A funny thing happened to me at work on Thursday- the company folded.

There I was walking around the office, handing out the layout of the just about to be mailed out upcoming issue and I was called into an office-wide meeting. And just like that, laid-off, as was everyone else in the company. Which is why I found myself Friday morning, three days after getting a job, once again lying in bed and watching Dylan confront Andrea over her almost affair with another student while Jesse was busy taking care of the baby. It's my fourth layoff, third since I turned 30, and fifth loss of job. I was kind of excited over the possibility of setting a new record for quickest layoff in layoff history, but then I remembered that at one of my old jobs, someone got laid off her first day, the head of the company suddenly changing his mind as to whether an international sales person was needed. D'oh.

God, I love the layoff meetings. All the tears and apologies, discussion of severance packages and COBRA payments, and the sheer utter shock of it all. I should know because I've been through so many of them. My first sort-of real job after college was temping at a major long-distance phone carrier. After months and months of layoff rumors, rumors so pronounced the CEO had to send out a video-taped message saying layoffs weren't going to happen (hah!), they brought the entire Department into a conference room and broke the news. I can still remember all the people crying at the announcement and the laid-off VP of the company, a gruff ex-Israeli tank commander during the Yom Kippur War, slamming his fist on the table at the fuckedup-ness of it all.

Stupid me was actually beginning to get into working again. I even started paying off some bills. I had a kick-ass ergonomic chair, a big cubicle space, a lap-top computer, and a phone that was so cutting edge I had no idea how to work it. And despite all my bitterness towards how they had treated me, I was liking it there. I still didn't really trust the bosses, but everyone else in the company was really nice and kept telling me how glad they were that I had been hired. That morning I had even earned major thanks for completely revising something, an easy little thing to do that quickly made everyone's job a little easier. And that afternoon I was supposed to meet with the Web guy and learn how to post stuff up on the company Web site.

There goes that.

I guess I can say I kind of saw this coming. Red flags were flapping all over the place. Hell, that morning one of the bosses sent out an e-mail about a company-wide conference call but cancelled it a few minutes later. That's a pretty big red flag. And having been through all of this way too many times before (as pretty much all of San Francisco has), I knew all the signs- the closed door meetings, the grumbling about money, the sudden concern with cutting costs. Hell, I saw this coming when I first interviewed with them when I couldn't help wonder about a company that rented an entire floor in a San Francisco office building (23rd floor no less) yet had only fourteen employees.

But still, I had hope. They wouldn't have hired me if they didn't think they were going to cease to exist three days later, right? And besides, just because I have paranoid concerns about something doesn't mean it's not going to happen, right? A psychiatrist once tried to tell me that things like pessimism and paranoia are only mental constructs, things that happen only in the mental wiring and have no bearing whatsoever with reality. Which makes me wonder, if that's true, why is it that when I usually have that paranoid feeling about something, it comes true?

Friday morning I realized that I'm starting to watch "Charmed" episodes for the second time. All I can say is that you know you've been unemployed for a long time when you've lapped yourself on reruns of a show that has been running for six years and up until October you had never watched before.

Ugh.

Here's an interesting bit of conversation to overhear (ahem- eavesdrop) walking down the street:

One woman to her male friend "....so I was lying there naked and they were pointing at me and saying 'you're a good Catholic girl?'"

Before Friday's interview turned into a debacle, my big concern was what should I do about my still lingering conjunctivitis. There was a chance that I might be contagious and so should probably avoid shaking hands with people, but it was an interview- how in the world could I avoid not shaking hands with people? And yes, total Mr. Pitt and the Japanese businessmen. Not to mention total Larry David running into Ben Stiller at a movie.

Naturally, on my 2nd day of work, my nominal boss called in sick today.

Coincidence?

Not that I'm the biggest Howard Stern fan, but.....

Clear Channel Drops Howard Stern's Show

What the in the Wide Wide World of ABC Sports is going on with our country? Seriously, have we all lost it?

You know what the craziest thing is? This wouldn't have happened if it weren't for Janet's little tit slip. One little second of boobage and all of a sudden Howard Stern looses his show.

Does this mean that Michael Powell (the head of the FCC) is the new Pig Vomit?

Tomorrow's the big day, the world premiere of the "Star Wars" for the Evangelical set, "The Passion of Christ." I wonder if it'll be just like a "Star Wars" premiere. Are people sleeping out for tickets right now? Will people dress in character? And you know how in the "Lord of the Rings" flicks everyone cheered when Aragorn and Legalos first appear? Will people cheer at the first appearance of Jesus? Of their favorite disciple? Or will they only cheer if they have somebody as good looking as Viggo or Orlando Bloom was playing Mark or John?

I can't wait to see the "Passion of Christ" Happy Meal tie in with McDonalds.

Actually, I hear the movie's quite similar to "Star Wars" in that everyone's favorite scene is when God tells Jesus that he's His son during a light saber fight. I also hear that Danny Glover does a really good job playing Luke, an old Disciple whose about to retire and who constantly tells Jesus that he's "getting to old for this shit."

From the reviews of the movie, it actually sounds kind of brutal. Lots of ultra-violence and gore, which is kind of weird considering those are the same people who keep on ranting about movie violence and gore. It's even weirder when you hear that the background music to the scene where Pilate is giving Jesus the thirty-nine lashes is Steel Wheel's "Stuck in the Middle of You."

Actually, I do have to admit that I kind of want to see it. I'm just not sure if I should. And it's not just because from what I hear, the Jews look only slightly less sinister than Orcs (oh wait, Jesus was Jewish, so nevermind). It's just that all the blowhards on Fox and have basically said that if you don't see the movie and/or see it and don't like it, you're a scum-sucking, secularist, communist elitist who probably doesn't care if Gay people get married. Then there's all the Evangelicals who are claiming that the movie is a really good thing for when they do "outreach"- ie something to show poor starving African children before they feed them. Or try and convert the Jews.

And finally, is there any singing in this movie?

"Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ,
Who are you? What have you sacrificed?
Jesus Christ Superstar,
Do you think you're what they say you are?"

Dear George W. Bush: You fucking suck.

If it's war you want, it's war you got. It's manning-the-barricade-time, folks

I'm not dead yet....

I start work tomorrow at 10, at the company which will forever be known as the Worst. Publishing. Company. Ever (or, in short WPCE). It's one of those two-month-to-perm type jobs so I could all be back to where I was before come May, but for now....phew.

How to sum up Friday's big lunch-date interview? Words can't even begin to describe the fun of it all. It's kind of like on SportsCenter where they show about five or six highlights and then ask the viewer to pick the best highlight out of them all. There were just so many.

Before I begin, I have to say that when I was called about the lunch-date/interview, I expected that I'd be taken out to a nice lunch with most of the staff and we'd sit and talk and chew the fat. We'd talk about the company, the job, their expectations and my expectations and then, hopefully, I'd get a job offer. Or I'd at least get some sort of indication that I'd get one soon. For an expectation, I don't think that it was so out of line. That's what usually happens when some company decides to take you out to lunch while still in the hiring process. Or so I hear. While nothing like this has happened to me, I know it's happened to other people and that's what they said the point of a lunch/interview was. Throw in the fact that they kind of said they'd like to take me out to lunch because they felt bad about stringing me along for so long, and I had kind of great expectations.

Silly, stupid me.

Now, to the highlights:

-The person who called me to set up the appointment, somebody who I had already met and said several times he wanted to hire me, disappeared. And I mean disappeared. Nobody in the office knew where he was and he wasn't answering his cell phone.

-Another person who I was supposed to go out to lunch with, somebody with whom I hadn't met before, came by to say he had forgotten that he already had a meeting and couldn't make it.

-The person who first contacted me about the job, the person who was my contact there and told me what a great addition to the staff I'd be, and the person who would by my boss, handed in her resignation on Tuesday and just walked out of the office.

-Which left one person who was around to take me out to lunch, the Vice President. Right in the middle of the interview, he realized he had a conference call with the CEO and didn't have time to continue. So he asked me if I could come back an hour later. So smack dab in the middle of the interview, I went off to Stacey's bookstore for a half an hour to kill time. Then I went back into the office, kicked it in a conference room, and read the paper for another half-an-hour, waiting for the conference call to be over.

-Being told in the last interview, the one after the hour wait, that there still working on funding, that the company started off with 72 employees and was now down to 12, and that they were thinking that the job was only going to be contractual and part-time because, well, see above.

As for lunch? You know how I was expecting a nice, expensive fancy meal? I got the Soup Factory. Yep, a soup place. Which is all the more funnier when you add in the fact I was told by at least several people that under no circumstances was I to order soup during the lunch, what with all the slurping and spilling that could go on.

The best part of the lunch was how because I didn't order soup (I got a small salad- the sandwiches sucked, which meant I basically didn't eat until I got home) I got to the front of the line pretty quickly, much faster than the Vice President did. That led to a couple of awkward seconds as I'm standing at the cash register where the person is asking me if that is all and I didn't know what to do. When the Vice President finally caught up to me, there was a couple awkward seconds where I was about to reach for my wallet and he stared at me, finally reaching for his wallet to pay for the whole thing. After we ordered, we went back up to the office and ate at the guys desk.

Let's just say to that there's nothing more uncomfortable than trying to have an interview while eating lunch. Especially when the person you're interviewing with, a nebbishly Jewish guy in his mid 40's who wreaked of being in way over his head, really had no idea what he was going to say. We'd be sitting there just shooting it, that is when someone could think of something to say, and then there'd be an awkward pause as he bit into his sandwhich. Or he'd ask me a question just as I'd take a bite and I'd either have to pause before speaking or put my hand over my mouth to respond. That was when I wasn't trying to quickly clean up the little bits of crumbs that I'd dropped on his desk and hoping he didn't notice I was getting dressing all over his nice desk.

And there I thought that the biggest problem I'd face during the interview was whether or not to extend my hand in greeting, what with me being still kind of contagious (definite "Seinfeld"/"Curb Your Enthusiasm" type moment). That and trying to not to get too distracted by the way hot receptionist.

And the best part of the whole thing? If I'm offered it, I have no choice but to take it.

And we got Oscar Picks. I was going to do something different with the picks this year, something fabulous, but I'm not feeling very fabulous these days. Anyways, we'll be back a little later with friday's lunch/interview debacle.

Well it's Oscar time again and America can't be more grateful. With the Democratic nomination almost sewn up and the Superbowl over, what other topic do we have left for people to over-analyze, debate, and give wildly unbelievable predictions that they really have no clue about? What else are we gonna discuss, praytell? Why we just invaded a country claiming WMD's only to have to say "oops, sorry, guess they're not here?" I think not. So going with that theme, here's a look at the 2004 Oscar Awards.

First, I should preface this by saying I'm a little biased towards "Return of the King." I don't just think the movie should win every award it's nominated for, but it should have been nominated in every category and win those too. And yes, that means things like "Best Foreign Documentary." We're talking about a movie that has a battle scene involving four-tusked oiliphants, flying dragon-like beasts, guys on horses, catapults, and one kick-ass fire breathing battering ram. Does "Mystic River" have any of that? No. I think not. Seriously, while "Return of the King" may not be "a serious" movie or a "dramatic" movie or an "artistic" movie, it's a great movie movie. In fact, it's more like that. The movie just flat out kicks ass. And for kicking so much ass for so long (if you include all ten hours of the entire trilogy) this movie deserves as much golden statuettes as the Academy has on hand.

But as much money as the three films have made, as great reviews as it got, a lot of people are pooh-poohing it, saying it won't win and doesn't deserve too. But why? When it comes down to it, the entire reason why people are pooh-poohing it can be summed up in one word- Hobbits.

Yes, there are people out there who think the movie shouldn't win because it's about four-foot halflings with giant furry feet. And all I can say to that is whatever. Let me ask you this- would Ingrid Bergman's "Persona" be any less sweet if it starred Hobbits instead of Liv Ullman?

Anyways,

Best Picture-
Return of the King
Seabiscuit
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the River
Mystic River
Lost In Translation

Still need convincing? We can go several ways here. The Academy loves epics and "Return of the King" is about as epic as epic gets. And there's nobody who could tell me that "Braveheart" and "Gladiator" weren't as good as "Return of the King." If people still think that it's different with "ROTK" I wonder, would you say something different if, say, the Orcs were Romans instead and Hobbits merely the Visigoths or Celts? Or what if the Orcs were some English king and Gandalf was merely some guy with a bad scottish accent and a kilt?

Or we could go the Serious Movie route. "Return of the King" features people crying, deaths, addiction, and a clash between good and evil (not to mention giant Eagles that swoop down to rescue hobbits stranded in the middle of a river bed). How many of the other movies include all of that?

Or we could go this way, by looking at the other movies. "Seabiscuit" was an inspiring tale about redemption, healing, and the magic of betting. You know how I know that? Because they told you that every five minutes of the movie. I might have actually liked the movie more if they didn't have voice-overs constantly telling you how incredible the horse was, how the nation wouldn't have survived the Depression without the horse, or how all the three main characters found each other. As for "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World," I'm still wondering why people think it's a good movie. The movie critic for Time Magazine even picked "ROTK" to win, but said "M&C" should win because "ROTK" had a few moments that dragged. If that's a problem with "ROTK," then why isn't it a problem with the entire middle portion of "M&C?" Remember folks, just because something is boring yet tasteful still doesn't mean it's not boring. "Mystic River," on the other hand, is a serious, serious, movie with lots of acting and crying and death and all that fun stuff yet has enough chops to it not to be overdone, but while I thought it was a good movie, I didn't think it was great. As for "Lost in Translation," I didn't just love "Lost in Translation," I lurved it. I adored it. I wanted to take it out for a nice romantic dinner and bring it over to meet the parents. But it's just not "Best Picture"-y.

Finally, I ask you this question- what movie will people remember in five years? In ten? In thirty? People are gonna be watching DVD's or whatever the hell kind of gizmo we have of all the "Lord of the Rings" movies when George Bush builds us that Moon colony he's been talking about. Can you really seriously say that about "Master and Commander?"

Will Win: Return of the King
Should Win: Return of the King (if not, Academy Members should be forced to watch an Adam Sandler marathon as punishment).

Best Director-
Peter Jackson- "Return of the King"
Sofia Coppola- "Lost in Translation"
Clint Eastwood- "Mystic River"
Fernando Meirelles- "City of God"
Peter Weir- "Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World"

Do I even have to say it?

The Acting Awards:

In baseball and even football, there are people know who are able to crunch numbers and use them to back up whatever type of prediction they want to make. Things like "teams that run bases only on Tuesday have a .752 chance of winning that game if it's started by a left-hander over 6' 2"" So, using that idea, I'm going to try and predict the Acting Awards mathematically. Points will be awarded for these things:

1)The actor cries a lot (the more the better. If somebody just cries once, it's not worth the same as someone who spends the whole movie crying or has a big emotional scene where they do lots of crying and screaming).
2)There's some sort of death involved in the movie (bonus points if they play the one who dies)
3)The actor has to do something to make themselves ugly (this is always seen as a "courageous" choice).
4)Actor either has disease or is mentally handicapped. Also applicable if they are "haunted" by something in their past. (bonus points for some combination of the three).
5)They're in a period piece
6)They speak in an accent, whether it be foreign or some sort of speech impediment (bonus points, for instance, if it's a movie about a stutterer with cancer)
7)They're names are Nicole Kidman, Renee Zellwigger, Jack Nicholson, or Tom Hanks (also is true of oldish English actors who've been knighted by the Queen- see Dame Judy Dench or Sir Ben Kingsley. If Judy Dench were in a Rob Schneider movie, she'd get nominated).

Let's see how this goes

Best Supporting Actress

Shohreh Aghdashloo - "House of Sand and Fog"
Patricia Clarkson - "Pieces of April"
Marcia Gay Harden - "Mystic River"
Holly Hunter - "Thirteen"
Renée Zellweger - "Cold Mountain"

Kind of at a loss here since I haven't seen any of these movies, but I think Renee has it because (from what I hear) she's in a period piece, lost her husband in the war, tries to look like some poor country bumpkin, speaks like Grandma Clampett and is named Renee Zellwiger. Considering it's a big Miramax period piece, I'm guessing she's coming with the waterworks at some point in the movie. That's a big six out of seven points. The others? Well, who cares about this award, so we'll move on.

Should Win: Holly Hunter (what the hell, I always liked her)
Will Win: Renee Zellwiger

Best Supporting Actor

Alec Baldwin - "The Cooler"
Benicio Del Toro - "21 Grams"
Djimon Hounsou - "In America"
Tim Robbins - "Mystic River"
Ken Watanabe - "The Last Samurai"

Side note before we go to the toteboard, where's Sean Astin? He cries. He gained thirty pounds for the movie AND he had to wear those fake Hobbit feet the whole movie. And it's kind of a period piece in that they all wear goofy outfits and wear goofy wigs. Why wasn't he nominated? Just because he played a hobbit?

Actually, what was the best "supporting" character in any movie this year? Same with the past two years- Gollum. I don't know if Andy Serkis (the actor who "played" Gollum) technically acted, but that was one of the best performances I've seen. And, if you go by the scoring system, he's got Five out of Seven (Gollum dies, he's addicted to the ring, it's a period piece, he talks funny, and you can't say Serkis doesn't allow himself to be made ugly). Plus, I saw how they filmed his scenes and the poor guy had to do everything in that blue suit they use for CGI effects, including in scenes where he had to dive in super-cold water. Let's see DeNiro do that.

Okay, now that I've gotten my rant on, onto the winner. I heard "In America" was really good, but didn't see it so can't say anything about his performance. I don't get what was so good about Ken Watanbe's performance because all he did was act all zen-like (he does, however die and it is a period piece). That leaves Robbins, Baldwin, and Del Toro.

Alec Baldwin's career is a funny thing. Everyone knows he's a brilliant actor (see "Glengary Glen Ross"), a great talkshow guest, and always brings his A game to Saturday Night Live (I've always had a fondness for Baldwin because of a Bono impression he gave in the early 90's). Except for Bill O'Reilly and Kim Basinger, everyone likes him, yet he's always in crappy movies. Why he's not a bigger actor is beyond me. Same with Robbins whose very good in all of his movies (he was Nuke LaLoosh in "Bull Durham" fer crissakes) and is with the one of the coolest woman on the face of the planet, Susan Sarandon. I think Robbins gets shortchanged a bit because he's a bit goofy looking and doesn't hide his political beliefs. As for Del Toro, the chicks dig him. As far as I know, nobody dies in "The Cooler" and it's not a period piece, so there goes Baldwin. "21 Grams" has a lot of crying and has a lot of death and drug stuff in there (that's 3 out of 7) but he won a couple of years ago, so he won't here (it's a corollary). We'll give it to Robbins even though I'm the only one who thought he was better than Sean Penn and everyone thinks Sean Penn was better than him.

Should Win- Tim Robbins (did I mention he was Nuke LaLoosh?)
Will Win- Tim Robbins

Another side note- The three writers of "Return of the King" were nominated for "Best Adapted Screenplay" but my guess is that there's no chance in hell they'll win. Mainly because there's no way in hell they'll get any credit for adapting a book mainly read by pimply faced Dungeons & Dragons geeks. It'll probably go to whoever wrote "Mystic River" because "Mystic River" isn't read by people who name their bong after characters in the movie. But it should win and it should be an easy choice. "The Lord of the Rings" just might be the most beloved, most read, most fanatically followed since the Bible. In other words, there's a whole hell of a lot of people who know those books inside and out. My dad, for instance, has it as his tradition that he'll read them every seven years. Talk about pressure. I mean, considering how many people have read the books, loved the books, and know the books inside and out, Jackson et al managed to film the movies and not piss any of them off. Can whoever wrote "Seabiscuit" or "Mystic River" claim that?


Best Actress-
Keisha Castle-Hughes - "Whale Rider"
Diane Keaton - "Something's Gotta Give"
Samantha Morton - "In America"
Charlize Theron - "Monster"
Naomi Watts - "21 Grams"

Hmmm. It's sounding like a battle between Charlize Theron (she's pretty AND she can act!) versus Ms. Annie Hall herself, Diane Keaton (she's over 60 AND plays a romantic lead!). Nobody seems to be talking about Samantha Morton and Keisha Castle-Hughes should just happy to be there and could she please fill out her "Where Are They Now?" application form so we can know where she'll be in twenty years. As for Naomi Watts, aka my future wife, it's not her year but as she's slowly moving into the Nicole Kidman/Renee Zellwigger category in which she'll soon be nominated for everything even she appears in, even f it's a cameo in the next "Scary Movie" sequel. So, it's no biggy if she doesn't win this year.

I'm going with Charlize because she's off the charts point-system wise. She dies, she makes herself ugly, she has an accent, and she cries. Plus, she gets extra bonus points for playing a lesbian, getting raped, and killing other people. Hope you enjoy your moment of fame, Charlize, and hope you enjoy competing with Hillary Swank for all those future HBO movies you'll be doomed to competing for. Unless, of course, you go the Halle Berry route and just flash your breasts everywhere for money.

Should Win- Scarlett Johannsen "Lost in Translation" (I know she wasn't nominated, but she rocked in it and if there's a guy who didn't see the movie and didn't want to instantly hop on a plane to Tokyo and cruise hotel bars looking for her, I don't know them).
Will Win- Charlize Theron


Actor in a Leading Role-
Johnny Depp - "Pirates of the Carribean"
Ben Kingsley - "House of Sand and Fog"
Jude Law - "Cold Mountain"
Bill Murray - "Lost in Translation"
Sean Penn - "Mystic River"

This one's a toughy. Kingsley's entering Dame Judy Dench category whereas if he gets nominated for everything just because. Then there's Jude Law whose nothing but a pretty-boy Brit and whose movie I didn't see. Neither of them have a chance. Instead, it'll be between Murray, Depp, and Penn and this is where it gets interesting, mainly because they're all good guys and everybody loves them. Strangely, they're also well known Hollywood cranks who don't do press, don't live in Hollywood, and don't do big dumb-action flicks. Any three of them could win and it'll be okay by most everyone (except for the cranks on Fox News who'll go into hyper-ventiliation mode if Penn wins).

"Pirates of the Carribean" would have flat-out sucked if it wasn't for Depp. Depp's performance was so good it carried the movie and turned it into the frolicy free-for-all that it was. If you think about it, he also scores high on the list as he makes himself look ugly, speaks in an accent, and it's a period piece. Unfortunately, he's cursed in the fact it's a comic performance. Then again, so is Murray for "Lost in Translation" but my feeling is that there are a lot of people rooting for him. How could you not? Just the thought of someone who started his career giving Noogies to Gilda Radner on the old "Saturday Night Live" makes you want to root for him. But, as befitting the movie, he doesn't score high on the scoring system. Stupid Sofia Coppola made a movie in which nobody cries, breaks down, dies, or makes themselves look ugly. Instead you get a brilliant performance that's equally as sad as it is funny.

So we're going with Penn who everyone says is phenomenal, although I thought he was a little too showy, like he was trying to do a Robert deNiro impression. Amazingly, the guy has been nominated several times before yet never won so he's got the "let's give him a lifetime achievement type award," especially as he was jobbed for the role he should have won for- Jeff Spicoli.

Should Win- Bill Murray and that's the fact, Jack.
Will Win- Sean Penn

MUSIC (SONG)
" Into the West from The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King - Fran Walsh Howard Shore and Annie Lennox
"A Kiss at the End of the Rainbow from A Mighty Wind - Michael McKean and Annette O’Toole
"Scarlet Tide" from Cold Mountain - T Bone Burnett and Elvis Costello
The Triplets of Belleville from The Triplets of Belleville Benoit Charest and Sylvain Chomet
"You Will Be My Ain True Love" from Cold Mountain - Sting.


This is always the dumbest category. Anyone remember any of these songs? Boy that song from "The Triplets of Belleville" really made it big on the pop charts didn't it? Boy, that Sting sure knows his music of the Civil War era, doesn't he? And finally, I ask you this, what song was there from "Return of the King?" Was it the song Pippin sang while Denethor sent Farimir on his suicide mission or was it the song that was playing in the background as everyone was filing out of the theaters as fast as possible so they could finally take a leak? Can't we kill this nomination, please?

Should Win- "A Kiss at the End of the Rainbow" (trust me, it's hilarious)
Will Win- Eh, who cares.

So it's about forty-five minutes until my big "lunch" interview with that company and naturally, guess what happens? Yep, cut myself shaving. A full on gusher brought to you by the same spot that lately has been spurting like a Texas oil rush. It's my fault for not planning ahead and showering three to four hours before the interview, giving myself the several hours to try and stem the tide. But no, I got cocky and showered an hour before.

Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

Man, I hate it when you have to make a phone call and you're so dreading the phone call that you drink a half bottle of wine to deal with it and then when you call, they're not there.

D'oh.

Wel, well, well, the big story in today's newspaper is all about Smirkboy saying he is "very troubled" about what he's seeing in San Francisco and, more ominously, he is "watching." Take your pick, but in reading that, doesn't Bush come off either as a prudish school-marm threatening her impudent children or the evil eye of Sauron?

We here in San Francisco are so very worried. And so very concerned that our actions make the President "troubled." Isn't that why we all live here?

Now with Bush weighing in on certainly the most troubling issue in the land, we now have what appears to be a little smack-down between our Commander in Thief and our Mayor. I think I speak for everyone when I say Go Go Gavin.

Even crazier, if you listen to all the Wing-Nuts out there (the nice, politically correct term for all the foaming-mouth Right Wing dingbats) they all think that for this little act of Civil Disobedience, Gavin should be led off in chains and arrested. His Wing-Nut Eminence himself, Bill O'Reilly, said so on his "I'm Right and You're Not" show (err, I meant "The No-Spin Zone") last night. To which I say this: what are you freaking nuts? Eh, nevermind.

Nothing like a Mayor being thrown into jail for allowing a bunch of loving couples to get married to get the whole martyr thing going. Besides the fact that it'll ensure that Gavin will never have to even think about raising money for his re-election due to the fact he'll be considered a God Who Walks Amongst Us here the inevitable protests will make the anti-war protest from last year look like a "night of dialogue" held in your average Mission coffee shop. Hell, even I'd probably man the barriers for that one.

The most frustrating thing about the whole debate, well one of the one's and besides the fact we're even having the debate at all, is all the squawking of "activist judges" and "what about the majority view?" from pundits, politicians, and lawyers, all of whom should know better. The idea, of course, being how dare a bunch of judges decide something that goes against the majority views of the people and the will of the politicians. Now, it's been awhile since I took any sort of Civics class, but I'm pretty sure that the idea of the American judicial system is that it's supposed to do things like that. Isn't that what the whole "checks and balances" thing is about? And isn't that one of the main pillars of this Democracy? And why am I the only one who seems to know this while watching TV? Shouldn't a lawyer or politician know his basic pillars of American Democracy?

As for the whole issue of what the majority opinion is and how the majority opinion should be rule throughout the land, again, isn't that one of the tenets of our country that the will of the majority is, in fact, not the rule of the land? And that it's supposed to be super-ceded by minority rights? Don't we have a long history of ruling in favor of the minority (cough * the 2000 election* cough)? Wasn't that one of the reasons why this country was founded, because most of us are people who got kicked out our respective homelands for being in a minority? I know, for instance, that my great-grandparents had to leave Russia because the will of the Russian people towards the Jews involved a lot of raping and pillaging.

And finally, I bring up this point on the whole debate. Unfortunately, I'm not clever enough to think of this myself and it's actually sort of a paraphrase of some message on a message board I read somewhere, but it's still pretty good. And that's this- that the Republicans have a long, long history of shitting on some minority to scare uptight white folks, then have to spend years afterwards telling everyone that they're not really intolerant, they just play one on TV. Is there anyone who doesn't doubt that in another twenty years or so, some "Compassionate Conservative" President is going to have to give speech after speech in praise of some Gay Civil Rights leader (Harvey Milk? Matthew Shepard? Rosie O'Donnell) or even Gavin himself to try and let everyone know that they're really sorry for all the Gay Bashing and that they'll never ever do something like that and, gosh, we Republicans really are nice people, we swear.

I'm pretty sure I got conjunctivitis when I was a baby and I remember getting it several times as a kid, even getting to stay home from it one day, but I've never gotten it as an adult. Hell, I didn't even know you could get it as an adult, which is why when the doctor told me what I had, I kept on asking him how I could have possibly gotten it (stupid, barely noticeable cold that I've done a good job at fighting off). But I have it.

When I was a kid, I didn't remember it as being that awful. But maybe it's only because it was around twenty years since I've had. Now, as a full-fledged adult, I have to say it kind of sucks. No, it's not serious and it's not painful (although it occasionally can be), but it's more of a pain in the ass. It's like one of those barely audible high-pitched screeches or like Real World Robin's breasts where it's just kind of there, but it's just noticeable enough to make you fixate on it to the point where it just completely bugs the shit out of you. All I can think about is that little pain in my eye and how much I just want to rub and rub my eye until it goes away. To add to the fun, it's making me highly sensitive to light so I'm now one of those people who I hate- I'm the guy who wears sunglasses inside.

All of this, in a way, is reminding me of two friends in college. They both got really, really bad bouts of poison ivy. They had it everywhere and when I say everywhere, I mean everywhere (editor's note- when camping, please make sure you know exactly what kind of bush you are about to pee into). All of the itching was driving them so up the wall that they basically did nothing but smoke dope for about three straight days, something they could do pretty easily considering they were also dealers (legal note- we here at Hooray for Anything would like to take this time to publicly deny any sort of association with them vis a vi the buying of illicit substances. We never did any of that sort of activity in college and only knew them through Bible study classes). Anytime one of them got even the barest hint of an itch, which happened a lot considering how bad they got it, they'd just take another bong hit, hoping the dope would kill any sort of itchiness. For days they just sat in their apartment, watching movies and eating food brought to them by their girlfriends, smoking bong hits every ten to fifteen minutes (or so I heard as I was to busy studying to hang with them during that particular time). That's kind of how I feel right now. I'm nowhere near as bad as they were (trust me), but right now I'd do anything to not be spending all my time trying to not be driven crazy by the little itchy feeling in my eye.

So when I woke up this morning, I woke up with what people euphamastically refer to as "minor eye irritation." That being the constant feeling that something is in my eye despite every possible attempt to get it rid of it. And irritation only begins to describe what it feels like. Many hours later, I finally got to see the doctor, where I was told that I am the lucky winner of conjunctivitis.

Yay me.

So that stupid-ass company that's been taking their sweet time "checking my references" before hiring me finally called. They finally decided to do something about me- they're going to take me out to lunch.

When I asked why they just said they hemmed and hawed for a bit and then kind of said something like they wanted to make it up to me for taking so long. Oh, that and they've been busy changing things and wanted to fill me in on what's going on. Goody.

Now, this is a good thing, right? Why is it that the only thing I can think about is the old adage that if you're going to break up with somebody, you take them out to lunch so they won't make such a big scene that way. Like they know I'm pissed and that I've been stressed out and saying nasty things about them in the past few weeks, so instead of just sending me a nice "thanks for coming" e-mail, they'll make up for the whole thing by buying me a nice lunch.

Or maybe the lunch is to make up for something else, like getting screwed over on salary or putting me on some incentive plan where I wouldn't make that much now, but maybe, possibly in a year or now, maybe. So then the taking me out to lunch would make up for it. You know, kind of a "well, sorry we can't pay you what you want to make, but here, order some appetizer's, it's on us!"

But on the other hand, if they're going to not give me the job, why still take me out to lunch? Could they possibly think that I'd want to hang out with them if they didn't give me the job? Do they possibly think I'd want to go out to lunch with them anyways after all they've done?

Mainly, though, I wonder this- if they want to hire me, why can't they just FUCKING DO IT. It's nice and all to get a free lunch, but all things considering, I'd rather take the job. And it's not even close.

Besides, what the hell are you supposed to wear for a "lunch" date with possible employers? Do I have to put on a suit? Do I have to wear my really uncomfortable dress shoes again and incur yet another blister on my heel? Do I have to wear a tie again?

Just hire me, please…..

I've been watching the news a lot and all the news channels are showing footage of all the gay couples trying to get married in San Francisco (way to make us proud, Gavin). The footage usually consists of one of two shots: the incredibly long lines of thousands of gay couples, along with their kids and families, in line hoping to be one of the lucky one's to get in and get married. The other shot is of the lucky gay couple, along with their family and kids, all choked up and looking incredibly happy as they are married.

And all I can think of as I'm watching this great footage is just how much of a dick you'd have to be to want to tell all those happy, crying, loving people that they can't do something that's making them so incredibly happy.

Jesus Christ, there's only one episode left of "Sex in the City." And there's like four episodes left of "Friends" and "Angel" just got cancelled. So I ask you- what the hell am I going to watch now? Nay, what are WE all going to watch?

I think I speak for everyone when I say that that this something that we need to hear where the candidates stand. I mean, if there's nothing on TV to watch, well, WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

I have this relaxation tape that I sometimes bust out when things get pretty hairball. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Today I busted it out for various reasons and think I stumbled upon a whole new way of meditating, a sure-fire way of relaxing even the most stressed out of all of us. I'm just not sure whether all those Mindfulness experts would approve of the idea of drinking beer while meditating.

On Valentine's Day I was hanging out at a bar waiting on a friend and I couldn't help notice the oodles and oodles of single women there, all clumped together with their fellow single girlfriends, decked out all red and valentine-like. I had to admit being a little intrigued because I couldn't figure out whether all the women decked out in red were merely the embodiement of plucky optimism or just plain sad.

Christ, it looks like A-Rod is going to the Yankees after all. Stupid baseball. Why does it make me think of this "story" on the the Onion last year: Yankees Ensure 2003 Pennant By Signing Every Player in Baseball?

Saw this on Craig's List Rants & Raves, God's gift to cranky, unemployed people.

Roses are red...
Violets are bluish.
If it weren't for Jesus,
We'd all be Jewish.

Cracked my ass up...

So much for my theory that it being Friday the 13th, I'd have something good happen to me. This morning I got a call from one of those two jobs saying I didn't get it. Besides the whole needing a job thing, it's actually not that big of a deal in that I interviewed at the place like seven months ago and have since then pretty much forgotten what the place was like, the job was like, and the people were like. Which, come to think of it, could have been the reason I didn't get the job, despite the fact they told me I didn't need to come in again because supposedly they remembered me so well (gee thanks). I'm only kind of bummed in that my dream was to get both jobs at the same time so I could play one off the other for gold, silver and coin, but that's not gonna happen. As if it would have happened anyways. I'm also bummed only because it would have been nice to know that seven months of thank you e-mails, phone calls, brown-nosing (two) HR types, constant refrains of "I really want this job" and months and months of searching to see when the job would be listed again would have paid off. So much for all that hard work and persistence.

Speaking of which, a friend's husband just got laid off this week, his second time in three years. That makes three people I know of who've been laid off in the past four months, months and months into what the economists call "a robust recovery." It's kind of interesting what's going on. Despite all of the great reports by economists, glowing praise by Greenspan, and a chorus of "super, thanks for asking" by Government hacks, the American public doesn't seem to be buying any of it. Just check out the current polls on Bushie. As I flip through the news channels during the day, it's kind of fun to watch all those finance/investment shows, especially on CNBC. All the economists, pundits, reporters, and investment types all talk about the economy with a tone of "the stock market's climbing, corporate profits are up, the sale of stretch Hummers are through the roof, employment is up in Bangladesh, and Wal-Mart is hiring left and right so why are the serfs complaining?"

"...the peasants are revolting"
"they certainly are"

It's been almost three weeks since I was supposed to hear about those two jobs and still so far, nothing. I talked to both of them on Wednesday and was told by one that they still hadn't had a meeting to decide who gets the job and told by the other that they've been too busy to call my references. And this was after they spent what felt like half the interview telling me how important it was to place someone in that position and how they need to bring someone in immediately. Guess not.

Both of them have apologized and the one that's supposedly about to check my references even sounded somewhat sincere, but Jesus Frickin' Christ people. In the best of all situations, the job interviewing process is supposed to be like a date. You make a decision about whether you want to work there and they make a decision as to if they want you to work there. In this case, wouldn't it be in the company's best interest not to drag the hiring out of a position past three weeks? I wouldn't exactly say I'm really impressed by either of them about how they're handling this. Among other things, the past couple of weeks have kind of sucked. Like being a constant state of suspended animation, waiting for some sort of shoe to drop so I can get on with it. In the best of all possible worlds, I'll get another job right before I finally hear the word back from them so I could tell them to go screw off (picture big speech about how to treat people and how to not treat people, complete with Oprah-style head shake and finger pointing).

But that's not gonna happen, now is it. Especially when our beloved Government is on record as saying how great it is that all of our jobs are going to India (does this mean that if there were no jobs whatsoever in this country, our economy would hit the macroeconomic version of Nirvana? The state of mind, not the band)

Problem is I need a job. Badly. And while it still sounds like I'm going to be hired by at least one of them ("checking references" usually means you got it), the bloom is way off the proverbial rose.

I am, however, thinking that with tomorrow being Friday the 13th and all, it would be just my luck that I'll get the big call tomorrow. That is if I didn't just jinx it by saying that. So, forget I said anything…..

Oops.

Uh yeah, I admit it, I just went to see a bargain matinee of "Butterfly Effect" starring his Ashton-ness.

It wasn't half bad either, but this will be the only time I'll admit it.

God, I'm getting so soft in my unemployment that the mere act of having to set the alarm this morning at 7 to make a nine o'clock interview (for a Temp job, no less) filled me with such dread that I couldn't sleep. Which is kind of silly considering that it's not like I'm sleeping much these days anyways. All night, all I could think of was, "oh, God, not at 7 in the morning. Not 7 in the morning. How am I ever going to get up?"

Yeah, I know, cry me a river.

Did I mention I've had to miss the big 9 o'clock "Charmed-fest"/"BH 9'er" hour two days in a row? The humanity…..

This is an actual class being taught at our very own Learning Annex:

How to Shoot Your Very Own Live Adult Video!.

But wait, that's not the whacky part of the class. This is:
**This Seminar Will Include a Live 2-Woman Scene!**

Yep, check this out- "This class was written up in New York magazine – and it's definitely one of the sexiest, most stimulating and popular classes ever offered at The Learning Annex! We're talking about "hands-on" how-to-film-it demonstrations featuring full frontal nudity! But that's just one of the ways you'll learn the inside skinny on how to become a player in the booming, multibillion-dollar adult video industry! It's a ton of hardcore fun!"

To think I've been spending all my money on writing classes...

This makes me sick:

Bush Plans To Back Marriage Amendment: Constitution Would Specify Man, Woman

"President Bush plans to endorse a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as the union of a man and a woman in response to a Massachusetts court decision requiring legal recognition of gay marriages in that state, key advisers said yesterday."

Don't let us down, John Kerry. A nation turns it's sanity to you.

You know, this not having a neighbor is kind of a cool thing. I can crank the TV all night without having to worry about pissing anyone off.

Oh yeah, I'm partying.

Went to a Temp Agency today to do the ole Tempin' Test. I'm up to 83 WPM these days. And yes, I do rock.

These tests were a little bit harder than most of the tests I've taken before. It wasn't because I got a little cocky and didn't study up before-hand, but because the tests seem to go straight from "how do you open up a file?" to "how do you run a macro that allows you to put addresses on 11x17 manilla envelopes?" And that wasn't even the worst part. The worst part is that they used this piece of crap computer to test me on and the screen kept on shaking like a chihuahua in a rainstorm. I'm sitting there trying to read the screen and figure everything out and the thing is going up and down, up and down, up and down. It's stressful enough to figure out how to figure out Macro's in Excel without trying to read moving type while fighting off a headache the whole thing is causing.

At one point, I wanted to hit the computer to try and get it to stop shaking, but figured that probably wouldn't look so good.

I finally saw the big video, the one that everyone's talking about and endlessly discussing, the most hyped appearance on camera since Paris Hilton put the night vision on a camcorder: Bush on "Meet the Press." I actually, in a strange way, kind of felt sorry for him. Total puppet trying to do something without the puppet masters behind him. It was kind of like when the Monkees decided they could write and play their own songs, except who doesn't love the Monkees? The main impression I got, though was of someone so cut-off from reality, so surrounded by sycophants and lackeys, so caught in the bubble, that he's clearly lost touch with reality. Seriously, I actually don't think he thinks he's lying.

Anyways, it looks like the dirt is starting to fly John Kerry's way. The National Enquirer had a way nasty piece on him in this week's issue after someone at the RNC probably handed over their Ops folder. And then there's the other side of his Vietnam experience. He's been keeping it pretty low-key these days, but Kerry did become a huge Vietnam War protestor, even helping start a group called "Vietnam Veterans Against the War," feat that got himself on Nixon's enemies list (which should make him A-OK in anyone's books). He famously spoke out against the war and threw what turned out to be someone else's medals into Arlington cemetery in protest. He was so famous as a protestor, in fact, that he was in Doonesbury cartoons in '71.

Now, of course, the yap dags on the Right are trying to use what Kerry said and did as a protestor against him, using the usual crap about how his speaking out was unpatriotic, un-American, blah, blah, blah. They're even bringing out the old war-horse "Hanoi Jane" references just to get the ole juices boiling, even though most people associate Jane Fonda these days with "Barbarella" and workout videos. Even worse, because he did accuse some soldiers in the war of not doing not-so-very nice things to the Vietnamese, he is now being taken to task for saying something he had no right to say considering he actually fought there and saw it. It is, after all, so much easier to impugn someone of their patriotism for saying something about the war when you were busy skiing in Vermont or doing wads of blow at Texas social functions.

All of this is going to be a big, huge deal and it only fills me with dread. No, not necessarily because it'll make Kerry look bad (which it will) but only because once again, we're going to be fighting over the 60's. Just what the world needed- more self-indulgent, narcissist spit-ball fighting between Baby Boomers. The 60's were more than forty years ago. Get over it. Haven't we been Big Chilled enough? Isn't it enough that they're about to completely bankrupt all of our entitlement programs?

But what'll happen to Gen-X when we finally achieve that pinnacle of leadership? What great debates will we have? What issues will come to haunt us forty years later? Cause, you know, we really had nothing. No big conflicts, no big debates, not one single huge experience we could call our own except for the launching of MTV.

Will someday a campaign spat occur over the whole East Coast/West Coast thing? (At a press conference, Sen. Lumpkin accused Sen. Moody of not keeping it real back in the day and said, quote, "how can you trust anyone who preferred Biggie Smalls over the dope fat, rhymes of Tupac? Tupac was whack, yo.")

Will we revisit the great Indie Wars of the early 90's? Will we have constant repeats of the great Hipster vs. Yuppie debate that marked the SF Mayoral Election? ("Sen. Umbridge denied he wore a mullet in High School and said that while the photo of him clearly shows him wearing one, he only wore it ironically. He also said that he did not listen to Bon Jovi and that he only went to the concert because his girlfriend wanted him to. To support his claims, he pulled out an old album copy of the Cure's 'Staring at the Sea: The Singles which he said he owned back in High School. He also accused Sen. Snape of not being into Nirvana until after Nevermind came out and called him a poseur.")

Gotta love the Grammys. Every year they always say how they're getting hipper, more with it, more cool. And every year they say this time, we won't screw it up. And every year they screw it up.

This year they almost to get it right. Just check out who was nominated for "Record of the Year":

Crazy In Love
Beyoncé Featuring Jay-Z

Where Is The Love
The Black Eyed Peas & Justin Timberlake

Clocks
Coldplay

Lose Yourself
Eminem

Hey Ya!
OutKast

That's a damn good line up- you could make an argument in favor of any of those songs to win the award. Even I think those songs are pretty brilliant (even the Coldplay tune) and I have major anti-pop snottiness issues. Hell, I bet Dick Cheney bops his head along to "Crazy In Love" and I betcha when nobody's looking, John Ashcroft sings "Hey Ya!".

But then you get to the "Song of the Year, " which is the big "Best Picture" type award, the award which the Grammy people really care about. Now check out the songs that were nominated (and yeah, what the hell the difference is between "Record of the Year" and "Song of the Year," who knows):

Beautiful
Linda Perry, songwriter (Christina Aguilera)

Dance With My Father
Richard Marx & Luther Vandross, songwriters (Luther Vandross)

I'm With You
Avril Lavigne & The Matrix, songwriters (Avril Lavigne)

Keep Me In Your Heart
Jorge Calderón & Warren Zevon, songwriters (Warren Zevon)

Lose Yourself
J. Bass, M. Mathers & L. Resto, songwriters (Eminem)

And the winner was: that hip, exciting, hugely successful song "Dance With My Father." You know, that song. The song that was all over MTV and the radio. The song that you hear at like every party you've ever been to. The song written by noted genius Richard Marx.

Seriously, has anyone actually heard that song? Yeah, I know Luther Vandross had a stroke and he's a good guy, but I ask you, as good as may be, does it make you want to shake it like a Poloroid Picture?

Avril Lavigne did a better song than Outkast? Please.

I just got off the phone with another recruiter, one I had never heard from. They have a job for me, one that's good paying and starts immediately. They ask me a few questions, which I answer, and then they start telling me what the job they have is like. Everything thing sounds great, wonderful, lovely until they get to a certain part of the description and I'm like "uh oh." And so I ask.

Yep, it's the same agency that I went through all that rigamorale on Friday. And in August. And a couple of years ago. They're still looking for someone and they have like every recruiter looking into filling the position and every recruiter is calling me and despite the fact they really need somebody and every recruiter wants to send me in there, they still won't hire me.

God damnit, just hire me. Get it over with. I won't suck. I swear. Just allow me a few days to get up to speed and I can do it. It's not that hard. And you know how earlier I said it's like everyone's trying to set me up with the same girl who keeps on rejecting me? Now it's like it's a day before the Prom and there's only one girl who still doesn't have a date and everyone's like "go with him...go with him...go with him...." and she's still saying no. She'd rather go dateless than go with me.

Criminy.

And now, back to our continuing story….

Friday, around three in the afternoon, I finally heard from a recruiter. I remember them- keep telling me they have plenty of stuff for me, love my resume, never call. You know, them. They actually had a job for me, a good high-paying one for two weeks, maybe more, starting on Monday.

Great, but one catch- I have jury duty.

I tell the recruiter this and he tells me that it's a shame because he's got a bunch of stuff for me, all starting on Monday. He then tells me I might be able to get out of it jury duty because he knows people who have and it's real easy. So while I'm on the phone, I grab the summons, do a little reading, and discover he's right, I can get a 90 day deferral. It is easy; all I have to do is call. I tell him I'll do what I can and then I'll call him back.

So I call the 1-800 number and find out that I can't get out of appearing over the phone on Monday because it's too late too. I wait on the phone a little longer, get an actual human, and find out that if I make it to the courthouse by 4:15, I can get deferral. I call the recruiter back, leave him a message telling him I'm going to get the deferral and that I'll call him as soon as I get it taken care of.

Now the great part of all of this is that for the first time in about seven months, I went to a Bikram class. I had gotten home around 2 from class and was still pretty much in my yoga gear when the recruiter called. In fact, I hadn't even showered yet. I had also just finished lunch and was pretty much looking forward to doing nothing that afternoon but getting blissy with it. There went that idea. I hopped in the shower, quickly changed and ran to the bus stop.

No bus.

Knowing that I only had about half an hour to make it there, I started walking to the courthouse. The courthouse is about twenty to thirty minutes away and doable, but not really something I want to do after an hour and a half yoga class in over hundred degree heat. I also have new shoes on which I haven't fully broken in yet and when I walk for long distances, I start getting shin splints. But walk I had to, and walk I did, shin splints in all. I got to the courthouse about four, filled out the form, and got my deferral. Work, here I come.

I get back to my place and call the recruiter. He tells me he was hoping it would all work because he thinks I'd be great there, hadn't really called anyone else, and started giving me the info. Naturally, there's a problem. I realize that it's a place I've already interviewed at before. Twice. Once the last time I was unemployed (they were the one's I thought I'd get a job because I had all these whacky connections to) and once right when the Recent Unpleasantness began. They turned me down both times, partly because they're looking for someone with slightly different skill sets than I have. All of this is kind of a pisser because they're always looking for people, I'm always around when they're looking for people, but they never want to hire me. Still, the Temp Agencies keep trying to send me over. It's like being constantly set up with the same woman only to be constantly turned down.

I tell them what the problem is and while I'm not sure it's a problem, the company might. He thanks me for the info, tells me he'll find out what the deal will be, and then tells me he'll call me right back.

And so I wait. Ten minutes go by. Then fifteen. I call them back and find out it's still not settled but another recruiter asks me for like the tenth time if I have any experience doing what the company needs and for like the tenth time I tell them I should be able to do but I'm not sure (I know, I know, I should lie but as the job is kind of technical, it's not an easy thing to BS. And bad things happen if I try to BS ). They thank me for the info and tell me they'll get back to me. And so I wait some more. Ten more minutes go by. Then twenty. It's almost six and I call them again. Oops. Sorry, they didn't want me back there. Forgot to call me back.

So, after all that- the franticness, the running to the courthouse, the getting out of jury duty, the waiting by the phone, I got bupkus. Nada. Nothing. No job, no money, not a thing.

I was at the bus stop at 16th & Mission waiting for the bus to see a movie ("Lost in Translation"- again. God, I love that movie). Anyways, as I was standing there I heard this somewhat mildly loud blam. I turned around and saw a young Mission-street Tweaker picking up a box of cereal that he had dropped on the sidewalk. The only thing he was carrying was a box of cereal and I began to watch what he was doing only I couldn't quite figure out why he was carrying a box of cereal at 1 in the afternoon and how he happened to drop it. I mean, it's only a box of cereal. So the guy picks it up and walks off behind me.

A minute later I hear an even louder blam and turn to my right. The box of cereal was lying on the ground, having fallen off from the top of the phone booth. The tweaker saw what happened, walked up to the box and picked it up, apologizing profusely to whomever was paying attention. Then he placed the box back up on the phone booth and walked off.

A couple of minutes later, an older Mission-Street Tweaker walked right up to the phone booth. He picked up the cereal box, opened it, and then after reaching his hand in, put it back on top of the phone booth. And then he walked away.

I don't know either.

I'm guessing that my kind-of-hot next door neighbor is moving out. I don't know for sure because I haven't seen her, but I'm guessing that all the boxes that have been piled up in front of her door is a sign of her moving. I've lived in my apartment for over two years (gah) and she's been my neighbor the whole time. I know just from the few conversations we've had that she's lived in her apartment for over five years and while I'm guessing she's moving in with her boyfriend, I still wonder if I have anything to do with my kind-of-hot next door neighbor moving away. I've done it before, actually.

Was it the hearing of the "Buffy" theme song at least twice a day that did it or the fact that just when she thought she'd never be hearing it twice a day, she's now hearing the "Charmed" theme song twice a day? Was it the constant blaring of Tool and Van Halen? Or was the turning point my uncovering of an old Dead album that I've been listening to a lot lately? Maybe it was my insomniatic nights and late night TV watching that did it. And if it wasn't the daily watching of the "Daily Show" that did it, was it back when I had Cinemax and the constant watching of movies titled something like "Wicked Tempations" or "Sinful Temptations" or "Wicked Sin" or "Temptations of the Sin" that did it?

Or maybe not.

Anyways, goodbye kind-of-hot next door neighboor.

Just a Red-Letter, Banner day for yours truly. How's this for mail? I got one letter from the IRS and one from Unemployment. The IRS wants me to pay them more money and Unemployment wants to fight about sending me more money. All I needed is a Dear John letter and I would have scored the rare trifecta. Luckily, I don't have to worry about that right now. Lucky me.

But wait…there's more. See the reason why Unemployment is suddenly deciding to fight me over more money is because some of the unemployment insurance is coming from a certain company that I worked at over a year ago. A certain company that put the u-c-k in suck. A certain company that I can't mention because last time I mentioned them, they threatened to bring out the lawyers.

Them. They're raising a snit about having to pitch in for Unemployment.

I'm sure they're going to be really easy going about all this too.

Way back when the Recent Unpleasantness began, I saw on the sheet that one of the companies who helped pay for my Unemployment was them but I didn't think nothing of it. Or, at least, I said a little silent prayer that in no way would they get involved. In fact, considering how lame-ass the company was (did I ever mention the sales person who took naps when nobody was around and would just sit at his desk and snore out loud?) I figured they'd never figure out what was going on. Well they finally did figure out what was going on- six or seven months later. And now, because of how Unemployment works, I have to go back and forth with them to get what's left of my Unemployment money.

Lovely.

And now I sit and think about it, dreaming about what it's like. To see Rocker Girl and Mr. DJ and… (editor's note- my legal department has advised us to stop right here before I get myself into more trouble)…all sitting around and laughing at what has become with me, laughing like witches at a cauldron as my last laugh on them has become their last laugh on me.

Here's some more fun: I have jury duty next week.

Now, on the one hand, I'd be a perfect person for jury duty in that I'm still unemployed (those two stupid-ass companies are still making up their minds. Just how long does it take call references anyways? And once again, like why do you have to call for references?). I'd be perfect because I have plenty of time to idle away doing jury duty. After all, it's not like I do anything important all day other than sitting around home and reading the "Charmed" message boards.

But, if I go on jury-duty, I can't work. No work means no money. And no work means more unemployment checks for me and it's getting more important for me to work because unless one of those companies gets off their ass, I have to start doing some serious temping again because I'm running out of unemployment money (thank you Republican Party). So, while it would be in the best interests of the state to have me serve jury duty because I actually can, it's also not in the best interests of the state to have me serve jury duty because it would mean having to shell out mo' money. And it's definitely in the best interests of me to do temp work because I need to make money. Whether or not any of this will fly when I go into the SF Department of Justice I have no idea.

The fun never ends.

(just to make sure, you know I'm exaggerating for effect here, right? You know that I don't spend all my time going through the "Charmed" message boards, right? You know that I write it because it just sounds funny. Like it's a much snappier punch-line than "reading political weblogs all day or crawled up in a ball on the couch crying myself to sleep. In fact, a lot of what I write here is for effect. Y'all know that, right? Just checking.)

(And no, I don't spend all my time going through "Charmed" message boards. Just every night before I go to bed.)

(Kidding)

Ah, so it's looking like Rummy's going with the "OJ/ Colombian Drug Smuggler" defense concerning the WMDs. From the actual Senate transcripts:

"First is the theory that WMD may not have existed at the start of a war. I suppose that's possible, but not likely.

Second is that it's possible that WMD did exist, but was transferred, in whole or in part, to one or more other countries. We see that theory put forward.

Third, it's possible that the WMD existed, but was dispersed and hidden throughout Iraq. We see that possibility proposed by various people.

Next, that it's possible that WMD existed, but was destroyed at some moment prior to the beginning of the conflict.

Or that it's possible that Iraq had small quantities of biological or chemical agents and also a surge capability for a rapid build-up and that we may eventually find it in the months ahead.

So, to do my patriotic duty and help the White House figure out where those pesky WMD's are, here are some more possibilities of where they could be:

-Saddam stuffed them all into a closet in one of his many mansions

-Evildoer Ebay

- "...I want you to consider: this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk, but Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now, think about that. That does not make sense!

Why would a Wookiee — an eight foot tall Wookiee — want to live on Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense!"

-Saddam put them up in his giant moon base where he and his team of fembots in short skirts and go-go boots were going to blackmail the world into giving them one billion dollars

-Wardrobe malfunction

By the way, Kerry's kicking Smirkboy's butt in polls right now on National Defense. In fact, things aren't going well right now for the President. So bad that Republicans have been canceling primaries because the results of the few Republican primaries were kind of on the embarrassing side.

Why is it then when you're listening to the radio, the station your listening to comes in perfectly clear during commercials, inane DJ blathering and crap songs, but the moment some good song comes on- blammo, the reception craps out and you're stuck listening to like Dave Mathews or something?

I'm walking down the street today, listening to the radio, when Live 105 plays this really cool new tune. Now, I'm into really cool new tunes because I want to believe that somewhere out there, there's a good new band playing cool new tunes so I can buy all these new CD's and pretend I'm still with it. So I want to listen. But everytime the song kicked up and came to what I was hoping was the total kick-ass chorus, the reception would kick out and I'd be stuck hearing that infernal, a-pox-on-your-house-for-even-playing-this-song, suck-fest of a song, "Red Red Wine."

No cool song, but tons of UB40.

Why is that?

Saw this headline in Salon.com
Rumsfeld: WMD may still be found in Iraq.

Jesus frickin' Christ, GIVE IT UP.

Why do I think it'll be 2030 and Rumsfield (who won't be dead yet because it'll turn out he's actually an evil demon from some other plane of existence come to destroy the earth) will still be giving speeches saying "no...no...no....I swear, you'll find them. Just keep looking, I'm sure those WMD's gotta be there somewhere. No need to investigate anything."

All I can say is that we here at Hooray for Anything have got a case of John Kerry fever. Dude's already polling higher than Smirkboy is and while it's early, he's already got the White House all fluxommed over the fact that while Kerry was in Vietnam being a War Hero, W. was doing beer bongs and eightballs of coke at Houston Society Functions.

Go, John, go......

Last night, in an effort to shake things up as it were (read total boredom), I decided to shave off my "to lazy to shave off my beard in half a week" beard and went with the goatee. Cause nothing says big change like big change to facial hair.

This morning I flip to BH 9'er to watch the first episode of Sophmore Year in College (Year 1 of Val and the Year Dylan almost kills himself-good stuff) and notice with that Brandon is wearing goatee and flannel.

And there went the goatee.

The grunge years were not kind to the gang at the Peach Pit.

Another thing everyone's talking about is that ad for that impotency drug that claimed that if "you have an erection for over four hours, you should see medical help." Question, though: if you have to seek medical care for a four-hour erection who do you call? Your Primary Care Physician? And just what kind of medical attention will you get to take care of it?

Is it me or does it seem like whole Janet Jackson nipple slippage thing (Titgate?) getting more people in a hyperventilated tizzy more than this whole no-WMD in Iraq thing? Janet Jackson "accidentally" shows her breasts during the Superbowl and the whole country goes bonkers. The phones at radio talk shows are off the hook, the pundits are in full bloviate, the Man in the Street is being asked to express their outrage, and the Government swings into action as posses are even know being rounded up. Why this is an outrage! Dear God, won't somebody think of the children!

Yet the very same week, it's finally admitted that we just basically invaded a country for something we told everyone was there only to have to go "oops" and nobody cares. There's even speculation out there that the U.S. pretty much knew it several weeks after Baghdad fell and still nothing. Nor the fact that, yes Fox News, Bush did hype it and that for every report that supposedly said those WMD existed, there were equally as many reports saying yeah right. No phones are going off the hook on radio talk shows, no heads are rolling, no cries of "shame! hame!" no sense of outrage. Bush is agreeing to an investigation with all the enthusiasm of a hen-pecked husband having to take the trash out, congress is waiting for some link to be found linking Iraq to an old Arkansas land-deal before going into full outrage mode, and the press is too busy trying to figure out whether John Kerry got Botox or not to really deal with this issue. As for the American People, the Iraq War was so '03 and who cares because we won and it just proves we're the bestest country in the world. Besides, won't somebody think of the children?

And so I ask you, what's a worse outrage: Janet Jackson's boob or the President being one?

Whuh? There was Janet Jackson nipplage during the halftime show and I missed it? God damnit, I always miss that stuff.

That little accident's got to be a huge bummer for Ms. Jackson (if you're nasty). Oh wait, turns out that little nipple slippage was as "accidental" as Madonna's kiss with Skank #1 & Skank #2.

You know, during the halftime show I was once again pondering the lameness of both the Halftime Show and a culture in which major pop stars think it's cool to do the Superbowl Halftime Show. Then I was thinking about what I would want out a Halftime show. Maybe some band going all Who-like and smashing everything in sight. Maybe a little impromptu Zeppelin blooze jam or Neil Young feedback symphony. And then I thought, you know, what would probably be the most incredibly controversial, balls-out, stick it to the man thing to do? Besides not doing it? Put up a huge banner or wear a t-shirt with the slogan "Bush Lied" or just a plain old "Bush Sucks." Get all Rage Against the Machine with it. Imagine the shit hitting the fan then.

But no.

Instead we had a major, over-the-hill female singer, one who used to be fairly iconic, resorting to showing off her (probably) fake breasts, all to "shock" the audience and get talked about. Naughty little Jackson. Quelle shocking. And only MTV would try and make their halftime show have some sort of "Rock the Vote" type theme thing telling kids to get involved and get active, then followed it by a halftime show featuring such socially conscious songs as "It's Getting Hot in Here," "BawatabababawhateverthefuckI'm called" and "Mo Money (Mo Problems)" (sung by the always socially consciously P. Diddy wearing some super-expensive faux-fur jacket no less). And you gotta love too that the "Socially Conscious" singer did indeed sing her one socially conscious song (with such controversial statements as "Say No to Illiteracy" or "Say No To Racism!), then, quickly changed it to have a duet of the incredibly political "Rock Your Body." And then, "Socially Conscious" star, to complete above theme, gets "controversial" by showing off her breast, all managed by the very-same Youth Related Network that tried to have it's theme as being socially conscious.

Oh yeah, and supposedly Bono wanted to play the halftime show to raise awareness of AIDS but got nixed by the Superbowl People. So AIDS no, but breasts yes.

God, where's Nirvana when you really need them?

I realize that for business purposes, it makes sense to outsource telemarketing to places like Bangladesh and Bombay. I may not like it or think it's in the best interest of our country, but I understand the business of it. Still, would it be possible for all those business' to make a better effort to pretend that they're not in Bangladesh and Bombay? Most of the telemarketing calls I've been getting lately are from people with such thick accents that I half expect them to say "thank you for shopping at Kwik-E-Mart, come again."

Not that I'm ever going to say "wow, that sounds like a great offer on a new credit card," but I'd be more liable to say it if it the person on the other end of the line didn't spend several minutes trying to figure out how to pronounce my name.