speaking, tangentially as i was in the last post, about belle and sebastian, i see that pitchfork reviews their three most recent EPs today. that's great and all, and pitchfork gives them very high marks, but have you ever seen a band besides radiohead put out more superfluous material? not superfluous in the sense that it's not good or worthy of being put out, but just in the sense that i cannot even begin to keep straight all of the eps that they've had. it's got to be around 10 at this point. can't they consolidate? i'm glad they can put out so much new material, but the cost is a little ridiculous -- for example, with these three new eps, there's eight new songs, and i think all together the eps would cost me around $20. i guess we could debate the merit of paying 20 bucks for eight songs, but i'm not sure it's worth it. anyway, i'm just rambling, and i probably have to be one of the first people to ever complain about one of their favorite bands putting out too many songs, so i'll shut up.

but i will never purchase anything from the dreaded reed-voiced isobel campbell. and that is final.

tommy alerts me to this bit on david segal's washington post online music chat today:

David Segal: Thanks much.

The caller refers to my sort-of imminent departure from the pop critic beat. By September, I'll be in NYC to write about Whatever for the Style section. I am, as the kids say, stoked.

But moving off the pop beat is a big bummer and I'm really going to miss it. And miss these chats.

But enough of that, you say. Dave, you say -- can I call you Dave? -- what does this change mean for me, the consumer of pop writing in the Washington Post? Enough about you. You're soooo July 2004. What happens in September and every month after that?

Glad you asked, people. We're looking for a replacement. If you know anyone interested, let 'em know. We've got a welter of superb applicants but the more the merrier.

What are we looking for? This isn't a typical pop job, in the sense that a lengthy list of concert and album reviews will land you the gig. Believe it or not, I'd never written a concert review before I arrived in this spot four years ago. And maybe I'd done one album review. I think. Actually, it might have been killed. What they want is less a track record in the biz than a demonstration that you can write in a variety of voices. A news voice, a distinctive critical voice, and a profile voice -- a profile voice that is never suck-uppy, preferably. And if you've got some deadline experience, even better.

By the way, I can't recommend this job enough. You work for and with incredibly bright people and they'll give you enough leash to run in just about any direction.

Interested parties can send their stuff to my attention, c/o the Washington Post, 1150 15th St., NW, 20071.

Tell 'em Large Marge sent ya.

now, i am not all that distressed to hear that david segal is leaving, because i've never really liked him that much since i read an online chat of his a few years back where he said he didn't know anything about belle and sebastian. what is up with that? but whatever. i would totally apply to this job if i thought i stood a chance in hell of getting it, but as a 24 year-old with not a ton of clips working in the publications department of an education association, i'm going to say odds are slim to none. i hope the job goes to joe heim (if he's under consideration), who's the editor of the wp.com's entertainment guide music section. i interned for him in college, and he was awesome and nice and once told me in regards to a concert preview i wrote about weezer, "it's so nice to get writing that doesn't have to be edited at all." aw. he went on to help me with my music writing, and i even freelanced for him a few times after the internship. of course, since i'm terrible about keeping in touch, i haven't seen him in years and i'm sure he doesn't have a clue as to who i am anymore, which is unfortunate, because that would be a good contact to have if i ever wanted to start being a rock stah music critic (which i don't really, anymore. in college i was way into the idea and wrote lots of stuff for the dec and the angle about concerts and cds, but the truth is that i'm not very good at it).

anyway, applying for some hot music critic job where they probably give you free washington post cocaine is moot, because i am almost sure that i am going to apply to journalism grad school this year. my decision was totally bolstered by the fact that i took a practice GRE test last night (sans the writing part) and did much better than i thought i would on it. yes, a paralyzing fear of the GRE was somewhat preventing me from thinking i could go to (a semi-decent) grad school. but now that i know i can get above a 200, i am inspired. (especially by my math score, which was equal to my verbal score, which is totally weird, because i scored equally on both sections on my SATs as well, and i really suck at math.)

i already know which reach schools i'll apply to -- northwestern and berkeley, who both have magazine publishing programs that look amazing -- the schools that will say, "oh, it is SO CUTE that you are trying to get in here!" it's harder to decide what other schools to apply to -- schools that are respected, but schools where you don't have to have interned at the washington post, CBS news, mother jones AND the wall street journal to get in. you think i exaggerate? check out these kids' resumes.

so i guess if you are some sort of journalism grad school expert, i would be much obliged to hear some advice on some solid schools i could apply to.

of course this decision, as with any decision i make, isn't really final until i am actually in attendance at whatever sorry school decides to take me under their wing. but i feel pretty good about it.

Don't miss Salon's bitchy interview with Ralph Nader, if only for the photo of a bleary-eyed Ralph, apparently stumbling from the bus station shadows to ask us for change. And what's that weird smell?

As for the actual interview, it serves to pretty well demonstrate that Nader doesn't understand at all why folks are pissed off when he doesn't live up to his own professed standards. As Consumer-Protection-Jesus he at least seemed deserving of respect. Now that the extent to which he's prepared to compromise himself has been revealed he just looks like any other politician, except a hell of a lot less mediagenic and, you know, viable.

mary beth cahill calls it in:

Washington, DC – Kerry-Edwards campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill today sent the following letter to Bush Cheney ’04 Campaign Manager Ken Mehlman in response to a letter Mehlman sent yesterday:

July 13, 2004
Ken Mehlman
Campaign Manager
BUSH-CHENEY '04, Inc.

Dear Ken:

Over the past several months, allies of the President have questioned John Kerry’s patriotism while your staff has criticized his service in Vietnam. Republicans and their allies have gone so far as to launch attacks against his wife and your campaign has run $80 million in negative ads that have been called baseless, misleading and unfair by several independent observers.

Considering that the President has failed to even come close to keeping his promise to change the tone in Washington, we find your outrage over and paparazzi-like obsession with a fund-raising event to be misplaced. The fact is that the nation has a greater interest in seeing several documents made public relating to the President’s performance in office and personal veracity that the White House has steadfastly refused to release. As such, we will not consider your request until the Bush campaign and White House make public the documents/materials listed below:

● Military records: Any copies of the President’s military records that would actually prove he fulfilled the terms of his military service. For that matter, it would be comforting to the American people if the campaign or the White House could produce more than just a single person to verify that the President was in Alabama when said he was there. Many Americans find it odd that only one person out of an entire squadron can recall seeing Mr. Bush.

● Halliburton: All correspondence between the Defense Department and the White House regarding the no-bid contracts that have gone to the Vice-President’s former company. Some material has already been made public. Why not take a campaign issue off the table by making all of these materials public so the voters can see how Halliburton has benefited from Mr. Cheney serving as Vice-President?

● The Cheney Energy Task Force: For an Administration that claims to hate lawsuits, it’s ironic that the Bush White House is taking up the Courts’ time to keep the fact that Ken Lay and Enron wrote its energy policy in secret behind closed doors. Please release the documents so that the country can learn what lobbyists and special interests wrote the White House energy policy.

● Medicare Bill: Please release all White House correspondence between the pharmaceutical industry and the Administration regarding the Medicare Bill, which gave billions to some of the President’s biggest donors. In addition, please provide all written materials that directed the Medicare actuary to withhold information from Congress about the actual cost of the bill.

● Prison Abuse Documents: A few weeks ago, the White House released a selected number of documents regarding the White House’s involvement in laying the legal foundation for the interrogation methods that were used in Iraq. Please release the remaining documents.

We also wanted to wish you a happy anniversary. As we are sure you and the attorneys representing the President, Vice-President and other White House officials are aware, today marks one year since Administration sources leaked the identity of a covert CIA agent to Bob Novak in an effort to retaliate against a critic of the Administration.

In light of the fact that the Administration began gutting the laws protecting the nation’s forests yesterday, we hope you will accept the paper on which this letter is written as an anniversary gift. (The one year anniversary is known as the “paper anniversary.”)

Sincerely,

Mary Beth Cahill

i would just like to say, as an american citizen who has lived under this administration for three years, that i TOTALLY expect and think i deserve better cover-ups from my president. especially in regards to the whole microfiche military service records that were so conveniently destroyed recently. if my president can't lie to me in a more convincing manner than this, i'm not sure he's going to get my vote this time around.