That's An Emergency All Right

Sylvester Stallone's son, Sage Moonblood (yes, Moonblood), was found dead the other day.  He was only 36, so one would have to think that there was something afoot other than natural causes.  But really, in the grand scheme of things, who cares?  Well, it would seem like the lawyer for the young Mr. Stallone cares quite a bit because he's going out of his way to give reasons for the death that I find to be rather amusing. 

Well, for starters, I know that the lawyer saying that a "health emergency" could have caused his death is one of the more amusing attempts at spin that I've heard in quite some time.  That's according to the Daily News. A health emergency! Yes, I'd say that anything that your body is going through that causes your subsequent demise is indeed a "health emergency"!  That's just a silly thing to say. 

Look, it seems likely at this point that the guy died from an overdose of prescription medication.  OK, fine.  Accidents happen.  But for some reason, people just do not like to admit when a celebrity has made a mistake that kills them.  And I don't get that.  Dead is dead and at that point, how they came to be dead is probably the least of the worries that one should have.  Then again, I'm not a celebrity (thank God), so what do I know? 

Sphere: Related Content

What Next?

I love it when this stuff just practically writes itself. So, I was reading an article over there at People.com about Natalie Portman and her latest movie, Black Swan. It's some sort of a ballerina thriller, whatever that is supposed to mean. (I wouldn't have thought that was even possible before this movie and since I haven't seen it yet, I'm still not convinced.) They quote the recently knocked up Ms. Portman as saying, "Everyone was so worried about who was going to want to see this movie...I remember them being like, 'How do you get guys to a ballet movie? How do you get girls to a thriller?' And the answer is a lesbian scene. Everyone wants to see that."

I can't say I really disagree with her on that one. Who doesn't like a couple of chicks making out? Every guy I know finds it completely enthralling. And I, myself, find it very enjoyable. But it turns out that every guy and myself are not representative of the commenters over there at People.com. And we are certainly not representative of one specific commenter.

Allow me to share with you the comments of a one Patricia Eation. Ms Eation commented "Sick, sick, sick. Portman needs to revise her statement to read, "only the sick minded loves a lesbian sex scene". Have the "gays" taken over the entertainment industry? Next they'll be gay rappers! Bottom line, STOP trying to force a twisted choice of couples on everyone. I will never accept a behavior that God hates". Wait. What now?

Gay rappers?! What the hell does that even mean? How is it that a couple of fictional ballerinas end up making out in a movie will lead to rappers being gay? I'm failing to see the connection, but I'm finding it absolutely hilarious. Gay rappers. OK, then. (I also don't know why she has "gays" in quotation marks. Is she implying that if Hollywood had, in fact, been overtaken by homosexuals, they would be fake homosexuals, thus necessitating the usage of quotes around 'gays'? I don't get that at all. But I find gay rappers to be so absolutely hysterical so I'm going to overlook it.)

I'm going to try to work that into conversation whenever a topic comes up that folks find simply unbelievable. I'm just going to slowly shake my head and say, "I know. I can't believe it. Next thing you know, there'll be gay rappers." It's going to be great. I've needed a new project for a while now. And I believe I've found it!

Sphere: Related Content

What Caused The Earthquake?

This Haiti thing has been the breeding grounds for ridiculous comments. First we have big, fat Rush Limbaugh shooting off of his mouth and saying that the only thing that you're going to get by donating for Haiti is that you'll end up on the White House mailing list. (Would that be such a bad thing, really? Maybe they have coupons like Bed, Bath and Beyond!) Then we have the (probably) completely senile (perhaps because his brain has been riddled by syphilis) Pat Robertson saying that the earthquake struck Haiti because the Haitians had made some sort of a deal with the Devil in order to get the French and Napoleon III out of town. (I'm still not really all that clear on what the Haitians were supposed to do to uphold their end of the bargain with the Devil. And I'm also not clear on how it is that suddenly the Devil has the power over earthquakes. I thought we left Mother Nature in charge of that. Did the Haitians back out of some sort of a deal with her?) And now we have another fruit loop to add to that mix. And it comes in the unlikely form of a one Danny Glover.

I'm pretty sure that Danny Glover hasn't been thinking straight for a while now. I'm guessing it all began probably right around when he signed up for that The Shaggy Dog movie, but it could have been much earlier (when were the Saw movies?). Anyway, Danny Glover had called into some show that was on something called GRITtv. I didn't have any idea what the heck that was either, so I checked out their website and found that "GRITtv with Laura Flanders is a new, news discussion and take-action show,available in multiple formats, with interactivity, a real relationship with news makers across the world, and a positive take on what's possible in the 21st Century." Now you know as much as I do.

I have the clip below. Mr. Glover begins spouting right around the 1:00 mark. I knew he was going to be a little bit wacky when he started off with ""I believe that this is going to be a defining moment for this administration. What we (something) for...in a new relationship, in a partnership with Haiti." Umm, OK?

I'm not sure how sending aid to another country (one that we're friendly with and all) like we tend to do is going to be a defining moment for President Barry's administration. I'm just not seeing it. Frankly, I'd prefer that a defining moment for any American President's administration be one that is directly related to helping the people of the nation over which the administration sees, but that could be just me. I might be the only one who wants a President's defining moment to actually impact the country which elected him. Maybe. But maybe not.

I'm also not sure how this "partnership" with Haiti is possible. What exactly is it that Haiti is going to do for us? See, because when you "partner" up with someone, you're both helping each other. In this instance, from what I can tell, we're going to help Haiti and Haiti is going to let us help them. That's really not what I would call a "partnership". It's nice, but it's hardly "partnering".

Mr. Glover continued along lines of questionable thinking processes by saying: "That means that other countries in the region — Venezuela, Brazil, Cuba (which he pronounced COO-ba for some reason) and other countries have already accepted the point that this is a great moment for another type of internationalism, you know." Actually, I...I don't know. Do we know about these other countries alleged acceptance of said alternate internationalism? I wish he had some examples. Perhaps a chart. I love charts! But I digress. Onward...

"And I hope we seize this particular moment because the threat of what happens in Haiti is the threat that can happen anywhere in the Caribbean to these island nations, you know?" Um, yes? Yes, an earthquake can happen just about anywhere. The Caribbean. The not Caribbean. Earthquakes are real. Thank you for pointing that out to us, Danny Glover.

Oh, but before you give thanks and leave, please read on! See, I didn't realize that he was going to continue to explain WHY this earthquake happened and WHY this can happen anywhere. And I'm sure you're just dying to find out, right? Whatever. Keep reading.

"They're all in peril because of global warming; they're all in peril because of climate change. When we see what we did at the climate summit in Copenhagen, this is the response, this is what happens, you know what I'm saying? But we have to act now." Wait. What now?

What we did at the climate summit? We didn't do anything at the climate summit! Because we didn't do anything, Haiti had an earthquake? I...I don't think that's correct. I'm fairly certain that the climate summit had little or nothing to do with the natural disaster that occurred in Haiti. You know why I think that? Because it's TRUE!

Sad. Perhaps Danny Glover has the same alleged syphilis riddled brain problem that might have affected Mr. Robertson. That's unfortunate. I really liked Mr. Glover in Lethal Weapon. (And by the way...Danny? They're using the 'climate change' term these days. Saying 'global warming' is out because sometimes there's 'global colding' and so if they go with 'climate change', well, change is change! And that way they're never wrong. Now go find your slippers and stop calling TV stations.)

Sphere: Related Content

Nicolas Cage is NOT a Victim

It's fairly easy for a headline, probably written by some dumbass 22-year old media intern, to make me irritated and/or angry. Usually that's because I know that what follows a really inflammatory, inaccurate and outright misleading headline is an inflammatory, inaccurate and outright misleading article Today's case in point would be this gem from CNN Money: Nicolas Cage: Movie star, foreclosure victim. Um, what now? Does that say 'victim'?

I've long been under the impression that when someone is a victim it is because something has happened to them. I'm having a hard time understanding how Nicolas Cage, movie star, is a victim of foreclosure. Let's see if a one Hibah Yousuf, a CNN Money.com staff writer, can clear things up for us, shall we?

Her article begins with "Even Academy Award winners are suffering from financial woes this recession. Actor Nicolas Cage lost two homes in New Orleans worth a total of $6.8 million in a foreclosure auction Thursday." Financial woes? During this recession? But...but...but didn't she then just say something about $6.8 million in homes? Right. She did! I see it! It's right there! $6.8 million in homes! Lost to a foreclosure auction! Wait a minute.

I was under the impression that folks that were losing their homes during the recession were doing so because they were unable to make their house payments. Now, you and I both know that in the majority of cases, the home prices were overinflated by people who were just trying to get rich (and did!) and the over-priced homes were bought with people who were allowed to do so with almost no credit check, no down payment and, in many cases, no way of ever making a single payment. Granted, I have a hard time using the term "victim" in those cases either, but they do represent your typical person who has had a home foreclosed upon during this recession. (Idiots.)

Let's see...apparently "Cage owed $5.5 million in mortgage payments and $151,730 to the City of New Orleans in real estate taxes, according to (Civil Sheriff Paul) Valteau." Five and a half million in back mortgage payments? Did he lose his job or something? I...I don't think he did!

According to something called The Movie Times, he made $16 million in 1998 for Snake Eyes; $20 million in 2000 for Gone in 60 Seconds; $20 million in 2002 for something called Windtalkers; and $20 million in 2004 for National Treasure. You have to assume that the National Treasure movie that he made in 2007 would have paid him somewhere around the same $20 million range as the first one did, wouldn't you? I would. I am. Mind you, these were just the movies that were listed at The Movie Times that had a salary attached to them and I only included the ones that were double digit salaries. He made other movies in the past 11 years. He made more than just the $76 million that I detailed in those four movies. And that $20 million in 2007? Wasn't that right around the peak of the "recession" that Ms. Yousuf is attributing Mr. Cage's hardships to? I don't know about you, but $20 million doesn't sound like much of a hardship to me - ever!

The article continues by stating that Mr. Cage is suing a one Samuel Levin who is his former business manager. Mr. Cage is claiming in his lawsuit that Mr. Levin "...duped the Hollywood actor out of more than $20 million since 2001 when he was hired." Really? How is "being duped" part of the "recession"? Did Ms. Yousuf not read her own article when she wrote it?

But wait! There's more. "...Cage owes more than $6 million in back taxes and his properties in California and Las Vegas have also been foreclosed on and are designated for auction later this month." Wait. Wait a minute. Two more houses have been foreclosed on? There's another six million in back taxes that he owes? Well, if that's true, then Mr. Cage had at least four houses. That doesn't sound like the recession, Ms. Yousuf. No, that sounds like stupidity and irresponsibility (much like the kind that is peppered throughout your article). There is a difference.

Look, even if that Levin cretin did "dupe" Nicolas Cage out of $20 million, from what I can figure (and he has 5 projects slated for 2010 and has already done 5 this year so far), he still should have had around $40 million easily to play around with. Tell me something, if you have that much money, why wouldn't you just buy a house outright? Why are you getting a mortgage? I don't get it. Then again, I don't get why you'd have four houses, none of which it would seem like you could pay for.

According to an article over there at New York Magazine, it would seem that Mr. Cage has owned 3 castles, 2 Bahamanian islands, 1 pet shark and 1 Lamborghini (formerly owned by the Shah of Iran, of course, which he paid $493,000 for). He also, in 2007, outbid Leonardo DiCaprio in what they described as a "frenzied auction" for a dinosaur skull and ended up paying $247,000 for it. According to that same article in New York Magazine, "Most of his dozen or so homes, 50 cars, 2 islands, 2 yachts and jet have been sold, foreclosed upon or are on the market." What. The. Hell?

We've only read about four of his houses that have been sold through foreclosure so far. You're telling me that there are at least EIGHT more?! And FIFTY cars?! What in the hell is wrong with someone that they go out and buy FIFTY cars? The only type of island that anyone should be buying is Thousand Island dressing. (And personally, even that is questionable.) According to US Magazine "...one Bel Air home, purchased in 1998, features a billiard room with a 1955 Jaguar parked inside plus an array of "shrunken heads." An...an...array? Of shrunken heads? How many constitutes an array? Why would you want an array of shrunken heads? How do you play billiards in a room with a car parked in it. Perhaps Mr. Cage is confused on the concept because that room with the 1955 Jaguar parked inside of it isn't usually known as a "billiard room" as much as it is known as a garage.

Oh, but according to Hibah Yousuf of CNN Money.com, poor, poor Nicolas Cage is a victim of the recession and a victim of foreclosure. Please don't take this the wrong way Ms. Yousuf when I say that you should resign. Immediately.

Seriously, ma'am, what is wrong with you? How on earth can you even attempt to try to paint Nicolas Cage as some sort of victim of anything other than his own irresponsiblity and his own stupidity? He is a moron. He had a gazillion dollars and he pissed it away. All I needed to know in order to figure that out was "frenzied fossil bidding war with Leonardo DiCaprio". But to CNN Money.com, Nicolas Cage is a victim. Spare me. Does that mean that Leonardo DiCaprio is in jeopardy of becoming the next vicitm of the recession? Does he have an array of unusually tiny heads as well?

If I haven't convinced you by now that CNN Money.com has ZERO credibility at all as a credible news source covering the financial market, then you probably are too dumb to have enough money to be concerned about such erroneous reporting. In which case, crawl on back to your parent's basement and poke your head out when Call of Duty 3 gets released. If I'm missing something or I have misinterpreted something, I'd love to hear about it. But I'm fairly astute in the English language and that articles says "Nicolas Cage...Foreclosure victim" and the first sentence attributes his victimhood to the recession. Again, Ms. Yousuf? Resign. Immediately. And take your editor with you. Please. Good Lord, what a pile of crap that article was.

Sphere: Related Content