That's how I would have titled the final Star Wars installment.

Either that, or "My Very Very Bad Day, by Anakin Skywalker."

(BTW I'm so tempted to write out the plot to "My Very Bad Day" in six-year-old Dickie form and ruin the movie Homer Simpson-style. "Who woulda thought Darth Vader was Luke's father?")

Dewey and I checked out the 12AM showing, and it definitely lived up to the hype. Although you wouldn't think, judging from the first half of the movie...which basically follows suit with Episodes I and II. Cool action, coupled with fluffy character and plot. And holy god, they ain't kidding about the Anakin/Padme dynamic.

Not only did Lucas learn nothing from the universal criticism panning the Episode II "romance" scenes, but he was emboldened by it - telling everyone, "Fuck you all. You know what? You don't like my dialogue? You're gonna take even more then until you like it!" People were laughing out loud during the Anakin/Padme moments. Ridiculous.

But there's a distinct scene where everything changes, and suddenly the story feels injected with renewed passion and emotion - by no coincidence as it nears the original trilogy, chronologically. Very cool stuff.

**************************************************

And now, for something completely different. First, from a Moyers transcript posted on Salon, forwarded by RM:

"These 'rules of the game' permit Washington officials to set the agenda for journalism, leaving the press all too often simply to recount what officials say instead of subjecting their words and deeds to critical scrutiny. Instead of acting as filters for readers and viewers, sifting the truth from the propaganda, reporters and anchors attentively transcribe both sides of the spin invariably failing to provide context, background or any sense of which claims hold up and which are misleading."

Second, from today's filibuster article in the News-Press today, written by someone who shall remain nameless:

"At a news conference on Wednesday, Ms. Boxer said Justice Brown had voted alone in 31 different cases on the state's highest court, which has seven members, one Democrat and six Republicans.

" 'She's bad on domestic violence . . . bad for rape victims . . . bad for women's reproductive rights,' asserted Ms. Boxer, with Rep. Lois Capps, D-Santa Barbara, standing behind her in support."

I have failed you, Obiwon. My mind grows twisted in the Dark Side...

************************************************

Below's the story in its entirety. Since the reporter ahead of me asked Boxer the all-important "Where do we go from here - is there any chance at a compromise" question, I lobbed her a softball, admittedly, asking how she would refute the Republican's argument that the nuclear option is merely a new precedent, not an outright change in the Senate rules.

So friggin' Patty Murray of Washington grabs the podium mic and says, "If they believe that, they would bring it to the floor as a rule change that takes 67 votes in the Senate!"

Thanks Patty. That's a great answer. EXCEPT I DON'T WRITE FOR THE SEATTLE FRIGGIN' TIMES. (Not yet, at least.) If I were concerned with giving B&G his Senator's perspective, I'd ask you. But see, I don't care about getting B&G his news. He's on his own, on that one. Look, I'm trying to have a one-on-one with Boxer here!

(I should go easy on the coffee, even on four hours of sleep...)

************************************************

Feinstein, Boxer blast judicial nominee

5/19/05
By DICKIE CRONKITE
NEWS-PRESS CORRESPONDENT

WASHINGTON -- From separate pulpits, Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer criticized President Bush's judicial nominee Janice Rogers Brown, saying her votes as an associate justice of the California Supreme Court revealed an extreme ideology outside the public mainstream.

At a news conference on Wednesday, Ms. Boxer said Justice Brown had voted alone in 31 different cases on the state's highest court, which has seven members, one Democrat and six Republicans.

"She's bad on domestic violence . . . bad for rape victims . . . bad for women's reproductive rights," asserted Ms. Boxer, with Rep. Lois Capps, D-Santa Barbara, standing behind her in support.

The criticisms came as the Senate began debate on another of the president's nominees, Texas Supreme Court Justice Priscilla Owen. Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., is expected to use a procedural vote next week to try to end Democratic filibusters against the nominees.

Ms. Feinstein voiced her concerns about Justice Brown from the Senate floor: "Statements alone would not be enough for me to oppose her nomination," she said. "(But) these views also drive her legal decision-making."


Ms. Boxer and Ms. Feinstein both bashed a strong statement Justice Brown made in a 2000 speech critical of big government, when she said that senior citizens "blithely cannibalize their grandchildren because they have a right to get as much Ôfree' stuff as the political system will permit."


"(Justice Brown's) life story is an inspiration," Ms. Boxer said. "But it's what she wants to do to our lives that is so frightening to us."


Although political maneuvering on the filibuster is confined to the Senate, the controversy has spread across Capitol Hill as one of the most provocative issues of the day.

"When 51 percent can cancel out 49 percent, it begins to sound like the experience too many of us have had in our own lives," said Mrs. Capps. "This is about protecting our Constitution."


Mrs. Capps and 23 other House members delivered a letter to Mr. Frist's office Wednesday urging him not to use the "nuclear option."


Rep. Elton Gallegly, R-Simi Valley, disagreed. "Fifty-nine percent is a landslide by any normal standards," he said. "How you can hold any bill hostage, to me that's contrary to what the democratic process is all about."


Mr. Gallegly further pointed out that when the filibuster was introduced, senators were appointed, not elected. "That seems to be the part conspicuously missing in this debate," he said.


Dickie Cronkite writes for Medill News Service from Washington, D.C. E-mail him at *******@newspress.com.