Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Fog of War




Maybe you were on an email list and received a series of these pictures from the Pearl Harbor attack, hidden inside a Kodak Brownie camera for 63 years. It's hard to do a better job of showing 'the fog of war'--what it's like when you're under attack and don't really know what to do. It's the same in Iraq...and was the same for me in Vietnam.
Those pictures of Pearl Harbor, I've scanned them a few times now, even printed a couple up. Can you imagine what was going through those guy's heads when it hit? Yeah, goin' home in a couple weeks for X-mas, get to see the family and so forth, BAM, not now, holy shit, I'm helpless. Now that's the tone I imagine went through each and every person on the island. A feeling of total helplessness.
I only had that experience once, when the Huey I was in got shot down. Going in circles (auto rotate) you have this feeling like whatever is going to happen, make it happen now--I'm scared to death and don't know what to do. Training helps in a fire fight when you expect to be in one and your mind gets prepared so that when the shit happens it's not a surprise and then you can react and counter. It's not unlike a big game situation in football because the physical aspect of the game is there, and you could get your ass kicked big time. It's much more about survival and, if you have leadership responsibilities, protecting those you are fighting with. It is the ultimate us against them mentality.
No one, and I mean no one, in a fire fight stops to think of the possible political/geopolitical outcome of the situation. It's just, "how do I get my ass out of this and prevent my guys from getting killed?" That's it. Survival.
I did know this: I did not want to be taken prisoner under any circumstance. The stories we heard about that stuff were probably exaggerated but they still made me sick. No, I would have been one of those guys who took it before surrender, down with the ship type. Thank goodness I never had to make that decision.
I could tell who to trust, count on, respect (regardless of rank) as soon as the shooting started. Or even as little as 10 minutes after meeting a guy. I had 2 lieutenants, both great, never took needless chances, weren't gung-ho and asked questions. When the second guy came in, the first thing he did was ask me what the hell this (war) was all about. In other words, 'I've been in the states training and I don't know shit about live combat so tell me the real story'. This was good as it gave us the confidence that this guy wasn't gonna march us into a blood bath. We were lucky, there were plenty of the other types of officers and if the VC didn't get them, their own men sometimes did. Like the 1st part of "Band of Brothers" where the guy who played Ross on Friends is put in command. That guy wouldn't have lasted a week in the Nam'.
War is hell.

hortense



Is anyone listening?

How much money can we spend on a war that will never, ever work? 30 billion, 50 billion, why not 500 billion I mean it's only our future we're gambling with. Are people sincerely that stupid? We have, at this time the most incompetent president in our brief 200+ year history running the show and the show needs to close. There is no way to get out of this "war" with honor, none. Investing young human lives and billions of dollars is abhorent and immoral. I was there, in the front lines in 71', I feel a complete sense of deja vu surrounding me and it makes me sick.

hortense

Oscars Post Mortem

I never saw one minute of the Oscars, not one, don't care, it's the ultimate popularity contest. However, in my opinion there were only two errors in the outcome. Both at the supporting actor/actress category.
I love Alan Arkin but his performance in LMS could have been done by a number of people. Compared to his acting in "Wait Until Dark" or "Catch 22" it was nothing more than throw the guy a bone. He was much better in the hysterical comedy with Peter Falk, "The In-Laws". This was simply a sympathy Oscar. Eddie Murphy should have won (from the list of nominees) for his versatility in his portrayal of the James Brown like character in "Dreamgirls", a very overrated movie by the way. LMS was in my mortal opinion nothing more than a good made for TV movie. It just didn't do it for me. This was supposed to be how a real dysfunctional family acts and lives? Not for me, no one is gonna let grandpa prepare the final act, whacked out on heroin and fatalism. It just didn't do it for me, but that's what makes the world go round.
The best actor/actress category was a "no-brainier" for anyone that saw those two movies, simply mesmerizing performances, two of the best ever. Best picture, no contest, it should have been.


hortense

Genie in a ...Garage?

Five years ago we did a remodel on our house. Among the things that changed were the garage doors and their openers. The old ones were basic, but they had a socket on the side which held a light bulb that would turn on every time the door opened--very helpful in the dark.
The new ones are much fancier, sleek black and white boxes with a nice chain drive--but for some reason, the damn contractor installed ones without lights. So you either leave the overhead garage lights on all the time, or you're going to fumble to the door in the dark after you've turned off your headlights.
How many times over the years have I muttered to myself about this?
Then, yesterday, something struck me. The black plastic housing on those boxes is opaque; but the white part is translucent. I got up on a step stool. Sure enough, up near the ceiling, there are two tiny screw connecting the two colored housings together. I unscrew them, the white part flips down, and sure enough, there are two lonely light sockets, just itching for their chance to shine.

How many other things in life are hidden in plain view, just waiting to be recognized?

diderot

Monday, February 26, 2007

No-Bull Durham

If you've bothered to read the boilerplate to the left of this post, you know that the Three Guys cemented their life-long friendship on the baseball field of their Chicago high school. Maybe that means nothing to you...maybe you don't even like baseball.

But still, could it be that you once had someone convince you to watch the movie Bull Durham? And did you happen to identify with the Kevin Costner character--the older guy who vied for the affections of Susan Sarandon, pitted against the much younger and more virile Tim Robbins character? If baseball players were really like Crash Davis (Costner), instead of those spoiled, overpaid prima donnas, then maybe you'd care.

Well, guess what. Crash Davis lives.

Courtesy of Athlon Sports, here is a career snapshot of the real life Chris Coste, a catcher who finally got his chance with the Philadelphia Phillies last year:
  • 34 years old, veteran of five years in the Independent League (i.e., pays minimum wage if you're lucky), as well as a player in five different countries
  • Got married on the field while playing for the Fargo-Moorhead franchise in the Northern League (not as bad as it sounds--he was raised in Fargo, so at least he was close to home). While playing, he also worked in the front office, and did a radio show, for which he was paid $12 a day
  • Previously signed and released by four different Major League organizations
  • Has authored one book on minor league baseball, and another one is on the way
  • Finally made his Major League debut last year, at age 33. In his first at-bat, he was hit by a pitch (and believe me, even though 'real' players never rub the wound, it 'really' hurts)
  • Improbably, he hit .328 in more than 200 trips to the plate; that would have ranked him #3 among all catchers in baseball had he been granted enough plate appearances to qualify. After the season, the organization voted him 'most inspirational' player
  • Despite that performance, he is listed as the #3 catcher this year for the Phillies, and is not even guaranteed a spot on the team
Fame is fleeting--although there is some talk of making a movie of his story. Take that, Barry Bonds!

diderot

Educated, Intelligent and Smart

If ever a distinction needed to be made, it is that between the terms 'educated', 'intelligent' and 'smart'. They are often carelessly interchanged. This is dangerous.
To simplify, let's say 'educated' is just the measurement of the level of education you've successfully attained. Maybe just grade school or high school...or maybe a PhD in physics. In any case, I would suggest that we've all met people who were 'well educated', but whom we would not consider equally intelligent or smart.
Intelligent, as I understand it, is simply a measurement of the individual facility to learn and comprehend things--some of them inherently unintelligible, like calculus (OK, that's my bias speaking). It is popularly measured by "IQ" scores.
Finally, there is 'smart'--something entirely different from the first two. It is an immeasurable ability of people to understand how the world works. Who read between the lines. See ulterior motives. 'Read' people well. Become hard to fool. It is a trait the Three Guys often attribute to fellow Chicagoans.
Which leads to the discussion of comments made over the weekend by our country's Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice. She of a doctorate at the University of Denver and similar honorary degrees from half a dozen others; an apparently successful stint as provost of Stanford; and seats on the board of both Chevron and Charles Schwab. Certainly it would be impossible to argue either her education or her intelligence.
But her latest comments over the weekend, asserting that the overthrow of Saddam was equal to the defeat of Hitler, stops the train of tributes dead in its tracks. This is hardly her only stumble; she has been misstating reality and failing her country for the last seven years. One can only presume that a person of her accomplishment is not deliberately lying. Surely that tendency would have been noticed by someone before she was appointed the top person advising the President of the United States on intelligence matters.
Which leaves only one possibility. The chasm between her education and intelligence, on one hand, and her absolute void of 'smarts' on the other, makes her verifiably the stupidest person on Earth.

diderot

Sunday, February 25, 2007

The Political Cookout

In considering a Presidential candidate, for the sake of argument, let's say that the voting public in America is divided into three roughly equal segments. A third will always vote for more liberal candidate, a third for the more conservative, and a third is in the middle, alternatively labeled the 'independent' or 'undecided' voters. But these are two entirely different animals.
The truly 'independent' are perhaps the most discerning and open minded of voters, earnestly studying a candidate's background and positions to determine which might better lead the country. The undecided are, in many ways, the polar opposite. These are voters who are so disconnected from the entire process that they will ultimately cast their ballots on an entirely different basis.
Enter the Political Cookout.
Imagine that you're hosting a barbeque in your backyard on a summer night, and your spouse has invited several people that you don't know. As you're standing over the open flames sizzling your burgers and chicken wings, one of those strangers approaches with a beer in hand, ready to say hello and get acquainted. You're the cook--you can't excuse yourself from your station. You're going to have to stay and talk. How will that conversation go?
This is how most of the 'undecideds' ultimately do decide their vote. For them, 'studying up on the candidates' is confined to paid TV commercials, maybe a couple of soundbites on the news, or even catching part of one debate. From that input, a visceral conclusion is drawn--which of these people do I think would be the most bearable to me, trapped in front of that grill?
It's pointless to judge why their contact with the political process is so limited--it just is. And the perverse genius of the Lee Atwaters and Karl Roves of the Republican Party is that they have never looked down their noses at the 'undecideds'--they've embraced them, because in the majority of elections, they're the folks who will decide the winner. I'm hardly the first to make this observation, but when you consider the perceived persona of Eisenhower vs. Stevenson, Kennedy vs. Nixon, Reagan vs. his opponents and Clinton vs. his, I would submit that the undecided voters overwhelmingly determined that they'd rather have that beer and talk with the guy who won instead of the guy who lost. (Carter vs. Ford, you say? I believe that in this case, the ultimate 'unfairness' of the Nixon pardon swung even a huge share of the undecideds against Ford, even if Ford was seen to be the more 'regular' guy. )
When Rove stood his candidate up against both Gore and Kerry, he knew that he would never win among the independents. These were as close as you could get to mismatches in terms of experience, credentials and IQ. His only hope was to win the Political Cookout test, not only by making his own foil seem more personally likable, but more importantly, by making the opponents look as geeky, out-of-touch and generally unlikable as possible. Would you really want to have that beer with a guy who was delusional enough to think he was the role model for A Love Story? Or worried about changing his wardrobe from 'power colors' to 'earth tones'? Or a guy who married some divorcee for her money, and was so unpatriotic that he flung his own war medals into the trash? Of course not. Vote for my guy. He's more 'real'.
Which brings us to the current posse of hopefuls. Each candidate has his or her own set of handlers, deciding which is the best persona to project. And of course, the political calculus is different at this stage, since the necessary appeal now is only to voters of your own party in a handful of states. But at the same time, the media is already projecting how these personalities will play in front of the full electorate more than 20 months into the future. And voters across the nation, even the now-and-future undecideds, are already picking up cues.
For the GOP, this mission is especially dangerous right now. Giuliani, the Hero of the Horror, has a set of lifelong positions from abortion to social welfare that make him a real threat to the Democrats--but currently, he isn't running against any Democrat. What most threatens him is that the right wing of his own party never gives him a chance. So his answer, thus far, is to try and change the subject. And for the time being, it's working, because the majority of attention remains fixed on McCain.
And what a tragic figure he's become. His reputation, even among members of his own party, is rapidly moving from 'guy who survived a prison camp' to 'guy who didn't survive the prison camp very well'. He has politically abandoned previous positions faster than Anna Nicole Smith switched lovers. Whether he can temporarily accomplish Bush's miracle-- "hey, don't worry about my past!"--it will come back to haunt him should he win the nomination, turning the Kerry 'flip-flop' vocabulary against him, in spades.
Romney has exactly the same problem, but it's being subsumed so far by confusion about his 'Mormon-ness'. The subject of religion in this election is fascinating, but a topic for a future post.
When you consider the Democratic field (for the moment, at least, just two contenders), not only does Obama win the cookout test, but with more and more exposure, he's going to pull even further ahead on this count. His facility for saying things directly and honestly is not just appealing, it's the perfect tonic for the toxicity that's enveloped Washington for the last four election cycles. Like any good marketers, political consultants measure both awareness and favorability. Obama so far is in the happy position of knowing that as the first rises, so will the second.
Which leaves us, at last, with Sen. Clinton. Among political junkies, I would submit that for the last half century, the political campaign you'd most like to be inside of --just to observe the advice and argument--is hers, right now. As a candidate who's always been over-advised and over-coached, the natural reaction to the Obama threat is to do more of the same. But for her, that's pure poison. Her ability to compete, particularly in a general election, will largely be determined in how she responds right now to the cookout factor. Presently, the persona she projects is not one that would make you turn and say, "hey, how about you grab us a couple more beers?" And if she continues beyond the first exploratory steps of trying to drag down Obama rather than raising herself, she will never be invited back to this barbeque. The undecideds simply won't have her.
The lesser known of the Steely Dan duet, Walter Becker, once wrote a line of lyrics, "tomorrow's for squares, tonight is for real".
Hillary had better decide to get real now, or there won't be a tomorrow.

diderot

Friday, February 23, 2007

Movie Review: Breach

Yes, if you follow the news you know what's going to happen, but it carries great suspense anyway.
Yes, the casting and direction are superb.
But the conclusive reason you should see Breach which you may not know is that the real-life main character, Robert Hanssen, went to the same high school as the Three Guys. (But we did NOT slip him any state secrets.)

diderot

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Media Sins: What is Journalism?

I took my first paying job in journalsim 37 years ago. It seems almost impossible to put into words how the perception of what a journalist should be has changed. But this link does a great job of explaining how the profession has gone wrong.

diderot

Monday, February 19, 2007

A Chicago Story

My first job out of college was working as a cub reporter for the City News Bureau. This was like a minor league Associated Press, covering every little incident in King County, thus acting as a scouting service for the big papers who therefore didn't have to commit a more expensive reporter of their own. We tended to things like the City Landmarks Commission, which determined important issues like whether the addition of an awning would despoil an otherwise 'pristine' example of a dingy, 1920's meatpacking warehouse.
I did well enough to work my way up to the weekend evening beat covering not just an area police headquarters, but the main headquarters itself, at 1121 S. State. At that time, I always thought the placement of this building was the equivalent of a fort in medieval times, situated at the outpost of 'safe' territory, standing ready to repel invaders. As a white boy growing up on the Northwest side, you may not have known a lot about the city, but you knew that you didn't voluntarily roam south of Police Headquarters.
Covering this building was an OK beat on weekdays, when the building was full. It was a graveyard on weekend evenings, when all of the police brass was out on the town.
But one Saturday night, there was some ongoing crime that needed attention, so I didn't leave until about 2 am. I walked down the steps underground to the subway platform, and it was the first time I had ever seen it absolutely deserted. The only sound was the soft 'whooshing' of some train a couple of miles away. I could hear myself breathe--and nothing else.
Until that sound came. Footsteps. A single set. Walking down the same marble stairs I had come d0wn a minute or two before. I didn't dare turn to see who they belonged to, so I sat on the bench, staring at the tracks.
Slowly, they came closer. And closer. And then, I realized this someone had sat down right next to me. So close I could smell the booze on his breath. So I finally turned. And sure enough, it was a large black man. Looking right at me. I couldn't detect the weapon immediately, but there was something tucked under his arm. I couldn't help but thinking, 'here I am, literally steps from police headquarters, and this is happening to me.'
He just looked at me for a minute, and then he said softly, "hey, man, you know what a lesion is?"
"A what?"
"Lesion--something like that. You know anything about it?"
My brain raced. "Well, yeah, I think it's a cut...or a scar--or something."
We both paused. Did he intend to inflict a lesion--or several of them--on me?
Sure enough, he reached under that arm. But what he pulled out was not a weapon, but a long, large manila envelope. And from it, he extracted a single X-Ray. "Doc says these are my lungs, and this here is a lesion." He pointed to a dull white spot.
I said I didn't know what that was. I suspected it wasn't good news, but it didn't seem responsible to hazard a guess.
"OK, well thanks," he said, and he stood up and walked a few steps away, where he remained until his train came, taking him...and his lesions...to the southside.
Mine finally came and I boarded, in the opposite direction.
But from that day, I could never quite envision the southside as quite so hostile.

diderot

The Swamp Fox

When I was a kid, I simply could not get enough of the Landmark Books. Biographies of athletes, inventors, politicians and other legendary figures. Histories that recounted the battles of King Arthur, Napoleon and D-Day. And among them, probably my favorite was the heroic depiction of Francis Marion--known better (at least to some) as the Swamp Fox.
Marion was despised by the British during the Revolutionary War because he and his small band of men would win battles, at times, without ever being seen. They would pick off the redcoats from behind the thickets of swampland...intercept traveling parties under the cover of darkness...and build their reputation by whatever means necessary as the greatest scouts of that, and perhaps any other, American war.
Oh, how the British hated him! Winning or losing, they claimed, was incidental--at least the man should have the decency to obey the rules of modern warfare!
Of course, it's been impossible not to think of the Swamp Fox recently. Last week a U.S. general chastised the Iraqi terrorists for 'being afraid to face us on the battlefield'. We have heard the arguments about the need for our military to equip and train itself for 'a new kind of warfare'. And yesterday, that oily prevaricator, Tony Snow, assured a Sunday morning talk show host that certainly the suicide and IED attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq were 'unprecedented'.
I guess, from the historical perspective of the U.S., you can't have it both ways. Either Marion was a 'terrorist', just like the opponents in Iraq--or those Iraqis would have to be construed as wily and inventive 'freedom fighters', doing what they need to do to repel foreign occupiers.
I wish I had written down the name of the retired U.S. general I saw on TV two or three years ago, when it first became evident that what was going on in Iraq was an organized opposition, not just random acts of violence. His assessment, to paraphrase, was, "that's it. We've lost. There is no way we can beat this kind of opposition because we'll never be able to find them. The only question remaining is how long we'll take to admit it, and how many more lives we'll lose in the process."
I can't be sure, but I assume he was thinking of the Swamp Fox.

diderot

Update: Today President Bush compared his position in Iraq with that of George Washington fending off the British during his time. As usual, absolutely, 100%, 180 degrees wrong by Bush. The British invaded America. We invaded Iraq.

Thursday, February 15, 2007

Olbermann

For about a year, Countdown with Keith Olbermann has been the best news show on television--exponentially.
Today he got his reward in the form on a nice contract from NBC, in which the guys who count beans for a living at GE acknowledged that Olbermann's approach is creating a lot more beans.
For years many media pundits believed only the Limbaughs and O'Reilly's of the world could turn a profit.
In Olbermann, the other side of the spectrum has a viable voice.

diderot

Headwaters

All the mighty rivers of the world, from the Amazon to the Congo to the Nile, come from humble beginnings. A modest web of headwaters combines sequentially to form a communal vessel which quite literally allows life for millions of living creatures.
Similarly, each of our individual lives gathers with countless others to form tribes and towns and civilizations. And several small encounters the past few days have left me wondering exactly where our American river is headed.
A couple evenings ago I attended a meeting at school, designed to instruct parents on how to best equip their kids on making the 'transition' to high school. But of course, you can no longer talk about high school without simultaneously talking about college, and the strategies required to navigate your own student into the 'right' school. Throughout the formal presentation, there was one mother who could not help gesturing and chuckling and commenting out loud to indicate to all of us less worthy attendees that she really understood how the system worked. And of course, when the call came for questions, her hand was the first in the air.
"I really find it painful even asking this," she began. But of course, she mustered the resolve to go on. "But is Ms. ______ still the only one teaching that Honors Social Studies class?" She was informed that yes, as the person with seniority in that discipline, and having taught it for a decade, she was the one. "Oh", she responded, with a sorrowful look on her face. "That's a shame".
As she intended, the other parents were now aghast. Whatever did she mean? She forced herself to go on and explained that when her older son was in that class with that teacher, he found it so disagreeable that, "we had to pull him out of school altogether--he just couldn't go on. We had no choice but to home school him for the rest of that year".
Instantly, the room was a wasteland of shattered college dreams, this crone most had never heard of a minute earlier, suddenly threatening the grade point averages the parents so zealously coveted. Now, I don't know--maybe this teacher was terrible. But a second mother offered that her older daughter also took the same class, "and she didn't have any problems at all". But no matter, by that time the damage was done. A teacher who, no matter what her proficiency...who had devoted her career to teaching young people...who somehow wound up teaching the single honors class in a discipline...who, it was later revealed, adhered to perhaps a 'too rigorous' style of teaching...was now trashed behind her back. Forty people who could not identify her by sight--now feared her by name. I was informed later that the Mother who raised the calumny in the first place refers to the son in question as a certified genius. And that's not a euphemism--she really calls him 'a certified genius'.
Maybe grades are a little easier to come by if you're home schooled.
Then yesterday I ventured into downtown Bellevue, the spiritual and commercial center of what's referred to in the Seattle area as the Eastside. To Chicagoans, this is the equivalent of the North Shore. It's where you live if you need to display your excessive wealth. Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer, the twin terrors of Microsoft, live in a subsidiary of Bellevue, a short distance apart. (In fairness, it must be said that Bellevue is large enough that it is multi-racial, multi-cultural and multi-class--although the people in the neighborhoods I'm referring to seldom risk rubbing elbows with any but their own kind). Anyway, I'm driving into the hub of downtown Bellevue when a big, black SUV in front of me suddenly slams on its brakes and swerves dangerously into the entrance to a parking lot. No slowdown, no turn signal. I was not close enough to hit it, but I was curious, so I looked back. Sure enough, a bleach blonde with a cellphone slapped up against her ear. When you're driving one handed, I guess you have to make a choice between holding on to the wheel or hitting the turn signal stalk.
A little while later I'm walking out of a store. Right across the drive, 30 feet away, there is ample parking. But there are also a few spots directly in front of the store, a few steps closer. Two for handicapped parking, and two clearly marked 'load/unload only'. As I'm walking off the curb I'm almost run over by an even bigger black SUV screeching into one of the load/unload spots, and sure enough, out pops another young blond, laughing, with her cellphone at the ear. I saw her look directly at the 'load/unload' sign and amble into the store.
I know I'm getting crotchety, but I couldn't help it. I sat in my car for five minutes to see if she'd come out with her 'load'...and then walked back into the store. I just had to know. And sure enough, there she was, pushing an empty shopping cart, still talking on the phone, walking up and down the aisles looking for something she might want to buy. Nothing to load yet. Nothing really to do but talk on the phone. But obviously secure in the knowledge that those parking restrictions were really intended for people less worthy than she.
OK, one more quick Bellevue story. At one high school in the district (one in which members of various economic classes actually do attend), the cheerleading squad (not surprisingly nor atypically) is composed of girls from the 'best' families. The parents of one of the cheerleaders decide the stress in their lives is too much, so they plan a quick trip down to Mexico to relax. Originally, the cheerleader daughter was going to stay in school while they were gone, so she quickly does what any red-blooded American teen would do--announces a party at her house one day as soon as school is over. But then something happens and she decides to go to Mexico with her folks, so the party is called off.
Except that it wasn't. Other cheerleaders physically break into the house and hold the party, generally trash the place with dozens of friends, and leave evidence of what happened in the form of empty liquor bottles, the residue of certain controlled substances, and, it is said, video camera equipment in one of the bedrooms. Say what you will about the behavior inside, there is no question about the process of getting inside--it's a crime.
The parents return. They're livid. The school is notified. The police are notified. Punishments are assembled.
But suddenly, while suspensions are handed down, the criminal investigation disappears. Why? Well, the parents, facing the pleadings of their daughter, refuse to press charges. Yes, breaking and entering is bad. But as their precious cheerleader explained, having her fellow cheerleaders mad at her would be even worse. So the pampered perps walk.

The reason for bringing all this up is the release of a study today by a group in England reporting on the 'state' of raising children in the 21 richest countries in the world. Of that group, the U.S. ranks 20th--with only Great Britain doing a worse job.
Yes, the methodology is somewhat controversial, including not only the obvious things like health and disease and substance abuse, but also the number of single-parent homes, and the number of dinners per week consumed as a family. But according to the researchers, beyond all the findings, the single largest underlying determinant of a society's success in raising its children is the disparity of wealth. The further the rich and poor diverge, the more likely even the 'best' kids will suffer.

So, collectively we may stand on the banks and lament the pollution in our mighty national river. But I wonder if we could understand the problem better by working our way back upstream...up to the headwaters...up to the tributaries that flow from even the 'best' homes. If you are too ready to blame a teacher for your student's problems...too comfortable with breaking the rules that are meant for 'others'...too ready to sacrifice the rule of law for the social status of your little cheerleader...might it be that the problems begin with you?

diderot

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Media Sins: USCAP

Turn on the news today and you're faced with the following shocking revelations: it's winter and it's snowing in the Midwest...people in Congress are saying stupid things about Iraq...and Anna Nicole Smith is still dead.
Of course, no one is forcing us to watch, but the sin here is that for those who really want an idea of what's going on in the world, there is no room for mention of things like USCAP.
Everyone knows that the Hatfields and McCoys of the environmental scene are Big Energy and the tree huggers. And yet, key opponents--people like GE, DuPont and BP on one side, and NRDC and Environmental Defense on the other--have put their heads together and said, 'we've got to do something about global warming--and here's our plan'.
Their report is short on exact numbers in some key areas, but there's no question but that it's something that can and should be argued immediately by Congress, and other interested parties.
My favorite environmentalist, Scott Miller, and I often lament that if the current, genuine, environmentally-charged Al Gore had replaced the somewhat stilted version who ran in 2000, he'd still be sitting in the White House now. But no use crying over spilled chads.
This initiative deserves some play. If you're interested, the link is here.


diderot

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Another Quiz

Where do you rate on the political scale?

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

diderot

King

I think I'll just call it 'Oketo's Curse'. Ever since he mentioned it, there seems to be another semi-luminary from out youth who passes away every day.
Today the news is of Eddie Feighner--practically unknown by that name, and for that matter, not really that much better known as the lead player in something called The King and His Court.
He was the best fast-pitch softball player who ever lived. He could throw a rising 104 mph fastball, and a breaking ball that broke a foot and a half. Someone said he once threw a strike right over the plate while launching the ball from right field--and that the ball curved around second base on the way. That seems a little Paul Bunyan-esque to me, but it is true that he once struck out six major league all stars in a row, starting with Willie Mays and ending with Roberto Clemente. Eddie said, 'it was a mismatch'.
His 'team' consisted of only four players. Him, a catcher, a first baseman and a shortstop. He really kept the two extra guys out on the field to prevent a runner from stealing in case he accidentally walked someone.
You had to see it to believe it.

diderot

Monday, February 12, 2007

You're Smart, Huh?

OK, link through this and give it a whirl...

http://flashbynight.com/test



diderot

Pitchers and Catchers Report

After months of wall to wall Bear coverage in Chicago it is a relief and a watershed moment to realize that it is now three days until Cub "pitchers" and catchers report. As a Cub fan it does two things. One, it is the hope that this is the "wait til next year". And two, of course, it reminds me that I am about to begin year 53 of attending Cubs games and----no pennant, no Series. So, since I have no legitimate winning team(s) to look back on I, like most Cubs fans, revisit our few and far between near misses.
For most of us they begin and are permanently fixed on 1969. After a glorious start those of us that lived and died Cubs in 69 began to believe. Ron Santo's "This Old Cub" talks about 69 and referred to the players as being treated as if they were rock stars. I think that is the best description I have heard of the attention and adulation those players were given. Their pictures were on everything and everbody, even Sox fans, knew the daily stories of each player. We all know what happened. The usual. There were many turning points in that season. The late August loss in NY when a black cat ran in front of the Cubs dugout is the popular choice. Don Young's dropped and missed flyballs are also legendary. But for me it was a few weeks earlier.
It was a Cubs - Mets game at Wrigley. Late summer, weekday afternoon and a highly anticipated series. About 5 or 6 high school/college friends got tickets and we sat in the rightfield bleachers. Old Cub fans remember that in those days 22,000 tickets went on the sale the day of every game. To buy tickets in advance was for box seat types or nonfans. It was to be the series of celebration. Most of the details have blurred over the 38 years but what most Cub fans can remember of the game is that it was the day Al Weis hit two home runs. Al Weis! To make it worse the ex-White Sox utility man probably had three homers in his career.
But that was not the death knell. In addition to Weis, one of the Mets infielders, either Garrett or Boswell, hit a home run into the rightfield bleachers to further sink us. The home run came sailing toward our group. None of us had ever caught a home run as we usually were parked in the cheapest seats in the back of the "grandstand". As we all smashed together our buddy Bob jumped above the rest of us and tried to make a one handed catch. The ball hit him on the tips of his index and middle finger on his right hand. He did not catch the ball and we all went after it but came up empty. Then we looked at Bob. His "web" between his fingers was split about two inches down toward his palm, and 'bleeding' would be an understatement.
Now, he couldn't stay. He had to go to the hospital. The dilemma was, were we all going to leave the game or could Bob take the bus to the hospital? The bus. This was a Cubs - Mets game in 1969. We had been waiting for this our entire sports lives. Seems ridiculous now but made sense then. Anyway, Pee Wee had driven and he decided he would drive him to the hospital. The rest of us "friends", decided we could not leave. We would take the bus home. So we stayed and the Cubs suffered a devastating loss. It was all downhill after that. Bob recovered but I do believe that because we chose not to leave the game and support our buddy the "gods" got pissed and created our/my Cubs Curse. 38 years later, we have not beaten the curse yet.

But, this is next year!

Oketo

Leo Greene

Leo is one of the most intelligent and gentle people I've ever worked with. He's long since left Seattle for a reporting job in California, but recently was diagnosed with terminal ALS, otherwise known as Lou Gehrig's disease.
Being both introspective and an accomplished writer, he's decided to report on his own demise. For those interested, you can find his continuing story at http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_5205231#

diderot

More PC

Those players are so etched in our minds. I knew as much about the Sox as I did about the Cubs because it was baseball. 48 years ago --already. Jim Bunning. Loved his Tigers baseball card in 1959. It had a pink background. Now, he's the worst senator in the US. Nellie hitting a home run almost was physically impossible with his stance and bat. I can still see the old Comiskey on our black and white TV, late afternoon, hot dog wrappers blowing around the outfield track, the shadows coming through those arches and showing up on the field, centerfield marking at 415. If you remember, I have the 59 Sox baseball cards and pennant on my basement wall. Rudolph is one of them.
When I found this site, the first thing I clicked on was June 1, 1957. The Cubs lose to Reds 22-2. Really. Tom Poholsky, a guy I won a trivia contest by naming in about 1975, gives up 9 runs in one inning. I remember those days. I learned early what it meant to be a Cubs fan.

Oketo

PC

No, I'm not talking about your laptop or what's acceptable to modern society. This week, PC has only one definition--Pitchers and Catchers...as in, the time they arrive for the start of spring training.
Oketo turned me on to baseball reference.com, a website where you can research not only players and games, but actual box scores for all major league games as far back as 1957. This prompted me to find out what happened on opening day for my White Sox in my favorite baseball year, 1959, when they made it, but lost, in the World Series.
Here's what the box score shows:
  • Billy Pierce and Jim Bunning were the starters. Bunning went to the Hall of Fame--and the U.S. Senate. Pierce should be in the Hall--more wins and complete games than Drysdale, better winning percentage and ERA than Bunning, more wins, shutouts, complete games and strikeouts than Whitey Ford--all of whom made it. In any case, it's opening day, and neither one of the starters makes it past the fifth
  • Nellie Fox has what could be the best opening day of any batter in history--5 for 7, including a double, a homer--even a sacrifice bunt
  • Charlie Paw Paw Maxwell (remember him?) hits a three run shot off of Ray Moore (Ol' Blue, remember him?) to tie it in the 8th
  • Gerry Staley goes four and two-thirds in relief (on opening day!) for the win after Fox's two run shot in the top of the 14th
  • The loss and the save go to the two guys with perhaps the biggest ears in MLB history--the save to the Sox' Don Rudolph, and the loss to Tiger's Don Mossi

What the box score doesn't report is the fact that Rudolph didn't last long with the Sox--good fastball, no breaking ball, so owner Bill Veeck traded him in the middle of that season. Rudolph's main claim to fame was that he was married to a stripper who worked professionally as 'Patti Wagon'. When Veeck traded him, he said, "Alas, the wrong Rudolph had the good curves"

Man, I love baseball,

diderot

Friday, February 9, 2007

Teach Your Children Well

The somewhat unorthodox state of Utah is being subjected to some not-so-subtle snickering over its recent attempts to legislate a safety net around its youngest citizens. Proposed laws would require written parental consent for participation in any extra-curricular school activity, or even visiting a tanning salon. But at the same time, the legal age for using a hunting rifle there would drop from 14 to 12, while driving off-road ATVs, previously restricted to those 8 and above, would now be permissible for six-year-olds. (Incidentally, protection concerns aren't limited to kids in the wide open West. New York legislators will soon be considering a bill to make it illegal for anyone to use a cellphone, an iPod or any other handheld electronic device while simply walking across the street).
Whether one judges these attempts to be foolish, or even illegal, a point can be made that technology truly is changing everything...and most troublesome, in the raising of kids. Let's face it--they know how to operate technology better than we do. And we know the dark side of the unseen online world that lurks just a few keystrokes away.
I raise this because of recent market research that shows that teens (to the surprise of absolutely no one) are getting 'older' a lot faster than they used to. There's simply too much of the adult world to protect them from. It's a losing battle.
The research confirms that teens appear and act older...and certainly learn things we wish could be saved for sometime in the distant future. But one thing remains constant--and it's the most important thing. A 14-year-old is still a 14-year-old on the inside. What they feel, and what they need from their parents and mentors hasn't changed at all. Teens are still in the time of life where they are making life-defining decisions about who they will be as adults. About how they see the world. And in pop-psych terms, observing the 'modeling' about what it means to be a grownup.
So, the bottom line would appear to be this: it's never been harder to be a parent. But therefore, it's never been more important.
Happy trails!

diderot

p.s. Those of a certain age will recognize the title of this post--Treat Your Children Well--from the title of a Crosby Stills and Nash song. There is great wisdom within, written in parallel verses from the viewpoint of a parent relating to child, and vice versa: "don't you ever ask them why, if they told you, you will cry, so just look at them and sigh and know they love you...". Remember when we listened, we always assumed the viewpoint of the younger person observing the older person? When exactly did we switch perspectives?

Thursday, February 8, 2007

Hole-y socks


Yeah, I know this is a couple days old, but just to make sure you didn't miss it...

Paul Wolfowitz is the single individual most responsible for the Iraq invasion. He convinced Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al, that it was a no-brainer. And that we really didn't need to spend much time worrying about post-victory occupation.
Wolfowitz, consequently, is reputed to be the person most despised by the U.S. military command. (You see, the generals really DO care if their soldiers and Marines are killed).
Ultimately, it was too much, and he had to go. But rather than being sent to a prison cell, he landed as President of the World Bank. It's an agency designed to combat world poverty, but in reality is just as rich and lofty and self-important as it sounds.
As such, Wolfie now makes a lot more money than he did in the U.S. government, and has to do important things like he's shown doing here...taking his shoes off to visit a mosque in the Middle East.
Only problem is, Wofie's got holes in his socks.
Matches his logic.

diderot

When I Was A Kid...

OK, we didn't have no stinkin' wind chill index. What is that? A number, that's what. Just like the towing capacity of your SUV...that never tows anything. Just like the SAT score your kid really should have scored. It's just a number--one that's all pimped up to make you feel more important.
Now, when I was a kid, we didn't have no wind chill index. That's right--regular 15 below was good enough for us. And we didn't have a soccer Mom driving us to school to prevent our lips from chapping.
I remember one sunny morning, about three fresh feet of overnight snow on the ground. Was there school? Hell, we didn't know. We didn't have a 'school closing crawl' on the bottom of the damn TV screen. Nobody had the damn TV on in the morning anyway. Rots your mind.
So Coach and I met at our usual spot and goose stepped the two miles to school. And when we got there, there was a sign on the door saying that school had been called off.
So we walked home.
You went--you found out--you dealt with it.
Cold is cold. Period. Don't need to strut its stuff with a phony number. Always been cold. Cold is nothing more special these days.
Deal with it.

(Man, it feels great being old...)

diderot

Wednesday, February 7, 2007

Hooray For Fitz

History may well look back and determine that this was the week that the final unraveling of the Bush presidency began. The venue is a courtroom in Washington, D.C., where members of the administration and its courtiers in the media are finally turning on each other, all amidst the trial of Scooter Libby.
It should be noted that the agent of this demise is none other than a Chicago guy, a purveyor of common sense and possessor of a finely honed bullshit detector--prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.
Not often that a registered Republican earns kudos from the Three Guys, but he assuredly does. He is what all of his prey falsely pretend to be--a patriot.

diderot

Tuesday, February 6, 2007

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics

No one should be surprised that Bush lied when he said his just-released budget puts us on a path to eliminate the deficit. In fact, the numbers contained in the document itself tell quite a different story.
Over the next ten years, if things unfold as he plans, we would actually add another $1.9 trillion to our national debt. Of that number, $1.6 trillion would be paid to the top one percent of Americans in the form of permanent tax cuts. These households would receive an average of $67,000 annually in tax cuts--or more than the entire income of an average household. (Oh yeah, and if you make more than a million a year, the tax cut comes to $162,000, or more than the incomes of three typical households).
You can guess what programs see cuts. Project Head Start. Schools. Pollution control. Health research. And again, the homeland security dollars that are spent on those same beloved 'early responders' that he so carefully posed with after 9/11.
In fact, there are a lot of ways you can slice and dice numbers--especially budget numbers.
So let me submit one calculation free of charge for use by the President's handlers. With a total military budget request of a mere $716 billion next year...and assuming a steady rate of casualties in the surge-propelled year ahead...every American will be asked to pay less than $3 per U.S. serviceman killed in Iraq.
See, that's not so bad, is it?

diderot

Monday, February 5, 2007

da Bears: Chicago Reaction

Yesterday I learned that I have officially narrowed my sports fanaticism to no longer include the NFL. I'm the guy that sat through the 1963 title game by myself in 5 degree weather. I'm not sure what is happening?

People seem to have forgotten that this was the second time the Bears have been to the Super Bowl in 41 years. Within minutes the rational and irrational talk radio guys were all over Grossman. He was not very good, but it is not as if the Bears have a history of great QB's--not since Luckman?--or even good offenses. Talk radio in Chicago survives by Bears QB controversies and opinion. So I think a lot of the opinions that make it on radio are orchestrated. As always, the people who talk are blaming Grossman or Ron Rivera, the defensive coordinator. Coaches and QB's.
Hey, sometimes you lose.

Manning may not have been godlike but he did throw for lots of yards in the rain. He did not score in the red zone or the final would have been 48-17, but the Bears were supposed to be a great defensive team and the rain should have helped them. So, I think Manning did a nice job. And I'm glad he got a Super Bowl win. Not necessarily against the Bears, but I was tired of nitwits questioning his ability because he had no "Ring". (The 'ring' thing has also worn me out.) The same thing was said of Jordan until the Bulls won.

I think that one thing that has to be looked at is the length of the game. There are so many commercials that the first quarter took over an hour. Halftime of 40 minutes. How in the world, in a game of emotion, do you keep up your emotion when every 2 minutes there is a four minute break? How do you stay focused? Guys work their entire careers to be in a Super Bowl and the NFL would seem to want ideal conditions? As always, it is about the money and not the athletes. To me, it is not even a true football test. Two weeks off. The press. Length of game-commercials. This is not about the Bears but about what I think has happened to the NFL. They are the Republican party of leagues.

But, the Bears are not that good. They were almost beaten this season by many average and below average teams. Ron Turner is the coordinator and he is OK. Their offense is not that good. Grossman and the Bears were up and down for the last 8 weeks. They were down Sunday. But in their defense, they were down by 5 and marching in the fourth quarter when Grossman threw the interception. That kid who picked it was from Hubbard High School in Chi. So, that also gives you a picture of how bad the NFL has become. Colts up by 5 after outgaining the Bears 4 to 1 but could not get a TD in the red zone. This is the "Super" Bowl? How about Hester watching himself on the video as he ran? Now that's focus.

Coach, I don't know how you kept doing it all those years.

Do I sound old???

Oketo

da Bears: Inside Football

OK, short and sweet:
  • Bears offense is very, very, vanilla. When you have two weeks to prepare for a team that plays exactly the same defense as you do, wouldn't it be prudent to actually put in plays that are designed to defeat what is called a cover 2 look?
  • The right guard for the Bears is awful and is not an NFL player, not close.
  • The defense, which was on the field all night was OK and then they started missing tackles when they got tired. The Bear corners cannot cover and they tackled very poorly all night.
  • You have played cover 2 all year long and your deep safety decides to run with the TE leaving his deep zone uncovered for the Colts first TD. This was the biggest play of the game because Manning was on the ropes then.
  • The Bears, except for special teams were out-coached big time the whole night. Did you see how frustrated Urlacher was when they just kept hanging back and not attacking? Reminded me of Ohio State vs. Florida. Does anyone watch game film?
  • I swear to both of you that my backup QB is never gonna botch 3 snaps in one game, never. Grossman is not a big time QB and because Lovie wouldn't give Griese more snaps in the regular season he couldn't play him, I guess.

Now, everyone is gonna say that hey, they made it all the way to the Super Bowl. Yeah, in a weak conference with a weak schedule. The loss of Brown the safety and Harris was really huge, they never recovered from those guys being gone for the season. It's OK to lose but Jesus, have a plan that makes sense.

  • One other thing, name me an offense that is real productive that doesn't execute from shotgun. Having trouble? That's cause there aren't any. QB has 1 to 1 1/2 seconds more to read blitz and when it's wet it's more.
  • Oh, something else, speed rushers like the Bears DE's are not effective when it's raining. Number 95 for the Bears stinks as does #31.

At least the team that won is easy to like, not the same as New England or Dallas.

This sounds really conceited but I swear I could have put together a game plan that would have been 10X more effective than the one they had, awful.


Coach

Best Picture Ever?

This purports to be a class picture from a Chicago Public School. Who knows? Doesn't really matter.
The main point is true: the really great do stand alone (or sit, as the case may be...)

diderot

Et Tu, Colin?

Four years ago today, that's the phrase that kept ringing in my head. Colin Powell--the heroic face of the armed forces--sat in the United Nations and laid out the case for invading Iraq. From across the political spectrum, support rang out. It didn't matter that the specifics might have seemed a bit spotty...more than a little cherry-picked. This was Powell. He was a man of trust. A man of integrity.
And he, too, was duped by these people.
So, Powell paid the price--forced from public life, stripped of his reputation.
But what about all the pundits and publishers and columnists and anchor-folk who couldn't jump up and down fast enough to proclaim him right?
What have they paid? Why are they still in front of the cameras...when Powell isn't?

diderot

Sunday, February 4, 2007

Super Bowl Post Mortem

Once upon a time two of the three guys from Chicago were walking down a dark street late on a Saturday night. We were about 13. One of our Dads was walking some distance behind us. A group of kids a little older than us was walking the opposite direction on the other side of the street. Something was said. Something was replied. Then a taunt. Then a threat.
Then the Dad walked up right behind us, knocked us both on the heads, and told us to shut up and keep walking. When we got to the car, he said, "I don't care how tough you think you are. Remember this--there is always someone in the world tougher".
That's the lesson the Bears learned.
Life goes on.

diderot

p.s. Answer to the previous Trivia question. The Bear players in the picture, are, from left to right, quarterbacks George Blanda, Ed Brown and Zeke Bratkowski. Blanda is the most famous, largely for playing competitively until he was 48 years old. There were people tougher than him--but not many.

Saturday, February 3, 2007

Brett Is Back

I don't care what happens in the Super Bowl. Brett Favre back on the frozen tundra is the most important NFL news of the weekend.

diderot

Obama: One 'Clean' Cat

Let's get this straight. When Biden called Obama 'clean', it had nothing to do with personal hygiene. Biden is a political animal on the cellular level--the Democrats' John McCain. Without media exposure, he would expire.
What he was saying is that, in his visceral view, Obama is the first black presidential candidate who is politically 'clean'--i.e., they haven't got anything personal to use against him--yet. Like when the movie suspect is frisked and no weapon is found--he's 'clean'.
Al Sharpton had Tawana Brawley. Carol Mosely Braun had her campaign contribution scandals. Shirley Chisholm once stunned her contemporaries by voting for Hale Boggs instead of John Conyers as House Majority Leader. Jesse Jackson had financial improprieties at Operation Push (never made public).
But when it was misconstrued, and it was time to apologize, Biden could hardly come out and explain the context of his adjective, could he? "What I was really trying to say is that all those other black candidates were 'dirty', see?..."

diderot

Big Oil

There was a lot of tut-tutting this week with the news that Exxon Mobil established a new corporate record with yearly profits just shy of $40 billion. (By comparison, if you think you're the smartest duck on the pond because you bought Google 18 months ago, understand that Exxon Mobil makes more profit in a single quarter than Google makes revenue in an entire year). To serve its obligation of 'objectivity', CNN interviewed an oil industry analyst from Oppenheimer who said that this is really a non-story, since EM 'returns' more than that $40 billion to shareholders.
Aye, there's the rub. It's all fair because the money you pay at the gas pump (or their industrial customers pay for lubricants, etc.) is more than offset by what's realized in stock value and/or dividends by shareholders.
Which brings us to what I contend is the central shift in U.S. economics over the last two decades. Any profitable business has three central choices of where to 'spend' is earnings. First, they can pass along the 'savings' to its customers, in the form of lower prices (or even R and D, which should result in future lower prices). Presumably a competitive advantage--at least lower pricing used to work for WalMart.
Second, the money can go to its own employees--better wages, continued health care, a company pension, maybe even a better annual picnic, etc.
And finally--and these days, most decisively--you pay out to the shareholders. Shareholder value is king. In the end, it's the shareholders who really matter.
Now, cynical you might say that happy shareholders make for wealthy CEOs. You might point out that Lee Raymond, Exxon's last CEO, made $51 million his final full year on the job, and then left with a retirement bundle worth another $400 million. But remember, you said it, not me. His shareholders would counter that Lee was worth every penny, since the share price during his 12 years in the big chair rose 500 percent.
Virtuous circle, no?
The coincidental counterpoint to this festive occasion was the the official U.S. response to a global scientific conclusion announced in Paris this week that it is humans, after all, who are responsible for global warming. Aha! (OK, they said ' 90% likely'. Since they also noted that 11 of the 12 warmest years ever recorded all happened in the last 12 years, I'm sticking with my full 'aha!').
Coach Bush then sent his Energy Secretary, Samual Bodman, up to the plate. Bodman calmly explained that this really isn't so pertinent to those of us in America, since we are only 'a small contributor' to the problem of greenhouse gases. (OK, we represent 5% of the world's population but spew 25% of the greenhouse gases, but who's counting?) Furthermore, to do anything about it would risk damaging our economy! Yikes! And on this score, you have to give the devil his due. In a previous life, he was head of Fidelity Investments, and probably met Lee Raymond personally! So he knows from economics.
But to put a final ribbon on this package, let's revisit another Bodman gem from the early days in his current gig as Exxon shill...I'm sorry, I meant Energy Secretary. When asked by reporters why America shouldn't aggressively attack global warming in the form of the relatively logical step of setting a higher standard for average auto fuel economy, Bodman responded, "...do we put our citizens at risk by having lighter vehicles, less safe vehicles..." manufactured in Detroit?
I agree. The world would be a much safer place if everyone drove an Escalade with those really fly rims. And rather than being fatally T-boned by one of those bad boys, wouldn't you rather be toasted to death sunbathing in Duluth in the middle of February? Or suddenly find yourself submerged beneath a thirty foot wall of water in Orange County?
But let's not be so fatalistic. At least share prices keep rising...


diderot

Friday, February 2, 2007

Spoiled, spoiled, spoiled...

I wonder what it's like to be a 21-year-old sports fan in Chicago these days. Surely you wouldn't remember it firsthand, but the year you were born, the Bears won the Super Bowl. (Obviously you've heard a little bit about that season--after all, if someone dropped a nuclear bomb on Michigan Avenue this week, the headlines would still be talking about Rex Grossman's mental state).
And in the lifetime of this young fan, there have been seven other world championships bestowed on the city's teams--six by the Bulls, and one the year before last to the White Sox. That makes eight world championships in the lifetime of someone just now legally able to buy his first Old Style.
Let me tell you how it once was. Before I left Chicago, I spent more than 25 years watching the city's main teams--collectively, that's more than 100 pro seasons--and what did I get for it? Two stinkin' championships--the Blackhawks in 1961, and the Bears two years later. And if memory serves correctly, neither one of those games was televised.
Now, you could call this coincidence, but consider that in my time in my current town, Seattle, there has been nary a championship to speak of. We had a baseball team a few years back that set a record by winning 116 games in a single regular season--and didn't even make it to the World Series. Yes, one of those Bulls championships was at the expense of Seattle--the Sonics at least made it to the finals. And the Seahawks went to the Super Bowl last year...where they promptly folded.
So, I believe my personal record of local fandom, ranging from abject failure to maybe-next-year, is something not to be dismissed lightly. Should the Bears win on Sunday, and you feel so giddy as to rub still another championship in my face, let me give you warning.
Do not taunt me, or I swear to God, I WILL move back!

diderot

Girls Just Wanna Have...Fame?

When I was a kid, you could identify a truly progressive family by the expectations that were communicated to its daughters. That was a time when what the vast majority of girls wanted out of life was pretty much what was presumed--marriage and motherhood. The avant garde might entertain a career as teacher or nurse...as long as it dovetailed with 'the woman's role'. But the idea of a 'girl' as scientist or policewoman or business executive? Forget it--no way. It was a direct and slippery slope from June Cleaver to Chairman Mao.
There's a research firm in Chicago that's been studying the state of the teen mindset for decades, and to the surprise of no one (I think), things have changed. Parents of daughters might feel proud that girls today feel more in control of their destinies, and see far fewer obstacles preventing them from getting what they want. (The corrollary trend--the purported 'wussifying' of boys--has been widely reported in the media).
But the rub comes in their new-found aspirations. The top goal of teenaged girls today is to become--a celebrity. While the study didn't probe this, I have a feeling that the self-defined state of 'celebrity' in play here is not one won on the basis of intelligence, hard work and social benefit. Instead, it smells just like that vacuous, self-absorbed, achievement-free form of celebrity personified by Paris Hilton. It doens't matter how you wind up on the cover of the tabloids--just do it, baby. We are all American Idols.
And the kicker is this--a full 50% of teen aged girls actually believe they WILL BECOME celebrities.
So, hold your heads up high, Boomer and Gen X parents. We have liberated our daughters from wanting to be something...to wanting to be nothing.
The road to hell truly is paved with good intentions.

diderot