Washington Free Beacon » Blog

Dictionary of the People

Robert Charette — Tue, 21 May 2013 20:31:53 +0000

The U.S. court system is built upon the Sixth Amendment, which entitles Americans to a fair and speedy trial with an impartial jury. And now, thanks to the increasing use of Urban Dictionary in our courts, Americans also enjoy the right to a trial in the slang of their choosing. How else could county court handle a dispute between two “ratchets?”

The Newspaper of Record breaks it down:

Two weeks earlier, a court in Tennessee noted that a phrase used by a manager at a supply chain logistics company — “to nut” — was defined by Urban Dictionary as “to ejaculate.” After weighing that and other evidence, it rejected a motion to dismiss a sexual harassment claim by female employees.

It can take years for slang terms to be included in traditional dictionaries, whose editors want to be certain that the words have staying power. By contrast, some new words rush into Urban Dictionary in less than a day. As a result, the site has cropped up in dozens of court cases in recent years, according to a Lexis database of federal and state cases, although the outcome rarely rests solely on a definition.

Understandably, the legal use of a website that allows its users to crowdsouce the definitions of “twerking” and “Eskimo brother” can be polarizing.

Slang dictionary editor Tom Dalzell says the use of Urban Dictionary in court is a terrible idea because it’s not an actual authority. But isn’t that the whole point of crowd sourcing?

As the Times points out, traditional dictionaries take much too long to adapt to the word on the streets.

If a discussion over who has to jump on the “grenade” ends up in, say, an assault charge, the courts can take advantage of the scores of “Jersey Shore” fans on the Interwebs and understand that the juiceheads were fighting over who had to take one for the team.

More Evidence Hipsters Are Horrible

Robert Charette — Tue, 21 May 2013 18:00:28 +0000

The two groups Americans of all stripes condemn are members of Congress and hipsters. And the latest evidence that hipsters are bound to plummet further into the reputation depths is this: the rising price of beer.

A cheap glass of beer is fast becoming an endangered species in New York City – and you can blame Pabst Blue Ribbon-swilling hipsters for that.

They are the reason why “sub-premium” beer prices in the city have climbed 9.4% in the last seven months, say Restaurant Sciences, which tracks food and beverage sales nationwide.

“I believe the single biggest driver in sub-premium beer price increases is indeed specifically PBR,” said Chuck Ellis, who heads the research company. “It has become quite fashionable.”

Because of hipsters’ unquenchable thirst for beer that tastes like chalk, watering holes are raising the prices of mainstream, sub-premium beer. A $4.50 Bud Light becomes $4.75, then $5.00. America crumbles.

Sub-premium beer has had prices on a steady uptick since October. I can only assume ultra/super-premium drinkers aren’t deterred by $5.25 beer. Salute.

Hipsters are interfering with millions of middle-class Americans. All that natural gas driller in North Dakota wants to do when he clocks out after a 10 hour day is order a cheap cold one before he goes home and faces reality. That hard-working American’s day gets ruined when his sub-premium beer is more expensive because of hipsters. If a coal miner in Scranton gets priced out of his Keystone Light Night, then the hipsters, and the terrorists, and indeed the hipster terrorists, have won.

A recent PPP poll showed 27 percent of Americans supporting the taxation of hipsters just for being hipsters. I may oppose senseless taxes, but a hipster tax would be good for America.

Mary J Blige Just Got A Lot More Drama

Robert Charette — Tue, 21 May 2013 16:19:49 +0000

It has been revealed that noted Obama superfan Mary J. Blige hates America. She’s eschewed her patriotic tax-paying duty for more than three years, landing her a $3.4 million IRS tax lien.

The queen of Hip-Hop-R&B got slapped with the lien after failing to pay income taxes for 2009 ($574,907.30), 2010 ($2,203,743.53), and 2011 ($647,604.60), per TMZ.

And that’s just federal taxes.

Mary J is on the hook by the state of New Jersey for a $901,769.65 tax lien that was issued back in February.

All told: That’s $4,328,025.08 worth of patriotism.

Flashback to last August, when Obama pushed to increase taxes:

And here’s the thing — there are a lot of well-to-do Americans, patriotic Americans, who understand this and are willing to do the right thing, willing to do their part to make this country strong.

Considering Mary J owes money to pretty much everyone other than me, this story is not completely shocking. Girl’s got some serious bills.

She owes:

A landscaper $4,301 on her $2.5 million house in the Palisades
Property taxes that set her back close to $100,000 on a home she’s been trying to sell since 2011 for $12.5 million
$3 million in defaulted mortgages on her assorted palaces.

On top of all that, her New York-based charity has yet to file returns, is missing hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations, and defaulted on a $250,000 loan. At the time, Blige said, “The problem is that I didn’t have the right people in the right places doing the right things.”

You think?

Perhaps MJB and fellow anti-American and Obama superfan Ray Lewis should rename the “Squirrel Dance” the “We Don’t Pay Taxes Dance.”

In addition to being homers for the president, both superstars are vocal about their religious beliefs.

Dear God, I want take a minute, not to ask of anything from you, but simply to say thank you, for all I have.

— Mary J. Blige (@maryjblige) September 23, 2012

With Mary’s kind of tax bill, though, “all I have” is pretty much what the IRS is going to take.

Regulators! Mount Up!

Sonny Bunch — Tue, 21 May 2013 14:32:10 +0000

I tend to leave the rap-blogging to Mr. Charette; that’s his scene. But I cannot abide the latest silliness from the American Enterprise Institute’s Stan Veuger, who has included Warren G’s “Regulate” in his list of “The 21 greatest conservative rap songs of all time.” His misreading of the events depicted in that ditty are so egregious—so monumental—that they must be disputed.

Veuger writes:

Upholding the rule of law, enforcing property rights, and effectively exercising a monopoly on violence are among [the government's] core functions. Warren Griffin III, or Warren G, and Nathaniel Dwayne Hall, or Nate Dogg, describe what society looks like when those functions fall victim to rampant government expansion in this song from the soundtrack to the movie Above The Rim. More specifically, Mr. Griffin falls victim to a carjacking in his own community. …

Mr. Griffin sees no obvious way out of this — law enforcement is nowhere to be seen — until Mr. Hall appears (“If I had wings I could fly / let me contemplate / I glanced in the cut and I see my homey Nate“). In the absence of a government capable of enforcing the rule of law, a spontaneous order emerges:

Sixteen in the clip and one in the hole

Nate Dogg is about to make some bodies turn cold

Now they droppin’ and yellin’

It’s a tad bit late

Nate Dogg and Warren G had to regulate

Veuger’s argument is based on a misreading of the song. Warren G was not simply driving around his ’hood when he got carjacked; he was attempting to partake in an illegal dice game. Here is the relevant passage:

So I hooks a left on the 21 and Lewis
Some brothas shootin’ dice so I said “Let’s do this”
I jumped out the ride,
And said “What’s up?”
Some brothas pulled some gats so I said “I’m stuck.”

Veuger seems to be misinterpreting the word “jacked.” It is not necessarily short for “carjacked.” Here’s Urban Dictionary’s first definition:

Origin from ‘hijacked’: as the past-progressive meaning stolen in a violent fashion.
Commonly refers to robbery, theft, misuse, seizure, possesion [sic].

The fourth definition is “stolen”; the fifth, “To get robbed, mugged, rolled or beaten up by someone.” You get the idea.

I will be honest: I’m not an expert on the American Enterprise Institute’s stance on illegal gambling. But I have a feeling that it has not yet come out in favor of gangbangers waging warfare on our streets in order to defend their property from being stolen during illegal craps games. This does not strike me as a particularly “conservative” message.

Regardless of whether or not the message is “conservative,” Warren G’s “Regulate” is an amazing song. And, in the end, isn’t that what matters? Why must we go searching for the “conservative message” hidden within random pieces of entertainment? Can’t we just enjoy something even if it’s, gasp, liberal? (Or, as is the case with “Regulate,” entirely apolitical?)

For your listening pleasure:

Daily Peel

CAF Truth Monkey — Tue, 21 May 2013 11:08:40 +0000

Over 20 children among those reported dead following Oklahoma tornado.

Florida man sets new record with the capture of a 18-foot, 8-inch python.

Two FBI special agents fell to their deaths during a training exercise over the weekend.

Senate findings reveal Apple pays close to zero in taxes.

IRS officials to face more grilling in the Senate today.

Vin Diesel Gets No Respect

Robert Charette — Mon, 20 May 2013 19:52:32 +0000

It’s hard out there being Vin Diesel. Prestige lead roles and industry respect go to girly men like Leonardo DiCaprio. Meanwhile Vin is relegated to co-starring in a six-going-on-seven-with-no-signs-of-slowing-down franchise that’s grossed billions of dollars and has consumed who knows how much human growth hormone on set. What’s a serious actor such as Vin Diesel to do?

Vin vents his frustrations to Men’s Fitness:

“Hollywood is more concerned about its male actors being in shape than its female actors,” he continues.

“Being a physical presence will rule you out of a lot of roles,” Diesel tells the mag. “I couldn’t have done [a movie like] ’Ferris Bueller’s Day Off’ with that physical presence. But I like it as part of me; it’s part of what I represent, and I think if Humphrey Bogart were around today he’d be a lot bigger.”

Vin is spot on with his armchair studio head analysis. Director Ben Younger in “Boiler Room” is the only director ambitious enough to put a suit over Vin’s pythons and let his face act, not his deltoids.

Proof of a great scene is its educational value. And as a salesman in a past life, I was forced to study Vin’s charisma and gumption and integrate it into my sales technique.

Look at countless yoked and/or juiced actors who’ve had to relinquish their guns for the sake of a job.

50 Cent in “All Things Falls Apart”:

Christian Bale in “The Machinist”:

Tom Hanks in “Cast Away”:

All these leading men have deprived their bodies of protein and the bench press for the sake of a serious movie role. “Cast Away” would be leagues better if we could have listened to Vin’s buttery voice croon to Wilson for nearly three hours.

Serious thespians like Vin and his Fast Six co-star Dwanye “The Rock” Johnson are paid to log hours upon hours getting ripped. Tell me why Vin couldn’t have been cast as a well-fed Thaddeus Stevens in “Lincoln”?

How more dashing Bogart would have been if he’d used 13-inch forearms to sweep Hepburn off her feet?

That Episode of Mad Men Was … Interesting

Sonny Bunch — Mon, 20 May 2013 18:05:39 +0000

I’m less concerned by the events of last night’s Mad Men—which was an incoherent mess that taught us nothing new about any of the characters (“Don Draper’s childhood was awful! The 60s were weird! Stan has a crush on Peggy! Black people are scary!*”) while laying on the symbolism so thick that it swiftly metastasized into SYMBOLISM!—than the reactions to last night’s Mad Men. It was a prime example of “interesting” television.

Mad Men’s creators do this once a season or so. They monkey with the conventions of narrative to give the critical set something they can really sink their teeth into. We critics love this sort of thing; here’s how I defined “interesting” cinema a year or so ago, using Nicolas Winding Refn’s Bronson as an example:

But Bronson is certainly an interesting movie — the sort of film that might divide critics (it was 70% fresh among top critics on Rotten Tomatoes) but will definitely make them pay attention. “Well, you don’t see that every day” is the cliched reaction, but it’s accurate: stylistically and tonally, it’s different. Ten percent will put it on their top ten list and ten percent will put it on their bottom ten list. Its difference in a sea of bland, unending sameness at the multiplex makes it stand out.

Last night’s episode of Mad Men fits that definition perfectly. Here’s how the AV Club’s Todd VanDerWerff described his reaction to the show:

I think I liked it? An equal part of me hated it. And the largest part of me is sort of blown away by the show’s willingness to just go there and commit.

So interesting! I kind of loved Matt Zoller Seitz’s evolving reaction to the episode:

MAD MEN knocking the cover off the ball tonight

— Matt Zoller Seitz (@mattzollerseitz) May 20, 2013

All right, MAD MEN, you still got it.

— Matt Zoller Seitz (@mattzollerseitz) May 20, 2013

Watching MAD MEN again to quantify the extent to which they were fucking with us. Early money on “considerable.”

— Matt Zoller Seitz (@mattzollerseitz) May 20, 2013

And then, this morning, in his official recap:

After two viewings, and no desire for a third, I’m convinced that metafiction/jazzing around is the only prism through which “The Crash” is anything other than audaciously annoying. More so than any Mad Men episode I can recall, it doesn’t quite feel like a Mad Men episode, but a bunch of half-formed ideas for a Mad Men episode. … Some of the ideas are great, others stunningly bad; still others don’t quite feel like ideas, even if you squint. It feels like the TV-drama version of one of those papers that every halfway-smart student writes when they’re exhausted and can’t come up with an idea, and decides to write about their inability to come up with an idea instead, and hope they’ll be so clever that they’ll get an A anyway.

(Fun fact: VanDerWerff gave last night’s episode of Mad Men an A.)

Over at Slate, Seth Stevenson grasps around to find a method to the show’s madness:

Was the amphetamine clockwork of the episode—skies flickering dark then light, days whirring together—meant to evoke the frightening velocity of the era? It must have felt in summer 1968 like the world was hurtling, spinning frantically out of control.

Why not! The beauty of “interesting” television (and interesting cinema) is that you can find almost any meaning you want. I briefly considered writing a post about Mad Men, the I Ching, and The Man in the High Castle that suggested the episode was about alternate realities and paths untaken. Because, again: why not? That’s the sort of thing that “interesting” television allows you to do when you’re a critic. It’s why we secretly love it even when we proclaim to hate it.

*At this point, it feels as if Mad Men‘s writers are trolling liberal critics of the show who want it to deal with race. “Oh, you want us to ‘tackle’ race? OK. Roger and Joan are going to get mugged by a black guy and Don’s kids are going to be menaced by a mammy. HA!”

Ryan Lochte’s Hero Journey

Robert Charette — Mon, 20 May 2013 17:02:39 +0000

Joseph Campbell’s monomyth has the following structure: a reluctant hero sets out on a fantastic journey where he endures trials and tribulations in order to claim victory over a malevolent foe. “What Would Ryan Lochte Do?” is the E Network’s very own monomyth.

In this week’s journey from Gainesville to Los Angeles, our hero faced his first existential crisis. Does Ryan answer the beckoning call of a post-swimming career designing neon pink New Balances in the City of Angels? Or does he remain Lord of Gainesville, spending his golden years zip-lining with the ”Lochterage” and sampling every type of sushi at Dragonfly with UF undergrads? Ryan credits his coaches and photographers for his aptitude in the pool and at photo shoots. But, to Ryan’s dismay, there is no life coach on the Lochterage payroll. Where does our hero belong on this big, beautiful, blue Earth?

Ryan and Gene venture to LA for a litany of meetings and media appearances, including two prestigious ceremonies. First Ryan is named as a finalist for Cartoon Network’s “That’s How I Roll” award, which apparently recognizes the year’s biggest show boat. True to his champion pedigree, Ryan wins the award, beating out such competition as Steeler defensive lineman Brett Keisel and Serena Williams.

Second, Ryan joins fellow winners-at-life Rosie O’Donnell and Betty White in having a hot dog named after him. Ryan’s backstroke records may fade, but the “Lochte Dog” will endure through time:

Another thing that remains timeless is Ryan’s enduring crush on “Baywatch” star Carmen Electra, as it’s still 1997 in Gainesville and NBC airs “Baywatch” in primetime (that’s why “1600 Penn” got canceled!). True to his mantle as “Ryan’s BFF Assistant,” Gene made Ryan’s dream of meeting the Aerobic Stripper come true.

Electra’s beauty renders our hero speechless, but because Ryan Lochte is a champion, he composes himself long enough to accept Electra’s invitation to a nightcap. Even an experienced man-eater such as Electra succumbs to the “Lochte charm,” as our hero returns home the conquering hero, becoming Eskimo brothers with Hermit Kingdom emissary Dennis Rodman.

Ryan’s charmed night with Carmen appears to have allayed his doubts about leaving home for the first time in 28 years. His quest for love soldiers on, as he searches for authenticity not in shameless models or Playmates, but in the indelible Carmen Electra.

The Apotheosis of Kanye West

Robert Charette — Mon, 20 May 2013 15:29:43 +0000

Rakim, Nas, and Jay-Z have all at some point dubbed themselves “Hip-Hop’s God.” Based on this past weekend, it won’t be long before Kanye West joins their ranks.

Kanye has used biblical imagery throughout his career, but not until his G.O.O.D. Friday series did the Chi-town rapper make any overt claims to being seated at the right hand of you-know-who. Mark May 18, 2013, as the day Kanye began his apotheosis. With a cryptic tweet, Kanye spoke to his followers from on high:

NEW SONG AND VISUAL FROM MY NEW ALBUM BEING PROJECTED TONIGHT ACROSS THE GLOBE ON 66 BUILDINGS, LOCATIONS @ KANYEWEST.COM

— KANYE WEST (@kanyewest) May 18, 2013

The visage of a new Kanye could be witnessed upon 66 spires in two continents.

And leave it to Kanye’s Mary Magdalene to reveal what would emerge from Kanye’s SNL’s performance:

Yeezus

Toss out the rumored “I Am God” title for Kanye’s sixth official LP. Behold “Yeezus.”

Yeezus made Twitter his Mount of Olives, where he revealed lyrics to his disciples.

BLK SKN HEAD 2 twitter.com/kanyewest/stat…

— KANYE WEST (@kanyewest) May 19, 2013

BLK SKN HEAD twitter.com/kanyewest/stat…

— KANYE WEST (@kanyewest) May 19, 2013

In his trademark, bombastically offensive style of performance, Yeezus debuted “Black Skinhead” and “New Slaves.”

“Black Skinhead”:

“New Slaves”:

If “My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy” was Kanye’s Passion, “Yeezus” may mark his ascension into heaven.

You’re Often Wrong. Deal with It.

Sonny Bunch — Mon, 20 May 2013 13:13:01 +0000

The Internet has had a good bit of fun with the husband and wife who own Amy’s Baking Company, a restaurant in Arizona. To recap: After a disastrous appearance on Gordon Ramsay’s Kitchen Nightmares, the proprietors took to social media to defend themselves and their business.

It did not go well.

I don’t really feel the need to pile on in that regard; the link above will give you a good sense on just how poorly they handled the situation. I do think it’s worth taking a moment to move beyond the snickering and consider what prompted the meltdown in the first place in order to see what we, the humble viewer, can learn.

First, some background on the show. Kitchen Nightmares is a reality show in which celebrity chef Ramsay visits a failing restaurant in order to figure out what’s wrong and how to fix things. Frequently, many things are messed up all at once: the kitchen is dirty and the menu is too large and the décor is bad and the kitchen staff are lazy and … you get the idea. Almost as frequently, the owners are somewhat clueless, having never owned a restaurant before or having owned a restaurant for so long they are stuck in their old, outdated ways.

But the people who call Ramsay up always understand that something is wrong. They might not know what, specifically, is causing their business to fail. But they know that it’s failing. And they know that Ramsay—one of the most famous, most successful restaurateurs in the world—can help them solve the problem. Sometimes the owners will butt heads with Ramsay for a bit, but they always accede to his wisdom. He is, after all, there to help.

But the owners of Amy’s Baking Company convinced themselves that nothing is wrong. If you watch the episode (and you really should; it’s highly entertaining in that “Dear God, look at the crazy people sort of way”), it’s clear that the duo think their restaurant is amazing, that some random people on the Internet have unfairly singled out their diner for scorn, and that Ramsay will affirm their awesomeness and tell “the haters” to back off.

As a result, when Ramsay pointed out the numerous problems in the restaurant—high employee turnover, pizza that was undercooked, burgers that were overstuffed, frozen ravioli passed off as freshly made, etc.—the owners couldn’t handle it. They shut down entirely, saying they would just ignore Ramsay’s criticisms. He was, apparently, one of “the haters.”

There are few tics more destructive than an inability to accept criticism from people who are trying to help us. I can understand the defensiveness. As Eli Lake knows, some critiques are easily dismissed because the critic does not have your best interest at heart. But when you’re dealing with someone who actually does want to help you—who wants to make you better at what you do, who has more experience than you do, and who is committed to seeing you succeed—a deep-seated urge to reject assistance is self-destructive.