917 It Is

I kept my New York phone number. And I got the pink Pearl. I may come to regret both decisions, but not today. Today, I am as happy as a school girl with her new Strawberry Shortcake lunchbox. Soon, you will all be getting messages from me with the little tag "Sent from my Verizon wireless Blackberry" stamped at the bottom, at which time you may dismiss me as the poser that I am.

Existential Angst by Area Code

Next week, I can finally upgrade my cell phone with Verizon's New Every Two promotion. Yep, my contract is up and it's time to re-sign. I will do so without hesitation as I've never officially hit a dead zone with my Verizon carrier (why, yes, I can hear you now even though I'm waaay out here in the San Fernando Valley). And since I've been whining almost incessantly about my dying battery to everyone who calls me, I'm more than ready to trade up. These days, I'm thinking about a Blackberry. I want a QWERTY keyboard as the texting has gotten out of control and really like that the new models offer GPS. Why buy a TomTom when your cell phone is already tracking you? Brilliant! My sister suggests the Curve (she's got the pink one) because of the easy-to-type keyboard, but I really like the smaller Pearl which both of my bosses have. I've played with both and haven't really made a decision yet. But I'm sure by the end of the business day September 23rd, I'll have settled on one or the other. The thing I haven't decided on yet is whether I should change my phone number.

When I first moved out to L.A., my contract came up and I waltzed into a Verizon store to trade up. "What's your phone number?" the young lad behind the counter asked, fingers poised above the computer keyboard. "917-blah-blahblah," I replied. "917? Where's that?" "New York," I answered. "Oh. Well, are you planning on changing it?" I almost snorted in response. Why would I do something like that?! I'm east coast! The snobby little voice inside my head said. Instead, I replied, "No. I'm planning to keep it." "I'm sorry then. You'll have to go to one of the corporate stores...or online. We can only service local numbers." Erm...what? OK, so, whatever. I found a corporate store, went in, and bought my sporty, little, red KRazor without nary a problem. Nary, I say, because the woman who waited on me there convinced me to buy a Bluetooth piece -- which I've barely used -- because she doesn't get commissions on out-of-state phones. What kind of racket is that?

Now my contract is up again and there is a Verizon store two blocks from my apartment. It does not look like a corporate store, however. Therefore, I'll have to go back to Hollywood or order my Blackberry online if I want to keep my phone number. There is a part of me that is more grown up now and has reconciled to the fact that I am, technically and factually, a Los Angeleno (groan!). And paying New York taxes and paying for NYC 911 coverage on a monthly basis is kinda silly. But...but, the little voice says in my head, what if I go back? Then you get a new number. But, the little voice says again, this time with a whine to it, it won't be a 917 number. Those of you in New York -- and for anyone who saw Sex and the City -- you know that the 917 numbers have gone the way of the 212. That is to say, if you weren't there when they were handing them out, you ain't getting one. 212 and now 917 are sorta like a little badge of New York Snob Honor. (And as many of you know, I am kind of a snob. Just a little one, though.) Plus, I got my cell number a few days after 9/11 so there is this weird attachment to it.

I mean, it's really not a big deal, one way or the other. I have a friend who has had her Chicago cell number since her college days, and has lived in both New Jersey and now California without changing it. And everyone already has the New York number, so, really, why bother? But then there is another part of me that says, I should get a California number as all the people calling me from inside California are paying long distance to speak to a girl who is probably three blocks away from them, while my phone calls to and from New York are few and far between now that I'm not eating (and, more aptly, drinking) there any more. (As for Connecticut, it doesn't matter as it's all long distance.) And, as a patriot, shouldn't I be paying California taxes and for L.A. 911 service? Wouldn't a new California number be symbolic of a new me? Hmm. As you can see, this goes waaay beyond the number. It goes to the very core of who I am. Am I New York? Am I L.A.? Or am I just a girl with too much time on her hands so she worries about stupid things like what her cell phone number says about her? (Don't answer that.)

Nick and Nora(h)

Back over the summer, I saw something about a movie titled Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist starring Micheal Cera. I fairly groaned. Did we need another Superbad? Or even another Juno? (Do not get me started on Juno.) And it really irked me that some young turk screenwriter was trying to be cheeky by using the names Nick and Norah in a film aimed at pre-teens who have no idea who Nick and Nora are. But then a miracle happened. I went to the theater over the weekend to see The Women (no...just, no) and saw the full trailer. And suddenly, I felt young and sweet again, like that feeling that comes from sucking on a pixie stix but without the wet paper on my tongue. Is it me, or does this look like a John Hughes film? So, I skipped over to IMDb and checked out the credits because John Hughes has this habit of popping back up in the credits but under the name "Edmond Dantes." (And if you know your classic literature, you know who Edmond Dantes is.) But no! It's not! Or should I say, he's not affliated. I did see, however, that the screenplay is based on a YA novel that was published by Knopf and just like that, people were forgiven for using the names Nick and Norah. (Yes, I'm a literary snob.) Not that you care about any of this, but suffice it to say, yes, I will be braving the movie theater with the thousands of texting and twittering teens to see it. Especially since we're heading into Oscar season and that means a ton of depressing films about depressed adults like Kate and Leo in Revolutionary Road or Meryl Streep in Doubt. Ugh. A little pixie stix for the mind is a good thing.

Shh, My Show Is On!

"I just want to ask you, do you watch The Office, 30 Rock, Samantha Who?, Grey's Anatomy, and/or Lost? Because I do, and I've kinda already set the DVR for them." This was said to me by my roommate who volunteers her weekday evening hours at a Co-op playhouse. Basically, what she wanted to know was, should she delete the shows after she watches them, or should she keep them for me? Also, to warn me that The Office and 30 Rock, and Grey's Anatomy go on at the same time and I won't be able to watch a third channel (like America's Next Top Model or Project Runway -- AGH!) at the same time. (Curse you cable programmers!) I told her I watched all of them, but wasn't committed to any but Lost. (Lost? I love you. And I forgive you Season 3. It is forgotten. Let us speak no more of it.) Yes, friends, it's that time of the year again when we all put on our jammies at 8 o'clock and hunker down in front of the boob tube regardless whether we're watching the show live or twenty minutes later so we can fast forward through the commercials. What will I be watching this fall? So glad you asked.

I love Mad Men! And if you're not watching it, you can go out and rent all of Season 1 and watch them back-to-back in one weekend. I should know, because I've done it. It's now Season 2 and the year is 1962 and if you know anything about your history, you know that Vatican II started in 1962 (totally revamping Catholicism, and main character Peggy is a Catholic - -and Colin Hanks is her creepy priest!) and The Feminine Mystique was published in 1963 (burn, baby, burn those bras!) and The Pill became a generic drug giving millions of women access to it. Also in 1963, the Civil Rights Movement gets going with MLK's letter from a Birmingham jail, that fire hose thing that happened in Alabama, Medgar Evers getting shot, and the March on D.C. (Secondary character Paul is dating an African-American girl.) Unlike that cancelled show American Dreams, it doesn't put the main characters into the maelstrom, instead it just allows history to sort of brush against these people's lives. It's so smart! Sigh, Matthew Weiner, I adore you. (DON'T screw it up.)

America's Next Top Model is on right now (don't you judge me), and Project Runway is almost over (go Korto!). I'm looking forward to Pushing Daisies coming back and 30 Rock, of course. I have no clue when Friday Night Lights is coming on, but I'll be waiting. I am wondering what's going to happen on Dirty, Sexy, Money (very happy that they've decided to make Juliette a secondary character. She's totally the Shannon of the Darling family), though I'm not thoroughly committed. Same goes for Ugly Betty. I'm completely done with Heroes. As for Grey's Anatomy, after two seasons of not watching I'm almost ready to give it another go just because Kevin McKidd has been cast, and I wuv him. I'll check in with Brothers & Sisters, but after the Rebecca Reveal last season, I don't know if I'm going to stick with it.

New shows are just starting. Fox was smart to get Fringe out the door, and so far I've watched both episodes and it feels a bit like Lost from the Dharma Initiative's point of view. But, whatever. I'll give it a couple more episodes (though I'm not really buying Joshua Jackson as a womanizing dick). At work, I'm TiVo'ing TrueBlood as its on HBO and we don't have premium cable at home. The show is based on a series of books that Penguin publishes written by Charlaine Harris, so I was curious. So far it's OK. I'm not really believing Anna Paquin as optimistic Sookie, however, and something is going to have to be done about that. I'll give The Mentalist a shot, but it looks like Medium but with a faker (which would be Psych, wouldn't it? Just because the USA network kinda sucks doesn't mean that you can go and rip them off). I am skipping the new 90210 as well as the new Knight Rider. I barely watched the originals so the nostalgia factor isn't working on me. I'm slightly curious to see if Kath & Kim is going to be as awful as it looks. The Ex-List looks fun, -- reminds me of Marian Keyes's Lucy Sullivan Is Getting Married -- but I don't see how they're going to sustain it without the heroine looking like a total slut. I'll totally pass on Gary Unmarried and Crusoe. However, I will check into 11th Hour and Life on Mars, but I'm not hopeful.

And that, my friends, is the plan for this season. Feel free to Comment with your commiserations on Lost's delayed start date, argue for 90210 (I know you want to), and admit that your heartbroken that Blayne was tossed off of Project Runway. Because whether you're voting for Obama or McCain, nothing can bring us together like a good season of television!

Engaged! (No, not me...)

I saw this morning that Jennifer Hudson is engaged to some other reality personality that I've never heard of and don't care about. This made me think back to last year (or was it the year before?) when Nicollette Sheridan, Katherine Heigl and Kate Walsh all got engaged right after their stars started to rise. In the case of Nicollette Sheridan, rise again...and engaged to the same man. This seems oddly coincidental, right? I mean, at the exact same moment that a gal can have her pick among the masses, her not-as-famous boyfriend drops to a knee and asks for her hand in marriage? Does that seem weirdly auspices, ladies? I'm just asking. And while the fiercely independent feminist inside me bridles at the suggestion that a man would yoke his dynamic girlfriend with a diamond band, it does give the happy-ever-after romantic inside of me hope. If I ever become insanely rich and famous, it will only be a matter of time before men everywhere will find me wildly attractive. Here's to hoping money and power can get me what my looks and personality couldn't! (Wow, is this how it feels to be Donald Trump?)

FYI: Nicollette and Michael have recently called off their engagement...again. To which I say, "Nicollette, you could do better anyway."

Who Would You Rather Do...

I have a question: Who is running in November again? I've read more crap about Palin in the last week than I've read about Obama or McCain's social policies in the last six months. I'm a little sick of it. But what I'm really sick of is the rampant sexism and objectifying. Like this t-shirt. This bumpersticker. And worse, the doll below (there's another where she's got a gun strapped to her thigh).





I didn't even think about the "fuckability" quotient until my friend's husband -- a Democrat -- mentioned McCain's brilliance at choosing someone who would intimidate women who can't do it all while revving up the engines of men everywhere with her beauty queen looks and anti-feminist message. And while I'm slightly nauseous about it, others are getting down right pissed off that Palin is the poster gal of what we're all supposed to aspire to: women-hating fembots. And worse, according to polls, it seems to be working. McCain is up with white women.

Femini-sensitive?

I debated whether to post this, but I kinda am wondering, am I the only one that saw this cover and thought, "Way to objectify Tina Fey"? It looks like she's wife'ing David Letterman's necktie while she's being stripped by Chris Rock. 

Dear Senator McCain

Dear Senator McCain:

In 2000, I was part of the Republican party and voted for you in the GOP primary. I mourned your loss to George W. Bush, and for the next eight years fairly wept every time I saw you on The Daily Show or Meet the Press. During the same time frame, I felt that the party lurched into a murky and militant direction and away from it's traditional roots. Ultimately, I decided to change my party due to the awesome (and not in the good way) power the Christian Right held over the current administration and the rampant pandering to corporate interests. I no longer recognized the party of Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt and "jumped shipped." As a Navy man, you know what I mean. Needless to say, I was very excited about your re-emergence in the arena again earlier this year and was slightly disappointed that I would have to watch from the sidelines (instead, I got mired in the Hillary vs. Barrack turmoil. As your good friend Joe Lieberman would say, "oy!").

But, John -- may I call you John? -- I was bit confused by your strategy to gain the nomination. I always considered you a pretty honorable guy and approved of your no-nonsense ways. Now, I know politics is not a pretty game, and I surmised back in March that in order to secure the GOP ticket, you were playing to the proven base who was guaranteed to vote in the primaries and not to the moderates who only feel it's necessary to vote in the general elections, but have to admit to some bemusement at the features of John McCain 2.008, prefering the easier-to-understand John McCain 2.000. However, as primary season forged on, I forgave you some of the more obvious postering you did to "prove" that you were a "real" Republican. I didn't like it, but I understood it. I just figured that once you clinched it, you would move back to your more centrist ways. Umm, John? You're not moving. In fact, everyday past Super Tuesday, you've become harder to read. Case in point, Sarah Palin.

I've read everything I could about the woman, and I've been completely baffled by your choice. Obviously, you're not trying to lure the Hillary supporters because you are a smart enough man to know that you can't just replace one vagina with another vagina and think that women are dumb enough not to notice the difference. And you're obviously not trying to gain the middle ground because -- in case you haven't noticed -- there's a huge bruhaha over her obvious Christian Coalition value system. I kept looking for something that made instinctive sense to me as a fan of your Country First governing philosphy, but found nothing. That is, until I read this Op Ed by David Brooks in yesterday's New York Times. Now, obviously, this is just Mr. Brooks's opinion, and he could be wrong. But at least, this seems to be a more considered response to the choice in regards to John McCain, Smart and Well Respected Senator versus everyone else's response to John McCain, Stupid and Reckless Presidential Candidate. Personally, I just don't believe that a politician as savvy as you would be stupid or reckless this far into the game. If anything, I think you've been way too considerate of the Republican base much to the exclusion of the general populace at large. But that's just me. After I read the Op Ed, I finally realized exactly what it is that turns me off about Sarah Palin. And it's not her bizarro Amazon-meets-the-Madonna facade. It's that Sarah Palin does not have a national governing philsophy. As far as I can tell, she was quite content being the mayor of her little town and now the governor of Alaska. I don't think she's thought much past the governorship at this point. When asked whether she would accept the Vice Presidency, she said (to paraphrase) that she didn't know what the vice president does and she would accept it only if she knew she was going to be productive and if it would help Alaska. (I'm trying hard here not to wince at her obviously un-rehersed reply.) This woman was very content to be her in neck of the woods (literally) and hadn't really thought about the national stage until you came along. Now, I'll admit to being a sucker for a good Cinderella story, but when it comes to my politics, I don't want a fairy tale. I need someone who's aggressive and egocentric enough to think, "If I was President, I would..." That's not to say that Sarah -- if I can call her Sarah; afterall, she's only 9 years older than me -- wouldn't make an excellent president...8 years from now. After being under your wing and being mentored extensively by you on national and international policy. Maybe start her in the Department of the Interior. But the Vice Presidency? Now? That's a steep learning curve! And, quite frankly, John, I hadn't thought about your age or medical problems this entire time, thinking it a non-issue, until your left-field announcement. God forbide you get into the White House and one year from now the unthinkable happens! It might have been a good premise for a television show starring Geena Davis, but as we're in the midst of two wars and steep econimical decline, I'm highly uncomfortable with a president that is as unprepared for the agency as Sarah is. And I will admit that for the first time ever, I'm not looking at the Vice Presidency as a superfluous second choice. I'm actually taking into account not only your age, but the possible assassination of the first black president by psychos like those meth-heads in Colorado.

I realize its too late for you to reconsider, but I felt that it was duty to explain to you my reservations and why I might not be voting for you come November. I always believed that you would make a good president, but I highly disagree with you about Sarah...oh, and pro-choice. But that's for another letter.

My best regards to you and your family,

ME