CNN Romney Interview Contrived, Soft, and Nauseating

I was watching that CNN British Piers Morgan dude interviewing Mitt and Ann Romney last night and wondered whether they cleared out half of London just to provide that vast, empty backdrop as they sat outside.  It looked awfully contrived to me.  And the "safe" answers that the two gave to the patty-cake questions posed them completed the nauseating effect of the whole show.  I don't know what would be worse: having to put up with this guy's policies should he be elected, or just seeing him on TV all of the time, hemming, hawing, and (ultimately) lying...

Then again, I suppose the mirror image to this, if you dislike our current president, is that you had to put up with the same thing watching Obama in 2008 and then getting stuck with him up to now.  Oh well, I suppose we can take turns with this disgust, but I think I'd rather wait until 2016: after all, I was stuck with Dubya for eight years... fair is fair!

My Pre-Dawn Run in Hollywood

This morning in Hollywood I decided to run, but did not want to wait until weather conditions became intolerable.  After all, I don't have indoor, air-conditioned treadmill access down here.  Instead, I got up just before sunrise and ran a 2.7 mile course around my childhood neighborhood.  Unlike with the case of the last time I attempted this down here, I had no adverse physical reactions from the temperature coupled with high humidity.  This morning my running conditions were: temperature 79, humidity 89%.  I plan to do the same tomorrow.

As a curious sideline to my run, I noticed at this predawn time, as it gradually began to lighten around me, the somewhat hilarious sounds of roosters crowing every few houses I passed.  I mean, there are A LOT of roosters in my old subdivision.  Apparently, people around here in this suburban south Florida neighborhood like to raise chickens, perhaps due to its now more culturally diverse nature (as opposed to back in the 1960's and 70's when I lived here).  That's all well and fine with me, although some of the roosters sounded like they were strangling....

I-75 Now My Preferred Route to S. Florida over Turnpike

For my drive down to Hollywood near Miami, I have completely abandoned the Florida Turnpike in favor of the more lengthy, but also more pleasant western route of I-75. I am presently sitting at a Starbucks just east of Tampa, in a pretty cool shopping area.  It suits me much more than those "islands" on the Turnpike like Okahumka, Fort Drum, or Canoe Creek. Besides, I'm not fishing around for money to give away just for the privilege of driving down that road.

The last time I took the Turnpike to South Florida, I left it as soon as I got into Fort Pierce and could easily switch over to I-95, the eastern route in the state.  And coming back northward home to Gainesville, I had opted on my last two visits for I-75.  So it's pretty set for me that this is the way to go from now on (unless I begin to fly down)...

My Mixed Reaction to Penn State Penalties

Penn State University has just received numerous, very severe penalties for complicity in Jerry Sandusky's child molestations that went on for several years with the knowledge of various responsible parties in the university, including their head football coach, the late Joe Paterno.  Among the penalties that the governing board of the NCAA meted out were a $60 million fine, curtailment of football scholarships for the next four years, and a ban on bowl appearances for the same time span.  I agree with these sanctions. But they also did something that, while understanding the heinousness of the crimes that the officials had covered up and allowed to continue, I have a philosophical objection to...

All of Penn State's football victories from 1998 through 2111 were retroactively taken away.  This means that Coach Paterno's all-time NCAA career record of 411 coaching wins is gone, whittled down to 298.  Maybe the destruction of his legacy was part of their intent in levying this punishment.  But it also may have an unintended consequence as well.  Suppose I am watching an important college football game in the future, as I am reasonably assured of doing.  Why then should I suppose that the results of that game will hold up in future years when some later allegation about a violation may be proven true and that result possibly annulled? How can I ever believe in the finality of the results of any athletic contest held under the authority of the NCAA?

I believe that it is awfully presumptuous of NCAA officials to go back in time and rewrite their sports histories.  This certainly doesn't happen in professional sports: the penalties handed out for past violations affect the present and future, with the penalized teams and individuals having to suffer the immediate effects  thereof.  Going back and rewriting the books hurts innocent participants and fans, and creates the impression that what happens on the field is ultimately meaningless: a circle of judges sitting around a table behind closed doors high up in the NCAA will determine what "happened" according to their own dictates at any particular time they choose to do so.

Taking away past wins is nothing new with the NCAA.  This has gone on for decades.  And with all of the other means of punishment at their disposal, it is completely unnecessary. Yes, the violations may be bad: certainly they were in this case with that Sandusky ghoul. But choose another direction for sometimes deservedly severe punishment...

Michael Shipp's Senate Confirmation Vote

It could be that I just don't understand much about the way they do things up in Washington, especially my United States Senate.  Maybe this is so partially because I haven't been watching the proceedings, which are broadcast on C-Span2.  Well, this afternoon I just happened to be channel surfing and...lo and behold, when I hit C-Span2, it showed the U.S. Senate in action... not in adjournment and not in one of those endless, annoying quorum calls with the pretty classical music playing in the background and the screen showing a procession of inane tweets from the legislators.  No, instead a roll call was taking place for a floor vote: the President's nominee for a U.S. District Court Judge seat in New Jersey.  The nominee, Michael Shipp, was already a Magistrate Judge in that state.  None of this meant anything to me, except for the fact indicated on the screen that Obama had nominated him half a year ago, back in January.  So after the initial roll call, I hung around to see how close the voting would go and whether Shipp would be confirmed. After all, there must be SOME significant reason to put off the President's nomination for six months!

As the votes started coming in, and the assorted senators began filing into the front of the chamber (some faces being unfamiliar to me), the ayes and no's were sounded.  And everyone was voting "aye"!  Even the most extreme Obama haters there.  Apparently, this judicial candidate was noncontroversial and generated no opposition whatsoever to his nomination for this position.

I cannot fathom why slam-dunk votes of this type are needlessly delayed.  Either the opposition party is using parliamentary tactics to bring to a grinding halt the ENTIRE legislative agenda of the majority party, with Shipp's nomination a collateral casualty, or the process itself of moving ANY legislative activity through that body is severely flawed.  I suspect a little of both is true here.  Any thoughts from you, my valued reader?

Starbucks and McDonald's

One of the Starbucks stores I regularly sit in (at the corner of NW 16th Avenue and 13th Street in Gainesville) displays on its walls large pictures showing largely third world agricultural workers picking and preparing the coffee beans that presumably eventually make their way into my cup in one form or another.  These pictures are attractive and serve the purpose of connecting the customer with the producer.  In this regard, Starbucks, with its star product of coffee, has a huge advantage over a place like McDonald's, which features its beef hamburgers. After all, who wants to sit in a McDonald's and, while chomping away on a Big Mac, be treated to murals of cattle being slaughtered and their bloody meat butchered?

Yes, the indoor ambiance of most Starbucks beats McDonald's easily, and this may be one reason that, although the latter offers cheaper (and better tasting, in my opinion) brewed coffee and espresso drinks (hot and cold), people will still line up in the morning at the former for their coffee.  What I don't get, though, are the customers who'll do this and not sit down with their drink, but rather get right back into their cars and drive off.  If you're going to do that, why not just do a drive-through at McDonald's without having to get out in the first place (and save gobs of money in the process).  Of course, one possible explanation is that some customers are finicky and particular about their coffee beverage, and can be quite complicated with their order.  Starbucks is more suited for this.

Both Starbucks and McDonald's offer free wi-fi access.  Their store hours are very comparable, too.  And I find that usually I can find decent seating at McDonald's while Starbucks is sometimes completely crammed, with no seats available.

If all you want is brewed coffee, there is no better deal short of brewing your own (or getting the free coffee offered at Publix) than what you get at McDonald's.  One dollar pays for as large a coffee as you want, and then you get free refills.  The cheapest coffee at Starbucks is the misnamed "tall" size at $1.65, and then a refill will  cost $.50 more.

I guess what I'm getting at is that I know when I go to a Starbucks instead of a McDonald's that I am paying more for the pleasant surroundings than I am paying for the actual drink.  The idea of just buying a coffee there and leaving makes no sense.  I can easily brew much better tasting coffee at home and bring it along with me...

Looking for Indoor Running Solutions

I think we've reached the stage of the year when denial is unavoidable: the dog days of summer are here, at least in north central Florida.  For several mornings I have been struggling to get in simple 3.25-mile runs around my neighborhood against the ever-intensifying combination of heat and high humidity.  Finally, yesterday I caved in and resorted to the treadmill at my nearby YMCA.  Ditto for today.  And I wonder whether tomorrow will bring more of the same.

It is awful outside, even in the middle of the evening (at this writing it is about a quarter to ten).  Right now the temperature and humidity are such that I still wouldn't run in it, and it's nighttime.  It is times like this when I wish I lived in a more temperate, cooler climate.  I'm thinking more specifically about the coastal Pacific northwest, running from San Francisco northward to the Canadian border.  No, I'm not too keen on that Olympic National Park area of western Washington state, where it rains so much (and the hopefully-fictional vampires roam).  But dammit, even that would be preferable to what I have to go through right now.

When you cannot even just sit still in a chair on your front porch, in the shade, for a few minutes without beginning to sweat from the oppressive weather...well, I guess that's what air conditioning is for!  And why I am currently sitting INSIDE this Starbucks instead of outside.  Oh, and those mosquitoes out there don't help either.

I get tired of running on treadmills.  I would much prefer an indoor course, not necessarily a running track, where I would have dependable access and could escape the often intolerable outdoor conditions.  Something like a warehouse, auditorium, mall...even the sanctuary of a church would do.  I wouldn't want to mess up any carpeting, though: the flooring would need to be more solid.

So perhaps that's my solution to the weather here: find such a place indoors to run to my heart's content.  Easier said than done, but who said it can't be done?  Not me. But where?

Overly Emotional Investment in Sports and Politics

I sometimes get excited about watching sports, I admit it.  It's more fun to pick a team or athlete and fervently root for them to win than it is to just dispassionately sit there and "objectively" follow the proceedings.  Having said that, though, I have to say that this passion can be taken too far: when the emotion invested in pulling for one side's victory becomes so overwhelming that one cannot walk away from it afterwards and function in a calm, rational frame of mind.  Although I sometimes go a little overboard with this myself, I have learned to temper my disappointment (or elation) over the years.  The turning point in this for me was a regular season-ending game in the NFL, in 1977, between the Baltimore Colts and the New England Patriots.  And which team was it that I was so fanatically and fervently following? The Miami Dolphins!!!

That I would get so emotionally caught up in a game that didn't even feature the team I cared about points to how irrational things can get.  But the situation was this: New England was already eliminated from the post-season playoffs, and Miami had just finished their season.  If Baltimore won this game, they would finish with the same record and go instead of the Dolphins because they beat them twice during the year.  If New England won, Miami would play on.  So I ended up allowing myself to get sucked into rooting for a team (the Patriots) that I seriously disliked...

Having blown a big lead over the Colts, New England was struggling to keep Baltimore's offense from a late fourth-quarter touchdown that would give them the lead (and almost certainly the win).  Then, miraculously, after Colt quarterback Bert Jones had driven his team down the field and was about to score, he fumbled the ball and a Patriot defensive player fell on it, taking the ball back for New England and ensuring them of victory (and the playoffs for Miami).  But wait, an official had blown the whistle too early, nullifying the fumble and keeping the football in the Colts' hands.  They then proceeded to score the winning touchdown...and I was very, very angry at the unfairness of it all.  Afterwards, I could barely even speak to anyone because of my negative feelings, and then I realized that something had to change: it simply wasn't worth it to allow myself to get so involved like this.

In the decades that followed, I have observed others going off the deep end emotionally, not just with sports, but also with politics.  Especially presidential politics, and MOST especially presidential elections.  This year may be the worst I've ever seen in terms of people speaking in hyper-emotional, irrational terms about the opposing candidate and political party, which is generally seen as the "enemy" (regardless which side they are supporting).  People, step back and take a deep breath. It isn't worth it.  Get a hobby.  Form new friendships (away from politics).  Take a nap.  Watch the Sprout Channel to gain a perspective.  Read a good book.  Study a foreign language.  Go for a run/swim/walk/bike ride.  Do some sudoku/crosswords/jumble/kakuro. Take another nap. Clean out the garage. Go to the park.  Shop.  "Chill" out at Starbucks. 

In other words, get a life! 

Deer at Noon, Big Rain Soon

I slept in a little this morning, putting me behind in my assorted routines/projects for the day.  Among these was my running.  Still, I managed to get out into my suburban neighborhood for what has lately been almost automatic: my 3.25 mile course, which essentially takes up much of the perimeter of my subdivision (along with the adjacent one).  The western stretch of the course, which I reached today at noon, has homes bordering a wooded area (much of which is part of the infamous Dove World Outreach Center's property).  As I was running down this stretch, my peripheral vision caught the movement of something large and brown moving across a front yard on the left.  Oh-no, I first thought, a big dog! Hope it's friendly and doesn't go after me.  Then I looked at it directly, and to my amazement, saw a large antlerless deer casually making its way past me, showing no sign of concern on its part.  It then went around a house's corner and disappeared.  I went on running through the overcast gloom, hoping that I would get home before a storm hit.  And I was successful...

I cleaned up and a little later left my home at 12:45 PM. Just as I was pulling my car out of the driveway, the rain began, and with a ferocious intensity that lasted several minutes as I drove through it, squinting to try and see the road ahead of me.  And then I got to wondering about this rain and the deer I saw...

Suppose the deer knew somehow about the upcoming storm and came out more into the open because of it.  I can see how connections can be made between animal behavior and meteorological or seismic activity: it is very tempting to "connect the dots" and make a picture out of disparate, unrelated events.  Still, maybe that deer WAS less inhibited without the sun beating down, and certainly it isn't a farfetched notion to think that it felt an impending cloudburst.  But seeing a deer doesn't automatically point to the storm.  Still, I coined my own "folk proverb" about the weather and animal behavior: "Deer at noon, big rain soon."  Hey, I'm batting a thousand with it so far...

Mid-July Running Report

This month is seeing me continuing with my very consistent running pattern.  I have run on every day in July so far, with today's run extending my personal record streak to 79 consecutive days of running.  I also have kept my range tight: except for July, when I ran 7 miles, I have kept the other 17 days between 3.0 (on July 4's Melon Run race) and 4.2 miles.  I am also easily on pace to surpass my monthly goal of 100 miles (66.81 in 18 days).

I still have that urge to try for longer distances, but truth be told, I am also content with the facts that (1) the heat and humidity of the summer work in favor of shorter runs and (2) running for longer distances naturally takes up a larger hunk of my time, time that isn't always easy to come by.  It's a lot easier to block out a half-hour for a run, with some preparation time before and showering and recovery time after.  Still, if the conditions are favorable (free time and cooler, dryer weather) I'd like to try a longer run from time to time, even returning for an occasional 10+ mile run...

A Cynical Look at the Olympics

Here come the Olympics again, whether you like it or not.  These are not only the most talented and fanatically dedicated athletes in the world.  Were only that the case, I might approach the "five loops" with more enthusiasm than I have.  No, the exalted participants in the games are pretty much FULL-TIME athletes, either professionals in their sport or sponsored by others so that they can avoid the "distraction" of having to go to work and earn a living like the rest of us average plebeians.  That is what's got my goat about the games.  And don't even start with the rampant jingoistic nationalism permeating them...

Take the men's basketball event.  The U.S. "dream team", which was to feature NBA pro multimillionaire standouts like Derrick Rose, Dwight Howard, and Blake Griffin, has been rife with injuries, causing concern among some about their chances to win a gold medal.  As if I care about these professionals masquerading as amateurs for a few weeks!  And what about this Michael Phelps, filthy rich over his endorsement deals and commercial appearances, devoting his full time and resources to again being the best swimmer in the world?  Doesn't sound like a level playing field (or pool, or court) to me!

I never did like it back during the Cold War when the communist bloc countries like the Soviet Union and East Germany would use de facto professional athletes, training them full-time in their events and giving them phony job titles to allow them to pass as "amateurs", back when the Olympics actually pretended to care about amateurism in sports.  So those countries won more medals.  But instead of curtailing the problem, it was allowed to spread by essentially professionalizing all of the participants.  So the idea that somebody could work at a productive, meaningful job in a market-based economy and still train and make the team is sadly forever gone...unless, of course, that paid job is the sport itself.  These athletes on TV, these "Olympians", are not like you or me: they are both elites and elitists, and frankly I have no desire to follow or care about whether they win, place, show, or completely lose out in their precious god-awful, important (to them) events...

...on the other hand, it is always fun to observe how a particular sport is played, even if everyone at the "highest" level appear to perform almost like clones of each other.  It makes me want to just sit there this fall and watch Tim Tebow at quarterback, complete with his oddball, inefficient, but somehow winning technique, but HIS technique nevertheless...

A Strange Presidential Election Statistic

From early 1973 up to the Persian Gulf War of 1990-91, the United States experienced a period of "relative" peace.  In this period, although there were actions and crises abroad (the Mayaguez incident in Cambodia (1975), Iranian hostage rescue attempt (1980), Lebanese peacekeeping mission (1983), Grenada invasion (1983), bombing of Libya (1986), Panama invasion (1989), and covert operations in many places including Nicaragua and Afghanistan), we were not involved in a heavily staffed, full blown military effort that was tantamount to war.  This climate against major military involvement overseas was relevant to me in that, although I initially had to preregister for the draft in the early 1970's, suddenly the draft completely ended, including registration, for the entire time that I would have had to be in it.  Even now, with no draft, it is now a requirement for those deemed qualified to preregister (just in case a draft needs to quickly be reinstated).  But with Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and President Bush's determination to drive them out with primarily American military might, we have experienced a resurgence of the military, with anything of a martial nature being seen as a positive political force.  Veterans are now accorded a higher place in our society, although much still needs to be done to tend to the needs of those returning from combat duty with injuries and illness.  It is considered to be good political capital to identify oneself with the military in a supportive way.  Certainly this is the case with my own congressman, (very) conservative Republican Cliff Stearns, who decries big federal government...except in military and veteran matters.  I'm not necessarily against the military receiving a big budget (albeit with effective oversight), and I am all for giving veterans their due in civilian life.  And especially after 9/11, all of us are in debt to our fine soldiers who put their lives on the line abroad to protect us.  God bless them.

So, in the presidential elections since 1990, you might just think that candidates with records of military combat service abroad would prevail over those who either got deferments, safe assignments at home, or completely avoided military service.  And you would just think wrong.

In 1992, President George H.W. Bush, a World War II hero soldier, lost his reelection bid to Bill Clinton, Vietnam War deferment recipient.  Clinton in turn defeated Robert Dole, another decorated (and severely injured) WW2 veteran, in 1996.  2000 saw Al Gore, his service in Vietnam notwithstanding, lose to George W. Bush, who avoided Vietnam combat with his cushy National Guard service during the period.  Dubya then won reelection against Vietnam War combat veteran John Kerry in 2004.  So 2008 rolls around and what happens?  I guess you know the pattern by now: Vietnam War hero and long-term POW John McCain lost to Barack Obama, who opted (like me) to avoid the military in his youth and wasn't confronted with a war during that period.

1992, 1996, 2000, 2004, 2008.  The hero/soldier/veteran loses out.  And political parties were irrelevant to this outcome. So now here we are in 2012.  I guess "they" got the lesson by now, since we have as candidates non-military Obama running for reelection against Mitt Romney, who...you guessed it... avoided military duty with deferments.  So the chain WILL be broken this year, but not with a combat veteran getting into the oval office...

South Florida Visit Soon: Where to Go

I am anticipating a trip to South Florida in the next couple of weeks, and I am wondering what I should do down there (besides visiting a close relative).  After all, I have heard that the Dania Beach Hurricane roller coaster at Boomer's in Dania has shut down.  Well, that turns Boomer's into "Bummers" as far as I am concerned.  The beach is always an attractive option, I suppose.  But what else is there?

My memory of the area is full of great places like the Crandon Park Zoo on Key Biscayne, the Miami Seaquarium on Virginia Key (where they once had a segregated beach for blacks: hopefully this has changed by now in 2012), Haulover Beach (the formerly and unfairly "whites-only" beach where I went with family in the early 1960's and is, I believe, now a nudist beach), and the Museum of Science and Space Transit Planetarium in Coconut Grove. Then, of course, there is downtown Miami and Miami Beach as possible attractions in themselves. And I once worked at a business in Miami Shores, walking during my lunch breaks through the tiny, beautiful residential community of neighboring El Portal.

I would like to experience walking through downtown Miami, but is there a pedestrian/shopper friendly area there akin to Time Square in Midtown Manhattan?  I don't know, but maybe now is the time to find out before I go down there. And turn down the wrong street!

And that reminds me: downtown Hollywood is a pleasant place to stroll around; since the only coaster the area had is gone, I guess it's time to find another tradition to start...

Is Perception Engaging in Mental Illness PC?

As I mentioned as the close of my last article, the TNT new crime-investigation drama Perception, which showed its first episode last Monday, seems to have its own agenda regarding what should properly be the public's "perception" of mental illness, specifically the condition known as schizophrenia.  That the protagonist, neuropsychology professor Daniel Pierce, has this affliction is obvious; he even suffers from hallucinations arising thereof.  But this character is resolute about integrating himself into (not isolating from) general society.  And he wants others to accept people with his "condition" as full, welcome members of society, and not regulated to some ostracized, segregated status as "crazy" and, consequently, as some sort of dangerous threat. With this fictional character's viewpoint I wholeheartedly agree.  More than you could imagine, actually.  However...

It is one thing to want more acceptance for schizophrenics in our society.  They should have just the same rights and opportunities as others and shouldn't suffer discrimination for what is a medical illness anymore than someone with, say, diabetes, heart trouble, or cancer.  In the past, and possibly even in the present, those with this illness were subject to legalized abduction, incarceration in mental hospitals, and forced against their will to undergo treatments some of which was barbaric (like shock treatment or lobotomies).  As well as blatant discrimination with jobs and housing. Their rights MUST be upheld and respected!

Still, it is one thing to properly demand acceptance and respect.  It is, however, something completely different to act as if suffering mental illness is simply a matter of diversity, with the afflicted simply being "eccentric".  This is how the Wikipedia article written about Perception describes Dr. Pierce.  I abhor this apparent political correctness about what words can and cannot be used to name this disorder.  And it is a disorder, not just an eccentricity.  Our jails are teeming with the mentally ill, not just "eccentrics", and the homeless have an enormous number of the same, who because of their "eccentricity" cannot function independently in society.  This isn't just a diversity issue.

So let us all respect those afflicted with mental illness, including schizophrenia, as legitimate human beings suffering from a truly physical illness, and who merit the same degree of insurance coverage and societal respect and sympathy for their circumstance.  Be vigilant about protecting the civil liberties and rights of the mentally ill as well.  But if you don't like a word such as "schizophrenic", don't soften it to "eccentric": you are rendering service to no one in doing this. And you may actually be going counter to your own intentions by once again making this topic a taboo matter to discuss openly and honestly...

Watching Perception from its Beginning

I have a mixed record about keeping up with popular culture, especially that of a mainstream nature.  For example, on game shows like Millionaire or Jeopardy, I usually excel in the more academic areas while withering with questions (or answers, in Jeopardy) about celebrities, "top" pop music, and TV series.  So for me to say that I am interested in actually following a new television dramatic series from its very beginning is something of a statement.  But I may have come across a new series that is worth my attention: Perception.

Monday is one of my days off; the other weeknights during prime time I am at work.  So with Perception's premiere last Monday, I saw an opportunity to get into a new series from its beginning, with a high probability of being able to keep up with it should it turn out interesting.  And so far, I am sold on it.  So far.  And conditionally.

Perception is a crime investigation series that, like Monk before it, features a brilliant and sympathetic crime-solving individual with a decidedly pronounced mental handicap.  With Monk, it was obsessive-compulsive disorder.  With Perception's Dr. Daniel Pierce, a neuropsychologist, it is schizophrenia, replete with hallucinations (how convenient for the screen).  And as in Monk, the protagonist has an assistant who helps him to interface and cope with the often rough and intolerant world.  Oh, and naturally since he is solving crimes, Dr. Pierce is connected with the "authorities", here through an FBI agent who was a former student of Pierce and recruited the good professor's help on difficult cases.

As I mentioned, the character Daniel Pierce suffers hallucinations which in his case (at least in the first episode) are of relatively benign people who assist him in solving cases.  Plus, although it hasn't been revealed as such, there is one character he regularly talks with that I suspect to be a hallucination as well.  All of this dovetails well with the cinematic, romanticized view of the schizophrenic as some sort of brilliant soul with visual fireworks going on all around him/her that plain, ordinary people are (dammit) missing out on.  This was also the case in Ron Howard's portrayal of schizophrenic mathematician John Nash in the movie A Beautiful Mind. With all of the hallucinations and associated visual tricks and mysteries depicted here, I was surprised later to read that, unlike in the movie version, the real-life John Nash, although he was certainly delusional, actually did not suffer from hallucinations.  But that wouldn't have played very well to audiences, would it?

I am approaching Perception with the view that it is fiction, with the vivid and complex hallucinations of its protagonist used as devices to move the story forward in this very visual medium.  Sure, some people do suffer from them, but most probably not in the self-enlightening manner that this series, at least from my first viewing of it, seems to be bent to depicting them...

There is another angle to this series: how it portrays mental illness as the protagonist faces it as more of an aspect of diversity than as a medical condition, at least as I see it.  More on this in a future article...

Coffee Shop Habit

Sometimes I am fortunate to get off a few minutes early from work.  Also, fortunately, there are a couple of Starbucks in town that consistently stay open late at night (well, it's late at least for hokey Gainesville). The location on Archer Road stays open until midnight and is near my workplace, but it is usually filled to capacity when I get there.  So instead, I often take a slight detour eastward on my way home and go to the one at the corner of 16th Avenue and 13th Street (US 441).  They close at eleven, but I don't want to stay out late, anyway (the hokeyness has worn off on me, I guess).  This Starbucks has its usual complement of police "customers" crowding the place (and parking lot) at this time of night, which is fine since they seem to have me pegged as a legitimate human being and not a "suspect" to be scrutinized; besides, there is plenty of seating to go around, so bring 'em on...

I wonder sometimes how far back in my life this predilection to whiling away my time in public establishments drinking coffee goes.  I recall once when I was with my father as we attended one of those hip (back then) new age self-improvement seminars down at the Marriott near Miami International Airport.  It was October, 1972, and we had just finished hearing some sort of silly lecture  (the message from which I have forgotten) and went downstairs to the restaurant where we sat around the bar there with some others attending the seminar...and we had coffee.  Somehow the ambiance there made a strong, positive impression on me.  I was sixteen at the time. Still, I didn't get into the habit of going out to drink coffee until 1978, after I had been in Gainesville and was going to the University of Florida as an undergraduate student.  It was then that I took to this habit, something that I have never relinquished to this day.

Now when I am sitting in a coffee shop, I don't just sit there staring off into space.  I usually have my portable work processor with me in case something comes to mind that I'd like to write down, maybe even fit into a blog article (like right now, as a matter of fact).  Also, I have some foreign language texts that I study on a regular basis.  And then there are whatever books that I happen to be reading as well.  And a spiral notebook is on hand in case I'd like to jot down some thoughts or plan things out.

Well, I guess my time has "whiled" away enough, and it is approaching closing time.  It's homeward bound time!

Assorted Running Banter

Although I have laid off running in half-marathons for a while, I was intrigued the other day while surfing the Net when I discovered that in south Florida, several half-marathons are being held throughout this year.  As a matter of fact, in the middle of sweltering August, one will happen in Hialeah and another in North Miami the next day.  To be sure, these aren't your typical road-running races that I have run in the past.  Rather they are trail races and involve running on dirt paths and encountering assorted obstacles along the way.  Still, in south Florida, I don't envision hills presenting any kind of problem...

Someday, when this current medical condition I am going through gets satisfactorily resolved, I'd like to return to running half-marathon races.  With a vengeance.  And these newly sprung trail races may be just the sort of lower-cost, closer events that I could use to fill the half-marathon calendar up.  A calendar which, at least here in Florida, dries up in March and doesn't pick back up again until September.

Looking back on my participation in July 4's Melon Run here in my hometown of Gainesville, I was much more pleased with the experience than I was when I ran it in 2010.  And moreover, the professional photographer covering the race accomplished something that no previous photographer had managed: actually capturing a picture of me while running the race!  So naturally, I bought a print, although in all honesty it doesn't exactly flatter me...

This month, as expected, has seen the temperatures mount to an almost unbearable level for running.  This has driven me indoors to the treadmill on a number of occasions.  This morning, though, I decided to run a little earlier than usual, at 9 AM when the temperature was only around 80 degrees and the humidity was still high at around 77%.  It was a very uncomfortable, but manageable 3.25 mile run.  But I'm thinking of pushing back the running even earlier, to sunrise, as a matter of fact.  And changing my name to "The Dawn Runner". So who am I kidding, anyway? Run a half-marathon in the middle of summer in Greater Miami? C'mon!

Too Early for Album and Song of 2012?

Having recently obtained a copy of Regina Spektor's new release What We Saw From the Cheap Seats, I was a little apprehensive.  After all, two different musical acts that I have come to greatly admire, Sufjan Stevens and Radiohead, had recently issued new albums that, frankly, seriously disappointed me.  With Stevens it was worse, with a disappointing EP released almost concurrently with a letdown of an LP.  So I thought that maybe, just maybe, musical creative talent was thinning out of our atmosphere, possibly attributable to the extensive and exploding talk radio bullcrap polluting our airwaves.  Then I listened to Regina Spektor's new work.  What a work.

Often it takes me a few listens to get a feeling for a new recording.  Regina's new album was love at first listen, though.  Out of the eleven tracks on What We Saw From the Cheap Seats, I disliked only one (and it was the shortest song).  The rest was good listening...and then there were the two tracks that I could only reasonably describe as masterpieces.

Firewood and Open are about as good as it can get.  And Firewood went further: it made me literally cry (and it takes an awful lot to get someone like me into that state).  Each and every time I heard it I wept, and it got to be a little embarrassing when I would listen to it on my MP3 player out in public.  As a matter of fact, as far as I am concerned, Firewood is now the all-time greatest tear-jerking song.  Just beautiful.  And Open?  A more philosophically-bent piece it is, with a rather disturbing but very inspired and creative vocal twist in its middle that intensifies its message.  Of the two, though, Firewood has instantly shot up to become my favorite song of 2012 (with Open comfortably in second place).  Already, in early July.

Can I just close out the rest of 2012 and declare What We Saw From the Cheap Seats as this year's greatest album and Firewood as the song of the year?  Why not?  I have a hard time imagining how any new album or song would have a chance of surpassing them...

Regina...what an appropriate name: she rules!

Baseball's 2012 All-Star Break

We've arrived once again at the time of the summer when sports enthusiasts are all abuzz about...Wimbledon tennis, right?  Uh, sure, if you say so.

No, I was referring instead to the "real" sports annual milestone: the Major League Baseball All-Star break.  This is the time when a few watch an essentially meaningless Tuesday night game showcasing star players, but my interest is with the standings and how the various teams are doing.  In the American League East, my New York Yankees are comfortably in first place, although this year all five teams are competitive.  Baltimore is the biggest surprise, managing to stay in second place this late in the season.  In the AL Central are two other surprises: the first place Chicago White Sox and the embarrassing Cleveland Indians in second. I say embarrassing because whenever I am watching a game that they're playing in all I can do is stare at that offensive, toothy, grinning caricature of a Native American on their uniforms (and just about anywhere else, it seems).  Oh well, I guess I'll have to stay embarrassed because they're never going to change it.  Now what was I talking about? Oh yeah...

Although the Chisox and Grotesque Grinjuns are currently ahead of them in the AL Central standings, the Detroit Tigers, last year's divisional winner, is poised right behind them in third.  I expect them to surge ahead of the two upstarts in the season's second half and win it again (although I like the Pale Hose).

Over in the AL West, Texas is once again solidly in front while the Los Angeles/California/Anaheim/Los Angeles (at Anaheim) Angels are in solid second (even if their name isn't solid), having recovered from a horrendous start to the season.  I'm rooting for the "Wherever" Angels to overtake the Rangers for the divisional title.  Whoever finishes second should make it to the playoffs as a wildcard team, though.

The National League features a few surprises of its own.  The East has been turned on its head with perennial cellar-dweller Washington solidly in first place and perennial champion Philadelphia solidly in last.  Many are expecting the capital city's Nationals to fade some in the second half, and the New York Mets and Atlanta Braves are in good positions to surge to a title.  The NL Central also has a surprise leader: the Pittsburgh Pirates.  But lately this division has seen a big turnover in champions each year.  The Seattle Pilots, last year's divisional champions, are currently mired in the lower division (and I'm aware of what I just said) while Cincinnati and defending World Series champion St. Louis are in second and third places respectively.  Look for the champ Cards to brush away the opposition in the second half of the season, despite having lost star slugger Pujols to the Angels.  The NL West is shaping up as a three-way race between last year's winner Arizona, 2010's World Series champion San Francisco, and the overhyped Los Angeles Dodgers.  Who knows who will manage to win that division this year: your guess is as good as mine.

I'm trying to think of what would be the "best" World Series this year, based on what has been going on so far.  The Washington Nationals, although with clearly the best record in the National League so far, don't appeal to me.  No, I think rather that the New York Mets or San Francisco Giants would be a more attractive matchup against, of course, my pick in the American League: the Yanks!

2012: Not the Last Chance

I was skipping across my FM radio dial the other day and happened to come across the Neil Boortz show just as the host was finishing for the day.  And what words of right-wing conservative wisdom did soon-to-retire Mr. Boortz leave with us?  Just a reminder of a point he has apparently been repeating: the 2012 presidential election is our "last chance".  On hearing "last chance", I instantly picked up on his meaning, although our political outlooks are quite divergent.  Because I've heard observers from both sides, left and right, who see the upcoming election as leading inexorably, even permanently in one direction, all good or all bad, depending on which "side" one is on.

If Obama is reelected to his constitutionally-limited final four-year term, according to too many on the right, he will pursue an aggressive, socialist agenda while trying to figure out how to surreptitiously remain in office after his final term ends.  And just like I heard about Bill Clinton as he was nearing the end of his second term, with speculation running rampant among some opposition circles that he would impose martial law over some trumped-up national emergency just to stay in power, this tired old tune is being sung again, with just the names changed.  It saddens me to think that there are people around us who are this prone to unreasoning suspicion and paranoia and who flatly cut off anyone whose political leanings differ from theirs.

The left has its own fears.  If Romney gets elected, the rich will supposedly completely take over and have de facto dictatorial powers over everyone else.  The organized labor movement will be completely legislated out of existence.  Women and minorities will see their hard-fought civil rights gains over the past decades severely reversed.  And the U.S. Supreme Court will become irreversibly stacked with hard-line right-wing justices who, if Congress doesn't abide by their political and social agenda, will simply usurp the Legislative Branch's authority and write their own laws (which I believe they've already done with the recent Citizens United decision).  The Supreme Court, I admit, presents some problems here.

Forgive me for perhaps sounding naive, but I don't believe in either scenario (although the Supreme Court going overboard in one direction does sound ominous).   For me, Obama already has a substantial track record as president and he strikes me as someone who relishes collaborating with others, especially Congress, not ruling with an iron fist.  His reelection would produce more of the same leadership philosophy.  On the other hand, Mitt Romney has reached the position he is now in (the presumed nominee of a major party) by either avoiding specifics in his stances on the issues or flip-flopping on them.  But should he become president, he would be forced to actually make some decisions, some of them necessarily controversial by their nature.  And then an opposition movement would naturally form and grow against him.

It's the political pendulum and it has been going on in American presidential politics, as far as I can discern, since the 1824 election between John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson when third place finisher Henry Clay threw his support to Adams against plurality winner Jackson, giving Adams the election and creating as a by-product two factions with one in power and one in (often bitter) opposition.

Back and forth.  Momentum shifts.  This is the way it goes, folks, so chill out!  Remember, George W. Bush won reelection in 2004 and strengthened his party's majority in both houses of Congress that year.  Just two years later the Democrats took back both houses and, with Obama in 2008, the White House as well.  There is no "last chance", just the next election. The day after the 2012 election they'll be talking about 2016. And on and on it goes...