The threat of the undecideds

If you’ve been keeping up with this year’s midterm election buzz, you might have heard about Prop 19. That’s the ballot proposition that would legalize marijuana in the state of California. (I use the term “legalize” liberally; click here for full information on Prop 19.)

Since it made it onto the ballot, public opinion surrounding Prop 19 has been for the most part positive. In polls conducted as early as April of this year, those in favor of Proposition 19 have maintained a lead over those opposing it, although this margin has narrowed in recent months. Meanwhile, the number of voters as yet undecided about the proposition seems to be on the rise.

Now, I’m rather liberal and intend to vote yes on this proposition come November 2 – rather, whenever my absentee ballot arrives in the mail. Either outcome, yes or no, won’t have any substantial impact on my life. I don’t smoke marijuana and don’t plan to should it become “legal.” However, I do see the economic benefits that can come about as a result of legalizing a substance so many people use illegally already. Why shouldn’t the government make some money off of it? And, if alcohol is legal, why not pot?

But what strikes me as odd is how many voters are still undecided. Until recently, I was certain young, similarly minded Californians would venture out to the polls this November in drones to unequivocally vote Yes on Prop 19, even if they weren’t potheads or recreational marijuana users; and that older Californians – i.e., the baby boomers – and those on the other side of the political spectrum – namely, moderates and conservatives – would be the ones opposing or not knowing how to vote on this measure.

However, I’m no longer convinced this is true. Case in point: my co-worker. For the last couple of months, I have been doing some part-time work at a winery in the Central Valley, which has been somewhat educational and a lot of fun. Plus I get free wine!

Keep in mind the Central Valley has traditionally been red territory (although this has changed in recent years) and is still relatively conservative. Also bear in mind the Central Valley has played host to numerous meth labs over the years and contributed to California’s overall disreputation as a major source of methamphetamine in the United States,[1] but that’s beside the point.

No, my point is as follows: my co-worker, a 22-year-old, relatively poor white kid (and a ginger!) who smokes pot, was, until this past weekend, undecided about Prop 19. I was, to say the least, dumbfounded to learn this fact.

Then it struck me. This is what’s wrong with the average American voter – the undecideds and independents, a category I was so sick of continually being lumped into by the media (and the Republicans) that I reregistered as a Democrat (“Socialist” would probably not be the best option given my career aspirations)! People who can’t make up their minds even when they take part in the illegal activities they’ll soon be voting to legalize or not.

My co-worker, it seems, was having a hard time making up his mind over whether or not to approve this measure due to the claims being made by either side. He was particularly perplexed by the following assertions:

• The way Proposition 19 is written, it “will prevent bus and trucking companies from requiring their drivers to be drug-free. Companies won’t be able to take action against a ‘stoned’ driver until after he or she has a wreck, not before.”
• Enactment of Proposition 19 will endanger school children because “A school bus driver would be forbidden to smoke marijuana on schools grounds or while actually behind the wheel, but could arrive for work with marijuana in his or her system.”

Despite not being totally familiar with the text of the proposed law, this didn’t seem right to me. First of all, these claims just sounded stupid. Secondly, common logic follows that if you go to work fucked up – ok, “under the influence” – there will be consequences. Just like with alcohol.

That’s when I gave him the best advice I ever received. When I was working on my Georgia (the country, not the state) project last year, I used second-hand information to diagnose and propose solutions to an “institutional problem” afflicting the country, rather than look at the Georgian constitution itself.

It turns out that information was completely wrong, and, as such, my analysis of the problem was pretty messed up too. Then my professor told me I should have looked at the original documents and not some second-hand analysis.

And that’s exactly what I told my co-worker to do: look at the original text of the proposed law. In regards to his concern over bus and/or truck drivers showing up to work “stoned,” the initiative would actually prohibit:

• Consumption in public or in a public place;
• Consumption by the operator of any vehicle, boat or aircraft while it is being operated, or that impairs the operator;
• Smoking cannabis in any space while minors are present.[2]

a fact he seemed to completely overlook. I don’t know about you, but this sounds pretty open and shut to me.

Also, take into account alcohol. I can buy an unrestricted amount of alcoholic beverages under the current law, but would be limited to purchasing just one ounce of marijuana at a time should Prop 19 pass. You still don’t think marijuana will be more heavily regulated than other vices??

So what’s the moral of this story? Be an educated voter and don’t believe everything you hear/read. If you want the facts, go directly to the source! Oh yeah, and use common sense!

---

[1] http://feinstein.senate.gov/releases01/meth%20summit%20statement.htm

[2] http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Text_of_Proposition_19,_the_%22Regulate,_Control_and_Tax_Cannabis_Act_of_2010%22_(California)#Section_11300:_Personal_Regulation_and_Controls

Political hashtags aka Twittering for politics

Wanting to getting involved in the political process this midterm election but confused as to how, I decided to take to Twitter to launch a political campaign of sorts. Not for myself, of course; more as a means to show support for the political hopefuls (and incumbents) I want to see in office and to spread what I consider important (OK, and hilarious!) information about key races.

My Twitter has hitherto been largely inactive, mostly because I didn’t know what the hell I was supposed to do with it. Most of my friends aren’t on the network, and, at the time I created my account, I wasn’t interested in amassing a large following (like all those trannies who follow me on flickr for some reason).

In fact, prior to starting this project, I only knew of Twitter as a conduit for everyday folks to learn of the inane activities of their favorite celebrities. Sure, I was the same way at first, but I could no longer stomach the constant updating of @lindsaylohan — hmm, guess she won’t be any updating for a bit — or @sn00ki; although I do enjoy the occasional tweet from @chelseahandler and @michaelianblack.

Now, however, I feel like I have a reason to actually use my Twitter account. If only in this fleeting, politically crazy moment. I had been upset about how many incumbent and establishment candidates were knocked out of their respective races by the fringe Tea Party-endorsed hacks in the primaries but now take some solace in the fact that I can vent that frustration using social media. And that people will see it. That’s right, my social media prowess has been awakened by my political fervor. And so can yours!

Sure, I realize I won’t have a major impact on or be the deciding factor in any race in particular. But, unlike Facebook, Twitter is, from what I can tell, mostly wide open and a much more effective way of spreading awareness and information, or, at the very least, passing, witty thoughts. I’ve also gained a number of new followers (people I didn’t have to beg to follow me!), so, it might seem, my plan is working…

I also learned you have to use hashtags! And here is the reason for this post: I’ve been compiling a list of political hashtags for you to use in your politics-oriented tweets, so they have a better chance of being seen in the Twitter-verse. And so you can find more like-minded people like yourselves.

Hashtags are just that: tags. A way for Twitter to categorize the constant stream of crap being published to the site. Click on a hashtag and you’ll be taken to a search page where everyone who’s posted using that particular hashtag appears. Some are frequently used and so your post will quickly be pushed to the bottom of the page. Others are very frequently used so there’s little chance your post will be seen in the midst of all the rest of the tweets on the page. But don’t despair.

Try to use hashtags strategically, though not necessarily sparingly. Meaning don’t tag every post with the same five or six keywords. Be creative. Try to mix up which hashtags you use. Embed them into your posts; don’t just lump ‘em all at the end. Otherwise Twitter will stop publishing you in its live feed for a while (I know this firsthand).

Don’t know which keywords will count as hashtags? Do a simple search before posting (be sure to include the # symbol!) and see if it gets any hits. If it looks like a fairly popular trend, go for it! If there are zero or few hits, try something different.

There are also tools that can help you learn which hashtags trend better (in other words, are more popular) than others, such as hashtags.org, and others that tell you the meaning behind certain hashtags, like #tagdef. Just play around with Twitter for a bit and you’ll eventually get the hang of it!

And so, for your enjoyment, here is my list of political hashtags:

Note: hashtags are not case sensitive so feel free to capitalize letters if you see fit; however, DO NOT include spaces in your hashtags.

Politics in General:

• #gov – Refers to the government in general.
• #politics – Use when referring to politics in general.
• #president – Refers to the President of the United States.
• #whyimvotingdemocrat – The reasons you’re voting for the Democratic party.
• #whyivote – Why you’re passionate about voting this election season.

Political Parties:

• #dems/#dem – Democratic Party. Use to advocate for or show disapproval of the party.
• #gop – Republican Party. Use when either showing support for or criticizing the GOP.
• #votedem – Include in posts in which you want to encourage others to ‘vote Democrat.’ Don’t know of the GOP equivalent (try ‘#vote #gop’).

Political Ideologies:

• #p2 – Progressives/Progressives on Twitter. Use when either supporting or disparaging this group (same follows for those below).
• #socialism/#socialist – For referring to socialism and/or socialists.
• #tcot – Stands for ‘Top Conservatives on Twitter.’ This one is particularly popular, with updates coming every few seconds.
• #teaparty – You got it, the Tea Party movement.
• #tlot – ‘Top Libertarians on Twitter.’
• #topprog – ‘Top Progressives on Twitter.’

Races by State:

• #(state)gov – Use in posts referring to a state’s governor’s race. For example, #cagov (California governor’s race).
• #(state)sen – Similarly, use when referring to a particular state’s senate race: i.e., #casen, #aksen, #desen (California, Alaska, and Delaware senate races, respectively).

Issues:

• #dadt – The ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy (prevents homosexuals from serving openly in the U.S. military).
• #economy/#finance/#taxcuts – In reference to the economy and/or tax cuts (i.e., the ‘Bush Tax Cuts’ issue currently taking precedence in the media and on the political front).
• #hcr – Refers to health care reform (i.e., The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act aka Obamacare, etc.).

And Just for Fun:

• #teapartymovietitles – This was trending like wildfire yesterday!! Take a well-known movie title and alter it to make fun of the Tea Party movement. Some of my favorites included ‘Baracknaphobia,’ ‘Love Actually Only Exists Between a Man & Woman,’ and ‘The 41 Year Old Virgin’ (re: Christine O’Donnell)!! Started by @michaelianblack, I believe.

Also, find me at @MatthewBachmann!

The cat whisperer

I recently took a trip out to Amador County to visit a friend (who was up visiting from San Diego, if that isn’t too confusing for all of you). And there were animals aplenty to take photos of! While there, we visited my friend’s sister’s ranch to feed the feral cats (aka the country kittehs!) and pick some of the (over-) ripening fruit.

This peach tree was so heavy with ripe fruit one of its branches broke off!

These are possibly Zinfandel or Muscat grapes. And ready for the winery!!

We then visited a few of the local wineries in Amador, starting with Sobon Estates. There, we were greeted by the winery cat. He was very friendly.

And showed little regard for the rules.

Then there were all my friend’s family’s pets. This guy was named Bug. Notice the little piece missing in the corner of his ear. You can tell he’s an outside cat. He also accompanied us while we walked the dogs around the neighborhood.

Bug and a kitty friend whose name I didn’t get.

There were also the dogs Bear (Who’s quite the guard dog until he realizes you’re a friend, then he doesn’t care one bit. I arrived at my friend’s place while they were out and he barked for about 15 minutes straight. Then when they got back, he stopped being aggressive toward me!) and his lady friend (in the background), Grizz.

Before dinner, we went to my friend’s aunt’s home where there were even more animals! First, the bird that could mimic virtually any noise! And swear!

And more country kittehs!!

Oh yeah, and deer! We’re talkin’ the country here, folks!!

All in all a good trip. Also, with cats popping up left and right from out of nowhere, I learned I’m quite the cat whisperer, something that will no doubt aid me in my glamour pet-ography endeavors!

See more glaminals at my site, My Glamour Pet!!

Dispelling the Ebonics myth

I like MSNBC. I really do. In fact, I spend most of my afternoons these days (being unemployed and all) streaming MSNBC live from the Internet. While I tend to see eye to eye and be on par ideologically with most of the network’s commentators, I’m not one of those types who rely solely on one news source to get their current events. Rather, having worked in the media myself, I understand fully the pitfalls media companies can so easily succumb to, namely bad fact checking. Today was one of those days on MSNBC.

It all started innocently enough. Dylan Ratigan was going on about how the DEA put out a job post for an “Ebonics Translator.” Sure, it’s kind of funny. Why should a government agency need an Ebonics translator? I mean, Ebonics isn’t a real language, is it?

Then everyone had a good laugh as Dylan tested one of his (Black) guests’ Ebonics translation skills (the Washington Post’s Jonathan Capehart, whom I enjoy watching very much as a contributor on MSNBC, and who’s a good sport, I must add). Watch video of the incident here.

So, I guess it’s not all that offensive. The idea of Ebonics as a language has been the butt of many a joke since the late 90s. And it probably made for some good TV. But to someone whose background is in linguistics, it actually is kind of offensive.

See, ever since the Oakland School Board attempted to institute “Ebonics,” as it came to be known to most Americans, as a learning tool in 1996, it has repeatedly been misrepresented in the media, which I (although quite young at the time) attribute the proposed program’s eventual downfall and near complete ridicule of across the country to. And today on Dylan Ratigan, it was no different.

However, to linguists, and this former linguistics student, the concept of Ebonics is very real. While not recognized as a “language,” Ebonics, or as it is more commonly referred to within the linguistic community, African American Vernacular English (AAVE), is accepted as a dialect of American English.

That is, AAVE exhibits a number of characteristics shown to be present in other, established, languages, including (as I steal a little from Wikipedia) its own phonological features as well as verb tenses that appear to be used consistently across speakers and follow a certain pattern.

I suppose what I take most offense to is Dylan’s, and many other Americans’, assessment of AAVE, or Ebonics or whatever you want to call it, as simply “slang.” And not only slang, but slang that is “constantly changing.” Hello, asshole, all languages are constantly changing in one way or another!

To refer to something as just slang diminishes its value in a society and makes its speakers feel inferior. While I’m not advocating for labeling people like K-Fed bilingual, I am calling for those whose duty it is to report the facts to actually do a bit of research and perhaps learn a little about the things they’re supposed to be informing us about. Seriously, I just went to Wikipedia to refresh my memory on the topic.

The whole “language vs. dialect” debate is controversial depending on where you live, and even after earning my bachelor’s degree in linguistics, I’m not sure I entirely understand it. But what I do understand is the speakers of a “dialect” will be made to feel lesser because their language/tongue/speech does not meet the standard (or, in some cases, is not even the same language and, as such, is regarded as inferior).

I feel like this is the same struggle we’re having with the Spanish language in this country. Why is it that I, someone who studied Spanish throughout high school and yet doesn’t speak a lick of the language (anymore), don’t feel the need to relearn that which I’ve lost since those days, even though it would benefit me immensely in my professional career and beyond? Why do I watch Spanish films and wish I could speak the language in that manner (Barthelona, not Barselona)? Why the hell do I want to learn German and Czech? Those places are thousands of miles away!!

Probably because, in this country at least, Spanish is associated with immigration and low-paying jobs and menial labor. I hate myself for feeling that way, but I still fall victim to the stigma. So how do we make it better? Stop perpetuating myths that one language is superior to another. And maybe do just a little bit of sleuthing to figure out what the root of an issue is.

Grammar ranting

A recent spat (of sorts) between a colleague (of sorts) and myself got me to thinking about grammar and language usage, taking me back to my roots in linguistics and the whole “prescription vs. description” debate.

Take any linguistics course (or decide to major in the subject as I did) and the first thing you’re taught is linguists are descriptivists, meaning they see changes in language occur, acknowledge such changes, and make no judgment regarding their usage in the greater population. Some examples I’ve noticed myself that are becoming increasingly prevalent include saying “there is/there’s” instead of “there are” (i.e., “There’s two dogs in the park”), and using “a” in place of “an,” even when a noun that starts with a vowel follows.

On the other hand, we have prescriptivists. Grammarians. Those who wish to preserve the formal rules of a language, and who will tell you (in other words, prescribe) how to do so as well. These are the guys who insist that it’s incorrect to end a sentence with a preposition (words like at, to, on, etc.). And that splitting your infinitives is just plain wrong (it’s “To go boldly” not “To boldly go!!,” to use the famous Star Trek example). This site goes over some more (alleged) non-errors in the English language.

Disregard that rules such as these were borrowed from Latin (although I’m not entirely familiar with the history, I’m pretty sure it has something to do with the church), which makes sense, since in Latin (and its daughter languages French, Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, and so on), you CAN’T split infinitives OR finish a sentence with a preposition. My only counterexample comes from French, when I’ve ordered food at a restaurant: Quelque chose à boire avec? (avec being the preposition with), which roughly translates to “Do you want something to drink (to go along with your food)?” However, note that this is not considered grammatical, and may just be a truncation of a once longer sentence or expression.

While, in some cases, these prescriptivists’ actions are admirable, they are also in vain. Just like life on this planet, language evolves over time. Rules are forgotten, misused, and readopted into the language as such (like saying “There’s two cats,” or “Who can you trust?” instead of “Whom can you trust?”). Words take on different meanings and new vocabulary is added to the lexicon daily.

The recent spat I alluded to earlier (or is it “to which I alluded earlier??”) resulted over me expressing my opinion on my colleague (of sorts)’s prescriptive notes on how to properly distinguish between pairs of words that are commonly misused today (i.e., since and because, between and among, and more than and over). I have to admit, these distinctions were all news to me; I don’t ever recall being taught these rules in school.

And therein lies the problem. I see it as largely a generational thing. The importance of correct language usage has diminished in recent generations and grammar isn’t being given the proper attention in school it necessitates (what isn’t these days?). Kids today no longer say “an” and write things like “should of” instead of “should have” (which really, really irks me, by the way).

As you can see, I do sympathize with his argument and prescriptivists’ overall cause. It’s important to hold ourselves to a certain standard when it comes to language and writing; however, to refer to anything that doesn’t fit the standard yet IS spoken or used by the population at large as inferior (or in my colleague [of sorts]’s words, “sloppy usage”) is where I disagree.

I mean, if something has gained widespread usage and acceptance and is being spoken (and/or written) by the majority of speakers of a language, hasn’t it then become the standard?

Re-renaissance

I’ve decided the blog is worth salvaging and I should continue to write. First up At some point in the future, my 10-year anniversary with Barbarella, my gateway drug into the B-Movie world that has since become a permanent fixture and driving force in my life.

Job hunting… and the City

Today, I come to you from a downtown café that looks and sounds more like a noisy, futuristic 1950s diner (uh, does that make any sense?). What diners were supposed to look like in the future, from the 50s perspective, I must mean. I was lured in under the pretense of “free wi-fi,” but, alas, I sit here drinking an overpriced coffee toujours disconnected, cut off from the world I know and love, surrounded by tourists, most of them foreign. If it were 5pm (or 4pm or even noon), I’d be having something much stiffer.

I’m wearing my grey (more silver, perhaps) H&M suit, the one where the jacket fits well but the pants hang too low, giving them the appearance of pyjamas (in my mind, at least). Oh, and look at that, I just wrote “pyjamas,” which Word insists is the wrong spelling, but I insist I’ve seen elsewhere before. Must be the French.

I’ve just had an “interview.” I use quotation marks because, while it was an interview, per se, it was only an interview with a temp agency. Mind you, this will only have been my second interview this month (not counting my three-ish phone interviews), and third-ish with temp agencies in the city. But I wasn’t about to take it for granted (hence, the suit). In fact, something about getting up at 6:30 in the morning and heading downtown screamed “Wear a suit!” to me. And so I did.

I wish I could say this has been my life for the last month. Getting up at 6:30am everyday and heading downtown for an interview. Or work. But it hasn’t. In the five weeks I’ve “officially” been in San Francisco, I haven’t managed a single in-person interview with a company, aside from a couple temp agencies.

Sure, I got a few phone interviews: the one where I blatantly lied about knowing how to use a certain type of campaigning software (it would have been easy enough to learn); the one where my “marketing strategy” consisted of using social networking (not so great for a geographically specific internet service providing company, apparently); and the one with a temp agency where I had to do all my skills assessment testing on my own.

While this might not sound like so much of a burden for any tech savvy individual, for this Mac user it was. For the greater part of one afternoon I was forced to seek out a PC (as Windows was the only OS that would support this particular testing software) with a full keyboard so I could take my 10-key and Word/Excel tests. This process involved spending an hour at a public library, trying to complete the tests in 15-minute intervals (the maximum time allowed on the public computers) and then heading to a cyber café, exasperated, where I paid $5 for 40 minutes, hardly enough time to finish my Excel test due to a slow connection and excessive loading times.

I am happy to report, however, that I type 83 words per minute, some 6,000 keys per hour, and possess intermediate skills in Word and Excel (despite having used the shit for the last two-point-five years in grad school; I blame the time limits). Still, what cost me $5 and two to three hours of my time should only have taken an hour, max, and zero dollars to complete.

And yet, despite my efforts, nothing has come of them. Though it’s not for lack trying. When I first arrived in the city, I was applying to any and everything on Craigslist, hoping to land even the most basic admin job. Not the best plan I soon learned. The only responses I got consisted of shady businessmen and wedding dress designers, all of whom seemed to be on trips overseas and spoke/wrote terrible English. Plus, I’m getting far more spam in my school mailbox than ever before.

I even tried applying to the large chain coffee shops and grocery stores, especially shameful career choices for someone with a master’s. Yet, to no avail. While I wouldn’t have minded working at one of these places for a bit, I must admit it would have killed me just a little inside to do so. Maybe I do have this disillusioned sense of entitlement like my brother says, but frankly I shouldn’t have to work in a shop. Not after all I’ve put myself through. That, and they wouldn’t hire me there, as I recently found out when I actually walked in to one of these places to ask about employment opportunities (they had just hired a few new people and I put in my application over a month ago).

At my current “roommate’s” (aka, the person on whose futon I’ve been crashing for the last month) insistence, I also trekked around the neighborhood looking for places to apply at. This, after her insistence that I take any job and abandon it at the first sign of something better, that I pay for the time I’ve spent with her (something I gladly agreed to and thought would get her off my back), and that I basically not spend any time at the apartment (obviously the former didn’t work). In fact, I did stop in a sketchy crawfish restaurant one day where the nice older Asian man skeptically looked on as I smiled and inquired about the “Help Wanted” sign (it was for kitchen help and I don’t think he meant cooking). He pleasantly took my information but, as I had expected he would, never got in contact with me. One recent trip around my neighborhood told me he later filled the position.

And now I find myself still jobless and basically homeless (since I “only paid for one month” at my friend’s place) in San Francisco. Thank god for a brother who won’t say “No” to me and another friend who’s not so uptight and going on vacation next week, even going as far as to let me stay at her place while she’s gone. That may, perhaps, extend my stay here a little longer.

Soon, however, I will find myself back home, doing what I should have been doing during the three months I was there just after grad school and right before moving out to the city: looking for a job!! Well, really looking for a job. Sure, I’d apply for things here and there, and actually landed a couple interviews, but I was far too passive about my job search and far too dependent on wine to get me motivated (FYI, cover letters and wine DON’T mix). I think it’ll be time for a new strategy once I get there.

By now the café has nearly cleared out and I’m surrounded by what appear to be locals. It’s hard to believe one cup of coffee can sustain a person for more than an hour (especially for this addict). And that I could survive this long without a Web connection (never did find an open network). I still have half my croissant, too. But I don’t think I’ll be finishing it, it wasn’t that good.

Ugh, is it noon yet? Where’s my drink?

Update: I now come to you from yet another café (-slash-bookstore). This time with wi-fi. Just so I can upload this shit. Still no drink though.

A trainwreck at Harlot

Some of the "discerning" decor at Harlot

SF hotspot Harlot describes itself as “appealing to the more discerning after-work and late night San Francisco crowd.” While this may be true on any weekend night, it failed to meet these requirements on all accounts last Thursday. Paired with radio station Alice, the club hosted its “Cosmos, Cupcakes, and Couture” party promoting the Sex and the City 2 movie at which all the randoms showed up in drones.

More reminiscent of a chaperoned high-school event, the clientele featured 80-year-old gentlemen, ajummas (aka, your Korean grandmother), as well as straight younger guys who had no business showing up to a Sex and the City themed party alone. Also present were the Carrie and Samantha wannabes (sorry, girls!) all vying for the free movie passes and a chance to take home a pair of Jimmy Choos or Manolo Blahniks.

The classiest drink I've ever had in a bar

So the word that popped into my head as I sipped on my champagne (thanks, K!) on my first trip to Harlot was trainwreck! How could a venue that prides itself on its “discerning” crowd attract such a motley crew that looked like it belonged less in “a perfect venue for that special night on the town” and more at a Craigslist personals meet-up? I figured since the place was called Harlot “harlot” would have been a prominent theme. Instead, what I got were leopard-print Hammer pants and a puffy purple coat. Sure, there was your attractive guy and girl here and there, but the place mostly looked as though BART had just come hurtling through.

Obviously the free stuff did its part, a little too well if you ask me, and brought in the crowds. But then I got to wondering HOW they all found out about this party-slash-giveaway. I heard about the event on Facebook, surely not your grandma’s news source of choice. “Well, then clearly the radio station must have played a role,” you might add.  One look at their Top 10 says otherwise (The Script, Lady Antebellum, Lady Gaga to name a few). I don’t know about you, but I know for a fact my grandparents aren’t listening to this stuff (plus, I seem to recall 60 Minutes’ Andy Rooney complaining about not knowing who today’s artists were as well).

That's right, avert your eyes, children!

And not only did the crowd resemble a derailed boxcar, the actual giveaway was a bit of a disaster. Sure, who am I to complain when I could win a free ticket to a movie I might not otherwise pay for or a pair of shoes I’d never wear (I could perhaps sell them on eBay!)? But eight tickets (and sometimes six or seven when someone couldn’t make it to the front of the club within five seconds) every 10 minutes? And only the grandpas winning movie tickets? I’ll tell you, my friends and I were so distraught we didn’t even wait for the grand prize drawing (the shoes, that is) and ended up two doors down drinking our sorrows away in $3 happy hour beers.

The club, I will admit, did deliver on a few of its promises. We did, in fact, get our cupcakes. And it did provide for an “ostentatious” and “unique social experience!”

Waiting for 7

Most days I’ll wait until 7 o’clock to come back home, even though it means barely leaving work a little more than 12 hours after leaving in the morning. “Why?” you might ask. It generally costs me $2.35 to ride the metro to my stop. Then I have to take a bus, which, without a transfer, costs another $1.35. Multiply that by two and those are my daily transportation expenditures. Unless, that is, you ride the metro after peak hours, which end at 7 pm. That way, I save a dollar (doesn’t sound like much, but BELIEVE ME, it is). Plus, with a rail-to-bus transfer, I only pay $0.35 to ride the bus home, saving me another dollar.

But it’s not all that bad. Most of the time my friend, Helen, waits with me. I’ll play around online at work (jazzing up my wiki-space or figuring out how close the monuments are to my work — walking distance, seriously) or wander around Chinatown/Penn Quarter. I’ve probably been to H&M three or four times already, but haven’t bought anything yet. I’m biding my time for something good.

Today, we got our transit benefits as well, which means I don’t have to worry about spending over $7 per day on transportation alone. I also got a SmarTrip card, which means I don’t have to worry about having correct change anymore. And it really is smart! For instance, if you ride the metro and have to transfer to the bus, like I do, instead of getting a paper transfer, all you do is swipe your card on the bus’s SmarTrip target, and it only deducts $0.35! Of course, you have to transfer within two hours. I’ll stop acting like a walking advertisement for SmarTrip now. Finally, DC is good for something besides screwing me over financially.

Oh zee French

Amidst accounting and finance learning, I somehow stumbled onto French popstress Yelle, whose techno/electro/80s stylings have monopolized my iTunes in recent days.

And Carla Bruni has managed to make a rentrée into my life. Not so much for her music, but for this:

A photo to be auctioned off. For all the fuss pundits have been making over this photo, they overlook the fact that she was a model, which means she’s bound to have taken plenty a nude photo, and she’s Italian, so she’s probably not so uptight (as Americans) about being nude.

I’ve also glimpsed Lou Doillon in this month’s French Playboy, whose photos would make most fashion magazines jealous.

Très belle. Very Birkinesque, which is appropriate, I suppose, as Jane is her mother. Dieu merci for the French.