Spitzit’s House

Where serious topics come to relax

Sarah Palin for Republican VP – WTH?

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is no relation to Michael Palin of Monty Python fame, but wouldn’t that be the “funny as hell” icing on the cake! What a shocker of a running mate for McCain! McCain/Palin 2008. It has a nice ring to it.

I am not a politically active or opinionated person, as I pretty much believe that all politicians are fork tongued, double speaking…well, politicians. I vote every election, but I don’t get caught up in the partisan banter and mud slinging garbage that every election devolves into. They generally all make fools of themselves in the process anyway. But I just can’t resist watching what continues to be a historical election year. And to think that I thought that the last “chad counting” election would be hard to top. You just don’t have to be an avid fan or follower of politics to know when you are seeing something unique and strangely exciting happening. History has already been made in the Primaries and we are now guaranteed to have either our first female or black man in the White House, sort of. I know the VP doesn’t live in the White House, but you know what I mean.

Palin has very little political experience, and I have to admit that it is a little scary considering the thought of having someone so green sitting behind the helm of the Oval Office desk if the President died or was unable to serve. Then again, this woman may just be one ball-busting kind of gal that will turn Washington on its head and have it swooning in the gaze of her dark smoldering “hockey-mom” eyes right before she plants her ethical knee of justice squarely in the corrupt groin of modern politics. She ain’t hard on the eyes either, but that won’t be relevant when it comes to the task of dealing with foreign policy, an unpopular war, and a questionable economy.

I am now even more excited to see what happens. The feeding frenzy has begun and I hope Palin is prepared to handle the attack of a million hungry sharks in the Democratic party and the razor sharp words of a Democratic slanted media that are ready to shred her pretty little image apart. The game is on, and the question is will she blink? Will she break down and cry? or will she weather the fury storm and come out on top and have us all endeared to her charming smile?

Palin, I just hope you don’t have any skeletons in your closet; no drugs, no stripping, sex tapes, or nude photos buried in some obscure drawer somewhere just waiting for this moment in your life to suddenly surface. If you’re pure of heart, with a stiff back-bone, and are as hard-assed as some seem to think you are, then this ticket may just have a better than average chance of taking this race to the White House.

God Bless America!


August 29, 2008 Posted by | Everything Else, politics | , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 6 Comments

The Rule Of Four is quite the bore

Published in 2004, The Rule of Four was written by childhood buddies, Ian Caldwell and Dustin Thomason. It is their first published book, therefore, I will start by fairly stating that the book is not horrible, and is far from the worst book I have ever read. Without doing any formal research, my psychic mind also tells me that Ian and Dustin are most likely a couple of Ivy League intellectuals that are completely disconnected from the rest of us idiots.

I have had this book for about 3 years now. I purchased it like I do most books, based on how interesting it sounds from the synopsis on the dust cover. Not exactly scientific, but it works for me. At the time, I was still high off the “Da Vinci Code” and desperately looking for another history/fiction thriller steeped in mysterious codes from the past. The Rule of Four seemed like it would hit the spot. The calculated release of this book while readers were still buzzed on Da Vinci Code was the only genius thing about the book.

Over the past few years I have attempted to read The Rule of Four on at least three occasions and each time I have put it down to read something more compelling. However, this last time I was determined to make myself read it cover to cover, all 368 pretentious pages of it.

The story basically follows four super smart college room mates in their senior year at Princeton as they navigate the evidently much sought after and deadly mysteries of an ancient and anonymously written book called the Hypnerotomachia Poliphili. The four characters include the standard cast of characters that we all know and love including our main character, Tom as the somewhat normal guy with a haunted past; Paul, the brilliant but reclusive genius; Charlie, the athletic and brawny man’s man; and Gil, the charming, good-looking popular guy that everyone wants to be with. Basically, what you have here is the Ivy League A-Team.

The book is dreadfully boring in the beginning, but does have parts where it starts to get exciting. However, each time the book gets you going, it just derails back into boring dialogue about obscure historical figures, or Princeton history and tradition. In a nutshell, Paul and Tom are trying to decode a 500 year old book that apparently will reveal a map to a hidden treasure trove of lost art and historical artifacts that was stowed away by a rich Italian guy who feared that a powerful Bishop at the time was going to gather all the world’s great art and burn it. For ages scholars have been trying to decode the strange book that is written in multiple languages, is based on one long dream and seemingly makes no sense at all. But two Princeton seniors are on the verge of cracking the code that 500 years worth of scholars have not even come close to. All this sound confusing or unfamiliar? That’s because it is.

My main problem with the book is that it is written by scholars for scholars. The book is chock full of obscure historical references and people that I have never heard of. It is all done in the casual manner that almost assumes the reader is also a scholar and we are all familiar with obscure European history, and we are all willing to ditch our smoking hot girlfriend to spend time decoding a book. What the book does succeed in doing is alienating the reader, and when the reader feels alienated, the reader becomes bored and disinterested.

Take the “Da Vinci Code” or even the movie “National Treasure” for example. They are both stories, that are very loosely based around history. Granted, they could have tried to be a little more historically accurate, but the point is that the historical events and figures in these stories are ones that most people have heard of, therefore, we are drawn to it. The Rule of Four could have been better if it had been dumbed down a bit, but that would probably go against the writer’s principles and would have offended other scholars that loved the book.

I’m no idiot, but I’m definitely no scholar either. I read the book, found it to be very pretentious and boring…but not terrible. Somewhere in all the scholarly minutiae was a good story that just got lost by a couple of virgin writers that needed to show off how smart they are. On a scale of 1 to 10, The only Rule of Four is a Four.

August 29, 2008 Posted by | Book Reviews | , , , , , | Leave a comment