As SushiAttack eloquently mentioned yesterday, our site has been besieged with ads for feeding kids in africa.  Look, I can’t speak for anyone else here.  But I don’t care.  Get it?  Don’t care.  Show me the spiritual healing ads for SF instead - I care more, albeit marginally, about those.  Not clear?  How about this:

Before you hippies start forming a protest, let’s make something clear.

1.  We all know there are african kids dying every second of the day.

2.  We all know that the resources that we have could save these kid’s lives.

3.  I just bought a pair of $100 bluetooth headphones because I couldn’t deal with a 2mm cord, TJFKAK got a pair of super expensive earrings for xmas not to mention gifting a roomba (thanks!), and SushiAttack poops out enough dollars worth of sushi to support an african village.

In short, you have the wrong site.

Let’s be honest here - we all pretend to care about starving african kids, but let’s be real, we don’t do anything.  Oh…wait…you give 30 cents per day to save a life - how munificent of you.  If you really care about the lives of these kids, why not sell all your possessions, buy a bunch of aids vaccine, and move to africa.

Sure, some people act like they care, or say they care, but face it, most of our munificent acts are actually out of guilt - we don’t like to see starving pictures of african kids (we all knew there were starving african kids before we saw these pictures), therefore by being charitable we are just making ourselves feel better.  It’s selfish.  So, i say, cut out the middleman and buy myself a steak.

 ahhhh, that’s better.

So what have we learned today?  Those of you who pretend to care about every human life, then walk around with coach purses (god forbid Louis Vuitton - why not just buy an African nation?), you are a hypocrite.  You don’t care about these kids dying, and if you do give, it’s because you saw a sad picture of a tsunami victim or a fat bellied african kid that made you feel sad, so, just like you eat a tub of ice cream and go shopping a Neimans after a breakup, you engaged in a selfish act to make yourself feel better.

You really care about every single human life - more than a purse, a wallet, or other possessions?  Then you’re not reading this, because you’re in a hut in africa.

And lets face the realities of these ‘adopt a kid’ programs too.  They are a poorly designed pyramid scam that cannot possibly help to sustain what is a regional absence of wealth, infrastructure, medical attention…need I go on?  They make you feel bad, and like the bleeding heart hippies you are, you sign up, then they take 30 cents off of every dollar for administration fees (i.e. you’re paying some American to eat the steak pictured above) and distribute the rest among too many kids to do any good.

Oh, wait, you got a letter from your child?  How precious!  So, you’re telling me that with your 70 cents per day, they were able to teach these African kids with no education at - let alone nutrition -  all how to read and write ENGLISH?!  It takes 5 years to do this in the United States with our TRILLION DOLLAR education system, but with your 70 cents they can teach these kids to write in perfect english in less than a month?

WAKE THE FUCK UP.

You are paying for Americans in African to get a bunch of african kids to sit around and copy charters on a piece of paper.  Do you think they have any idea what they’re writing?  They probably have them copy an ‘e’ backwards so it looks cute.  Why not pay an old folks home to knit you some sweaters too, while you’re at it.

Now, if you do care about these kids, good for you.  If you actually happen to be working in Africa to develop some semblance of a modern infrastructure that can provide these kids with running water, dispose of sewage, deliver food and medicine in a timely manner, then yes, you are part of the solution, not the problem.

For the rest of you, lets cut the crap, ok?  Even if you do donate to ’save a starving african’ you are just paying to sustain these kids for a little while, until they are no longer young and cute, after which the lack of any economic structure or education kicks in and these kids die just like all the rest.

And Google, cut out these f’ing ads.

On the advice of a friend, I’ve started to watch the show The Riches on FX.  Its really good!  The plot centers around a family of “Irish Travelers” that moves from town to town making money off small cons.

The show is interesting because although it takes place within the United States, the lifestyle these people live is so different.  They essentially are a nomadic people with a loose hierarchical structure similar to the mafia.  The families all independently travel around and make small amounts of money some of which needs to be paid up to the “boss.”  Although they are loosely organized, the families are out for themselves.

The show starts with one family that falls out of favor with the larger group of Travelers.  The family causes an accident along a roadway then assumes the life of the family that perished in the accident.  Since the deceased family was on their way to move into a new job, house, town etc.  no one at their destination has any idea of what they look like.  So essentially we watch a white trash family con their way into a upper class existence.  Running a con this big truly becomes a family affair.

I’m sure many of the old shows are available somewhere on the internet or even replayed on FX.  Take a look at this one and let me know what you think.  I see an Emmy in the future if they can keep the quality high.

Some comments from the blog sphere:

“The Riches” Eps. 1-3. I’m falling hard for the grift.

The Riches (FX) with Eddie Izzard

‘The Riches’ features three priceless leads

the riches

I’ve been reading Anthony Bourdain’s Kitchen Confidential as well as vo’ing his Travel Channel series No Reservations, and I have to say, I am both impressed and annoyed with the guy.

On one hand, he is a great, nearly universally acclaimed writer.  This is evident from his book, his narration of No Reservations, as well as his many published articles.  He does a good job of avoiding general observations, instead focusing on the often ironic environment of local cities and foreign countries, as well as the food industry as a whole.

At the same time, he often comes off as an elitist curmudgeon, bemoaning things that are normal, off-the shelf and widely available to the general public.  This is particularly true when it comes to food and dining.

Bourdain did pay his dues, to be sure.  He graduated from the CIA, held several prestigious positions at leading restaurants, and later opened his own place, Les Halles in New York City.  He also worked as a grunt during his formative years - time that is well documented in Kitchen Confidential - while engaging in not-so-ready-for-tv kitchen practices involving sex and drugs, among others.

While impressive, this history, it seems, is the root of Bourdain’s elitism.  He disdains many stars of the food network, celebrity chefs that share neither his checkered past nor high standards.  Most notable here are beefs with chefs Emeril Lagasse, Bobby Flay, and Rachel Ray of all people.

I sense a ‘keeping it real’ factor here - a somewhat blue collar backlash on the more famous, but less street smart chefs that we see on the food network.  It’s a petty attack however, some people are dealt better hands than others - so be it.

Bourdain also attacks celebrity chefs for using off-the-shelf, pre-packaged, or lower quality ingredients.  Rachel Ray is a frequent target here - Bourdain often remarks how Ray encourages viewers to throw together a meal with little passion - voila, a 40 minute meal.

But with this attack Bourdain bites his own critique.  Just as foreigners use a broad range of ingredients, from ants to testicles, because of their local environment, Americans too must make similar sacrifices.  Not everyone can be a chain smoking, heavy drinker that is free to roam the world experiencing life - for some life is working a long day at work, and picking up whatever is available at the supermarket, whether it’s prepackaged or not, in order to make a meal for their family.

Bourdain extols ethnic cuisine because it is unique, fresh and pure, but at the end of the day a 40 minute meal is, just like a seal eyeball, what the locals must do to put a meal on the table.  The locals here however, have resources at their disposal like granulated garlic and canned tomato sauce - not as romantic as a cobra perhaps, but from the same vein nonetheless.

Rachel Ray is an easy target, and fits with Bourdain’s image of a gritty, street-worn chef.  But really these attacks are evidence more of Bourdain’s ‘man as an island’ lifestyle, rather than creativity.  In this respect, Bourdain comes off as a rich prep school brat, unable to understand why hard working families must make sacrifices with their food, rather than combing the world for fresh ingredients.  He criticizes those that don’t have a passion for cooking, unable to understand that a passion for basic necessities is instead what drives the 40 minute meals crowd.

Similarly, Bourdain trashes the Vegas strip, instead opting for ‘local’ vegas cuisine.  But isn’t this like trying to turn a ho into a housewife?  Vegas is what it is.  Vegas is known for the strip.  Not every experience has to be non-commercial and close to the earth…some can be flamboyant, artificial and glitzy - things are what they are.  Trying to turn vegas into a unique cultural experience is like criticizing straw huts in vietnam, instead looking for a Cheesecake Factory.  Part of appreciating the culture is accepting what the culture gives you - in vietnam, it’s straw huts, in vegas, it’s a hotel that looks like New York city.

It’s unfortunate, because I love 80% of No Reservations.  But every episode Bourdain gets on his ‘Rachel Ray is Fake’ or ‘Celebrity chefs cheated their way here’ soapbox, and frankly, it’s annoying.

The thing is, Bourdain’s carefully manufactured ‘hard’ image is itself, quite off the shelf and prepackaged.  Oh the witty chain smoker and heavy drinker, surely we have seen nothing on television like this before!  I prefer the wit of Magnum PI to be honest - at least that guy had better shirts.

If Bourdain removed his head from his ass for a moment, instead focusing, on say, his cooking, he could have a show on the food network - a perfect platform to communicate the virtues of fresh ingredients, local cuisine, rare ethnic treats and whatnot.  But no, instead Bourdain is too busy being witty and gritty, in the end making himself unpalatable for the food network audience, that, at the end of the day, is interested primarily in food.

And let’s be clear, despite his hatred toward many food network chefs, Bourdain would sell out to the food network given the opportunity.  He is after all, on the Travel Channel, a network that shows Bizarre foods and Globe Trekkers alongside the World Poker Tour - not exactly the high standard of cable television.

So, mixed reviews for Bourdain.  Great writer, questionable platform, poor implementation.

Yes it is - you know it.  Deal or no Deal requires no skill at all - you just need to be able to count to 26 (or alternatively memorize the names of 26 models).  It is truly the dumbest show on TV.

And worse yet, since it’s a TV show, they pick the people with the most interesting personalities to appear on the show.  That means you get idiots jumping around the stage, yelling, making asinine comments, doing their stupid dances, telling their stupid personal stories, etc.

But I love the show and watch it religiously.  I can’t tell you why.  I can only tell you I do.

One thing though, is that I notice that with each contestant, I either really want them to win or really want them to lose.  Like the annoying white trash idiot who talked about buying beer with his winnings - I wanted that guy to lose like no other, and was glad when he walked away with $10.  Then you get the nice people who have families and stuff, and you actually root for them.

See, Deal or no Deal makes you at least care about these people, one way or the other.

Another thing is the rags to riches to rags plot.  I mean, it happens nearly every show.  You see a person, and lets face it, the show usually has blue collar, lower class contestants, rise from an initial offer of low five figures to six figures, then you see the greed that brings these folks back down to five figures and finally to a two or three figure deal.  These people have changed their lives completely in less than an hour, sometimes 180 degrees, sometimes 360 degrees - and a few actually walk away with six figures.

I mean, I watch this shit and think that i must have something better to do with my time - but I don’t.  I do have the time to watch idiots prance around stage, and i call them idiots, but what do you call the idiot with no prospect of winning money watching the idiots on tv?

Anyway, I hesitate calling it a good show, but at least it’s entertaining.  One suggestion though, TiVo it.  Only about 5% of the show is actual excitement - the rest is filler and the host building up excitement, or contestants dancing around like idiots.  You can skip through those scenes.