I resemble that remark

As I'm sure you're all aware, rabbit ears and roof-top antennas will become mostly useless as of Feb 17, 2009. That's when there's going to be a switch-over to all digital broadcasts and Luddites such as myself--with my 25-year-old television set and no cable or satellite dish--will need a converter box to watch over-the-air broadcasts.

Or do I? I've been wondering about that lately. It appears I'm not the only one. This little tidbit appeared at IMDB.com....

Suggesting that the days of over-the-air broadcasting may be numbered, a new report indicates that just 15 percent of all households still receive broadcasts via antennas, with about 10 percent of those planning to sign up for cable or satellite providers when the switch to digital transmission takes place on February 17.

The report also indicated that about 20 percent may not purchase converter boxes and instead rely more on DVD and other entertainment. "Terrestrial viewers tend to be more likely to use alternative video entertainment forms such as DVD rentals and broadband video, and the transition may push them further in that direction," the report said.

Earlier this year, the FCC chairman stupidly predicted that America's cities might burn and civilization would fall into total anarchy when the switch-over happened. Click here to read my original post on Jonathan Adelstein predicting possible "widespread panic" among idiots who will miss "Tyra" because of the change-over. (You can also see my PSA regarding the switch.)

It appears that Adelstein's hyperbole was even more hysterical and exaggerated than I had assumed. I could believe that I was in a minority as far as being completely disinterested in the change-over, but it now appears that I may not be.

I have not had cable TV for at least nine years at this point. I haven't missed it, because I have a friend who tapes key shows for me, I get my news from newspapers and websites, and I watch waaaay too many movies to see much broadcast television anyway. So, I may just not even bother with the converter... and someday, when I've got a better-paying job and I'm flush with cash, maybe I'll get cable just to say that I have it.

Tony Hillerman dead at 83

Tony Hillerman, author of the acclaimed Navajo Tribal Police mystery novels and creator of two of the unlikeliest of literary heroes -- Navajo police officers Joe Leaphorn and Jim Chee -- died Sunday of pulmonary failure. He was 83.

Hillerman's daughter, Anne Hillerman, said her father's health had been declining in the last couple years and that he was at Presbyterian Hospital in Albuquerque when he died at about 3 p.m.

Dolomite has pimped his last 'ho.

Rudy Ray Moore, a raunchy 1970s comedian who played the title role of a flashy pimp in the movie "Dolomite" and influenced a generation of rappers, has died. He was 81.

Moore died Sunday evening at an Akron nursing home from complications of diabetes, said his brother, Gerald Moore.

Yes, the truth hurts. But it's the TRUTH.

I don't usually on celebrity relationship dramas unless one of the parties involved is being extraordinarily obnoxious, such as Madonna with her divorce against Guy Ritchie.

Among the complaints in her "case" for why she's the injured party is the following tidbit from The Daily Mirror.

Madonna is building an extraordinary divorce case against Guy Ritchie, claiming he was a cruel and verbally-abusive husband who would belittle and ridicule her in front of others.

Lawyers for the singer, who was widely believed to be the dominant partner in the marriage, are putting together a dossier of incidents.

They include allegations that he told her she 'looked like a granny' on stage compared with her younger backing dancers. He is also alleged to have declared that she could not act, and was 'past it' after she turned 50.

Telling Madonna the truth is, apparently, cruel and abusive.

It is a TRUTH that Madonna can't act and never has been able to act. She embarrassed herself (and everyone else watching her because it was so awkward) in "Desperately Seeking Susan", "Shanghai Surprise", and "Dick Tracy".

It is a TRUTH that Madonna looks like a granny up there on stage with backup dancers who are less than half her age in some cases. It is TRUTH that one should stop dressing like a fetish hooker well before the age of 50 (at least in public).

Partisan hack speaks of what he knows best

Dan Rather, an editorialist who managed to pass for a journalist for many years and whose shenananigans finally caught up with him when he eagerly based "news" on forged documents back in 2004, made some comments in advance of last night's presidential debate that were on a topic he's an expert in.

Here's what IMDB reported:

Former CBS Evening News anchor Dan Rather insisted Tuesday that the "so-called" presidential debates are not controlled by the journalists presiding over them but by the two political parties.

He accused his colleagues of showing too much deference to the candidates and operating in general in a "defensive posture" and imposing self-censorship on themselves.

"These so-called debates are not for the people, by the people," Rather said Tuesday at Time Warner's Politics 2008 Summit. "They are for the parties, by the parties. That's what's wrong with them."

Dan Rather is right. The debates we've been seeing haven't been debates at all. They've just been campaign commericals. And, since Rather is an expert in being a partisan media hack, there's no question he knows what he's talking about here.

And it's a shame. If Obama wasn't such a coward and had stood by his pledge to debate McCain "any time, any where"--remember, McCain tried to take him up on that offer with a bunch of townhalll-format debates but Obama turned him down flat--we might actually have gotten some real debates with real questions asked by moderators who weren't concerned with partisan books about to be published or with making sure they look good for the RNC and DNC goons who have bribed them.

I wonder why Rather is speaking out, though. Perhaps he is upset because his colleagues didn't make a greater effort to make the Democrat ticket look better by maybe working in a few more Obama slogans in the questions, or maybe he's still on a pointless crusade to convince everyone he was actually a serious journalist for the past couple of decades?