According to sources, Mayor Villaragaiosa and former Telemundo anchor Mirthala Salinas have broken up This is apparently the end to the months long affair, which broke up the mayor's marriage and became national news when the story broke.
In an attempt to shore up the Mayor's public image, "sources" leaked this bit of news to the LA Times. As stated in the article, the mayor is now apparently focusing on his relationship with his kids and working hard to battle problems such as health care, education, and traffic which he had promised to work on during his campaign.
To me, this story means very little. He took a risk and left his wife for this woman, took a giant P.R. hit and now finds himself alone and vulnerable. Due to his constant adultery, the Mayor has pretty much lost his chance to run for governor and now has to actually work hard on the poltical end if he ever hopes to be considered for that office.
A funny aspect of this story is that Salinas is apparently out of a job. When news first broke that the Mayor was being divorced, it was Salinas herself who reported it on Telemundo, with her being the political anchor for the channel. This of course was highly comical as it turned out she was a prime reason for the divorce, and a gigantic conflict of interest. After the network found out, she was placed on a leave of absence. Recently, she was reassigned to a smaller station out in Riverside County, but apparently she felt it either beneath her or too embarrassed, and she refused to show up for work.
Hopefully, the Mayor is serious about his intent to focus on his family life and the city now. For his tenure so far, the Mayor has done very little in terms of his campaign promises and has embarrassed himself and this city with his very public extramarital affair. Perhaps this was the wakeup call he needed to get serious about politics and realize what a high-profile job he has and all the extra responsibilies that the job entails.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Friday, November 16, 2007
WGA Strike Part II
So another week has gone by and still the WGA is continuing with their strike. As thousands are being fired each day due to the strike, the writers continue to provide a valuable publicity opportunity for many celebrities and politicians.
Today, it's John Edwards turn.
Yes, that same annoying Presidential Candidate who made his millions contributing to the destuction of the health care system while ironically promoting health care as the backbone for his campaign.
Now, Edwards is desperate for attention with the primaries coming up in a few months. Trailing both Barak Obama and Clinton in the polls, Edwards knows that he has little time to gain support headed into the Iowa primary. Without a victory there or in the following primary, his candidacy may be over.
So what better way to get the support of the people than joining the picket line of a bunch of whiny Hollywood dissident writers who the majority of the population barely sympathizes with?
While i'm sure the polls will show most Americans may side with the writers, I would wager that most of America (and many Iowans) couldn't care less about the strike, at least until their favorite tv shows go off the air.
To me, this just further establises John Edwards as a kid trying to win a popularity contest. With his South Carolinian accent and fake smile, Edwards is already annoying enough as he is. I can't imagine how lame it will be to see pictures of him holding a sign and marcing around the picket line for an hour or two before he's off to stay at the Beverly Hills Hotel and get a relaxing spa treatment or something.
But hey, this is Hollywood. Even a day shopping at Whole Foods can be seen as a photo-op here.
To the WGA and the producers- please hurry up and get a deal done. I really don't want to see picketers for the next few months joined by the latest celebrity/politician in need of a quick publicity boost.
Today, it's John Edwards turn.
Yes, that same annoying Presidential Candidate who made his millions contributing to the destuction of the health care system while ironically promoting health care as the backbone for his campaign.
Now, Edwards is desperate for attention with the primaries coming up in a few months. Trailing both Barak Obama and Clinton in the polls, Edwards knows that he has little time to gain support headed into the Iowa primary. Without a victory there or in the following primary, his candidacy may be over.
So what better way to get the support of the people than joining the picket line of a bunch of whiny Hollywood dissident writers who the majority of the population barely sympathizes with?
While i'm sure the polls will show most Americans may side with the writers, I would wager that most of America (and many Iowans) couldn't care less about the strike, at least until their favorite tv shows go off the air.
To me, this just further establises John Edwards as a kid trying to win a popularity contest. With his South Carolinian accent and fake smile, Edwards is already annoying enough as he is. I can't imagine how lame it will be to see pictures of him holding a sign and marcing around the picket line for an hour or two before he's off to stay at the Beverly Hills Hotel and get a relaxing spa treatment or something.
But hey, this is Hollywood. Even a day shopping at Whole Foods can be seen as a photo-op here.
To the WGA and the producers- please hurry up and get a deal done. I really don't want to see picketers for the next few months joined by the latest celebrity/politician in need of a quick publicity boost.
Friday, November 9, 2007
WGA Strike
For anyone who has been paying even the smallest amount of attention to the news lately, the ongoing Writers Strike by the Writer's Guild of America has been a hot topic. For a whole week now, Hollywood has been virtually shutdown.
The writers probably have many valid points. Perhaps the DVD residuals they are currently recieving aren't completely fair. They also want higher residuals from internet sales of their work. However, I simply do not feel it is worth it to go on strike. What these writers are doing seems to me to be incredibly selfish. They themselves aren't going to lose a lot of money because they still get paid for reruns that are aired. Unfortunately for the vast majority of the blue-collar workers in Hollywood, this isn't the case.
I am talking about the crew members on all of these productions. They aren't a part of the strike, and because of it are finding themselves out of employment.
Unions were created to serve a good purpose. They were meant to give the workers some representation and rights. Through unions, better conditions and wages have sprung from nothing. However, in today's age they seem more aimed at exclusion. Workers are prevented from being hired if they aren't member of the 'union'.
The WGA has a right to strike, but they simply must be far more mindful of their actions. They have to realize that thousands and thousands of people who aren't members of their unions are affected by their actions. The strike to me seems rather selfish.
I wish that both sides would have been more willing to continue negotionating and reach some sort of temporary agreement so productions could continue during the process. Instead, thousands of workers are wondering if they are going to be able to afford their rent and car payments.
I also feel that this strike has only led to actors and actresses trying to gain publicity by "showing support" at the picket line by visiting the strikers for an hour or two. Coincidentally, this creates quite the photo-op.
In a city full of fake people and superficial problems, this strike just seems to be more of the same. It's hurting the people who have nothing to do with it. The result the writers are seeking simply does not justify the strike. They are off on a matter of percentage points for DVD and internet cuts. I think that the strike may just anger the studios who feel that they are being backed unfairly into a corner.
The writers probably have many valid points. Perhaps the DVD residuals they are currently recieving aren't completely fair. They also want higher residuals from internet sales of their work. However, I simply do not feel it is worth it to go on strike. What these writers are doing seems to me to be incredibly selfish. They themselves aren't going to lose a lot of money because they still get paid for reruns that are aired. Unfortunately for the vast majority of the blue-collar workers in Hollywood, this isn't the case.
I am talking about the crew members on all of these productions. They aren't a part of the strike, and because of it are finding themselves out of employment.
Unions were created to serve a good purpose. They were meant to give the workers some representation and rights. Through unions, better conditions and wages have sprung from nothing. However, in today's age they seem more aimed at exclusion. Workers are prevented from being hired if they aren't member of the 'union'.
The WGA has a right to strike, but they simply must be far more mindful of their actions. They have to realize that thousands and thousands of people who aren't members of their unions are affected by their actions. The strike to me seems rather selfish.
I wish that both sides would have been more willing to continue negotionating and reach some sort of temporary agreement so productions could continue during the process. Instead, thousands of workers are wondering if they are going to be able to afford their rent and car payments.
I also feel that this strike has only led to actors and actresses trying to gain publicity by "showing support" at the picket line by visiting the strikers for an hour or two. Coincidentally, this creates quite the photo-op.
In a city full of fake people and superficial problems, this strike just seems to be more of the same. It's hurting the people who have nothing to do with it. The result the writers are seeking simply does not justify the strike. They are off on a matter of percentage points for DVD and internet cuts. I think that the strike may just anger the studios who feel that they are being backed unfairly into a corner.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Something is Missing...
Los Angeles is the second largest city in the country and home to numerous sports franchises. The Dodgers, Angels (in name), Lakers, Clippers, Kings, Sparks, Galaxy, and Avengers all call Los Angeles home, as well as the Bruins of UCLA and the Trojans of USC. Looking at the list, you may notice something is missing.
An NFL franchise.
For the past 11 years, ever since the LA Raiders packed up their bags and moved themselves back to Oakland, the city and fans have been clamoring for a team to come to LA. The problem has been, and continues to be, where will they play? The only viable scenarios that have been presented involve the use of the LA Coliseum. However, with renovation costs now estimated at $1 billion, this is simply not realistic. If the city is serious about attracting a new team, a brand new stadium must be erected, and it must be somewhere in the vicinity of downtown. A new football stadium would only further the revitalization of Downtown and provided countless jobs and income to the city.
It is simply embarrassing that LA still does not harbor a true professional football franchise. With around 3.5 million inhabitants living in the city limits and up to 10 million more on the outskirts, the potential fanbase is already enormous. Los Angeles is the second largest media market in the nation, and yet the “National” Football League is not represented in LA. Baffling. On the other hand, booming metropolises like Green Bay, Wisconsin and Buffalo, New York have no problem housing teams.
What has stopped the NFL and LA from reuniting? Bureaucracy and politics. But that should not come as a surprise to anyone who is used to living in LA.
For the past several years, competing plans were being pushed to the NFL as potential sites for a team. Most prominent were the Los Angeles Coliseum, which was originally built for the 1932 Olympic Games and currently is home to the USC Trojans, the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, and a potential site in Carson near the Home Depot Center. As the months and years went on, all three sites competed for attention and rotated as the supposed “front-runner” for the NFL’s services.
Eventually, the posturing became too much. Carson dropped out and decided it would be more lucrative to build a shopping mall instead. The Rose Bowl was never interested enough to begin with, and they too dropped out. All that was left was the Coliseum. However, the $1 Billion price tag to fix it up, the fact that USC (who has been wildly successful and drawn sellouts of 90,000+ for the past five years) would prefer to remain the sole tenant, and the site’s status as a Historical Landmark and its accompanying notoriously difficult to-deal-with Coliseum Commission has led the NFL to drop them from consideration.
So where does that leave Los Angeles now?
Right to where it should have started at the beginning – a new site built in the vicinity of downtown to correlate with the fantastic new programs being developed currently to revitalize the area. It began several years ago with the Staples Center, and is now continuing with L.A. Live well under construction (the Nokia Theater just opened) and the Grand Avenue project just breaking ground. Thousands are flocking back to the area, with up to 20,000 more residents expected to move by 2010. There is potential in the area for a stadium, anywhere from the old abandoned warehouses to the space by Dodger Stadium.
For this to be accomplished, public dollars have to be devoted. And this is where the biggest obstacle lies.
The NFL will gladly put in hundreds of millions of dollars to assist LA in building a stadium, as it has just as much interest in establishing a franchise here as the city does. However, the fact that LA refuses to give a penny to professional sports is scaring off the league. The NFL is doing very well and has far more power in the relationship, as they can easily afford to not have a team in place for the next decade.
If the citizens of the city really want a team, they are going to have to put forth and vote for measures allowing the use of small taxes to help fund the project. The potential job opportunities and revenue that can eventually flow in far outweigh the short-term expenditures needed at the beginning. With a franchise in the heart of LA, up to 65,000 fans would pour into the surrounding area for 9 weekends of the year in which they will happily be spending their money in an area in which they normally would not. Why force fans in the city to drive to San Diego to see professional football?
It is up to us to make a difference. For too long have the fans in the city complained while taking little action. Los Angeles has the potential to be the leading sports city in the world, and has all the pieces in place to do so. All that is needed is a little more leadership, and a lot more involvement by its citizens. We have brought major championships to the city in recent years through the Lakers and the Trojans among others, and now we are just waiting for that Super Bowl victory.
Let’s make it happen.
An NFL franchise.
For the past 11 years, ever since the LA Raiders packed up their bags and moved themselves back to Oakland, the city and fans have been clamoring for a team to come to LA. The problem has been, and continues to be, where will they play? The only viable scenarios that have been presented involve the use of the LA Coliseum. However, with renovation costs now estimated at $1 billion, this is simply not realistic. If the city is serious about attracting a new team, a brand new stadium must be erected, and it must be somewhere in the vicinity of downtown. A new football stadium would only further the revitalization of Downtown and provided countless jobs and income to the city.
It is simply embarrassing that LA still does not harbor a true professional football franchise. With around 3.5 million inhabitants living in the city limits and up to 10 million more on the outskirts, the potential fanbase is already enormous. Los Angeles is the second largest media market in the nation, and yet the “National” Football League is not represented in LA. Baffling. On the other hand, booming metropolises like Green Bay, Wisconsin and Buffalo, New York have no problem housing teams.
What has stopped the NFL and LA from reuniting? Bureaucracy and politics. But that should not come as a surprise to anyone who is used to living in LA.
For the past several years, competing plans were being pushed to the NFL as potential sites for a team. Most prominent were the Los Angeles Coliseum, which was originally built for the 1932 Olympic Games and currently is home to the USC Trojans, the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, and a potential site in Carson near the Home Depot Center. As the months and years went on, all three sites competed for attention and rotated as the supposed “front-runner” for the NFL’s services.
Eventually, the posturing became too much. Carson dropped out and decided it would be more lucrative to build a shopping mall instead. The Rose Bowl was never interested enough to begin with, and they too dropped out. All that was left was the Coliseum. However, the $1 Billion price tag to fix it up, the fact that USC (who has been wildly successful and drawn sellouts of 90,000+ for the past five years) would prefer to remain the sole tenant, and the site’s status as a Historical Landmark and its accompanying notoriously difficult to-deal-with Coliseum Commission has led the NFL to drop them from consideration.
So where does that leave Los Angeles now?
Right to where it should have started at the beginning – a new site built in the vicinity of downtown to correlate with the fantastic new programs being developed currently to revitalize the area. It began several years ago with the Staples Center, and is now continuing with L.A. Live well under construction (the Nokia Theater just opened) and the Grand Avenue project just breaking ground. Thousands are flocking back to the area, with up to 20,000 more residents expected to move by 2010. There is potential in the area for a stadium, anywhere from the old abandoned warehouses to the space by Dodger Stadium.
For this to be accomplished, public dollars have to be devoted. And this is where the biggest obstacle lies.
The NFL will gladly put in hundreds of millions of dollars to assist LA in building a stadium, as it has just as much interest in establishing a franchise here as the city does. However, the fact that LA refuses to give a penny to professional sports is scaring off the league. The NFL is doing very well and has far more power in the relationship, as they can easily afford to not have a team in place for the next decade.
If the citizens of the city really want a team, they are going to have to put forth and vote for measures allowing the use of small taxes to help fund the project. The potential job opportunities and revenue that can eventually flow in far outweigh the short-term expenditures needed at the beginning. With a franchise in the heart of LA, up to 65,000 fans would pour into the surrounding area for 9 weekends of the year in which they will happily be spending their money in an area in which they normally would not. Why force fans in the city to drive to San Diego to see professional football?
It is up to us to make a difference. For too long have the fans in the city complained while taking little action. Los Angeles has the potential to be the leading sports city in the world, and has all the pieces in place to do so. All that is needed is a little more leadership, and a lot more involvement by its citizens. We have brought major championships to the city in recent years through the Lakers and the Trojans among others, and now we are just waiting for that Super Bowl victory.
Let’s make it happen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
