Oh my God, this is so disturbing!! Thursday, Oct 25 2007 

If you’re an attractive girl and want to go to one of the World Series games in Boston, you should have no problem whatsoever. There are TONS of ads on Craigslist written by guys looking for a pretty girl to go to the game with them. Most of them are pretty innocent and normal — just guys looking for a girl.

This one that I just came across in the casual encounters section, however (don’t judge!), brings unbelievable to a new level.

Check it out:

I am a young executive male who is visiting Boston. I just got three tickets to tomorrows game and I am looking for women 21 and up who would like to come to the game with me. You must be very good looking and willing to dress provocatively. In addition, I will also pay $500, as well as your expenses, and on top of that I will also pick up a dress for you to wear, we can pick it out together.

Also, after the game if you would like I would be willing to pay extra to spend sometime in my hotel.

Please serious replies only and if you do not attach a pic I will not reply!

Ew. Gross, gross man. Is anyone else picturing Tailor-Made from I Love New York 2?

More importantly, can you imagine the kind of girl who would respond to an ad like this? How could you be SO lacking in self-esteem to do something like this? It’s so completely degrading — from the three girls to the provocative outfits to hotel room….ew.

Guy, let it be known that YOU ARE GROSS and offering a presumatively generous gift of $500 to three different people does absolutely nothing to cover up the fact that you are piece of zit-covered, maggot-infested slimeball on the back of a diseased slug.

The Boston Globe’s feature on me has been posted! Sunday, Jul 15 2007 

The story is FANTASTIC, and the writer, Danielle Dreilinger, did such a great job.

Here is the story, taken directly from boston.com:

Stop sign travesties!
Self-proclaimed “grammar vandal” goes after public mistakes that grate
By Danielle Dreilinger, Globe Correspondent July 15, 2007

The ads said “run easy,” but they made Kate McCulley’s teeth clench.

The 22-year-old grammarian stared at Reebok’s Marathon-themed posters on her commute from Somerville to Fort Point this spring, on her way to her job as a research assistant at a concierge services company. “RUN EASY BOSTON,” the ads announced, inviting locals to . . . do what?

The question began to haunt her.

“Should I run an easy Boston? Should I run, and is Boston a promiscuous city?” she riffed on her travel blog, katesadventures.com. Her conclusion: “Without punctuation, we have nothing.”
It didn’t help her mood that she was reading “Eats, Shoots & Leaves,” the best-selling book about grammar that tickles readers with its gentle wit but hits hard about the sorry state of language usage. Her copy included a packet of punctuation stickers as a do-it-yourself correction kit.

The Reebok sign should have read “run easily,” McCulley observed, and it should have had a comma after “easily,” before “Boston.”

(Grammar note: “Easy” is an adjective, which must never be used to describe a verb, such as “run”; that task calls for the adverb “easily.” A sentence addressing someone directly, such as “Run easily,” must separate that address from the party being addressed — in this case, Boston — with a comma.)

On May 29, a memorable date for its linguistic personal import, McCulley cracked. The mild-mannered blogger ducked inside (well, next to) a bus shelter on Summer Street by South Station, pulled out her handy sheet of comma stickers, and made one small correction:
“RUN EASY, BOSTON.”

She had become the Grammar Vandal.

McCulley’s credentials? She’s an aspiring writer who majored in English in college and grew up loving to read and spell. Her reference book? “Most of what I go by is instinct,” she said, though she holds the “Associated Press Stylebook” close to her heart.

In the week after McCulley’s small act of rebellion, Buzzfeed.com, a blog that tracks hot Web topics, chose her as a top “grammar Nazi” blogger. People reposted the item on the popular Newsvine blog.

McCulley realized some people did care about language — enough for her to start a new blog, www.thegrammarvandal.com.

The Reebok ad has since disappeared, but the comma remains on the bus shelter, a vestige of the beginnings of McCulley’s crusade around Boston for truth, usage, and the grammatical way.
McCulley has always noticed grammar errors, she said. The only difference is that now when she sees one, “I take a picture and post it on my blog,” she said.

It’s a question of standards. “It’s as if we’ve resigned ourselves” to errors, she said. “Are we giving up everything to LOL and BRB?” (That’s “laugh out loud” and “be right back,” for those who are completely out of it.) She does use “LOL” in text messages but takes the extra time to tap correct grammar into that tiny keypad. “Twice as long, twice as right!” she chirps.

McCulley seems completely unfazed by the responsibility she’s taken upon herself. She’ll debate finer points: Should Boston RealtyNet hyphenate “full service”? And she admits even she can’t be perfect. Several responses to her original vandalism blog post ing criticized its grammar. She considered the points “debatable.”

Nothing is immune to the Grammar Vandal’s keen eye, not even the blue T-shirt she wore on a recent walk to point out grammar errors along Newbury Street. McCulley couldn’t possibly walk around wearing a shirt saying “Without Me Its Just Aweso.” So she took a Sharpie to the shirt, adding a comma after “me” and an apostrophe to “it’s.”

“Of course , I’m obsessive,” she said.

On her walk around Back Bay, the grammar vigilante’s judgments were sure and steady. Though Newbury Street is considered among the classiest of thoroughfares in an educated city, its signs are riddled with errors.

Newbury Visions riled McCulley with its sign for “eye exams contact lenses.” As with the Reebok ad, the she felt the sign cried out for separation between its elements.

Another peeve surfaced several blocks down, at the Boloco restaurant. ” ‘Everyday’ can be one word, but only as an adjective meaning ‘usual’ or ‘typical,’ ” McCulley explained, not “each day.” Boloco’s sign almost certainly didn’t mean to say its “breakfast burritos” are ordinary, but that they are on the menu daily.

Still, why worry when people probably understand from the sign that they can get a daily fix of tasty burritos at Boloco, or recognize the phrases “eye exams” and “contact lenses?”

McCulley bristled at the question. “Getting the idea across is the very basic, the minimum,” she said.

Continuing down Newbury, McCulley pointed out a discrepancy between “Alexanders” and “Alexander’s” on a beauty parlor (the possessive apostrophe is needed, unless the shop is for more than one Alexander). Questioned later, store manager Lourdes Lopez said the proper spelling of the salon is actually “Alexander’s,” after the original owner.

McCulley judged Avante Gard Medical Spa’s name plain “wrong.” (Should be “Avant-Garde.”) She allowed the period at the end of “Betsey Johnson.” to stand, though, citing “artistic license.”
A very few stores earned gold stars. BeBe Nail & Skin Salon hyphenated “walk-ins.” Co So Artists’ Gallery formed the plural possessive correctly. “That is all too rare these days,” McCulley said. “It’s perfect!”

What really got McCulley’s goat wasn’t an error here or there by a single person but mistakes made by businesses. Shouldn’t they have editors to check ads and signs? She paused in front of the Madura linens store at the corner of Dartmouth and Newbury streets and pointed out a shiny, printed sign advertising a sale “On marked items only, while supplies last curent prices.” (Proper spelling: current; comma needed after “last.”)

Store manager Victoria Whitney sighed when asked about the sign. Madura is a French company, she said, and the sign was custom-made in France. By the time it arrived here, it was too late to fix the error.

The worst offender in all of Boston, according to the Vandal: Lush, a purveyor of earthy-yet-expensive soaps and cosmetics. McCulley directed a reporter to peek through the window at a blackboard inside. It read:

‘HAVE FUN THIS IS AN ADULT CANDY STORE.’

McCulley could hardly contain her disdain. “Have fun, exclamation point; this is an adult candy store, period,” she said.

All along the walk, the Vandal watched for opportunities to use her trusty comma stickers (which conveniently double as apostrophes). She couldn’t reach the Alexanders sign unless she hung off a stairway. The Madura sign was behind glass. McCulley knelt and drew a connecting bracket on a CVS placard announcing openings for “over night” staff, making it into a single word.

Finally she zeroed in the European Watch Co. The sign was accessible. The store was closed. And the sign read “New Pre-Owned Vintage.” It was her pet bugaboo: the missing comma.
McCulley climbed up on the stone ledge and quietly adjusted the phrase as oblivious shoppers walked by. She stood back and admired the sign, which now said “New, Pre-Owned, Vintage.”

“There you go,” she said. “That is beautiful.”

That beauty might be fleeting. When alerted to the fix, manager Albert Ganjei noticed the black stickers didn’t match the white text. He might order some white commas, he said.
But the life of a Grammar Vandal can be lonely. Some friends “have stopped sending me e-mails for fear I will correct them,” she said. One acquaintance followed an e-mail to her calling Mitt Romney’s sons “hott” with a second message explaining she was purposely adding the second “t” to emphasize the hotness of the young men. The postscript made McCulley feel “like a monster!” she said.

Hence the blog, where she hopes to find like-minded souls.

If one passer by learns how to use a comma from her edits, McCulley said, “then I think my job is” — she paused and corrected herself — “well, not done.”

PHOTO GALLERY: The ‘grammar vandal’

Fantastic Words Friday, Apr 13 2007 

I don’t know what y’all be thinking when you bring them round me
Let me remind you that I AM THE KING OF R&B
Do you know what that means?
That means if you love your chick
Don’t bring her to the VIP —
Cause I might leave with your chick!

Fuck me, I love me some R. Kelly….but seriously, he makes it too easy.

Barack Obama on Democrats and Faith Thursday, Jun 29 2006 

Senator Barack Obama (whom I absolutely love) recently spoke about Democrats, criticizing the views held by the party in regards to religion and faith. What he says, as usual, hits the nail on the head.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Sen. Barack Obama chastised fellow Democrats Wednesday for failing to “acknowledge the power of faith in the lives of the American people” and said the party must compete for the support of evangelicals and other churchgoing Americans.

“Not every mention of God in public is a breach to the wall of separation. Context matters,” the Illinois Democrat said in remarks to a conference of Call to Renewal, a faith-based movement to overcome poverty.

“It is doubtful that children reciting the Pledge of Allegiance feel oppressed or brainwashed as a consequence of muttering the phrase `under God,”‘ he said. “Having voluntary student prayer groups using school property to meet should not be a threat any more than its use by the High School Republicans should threaten Democrats.”

Obama, the only black in the Senate, drew national notice even before arriving in Congress last year, and has occasionally used his visibility to scold members of his own party. Widely sought as a fundraiser for other Democrats, Obama responded with a noncommittal laugh this spring when asked whether he wants a spot on the national ticket in 2008.

His speech included unusually personal references to religion, the type of remarks that usually come more readily from Republicans than Democrats.

“Kneeling beneath that cross on the South Side of Chicago, I felt I heard God’s spirit beckoning me,” he said of his walk down the aisle of the Trinity United Church of Christ. “I submitted myself to his will and dedicated myself to discovering his truth.”

Obama said millions of Christians, Muslims and Jews have traveled similar religious paths, and that is why “we cannot abandon the field of religious discourse. … In other words, if we don’t reach out to evangelical Christians and other religious Americans and tell them what we stand for, Jerry Falwells and Pat Robertsons will continue to hold sway.”

Obama coupled his advice with a warning. “Nothing is more transparent than inauthentic expressions of faith: the politician who shows up at a black church around election time and claps — off rhythm — to the gospel choir.”

At the same time, he said, “Secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering the public square.”

As a result, “I think we make a mistake when we fail to acknowledge the power of faith in the lives of the American people and join a serious debate about how to reconcile faith with our modern, pluralistic democracy.”

Obama mentioned leaders of the religious right briefly, saying they must “accept some ground rules for collaboration” and recognize the importance of the separation of church and state.

Source

I’m a huge Clinton fan, even since back when he was first elected in 1992 (although I didn’t know THAT much about him back then). And it’s obvious that I despise Bush. Clinton was a truly great president and was leading us so much better than we’re being led now. But since the Bush/Gore election of 2000, Democrats and Republicans have each polarized their own parties. Except for brief unity following 9/11, the Republicans have dug themselves deeper into basing their politics on religion (namely Christianity, of course) and Democrats have been trying to build off Bush’s unpopularity by trying to be everything that Bush isn’t, while the gay rights movement has gained so much momentum.

It just keeps getting worse and worse — like poison ivy. The more you scratch it, the more it itches. It’s becoming taboo for a candidate to endorse a principle generally favored by the other party.

That’s why Obama is so refreshing. Ever since he came on the scene during Election 2004, he’s been championing the cause of bringing the parties closer together again, working together for a better America. He was on the cover of Newsweek’s “Who’s Next” issue in the last week of 2004, with the headline “Seeing Purple.” He’s made so many good points, but what’s most significant is that he’s a Democrat critical of the current state of the Democratic Party, rather than attacking Republicans, as most Democrats are doing nowadays.

You know, things are getting so bad in America that sometimes I wonder if this is the beginning of the end of our empire. Save splitting the country in half, neither party is going to convince the rest of country to side with them. (Although fuckthesouth.com does make quite the case for splitting the country in half.) We have to be humble enough to admit our shortcomings and see the big picture, and Obama is doing that.

As for him possibly running for president in 2008, my opinion on that is that he’s just a junior senator and doesn’t have quite as much experience as would be ideal. A junior senator seems better-suited to be the running mate. However, Obama has such a well-defined presence and grasp of reality that I wouldn’t want to see him in the background, whether it’s for Hilary or someone else. John Edwards was a junior senator when he ran for president in 2004, and while his charisma (too much charisma and not enough original substance, in my opinion) and ideals shot him to the top, he didn’t have that X-factor that could catapult him into being a serious candidate for president that the entire country could get behind.

(While I liked him very much as a politician, my caveat with him was that he used to be a lawyer who represented people getting ridiculously huge settlements — like several million. I remember that he once represented a man who originally was awarded a few million after suing a doctor for malpractice, then Edwards fought for the money to be raised to several tens of millions. Is that necessary? Does somebody REALLY need THAT much money? I think that our legal system needs to be overhauled because lawsuits that large are crippling our cities, our schools, our doctors….Fairfield University recently had to award $100,000 to a kid who did nothing but cause trouble, thanks to the legal system. I could write a whole entry about lawsuits, but not today.)

But if there were ever a junior senator that HAS that X-factor that could make him an ideal candidate for president, it’s Barack Obama. He HAS IT, whatever IT is.

Although I yearned for Kerry to win the 2004 election, I had a little inkling in the back of my mind that he wasn’t the ideal Democratic candidate. And even if it cost us the election, it would be better to wait four more years and get a much better Democratic candidate. Is it Obama? I believe so. It’s certainly not Hilary — while I like her very much, she’s too disliked by too many people.

Keep watching this guy. He’s going to do a lot of good things.

All that being said, what struck me most about this article was the fact that Obama is the only black person in the Senate. I knew there weren’t a lot, but only one?! Jesus. (And whatever happened to Carole Moseley Braun?) I’m not sure if there are any Hispanic or Asian senators, but I do know that there’s a Native American (Republican) senator from Colorado. It’s ridiculous, isn’t it?