--When listening to different takes on the “surge” in Iraq, I hear two basically different points of view, both valid, within their limitations. The first, generally espoused by supporters of President Bush, claims that the surge has been a success. By making agreements with Sunni leaders disillusioned by the presence of Al-Qaeda in their midst, the U.S. was able to take back for the Iraqi government territory that had been in the control of insurgents. And that has indeed happened. So to that extent, the surge HAS been successful. But the Iraqi government was then supposed to take advantage of this improved situation on the ground and pass reconciliation legislation that would give all of the major factions within Iraq a sense of participation and security. It is in this area, as detractors of the surge’s effectiveness claim, that the surge is not coming to fruition. And if too much time passes without realizing true reconciliation there, then it all will have been in vain.
--The presidential campaign continues, and after the recent flack about Barack Obama’s pastor and Hillary Clinton’s exaggerations about her experience, not much has changed. Obama is still leading Clinton in delegates, primaries won, and states won. In national polls he leads against both Clinton and John McCain. The only change I am seeing is an increasing number of Democrats beginning to urge Hillary to back out, either now or at least not long after the April 22 Pennsylvania Primary results are revealed.
--A giant 160 square-mile chunk of Antarctic ice just dropped off into the ocean, continuing the undeniable trend of polar ice melting. In the U.S., we had a relatively late winter due to the La Niña effect, causing some (especially folks like Rush Limbaugh) to question the existence of global warming. But friends, it hasn’t gone away!
--The University of Florida Gators men’s basketball team has made the “final four” for the National Invitation Tournament. The next game is tomorrow evening. Florida has shown itself to be an NCAA Tournament-caliber team through its excellent play in the NIT. In the NCAA tourney, I predict a North Carolina-UCLA final next week, with the UCLA Bruins prevailing in that one.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Sunday, March 30, 2008
I'm Back!
Well, what can I say? I just couldn't stay away, could I?! Even though I'm back today on this blog, however, I'm not planning on writing anything long. The last two or three days have seen a resurgence of my respiratory allergies with a vengeance. I had my hands full just concentrating on getting through each day. The respite from my allergies that I enjoyed last year apparently wasn't permanent. Instead of taking over-the-counter products to alleviate the symptoms, I'm probably going to have to get a referral to see an allergist for more effective relief. After all, I enjoy being outdoors, and am even planning to spend a lot of time running cross-country this year. But not with things as they currently stand!
In the days ahead, from time to time I may publish some rather short blog entries, just to keep the discipline and continuity going. Having gaps in my blog just isn't cool with me!
In the days ahead, from time to time I may publish some rather short blog entries, just to keep the discipline and continuity going. Having gaps in my blog just isn't cool with me!
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Blog Break
I'm going to be taking a break from this blog for a few days, at least through the end of March. Please feel free to check out my archives, which go back to April of last year.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Favorite Songs of 1981
For 1981, I generally just listened to the average top-40 radio stations around for my music. This is because music had not yet been split up and over-specialized on different stations according to genre. There was a good mix of all types of popular music to listen to without changing the dial! The Moody Blues had two good songs I liked from 1981 in The Voice and Gemini Dream. Rising star Sheena Easton beat that with three: For Your Eyes Only, Morning Train (9 to 5), and Modern Girl. British bands Queen and ELO each came out with different-sounding tunes in Crazy Little Thing Called Love and Hang On Tight, respectively. Time got the "treatment" by the Alan Parsons Project with Time and by Styx with their classic Too Much Time On My Hands. Rush's phenomenal album Moving Pictures came out this year (it would be eleven more years before I discovered it) and with it, the unique, weird hit Tom Sawyer. Neil Diamond showed his patriotic side with America. Hank Williams Jr.'s A Country Boy Will Survive is one of my all-time country favorites. The Theme from Hill Street Blues, by Mike Post, was my favorite instrumental from 1981. Juice Newton hit the big time this year with her Queen of Hearts, a song that may have entered into Tom Petty's subconscious when he dreamed up his Running Down a Dream a few years later. Rod Stewart told a poignant story of a young couple in love in Young Turks. REO Speedwagon came out with a "Bo Diddley-beat" song: Don't Let Him Go. Dan Fogelberg's Same Old Lang Syne was a great seasonal song about a tender but bittersweet reunion. Blondie's tribute to rap music, Rapture, wasn't such a big hit with me in 1981, but it grew over the years and is now by far my favorite of that group. Swing Town, by the Steve Miller Band, and Sausalito Summernight, by Diesel, were two similar-sounding early autumn "happy" songs. Hall and Oates came out with three great tunes in '81: Kiss on My List, Private Eyes (my #3 favorite from that year, and I Can't Go For That (my #2 favorite). My top record from 1981 had to be Kim Carnes, scratchy voice and all, belting out her memorable Bette Davis Eyes, a song that, in spite of hearing it played so often, I never tired of listening to.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Reading on the Eights: 3/26
I split up my reading three ways during the last eight weeks: science fiction, Stephen King's Dark Tower series, and trying out some other authors.
I finished reading Isaac Asimov's The Robots of Dawn and then followed that up with his final robot novel, Robots and Empire. These books were a part of Asimov's general future narrative of robots, interstellar travel and settlement, empire, and finally, the Foundation. I have heard that even novels of his that are ostensibly independent of this narrative are still linked by some references within them. But Isaac Asimov is only one writer of many who do this, Stephen King being another one.
I have just completed The Wastelands, Stephen King's third of seven novels in his Dark Tower series. A few weeks earlier, I had read through book #2: The Drawing of the Three. In a nutshell, the premise of the Dark Tower series is that a "gunslinger" named Roland, in a future and deteriorating world, is searching for the Dark Tower, which reputedly holds the universe together through "beams". But something has gone dreadfully wrong in the Dark Tower, something of an evil nature, and Roland is on a mission to remedy matters. Along the way, he has several improbable contacts with our contemporary world and its people. A combination of science fiction and fantasy, King admits that he was inspired for this series by Tolkien's Lord of the Rings trilogy. The writing is great! I'm looking forward to seeing what happens to Roland. And like Asimov's stories, King has allowed elements of his Dark Tower saga to seep into a few of his other works.
Rounding out my reading, I tried out a couple of popular mystery/suspense writers: Mary Higgins Clark and Dean Koontz. I finished Clark's Nighttime is My Time, a stereotypical whodunnit murder mystery, with the author casting suspicion on half the characters in the novel before the villain is "unmasked" at the end. The writing was pleasant to follow and the reading went quickly. But I didn't particularly enjoy the story. For Koontz, I read his Shattered, which is another stereotypical story, this one about a cross-country road trip where the protagonists are pursued by a murderous predator. I liked Koontz's writing more than Clark's, but the endings of both novels were both predictable and flat (to me). I've also just begun reading Sue Grafton's novel "B" Is For Burglar. I've already read her "A" and "L" entries in this alphabetically entitled series, and I can attest that she is a great mystery writer!
I've also, during the past eight weeks, resumed reading science fiction short stories, beginning with works from the early 1930s, such as The Evolved Man (by Edmond Hamilton), The Jameson Satellite (by Neil R. Jones), Submicroscopic, and Awlo of Ulm (the last two by Capt. S.P. Meek). I plan to continue this as a sideline to my reading of novels until I've read all the short stories in my pretty-large collection.
I finished reading Isaac Asimov's The Robots of Dawn and then followed that up with his final robot novel, Robots and Empire. These books were a part of Asimov's general future narrative of robots, interstellar travel and settlement, empire, and finally, the Foundation. I have heard that even novels of his that are ostensibly independent of this narrative are still linked by some references within them. But Isaac Asimov is only one writer of many who do this, Stephen King being another one.
I have just completed The Wastelands, Stephen King's third of seven novels in his Dark Tower series. A few weeks earlier, I had read through book #2: The Drawing of the Three. In a nutshell, the premise of the Dark Tower series is that a "gunslinger" named Roland, in a future and deteriorating world, is searching for the Dark Tower, which reputedly holds the universe together through "beams". But something has gone dreadfully wrong in the Dark Tower, something of an evil nature, and Roland is on a mission to remedy matters. Along the way, he has several improbable contacts with our contemporary world and its people. A combination of science fiction and fantasy, King admits that he was inspired for this series by Tolkien's Lord of the Rings trilogy. The writing is great! I'm looking forward to seeing what happens to Roland. And like Asimov's stories, King has allowed elements of his Dark Tower saga to seep into a few of his other works.
Rounding out my reading, I tried out a couple of popular mystery/suspense writers: Mary Higgins Clark and Dean Koontz. I finished Clark's Nighttime is My Time, a stereotypical whodunnit murder mystery, with the author casting suspicion on half the characters in the novel before the villain is "unmasked" at the end. The writing was pleasant to follow and the reading went quickly. But I didn't particularly enjoy the story. For Koontz, I read his Shattered, which is another stereotypical story, this one about a cross-country road trip where the protagonists are pursued by a murderous predator. I liked Koontz's writing more than Clark's, but the endings of both novels were both predictable and flat (to me). I've also just begun reading Sue Grafton's novel "B" Is For Burglar. I've already read her "A" and "L" entries in this alphabetically entitled series, and I can attest that she is a great mystery writer!
I've also, during the past eight weeks, resumed reading science fiction short stories, beginning with works from the early 1930s, such as The Evolved Man (by Edmond Hamilton), The Jameson Satellite (by Neil R. Jones), Submicroscopic, and Awlo of Ulm (the last two by Capt. S.P. Meek). I plan to continue this as a sideline to my reading of novels until I've read all the short stories in my pretty-large collection.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Silent Speech
Confession time: I have a lousy habit of talking out loud to myself. I'm not referring to angry mumbling, which is a completely different matter. What I mean is that sometimes I will be thinking about a particular subject and, while working it out in my mind, I will talk aloud to myself. Now to others, this probably doesn't look so cool. So what I'd like to do is something that sounds a bit paradoxical: speak silently.
When we (or at least I) think silently, we take mental shortcuts and don't think in full, grammatically and semantically-correct sentences. We tend to hop around from one topic to another, and allow emotions and "tape-playing" to sway our thoughts. That is one big reason why I tend to talk out my thoughts: to expose them to a kind of feedback-test (through my own ears) as to how viable and rational they are. But I don't need to audibly vocalize my thoughts when I do this. To think in a "silent speech" manner would impose the discipline of concentration on thoughts, pushing back unwanted distractions (at least from conscious thinking).
Instead of talking to myself, I need to cultivate the skill of "silent speech", whereby my thoughts are produced within me with the same structure and content that would be acceptable writing or speech, without the mental shortcuts. At first, this would tend to slow down and even hamper my progression of thoughts, but in the end it will be a good exercise that will pay future dividends in my writing, speech, and avoid having people look at me as if I'm crazy!
Silent speech is a form of thinking that I am setting aside time for. I believe that many good writers and speakers already have trained themselves to be good at this, without necessarily knowing what they were doing. I've read that the late prolific writer Isaac Asimov claimed that he was always writing, even when he wasn't physically doing so. He had trained himself to think in a writing-friendly manner, and his memory was such that he could think up long sections of material and then later faithfully reproduce it on paper! I don't know how far I'll be able to go with this, but I do know that it's worth a sustained effort!
When we (or at least I) think silently, we take mental shortcuts and don't think in full, grammatically and semantically-correct sentences. We tend to hop around from one topic to another, and allow emotions and "tape-playing" to sway our thoughts. That is one big reason why I tend to talk out my thoughts: to expose them to a kind of feedback-test (through my own ears) as to how viable and rational they are. But I don't need to audibly vocalize my thoughts when I do this. To think in a "silent speech" manner would impose the discipline of concentration on thoughts, pushing back unwanted distractions (at least from conscious thinking).
Instead of talking to myself, I need to cultivate the skill of "silent speech", whereby my thoughts are produced within me with the same structure and content that would be acceptable writing or speech, without the mental shortcuts. At first, this would tend to slow down and even hamper my progression of thoughts, but in the end it will be a good exercise that will pay future dividends in my writing, speech, and avoid having people look at me as if I'm crazy!
Silent speech is a form of thinking that I am setting aside time for. I believe that many good writers and speakers already have trained themselves to be good at this, without necessarily knowing what they were doing. I've read that the late prolific writer Isaac Asimov claimed that he was always writing, even when he wasn't physically doing so. He had trained himself to think in a writing-friendly manner, and his memory was such that he could think up long sections of material and then later faithfully reproduce it on paper! I don't know how far I'll be able to go with this, but I do know that it's worth a sustained effort!
Monday, March 24, 2008
Monday Newsbreak: 3/24
--US and Russian officials have been meeting to discuss possibilities for some agreement regarding missiles and missile defense. The Russians are obviously concerned that we are engaging in treaties and missile defense agreements with nations that had earlier been part of the Warsaw Pact or the Soviet Union itself. Although I support my country's interests, I also concede that the Russians have a point: "defensive" measures can often appear to be offensive. I remember the concern during the Cold War that the Soviet Union had in place a much greater civil defense system than did the West. And this led to the accusation that their civil defense efforts were so much emphasized because they thought they could outlast, and thus win, a massive nuclear exchange between the two sides.
--Comedian Sinbad, who accompanied then-First Lady Hillary Clinton once during the nineties to on a visit to Bosnia, had some of his best lines when he sarcastically deflated her claim that she had braved sniper fire and was on a dangerous mission back then. Hillary's not-so-witty retort was that he was a comedian! I have an idea for a new "fantasy" series: The Adventures of Lady Hillary. There wouldn't be any concern about offending anyone since all of the stories would clearly be pure fiction!
--Legendary science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke died at age 90 this past Wednesday. He was best known for his Space Odyssey series that produced four books and two movies. To me, Clarke's vision of us having permanent moon bases by 1999 always made me feel that we had lost our dream and determination to conquer space after our initial Apollo moon successes.
--One of the criticisms of Reverend Jeremiah Wright has been that he claimed that America had brought on the 9/11 attacks by its foreign policy. And Barack Obama is somehow guilty by letting this guy be his pastor. But I distinctly remember John McCain coddling the late Reverend Jerry Falwell, who claimed that 9/11 was a divine judgement against America's decline in morality. Personally, I think that anything that a religious leader says needs to be taken with a grain of salt. I've heard utter nonsense from those of various faiths as well as some thoroughly asinine statements made in churches I've attended. I've gotten to the point where I just expect those in religious authority to make ridiculous comments, and maybe I've numbed myself a bit to them. Could this also be how Barack Obama has reacted to his pastor's diatribes?
--In college basketball, both the NCAA and NIT tournaments have begun. I've been having a bit of difficulty with enthusiasm for the NCAA tourney, since my University of Florida Gators weren't good enough this year to make it. UF is doing quite well so far in the National Invitation "runner-up" Tournament, having easily won its first two games (making it one of eight teams remaining). The big test will be tomorrow when they head out west to face Arizona State.
--Comedian Sinbad, who accompanied then-First Lady Hillary Clinton once during the nineties to on a visit to Bosnia, had some of his best lines when he sarcastically deflated her claim that she had braved sniper fire and was on a dangerous mission back then. Hillary's not-so-witty retort was that he was a comedian! I have an idea for a new "fantasy" series: The Adventures of Lady Hillary. There wouldn't be any concern about offending anyone since all of the stories would clearly be pure fiction!
--Legendary science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke died at age 90 this past Wednesday. He was best known for his Space Odyssey series that produced four books and two movies. To me, Clarke's vision of us having permanent moon bases by 1999 always made me feel that we had lost our dream and determination to conquer space after our initial Apollo moon successes.
--One of the criticisms of Reverend Jeremiah Wright has been that he claimed that America had brought on the 9/11 attacks by its foreign policy. And Barack Obama is somehow guilty by letting this guy be his pastor. But I distinctly remember John McCain coddling the late Reverend Jerry Falwell, who claimed that 9/11 was a divine judgement against America's decline in morality. Personally, I think that anything that a religious leader says needs to be taken with a grain of salt. I've heard utter nonsense from those of various faiths as well as some thoroughly asinine statements made in churches I've attended. I've gotten to the point where I just expect those in religious authority to make ridiculous comments, and maybe I've numbed myself a bit to them. Could this also be how Barack Obama has reacted to his pastor's diatribes?
--In college basketball, both the NCAA and NIT tournaments have begun. I've been having a bit of difficulty with enthusiasm for the NCAA tourney, since my University of Florida Gators weren't good enough this year to make it. UF is doing quite well so far in the National Invitation "runner-up" Tournament, having easily won its first two games (making it one of eight teams remaining). The big test will be tomorrow when they head out west to face Arizona State.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Bible Observations: Genesis 9
I know that it’s been a while since my last entry in this series, but I haven’t given up! I’m still plugging away, but like usual, there are a few serious questions arising from my reading.
As we pick up with Genesis 9, the Flood’s waters have subsided and Noah, with his family and the animals from the Ark, are left to repopulate the Earth. God makes a covenant with Noah and his sons, signified by a rainbow. But, as I read the passage, I also noticed that God’s covenant was also with every living creature as well. Now, how can anyone of a faith that points to the Bible for inspiration read this and then belittle the desperate efforts some people are making across this country and around the rest of the world to save endangered species from extinction? The idea that societies may need to sometimes restrict their economic development in specific cases in the interests of other “living creatures” is BIBLICAL, not just something that leftist “tree-huggers” advocate.
Also, in this passage God demands an accounting from any man who sheds the blood of his fellow man. Now I know that one of the Ten Commandments given to Moses was really “Thou shalt not murder”, not “Thou shalt not kill.” This apparently has been interpreted to mean that the accountability to God for shedding another’s blood is “exempted” in the case of war. But to me, all this interpretation really means is that those powerful enough to amass and direct armies can get away with murder, while the relatively powerless are subject to full accountability for killing others.
Genesis Chapter 9’s last half deals with a very puzzling and disturbing tale regarding Noah and his sons. Noah had become drunk one night and passed out naked in his tent. His youngest son, Ham, entered his father’s tent and saw his nakedness. Ham then went and told this to his older brothers Shem and Japheth. The two more righteous brothers then entered their father’s tent backwards (so as not to see him) and laid a garment over him to cover his body. Upon awakening, Noah apparently was able to automatically figure out everything that had happened and condemned Ham while praising Shem and Japheth. This doesn’t make any sense to me! It seems (to me) that there was much more to this story than was finally written into scripture. Nakedness in ancient times wasn’t the big taboo that it would later become. And Noah’s quick sizing-up of the situation, as well as his apparent overreaction, doesn’t make any sense either. This bears more investigation. After the telling of that tent incident, Genesis 9 informs us that Noah lived 350 more years, finally dying at the age of 950.
I sadly suspect that the tale of Ham’s offense against Noah was inserted into scripture in order to justify the putting down of those nations further south in Africa whose people have been assigned the designation of “Hamites”, or descendants of Ham.
Personally, I feel that Genesis 9 is an example of what is wrong with some religious people today. If a passage revealing God’s covenant with all of Earth’s living creatures creates some inconvenience or discomfort, then, well, it can simply be ignored. And if, as with the tale of Noah and Ham in the tent, a story makes no sense, then it is somehow a matter of faith to just gloss over the story’s inconsistencies and manufacture some kind of moral lesson from it.
As we pick up with Genesis 9, the Flood’s waters have subsided and Noah, with his family and the animals from the Ark, are left to repopulate the Earth. God makes a covenant with Noah and his sons, signified by a rainbow. But, as I read the passage, I also noticed that God’s covenant was also with every living creature as well. Now, how can anyone of a faith that points to the Bible for inspiration read this and then belittle the desperate efforts some people are making across this country and around the rest of the world to save endangered species from extinction? The idea that societies may need to sometimes restrict their economic development in specific cases in the interests of other “living creatures” is BIBLICAL, not just something that leftist “tree-huggers” advocate.
Also, in this passage God demands an accounting from any man who sheds the blood of his fellow man. Now I know that one of the Ten Commandments given to Moses was really “Thou shalt not murder”, not “Thou shalt not kill.” This apparently has been interpreted to mean that the accountability to God for shedding another’s blood is “exempted” in the case of war. But to me, all this interpretation really means is that those powerful enough to amass and direct armies can get away with murder, while the relatively powerless are subject to full accountability for killing others.
Genesis Chapter 9’s last half deals with a very puzzling and disturbing tale regarding Noah and his sons. Noah had become drunk one night and passed out naked in his tent. His youngest son, Ham, entered his father’s tent and saw his nakedness. Ham then went and told this to his older brothers Shem and Japheth. The two more righteous brothers then entered their father’s tent backwards (so as not to see him) and laid a garment over him to cover his body. Upon awakening, Noah apparently was able to automatically figure out everything that had happened and condemned Ham while praising Shem and Japheth. This doesn’t make any sense to me! It seems (to me) that there was much more to this story than was finally written into scripture. Nakedness in ancient times wasn’t the big taboo that it would later become. And Noah’s quick sizing-up of the situation, as well as his apparent overreaction, doesn’t make any sense either. This bears more investigation. After the telling of that tent incident, Genesis 9 informs us that Noah lived 350 more years, finally dying at the age of 950.
I sadly suspect that the tale of Ham’s offense against Noah was inserted into scripture in order to justify the putting down of those nations further south in Africa whose people have been assigned the designation of “Hamites”, or descendants of Ham.
Personally, I feel that Genesis 9 is an example of what is wrong with some religious people today. If a passage revealing God’s covenant with all of Earth’s living creatures creates some inconvenience or discomfort, then, well, it can simply be ignored. And if, as with the tale of Noah and Ham in the tent, a story makes no sense, then it is somehow a matter of faith to just gloss over the story’s inconsistencies and manufacture some kind of moral lesson from it.
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Barack Obama, Reverend Wright, and the Media
It's been known for quite a long time that Barack Obama has had a political firebrand for a pastor in Reverend Jeremiah Wright. But now that he is approaching victory to become the Democratic Party nominee, the mainstream media has taken hold of Obama's association with Reverend Wright and won't let go. This, to me, is an abdication of journalism.
Since the issue of Wright's critical diatribes has been widely known for a long time, the media has been at fault for not bringing it to light earlier. The timing for doing so now is nothing less than contrived and cynical. Leading the charge against Obama is, as expected, right-wing conservative talk radio. But another element has creeped into this issue that I am at a loss to explain. Karl Rove, who was George W. Bush's chief political strategist and who has been accused of assorted dirty campaign tricks in the past, is no longer officially connected with the Bush Administration. But Rove obviously has a reputation as being extremely partisan and manipulative. So why is it, then, that all of the major news networks are repeatedly welcoming him on the air to interview him about Obama's "pastor problem"? Rove always puts on a concerned, "objective" demeanor, pretending to be fair toward Obama while slamming him mercilessly. Over and over again, interview by interview. I don't get what the folks on these channels are thinking. Unless maybe some of them are hoping against hope that this issue will ruin Obama's campaign and hand the nomination to Hillary Clinton!
It does seem pretty peculiar to me that lately, the right-wing interests in this country seem to have lightened up on Hillary Clinton. First, John McCain's "disappointing" triumph on the Republican side caused some of them to even tacitly endorse Hillary. Now that Obama is approaching winning the Democratic nomination, the Republicans want to prevent the Democrats from reuniting under their candidate. So they attack the leader, Obama. And this plays into the desperate last-gasp efforts on the part of the Clinton campaign to reach out and try anything to derail him. Apparently, they are not anywhere as interested in returning the Democrats to power as they are in just returning themselves to power! Otherwise, why wouldn't Hillary Clinton come out in support of Barack Obama regarding this Reverend Wright issue? Even John McCain stood up for Obama a few weeks ago when he felt a local Ohio talk show host had gone too far with his criticisms of the Illinois Democrat.
Barack Obama has repeatedly disavowed the provocative statements of Reverent Wright, but that's apparently not good enough. But consider this: if you're opposed to Obama becoming President, then you're going to embrace anything that could hinder his campaign. But suppose you are an Obama supporter or haven't yet decided. Then doesn't this Reverend Wright controversy seem just more than a little over the top and contrived? Why would you allow people like Sean Hannity or Karl Rove to make up your mind for you?
Since the issue of Wright's critical diatribes has been widely known for a long time, the media has been at fault for not bringing it to light earlier. The timing for doing so now is nothing less than contrived and cynical. Leading the charge against Obama is, as expected, right-wing conservative talk radio. But another element has creeped into this issue that I am at a loss to explain. Karl Rove, who was George W. Bush's chief political strategist and who has been accused of assorted dirty campaign tricks in the past, is no longer officially connected with the Bush Administration. But Rove obviously has a reputation as being extremely partisan and manipulative. So why is it, then, that all of the major news networks are repeatedly welcoming him on the air to interview him about Obama's "pastor problem"? Rove always puts on a concerned, "objective" demeanor, pretending to be fair toward Obama while slamming him mercilessly. Over and over again, interview by interview. I don't get what the folks on these channels are thinking. Unless maybe some of them are hoping against hope that this issue will ruin Obama's campaign and hand the nomination to Hillary Clinton!
It does seem pretty peculiar to me that lately, the right-wing interests in this country seem to have lightened up on Hillary Clinton. First, John McCain's "disappointing" triumph on the Republican side caused some of them to even tacitly endorse Hillary. Now that Obama is approaching winning the Democratic nomination, the Republicans want to prevent the Democrats from reuniting under their candidate. So they attack the leader, Obama. And this plays into the desperate last-gasp efforts on the part of the Clinton campaign to reach out and try anything to derail him. Apparently, they are not anywhere as interested in returning the Democrats to power as they are in just returning themselves to power! Otherwise, why wouldn't Hillary Clinton come out in support of Barack Obama regarding this Reverend Wright issue? Even John McCain stood up for Obama a few weeks ago when he felt a local Ohio talk show host had gone too far with his criticisms of the Illinois Democrat.
Barack Obama has repeatedly disavowed the provocative statements of Reverent Wright, but that's apparently not good enough. But consider this: if you're opposed to Obama becoming President, then you're going to embrace anything that could hinder his campaign. But suppose you are an Obama supporter or haven't yet decided. Then doesn't this Reverend Wright controversy seem just more than a little over the top and contrived? Why would you allow people like Sean Hannity or Karl Rove to make up your mind for you?
Friday, March 21, 2008
Entitlement Blues
I have a few words to say on the subject of entitlement. I’m not specifically referring to the common usage of the term in reference to government “entitlement” programs that conservatives take great pleasure in railing against. I’m more interested in the generic way that people like to use entitlement to manipulate their lives.
It’s easy to turn on the TV and see politicians behaving as if they were entitled to be elected to a particular office. The most glaring example of this in recent years has been the Bush and Clinton families. First, George H.W. Bush was supposedly entitled to public office because of the legacy of his father, Connecticut Senator Prescott Bush. Then, “H.W.”’s kids, George W. and Jeb, were entitled to governor positions because of their father. And then, we were supposed to crown “Dubya” as President because “Daddy Bush”’s influence would obviously be imparted on his son and make us all feel so very secure. And now Hillary Clinton is pulling the same stunt, suggesting that as President, it’ll just be a happy-feely continuation of the Bill Clinton years. And I get the definite impression that she feels that Barack Obama is usurping her entitlement to that office! After all, it takes an awful lot of gall to suggest that Obama be her running mate as Vice-President when he’s leading in votes, delegates, and states won! Of course, political entitlement is nothing new. It’s as old as our country, and is very commonplace at the state level nowadays (Kennedy, Rockefeller, Romney, Dodd, Gore, Pryor, Bayh, Bennett, Sununu, Landrieu, Long, Murkowski, and Chafee are names of families with father/son, father/daughter, and husband/wife political “inheritances”).
But there is a sense of entitlement that permeates all of us, and to some extent I suppose that the pervasive advertising in our lives can be partially blamed. By this I mean that it’s very easy for us to look around and see what somebody else has and then say, “I work just as hard (or harder) as them, I deserve that, too!” And of course, Madison Avenue also says we deserve it! It wasn’t always so easy to buy things on credit as it is nowadays. The way I see things is that I like material things as much as the next guy. But I can be satisfied with a reasonably-priced priced product instead of a deluxe model with all the bells and whistles (and a much higher price tag). The concept of “enough” is something that I desperately wish would creep into the psyche of others so that I wouldn’t sometimes be made to feel that I’m “selling myself short” by “settling” for “lesser value” when I know, deep in my heart, that the question of what one is really entitled to has nothing to do with the excuses that people make to cover their material greed (or political ambition).
It’s easy to turn on the TV and see politicians behaving as if they were entitled to be elected to a particular office. The most glaring example of this in recent years has been the Bush and Clinton families. First, George H.W. Bush was supposedly entitled to public office because of the legacy of his father, Connecticut Senator Prescott Bush. Then, “H.W.”’s kids, George W. and Jeb, were entitled to governor positions because of their father. And then, we were supposed to crown “Dubya” as President because “Daddy Bush”’s influence would obviously be imparted on his son and make us all feel so very secure. And now Hillary Clinton is pulling the same stunt, suggesting that as President, it’ll just be a happy-feely continuation of the Bill Clinton years. And I get the definite impression that she feels that Barack Obama is usurping her entitlement to that office! After all, it takes an awful lot of gall to suggest that Obama be her running mate as Vice-President when he’s leading in votes, delegates, and states won! Of course, political entitlement is nothing new. It’s as old as our country, and is very commonplace at the state level nowadays (Kennedy, Rockefeller, Romney, Dodd, Gore, Pryor, Bayh, Bennett, Sununu, Landrieu, Long, Murkowski, and Chafee are names of families with father/son, father/daughter, and husband/wife political “inheritances”).
But there is a sense of entitlement that permeates all of us, and to some extent I suppose that the pervasive advertising in our lives can be partially blamed. By this I mean that it’s very easy for us to look around and see what somebody else has and then say, “I work just as hard (or harder) as them, I deserve that, too!” And of course, Madison Avenue also says we deserve it! It wasn’t always so easy to buy things on credit as it is nowadays. The way I see things is that I like material things as much as the next guy. But I can be satisfied with a reasonably-priced priced product instead of a deluxe model with all the bells and whistles (and a much higher price tag). The concept of “enough” is something that I desperately wish would creep into the psyche of others so that I wouldn’t sometimes be made to feel that I’m “selling myself short” by “settling” for “lesser value” when I know, deep in my heart, that the question of what one is really entitled to has nothing to do with the excuses that people make to cover their material greed (or political ambition).
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Favorite Songs of 1982
Caveat: If you reach this entry through a search engine while looking for some audio files or a comprehensive review of the year's music, I feel that it's only fair to let you know that I'm just going over the songs that I personally liked the very most from 1982 (as I lived through it then). So chances are that some or all of your favorites may not even be mentioned here!
1982 was a year full of memorable songs for me. Vangelis had his stirring monument to the noble and apparently dying institution of amateur sports with Chariots of Fire. My favorite Kenny Rogers song came out this year: his sweet Love Will Turn You Around. Journey's slow, mellow Still They Ride, although not one of their greatest hits, was still my favorite of theirs. Soft Cell's only major hit, Tainted Love, was a classic nevertheless (and extremely funny, intentionally or not). Joe Cocker and Jennifer Warnes teamed up to produce the beautiful love song Up Where We Belong. Dancer Toni Basil had her only big hit with her bubble gum/cheerleading tribute Mickey. My favorite Toto tune, Africa, came out late in the year, as did Men At Work's "geographical" contribution: Down Under (about Australia). The Who made their comeback after drummer Keith Moon's death with their emotional, happy You Better You Bet. Gypsy was another great Stevie Nicks song done under the banner of Fleetwood Mac. 1982 was the year I became aware of former Genesis frontman Peter Gabriel when he came out with his "shocking" and interesting Shock the Monkey. Supertramp's last good song of any consequence was their sad It's Raining Again. Robert Plant started his post-Led Zeppelin solo career sounding just like his old band with Burning Down One Side. The Split Enz "got me" on their side with their I Got You. Pat Benatar's Promises in the Dark was an initially slow-then-speeding up song that left me breathless at the end. Paul McCartney' Take It Away was a rare contribution of his that I liked. Billy Joel's sociopolitically-themed Nylon Curtain, (in my opinion) his last great LP, contained three great tracks: Allentown, Goodnight Saigon, and Pressure, my third favorite song from 1982. The west coast new wave band Missing Persons, featuring singer Dale Bozzio, hit the big time this year with Words and Destination Unknown, my #2 song from 1982. And while I lived back then during that year, there was one song that I could never get enough of: Genesis's screaming, keyboard-intensive, long jam session: Abacab.
1982 was a year full of memorable songs for me. Vangelis had his stirring monument to the noble and apparently dying institution of amateur sports with Chariots of Fire. My favorite Kenny Rogers song came out this year: his sweet Love Will Turn You Around. Journey's slow, mellow Still They Ride, although not one of their greatest hits, was still my favorite of theirs. Soft Cell's only major hit, Tainted Love, was a classic nevertheless (and extremely funny, intentionally or not). Joe Cocker and Jennifer Warnes teamed up to produce the beautiful love song Up Where We Belong. Dancer Toni Basil had her only big hit with her bubble gum/cheerleading tribute Mickey. My favorite Toto tune, Africa, came out late in the year, as did Men At Work's "geographical" contribution: Down Under (about Australia). The Who made their comeback after drummer Keith Moon's death with their emotional, happy You Better You Bet. Gypsy was another great Stevie Nicks song done under the banner of Fleetwood Mac. 1982 was the year I became aware of former Genesis frontman Peter Gabriel when he came out with his "shocking" and interesting Shock the Monkey. Supertramp's last good song of any consequence was their sad It's Raining Again. Robert Plant started his post-Led Zeppelin solo career sounding just like his old band with Burning Down One Side. The Split Enz "got me" on their side with their I Got You. Pat Benatar's Promises in the Dark was an initially slow-then-speeding up song that left me breathless at the end. Paul McCartney' Take It Away was a rare contribution of his that I liked. Billy Joel's sociopolitically-themed Nylon Curtain, (in my opinion) his last great LP, contained three great tracks: Allentown, Goodnight Saigon, and Pressure, my third favorite song from 1982. The west coast new wave band Missing Persons, featuring singer Dale Bozzio, hit the big time this year with Words and Destination Unknown, my #2 song from 1982. And while I lived back then during that year, there was one song that I could never get enough of: Genesis's screaming, keyboard-intensive, long jam session: Abacab.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Capital Punishment
I am an opponent of capital punishment. On the surface, the idea of making those guilty of taking someone else's life pay with their own seems to be one of simple, intuitively obvious justice. But there are a few problems I see with this.
First of all, the above argument falls apart when considering capital cases that don't deal with murder. For those crimes, there is NO compelling reason to consider capital punishment. But for the sake of argument, let's just consider the crime of murder. In our country at least, in order to get a death sentence for a murder, the convicted has to be shown to have committed the act in a premeditated way. Now it's going to be a lot easier to demonstrate that one killed another than it is to get inside the killer's mind and demonstrate, through a back-trail of their actions, some sort of premeditation. So the very thing that could sentence one to death (instead of life in prison) can be very subjective to determine. And the final determination thus may be made while unconsciously taking into account personal characteristics about the guilty that the judge and/or jury disapprove of. Things like race, speech, general appearance, tattoos, scars, facial expression, what part of the "tracks" they live on, and so on.
There is also evidence that African-Americans are given death sentences for first-degree murder convictions to a much higher degree than are others. For this reason alone, capital punishment should be abolished in favor of life in prison without parole. I'm no expert in law, but it seems to me that killing someone because of their race has to be the most extreme example of a civil rights violation!
And speaking of civil rights violations, even more repugnant (as repugnant as that is) than doling out differing life-or-death decisions based on race is executing those are are really innocent of their crimes. Recently, DNA testing has shown that many death row inmates were actually completely innocent! Now I know that the justice system can't be absolutely perfect, and that sometimes the innocent are wrongly convicted. But if an inmate is discovered to be innocent while in prison, he (or she) can still be released to enjoy the rest of their life in freedom. But once executed, there is no reversal of the error in justice, and the state has killed an innocent person!
Finally, I hear from time to time that capital punishment is a deterrent to murder. And maybe it is, at least marginally. But with the plague of murders committed in our country annually, especially in contrast with the relatively low incidence of murder in other Western nations, having the state selectively kill certain perpetrators (to me) completely skirts the problem. And the problem is that we, in our American society, promote, even extol violence. For some perverse reason, the idea is prevalent in our land that if someone wrongs you or even simply shows disrespect toward you, then you should (if you have any self-respect) retaliate by committing violence against the perceived offender. This goes all the way back to school-yard fights between kids. The kid who walks away from a taunt instead of fighting is usually branded a "sissy" or another derogatory term, which sometimes sticks with him for years. Popular TV series, movies and music that extol violence play a large role in fostering the culture of violence among the population. To me, it seems to be almost like a drug, for which some people have to continually get a "fix"!
There is one other aspect to capital punishment that I would like to raise. And that is the issue of "closure" for the murder victim's family and friends. I have noticed on many occasions that many years transpire between a convicted murderer being sentenced to death and the actual execution. In that period are numerous appeals and hearings. And these compel those who were close to the victim to attend them and repeatedly relive the trauma, sadness, and anger surrounding their loss. Although it may not satisfy the blood lust for revenge that some may feel against a murderer, a life sentence without parole would put closure at the time of sentencing and avoid the appeals and hearings that create so much unnecessary suffering. Then those families and friends could finally reach a sense of peace about their loss and go on with their lives.
So you see that I have quite a few reasons for opposing capital punishment. Do premeditated murderers deserve to die? Sure! But let's not be the ones who kill them. Let them be reminded each day for the rest of their lives why they have been put away from society in a locked cage!
First of all, the above argument falls apart when considering capital cases that don't deal with murder. For those crimes, there is NO compelling reason to consider capital punishment. But for the sake of argument, let's just consider the crime of murder. In our country at least, in order to get a death sentence for a murder, the convicted has to be shown to have committed the act in a premeditated way. Now it's going to be a lot easier to demonstrate that one killed another than it is to get inside the killer's mind and demonstrate, through a back-trail of their actions, some sort of premeditation. So the very thing that could sentence one to death (instead of life in prison) can be very subjective to determine. And the final determination thus may be made while unconsciously taking into account personal characteristics about the guilty that the judge and/or jury disapprove of. Things like race, speech, general appearance, tattoos, scars, facial expression, what part of the "tracks" they live on, and so on.
There is also evidence that African-Americans are given death sentences for first-degree murder convictions to a much higher degree than are others. For this reason alone, capital punishment should be abolished in favor of life in prison without parole. I'm no expert in law, but it seems to me that killing someone because of their race has to be the most extreme example of a civil rights violation!
And speaking of civil rights violations, even more repugnant (as repugnant as that is) than doling out differing life-or-death decisions based on race is executing those are are really innocent of their crimes. Recently, DNA testing has shown that many death row inmates were actually completely innocent! Now I know that the justice system can't be absolutely perfect, and that sometimes the innocent are wrongly convicted. But if an inmate is discovered to be innocent while in prison, he (or she) can still be released to enjoy the rest of their life in freedom. But once executed, there is no reversal of the error in justice, and the state has killed an innocent person!
Finally, I hear from time to time that capital punishment is a deterrent to murder. And maybe it is, at least marginally. But with the plague of murders committed in our country annually, especially in contrast with the relatively low incidence of murder in other Western nations, having the state selectively kill certain perpetrators (to me) completely skirts the problem. And the problem is that we, in our American society, promote, even extol violence. For some perverse reason, the idea is prevalent in our land that if someone wrongs you or even simply shows disrespect toward you, then you should (if you have any self-respect) retaliate by committing violence against the perceived offender. This goes all the way back to school-yard fights between kids. The kid who walks away from a taunt instead of fighting is usually branded a "sissy" or another derogatory term, which sometimes sticks with him for years. Popular TV series, movies and music that extol violence play a large role in fostering the culture of violence among the population. To me, it seems to be almost like a drug, for which some people have to continually get a "fix"!
There is one other aspect to capital punishment that I would like to raise. And that is the issue of "closure" for the murder victim's family and friends. I have noticed on many occasions that many years transpire between a convicted murderer being sentenced to death and the actual execution. In that period are numerous appeals and hearings. And these compel those who were close to the victim to attend them and repeatedly relive the trauma, sadness, and anger surrounding their loss. Although it may not satisfy the blood lust for revenge that some may feel against a murderer, a life sentence without parole would put closure at the time of sentencing and avoid the appeals and hearings that create so much unnecessary suffering. Then those families and friends could finally reach a sense of peace about their loss and go on with their lives.
So you see that I have quite a few reasons for opposing capital punishment. Do premeditated murderers deserve to die? Sure! But let's not be the ones who kill them. Let them be reminded each day for the rest of their lives why they have been put away from society in a locked cage!
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Foreign Languages on the Eights: 3/18
Almost all of us have things that we want to accomplish or improve upon in our lives. And effecting the changes that enable us to realize our goals usually involve both investing time and changing entrenched habits. All of which can make for a very interesting life, if one has the tenacity and courage to take on his or her dreams, that is. But I’ve found that trying to change several areas of my life at the same time can be awfully difficult, even counterproductive.
Sometimes I think that I tend to spread my goals out too much and try to fulfill to much at one time. Perhaps it would be better to prioritize what I’m trying to do and concentrate on only the most important goals in my efforts. After all, not only are there only twenty-four hours in a day, but, as you already know, that time is diminished by the demands of living to the point where it can be a struggle to find time to work on personal endeavors. Often I find that, even when I have some available time to work on something, I am too mentally or emotionally exhausted to focus on what I need to do.
In the sections of this blog that I refer to as “The Eights” (based on the Weather Channel’s use of that term to give local weather forecasts every eight minutes), I report, at eight-week intervals, on various self-improvement projects that I have been working on. But often I come to the time that I need to report on a particular area and find that I had been neglecting it. So, I wonder whether or not I’m spreading myself out too thin by trying to do too many different things. One major example is foreign language study.
Since my late teens, I’ve been interested in foreign languages, having studied several over the past few decades. But I’m never going to reach a reasonable level of proficiency in any of them if I keep hopping around from one language to another. For the past few months, I had been studying Vietnamese. But my progress has bogged down a bit, not because of a lack of interest or ability. It’s just that I’ve let other things encroach on my study time, as well as the creeping feeling that my foreign language study would be better served by concentrating instead on a language that I am much further down the road on toward proficiency. So, with this in mind, I am trimming my goals a bit to studying in an intensive manner just Spanish, French, German, Russian, and Chinese. I recognize that, even in doing this I am still spreading myself out quite a bit. But, unlike with other languages (like Vietnamese), I already understand quite a lot in these five languages and feel that I am close to crossing learning thresholds in all of them. So, from here on, I will be concentrating on them in my foreign language study and will report “on the eights” about my progress in this regard. Without abandoning my already-attained knowledge of Vietnamese.
Sometimes I think that I tend to spread my goals out too much and try to fulfill to much at one time. Perhaps it would be better to prioritize what I’m trying to do and concentrate on only the most important goals in my efforts. After all, not only are there only twenty-four hours in a day, but, as you already know, that time is diminished by the demands of living to the point where it can be a struggle to find time to work on personal endeavors. Often I find that, even when I have some available time to work on something, I am too mentally or emotionally exhausted to focus on what I need to do.
In the sections of this blog that I refer to as “The Eights” (based on the Weather Channel’s use of that term to give local weather forecasts every eight minutes), I report, at eight-week intervals, on various self-improvement projects that I have been working on. But often I come to the time that I need to report on a particular area and find that I had been neglecting it. So, I wonder whether or not I’m spreading myself out too thin by trying to do too many different things. One major example is foreign language study.
Since my late teens, I’ve been interested in foreign languages, having studied several over the past few decades. But I’m never going to reach a reasonable level of proficiency in any of them if I keep hopping around from one language to another. For the past few months, I had been studying Vietnamese. But my progress has bogged down a bit, not because of a lack of interest or ability. It’s just that I’ve let other things encroach on my study time, as well as the creeping feeling that my foreign language study would be better served by concentrating instead on a language that I am much further down the road on toward proficiency. So, with this in mind, I am trimming my goals a bit to studying in an intensive manner just Spanish, French, German, Russian, and Chinese. I recognize that, even in doing this I am still spreading myself out quite a bit. But, unlike with other languages (like Vietnamese), I already understand quite a lot in these five languages and feel that I am close to crossing learning thresholds in all of them. So, from here on, I will be concentrating on them in my foreign language study and will report “on the eights” about my progress in this regard. Without abandoning my already-attained knowledge of Vietnamese.
Monday, March 17, 2008
Monday Newsbreak: 3/17
--On Friday night, right in the middle of the Southeastern Conference college basketball tournament taking place in Atlanta, Georgia, tornadoes ripped through the city, even damaging the site of the games (the Georgia Dome) and sending debris onto the court and the players. Estimates have the damage to businesses and homes around $200 million, but so far no deaths have been reported. Is it just my imagination, or is this sort of thing happening much too often during the past few weeks?!!
--A crusading moralist, former Attorney General and New York Governor Eliot Spitzer showed his utterly base hypocrisy when the facts of his multiple prostitute liaisons came out. Mr. Spitzer, during his reign as NY Attorney General, never seemed to have any compunction about ruining anyone else’s career because of their mistakes. And all the while, the state’s chief law enforcement official was recklessly breaking it himself. Not that I think that his having sex with prostitutes should have been against the law in the first place. To me, that is a matter between him and his wife. If Spitzer hadn’t used his oh-so pious and self-righteous public demeanor to further his political career at the expense of others, I would probably be of the opinion that he should be left alone to sort out his personal problems as a private matter, and to remain as New York Governor. But it was he who placed himself so high on his public pedestal, and now it’s crashed!
--A crisis is developing in western China as violent confrontations have erupted between Tibetan protesters and the Chinese government authorities. With the press as tightly controlled as it is there, reported deaths are hard to confirm, but the figure ranges from 30 to over 100. Personally, I have no problem with the Chinese maintaining that Tibet is a part of their country. But I do object to the suppression of Tibetan Buddhist expression and autonomy in that region, starting with the exile since 1959 of the Dalai Lama. Why can’t they see that a Buddhist Tibet with some autonomy is an asset to their country and not a liability? And this happening just a few months before China hosts the Summer Olympics.
--The University of Florida men’s basketball team has gone into a late-season slump (four straight losses) and missed out on the (already remote) chance to defend their National Championship. But I’m looking forward to seeing how the Gators do in the National Invitation Tournament (starting this Wednesday). As for the NCAA tourney, I’m pulling for teams like Tennessee, Georgia, Vanderbilt, and North Carolina. I suspect, though, that this may indeed be UCLA’s season to win it all! Last night, I was watching ESPN’s “bracketology” program analyzing the tournament’s selections and matchups. Among the analysts were “Mr. Enthusiasm” Dick Vitale and former Indiana and Texas Tech coach Bobby Knight. For some reason, Vitale, who is usually humorous and upbeat, seemed agitated and uptight. And Knight, known for his on-court chair tossing and cursing at press conferences, was very calm, polite, and professional as he expressed his opinions. Who would have thought it?
--A crusading moralist, former Attorney General and New York Governor Eliot Spitzer showed his utterly base hypocrisy when the facts of his multiple prostitute liaisons came out. Mr. Spitzer, during his reign as NY Attorney General, never seemed to have any compunction about ruining anyone else’s career because of their mistakes. And all the while, the state’s chief law enforcement official was recklessly breaking it himself. Not that I think that his having sex with prostitutes should have been against the law in the first place. To me, that is a matter between him and his wife. If Spitzer hadn’t used his oh-so pious and self-righteous public demeanor to further his political career at the expense of others, I would probably be of the opinion that he should be left alone to sort out his personal problems as a private matter, and to remain as New York Governor. But it was he who placed himself so high on his public pedestal, and now it’s crashed!
--A crisis is developing in western China as violent confrontations have erupted between Tibetan protesters and the Chinese government authorities. With the press as tightly controlled as it is there, reported deaths are hard to confirm, but the figure ranges from 30 to over 100. Personally, I have no problem with the Chinese maintaining that Tibet is a part of their country. But I do object to the suppression of Tibetan Buddhist expression and autonomy in that region, starting with the exile since 1959 of the Dalai Lama. Why can’t they see that a Buddhist Tibet with some autonomy is an asset to their country and not a liability? And this happening just a few months before China hosts the Summer Olympics.
--The University of Florida men’s basketball team has gone into a late-season slump (four straight losses) and missed out on the (already remote) chance to defend their National Championship. But I’m looking forward to seeing how the Gators do in the National Invitation Tournament (starting this Wednesday). As for the NCAA tourney, I’m pulling for teams like Tennessee, Georgia, Vanderbilt, and North Carolina. I suspect, though, that this may indeed be UCLA’s season to win it all! Last night, I was watching ESPN’s “bracketology” program analyzing the tournament’s selections and matchups. Among the analysts were “Mr. Enthusiasm” Dick Vitale and former Indiana and Texas Tech coach Bobby Knight. For some reason, Vitale, who is usually humorous and upbeat, seemed agitated and uptight. And Knight, known for his on-court chair tossing and cursing at press conferences, was very calm, polite, and professional as he expressed his opinions. Who would have thought it?
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Now or Never
Being 51 years old can be seen in different ways, some positive and some negative. One positive way is that I have amassed enough personal memories and experiences during my lifetime so far to arrive at some conclusions regarding “how things are”. And one of the conclusions I have reached is that opportunities tend to run in cycles. What I mean by this is that if I screw up in some area of my life, I need to realize that at some future point I will again get the chance to realize my goals and not to get overwrought with feelings of failure.
As a young person, I often felt that I was in “now or never” situations, especially regarding my academic and career goals. And while it’s true that, at this stage in my life, I am not likely to be entering medical school to train as a physician, it’s also true that, within the academic spectrum, the vast majority of fields are still wide open for me to pursue! And, of course, there are age restrictions imposed on those seeking certain careers, such as, for example, the military. But the range of opportunities is so vast that a small number of closed doors pales in comparison. In athletics, I believed in my youth that I had better make my mark then because older people were naturally less athletic and couldn’t compete in sports. But as I have grown older, I have discovered a greater, purer joy in participating in athletics that I didn’t properly appreciate in bygone years. And since many sports have age levels built into their structures, I can usually participate in an age-appropriate level. For example, I am looking forward sometime this year to running a local 5 Kilometer road race. The best finishing times will, no doubt, go to those who are much younger than me. But I’ll also be competing with other runners in my age group! It’s also been said that for one to learn to speak a foreign language or to learn how to play a musical instrument, it is necessary to take advantage of a window of opportunity that exists in early childhood. But I’m in my fifties, and I derive great pleasure in studying both piano and several foreign languages.
As long as people are breathing and can think for themselves in this life, they need to adopt the notion that they have choices and opportunities. The notion permeating our youth of “now or never” is a pernicious lie that has caused untold needless suffering. In truth, there is plenty, plenty of time in life to accomplish and experience all kinds of rewarding and interesting things!
As a young person, I often felt that I was in “now or never” situations, especially regarding my academic and career goals. And while it’s true that, at this stage in my life, I am not likely to be entering medical school to train as a physician, it’s also true that, within the academic spectrum, the vast majority of fields are still wide open for me to pursue! And, of course, there are age restrictions imposed on those seeking certain careers, such as, for example, the military. But the range of opportunities is so vast that a small number of closed doors pales in comparison. In athletics, I believed in my youth that I had better make my mark then because older people were naturally less athletic and couldn’t compete in sports. But as I have grown older, I have discovered a greater, purer joy in participating in athletics that I didn’t properly appreciate in bygone years. And since many sports have age levels built into their structures, I can usually participate in an age-appropriate level. For example, I am looking forward sometime this year to running a local 5 Kilometer road race. The best finishing times will, no doubt, go to those who are much younger than me. But I’ll also be competing with other runners in my age group! It’s also been said that for one to learn to speak a foreign language or to learn how to play a musical instrument, it is necessary to take advantage of a window of opportunity that exists in early childhood. But I’m in my fifties, and I derive great pleasure in studying both piano and several foreign languages.
As long as people are breathing and can think for themselves in this life, they need to adopt the notion that they have choices and opportunities. The notion permeating our youth of “now or never” is a pernicious lie that has caused untold needless suffering. In truth, there is plenty, plenty of time in life to accomplish and experience all kinds of rewarding and interesting things!
Saturday, March 15, 2008
My Top Ten Favorite Ringo Songs
Although Beatles drummer Ringo Starr isn't known for his creative influence on their works, he has recorded some memorable music, both as a Beatle and as a solo artist. Here are my top ten favorites of Ringo's songs:
#10: It Don't Come Easy
This was Ringo's first singles release after the Beatles breakup, and it was very popular. I liked it, too, although I felt that it was way overplayed. A funny thing happened in conjunction with this song back then in early 1971. On several different occasions, I would be sitting around when suddenly I would feel prompted to turn on my radio. And time after time, the song being played would be It Don't Come Easy! Although I was beginning to think that I had psychic powers, this never did work with any other songs during the following years (and decades).
#9: Yellow Submarine
Yellow Submarine was the Beatles' "feel good" song in the midst of their final years of turmoil, although it actually appeared on their Revolver (UK) album in 1966. Although I wasn't too thrilled with Yellow Submarine when it first came out (this song was also overplayed on radio), I came to identify it positively with the same-titled movie, an animated farce that is one of my favorites.
#8: I Wanna Be Your Man
This was Ringo's track on their first U.S. album Meet the Beatles. A fast-paced "screamer", I Wanna Be Your Man was also recorded and released as a single by competitors The Rolling Stones around the same time.
#7: Matchbox
When the Beatles made their comedy farce A Hard Days Night, they released, within the United States, two albums that had overlapping tracks. My parents opted for buying the United Artists movie soundtrack album instead of Capitol Records' Something New. I wish they had picked Something New, which had a better selection of tracks, including Matchbox, a pleasant Ringo-rocker.
#6: Octopus's Garden
I suppose that if the Beatles had managed to stay together, then this would have been a good theme song for another Yellow Submarine-type movie. After all, with Octopus's Garden, we're once again frolicking around on the bottom of the sea! I generally didn't like the tracks on side one of Abbey Road, but Octopus's Garden stood out as the best by far (to me). Side two of Abbey Road, on the other hand, was a complete masterpiece!
#5: Don't Pass Me By
Ringo Starr was a true fan of American country music, and he showed his affection for this genre while with the Beatles by singing country songs on their albums (Honey Don't, Act Naturally, and What Goes On). Don't Pass Me By has a definite country flair to it as well. Personally, I associate it with some of my running training back in high school when, for some reason, I would keep playing this song over and over again in my mind while running! I guess the song's tempo went well with my pacing.
#4: Photograph
Ringo seemed to enjoy a very successful solo career. One of the reasons is that, of all the Beatles, he was the one who wasn't under scrutiny to produced artistically-relevant material. Also, after the initial offenses associated with the Beatles breakup in 1970-71, he cultivated friendship with his old bandmates. One of the fruits of this is his big 1973 hit Photograph, a record that could easily have been named as a Beatles song since all four Beatles contributed to it. This is the only single I've heard from Ringo's solo career where he is singing with a lot of heartfelt emotion. The other songs were either covers or novelty songs. I wish he had made a few more like Photograph.
#3: Boys
In 1964, the local (in Miami) Beatles radio stations 560-WQAM and 790-WFUN played a slew of earlier-recorded Beatles songs that had yet not been released on albums in the U.S.. Boys was one of these, and I took to it (being a seven-year boy myself). I liked the whole song and memorized it to the point where my father actually recorded me then singing it on tape (I wonder whether that still exists).
#2: I Get By With a Little Help From My Friends
Putting a Ringo song as the showcase track introducing their most celebrated album (Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band) was a stroke of genius on the part of Beatles producer George Martin. The song, basically a conversation between Ringo and the rest of the band, not only is the perfect response to the Sgt. Pepper build-up on track one: it represents Ringo Starr's professional life and success. He HAS gotten by with a little help from his friends.
#1: Goodnight
At the tail end of the 1968 Beatles double album generally referred to as the The White Album, Goodnight is the perfect cap to an album side dominated by the eery, disjointed John/Yoko collaboration Revolution 9. Goodnight, in my opinion, may be the greatest lullaby ever recorded, and definitely should displace Rock-a-Bye Baby for its sweet, soothing lyrics and melody. And Ringo, once again showing himself at his best singing from the heart, makes Goodnight a much better song than it already is.
#10: It Don't Come Easy
This was Ringo's first singles release after the Beatles breakup, and it was very popular. I liked it, too, although I felt that it was way overplayed. A funny thing happened in conjunction with this song back then in early 1971. On several different occasions, I would be sitting around when suddenly I would feel prompted to turn on my radio. And time after time, the song being played would be It Don't Come Easy! Although I was beginning to think that I had psychic powers, this never did work with any other songs during the following years (and decades).
#9: Yellow Submarine
Yellow Submarine was the Beatles' "feel good" song in the midst of their final years of turmoil, although it actually appeared on their Revolver (UK) album in 1966. Although I wasn't too thrilled with Yellow Submarine when it first came out (this song was also overplayed on radio), I came to identify it positively with the same-titled movie, an animated farce that is one of my favorites.
#8: I Wanna Be Your Man
This was Ringo's track on their first U.S. album Meet the Beatles. A fast-paced "screamer", I Wanna Be Your Man was also recorded and released as a single by competitors The Rolling Stones around the same time.
#7: Matchbox
When the Beatles made their comedy farce A Hard Days Night, they released, within the United States, two albums that had overlapping tracks. My parents opted for buying the United Artists movie soundtrack album instead of Capitol Records' Something New. I wish they had picked Something New, which had a better selection of tracks, including Matchbox, a pleasant Ringo-rocker.
#6: Octopus's Garden
I suppose that if the Beatles had managed to stay together, then this would have been a good theme song for another Yellow Submarine-type movie. After all, with Octopus's Garden, we're once again frolicking around on the bottom of the sea! I generally didn't like the tracks on side one of Abbey Road, but Octopus's Garden stood out as the best by far (to me). Side two of Abbey Road, on the other hand, was a complete masterpiece!
#5: Don't Pass Me By
Ringo Starr was a true fan of American country music, and he showed his affection for this genre while with the Beatles by singing country songs on their albums (Honey Don't, Act Naturally, and What Goes On). Don't Pass Me By has a definite country flair to it as well. Personally, I associate it with some of my running training back in high school when, for some reason, I would keep playing this song over and over again in my mind while running! I guess the song's tempo went well with my pacing.
#4: Photograph
Ringo seemed to enjoy a very successful solo career. One of the reasons is that, of all the Beatles, he was the one who wasn't under scrutiny to produced artistically-relevant material. Also, after the initial offenses associated with the Beatles breakup in 1970-71, he cultivated friendship with his old bandmates. One of the fruits of this is his big 1973 hit Photograph, a record that could easily have been named as a Beatles song since all four Beatles contributed to it. This is the only single I've heard from Ringo's solo career where he is singing with a lot of heartfelt emotion. The other songs were either covers or novelty songs. I wish he had made a few more like Photograph.
#3: Boys
In 1964, the local (in Miami) Beatles radio stations 560-WQAM and 790-WFUN played a slew of earlier-recorded Beatles songs that had yet not been released on albums in the U.S.. Boys was one of these, and I took to it (being a seven-year boy myself). I liked the whole song and memorized it to the point where my father actually recorded me then singing it on tape (I wonder whether that still exists).
#2: I Get By With a Little Help From My Friends
Putting a Ringo song as the showcase track introducing their most celebrated album (Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band) was a stroke of genius on the part of Beatles producer George Martin. The song, basically a conversation between Ringo and the rest of the band, not only is the perfect response to the Sgt. Pepper build-up on track one: it represents Ringo Starr's professional life and success. He HAS gotten by with a little help from his friends.
#1: Goodnight
At the tail end of the 1968 Beatles double album generally referred to as the The White Album, Goodnight is the perfect cap to an album side dominated by the eery, disjointed John/Yoko collaboration Revolution 9. Goodnight, in my opinion, may be the greatest lullaby ever recorded, and definitely should displace Rock-a-Bye Baby for its sweet, soothing lyrics and melody. And Ringo, once again showing himself at his best singing from the heart, makes Goodnight a much better song than it already is.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Factors in Choosing the President
The new President that we, as a collective people in America, will be choosing this November, is going to have to make many crucial decisions regarding our lives and the place of our country within the world. Many problems will crop up that demand an appropriate mixture of judgment, action, restraint, and balance. Where the President stands philosophically will determine his or her actions to a large extent. And there are two broad areas in which I see the potential Presidents differing.
One area is where to achieve a balance between the public good and private interests. Issues such as undocumented immigration, energy conservation and independence, and problems with our health care and insurance system are examples that a future President will need to come down on one side of the public/private dichotomy or the other. The other area is how a President should react to events in the world that either directly bear on American security and economic interests, or indirectly affect us through disasters, wars, or human rights issues arising elsewhere. What is the appropriate balance between projecting a forceful, imposing image of U.S. military might and projecting the image of America as the world's hope for benevolent, peaceful change through diplomacy and trade? If a foreign government behaves in a provocative manner against the United States, how will the new President react?
Part of what will determine the new President's decisions will be based on the aforementioned philosophical points. And it's not just a conservative vs. liberal question. On illegal immigration and foreign policy, conservatives favor a big government approach, while liberals favor more state intervention in issues like health care, energy, and the environment. But, of course, the candidates' philosophical take on the issues is not the only factor in affecting the next President's decisions. It will also be the quality and demeanor of that individual's personality, as well as that of his or her advisers. And the ability to clearly convey his or her vision of where the nation needs to go to the American people is also crucial.
So there you have it: the skeleton of how one should evaluate prospective Presidents. Not by whose aide said what about a rival candidate. Not by how much money a candidate raised. Not by whether the candidate has been winning "red","blue", large, or small states in the primaries and caucuses. Not by the gender, age, perceived race, religion, or political pedigree of the candidate. Not by what the candidate's spouse said. Not by the candidate's middle or married name. And not by whether one candidate seems to be more likely to win. The office of President is too powerful and the stakes are too high to vote for irrelevant reasons. But vote we shall, for better or for worse!
One area is where to achieve a balance between the public good and private interests. Issues such as undocumented immigration, energy conservation and independence, and problems with our health care and insurance system are examples that a future President will need to come down on one side of the public/private dichotomy or the other. The other area is how a President should react to events in the world that either directly bear on American security and economic interests, or indirectly affect us through disasters, wars, or human rights issues arising elsewhere. What is the appropriate balance between projecting a forceful, imposing image of U.S. military might and projecting the image of America as the world's hope for benevolent, peaceful change through diplomacy and trade? If a foreign government behaves in a provocative manner against the United States, how will the new President react?
Part of what will determine the new President's decisions will be based on the aforementioned philosophical points. And it's not just a conservative vs. liberal question. On illegal immigration and foreign policy, conservatives favor a big government approach, while liberals favor more state intervention in issues like health care, energy, and the environment. But, of course, the candidates' philosophical take on the issues is not the only factor in affecting the next President's decisions. It will also be the quality and demeanor of that individual's personality, as well as that of his or her advisers. And the ability to clearly convey his or her vision of where the nation needs to go to the American people is also crucial.
So there you have it: the skeleton of how one should evaluate prospective Presidents. Not by whose aide said what about a rival candidate. Not by how much money a candidate raised. Not by whether the candidate has been winning "red","blue", large, or small states in the primaries and caucuses. Not by the gender, age, perceived race, religion, or political pedigree of the candidate. Not by what the candidate's spouse said. Not by the candidate's middle or married name. And not by whether one candidate seems to be more likely to win. The office of President is too powerful and the stakes are too high to vote for irrelevant reasons. But vote we shall, for better or for worse!
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Favorite Songs of 1983
The rise of music videos dominated my take on popular music from back in 1983, with most of my listening taking place in front of a TV set. The biggest act of that year, Michael Jackson (from his Thriller album), came out with songs I liked in Billy Jean, Beat It, and PYT (Pretty Young Thing). Also, the final album of the Police, Synchronicity, produced tracks like King of Pain (not on video) and Synchronicity II (one of my favorite Police songs). Robert Plant showed a slower, mellower side as a solo artist with Big Log and In the Mood. Awful accompanying video notwithstanding, Pat Benatar's Love is a Battlefield was her best, in my opinion. And speaking of what love is, my all-time favorite of the Eurythmics, Love is a Stranger, had a great video to go with it. The Moody Blues slipped into the mix almost unnoticed an upbeat release titled Sitting at the Wheel. Neil Young paid homage to rock n' roll's doo-wop era with his funny Wonderin'. Wall of Voodoo's Mexican Radio was enhanced by the screaming-funny video. Speaking of funny, Men at Work's Be Good Johnny may have been the funniest, while their more sober It's a Mistake had a catchy beat to it. Eddie Grant and Donna Summer imparted a Caribbean flavor to the pop music scene with Electric Avenue and Unconditional Love, respectively. The Human League's inspiring Keep Feeling Fascination (the only song of theirs I liked) was a 1983 product. Dance-wise, the Kinks had Come Dancing while Men Without Hats had The Safety Dance. Kid Creole and the Coconuts had their Male Curiosity, a (very) minor hit. Our House, by Madness, completed the comic impression that this year was making in music. Perhaps the most sarcastic song in the history of music came out in 1983: Jackson Browne's masterpiece Lawyers in Love. Styx produced a veiled protest against Japan's takeover of the technology of automation with their cryptic Mr. Roboto. Electric Light Orchestra fell flat (but not with me) with their Secret Messages. The video was a cute takeoff on old pulp sci-fi/fantasy serials. Paul McCartney's So Bad was an uncommonly good song (and video, with Ringo Starr drumming). I saw the video for Invisible Sun by the Police during 1983 and fell in love with the song. The same was true for Donald Fagen's New Frontier. Pete Townshend had two earlier, very good songs of his publicized in '83 via videos: Rough Boy and Face Dances Pt.2. Elton John made one of his many comebacks with his defiant I'm Still Standing. Patrick Simmons, from the Doobie Brothers, had a minor hit that I liked: So Wrong. INXS's The One Thing was my #3 favorite song from 1983, coming out early in the year. The Fixx, with a generally pacifist/philosophical theme to their music, had several songs exposed through videos. My #2 favorite song for '83 was their Saved By Zero. I also liked their One Thing Leads to Another. And my top favorite tune from 1983 is from the Scottish band Big Country for their loud, shouting, positive song (with a guitar-made bagpipe sound) In a Big Country.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Piano on the Eights: 3/12
These past eight weeks in my piano-learning odyssey were highlighted by a recital on February 10 that I played at. I was one of twenty-five students, about a quarter of us adults and all of us students of the same teacher. I played an excerpt titled Melody in F by Rubinstein. I prepared a lot for it in the days preceding the recital, and when it was time for me to go up and play in front of the audience, it seemed as if someone else was playing the piece, with me in the background! So, the recital went off pretty well for me. My son, who is a much better pianist than me, also played at the recital.
I continued practicing as usual, and am still feeling as if I am not putting in the needed time and effort to reach my full potential. I practiced on excerpts from Borodin's Polovetzian Dances, Tchaikovsky's Swan Lake, and Joplin's The Entertainer, among others. I have begun to focus more on the "back" part of the keyboard where the black keys are. I believe that treating this section as the "starting point" for my keying, instead of as an area that I go to only when specially demanded by the printed music, will greatly facilitate my learning of the musical theory and my skill at playing.
I continued practicing as usual, and am still feeling as if I am not putting in the needed time and effort to reach my full potential. I practiced on excerpts from Borodin's Polovetzian Dances, Tchaikovsky's Swan Lake, and Joplin's The Entertainer, among others. I have begun to focus more on the "back" part of the keyboard where the black keys are. I believe that treating this section as the "starting point" for my keying, instead of as an area that I go to only when specially demanded by the printed music, will greatly facilitate my learning of the musical theory and my skill at playing.
Horizontal Ladder Monkey Bars
As you may already know (if you have been reading this this blog regularly), I am a big SpongeBob SquarePants fan. Well, on their Lost Episode, Patchy the Pirate (not animated) left his suburban Encino, California home with his treasure map to find the tape of the lost episode (that he had lost). The map directed Patchy to a playground where, for some absurd reason, he felt compelled to undergo all of the kiddie rides there before he started digging. Among the rides was one of those types of horizontal ladder monkey bars that I used to play on as a kid. Being an adult, Patchy naturally looked totally silly walking, instead of swinging, under the bars, still painstakingly clutching on to each rung as he crossed it.
At my old elementary school, we had a couple of these types of monkey bars, and it was something of a competition among some of us to see who could swing across the bars to the other side while skipping as many rungs as possible. Just about anybody, with some practice, could skip a rung while passing across, but only a few of us (me included) could make it skipping two. But on a couple of occasions, I observed classmates making the "trip" skipping three rungs!. But I never got that far.
Nowadays, like Patchy, whenever I come across one of those horizontal ladder monkey bars (which is becoming increasingly rarer), I usually find them way too low for me to swing from. But once, a few years ago, my family and I were approaching Atlanta from the north. A few miles north of that great city, we stopped off at a state park with a well-equipped playground. With horizontal ladder monkey bars. And they were very high up off the ground! But I found, as I tried to cross one, that my arms and shoulders had become so much weaker over the years that I could barely just stay put hanging from a rung, much less cross the "ladder"! But I realized then that it would be a fun thing to get myself into better shape by practicing crossing them after I returned to Gainesville. Only I never did find any that were high enough off the ground for me to swing from. And besides, the trend in playgrounds nowadays seems to be equipment made from plastic or wood. Apparently some do-gooder somewhere decided that the metal equipment posed a greater danger to children. But having seen Patchy cross the bars on that SpongeBob episode for what seemed like the umpteen-millionth time, it suddenly occurred to me that it would be fun to check out if there are still any of those around town. And if there are, this may be the start of a new training program to complement my running (I don't care for weight-training: but that's another story). Who knows: I may just get to be a three-rung skipper after all!
At my old elementary school, we had a couple of these types of monkey bars, and it was something of a competition among some of us to see who could swing across the bars to the other side while skipping as many rungs as possible. Just about anybody, with some practice, could skip a rung while passing across, but only a few of us (me included) could make it skipping two. But on a couple of occasions, I observed classmates making the "trip" skipping three rungs!. But I never got that far.
Nowadays, like Patchy, whenever I come across one of those horizontal ladder monkey bars (which is becoming increasingly rarer), I usually find them way too low for me to swing from. But once, a few years ago, my family and I were approaching Atlanta from the north. A few miles north of that great city, we stopped off at a state park with a well-equipped playground. With horizontal ladder monkey bars. And they were very high up off the ground! But I found, as I tried to cross one, that my arms and shoulders had become so much weaker over the years that I could barely just stay put hanging from a rung, much less cross the "ladder"! But I realized then that it would be a fun thing to get myself into better shape by practicing crossing them after I returned to Gainesville. Only I never did find any that were high enough off the ground for me to swing from. And besides, the trend in playgrounds nowadays seems to be equipment made from plastic or wood. Apparently some do-gooder somewhere decided that the metal equipment posed a greater danger to children. But having seen Patchy cross the bars on that SpongeBob episode for what seemed like the umpteen-millionth time, it suddenly occurred to me that it would be fun to check out if there are still any of those around town. And if there are, this may be the start of a new training program to complement my running (I don't care for weight-training: but that's another story). Who knows: I may just get to be a three-rung skipper after all!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
