Classic Rant #994 (July 1, 2013): Not a Disaster

This weekend, with the weather not so great in my neck of the woods, my family and I decided to go to the movies.

We hadn't been to the movies in several weeks, and now, with the summer upon us, the big summer flicks are out and about, so now is the time to go to the movies.

We had originally wanted to see the Superman movie, but the times weren't good for us, so we chose to see the big disaster movie of the summer, which we found to be not much of a disaster at all.

"World War Z," starring Brad Pitt, harkens back to those disaster films of my youth--remember "Earthquake"?--and it is quite a stimulating experience.

For two-plus hours, it is zombies, zombies and more zombies.

Brad Pitt--who is also co-producer of the film--stars with a basically no-name cast as a World Health Organization-United Nations specialist who is summoned to help combat a virus which is spreading throughout the globe, turning everyday people into zombies.

And like every good disaster picture, Pitt is the consummate hero, fighting this evil at every turn, in spite of great odds against him.

Finally, through his heroic efforts, he is able to withstand the peril caused by the zombies, and the world once again becomes safe.

Yes, I am skipping over much of the film, because I really don't want to give it all away.

And yes, there are holes in this movie the size of craters, but I will try not to give that away, too.

But Pitt is very good in this film, and it is actually a very family oriented flick, because he does what he does entirely for the safety of his family.

He is your typical reluctant hero, but he does what he does because he fears for the safety of his family if he doesn't do what the government wants him to do.

Yes, there are lapses--how do the greatest scientific minds the world has to offer overlook the one thing that Pitt, who is not a scientist nor a doctor, discovers as the cure for this virus, which, without giving it away, is sort of a reverse "War of the Worlds" solution--but all in all, the movie kept the audience we were in pretty spellbound until the end.

People cheered when the credits began to roll, and I haven't heard that type of reaction at the movies in quite a while.

And if you decide to see this movie, do not waste your money on 3D.

We didn't, and quite frankly, there is no reason to see this film in 3D. Maybe a zombie coming at you looks better in 3D, but you can live with the 2D, so don't spend the extra money.

So, in my opinion, "World War Z" is well worth seeing, although I was perturbed that our local movie house raised its ticket prices, not just for this film, but for all of its films.

To me, that is the real "World War" going on now, rising prices on everything without our paychecks rising along with the prices.

We should all fight back, and one way is to not see this film in 3D.

But go see the film, I guarantee you will enjoy it.

Rant #2,345: Mirror, Mirror (Part 2)

Yesterday, we spoke about how out of view actresses use the Internet to keep in the wide gaze of the Web-loving public.

Today, we look at a breaking story, where an everyday woman proved her ignorance about the Internet by exposing herself--figuratively and literally--to a lot of scorn.

Lauren Miranda, 25, middle school teacher in Bellport, Long Island, was fired after a topless photo of her turned up and was made public.

The photo, which she says was obtained by a student and circulated by that student, was brought to the attention of school officials, and the math teacher was summarily fired.

The teacher said her rights as a woman have been violated by this action, and she is suing the school district for several million dollars inn damages as a result.

The story went worldwide on the Internet yesterday, and foreign outlets--including numerous Hispanic sites, since the woman is Hispanic--put up the photo, and didn't cover it up enough to leave it to your imagination what she had to show.

Most of those photos are gone, and what you have in its place is either a much more covered up photo or a current photo of the teacher, pleading her case.

Let me just say that I don't ever remember having a teacher in middle school who looked like this, and it kind of made we want to go back to school.

Back to reality ...

The teacher claims that she is being discriminated against because she is a woman, and similar photos of bare-breasted men don't get a peep out of anyone.

She is proud of her body, proud of her breasts, but since she is a woman, she is held to a different standard than her male counterparts.

And she also reiterated that she suspects the photo--which was taken a few years back for her boyfriend, who is also a teacher in the district--the student somehow got off her phone or her boyfriend's phone.

Look, she makes some interesting points--yes, a topless woman is looked at differently in our society than a topless man--but she does neglect one thing.

Teachers are held to higher standards than, let's say, hairdressers. They are still expected to be prim and proper, maybe beyond current reality, and the way they look and dress and act is very important to keep up that image.

Whether right or wrong, in this society we live in, a woman's bared chest is a lot different than a male's bared chest.

Yes, I know, a lot of people today want to assert their beliefs that there is no difference between men and women, but most of us know that that is pure balderdash.

What's more, if you have a topless picture of a female teacher lurking around, she loses all credibility, no matter how good a teacher she is, and Miranda evidently was quite a good teacher from the reports I read, but you can throw that all out the window now.

And she taught middle school yet. This is the time period where boys really first assert their own sexuality, seeing that their female counterparts are quite different than they are, and can you expect this teacher to be able to teach her middle school students with a topless photo of her going around the school?

Furthermore, and perhaps this is the most important point of the whole mess, no matter how good a teacher she is, how could she be so ignorant as to keep the photo on her phone, or at least keep the photo on her boyfriend's phone?

With such cellphones having Internet access, everything kept on that phone is open to hacking and going viral. That picture was a prime element to go this route, so how stupid could she--and her boyfriend--be to keep it where it was so accessible?

I have not heard about any punishment given to the student, but, of course, the kid should probably get some penalty for hacking into one of the phones, or somehow obtaining the picture through one of the phones, and making it public.

But how could the teacher even think that she could go back to teaching in the school and the district with the photo in circulation?

For someone who appears to be pretty smart, she also appears to be pretty ignorant about how things work.

In the old days, you just know that Playboy Magazine would be beckoning at her door, and from what I have seen from those photos that were put up yesterday, yes, she has the goods to carry such a thing off, but in today's world, nothing surprises anyone anymore, so she will probably keep her shirt on for now.

But sorry lady, you cannot teach in this school district anymore.

Let's hope that this otherwise good teacher learns a hard lesson from this--whatever you put on your phone can be available to anyone.

Better to take such photos, if you actually have the need to take such photos, with a non-Internet-connected camera ...

But better yet, not to take them at all.

She may have ruined her career over this stupid misstep, and you may really love your body, love your breasts, and have no regrets in taking the photo, but in the long run, it really isn't worth it, is it?

Classic Rant #993 (June 28, 2013): Big Deal

This past week was pretty consequential for some people.

Gays got the right to marry, the voting rights act was thrown out the window ...

And my son started his summer job.

But there is one story that really rubs me the wrong way, creating a media circus that proves that in this age of the Internet, we as a civilization have really gone off the deep end.

Can someone please tell me what all the fuss is about revolving around the life, and death, of actor James Gandolfini?

The star of the the popular show "The Sopranos" died last week of a heart attack. He was just 51 years old.

That should have been the end of the story, but the media has made his passing almost akin to that of the death of a head of state.

At least in my neck of the woods, they have covered every nuance of his passing. Why he died, when, what he ate before he died, and, of course, his wake, funeral and burial.

Heck, New Jersey, the state that had flags lowered when Whitney Houston drugged herself to death, did the same for Gandolfini, who, according to reports, ate himself to death.

I swear that I watched this one incident that truly demonstrates how we have gone off the deep end with his death.

One local news outlet covered some nuance of his death in a piece that probably lasted about three minutes, then went right into the current state of Nelson Mandela's health, a report which lasted maybe 30 seconds.

Don't you think that should have been, at the very least, the other way around?

Heck, there were actual funeral groupies who met across the street from the funeral home where his wake was held.

They couldn't get in, because it was an "invitation only" wake, which I have never heard of.

Heck, if I could get a hold of a ticket, think of what it could have gone for on eBay.

These poor fools met across the street from the wake, and wept together over his death.

I mean, was he Rudolph Valentino or what?

Sorry, I don't get this.

Anyway, the weekend is almost here, thank goodness, and maybe this coverage will just fade away, like it should.

I need time to cool off. Speak to you on Monday.

Rant #2,344: Mirror, Mirror

Now that we are firmly in the Internet age, do you notice how many supposed celebrities use this medium as a self-promotion tool, keeping them completely in the public eye even when there is no reason to think of them in any capacity at all?

For some reason, numerous celebrity women have embraced the Internet in this way, and I have to say that their posts are consistently annoying, but also have-to-see diversions.

And no, we are not talking about the "Olive Oyls" of the celebrity world, we are talking about women who are eye candy, certainly for guys like me, but I suspect also for many women, but of course in not the same way.

Among those that use the Internet to their own advantage is the Kardashian clan. To this moment, I cannot figure out what the big deal about this obviously very dysfunctional family is, although I suspect that when you mix dysfunctionality with some type of beauty, this is what you come up with.

This family has made a multi-billion-dollar industry off of these things, so you almost can't argue with them, but what exactly do they do? Why is their very existence on this earth, and every move that they make, so very interesting?

I haven't the slightest idea, and again, if they looked like Olive Oyl, no one would care.

Then we have Alyssa Milano, another beautiful woman whose mouth is certainly equal to her ever expansive ego.

She had her fame in a few TV shows of yore, including "Who's the Boss" and "Charmed," but lately, she has made herself into the spokesman--or spokeswoman, if you will--for any movement that she feels in tune with, whether it be the sexual attacks on women movement, the anti-male movement, you name it, and she will have something to say about it ...

As if anyone really cares what this woman has to say about anything. And when you self-appoint yourself judge, jury and spokesman for anything, well, her opinion is worth less than yesterday's toilet paper, and again, nobody would care if she was an "Olive Oyl" type.

And then we have the true egoists, the ones who simply need to have their photos placed on the Internet to make them feel good about themselves, to validate their very existence on this earth for ... for well ... something, although I am not too sure what that is.

But because of their outer beauty, myself and millions of others tune into their posts very, very willingly.

We have Elizabeth Hurley as an example.

This actress, or supposed actress, or model, or whatever she is, never defined herself as either an actress or a model, and at age 53, she is kind of past what some would consider her prime years of stardom on the screen or as a modeling subject.

She knows that, and she knows that very well. She also knows that she is probably one of the most beautiful women in the world--or at least one that most of us know about--so she parades herself on the Internet every few weeks in bikinis just to show the world how good she looks in this type of bathing suit, even at her "advanced" age.

And even though we are embarrassed to do so, we all look into her posts, because we want to see just how good the headline blares that she looks in a bikini, even if she is 53 years old.

Look, we all do it, we all glare at this nonsense put up by the Khardashians, by Milano, and by Hurley. These women know that any publicity is good publicity, keeps them in the public eye, and makes them viable again as, well, Internet stars.

I am sure there are men in this category too, but funny, I can't pinpoint any, so I would say that this is a female phenomenon for the Internet age.

In the old days, publicists for such women would almost beg gossip columnists like Earl Wilson to include just a little mention of their clients, who were seen at whatever club, who were seen with whatever actress or actor, who were seen doing normal things that normal people do.

And I mean, any mention of these actresses in a column was worth its weight in gold in publicity and keeping the actress in the spotlight.

Today, the Internet is its own gossip columnist, and publicists simply have to have their clients say just about anything, or do just about anything, and you can bet it will turn up on the Internet for all of us to marvel at.

Let me tell you, even if we don't want to look, we do, and that goes for both men like me and women like some of you out there.

We just can't help ourselves, and I guess eye candy sweetens the mind, even for a moment, and that is what these ladies are really after.

They are after that moment, and yes, they get that moment each and every day.

Classic Rant #992 (June 27, 2013): Big Day

Today is just another day for you and I.

We get up, take a shower, get ready for work, proceed during the work day, end the work day, come home, eat dinner, watch some TV, and then go to sleep.

And we are like guinea pigs in a cage, because tomorrow, we are going to do it all over again.

Well, that is 100 percent true for me, at least, but for my son, today is an incredible day.

Today, he begins his first real, honest to goodness paying job of his entire life.

After three years of trying, he finally got a summer job at his old day camp.

He actually has two jobs there: as a video game expert, working the video game room, and as a bus monitor.

My son went to that camp for 10 years as a camper. He has very fond memories of those years.

But the past two years, he had hoped to work there in some capacity.

Each time, he got shot down.

He has some learning disabilities, has ADHD, and is very quiet by nature.

We often wondered if this was holding him back at the camp.

So for the past two years, he was a volunteer counselor at the camp run by the school district we live in.

He paid his dues the past two years.

It was if he had to work two years in the minor leagues before he could make it to "The Show," as they say.

He put in his time, and VOILA!, now he has a summer job at the camp that he loved to go to as a camper.

He has a lot of responsibility, especially as a bus counselor.

He must make sure that all the kids who are supposed to be on the bus are actually on the bus.

He must make sure that they are all accounted for when they leave the bus, too.

It is more responsibility than he has ever had in his life, and we think he can do a super job at it.

As a video game expert, he will man the video game room. He has a supervisor, and we told him to listen to what the supervisor says and follow his lead.

Yes, my wife and I are a bit nervous about the whole thing, but we are confident that our son can do a good job.

Look, he will be a senior in high school next year, which will be his final year in the education system, at least for the foreseeable future. He has learning difficulties, so college is not in the offing, at least not right now.

So after high school, he will go directly into the workforce. We feel with his volunteer work and this camp job, his resume is actually a pretty good one.

With the proper direction, he should be able to start his career right after high school.

And this is the first step of the long path he is going to take.

In New York State, kids like our son get a certificate that signifies that they graduated high school, not a diploma.

This is a heinous situation, because many people don't understand that the certificate is equal to a diploma. Congratulations to the state education department, which has messed up on this one big time.

Anyway, we feel that with his background, certificate or diploma, he will succeed in life after high school.

And today is the first day of the rest of his life, or at least the first day of his working life.

So we wish him well ... with our fingers crossed, of course.

Good luck, son, we know you will do well!

Rant #2,343: Ship of Fools

Happy Monday!

It's my favorite day of the week!

April Fools!

Yes, today is April Fools day, a day where we can say things and do things that are contrary to the way they should really be, and then we get away with it by simply shouting out, "April Fools!"

I remember as a kid, I used to tell people that today was a different day then it was. For instance, I would tell others that today was a Tuesday rather than a Monday, and then I would shout out "April Fools!"

We all had a good laugh with that one.

A few years ago here, I proclaimed that my April Fools Rant would be my last, and that I was shutting down the blog. That didn't go very far, and I was called out for it by readers, some in particular who have since blocked me because they don't like my views on certain subjects.

Now, who are the real April Fools in this instance?

In today's world, April Fools Day has kind of gone by the boards because we have found that truth is stranger than fiction, so why fool about it?

We have a situation where an actor does some heinous things to try to prove his point, that he is so, so underpaid, using the race card to claim some pretty horrible things happened to hin.

He is guilty as can be, everyone truly believes this, yet not only does he get off by simply paying a fine, he doesn't even have to admit his guilt--and he still claims that all of this happened to him.

April Fools! I think not.

We have a prominent movie director with several hits under his belt who says that he will never have a white person as the lead actor in any of his movies, because he says, "We've seen that movie.".

The director, who is black, is not derided by many in the public, but he is applauded by his peers, both black and white, for his stance, and many everyday citizens also applaud him.

April Fools! I think not.

There is a major criminal trial going on in New York right now, where a jogger in Howard Beach was fatally assaulted during one of her runs. The New York Police Department, using whatever evidence they had at hand--including DNA evidence--pinpointed the alleged murderer, the young black man said he did it, yet they cannot get a conviction because of a variety of factors.

The newest factor is that the NYPD has been accused of an excessive race-related focus on black men in the area, including the alleged murderer, throwing more doubt onto the trial, the second one revolving around the case.

April Fools! I think not.

New York City and State politicians are pushing a pro-marijuana agenda, stating that the complete decriminalization of recreational use of pot will bring millions into the city and state's coffers.

They do this while they completely ignore the fact that smoking weed, and smoking in general, is a health hazard costing the city and state millions and millions of dollars a year in lost productivity, they willfully refuse to differentiate between recreational use and medical use, which confuses the public, and they go against their own very explicit anti-smoking campaign, which often shows the innards of those who have chosen to smoke and have paid the price for doing so.

April Fools! I think not.

The heavily favored New York Yankees, the favorite to win not only the American League championship but the World Series this year, drop two of three games to the Baltimore Orioles--the team with one of the worst records in baseball history last year--to open the season.

Not only did the Yankees lose two of the three games to this predicted bottom-feeder team, but they did it at home at Yankee Stadium.

April Fools! I think not.

We had a 70 degree day on Saturday, the next to last day of March, and even though Sunday was a wipe out--it rained most of the day, until the sun came out in late afternoon--today, some areas started April in the 20s, with a hint of snow in the air.

We had really no winter, and now that spring is here, we have to ask, when will consistent nice weather spring up? Going from 70 to the 20s and 30s is kind of odd behavior by Mother Nature, isn't it?

April Fools! I think not.

You see what I am talking about?

April Fools Day has lost a lot of its glimmer because truth is truly stranger than fiction.

You can't possibly make this stuff up.

So while you ponder all of this, have a great April Fools Day, and I will speak to you again tomorrow on Wednesday.

Gotcha!

April Fools!

Classic Rant #991 (June 26, 2013): Pit Cruise

My family and I have been on two cruises over the past three years, and we hope to go on another cruise maybe in 2015.

We really have enjoyed these cruises.

As people told us for years prior to us ever going on a ship for a vacation, it really is the ultimate vacation.

Everything is done for you to make you feel like a king or a queen for a week, or however long you take the cruise for.

And, of course, you go to places you probably wouldn't go to if you weren't on a cruise.

It is very, very relaxing.

And yes, we took Carnival ships both times.

Carnival has been under the microscope because they have had a number of horrible incidents which have led to passengers being very, very unhappy.

During the past year or so, there have been several major malfunctions on board several of the ships, and it has come out into the open that Carnival hasn't been keeping up on the maintenance of many of its ships.

Now, a report has come out that bookings are way, way down this year, directly because Carnival has gotten a really, really bad name in the industry.

They have gotten not only a bad name because of maintenance issues, but word is also out--whether true or not--that their workers are not paid well, meaning not the "star" people, but the cleanup people, the maintenance people, the lower-echelon workers on these ships.

Some claim that they are almost slave labor, or at the best, indentured servants.

Look, no matter what your feelings on Carnival--and their pretty vapid damage control--they are not going out of business.

They control a large percentage of the ships that cruise around the world, under a variety of different names, not just Carnival.

Second, most people taking Carnival cruises, like my family, have never had the least bit of a problem with them.

I think the only thing that didn't work the last time we cruised with them was one, single elevator.

We did notice some differences between our first cruise and our latest cruise.

We thought that we were nickel and dimed for just about everything, and there were one or two incidents where, quite frankly, we did have to ask some questions that we didn't have to ask on the first cruise.

But, nonetheless, we had a good time the second time around, and we look forward to our third go-around.

Look, cruise ships have been under scrutiny since the days of the Titanic.

Notice that none of these ships fly under the flag of the United States; it's always some other country.

I am not going to directly say that other countries don't have as high standards as we do here, but I guess that is true, so when you are sailing under a different flag, different rules apply.

Knowing little about this industry as I do, I have always wondered why an American ship line doesn't exist.

But on the other hand, I think the all-around standards would be so high that such a line would not be feasible--and it would probably cost passengers an arm and a leg to cruise with such a line, which is not the message the industry wants to put out.

Anyway, my family has never had any huge problems with Carnival, so we will cruise again, although we are looking into other cruise lines this time around.

So, my advice to you is if you plan to cruise, do it with confidence, but shop around.

You want to make this cruise your "cruise of a lifetime," and now, with the industry under incredible scrutiny, you can probably get some amazing deals.

Take advantage now, because you don't know how long this is going to last.