Monthly Archive

It seems like a lifetime since I last caught an episode of the highly addictive Grey’s Anatomy. The writer’s strike put everything in Hollywood on hold except for scripts written before the strike. So one of the only shows I’ve been able to continue to enjoy is Prison Break.

Prison Break is one of those shows that at its core has this long running mystery. However, unlike Lost, along the way we start to see significant pieces of the mystery surface. Other than that, Prison Break primarily depends on the one or two actors who’ve made their character their own and on the constant twists and turns thrown our way.

Season Three began right where Season Two left off, many of our main characters are back in prison but this time in a anarchic jail in Panama. Within the prison we see the power plays of the money laundering drug lord who demands respect and keeps people in check. We learn of the kill or be killed method of solving difference with other inmates. Aside from that there’s Whistler who’s past is unclear and who the Company wants out.

Without going into detail about what goes on ( I don’t want to spoil anything ), the 13 episode 3rd Season of Prison Break wrapped up very nicely a story that perhaps might of been stretched on a little longer. The final episode which aired last week was one the best episodes in regards to filming, suspense, and anticipation. By the end, so many character dynamics are set up and put to rest that it makes you yearn for Season 4 to start!

Unfortunately we’ll have to wait until September. I would recommend buying or renting Prison Break on DVD. Season 1 was masterful in the suspense you later continue to expect of the series.

Prison Break:  4/5 stars

The Matthew Sheppard Act which was legislation introduced to the Congress, was designed to provide protection to victims of hate crimes against gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability. The legislation is the work of the Matthew Sheppard Foundation, which carries on the memory of the murder of openly gay college student Matthew Sheppard, and members of Congress. Under the proposed legislation crimes committed against victims under the circumstance listed above are to be added to the preexisting conditions of race, color, religion, and country of origin. It also calls for the state funding of hate crime investigations by federal authorities when local authorities choose not to.

The bill, which was too controversial for the formally Republican controlled Congress, lay dormant until last year when the Democrats regained control of Congress. In light of the fact that the President would veto this legislation and the votes weren’t there for an override, the Matthew Sheppard Act was attached to a defense authorization bill. Strategically it made sense because Bush and his warmongers could never deny more money to the slaughter of innocents abroad, but problems within Congress led to its eventual downfall. The Democrats didn’t want to vote for any more war funding (by the end of 2007) and the Republicans didn’t want to vote for anything that wouldn’t align with their constituency… supporting GLBT rights. The act was eventually dropped and future attempts will no doubt surface.

Hate crimes legislation is significant because of the social circumstances of our time. Divisions within our population have placed white males at the top of the power structure. Any other group or variation of people falls into an oppressed minority. The idea of hate crimes, as opposed to a regular crime, stems from the notion that those in the majority who abuse their ascribed power should be punished on a different scale because they’ve benefitted more from life in our society than all the minority groups. While it may seem unfair, those in the majority are able to discriminate against us in the minority with much more ease and effectiveness. A crime against a member of the majority is just basic discrimination, but doesn’t warrant racism or sexism. In order for those charges to be made those ideas need to be widespread amongst the majority.

The Matthew Sheppard Act needs to be readmitted to the legislative process in Congress and even to state governments, because every time someone recognizes something for what it is, it sets an example for others. Plus the requests of the legislation are not unfounded. There has been a rise of violence against members of the GLBT community, especially transgender and transsexual individuals. While gays and lesbians are slowly entering the mainstream, trans people have a long and hard battle to fight to gain recognition amongst the public. The hardest of all is fighting the very institutions that dictate to people what is right and wrong.  We need to help people make the connection that the struggle for trans people, is the same as the struggle of gays and lesbians. It isn’t their choice. It is who they are.

Today in my GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender) studies class, the professor asked us to recount a time where we’re in a minority roll that was disadvantageous to us. I thought of the time I came out to my parents that I was an atheist.

I was 16 years old and I had realized that I didn’t care one bit for my religious obligations of going to church, confessing, and praying as a Catholic. A year later, 2003, the gay rights movement receives a boost in its efforts when “gay marriage” (in quotations because “gay marriage” implies that its a different kind of marriage that is sought) is brought to the attention mainstream media and discussion. I’m watching TV with my dad, the spanish news, and they show gays marrying in San Francisco and in New Paltz, NY. He confidently said that “gay marriage” was  an abomination and that it went against the very laws of nature to be gay.

Fortunately, my dad is uneducated, so its not really his fault that his argument makes no sense. Nature has no laws. Nature just is. Plus, laws are legislation or rules created by man in order to provide order and stability. My dad begins to mention God in his argument against gays. Like many others who argue against this, God seems to always enter the picture.

So I ended criticizing that comment and my dad asked “What? Do you not believe in God?” I was nervous but I said it. “No!” He couldn’t comprehend it, especially after being raised Catholic and being under the impression that I believed because I attended church and because he thought he raised me to know “better.” My dad turned red and dropped the conversation. Still today he reminds me to go to church when I have a chance. Perhaps he doesn’t notice that I don’t follow traditional Christian manners when we say grace.

The best part of this all is that admist of all the talk about homosexuality, “gay marriage”, and nature/natural my mom never said a word as she sat in the background. The minute I said I didn’t believe in God, she remarked “Its just a phase!” I already felt as a minority in the room when being the only one defending our GLBT brothers and sister’s right to get married. However, shit hit the fan and I felt most like a minority, when renouncing my imposed religion to my parents.

The term “equal marriage” the preferred when the GLBT movement fights for their right to marry. Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgender marriage implies that the marriage ( the union) would be any different. The argument about the sanctity of marriage is also flawed. Marriage predates religion and even when in religious context was usually meant as property.

 While I say that I’m an atheist because I don’t believe in God, I do keep in mind that I don’t have all the answers. There may be a god one day, however I (Edit do DON’T view god as necessary to the progression of the human race. If we wanted things we benefit from like healthcare, jobs, housing, and education…we don’t have to look to god for those things. Realistically we can find solutions to them by demanding them and getting others to do so too. 

Ever thought about voting, supporting, or debating the ideas of Ron Paul. Here’s a really great piece that will make you think twice as it deconstructs his politics. It also talks about the unusual alliance of the Left/liberals with Ron Paul. A MUST READ.

http://www.counterpunch.org/wolf12122007.html

“Millions Without A Voice” By Amy Goodman

Amy Goodman is an independent journalist and host of Democracy Now! on Pacifica Radio and Free Speech TV. This entry is from Amy Goodman’s Weekly Column dated Feb 6, 2008.

As I raced into our TV studio for our Super Tuesday morning-after show, I was excited. Across the country, initial reports indicated there was unprecedented voter participation, at least in the Democratic primaries, several times higher than in previous elections. For years I have covered countries like Haiti, where people risk death to vote, while the U.S. has one of the lowest participation rates in the industrialized world. Could it be this year would be different?

Then I bumped into a friend and asked if he had voted. “I can’t vote,” he said, “because I did time in prison.” I asked him if he would have voted. “Sure I would have. Because then I’m not just talking junk, I’m doing something about it.”

Felony disenfranchisement is the practice by state governments of barring people convicted of a felony from voting, even after they have served their time. In Virginia and Kentucky, people convicted of any felony can never vote again (this would include “Scooter” Libby, even though he never went to jail, unless he is pardoned). Eight other states have permanent felony disenfranchisement laws, with some conditions that allow people to rejoin the voter rolls: Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, Florida, Mississippi, Nevada, Tennessee and Wyoming.

Disenfranchisement—people being denied their right to vote—takes many forms, and has a major impact on electoral politics. In Ohio in 2004, stories abounded of inoperative voting machines, too few ballots or too few voting machines. Then there was Florida in 2000. Many continue to believe that the election was thrown to George W. Bush by Ralph Nader, who got about 97,000 votes in Florida. Ten times that number of Floridians are prevented from voting at all. Why? Currently, more than 1.1 million Floridians have been convicted of a felony and thus aren’t allowed to vote. We can’t know for sure how they would have voted, but as scholar, lawyer and activist Angela Davis said recently in a speech honoring Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in Mobile, Ala., “If we had not had the felony disenfranchisement that we have, there would be no way that George Bush would be in the White House.”

Since felony disenfranchisement disproportionately affects African-American and Latino men in the U.S., and since these groups overwhelmingly vote Democratic, the laws bolster the position of the Republican Party. The statistics are shocking. Ryan King, policy analyst with The Sentencing Project in Washington, D.C., summarized the latest:

About 5.3 million U.S. citizens are ineligible to vote due to felony disenfranchisement; 2 million of them are African-American. Of these, 1.4 million are African-American men, which translates into an incredible 13 percent of that population, a rate seven times higher than in the overall population. Forty-eight states have some version of felony disenfranchisement on the books. All bar voting from prison, then go on to bar participation while on parole or probation. Two states, Maine and Vermont, allow prisoners to vote from behind the walls, as does Canada and a number of other countries.

The politicians and pundits are all abuzz with the massive turnouts in the primaries and caucuses. There are increasing percentages of women participating, and initial reports point to more young people. The youth vote is particularly important, as young people have less invested in the status quo and can look with fresh eyes at long-standing injustices that disenfranchise so many. In this context, one of The Sentencing Project’s predictions bears repeating here: “Given current rates of incarceration, 3 in 10 of the next generation of black men can expect to be disenfranchised at some point in their lifetime. In states that disenfranchise ex-offenders, as many as 40 percent of black men may permanently lose their right to vote.”

The Sentencing Project’s King said: “We are constantly pushing for legislative change around the country. But public education is absolutely key. There are so many different laws that people simply don’t know when their right to vote has been restored. That includes the personnel who work in state governments giving out the wrong information.”

I called my friend to tell him he was misinformed. He hadn’t been on probation or parole for years. “You can vote,” I told him. “You just have to register.” I could hear him smile through the phone

Today Michael Eisner, the former CEO of Walt Disney, came out of nowhere and said that a deal had been reached between the WGA and the AMPTP.

The funny thing is that the WGA members are supposed to meet this Saturday to discuss the current situation and negotiations. The members of the WGA, the writers, need to vote to approve a deal. If a deal had been reached last Friday like Mr. Eisner claims, then why 6 days later no one from the WGA has said anything? No one from United Hollywood has said anything? None of the lead organizing writers of the WGA have said anything.

What it is is a smart tactic by the AMPTP and Eisner by spreading these rumors the last month and a half. Saying that they’ve brought something the writer’s would benefit from to the table but they were to greedy and didn’t accept. What Eisner is doing is pretty shitty. He seems to be trying to shift the problem on to the writers and off the backs of the studios. Shifting the issue from corporate greed to individual greed. Claiming that a deal has been struck, knowing writer’s are going to meet this weekend and probably reject the shortcomings of a proposed new contract.

It’s bad enough that news media outlets are not covering the WGA perspective. No one in the media talks about the importance of the writer’s union surviving and remaining credible. The role of a union is just not explained.

We should have an update this weekend on where the writer’s stand.

Have you heard people ranting about how their favorite shows aren’t on the air? How about the claims that the writers are being selfish? The “extreme tactics” of the WGA picketing the Golden Globes? It seems like these rants come from two places: 1. The bourgeois production studio heads and the mainstream media. 2. Uninformed working class people who don’t see the importance of the strike.

The ongoing battle between writers of the WGA (Writer’s Guild of America) and AMPTP (Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers) has mainly to do with streaming content through new media like web streaming, podcasting, and rental/purchase downloads. Put simply, the AMPTP doesn’t want to pay out (the writer’s earn zero from new media content) to writer’s claiming that it is too early in this new media stage to know if it’ll be profitable. So here lies their concern, in profit. To be expected, we are talking about 5 or 6 studios who dominate movie/television production and like any other corporation securing profit is crucial. The WGA’s other demand is that they get paid more for each DVD sold. Currently they earn only 4 cents per DVD. They are asking for 8 cents. The studios won’t budge there either.

So people will say, IT’S ALL ABOUT MONEY! The writer’s are greedy! They’re all millionaires anyway, working in Hollywood. False. While a number of writer’s have exclusive development deals with certain production studios, most writer’s are freelance. Most writers work an episode here and an episode there. Some writers are on a show for a season,  and then won’t find work for 6 months. Unlike a teacher, doctor, or lawyer who have a consistent work schedules, writer’s depend on projects to work. If your show is cancelled 5 episodes in, you are out of a job. Since TV pilots are only picked up in the spring time, finding work at other times of the year is hard.

What’s important here? I’d argue:

1. Writer’s deserve a livable wage like everyone else does. Not a minimum wage like so many of the working class live off of, but a living wage. A wage that can pay for housing, food, and basic medical costs. A wage that lets you not have to worry about awaiting the next pay check.

2. The WGA needs all the support in the world. They are currently fighting against some of the most powerful companies in our country and arguably the world. Many of these movie studios are owned by the 5 corporations that own all of the media outlets. The WGA, a union of writers, is haulting a multi-billion dollar industry to not only get a pay raise that they deserve, but also to show that this battle is ongoing. This is a long term struggle and they are more than willing to fight it out as long as they can.

3. We MUST Support the WGA! They are setting an example for the rest of the community in Hollywood. In June, SAG’s (Screen Actor’s Guild) contract will be up and the actors (again, not all are millionaires) may very well go on strike to make their demands. The SAG has been crucial to keeping the WGA strike because of the support they’ve given to writers. When the WGA decided to picket the Golden Globes, SAG members did too and pledged not to show up to the award show they were invited to.

Here’s a link to Joss Whedon’s post on United Hollywood’s blog. In it he tackle the notion that a deal has been struck. He takes on the issue of tactics and the Director’s Guild deal that was struck last month. What’s good for them doesn’t mean is good for the writers. Thats the emphasis of his post. Not to mention that its written in typical Joss Whedon style talk. It’s great, check it out: http://unitedhollywood.blogspot.com/2008/02/from-joss-whedon-do-not-adjust-your.html

You can call the writer’s whatever you want. There is no denying that they are doing what is long overdue. With the decline of union power in the last 40 years, so has come the disparity in wages. In the last 2 decades alone, CEOs and corporate executives have seen their pay go from millions to multimillions and in some cases even billions. Meanwhile the working class has further been pushed into an economic quagmire. Pitting their nutrition vs. healthcare vs. their homes. When we as a society have resorting to have to pick which of our basic necessities is most important, then we’ve got problems.

In solidarity!

Review: Roger and Me

written, produced, and directed by Michael Moore

I finally saw Michael Moore’s first documentary feature film, Roger and Me. I’m a huge fan of Sicko and thought Fahrenheit 9/11 was good. I remember seeing parts of Bowling for Columbine and that was pretty good too. What makes Michael Moore’s films so appealing is the comedy he adds to the sad stories of corruption and greed. Roger and Me is no exception to that.

The film takes place in Moore’s hometown of Flint, Michigan in the late 1980s. General Motors has decided to shut down its plant in Flint. In doing so, the city of Flint loses 30,000 jobs. With a great chunk of the community without a job and their union leader in the pockets of management, the working class of Flint is left with nothing but hope for better days.

In the 1970s we begin to see manufacturing jobs start to disappear in the United States. Factories reopen in Mexico, Latin America, Asia, and any other place where corporations can pay workers daily the amount of cash you’d typically find in your sofa. Moore documents the great affect the loss of jobs had on the community. Small businesses followed suit and soon enough people weren’t able to pay rent, buy food, or afford a ride out of Flint.

Roger and Me, takes us through the town of Flint to show the affect that corporate neglect towards workers has on businesses, families, poverty, and crime. We hear from other members of the big business community as well as upper class individuals who are out of touch with the everyday nightmare. Throughout the film, Moore is on a mission to speak to then-CEO of General Motors, Roger Smith to get his perspective on Flint. But first Moore must make it through all the bureaucratic elements in order to do so.

4 out 5 stars.

What can I say that hasn’t already been said by just about everyone in corporate and independent media?

If you have a candidate to vote for in the primary, go vote!

If you’re like me and the choices don’t reflect what you believe in, then the best thing you can do is either spread the word about a candidate you do want to vote for or get out there and join a movement. You see, the idea of voting for someone and then sitting back at home doesn’t sit well with me. People are heading to the voting booth to give up their power to change things. They’re placing their faith on an individual who may or may not fulfill his/her promises. In the case that they don’t, which happens more often then you’d like to think, you need to make your voice heard. Attend a rally. Join a grassroots organization. Get involved in local politics to find a more immediate satisfaction or better chance for change.

It’s Super Tuesday because every presidential election year a large number of states hold their primaries and caucuses on this date. Today is the day the American people help determine who will or will not get their party’s nomination.

I’m currently supporting the presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney of the Green Party. She’s a former Democratic congresswoman that left the party because she was tired of the corporate alliance it was building, like their counterparts across the aisle.

“What’s the sitch?” was the phrase commonly used among the characters of the TV show Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Sitch was sort of an abbreviation for situation. It was one of many plays on language that the show established. I thought of a number of names before deciding on the Sitch and each of them were doomed for good reasons.

Names like: Was it Worth It? after a Ryan Harvey Song

Wait For it!… after a great line from “How I Met Your Mother”

Ultimately I felt that “The Sitch” was great because it was a title I could use to publish a blog on just about anything. I thought about making a depressing blog where I just complained about the world sitch that we’re in. I didn’t want to limit myself because there’s just to much to comment on and so much that affects us everyday.

A number of things you can expect on here: Reviews for Movies, TV shows, Books, Speakers, and Events. Political essays and commentaries that foster debate. Promoting events and other things to go to or get involved with.