As I sat there watching an NFL playoff game on TV the other day, a curious idea occurred to me. Why not just watch the whole game (at least the active plays) in slow motion? After all, the action happens so quickly that often even the paid officials get fooled by events and make incorrect calls, only to be shown wrong by slo-mo replays.
Say a game begins at 2 pm. The folks at the TV network could schedule the slow-motion version at 3, giving them time to get a head start editing out time-outs and "dead" time between plays. There could still be the same amount of commercials, but the game probably wouldn't last much longer than the real-time version.
There is so much going on within a single football play, and much of it is away from the ball. I would like to be able to watch how all of the players on the field play, but the camera usually has many of them out of the picture. So, in accompaniment with the slow-motion play-by-play, I would like a wider view of the field that shows more of the action.
Slowed down broadcasting also applies to fast-moving sports like basketball and hockey, especially the latter. Hockey moves so quickly that I usually don't even know where the puck is at any given moment (which is the main reason that I don't like to watch hockey). Slowing things down would give me time to assimilate both the offensive and defensive strategies and how they are implemented. It would also, I believe, highlight the players' skills better.
I have been in public places while various games are on TV. And I have noticed that people are almost instinctively drawn to pay attention to slow-motion replays, even if they hadn't been following the game!
Of course, I could record a game myself and replay it a notch slower, speeding it up between plays and during commercials. But that sounds like too much delay and work. Besides, from the viewpoint of the network and sponsors, a slow-motion option would have to come from them in order for them to still be able to profit from the advertising.
There is already much slow-motion replaying going on anyway, at least in football where there is all this dead time between plays. So basketball and hockey, with their generally continuous play, would probably benefit the most from a totally slow-motion format.
Now to baseball and slow-motion broadcasts. It is very difficult to follow pitches when the slower ones are whizzing by at 70 mph and the fastest can exceed 100 mph. But at a slower pace, everything is revealed! Just cut out the extremely tedious dead time between pitches and overall you'd probably end up with a shorter game, even with the actual action slowed down! And the broadcasters could still insert their oh-so-sacred commercials anywhere they wanted!
Friday, January 22, 2010
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Half-Marathon: Fait Accompli
Yesterday, I tried to run a half-marathon around my neighborhood. And I succeeded, finishing with 13.6 miles in the not-so-Earth-shattering time of 2:20:43. But I wasn't concerned about how fast I ran it; I just wanted to see how far I could go.
After my 10-mile run the precious Wednesday, I redesigned my course so that on the next long run I would pass by my house every 3.4 miles, giving me the opportunity to rehydrate myself with Gatorade (or "G') and wolf down a banana or two if I felt like it. And it worked!
The run went pretty smoothly and uneventfully although, with about three miles to go, I did experience my right leg starting to go into a cramp. But I was somehow able to keep it at bay and finish the run. Toward the end (besides the leg cramping), my lower legs and feet ached a lot. But I was mentally very sharp and energetic, fatigue not affecting me on this run. Had my legs/feet felt better and I wasn't constrained by time (I had to leave for work a half hour after my run finished), I probably could have run several miles further.
After the actual 13.6 mile run was completed, the process involved with it continued. I was now in recovery, and it hurt. For the next hour, I experienced some significant cramping in my feet and thighs (especially the left). But it finally relented, and I was able to enjoy a typical workday. Today, although I feel sore in some spots, I feel pretty good overall.
After I finished that 10-mile run a week ago, I told myself that I wasn't cut out for this and should just concentrate on three-mile runs instead. My feet ached during the last two miles of that run. But with the 13.6 mile run, I was O.K. after ten miles. Around the eleven mile mark, though, the aching returned. I think there may be a number of reasons for this. One, I could stand to lose about forty pounds. That would be forty pounds less that my feet wouldn't have to support every time they hit the ground. Two, I could probably use a new pair of running shoes, designed to fit my particular way of foot placement. And three, a little aching might just be a natural result of running a lot further than I have been accustomed to.
So now that I know for sure that I can cover the distance, I am more likely to run that half-marathon race on February 14. We'll see. Maybe next Wednesday I'll start my run earlier in the morning and see how far I can go!
After my 10-mile run the precious Wednesday, I redesigned my course so that on the next long run I would pass by my house every 3.4 miles, giving me the opportunity to rehydrate myself with Gatorade (or "G') and wolf down a banana or two if I felt like it. And it worked!
The run went pretty smoothly and uneventfully although, with about three miles to go, I did experience my right leg starting to go into a cramp. But I was somehow able to keep it at bay and finish the run. Toward the end (besides the leg cramping), my lower legs and feet ached a lot. But I was mentally very sharp and energetic, fatigue not affecting me on this run. Had my legs/feet felt better and I wasn't constrained by time (I had to leave for work a half hour after my run finished), I probably could have run several miles further.
After the actual 13.6 mile run was completed, the process involved with it continued. I was now in recovery, and it hurt. For the next hour, I experienced some significant cramping in my feet and thighs (especially the left). But it finally relented, and I was able to enjoy a typical workday. Today, although I feel sore in some spots, I feel pretty good overall.
After I finished that 10-mile run a week ago, I told myself that I wasn't cut out for this and should just concentrate on three-mile runs instead. My feet ached during the last two miles of that run. But with the 13.6 mile run, I was O.K. after ten miles. Around the eleven mile mark, though, the aching returned. I think there may be a number of reasons for this. One, I could stand to lose about forty pounds. That would be forty pounds less that my feet wouldn't have to support every time they hit the ground. Two, I could probably use a new pair of running shoes, designed to fit my particular way of foot placement. And three, a little aching might just be a natural result of running a lot further than I have been accustomed to.
So now that I know for sure that I can cover the distance, I am more likely to run that half-marathon race on February 14. We'll see. Maybe next Wednesday I'll start my run earlier in the morning and see how far I can go!
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Mass Brain Freeze in Massachusetts
Ouch.
I can't wait for the shock and dismay to set in when Senator Centerfold votes consistently against the interests and political leanings of those whose votes elected him. I give the brilliant people of Massachusetts about a month before the brain thaw sets in.
I understand that one poll taken of voters stated that 48% of them had health care reform as their number one issue, and most opposed the legislation in its current form (as do I). But that isn't the only issue involved here. There are a multitude of important items that will be next to impossible to act upon now that the stonewalling GOP has 41 votes in the Senate. And one of those items is likely to be a U.S. Supreme Court nomination.
Scott Brown will, alas, have to run for reelection in 2012 (if he still wants the job by then and doesn't "go rogue" like Palin). So the Democrats in Massachusetts have a couple more years to try to come up with a candidate that can match their previous one in arrogance and political stupidity. But let's see how "independent" the new senator will truly be. He'll have to be more like a Snowe or Collins than a Santorum if he wants to have a prayer of being reelected in '12. Unless, of course, Martha Coakley is renominated by the Dems.
I can't wait for the shock and dismay to set in when Senator Centerfold votes consistently against the interests and political leanings of those whose votes elected him. I give the brilliant people of Massachusetts about a month before the brain thaw sets in.
I understand that one poll taken of voters stated that 48% of them had health care reform as their number one issue, and most opposed the legislation in its current form (as do I). But that isn't the only issue involved here. There are a multitude of important items that will be next to impossible to act upon now that the stonewalling GOP has 41 votes in the Senate. And one of those items is likely to be a U.S. Supreme Court nomination.
Scott Brown will, alas, have to run for reelection in 2012 (if he still wants the job by then and doesn't "go rogue" like Palin). So the Democrats in Massachusetts have a couple more years to try to come up with a candidate that can match their previous one in arrogance and political stupidity. But let's see how "independent" the new senator will truly be. He'll have to be more like a Snowe or Collins than a Santorum if he wants to have a prayer of being reelected in '12. Unless, of course, Martha Coakley is renominated by the Dems.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Massachusetts Senate Election Today
One year minus one day since Barack Obama was inaugurated as President, the media is all a"twitter" about a special election being held in Massachusetts to fill that state's Senate seat, formerly occupied by recently deceased Edward Kennedy and temporary appointee Paul Kirk, both Democrats. But Martha Coakley, who easily won the Democratic primary, has run a particularly inept campaign while the Republican contender, Scott Brown, has captured the state's imagination as a likable underdog. The opinion polls have the race, which will be decided today, as a dead heat. Obama visited Massachusetts Sunday to campaign on behalf of Coakley.
There is more than the usual interest in one special Senate election. The Democrats, along with two Independents caucusing with them, have a 60-40 advantage in that body, usually enough to withstand Republican filibusters and other delaying tactics. This would end if a seat switched from the Dems to the GOP. Furthermore, the health care reform bill currently in conference needs those 60 votes for final approval, and a Brown victory would deny that possibility.
Not that I want the Democrats to lose the election, but I am not all that enthusiastic about the health care reform bill in its current form. It legally coerces citizens to purchase health insurance from private companies, which are already exempt from the Federal Anti-Trust Act and can charge whatever they choose to charge for their "protection". As a matter of fact, this whole thing sounds like a sort of seedy protection racket, and the people at large are the ones getting shaken down. So it won't exactly hurt my feelings if this extremely flawed legislation goes down in flames.
Although the media has made a big deal about Martha Coakley's incompetence as a campaigner, there is also a large segment of the Massachusetts electorate who, like me (and Howard Dean), have serious concerns about what would happen if health care reform in its present form becomes the law of the land. I think Coakley will squeak out a victory today, but I also thought that Texas would beat Alabama for the college football championship!
There is more than the usual interest in one special Senate election. The Democrats, along with two Independents caucusing with them, have a 60-40 advantage in that body, usually enough to withstand Republican filibusters and other delaying tactics. This would end if a seat switched from the Dems to the GOP. Furthermore, the health care reform bill currently in conference needs those 60 votes for final approval, and a Brown victory would deny that possibility.
Not that I want the Democrats to lose the election, but I am not all that enthusiastic about the health care reform bill in its current form. It legally coerces citizens to purchase health insurance from private companies, which are already exempt from the Federal Anti-Trust Act and can charge whatever they choose to charge for their "protection". As a matter of fact, this whole thing sounds like a sort of seedy protection racket, and the people at large are the ones getting shaken down. So it won't exactly hurt my feelings if this extremely flawed legislation goes down in flames.
Although the media has made a big deal about Martha Coakley's incompetence as a campaigner, there is also a large segment of the Massachusetts electorate who, like me (and Howard Dean), have serious concerns about what would happen if health care reform in its present form becomes the law of the land. I think Coakley will squeak out a victory today, but I also thought that Texas would beat Alabama for the college football championship!
Monday, January 18, 2010
Can I Run a Half-Marathon?
Last Wednesday, I ran 10 miles. This was the longest I had run nonstop since March of 1975 (I am 53 years old). It took a few days to recover, but I think that I am now ready to try another long run. This time I would like to cover a half-marathon distance of 13.1 miles. If I succeed, then I will enter the February 14 half-marathon here in Gainesville, Florida. I plan to make my attempt at 13.1 miles either today or Wednesday, using my neighborhood as the course. As with the 10 mile run before, I am just going to try to cover the distance without emphasizing speed.
I really would like to be more comfortable running longer distances. Someday I would like to try running a full marathon. But I need to eat better, get my weight down, and get used to running at longer distances than I have been doing. I have been running 3.4 to 3.6 miles every other day, alternating with weight training designed to strengthen my upper body.
I really would like to be more comfortable running longer distances. Someday I would like to try running a full marathon. But I need to eat better, get my weight down, and get used to running at longer distances than I have been doing. I have been running 3.4 to 3.6 miles every other day, alternating with weight training designed to strengthen my upper body.
Sunday, January 17, 2010
NFL Teams Down to Four
The only football left in the "2009" season is in the National Football League playoffs. From 32 teams, we are now left with four: Indianapolis Colts, New York Jets, Minnesota Vikings, and New Orleans Saints. My preseason prediction of Baltimore beating Minnesota in the Super Bowl proved wrong this past weekend, with the Ravens making numerous mistakes (including dropping crucial easy passes) in their decisive loss to the Colts, who I guess decided that they actually do want to play football after their shameful decision to forfeit to the Jets in their fifteenth game by putting in the second-string lineup in a close third quarter. But lo and behold, here come the Jets again, and with a vengeance, having dismantled the favored San Diego Chargers. Indianapolis and New York will play their rematch next week with the winner (hopefully the Jets) going to the Super Bowl. In the other conference championship game to be played, Minnesota is pitted against New Orleans. I will be rooting for future Hall of Fame quarterback Brett Favre's underdog Vikings in this one.
But does it really matter who goes on to win the Super Bowl? I suppose it does if your team is one of those still left. But in the long run, I probably will forget who won this year's championship three or four years down the line. Still, it's fun to pick out a team and root for it, even if I make that decision based on a coin flip or by whose mascot I like the most.
But does it really matter who goes on to win the Super Bowl? I suppose it does if your team is one of those still left. But in the long run, I probably will forget who won this year's championship three or four years down the line. Still, it's fun to pick out a team and root for it, even if I make that decision based on a coin flip or by whose mascot I like the most.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Philip K. Dick's The Man in the High Castle
The Man in the High Castle is Philip K. Dick's examination of a alternative history world where the Japanese and Germans have emerged victorious in World War II and the United States has been carved up between the two. The story's setting is the American West, run by Japan, which turns out to be a more more benevolent occupier than the Germans in the American East (there is also a relatively autonomous region in the Rockies). The protagonists (there is no one "standout" character), Japanese and American alike, all consult with the ancient Chinese book I Ching to discern their futures and best strategies for living.
I think that Dick showed how the losing side of a war can adapt to occupation by adopting much of the culture of the victors. That is, to some extent, how the Japanese were able to adjust following their "real" loss in World War II and their relatively benevolent occupation by the Americans and the reconstruction of their political system to conform with Western culture.
In the story is a book, written by a man living in Wyoming (in that aforementioned autonomous region), that espouses an alternative history in which the Allies instead won the war and occupied Japan and Germany. This book, naturally frowned upon by the authorities, becomes an enormous underground hit and, along with the I Ching, is in the possession of the protagonists as well. Eventually, one of them decides to visit the author and discover how he was able to write his "history" in such vivid detail, as if he had actually experienced it himself. And this is revealed at the end, an explanation that is disturbing to no end!
The Man in the High Castle won the esteemed Hugo award in 1963 for best science fiction novel. It impressed me as well, although it is not my favorite alternative history story. That personal honor goes to Stephen Baxter's incredible 2006 novella The Pacific Mystery, which also sets up a world in which the "bad guys" won World War II. I recommend both Baxter's and Dick's very different versions of a world where Nazis run rampant and the protagonists begin to sense that something is not quite right with reality.
I think that Dick showed how the losing side of a war can adapt to occupation by adopting much of the culture of the victors. That is, to some extent, how the Japanese were able to adjust following their "real" loss in World War II and their relatively benevolent occupation by the Americans and the reconstruction of their political system to conform with Western culture.
In the story is a book, written by a man living in Wyoming (in that aforementioned autonomous region), that espouses an alternative history in which the Allies instead won the war and occupied Japan and Germany. This book, naturally frowned upon by the authorities, becomes an enormous underground hit and, along with the I Ching, is in the possession of the protagonists as well. Eventually, one of them decides to visit the author and discover how he was able to write his "history" in such vivid detail, as if he had actually experienced it himself. And this is revealed at the end, an explanation that is disturbing to no end!
The Man in the High Castle won the esteemed Hugo award in 1963 for best science fiction novel. It impressed me as well, although it is not my favorite alternative history story. That personal honor goes to Stephen Baxter's incredible 2006 novella The Pacific Mystery, which also sets up a world in which the "bad guys" won World War II. I recommend both Baxter's and Dick's very different versions of a world where Nazis run rampant and the protagonists begin to sense that something is not quite right with reality.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Tennessee Deserves Better than Kiffin
I have been to Knoxville, Tennessee a few times and thoroughly love the place and its friendly people. As a state university city, its reminds me a lot of my Gainesville. But it also has another, industrial element to it, giving it more of a big-city image. For most of the country, Knoxville is known for being the location of the University of Tennessee, right off the banks of the Tennessee River. And the University of Tennessee is probably most known for its football team and its fans' utter, undying fanaticism.
For decades, Tennessee head football coach Phillip Fulmer has delivered to those fans with strong, competitive Volunteer teams. His long tenure was spotlighted by the unforgettable teams of Peyton Manning in the mid-1990s and a national championship in 1998. They had a great rivalry going with my University of Florida Gators as well, with the seasons of each school often hinging on who won the early-season matchup. In 2007, although the Gators beat Tennessee early on, the Vols still managed to win the Southeastern Conference East Division, quite an accomplishment. But the following year, they had only the second losing season in Fulmer's 17 year stint there and he lost his job. Pretty shabby treatment for someone who was locally so revered that he had a street named after him!
To succeed Fulmer, UT hired Lane Kiffin, whose chief assets were that he was defensive coach Monte Kiffin's son and that he was an assistant coach at USC a few years ago when they won two national championships. But his only head coaching experience had been with the NFL's Oakland Raiders, where he compiled a horrendous 5-15 record before being angrily sacked by that team's owner Al Davis in an infamous press conference.
But Tennessee treated Kiffin as a savior, much in the same manner that Florida had done with Urban Meyer and Alabama with Nick Saban. Football fans can be funny that way; all you need is for "Coach Fix-It" to sign on the dotted line and you're supposed to be good for a string of conference titles and national championships!
Tennessee was so taken by the brash, verbally combative new head coach that, during his first (and it turns out his only) season, they tended to treat close losses as victories. This never happened under Fulmer. Tennessee finished the season at 7-6 and Kiffin was regarded as a great success who turned around their football program. Huh? (Or, in more vulgar terms: WTF?)
As a UF fan, I would have been content to have Lane Kiffin stay with Tennessee and pilot the Vols to more "close" losses to the Gators (while claiming moral victories). But alas, his dream job of coaching his old haunt USC came up and that premier college football school hired him, with his lifetime head coaching record of 12-21 and a trail of angry people trashing him! The job switch happened in a span of hours, and Kiffin naturally took along with him his assistant coaching staff as well (including his father). Tennessee fans deservedly feel betrayed.
But I say to the good folks in Knoxville and beyond who follow the Vols, you deserve better than Lane Kiffin. What you need is a good old-fashioned Phillip Fulmer/Bobby Bowden type who will stay around, be a mentor to his players, and make you proud. And Tennessee football will rebound, let there be no mistaking that. I look forward to the days when the Tennessee/Florida rivalry will once again heat up, with the schools trading victories from year to year.
For decades, Tennessee head football coach Phillip Fulmer has delivered to those fans with strong, competitive Volunteer teams. His long tenure was spotlighted by the unforgettable teams of Peyton Manning in the mid-1990s and a national championship in 1998. They had a great rivalry going with my University of Florida Gators as well, with the seasons of each school often hinging on who won the early-season matchup. In 2007, although the Gators beat Tennessee early on, the Vols still managed to win the Southeastern Conference East Division, quite an accomplishment. But the following year, they had only the second losing season in Fulmer's 17 year stint there and he lost his job. Pretty shabby treatment for someone who was locally so revered that he had a street named after him!
To succeed Fulmer, UT hired Lane Kiffin, whose chief assets were that he was defensive coach Monte Kiffin's son and that he was an assistant coach at USC a few years ago when they won two national championships. But his only head coaching experience had been with the NFL's Oakland Raiders, where he compiled a horrendous 5-15 record before being angrily sacked by that team's owner Al Davis in an infamous press conference.
But Tennessee treated Kiffin as a savior, much in the same manner that Florida had done with Urban Meyer and Alabama with Nick Saban. Football fans can be funny that way; all you need is for "Coach Fix-It" to sign on the dotted line and you're supposed to be good for a string of conference titles and national championships!
Tennessee was so taken by the brash, verbally combative new head coach that, during his first (and it turns out his only) season, they tended to treat close losses as victories. This never happened under Fulmer. Tennessee finished the season at 7-6 and Kiffin was regarded as a great success who turned around their football program. Huh? (Or, in more vulgar terms: WTF?)
As a UF fan, I would have been content to have Lane Kiffin stay with Tennessee and pilot the Vols to more "close" losses to the Gators (while claiming moral victories). But alas, his dream job of coaching his old haunt USC came up and that premier college football school hired him, with his lifetime head coaching record of 12-21 and a trail of angry people trashing him! The job switch happened in a span of hours, and Kiffin naturally took along with him his assistant coaching staff as well (including his father). Tennessee fans deservedly feel betrayed.
But I say to the good folks in Knoxville and beyond who follow the Vols, you deserve better than Lane Kiffin. What you need is a good old-fashioned Phillip Fulmer/Bobby Bowden type who will stay around, be a mentor to his players, and make you proud. And Tennessee football will rebound, let there be no mistaking that. I look forward to the days when the Tennessee/Florida rivalry will once again heat up, with the schools trading victories from year to year.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Haiti's Devastation
A devastating earthquake of magnitude 7.0 struck Haiti, with as many as 28 aftershocks averaging 5.0. It seems that the horrors that have been inflicted on this impoverished nearby little Caribbean nation are being revealed almost exponentially as the media gains greater access to the focus of the catastrophe. Different estimates of fatalities have been given, from as many as 100,000 to even a half million. In a country encompassing only nine million people!
Haiti is so poor that 80% of its GDP is in the form of foreign aid bestowed upon it, according to a Public Radio segment I recently heard. The same source, however, goes on to say that this may be misleading as a moneyless barter system tends to account for much of their domestic economy. But for Haiti to ever climb out of their despair, they need to have a stable, available currency that can enable them to develop the infrastructure necessary for them to exist as a viable country that is friendly to small business development and trade, both domestic and international.
"1-12" probably won't go down in history with the same instant, emotionally arousing effect that "9-11" did. To be sure, "9-11" was the wake-up call that mobilized us to the real, dire threats that terrorism posed to us if left unchecked; earthquakes are, on the other hand, naturally and (seemingly) randomly occurring events that sometimes tragically affect heavily populated areas. Especially heavily populated areas devoid of effective building standards, as is now the case with Haiti.
When I was a little kid in the early 1960s, I would hear references to places like Jamaica and Haiti as vacation paradises. One could travel there, be in exotic surroundings, and be pampered while lounging around on the beautiful beaches. Jamaica still enjoys a vibrant tourism industry, which contributes greatly to its economy. But Haiti has gone down a different path, with corrupt dictators and its military sapping the country's wealth and repelling visitors instead of luring them. Well, for a few years Haiti has enjoyed a very fragile democracy of sorts. This, though, is only a tiny step in the right direction. Things will have to change there on a grand scale in order to turn the country around. But short of a long term international takeover, I don't see this happening.
The 2004 "Christmas" tsunami that killed so many in southeast Asia seemed so far away, on the other side of the world. This earthquake, though, was too close. Especially when you consider that when a hurricane brushes by Haiti, people in south Florida begin to board up their homes and businesses. Yet Haiti and Florida, in spite of their proximity to each other, are in vastly different geologic zones. Or are they really?
Haiti is so poor that 80% of its GDP is in the form of foreign aid bestowed upon it, according to a Public Radio segment I recently heard. The same source, however, goes on to say that this may be misleading as a moneyless barter system tends to account for much of their domestic economy. But for Haiti to ever climb out of their despair, they need to have a stable, available currency that can enable them to develop the infrastructure necessary for them to exist as a viable country that is friendly to small business development and trade, both domestic and international.
"1-12" probably won't go down in history with the same instant, emotionally arousing effect that "9-11" did. To be sure, "9-11" was the wake-up call that mobilized us to the real, dire threats that terrorism posed to us if left unchecked; earthquakes are, on the other hand, naturally and (seemingly) randomly occurring events that sometimes tragically affect heavily populated areas. Especially heavily populated areas devoid of effective building standards, as is now the case with Haiti.
When I was a little kid in the early 1960s, I would hear references to places like Jamaica and Haiti as vacation paradises. One could travel there, be in exotic surroundings, and be pampered while lounging around on the beautiful beaches. Jamaica still enjoys a vibrant tourism industry, which contributes greatly to its economy. But Haiti has gone down a different path, with corrupt dictators and its military sapping the country's wealth and repelling visitors instead of luring them. Well, for a few years Haiti has enjoyed a very fragile democracy of sorts. This, though, is only a tiny step in the right direction. Things will have to change there on a grand scale in order to turn the country around. But short of a long term international takeover, I don't see this happening.
The 2004 "Christmas" tsunami that killed so many in southeast Asia seemed so far away, on the other side of the world. This earthquake, though, was too close. Especially when you consider that when a hurricane brushes by Haiti, people in south Florida begin to board up their homes and businesses. Yet Haiti and Florida, in spite of their proximity to each other, are in vastly different geologic zones. Or are they really?
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Crossword Lite
I am a notoriously bad crossword puzzle enthusiast. Not bad in the late Michael Jackson's sense of "good", but bad in the sense of "really crappy"! Usually, I can whip through those "easy" crossword puzzle books I buy from time to time, giving me a false sense of expertise with this genre of diversion. But then I'll come across a Sunday New York Times puzzle and I'm instantly and hopelessly lost, desperately looking for at least ONE clue that I can solve on it. When I was much younger and actually followed prime time television, I could fill out much of the weekly TV-based crossword in TV Guide magazine. But nowadays, forget it!
But all is not lost; help is on the way. In the (incidentally free) Independent Florida Alligator is published the Los Angeles Times daily crossword puzzle. Which I guess is about halfway between the difficulty of the Sunday NY Times and the "easy" puzzles. Then I discovered that the weekday New York Times crossword puzzle, included in the (not free) Gainesville Sun is also much simpler than their Sunday monstrosity.
I am not one of those strange people who look up the answers to the clues that they can't figure out. If I can't solve 42-down, then I'll try to solve the horizontal clues that overlap it. And not completely finishing a puzzle is no big deal, either. I just enjoy the process of "backward thinking" that deriving a term from its oft cleverly constructed description entails. How about you?
I dig crosswords because I can just rip them out of the paper and carry them around with me, working on them during "down" moments when I am waiting in line or during a break in my routine.
When I was a kid, we used to have cruddy crossword puzzles to do at school or in those cheap children's magazines. By "cruddy", I mean crosswords that had squares that weren't covered by both vertical and horizontal words. In these inferior puzzles, one had to just "know" the answer with the minimal help of having only a few vertical/horizontal overlaps. Of course, mitigating against this glaring flaw was the tendency for the puzzles to be mind-bogglingly simple to solve!
My parents were both avid and expert crossword puzzle enthusiasts, having become so adept at the game that they ended up concentrating on the much more difficult "diagramless" puzzles. As a matter of fact it was while looking over their diagramless puzzles as a kid when I first realized that my parents were pretty damned smart!
Not that being a lousy crossword "puzzler" conversely means I'm stupid (or so I try to convince myself). For me, diagramless is "off the table" for now. Weekday newspaper puzzles rule!
But all is not lost; help is on the way. In the (incidentally free) Independent Florida Alligator is published the Los Angeles Times daily crossword puzzle. Which I guess is about halfway between the difficulty of the Sunday NY Times and the "easy" puzzles. Then I discovered that the weekday New York Times crossword puzzle, included in the (not free) Gainesville Sun is also much simpler than their Sunday monstrosity.
I am not one of those strange people who look up the answers to the clues that they can't figure out. If I can't solve 42-down, then I'll try to solve the horizontal clues that overlap it. And not completely finishing a puzzle is no big deal, either. I just enjoy the process of "backward thinking" that deriving a term from its oft cleverly constructed description entails. How about you?
I dig crosswords because I can just rip them out of the paper and carry them around with me, working on them during "down" moments when I am waiting in line or during a break in my routine.
When I was a kid, we used to have cruddy crossword puzzles to do at school or in those cheap children's magazines. By "cruddy", I mean crosswords that had squares that weren't covered by both vertical and horizontal words. In these inferior puzzles, one had to just "know" the answer with the minimal help of having only a few vertical/horizontal overlaps. Of course, mitigating against this glaring flaw was the tendency for the puzzles to be mind-bogglingly simple to solve!
My parents were both avid and expert crossword puzzle enthusiasts, having become so adept at the game that they ended up concentrating on the much more difficult "diagramless" puzzles. As a matter of fact it was while looking over their diagramless puzzles as a kid when I first realized that my parents were pretty damned smart!
Not that being a lousy crossword "puzzler" conversely means I'm stupid (or so I try to convince myself). For me, diagramless is "off the table" for now. Weekday newspaper puzzles rule!
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Curse of Conspicuous Consumption
Normally, I like to claim that I am modest...so modest, in fact, that I can usually admit to having just about every personality fault in the world to some extent, if only minor. Of course, you could argue that this is really false modesty, for in doing so, that gives me leverage to talk about the subject as if I were somehow a big expert on it. But there is one "flaw" that I had in early childhood but since early adolescence have pretty much obliterated from my life: conspicuous consumption (or the deliberate flaunting of one's material possessions in front of others).
Originally, I learned about the term "conspicuous consumption" from U.S. history class, in which it was revealed that the nouveau riche of America's 19th century industrial boom (e.g. Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt) would build opulent estates, hold lavish parties, and indulge in just about anything (jewelry, clothes, transportation, furnishing, travel) that they could use to publicly delineate how successful they were and "different" from the hoi polloi. But that trait doesn't just apply to the long-dead super-rich. I see it in people running small businesses, who feel the need to drive a BMW or Mercedes to distinguish themselves from their employees. I see it in coworkers who, finally having a decent source of income in their lives, buy the latest miniature phone/MP3/Internet gadgetry to show off. I see it in yuppie couples who buy expensive homes that they can't afford in order to keep up with their friends, who also tend to live in unaffordable homes. But I see it in children most of all. And that breaks my heart.
Kids don't necessarily intend to be mean about showing off their possessions to others (although some are truly dirt-dog mean to the core). But deriving a sense of pride from owning and displaying one's material possessions can lead to some unintended consequences. One, it creates a sense of inferiority and envy in kids who are not so fortunate with their possessions, possibly even leading to dishonest behavior (lying and even theft) on their part to try to "keep up". Two, it skews values to the point where owning things is more important than accomplishing things. This is never more apparent than during the annual Greedfest (aka "Christmas"), when children (and sadly too many adults) just let their fantasies of material greed run rampant as they throw them out, hoping that someone (typically a parent) will "catch" them and dish them back out to them on Greedfest morning. Hey, I admit to having some greed as well (see, this is where my false modesty kicks in), having asked for and received some very nice presents (thank you Melissa, Will, Rebecca, Dad, Anita, Jim, Jerry, Keith, Krista, James, Amy, etc). But you know, I didn't then turn around and show them off to others, some of whom may not have been so abundantly fortunate.
Let's not confuse conspicuous consumption with responsible maintenance and cleaning, either. People who want their property to look clean and well-maintained, be it a home, car, or anything else, are simply reflecting their responsible behavior in how they take care of their possessions, which can run the range from simple to extravagant. Doesn't walking into a well-kept, modest house impress you more than walking into one that is larger and more ornate, but untidy and possibly dirty? If you agree, then you are on my "wavelength". Comments of affirmation are most certainly welcome! And if you think that your possessions define you, than please explain how and why. I just might be missing something here (another false modesty ploy of mine, I'm afraid).
Originally, I learned about the term "conspicuous consumption" from U.S. history class, in which it was revealed that the nouveau riche of America's 19th century industrial boom (e.g. Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt) would build opulent estates, hold lavish parties, and indulge in just about anything (jewelry, clothes, transportation, furnishing, travel) that they could use to publicly delineate how successful they were and "different" from the hoi polloi. But that trait doesn't just apply to the long-dead super-rich. I see it in people running small businesses, who feel the need to drive a BMW or Mercedes to distinguish themselves from their employees. I see it in coworkers who, finally having a decent source of income in their lives, buy the latest miniature phone/MP3/Internet gadgetry to show off. I see it in yuppie couples who buy expensive homes that they can't afford in order to keep up with their friends, who also tend to live in unaffordable homes. But I see it in children most of all. And that breaks my heart.
Kids don't necessarily intend to be mean about showing off their possessions to others (although some are truly dirt-dog mean to the core). But deriving a sense of pride from owning and displaying one's material possessions can lead to some unintended consequences. One, it creates a sense of inferiority and envy in kids who are not so fortunate with their possessions, possibly even leading to dishonest behavior (lying and even theft) on their part to try to "keep up". Two, it skews values to the point where owning things is more important than accomplishing things. This is never more apparent than during the annual Greedfest (aka "Christmas"), when children (and sadly too many adults) just let their fantasies of material greed run rampant as they throw them out, hoping that someone (typically a parent) will "catch" them and dish them back out to them on Greedfest morning. Hey, I admit to having some greed as well (see, this is where my false modesty kicks in), having asked for and received some very nice presents (thank you Melissa, Will, Rebecca, Dad, Anita, Jim, Jerry, Keith, Krista, James, Amy, etc). But you know, I didn't then turn around and show them off to others, some of whom may not have been so abundantly fortunate.
Let's not confuse conspicuous consumption with responsible maintenance and cleaning, either. People who want their property to look clean and well-maintained, be it a home, car, or anything else, are simply reflecting their responsible behavior in how they take care of their possessions, which can run the range from simple to extravagant. Doesn't walking into a well-kept, modest house impress you more than walking into one that is larger and more ornate, but untidy and possibly dirty? If you agree, then you are on my "wavelength". Comments of affirmation are most certainly welcome! And if you think that your possessions define you, than please explain how and why. I just might be missing something here (another false modesty ploy of mine, I'm afraid).
Monday, January 11, 2010
Nevada's Questionable Senators
Democrat Harry Reid and Republican John Ensign are about two of the most diametrically opposed senators that even served the same state at the same time, in terms both of their projected images and of their political orientation. Reid is a pugnacious ex-boxer with a heart for working people and a problem with speaking coherently. Ensign is the quintessential corporate hack politician, with a suave manner that would seem to make him more befitting of a stage act in Las Vegas. Yet the two have reportedly gotten along quite well with each other over the years, with each refusing to campaign against the other's reelection bids. And I kind of respect each of them in their own way, for the strengths that they project. But...
John Ensign has been one of those senators who has used his religious faith (right-wing Christian evangelist) as a tool to further his political ambitions. He was, though, recently exposed as having an extramarital affair, while some his GOP colleagues "in the faith" and "in the ideology" have been quick to forgive and forget. So to me, Ensign comes across as a walking, talking self-righteous (but very glib) hypocrite. I have no doubt of his reelection in the future.
Harry Reid, on the other hand, keeps his Mormon religious faith close to his vest. He is personally pro-life, but has respected the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision regarding abortion and has opposed efforts to overturn that ruling by placing hardships on poor women seeking abortions (restrictions which Ensign has supported). Unlike Ensign, Reid seems to have a bit of trouble enunciating his ideas into clear, coherent speech. Which makes me wonder why, of all the people in the Senate that the Democrats could draw upon, he was the one chosen to be the Majority Leader!
It has come out in the news recently that, during the 2008 presidential campaign, Reid had made an idiotic statement to someone about how candidate Barack Obama's relatively light skin color for an African-American, coupled with his lack of a "Negro dialect" (unless he wanted to use one) would help him in the election. A really stupid thing to say, I'll admit. But the furor being raised over this revelation, chiefly by the Republicans, is overblown. Reid wasn't making a racist comment per se; he was giving his opinion, albeit very poorly expressed, as to how others in the electorate perceive race and make voting choices from those perceptions. But, like I said earlier, there seems to be some sort of disconnect between what Harry Reid's mind produces and what ultimately comes out of his mouth!
Ever since Tom Daschle was defeated for reelection in 2004 and Reid became the leader of the Senate Democrats, I have opposed him in this post. I think his heart is in the right place, but he has neither the political skills to negotiate across the aisle nor the ability to effectively express and promote his party's position on various issues. And I am sick to death of hearing him getting up on the Senate floor and sounding personally offended because, lo and behold, the opposition party was behaving like an opposition party!
I would like to see someone like Dick Durbin (Illinois) or Chuck Schumer (New York) step up to the post of Majority Leader. Either would be an vast improvement over what we have had to endure with Reid. Not only are these two much better speakers, but they also represent states that are more likely to reelect them even in the aftermath of a difficult-but-necessary legislative session.
Of course, after the 2010 election, this all may be a moot point anyway. Not that the Democrats will lose enough seats to relinquish their majority status in the Senate. But Harry Reid, at least according to current Nevada public opinion polls, is very unpopular and may be headed for defeat.
John Ensign has been one of those senators who has used his religious faith (right-wing Christian evangelist) as a tool to further his political ambitions. He was, though, recently exposed as having an extramarital affair, while some his GOP colleagues "in the faith" and "in the ideology" have been quick to forgive and forget. So to me, Ensign comes across as a walking, talking self-righteous (but very glib) hypocrite. I have no doubt of his reelection in the future.
Harry Reid, on the other hand, keeps his Mormon religious faith close to his vest. He is personally pro-life, but has respected the Supreme Court's 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision regarding abortion and has opposed efforts to overturn that ruling by placing hardships on poor women seeking abortions (restrictions which Ensign has supported). Unlike Ensign, Reid seems to have a bit of trouble enunciating his ideas into clear, coherent speech. Which makes me wonder why, of all the people in the Senate that the Democrats could draw upon, he was the one chosen to be the Majority Leader!
It has come out in the news recently that, during the 2008 presidential campaign, Reid had made an idiotic statement to someone about how candidate Barack Obama's relatively light skin color for an African-American, coupled with his lack of a "Negro dialect" (unless he wanted to use one) would help him in the election. A really stupid thing to say, I'll admit. But the furor being raised over this revelation, chiefly by the Republicans, is overblown. Reid wasn't making a racist comment per se; he was giving his opinion, albeit very poorly expressed, as to how others in the electorate perceive race and make voting choices from those perceptions. But, like I said earlier, there seems to be some sort of disconnect between what Harry Reid's mind produces and what ultimately comes out of his mouth!
Ever since Tom Daschle was defeated for reelection in 2004 and Reid became the leader of the Senate Democrats, I have opposed him in this post. I think his heart is in the right place, but he has neither the political skills to negotiate across the aisle nor the ability to effectively express and promote his party's position on various issues. And I am sick to death of hearing him getting up on the Senate floor and sounding personally offended because, lo and behold, the opposition party was behaving like an opposition party!
I would like to see someone like Dick Durbin (Illinois) or Chuck Schumer (New York) step up to the post of Majority Leader. Either would be an vast improvement over what we have had to endure with Reid. Not only are these two much better speakers, but they also represent states that are more likely to reelect them even in the aftermath of a difficult-but-necessary legislative session.
Of course, after the 2010 election, this all may be a moot point anyway. Not that the Democrats will lose enough seats to relinquish their majority status in the Senate. But Harry Reid, at least according to current Nevada public opinion polls, is very unpopular and may be headed for defeat.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Oh, If They Would Only Heed Me
I would advise those Democratic politicians in Congress to stop looking ahead to the next election and instead focus on doing what they were sent to Washington to do. Which is to represent their constituents and the broader interests of the country. They were elected as Democrats, and as such their electors already knew that this party was the "liberal" party and would pursue legislation that had a liberal/leftist imprint on it. It never ceases to confound me how people are suddenly "waking up" to discover that we have liberals in power! Considering how they elected them in the first place, I can only assume that a very large segment of our voting population either is extremely ignorant or suffers from memory impairment. Or perhaps they just sway to and fro, according to what they perceive as the prevailing political mood being portrayed in the media. In any event, it is frustrating that, regardless whether a politician is conservation or liberal, they have to cater to this overly malleable group of voters to win an election. Especially when it concerns the Presidency or politically divided districts and states!
So to my elected officials, be you Republicans or Democrats, just center yourselves in the present and delegate the matters concerning your reelection campaigns to others in your staffs. Your votes are crucial in the year to come, and they need to be cast by responsible representatives and senators, not hack politicians!
So to my elected officials, be you Republicans or Democrats, just center yourselves in the present and delegate the matters concerning your reelection campaigns to others in your staffs. Your votes are crucial in the year to come, and they need to be cast by responsible representatives and senators, not hack politicians!
Friday, January 8, 2010
People Waving Around Books
Where I work, we have a union and a collective bargaining agreement with management. To this I say, "Great, hooray for collective bargaining"! Once, after I had been working here for a few years, my union local's leadership decided to promote a campaign whereby every member was given a copy of the national collective bargaining agreement, in the form of a small paperback book. The language contained therein was simple to read and understand. There were certain rules in the contract that management and workers were compelled to follow or else they would be in violation of the agreement. For a lay worker using the contract agreement book to monitor management compliance, though, it was an exercise in futility. For no matter how clear the language in the agreement was on any particular item, what really ruled the day was the long trail of "letters of understanding", based on real cases that formally interpreted the rules and ultimately governed their implementation. And these "letters", extraneous to the actual collective bargaining agreement, were only readily available to union officers and stewards, not the rank and file.
Similarly, I often see representatives and senators openly flaunting a little book containing the United States Constitution, as if by doing this it gives them a moral edge over their colleagues. Senator Robert Byrd (D, WV) has been the most notorious for doing this. But, as with the collective bargaining agreement, the Constitution's language may be simple and clear while its interpretation and ultimate application is murky and strewn with a mind-boggling trail of court interpretations. My personal experience with a Constitutional history course at UF introduced me to how murky and muddy the waters of interpretation can be.
And then there is the Bible (or Koran, etc.). I can't begin to count the number of times I've seen a preacher waving this book around on stage, claiming its absolute literal truth and urging listeners to read it for spiritual enlightenment. But such a preacher would in reality be horrified if people were to simply read the Bible, apply the message they personally derived from it, and then go forth with their lives. After all, that would put him (or her) out of a job, for the task of the clergy is to "interpret" scripture in such a way that furthers the church's (and preacher's) agenda. So it's apparently not enough to read the Bible/Torah/Koran/etc. and arrive at our own conclusions; it has to be interpreted for us by the "experts" for us to be enlightened as to its "true" meaning.
I am personally sick of people waving around books like the Constitution, the Bible, or even my collective bargaining agreement. On one hand, they are doing this to gain an edge over others by appearing to be more principled. On the other hand, these documents, albeit important, are only the starting points, not the final products that are reflected in real world application. They are important as foundations in their respective areas, but it is deceptive to pretend that their interpretations are anything but complex, inconsistent, and convoluted. And sometimes motivated by special interest agendas.
Similarly, I often see representatives and senators openly flaunting a little book containing the United States Constitution, as if by doing this it gives them a moral edge over their colleagues. Senator Robert Byrd (D, WV) has been the most notorious for doing this. But, as with the collective bargaining agreement, the Constitution's language may be simple and clear while its interpretation and ultimate application is murky and strewn with a mind-boggling trail of court interpretations. My personal experience with a Constitutional history course at UF introduced me to how murky and muddy the waters of interpretation can be.
And then there is the Bible (or Koran, etc.). I can't begin to count the number of times I've seen a preacher waving this book around on stage, claiming its absolute literal truth and urging listeners to read it for spiritual enlightenment. But such a preacher would in reality be horrified if people were to simply read the Bible, apply the message they personally derived from it, and then go forth with their lives. After all, that would put him (or her) out of a job, for the task of the clergy is to "interpret" scripture in such a way that furthers the church's (and preacher's) agenda. So it's apparently not enough to read the Bible/Torah/Koran/etc. and arrive at our own conclusions; it has to be interpreted for us by the "experts" for us to be enlightened as to its "true" meaning.
I am personally sick of people waving around books like the Constitution, the Bible, or even my collective bargaining agreement. On one hand, they are doing this to gain an edge over others by appearing to be more principled. On the other hand, these documents, albeit important, are only the starting points, not the final products that are reflected in real world application. They are important as foundations in their respective areas, but it is deceptive to pretend that their interpretations are anything but complex, inconsistent, and convoluted. And sometimes motivated by special interest agendas.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
My NCAA Title Game Prediction
Here is my prediction for tonight's NCAA National Championship football game:
Texas 27, Alabama 16.
I know this runs against the prevailing "wisdom" of the sports media talking heads, who seem to only pay attention to what happened most recently with these teams. Texas squeaked by Nebraska in the Big 12 championship game, its vaunted offense looking rather unimpressive. And Alabama overpowered favored Florida in the SEC title match. But Nebraska may have had the best defense in the country this year and Florida was missing one of its vital defensive starters due to a suspension. The two contending teams need to be evaluated over the course of the season as a whole, not just by their most recent games. Especially when those games occurred a month ago! Texas has usually completely dominated their opponents this year while Alabama has slogged through several close contests.
Hopefully, you don't bet on sports and will take my prediction with a grain of salt. But my NFL predictions for this year were largely on-target, with me correctly predicting divisional titles for New England, Indianapolis, San Diego, Dallas, New Orleans, Minnesota, and Arizona. The only division I missed, the AFC North, was unexpectedly won by Cincinnati by only one game over my pick, Baltimore (which still finished "in the playoffs"). For what it's worth, I'm still sticking with my prediction of a Baltimore win over Minnesota in the Super Bowl.
One factor that I believe is skewing the opinion of others toward Alabama is the notion that the Southeastern Conference is pretty much invincible now. After all, it has won the last three national championships, splitting the titles between LSU and Florida. But past seasons, like most recent games, are not the best indicators about Alabama and Texas. Rather look at their current season records and judge for yourself.
Could I be wrong? Of course I could. But I am more likely to believe that Texas could blow out Alabama by an even larger margin than lose to them. Well, let's see what happens tonight!
Texas 27, Alabama 16.
I know this runs against the prevailing "wisdom" of the sports media talking heads, who seem to only pay attention to what happened most recently with these teams. Texas squeaked by Nebraska in the Big 12 championship game, its vaunted offense looking rather unimpressive. And Alabama overpowered favored Florida in the SEC title match. But Nebraska may have had the best defense in the country this year and Florida was missing one of its vital defensive starters due to a suspension. The two contending teams need to be evaluated over the course of the season as a whole, not just by their most recent games. Especially when those games occurred a month ago! Texas has usually completely dominated their opponents this year while Alabama has slogged through several close contests.
Hopefully, you don't bet on sports and will take my prediction with a grain of salt. But my NFL predictions for this year were largely on-target, with me correctly predicting divisional titles for New England, Indianapolis, San Diego, Dallas, New Orleans, Minnesota, and Arizona. The only division I missed, the AFC North, was unexpectedly won by Cincinnati by only one game over my pick, Baltimore (which still finished "in the playoffs"). For what it's worth, I'm still sticking with my prediction of a Baltimore win over Minnesota in the Super Bowl.
One factor that I believe is skewing the opinion of others toward Alabama is the notion that the Southeastern Conference is pretty much invincible now. After all, it has won the last three national championships, splitting the titles between LSU and Florida. But past seasons, like most recent games, are not the best indicators about Alabama and Texas. Rather look at their current season records and judge for yourself.
Could I be wrong? Of course I could. But I am more likely to believe that Texas could blow out Alabama by an even larger margin than lose to them. Well, let's see what happens tonight!
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Colts and Bengals Incur My Wrath
I am more than a little dismayed at how the New York Jets managed to get into the NFL playoffs this season. Not that it's any of their fault, mind you. The reason I usually root against NY is simply because they are divisional rivals of "my" team, the Miami Dolphins. Of course, if they end up playing the Dolphins' other "good" divisional rival, the New England Patriots, later in the playoffs, I'll be a big Jets fan (for the duration of that hypothetical game, that is).
No, for the last two games of the regular season, the New York Jets just went out and played some good old solid, spirited football. Their fans should be proud of them. It's just that their opponents for those two games, the Indianapolis Colts and the Cincinnati Bengals, essentially conceded victory to the Jets by resting their first stringers, and especially their star players, for the upcoming playoffs.
I am especially down on the Colts, who at 14-0, had a chance to go undefeated, but who instead chose to bench star quarterback Peyton Manning early in the third quarter of a close contest against New York. The Jets, playing against a substitute Colt lineup, took over the game and never looked back.
The following week, Cincinnati, having just clinched their division, decided to rest their starters as well. And who should they be playing, but the Jets! And those Jets coasted into the playoffs with a too-easy 37-0 win.
What is the most disturbing about all this is that there were other teams, like Houston, Pittsburgh, and Denver, who were in the thick of the playoff hunt as well. They were cheated out of an opportunity to compete on the same level as New York, which was essentially forfeited the last two games. This badly tarnishes the integrity of the sport.
I was rooting for the Miami Dolphins, which once had a 7-6 record (including two wins over those Jets) but lost their final three games of the season. So my gripe has nothing to do with them being cheated out of anything. They blew their playoff chances on their own, injury excuses notwithstanding (but forthcoming).
As long as the Colts or the Bengals have the coaches that they presently have, I will no longer root for them. Even if New England is the scheduled opponent (that's how bad I feel about them)! As a matter of fact, the Jets are scheduled to once again play against Cincinnati this weekend in the first round of the playoffs. Go Jets!
No, for the last two games of the regular season, the New York Jets just went out and played some good old solid, spirited football. Their fans should be proud of them. It's just that their opponents for those two games, the Indianapolis Colts and the Cincinnati Bengals, essentially conceded victory to the Jets by resting their first stringers, and especially their star players, for the upcoming playoffs.
I am especially down on the Colts, who at 14-0, had a chance to go undefeated, but who instead chose to bench star quarterback Peyton Manning early in the third quarter of a close contest against New York. The Jets, playing against a substitute Colt lineup, took over the game and never looked back.
The following week, Cincinnati, having just clinched their division, decided to rest their starters as well. And who should they be playing, but the Jets! And those Jets coasted into the playoffs with a too-easy 37-0 win.
What is the most disturbing about all this is that there were other teams, like Houston, Pittsburgh, and Denver, who were in the thick of the playoff hunt as well. They were cheated out of an opportunity to compete on the same level as New York, which was essentially forfeited the last two games. This badly tarnishes the integrity of the sport.
I was rooting for the Miami Dolphins, which once had a 7-6 record (including two wins over those Jets) but lost their final three games of the season. So my gripe has nothing to do with them being cheated out of anything. They blew their playoff chances on their own, injury excuses notwithstanding (but forthcoming).
As long as the Colts or the Bengals have the coaches that they presently have, I will no longer root for them. Even if New England is the scheduled opponent (that's how bad I feel about them)! As a matter of fact, the Jets are scheduled to once again play against Cincinnati this weekend in the first round of the playoffs. Go Jets!
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
18-22-26-18-17-23
So reads the string of forecast low temperatures for this week at the top of the front page of today's Gainesville Sun. We have already been experiencing sub-freezing mornings here for three days or so, and I'm getting used to it. In fact, it is amazing how quickly I adapt to changes in temperature. As long as they stick around for a while, that is. Had the temperatures climbed right back up, I would have had a much more difficult time handling this. In any event, we are talking about record lows for this time of year (the average low is around 42 degrees).
Which brings me to a conjecture about where one should live. If I had a personal attachment to snow, then I would want to live in an area that had a guaranteed snowfall (which lasted) every year. If not, then I would want to stay in a place like here in northern Florida, where it can occasionally get cold, but is usually very dry on those occasions (it hasn't snowed in Gainesville since 1989). The reason is simple, actually. The worst time with cold weather, as I see it, is when the rain is falling and freezing on the road (and car windshields). Any snow that does falls is very temporary, sloshy (is that a word?) and dirty. The kind of idyllic winter wonderland you see on Christmas cards, with horse-drawn sleighs and country scenes, only exists either at a certain altitude level or at a certain latitude.
So, by this reasoning, (and presuming I don't live in the temperate Pacific coastal areas) if I didn't live in northern Florida (or the southernmost parts of the Deep South), I think I would rather live in a place like New England or Michigan than--say--Atlanta, Nashville, or Charlotte. In those cities, it seems to me that I would get all of the worst effects of winter weather with few of the benefits. Then again, I never had to endure a snow blizzard.
But, back to this article's title, I don't recall ever having experienced such a long chain of substantially sub-freezing mornings in Gainesville. Usually, this time of the year it occasionally dips down deep for two or three days, climbs back up for a couple more, and then dips back down as the next cold front passes through. Not this time, though. But it is dry here---oh so dry!
Which brings me to a conjecture about where one should live. If I had a personal attachment to snow, then I would want to live in an area that had a guaranteed snowfall (which lasted) every year. If not, then I would want to stay in a place like here in northern Florida, where it can occasionally get cold, but is usually very dry on those occasions (it hasn't snowed in Gainesville since 1989). The reason is simple, actually. The worst time with cold weather, as I see it, is when the rain is falling and freezing on the road (and car windshields). Any snow that does falls is very temporary, sloshy (is that a word?) and dirty. The kind of idyllic winter wonderland you see on Christmas cards, with horse-drawn sleighs and country scenes, only exists either at a certain altitude level or at a certain latitude.
So, by this reasoning, (and presuming I don't live in the temperate Pacific coastal areas) if I didn't live in northern Florida (or the southernmost parts of the Deep South), I think I would rather live in a place like New England or Michigan than--say--Atlanta, Nashville, or Charlotte. In those cities, it seems to me that I would get all of the worst effects of winter weather with few of the benefits. Then again, I never had to endure a snow blizzard.
But, back to this article's title, I don't recall ever having experienced such a long chain of substantially sub-freezing mornings in Gainesville. Usually, this time of the year it occasionally dips down deep for two or three days, climbs back up for a couple more, and then dips back down as the next cold front passes through. Not this time, though. But it is dry here---oh so dry!
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Day and Night Running
Lately, I have been trying my hand at some night running, with some interesting observations.
For one, although I am near-sighted, I don't wear glasses while running. In the day, I can still easily see distant objects, with the color-sensing cells of my eyes (are they the rods or the cones, I forget) compensating for my difficulty in far vision. I know this must be true, for at night the distant view becomes much more blurry for me. Maybe I just need to start wearing glasses then!
On November 29, I had just driven back into Gainesville from Jacksonville. It was already well into the evening, but I wanted to run. So I ended up going over to the University of Florida and running an improvised course through its campus. My running pace was slower than usual. I attribute that to being more careful about where I placed my feet in the relative darkness. But this past December 29, I ran pretty much the same course in broad daylight and, although I ran it faster, the extreme hilliness of the terrain strongly affected me. But I didn't seem to care much about this the month before, in the dark!
Running at night is a vastly different experience from running in the daytime. Of course, if you're going to run around a well-lit track at night, that is more like daytime running. But I'm talking about road running. In the day, it is more of an assault on my senses, with the lighting and sounds (and somehow even the sloping road) having more of an impact on my mind. In the night, though, sounds are more muffled and the view is dimmer and blurrier. In a way, this frees me to enjoy the experience more. Besides, nights are cooler and more pleasant. Will my speed pick up at night? Eventually, once I am more confident about the courses I run on. In any event, I intend to pursue night running more, with the UF campus being my main focus. Watch out Gators, here I come!
For one, although I am near-sighted, I don't wear glasses while running. In the day, I can still easily see distant objects, with the color-sensing cells of my eyes (are they the rods or the cones, I forget) compensating for my difficulty in far vision. I know this must be true, for at night the distant view becomes much more blurry for me. Maybe I just need to start wearing glasses then!
On November 29, I had just driven back into Gainesville from Jacksonville. It was already well into the evening, but I wanted to run. So I ended up going over to the University of Florida and running an improvised course through its campus. My running pace was slower than usual. I attribute that to being more careful about where I placed my feet in the relative darkness. But this past December 29, I ran pretty much the same course in broad daylight and, although I ran it faster, the extreme hilliness of the terrain strongly affected me. But I didn't seem to care much about this the month before, in the dark!
Running at night is a vastly different experience from running in the daytime. Of course, if you're going to run around a well-lit track at night, that is more like daytime running. But I'm talking about road running. In the day, it is more of an assault on my senses, with the lighting and sounds (and somehow even the sloping road) having more of an impact on my mind. In the night, though, sounds are more muffled and the view is dimmer and blurrier. In a way, this frees me to enjoy the experience more. Besides, nights are cooler and more pleasant. Will my speed pick up at night? Eventually, once I am more confident about the courses I run on. In any event, I intend to pursue night running more, with the UF campus being my main focus. Watch out Gators, here I come!
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Philip K. Dick's Puttering About in a Small Land
One of science fiction writing legend Philip K. Dick's relatively obscure realism novels, Puttering About in a Small Land, gave me an idea as to why these realism novels of his were so difficult to get published (many of them didn't until after his death). And the reason is really quite simple: they don't have any "hooks".
These novels, including Puttering, are more than anything a combination of very compelling character portrayals with some brutal social commentary woven in. All, so far, deal with people in the middle-to-lower class struggling to make ends meet while trying to hold on to their individual dreams and carrying on mostly dysfunctional relationships with one another. But there are no attractive backdrops to the stories that would draw the reader's interest to pick up the book, or at least to convince a publisher that it would stand a fighting chance on a store's bookshelf. Dick's sci-fi works, on the other hand, always have these hooks, or gimmicks if you will, that intrigue the reader.
Puttering About in a Small Land is about two California couples going about their mundane existences while trying in various ways to "break through" into more meaningful lives. And each of them has his/her own, distinct vision of what a "meaningful life" is. For Roger Lindahl, the novel's main focus, it is freedom and excitement. For his wife Virginia, it is security and control over all of the facets of her existence. The other couple, the Bonners, also have their own personally-held ideals. How these people put their visions into play, along with the consequences of their actions, determines the plot line of the novel. But truth be told, I wasn't particularly sympathetic to any of the characters, although the author did a masterful job at revealing and exploring them. What happened to them by the end of the story was of little consequence to me, so it made reading it a pretty drawn-out exercise of tedium. I suppose the main "lesson" I picked up from this story (more of an affirmation of what I already feel) is how much people create narratives of their past (usually casting themselves as victims) to justify their present behavior.
Maybe, for the sake of "completism", I will continue reading Philip K. Dick's other realism novels. But I greatly prefer his science fiction. Good news: The next novel I'm reading is his award-winning sci-fi story The Man in the High Castle.
.....And yes, I'm aware of the ambiguity of this article's title!
These novels, including Puttering, are more than anything a combination of very compelling character portrayals with some brutal social commentary woven in. All, so far, deal with people in the middle-to-lower class struggling to make ends meet while trying to hold on to their individual dreams and carrying on mostly dysfunctional relationships with one another. But there are no attractive backdrops to the stories that would draw the reader's interest to pick up the book, or at least to convince a publisher that it would stand a fighting chance on a store's bookshelf. Dick's sci-fi works, on the other hand, always have these hooks, or gimmicks if you will, that intrigue the reader.
Puttering About in a Small Land is about two California couples going about their mundane existences while trying in various ways to "break through" into more meaningful lives. And each of them has his/her own, distinct vision of what a "meaningful life" is. For Roger Lindahl, the novel's main focus, it is freedom and excitement. For his wife Virginia, it is security and control over all of the facets of her existence. The other couple, the Bonners, also have their own personally-held ideals. How these people put their visions into play, along with the consequences of their actions, determines the plot line of the novel. But truth be told, I wasn't particularly sympathetic to any of the characters, although the author did a masterful job at revealing and exploring them. What happened to them by the end of the story was of little consequence to me, so it made reading it a pretty drawn-out exercise of tedium. I suppose the main "lesson" I picked up from this story (more of an affirmation of what I already feel) is how much people create narratives of their past (usually casting themselves as victims) to justify their present behavior.
Maybe, for the sake of "completism", I will continue reading Philip K. Dick's other realism novels. But I greatly prefer his science fiction. Good news: The next novel I'm reading is his award-winning sci-fi story The Man in the High Castle.
.....And yes, I'm aware of the ambiguity of this article's title!
Friday, January 1, 2010
New Year Greetings
I'd like to wish everyone a happy New Year. May you enjoy health, prosperity and an interesting (but not too interesting) life. I have my own little set of personal goals I'm working on for the year ahead. Most of them deal with me changing bad habits into good ones. Good luck to me!
Thursday, December 31, 2009
2010 Forecast: Heavy Smug and Smirks
So now we have reached not only the end of another year, but also the end of another decade. Forget the technical argument of the century changing at 2001, not 2000; I'm referring to the traditional way of classifying decades, starting with 2000 and ending with 2009. In a recent column, Paul Krugman referred to the passing ten years as the "naughties". However one refers to it, the last decade merits review and analysis. Which I will naturally do in future posts.
What I would instead like to do on this last day of the year is look ahead to 2010 and what might happen. After 2001, though, I must proclaim that I am released from science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke's timetable of future events. Unlike his movie (and novel) 2010, the United States and the Soviet Union will not, I repeat will not be on the verge of nuclear war due to proxy skirmishes in Central America (the fact that the Soviet Union no longer exists helps to convince me of this). Jupiter will not explode into a second star, causing everyone back home to embrace each other and forgo war. And the Chicago Cubs won't win the World Series (wait, Clarke didn't predict them winning; he wasn't that unrealistic). Instead, life will continue pretty much as it has been this past year. Some more politicians and celebrities will flush their reputations down the toilet with disreputable behavior. The media will exploit this and make a lot of money doing so. There will be more terrorism attempts at home and successful ones abroad. Congress will tackle new projects, in particular immigration reform, that the GOP and the media will say are political "Waterloos" (or something similar) and will bring on the downfall of the Democrats and Obama. Again. They'll say that again. And then the 2010 midterm elections will arrive and the voters will cast their ballots according to how they see the economy moving. Which by all accounts should be in full-blown recovery by then. The Democrats will win some and lose some, coming out of the process still firmly in the majority, albeit not necessarily with a 60 vote supermajority in the Senate.
Smugly smirking Fox News Channel hosts will continue to have as guests smug smirkers knocking the Obama administration, while MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow will continue to offer up their own opinions smugly, accompanied by their own lineups of smugly smirking head-nodders. Ho-hum, why don't I just turn off the TV and do something else the whole year?
What I would instead like to do on this last day of the year is look ahead to 2010 and what might happen. After 2001, though, I must proclaim that I am released from science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke's timetable of future events. Unlike his movie (and novel) 2010, the United States and the Soviet Union will not, I repeat will not be on the verge of nuclear war due to proxy skirmishes in Central America (the fact that the Soviet Union no longer exists helps to convince me of this). Jupiter will not explode into a second star, causing everyone back home to embrace each other and forgo war. And the Chicago Cubs won't win the World Series (wait, Clarke didn't predict them winning; he wasn't that unrealistic). Instead, life will continue pretty much as it has been this past year. Some more politicians and celebrities will flush their reputations down the toilet with disreputable behavior. The media will exploit this and make a lot of money doing so. There will be more terrorism attempts at home and successful ones abroad. Congress will tackle new projects, in particular immigration reform, that the GOP and the media will say are political "Waterloos" (or something similar) and will bring on the downfall of the Democrats and Obama. Again. They'll say that again. And then the 2010 midterm elections will arrive and the voters will cast their ballots according to how they see the economy moving. Which by all accounts should be in full-blown recovery by then. The Democrats will win some and lose some, coming out of the process still firmly in the majority, albeit not necessarily with a 60 vote supermajority in the Senate.
Smugly smirking Fox News Channel hosts will continue to have as guests smug smirkers knocking the Obama administration, while MSNBC's Keith Olbermann, Ed Schultz, and Rachel Maddow will continue to offer up their own opinions smugly, accompanied by their own lineups of smugly smirking head-nodders. Ho-hum, why don't I just turn off the TV and do something else the whole year?
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Big Business, the Government, & the Two Parties
I have noticed an interesting trend when following floor speeches in the US Senate and House of Representatives. The conservatives, mainly on the Republican side, rail against the threat of expanding big government and its concomitant abuses, with the hopes for our future depending on benevolent big business. While the liberals, mainly on the Democratic side, rail against the threat and abuses of big corporations, and how the government stands in the way of them completely overrunning the people. But where do small businesses stand in this?
Both sides claim to be the advocate of small business. I think there is a kind of mentality that small business operators have (not just those under 5') whereby they tend to identify themselves as smaller, aspiring versions of the big corporations, and hence a tendency to affiliate themselves with the conservatives and the GOP. But although every once and a while a small business will expand and grow into a large one, the overwhelming number of them will remain small and very, very different in design and scope from the "big boys". In fact it could be argued that the greatest threat to small businesses comes not from overburdening government regulation, but rather from inequitable competition with these major corporations. When a "super" Target or Wal-Mart sets up shop in town, especially a small town, you can almost hear a collective shudder running through the surrounding small business community.
From the standpoint of an individual such as myself, both major corporations and government are gargantuan powers which have to be checked in some way in order to prevent them from completely engulfing my life and freedoms. So it's slightly comforting to see the two main political parties tee off against one another, in effect checking the power of one institution with the other. The only problem with this is when big government teams up with big business to the detriment of the people. To me, this may be happening with the health care reform bill recently approved by the Senate and sent to conference. And was sadly the case in Iraq where the government awarded no-bid contracts with various corporations, most notably Dick Cheney's Halliburton.
Of course, there are times when conservatives like to evoke and exalt the power of the state. In social issues like abortion or gay rights, conservatives have no qualms at all with using big government to impose their social mores on everyone else. And also, they are very gung ho with taxpayers' money regarding the military and the prosecution of wars. Unfortunately, this adulation of the military often fades away when addressing the concerns of veterans.
Back to small business, if the Democrats with this health care bill can ease the enormous burdens that they are incurring with rising costs and preexisting condition exclusions, then we might just see a political realignment occurring in a few years. I for one never thought that employers should ever have been saddled with the obligation to provide health insurance for their employees anyway, the whole process having evolved from businesses using it as a benefit inventive to prospective hires.
Both sides claim to be the advocate of small business. I think there is a kind of mentality that small business operators have (not just those under 5') whereby they tend to identify themselves as smaller, aspiring versions of the big corporations, and hence a tendency to affiliate themselves with the conservatives and the GOP. But although every once and a while a small business will expand and grow into a large one, the overwhelming number of them will remain small and very, very different in design and scope from the "big boys". In fact it could be argued that the greatest threat to small businesses comes not from overburdening government regulation, but rather from inequitable competition with these major corporations. When a "super" Target or Wal-Mart sets up shop in town, especially a small town, you can almost hear a collective shudder running through the surrounding small business community.
From the standpoint of an individual such as myself, both major corporations and government are gargantuan powers which have to be checked in some way in order to prevent them from completely engulfing my life and freedoms. So it's slightly comforting to see the two main political parties tee off against one another, in effect checking the power of one institution with the other. The only problem with this is when big government teams up with big business to the detriment of the people. To me, this may be happening with the health care reform bill recently approved by the Senate and sent to conference. And was sadly the case in Iraq where the government awarded no-bid contracts with various corporations, most notably Dick Cheney's Halliburton.
Of course, there are times when conservatives like to evoke and exalt the power of the state. In social issues like abortion or gay rights, conservatives have no qualms at all with using big government to impose their social mores on everyone else. And also, they are very gung ho with taxpayers' money regarding the military and the prosecution of wars. Unfortunately, this adulation of the military often fades away when addressing the concerns of veterans.
Back to small business, if the Democrats with this health care bill can ease the enormous burdens that they are incurring with rising costs and preexisting condition exclusions, then we might just see a political realignment occurring in a few years. I for one never thought that employers should ever have been saddled with the obligation to provide health insurance for their employees anyway, the whole process having evolved from businesses using it as a benefit inventive to prospective hires.
Monday, December 28, 2009
Football Commentary
As the year's end draws near, we have reached a crucial point in the football season. Two main news stories come to mind. One is the resignation and subsequent reversal thereof regarding University of Florida head coach Urban Meyer. The other is the late-season collapse of the Miami Dolphins.
Urban Meyer has, for the past five years, coached UF with a single-minded ferocity that, at times, bothered me quite a bit. The man seemed devoid of humor and carried on with his job as if it were some sort of divine mission, with critics somehow standing on the wrong side of an absolute moral standard. The fact that his star player Tim Tebow would consistently "stick up" for him in the face of any criticism only made the situation worse, in my opinion. Now that Meyer has revealed that he has health problems, possibly concerning his heart, it may be advisable to tone down that supposed "mission" into a fun, fulfilling job and pick up an ability to kid around somewhere along the way. He has taken a leave of absence, beginning after the Sugar Bowl game on January 1, and will resuming coaching the Gators sometime before next year's season begins. I wish him the best, both in terms of physical health and job enjoyment.
At season's end, the NFL Miami Dolphins are pretty much in the standings where I had predicted them to be at the season's start. But things have changed on the team. Original starting QB Chad Pennington suffered an early season-ending injury, clearing the way for Chad Henne to take over the helm. And he has shown much promise, despite his many mistakes. Henne reminds me of a young John Elway, who also had a strong passing arm but made a lot of bad throws early on in his career. Henne could well lead the Dolphins to "playoff glory" in the future. RB Ronnie Brown, who was crucial to the team's effective wildcat formation, also was injured and taken out for the season, leaving the running game one-dimensional. Ricky Williams has had a great season, but Brown's absence has made his job more difficult as well. But the Dolphins have simply been too inconsistent with their play, from game to game, to be able to make a realistic run to qualify for the playoffs. Also, their schedule has been very tough. Still, I admire how they fought through their games, win or lose.
Before this season, I expressed an interest in following the Pacific Ten Conference in college football. Unfortunately, I was unable to follow many of the games on television as I had hoped. Also, the calibre of play was not as high as I had expected, with Pac-10 teams generally faring poorly in games with non-conference opponents. To top it off, nobody emerged as the premier team in the conference. Sure, the Oregon Ducks ended up winning the conference title and will face Iowa in the Rose Bowl. Well, maybe they will do well then and give me something to look forward to next year.
Urban Meyer has, for the past five years, coached UF with a single-minded ferocity that, at times, bothered me quite a bit. The man seemed devoid of humor and carried on with his job as if it were some sort of divine mission, with critics somehow standing on the wrong side of an absolute moral standard. The fact that his star player Tim Tebow would consistently "stick up" for him in the face of any criticism only made the situation worse, in my opinion. Now that Meyer has revealed that he has health problems, possibly concerning his heart, it may be advisable to tone down that supposed "mission" into a fun, fulfilling job and pick up an ability to kid around somewhere along the way. He has taken a leave of absence, beginning after the Sugar Bowl game on January 1, and will resuming coaching the Gators sometime before next year's season begins. I wish him the best, both in terms of physical health and job enjoyment.
At season's end, the NFL Miami Dolphins are pretty much in the standings where I had predicted them to be at the season's start. But things have changed on the team. Original starting QB Chad Pennington suffered an early season-ending injury, clearing the way for Chad Henne to take over the helm. And he has shown much promise, despite his many mistakes. Henne reminds me of a young John Elway, who also had a strong passing arm but made a lot of bad throws early on in his career. Henne could well lead the Dolphins to "playoff glory" in the future. RB Ronnie Brown, who was crucial to the team's effective wildcat formation, also was injured and taken out for the season, leaving the running game one-dimensional. Ricky Williams has had a great season, but Brown's absence has made his job more difficult as well. But the Dolphins have simply been too inconsistent with their play, from game to game, to be able to make a realistic run to qualify for the playoffs. Also, their schedule has been very tough. Still, I admire how they fought through their games, win or lose.
Before this season, I expressed an interest in following the Pacific Ten Conference in college football. Unfortunately, I was unable to follow many of the games on television as I had hoped. Also, the calibre of play was not as high as I had expected, with Pac-10 teams generally faring poorly in games with non-conference opponents. To top it off, nobody emerged as the premier team in the conference. Sure, the Oregon Ducks ended up winning the conference title and will face Iowa in the Rose Bowl. Well, maybe they will do well then and give me something to look forward to next year.
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Blog Still Truckin' On
I haven't given up on this blog; I have lately been in a period of "distraction" when other things going on in my life (mostly great) have taken up my time. But I do love to go out (perhaps to a Starbucks) and just sit, think, and type out whatever comes to mind. Eventually, things will settle down again and I'll be writing more. So bear with me, blog resumption is coming! More ridiculous articles ahead to amuse yourselves with, loyal readers!
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Xmas Season Postal OT
Being a postal worker involved in processing mail that I am, December is by far the most intense, busiest time of the year. Contract provisions governing the other eleven months regarding double overtime and other matters are waived for December due to the heavy amount of holiday mailings. This past week has been the busiest for my shift, which is for processing outgoing mail in the late afternoon and evening. I have a job sorting Priority parcels on a machine that classifies and moves them out according to destination as I, along with the rest of my team, key the correct sorting codes on keypads that directs the parcels down a conveyor belt to be dropped in the appropriate containers for later dispatch and transport.
Because I have been working considerably longer hours during this past week, I haven't had the opportunity to do other things that I would normally due. Including writing on this blog. Hence the most recent gaps in daily entries.
I had intended to set up a regular time, early in the afternoon before going to work, to write my entries out. But since that time has been co-opted by me having to report to work early every day, I'll have to wait until business has settled back down. After Christmas, that is. BAH HUMBUG!
Because I have been working considerably longer hours during this past week, I haven't had the opportunity to do other things that I would normally due. Including writing on this blog. Hence the most recent gaps in daily entries.
I had intended to set up a regular time, early in the afternoon before going to work, to write my entries out. But since that time has been co-opted by me having to report to work early every day, I'll have to wait until business has settled back down. After Christmas, that is. BAH HUMBUG!
Friday, December 18, 2009
Weird, Disturbing Kindergarten News
Oooh, I can sense another South Park episode coming on. Having just read Chuck Shepherd's weekly News of the Weird in my local newspaper, I have a new candidate for a spoof. For many New York City parents are now sending their children to expensive test-preparation courses for...kindergarten!
According to the article, New York City's public school system has a high-achiever kindergarten program, but applicants have to be in the 90th percentile on two different tests. And the age of the applicants? Three, four years old!
It's true that some kids are precocious, learning to read at a very early age or demonstrating other special talents. The late Isaac Asimov and my friend in New York are examples. For myself, I was a pretty bright little kid who may or may not have qualified on the "admissions" exams for an advanced kindergarten program, whatever that program may constitute. I do know that if this program is run the in same manner that the "high-achiever" public school I attended from fourth through twelfth grade was, I would rather just as soon pass up on the offer, thank you. Of course, it's the parents who ultimately make these decisions, not the poor kids, who have to live with the consequences for the rest of their lives.
It might be argued that having such a high-achiever kindergarten program in the NYC public school system gives an otherwise unavailable opportunity for kids in depressed, blighted areas to rise above their surroundings and enjoy a more positive, constructive learning environment. But these test preparation courses not only unfairly skew the admissions test scores; their expensive nature (as much as $1,000 or even more) also ensures that those admitted to the program will tend to be from the more affluent families. It may be a great idea for a private school, but hardly something that should be part of the taxpayer-funded public school system.
According to the article, New York City's public school system has a high-achiever kindergarten program, but applicants have to be in the 90th percentile on two different tests. And the age of the applicants? Three, four years old!
It's true that some kids are precocious, learning to read at a very early age or demonstrating other special talents. The late Isaac Asimov and my friend in New York are examples. For myself, I was a pretty bright little kid who may or may not have qualified on the "admissions" exams for an advanced kindergarten program, whatever that program may constitute. I do know that if this program is run the in same manner that the "high-achiever" public school I attended from fourth through twelfth grade was, I would rather just as soon pass up on the offer, thank you. Of course, it's the parents who ultimately make these decisions, not the poor kids, who have to live with the consequences for the rest of their lives.
It might be argued that having such a high-achiever kindergarten program in the NYC public school system gives an otherwise unavailable opportunity for kids in depressed, blighted areas to rise above their surroundings and enjoy a more positive, constructive learning environment. But these test preparation courses not only unfairly skew the admissions test scores; their expensive nature (as much as $1,000 or even more) also ensures that those admitted to the program will tend to be from the more affluent families. It may be a great idea for a private school, but hardly something that should be part of the taxpayer-funded public school system.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Philip K. Dick's The Cosmic Puppets
Many years ago, there was a TV movie starring Martin Landau titled Welcome Home, Johnny Bristol. In it, a weary Vietnam ex-POW decides to go back to the beloved little town in Vermont where he grew up, see some of the old faces, and see how much things had changed (or hadn't). The only problem is that he can find no trace of this town's existence, either in the present or the past. Ultimately, this mystery is resolved with a pretty ordinary explanation. Philip K. Dick's relatively short novel The Cosmic Puppets creates a similar scenario. Only here, the town is in a remote Virginian valley and the story's resolution is quite cosmic in nature.
The protagonist is Ted Barton, recently married and passing on through to visit his childhood town of Millgate, Virginia. When he reaches it, he discovers that everything has changed, even retroactively, with a completely different history. The people are all different, the streets are all different, and all the town's buildings and landmarks are different. Barton decides to stay in town for a few days in order to sort out this mystery. And discovers two children who seem to be engaged in a life-and-death struggle against each other, using bees, rats, spiders snakes, and even animated clay models (called "golems" here) as surrogate spies and soldiers. Barton becomes entangled in their conflict. Which turns out to be anything but local.
The Cosmic Puppets was an early science fiction novel of Philip K. Dick, written in 1953. Only 143 pages in length, I read it by just stopping by at a local bookstore and reading a few pages at a time (it wasn't available at my local public library). Another writer such as Stephen King probably could have taken this story's premise and expanded it into an 800-page novel. Which he did with other ideas in novels like Desperation, The Regulators, and Insomnia (another "cosmic" thriller). But as I have said before, part of Philip K. Dick's appeal to me is the relative terseness of his writings. And The Cosmic Puppets is about as terse as they come! A worthwhile read, even if you have to shell out some money for it.
The next novel of Philip K. Dick that I am reading is another of his "reality" stories, titled Puttering About in a Small Land. So far, it seems to me to be his best work of this genre, and I am looking forward to reviewing it in the near future.
The protagonist is Ted Barton, recently married and passing on through to visit his childhood town of Millgate, Virginia. When he reaches it, he discovers that everything has changed, even retroactively, with a completely different history. The people are all different, the streets are all different, and all the town's buildings and landmarks are different. Barton decides to stay in town for a few days in order to sort out this mystery. And discovers two children who seem to be engaged in a life-and-death struggle against each other, using bees, rats, spiders snakes, and even animated clay models (called "golems" here) as surrogate spies and soldiers. Barton becomes entangled in their conflict. Which turns out to be anything but local.
The Cosmic Puppets was an early science fiction novel of Philip K. Dick, written in 1953. Only 143 pages in length, I read it by just stopping by at a local bookstore and reading a few pages at a time (it wasn't available at my local public library). Another writer such as Stephen King probably could have taken this story's premise and expanded it into an 800-page novel. Which he did with other ideas in novels like Desperation, The Regulators, and Insomnia (another "cosmic" thriller). But as I have said before, part of Philip K. Dick's appeal to me is the relative terseness of his writings. And The Cosmic Puppets is about as terse as they come! A worthwhile read, even if you have to shell out some money for it.
The next novel of Philip K. Dick that I am reading is another of his "reality" stories, titled Puttering About in a Small Land. So far, it seems to me to be his best work of this genre, and I am looking forward to reviewing it in the near future.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Health Care Reform Slogs On
So it looks as if the Senate version of health care reform will come down soon to a showdown vote to end debate and have a final up-or-down vote on passage. With the more progressive features like the public option and its substitute of Medicare extension to age 55 cut out, the bill's fate still confronts anti-choice Democratic Senator Ben Nelson, who is determined to add more restrictions on abortions to the bill before giving it his approval. Considering that former DNC chairman Howard Dean has already come out in strong opposition to the bill as it currently stands, too much of a concession to Nelson could tear away the support of some of the most ardently pro-choice senators.
I've already stated on this blog (and have been affirmed in this opinion by Dean and others) that it is disturbing to have the following scenario facing us if this bill is passed:
--Legally-imposed mandate that everyone purchase health insurance from private health insurance companies, which are not subject to federal antitrust laws; fines levied on those in violation.
--No public option available to keep companies honest and competitive with their prices.
The combination of the above two, at best, is corporate welfare at its worst. And there can be a strong argument made that this is an underhanded way of establishing a fascist type of society, without the overt ideology. For what is fascism anyway, but the partnership between the state and the big money interests and corporations to the detriment of the general population? Yes, I think that there is definitely something wrong having the government, with its police powers, shaking down already financially-struggling people to help further enrich the fatcats in the private health insurance industry!
Maybe, though, I have it all wrong. Maybe, if this bill is enacted, the pool of choices (albeit all private) may drive prices down and make health insurance more affordable, even without a public option. As might the idea that having more participants (albeit forced by law to participate) would keep prices down. But the Senate bill, even if finally passed, still has to be reconciled with the more liberal House version in conference. With the final product subject to up/down votes in both houses. No done deal, I say. Ironically, the President seems so mellow on this extremely divisive and passion-stirring subject that he is likely to sign a final passed bill into law regardless what garbage it contains!
I've already stated on this blog (and have been affirmed in this opinion by Dean and others) that it is disturbing to have the following scenario facing us if this bill is passed:
--Legally-imposed mandate that everyone purchase health insurance from private health insurance companies, which are not subject to federal antitrust laws; fines levied on those in violation.
--No public option available to keep companies honest and competitive with their prices.
The combination of the above two, at best, is corporate welfare at its worst. And there can be a strong argument made that this is an underhanded way of establishing a fascist type of society, without the overt ideology. For what is fascism anyway, but the partnership between the state and the big money interests and corporations to the detriment of the general population? Yes, I think that there is definitely something wrong having the government, with its police powers, shaking down already financially-struggling people to help further enrich the fatcats in the private health insurance industry!
Maybe, though, I have it all wrong. Maybe, if this bill is enacted, the pool of choices (albeit all private) may drive prices down and make health insurance more affordable, even without a public option. As might the idea that having more participants (albeit forced by law to participate) would keep prices down. But the Senate bill, even if finally passed, still has to be reconciled with the more liberal House version in conference. With the final product subject to up/down votes in both houses. No done deal, I say. Ironically, the President seems so mellow on this extremely divisive and passion-stirring subject that he is likely to sign a final passed bill into law regardless what garbage it contains!
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Get Off Tiger’s Back
The latest feel-good news story for those Nancy Grace types whose self-image is so low that they can only derive a sense of self-worth by putting down others who are in a personal crisis is the recent Tiger Woods saga. Woods had an auto accident near his home in Orlando and defied police efforts to interview him at his home afterwards. That is the only problem I have with Woods regarding this story. But the predatory gossip press has expanded on the famous pro golfer’s misfortune and intruded into his marital life, emphasizing extramarital affairs, insinuating spousal abuse, and even interviewing former lovers and adorning their pictures on the covers of gossip magazines. But I personally sense that there is more to this story than people deriving some sick vicarious pleasure at the downfall of a celebrity.
Tiger Woods has a multiracial background, if you want to believe that there actually is such a thing as race. And apparently it is too much of a temptation to emphasize his marriage to a woman of Swedish background. So that old, stinking racism against interracial marriages, which still runs high across demographic boundaries, has found a vehicle for expression. Only you don’t hear anyone actually explicitly coming out against Tiger’s “interracial” marriage per se. But his blond light-skinned wife has become something of a caricature in the press, and I have seen many drawings of her that would never have been published had she, say, an African-American background. I would have thought that by the year 2009 we all would have lifted ourselves out of this sort of slimy bigotry.
Which leads me to wonder aloud why all of these big corporations are dropping Tiger Woods from sponsorships. After all, celebrities goof up all the time, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t merit respect for what they have accomplished in their respective professions. This notion that Woods has “fallen”, so he doesn’t deserve the title of “role model”, is pure bull. I am sick of the nonsense that someone who has become a success in a particular area suddenly has to project a saint-like image in order to have any chance of economically capitalizing on that success.
Yes, I wonder whether the unspoken unforgivable “sin” that Tiger Woods has committed wasn’t his accident or adultery, but rather his marriage to his “white” wife! Could I be wrong about this? Maybe, but I seriously doubt it. Beyond the matter with the police I have previously mentioned, this is all none of anyone else’s business. Every time I hear some editorial take on this story or a new “scoop”, I get angrier. Butt out, jerks!
Tiger Woods has a multiracial background, if you want to believe that there actually is such a thing as race. And apparently it is too much of a temptation to emphasize his marriage to a woman of Swedish background. So that old, stinking racism against interracial marriages, which still runs high across demographic boundaries, has found a vehicle for expression. Only you don’t hear anyone actually explicitly coming out against Tiger’s “interracial” marriage per se. But his blond light-skinned wife has become something of a caricature in the press, and I have seen many drawings of her that would never have been published had she, say, an African-American background. I would have thought that by the year 2009 we all would have lifted ourselves out of this sort of slimy bigotry.
Which leads me to wonder aloud why all of these big corporations are dropping Tiger Woods from sponsorships. After all, celebrities goof up all the time, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t merit respect for what they have accomplished in their respective professions. This notion that Woods has “fallen”, so he doesn’t deserve the title of “role model”, is pure bull. I am sick of the nonsense that someone who has become a success in a particular area suddenly has to project a saint-like image in order to have any chance of economically capitalizing on that success.
Yes, I wonder whether the unspoken unforgivable “sin” that Tiger Woods has committed wasn’t his accident or adultery, but rather his marriage to his “white” wife! Could I be wrong about this? Maybe, but I seriously doubt it. Beyond the matter with the police I have previously mentioned, this is all none of anyone else’s business. Every time I hear some editorial take on this story or a new “scoop”, I get angrier. Butt out, jerks!
Sunday, December 13, 2009
As the World Turns Canceled
CBC [see comments below] has just announced its plans to cancel the soap opera As the World Turns, which began its incredibly long run in 1956 (my birthyear). I generally have a strong feeling of disdain for soap operas, or novelas as they are called on Spanish-language television. Even from early childhood, I could see no point in watching programs where grownups stood around arguing with each other all the time. (Correction: sometimes they sat around arguing with each other.) Frankly, when I was a kid, soap operas painted for me an image of adults as just being a foolish, contentious bunch of dumbasses. Hmm--come to think of it, they may have had something there after all!
My beloved mother, alas, was a big fan of the genre, though. And As the World Turns, with its evil lead character Lisa running around messing up everyone's lives, was by far her favorite in the late 1950s and early 1960s. When I was three or four, I lived in an apartment in Opa-Locka, Florida. Our TV set worked O.K. ... except, that is, for the slight problem that it couldn't pick up channel four (which was CBS for the Miami area). So on weekday afternoons, my mother and I would walk down to the other end of the apartment complex to visit her friend Betty and watch the show. And I would hang around, drink "cossee" (coffee), and play with the kids around there. So As the World Turns occupies a special place in my memory, although it's a pretty ancient, dilapidated place!
I'm trying to think of any soap operas that I actually watched and enjoyed. The only one I could come up with was the gothic series Dark Shadows around 1969. And that was only for a stretch of a few weeks. Many years ago I would sit in on episodes of Days of Our Lives and General Hospital, but that was when my wife enjoyed those shows and I watched them with her as part of sharing her company. But as a personal choice, I guess I just don't dig this genre, pure and simple.
My beloved mother, alas, was a big fan of the genre, though. And As the World Turns, with its evil lead character Lisa running around messing up everyone's lives, was by far her favorite in the late 1950s and early 1960s. When I was three or four, I lived in an apartment in Opa-Locka, Florida. Our TV set worked O.K. ... except, that is, for the slight problem that it couldn't pick up channel four (which was CBS for the Miami area). So on weekday afternoons, my mother and I would walk down to the other end of the apartment complex to visit her friend Betty and watch the show. And I would hang around, drink "cossee" (coffee), and play with the kids around there. So As the World Turns occupies a special place in my memory, although it's a pretty ancient, dilapidated place!
I'm trying to think of any soap operas that I actually watched and enjoyed. The only one I could come up with was the gothic series Dark Shadows around 1969. And that was only for a stretch of a few weeks. Many years ago I would sit in on episodes of Days of Our Lives and General Hospital, but that was when my wife enjoyed those shows and I watched them with her as part of sharing her company. But as a personal choice, I guess I just don't dig this genre, pure and simple.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
I Change My Mind (Horror of Horrors)
I change my mind, from time to time. For example, my favorites in music vary over the months and years, and sometimes pretty dramatically. My political notions undergo some revisions as well as I follow the issues, how they are presented by their advocates, and how I conclude how much those advocates are motivated by the public welfare and how much by ulterior motives such as power or secret ideological agendas. I change my own personal self-improvement goals as well quite a bit. Earlier in this blog, I used to express them much more often (and my progress or lack thereof), using the reasoning that expressing my goals publicly would sharpen my focus in striving for them. I'm thinking of reviving that, as a matter of fact.
I have not always been center-left in my political leanings. When I was growing up, I was more centrist-right, reflecting the views of my parents. They opposed anyone whom they perceived as being too extreme in one direction or the other. Hence they were against both Republican Barry Goldwater in 1964 and Democrat George McGovern in 1972. By 1976, though, I had come of voting age and had early on jumped on board with upstart Georgian Jimmy Carter's candidacy. In 1980, I missed out on that election although I felt then, as did many others, that the country was quickly going to hell in a hand basket and that Carter needed to turn the reins of power over to someone else. I think that the turning point that made me reject Carter was his cynical ploy of "staying in the White House" in the early months of the Iran Hostage Crisis to avoid campaigning head-on against challenger Ted Kennedy. Not that I supported Kennedy: he should have supported Carter instead of dividing his party.
By 1984, I was back with the Democrats and gamely supported them in the next three presidential elections, finally winning with Clinton in '92. Then, from 1994-2001, I shifted over to a more center-right orientation. After watching C-Span and C-Span2 in the spring of 2001, though, I discovered that the Democrats had better ideas and a better grasp of the issues, while the Republicans, albeit with some good arguments from time to time, tended to be hollow in their intentions. So I switched back to being a Democrat and have supported them ever since. But, hey, my leanings aren't set in stone and they could change in the future. But not if folks like Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint, Mitch McConnell, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck continue to determine the GOP's direction.
I have not always been center-left in my political leanings. When I was growing up, I was more centrist-right, reflecting the views of my parents. They opposed anyone whom they perceived as being too extreme in one direction or the other. Hence they were against both Republican Barry Goldwater in 1964 and Democrat George McGovern in 1972. By 1976, though, I had come of voting age and had early on jumped on board with upstart Georgian Jimmy Carter's candidacy. In 1980, I missed out on that election although I felt then, as did many others, that the country was quickly going to hell in a hand basket and that Carter needed to turn the reins of power over to someone else. I think that the turning point that made me reject Carter was his cynical ploy of "staying in the White House" in the early months of the Iran Hostage Crisis to avoid campaigning head-on against challenger Ted Kennedy. Not that I supported Kennedy: he should have supported Carter instead of dividing his party.
By 1984, I was back with the Democrats and gamely supported them in the next three presidential elections, finally winning with Clinton in '92. Then, from 1994-2001, I shifted over to a more center-right orientation. After watching C-Span and C-Span2 in the spring of 2001, though, I discovered that the Democrats had better ideas and a better grasp of the issues, while the Republicans, albeit with some good arguments from time to time, tended to be hollow in their intentions. So I switched back to being a Democrat and have supported them ever since. But, hey, my leanings aren't set in stone and they could change in the future. But not if folks like Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint, Mitch McConnell, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck continue to determine the GOP's direction.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Miami Dolphins and the "Perfect" NFL Teams
As a follow-up to my article the other day on the "curse of perfection", specifically regarding football teams, let me direct my attention to the professional sector. In the NFL, there are an unprecedented two teams, the Indianapolis Colts and the New Orleans Saints, which still have perfect regular season records of 12-0 with four more games to go before the playoffs. I say good for them, but the team I am following, the Miami Dolphins, is 6-6 and can make the playoffs as well if they finish the season strong. And if they make the playoffs, then who knows what could happen?
As far as I'm concerned, Miami made a success out of its season last Sunday by knocking off its archrival New England 22-21. Now that is a team whose fans have had to come to grips with the "curse of perfection" after the NY Giants, with five regular season losses, deprived them of the championship two years ago, despite the Patriots having won all of their previous games, with a 17-14 Super Bowl win. The Dolphins may well do the same thing this year against the "perfect" Colts or Saints in the playoffs.
But what would be even sweeter than that would be for Miami to pass New England in the standings, win the division again, and deprive the Patriots of a playoff spot for the second year in a row. And this time without the excuse of their MVP quarterback Tom Brady being injured. Or the Dolphins could just as well screw up and lose their final games. Oh well, I can dream, can't I?
As far as I'm concerned, Miami made a success out of its season last Sunday by knocking off its archrival New England 22-21. Now that is a team whose fans have had to come to grips with the "curse of perfection" after the NY Giants, with five regular season losses, deprived them of the championship two years ago, despite the Patriots having won all of their previous games, with a 17-14 Super Bowl win. The Dolphins may well do the same thing this year against the "perfect" Colts or Saints in the playoffs.
But what would be even sweeter than that would be for Miami to pass New England in the standings, win the division again, and deprive the Patriots of a playoff spot for the second year in a row. And this time without the excuse of their MVP quarterback Tom Brady being injured. Or the Dolphins could just as well screw up and lose their final games. Oh well, I can dream, can't I?
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Philip K. Dick's Time Out of Joint
I have a theory about some of the blockbuster movies and television series that have come out over the past few decades. It is that those responsible for creating some of these successes lifted, possibly unconsciously, the premises for them from earlier, relatively unknown stories. Stories by authors like Philip K. Dick. Take his 1959 science fiction novel Time Out of Joint, which I recently read, as an example.
Like Dick's realism novel Voices From the Street, which I had earlier reviewed, Time Out of Joint reminds me vividly of a television series and a movie: The Prisoner (again) and The Truman Show, respectively. The story's protagonist is Ragle Gumm, a single, deliberately unemployed middle-aged man who resides in a small town with his sister and her husband and makes a small fortune posting consistently winning entries in an ongoing nationwide newspaper game. Originally content with his lifestyle, circumstances begin to unravel and Gumm decides to leave town and begin his life afresh. But he soon finds out that everyone out of town knows him by name and appearance and is working to bring him back "home". He even intercepts radio broadcasts mentioning him by his name and location. So Gumm realizes that he is living a life of illusion: a very important life, evidently, from the perspective of others. But a fake one, nevertheless, in a contrived location around contrived people and family. Why? Having probably already revealed too much of the plot, I'll leave it at that. But you should be able to make the connection I made with The Prisoner (the original series) and The Truman Show. Time Out of Joint also has the feel of a very well-written Twilight Zone episode, creating an atmosphere of mystery and intrigue while ending with a relatively mundane explanation.
As I read through this novel, I began to identify more with Ragle Gumm. Is this because I may have paranoid or narcissistic tendencies, believing that in some hidden way I am the center and reason for everything going on around me, or is it more that I believe that there is something very significant underlying my life of which I am as yet unaware? The former choice is unhealthy from a psychological standpoint, but the latter view is that of a "seeker", i.e. one who believes that there is more to life than everyday existence. A seeker strikes out to find answers. And then to find the appropriate questions for those answers!
Time Out of Joint, so far, is my favorite Philip K. Dick novel. It really helps to be able to strike up some empathy for the protagonist, not always the case for me with some of his other works. I am currently reading another science fiction novel of his titled The Cosmic Puppets, which more closely resembles something that Stephen King might have written (like his The Regulators, published under "alter ego" pseudonym Richard Bachman).
Like Dick's realism novel Voices From the Street, which I had earlier reviewed, Time Out of Joint reminds me vividly of a television series and a movie: The Prisoner (again) and The Truman Show, respectively. The story's protagonist is Ragle Gumm, a single, deliberately unemployed middle-aged man who resides in a small town with his sister and her husband and makes a small fortune posting consistently winning entries in an ongoing nationwide newspaper game. Originally content with his lifestyle, circumstances begin to unravel and Gumm decides to leave town and begin his life afresh. But he soon finds out that everyone out of town knows him by name and appearance and is working to bring him back "home". He even intercepts radio broadcasts mentioning him by his name and location. So Gumm realizes that he is living a life of illusion: a very important life, evidently, from the perspective of others. But a fake one, nevertheless, in a contrived location around contrived people and family. Why? Having probably already revealed too much of the plot, I'll leave it at that. But you should be able to make the connection I made with The Prisoner (the original series) and The Truman Show. Time Out of Joint also has the feel of a very well-written Twilight Zone episode, creating an atmosphere of mystery and intrigue while ending with a relatively mundane explanation.
As I read through this novel, I began to identify more with Ragle Gumm. Is this because I may have paranoid or narcissistic tendencies, believing that in some hidden way I am the center and reason for everything going on around me, or is it more that I believe that there is something very significant underlying my life of which I am as yet unaware? The former choice is unhealthy from a psychological standpoint, but the latter view is that of a "seeker", i.e. one who believes that there is more to life than everyday existence. A seeker strikes out to find answers. And then to find the appropriate questions for those answers!
Time Out of Joint, so far, is my favorite Philip K. Dick novel. It really helps to be able to strike up some empathy for the protagonist, not always the case for me with some of his other works. I am currently reading another science fiction novel of his titled The Cosmic Puppets, which more closely resembles something that Stephen King might have written (like his The Regulators, published under "alter ego" pseudonym Richard Bachman).
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Passing the Torch (or Curse)
Conversation overheard the other morning at the Clock Restaurant while I was eating breakfast:
Customer: Go Gators!
Waitress: Go Gators! (sigh) Doggone it!
I have a slightly different take on Florida's convincing 32-13 drubbing at the hands of now "perfect" Alabama for the SEC football championship. The situation reminds me of a Twilight Zone episode titled A Game of Pool. In it, a pool fanatic played by Jack Klugman is a general loser at life, except for pool: he practices and plays it day and night. And only wants one thing in life: to be the best pool player ever. The only problem is that the man who was the recognized best, played by Jonathan Winters, had just died, depriving Klugman of his opportunity to dethrone the champ. So this talented man was turning into a very bitter man over this. Then one day, what should happen but the ghost of Winters shows up and challenges Klugman to a match. The stakes: if Klugman wins, then he is recognized as the greatest ever. But if he loses, then he forfeits his life. In the end, Klugman "wins", but as a result is cursed with the responsibility, after his eventual death later on, of replacing Winters in heaven with the job of defending his "title" against future wannabes on Earth.
I feel kind of like that about following a team that, like Florida recently, has come to be expected to be perfect and better than everyone else. This year they haven't been annihilating their opponents with the extremely lopsided scores that their fans have been used to. And quarterback Tim Tebow has also been much more closely scrutinized regarding his performance than ever before. But they kept on winning, until last Saturday that is. Once the shock of their defeat has settled in, they can now go back to just being a very good and entertaining team. And the curse of perfection has been successfully transferred to the University of Alabama. Good luck, guys! Now Gators, just go out and have some fun in the Sugar Bowl against Cincinnati!
Customer: Go Gators!
Waitress: Go Gators! (sigh) Doggone it!
I have a slightly different take on Florida's convincing 32-13 drubbing at the hands of now "perfect" Alabama for the SEC football championship. The situation reminds me of a Twilight Zone episode titled A Game of Pool. In it, a pool fanatic played by Jack Klugman is a general loser at life, except for pool: he practices and plays it day and night. And only wants one thing in life: to be the best pool player ever. The only problem is that the man who was the recognized best, played by Jonathan Winters, had just died, depriving Klugman of his opportunity to dethrone the champ. So this talented man was turning into a very bitter man over this. Then one day, what should happen but the ghost of Winters shows up and challenges Klugman to a match. The stakes: if Klugman wins, then he is recognized as the greatest ever. But if he loses, then he forfeits his life. In the end, Klugman "wins", but as a result is cursed with the responsibility, after his eventual death later on, of replacing Winters in heaven with the job of defending his "title" against future wannabes on Earth.
I feel kind of like that about following a team that, like Florida recently, has come to be expected to be perfect and better than everyone else. This year they haven't been annihilating their opponents with the extremely lopsided scores that their fans have been used to. And quarterback Tim Tebow has also been much more closely scrutinized regarding his performance than ever before. But they kept on winning, until last Saturday that is. Once the shock of their defeat has settled in, they can now go back to just being a very good and entertaining team. And the curse of perfection has been successfully transferred to the University of Alabama. Good luck, guys! Now Gators, just go out and have some fun in the Sugar Bowl against Cincinnati!
Saturday, December 5, 2009
President Obama's New Afghan Policy
President Obama has delivered his decision on Afghanistan in a speech Tuesday evening. The President will send 30,000 more American troops to this civil war-ravaged, historically multi-factioned and warlord-dominated country in order, apparently, to eventually speed up their withdrawal. This seems to be somewhat like the "surge doctrine" used in Iraq during the last two years of the Bush presidency, when a more more aggressive military posture was employed to overcome insurgents there, particularly in Sunni areas.
In Iraq, however, whatever successes the surge had were based on the foundation of area tribal chiefs and leaders switching their allegiances from the insurgency to the government. In Afghanistan, the Taliban is not just some covert insurgency, but rather a very organized shadow government, not necessarily dependent on local chiefs for its survival. I may be misinformed, but I don't believe that the same scenario for success exists in Afghanistan (especially the southern region where the Taliban is the strongest) that existed in Iraq.
The additional U.S. troops will fill in the void of security in areas that the Afghan government does not control. Which of course means that these areas are, for all practical purposes, Taliban territory. With popular support rooted in those areas. When our soldiers go into these areas, they will once again be confronted by the specter of having to regard the local civilian population as the enemy unless proven otherwise, inviting possibly tragic misunderstandings and even atrocities.
But then again, I could have it all wrong. Maybe, as in Iraq, the groundwork for some success has clandestinely been laid with more moderate Taliban supporters being persuaded to support a temporary American presence in return for political recognition or autonomy of some sort. Who knows? Perhaps our elected leaders, with their access to classified intelligence, know something that I or my fellow lay citizens don't. But then again, this same reasoning was put over on us by the previous Bush administration to justify invading Iraq in 2003("trust us, we have access to special intelligence and know better than you").
Come what will, I believe that continually ostracizing the Taliban in this area is not a formula for success. Our focus should be to separate them from Al-Qaeda, not eliminate them. There will always be a harsh, Islamic fundamentalist presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Those following it are in the minority in both countries, but they are devoted and willing to sacrifice themselves and others to achieve legitimacy. Ultimately, the solution for peace will come through negotiation and some sort of political equilibrium with these groups. And there will always be a degree of tension between the fundamentalist interests and those who want a more secular, albeit still Islamic, society in their countries.
Anyway, the way I see it, our main problem over there isn't Afghanistan, but rather Pakistan, a country with nuclear weapons that is directly threatened by extremist forces and in which Al-Qaeda is currently based. And where American troops are not welcome by the presiding official government. Good luck on sorting that mess out, Mr. President! I just hope our additional troops don't just succeed in driving the Taliban completely over the border into Pakistan, further destabilizing that already too-unstable nation.
In Iraq, however, whatever successes the surge had were based on the foundation of area tribal chiefs and leaders switching their allegiances from the insurgency to the government. In Afghanistan, the Taliban is not just some covert insurgency, but rather a very organized shadow government, not necessarily dependent on local chiefs for its survival. I may be misinformed, but I don't believe that the same scenario for success exists in Afghanistan (especially the southern region where the Taliban is the strongest) that existed in Iraq.
The additional U.S. troops will fill in the void of security in areas that the Afghan government does not control. Which of course means that these areas are, for all practical purposes, Taliban territory. With popular support rooted in those areas. When our soldiers go into these areas, they will once again be confronted by the specter of having to regard the local civilian population as the enemy unless proven otherwise, inviting possibly tragic misunderstandings and even atrocities.
But then again, I could have it all wrong. Maybe, as in Iraq, the groundwork for some success has clandestinely been laid with more moderate Taliban supporters being persuaded to support a temporary American presence in return for political recognition or autonomy of some sort. Who knows? Perhaps our elected leaders, with their access to classified intelligence, know something that I or my fellow lay citizens don't. But then again, this same reasoning was put over on us by the previous Bush administration to justify invading Iraq in 2003("trust us, we have access to special intelligence and know better than you").
Come what will, I believe that continually ostracizing the Taliban in this area is not a formula for success. Our focus should be to separate them from Al-Qaeda, not eliminate them. There will always be a harsh, Islamic fundamentalist presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Those following it are in the minority in both countries, but they are devoted and willing to sacrifice themselves and others to achieve legitimacy. Ultimately, the solution for peace will come through negotiation and some sort of political equilibrium with these groups. And there will always be a degree of tension between the fundamentalist interests and those who want a more secular, albeit still Islamic, society in their countries.
Anyway, the way I see it, our main problem over there isn't Afghanistan, but rather Pakistan, a country with nuclear weapons that is directly threatened by extremist forces and in which Al-Qaeda is currently based. And where American troops are not welcome by the presiding official government. Good luck on sorting that mess out, Mr. President! I just hope our additional troops don't just succeed in driving the Taliban completely over the border into Pakistan, further destabilizing that already too-unstable nation.
Friday, December 4, 2009
Assorted Rants, Reader Beware
--In a radio interview with conservative talk show host Rusty Humphries, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, who abandoned her position of responsibility to "go rogue", openly approved of those who were continuing to question Barack Obama's status as a native-born American citizen. Palin reminds me of people who win the lottery before they learn how to manage money. So they squander their prize with reckless spending. With Palin, the lottery win was McCain selecting her as his running mate in 2008. Her lack of expertise is in managing political capital, not money. And she is squandering it all with reckless speech. Well, maybe not all: she'll always have the conspiratorial nutcase wing of the political right at her beck and call. Do I see a Sarah Palin/Ron Paul ticket in the works?
--Recently, some Republican lawmakers have tried to use a recent misguided government study that was skeptical of women having mammograms for early breast cancer detection before age 50. They cried that this is an example of government health care rationing and is what we can expect if the Democrats' health care reform bill is enacted. But the study was just that: a study, nothing more. And as Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd recently pointed out on the Senate floor, our health care is now already constantly being rationed in minute detail, not by the government, but rather by the private health insurance companies. Which, by the way, enjoy protection as monopolies with their exemption from federal anti-trust laws.
--Regarding the Tiger Woods incident where he had an auto accident and seems to be covering up some personal meanderings, I couldn't care less about the personal business. But I AM concerned about the fact that he was able to get away with repeatedly refusing to talk to police officers following the accident without any legal consequences. Suppose you or I tried the same thing: how long would the police have waited before we were dragged out of our homes, possibly Tasered, and pushed into a squad car and driven off to jail, with charges of resisting the police being levied against us? This is another case of the law being applied differently, depending on how powerful and wealthy one is. Scary.
--The buzz around Gainesville is naturally about the upcoming Southeastern Conference championship game between the Florida Gators and the Alabama Crimson Tide on Saturday in Atlanta. In football. American football. You know, that weird sport where big people in astronaut-like gear and tight pants form lines opposite each other and then abruptly collide en masse, falling down all over the place and then getting up to repeat the process? And somewhere along the line, some points mysteriously get added to one side or another? With funny little guys in striped outfits running around, throwing flags, blowing whistles and wildly gesticulating with their arms? Yeh, that sport. I'm pulling for UF, but I am no fanatic, either. As Billy Preston once so eloquently put it, "Let the bad guy win every once in a while." Maybe I'll begin to care more who wins when someone shows me how that is going to make even a rat's @$$ of a difference in my life. [Note previous day's article and how irrationally I root for the Miami Dolphins.]
--Recently, some Republican lawmakers have tried to use a recent misguided government study that was skeptical of women having mammograms for early breast cancer detection before age 50. They cried that this is an example of government health care rationing and is what we can expect if the Democrats' health care reform bill is enacted. But the study was just that: a study, nothing more. And as Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd recently pointed out on the Senate floor, our health care is now already constantly being rationed in minute detail, not by the government, but rather by the private health insurance companies. Which, by the way, enjoy protection as monopolies with their exemption from federal anti-trust laws.
--Regarding the Tiger Woods incident where he had an auto accident and seems to be covering up some personal meanderings, I couldn't care less about the personal business. But I AM concerned about the fact that he was able to get away with repeatedly refusing to talk to police officers following the accident without any legal consequences. Suppose you or I tried the same thing: how long would the police have waited before we were dragged out of our homes, possibly Tasered, and pushed into a squad car and driven off to jail, with charges of resisting the police being levied against us? This is another case of the law being applied differently, depending on how powerful and wealthy one is. Scary.
--The buzz around Gainesville is naturally about the upcoming Southeastern Conference championship game between the Florida Gators and the Alabama Crimson Tide on Saturday in Atlanta. In football. American football. You know, that weird sport where big people in astronaut-like gear and tight pants form lines opposite each other and then abruptly collide en masse, falling down all over the place and then getting up to repeat the process? And somewhere along the line, some points mysteriously get added to one side or another? With funny little guys in striped outfits running around, throwing flags, blowing whistles and wildly gesticulating with their arms? Yeh, that sport. I'm pulling for UF, but I am no fanatic, either. As Billy Preston once so eloquently put it, "Let the bad guy win every once in a while." Maybe I'll begin to care more who wins when someone shows me how that is going to make even a rat's @$$ of a difference in my life. [Note previous day's article and how irrationally I root for the Miami Dolphins.]
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Dolphins Still In It (Barely)
It's too bad that this year's edition of the Miami Dolphins has experienced some problems, both in terms of their place in the standings and with season-ending injuries to key players. But I'm still with them and admire the gritty, determined manner in which they tackle each game (although they suffered a collective fourth-quarter meltdown against Buffalo last week).
The injuries didn't begin at the beginning of the season, but Miami still couldn't buy a victory, incurring several close losses. Then quarterback Chad Pennington, running back Ronnie Brown, and defensive tackle Jason Ferguson suffered injuries putting them out of action until next year. Backup quarterback Chad Henne, although erratic at times with his accuracy, has generally done quite well replacing Pennington, who in all probability won't be with the Dolphins after this season. Ricky Williams, likewise, has worked very hard, with varying degrees of success, to cover for Brown's absence. One of the big problems with this is that Miami's once-vaunted wildcat offense has thus become much easier to predict and contain with only one star running back in there to cover at a time instead of the great Brown/Williams combo.
These problems notwithstanding, Miami is still, after eleven games, only one game out of wild card playoff contention with a 5-6 record. But they would have to hold off three teams with their same record and pass ahead of three others with 6-5 marks. And next week they play New England, a pretty steep hurdle to cross in itself. Another loss by the Dolphins will pretty much eliminate them from playoff contention, as I see it. Better, I think, to appreciate them from week to week and hope for a .500 season.
The injuries didn't begin at the beginning of the season, but Miami still couldn't buy a victory, incurring several close losses. Then quarterback Chad Pennington, running back Ronnie Brown, and defensive tackle Jason Ferguson suffered injuries putting them out of action until next year. Backup quarterback Chad Henne, although erratic at times with his accuracy, has generally done quite well replacing Pennington, who in all probability won't be with the Dolphins after this season. Ricky Williams, likewise, has worked very hard, with varying degrees of success, to cover for Brown's absence. One of the big problems with this is that Miami's once-vaunted wildcat offense has thus become much easier to predict and contain with only one star running back in there to cover at a time instead of the great Brown/Williams combo.
These problems notwithstanding, Miami is still, after eleven games, only one game out of wild card playoff contention with a 5-6 record. But they would have to hold off three teams with their same record and pass ahead of three others with 6-5 marks. And next week they play New England, a pretty steep hurdle to cross in itself. Another loss by the Dolphins will pretty much eliminate them from playoff contention, as I see it. Better, I think, to appreciate them from week to week and hope for a .500 season.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Night Run Through UF
After driving back from Jacksonville this past Sunday, I thought it would be interesting to see whether the outdoor track on the University of Florida campus was available for me to run on at night. When I pulled my car into the adjacent parking lot and got out, the gates at first glance seemed to be locked up. And I didn't see anyone running on the track, so I assumed that it was closed. However, already ready to go on a jog, I decided to do just that. Across the UF campus, instead.
I was a little skittish at the prospect of running at night through the University of Florida because I knew that their night lighting was somewhat dim and might fail to properly illuminate obstacles and holes in my running path, causing me a possibly injurious spill. But I quickly became accustomed to the low level of lighting and gamely "chugged" on through, passing landmarks like the O'Connell Center, Ben Hill Griffin Stadium, Weil Hall, Turlington Hall, Marston Science Library, Century Tower, Music building, Little Hall, Tigert Hall, various dorms, Reitz Union, more dorms, and finally Fraternity Row, before completing my 2.7 mile loop in the darkness back just outside the track.
It was just then, at the end of my jaunt through UF, that I noticed someone running around the track. So I examined the gates more closely and found an opening. And entered the track, running another half mile. Cool!
So night running apparently does work at UF, after all. But like Charlie Daniels, I think I'm gonna reroute my trip (at least the final part) in the future (only slightly, not going via Omaha): I'll forsake Fraternity Road, which has no sidewalk or bike path, and go a little further west down Village Drive, which has both. And this small change will also give me a running route exactly five kilometers in length. Doubly cool!
I was a little skittish at the prospect of running at night through the University of Florida because I knew that their night lighting was somewhat dim and might fail to properly illuminate obstacles and holes in my running path, causing me a possibly injurious spill. But I quickly became accustomed to the low level of lighting and gamely "chugged" on through, passing landmarks like the O'Connell Center, Ben Hill Griffin Stadium, Weil Hall, Turlington Hall, Marston Science Library, Century Tower, Music building, Little Hall, Tigert Hall, various dorms, Reitz Union, more dorms, and finally Fraternity Row, before completing my 2.7 mile loop in the darkness back just outside the track.
It was just then, at the end of my jaunt through UF, that I noticed someone running around the track. So I examined the gates more closely and found an opening. And entered the track, running another half mile. Cool!
So night running apparently does work at UF, after all. But like Charlie Daniels, I think I'm gonna reroute my trip (at least the final part) in the future (only slightly, not going via Omaha): I'll forsake Fraternity Road, which has no sidewalk or bike path, and go a little further west down Village Drive, which has both. And this small change will also give me a running route exactly five kilometers in length. Doubly cool!
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Philip K. Dick's The World Jones Made
The World Jones Made, a science fiction novel by Philip K. Dick written in 1954, explores the "future" world of 2002. And, like other typical works of science fiction produced in this era, mankind is deep into outer space, colonizing the moon, Venus, the outer planets, and even exploring nearby star systems. Seven years ago, so it would seem. So where have we gone wrong in our real world?
After giving it a little thought, I hold that we're right on track with our space exploration. The impetus given to human space exploration in the fifties and sixties was motivated in large part by the Cold War rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union, along with the desire to develop and test long-range missiles capable of accurately delivering nuclear warheads to enemy targets in the event of a nuclear war. As the threat of nuclear war diminished with arms control agreements and easing of relations, so diminished the military's influence on space exploration policy. I believe that many today are wary that a new effort to send men and women into deep space will encourage its militarization and eventually threaten life on Earth. And noting how, in the last century and a half, technological innovations have quickly been converted to instruments of war and death, I would sadly have to concur with them.
But there is an even more obvious reason why we "real folks" haven't lived up to the standards of space exploration set by those sci-fi writers of decades long gone. And it's pretty simple, actually. To make a story more appealing to its readers, many of them in their youth, the writer may find it attractive to paint a picture of colonized planets and star exploration within the projected life spans of those readers. Which gives the story an added dimension of personal involvement on the part of the reader. I remember, in my own youth, reading an Alan Nourse novel titled Rocket to Limbo, in which an expedition to Alpha Centauri takes off in 2008. It had a great impact on me, and putting a date within my own reach no doubt contributed to that. And who can argue against the appeal of Arthur C. Clarke's 2001: A Space Odyssey and its sequel 2010?
Philip K. Dick was no scientist, but he knew just enough to be able to enable readers to visualize the future. Dick's greatest strength as a writer was to capture and convey the essence of human nature in all of its forms, good or bad, foolish or wise, weak or strong, through his stories' characters. And The World Jones Made does not disappoint in this respect.
The story's protagonist is a security officer named Cussick who is protecting a worldwide government based on the philosophy of Hoff's Relativism, which criminalizes absolutism, even in ordinary conversation. His foil is a character named Jones, who has the paranormal ability to experience his own life exactly one year into the future. Dick takes this ability and explores all of its ramifications, which become more fascinating as the novel progresses.
There is a subplot to The World Jones Made that involves humans who have been genetically manipulated to adapt to an environment not normally found on Earth. To say more about this would be giving away the story, and I am recommending that you read it. So I'll just let it go at that, except to say that Dick uses this to create a perfect symmetry between the novel's beginning and conclusion.
The World Jones Made, although obviously outdated and technically very flawed, is still very good, entertaining reading. Philip K. Dick explored the nature of personality cults as well as his own favorite topic: the nature of subjectivity versus objectivity. And of course, it's always fun to go back and see what some people thought today's world in the early 21st century might be like.
After giving it a little thought, I hold that we're right on track with our space exploration. The impetus given to human space exploration in the fifties and sixties was motivated in large part by the Cold War rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union, along with the desire to develop and test long-range missiles capable of accurately delivering nuclear warheads to enemy targets in the event of a nuclear war. As the threat of nuclear war diminished with arms control agreements and easing of relations, so diminished the military's influence on space exploration policy. I believe that many today are wary that a new effort to send men and women into deep space will encourage its militarization and eventually threaten life on Earth. And noting how, in the last century and a half, technological innovations have quickly been converted to instruments of war and death, I would sadly have to concur with them.
But there is an even more obvious reason why we "real folks" haven't lived up to the standards of space exploration set by those sci-fi writers of decades long gone. And it's pretty simple, actually. To make a story more appealing to its readers, many of them in their youth, the writer may find it attractive to paint a picture of colonized planets and star exploration within the projected life spans of those readers. Which gives the story an added dimension of personal involvement on the part of the reader. I remember, in my own youth, reading an Alan Nourse novel titled Rocket to Limbo, in which an expedition to Alpha Centauri takes off in 2008. It had a great impact on me, and putting a date within my own reach no doubt contributed to that. And who can argue against the appeal of Arthur C. Clarke's 2001: A Space Odyssey and its sequel 2010?
Philip K. Dick was no scientist, but he knew just enough to be able to enable readers to visualize the future. Dick's greatest strength as a writer was to capture and convey the essence of human nature in all of its forms, good or bad, foolish or wise, weak or strong, through his stories' characters. And The World Jones Made does not disappoint in this respect.
The story's protagonist is a security officer named Cussick who is protecting a worldwide government based on the philosophy of Hoff's Relativism, which criminalizes absolutism, even in ordinary conversation. His foil is a character named Jones, who has the paranormal ability to experience his own life exactly one year into the future. Dick takes this ability and explores all of its ramifications, which become more fascinating as the novel progresses.
There is a subplot to The World Jones Made that involves humans who have been genetically manipulated to adapt to an environment not normally found on Earth. To say more about this would be giving away the story, and I am recommending that you read it. So I'll just let it go at that, except to say that Dick uses this to create a perfect symmetry between the novel's beginning and conclusion.
The World Jones Made, although obviously outdated and technically very flawed, is still very good, entertaining reading. Philip K. Dick explored the nature of personality cults as well as his own favorite topic: the nature of subjectivity versus objectivity. And of course, it's always fun to go back and see what some people thought today's world in the early 21st century might be like.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Health Care For All
Here I am, sitting off in a corner of a Starbucks next to the Oaks Mall here in Gainesville, across the street from the North Florida Regional medical offices where I am currently between appointments for routine medical tests and consultations. For which my excellent health insurance, provided by my employer, USPS, gives coverage with a very reasonable premium. This is the same general type of coverage that our lawmakers in Washington enjoy. And many of them, Republicans for the most part but also several Democrats, evidently think that they are so superior to the American people that they would deprive the rest of the country's population of the same benefits that they enjoy themselves. By opposing health care reform.
As far as the public option that we have heard so much about over the past few months is concerned, it doesn't explicitly exist in the pool of choices I have for health insurance. Instead, insurance companies and FHOs have negotiated special policies with the government to cover federal employees, with their prices being relatively low. So, in a sense, there is already a degree of "public" in the available private options, at least for federal employees.
I have been opposed to efforts put forth by a few Democrats (and Independent Joe Lieberman) to pass a bill without a public option. I can handle that, provided that any mandated health insurance is not beyond the means of the people to pay for. Especially poor people. The only problem is that there is no guarantee that this won't happen, and I am strongly opposed to creating a new class of criminals, based on a new unreasonable mandate to carry health insurance. If there are provisions within the bill to lessen the load on the poor (and I've heard that there are), then those poor Americans should not have to jump through any bureaucratic hoops to obtain that relief and avoid fines or prosecution. After all, there are many living in poverty right now who don't receive available public assistance simply because they are averse to the red tape involved in it or are simply ignorant of their options.
As far as the public option that we have heard so much about over the past few months is concerned, it doesn't explicitly exist in the pool of choices I have for health insurance. Instead, insurance companies and FHOs have negotiated special policies with the government to cover federal employees, with their prices being relatively low. So, in a sense, there is already a degree of "public" in the available private options, at least for federal employees.
I have been opposed to efforts put forth by a few Democrats (and Independent Joe Lieberman) to pass a bill without a public option. I can handle that, provided that any mandated health insurance is not beyond the means of the people to pay for. Especially poor people. The only problem is that there is no guarantee that this won't happen, and I am strongly opposed to creating a new class of criminals, based on a new unreasonable mandate to carry health insurance. If there are provisions within the bill to lessen the load on the poor (and I've heard that there are), then those poor Americans should not have to jump through any bureaucratic hoops to obtain that relief and avoid fines or prosecution. After all, there are many living in poverty right now who don't receive available public assistance simply because they are averse to the red tape involved in it or are simply ignorant of their options.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Blog Entering Patchy Period
I am anticipating a period of a few days in which my blog entries may be sporadic. Or relatively short. Things should pick up, though, sooner or later.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Dip Into Thirties, Finally
This morning the local temperatures here in Gainesville dipped down into the thirties for the first time since early April. Although meteorologists have predicted a wet and cold winter due to the El Niño effect, we have been experiencing a rather warm, dry autumn so far. Lows in the upper thirties, highs in the fifties: that is "my" optimum weather!
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Philip K. Dick's In Milton Lumky Territory
In Milton Lumky Territory is a realism novel by Philip K. Dick (1928-82), known primarily for his science fiction. The setting is the American Pacific Northwest, mostly in the state of Idaho. The three main characters, Bruce Stevens, Susan Faine, and Milton Lumky, are struggling with their jobs and businesses in the area. Bruce joins Susan's typewriter/office services business and tries to improve on it by concentrating on selling higher-quality typewriters. To accomplish this, he searches the Pacific area from San Francisco to Seattle for a supplier of a certain Japanese electric typewriter that he feels will sell well and turn the business around. Lumky, on the other hand, is a travelling office paper salesman who knew Susan from earlier and is getting to know Bruce. He reveals a supplier who has a large stock of the typewriters in question. There is a clash of personalities and values between Lumky and Stevens, as the former accuses the latter of lacking in spirituality and concern for others. Lumky asks Stevens if he believed in God, and Stevens can only laugh back uncontrollably in response. Lumky becomes angry at him, not only for his atheism but for the fact that Stevens, unlike himself, thrives being on long road trips.
This novel, not one of my favorites of Dick's, does examine closely how people think and relate to one another. It paints no favorable picture of anyone, as all of the story's main characters are really pretty disagreeable and miserable people. Which makes reading through it a somewhat depressing experience.
The bleak, ugly description of Idaho that Dick lays out is also rather depressing. The roads are bad, the weather is miserable, and there are these nasty flying, biting bugs that get in your face and clog up your car's radiator.
I suppose that if you are a glutton for punishment, you may want to read In Milton Lumky's Territory. I for one didn't particularly enjoy it, although it did provide some insight into what motivates some people to behave in a petty manner regarding money. And like other Philip K. Dick realism novels such as Humpty Dumpty in Oakland and Voices From the Street, it exposes the mindset of people running small businesses, at least as Dick sees it. And a not-so-favorable portrayal at that.
I am currently reading a science fiction novel of Dick: The World Jones Made. Much, much more enjoyable and interesting (I'm about two thirds of the way through it). I think Philip K. Dick's strength was definitely in the genre of science fiction! The fact that many of his realism novels, including In Milton Lumky's Territory, were repeatedly rejected by publishers during his lifetime and were only published posthumously is just an affirmation of my own opinion.
This novel, not one of my favorites of Dick's, does examine closely how people think and relate to one another. It paints no favorable picture of anyone, as all of the story's main characters are really pretty disagreeable and miserable people. Which makes reading through it a somewhat depressing experience.
The bleak, ugly description of Idaho that Dick lays out is also rather depressing. The roads are bad, the weather is miserable, and there are these nasty flying, biting bugs that get in your face and clog up your car's radiator.
I suppose that if you are a glutton for punishment, you may want to read In Milton Lumky's Territory. I for one didn't particularly enjoy it, although it did provide some insight into what motivates some people to behave in a petty manner regarding money. And like other Philip K. Dick realism novels such as Humpty Dumpty in Oakland and Voices From the Street, it exposes the mindset of people running small businesses, at least as Dick sees it. And a not-so-favorable portrayal at that.
I am currently reading a science fiction novel of Dick: The World Jones Made. Much, much more enjoyable and interesting (I'm about two thirds of the way through it). I think Philip K. Dick's strength was definitely in the genre of science fiction! The fact that many of his realism novels, including In Milton Lumky's Territory, were repeatedly rejected by publishers during his lifetime and were only published posthumously is just an affirmation of my own opinion.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Urban Meyer and Notre Dame
With Notre Dame once again having a mediocre season at 6-5, talk is heating up about an impending head football coach vacancy up there in South Bend, with Charlie Weis on the way out after a string of disappointing seasons. And talk is also heating up about the possibility that Florida head coach Urban Meyer will step in to replace Weis.
Before coming to UF, Meyer has described coaching at Notre Dame, where he was previously an assistant coach for five years, as his "dream job". But he has become very comfortable here in Gainesville and has accomplished everything he would have wanted to at Notre Dame, particularly two national championships in four seasons and possibly a third this year. He can recruit more easily in the high schools of Florida and the South at large, and he doesn't have to overcome the stringent academic standards that Notre Dame has to bring in players who may have had enough difficulty just passing high school. Meyer is almost idolized in the Gainesville area, something that I have already written disturbs me to no end. If he went to Notre Dame, then winning the national championship occasionally and competing for it every season would be the minimum expectation among their fans. Of course, give Meyer a string of three or four seasons with three or four losses per season at UF and see much longer he would remain idolized here in Gainesville.
Urban Meyer has consistently and firmly denied rumors that he would be interested in coaching at Notre Dame, and has reiterated that he is very happy at the University of Florida. The only problem with that is that Alabama head coach Nick Saban was saying the same things while coaching the Miami Dolphins when the Alabama job became available. And once Alabama made him an "offer he couldn't refuse", Saban reneged on his commitment to the Dolphins and jumped over to Alabama. Meyer has "jumped ship" before, most recently leaving Utah for Florida following only his second season of coaching for them, after recruiting players there who believed that he would be with them for their college careers.
For me, I think Urban Meyer is a good coach with essentially no sense of humor, at least as far as it relates to him or his team. This whole mindset around here that it is somehow offensive to criticize Meyer, Tim Tebow, or any other UF player or coach is offensive in itself to me. I would rather have a less successful coach and a team to follow that had moderately successful seasons than a coach and team that are EXPECTED to win every game they play (and by large point margins at that). So Meyer is welcome to jump ship, as far as I'm concerned. Whether he does or not, I'll still root for the Gators. But it wouldn't hurt my feelings if he left, either. After all, Nick Saban has already conditioned me in this area!
Before coming to UF, Meyer has described coaching at Notre Dame, where he was previously an assistant coach for five years, as his "dream job". But he has become very comfortable here in Gainesville and has accomplished everything he would have wanted to at Notre Dame, particularly two national championships in four seasons and possibly a third this year. He can recruit more easily in the high schools of Florida and the South at large, and he doesn't have to overcome the stringent academic standards that Notre Dame has to bring in players who may have had enough difficulty just passing high school. Meyer is almost idolized in the Gainesville area, something that I have already written disturbs me to no end. If he went to Notre Dame, then winning the national championship occasionally and competing for it every season would be the minimum expectation among their fans. Of course, give Meyer a string of three or four seasons with three or four losses per season at UF and see much longer he would remain idolized here in Gainesville.
Urban Meyer has consistently and firmly denied rumors that he would be interested in coaching at Notre Dame, and has reiterated that he is very happy at the University of Florida. The only problem with that is that Alabama head coach Nick Saban was saying the same things while coaching the Miami Dolphins when the Alabama job became available. And once Alabama made him an "offer he couldn't refuse", Saban reneged on his commitment to the Dolphins and jumped over to Alabama. Meyer has "jumped ship" before, most recently leaving Utah for Florida following only his second season of coaching for them, after recruiting players there who believed that he would be with them for their college careers.
For me, I think Urban Meyer is a good coach with essentially no sense of humor, at least as far as it relates to him or his team. This whole mindset around here that it is somehow offensive to criticize Meyer, Tim Tebow, or any other UF player or coach is offensive in itself to me. I would rather have a less successful coach and a team to follow that had moderately successful seasons than a coach and team that are EXPECTED to win every game they play (and by large point margins at that). So Meyer is welcome to jump ship, as far as I'm concerned. Whether he does or not, I'll still root for the Gators. But it wouldn't hurt my feelings if he left, either. After all, Nick Saban has already conditioned me in this area!
Monday, November 23, 2009
Health Care Reform Bill, Prospects
Well, the health care reform bill has finally gotten into debate in the US Senate with the bare sixty votes needed. All of the Democrats (included the two Independents caucusing with them) voted for starting debate while all Republicans voted against it. This was to be expected. Now I'll predict what will happen next.
Now that debate on this bill, completely opposed by the GOP, has begun, several amendments will be put forth by Republican senators who have no intention whatsoever to vote for the bill, regardless whether or not their amendments are approved. And some of these amendments will be accepted. The task of the Democrats will be to alter the bill enough to give political cover to Independent Senator Joe Lieberman and more conservative Democrats Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, and Ben Nelson. This will be done by reinstating the "trigger" gimmick that would activate the public option should prices stay too high. But they'll call it something else and make it slightly different. In the end, cloture on the bill will pass with 60 or 61 votes, Maine Republican Olympia Snowe possibly returning with her support of it. And it will easily pass in this form in the final Senate vote.
The next step will see this legislation brought to conference, where the House and Senate versions will have to be reconciled into something of a compromise between them. Once that final version is produced, the two bodies will have to approve it. And if there is not a public option after conference, then there is a real danger of it not being approved in the House of Representatives, where support for a public option is stronger and more insistent.
Let's see how well I do with my prediction. I seem to be doing pretty well with my football prognosticating this year (well, the Ravens aren't doing as well I thought they would); maybe it will carry over into politics!
Now that debate on this bill, completely opposed by the GOP, has begun, several amendments will be put forth by Republican senators who have no intention whatsoever to vote for the bill, regardless whether or not their amendments are approved. And some of these amendments will be accepted. The task of the Democrats will be to alter the bill enough to give political cover to Independent Senator Joe Lieberman and more conservative Democrats Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, and Ben Nelson. This will be done by reinstating the "trigger" gimmick that would activate the public option should prices stay too high. But they'll call it something else and make it slightly different. In the end, cloture on the bill will pass with 60 or 61 votes, Maine Republican Olympia Snowe possibly returning with her support of it. And it will easily pass in this form in the final Senate vote.
The next step will see this legislation brought to conference, where the House and Senate versions will have to be reconciled into something of a compromise between them. Once that final version is produced, the two bodies will have to approve it. And if there is not a public option after conference, then there is a real danger of it not being approved in the House of Representatives, where support for a public option is stronger and more insistent.
Let's see how well I do with my prediction. I seem to be doing pretty well with my football prognosticating this year (well, the Ravens aren't doing as well I thought they would); maybe it will carry over into politics!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
