Crisis on Earth-Star Wars

Crisis on Earth-Star Wars

by a former Jedi Master

As a former superhero-turned-family man, I appreciate history and continuity. These two things are very important to me.

Take Star Wars: the books actually make an attempt to stay in continuity with the movies. George Lucas approves any new storylines, so you know what you're reading is actual storyline, not just pages and pages of stuff that can be deleted at a whim by someone in the future who decides they want a new ending to your favorite Timothy Zahn book, or whatever.

The movies, on the other hand ... have gone in a direction I don't like. I speak of the original trilogy, which I bought on DVD when it finally came out.

The first shocker was seeing the young Anakin at the end of Return of the Jedi, instead of the aged Anakin. Do you know what that means? That actor has been ERASED FROM THE CONTINUITY.

Does Lucas not respect his older fans? I mean, sure, for kids, it makes sense to have Anakin at the end of RoJ, since they'll recognize him from the new trilogy. But, hey! We didn't have a young Anakin and we loved and appreciated the movies! Hasn't Lucas ever heard of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it?"

The real shocker, and what inspired this article -- was watching Empire Strikes Back last night. I've seen bits and pieces of the movie, while coloring with my toddler, but last night I paid attention for the first time ... and I saw the REAL Emperor.

That's right. Ian McDiarmand -- not the other guy who was the original emperor. There Darth Vader was, kneeling and saying, "What is thy bidding, my master?" when the Emperor from Return of the Jedi appears!

My jaw hit the floor. I had always wondered why they hadn't inserted him in after the fact, like in the Special Edition. I couldn't breathe, I was so stunned and pleased.

And they added dialogue! They explained how Vader comes to know he has a son! Wow!

And to hear the REAL Emperor say "Yeeeeesssss," instead of the original Emperor actor with his quick, "Yes, yes," was great...but then, I got to thinking.

There was something about the original emperor, and knowing that wasn't the guy from Return of the Jedi. There was something about accepting that little quirk, and being able to chuckle to yourself about it, as you attempted to imagine the similarities between the original guy and the new guy when watching Return.

And then the thought hit me -- my son will never see the original Emperor. And he will never see the old Anakin. They are now BOTH ERASED FROM THE CONTINUITY FOREVER.

That's because the original movies, as they were first released in the 1970's and 80's DON'T EXIST ANYMORE. So, unless you happen to have a video copy of it (which, much to my regret, I lost several moves ago), you are out of luck.

Imagine -- you're sitting with a friend your age, and your offspring. A scene from Star Wars pops up, and you turn and say, "Hey, you remember when Han shot first?" or "Remember when Anakin stood there next to Obi-Wan and Yoda?" and your friend will laugh and your kids will stare at you, absolutely dumbfounded.

"What are you talking about, dad?" they'll say, genuinely perturbed. "There was no such scene," or "That never happened," or "What Anakin?"

Your kids will think your nuts ... and eventually, you, too, will forget that scene ... and you will accept what George Lucas has recreated as THE ORIGINAL.

I'm reminded of issue 11 of Crisis on Infinite Earths, when only the heroes who stood before the dawn of time remembered the old timeline. I feel like a man without a planet.

Or without the old Anakin.

Users are losers

Users are losers

Message to Drug Users

Hey stoners, s'up?

Dude, did you know marijuana contributes to slow reaction times, memory loss, and decreased cognitive thinking? Not to mention slower erection time. Unfortunately, all of you are in denial and simply REJECT the research.

Bro, long-term use of weed can contribute to lung cancer.

Oh, and one more reason: it’s illegal, and you can get into unnecessary trouble. You put a burden on our judicial system and rehab centers. In fact, you are supporting Columbian drug lords, and contribute to slave labor, organized crime, and death.

You think that drug use is a personal choice, and that not only should it be legalized, but those who speak out against it should keep their mouths shut and stop being "judgmental" or "holier than thou". We should "mind our own business".

Here’s a counter argument: any sane person realizes that driving a vehicle while being stoned is just as bad as driving while under the influence of alcohol. You’re driving on the road and highways, and you’re endangering yourself, family, friends, and animals.

Here's another one- your WORK PERFORMANCE SUCKS- you're LATE, you're FORGETFUL, and you start Jonesing when your dealer runs dry. You have no MOTIVATION and you get offended when the people that DO want to work get their "panties in a bunch" for wanting to perform their jobs.

Some of you think that since weed is “natural” that there are no harmful effects. Ever touch poison ivy?

Studies have shown that being a user- even a “recreational user”- increases the chance of you experimenting with even more messed up drugs, like Ecstasy and coke.

What are you running from? Are your lives so stressful that you have to use artificial means to achieve happiness or relax? Are you that bummed out about something? Do you just cave in to the peer pressure? Do you think it’s cool to pollute the air and mess up your body and mind? Trying to increase the chance of getting laid?

It leads to this...

Ya think it makes you focus better. All it does is push you down further in your own misery. You can't handle the responsibility, so you do something even more irresponsible, which further creates more problems in your life.

Here are some patterns I've seen:
1) You all think it's your right to break the law, and endanger others, without admitting it.
2) You think it actually increasing your focus (I guess because you were really, really, really into that 70's movie you rented from Blockbuster..what was it's name? I forgot, dude, but that was awesome.
3) You think anyone who doesn't use is uncool or an authority figure.
4) You feel you need it to "get in the mood".
5) You convince yourself that smoking weed every Friday night will NOT lead into harder drugs, and that you can stop any time.
6) You're in a fog most of the time, but you deny it.
7) You think it's just sooooooooo much funnnnnnnnn.
8) You have ALL the arguments that support using it.
9) It's the only thing that really motivates you.
10) You enjoy using the "lingo" and talking about it like a hobby.

Don’t like what I’m saying? Move along, then, I'm just trying to help.

Wrapped up like a douche

Wrapped up like a douche

Hey, I can't believe they allow "Blinded by the Light" by Manfred Mann to be played on the radio! I mean, the lyrics are disgusting:

Blinded by the light
Wrapped up like a douche
Another runner in the night

How can the FCC allow this kind of vulgarity on the air, for over 25 years? Day after day, on every classic rock station in the country, you'll hear Manfred Mann sing about being a wrapped-up douche -- and what that has to do with running is beyond me. I could see running from the douche, especially if you mistook it for a water bottle and took a swig.

Oh, and just for the record: I looked up the lyrics on the web before writing this idealistic piece. Supposedly he's saying, "deuce," not "douche." Yeah, right. "Deuce" doesn't even make sense. It makes less sense than "douche."

The singer is clearly making a "shh" sound at the end of the word in question. So, don't try to fool me, Manfred Mann. you can fool the tourists, but I live here.

Can you see the lead singer on stage at some race track or state fair, with kids walking by? Singing with all his heart? Singing with conviction? "Blinded by the light! Wrapped up like a douche! Another runner in the night!"

That's totally ridiculous.

I just think they should stop playing that song, that's all.

[Editor's note: We learned from an acquaintance of a friend that, apparently, the lyrics are "revved up like a deuce". Deuce is a reference to a car of some kind. I have to admit, however, that it does sound like he's saying douche.]

Somebody's writing chain emails....

Somebody's writing chain emails....

Blog diary -- 12/26/07

I got another one today. Story of pregnant woman visited by Jesus before giving birth to stillborn baby. Supposed to teach gratefulness and faith in creator, even during hard times.

Same writing pattern as previous chain emails. Like the homeless man who needs food and is Jesus in disguise. Or the angel that visits suicidal old man at truck stop. Can mean only one thing: same person writing all of them.

Serial author must be stopped. Spare no expense. Will be difficult, but must try. For the sake of internet, threat must be eliminated. Otherwise, more important emails missed due to clogged inbox.

Must go now. Friend needs laptop back.

***

OK, seriously- what profit is to be made by spamming NON-PYRAMID SCHEME chain letters??? I can understand the SPAMaster hitting a billion machines a day selling Viagra. But what is to gained by the UNREALISTIC CHAIN LETTERS that all of our relatives and office co-workers so happily forward to me? Why can't they forward DAILYSKEW E-MAILS TO THE WORLD????????????????????????????????????????????

Paul Lo Duca: Hype

Paul Lo Duca: Hype

Back in August 2004, I wrote an editorial about how baseball catcher Paul Lo Duca was overrated, in effect I buried him. Turns out I was correct. Not only did this guy NOT win a championship with any team since I wrote that article, but he got caught cheating on his model wife with teenage girls. He also got into several fights with players while with the New York Mets. He did not heal the New York clubhouse; in fact, he added to the chaos under Willie Randolph, and contributed to the greatest downfall in Mets' history (AND THAT'S SAYING SOMETHING!). The icing on the cake: everyone in baseball apparently knew that he was steroid and HGH user, as shown in the Mitchell Report.

So, let's hit rewind and see what I wrote over 3 years ago:

August 4, 2004- The Dodgers traded Paul Lo Duca to the Marlins in a deadline deal. Then the MEDIA christened catcher Paul Lo Duca the "heart and soul" of the Dodger team, and how the chemistry has been ruined in the Dodger clubhouse. After all, Lo Duca was a "clubhouse leader" and "proven veteran".

It's amazing that Saint Lo Duca's "leadership" didn't win the Dodgers a pennant. After all, he's been playing with them since 1998. Why can't the MEDIA explain that?

Let's take a look at Saint Lo Duca's stats: he had one above average OPS+ year in 2001, when his OPS (on-base+slugging%) was higher than 44% of the league. In 2002, he was league average. And in 2003, he was 8% below league average. By the way in '98 he was 26% below avg., 58% below avg. in '99, and 25% below avg. in 2000. His homerun totals in his 6-year career: 0, 3, 2, 25, 10, and 7. Huh. According to Similarity Scores, his stats are most similar to the greatness that is Michael Barret. Huh.

And to add to his legend, he hit a homerun on the first pitch seen in a Marlins uniform. The sad thing about baseball is that below average players always seem to shine when everyone's watching. So a year from now, I will be eating these words. After all, Paul Lo Duca will carry the Fish all the way to the championship in 2004, right?

The MEDIA has elevated his status to other "proven leaders" like Pudge and Derek. I wish there was an "intangibles" ranking on ESPN, so I can look up to see who the other league leaders are.

Ronald Reagan

Remembering the 80's President

by a child of the 80's



I'm not even sure I should be writing this. I don't know anyone personally who loved Ronald Reagan, other than my parents who voted for him twice -- the only people who seem to have anything nice to say about the man are the voices I hear on the radio, in some far-off studio, or MEDIA anchors who are biting their tongues.

I've always felt embarrassed about admitting that I liked him as a President. Whenever his name would come up, friends or other family members would say stuff like, "Oh, he's such an actor! That's why he's so good at fooling people!" or "He didn't do anything in his second term -- Nancy ran the show!"

And it's almost like his announcement of his having Alzheimer's in 1994 was a seal of approval for those who thought he was old and incompetent. "See? He's probably had it for years."

This week, I have heard and seen another side to the Reagan story. I have heard of a man who was likable, and humorous. A man who had the courage to take on the Communists. A man who prayed.

I heard about a President who loved to write! He would answer 30 letters a month personally ... and sometimes he would go out of his way to help a person, even making phone calls to various government departments to get things done, for John Q. Citizen.

I think one reason I like President Reagan is because he came from the same generation as my father. They both came from humble roots. My father, as an immigrant, gave up a successful business in [censored DailySkew] to come here. Reagan could easily have played it safe and continued being an actor; instead, he got into politics, ran for office, and changed the world.

My father didn't change the world, but he impacted my world. And, in President Reagan, I saw someone who had similar ideals as my dad. He was a Christian. He had conviction. He was honest. And he was wise.

Hearing his speeches this week gave me goose bumps. Finding out he was an economics major in college, after hearing from THE MEDIA in the 1980's that Reaganomics was a stupid creation of a senile Hollywood actor ... well, that was absolutely shocking. I had no idea that our 40th President was a learned expert in economics -- I felt betrayed by the pundits and talking heads of my childhood, who conveniently left that fact out when belittling the President.

Reagan's optimism reminded me of my own optimism, which has proven annoying at times, quite frankly. I have a tendency to see the best in people, and to give them a free pass, and believe that they can overcome their problems. I have tendency to have too much faith in people. Over the years, I have learned to temper this with realism. Still, I think optimism, properly focused on something achievable, is a powerful tool. Reagan's accomplishments are proof of this.

I wasn't sure if I should write this when I started out, and now I'm not sure how to finish. I'm sure when I proofread and edit, I will delete things that you will never see, move things around so they make more sense, and generally clear up my ideas. I guess to sum up, there was a quote from Reagan that had to do with choosing sides. He said, paraphrasing, that by blaming both sides of a conflict you separate yourself from the moral battle taking place. He was referring to those who pointed the finger at both America and the USSR for the arms race (thank you, Dan Rather, for those nightly charts showing how many missiles each side had pointed at each other. You made stories like Dark Knight Returns realistic).

He basically said that you have to choose a side, and fight. That is something I have a hard time with, these days. I try to see everyone's point of view -- I think the 90's political correctness invaded my brain at some point and has grown into a forest of vacillation. I think this website, at times, is an exercise in destroying that part of me. Somehow, I know it's wrong not to choose a side and stick with it. I hate bandwagon jumpers in sports ... but somehow, I get embarrassed and take it personal when it comes to politics, so I just avoid the whole thing.

I think I'm going to change that. Let me look up that quote, and memorize it. I think that'll do me some good.