Saturday, July 21, 2007
Can someone explain this to me?
Before Miles, I had one other significant relationship. My first partner and I met when we were 20, had a big fancy wedding at 26 and split up in a very bitter divorce at 30. That was 2002.
Since then, I have lived at three different addresses. My ex and I are no longer as bitter but we have very little contact and mainly know of one another's doings from another couple. I have Miles and my ex, who is a third-year medical resident in the Chicago area, has some guy who likes piercings and kilts. And that's all I'm gonna say about that.
But, oddly, this week something weird started happening: I'm getting mail at this house for my ex-partner. It's not forwarded. It doesn't have my name anywhere near it. And, again, this is my third address since we broke up. My ex, in fact, has never had any reason to send me anything here, so I doubt he even knows my address.
Both pieces of mail so far were junk. One was some debt-consolidation service that referenced his medical-school loan debt (whew - dodged that bullet). The other offered him a low-interest credit card. I suspect, given this, that more is to come.
Could it really be that some junk-mail firm figured out that we were once involved -- although that's been over for nearly five years and was never legal in any way that would show up in the sorts of documents and services that such firms use to harvest information? It is true that if you Google his whole name, the fourth entry is a notice that appeared in 1999 in my university's alumni magazine announcing our wedding. But the first three entries aren't even him, they're other people -- other doctors, in fact -- with his whole name. And anyway, isn't that a lot of steps for them to take to put his name to my address?
Baffling, no? Anyone have any vague explanation? Or any way to stop it now that it's started?
Since then, I have lived at three different addresses. My ex and I are no longer as bitter but we have very little contact and mainly know of one another's doings from another couple. I have Miles and my ex, who is a third-year medical resident in the Chicago area, has some guy who likes piercings and kilts. And that's all I'm gonna say about that.
But, oddly, this week something weird started happening: I'm getting mail at this house for my ex-partner. It's not forwarded. It doesn't have my name anywhere near it. And, again, this is my third address since we broke up. My ex, in fact, has never had any reason to send me anything here, so I doubt he even knows my address.
Both pieces of mail so far were junk. One was some debt-consolidation service that referenced his medical-school loan debt (whew - dodged that bullet). The other offered him a low-interest credit card. I suspect, given this, that more is to come.
Could it really be that some junk-mail firm figured out that we were once involved -- although that's been over for nearly five years and was never legal in any way that would show up in the sorts of documents and services that such firms use to harvest information? It is true that if you Google his whole name, the fourth entry is a notice that appeared in 1999 in my university's alumni magazine announcing our wedding. But the first three entries aren't even him, they're other people -- other doctors, in fact -- with his whole name. And anyway, isn't that a lot of steps for them to take to put his name to my address?
Baffling, no? Anyone have any vague explanation? Or any way to stop it now that it's started?
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Strip Outtakes Available!
For those of you who may not have noticed, we posted a 12-minute bonus this week containing outtakes from this week's show with Jon Lovitz. Lovitz was supposed to call in live and when he didn't, things went a little kooky.
Listen to it here or right-click here to download the file and hear whenever you want. And catch our live shows on Tuesdays, 7-8 pm PT at LVRocks.Com.
Listen to it here or right-click here to download the file and hear whenever you want. And catch our live shows on Tuesdays, 7-8 pm PT at LVRocks.Com.
Placentamania! and Norm!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c907e/c907e0e367fc3f5bf0b8e465dd3f327994d8d926" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bbfe2/bbfe2366b514d5fb1abf48d5734432071b7b24e4" alt=""
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Danny Gans redux and more
Three images of interest out there from my prowl through the week's worth of papers and magazines that stacked up while I was away on account of my grandfather's illness, death and funeral:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c894e/c894eefa8fc39fcdbfe1beaa4b718f9d5d4711dc" alt=""
Danny Gans appeared on the cover of Las Vegas Magazine looking closer to his real self than his new advertisements. Just wondering why they bothered to fake his ad photo if they're cool with him looking like he really looks on magazine covers. (See earlier post about Danny's new image.)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/51134/511343d8f19addbedb5d52145a4cd274ff27fcec" alt=""
This photo appeared in the Las Vegas Sun several days after 7/7/7 with an article about how the crush of wedding interest in that "special" day left some couples unwed and unhappy. Except that his photo was taken days after, too. Why are they still in their formal wear? The caption said something about how they were still eating leftover cake, which may explain why she's looking so grave, huh?
This is a "house ad" (an ad in the newspaper for the newspaper itself, usually used as filler or to promote something new they're up to) for the Review-Journal is just baffling. They're pushing their new service offering the paper via PDA. Except that the caption shows the boss telling the folks at his meeting "Will you guys please read the R-J at home next week!" Now, you know times are bad when the daily newspaper itself doesn't expect people to read it, uh, daily. Yikes.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c894e/c894eefa8fc39fcdbfe1beaa4b718f9d5d4711dc" alt=""
Danny Gans appeared on the cover of Las Vegas Magazine looking closer to his real self than his new advertisements. Just wondering why they bothered to fake his ad photo if they're cool with him looking like he really looks on magazine covers. (See earlier post about Danny's new image.)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/51134/511343d8f19addbedb5d52145a4cd274ff27fcec" alt=""
This photo appeared in the Las Vegas Sun several days after 7/7/7 with an article about how the crush of wedding interest in that "special" day left some couples unwed and unhappy. Except that his photo was taken days after, too. Why are they still in their formal wear? The caption said something about how they were still eating leftover cake, which may explain why she's looking so grave, huh?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/67808/678083567a95b3f9d0780885aa8343a56e728172" alt=""
Labels:
danny gans,
las vegas sun,
review-journal
No Poker Face Here - But There Should Be
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/aeba3/aeba36c0412722d35391b519fdf33cb11dff7539" alt=""
"Well, that's all folks. The crowds have come and gone, the cards have fallen, an a Champion has been crowned. Jerry Yang will make a fantastic poker ambassador.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/cb88b/cb88bdd31fb3cb200b74ef1601f00c712ce031bd" alt=""
Now, imagine the NFL summing up the Super Bowl by writing, "These guys are great, not like the &$@@#s who won last year." Inappropriate, right?
Sure, Jamie Gold was a controversial champion and he offended some sensibilities by his behavior during and after the tournament. His admission of cheating to me in The New York Times and on "The Strip" podcast were embarrassing, no doubt. But ultimately, he hurt only himself by squandering his fame.
The snarky reflections on his place in poker lore -- and how he compares to his successors and predecessors -- are best left to bloggers, columnists and fans. For the WSOP organization itself to make such a snide remark is out of bounds.
Labels:
jamie gold,
jerry yang,
new york times,
poker,
world series of poker
Jon Lovitz Found!
He's supposed to call at 4 pm PT. Should be, uh, interesting. I may post it later tonight instead of tomorrow. Will see how busy I am.
Is Jon Lovitz Missing?
Those of you who tuned in for the live show last night are aware that comic Jon Lovitz did not call in when he was supposed to for our live interview. Remarkably, this is the very first time in nearly two years of weekly programs that a celebrity has stood us up for "The Strip" podcast. Rather than being embarrassing, though, it ended up being a very funny show and we may, in fact, air it in its original, uncensored off-the-rails silliness at some point. Miles was so funny about Lovitz' absence that there were spots where I couldn't even speak I was so overcome by the giggles.
Still, business is business and I wanted to interview Jon Lovitz. The spokeswoman at the Orleans was horrified and is feverishly working to get him sometime today so we can put together a proper show for posting as a podcast tomorrow.
Except that nobody's quite sure where he's at. She says that his agent has left messages for him all over the place and reminded him twice yesterday of our interview. So it's a mystery.
Perhaps Andy Dick abducted him for beating him up last week? I sure hope nothing serious has happened or none of this will be even a little bit amusing...
Still, business is business and I wanted to interview Jon Lovitz. The spokeswoman at the Orleans was horrified and is feverishly working to get him sometime today so we can put together a proper show for posting as a podcast tomorrow.
Except that nobody's quite sure where he's at. She says that his agent has left messages for him all over the place and reminded him twice yesterday of our interview. So it's a mystery.
Perhaps Andy Dick abducted him for beating him up last week? I sure hope nothing serious has happened or none of this will be even a little bit amusing...
Labels:
andy dick,
jon lovitz,
the orleans,
the strip
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Most Churches Per Capita? God, No.
There are some cannards that journalists like to employ to show something ironic about Las Vegas, and the most frequently used one is the notion that Las Vegas has "more churches per capita than anywhere else in the country."
It popped up again in a Q-and-A by Jerry Fink of the Las Vegas Sun conducted with comic Lewis Black. He asks Black for a thought on this apparent paradox, and the comedian gave a standard-issue response about Sodom and Gomorrah hedging its bets.
Except it's not true. This 1997 piece from the Review-Journal takes us through some of the numbers, figuring that at best we had, at that time, a ratio of 1 church/synagogue to 1,700 people. Memphis, Tenn., by contrast, had about 875-to-1. And that was a decade ago, so add another half-million Las Vegans which would have necessitated about 300 new Houses of Worship just to keep at that old pace. I can assure you that if Vegas was opening 2.5 new churches every month, somebody would've noticed.
What's more, do a simple Google search and you'll find countless American cities wishing to, without any further statistical backup, claim to be the most pious city in these United States. Among those is Nashville, Grand Rapids, Mich., Waco, Texas, Wheaton, Ill., and Berkeley, Calif.
Interestingly, there's no such bragging-rights war going on in cities overseas. But either way, Vegas doesn't win this title. And thank God for that.
It popped up again in a Q-and-A by Jerry Fink of the Las Vegas Sun conducted with comic Lewis Black. He asks Black for a thought on this apparent paradox, and the comedian gave a standard-issue response about Sodom and Gomorrah hedging its bets.
Except it's not true. This 1997 piece from the Review-Journal takes us through some of the numbers, figuring that at best we had, at that time, a ratio of 1 church/synagogue to 1,700 people. Memphis, Tenn., by contrast, had about 875-to-1. And that was a decade ago, so add another half-million Las Vegans which would have necessitated about 300 new Houses of Worship just to keep at that old pace. I can assure you that if Vegas was opening 2.5 new churches every month, somebody would've noticed.
What's more, do a simple Google search and you'll find countless American cities wishing to, without any further statistical backup, claim to be the most pious city in these United States. Among those is Nashville, Grand Rapids, Mich., Waco, Texas, Wheaton, Ill., and Berkeley, Calif.
Interestingly, there's no such bragging-rights war going on in cities overseas. But either way, Vegas doesn't win this title. And thank God for that.
Labels:
gay vegas,
jerry fink,
las vegas sun,
religion
"The Strip" is LIVE tonight with Jon Lovitz
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/42064/420648e3c2641e139c142f88e3c716977ce21d6f" alt=""
Click on Cam/Chat and just other listeners as they hear us mess up, cuss and bicker! Plus, ask Jon Lovitz your questions through us!
See you all later!
Monday, July 16, 2007
Daddy, She'll Ask, What's A Phonebook?
Question: Does anyone use these 7-pound booster seats anymore? Couldn't they lower our phone bills by making phone book delivery optional? Uh, wait, scratch that. This is the phone company. They charge me to NOT be listed.
But really -- am I the only one who never even looks at the phone book anymore in the Google Age?
Oh Danny, You Kidder You
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/24719/24719b8c59d2bf45dc016dc43ba2c2f0b8d0b459" alt=""
See, they're different. But I won't go so far as to say it's a lack of truth in advertising. If anything, it shows that Danny Gans' image, just like his act, is obviously stuck in the '90s.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Sunday At The Trop Pool With Jamie
Amusingly (see pic above right), the Trop now has a sign we hadn't ever noticed before warning us to "be prepared to show Hotel I.D." We never saw a suspicious soul again. What's more, they provided towels!
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b4782/b4782a95f6853a59a6233324244ec8d78d6b9540" alt=""
Also, why does it look like an egg? And read that sign carefully, please. Check E-Mail! Chat With Friends! Keep In Touch With Associates! Does anyone who would possibly wish to be online by a pool really need an explanation of the thrilling benefits of the Internet! I'm a little stunned it doesn't also say, "Find a sex partner for tonight!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)