Look, this is my blog, and I WILL DO AS I PLEASE.

Nine Types of Light – TV on the Radio

Alright, Alright, so it took me a few months to fully listen to this CD. But I finally got a chance to on my drive home from CoMo to NoVa (that’s Columbia, Missouri to Northern Virginia for you uninformed, uncool folks out there).

I’ve always had trouble truly listening to a TV on the Radio CD over and over. They’re… unique. They’re… weird. And sometimes Tunde Adebimpe’s high pitched singing gets to me after, say, track 11.

That said, their older albums are good. Dear Science is a fun as hell CD, especially “DLZ”, “Make Love All Night Long” and “Crying.” I never really got into Desperate Youth, Blood Thirsty Babes, but I did love “Staring at the Sun” [I know, how mainstream of me - gimme a break, my favorite band is Dave Matthews Band].

Nine Types of Light, though, may be the most digestible of all of the TVOTR albums. “Second Song” is a great way to start the album off. “Keep Your Heart” features Adebimpe’s deeper, much slower voice for much of the song, which I’m less of a fan of. “You” is all right. It’s definitely got cool instrumentals (as most TVOTR songs do).

“No Future Shock” is another one of my favorites. This song goes from 0 to 60 pretty slowly, but once it gets going it doesn’t let go. Well, that is, until the next song starts.

“Killer Crane” is a nice cool down after “No Future Shock.”

“Will Do” is also a good song. It’s not as crazy as “No Future Shock,” but not as low key as “Killer Crane.” “Will Do” also has this gem:

“Oh my reddest rose, caldera, set it off
How your fire grows hermosa caldera glistening
Through your fussed blows careen your caldera set it off
As your body flows the second hand flashes passes
Over your skin like time”

Interpret those for yourself, but the way Adebimpe sings it sounds fun. And it stays stuck in my head for the rest of the day.

“New Cannonball Blues” will put your subwoofer or your way-too-expensive Bose Quiet Comfort’s (or your Dr. Dre Beats…) to good use. And it’s also a ton of fun to listen to.

“Repetition” – YES! Blast this in your car while driving down the highway. “Caffeinated Consciousness” too.

And despite how [I assume] some TVOTR diehards feel, I love the addition of the two remixes at the end of the [deluxe version of ] the album. They’re fun.

With other TV on the Radio albums, listening to the whole album straight through would make you feel like you’ve just been put in a very loud, jumbled, blender with 14 different genres of music. Who knows, maybe that was TV on the Radio’s point. But this one, I don’t get that feeling. Much less TV on the Radio post-listening fatigue.

Or maybe I’m just not cool enough. Either way, this album has a ton of fun tracks, and is worth a download. Also, if you’re not so sure about TV on the Radio, this may just be the album to start with, before moving on to the others.

Favorite tracks: No Future Shock, New Cannonball Blues, Second Song, Will Do, Repetition, Caffeinated Consciousness

Stay Positive – The Hold Steady

So, now this seems like a trend. I’m reviewing a bunch of old albums! Well, look, I was in New Zealand, and… I was too busy to listen to music…. because I was skydiving, bungee jumping, and soaking in all the beauty of “Aotearoa”  (shameless bragging).

In all reality, it seemed half of my friends (I only have like 5) were listening to The Hold Steady everyday. And I just couldn’t get into them. Until finally I decided to sit down and listen to “Stay Positive” from track 1 to 11. It’s news to me, but that album came out in 2008! They have a newer album, Heaven is Whenever, which I haven’t fully digested.

But of all their albums, Stay Positive is what grabbed my attention. The Hold Steady are known for their storytelling lyrics, and, well, it seems from a closer look at their lyrics, there are a ton of references to classic rock. Wikipedia seems to agree with that quick synopsis.

I won’t pretend to understand what each one of the songs means; I’ll leave that to Hold Steady diehards. I’m sure they discuss it on forums somewhere out there on the interwebz. Sometimes it’s blatently clear. Other times I’m very confused.

Truth be told, I think some of their other albums are pretty meh. Way too much [lead singer] Craig Finn just talking into the microphone for me.

But enough about all that.

This album rocks. From the first track to the last, it rocks. With all the “alt nation” and “indie” out there, it seems like The Hold Steady are a return to something more classic, more traditional, even… just maybe… more basic. Even with Craig Finn’s strange voice (it suits the band’s style well). Granted, I think most people consider them “indie.” Then again, I’d definitely put them in the “heartland rock” genre, with guys like Tom Petty, Springsteen, etc. But all these genres blend together, and a discussion of them is pretty silly anyways. Anyways, they definitely have strands of Petty and Springsteen.

They also remind me just a little of a more fun, happier, version of The Counting Crows at times. There’s a touch of southern rock in their music for sure.

As Finn says in the opening lines of the first song “Constructive Summer”, “our songs are sing-along songs.” Yes they are!

I’m not even going to tell you what songs are better than others. They’re all freaking good, and you just have to listen to the whole album all the way through. Ok, fine, I’ll give you a few favorites: Joke About Jamaica, Navy Sheets, Magazines, Stay Positive, Lord I’m Discouraged.

Well, that’s all I got for you now. Merry Christmas Eve!

P.S. I just returned from Jamaica, and while “Joke About Jamaica” is probably my favorite track on this album… there isn’t much about Jamaica.

Although… take a closer look at the lyrics:

“They used to think it was so cute
When she said “Dyer Maker”
All the boys knew it was a joke about Jamaica
She’d always find a ride back home from the bar”

I do know [which means I JUST googled it] “Dyer Maker” is a Led Zepplin song, and that song was meant to imitate reggae and dub that was coming out of Jamaica in the 70s. BOOM. Connection. But that’s about as far as the connection goes.

Since I usually give some other albums for folks to listen to, here it goes: El Camino – The Black Keys (this is a no brainer). I finally downloaded Bombay Bicycle Club‘s latest album, A Different Kind of Fix. Also recently downloaded former Oasis vocalist Noel Gallagher’s new album.

Lately, there’s been a lot of talk about “creating jobs” mostly from Politicians. In addition, there’s been a lot of stories in the media done about how Politicians CANNOT create jobs. To simplify this topic down to a simple yes they can and no they can’t is silly. But I find most in the media saying that “no, the government cannot create jobs.”

There’s a lot of talk, on both side of the political spectrum, but especially on the Republican side, about how tax breaks and deregulating is going to “create jobs.” That simply hasn’t worked, because we, overall, have been doing that for years (lets not forget GE paid $0 in taxes last year) and haven’t really reaped the benefits of it.

As the New York Times’ Adam Davidson said:

Every politician currently has a “jobs plan,” very often a list of vague proposals filled with serious-sounding phrases like “budget framework” and “regulatory cap” that are designed, for the most part, to mean both everything and nothing at all.

Davidson goes on to basically say that politicians can’t create jobs. That subsidies for one industry (clean energy) and regulations for another (oil) just shift jobs from one technology to the other.

There’s some real problems with that argument. 1. we still subsidize the hell out of coal and oil, and we give major tax breaks to coal and oil. Also, while there are subsidies and tax breaks for clean energy, since corporations have helped write most of these tax break rules, a lot of times its still a raw deal for clean energy.

2. if you create, say, wind farms in states that do not produce coal (and there are only 13 states that employ more than 1,000 people in the coal industry), those jobs are NOT being taken away from one energy and moved to another, they overall should be a clear INCREASE in employment for the state.

Davidson goes on to criticize the stimulus and that it didn’t create enough jobs. Well, as former President Bill Clinton said on the Daily Show this week, the stimulus provided us a floor for how bad the recession would get. Without it, we would have most likely gone into a depression. So, the stimulus’ main goal of it wasn’t to create jobs. Sure, politicians can claim it created X amount of “shovel-ready jobs”- and it did, but it’s main goal wasn’t that.

Instead, it’d be nice if instead of talking about “deregulation” and “lowering taxes” if we just skipped all that and just employed people. What do I mean? I mean the government directly employing people. AKA a renewed Works Progress Administration (WPA).

Thomas Frank has written multiple books, including one of my favorites, What’s the Matter with Kansas, which explains in great detail why poor people vote for Conservatives, why they really shouldn’t, and some of the lunacy that goes on to court their vote (hint: it all goes back to “values” that are often drawn up only for political gain)

This month, Frank wrote a piece in Harper’s about job creation. He mentioned that Ronald Reagan, Mr. small government, said in his memoir, An American Life, that the WPA was “one of the most productive elements” of FDR’s New Deal. Frank also points out that as Governor of California, Reagan proposed a WPA-style public works program that would replace the state’s welfare program.

A similar program to this, the Civil Works Administration, employed Reagan’s dad, Jack Reagan. Here’s Frank:

the Civil Works Administration … set up in November 1933 as a desperate nation headed into its fith Depression winter. To create jobs, the CWA did not offer tax breaks or fine-tune the regulatory climate. No, the CWA simply hired unemployed people and put them to work. It was organized virtually overnight, and it did not wait for grand projects to be fleshed out: it simply sent people out into the nation’s public spheres to rake leaves, shovel snow, fix roads, dig ditches, and so on. The program’s administrator … found jobs for 4 million people in two months.

…

We do not remember these programs as evidence of a national flirtation with communism. By and large, the things they built are treasured today. … The Roosevelt Administration dealt with unemployment by putting murals in post offices, by bringing electricity to deepest Appalachia, by paying artists to paint, theater directors to stage plays, and penniless authors to assemble collections of folklore and write a famous series of guidebooks.

I’ll leave you with one more tidbit. Kevin Hasset, of the (very) conservative American Enterprise Institute, told a congressional panel in 2010 that “if the economic stimulus moneys were spent DIRECTLY hiring individuals, they would have created twenty-one million jobs.”

I say, let’s do it. Let’s stop talking about tax breaks, regulations, even subsidies to create jobs. There are a lot of great things about public-corporate partnerships. But there’s a lot of negatives to them as well. And in reality, in this economy, we don’t know what companies are going to do with those tax breaks (see: record breaking bonuses and record breaking profits for companies). We also know that there will be a big limit on how many jobs it will create, because companies are not producing a whole lot, because people are not buying a whole lot. A 21st century WPA wouldn’t have that problem. We could hire people to fix our crumbling schools in every major city in the U.S. We could have them fix the potholes on our decaying road system. They could go into libraries and digitally scan every print newspaper from the 1900s on and make it available online – for everyone. We could pay recently laid off journalists to cover local news and politics again. We could provide clean water for West Virginians who can’t drink the water from the tap because the chemicals from mountaintop removal coal mining have made it poisonous. We could build the infrastructure for high speed internet for rural towns all over the nation. We could build solar panels to power the sunbelt.

Most of these ascendant policies function in a way that directly contradicts Americans’ expectations of social welfare policies: They shower their largest benefits on the most affluent Americans. Take the Home Mortgage Interest Deduction (HMID), for example, which is currently the nation’s most expensive social tax break aside from the tax-free status of employer-provided health coverage. Let us assume that a family buys a median-value home and to finance it borrows $230,000 at an interest rate of 6.25 percent for 30 years. The richer the household, the larger the benefit: In the first year, the average family, with an income between $16,751 and $68,000, would owe around $3,619 less in taxes; those in the next income group, with earnings up to $137,300, would reap an extra $5,146; and so forth, on up to the wealthiest 2 percent of families, with incomes over $373,650, who would enjoy a savings of $6,673. Of course, in reality, these differences are likely to be much greater. Low- to moderate-income Americans usually do not have enough deductions to itemize, so they would forgo this benefit and receive instead only the standard deduction. Meanwhile, the most affluent are likely to purchase far more expensive homes; if a family in the top income category opts for a more upscale home and borrows $500,000 for a mortgage, it will reap a benefit of $14,506 from the HMID; if this family purchases a truly exclusive property and borrows $1 million for a mortgage, it will qualify to keep a whopping $29,012!

To read more, check out Suzanne Mettler’s article.

So I didn’t mention some artists I was listening to last time. One of them I HAVE to mention.

Band: Bon Iver

Album: “Bon Iver” AND “For Emma, Forever Ago”

I first fell in love with “Skinny Love” in New Zealand, and downloaded Bon Iver’s entire 2008 album, “For Emma, Forever Ago” in mid-July. I was impressed, but also knew they had JUST come out with a new album, self titled “Bon Iver”, in June, so I quickly added that as well. At first the new album took some time to get into. I wasn’t really feeling it, and kept going back to “For Emma, Forever Ago.”

Well, since then I’ve listened to Bon Iver’s self titled album over 50 times from July to now. Both albums kick ass. But especially “Bon Iver.” An album hasn’t consistently stayed in my recent played for this long since probably Phoenix’s “Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix”, The Strokes “Angles” or Mumford & Sons “Sign No More.” And, at least the current time, I’d argue “Bon Iver” is better than all of those, except maybe “Wolfgang Amadeus Phoenix.” I was quite obsessed with that CD for a LONG time.

To put it in more perspective/to quench my researching nerdiness, I added Bon Iver’s album in mid-July of this year, so less than 4 months. I added Dave Matthews and Tim Reynolds’ “Save Me” live recording at Radio City to my iTunes library in 2009. It’s my most played Dave Matthews song ever – BUT a few of Bon Iver’s songs already have more plays than that song. Crazy, eh? (What, did you think you were going to get through a blog post on Taylor Made without a reference to Dave Matthews? Nope. And I’m sorry to all you Hipsters who never thought they would see Bon Iver and Dave Matthews mentioned in the same breathe. Too bad, get over it.)

What else to listen to? I dunno, but if you haven’t already, certainly check out the Strokes relatively new album “Angles.” Also, go download a few of Citizen Cope’s albums. He’s real good. Oh, and Thievery Corporation’s. Download some of their stuff. The last two artists/bands have DC roots!

Sublime with Rome – Yours Truly

Well, this is not Bradley Nowell’s Sublime. However two original Sublime members are in the band  (Eric Wilson and Bud Gaugh). The lead singer is obviously different: Rome Ramirez is heading up the band. Rome co-wrote “Lay Me Down” by the Dirty Heads, which is an incredibly catchy song and worth a download. If you like Sublime, Slightly Stoopid, Rebelution, Pepper, The Expendables, etc. “Yours Truly” is certainly worth a download. I like most of the album equally, but as for highlights… the single “Panic” is good, “Only”, “PCH”, and “Murdera”, “Take it Or Leave It.”

Red Hot Chili Peppers – I’m With You

I like it. That’s all you have to know. Go listen to it. It hasn’t grabbed me like previous RHCP albums have. Even Stadium Arcadium grabbed a hold of me and I didn’t let go for weeks/months. This album hasn’t done that, but let’s face it: The Chili Peppers are getting old, they’ve been around forever. They’ve put out unbelievable music and they’re an unbelievable band. It may sound like I’m lessening the mediocrity of this album, but, honestly, I’ve only listened to the album twice, so the jury is still out. To say it’s a return to “old Chili Peppers”, and when I say old, I mean like pre-Blood Sugar Sex Magik, is total BS. The songs features all the melody singing Keidis has been doing for his last few albums (Stadium Arcadium, By the Way). But it’s also a little different, and may be a little funkier than By the Way, which is probably their softest album. I’m not sure if this one is softer than By The Way overall, but it’s a close call.

I like most of the album, but some highlights: “Factory of Faith”, “Look Around”, “Goodbye Hooray”, “Happiness Loves Company”, and “Even You, Brutus?”

Not a huge fan of “Brendan’s Death Song.” “Ethiopia” reminds me of By The Way/Stadium Arcadium Chili Peppers, and it’s an alright song. Lyrically, “The Adventures of Rain Dance Maggie” is a little bland, but it’s grown on me. “Did I let You Know” is real poppy and repetitive. “Goodbye Hooray” is probably the closest to a Blood Sugar Sex Magik RHCP song, but it also features some Piano. It’s certainly very different! “Happiness Loves Company” is exactly that – happy, and I like it a lot. Again, different for RHCP, but I like it.”Even You, Brutus” is one of my favorite songs. Yet again, never heard the Chili Peppers do a song like this one, but I do love it. It also features Piano. “Meet Me At the Corner” features some very John Frusciante-sounding backup vocals which is weird to hear since he’s not in the band any more. It’s pretty soft and sweet. “Dance, Dance, Dance” is the last song on the album

Ugly Casanova – 180 Degrees South Soundtrack (and) Sharpen Your Teeth

The lead singer from Modest Mouse, Isaac Brock, is the lead singer for this band as well. This band is like a lighter version of Modest Mouse. Pretty laid back songs, but all really good stuff. I really like what they put out for the 180 Degrees South soundtrack, which is a cool nature/outdoors adventure/sorta hippy-ish documentary.

Foster The People – Torches

Everyone’s heard “Pumped Up Kicks”, and maybe you’ve heard “Helena Beat.” But the whole album is worth hearing.

I’m listening to a lot of other music, but this is all I have time to post right now! Here’s a quick run off of other stuff worth downloading: Dispatch’s new EP, and if you don’t have it, go get all the other albums Dispatch has put out, especially the album “Bang Bang.” Since I haven’t written anything about music in a long time, last winter I was quite obsessed with The Decemberists new CD and Mumford and Sons’ debut album. If you haven’t heard those yet, I don’t know where you’ve been, but you need to give them a listen.

If you’re looking for more of what I’m listening to, please check out my Hype Machine “loved songs”.

For even more, check my last.fm profile.

David Dankel, a lifelong Democrat who voted for Obama, came to Ft. Dodge to see Bachmann because he was “tired of paying for everyone else.” In April, Dankel saw his $16-an-hour factory job of 23 years move to Mexico. “I was getting ahead and now I can’t find a job. Obama promised change—well, where is it?”

Seriously? What “change” were you expecting? I mean I’m fed up too, but let me get this straight: You didn’t get the “change” you want so much that you are going to go and vote for the most fringe Republican candidate the Party has ever had? How can you call yourself a lifelong Democrat? Seriously? Lifelong Democrats don’t have views EVEN CLOSE to Bachmann’s. I call bullshit David Dankel, lifelong Democrat.

This was from Newsweek’s profile of Bachmann, which is an okay article, but Rolling Stone, The Daily Beast, and The New Yorker have all written much better articles about her. I’m clearly no fan of hers, but I find her life story fascinating and terrifying.

When Barack Obama was elected, some voters, pundits, and political nerds like myself saw this as a sweeping motion in support of a more liberal US government. Maybe, just maybe another new deal, A New Deal 2.0. Two years later that’s clearly FAR from the truth. Obama is no FDR.

A few of my friends tried to warn me. They said the country was no more liberal than it was before, and really the main reason Obama was elected was because the economy sucked and Bush was so bad he had soured people’s opinions of the Republican Party. A whole lot. It’s not that I didn’t know these things. They’re pretty obvious, and certainly played a roll in Obama being elected. A damn good communications strategy also helped him win. But I still thought we had a chance here to do some big things. And I felt people were much more open to some of the liberal ideas Democrats have – health care reform, climate change/renewable energy initiatives, etc.

Ok, there’s my sob story. Here’s the real issue: our government is moving further right. Way, way, right.

The National Journal puts out vote ratings every year or so, rating Democrats and Republicans on how liberal or conservative they are. Some take aways from the 2010 vote ratings:

For only the second time since 1982, when NJ began calculating the ratings in their current form, every Senate Democrat compiled a voting record more liberal than every Senate Republican—and every Senate Republican compiled a voting record more conservative than every Senate Democrat. Even Nebraska’s Ben Nelson, the most conservative Democrat in the rankings, produced an overall voting record slightly to the left of the most moderate Republicans last year: Ohio’s George Voinovich and Maine’s Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe. The Senate had been that divided only once before, in 1999.

In general, the article basically shows that Democrats and Republicans are moving further away from the center. As a fairly progressive Democrat, it’s hard for me to believe Democrats have moved that far away from the center. For example, we still have a fairly large blue dog caucus – the group of conservative democrats that really held up the passage of the health care reform bill for awhile. Granted, that group got a lot smaller in the last election. But Republicans have no similar group, and haven’t for a long time. The amount of “liberal” Republicans is almost non-existant. What do they have, Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins?

And this isn’t just my feeling. It’s backed up by the National Journal article:

In 2010, the vote ratings show, the ideological consolidation was greater among Republicans than Democrats. Almost without exception House Republicans generated strongly conservative voting records, regardless of the demography or political leanings of their districts. By contrast, House Democrats from districts that voted for John McCain in 2008 or are dominated by working-class whites produced much less liberal records than their colleagues from districts that strongly supported Barack Obama or are more racially diverse and well educated.In the Senate, just eight Republicans notched a composite conservative score of less than 70, while 21 Democrats received a liberal ranking of less than 70.

Only EIGHT Republicans scored below 70, while 21 Democrats scored less than 70.

We can also look at the budget deals of the last few presidents to get an idea of just how far right our government has moved. This graph was put together by the Center On Budget and Policy Priorities:

So, if we listen to the current Republican Party, they basically don’t want ANY tax increases, ever. However, their hero, Mr. Ronald Reagan made a TON of tax increases. The first Bush had not as many, but he DID have tax increases. So did Clinton. Now, the Obama graph on this is now incorrect, because this was written when the current debt deals still had the option of tax increases on the table. Those are long gone now. Instead, there should be NO blue in that graph. So, you have what Republicans call one of the most liberal presidents ever, but he has ZERO tax increases in his debt deal. Compare that to the Presidents of the last 30 years and you can clearly see how far right our government has moved on the issue. As Ezra Klein put it, “Today, tea party conservatives would be begging Sen. Jim DeMint to primary the Gipper [Reagan].”

“No New Taxes” was H.W Bush’s slogan, but Obama, a DEMOCRAT has actually done it with this debt deal.

Speaking of taxes, let me talk about that for a moment. Despite what you might hear, federal taxes are the lowest they have been in SIXTY years. You want proof? Just read one of these links. Please.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/31/are-taxes-in-the-u-s-high-or-low/

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/taxes/2010-05-10-taxes_N.htm

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/07/politics/main7326720.shtml

That first one is especially good, because then it goes on to show that we have one of the lowest corporate tax rates in the world! But if you listen to the Republicans today, taxes are “out of control.” “Especially those corporate tax rates that cause all the corporations to ship our jobs overseas!” Side note: No, corporations just don’t want to pay people a decent wage to do the work. But anyways….

That’s all I got for now. I could go on and on and on about this. And maybe I will later this week. Like for example, Obama’s health care reform package very closely resembles the GOP’s plan from 1992. The individual mandate? The one Republicans have derided as being unconstitutional? That was originally a REPUBLICAN idea. So, a little less than 20 years later, a DEMOCRAT is passing a health care reform bill that would have been considered “conservative” 20 years ago, but now is considered by the right to be the worst, most evil thing to ever pass in this country.

We haven’t gone nuts — but the “conversation of democracy” has become so deeply dysfunctional that our ability to make intelligent collective decisions has been seriously impaired. Throughout American history, we relied on the vibrancy of our public square — and the quality of our democratic discourse — to make better decisions than most nations in the history of the world. But we are now routinely making really bad decisions that completely ignore the best available evidence of what is true and what is false. When the distinction between truth and falsehood is systematically attacked without shame or consequence — when a great nation makes crucially important decisions on the basis of completely false information that is no longer adequately filtered through the fact-checking function of a healthy and honest public discussion — the public interest is severely damaged.

Later on he criticized President Obama for not communicating well:

Yet without presidential leadership that focuses intensely on making the public aware of the reality we face, nothing will change. The real power of any president, as Richard Neustadt wrote, is “the power to persuade.” Yet President Obama has never presented to the American people the magnitude of the climate crisis. He has simply not made the case for action. He has not defended the science against the ongoing, withering and dishonest attacks. Nor has he provided a presidential venue for the scientific community — including our own National Academy — to bring the reality of the science before the public.

1. I said “dreaded” in relation to returning to Auckland. “Let me be clear” (say that in a Barack Obama voice – if you don’t know, the guy says it all the time), Auckland is an ok place. But the problem with it is… it’s just a big city. The Central Business District doesn’t really have any character or culture to it. It’s just…. a city. Don’t get me wrong, if I were to do my study abroad over, I’d still pick Auckland – it’s the gateway to an unbelievable country – but there’s a reason people from all over NZ use the term JAFA – Just Another Fuckin Aucklander. Seriously, there’s a wikipedia page on it. I’m not alone in my feelings, I know many Australians and Kiwis from all over who feel the same way. I also know some fellow study abroad students that feel the same way. Although not everyone feels this way obviously, because a lot of people live in Auckland.

Auckland is completely different than the rest of NZ. Part of that makes it sort of cool at first. Despite it being a relatively small city on the world scale, for NZ, it’s huge. Too big for Kiwis likings I believe, although again, almost half of Kiwis reside in the Auckland area. New Zealand is known for its natural beauty, and besides a few beaches, the Auckland Domain, and Mt. Eden, Auckland isn’t exactly naturally beautiful. Don’t get me wrong, it could be. Looking out at Rangitoto from Mission Bay is a spectacular view. Really, all Auckland needs is, sorry Kiwis, but… a Sydney-nization. It needs some prominent building (other than the sky tower) that serves some cultural or artistic purpose (think Opera House). It needs prettier buildings. It needs something like “The Rocks” in Sydney. It needs a hell of a lot better public transportation.

I didn’t explore the suburbs of Auckland much, but from the little that I have, they do seem to be much better than Auckland central. My favorite part of the Auckland area are the two main beaches – Mission Bay and Takapuna. They’re both really pretty and the shops, cafes, etc. that surround them are cute.

Auckland is also different from the rest of NZ in that it’s extremely multicultural. It’s fair to say most of the rest of NZ is either NZ Whites or Maori. Auckland though is Maori, Asian, White (from Eastern and Western Europe, North America, etc.) Indian, African, Pakistani, Arab, etc. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the dislike towards Auckland by some is because of this. I’ve even heard some say it. One Australian said Auckland was “run by bloody Maoris” and “they just don’t get it.” Others have called Auckland “Chinatown” in not the most heartfelt of ways. All of which is sad because the mixing pot of cultures is a big positive to Auckland as a city.

Wellington, to me, is the city that should be the face of NZ. Not Auckland. Wellington is beautiful. Its waterfront beats Auckland’s by a mile. It has good nightlife, tons of free attractions, and there is art prominently displayed throughout the city. It also is the capital of NZ, which I think is a positive – all the excitement and banter that comes along with politics helps the city. It’s also sorta centrally located in NZ.

Ok, back on topic. Here I am, trying to write a blog post updating readers on my travels in New Zealand, and I can’t even stay on topic. I gotta start talking about why I’m not motivated to update my blog as much as I am to update my Twitter or Facebook.

ANYWAYS,

Currently, I’m “stuck” on the South Island. I was supposed to fly back to [dreaded] Auckland today, but the volcanic eruption in CHILE (yes, Chile!) is affecting the NZ airspace on the north island. Luckily, Air New Zealand is just going AROUND the volcanic ash, so I just booked a flight with them and am expecting a refund from Jetstar Airways… whenever I can get through to their support line… side quesiton: why the hell hasn’t Jetstar figured out a way around the volcanic ash like Air New Zealand has? This whole venture cost me a few extra hundred dollars, and my NZ travel insurance doesn’t cover flight changes due to natural disasters when they are DOMESTIC flights. Oh well I guess.

I would wait out the whole volcanic mess, but I can’t because I have my last exam in less than 2 days. At the latest I need to be there tomorrow, which is the current plan.

Anyways, the South Island is BEAUTIFUL. People say the south island is completely different than the north island, essentially they’re different countries. I’d say this is largely true. They are very different. Sure, you still feel like you’re in New Zealand, but compare the Bay of Islands to the Southern Alps… completely different. And that’s one of the beauties of New Zealand: this country has every kind of natural wonder you could want. And it’s all bunched together on a fairly small landmass. Rain forests next to sand dunes, rain forests next to glaciers, etc. etc.

We started out our trip flying into Christchurch. The city is clearly still recovering from the earthquake, and numerous aftershocks every few days can’t be helping the situation. In fact, less than a day after we left CC, another aftershock hit, the largest since the earthquake originally hit in February. That said, the whole country seems to have overall a good sense of humor about the whole thing. Despite all the suffering and sadness, they crack jokes about it even inside Christchurch! We really didn’t get to see much of the town, because we came in at night and left in the morning. However, as I’m told, there isn’t much to see: things are still pretty destroyed there.

We drove on to Dunedin, stopping at the Moeraki Boulders on the way. Dunedin is definitely a cool city, but I much prefer Wellington and Queenstown, but more on that a bit later. Dunedin has a cool city center area called “the octagon” which has lots of cafes and such. I would have loved to check out the Speights brewery, but again, we were in a bit of a rush, getting there around the afternoon and left early in the morning for Queenstown. The reason for this was one of my traveling partners was leaving earlier than the rest of us, so she was only going to get one day in Queenstown. So, I probably can’t give Dunedin the justice it deserves since I was there for such a short time.

Queenstown. Ah yes. Surrounded by huge mountains (which means there are plenty of ski fields), this place is truly special. Touristy? Yes. Adrenaline Addicted? Yes. Obsessed with skiing? Yes. I like two of those things a whole lot. And the city isn’t ‘Bay of Islands’ touristy, it’s just clearly a destination city for lots of… touristy things. But it still has character I think. It has something like 80 bars, and despite what anyone says about any other city in NZ, I found Queenstown to be the party capital of NZ.

Just about every bar, cafe, restaurant, etc. has ski/snowboardng movies playing on a TV screen somewhere, which made me extremely happy. Ferg Burger, a famous burger place in QT is definitely worth a visit. The Nevis Bungy jump, at 134 meters, is one of the largest in the world. And you better believe I did it. I’d argue it was more amazing than sky diving, but that’s partly because the adrenaline rush from bungy jumping is so much higher for bungy. With sky diving, your brain doesn’t recognize how far away you are from the ground, so there is no “ground rush” feeling. It’s all actually fairly controlled. Still amazing, but bungy is definitely more of an adrenaline rush. Especially a 440 foot bungy. Jetboating is also famous in QT. You travel around a body of water on a boat, most famously, (the extremely narrow at times) Shotover river, at speeds up to 80 KMs. I did this on my second to last day in Queenstown. I had low expectations after everyone had said it was overrated. While it was cool, it’s certainly not worth what you pay for it. Other things to do? Take the gondola up for a nice view of Queenstown and ‘The Remarkables’ [mountains] in the background. From there you can do luging as well, which in Rotorua is only ok, but the Queenstown luging trails are much better, especially the advanced route!

Queenstown is a pretty small town, as are most places in NZ. Lots of cool local restaurants and stores.We spent a decent amount of time just walking down “the mall” and exploring downtown Queenstown.

More to come soon. I’ll talk about Milford Sound, Mt. Cook, and previous trips to Wellington and Sydney, and what’s next in my travels!