Not that I really know what I'm talking about regarding football, but it's once again that time of year when I still like to pretend. So here I am, predicting the outcome of the 2010 National Football League season. But this time around, I'll just stick with which teams I think will be the best and forget about those "also-rans".
In the American Conference East, I honestly feel that this might be the year that Miami pulls it all together and goes far into the playoffs. So they get my nod in the East, with New England making the playoffs as a wild card team. In the AFC South, I feel that Indianapolis will continue their domination. The North will see Baltimore on top, with Pittsburgh making the playoffs as the other AFC wild card team. And San Diego will win the West.
In the National Conference, I see Dallas winning the East with the New York Giants getting into the playoffs as a wild card team. In the South, New Orleans will repeat as champions. The North will be won by Green Bay, with Minnesota making the playoffs as the second NFC wild card team. And San Francisco will win the NFC West.
As far as how the playoffs should go (presuming that they are composed of my picks), I see events leading up to Dallas playing Indianapolis in the Super Bowl. Indy should prevail. We'll see.
Of course, these are my predictions as to who will be the best, not necessarily the teams I want to do the best. Here is a list of the teams I actually support, in order of liking:
1-MIAMI DOLPHINS (by far)
2-Tampa Bay Buccaneers
3-Minnesota Vikings
4-Jacksonville Jaguars
5-Baltimore Ravens
6-Green Bay Packers
7-New York Giants
And my list of most hated teams?
1-New England Patriots
2-Buffalo Bills
3-Oakland Raiders
4-Pittsburgh Steelers
5-New York Jets
6-San Francisco 49ers
7-Seattle Seahawks
Well, I really only intensely dislike New England and Buffalo. With the others I may switch my allegiances (I found myself last year pulling for the Jets in the playoffs).
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Dove Wacko Outreach Center's Stunt
There are so many different angles I could write about concerning this planned Qur'an burning by Dove World Outreach Center that I had been holding off doing anything on this blog about it. Well, here are a few, just to scratch the surface.
Yes, Dove pastor Terry Jones is a manipulative, controlling publicity seeker. After inflicting this charade on the world, he will no doubt concoct other obnoxious stunts that reflect his personal notions about who are the "good guys" and who are the "bad guys". There is already a line of media trucks parked at the church on NW 37th Street in anticipation of the Saturday night "event". Oh, don't they love a freak show!
Northwest 37th Street is, with the exception of Dove Wacko Outreach Center, a residential road, a side street off the heavily travelled NW 53rd Avenue. I personally use both as part of my running course. I keep hearing how this planned Lower Manhattan mosque, which seems to offend so many, is only a stone's throw from "sacred" Ground Zero. Well, as the DWOC is actually about the same distance from my home, as the crow flies. Fortunately, there is no street directly connecting my own personal "sacred" ground to this abomination of a church. But the poor folks residing on the same street as Dove will have to submit to identity checks in order to simply get to their homes Saturday night. I'm half tempted to try jogging through there Saturday morning just to see how far I get. And to watch the freaks assembling for the big show.
The scenario around here reminds me of that old South Park episode where the community, so afraid that Muslims around the world would blame them for a Family Guy episode showing Muhammad, collectively buried their heads in sand piles while that show was airing. Instead, in the "real" world, there will be a "A Gathering for Faith, Understanding, and Hope" rally Friday evening (the 10th) at the nearby Trinity United Methodist Church to show the world that we're not really like those losers down the road. Don't expect media trucks to line up for this rally, though: it's won't be sensationalist or negative enough to whip up television ratings!
Terry Jones has already expressed a lack of concern over possible fatalities resulting from his publicity stunt. He refused to respect General Petraeus by continuing with his plan after the general pointed out how American soldiers, serving and defending their country (and supposed Jones' country) and already risking their lives on its behalf, will be further endangered. And that their difficult mission will be hampered as this highly visible act will only play into the hands of their enemies the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.
On the other hand, the fact that a church as small and insignificant as this can manipulate events worldwide says a lot about not only how hypersensitive people are to merely symbolic acts, but also how much more interested the media and population at-large are about the negative instead of the positive.
In the end, I suppose that with both this Qur'an-burning stunt and the Lower Manhattan mosque, we are confronted with the issue of our Constitution's First Amendment and whether public opinion can overturn it. It looks as if the First Amendment will prevail in both cases, with the State not buckling under to popular outcries. I suppose that's at least something. After all, the outcries can generate spirited, productive debate as long as they just remain outcries.
Yes, Dove pastor Terry Jones is a manipulative, controlling publicity seeker. After inflicting this charade on the world, he will no doubt concoct other obnoxious stunts that reflect his personal notions about who are the "good guys" and who are the "bad guys". There is already a line of media trucks parked at the church on NW 37th Street in anticipation of the Saturday night "event". Oh, don't they love a freak show!
Northwest 37th Street is, with the exception of Dove Wacko Outreach Center, a residential road, a side street off the heavily travelled NW 53rd Avenue. I personally use both as part of my running course. I keep hearing how this planned Lower Manhattan mosque, which seems to offend so many, is only a stone's throw from "sacred" Ground Zero. Well, as the DWOC is actually about the same distance from my home, as the crow flies. Fortunately, there is no street directly connecting my own personal "sacred" ground to this abomination of a church. But the poor folks residing on the same street as Dove will have to submit to identity checks in order to simply get to their homes Saturday night. I'm half tempted to try jogging through there Saturday morning just to see how far I get. And to watch the freaks assembling for the big show.
The scenario around here reminds me of that old South Park episode where the community, so afraid that Muslims around the world would blame them for a Family Guy episode showing Muhammad, collectively buried their heads in sand piles while that show was airing. Instead, in the "real" world, there will be a "A Gathering for Faith, Understanding, and Hope" rally Friday evening (the 10th) at the nearby Trinity United Methodist Church to show the world that we're not really like those losers down the road. Don't expect media trucks to line up for this rally, though: it's won't be sensationalist or negative enough to whip up television ratings!
Terry Jones has already expressed a lack of concern over possible fatalities resulting from his publicity stunt. He refused to respect General Petraeus by continuing with his plan after the general pointed out how American soldiers, serving and defending their country (and supposed Jones' country) and already risking their lives on its behalf, will be further endangered. And that their difficult mission will be hampered as this highly visible act will only play into the hands of their enemies the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.
On the other hand, the fact that a church as small and insignificant as this can manipulate events worldwide says a lot about not only how hypersensitive people are to merely symbolic acts, but also how much more interested the media and population at-large are about the negative instead of the positive.
In the end, I suppose that with both this Qur'an-burning stunt and the Lower Manhattan mosque, we are confronted with the issue of our Constitution's First Amendment and whether public opinion can overturn it. It looks as if the First Amendment will prevail in both cases, with the State not buckling under to popular outcries. I suppose that's at least something. After all, the outcries can generate spirited, productive debate as long as they just remain outcries.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Happy Anniversary, Melissa
It's now been 24 years since I have married my dear wife Melissa. She has been a never-ending source of inspiration and encouragement to me, not to mention her beauty and compassion (after all, she married me). Wow, what a difference a wonderful, caring woman can make in a poor soul's life!
I love you, Melissa, and I look forward to many more years of repeating this wonderful tune!
I love you, Melissa, and I look forward to many more years of repeating this wonderful tune!
Monday, September 6, 2010
Gator Football Offensive Woes
Saturday's game between the Florida Gators and the Miami University Redhawks turned out to be quite a surprise for those Gator fans (including me) who expected an offensive fireworks display from Florida's vaunted stars like John Brantley, Jeff Demps, and Chris Rainey. The fact that, through three quarters of play, UF only had 25 yards of total offense probably had more to do with the poor performance of the offensive line than anything else. Especially center Mike Pouncey, who suddenly seemed to have forgotten how to hike the football. Also, receivers seemed to have forgotten how to catch the ball and should they actually succeeded in catching it, what they were supposed to do next (which was to run down the field with it, duh). The entire scenario smacked of poor preparation and discipline with this year's edition.
The game was a grand exercise in frustration for Florida, with the only bright moments coming from the defensive team. Early in the fourth quarter, with Florida leading only 21-9 (all three Gator scores having been set up by the defense), Miami was prevented from getting a touchdown and had to settle for their fourth field goal. After that, and to the game's end, the offense woke up and behaved as it should have for all four quarters, coming up with two touchdowns.
Last year Miami University, a relatively minor football school from the obscure Mid-America Conference, went 1-11 with one of the worst (if not the absolute worst) defenses in the NCAA. Maybe they've improved this year, but probably not that much. This performance does not bode well for the Gators. Next week they play a much more highly-regarded opponent in the University of South Florida, which won their opening game with a 59-14 rout. Uh-oh!
The game was a grand exercise in frustration for Florida, with the only bright moments coming from the defensive team. Early in the fourth quarter, with Florida leading only 21-9 (all three Gator scores having been set up by the defense), Miami was prevented from getting a touchdown and had to settle for their fourth field goal. After that, and to the game's end, the offense woke up and behaved as it should have for all four quarters, coming up with two touchdowns.
Last year Miami University, a relatively minor football school from the obscure Mid-America Conference, went 1-11 with one of the worst (if not the absolute worst) defenses in the NCAA. Maybe they've improved this year, but probably not that much. This performance does not bode well for the Gators. Next week they play a much more highly-regarded opponent in the University of South Florida, which won their opening game with a 59-14 rout. Uh-oh!
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Retroactive Name Changing
As I was passing through Starke (about 25 miles northeast of Gainesville) this morning on my way to pick up my son in Jacksonville for a Gainesville visit this Labor Day weekend, I looked over at the southbound side of US 301. It was bumper-to-bumper traffic, most of which I'm sure was destined for the University of Florida's season-opening home football game against Miami University (of Ohio), to begin at noon. I had planned my trip so that I would be driving against this flow. By the time we're on our way back, we should be pretty clear of extraneous traffic (I'm writing this just outside of Jacksonville).
Although you may think from the first paragraph that this article is about traffic and football, it is neither. Rather I was intrigued by the way that, when referring to Miami University, it almost always bears that parenthetic tag "of Ohio" dragging along behind it. This is, of course, to prevent any confusion between it and the University of Miami (which oddly never seems to need the tag "of Florida"). I'm sure that in the past, Miami University didn't have to be distinguished this way. And I think about other "modified" names as well.
Remember George Bush, our 41st president? Nobody ever referred to him as "George H.W. Bush" until his begotten namesake-with-a-dubya became president. Now, when discussing his record, it's "George H.W. Bush did this", "George H.W. Bush did that".
After being prodded by an influential producer/record manager, John Mellencamp originally launched his recording career under the name "Johnny Cougar". He later had misgivings and briefly changed to "John Cougar Mellencamp" before finally dropping "Cougar" altogether. But when discussing his early hits like Hurts So Good or Jack and Diane, it's now always "John Mellencamp" as the artist who recorded them, not "Johnny Cougar".
Or take how we have been designating our years. Charles Osgood notwithstanding, there has been the greatest resistance to referring to years in the 2000's according to the previous centuries' custom like, for example, "nineteen o-three" or "fourteen ninety-two". Instead of "the twenty-o-four election", it's "the two thousand and four election". But now we're starting to go back to form and say "twenty-ten" for 2010. So what, you say? Just that I wonder whether at some point in the future, when referring back to 2004, those looking back won't just refer to it as "twenty-o-four", something that almost no one (except of course Osgood) used to say.
I wonder what people, places, or anything else with which we are currently comfortable naming a certain way will end up bearing a modified designation, a modification that will be retroactively applied.
Perhaps you may think that I am nitpicking a little with this, but I don't think so. Of course, Miami U, Poppy Bush, John(ny) {(Cougar)[Mellencamp]}, and 2004 are all, in essence, the same regardless of how they were designated at different times. So are Beijing (formerly Peking, even more formerly Peiping), Ho Chi Minh City (formerly Saigon) and Mumbai (formerly Bombay). But if you're going to go back and try to recreate a scenario from the past, you better get in line with the "old" way of naming things!
Although you may think from the first paragraph that this article is about traffic and football, it is neither. Rather I was intrigued by the way that, when referring to Miami University, it almost always bears that parenthetic tag "of Ohio" dragging along behind it. This is, of course, to prevent any confusion between it and the University of Miami (which oddly never seems to need the tag "of Florida"). I'm sure that in the past, Miami University didn't have to be distinguished this way. And I think about other "modified" names as well.
Remember George Bush, our 41st president? Nobody ever referred to him as "George H.W. Bush" until his begotten namesake-with-a-dubya became president. Now, when discussing his record, it's "George H.W. Bush did this", "George H.W. Bush did that".
After being prodded by an influential producer/record manager, John Mellencamp originally launched his recording career under the name "Johnny Cougar". He later had misgivings and briefly changed to "John Cougar Mellencamp" before finally dropping "Cougar" altogether. But when discussing his early hits like Hurts So Good or Jack and Diane, it's now always "John Mellencamp" as the artist who recorded them, not "Johnny Cougar".
Or take how we have been designating our years. Charles Osgood notwithstanding, there has been the greatest resistance to referring to years in the 2000's according to the previous centuries' custom like, for example, "nineteen o-three" or "fourteen ninety-two". Instead of "the twenty-o-four election", it's "the two thousand and four election". But now we're starting to go back to form and say "twenty-ten" for 2010. So what, you say? Just that I wonder whether at some point in the future, when referring back to 2004, those looking back won't just refer to it as "twenty-o-four", something that almost no one (except of course Osgood) used to say.
I wonder what people, places, or anything else with which we are currently comfortable naming a certain way will end up bearing a modified designation, a modification that will be retroactively applied.
Perhaps you may think that I am nitpicking a little with this, but I don't think so. Of course, Miami U, Poppy Bush, John(ny) {(Cougar)[Mellencamp]}, and 2004 are all, in essence, the same regardless of how they were designated at different times. So are Beijing (formerly Peking, even more formerly Peiping), Ho Chi Minh City (formerly Saigon) and Mumbai (formerly Bombay). But if you're going to go back and try to recreate a scenario from the past, you better get in line with the "old" way of naming things!
Friday, September 3, 2010
Charlie Crist's Caucusing Plan
If Florida's formerly-Republican and now-Independent sitting governor and current Senate candidate Charlie Crist somehow manages to pull out this election and make it to that legislative chamber, then how will he caucus? The question of whether Crist will side with the Republicans or the Democrats has been bandied about lately, with the somewhat cryptic answer being provided from somewhere within the governor's camp: he'll caucus with whichever party has the majority.
In a purely politically expedient sense, this is probably a very good idea. Although I wouldn't think that it is such a good idea that Crist should want it publicized in advance. Still, it does take away the excuse for a voter to reject him solely on whether or not he is going to somehow tip the Senate's balance of power against their party. Well, kind of... actually, not at all!
If Charlie Crist (is elected and) wants to caucus with whatever party is in "control" of the Senate (and I use the word "control" very loosely), then he will have more of a say with proposed legislation, especially at the committee level. But if he wants to reassure concerned voters against the notion that the balance of power is in his hands...well, that would be a fallacy.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that Charlie Crist is elected. If either party, aside from Crist's seat, has 51 seats, then it truly doesn't matter, for organizational purposes, which party he declares for. Also, if the split is 50-49 in favor of the Democrats, he would side with them as Vice-President Biden would be constitutionally empowered to cast the 51st vote for the Democrats. But what if the entirely possible scenario develops where the Republicans have a slim 50-49 margin?
In this case, Crist does hold the balance of power. If he sides with the GOP, they have a 51-49 margin. If he sides with the Dems, they have a 51-50 margin with Biden's tiebreaker. So I don't think it is unreasonable to keep probing him about his intentions regarding party affiliation should he win.
The way I see it, though, is that from the viewpoint of a Democrat noting how my own party's nominee is so hopelessly behind in the polls, it would be prudent for me to support moderate Crist just to prevent extremist (in my opinion) Republican Tea Party nominee Marco Rubio from "representing" me in the Senate. For six freaking years!
In a purely politically expedient sense, this is probably a very good idea. Although I wouldn't think that it is such a good idea that Crist should want it publicized in advance. Still, it does take away the excuse for a voter to reject him solely on whether or not he is going to somehow tip the Senate's balance of power against their party. Well, kind of... actually, not at all!
If Charlie Crist (is elected and) wants to caucus with whatever party is in "control" of the Senate (and I use the word "control" very loosely), then he will have more of a say with proposed legislation, especially at the committee level. But if he wants to reassure concerned voters against the notion that the balance of power is in his hands...well, that would be a fallacy.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that Charlie Crist is elected. If either party, aside from Crist's seat, has 51 seats, then it truly doesn't matter, for organizational purposes, which party he declares for. Also, if the split is 50-49 in favor of the Democrats, he would side with them as Vice-President Biden would be constitutionally empowered to cast the 51st vote for the Democrats. But what if the entirely possible scenario develops where the Republicans have a slim 50-49 margin?
In this case, Crist does hold the balance of power. If he sides with the GOP, they have a 51-49 margin. If he sides with the Dems, they have a 51-50 margin with Biden's tiebreaker. So I don't think it is unreasonable to keep probing him about his intentions regarding party affiliation should he win.
The way I see it, though, is that from the viewpoint of a Democrat noting how my own party's nominee is so hopelessly behind in the polls, it would be prudent for me to support moderate Crist just to prevent extremist (in my opinion) Republican Tea Party nominee Marco Rubio from "representing" me in the Senate. For six freaking years!
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Running DX Back Up to 12 Miles
Yesterday I set out on my run around the neighborhood once again, determined to have a "long-mileage" day. I had extended my course by 1.14 miles, meaning that should I complete it I would attain 12 miles. And I did, while avoiding experiencing the kinds of lower leg and foot aches and cramps I regularly experienced in cooler weather early this year when covering similar distances. I attribute this to following renown marathon runner Jeff Galloway's sage advice to take periodic short walking breaks throughout the run.
I always run the first seven minutes and then walk for one. Then I run six, walk one, run six, etcera, until the run is completed. By doing this, I calculate that I actually run about 95% of the distance. I have noticed that I not only feel more refreshed and energized at the end of each walking break, but also I correct my stride to a more comfortable form upon resuming my running. And by doing this, it gives me the enormous psychological advantage of breaking up my run into shorter segments, with a walking break never too far off into the future, regardless of the ultimate length of that day's run.
In spite of my walking breaks during yesterday's 12-mile run, I still ran comfortably ahead of the pace I had set during this past February's LifeSouth Five Points Half-Marathon, held here in Gainesville. So I fully intend to take walking breaks throughout any future long-distance races I enter.
Speaking of future races, there is a half-marathon in Gainesville scheduled for November that I plan to enter. On December 19, Jacksonville will be holding its own marathon. On January 11, 2011, the wild-and-extremely-crowded (last year had 24,000 runners) Disney World Marathon happens. And in mid-February, I'm back to Gainesville's Five Points event, this time planning to go the full marathon distance.
Well, that's my agenda as far as upcoming long-distance races are concerned. As for September and October, there are also plenty of those painfully short 5K races in which I could run. But as I have written before, these have become too tedious in more ways than one. If I can find a race during the next two months that is reasonably long and not too far away from Gainesville, then I may just enter it. Otherwise, I'll just stick to my neighborhood running, gradually increasing my mileage over the next several weeks.
I always run the first seven minutes and then walk for one. Then I run six, walk one, run six, etcera, until the run is completed. By doing this, I calculate that I actually run about 95% of the distance. I have noticed that I not only feel more refreshed and energized at the end of each walking break, but also I correct my stride to a more comfortable form upon resuming my running. And by doing this, it gives me the enormous psychological advantage of breaking up my run into shorter segments, with a walking break never too far off into the future, regardless of the ultimate length of that day's run.
In spite of my walking breaks during yesterday's 12-mile run, I still ran comfortably ahead of the pace I had set during this past February's LifeSouth Five Points Half-Marathon, held here in Gainesville. So I fully intend to take walking breaks throughout any future long-distance races I enter.
Speaking of future races, there is a half-marathon in Gainesville scheduled for November that I plan to enter. On December 19, Jacksonville will be holding its own marathon. On January 11, 2011, the wild-and-extremely-crowded (last year had 24,000 runners) Disney World Marathon happens. And in mid-February, I'm back to Gainesville's Five Points event, this time planning to go the full marathon distance.
Well, that's my agenda as far as upcoming long-distance races are concerned. As for September and October, there are also plenty of those painfully short 5K races in which I could run. But as I have written before, these have become too tedious in more ways than one. If I can find a race during the next two months that is reasonably long and not too far away from Gainesville, then I may just enter it. Otherwise, I'll just stick to my neighborhood running, gradually increasing my mileage over the next several weeks.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
GOP Can Take the Senate
Unlike those Democrats who criticized Robert Gibbs for suggesting that the Republicans might take back both the House of Representatives and the Senate, I think that the White House Press Secretary was right on target with his comment. I'll leave the more complicated House picture for others to analyze (it's considered more likely to switch parties anyway). Instead, I'll look at the Senate, which currently favors the Democrats over the Republicans 59-41.
That margin means that the GOP would need to pick up ten seats in order to wrest away control, since as Vice-President, Joe Biden can cast tie-breaking votes should a 50-50 situation result (which happened briefly in the first few months of 2001, with VP Cheney making similar tie-breaking Senate appearances for the Republicans). Since about only a third of the seats are up for election, there would have to be a remarkable change in the Senate's party composition for the Democrats to lose ten seats. Let's look at this.
The website RealClearPolitics is very good at keeping abreast of the various public opinion polls for races nationwide. By looking at them on a state-by-state basis, I came to my first conclusion: the Republicans will probably hold on to all of the seats they currently hold (even though Ohio seems like a potential loss right now with it being relatively close). This might change during the last few weeks of the campaign as Tea Party GOP candidates Miller and Paul, although currently ahead of their Democratic opponents, appear to be vulnerable in their respective states of Alaska and Kentucky. Assuming though, that they win and retain their party's seats, then what about those currently-Democratic seats in play this year? In Arkansas, North Dakota, Delaware, and Indiana, it is a bygone near-certainty that they will go Republican, taking the Dem lead down to 55-45. But that's still a clear majority, right?
There are several other races where Democratic Senate seats are in trouble. Incumbent Bennet is behind in the Colorado polls. Now we're at 54-46. In California, Washington, Wisconsin, Illinois and Nevada, the polls have the two main candidates in each race pretty much even. That's five seats, and the Republicans are drawing a much higher, more enthusiastic voter turnout in this election season. So unless the trends reverse themselves, all of these seats could easily go Republican, giving them the 51-49 margin they need to run things as a majority party in the Senate.
Although personally a Democrat, I don't see Republican control of both houses of Congress as necessarily such a bad thing. For one, it would makes Obama's reelection in 2012 much more viable, given the almost constant "blame Congress first" mindset on the part of the American public no matter which party is in control. Secondly, losing control of Congress might just be the thing to wake up those inexplicably apathetic Democrats who apparently are destined to sit out this year's election (I don't get people who won't vote because of lack of enthusiasm).
On the down side, it would be harder for Obama to get his judicial nominations confirmed. I imagine that at least one more Supreme Court justice may retire during the President's first term. Also, whenever the opposition party takes control of Congress during an administration's tenure, they almost always begin to start probing around with investigations and "independent" prosecutors to uncover (or manufacture) scandals within that administration. I don't see any change from this pattern happening with Obama and the Republicans.
Still, it's only the beginning of September and we have two full months to go. But I have yet to see the Democrats show the kind of aggressive ads that they would need to have at least a fighting chance. Certainly they have enough material they can use to attack the Republicans. Why aren't they barraging the media with it?
That margin means that the GOP would need to pick up ten seats in order to wrest away control, since as Vice-President, Joe Biden can cast tie-breaking votes should a 50-50 situation result (which happened briefly in the first few months of 2001, with VP Cheney making similar tie-breaking Senate appearances for the Republicans). Since about only a third of the seats are up for election, there would have to be a remarkable change in the Senate's party composition for the Democrats to lose ten seats. Let's look at this.
The website RealClearPolitics is very good at keeping abreast of the various public opinion polls for races nationwide. By looking at them on a state-by-state basis, I came to my first conclusion: the Republicans will probably hold on to all of the seats they currently hold (even though Ohio seems like a potential loss right now with it being relatively close). This might change during the last few weeks of the campaign as Tea Party GOP candidates Miller and Paul, although currently ahead of their Democratic opponents, appear to be vulnerable in their respective states of Alaska and Kentucky. Assuming though, that they win and retain their party's seats, then what about those currently-Democratic seats in play this year? In Arkansas, North Dakota, Delaware, and Indiana, it is a bygone near-certainty that they will go Republican, taking the Dem lead down to 55-45. But that's still a clear majority, right?
There are several other races where Democratic Senate seats are in trouble. Incumbent Bennet is behind in the Colorado polls. Now we're at 54-46. In California, Washington, Wisconsin, Illinois and Nevada, the polls have the two main candidates in each race pretty much even. That's five seats, and the Republicans are drawing a much higher, more enthusiastic voter turnout in this election season. So unless the trends reverse themselves, all of these seats could easily go Republican, giving them the 51-49 margin they need to run things as a majority party in the Senate.
Although personally a Democrat, I don't see Republican control of both houses of Congress as necessarily such a bad thing. For one, it would makes Obama's reelection in 2012 much more viable, given the almost constant "blame Congress first" mindset on the part of the American public no matter which party is in control. Secondly, losing control of Congress might just be the thing to wake up those inexplicably apathetic Democrats who apparently are destined to sit out this year's election (I don't get people who won't vote because of lack of enthusiasm).
On the down side, it would be harder for Obama to get his judicial nominations confirmed. I imagine that at least one more Supreme Court justice may retire during the President's first term. Also, whenever the opposition party takes control of Congress during an administration's tenure, they almost always begin to start probing around with investigations and "independent" prosecutors to uncover (or manufacture) scandals within that administration. I don't see any change from this pattern happening with Obama and the Republicans.
Still, it's only the beginning of September and we have two full months to go. But I have yet to see the Democrats show the kind of aggressive ads that they would need to have at least a fighting chance. Certainly they have enough material they can use to attack the Republicans. Why aren't they barraging the media with it?
Monday, August 30, 2010
Read Sue Grafton's "F" Novel
Yesterday I went down to my local public library to submit two suggestions for purchase. While I was there, I did what I usually do and browsed throughout the place, finally deciding to check out a couple of books.
One of them was mystery writer Sue Grafton's "F" is for Fugitive, one of her alphabetical Kinsey Millhone detective series (I think she's gotten through "T" or "U" so far). I had already read her "L" is for Lawless, "A" is for Alibi, and "B" is for Burglar, so I knew pretty much what I was in for: smoothly written, humorous writing giving the reader ample opportunity to participate in the guessing game of "whodunnit".
Grafton is really an excellent writer, as I don't always pick up a novel one day like this and finish it the next. I think I'll have to pay a quick return visit to my library and check out another "letter"!
One of them was mystery writer Sue Grafton's "F" is for Fugitive, one of her alphabetical Kinsey Millhone detective series (I think she's gotten through "T" or "U" so far). I had already read her "L" is for Lawless, "A" is for Alibi, and "B" is for Burglar, so I knew pretty much what I was in for: smoothly written, humorous writing giving the reader ample opportunity to participate in the guessing game of "whodunnit".
Grafton is really an excellent writer, as I don't always pick up a novel one day like this and finish it the next. I think I'll have to pay a quick return visit to my library and check out another "letter"!
Sunday, August 29, 2010
College Football & the 2010 Gators
I suppose that now is probably as good of a time as any other to deliver my two cents' worth about the upcoming college football season, due to commence this coming weekend. The team I am primarily following is naturally the University of Florida, based here in Gainesville. With last year's enormous hype about senior star quarterback Tim Tebow, the Gators' #1 ranking for week after week, and their convincing Southeastern Conference title game loss to eventual National Champion Alabama, there is a marked difference in this year's squad and outlook. The Gators are no longer considered the best team in the conference and there are many questions about the new starters, especially so since junior John Brantley will be replacing Tebow. But as I have written before, I think that Brantley will make the Gator offense much more explosive with his passing ability than did Tebow. On the other hand, I have observed over the years that a team with a good ball control offense, especially with a player who is consistently successful on third or fourth down with short yardage in getting first downs (as Tebow was so successful at), tends to not only have better field position over their opponent over the course of a game, but also rests their defense and keeps the opposing offense off the field. And that is my main concern with Florida: can Jeff Demps and the rest of the Gator running attack step up and consistently keep drives alive with short-yardage runs? We'll see.
Florida's first game is on Saturday September 4 and, as usual, is at home against a smaller college. This time it's against Miami of Ohio. It will be interesting to see how the Gators' offense presents itself on the field, but it won't be until subsequent games that they are truly tested. And they will be severely tested with early games against Tennessee, LSU, and their nemesis Alabama (on the road in Tuscaloosa).
Other than that, I haven't paid a lot of attention to college football. I still don't know how teams can be ranked like they are when no one has yet played any games!
Florida's first game is on Saturday September 4 and, as usual, is at home against a smaller college. This time it's against Miami of Ohio. It will be interesting to see how the Gators' offense presents itself on the field, but it won't be until subsequent games that they are truly tested. And they will be severely tested with early games against Tennessee, LSU, and their nemesis Alabama (on the road in Tuscaloosa).
Other than that, I haven't paid a lot of attention to college football. I still don't know how teams can be ranked like they are when no one has yet played any games!
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Facebook vs. Blogging
I have written on this blog before, noting how I didn't understand the great appeal of Facebook. I have been observing my wife and daughter get totally into this Internet networking thing, though, and they like it a lot. Finally, it began to dawn upon my oft-slow mind what it's all about. And why it runs in direct contradiction to my own philosophy of blogging.
People who network using Facebook are basically taking people they already know and using the site to draw themselves closer together. If newer "friends" are added, then these are mostly relatives or friends of those they already know. So with Facebook, we see a kind of tribal, clannish drawing together of people, a (sophisticated) kind of semi-closed community that is largely reflective of the participants' already-established relationships. To me, this is too much like the stereotypical view of life in a small town, where everyone knows each other and the minutest details about their lives. And which includes excluding outsiders whom they don't think merit being admitted into their "circle". Apparently, this kind of social existence is what many actively seek. But not me.
No, I tend to be a bit insulated about sharing my life with others. Wait, you say, you've been writing a blog on an almost daily basis for well over three years, putting it all out there for anyone in the world with Internet access to see. If that's you saying that, then I would respond by agreeing with you somewhat and then making my point: by doing this, I am not drawing in the wagon trains around me with family and friends like in Facebook. No, I am instead reaching out to ANYONE in the world who is interested in communicating with me! If you're a friend who reads my ridiculous blog, then that is totally cool and welcome. But I also appreciate it when people from just about any place imaginable drop in to read what I have, whether or not they happen to agree with me. This sort of thing just doesn't happen on a Facebook level.
As for me sharing details of my personal life on my blog with strangers, two points.
One, I don't share the most intimate stuff. Two, I regard what I do share as basically "human" information that others, regardless of their background and belief systems, can relate to as they are also most likely very closely involved in the lifelong act of "being human". In other words, this is the diametrically opposite emphasis from the tribalism of Facebook.
Since my blog gives anyone the opportunity make pertinent comments about any of my articles, even anonymously, I feel that it provides at least structure conducive to reasonable interaction. But still...
The overwhelming trend seems to be increasingly in favor of Facebook and away from traditional blogging. Maybe I need to make a concerted effort to join up with some of those blog directories and circles that I come across from time to time. Just to allow others greater exposure to the blog.
People who network using Facebook are basically taking people they already know and using the site to draw themselves closer together. If newer "friends" are added, then these are mostly relatives or friends of those they already know. So with Facebook, we see a kind of tribal, clannish drawing together of people, a (sophisticated) kind of semi-closed community that is largely reflective of the participants' already-established relationships. To me, this is too much like the stereotypical view of life in a small town, where everyone knows each other and the minutest details about their lives. And which includes excluding outsiders whom they don't think merit being admitted into their "circle". Apparently, this kind of social existence is what many actively seek. But not me.
No, I tend to be a bit insulated about sharing my life with others. Wait, you say, you've been writing a blog on an almost daily basis for well over three years, putting it all out there for anyone in the world with Internet access to see. If that's you saying that, then I would respond by agreeing with you somewhat and then making my point: by doing this, I am not drawing in the wagon trains around me with family and friends like in Facebook. No, I am instead reaching out to ANYONE in the world who is interested in communicating with me! If you're a friend who reads my ridiculous blog, then that is totally cool and welcome. But I also appreciate it when people from just about any place imaginable drop in to read what I have, whether or not they happen to agree with me. This sort of thing just doesn't happen on a Facebook level.
As for me sharing details of my personal life on my blog with strangers, two points.
One, I don't share the most intimate stuff. Two, I regard what I do share as basically "human" information that others, regardless of their background and belief systems, can relate to as they are also most likely very closely involved in the lifelong act of "being human". In other words, this is the diametrically opposite emphasis from the tribalism of Facebook.
Since my blog gives anyone the opportunity make pertinent comments about any of my articles, even anonymously, I feel that it provides at least structure conducive to reasonable interaction. But still...
The overwhelming trend seems to be increasingly in favor of Facebook and away from traditional blogging. Maybe I need to make a concerted effort to join up with some of those blog directories and circles that I come across from time to time. Just to allow others greater exposure to the blog.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Rain, But Scarcity of Tropical Storms
As you can see, the weather here in north central Florida has been quite rainy lately. But still there is little sign of the supposedly intense, busy hurricane season we were going to be experiencing this year. I remember about this time in late August 25 years ago in 1985, when the "E" storm, Hurricane Elena, was briefly threatening to come ashore on the Gulf of Mexico side at Cedar Key and engulf Gainesville (only to abruptly change its direction at the last moment to the WNW). So far, we're only barely up to "E", with Earl, just a tropical storm, out in the eastern Atlantic, threatening no one. Will things pick up during the next few weeks, which is the busiest time in the hurricane season? Most likely, but it doesn't look like it will be an exceptionally busy time, either.
Not that I'm complaining, but this does make those meteorological prognosticators look like they don't know what they're doing!
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Erasing Superman
The other day I had to call a plumber out to my house. Everything went fine, and my problem was fixed. I looked outside at the plumber's vehicle, only to see the above-pictured familiar image (with a slight modification): Superman, or should I say Superplumber.
Superman has so ingrained itself within our popular culture that it is not surprising for a small business like my plumber's to choose to depict it as part of an advertisement. Yet when recording artist Sufjan Stevens placed his own comic version of "the man of steel" on his 2004 Illinoise album cover, his own record company, concerned that the image might result in a lawsuit from DC Comics, held up the album's distribution until a new version was produced. So the initial copies of Illinoise that had been distributed to music outlets for sale were all recalled and modified versions were rereleased, without the Superman image on the cover. It probably cost Stevens a lot of momentum with his album sales, having it held up like that.
And that's too bad, considering that Illinoise was a themed album examining various aspects of the state of Illinois, its history, and Stevens' personal experiences of having once lived there. One of the songs on it was a tribute to Superman, whose Metropolis roughly corresponded to Chicago (while his friend Batman's Gotham City corresponded to New York). I felt that the album cover, which was a mosaic showing various themes covered in the songs, was entirely appropriate, in an artistic sense, with Superman's inclusion on it.
Yet the Superman on the plumber's truck is nothing more than a tacky ad, with nothing of artistic value or even intent. But isn't there something a little more to the point about all this?
For one, isn't the whole concept of "Superman", as adapted to comics and commercially exploited, basically in itself rooted in German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche's "Übermensch" from his book Also Sprach Zarathustra? And doesn't the idea of an all-powerful savior fit as well into the traditionally messianic culture that permeates Christianity, the predominant religion here? Ultimately, when does a trademark or symbol become so much a part of the popular culture that enforcement and restriction of its unauthorized use become arbitrary and counterproductive?
If I owned the Superman copyright, I would welcome the use of the Superman symbol by plumbers, musical artists, or others. After all, this is free advertising for my product! I suppose, though, that if someone exploited the Superman theme and image to make a porn movie, then perhaps it might be appropriate to step in and have a few words with the filmmaker!
In other words, copyright enforcement is not an exact science. There needs to be some reason employed here both by those owning copyrights and by those who want to use symbols and trademarks. If someone is discussing or artistically examining something that in some way involves someone else's copyright, that discussion or examination should be free from interference or censorship. Perhaps this is where the line was drawn with Sufjan Stevens, with the song permitted to go through but the cover art not. But I hold that the album cover is part of the artist's expression, not just the audio content on the CD.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Suspicious of Endorsements for Judicial Candidate
I see this sort of thing every time there is someone running for a local judicial seat, and it bothers me enough to vote for the opponent in that race: inevitably ads will come out on TV or in the newspaper listing all of the different law enforcement organizations endorsing one of the candidates.
I don't have a problem with any organization choosing to endorse anyone for elective office. But when I visualize a judge at work, up there presiding over a criminal hearing or trial with the prosecution on one side and the defense on the other, my confidence in his or her impartiality is threatened by the knowledge that one side feels that it is going to get favored treatment. And let's face it: the police are the tool of the prosecution.
On this election day, we have a candidate for Alachua County Judge. In my Gainesville Sun this past Sunday was a full page ad listing all of the important people supporting the candidate in question. The first name on the list was that of Alachua County's current sheriff. At the top of the ad, in bold print, was listed the candidate's endorsement by both the Police Benevolent Association of North Central Florida and the Fraternal Order of Police Gator Lodge 67. Which was all well and fine for them; like I said, to each his own. But it created the impression, at least with me, that these organizations believe that the candidate, once seated, will bestow deferential treatment to cops over the accused against whom they testify.
This is why I am henceforth voting for the "other guy" in judicial races where one candidate receives the lion's share of law enforcement endorsements. Besides, think about this as well: the judge isn't supposed to give special deference to important community leaders over the average Jill or Joe. But that list of bigshots backing this one particular candidate also gives me the impression, however ultimately false it may turn out to be, that it will be the social elite who will benefit unduly from this man's jurisprudence, to the disadvantage of ordinary members of society whose names aren't expected to pull weight in a newspaper ad.
In spite of this, I think that voters in general gobble up these endorsements for judges and will most likely sweep this particular candidate into power by a landslide. Maybe he will be a good, fair judge. But these types of endorsements have had the reverse effect on me, turning me strongly away from the judicial candidates who receive and publicize them.
I don't have a problem with any organization choosing to endorse anyone for elective office. But when I visualize a judge at work, up there presiding over a criminal hearing or trial with the prosecution on one side and the defense on the other, my confidence in his or her impartiality is threatened by the knowledge that one side feels that it is going to get favored treatment. And let's face it: the police are the tool of the prosecution.
On this election day, we have a candidate for Alachua County Judge. In my Gainesville Sun this past Sunday was a full page ad listing all of the important people supporting the candidate in question. The first name on the list was that of Alachua County's current sheriff. At the top of the ad, in bold print, was listed the candidate's endorsement by both the Police Benevolent Association of North Central Florida and the Fraternal Order of Police Gator Lodge 67. Which was all well and fine for them; like I said, to each his own. But it created the impression, at least with me, that these organizations believe that the candidate, once seated, will bestow deferential treatment to cops over the accused against whom they testify.
This is why I am henceforth voting for the "other guy" in judicial races where one candidate receives the lion's share of law enforcement endorsements. Besides, think about this as well: the judge isn't supposed to give special deference to important community leaders over the average Jill or Joe. But that list of bigshots backing this one particular candidate also gives me the impression, however ultimately false it may turn out to be, that it will be the social elite who will benefit unduly from this man's jurisprudence, to the disadvantage of ordinary members of society whose names aren't expected to pull weight in a newspaper ad.
In spite of this, I think that voters in general gobble up these endorsements for judges and will most likely sweep this particular candidate into power by a landslide. Maybe he will be a good, fair judge. But these types of endorsements have had the reverse effect on me, turning me strongly away from the judicial candidates who receive and publicize them.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Major League Baseball Races on Aug 23
As I had hinted at a month ago, I am once again examining the races in the various MLB divisions, especially as they apply to teams I am following. Here goes:
The best race in baseball involves teams I generally root for: the New York Yankees lead the Tampa Bay Rays by a game in the American League East, with the Boston Red Sox six and a half back and Tampa's main challenger in the wild-card playoff position race (the three divisional winners, plus the best second-place team, make the playoffs in each league). We're at the stage in the 162-game regular season when there are 37-39 games left to go, so although time is dwindling away, there is still nevertheless time for a currently-lagging team to make a serious move for contention with a surge. And the Red Sox have historically been a surging team. We'll see how they do this time around.
In the AL Central, the Minnesota Twins have pulled away to a five-game lead over my Chicago White Sox, something that I had expected to happen. The Detroit Tigers have badly faded out of contention. In the West, Texas seems poised to run away with that title.
The National League East has the Atlanta Braves in a tight race against Philadelphia, leading the Phillies now by only two and a half games. Florida and the NY Mets are essentially out of it, playing around .500 ball this late in the season. The Central contains a surprise: Cincinnati is ahead of St. Louis by three and a half games; I had expected the Cardinals to already be pulling away in this division. My Chicago Cubs have faded badly at 51-74. The West has San Diego strongly expanding their first-place margin to a big eight-games over the rest of the pack. The three second place teams Philadelphia, St. Louis, and the San Francisco Giants are also in the thick of the race for that wild-card National League slot.
It is in the East in both leagues where most of my interest lies. In the NL, it is a simple matter of me rooting for Atlanta and against Philadelphia. But since I like both the Yankees and Rays, my main concern in the AL is that Boston suddenly doesn't get a long winning streak going and knock one of them out of the playoffs at the end of the regular season.
I'll see if I can't check out how the standings are going a month from now as well. By then we should have a pretty clear picture of who is going on into the playoffs and who will be looking forward to next year.
The best race in baseball involves teams I generally root for: the New York Yankees lead the Tampa Bay Rays by a game in the American League East, with the Boston Red Sox six and a half back and Tampa's main challenger in the wild-card playoff position race (the three divisional winners, plus the best second-place team, make the playoffs in each league). We're at the stage in the 162-game regular season when there are 37-39 games left to go, so although time is dwindling away, there is still nevertheless time for a currently-lagging team to make a serious move for contention with a surge. And the Red Sox have historically been a surging team. We'll see how they do this time around.
In the AL Central, the Minnesota Twins have pulled away to a five-game lead over my Chicago White Sox, something that I had expected to happen. The Detroit Tigers have badly faded out of contention. In the West, Texas seems poised to run away with that title.
The National League East has the Atlanta Braves in a tight race against Philadelphia, leading the Phillies now by only two and a half games. Florida and the NY Mets are essentially out of it, playing around .500 ball this late in the season. The Central contains a surprise: Cincinnati is ahead of St. Louis by three and a half games; I had expected the Cardinals to already be pulling away in this division. My Chicago Cubs have faded badly at 51-74. The West has San Diego strongly expanding their first-place margin to a big eight-games over the rest of the pack. The three second place teams Philadelphia, St. Louis, and the San Francisco Giants are also in the thick of the race for that wild-card National League slot.
It is in the East in both leagues where most of my interest lies. In the NL, it is a simple matter of me rooting for Atlanta and against Philadelphia. But since I like both the Yankees and Rays, my main concern in the AL is that Boston suddenly doesn't get a long winning streak going and knock one of them out of the playoffs at the end of the regular season.
I'll see if I can't check out how the standings are going a month from now as well. By then we should have a pretty clear picture of who is going on into the playoffs and who will be looking forward to next year.
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Foreign Language Study Fun But Humbling
I think the way that foreign languages are taught in school completely misses the point. Instead of beating in repetitious grammar patterns with a limited vocabulary, they should have been flooding us with vocabulary at the expense of the grammar. I spent many grueling years in elementary and high school studying under such a curriculum with the Audio-Lingual-Materials (or ALM) system of language instruction. It was an utterly dreadful experience. As humans, we all have a natural capacity to pick up on grammar. But all of the grammar in the world won't help if you can't think of the word you want to express or understand the word you read or hear!
For me, studying foreign languages is a pastime, a fun activity much akin to doing puzzles like sudoku or kakuro. I don't see myself necessarily becoming fluent in them, but I do have varying degrees of success in learning some of them. And the Internet is a paradise for anyone wanting foreign language exposure!
Ah, the Internet. Yes, there are translation tools like that found on Google. There is the incredible Wikipedia: pick your language and jump right on in! One can pick the language of choice and delve into blogs written in that language, with the option of practicing it by submitting comments. And there are numerous sites giving access to radio and television programming in various foreign languages from countries spread across the planet.
The one possible drawback involved with immersing oneself in foreign language study is that it is an incredibly humbling undertaking. For no matter how much progress I make in learning a particular language, there will always be many, many others who are much better at it than me. Including little bitty children, fresh out of the crib! Ouch!
For me, studying foreign languages is a pastime, a fun activity much akin to doing puzzles like sudoku or kakuro. I don't see myself necessarily becoming fluent in them, but I do have varying degrees of success in learning some of them. And the Internet is a paradise for anyone wanting foreign language exposure!
Ah, the Internet. Yes, there are translation tools like that found on Google. There is the incredible Wikipedia: pick your language and jump right on in! One can pick the language of choice and delve into blogs written in that language, with the option of practicing it by submitting comments. And there are numerous sites giving access to radio and television programming in various foreign languages from countries spread across the planet.
The one possible drawback involved with immersing oneself in foreign language study is that it is an incredibly humbling undertaking. For no matter how much progress I make in learning a particular language, there will always be many, many others who are much better at it than me. Including little bitty children, fresh out of the crib! Ouch!
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Christopher Plover and Lev Grossman
Lev Grossman, literary critic for Time magazine and the author of the best-selling novel Codex, wrote The Magicians, a novel that reflects and expands upon the world of magic as revealed by J.K. Rowling in her successful Harry Potter series. Only with Grossman, his novel painted the characters (his own, not hers) with true humanity, each one a mixture of the good and bad, the weak and the strong; Rowling instead tended more to ascribe virtues and vices to distinctively mark her individual characters. For this reason and many more, I enjoyed reading The Magicians. After all, with Harry Potter, I kept identifying myself with protagonist Potter's adversary Draco Malfoy, who in retrospect was much more realistically human than any of the "good guys". With Quentin Coldwater, the main character in The Magicians, there is plenty of "dark" Draco to go around, not to mention a good dose of virtue as well.
Grossman also drew upon the fantasy genre of the earlier twentieth century, making frequent reference to Lord of the Rings and The Chronicles of Narnia. But his chief inspiration was a series of "lighter" fantasy novels written earlier by an American named Christopher Plover titled Fillory and Further. In the fantasy realm of Fillory, there were talking animals, a supposedly evil woman who froze time, and... are you thinking what I'm thinking? That damned C.S. Lewis totally ripped off Plover when he wrote Chronicles of Narnia! The outrage of it all! Well, I could see that good ol' Lev Grossman saw this as well, not wanting to miss a chance to elevate Plover to his proper place as a premier, trailblazing fantasy writer. So he made Plover's Fillory the centerpiece of The Magicians. Good for him, at least a little justice being done here...
I managed to find a website devoted to preserving the memory of Christopher Plover and promoting his books about Fillory. The books, pictured on the right-hand side of the page, corresponded to Grossman's depictions in his novel. This only made me more indignant at the injustice done to Plover's literary legacy. Then I looked at the bottom of Plover's website at a list of links. All of them referred back to Grossman and The Magicians. The website was a plant, a hoax.
There never really was a Christopher Plover nor a series of books about a fantasy land called Fillory. Grossman invented it all and even had a little fun with his hoax. I even found another site that gave a review on Plover and his series. What a chump, for that reviewer to be taken in like that (after all, I only bought into it for a few minutes)! But wait, I'll bet that review was also a plant by Grossman!
The Magicians is just the first book about Quentin Coldwater and his adventures through a life of magic. It is very, very adult-themed, so I don't think it will make the Scholastic Book-of-the-Month Club (if there really is such a thing) anytime soon. But it was fun and interesting reading. The sequel is reportedly due out sometime in 2011; but having already experienced firsthand how Lev Grossman can mess around with people's minds, I'll just let myself be pleasantly surprised if and when it comes out. And then make sure my local public library stocks up on it!
Hey Grossman---you da man!
Grossman also drew upon the fantasy genre of the earlier twentieth century, making frequent reference to Lord of the Rings and The Chronicles of Narnia. But his chief inspiration was a series of "lighter" fantasy novels written earlier by an American named Christopher Plover titled Fillory and Further. In the fantasy realm of Fillory, there were talking animals, a supposedly evil woman who froze time, and... are you thinking what I'm thinking? That damned C.S. Lewis totally ripped off Plover when he wrote Chronicles of Narnia! The outrage of it all! Well, I could see that good ol' Lev Grossman saw this as well, not wanting to miss a chance to elevate Plover to his proper place as a premier, trailblazing fantasy writer. So he made Plover's Fillory the centerpiece of The Magicians. Good for him, at least a little justice being done here...
I managed to find a website devoted to preserving the memory of Christopher Plover and promoting his books about Fillory. The books, pictured on the right-hand side of the page, corresponded to Grossman's depictions in his novel. This only made me more indignant at the injustice done to Plover's literary legacy. Then I looked at the bottom of Plover's website at a list of links. All of them referred back to Grossman and The Magicians. The website was a plant, a hoax.
There never really was a Christopher Plover nor a series of books about a fantasy land called Fillory. Grossman invented it all and even had a little fun with his hoax. I even found another site that gave a review on Plover and his series. What a chump, for that reviewer to be taken in like that (after all, I only bought into it for a few minutes)! But wait, I'll bet that review was also a plant by Grossman!
The Magicians is just the first book about Quentin Coldwater and his adventures through a life of magic. It is very, very adult-themed, so I don't think it will make the Scholastic Book-of-the-Month Club (if there really is such a thing) anytime soon. But it was fun and interesting reading. The sequel is reportedly due out sometime in 2011; but having already experienced firsthand how Lev Grossman can mess around with people's minds, I'll just let myself be pleasantly surprised if and when it comes out. And then make sure my local public library stocks up on it!
Hey Grossman---you da man!
Friday, August 20, 2010
National Party Leaders & Their Involvement in Partisan Primaries
Why are prominent national political figures involving themselves so heavily with the intra-party primary season this year? I can't remember this ever happening before, at least to this degree. Sarah Palin is flying around all over the country pulling for "her" candidates while rival Newt Gingrich is backing his choices, often in opposition to Palin's. In the Kentucky GOP senatorial primary, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell supported loser Trey Grayson while outgoing senator Jim Bunning strongly backed winner Rand Paul. In the Democratic side, we already witnessed the debacle in Pennsylvania, where the Obama administration actively tried to get incumbent Arlen Specter's opponent (and eventual winner) Joe Sestak to drop out of the race for the U.S. Senate. And here in Florida, Bill Clinton has flown down to campaign for Kendrick Meek against Jeff Greene. Why?
This all makes me a little bit uneasy somehow. It seems to me that the national figures should let their parties' state and local elections play out naturally. Only after a nominee has been chosen should they then get out and campaign against the "other side". I know that, being a Democrat, were I to decide to toss my hat into the ring for an elective office, it would really badly irk me to see Clinton, Obama, or another well-known figure visibly campaign for one of my opponents against me. Especially when I had grown to respect these people over the years for their sense of fairness and judgement. I imagine that the same is also true for those civic-minded Republicans running for office when they see party bigwigs stumping for their opponents. It is as if the parties are so heavily into top-to-bottom control that they feel that they can't allow the actual people to decide for themselves!
This all makes me a little bit uneasy somehow. It seems to me that the national figures should let their parties' state and local elections play out naturally. Only after a nominee has been chosen should they then get out and campaign against the "other side". I know that, being a Democrat, were I to decide to toss my hat into the ring for an elective office, it would really badly irk me to see Clinton, Obama, or another well-known figure visibly campaign for one of my opponents against me. Especially when I had grown to respect these people over the years for their sense of fairness and judgement. I imagine that the same is also true for those civic-minded Republicans running for office when they see party bigwigs stumping for their opponents. It is as if the parties are so heavily into top-to-bottom control that they feel that they can't allow the actual people to decide for themselves!
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Pinyin vs. Radical-Based Chinese Dictionaries
There are basically two types of Chinese-English dictionaries out there. One is the traditional arrangement, by radicals. The other is by romanized transliteration, nowadays pretty much always using the pinyin system of transliteration. I have both kinds of dictionary. And a few thoughts to share.
Being a native English speaker, I grew up regarding language in primarily its spoken form, with the Latin script roughly (sometimes VERY roughly) reflecting pronunciation. Chinese is written using characters, each of which usually has a unique pronunciation (unlike with Japanese) and represents a concept or "idea" of sorts. Chinese makes tremendous use of compounding, usually with two characters combined, much in the same way that English forms "barnyard" or "sunshine". When I read Chinese and come across an unfamiliar character (quite a common occurrence), I don't know how it is pronounced, just from looking at it. Thus my dictionary arranged by pinyin order is useless, and I am left resorting to the radical-arranged dictionary. A radical is a character unto itself which comprises a part of other characters, albeit often in a distorted form. Which can make it a bit difficult at times looking up characters by radical. Within each radical category in the dictionary, characters are arranged in the order of number of strokes.
Also, the Internet Chinese keyboards I have seen so far rely on radicals. So with any character that I do know, I have to first know its radical and then browse down the list under that radical's heading to the character in order to type it. Pretty damned tedious! I would rather first browse through the character-in-question's pinyin spelling and then click on it. If there are any pinyin-based virtual keyboards like this, I haven't found them yet.
And of course, if I am just listening to someone speak Chinese and I want to look up a word in the dictionary, the pinyin dictionary is the must and the radical dictionary is useless.
What a bother!
Oh, on top of that, did I mention that Chinese is basically written with two different competing writing systems: the traditional and the simplified? No, I didn't.
Double bother!
Being a native English speaker, I grew up regarding language in primarily its spoken form, with the Latin script roughly (sometimes VERY roughly) reflecting pronunciation. Chinese is written using characters, each of which usually has a unique pronunciation (unlike with Japanese) and represents a concept or "idea" of sorts. Chinese makes tremendous use of compounding, usually with two characters combined, much in the same way that English forms "barnyard" or "sunshine". When I read Chinese and come across an unfamiliar character (quite a common occurrence), I don't know how it is pronounced, just from looking at it. Thus my dictionary arranged by pinyin order is useless, and I am left resorting to the radical-arranged dictionary. A radical is a character unto itself which comprises a part of other characters, albeit often in a distorted form. Which can make it a bit difficult at times looking up characters by radical. Within each radical category in the dictionary, characters are arranged in the order of number of strokes.
Also, the Internet Chinese keyboards I have seen so far rely on radicals. So with any character that I do know, I have to first know its radical and then browse down the list under that radical's heading to the character in order to type it. Pretty damned tedious! I would rather first browse through the character-in-question's pinyin spelling and then click on it. If there are any pinyin-based virtual keyboards like this, I haven't found them yet.
And of course, if I am just listening to someone speak Chinese and I want to look up a word in the dictionary, the pinyin dictionary is the must and the radical dictionary is useless.
What a bother!
Oh, on top of that, did I mention that Chinese is basically written with two different competing writing systems: the traditional and the simplified? No, I didn't.
Double bother!
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Brett is Back: All is Well Again with NFL Football
Brett Favre cracks me up. In fact, he's so funny that I have come to be one of his major fans, wherever he decides (or has trouble deciding) where he wants to play (or if he really wants to play). During Favre's Super Bowl heydays in the mid-nineties with the Packers (while I was miserably following --and still do-- the Miami Dolphins), I was barely aware of the man. Now, in his early forties (such an old guy, not at all like me--wait, I'm 53), Favre is kicking ass all over the league as a Minnesota Viking quarterback and enjoying the accolades he so richly deserves. But there's one thing, the thing that really makes him funny (and so wise).
Brett Favre hates training camp and exhibition games. To him, they are complete B.S., and I don't mean Bachelor of Science. He knows what he has to do when he gets out on the field, so why waste time and possible career-ending injury with all of that high-contact activity? So for the past two seasons, he has either announced his retirement from the game or hinted at it, essentially with the view of avoiding that tedious and unnecessary part of the pre-season. And each time, he has come back. Hopefully, his coach won't put him out there on the field very much in the Packers' remaining exhibition schedule.
Football is an injury-intense sport. It becomes ridiculous when teams' starting rosters begin to become depleted because of injuries, even before the season starts. Take the University of Florida Gators. The website for AM 850/WRUF lists some of their players' injuries, which includes a concussion to star running back Jeff Demps. And they haven't even played any games yet! So I think that if you are a player and can get away with it, better to avoid that hazardous period. Which is what Brett Favre was able to pull off.
Once I was watching a sports channel and they were poking fun at how Favre would warm up before going out on the field: he would bend his legs and stretch each of them a couple of times and then trot off, doing nothing more. Which is exactly how I warm up before running! A kindred spirit, I would say!
Brett Favre hates training camp and exhibition games. To him, they are complete B.S., and I don't mean Bachelor of Science. He knows what he has to do when he gets out on the field, so why waste time and possible career-ending injury with all of that high-contact activity? So for the past two seasons, he has either announced his retirement from the game or hinted at it, essentially with the view of avoiding that tedious and unnecessary part of the pre-season. And each time, he has come back. Hopefully, his coach won't put him out there on the field very much in the Packers' remaining exhibition schedule.
Football is an injury-intense sport. It becomes ridiculous when teams' starting rosters begin to become depleted because of injuries, even before the season starts. Take the University of Florida Gators. The website for AM 850/WRUF lists some of their players' injuries, which includes a concussion to star running back Jeff Demps. And they haven't even played any games yet! So I think that if you are a player and can get away with it, better to avoid that hazardous period. Which is what Brett Favre was able to pull off.
Once I was watching a sports channel and they were poking fun at how Favre would warm up before going out on the field: he would bend his legs and stretch each of them a couple of times and then trot off, doing nothing more. Which is exactly how I warm up before running! A kindred spirit, I would say!
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Inception: My Take (with Plot Spoilers)
Again, here is my warning: I will reveal stuff that happened in the movie Inception, so reader beware...
Now that we've got that clear, let's go on.
Inception is the first movie that I can ever recall going to see in which I personally insisted on going back promptly and seeing it a second time. There's a good reason for this: there are little clues left at various parts of the movie (starting at its very beginning) which I believe go a long way toward explaining its very cryptic conclusion and I wanted to check them out. My suspicions were confirmed.
I'm presuming, since I have already taken great pains in stating that I will reveal plot details of Inception, that you either already saw it or couldn't care less about seeing it. If you're in the latter group, then what are you doing wasting your time reading this article, you turkey! And since you probably did see it and want to read a fellow viewer's reaction, I'm not going to waste your time and mine recounting the movie's outline and finer details. No, I'm interested in the "cliff-hanging" mystery at Inception's tail end. You know, the continually spinning top.
Inception begins with dream-thief-for-hire Dom Cobb (played by Leo DiCaprio) washed up bloodied and tired on a beach, where he is taken to the opulent house of an very old, oriental man. We discover at the movie's end (when this opening scene's conclusion is shown) that this man is Saito, a powerful Japanese businessman (played by Ken Watanabe). Saito, at this advanced age, is seen taking one of Cobb's possessions, a small top, stating that he'd seen it long before in the past, and then spinning it on the tabletop. Then, we are suddenly taken in the film to what seems to be (at first glance) the past, when Saito is much younger, although now the same age as Cobb (if you didn't see the movie, I think I already lost you).
Well, to refresh your memory, my dear Inception fellow viewer, through a convolution of events Cobb ends up working for Saito on a project to insert an idea into a rival company's heir while he is dreaming. This process is called "inception", hence the movie's title. In one scene, Cobb, having just come out of a very disturbing dream, is frantically spinning his top because he uses it to ascertain that he is no longer dreaming (in dreams, it keeps spinning; in reality, it eventually stops). Who should walk in on him suddenly but Saito, seeing the top (which Cobb calls his "totem") and what Cobb is doing with it. This very short scene, lasting only a few seconds, makes no sense to me being in the movie unless it had some special significance. And I picked up on that instantly when I saw Inception the first time.
Well, Cobb, Saito (whom I regard as the story's "wild card" character), and the rest of their team ensue on their adventurous project, which involves going through deeper and deeper dream states, each state embedded within a "higher" dream. During this, it is revealed that Cobb's totem used to be his wife's and that while they were in an extremely deep dream state (for fifty years of "dream time"), she hid it. Cobb searched around and found it, then using it somehow to plant an unintentionally tragic idea in his wife's mind. So with that it was established in the movie that someone possessing someone else's totem within a dream could perform inception on them.
During the dream adventure, Saito gets shot and dies (within the dreams). He descends to the same dream level (called in the movie "limbo") where Cobb and his wife had spent so much time. Near the movie's end, Cobb tells a colleague he is going to bring Saito back. And then that opening scene reoccurs, with Cobb adding to it his plea for Saito to return back to the real world with him.
Suddenly, without having to pass through the process of awakening in each of the embedded "higher" dream states (which his other team members had to experience to return to awakened reality), Cobb finds himself fully awake in the presence of all of his colleagues. Including Saito, who promptly makes a phone call that would enable Cobb to come back to his country (the U.S.) and be reunited with his children. Everything from that moment on in the movie works in Cobb's favor without a hitch. In the final scene, Cobb is back in his house and he fishes out his totem-top, spinning it on his desktop. He then sees his children outside and rushes to greet them. The camera then focuses on the top, which continues spinning, long after (in my opinion) it should have stopped. The movie then abruptly ends.
So I think that the "young, real" Saito saw Cobb's totem and, recognizing it for what it was, later, in that limbo dream state, used it to perform an inception within Cobb's mind. Which was that everything was a success, Cobb was back home (as was Saito), and reunited with his beloved children. Because the "elderly, dream" Saito knew he could never himself return and neither could Cobb. So this inception was actually an act of compassion on his part.
Well, that's MY take on it, anyway. What's yours?
Now that we've got that clear, let's go on.
Inception is the first movie that I can ever recall going to see in which I personally insisted on going back promptly and seeing it a second time. There's a good reason for this: there are little clues left at various parts of the movie (starting at its very beginning) which I believe go a long way toward explaining its very cryptic conclusion and I wanted to check them out. My suspicions were confirmed.
I'm presuming, since I have already taken great pains in stating that I will reveal plot details of Inception, that you either already saw it or couldn't care less about seeing it. If you're in the latter group, then what are you doing wasting your time reading this article, you turkey! And since you probably did see it and want to read a fellow viewer's reaction, I'm not going to waste your time and mine recounting the movie's outline and finer details. No, I'm interested in the "cliff-hanging" mystery at Inception's tail end. You know, the continually spinning top.
Inception begins with dream-thief-for-hire Dom Cobb (played by Leo DiCaprio) washed up bloodied and tired on a beach, where he is taken to the opulent house of an very old, oriental man. We discover at the movie's end (when this opening scene's conclusion is shown) that this man is Saito, a powerful Japanese businessman (played by Ken Watanabe). Saito, at this advanced age, is seen taking one of Cobb's possessions, a small top, stating that he'd seen it long before in the past, and then spinning it on the tabletop. Then, we are suddenly taken in the film to what seems to be (at first glance) the past, when Saito is much younger, although now the same age as Cobb (if you didn't see the movie, I think I already lost you).
Well, to refresh your memory, my dear Inception fellow viewer, through a convolution of events Cobb ends up working for Saito on a project to insert an idea into a rival company's heir while he is dreaming. This process is called "inception", hence the movie's title. In one scene, Cobb, having just come out of a very disturbing dream, is frantically spinning his top because he uses it to ascertain that he is no longer dreaming (in dreams, it keeps spinning; in reality, it eventually stops). Who should walk in on him suddenly but Saito, seeing the top (which Cobb calls his "totem") and what Cobb is doing with it. This very short scene, lasting only a few seconds, makes no sense to me being in the movie unless it had some special significance. And I picked up on that instantly when I saw Inception the first time.
Well, Cobb, Saito (whom I regard as the story's "wild card" character), and the rest of their team ensue on their adventurous project, which involves going through deeper and deeper dream states, each state embedded within a "higher" dream. During this, it is revealed that Cobb's totem used to be his wife's and that while they were in an extremely deep dream state (for fifty years of "dream time"), she hid it. Cobb searched around and found it, then using it somehow to plant an unintentionally tragic idea in his wife's mind. So with that it was established in the movie that someone possessing someone else's totem within a dream could perform inception on them.
During the dream adventure, Saito gets shot and dies (within the dreams). He descends to the same dream level (called in the movie "limbo") where Cobb and his wife had spent so much time. Near the movie's end, Cobb tells a colleague he is going to bring Saito back. And then that opening scene reoccurs, with Cobb adding to it his plea for Saito to return back to the real world with him.
Suddenly, without having to pass through the process of awakening in each of the embedded "higher" dream states (which his other team members had to experience to return to awakened reality), Cobb finds himself fully awake in the presence of all of his colleagues. Including Saito, who promptly makes a phone call that would enable Cobb to come back to his country (the U.S.) and be reunited with his children. Everything from that moment on in the movie works in Cobb's favor without a hitch. In the final scene, Cobb is back in his house and he fishes out his totem-top, spinning it on his desktop. He then sees his children outside and rushes to greet them. The camera then focuses on the top, which continues spinning, long after (in my opinion) it should have stopped. The movie then abruptly ends.
So I think that the "young, real" Saito saw Cobb's totem and, recognizing it for what it was, later, in that limbo dream state, used it to perform an inception within Cobb's mind. Which was that everything was a success, Cobb was back home (as was Saito), and reunited with his beloved children. Because the "elderly, dream" Saito knew he could never himself return and neither could Cobb. So this inception was actually an act of compassion on his part.
Well, that's MY take on it, anyway. What's yours?
Monday, August 16, 2010
My Amazon Kindle WTF Moment
I tend to be a little behind the times when it comes to the latest advances in digital consumer technology. Such is the case with the Amazon Kindle portable digital reader, which I understand can hold up to 3,500 books. As with MP3 technology for music, though, I have one outstanding problem with Kindle and its competitors: what to do with my extensive and space-consuming personal library of books. As was the case with my extensive, lower-tech record and cassette collection, I don't want to have to purchase a digitalized version of a book that I already have in book form. And anyway, much of what I have is out of print. So until I can economically (and legally) copy my own material and put it on a Kindle (or a similar product), I probably will hold back on purchasing one.
Having said that, I'm still pretty interested in Kindle, as I would dearly love to cut back on the clutter in my home by reducing book space. So I naturally noticed and read a Kindle ad on the back of a magazine recently. And it was then that my "World Trade Fenter moment" jumped off the page at me.
Maybe you can explain this to me in a way that makes sense. According to the ad, you can either buy Kindle with wi-fi only for $139 or you can buy it with "free 3G + wi-fi" for $189. Do you see anything a little incongruous with that last sentence, or am I missing something here? If the only difference between the two versions is the "free 3G", then why does this version cost $50 more?
.....I'm waiting.....
Having said that, I'm still pretty interested in Kindle, as I would dearly love to cut back on the clutter in my home by reducing book space. So I naturally noticed and read a Kindle ad on the back of a magazine recently. And it was then that my "World Trade Fenter moment" jumped off the page at me.
Maybe you can explain this to me in a way that makes sense. According to the ad, you can either buy Kindle with wi-fi only for $139 or you can buy it with "free 3G + wi-fi" for $189. Do you see anything a little incongruous with that last sentence, or am I missing something here? If the only difference between the two versions is the "free 3G", then why does this version cost $50 more?
.....I'm waiting.....
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Alachua County School Board and Creationism
For the three open Alachua County School Board seats to be voted on August 24, I have had a difficult time distinguishing the candidates from each other, based on their comments about their philosophies concerning public education. Apparently though, others in my community have their own ideas as to who would best fill these posts, as I have seen an unprecedented plethora of school board campaign signs in people's yards and along the roadside. But Friday, that indecision dramatically changed for me.
In Friday's Gainesville Sun, staff writer Kimberly Moore wrote about a recent candidate forum for the school board candidates, held at a local retirement community. One of the questions was how the candidates felt about having creationism taught in public school alongside evolution. The answers startled me.
Of the candidates running in the three-district field, Bonnie Burgess, April Griffin, Felicia Moss, Wayne Gabb, and Jodi Wood all expressed a desire to see creationism taught in public school science classes as an alternative to evolution. Opposed to this were Gunnar Paulson, Carol Oyenarte, Jancie Vinson, and Rick Nesbit. And then there was a fence-straddling third group (the true politicians), composed of David Palpaut, Jennifer Deachin, and Christopher Smiley [who has submitted a comment correcting this report and stating his opposition to teaching creationism in public schools]. Their expressed view was that creationism should be taught, but in a religion or philosophy class instead of science.
I don't see those in the third group as being on my side with this issue; they are liable to side with the pro-creationism group on important votes. This leads me with four [correction: five, with Smiley's correction] possible candidates to choose from in the three districts. I'm not sure, but I think that MY district is Nesbit's. Or do I get to vote for all three districts? I guess I'll find out in the voting booth. Better that I research all three districts!
Is teaching creationism in public schools that big of a deal to me? Yes. Creationism is a branch of Christian apologetics designed to "paper" over principles of modern biological and cosmological science which appear to literally contradict that religion's scriptures and doctrine. It results in the demonization of honest and significant scientific work and of those who perform it. Making legitimate science controversial is nonsensical to me, and electing candidates who would impose their religion on the public at taxpayer expense just isn't the way to go. Anyone is free to believe whatever they want to believe. They can worship at the religious institution of their choice and give religious instruction to their own children. There are also the options of private religious schools and home-schooling for those parents who think that modern established science is somehow "of the devil". But public schools should be free of religious tampering with their science curriculum.
In Friday's Gainesville Sun, staff writer Kimberly Moore wrote about a recent candidate forum for the school board candidates, held at a local retirement community. One of the questions was how the candidates felt about having creationism taught in public school alongside evolution. The answers startled me.
Of the candidates running in the three-district field, Bonnie Burgess, April Griffin, Felicia Moss, Wayne Gabb, and Jodi Wood all expressed a desire to see creationism taught in public school science classes as an alternative to evolution. Opposed to this were Gunnar Paulson, Carol Oyenarte, Jancie Vinson, and Rick Nesbit. And then there was a fence-straddling third group (the true politicians), composed of David Palpaut, Jennifer Deachin, and Christopher Smiley [who has submitted a comment correcting this report and stating his opposition to teaching creationism in public schools]. Their expressed view was that creationism should be taught, but in a religion or philosophy class instead of science.
I don't see those in the third group as being on my side with this issue; they are liable to side with the pro-creationism group on important votes. This leads me with four [correction: five, with Smiley's correction] possible candidates to choose from in the three districts. I'm not sure, but I think that MY district is Nesbit's. Or do I get to vote for all three districts? I guess I'll find out in the voting booth. Better that I research all three districts!
Is teaching creationism in public schools that big of a deal to me? Yes. Creationism is a branch of Christian apologetics designed to "paper" over principles of modern biological and cosmological science which appear to literally contradict that religion's scriptures and doctrine. It results in the demonization of honest and significant scientific work and of those who perform it. Making legitimate science controversial is nonsensical to me, and electing candidates who would impose their religion on the public at taxpayer expense just isn't the way to go. Anyone is free to believe whatever they want to believe. They can worship at the religious institution of their choice and give religious instruction to their own children. There are also the options of private religious schools and home-schooling for those parents who think that modern established science is somehow "of the devil". But public schools should be free of religious tampering with their science curriculum.
Friday, August 13, 2010
Misdirection: World Travel for Missionary Work
I am suspicious of people who always seem to be catching a plane to this place or that, never staying in one location very long. They always seems to have the most legitimate reasons for their almost constant travel. They project to me (and most likely to others) an air of the utmost importance. After all, people who travel a lot are important people, doing important, useful things. Right? RIGHT?
I have no problem, really, with those who either have the means to travel for enjoyment and self-fulfillment or who, in the course of their work, quite understandably take in the sights and experiences of their travels (like my friend in New York). I would, too! But sometimes I wonder whether, with some, they use whatever the stated purpose of their travel is to justify their addiction to it. And here I am primarily thinking of church missions work.
It seems that the latest "big thing" in churches nowadays is to spread the Gospel message abroad by planting churches in as many countries as possible, with the expenses incurred by this being paid for by the church's membership in the form of offerings and fund drives. I know from personal experience of church leaders who seem to be in an almost continual state of travel to and from various countries scattered across the world. The churches they helped to establish have pretty much become self-sustaining, run by those countries' own people. Those who travel like this have others foot their bill, but don't have the needed accountability to justify what seems to me to be an excessive amount of plane-hopping. They will always be able to cite those in far-distant churches and communities who ask for their help, and what better God-honoring way than to deliver it to them in person? And after all, we're not talking about staying in ritzy hotels, but rather in often squalid conditions. But to me, that's just a rationalization obscuring the point. And the point is the "perpetual motion" buzz delivered by the travel.
As with any other thing, travel for travel's sake can get to be habitual, with the travel addict searching out excuses to set out again and again. Being someone who doesn't travel that much, I believe I can more readily observe this trait in others. Those who travel to excess, though, turn things around and try to paint themselves as somehow being self-sacrificial for the sake of others.
I'm not decrying the use of travel for overseas missions work; after all, the Great Commission in the book of Matthew commands missions work for believers. I just think that, as with any worthwhile endeavor, care needs to be taken to discern what constitutes reasonable travel and what constitutes travel for travel's sake. Otherwise, those in missions who are addicted to travel can always pull the wool over others' eyes through misdirection.
I have no problem, really, with those who either have the means to travel for enjoyment and self-fulfillment or who, in the course of their work, quite understandably take in the sights and experiences of their travels (like my friend in New York). I would, too! But sometimes I wonder whether, with some, they use whatever the stated purpose of their travel is to justify their addiction to it. And here I am primarily thinking of church missions work.
It seems that the latest "big thing" in churches nowadays is to spread the Gospel message abroad by planting churches in as many countries as possible, with the expenses incurred by this being paid for by the church's membership in the form of offerings and fund drives. I know from personal experience of church leaders who seem to be in an almost continual state of travel to and from various countries scattered across the world. The churches they helped to establish have pretty much become self-sustaining, run by those countries' own people. Those who travel like this have others foot their bill, but don't have the needed accountability to justify what seems to me to be an excessive amount of plane-hopping. They will always be able to cite those in far-distant churches and communities who ask for their help, and what better God-honoring way than to deliver it to them in person? And after all, we're not talking about staying in ritzy hotels, but rather in often squalid conditions. But to me, that's just a rationalization obscuring the point. And the point is the "perpetual motion" buzz delivered by the travel.
As with any other thing, travel for travel's sake can get to be habitual, with the travel addict searching out excuses to set out again and again. Being someone who doesn't travel that much, I believe I can more readily observe this trait in others. Those who travel to excess, though, turn things around and try to paint themselves as somehow being self-sacrificial for the sake of others.
I'm not decrying the use of travel for overseas missions work; after all, the Great Commission in the book of Matthew commands missions work for believers. I just think that, as with any worthwhile endeavor, care needs to be taken to discern what constitutes reasonable travel and what constitutes travel for travel's sake. Otherwise, those in missions who are addicted to travel can always pull the wool over others' eyes through misdirection.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Summer Campaigning Down and Dirty
Is it just me, or is this year's (still only summer) campaign season the dirtiest in recent memory? It's bad enough that the division between the two major political parties has become so polarized; now, within each party, the primary battles have reached a new nadir in mudslinging.
This is particularly true in my home state of Florida. For the governor's race, on the Republican side, Bill McCollum, currently the state's attorney general and an established party figure, is trailing in the polls to upstart Tea Party candidate Rick Scott. And the attacks have been frequent and severe from both sides. In the Democratic primary campaign for the Senate, Kendrick Meek and Jeff Greene are likewise slinging too much mud at each other with their ads (particularly by Greene against Meek).
I can see how the GOP candidates for governor might get a little heavy with their ads, seeing how the winner of the nomination stands a pretty good chance to win the general election against Democrat Alex Sink (who also stands a reasonable chance of winning). But neither of the Democrats for the Senate seat is remotely close in the polls to Independent (and current governor) Charlie Crist or Republican Marco Rubio. So with the Dems, the attacks are actually much worse to witness as they have assumed a very hateful, vindictive nature, reminding me a bit of Frodo and Gollum's irrational and vicious struggle for the ring at Mount Doom.
I personally like Crist and Sink for the respective races, due in large part to the fact that they are both political moderates who seem to understand that with their elections they would represent ALL of the state, not just those who share their personal political ideologies. And they do try to bring people together in consensus whenever possible (easier said than done).
Overall, this has been a very depressing election campaign season to follow. Hopefully, we can somehow get the bad feelings behind us after it is all over and work together to make a better society for ourselves.
Reality check: Sure, like hell we can!
This is particularly true in my home state of Florida. For the governor's race, on the Republican side, Bill McCollum, currently the state's attorney general and an established party figure, is trailing in the polls to upstart Tea Party candidate Rick Scott. And the attacks have been frequent and severe from both sides. In the Democratic primary campaign for the Senate, Kendrick Meek and Jeff Greene are likewise slinging too much mud at each other with their ads (particularly by Greene against Meek).
I can see how the GOP candidates for governor might get a little heavy with their ads, seeing how the winner of the nomination stands a pretty good chance to win the general election against Democrat Alex Sink (who also stands a reasonable chance of winning). But neither of the Democrats for the Senate seat is remotely close in the polls to Independent (and current governor) Charlie Crist or Republican Marco Rubio. So with the Dems, the attacks are actually much worse to witness as they have assumed a very hateful, vindictive nature, reminding me a bit of Frodo and Gollum's irrational and vicious struggle for the ring at Mount Doom.
I personally like Crist and Sink for the respective races, due in large part to the fact that they are both political moderates who seem to understand that with their elections they would represent ALL of the state, not just those who share their personal political ideologies. And they do try to bring people together in consensus whenever possible (easier said than done).
Overall, this has been a very depressing election campaign season to follow. Hopefully, we can somehow get the bad feelings behind us after it is all over and work together to make a better society for ourselves.
Reality check: Sure, like hell we can!
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Google Maps and Reality
The other day I checked out Google Maps to chart out a new addition to my running course as I gradually increase my mileage. My goal is to eventually have a full marathon-length course relatively close to home that doesn't involve repetition. A subdivision near Devil's Millhopper looked appealing. I noticed on my map that a long, winding road went northward from NW 53rd Avenue and eventually would deposit me quite a distance away on NW 43rd Street. Then I could run back and reconnect with my original course.
In practice, through, as I rode by bicycle through this neighborhood, I discovered that the "long and winding road" was just a cartographic fantasy. My map had connections showing between neighborhoods that simply did not exist (the connections, that is); I encountered multiple dead ends. Finally, on my disappointed way back through this subdivision, I decided to investigate one of those "dead ends", only to discover that it led into a park that didn't allow motorized traffic but did allow bicyclists (and runners) through. And that path through the park did enable me to get onto 43rd Street anyway, albeit in a different location. Cool, but my Google Map just had a street featured there.
Don't get me wrong: I am very grateful and happy in general with my "maps" feature on Google. It really is quite amazing, actually. And the maps are usually pretty accurate, especially when trying to navigate down established major roads. But sometimes that accuracy breaks down in neighborhoods and can cause some consternation on the part of the frustrated traveller!
In practice, through, as I rode by bicycle through this neighborhood, I discovered that the "long and winding road" was just a cartographic fantasy. My map had connections showing between neighborhoods that simply did not exist (the connections, that is); I encountered multiple dead ends. Finally, on my disappointed way back through this subdivision, I decided to investigate one of those "dead ends", only to discover that it led into a park that didn't allow motorized traffic but did allow bicyclists (and runners) through. And that path through the park did enable me to get onto 43rd Street anyway, albeit in a different location. Cool, but my Google Map just had a street featured there.
Don't get me wrong: I am very grateful and happy in general with my "maps" feature on Google. It really is quite amazing, actually. And the maps are usually pretty accurate, especially when trying to navigate down established major roads. But sometimes that accuracy breaks down in neighborhoods and can cause some consternation on the part of the frustrated traveller!
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Summer Running Mileage Milestone
Earlier today I ran 10.47 miles around my neighborhood. This is the first time that I have ever covered that distance during the summertime. And it represents an important step in my training to complete a marathon sometime this year (the sooner the better).
An important factor in today's accomplishment was a tropical low in the southern Gulf of Mexico, whose outer bands passed over Gainesville. It was breezy, the temperatures stayed in the low eighties throughout my run, and I enjoyed running at times through refreshing showers.
An important factor in today's accomplishment was a tropical low in the southern Gulf of Mexico, whose outer bands passed over Gainesville. It was breezy, the temperatures stayed in the low eighties throughout my run, and I enjoyed running at times through refreshing showers.
Monday, August 9, 2010
Blog Lull
I have once again entered a period of a lull in my blog writing, for various reasons. I'm not sure how long this will last, but I still plan to write articles from time to time. Thanks for reading!
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Weekend Beach Trip
If the above pix look a little familiar to my loyal readers, it's because we stayed at the same hotel in Daytona Beach Shores that we did last year! It was a brief but enjoyable stay, highlighted by my three-mile beach run earlier today in the middle of a torrential lightning storm!
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Are We Becoming a Police State?
I just finished reading a very disturbing article from the Gizmodo website revealing how ordinary citizens are being arrested, jailed, and criminally charged for videotaping their public encounters with on-duty police officers. The rationale for this persecution is a wiretapping law designed to protect people's privacy. How completely upside-down to apply it in this manner, especially when it is often the privacy of the ordinary citizen that is being threatened by the officer!
Video-taping public encounters with the police is the only sure way that a citizen has for protection against harassment or false accusations on the part of our public "protectors". Some of the cases that have occurred are being challenged in court, but the overall effect of prosecuting those who are only trying to protect their own civil rights is to intimidate people in the presence of the police and to aggravate distrust of civil authority. Not a very good way to promote law and order, in my opinion.
After all, police testimony against a defendant is still almost automatically accepted by juries. Unless, of course, the defendant can produce contradictory audio/visual evidence that clearly refutes that testimony. It seems to be a blatant violation of the US Constitution to deprive people of the right to defend themselves in the best way possible. Otherwise, if this prohibition against taping police encounters stands, police can arbitrarily trump up any kind of charge against people that they disapprove of, based on lies about them creating a "public disturbance" or "resisting a police officer".
I hope that we are NOT becoming a police state, but right now the prospects don't look so bright. This is the sort of situation that I would have expected in closed, authoritarian third world countries, not the good ol' freedom-loving, flag-waving USA!
Video-taping public encounters with the police is the only sure way that a citizen has for protection against harassment or false accusations on the part of our public "protectors". Some of the cases that have occurred are being challenged in court, but the overall effect of prosecuting those who are only trying to protect their own civil rights is to intimidate people in the presence of the police and to aggravate distrust of civil authority. Not a very good way to promote law and order, in my opinion.
After all, police testimony against a defendant is still almost automatically accepted by juries. Unless, of course, the defendant can produce contradictory audio/visual evidence that clearly refutes that testimony. It seems to be a blatant violation of the US Constitution to deprive people of the right to defend themselves in the best way possible. Otherwise, if this prohibition against taping police encounters stands, police can arbitrarily trump up any kind of charge against people that they disapprove of, based on lies about them creating a "public disturbance" or "resisting a police officer".
I hope that we are NOT becoming a police state, but right now the prospects don't look so bright. This is the sort of situation that I would have expected in closed, authoritarian third world countries, not the good ol' freedom-loving, flag-waving USA!
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Swim or Bowl, I Need Better Technique
Today I had planned to go swimming in the early evening hours at my nearby YMCA, but threatening thunderclouds caused me to change my plans. Instead, I went bowling with my family. Not as much of a workout, but it was a good family event and very enjoyable.I am neither a good bowler nor a good swimmer, lacking crucial elements in my technique for each. But help is on the way! While I still thought I was going swimming, I went on the Internet and got some good pointers (and some video) on how to properly swim. Similarly, I'm looking for some good bowling tips, particularly in the area of my release of the ball to put a good rotation and "hook" into it.
Before the seventh grade, I neither swam nor bowled. But in one of the rare times of actual nurturing that I experienced at school, I had the opportunity to learn both. My swimming was deplorable and slow for many years afterward, however, with no one (including within my family) bothering to help me with my technique. Over the years, though, I did get to where I could "get around" in a reasonable span of time with my swimming. But I know I could do much better if only I improved my form. The same goes with bowling.
I'm more motivated with improving my swimming than improving my bowling. What I really want is to be able to swim distances on a comparable level with my running, without worrying too much about my times. But I do need to get my form down first.
Monday, August 2, 2010
Humidity Big Factor in Summer Running
Today, around noon, I ran my convoluted course around my home neighborhood, totaling exactly nine miles. In 90 degree weather, with the humidity hovering around 60%. I perspired a lot, but took some safety measures: I walked for about a minute every seven minutes, chugging down a little refrigerated Powerade Zero during each walking period (I finished the 20-ounce bottle by the run's end, the last drops by then being warm). After the run, I downed another cold bottle of Powerade Zero and stepped into a cold shower for several minutes, these steps helping to cool both the exterior and interior of my body. Then, I downed a large cold protein shake to further aid in my recovery.
All of those measures notwithstanding, had the humidity been, say, 10-15 % higher, I would have probably had to cut my run short of 9 miles. For once the temperature reaches a certain threshold, it is the humidity that plays a dramatically important role in my training.
In the summertime here in northern Florida, the evening temperature (without thunderstorms) usually is around the 80 degree mark, more or less. That in itself can be quite uncomfortable to run any appreciable distance in, but what's worse is that the humidity here tends to skyrocket after sunset, sometimes reaching 85-90%. I have seen many runners wait for the nighttime and they look as if they are about to have a heatstroke in the humidity and darkness!
In order to be able to properly perspire, the air has to be dry enough to bring out the sweat. High humidity has an effect of blocking perspiration, which can contribute to the body's overheating and health dangers. So I would much rather run in hotter temperatures with a relatively low humidity. Which is why I never did take to night running.
That being said, I'm not sure my loved ones know what to make of me running nine miles in 90 degree weather with the sun beating down on me!
All of those measures notwithstanding, had the humidity been, say, 10-15 % higher, I would have probably had to cut my run short of 9 miles. For once the temperature reaches a certain threshold, it is the humidity that plays a dramatically important role in my training.
In the summertime here in northern Florida, the evening temperature (without thunderstorms) usually is around the 80 degree mark, more or less. That in itself can be quite uncomfortable to run any appreciable distance in, but what's worse is that the humidity here tends to skyrocket after sunset, sometimes reaching 85-90%. I have seen many runners wait for the nighttime and they look as if they are about to have a heatstroke in the humidity and darkness!
In order to be able to properly perspire, the air has to be dry enough to bring out the sweat. High humidity has an effect of blocking perspiration, which can contribute to the body's overheating and health dangers. So I would much rather run in hotter temperatures with a relatively low humidity. Which is why I never did take to night running.
That being said, I'm not sure my loved ones know what to make of me running nine miles in 90 degree weather with the sun beating down on me!
Sunday, August 1, 2010
Wife's 30-Year High School Reunion
My wife and I just came back today from attending her thirty-year high school reunion in Leesburg, Florida. I actually lived there during a seven/eight month stretch in 1987, so I was also looking forward to seeing how much the place had changed (or stayed the same). Melissa got to meet up with several old friends from her high school days, with the spirit of the event being very positive.
I heard it remarked that, for at least this graduating class reunion, the old social cliques had dissolved with a high level of friendliness cutting across the old divisions. Would that it be so in all reunions! That's probably the one thing that most stands in my way of attending one of my old high school reunions. I can't imagine people letting go of the old artificial social divisions that gave them a sense of security and/or superiority in those long bygone years.
Of course, if there are still those kinds of "subdivisions" within my own high school's graduating class ('74), then that really isn't my problem, is it? I would probably be most interested anyway in seeing how those who were my friends back then are doing now.
Being pretty much the quintessential tag-along spouse for someone else's event, I still had a rather good time at Melissa's reunion. Plus, I got to run down the streets of Leesburg, something that I had never done before (I wasn't into running back in '87). All in all, a really nice experience with some really nice folks. And that's saying a lot, since I tend to avoid using the word "nice" on this blog!
I still have frozen mental pictures of my old classmates as they were in the early 70's, although they have obviously aged just like me. Once I was able to get on a reunion website of my old high school and looked at some pictures of my old classmates, none of whom I could recognize (the fact that the pictures weren't captioned didn't help). With Melissa's reunion, I had the reverse problem: without ingrained memories, I easily accepted the present relatively aged appearance of her classmates, trying instead to guess (with difficulty) how they must have appeared during their more youthful "glory days". Well, I guess it's about time to fish out her old yearbook to find out!
I heard it remarked that, for at least this graduating class reunion, the old social cliques had dissolved with a high level of friendliness cutting across the old divisions. Would that it be so in all reunions! That's probably the one thing that most stands in my way of attending one of my old high school reunions. I can't imagine people letting go of the old artificial social divisions that gave them a sense of security and/or superiority in those long bygone years.
Of course, if there are still those kinds of "subdivisions" within my own high school's graduating class ('74), then that really isn't my problem, is it? I would probably be most interested anyway in seeing how those who were my friends back then are doing now.
Being pretty much the quintessential tag-along spouse for someone else's event, I still had a rather good time at Melissa's reunion. Plus, I got to run down the streets of Leesburg, something that I had never done before (I wasn't into running back in '87). All in all, a really nice experience with some really nice folks. And that's saying a lot, since I tend to avoid using the word "nice" on this blog!
I still have frozen mental pictures of my old classmates as they were in the early 70's, although they have obviously aged just like me. Once I was able to get on a reunion website of my old high school and looked at some pictures of my old classmates, none of whom I could recognize (the fact that the pictures weren't captioned didn't help). With Melissa's reunion, I had the reverse problem: without ingrained memories, I easily accepted the present relatively aged appearance of her classmates, trying instead to guess (with difficulty) how they must have appeared during their more youthful "glory days". Well, I guess it's about time to fish out her old yearbook to find out!
Saturday, July 31, 2010
My Top Three (or Four) TV Shows: Cartoons
I am suffering from a disconnect with reality, as all three of my top favorite television shows are cartoons. But is it really so unrealistic of me, considering what is really being offered out there?
First, let me say that I don't care for either The Simpsons, Family Guy, or King of the Hill. I don't know, they just rub me the wrong way, that's all (although the father character in Family Guy thoroughly cracks me up). And perhaps my favorites rub you the wrong way as well: South Park, Beavis and Butthead, and SpongeBob SquarePants.
When each of these shows first came out, I had negative impressions of them, keeping me from taking the time to watch them and let their characters settle in. And in each program, it is the strong characters who carry the show. All three are also skillfully satirical, doing so in a way that "leaves no prisoners".
SpongBob SquarePants, set on the bottom of the sea in a place called "Bikini Bottom", features the title character, a Gomer Pyle-like "innocent-but-irritating" yellow kitchen sponge, along with his friends: a stupid starfish, a skinflint crab, a supersmart tomboy squirrel (usually in a diving suit), and my favorite, a supercynical and vain octopus. I tend to root for this last character, named Squidward, and usually feel that an episode without his presence is just not up to the standards of the others.
In like fashion, I dig not only the title characters in Beavis and Butthead, two thoroughly clueless teenage boys, but also the way the show pokes merciless fun at the way schools are run, especially with regard to their teachers and administration.
The same holds for South Park, a show about fourth-graders "growing up" in the title fictional town, located somewhere in Colorado. Stan is the main character, but my favorites are the evil Eric Cartman (a rotund pal of Stan's), tag-along naive Butters, and Stan's father, who epitomizes the often ridiculous pretensions permeating adult society.
Oh, I might want to include my fourth favorite show, also a cartoon: The Adventures of Winnie the Pooh. But I'm referring to the classically-animated cartoon, not the marionette or computer-animated spinoffs (avoid these at all costs). Another show with rock-solid characters, my favorites being the fastidious Rabbit and the gloomy-but-wise Eeyore. And like B & B, The Adventures of Winnie the Pooh is no longer anywhere to be found on my TV "dial".
Nothing on TV is for real anymore, I'm afraid. Not even "reality television". Not even much of the news, for the large part (especially on Fox). So if you don't mind, I'll stick with Beavis and Butthead on DVD (it is no longer aired), South Park, and SpongeBob. And maybe it's time for me to begin amassing my Winnie the Pooh collection as well.
First, let me say that I don't care for either The Simpsons, Family Guy, or King of the Hill. I don't know, they just rub me the wrong way, that's all (although the father character in Family Guy thoroughly cracks me up). And perhaps my favorites rub you the wrong way as well: South Park, Beavis and Butthead, and SpongeBob SquarePants.
When each of these shows first came out, I had negative impressions of them, keeping me from taking the time to watch them and let their characters settle in. And in each program, it is the strong characters who carry the show. All three are also skillfully satirical, doing so in a way that "leaves no prisoners".
SpongBob SquarePants, set on the bottom of the sea in a place called "Bikini Bottom", features the title character, a Gomer Pyle-like "innocent-but-irritating" yellow kitchen sponge, along with his friends: a stupid starfish, a skinflint crab, a supersmart tomboy squirrel (usually in a diving suit), and my favorite, a supercynical and vain octopus. I tend to root for this last character, named Squidward, and usually feel that an episode without his presence is just not up to the standards of the others.
In like fashion, I dig not only the title characters in Beavis and Butthead, two thoroughly clueless teenage boys, but also the way the show pokes merciless fun at the way schools are run, especially with regard to their teachers and administration.
The same holds for South Park, a show about fourth-graders "growing up" in the title fictional town, located somewhere in Colorado. Stan is the main character, but my favorites are the evil Eric Cartman (a rotund pal of Stan's), tag-along naive Butters, and Stan's father, who epitomizes the often ridiculous pretensions permeating adult society.
Oh, I might want to include my fourth favorite show, also a cartoon: The Adventures of Winnie the Pooh. But I'm referring to the classically-animated cartoon, not the marionette or computer-animated spinoffs (avoid these at all costs). Another show with rock-solid characters, my favorites being the fastidious Rabbit and the gloomy-but-wise Eeyore. And like B & B, The Adventures of Winnie the Pooh is no longer anywhere to be found on my TV "dial".
Nothing on TV is for real anymore, I'm afraid. Not even "reality television". Not even much of the news, for the large part (especially on Fox). So if you don't mind, I'll stick with Beavis and Butthead on DVD (it is no longer aired), South Park, and SpongeBob. And maybe it's time for me to begin amassing my Winnie the Pooh collection as well.
Friday, July 30, 2010
The Never Done Before Day (Or Week)
I am suffering from an imagination deficit. The thought occurred to me that it would be cool if I were to do or experience at least one completely new thing each day and keep a personal record of my journey. But as I go through my routines, I find few opportunities around me to accomplish this, other than trying out variations on what I am already doing.
For example, I tend to sit at coffee shops. Why not try the Latin Cafe, which probably serves Cuban coffee? Or maybe a similar place elsewhere that enables me to sit and study without spending too much money at a time? But would this really qualify as a new experience?
I could do something like rollerskating, skateboard, skydiving, or rock climbing. There, that takes care of four days! Ultimately, it seems that in the final analysis that I would indeed have to include variations on what I already do.
For example, take dancing, which I just don't do. There are many different types of dancing and dabbling in each would constitute a "new" activity. Visiting different parks and attractions could also constitute different activities. Volunteer projects abound, and each could count as something different to do.
Still, it might be a bit too much to pressure myself to do something different every day. Better maybe to extend the span to each week, enabling me to plan better and to enjoy more substantial experiences.
It seems to me that there are three kinds of "new" activities. The first is what I would call "initiative", i.e. something that I truly haven't done before that will build upon itself as I subsequently engage in it again and again, growing in the process. My earlier examples are largely within this group. The second is "transformational", meaning it may be an activity I had been doing but I take it to a brand-new level of engagement and achievement. And the third is "punctuated": an activity that is new but is more experiential than accomplishment-oriented (e.g. visiting places like NYC).
What I will do is just write down on a blank paper all of the things and places I want to do and visit. And make some plans!
For example, I tend to sit at coffee shops. Why not try the Latin Cafe, which probably serves Cuban coffee? Or maybe a similar place elsewhere that enables me to sit and study without spending too much money at a time? But would this really qualify as a new experience?
I could do something like rollerskating, skateboard, skydiving, or rock climbing. There, that takes care of four days! Ultimately, it seems that in the final analysis that I would indeed have to include variations on what I already do.
For example, take dancing, which I just don't do. There are many different types of dancing and dabbling in each would constitute a "new" activity. Visiting different parks and attractions could also constitute different activities. Volunteer projects abound, and each could count as something different to do.
Still, it might be a bit too much to pressure myself to do something different every day. Better maybe to extend the span to each week, enabling me to plan better and to enjoy more substantial experiences.
It seems to me that there are three kinds of "new" activities. The first is what I would call "initiative", i.e. something that I truly haven't done before that will build upon itself as I subsequently engage in it again and again, growing in the process. My earlier examples are largely within this group. The second is "transformational", meaning it may be an activity I had been doing but I take it to a brand-new level of engagement and achievement. And the third is "punctuated": an activity that is new but is more experiential than accomplishment-oriented (e.g. visiting places like NYC).
What I will do is just write down on a blank paper all of the things and places I want to do and visit. And make some plans!
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Religious Huddling From the Big Bad World
For a religion as predominant in our American culture as evangelical Christianity, it astounds me how its adherents go to great pains to characterize themselves as being persecuted. But then again, that shouldn't come as a surprise; they probably don't want to recognize the many centuries of Christian persecution of others, instead blindly reverting to "first-century" Christianity as a blueprint for their worldview.
The New Testament clearly paints a picture of persecuted Christians, either from the ruling pagan Romans or the Jewish religious ruling class in Judea. In order to escape arrest, they would secretly meet in believers' homes or in hidden underground locations. The meetings were a kind of "huddling", within which participants could discuss their various attempts to withstand the pressures of the evil outside world to make them renounce their faith. I have to admit to a degree of admiration for these brave early believers.
But it is nothing short of comical to attend family groups of evangelical Christians nowadays and hear people sit around in in elegant living rooms throwing out the same spiel about being persecuted. What they are really saying is that they don't want to have to see or hear anything in the so-called "outside world" that contradicts their religious dogma. So "secular" music, television, and movies are somehow persecuting them by existing. Even science (like evolutionary biology and cosmology) is a threat; hence a whole new branch of religious apologetics called "creation science". And if our democracy puts into office politicians whose priorities don't include discriminating against groups of people evangelicals disapprove of (like gays), then oh, how they are so persecuted!
The New Testament clearly paints a picture of persecuted Christians, either from the ruling pagan Romans or the Jewish religious ruling class in Judea. In order to escape arrest, they would secretly meet in believers' homes or in hidden underground locations. The meetings were a kind of "huddling", within which participants could discuss their various attempts to withstand the pressures of the evil outside world to make them renounce their faith. I have to admit to a degree of admiration for these brave early believers.
But it is nothing short of comical to attend family groups of evangelical Christians nowadays and hear people sit around in in elegant living rooms throwing out the same spiel about being persecuted. What they are really saying is that they don't want to have to see or hear anything in the so-called "outside world" that contradicts their religious dogma. So "secular" music, television, and movies are somehow persecuting them by existing. Even science (like evolutionary biology and cosmology) is a threat; hence a whole new branch of religious apologetics called "creation science". And if our democracy puts into office politicians whose priorities don't include discriminating against groups of people evangelicals disapprove of (like gays), then oh, how they are so persecuted!
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Today's Evangelical Christianity Gnostic
I remember seeing in the backs of magazines advertisements for books revealing the secrets of certain special, closed societies that have reputedly been around for centuries. Secrets that told of principles for health, prosperity, and even supernatural powers...including the ability to live forever. This idea that there is a secret formula, hidden from most of the world, leading its practitioners to a better life apart from the rest, is the embodiment of a religious philosophy called "gnosticism". It was recently expressed in the Matrix movie trilogy with those escaping the false world of the Matrix (representing what we would call "reality") discovering the truth that set them free from the control of forces detrimental to humanity (the "machines"). The transformational moment came quickly ( by swallowing the "red" pill) and was irreversible. But away from the cinema, we don't need science fiction or secret societies to discover gnosticism: it surrounds us in our culturally powerful religion of evangelical Christianity.
You see, the key to "success" within evangelical Christianity is not to do good deeds or live a moral life. According to the "rules", it is to have passed through an irreversible barrier by at least once having sincerely recognized one's sinful nature and prayed for Jesus to enter one's life and grant eternal life. This is called "salvation" and once obtained, cannot be lost, no matter how dissolutely the saved individual subsequently lives. So we continually read news reports about professed Christians getting into the same criminal trouble as non-Christians. The divorce rate is as high among the evangelical community as it is among the "lost". But you see, that isn't the important thing. The important thing is that the special formula was worked out successfully at a moment in time, somehow obligating God to bestow eternal life and escape from hell on the transformed individual.
There is a reason, I believe, why kingdoms and empires during the first few centuries of Christianity worked hard to eradicate gnosticism and brand it a heresy. For a ruler who proclaimed himself a Christian would essentially decree that his people were consequently Christian, with their eternal fate linked to their loyalty to him and good conduct on this earth during their mortal lives. The idea that people could bypass their obligations to their political leaders with a few catch-phrases, a heartfelt prayer, and (with some a necessity) a dunking in water, seemed bogus.
Well, when I first heard of the salvation method being pushed in evangelical Christianity in 1967, it seemed pretty bogus to me as well. That's because it was presented (and still is) as a formula that needs to be sincerely practiced at a moment in time to work. This is similar to the function of a key, and in the Matrix series the symbolism of keys plays strongly in their gnostic story line. The salvation formula in evangelical Christianity isn't a big secret, but it nevertheless resembles gnosticism in that it IS a formula that purports to drastically and permanently change the nature of one's life (and afterlife). It also sharply separates, in the eyes of the initiates, themselves from those living in the "outside" world.
You see, the key to "success" within evangelical Christianity is not to do good deeds or live a moral life. According to the "rules", it is to have passed through an irreversible barrier by at least once having sincerely recognized one's sinful nature and prayed for Jesus to enter one's life and grant eternal life. This is called "salvation" and once obtained, cannot be lost, no matter how dissolutely the saved individual subsequently lives. So we continually read news reports about professed Christians getting into the same criminal trouble as non-Christians. The divorce rate is as high among the evangelical community as it is among the "lost". But you see, that isn't the important thing. The important thing is that the special formula was worked out successfully at a moment in time, somehow obligating God to bestow eternal life and escape from hell on the transformed individual.
There is a reason, I believe, why kingdoms and empires during the first few centuries of Christianity worked hard to eradicate gnosticism and brand it a heresy. For a ruler who proclaimed himself a Christian would essentially decree that his people were consequently Christian, with their eternal fate linked to their loyalty to him and good conduct on this earth during their mortal lives. The idea that people could bypass their obligations to their political leaders with a few catch-phrases, a heartfelt prayer, and (with some a necessity) a dunking in water, seemed bogus.
Well, when I first heard of the salvation method being pushed in evangelical Christianity in 1967, it seemed pretty bogus to me as well. That's because it was presented (and still is) as a formula that needs to be sincerely practiced at a moment in time to work. This is similar to the function of a key, and in the Matrix series the symbolism of keys plays strongly in their gnostic story line. The salvation formula in evangelical Christianity isn't a big secret, but it nevertheless resembles gnosticism in that it IS a formula that purports to drastically and permanently change the nature of one's life (and afterlife). It also sharply separates, in the eyes of the initiates, themselves from those living in the "outside" world.
Monday, July 26, 2010
List Madness: I Rank Led Zeppelin's Songs
I like lists of all kinds. Perhaps the favorite is my own personal list of favorites. To that end, I will sometimes take a break from writing and just put out a "favorites" list. And today: my rating of Led Zeppelin songs, from top to bottom.
Making a list like this is problematic, since such a list is bound to change from time to time. But for general purposes, here is my list of studio Zep recordings according to my liking (with some of the titles probably imprecise). I indicated each song's album, abbreviated in the following manner: Led Zeppelin "I" (eponymous), II, III,and "IV" (untitled) are self-evident. Houses of the Holy: HH, Physical Graffiti: PG, Presence: P, In Throught the Out Door: ITOD, and Coda: C.
Here's my list:
1 When the Levee Breaks [IV]
2 Misty Mountain Hop [IV]
3 Dazed and Confused [I]
4 Over the Hills and Far Away [HH]
5 Friends [III]
6 Going to California [IV]
7 Stairway to Heaven [IV]
8 No Quarter [HH]
9 In the Evening [ITOD]
10 Ramble On [II]
11 Bron-Yr-Aur [PG]
12 Four Sticks [IV]
13 The Crunge [HH]
14 The Song Remains the Same [HH]
15 Hey Hey What Can I Do [Box Set]
16 Your Time is Gonna Come [I]
17 Wearing and Tearing [Coda]
18 Bron-Y-Aur Stomp [III]
19 Gallows Pole [III]
20 Kashmir [PG]
21 Bring It On Home [II]
22 Poor Tom [C]
23 Dancing Days [HH]
24 Black Mountain Side [I]
25 Living Loving Maid [II]
26 Battle of Evermore [IV]
27 Candy Store Rock [P]
28 Ten Years Gone [PG]
29 The Ocean [HH]
30 Travelling Riverside Blues [Box Set]
31 Achilles' Last Stand [P]
32 How Many More Times [I]
33 Rain Song [HH]
34 Rock n' Roll [IV]
35 Black Country Woman [PG]
36 Wanton Song [PG]
37 Heartbreaker [II]
38 Hats Off to Roy Harper [III]
39 Carouselambra [ITOD]
40 Royal Orleans [P]
41 In the Light [PG]
42 Houses of the Holy [PG]
43 That's the Way [III]
44 Communication Breakdown [I]
45 South Bound Saurez [ITOD]
46 All My Love [ITOD]
47 Since I've Been Loving You [III]
48 Nobody's Fault But Mine [P]
49 Trampled Under Foot [PG]
50 D'Yer Maker [HH]
51 Immigrant Song [III]
52 Sick Again [PG]
53 I'm Gonna Crawl [ITOD]
54 Hots On for Nowhere [P]
55 Celebration Day [III]
56 What Is and What Should Never Be [II]
57 Ozone Baby [C]
58 Tea for One [P]
59 Out on the Tiles [III]
60 We're Gonna Groove [C]
61 Boogie With Stu [PG]
62 In My Time of Dying [PG]
63 Tangerine [III]
64 Custard Pie [PG]
65 Thank You [II]
66 Lemon Song [II]
67 Good Times Bad Times [I]
68 Black Dog [IV]
69 Walter's Walk [C]
70 Bonzo's Montreux [C]
71 You Shook Me [I]
72 Down By the Seaside [PG]
73 Moby Dick [II]
74 Baby Come On Home [released 1996]
75 The Rover [PG]
76 I Can't Quit You Baby [I,C]
77 Night Flight [PG]
78 Whole Lotta Love [II]
79 Babe I'm Gonna Leave You [I]
80 Fool in the Rain [ITOD]
81 For Your Life [P]
82 Darlene [C]
83 Hot Dog [ITOD] (actually much worse than #83, more like #999,999)
Making a list like this is problematic, since such a list is bound to change from time to time. But for general purposes, here is my list of studio Zep recordings according to my liking (with some of the titles probably imprecise). I indicated each song's album, abbreviated in the following manner: Led Zeppelin "I" (eponymous), II, III,and "IV" (untitled) are self-evident. Houses of the Holy: HH, Physical Graffiti: PG, Presence: P, In Throught the Out Door: ITOD, and Coda: C.
Here's my list:
1 When the Levee Breaks [IV]
2 Misty Mountain Hop [IV]
3 Dazed and Confused [I]
4 Over the Hills and Far Away [HH]
5 Friends [III]
6 Going to California [IV]
7 Stairway to Heaven [IV]
8 No Quarter [HH]
9 In the Evening [ITOD]
10 Ramble On [II]
11 Bron-Yr-Aur [PG]
12 Four Sticks [IV]
13 The Crunge [HH]
14 The Song Remains the Same [HH]
15 Hey Hey What Can I Do [Box Set]
16 Your Time is Gonna Come [I]
17 Wearing and Tearing [Coda]
18 Bron-Y-Aur Stomp [III]
19 Gallows Pole [III]
20 Kashmir [PG]
21 Bring It On Home [II]
22 Poor Tom [C]
23 Dancing Days [HH]
24 Black Mountain Side [I]
25 Living Loving Maid [II]
26 Battle of Evermore [IV]
27 Candy Store Rock [P]
28 Ten Years Gone [PG]
29 The Ocean [HH]
30 Travelling Riverside Blues [Box Set]
31 Achilles' Last Stand [P]
32 How Many More Times [I]
33 Rain Song [HH]
34 Rock n' Roll [IV]
35 Black Country Woman [PG]
36 Wanton Song [PG]
37 Heartbreaker [II]
38 Hats Off to Roy Harper [III]
39 Carouselambra [ITOD]
40 Royal Orleans [P]
41 In the Light [PG]
42 Houses of the Holy [PG]
43 That's the Way [III]
44 Communication Breakdown [I]
45 South Bound Saurez [ITOD]
46 All My Love [ITOD]
47 Since I've Been Loving You [III]
48 Nobody's Fault But Mine [P]
49 Trampled Under Foot [PG]
50 D'Yer Maker [HH]
51 Immigrant Song [III]
52 Sick Again [PG]
53 I'm Gonna Crawl [ITOD]
54 Hots On for Nowhere [P]
55 Celebration Day [III]
56 What Is and What Should Never Be [II]
57 Ozone Baby [C]
58 Tea for One [P]
59 Out on the Tiles [III]
60 We're Gonna Groove [C]
61 Boogie With Stu [PG]
62 In My Time of Dying [PG]
63 Tangerine [III]
64 Custard Pie [PG]
65 Thank You [II]
66 Lemon Song [II]
67 Good Times Bad Times [I]
68 Black Dog [IV]
69 Walter's Walk [C]
70 Bonzo's Montreux [C]
71 You Shook Me [I]
72 Down By the Seaside [PG]
73 Moby Dick [II]
74 Baby Come On Home [released 1996]
75 The Rover [PG]
76 I Can't Quit You Baby [I,C]
77 Night Flight [PG]
78 Whole Lotta Love [II]
79 Babe I'm Gonna Leave You [I]
80 Fool in the Rain [ITOD]
81 For Your Life [P]
82 Darlene [C]
83 Hot Dog [ITOD] (actually much worse than #83, more like #999,999)
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Five Guys and a Duck
A few weeks ago, while in Jacksonville to drop my son off at college, I stopped off with my family at a popular new fast food chain that he recommended: Five Guys.
Five Guys claims to make better hamburgers than other chains, and apparently a lot of people agree with them. A restaurant just recently opened in southwest Gainesville on Archer Road, with such an instant following that people trying to find parking in adjacent lots have come back to their cars finding them booted (Gainesville parking badly sucks, as I have written previously). Well, I have my own experience about Five Guys.
The Five Guys we went to in Jacksonville was located in Town Center, site of many stores and restaurants. Inside, it was very noisy with poor seating. We decided we would take our food outside where there was more room. But the noise level was still high, with their oldies rock music blaring at us wherever we went. The prices were much higher than McDonald's or Burger King but lower than sit-in places like Chili's or TGIF. But I wasn't at all impressed with the burgers and thought that their fries were actually quite lousy.
I resented paying five bucks for a hamburger that I could have gotten for less than half the price at other places. At least in a sit-in restaurant, someone seats you and you can relax, appreciate the surroundings, and have others serve you. That merits the higher tab at the end. But we had to wait at Five Guys for our high-priced order standing there just like we would at Mac or BK. And their menu was pretty much limited to burgers and fries, with few other choices.
Trying to find something positive out of the experience while sitting there wolfing down my lunch, I noticed a little brown duck waddle through an opening and begin to cover the floor around the outdoor diners, looking for scraps. It was quite tame, as newly seated customers would attract its attention and it would make its way over to them. I kept looking back at that opening to see if more ducks would enter, but this guy apparently had his own personal territory marked out!
Unfortunately, the Five Guys in Gainesville doesn't have their own resident duck to entertain the suckers--I mean customers-- who patronize them. I wonder whether this fad will wear off, or whether other people really do have a different sense as to what tastes good and what constitutes a good dining experience.
Five Guys claims to make better hamburgers than other chains, and apparently a lot of people agree with them. A restaurant just recently opened in southwest Gainesville on Archer Road, with such an instant following that people trying to find parking in adjacent lots have come back to their cars finding them booted (Gainesville parking badly sucks, as I have written previously). Well, I have my own experience about Five Guys.
The Five Guys we went to in Jacksonville was located in Town Center, site of many stores and restaurants. Inside, it was very noisy with poor seating. We decided we would take our food outside where there was more room. But the noise level was still high, with their oldies rock music blaring at us wherever we went. The prices were much higher than McDonald's or Burger King but lower than sit-in places like Chili's or TGIF. But I wasn't at all impressed with the burgers and thought that their fries were actually quite lousy.
I resented paying five bucks for a hamburger that I could have gotten for less than half the price at other places. At least in a sit-in restaurant, someone seats you and you can relax, appreciate the surroundings, and have others serve you. That merits the higher tab at the end. But we had to wait at Five Guys for our high-priced order standing there just like we would at Mac or BK. And their menu was pretty much limited to burgers and fries, with few other choices.
Trying to find something positive out of the experience while sitting there wolfing down my lunch, I noticed a little brown duck waddle through an opening and begin to cover the floor around the outdoor diners, looking for scraps. It was quite tame, as newly seated customers would attract its attention and it would make its way over to them. I kept looking back at that opening to see if more ducks would enter, but this guy apparently had his own personal territory marked out!
Unfortunately, the Five Guys in Gainesville doesn't have their own resident duck to entertain the suckers--I mean customers-- who patronize them. I wonder whether this fad will wear off, or whether other people really do have a different sense as to what tastes good and what constitutes a good dining experience.
Friday, July 23, 2010
MLB Standings at This Stage
I am interested in how the major league baseball standings are unfolding this year. I suppose that, at this late date in July, this would be a good time to assess where we are, especially regarding those teams I tend to follow and root for.
In the American League East, the defending World Series champions New York Yankees have a 3-game lead over the Tampa Bay Rays, with Boston still in the playoff hunt 7.5 back. Tampa Bay, although in 2nd place, does enjoy a 7-game margin over the other 2nd place teams in the league for the final wild-card playoff position. In the Central division, there is an interesting 3-way struggle for the lead going on between the currently-leading Chicago White Sox ("my" team here), the Detroit Tigers, and the Minnesota Twins (last year's divisional champions). In the West, Texas is 6 games ahead of the Los Angeles Angels.
Looking at the National League East, my Atlanta Braves are surprising everyone by enjoying a 7-game lead over the NY Mets and Philly, along with the best record in the league. The Florida Marlins are experiencing a difficult season, languishing in 5th place at 47-48 (although they are showing signs of a surge). The Central division is a two-team contest between the Cincinnati Reds and the St. Louis Cardinals with the latter enjoying a narrow 1.5 game lead due to a recent 8-game winning streak. The West has San Diego surprisingly in front, with San Francisco, Colorado, and the disappointing Los Angeles Dodgers still in the race.
For the rest of the season, I see the standings pretty much holding to the way they are now. I'd like to see the Chicago White Sox hold on to win their division, but I suspect that Minnesota will pull ahead at the end. St. Louis should put some distance between themselves and Cincinnati, while anyone could win in the West.
I may do this a month from now to see where things stand.
In the American League East, the defending World Series champions New York Yankees have a 3-game lead over the Tampa Bay Rays, with Boston still in the playoff hunt 7.5 back. Tampa Bay, although in 2nd place, does enjoy a 7-game margin over the other 2nd place teams in the league for the final wild-card playoff position. In the Central division, there is an interesting 3-way struggle for the lead going on between the currently-leading Chicago White Sox ("my" team here), the Detroit Tigers, and the Minnesota Twins (last year's divisional champions). In the West, Texas is 6 games ahead of the Los Angeles Angels.
Looking at the National League East, my Atlanta Braves are surprising everyone by enjoying a 7-game lead over the NY Mets and Philly, along with the best record in the league. The Florida Marlins are experiencing a difficult season, languishing in 5th place at 47-48 (although they are showing signs of a surge). The Central division is a two-team contest between the Cincinnati Reds and the St. Louis Cardinals with the latter enjoying a narrow 1.5 game lead due to a recent 8-game winning streak. The West has San Diego surprisingly in front, with San Francisco, Colorado, and the disappointing Los Angeles Dodgers still in the race.
For the rest of the season, I see the standings pretty much holding to the way they are now. I'd like to see the Chicago White Sox hold on to win their division, but I suspect that Minnesota will pull ahead at the end. St. Louis should put some distance between themselves and Cincinnati, while anyone could win in the West.
I may do this a month from now to see where things stand.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Communicating Means Listening, Too
The pastor at the church I attend has quite a gift with public speaking. His sermons are at the same time witty and profound, balancing well the religious message he is trying to convey with his personal life experiences. A lot of times I come out of there saying that he did a great job of communicating what he was trying to express. But not too long ago, I had a personal experience with him that gave me pause for reflection.
This pastor, who is about my age, had decided to train to run in the Sarasota Half-Marathon that was held in March earlier this year. He and an associate pastor in the church were quite public about what they were going to do (neither had run a half-marathon before), and the a.p. actually incorporated it into one of his own sermons. Well, I had thought at first that the half-marathon that they were going to run in would naturally be the LifeSouth Five Points race held right here in Gainesville on February 14. A race, incidentally that I had trained to run (and did). So when that day came and went without any sign of my two religious acquaintances, I wondered whether they might have skipped out. But no, they had decided to run in Sarasota instead. Fine, I thought, maybe I'll have the chance to "compare notes" about our experiences someday.
When that day came, it was after church and the pastor walked out and, noticing me standing there with my two children, walked over to warmly greet me. That's when I brought up his half-marathon race and asked him how it went for him. But he was very terse and quickly let himself be distracted by someone else. In mid-conversation. I was left feeling like someone who had just been insulted. And then it hit me.
If you know you have a more-or-less captive audience for a specific block of time (like with Sunday sermons), then you can plan elaborately textured speeches that leave the listeners impressed with your abilities. But most of the time, you are in informal situations where it can be a struggle to hold someone's attention for more than just a few seconds. It is not your fault that people don't have the courtesy or attention span to hear out your ideas; it is more due to their bad habits as poor, selfish, and inattentive listeners. In that stunted after-church "conversation" with the pastor, his discourteous behavior cast a shadow on the subsequent times I sat through his sermons; if he won't listen to me for a couple of minutes, why does he think I should listen at all to him?
So from now on, when I hear that someone is a great "communicator", I understand that this usually means that they have a good speaking delivery and methodology. But to truly warrant that kind of praise, the great speaker also needs to be a great listener. And I have discovered that, in spite of the relative scarcity of good speakers, there are even fewer good listeners, my proud running pastor included.
This pastor, who is about my age, had decided to train to run in the Sarasota Half-Marathon that was held in March earlier this year. He and an associate pastor in the church were quite public about what they were going to do (neither had run a half-marathon before), and the a.p. actually incorporated it into one of his own sermons. Well, I had thought at first that the half-marathon that they were going to run in would naturally be the LifeSouth Five Points race held right here in Gainesville on February 14. A race, incidentally that I had trained to run (and did). So when that day came and went without any sign of my two religious acquaintances, I wondered whether they might have skipped out. But no, they had decided to run in Sarasota instead. Fine, I thought, maybe I'll have the chance to "compare notes" about our experiences someday.
When that day came, it was after church and the pastor walked out and, noticing me standing there with my two children, walked over to warmly greet me. That's when I brought up his half-marathon race and asked him how it went for him. But he was very terse and quickly let himself be distracted by someone else. In mid-conversation. I was left feeling like someone who had just been insulted. And then it hit me.
If you know you have a more-or-less captive audience for a specific block of time (like with Sunday sermons), then you can plan elaborately textured speeches that leave the listeners impressed with your abilities. But most of the time, you are in informal situations where it can be a struggle to hold someone's attention for more than just a few seconds. It is not your fault that people don't have the courtesy or attention span to hear out your ideas; it is more due to their bad habits as poor, selfish, and inattentive listeners. In that stunted after-church "conversation" with the pastor, his discourteous behavior cast a shadow on the subsequent times I sat through his sermons; if he won't listen to me for a couple of minutes, why does he think I should listen at all to him?
So from now on, when I hear that someone is a great "communicator", I understand that this usually means that they have a good speaking delivery and methodology. But to truly warrant that kind of praise, the great speaker also needs to be a great listener. And I have discovered that, in spite of the relative scarcity of good speakers, there are even fewer good listeners, my proud running pastor included.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Major Story: Lohan in the Slammer, 2A
I have my Gainesville Sun delivered to me every morning, between 6 and 7. It comes rolled up in a plastic wrapper, landing in my driveway behind my car. This morning Melissa got up before me and brought the paper up to the front door before she left for errands. I got up, dressed, and set out for my nearest Starbucks to try to conjure up something for a blog article. I picked up the paper as I stepped out, hoping that today there would be something of interest to write about. When I arrived at Starbucks, I bought my usual tall "bold" roast coffee, pulled my still-wrapped Gainesville Sun out of my backpack along with my AlphaSmart word processor, and glanced at the headline on the upper-left corner of the front page. I may not take the paper out of the wrapper after all.
This is the news headline I saw: "Lindsay Lohan Begins Serving Sentence, 2A". Newspaper. News. Paper. O.K., I get the paper part, I put it down on the floor and my dog understands that as well. But news? Who is Lindsay Lohan? An actress, though not a very prominent one anymore, who for years has gotten herself into one legal predicament after another. I'm sorry that she's going to jail now. But does that rate as a news headline? NEWS??!!
.....Oh what the heck, I took the plunge and pulled the paper out of the plastic and opened it. Sure enough, on page 2, was a long article about Lindsay Lohan's ordeals. On the next page was a shorter article reporting that the jobless-benefits bill had advanced through the Senate, with the Democrats managing to break a GOP filibuster. Thumbing through to page 7, I discovered that Elena Kagan passed the Senate Judiciary Committee's vote on her nomination 13-6 (my Republican pal Lindsay Graham of South Carolina displaying his customary classy deference to tradition and voting "aye"), with the final debate and vote to go through to the Senate floor. Neither the jobless-benefits bill nor Kagan's committee vote had any front-page indicators. Nor did the lengthy, important article on 5A with the title "British PM says BP not behind bomber's release". Or how about the informative and interesting analysis in the adjacent article about how China has surpassed the U.S. as the world's largest energy consumer?
I suppose I should be happy that the Gainesville Sun at least did have the relevant news articles somewhere in their paper. And perhaps it isn't all their fault that they thought Lindsay Lohan might mean more to people at large than jobless benefits or a new Supreme Court Justice. Because, sadly, with people at large, the Sun probably sized up the situation correctly.
This is the news headline I saw: "Lindsay Lohan Begins Serving Sentence, 2A". Newspaper. News. Paper. O.K., I get the paper part, I put it down on the floor and my dog understands that as well. But news? Who is Lindsay Lohan? An actress, though not a very prominent one anymore, who for years has gotten herself into one legal predicament after another. I'm sorry that she's going to jail now. But does that rate as a news headline? NEWS??!!
.....Oh what the heck, I took the plunge and pulled the paper out of the plastic and opened it. Sure enough, on page 2, was a long article about Lindsay Lohan's ordeals. On the next page was a shorter article reporting that the jobless-benefits bill had advanced through the Senate, with the Democrats managing to break a GOP filibuster. Thumbing through to page 7, I discovered that Elena Kagan passed the Senate Judiciary Committee's vote on her nomination 13-6 (my Republican pal Lindsay Graham of South Carolina displaying his customary classy deference to tradition and voting "aye"), with the final debate and vote to go through to the Senate floor. Neither the jobless-benefits bill nor Kagan's committee vote had any front-page indicators. Nor did the lengthy, important article on 5A with the title "British PM says BP not behind bomber's release". Or how about the informative and interesting analysis in the adjacent article about how China has surpassed the U.S. as the world's largest energy consumer?
I suppose I should be happy that the Gainesville Sun at least did have the relevant news articles somewhere in their paper. And perhaps it isn't all their fault that they thought Lindsay Lohan might mean more to people at large than jobless benefits or a new Supreme Court Justice. Because, sadly, with people at large, the Sun probably sized up the situation correctly.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Foreign Language Geniuses
The acquisition of language is truly a remarkable phenomenon and is one of the main traits that set humanity apart from the rest of the animal kingdom. We tend to take our native language for granted, but encounter a wall of incomprehension when confronted with someone speaking a different language. When I hear someone rattling off in any other tongue than English, he or she seems like an incredible genius. The effect becomes very bizarre when I am watching a TV show and the "geniuses" are displaying behaviors that are anything but intelligent. My primary source of this on TV is my Spanish-language station Univision.
Univision has a good variety of programming on it, and I am glad that my local cable TV company chose to include it on their channel lineup. I tend to watch their morning show Despierta America and their late night news broadcast, usually still on the air when I get home from work. They also have campy comedy shows, reality/talk shows resembling Oprah Winfrey and Maury Povich, and many novelas (soap operas). It is in these genres of programming where I find the "genius bubble" frequently popping!
The final straw came recently when I was watching commercials and a Rosetta Stone ad came on, in Spanish of course. Genius after genius came on the commercial (speaking fluent native Spanish) relating what a great program of language instruction Rosetta Stone had been for them. Finally, they revealed the great product that most of those applauding this company were talking about: Rosetta Stone English! Suddenly I got real smug (for a few seconds at least) and reminded myself that to many I was the one who seemed like a genius. At least until people actually learned English and understood what I was saying!
Univision has a good variety of programming on it, and I am glad that my local cable TV company chose to include it on their channel lineup. I tend to watch their morning show Despierta America and their late night news broadcast, usually still on the air when I get home from work. They also have campy comedy shows, reality/talk shows resembling Oprah Winfrey and Maury Povich, and many novelas (soap operas). It is in these genres of programming where I find the "genius bubble" frequently popping!
The final straw came recently when I was watching commercials and a Rosetta Stone ad came on, in Spanish of course. Genius after genius came on the commercial (speaking fluent native Spanish) relating what a great program of language instruction Rosetta Stone had been for them. Finally, they revealed the great product that most of those applauding this company were talking about: Rosetta Stone English! Suddenly I got real smug (for a few seconds at least) and reminded myself that to many I was the one who seemed like a genius. At least until people actually learned English and understood what I was saying!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
