I called Jerry Falwell an idiot, not a fool
Last week I read a letter submitted to Hagerstown’s premier newspaper of record, The Herald-Mail. The letter’s author was pointing out what a great man the late Jerry Falwell was and he stated that the reason some people didn’t like Falwell was because he was conservative.
Something like that.
I didn’t like Falwell. It wasn’t because he was conservative. It was because he was a dick. I think he was a bully who picked on gay people.
I decided to write my own letter pointing out why some people (like me) didn’t like Falwell.
Today my letter was published. In the letter, I wrote that Falwell was a “bigoted idiot”. They changed it to read “bigoted fool”. This bugs me because I don’t use words like “fool”. It reminds me of Mr. T’s famous catch phrase “I pity the fool“.
This isn’t the first time The Herald-Mail has altered my words. It will though be the last. Every time they publish one of my letters, they change words. A word here, a word there. It’s annoying.
No more. I have a blog. Why do I need to write letters to the newspaper? If I want to call Falwell an idiot, I can. I can call him much worse.
The Rev. Falwell’s ‘flaw’ wasn’t his Christianity
To the editor:
I wanted to respond to John Miller’s recent letter proclaiming the many supposed virtues of the now-deceased Rev. Jerry Falwell.
People are speaking ill of him not because of his conservative views. They are speaking ill of him because he was a bigoted fool idiot.
He said that God had created AIDS to punish gay people and the societies that tolerate gay people. He said that if you were not a born-again Christian, you were a failure as a human being.
He also blamed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on pagans, abortionists, feminists, gay people and members of the ACLU. He also said that gay people were satanic beasts and that when they are finally all annihilated that there will be a celebration in heaven.
Who in their right mind not only believes these things, but actually says them aloud for others to hear? The fact is that Falwell gave Christianity a bad name.
He made Christians look bad. Who knows how many people Falwell kept away from Christianity with his intolerant and narrow-minded views?
Real Christians, the people who actually follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, don’t go around blaming pagans or the ACLU when things go wrong. Real Christians don’t talk about celebrating if a whole group of people were to be exterminated.
Rick Rottman
Hagerstown
Cindy Sheehan calls it quits?
Cindy Sheehan has quit the anti-war movement. She posted a resignation letter on Daily Kos renouncing her position as “the face of the American anti-war movement”. She blamed this decision on negative criticism made by members of Democratic Underground, a liberal website dedicated to progressive ideals. Some of the members of Democratic Underground were participating in a discussion on a forum referring to Sheehan as an “attention whore”.
Evidently she took exception to this.
I think it’s strange that she would respond to the charge that she’s an attention whore by going out of her way to bring yet even more attention to herself. Worse, she chose to issue this ridiculous resignation letter on Memorial Day. It’s the one day a year that is supposed to be about honoring those in the military that have paid the ultimate sacrifice. People like her son, Casey.
Casey didn’t “die for nothing” as Cindy Sheehan likes to say. He died going to the aid of his fellow soldiers. This is from the blog BLACKFIVE:
Soldiers of the 2nd Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment were ambushed with RPGs and pinned down and dying. While fighting off an attack himself, the Commander of the 2/5th, LTC Volesky, called for help. A Quick Reaction Force (QRF) was formed of volunteers – their mission was to go out and rescue the American troops.
Casey Sheehan’s Sergeant asked for volunteers. Sheehan had just returned from Mass. After Sheehan volunteered once, the Sergeant asked Sheehan again if he wanted to go on the mission. According to many reports (and according to his own mother), Casey responded, “Where my Chief goes, I go.”
The QRF was launched. Not long after entering the Mahdi area, the QRF was channeled onto a dead-end street where the roofs were lined with snipers, RPGs, and even some militia throwing burning tires onto the vehicles. The Mahdi blocked the exit and let loose with everything they had.
Sheehan’s vehicle was hit with multiple RPGs and automatic-weapons fire.
Specialist Casey Sheehan and Corporal Forest J. Jostes were killed.
Casey was killed doing a truly heroic thing. He deserves to be honored. What he doesn’t deserve is to have his mother go around telling everyone that her son died for nothing.
Tell that to the soldiers he volunteered to help that tragic day. Tell that to their families.
Memorial Day should be about Casey Sheehan and people like him, not Cindy Sheehan. She’s has 364 days a year to bring attention to herself. Memorial Day ain’t one of them.
It’s not as though I believe she is actually going away. I would be very surprised if this was the last any of us ever heard from Cindy Sheehan. I think she likes attention too much to just walk away.
Joe Quesada weighs in on Marvel’s tentacle rape porn for 9-year olds
Heidi MacDonald from The Beat has been kind enough to post a portion of the weekly question and answer session between comic book website Newsarama and Marvel Editor-in-Chief Joe Quesada.
She saved me from having to go and read the sickening love fest passing as comics journalism over at Newsarama.
Quesada weighs (no pun intended) in on the recent controversy over the creepy HEROES FOR HIRE #13 cover that I wrote about here.
When I refer to “controversy”, I am referring to why Marvel Comics would stoop to putting porn on the cover of a comic book intended for 9 year olds.
I don’t care all that much for Joe Quesada. This is a prime example of why:
This one I can answer to. First, I think people are reading way too much into that cover than was ever intended. I heard terms such as “tentacle rape” being thrown around when that in no way is what’s happening, nor does it happen in the book. Those tentacles are the arms of the Brood who appears in the issue and is a major story point, the Brood have tentacles, sorry about that.
Secondly, the concept for that cover, soup to nuts came from a female artist. Thirdly, not being a deep follower of manga, I have no idea what recurring theme people are referring to or concerned with. While I appreciate the sentiment and the feelings that some may have about this, I honestly feel that there is way too much being read into this cover.
Also, HFH is a book that features two strong, lead female protagonist who kick major ass; somehow folks have forgotten to focus on that.
Reading too much into it, huh Joe? Why is the tentacle — you call it an arm — secreting some kind of mystery white goo on the woman’s breasts? The woman with her hands chained above her head to a stone pillar. What is that white goo supposed to be?
Also, just how old is Joe Quesada? When was the last time you heard someone use the phrase, “Soup to Nuts”? Talk about old-man speak.
Rosie versus Elisabeth
Rosie O’Donnell is leaving the TV show The View even earlier then she had originally planned. Friday was her last show. A show as fate would have it, I actually watched. It seems that her decision to leave the show early is a direct result of her recent verbal kung-fu with co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck. An argument that Hasselbeck seems to have won. Not just because O’Donnell is quiting the show early, but because I’ve read the transcript.
This from the Los Angeles Times:
But in the last several days, the two have tussled over a rhetorical comment O’Donnell made about the number of civilian deaths in Iraq that appeared to equate U.S. military actions with terrorism.
On Monday’s show, O’Donnell complained that conservative critics had twisted what she said by claiming that she called the troops “terrorists.” She asked Hasselbeck if she thought O’Donnell believed the soldiers were terrorists. Rather than answer, Hasselbeck urged her to clarify what she had meant, at which point O’Donnell reiterated her support for the troops.
On Wednesday, O’Donnell initially appeared reluctant to be dragged into the debate again.
“Because here’s how it gets spun in the media: ‘Rosie, big fat lesbian loud Rosie, attacks innocent pure Christian Elisabeth,’ ” she said.
Hasselbeck called that “unfair,” adding: “I just don’t understand why it’s my fault if people spin words that you put out there or phrases that suggest things. And I gave you an opportunity two days ago to clarify the statement that got you in trouble on all those things.”
“That got me in trouble?” O’Donnell repeated sarcastically. “As a friend, you gave me the opportunity. That was very sweet of you. I was asking if you, who actually knows me, do you believe I think our troops are terrorists, Elisabeth?”
Hasselbeck hesitated.
“Do you believe that, yes or no?” O’Donnell pressed.
Hasselbeck raised her finger in the air. “Excuse me. Let me speak.”
“You’re going to doublespeak,” O’Donnell said. “It’s just a yes or a no.”
“I am not a double speaker, and I don’t put suggestions out there that lead people to think things and then not answer my own question, OK?” Hasselbeck shot back. “I don’t believe that you believe troops are terrorists. I have said that before. But when you say something like 650,000 Iraqis are dead, we invaded them … ”
“It’s true!” O’Donnell responded.
“Let me finish!” Hasselbeck said.
“You don’t like facts!” O’Donnell retorted.
Hasselbeck’s tone grew angrier: “I am all about facts. You know that. You tell me not to use facts because you want me to go only on emotion. Guess what? I like facts.”
As the tone grew more heated, Behar and guest co-host Sherri Shepherd fidgeted uncomfortably and finally pretended to get up from the table to break the tension.
But the two kept at it, and the producers switched to a split screen to showcase their back-and-forth.
O’Donnell said she was hurt that Hasselbeck didn’t defend her.
“I am certainly not going to be the person for you to explain your thoughts,” Hasselbeck retorted, pointing her finger at her co-host. “They’re your thoughts. Defend your own insinuations! Defend your own thoughts!”
“Frankly, every time I defend them, it’s poor little Elisabeth that I’m picking on,” O’Donnell responded. “That’s why I’m not going to fight with you anymore, because it’s absurd. So for three weeks, you can say all the Republican crap that you want. I’m not going to do it.”
“It’s much easier to fight someone like Donald Trump, isn’t it?” Hasselbeck spat, alluding to O’Donnell’s much-publicized feud with the real estate magnet. “Because he’s obnoxious.”
The audience oohed in surprise and O’Donnell looked shocked.
“I think it’s sad because I don’t understand how there can be such hurt feelings when all I did was say, ‘Look, why don’t you tell everybody what you said?’ ” Hasselbeck continued. “I did that as a friend.”
“Every day since September I have told you that I support the troops,” O’Donnell shot back. “I asked you if you believed what the Republican pundits were saying. You said nothing, and that’s cowardly.”
“No, no, no!” Hasselbeck said furiously. “You will not call me a coward, because No. 1, I sit here every single day, open my heart and tell people exactly what I believe.”
“So do I!” O’Donnell said.
“Do not call me a coward, Rosie.”
“It was cowardly.”
“It was not cowardly, it was honest.”
Behar broke in: “Is there no commercial in this show?”
Hasselbeck continued: “I’ll tell you what’s cowardly. Asking a rhetorical question that you never answer yourself. That is cowardly.”
Behar had had enough. “Who is directing this show?” she said. “Let’s go to commercial!”
Even though my personal politics are much more aligned with O’Donnell then Hasselbeck, I cannot stand her. I think Rosie O’Donnell’s loud, obnoxious, rude, uninformed, and a bully. Granted, she does a lot for various charities, but I would argue that the only reason people know this is because Rosie O’Donnell is constantly bragging about it.
Modest she ain’t.
Take any issue that Rosie is for and I believe she actually does more harm then good. The last thing you want Rosie doing is screaming and yelling about a cause you believe in. I literally cringe when I hear her speak up against the Iraq war.
Alabama boy kills rare and very unique creature
An 11 year old boy killed a giant will hog estimated to weigh over 1,000 pounds. It measured over 9 feet in length.
“It feels really good,” Jamison, of Pickensville, said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press. “It’s a good accomplishment. I probably won’t ever kill anything else that big.” Jamison, who killed his first deer at age 5, was hunting with father Mike Stone and two guides in east Alabama on May 3 when he bagged Hogzilla II. He said he shot the huge animal eight times with a .50- caliber revolver and chased it for three hours through hilly woods before finishing it off with a point-blank shot.
I think it’s a shame that something like this had to be killed. What makes this especially bad is that it was killed for some kid’s amusement. For the perverse pleasure in killing something. Couldn’t he just play video games? Instead he has to pump eight 50 cal bullets into a truly rare animal and then chase it for three hours to finish it off.
It’s both sadistic and cruel.
Todd Cochrane and the unadulterated pure evil of Feedburner
Todd Cochrane over at Geek News Central has been writing some rather snarky things about Feedburner. Todd doesn’t like Feedburner. I get that. No one is saying he has to like Feedburner. Just because I like Feedburner doesn’t mean everyone has to. What I don’t understand is his paranoid rhetoric.
For instance, it’s hard to take him serious when he proclaims that Feedburner is “evil”. In fact, not only does he announce that Feedburner is evil, he says they are pure evil. As though it’s evil hasn’t been diluted or watered down. We are lead to believe that Feedburner is 100% evil. Like Satan’s left armpit or fat-free mayonnaise.
Evil is a strong word that has absolutely nothing to do with what Feedburner has to offer.
Speaking of not taking him serious, today he had this to say:
I am blown away when I talk to bloggers and podcasters when they say they need FeedBurner. When I ask why, they say because they need a RSS feed. When I point out to them that their blog is already creating a fully functional RSS feed many are dumbfounded.
I just don’t believe that. Not that he was blown away. I just don’t believe that he spoke to bloggers and podcasters who thought they needed Feedburner because their blogs didn’t already have an RSS feed. One of the first steps when signing up with Feedburner is when Feedburner analyzes your blog and identifies any existing feeds. Feedburner then shows you these existing feeds and has you select one to use to syndicate your blog through Feedburner.
This is something Todd would know if he had ever actually tried the free syndication service known as Feedburner. The one he hates so much.
The one he thinks is pure evil.
I might believe that a podcaster or a blogger didn’t know their website already had an RSS feed before signing up with Feedburner. Maybe. They would certainly know they already had an RSS feed during the sign up process. I just cannot believe they would not know this until Todd told them.
Unless they were really, really stupid.
Dear Roscoe Bartlett
Roscoe Bartlett
2412 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C.
20515-2006
Dear Roscoe Bartlett –
I’m writing this letter in regards to comments you made shortly after your historic vote last March against the continued funding of our troops in Iraq.
You stated that you were against a time table for withdrawal. Wouldn’t you agree that our military has already accomplished everything they were asked to do? They have:
- Ensured that Iraq is free of weapons of mass destruction.
- Removed Saddam Hussein from power.
- Allowed Iraq to become a democratic and free country.
Our troops have successfully done their job. Now it’s time for you to do yours. You need to work towards bringing them home. Their mission has been accomplished.
You stated back in March that another reason you voted NO was because one-fifth of the spending bill was pork. Expenditures unrelated to our national defense. As though the continued occupation of Iraq has anything to do with the defense of our nation. Now that the Democrats have caved and removed any type of timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, voting YES on the supplemental spending bill should be fairly easy for you to do – unless you really are a fiscal conservative. All that pork is still firmly attached to the bill.
Rick Rottman
Hagerstown, Maryland
Heroes For Hire #13 is intended for nine year olds
When I first read about the cover illustration for HEROES FOR HIRE #13, I thought it was creepy, excessive, and overly sexualized. Especially considering that it’s rated T+. What’ that mean? This is from the Marvel Comics website:
9+ years old Appropriate for most readers, parents are advised they may want to read before or with younger children.
I wouldn’t expect to find a comic book meant for nine year old children to feature an illustration of scantly clad women chained to a stone pillar while a tentacle creature gropes them.
At first, I didn’t spend too much time studying it. It’s way too pervy for my taste. I then read this post over at Written World. Sure enough, the cover is even worse then I originally thought.
What is that white goo dripping on the bare breasts of the woman on the cover of a Marvel Comics funny book intended for nine year olds?
That question is of course only rhetorical. I don’t really want to know what that white goo is supposed to be. Believe me, I really don’t want to know. What I would like to know is how something like this gets the OK at the House Of Ideas. That is what they used to call Marvel Comics, right? The House of Ideas?
I remember when comic books couldn’t even show red blood. They colored it to look brownish. It looked sort of like something else. Something that was not blood. Now they are showing white goo on the breasts of women. Women who are chained to a stone pillar. Women being molested by a tentacle creature.
Rudy Giuliani is an idiot
Rudy Giuliani should have been spending less time flying around the country giving paid speeches on the 9-11 terror attacks and spent more time actually learning more about them. Including the reasons we were attacked.
This following is a partial transcript from the recent Republican South Carolina Presidential debate.
REP. PAUL: No. Non-intervention was a major contributing factor. Have you ever read the reasons they attacked us? They attack us because we’ve been over there; we’ve been bombing Iraq for 10 years. We’ve been in the Middle East — I think Reagan was right.
We don’t understand the irrationality of Middle Eastern politics. So right now we’re building an embassy in Iraq that’s bigger than the Vatican. We’re building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting. We need to look at what we do from the perspective of what would happen if somebody else did it to us. (Applause.)
MR. GOLER: Are you suggesting we invited the 9/11 attack, sir?
REP. PAUL: I’m suggesting that we listen to the people who attacked us and the reason they did it, and they are delighted that we’re over there because Osama bin Laden has said, “I am glad you’re over on our sand because we can target you so much easier.” They have already now since that time — (bell rings) — have killed 3,400 of our men, and I don’t think it was necessary.
MR. GIULIANI: Wendell, may I comment on that? That’s really an extraordinary statement. That’s an extraordinary statement, as someone who lived through the attack of September 11, that we invited the attack because we were attacking Iraq. I don’t think I’ve heard that before, and I’ve heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th. (Applause, cheers.)
And I would ask the congressman to withdraw that comment and tell us that he didn’t really mean that. (Applause.)
MR. GOLER: Congressman?
REP. PAUL: I believe very sincerely that the CIA is correct when they teach and talk about blowback. When we went into Iran in 1953 and installed the shah, yes, there was blowback. A reaction to that was the taking of our hostages and that persists. And if we ignore that, we ignore that at our own risk. If we think that we can do what we want around the world and not incite hatred, then we have a problem.
They don’t come here to attack us because we’re rich and we’re free. They come and they attack us because we’re over there. I mean, what would we think if we were — if other foreign countries were doing that to us?
Congressmen Ron Paul is correct. Bin Laden didn’t attack the United States because of our love of apple pie and baseball. He didn’t attack us because we love Jesus.
Rudy Giuliani has made a lot of money off of 9-11. You would think he would try to learn a thing or two about it. Instead he comes off looking like an idiot.
Congressman Ron Paul was right. The so-called “America’s Mayor” was wrong.
Maryland’s war on smoking
Starting next February, a new Maryland law will eliminate indoor smoking in most public places, including bars and restaurants, as well as in private social clubs and fraternal organizations.
I don’t think the law says anything about the immediate doorways to public places.
The chain restaurant Ruby Tuesday has banned smoking at their restaurant for a few years now. Before smokers would sit in the bar area and blow their smoke at each other. They didn’t bother me. Now because they cannot sit at their table and smoke, they go outside and stand at the doorway and smoke. That means that I have to walk through their smoke just to get into the restaurant. It makes me think twice before going there to have a broiled talupa fish sandwich. They are very good, but I don’t know if they are worth having if I have to walk through a gantlet of disgusting cigarette smoke both entering and leaving the restaurant.
With Maryland’s new law, it looks like I will be faced with this same problem not only at Rudy Tuesday, but at every other restaurant too.
I’m not against smoking. I’m just against doorway smoking.
I’m also against smokers that roll down their car window and throw the butt out the window. Just who do they think is going to pick that butt up? Why don’t they just use the ashtray in their vehicle? I assume it’s because they don’t want anything as nasty and disgusting as a cigarette butt in their vehicle. I cannot say that I blame them for feeling this way. It’s the same reason I don’t want cigarette butts all over the ground. They are nasty looking and disgusting.
I will be totally honest and admit that I used to smoke. In fact, I smoked a lot. I quit about eight years ago. It wasn’t the first time I tried to quit, but I hope it turns out to be the last. Nicotine is truly a powerful and addictive drug. The cigarette companies actually make it more addictive that it is naturally. With that said, I have a hard time understanding why people that smoke just cannot quit like I did. If someone as pathetically weak willed as myself can sever the addiction to nicotine, I have to believe anybody can.
(photo by Justin Shearer )
Is Wizard magazine really aimed at teenage boys?
I’ve been reading on the Internet for years that Wizard magazine is aimed at teenage boys. Critics of the magazine – and there are many – like to say this almost any time they want to put the magazine in a bad light. The inference is that if you enjoy reading Wizard magazine, you have the mind of a teenage boy.
It’s dismissive and more then just a little pretentious.
It’s also something that has never made much sense to me. It reminds me of the ignorant folks that say comic books are for children. As it turns out, the actual demographics for Wizard magazine tells a much different story.
Echo Media, founded in 1992 is an industry leader in direct response advertising. At least that is what their website states. They have released information about Wizard magazine, including the demographics of its readers. It’s interesting stuff:
- Average Income: $60,000
- Average Age: 21 – 34
- Percent Male: 90%
In other words, Wizard’s readership looks a whole lot like the people you would expect to see in your local comic book shop on a Wednesday afternoon. Imagine that. If Wizard magazine was truly targeted at teenage boys, the people at Wizard are significantly missing the mark.
It’s comic-book culture for people smart enough to know better
Dirk from Journalista makes mention of my favorite podcast, The Comic Book Haters. What makes today’s mention even better is that I have a segment on this week’s episode. I submitted an audio report of my recent experiences at the 2007 Pittsburgh Comicon:
“If you ever get a chance to walk behind Chewbacca, don’t pass it up.” This is one of the stranger things said in this week’s Comic Book Haters podcast (20.9MB downloadable MP3 audiofile), which features even more Free Comic Book Day anecdotes, a report on the recent Pittsburgh Comicon, and a takedown of the first issue of John Byrne’s Man of Steel miniseries from the mid-1980s. It’s comic-book culture for people smart enough to know better.
If you are a regular reader of this blog, you know I’m no stranger to saying (or writing) strange things.
I think Dirk does a nice job summing up the feel of the show. He seems to get the show when others don’t. Too many comic book nerds take one look at the title of the podcast and dismiss the show as being something it is not. That’s a shame. The show is really good. It’s entertaining and not pretentious or ostentatious.
If you have ever spent time reading the comment section of this blog, you are already familiar with the two hosts, DJ Sloofus and Schooly G. They frequently weigh in here on the stupid stuff I write about.
Give the show a try. Even if you’re not into comic books. An interest in comic books is not required. Only a sense of humor.
Thomas Jane backs out of Punisher 2
The actor that will always be Mickey Mantle to me has backed out of the sequel to ‘Punisher’. He says that he isn’t happy with the way the movie seemed to be going. He writes to Ain’t it Cool News that he doesn’t want to spend months of his life sweating over a movie that he just don’t believe in. I cannot say that I blame him. Most actors would be more then willing to sign up for a movie even if they knew it was a turd – if it meant yet another paycheck.
And yes, I am referring to Ben Affleck.
What interested me the most about this story was something I read on Comic Book Resources:
The property has had a checkered history on screen, with 1989 version starring Dolph Lundgren has never been a critical nor fan favorite, and Jane’s film being compared negatively to the much more brutal Denzel Washington revenge film “Man On Fire,” which was in theatres at almost the same time. Jane’s departure is likely to send this film back into development hell, from whence it may never return.
I thought I was the only one to make comparisons between ‘Punisher’ and ‘Man On Fire’. Both came out around the same time, but I don’t remember reading or hearing anyone else comparing the two flicks to one another. Though ‘Punisher’ has some very good parts, ‘Man On Fire’ just did a much better job telling a very similar story. ‘Man On Fire’ didn’t have any real kooky parts, while ‘Punisher’ had more then it’s fair share. It could have used a lot less John Travolta. As in none at all.
I thought Thomas Jane made a convincing Frank Castle. Too bad he won’t be in any sequels.
Opie & Anthony suspended from XM Radio for 30 days
This is the kind of thing that makes me glad I have an iPod. XM Satellite Radio has pulled the plug on Opie and Anthony (O&A) for 30 days. This stems from crude sexual jokes about Condoleeza Rice, Laura Bush, and Queen Elizabeth made by a homeless man on their show.
I read the press release on the XM Radio website. It sounds as though they suspended them not for the crude comments made last week, but because O&A didn’t seem overly contrite yesterday while talking about the incident.
Comments made by Opie and Anthony on yesterday’s broadcast put into question whether they appreciate the seriousness of the matter. The management of XM Radio decided to suspend Opie and Anthony to make clear that our on-air talent must take seriously the responsibility that creative freedom requires of them.
This seems extremely petty on XM’s Radio’s part. If they were going to suspend them, they should have done so after they made the comments. Then again, they were NOT the ones that actually made the comments. Now it seems they are being suspended for not sucking up to XM Radio management.
XM Radio may want to punish Opie and Anthony, but I feel like I’m the one that’s being punished. I will still be required to pay the monthly $12.99 subscription fee. I just wont get to listen to content I usually enjoy listening to. I guess I could cancel for the month, but they would then turn around and charge me a $10 connection fee to reestablish my account next month. That’s assuming O&A ever return to XM Radio.
XM Radio wins no matter what I do.
I’m not going to pretend that the comments weren’t extremely rude, crude, and in bad taste. The thing is, that’s what Opie and Anthony do. It’s what their show is all about. It’s a funny show that is often times extremely raw in nature. You never really know what you are going to hear. Because the show is on satellite, Opie and Anthony are free from FCC restrictions on content.
This makes me wonder why XM Radio didn’t have a problem with any of the other things they have done the past three years. Was everyone else fair game, but Condoleeza Rice, Laura Bush, and Queen Elizabeth off-limits? If I didn’t know any better, I would think this had something to do with the possible XM/Sirius merger. The one that would require the Federal government to step in and change the law to allow both satellite radio companies to merge.
Don’t say Mark Waid’s funnybook is “fun”
The Internets are a blazing over something comic book writer Mark Waid said in an interview posted on Comic Book Resources. He was talking about how sales for BRAVE AND THE BOLD dropped between issue #1 and issue #2. In fact, they dropped about 30%.
He blamed this drop in sales on people not wanting to read it after reviewers used the word “fun” to describe the book.
Seriously, that’s what he said:
“Fun, fun, fun” being our rap makes me worried. Sales were strong on the first issue, but the second issue drop-off was a little steeper than we’d predicted. And I honestly think that was because every reviewer said it was “fun.”
“Fun” automatically kills off a lot of your sales. Don’t get me wrong; the book’s still a success in the current market, and no one at DC has expressed anything but enthusiasm. We certainly seem to have a hit on our hands, George and I. I just hope that the “fun” label doesn’t hit us too hard. If so, it’s just another sign that current readers don’t want “fun” comics.
I have a hard time believing that sales dropped simply because reviewers used the word “fun” to describe the book.
Issue #2 of BRAVE AND THE BOLD came out March 22, but retailers had to decide back in December of 2006 how many copies they wanted sent to them by the distributer. Retailers typically order books three months ahead of time. That means they placed their orders for issue #2 a couple of months before reviewers ever referred to the book as being fun.
What then caused the drop? Maybe it’s because DC Comics employed a sales gimmick to increase orders for the first issue. The first issue of BRAVE AND THE BOLD had a 1:10 variant cover. For every ten copies retailers ordered of issue one, they were shipped one variant cover version. The second issue did not have a variant cover. There was no incentive for retailers to over-order the second issue.
Most retailers will bump up orders for comics that have a variant cover to they can turn around and charge customers more money for the variant cover comic. The higher the ratio between regular covers to variant covers, the higher the retailer mark up.
Since the second issue of BRAVE AND THE BOLD didn’t utilize any type of variant cover gimmick, retailers only ordered what they actually needed.
Imagine that.
Alan Moore and Melinda Gebbie get married
Comic book writer Alan Moore and long time significant other comic artist Melinda Gebbie were married this past weekend. Not only did fellow comic writer Neil Gaiman introduce these two, he took this picture.
I hereby declare this to be the coolest wedding photo ever.
Chasing the all mighty comic book smut dollar
I don’t understand why Marvel Comics would give the go ahead for something like this. Is this really how they want one of their main properties to be displayed? All sexed up? I was under the impression that they kind of liked Spider-Man and valued the entire Spider-Man property. If that’s true, why resort to making Spider-Man’s wife a bare foot, thong wearing laundry tub slut?
I’m no prude. I’m also not one to get offended. I just think this is stupid and even a little hypocritical. My favorite monthly Marvel comic Alias was supposedly canceled because writer Brian Michael Bendis was not allowed to use top-line Marvel characters such as Spider-Man. Alias dealt with stories more of an adult nature in content.
Just because there are statue companies out there that make sexed up weirdo friendly Japanese anime figurines, doesn’t mean Marvel Comics needs to do it too. They should let other companies, companies not called Marvel Comics corner the creepy pervert adult figurine market.
Marvel Comics should be above this.
Ok, I’m back. After typing the above sentence I broke out in uncontrollable laughter which resulted in me falling down, hitting my head, and blacking out.
I feel much better now. What was I blogging about? Oh yes, the pervert Mary Jane statue. I’ve been reading that people have been letting both Marvel Comics and Sideshow Collectibles (the company that is making the perv statue) know what they think about this statue. People have been leaving comments on both Marvel Comics and Sideshow Collectibles websites detailing their displeasure with this statue. Both Marvel Comics and Sideshow Collectibles have been responding by deleting these comments. They have allowed all the other comments to remains. The comments left by pervy men wanting to buy this statue.
What’s Marvel Comics trying to do, attract even more weirdos to the medium of comic books?
Ragnell over at Written World blogged about someone leaving a comment on Marvel Comics Editor-In-Chief Joe Quesada’s blog asking him if he’d please write about the approval process for this figurine. Regnell writes that two hours later, the person’s comment had been deleted.
Talk about dealing with a problem head on.
I think this statue is disrespectful. Not only to women in general, but to one of their own intellectual properties. So what will Marvel Comics do next, approve the making of a collectible statue showing Spider-Man putting on a condom?
Check out this guy’s blog
There is a fellow Hagerstown blogger that has a phenomenal blog worth checking out. It’s called Steve Likes to Curse and it’s quickly become one of my most favorite daily reads. Yesterday Steve wrote about visiting the County Museum of Fine Arts conveniently located smack dab in our city park. The following is an example of why I love reading his blog:
Ashley and I went to the Washington County Museum of Fine Arts at City Park today. The school art exhibit was up, with drawings and photos and sculptures from students in elementary school through high school all over the county. Some of it impressed me. A few girls from Boonsboro High are eerily talented; they might have futures as great artists or airbrushers of motorcycles.
Airbrushers of motorcycles? I almost shot coffee out my nose when I read that. Normally you have to pay money to read something that funny.
Brian Bolland and his Chicago real estate lawyer
This morning I found yet another email from comic book artist Brian Bolland concerning the whole issue surrounding my blog post over two months ago about a sketch he did at the 2007 New York City Comicon. The email basically contradicts everything he has said about this matter up until now. He is now saying that the before mentioned Chicago real estate lawyer is his lawyer – even though he said prior that he was not.
This is what he originally told me about the lawyer:
The guy you refer to is A lawyer (apparently a Chicago lawyer) but he is not MY lawyer. I’m not employing anyone. He’s a friend and a comic fan.
That seemed pretty clear to me. The Chicago real estate lawyer who represented himself as Mr. Bolland’s lawyer not only to me but to my hosting provider was in fact not his lawyer. Mr. Bolland even made the word “my” in uppercase letters. I took that to mean he was super serious about it.
Evidently not.
In his most recent email to me, he now sings a very different tune. He says this:
Mr. Caira was duly authorized to represent me in this matter. Although he is not my regular attorney, in this case and for this specific circumstance, he was acting as my representative.
Brian Bolland
4 May 2007
That just reeks of lawyer speak. As though a Chicago real estate lawyer wrote those words and told Bolland to send them. He also went on to state IN CAPITAL LETTERS that he wanted the entire letter posted anywhere on my blog where I wrote about this whole mess. That’s something I’m just not willing to do. Much of the letter contains facts that I know to be false and untrue.
I don’t put stuff on my blog that I know isn’t true.
My patience has run out.
The truth is I wrote a negative comment about a piece of art that Brian Bolland was paid $150 to do. The man is a professional artist. He ought to be willing to accept just a little bit of negative criticism every once in a while. He certainly seems more then willing to receive praise and admiration. If an artist is willing to be praised, he ought to be willing to be criticized as well. Especially if he deserves it. Otherwise said artist comes off looking like a thin skinned primadonna. He himself said that the art “was a pretty meagre drawing for the money“. He also admitted that he “shafted” the guy that commissioned the art. I’m then supposed to believe that I went too far when I wrote that he “ripped off” that same buyer? Not hardly.
I’m tired of getting lied to. Chicago real estate lawyer first told me that he was just a friend of Bolland’s and that Bollard didn’t ask him to do anything. He stated that he was not acting on Bolland’s direction. When I refused to post links to eight (8) images of better looking sketches Bolland did at the same 2007 New York City Comicon, he changed his story and claimed to be Bolland’s lawyer. He then sent me the secret confidential Cease and Desist letter that I supposedly cannot show anyone. He also sent an email to my hosting provider and demanded that my site be taken down.
Chicago real estate lawyer emailed my hosting provider and said:
It is critical that this site and the offending content be removed before my client is damaged and my privacy rights are violated any further.
The “privacy rights” he speaks of refers to things like his name, law office telephone number, and his law office fax machine number. Chicago real estate lawyer also went on to say:
Being that this is content in violation of the law I am notifying you of this situation before it moves to formal litigation in order to give you an opportunity to shut the site down before further damage is done to the name and reputation of Mr. Bolland by these scurrilous accusations.
Scurrilous accusations? They like to contend that by stating that Mr. Bolland “ripped off” the fan by drawing the “meagre” looking (his own description) sketch, people would immediately jump to the conclusion that Brian Bolland is some kind of wanted criminal. Give me a break. They were merely looking for any kind of excuse to silence negative criticism.
He threatened to sue my hosting provider unless my website was shutdown. Chicago real estate lawyer claims to have never said this. I think he was under the impression that my hosting provider wasn’t going to share the email with me. If that’s the case, he was wrong.
So what does this all mean? Well, it means that if Chicago real estate lawyer was indeed representing Bolland in these matters, Bolland cannot make the claim that he did not try to get my website shut down. I was more then willing to give him the benefit of the doubt when he told me that Chicago real estate lawyer was not his lawyer and that he didn’t ask him to do any of this.
Why would Bolland change his position on this? Most likely to protect Chicago real estate lawyer. Evidently Chicago real estate lawyer shows up at any comic book con in the United States that Bolland makes an appearance. He helps him by running the lines and managing the sketch list. Gets him food to eat and beverages to drink. That type of stuff. Yesterday a couple of people in the comment section of my blog brought up the idea that Chicago real estate lawyer could be in trouble with the Illinois State Bar for claiming to represent a client when in fact he didn’t. I’m fairly certain Chicago real estate lawyer read those comments. Not that I planned on perusing any type of complaint against Chicago real estate lawyer with the Illinois State Bar. That’s not my style. My brain is not hardwired that way.
Free Comic Book Day
Today is Free Comic Book Day. It’s the one day a year people can walk into their local comic book shop and without so much as even saying, “Trick or Treat” or “Put your mother F’n hands up” get something for free. That something being comic books. Specific books produced by publishers to be given away for free on this very special day.
A lot of people aren’t aware of the fact that these comics aren’t as free as one might think. Local comic book shops still pay for them. Just not as much as they do for other comic books. Which is really too bad.
Some retailers put a limit on how many books you can take. Something that makes a whole lot more sense if you are aware that retailers have to pay for the books. It does tend to kill the whole concept of the idea behind Free Comic Book Day. If you can only take two (2) comics, you may miss out on picking up a book you might otherwise never try. Maybe a book from one of the small independent publishers that are in dire need of getting more exposure of their stuff. If a person is limited to only two books and immediately grabs a Spider-Man book and a Superman book, they wont be able to try something different and new.
So stop in at your local comic book shop today and pick something up.
Brian Bolland, the blogosphere, and real estate lawyers that go too far
The last couple of days I’ve had my hands full dealing with a blog post I wrote over two months ago. It was about super-star comic book artist Brian Bolland and a sketch he did for someone at the 2007 New York Comicon. I found an image of the sketch posted online while looking for pictures from the con. I wasn’t looking for sketches. I was looking for images from the con. Pictures of overweight middle aged men dressed up like the Flash. If you have ever been to a con, you know exactly what I mean.
Google being the way it is, I pulled up an image of a sketch someone commissioned Brian Bolland to do at the 2007 New York Comicon. It was a Silver Age Batwoman and it wasn’t very good. When I say that it wasn’t very good, I mean to say that it wasn’t of the quality that Brian Bolland is famous for. The man is truly a fantastic artist.
I decided to blog about it. Why I chose to I’m not precisely sure. It was over two months ago. I think it was because the sketch didn’t look anything like what Brian Bolland is capable of doing. Not to say that he is known for doing Silver Age Batwoman drawings. Because the fan that commissioned the sketch paid $150 for it, I entitled the blog post, “Brian Bolland rips off one of his fans for $150 dollars”.
That turned out to be a huge mistake on my part.
I should have phrased it differently. It seems far too many people read the phrase “rips off” and argued that I was implying that Brian Bolland was some sort of criminal. Nothing could be further from the truth. I thought I was fairly clear with the context of the phrase “rips off”. Some still wanted to argue that I was calling Brian Bolland a thief.
I think some people took exception to the fact that I was criticizing Brian Bolland’s artwork and they were using my use of the phrase “rips off” as an excuse to criticize me. Which is fine. I can take criticism as long as it’s for something I actually did. Since I didn’t refer to Brian Bolland as a thief or a criminal, I didn’t appreciate being told that I did.
Enter the Chicago real estate lawyer. Because Brian Bolland is a mega star comic book artist, he has more then his fair share of rabid fans. One of those fans happens to be a real estate lawyer from Chicago. Evidently he took great exception to my criticism of Brian Bolland’s Batwoman sketch and decided to take swift action. Swift legal action.
He claimed to be Brian Bolland’s United States lawyer and accused me of both libel and slander. He sent me a Cease and Desist letter from his Chicago law firm’s email account demanding that I remove the post from my site along with any and all mention of Brian Bolland’s name. He claimed that as his attorney, he had the duty to “protect” Brian Bolland.
I can say with all certainy that this Chicago real estate lawyer made things exponentially worse. Far worse then things needed to be. If Brian Bolland was truly bothered by the title of my post, all he had to do was tell me and I would have changed it. Brian Bolland left two comments before the Chicago real estate lawyer got involved and he didn’t seem bothered with my usage of the phrase. If anything, he seemed more bothered by the actual quality of the sketch.
To be honest, the sketch really isn’t that bad. If I were able to draw something as good as the Batwoman sketch, I would be ecstatic. I would make copies and send them to all my friends. In the years following, I would constantly remind people of the time I drew the awesome Batwoman sketch. Hey, remember that time I drew that really cool looking Batwoman sketch? Yeah, that was awesome. It’s just that when it comes to the art of Brian Bolland, the bar is rather high. Higher then most comic book artists.
I’ve personally been assured by Brian Bolland that the Chicago real estate lawyer does not represent him. That the Chicago real estate lawyer is not his lawyer. That he did not authorize him to send me a Cease and Desist letter. That he did not authorize him to take steps to take down my website.
As stated earlier, it was a mistake on my part to use the phrase “rips off”. I’m sorry I did it.
Brian Bolland threatens legal action
This morning I found an email in my inbox from an attorney claiming to represent comic book artist Brain Bolland. The return email address along with his signature shows that he is from the Chicago law firm Klafter & Burke. Their website shows that they specialize in real estate and taxes. Evidently they are expanding their legal scope into the lucrative world of comic book law.
Yesterday this same person attempted to post two comments to my blog. He didn’t identify himself yesterday as a lawyer representing Brian Bolland. In fact, he claimed the complete opposite. He claimed to not speak for Brian Bolland.
His comments were automatically held for moderation because WordPress misidentified them as spam. He attempted to post numerous links within his comments. I have WordPress configured to identify any comment with two or more links to be spam.
This all stems from a post I made on my blog almost two months ago concerning a commissioned sketch Brian Bolland did for a fan at the 2007 New York Comicon. I found the image of the sketch while looking for photos from the convention. The fan (also named Brian) wrote that he paid $150 for it. The sketch measured approximately 3 by 4 inches.
I believed that Brian Bolland overcharged the fan for the sketch. In fact, I wrote that he “ripped off” the fan.
Evidently Brain Bolland Googled himself last week and found my post. He twice responded to what I wrote. His comments seemed good natured and not the least bit snarky. It seemed that he was admitting that he overcharged the fan for the commission. He wrote, “I feel particularly upset that I’ve shafted a fellow Brian.”
How can he admit that he “shafted” the fan, but then have his lawyer send a threatening email to me demanding that I remove my post? Isn’t shafting someone worse then ripping them off? I’m no wordsmith, but it certainly seems so to me. Maybe it’s just me, but the expression shafted seems to have a pseudo-sexual connotation to it that the phrase “ripped off” just doesn’t have.
If Brian Bolland wanted me to remove my post, why didn’t he just ask me himself? Why engage the services of a lawyer? The truth is that if he had simply asked me nicely to remove the post when he first discovered it, I probably would have done so. I had no malice or ill will towards him.
All that changed though when he decided to threaten me with legal action. I don’t particularly like being threatened. Then again, who does? Not that I have any malice for him now.
I now don’t particularly feel like removing the post.
Update: My hosting provider asked me to remove the the Cease and Desist letter sent to me by Brian Bolland’s lawyer, Christopher M. Caira of the Klafter & Burke law firm. Caira threatened legal action against my hosting provider unless the C&D letter was removed. Caira claimed that the letter disclosed private information including personal contact information. Oddly enough, it’s the very same “personal contact information” published on the Klafter & Burke website. I thought it was important to include the C&D letter to show what steps Brian Bolland and his lawyer were taking to silence critical speech.
Update to the update: I have removed references to Brian Bolland “ripping off” anyone. Though I only meant the expression to mean that in my opinion Brian Bolland delivered “a product or service that is overpriced or of poor quality (American Heritage Dictionary), too many people insist on telling me that I meant Brian Bolland was a criminal. I assure you that I did not. I am also fairly certain that the individual that repeatedly represented himself as Brian Bolland’s lawyer was not his lawyer, but simply a huge fan. He is a lawyer. He is just not Brian Bolland’s lawyer. Even though he identified himself as such not only to me, but to my hosting provider. It is my honest belief that this person who claimed to be Brian Bolland’s lawyer made things expotentially worse. Far worse then they needed to be.
-
Recent Comments
-
Rick: Hayami: Ryan, so far I’ve seen no evidence that Handley was sexually attracted to real children. Then you haven't been doing e...
-
Hayami: Ryan, so far I've seen no evidence that Handley was sexually attracted to real children. There're quite a few otaku who are more attracted to anime characters than to real people. There're quite a few erotic anime/manga/games fans who are attr...
-
siriunsun: Well, Rick.........you know how it is: John McSame just LOOKS the same as lots of people who were born in the United States. And his name is a lot more in line with certain stereotypes that make lots of sheep in this country feel happy and com...
-
Ryan: Matt Damon? Matt Damon!...
-
-
-
Books I Am Reading
-
Music I Am Listening To
-
- Kucinich caves on health care reform. Will now vote for the non-public option health care reform bill. http://bit.ly/9t4gNI
- Peter Graves has died - http://bit.ly/blfTde #cnn
- Courage? Really? http://is.gd/axTwj
Follow me @rickrottman