interviewed by vonstrassburg

[cellio]

1. I'll start with the favourite movie question since I'm in movie mode. Favourite movie of all time?

"Single favorite X" doesn't work well for me, whether we're talking about movies, books, songs, TV shows, foods, or whatnot. There are lots of movies I've really liked, but no single one stands out. So I'll list a few assorted ones: The Quiet Earth (even though I'm not sure what the ending means), Prince of Egypt (the animated one from five or six years back), The Right Stuff, The Gods Must Be Crazy, Dances with Wolves, Short Circuit, B5: In the Beginning. That's today, off the top of my head; next week could yield some different results. Does that give you any sense of my weird and varied tastes? :-)

2. If you could change one thing about your husband (anything -- taller, shorter, speaks French, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound, prime minister of Zimbabwe), what would that be?

I'd give him the ability to read my mind. :-) Or, more generally, enhance his ability to pick up on subtle social cues. And I'd be fine with it if he said the same thing about me, by the way.

3. Yes the time lord question is tres cool so I'll try it again. Where in time and space would you go, if you were a renegade Time Lord looking for a nice place and time to settle down? Sorry, Mitzra'im is already taken (as is wherever Zach goes if he answers first).

Ok, I'm (gasp) not actually a Dr. Who fan, so I'm not sure about one point: does the option space include the future?

I'm not really happy unless I have contact with friends, so either I have free access to instantaneous transport (the tardis does something akin to teleport, right?) or I have to choose a place where my friends are or bring them along. I'll assume I have transportation and so can go anywhere.

Now, Dr. Who takes place in a fictional reality with other populated worlds. I don't know anything about those worlds, so I'll apply the general principle that says fictional worlds are ok if they're SF-ish.

If all that's kosher, then I'm going to say: Minbar. Gorgeous scenery, peaceful climate (post-civil-war, anyway), people who will leave you alone if you want but would be interesting to talk with.

4. If you could visit any one place on earth for one hour and just look around, not touch, not take anything, not change anything (OK maybe you can take photos), without anyone knowing you'd been there or be able to see you or affect you while you were there (say you're in an insulated bubble), where would that be?

I can't tell if this includes time-travel. If it does, mid-tenth-century Cordova, Jewish quarter, 'cause I'm curious and there isn't a lot of solid information about life then.

If this question is limited to the present day, then... hmm. I think I'd go to Jerusalem, to experience the place in safety and privacy. And, oh, pray at the western wall without being harrassed by fanatics who don't think women who dress like I do should be allowed anywhere near the wall.

5. If you were a satirist, who would you write a satire about? It could be trifling, scathing, amusing, embarrassing, or even career-destroying, but it's understood to be a satire and so you're not subject to any libel or slander laws of any kind, and your skills are good enough to make everyone laugh.

Wow. What an opportunity. I fear I'm not sufficiently mean-spirited to put it to optimal use; the strong temptation when handed a chance like that is to take vengeance against some personal affront, and while there are people who've viciously attacked me at times, I try very hard not to hang onto grudges.

So instead, I'm going to use it politically, in an attempt at "career-destroying". There's no single person who can be usefully taken out in the Middle East, so let's stay closer to home. I think even Pittsburgh's die-hard Democrats are not stupid enough to re-elect our city-destroying mayor again, so I don't need to spend it there. National politics is a mess. So, all that said, I'm going to take out Pennsylvania's governor, Ed Rendell, before he completely destroys what's left of our economy.

Comments

[mrpeck.livejournal.com]

If I may ask, I'm kind of curious as to what you dislike about Rendell. I haven't heard many people in this area express opinions about him one way or the other. On the other side of the state, people generally love him from the time when he was mayor (unless they were involved in a municipal union in which case they despise him).

[cellio]

I dislike the ease with which he spends taxpayer money instead of letting the taxpayers keep more of it. For example, there's the $4M grant he gave a private enterprise for development near one of the taxpayer-funded stadia; that money should not have been spent, and it wasn't an isolated case. He touted income from slot machines as a way to reduce property taxes, but that's not happening. If slots are going to be legal but restricted in number, then ownership options should be auctioned to the highest bidders, with that revenue going to offset taxes. Instead, income from slots is being treated as income that can then be spent while taxes remain the same. I don't want government to be in the business of speculating on markets.

Basically, he seems to be a proponent of big government, and big government isn't a trustworthy caretaker of our money in most cases. Government should be administering the common good, not private enterprise and boondoggles. Ridge did a better job of riding herd on this sort of thing from what I could see.

Ok, I don't really want to destroy Rendell's career; I'd just like to send him back to Philly. :-)