Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Saturday, September 20, 2008
[This post is mainly for guys; women, of course, are free to read it, but, as they are all too well aware of the techniques revealed within, why would they?]
As regular readers of these wrds can tell you, I recently [earlier this week] became a year older [51, to be exact; I'm not particularly sensitive about aging. It's that sudden stop at the end that bothers me...] As a representative of "experience" on the Blogosphere [not "knowledge", mind you, but "experience"], I'm taking it on myself to alert some of our less-schooled male readers to consider their words carefully, especially when in conversation with A Person we'll call, for sake of identification, That Special Someone [and yes, there is a romantic component at work here. Just so's ya know...]
As anyone who's ever been in A Romantic Relationship can tell you, there are difficult conversations that can creep up at the least desirable moments [examples of these include inquiries about phone numbers found in your possession, requests for further details on the Person That Special Someone's Best Friend saw you out with last night, and so on]. The dangers of those questions would seem obvious to anyone. Candid replies may not work ideally in these scenarios, but, as always, do what seems best. Remember, honesty is not a bad option [especially if Last Night went better than you'd hoped].
Sometimes, however, questions can come from the worst possible place; the imagination of one or both parties to the relationship [if there are more or less than two parties to said relationship (at least under normal circumstances), get that situation well in hand before any further mayhem can ensue]. There are few questions more terrifying [or more dangerous] to Our Young Man In Love, than the school based around variations on "What if?" You probably have heard of the type: "Honey, if I were to die suddenly [NEVER a good place for the conversation to go], would you start dating again?" Your best option with this type of question is to invoke Phyfe's Rule; nip it in the bud!
But People Who Love can be wily [though, now that I think of it, I don't remember seeing any Road Runner cartoons that speculated on the love life of one Wile E. Coyote. But I digress], asking questions that slide into the hot fantasy category. Example; "Sweetie, if I could share you for the night with any woman in the world [or man, if more suitable to your situation. As always, your mileage may vary], who would it be?" For the love of God, never answer that question! Like a choice between a buzz saw and a vat of acid, there is NO safe option! For example, my quandary: I've always found Jo Frost, Television's SuperNanny, rather hot. Maybe it's the glasses; maybe it's the womanly proportions on that girl; maybe it's the prospect of being sent to the Naughty Chair [I can't wait to see what the "Comments" page does with this revelation]; at any rate, there you are.
Not so long ago, The Woman I Love [certainly not a courtesy title] asked that one; myself, being in a less than rested state, made the mistake of Candor. What in Hell was I thinking? I don't think TWIL was so much offended as completely puzzled by my pick. And there was no explaining it, of course.
So, Young Lovers, whomever you are, hello. Be vewy, vewy careful how you answer the Dangerous Questions. And, for those who MUST ask, follow the Attorney's Principle and NEVER ask a question that you don't know the answer to! Or want to know...
Posted by Mike Riley at 7:37 PM
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Is it just moi, or are any of the rest of you on the Blogosphere having trouble executing a three-point turn without encountering Something New about Sarah Palin, the Republican candidate for vice-president? And when are we to hear something substantive from the political flavor du jour?
Like most people, I thought Palin's selection by Presidential candidate John McCain came out of right field. Yes, I've heard all the comments that she has more "executive experience" than Barack Obama [and for the moment, let's ignore the fact that Palin probably administers more elk and caribou than humans]. Sure, Democratic veep choice Joe Biden once lifted part of a major speech from one given in the English Parliament, without acknowledgment. What college sophomore, in this Internet era, can say he or she hasn't committed the moral equivalent of that act? (We can't call it edifying, but it was almost inevitable)
I wouldn't even mind the Palinmania that seems to be sweeping the US, if she'd at least had a hit single or two [I mean, the Beatles waited to come here until they were atop the US charts]. My memory of the Eighties isn't as good as it used to be, but I don't seem to remember Geraldine Ferraro getting this much hype when the Democrats nominated her for VP. Could it be because [Heaven forbid] she's a former beauty-pageant contestant/TV sportscaster/"pothead" [by her own admission]? (I was the second and third, but have never entered a beauty contest. For obvious reasons...)
I guess my real problem here is that, at a time when the Other Issues [war, economic free fall, loss of world respect, (add whatever I've missed)], we're dwelling on eyeglasses, hair styles, and other peripheral matters. Then again, how is this different from any of our recent Presidential elections? For God's sakes, people, FOCUS...
Posted by Mike Riley at 2:21 AM
Friday, September 12, 2008
Posted by Mike Riley at 1:19 AM
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Anyway, I had an idea. In future, whenever a movie too closely copies another film, domestic or foreign, without openly admitting it, half the profits should go into research. After all, there are only supposed to be seven "plots". It's time for the creative people of the world to fill in the many gaps on the Periodic Table of Plots [or, at the very least, come up with an eighth plot!].
Posted by Mike Riley at 3:02 AM
Monday, September 1, 2008
In 1968, as the Vietnam War was at its height, no newscaster was more respected in the United States than Walter Cronkite [left]. Dutifully, he had been reporting on the US incursion based on Government-supplied information. But he began hearing reports from colleagues on the scene that led him to question exactly what was happening in that corner of Southeast Asia. As an "old school" journalist [he had reported with distinction during World War II a quarter-century earlier], Cronkite wanted to explore these stories himself. He finally persuaded CBS [the network he worked for] to send him to Vietnam, and report from the war zone. While there, he spoke to officers and enlisted men, official and unofficial sources. And he came to a disturbing conclusion; he, and the rest of the American people, were being lied to.
In his reports from Vietnam, and his reporting on the War thereafter, Cronkite was a changed man. In an editorial, he said what many on the scene had said; the War, as it was being fought, was unwinnable. His coverage changed the opinions of many at home.
Now that region, still rebuilding from Katrina, is about to be challenged again. AS this is being written, Hurricane Gustav is about twelve hours from reaching land in the Gulf. To be fair, the lessons learned from Katrina are bearing fruit. New Orleans, a city built below sea level, has been evacuated. The Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] is on the scene. Equipment and the military are there [it's a pity so many are unavailable, fighting another unwinnable war]. Once again, the Gulf region, and the world, holds its breath.
Those of you who pray, or meditate, or believe in positive thinking: please send your thoughts to New Orleans and environs. No area should go through what they have gone through.
Posted by Mike Riley at 1:08 AM