Eastern Market

I am just devastated over the fire at Eastern Market today. I can't even put my thoughts in order. Let me try to just enumerate them.

1.) I am very thankful no one was hurt. But the lack of human casualties bring the loss into focus. This was the destruction of something so important in the lives of countless Washington residents. I used to live a couple blocks from the market. Today, I am across town and don't visit as regularly as I have in the past, but I still feel a great connection to one of the heartbeats of Washington.

2.) Reading Marc Fisher in the post... He used all past tense. "Eastern Market was..." No, Marc, it is. The building is still standing. The merchants are still around. Eastern Market must be repaired. The merchants must have a place to survive in the meantime. The businesses who have been hit and will have to wait to reopen will need our support badly. Now. In the meantime. How can we help them?

3.) The building is still standing. Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you to the DCFD. The Post reported 160 firefighters fought the blaze until they had to leave the building then continued to fight it for hours after. Knowing our DC firefighters, they fought aggressively to put this out at great risk to themselves. It is only because of their dedication to our community that the building may rise from the ashes and was not a total loss. A monument should be erected during reconstruction thanking them for saving the historic landmark.

4.) The fire started in a dumpster behind the market. Another dumpster fire was reported last night, too, not too far away. Was this arson? I am against the death penalty, but can we beat the living tar out of the person who did this, if there was one?

5.) The loss of a building or a massacre of people devastates us because it happens in our backyard, but we feel guilt for our grief. Our local events cannot compare with the totality of destruction and loss in places like Iraq or Darfur. Are we even allowed to grieve?

John McCain on The Daily Show

America's court jesters, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, are able to bring to the surface and speak truth to power because comedy is a powerful way of communicating with people's instinctive selves. When Stephen Colbert says ironically to Sean Penn, "Why should I care what any actor says about politics or international relations other than Ronald Regan, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Fred Thompson?" he's speaking volumes about the hypocracy of the Right, the foolishness of their arguments, and the fakery of their leaders. Colbert so rocked the foundations of the White House Correspondents Association dinner last year that Washington is still feeling the aftershlocks in the form of the comedy stylings of Rich Little. But you can't BLAME Rich Little for bombing. His was a different time, and his material is stuck there. He's a walking "Best of" act from another era. This is the new millennium, a time of take-no-prisoners communication.

Jon Stewart sat down with John McCain last night and asked pointed difficult questions and gave blowback when McCain dodged the issues. Stewart's comedic relationship with McCain allowed for an interview that you would not see on a Sunday morning, where political talk shows are more about getting someone on the record instead of honestly debating issues. And it was infinitely deeper than most cable-talk "gotcha" shows that Stewart himself derided while a guest on the set of the thankfully-cancelled "Crossfire."

But even before the heat began, McCain began his interview with a joke about him wanting to kick a dog, and with a joke about bringing an IED (improvised explosive device) back from the infamous Iraq market stroll as a gift for Stewart to put under his desk. No, really, he actually said this. These are the comedy styling of John McCain, the man whose run for presidency ended before it began. At least he wasn't the entertainment at the White House Correspondents Association dinner.

Don't spend it all in one place

OK So I am hardly one to get things done early. I just completed my tax filing online. I owe the Feds $90. The District owes me $103. I paid $12.95 to file both electronically, so at the end of the day I have a nickel left. Now that's what I call tax planning!

Note to Media, Re: Sanjaya and Divas

Dear Media,

When Sanjaya doesn't get kicked off this week, will you PLEASE lay off the "What's wrong with American Idol?" stories. The media have created this rolling-snowball effect. Each week when he doesn't get kicked off, the media have a huge outcry about it, which brings more people into the "let's vote for Sanjaya" fold.

Initially, Sanjaya didn't get the boot I suspect for purely innocuous reasons. He's the first person of his ethnicity to make it to the top weeks, so he probably got a big boost from those voters. He's got a true fan base; don't ask me why. But heck, even I voted for Kevin last year just cause I thought he was adorable, but not the most talented. Plus Sanjaya had gotton a boost from the "vote for the worst" crew and Howard Stern, but I doubt those numbers were enough to really make a huge difference.

Then the crying girl was thrust upon an unsuspecting nation by Idol producers when 13-year-old Ashley Ferl was invited to sit front and center for the live show after she demonstrated her teary-eyed abilities in the dress rehearsal. While young Ms. Ferl didn't narrow her fandom to only Sanjaya, Idol cameras focused on her and her balling during his performance on "British Invasion" week. With this special attention given to Sanjaya, the media began to ride the wave.

Now every week when Sanjaya doesn't get kicked off, newscasters berate the show for its supposed faults. They jokingly encourage people to vote irresponsibly, because Idol "obviously" deserves it. They speculate that all of the voting is "of course" rigged. So why not just rig it so Sanjaya loses? Funny how the talking heads find fault with a fraudulent activity that they have no evidence happens, but then suggest the producers undertake fraudulent activity to reject someone who, for whatever reasons, is getting the votes.

Look, Sanjaya will lose. The sheer numbers of votes by people who actually care about the results will eventually overtake any naysayers. But this outrageous media attention is helping him last this far.

Idol has been accused in the past of racism because of voting results. Oddly, the media cared less about the racist 2004 election returns in Ohio than they did about why Jennifer Hudson got the boot in season three. Simply put, in many seasons Idol has what I call a "Diva upset." Sure, everyone loved Jennifer and Latoya and Fantasia. But even if the majority of people voting love a diva, eventually the divas will split the vote and one will go home. This usually happens when the divas get so popular that voters don't make the calls because they think their favorite diva is "safe."

This will happen again this year when either Melinda or LaKisha will be sent home before their time. They will split the diva vote, and one will be ousted early. The media will declare "racism!" and "vote rigging!" My prediction: LaKisha will get the boot and end up in fourth or fifth place. But will she beat Sanjaya?