judgmental and intolerant? Conservatives are demonized, with the universe polarized into a Manichaean battle of us versus them, good versus evil. Democrats are clinging to pat group opinions as if they were inflexible moral absolutes. The party is in peril if it cannot observe and listen and adapt to changing social circumstances.

Yeah I was kind of wondering the same thing during lunch today…