Las Vegas...racial profiling on strip. Improper Police procedure; rights violations!

Last night I was strolling along the strip astride thousands of the excited teaming masses out for a night on-the-town when a shocking incident unfolded on Las Vegas Boulevard.

Just a few steps from one of a handful of Al Fresco nightclubs, tourists were taken aback to witness a small brigade of officers handcuffing a couple of males somewhat roughly in plain view amid the night's fanciful partying.

In fact, as concerned citizens are want to do on occasion when something doesn't "smell right", they turned their cameras and cell phones in the direction of the officers with the specific aim of capturing the conflict on video for future reference.

For some inexplicable reason, there was a glaring "police" presence out in full-force last night. Officers tended to be paired-off in two's and casually patrolled along the bustling street with a keen eye to passers-by who trembled at the end of their cold stares.

As I approached MGM, I was quite disturbed to observe a burly officer stride up to a young man, then bully him somewhat. Just as he was about to use force on the slim unthreatening fellow, the cop happened to half-turn and notice me out of the corner of his eye - at which point - he instructed the youth to "relax". Then, he ordered him to squat on the pavement.

I overheard the young man protest, "What have I done?"

A fellow officer approached another lad nearby and got a little rough with him, too.

What was most distressing was the fact that all the pedestrians on the street they were harassing were young black men, attired in fashionable hip-hop clothing, with a decided flair for a lot of bling.

Well, it hit me right away: racial profiling!

Notwithstanding, from what I witnessed, the officers were not following correct police procedure - and consequently - it was evident that their victim's rights were being violated.

To be singled out like that, and humiliated in front of throngs of tourists on the festive streets of Las Vegas, must have been a very degrading, demeaning experience!

In all the years I have been visiting Las Vegas, I have never encountered such wild, improper police conduct, under the color of authority.

It is one thing to be engaged in surveillance to effect an arrest for alleged crimes being committed. But, quite another to discriminate without good cause and openly engage in racial profiling.

If what occurred last night is a sign that things are amiss on the streets of Las Vegas, then the powers-that-be at City Hall - and other elected officials - should take swift severe action to find an equitable solution to the problem.

Otherwise, I can only predict that Las Vegas' days as a mecca for tourism are numbered.

It may be wise to pay heed to a quote from George Orwell's book, Animal Farm, in this instance case:

"All are equal except some are more equal than others"

Las Vegas...Review-Journal to raise newstand cost. Not worth paper printed on!

As I strolled in to the local grocer to snap up a steaming cup of hot java and the morning paper, the clerk informed that the cost of the Review-Journal was going up to seventy-five cents on July 1st.

Well, what is my savvy consumer response to that?

As Samuel Goldwyn once quipped,

"You can count me out!"

Nope, I won't be gleaning the news that's not fit to print, anymore.

No loss.

After all, recently I became frustrated with the daily for a couple of reasons.

The - um - journalists, for starters.

A few days ago one of their columnists - Doug Elfman - chose to take a swipe at pin-up gal - Pamela Anderson - on a very shaky premise which was a big turn off.

Notwithstanding, that kind of tabloid-style piffle should be left to the gossip mongers, not to a writer employed at what has been hailed as a reputable newspaper in Las Vegas.

In addition, I have found that their reporters go on ad nauseam about this 'n that, much to their detriment. Obviously, the Journal has a lot of excess space each edition - otherwise - why would the editors let these bozos expound on such fluff?

When I wrote for a major daily years ago, my editor gave me a great piece of advice: get to the point. I adhere to the principle to this day.

I was also shocked this past week at the arrogance of one of their reporters - Benjamin Spillman - who claims to toil in the business section of the paper.

He had the audacity to zip off an e-mail to me in response to a post I wrote a few days ago - assuming that because I chose not to mention a tidbit in the feature - that somehow my report was off. On the contrary.

His assumption that I was not familiar with a particular fact was way off-base too.

Not only was I aware of the item, but I chose not to include it in the feature, because the mainstream media had been all over the item like flies over sh**. More importantly, the tidbit was so old, it was turning grey with age.

I always endeavour to report on news that is current and fresh and of interest to my readers. Unlike reporters at the Review-Journal who rely on old archives to whip up a story, I am actually in-the-trenches getting the scoops. And, more often-that-not, get my news flashes to copy for my readership well ahead of the "competition".

Notwithstanding, it should be noted that a Managing Editor (with a reputable publication) posted a comment on one of a number of web sites my blog is fed to, and applauded me for a story - he asserted - was the best report on the subject he'd read in fifteen years.

Benjamin, you're out of your league.

Now, go scrape the egg off your face.

Albertson's...automated cashiers. Kinks to iron out & a peak into an uncertain future!

In the wee hours of the morning when staff at Albertson's are busy stocking shelves and taking inventory, customers are being urged to use the new "automated cashiers".

At first, the idea was a bit off-putting. What, no service with a smile?

This past week I ventured into the future and gave the new-fangled device a shot.

Fortunately, I started with a simple purchase. God only knows what may have transpired, otherwise.

First, pursuant to the instructions on the screen, I scanned a bottle of reduced-fat milk. Yeah, have to watch the old gut, 'ya know?

When I was asked to input the code for the next item or proceed to pay, I chose the latter option.

At this juncture, I was instructed to place my purchase in a bag.

However, when I sat the milk carton inside of the spacious sack, a rude message popped up on the screen and lamented - "object blocking area" - or something to that effect.

When I plucked the beverage from the open bag (which was neatly nestled into a device to frame it just so at the point of purchase) I was instructed to scan another item or hit the "finish and pay" button.

I tapped the screen to close the sale - at which point - I was given several pay options - debit, credit card, or cash.

Amazingly, when I slipped two crisp dollar bills into the slot, correct change jangled into a small change catch-all basin below the register.

Then, a receipt flew out of a groove, and landed squarely in my sweaty palm!

So, I trundled off with my milk in hand (sans bag) a little bemused by it all.

Would a more complex sale be a snap, too?

For instance, the purchase of produce would require that I input the price per pound, I expect. In that event, I guess shoppers would be wise to carry a pencil and paper around in their cart to jot those prices down.

I wonder, if I fudged on the numbers, would a siren go off to warn management and embarrass me in front of the other customers?

Something else I noticed, too. All the instructions were in medium-sized type way below the natural eyeline on the screen. So, at check out - if you needed glasses to read script - you'd be SOL if you left 'em at home or in the car.

In that event, you'd have to call for assistance, fer sure.

For the most part, it appeared to be a fairly painless experience.

But, I have to wonder...

As we start using automation in various areas of our daily lives, will we start to get lazy? Worse than that, is it wholly possibly that without daily use, we'll slowly lose our faculties to add, count change, or even communicate in idle chit-chat at whim in the check-out line?

Ultimately, will we be replaced one day, too?

Shudder the thought!

I like to think I am one-of-a-kind, irreplaceable.

Yeah, tell that to your boss!

Chuck Palahniuk once said,
"When did the future switch from being a promise to being a threat?"

Las Vegas...Beatles fans descend on Mirage for Fab Four Forum. Yeah! Yeah! Yeah!

Die-hard fans of the Beatles will be toolin' in to the desert Oasis this weekend in their rattle-trap VW Bugs - decorated with peace signs and tributes of "love" - to catch an annual fest that is dedicated to the pop icons who first caught the world's curiosity way back in the sixties.

The nostalgic extravaganza will kick off at the Mirage on Sunday and run through Tuesday.

When I was a teen, the controversy boiled down to one issue: who were more popular, the Beatles or the Rolling Stones?

Of course, Jagger appealed to the naughty side of rebellious teens, so a handful of bad boys were inclined to go that route.

Meanwhile, the romantics - delighted by catchy lyrics and bouncy melodies - were drawn to the Fab Four. Their cute little mop heads, and tailored black suits, did a lot to catapult them into the stratosphere of pop-idol status, too.

I recall the first night I saw the mesmerizing Liverpudlians on Ed Sullivan. As I sat in my grandmother's prim and proper parlour, I tried to contain myself; but - like others in the room - could not help but twitch, sport a goofy smile, and tap my foot to the upbeat tunes as they emanated from the little idiot box and propelled -John, Paul, Ringo, and George - into the rarefied air of exalted super-star realms.

And, of course, Beatlemania was born!

If your parents were hip enough to buy you a Beatles' cap, then you were the envy all the boys. I wore one, in spite of the fact my aunt teased that the visual effect was not unlike that of a - as she demurely put it - "a pimple on a pig's ass".

And - better yet - if your locks were inclined to suit the mop-top hairstyle, you were the absolute coolest, man!

Darn. As fate would have it, my curly hair just wouldn't cut it.

But, I managed to save face. After all, I had the uncanny ability to expertly mimic Paul's vocalizing, much to the amazement of my pals.

When "Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" was released, I recall taking a gander at the cover of the LP, trying to fathom the meaning of it all.

Then, came an alleged experimentation with psychedelic drugs, a foray into Eastern Religion, and a dalliance with the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi (who turned out to be a fake, by the way).

I have a particular fondness for the Beatles - "White Album" - released shortly after that. No wonder! On the occasion I heard the musical musings fresh off the press, I smoked my first joint.

Whoo-ee! For three mind-boggling days I tried to decipher the words and their cryptic meaning - with some foggy notions - I might add.

There was the intriguing "No 9", for instance. Bungalow Bill. And, Rocky Raccoon.

"Rocky Raccoon, checked into his room, only to find Gideon's Bible". (???)

And, the frenetic - "Helter Skelter" - which caused a lot of speculation at the time.

Far out, man!

This weekend at the Mirage there will be a handful of scintillating exhibits to take in, memorabilia to turn over, trivia to expound on, and fun opportunities to interact in sing-a-longs, participate in art events, or try your memory recall in "name-that-tune competitions".

The Beatles celebration has been on-going now about three decades.

A fan - Mark Lapidos - approached John Lennon about the idea almost thirty-four years ago and it has been going strong since.

60's Pop Icon - Donovan (the quintessential hippie with flowers in the hair and flowing robes to boot) will appear for performances on Monday and Tuesday.

Funny that, just heard - "Catch the Wind" - on the radio yesterday. The haunting tune is one of my favorite ballads.

Recently - "Hurdy Gurdy Man" - was incorporated into the "Zodiac Killer" soundtrack with chilling effect (starring Jake Gyllenhaal).

Allegedly, on a couple of occasions when Paul and John suffered from a bit of writer's block, they approached the talented song-writer for a creative push. Donovan is credited for rustling up a couple of lyrics that spun a couple of well-known melodies into bona fide hits.

Recently, I caught a screening of - "A Hard Day's Night" - a film the Beatles shot during their heyday just before they stormed America back in the sixties.

In the film, they are clever, funny, and reveal keen comedic ability.

In fact, when the film was first released, critics compared them to the legendary Marx Brothers.

Some say, that since the Beatles broke up, life has never been the same.

Uh-huh!

Henry Wadsworth Longfellow once said,

"How beautiful is youth! How bright it gleams with its illusions, aspirations, dreams! Book of beginnings, story without end, each maid a heroine, and each man a friend!"

Supreme Court...agrees to rule on fleeting expletives & obscenity issues!

So, that's what a t** looks like...


The Supreme Court has taken up the task of revisiting the issue of obscenity on the public airwaves, a subject they last addressed over thirty years ago when they upheld fines against a radio station for broadcasting comedian George Carlin's infamous "seven dirty little words" monologue that was aired in mid-afternoon programming amid a lot of controversy.

Federal Law forbids broadcasting any obscene, indecent, or profane language.

However, when Congress constructed the laws pertaining to obscenity, lawmakers fell short in defining indecency, preferring for the FCC and the courts to tackle the specifics.

The issue is ripe for review once again in the wake of a major ruling handed down by an Appellate Court in New York which effectively blocked the FCC from enforcing a strict new rule in respect to "fleeting expletives".

For the broadcasters, the ruling was a clear victory.

The FCC had slapped hefty fines against the networks when two stage performers - independent of each other - uttered what many thought was offensive language on a couple of awards shows that were broadcast live.

At the Golden Globes, for instance, when Bono got up to accept an award, he excitedly cried out to the wildly enthusiastic audience,

"This is f**king brilliant!"

In a second incident, after Cher had been roundly written off by critics as a has-been, she found herself trotting up to the stage to accept a career achievement award. When she accepted her coveted prize, she made reference to their absurd musings and joyfully quipped,

"Well, f**k 'em!"

The FCC also imposed a $550,000.00 fine against CBS when there was an alleged wardrobe malfunction at a half-time show at a Sports Event in which Janet Jackson's breast became exposed to the nation in prime time without warning.

The networks filed suit arguing that they should not be held for responsible for fleeting expletives that pop out of the mouth's of performers in a moment of excitement when overwhelmed by such an auspicious occasion or have to pay fines for mishaps which occur during the course of a broadcast unexpectedly.

The New York court ruled in favor of the broadcasters on the grounds that the FCC had not been justified in its abrupt change in policy. In addition, the Justices elaborated that the FCC policy was "unclear" because the F-word was permitted in some news shows and in the TV broadcast of "Saving Private Ryan".

The producers argued that in the instance of "Ryan", the profanity used on the D-day beaches was integral to depicting the horror of war.

At the request of Government lawyers and George Bush's administration, the Supreme Court agreed to take on the case which is ripe for review.

Some are troubled by the decision since they believe that the New York Appellate Court ruling was "well-reasoned" - and therefore - should "stand".

Meanwhile, others have applauded the action taken by the Supreme Court.

Timothy Winter - the President of the Parents Television Council in Los Angeles - complained that coarse unedited profanity is unacceptable for broadcast over publicly owned airwaves when children are likely to be watching.

Mr. Winter also noted that within days of the expletives being hurled into the public airwaves into the faces of citizens around the country, at least 1.2 million members of his group complained about the flagrant obscenity.

In their review of the issues, the Justices will determine whether federal regulators may levy large fines on broadcasters who let expletives on the airwaves during daytime and early-evening hours.

Likewise, the Justices may take the occasion to define the term "obscenity" more succinctly, so that the "laws of the land" may be administered more astutedly in the future without hindrance or controversy.

Without doubt, the high court will also determine the exact extent of the "reach" of the FCC, how broad their powers are, and so forth and so on.

On the other hand, it is wholly possible in the grand scheme of things, that the Justices may conclude that the protection that the 1st Amendment provides in respect to - "Freedom of Speech" - does not permit the government to punish broadcasters for an occasional vulgarity.

I'm all for freedom of speech but against rampant obscenity on the airwaves, especially when it is exploitative, has no redeaming value, and has the potential to rob our youth of their innocence.

"Obscenity is what gives a Judge an erection"
Author unknown

Las Vegas...legal brothels, showgirls & urban myths

If you're tooling down Las Vegas Boulevard, you're bound to run across an eye-catching risque billboard-on-wheels advertising local Gentleman's clubs.

The novel blurbs are about forty feet long and six feet wide and have been the subject of gossip and speculation in recent days.

For example, one female friend swears that inside the billboards, scantily clad women are entertaining men as they are chauffeured around town from one hot spot to the next.

It may appear to be a far-fetched idea, but - I'm almost sure that one romantic desert evening while I was stopped at a red light behind one of the fantasy blurbs-on-wheels - that it was shaking up and down in a old-familiar rhythm that conjured up naughty images of the Missionary-style position.

Well, the trap door at the back appears to be wide and high enough to admit a couple of - um - guests comfortably.

Gives a whole new meaning to the term - "four on the floor" - doesn't it?

Meanwhile, one evening at Blush (Wyn Casino) I noticed a curious phenomenon, too.

I spied a ravishing young lady slip cash on a table (which rested behind the back of a long line of comfortable couches in the exotic watering hole) which was surreptitiously scooped up moments later by a big burly security guy dressed in a black designer suit with an earplug in one ear.

As she strolled off arm-in-arm with her new gentleman friend, I had to seriously consider that the "tip" she slipped him amounted to a "finder's fee".

Of course, since the heyday of Las Vegas, showgirls have been a mainstay in sin city.

I suppose when a starry-eyed chorus girl falls on hard times (which, at times, they are want to do) it is wholly possible the desperate ones may turn to the oldest professional in order to set things right for a wee stretch.

But - once caught up in that nefarious underworld - are they ever able to walk away without being scarred by the sex trade, I wonder?

Brothels have been tolerated in Nevada since the middle of the 19th century. One brothel in Elko has been in business since 1902. Officials - recognizing the intrinsic problems that go - um - hand-in-hand with such a profession - enacted a law in 1937 to require weekly health checks of all prostitutes.

In spite of that, Franklin D. Roosevelt banned acts of prostitution near military bases in 1942. When this order was lifted in 1948, Reno officials continued in their concerted efforts to shut down brothels on the grounds they were a public nuisance.

While the Nevada Supreme Court upheld the action in 1949, brothels continued to operate on the sly throughout the state.

Joe Conforte, the owner of the brothel called "Mustang Ranch" near Reno, managed to convince county officials several years later to pass an ordinance which would provide for the licensing of brothels and prostitutes, thus avoiding the threat of being closed down as a public nuisance.

On the heels of this victory for Conforte, the legislature passed a law in 1971prohibiting the legalization of prostitution in counties with a population above a certain threshold.

In 1977, county officials tried to shut-down the notorious Chicken Ranch owned by Walter Plankinton. At that time, brothels did not have to be licensed in that county. After filing a lawsuit on the grounds that State Law implicitly removed the assumption that brothels were a nuisance (1971), The Nevada Supreme Court was inclined to open up the marketplace when they agreed with Plankinton's interpretation of the Law.
Nye County v. Plankinton, 94 Nev. 739, 587 P.2d 421 (1978)

But, the battles continued. A state law that prohibited the advertising of brothels in counties which had outlawed prostitution was enacted in 1979. Shortly thereafter, a Federal Judge ruled that the lower court's finding in favor of the State was "overly broad" and ads touting brothels began to pop up in prominent locations in Nevada.

Currently, Nevada state law dictates that any county with a population under 400,000 is allowed to license brothels. License fees for brothels range from an annual $100,000 in Storey County to an annual $200 in Lander County.

Licensed prostitutes must be at least 21 years old, except in Storey County and Lyon County, where the minimum age is 18.

Nevada law requires that registered brothel prostitutes be checked weekly for several sexually transmitted diseases and monthly for HIV. In addition, condoms are mandatory for all oral sex and sexual intercourse. Brothel owners may be held liable if customers become infected with HIV after a prostitute has tested positive for the virus.

Nevada has laws against engaging in prostitution outside of licensed brothels, against encouraging others to become prostitutes, and against living off the proceeds of a prostitute.

The other night I heard a rumor that Heidi Fleiss has been itching to start up a brothel here in Nevada. But, as the gossip goes, the hard core mobsters have been shutting her out. I understand they're prepared to use force, if necessary.

Miss Fleiss was born in Los Angeles, California; the daughter of a prominent local doctor.

In 1988, she was introduced to Elizabeth Adams, a longtime Beverly Hills madam who dealt exclusively with a wealthy clientele. After allegedly learning the "tricks" of the trade, Fleiss struck out on her own and started up a high-class prostitution ring.

Known as the "Hollywood Madam", Heidi's propensity for boasting about her stature in the flesh trade - and a craving for the spotlight - caught the attention of the Feds.

In the scandal that followed, celebrities like Charlie Sheen got caught with their pants down, too.

In 1993, Fleiss was charged with five counts of pandering. When the case went to trial, the Hollywood Madam was convicted on three of the five counts. She received the mandatory minimum sentence of three years in prison; but, in a 1996 appeal, the conviction was overturned after jurors admitted to vote trading and other infractions.

The following year, Fleiss was tried in a federal court, where she was convicted of tax evasion and money laundering. She received a 37-month sentence, which she served at the Federal Correctional Institution in Dublin, California, without incident.

One has to wonder at this juncture, are the bosses in Nevada afraid of the competition, the attention that Fleiss might attract, or just plain worried that a female in charge of a house of ill repute may be inclined to instigate a number of house rules that may prove to be so attractive to the "girls" that they may be anxious to "jump ship"?

Bottom line, I expect that the underbelly of the Las Vegas Nightclub scene is still pretty much male-dominated and a handful of thugs would like to keep it that way.

Well, there's always Amsterdam, I guess!

Quote...bad neighborhoods!

You know you're in a bad neighborhood when you have to ask a security guard at McDonald's for a key to the restroom!

Julian Ayrs
The Daily Planet
Collection of Poems

U.S. Military...may conduct war maneuvers on Internet!

One of the main focuses of the Internet in recent years has been as a research tool, a social outlet for the curious masses, or as a means of touting opinions on the World-Wide-Web.

In recent days, Americans sat up and took notice when it became evident the Internet was also a powerful tool to influence the election process as well.

Now, U.S. Military officials are seeking ways to develop "virtual attacks" on enemies of the American way of life.

A spokesman for the military noted that initially agents limited their activities in this arena to diverting data packets that may have put National Data systems at risk.

At a meeting of the Association for Intelligence Officers recently, Lt. General Robert J. Elder Jr. noted that the military may facilitate network warfare in the future to interfere with an enemy communication system, for example.

In that event, the online maneuvers may replace the need for conventional weapons such as bombs, landmines, etc.

However, no such attack would be launched, Elder assured the media, without first considering the rules of engagement the military is normally mindful of in most military attack-mode scenarios.

In sum, there would be a formal declaration of war first, added Elder, at a New York Chapter meeting held in recent days.

Unbeknownst to many - myself included - apparently Cyber attacks were used by the U.S. Military in the early days of the Iraq war. So, the concept is not novel or far-fetched, to be sure.

On that occasion, Military experts jammed Iraq military systems, using the network attacks to thwart Iraq ground units from communicating with each other.

In view of the fact the "Homeland Security Act" is still in full force and effect, it occurred to me that it is wholly possible that the U.S. Military is surreptitiously scanning the bandwaves in the name of National Security right under our noses.

If so - will the American people ever be privy to the information that is gleaned - whether it is relevant or not to military intelligence or national security?

Enquiring minds want to know.

Thomas Jefferson once said,
"From time to time, the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots."

Pamela Anderson...reporter at Review-Journal takes unwarranted swipe at VIP star!

On Saturday, Pamela Anderson delighted fans when she turned up at Planet Hollywood for a much-publicized celebrity auction.

To rev up a bit of excitement in the crowd, the former VIP star tossed off her top, then sidled up to the auctioneer to participate in the proceeding with a lot of sensual vim and vigor!

By the time the hammer smacked down and the auctioneer barked out sold, Ms. Anderson helped raise $65,000.00 for her favorite charity, PETA.

Instead of applauding the sexy siren for her compassionate act, a reporter at the Review-Journal (who was penning a blase piece on celluloid artists at the CineVegas Film Festival) chose to take a swipe at the pop icon instead.

Mr. Elfman (who looks like an elf, by the way) used the occasion to help build a foundation for some piffle he was penning for the daily.

On the premise that her "excited flutter of a pep talk" and willingness to "roll around on the car" to pump up sales (her 2000 Viper was being offered at auction) lacked class, he proceeded to compare her to the filmmakers who attended the CineVegas Film Festival this year.

In sum, he quipped that the art house film fest enriched by virtue of the alleged intellectual tastes of the fimmmakers who - "unlike certain people named Pamela Anderson" - were actually talented.



What a load of hogwash!

For starters, Ms. Anderson was not part of a CineVegas event.


Notwithstanding, the boisterous antics she engaged in were all part of her "act".

I worked with Ms. Anderson several years ago on the first season of the popular TV Sitcom "Home Improvement". During the kick off episodes, I had a bit part as a producer in the show within-a-show ("Tool Time") and Pamela played the bodacious "Tool Time" girl.

In private, Pamela is actually quite shy, intelligent, and every bit a class act.

Not unlike Marilyn Monroe (or Mae West before her) the persona one encounters in the public eye is one she cleverly crafted. Over the past couple of decades, the Pamela Anderson "brand" has not only withstood the fickle finger of fate in Tinsel town, but turned the voluptuous actress into a bona fide "star".

Contrary to Elf's empty opinion, Pamela is a smart cookie, too!

In fact, Elfman went way out on a limb with his pap, because - in essence - he was trying to compare oranges with apples. No can do!

The low-brow writer was under the mistaken impression that he was writing an in-depth insightful essay of importance. What the feature amounted to was a lot of misguided tabloid fodder.

Surely, the Review-Journal is not so strapped when it comes to worthwhile news, that they're forced to print Elfman's crap?

In another section of the article, the columnist matter-of-fact states that artist Takashi Murakami (who appeared at CineVegas Festivities at an elitist affair last week which caused quite a scandal in some quarters) is an important twentieth century figure in art circles.

Why, pray tell?

According to Elf, Murakami is being compared to Andy Warhol for "having fused fine art with pop art."

What nonsense!

I was an Art Major and I began my career as an abstract-expressionist painter.

For starters, Mr. Murakami's out-of-whack smiley faces amount to nothing more than silly doodles, worthless "junk".

Whenever his name pops up in a serious art discussion at a gallery opening, qualified experts roll their eyes. Then, an old expression flashes to mind.

"I don't know much about art, but I know what I like."

People who "like" Murakami have taste up the wazoo.

I didn't conjure up the nick-name - "tacky" - for no good reason. In fact, I wouldn't even line the kitty litter box with one of his prints. After all, I wouldn't want to insult my cat.

In conclusion, the whole article on CineVegas reeked of behind-the-scenes maneuvering to me.

The way Elf gushed about this 'n that, for example, inferred to me - at least - that he's either on someone's payroll over there at CineVegas or too fond of the free passes (and perks that go with 'em) to dare cross the powers-that-be.

I prefer to read articles that are written by ethical journalists who endeavour to log in a balanced account of the events.

At a small-town newspaper like the Review-Journal, I guess management can't take the risk of offending potential advertisers with clout, by reporting the truth.

Until they do, their credibility is a big fat zero.


Review-Journal is the best? By whose standard?

Condoms - banned commercial!

Beverly Hills 213...slick glossy features & side-splitting "Brain Optional"

Each week, a newspaper carrier zips around ritzy Beverly Hills and tosses the latest cellophane-wrapped edition of Beverly Hills (213) on the front doorsteps of the tony elite in the ritzy enclave.

The splashy weekly is probably one of the last hold-outs - in extravagant wide-broadsheet format, anyway - with class written all over it.

Thin yes, but packed with eye-catching publicity shots of the latest designer fashions and accessories to grace the expensive racks on Rodeo Drive, and elsewhere.

A couple of known columnists grace the pages inside - James Bacon (who often wistfully reflects on the golden days of Hollywood and - likewise - a handful of old drinking cronies) and Rex Reed (who's inclined to chat over the latest little celluloid offering that has either revved up a delightful fanciful experience or prompted a hateful diatribe about the misguided musings of a hack writer).

To add a touch of clubiness to the publication. the editors usually reserve a page or two for the express purpose of featuring flattering stills of the town's upper echelon out-on-the-town at glitzy red-carpet premieres and charity functions - sure to spread good will - and keep hefty donations flowing into the coffers.

Recently, I was thumbing through the publication over lunch at Whole Foods when I stumbled across a funny entertaining feature.

"Brain Optional" managed to breathe some fresh air into a staid old-guard attitude that normally prevails between the covers.

The feature is a weekly collection of hilarious quotes lifted from the tongues of the famous - and not-so-famous - that tend to tickle the funny bone.


In the studio days, Sam Goldwyn was known for putting his foot in his mouth with side-splitting results. His off-the-wall remarks were either a simple misuse of language - or quite frankly - a calculated effort on his part to drum up publicity for his thriving business.

Some allege that Pete Smith - his publicity agent - collected a handful of the witticisms and distributed them to the newspaper and radio columnists to fan the flames and set Goldwyn apart from the competition.

His odd-ball comments became were known as "Goldwynisms".

Here's an example:

One evening, a friend of Mr. Goldwyn's was casually sipping on a cocktail, when he noticed a new abstract painting hanging on a prominent place on the wall.

"Where did you get the beautiful Picasso?"

Goldwyn peered at it for a moment, then responded:

"I don't remember. I think it was in Paris. Somewhere over there on the Left Wing."

On another occasion, when he wasn't feeling too well, he sighed to a friend,

"I've been laid up with intentional flu."

"He treats me like the dirt under my feet" is a favorite of mine; probably because I imagine it was a quip he made about an actor.

Another zinger - "I would be sticking my head in a moose" - was obviously inspired by that old circus trick where the "Master of Ceremonies" wows the audience by placing his head inside the open jaws of a powerful lion.

Two famous ones attributed to Goldwyn are:

"An oral contract isn't worth the paper it's written on."

And, "Gentlemen, include me out."

And a show biz favorite I often use in film reviews:

"They stayed away in droves."

"Brain Optional" featured a handful of outrageously funny "Goldwynisms" in a recent issue which are attributed to various individuals in the public arena.

"It's no exaggeration to say that the undecideds could go one way or the other."
George Bush

"Things are more like they are now than they ever were before."
Dwight D. Eisenhower

"Ninety percent of the game is half mental."
Yogi Berra

"The Streets are safe in Philadelphia. It's the people that make them unsafe."
Frank Rizzo

"Sure, its going to kill people. But, they may be dying of something else anyway."
Othal Brand
Texas Pesticide Review Board

"I haven't committed a crime. I failed to comply with the law."
David Dinkins
New York City Mayor
(Tax evasion issue)

"We have only one person to blame and that's each other."
Barry Beck
New York Ranger
(fight with player)

The above quote may starting popping up in conversations around California in the near future when gays start filing for divorces, I expect.

As the say at MGM, that's it folks!

Gay Marriage...expressions need updating!

Since the landmark court ruling in California last month (which was finalized this past week) it appears that at least one old expression may have to be updated.

In particular, the one that oft put forth the idea that a man's success was often due to a wife's tireless support in the background.

So, here goes:
Behind a successful male there may be another great man!