It was National Pie Day the other day, a day that is set aside to bake and cook all of your favorite pies. At least that is what the American Pie Council wants us to believe. It's one of many "days" that promote the sale or use of something. They make life a little more interesting, sort of like the ice cream you put on top of the apple pie you eat. Every January on National Pie day there is contest held in the U.S. to select the best pies, a wholly subjective task.
Say "pie" to people and most immediately think of sweet pies. Apple pie is the favorite of most Americans and has been for decades. But pies can be savory instead of sweet. Any food that is topped with a dough of some sort. The strange thing is that in my travels I am rarely surprised by what is in a pie. They seem universal and differ more in name than in the ingredients. Maybe because pie is a simple dish it is recognizable almost everywhere a person goes.
Take the meat pie as an example. Every culture has some kind of dish that is a dough wrapped around a meat filling. The insides and spices may be different, the dough varies, but they are all the same basic dish. Maybe you recognize the names of some of those meat pies. They include: Pasty pie, Meat pie, Steak and kidney pie, Chicken pot pie, pork pie etc. One that I like to make is Shepherd's pie. That is a lamb based meat pie topped not with dough, but with mashed potatoes.
I can't say what the best pie I ever ate is because there are too many I have eaten to remember the best one. It's probably a sweet one though. I love sweets. But we have one version of a meat pie that is very good too. The grandmas aren't passing down pie recipes to the kids anymore because granny has left the kitchen and is more often sitting in front of the computer than baking a pie. Just as fast food is killing home cooked dinner, it's also killing pie baking. The whole world seems to be moving toward eating professionally cooked food more often than home cooked dishes. The comfort food we eat like pie might be one of the first favorites to disappear from the home kitchen.
I have rambled on at length about "nothing". I guess I am "full of it". But I would rather be full of pie
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010
Commercial Strategy Change
I nearly doubled over when I saw a TV commercial the other day. In it, Domino's trashes its old pizza, then introduces a new one that it says is far superior. It goes on to list all the awful things about the pizza it has been selling (and praising in commercials) for years and years. Odd, huh! A food vendor saying what it has been selling to you and promoting as superior was in fact, "like cardboard"? Why would any consumer believe that Dominoes is truthful and sincere about its pizza now, but wasn't before? Is that a good way to market a product. Well, at least it'san original one.
The logic Dominos used in making and running the commercial all month is that it had had no choice but to be honest about its old recipe pizza if it had any hope of winning back customers and inspiring their taste buds enough to make them by Domino's pizza. And to do it they used disgruntled customers who described why they hated the old Domino's pizza but think the new recipe dough and toppings are superior. They did not mention that daintily.
On the commercial I saw (there are several similar ones running now) one customer said the old Domino pizza was "totally devoid of taste". Another said it was "worse than microwave pizza". Ouch! Microwave pizza is awful.
Domino's ranks as the number two pizza seller in the U.S. with many loyal customers who never buy from other pizza sellers. My least favorite pizza seller, Pizza Hut, is number one. Hmmmmmmm I think the taste of pizza is a specialized one. It would be very difficult to get a consensus on what good pizza is. But for Domino's to trash it's pizza in order to promote it's new pizza is a risky tactic. It would be sure to work only if the majority agree the original pizza product was faulty in taste. But the loyal customers that have been buying Domino's pizza think it was not. Might Domino's lose some of it's loyal customers who find the new product not to their liking? And will it win over enough new customers to make up for that loss?
In the food service business the mantra usual is that good food will sell itself and bad food can't be sold by any means..including commercials that say "we used to be terrible but never admitted it until now". Better to just praise the alleged benefits of the new formula Domino's is using in its pizza and let the customers taste for themselves.
My daughter likes pizza so, yes, I had to buy a "new" Domino pizza the next day to see if it was really new and improved. It wasn't, at least not to my taste. I am not a Domino fan anyway (of the fast food pizza sellers, I prefer 'Papa John'). But the newer version of Domino's was way too heavy on herbs and has an even more bitter sauce that the previous one. The cheese...well..that always is low grade process cheese no matter which fast good chain puts it on the pizza. More of that isn't necessarily better.
If I were grading the new Domino pizza I would give it a 'D'. The old version was far better and would get a "C+". But then....the best piece of fast food pizza I ever had I ate by accident in the early nineties, in Moscow, Russia where a guy with a tray of pizza was vending in the famous Arbat square (where free market business conducted in U.S. dollars was illegal but flourishing). I managed to get a slice of heaven that day and finding a better pizza has still eluded me.
As I wrote above, pizza preference is very nebulous one. So perhaps is how it is advertised. We shall see if those commercials work
The logic Dominos used in making and running the commercial all month is that it had had no choice but to be honest about its old recipe pizza if it had any hope of winning back customers and inspiring their taste buds enough to make them by Domino's pizza. And to do it they used disgruntled customers who described why they hated the old Domino's pizza but think the new recipe dough and toppings are superior. They did not mention that daintily.
On the commercial I saw (there are several similar ones running now) one customer said the old Domino pizza was "totally devoid of taste". Another said it was "worse than microwave pizza". Ouch! Microwave pizza is awful.
Domino's ranks as the number two pizza seller in the U.S. with many loyal customers who never buy from other pizza sellers. My least favorite pizza seller, Pizza Hut, is number one. Hmmmmmmm I think the taste of pizza is a specialized one. It would be very difficult to get a consensus on what good pizza is. But for Domino's to trash it's pizza in order to promote it's new pizza is a risky tactic. It would be sure to work only if the majority agree the original pizza product was faulty in taste. But the loyal customers that have been buying Domino's pizza think it was not. Might Domino's lose some of it's loyal customers who find the new product not to their liking? And will it win over enough new customers to make up for that loss?
In the food service business the mantra usual is that good food will sell itself and bad food can't be sold by any means..including commercials that say "we used to be terrible but never admitted it until now". Better to just praise the alleged benefits of the new formula Domino's is using in its pizza and let the customers taste for themselves.
My daughter likes pizza so, yes, I had to buy a "new" Domino pizza the next day to see if it was really new and improved. It wasn't, at least not to my taste. I am not a Domino fan anyway (of the fast food pizza sellers, I prefer 'Papa John'). But the newer version of Domino's was way too heavy on herbs and has an even more bitter sauce that the previous one. The cheese...well..that always is low grade process cheese no matter which fast good chain puts it on the pizza. More of that isn't necessarily better.
If I were grading the new Domino pizza I would give it a 'D'. The old version was far better and would get a "C+". But then....the best piece of fast food pizza I ever had I ate by accident in the early nineties, in Moscow, Russia where a guy with a tray of pizza was vending in the famous Arbat square (where free market business conducted in U.S. dollars was illegal but flourishing). I managed to get a slice of heaven that day and finding a better pizza has still eluded me.
As I wrote above, pizza preference is very nebulous one. So perhaps is how it is advertised. We shall see if those commercials work
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Sweet Sixteen
Saturday night was Jane's Sweet Sixteen birthday party at a big hotel in New Orleans. Here , the 16th birthday is considered special for girls, so some celebrate it with a big party at a nice venue. It's mostly for girls, though Jane says she knows a boy who is having one this year. I never had one when I was sixteen, but I never have been sweet. You probably already know that. Sigh.
Anyway, Jane invited about 50 friends and they all showed dressed so nicely (semi formal, but many girls were in formal gowns). Since I am the dad I was a chaperone and had to wear a suit. I choose to look like a Mafia Don because I wore a black suit with light pinstripes and a red shirt with red and white stripped tie. I should join the Mafia because I looked that part.
This party went very well and all the kids are so nice. I am happy Jane has so many good friends of good character who all get along well together. The hotel that was the venue and catered the party is the 'W', a trendy more youth oriented hotel that is very popular and more suitable for a teenage party. This hotel is pretty and adjacent to the French quarter. Because there is an NFL championship game here involving the local NFL team and the team from Minnesota the hotel was jammed with fans making the trip to see the game the next day. That gave even more life to the event.
We hired a tarot card/palm reader (she told me I would have along healthy life of happiness), a photographer to snap pictures randomly during the party, and a DJ to play music for the dance floor. It was lively and those kids had fun. The food for them was excellent and we had huge custom made cake made. After the party Jane and 5 friends stayed at the hotel in a room (Jane's mom got an adjacent room to supervise them).
To see my daughter happy and the center of attention among her friends was something I will cherish always. And I believe Jane will also always remember her Sweet Sixteen birthday night as one of the best nights of her life.
Anyway, Jane invited about 50 friends and they all showed dressed so nicely (semi formal, but many girls were in formal gowns). Since I am the dad I was a chaperone and had to wear a suit. I choose to look like a Mafia Don because I wore a black suit with light pinstripes and a red shirt with red and white stripped tie. I should join the Mafia because I looked that part.
This party went very well and all the kids are so nice. I am happy Jane has so many good friends of good character who all get along well together. The hotel that was the venue and catered the party is the 'W', a trendy more youth oriented hotel that is very popular and more suitable for a teenage party. This hotel is pretty and adjacent to the French quarter. Because there is an NFL championship game here involving the local NFL team and the team from Minnesota the hotel was jammed with fans making the trip to see the game the next day. That gave even more life to the event.
We hired a tarot card/palm reader (she told me I would have along healthy life of happiness), a photographer to snap pictures randomly during the party, and a DJ to play music for the dance floor. It was lively and those kids had fun. The food for them was excellent and we had huge custom made cake made. After the party Jane and 5 friends stayed at the hotel in a room (Jane's mom got an adjacent room to supervise them).
To see my daughter happy and the center of attention among her friends was something I will cherish always. And I believe Jane will also always remember her Sweet Sixteen birthday night as one of the best nights of her life.
Trouble in Obamanation
There's trouble in Obama land. President Obama, amid huge unpopularity ratings and failed legislative initiatives, told ABC News that he would continue pursuing an "ambitious" (i.e. shoving legislation down the throats of the American people, as in the health care bill, even when voters overwhelmingly dislike it) agenda because, "I'd rather be a really good one term president than a mediocre two term president."
Ha! My question is, "When are you going to start being a good president"?I have seen little evidence of it yet. Though I voted for Obama, and think he is at least better than the awful George Bush, I am disappointed at his performance, his broken promises, and the outright prevarication's his administration uses to promote its agenda. One need only look at his big three campaign promises to see that he has been an ineffective president.
First there was the "I will withdraw all troops from Iraq within one year of my presidency", promise. Not only are we still in Iraq, but in increasing numbers. And the Afghan war is expanding daily. Bush's folly has become Obama's folly. Why presidents shoot themselves in the foot with the "but I can win this war and then go home" mentality is mind boggling. It never works out that way for them.
Next we have the "My administration will be bipartisan", promise. To the contrary, Obama's administration has been 'Bush II' with it's own dirty tricks, half truths, and the "our way or no way" mentality. We now have a congress even more divided along party lines than we had under Bush. When the Democratic leadership in Congress (representing the Obama administration's programs and proposed legislation) bribed congressmen with political goodies for their home districts in exchange for their yes votes on the so called health reform legislation, we hit a new low in Congressional shenanigans. This bribery was planned, formulated and promoted by the Obama administration.
The third great broken promise is that of health care reform. What was promised was lower cost health care for the average person, the cost containment program. But what is offered is expensive, free health care for the poor" and a few who refuse to pay for it, paid for by taxpayers who receive no benefit from it. It's a "give the dead beats or poor free care and they will vote for us" concept. Almost 80% of Americans say they do not want it, yet Obama keeps insisting they do and trying to manipulate its passage in Congress.
Oh, Obama forgot to mention a third option in that interview, that he could be a mediocre or bad one term president. As of now, he is on that very path.
Ha! My question is, "When are you going to start being a good president"?I have seen little evidence of it yet. Though I voted for Obama, and think he is at least better than the awful George Bush, I am disappointed at his performance, his broken promises, and the outright prevarication's his administration uses to promote its agenda. One need only look at his big three campaign promises to see that he has been an ineffective president.
First there was the "I will withdraw all troops from Iraq within one year of my presidency", promise. Not only are we still in Iraq, but in increasing numbers. And the Afghan war is expanding daily. Bush's folly has become Obama's folly. Why presidents shoot themselves in the foot with the "but I can win this war and then go home" mentality is mind boggling. It never works out that way for them.
Next we have the "My administration will be bipartisan", promise. To the contrary, Obama's administration has been 'Bush II' with it's own dirty tricks, half truths, and the "our way or no way" mentality. We now have a congress even more divided along party lines than we had under Bush. When the Democratic leadership in Congress (representing the Obama administration's programs and proposed legislation) bribed congressmen with political goodies for their home districts in exchange for their yes votes on the so called health reform legislation, we hit a new low in Congressional shenanigans. This bribery was planned, formulated and promoted by the Obama administration.
The third great broken promise is that of health care reform. What was promised was lower cost health care for the average person, the cost containment program. But what is offered is expensive, free health care for the poor" and a few who refuse to pay for it, paid for by taxpayers who receive no benefit from it. It's a "give the dead beats or poor free care and they will vote for us" concept. Almost 80% of Americans say they do not want it, yet Obama keeps insisting they do and trying to manipulate its passage in Congress.
Oh, Obama forgot to mention a third option in that interview, that he could be a mediocre or bad one term president. As of now, he is on that very path.
Ice Cream For Everybody
Do you like ice cream? I do. I am not fanatical about it like so many people are and eat it only once in a while. More than a few people eat too much, and at the other extreme there is even an "ice cream diet' that promise to make you slim if you eat enough ice cream. Then there are the health food nuts who eat soy or rice ice cream , at least they call that ice cream. I do not. For me, real ice cream is cream, milk, sugar, and fruit or other natural flavors. People argue about the best ice cream, whether ice cream can be real if of soft consistency, the origin of it and more. I am not doing that here. If you like it and you call it ice cream, enjoy it. Just give me mine and the world's most popular flavor, vanilla, and I will smile.
If I asked you to tell me which nation has the highest per capita consumption of ice cream you might say "Germany" or "the United States', since those two countries have the most fat people per capita. Or perhaps you would name a nation that has blistering hot weather. But the answer is surprising. The U.S. is first at 23 liters per person, but Australians and New Zealanders consume about 20 liters each.
There are some weird ice cream imitators. For example, in China Mung beans are macerated into a paste and boiled together with milk and sugar. The result is called ice cream. I guess it is, but I don't want to eat that. In India and Pakistan they have Kulfi, which is a kind of condensed milk based , non aerated ice cream. Or you could try Dondurma, Turkish ice cream made out of salep and mastic resin...uh, sounds not very delicious. There are versions but what is more fascinating is the kinds of ice cream flavors.
According to the Guinness Book of Records the ice cream store that sells the most flavors is Coromoto in Merida, Venezuela. It seems the owner is a Portuguese (they eat allot of ice cream there) immigrant who was enamored with making different flavors that the traditional ice cream factory for which he worked, would not allow. Yes they have vanilla, chocolate and strawberry. Even I make those flavors in my ice cream maker. But Coromoto Parlor says it makes and sells 860 different ice cream flavors.
Each day about 60 of those are sold. How about trying these few, for example: chili, tomato, gherkin, onion, mushrooms in wine, garlic, cream of crab, avocado, eggs, macaroni cheese, sardines-in-brandy, Cointreau, cognac, vodka-and-pineapple and muy picante (a traditional Venezuelan meal of beef, rice, plantain, cheese and black beans in ice cream form..yuk!)There is even a Viagra ice cream that any man ought to order to please himself..err her. It's bright blue like those Viagra pills. (Oh, I need a double scoop of that one!)
But alas! Viagra ice cream is just regular ice cream with honey and pollen added. I think nothing to get "big headed" about.
If I asked you to tell me which nation has the highest per capita consumption of ice cream you might say "Germany" or "the United States', since those two countries have the most fat people per capita. Or perhaps you would name a nation that has blistering hot weather. But the answer is surprising. The U.S. is first at 23 liters per person, but Australians and New Zealanders consume about 20 liters each.
There are some weird ice cream imitators. For example, in China Mung beans are macerated into a paste and boiled together with milk and sugar. The result is called ice cream. I guess it is, but I don't want to eat that. In India and Pakistan they have Kulfi, which is a kind of condensed milk based , non aerated ice cream. Or you could try Dondurma, Turkish ice cream made out of salep and mastic resin...uh, sounds not very delicious. There are versions but what is more fascinating is the kinds of ice cream flavors.
According to the Guinness Book of Records the ice cream store that sells the most flavors is Coromoto in Merida, Venezuela. It seems the owner is a Portuguese (they eat allot of ice cream there) immigrant who was enamored with making different flavors that the traditional ice cream factory for which he worked, would not allow. Yes they have vanilla, chocolate and strawberry. Even I make those flavors in my ice cream maker. But Coromoto Parlor says it makes and sells 860 different ice cream flavors.
Each day about 60 of those are sold. How about trying these few, for example: chili, tomato, gherkin, onion, mushrooms in wine, garlic, cream of crab, avocado, eggs, macaroni cheese, sardines-in-brandy, Cointreau, cognac, vodka-and-pineapple and muy picante (a traditional Venezuelan meal of beef, rice, plantain, cheese and black beans in ice cream form..yuk!)There is even a Viagra ice cream that any man ought to order to please himself..err her. It's bright blue like those Viagra pills. (Oh, I need a double scoop of that one!)
But alas! Viagra ice cream is just regular ice cream with honey and pollen added. I think nothing to get "big headed" about.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Changing Obituaries
I read an article in my newspaper today about obituary notices, in particular how little the obituary uses the term "died" for the deceased. Instead, there is either a euphemism ("departed" is a common one...and "gone north" an odd substitution example) or no mention of death or of how the person did die. I think the author of that article was on to something in making that observation. I have noticed over the past few years that specificity as to death nomenclature and the cause of death is often absent in many newspaper obituary notices. With my luck I'll die typing a stupid E mail and it will be announced and posted on news sites as an example of how stupidity begets death. Oh well, since I'll be a lump of flesh lying over my keyboard at least I won't know about it.
Why are we so often now "dancing around death" in our obituary notices? Could it be that this generation is more afraid or apprehensive about dying, so much so that it practices avoidance in not even using the word or giving the cause of the person's death in the death announcement. Most death notices are pre written by the dead "guy", written by a close relative, or by the funeral home that shows his or her lifeless body for view to friends and foe alike. The funeral homes usually say "passed away" while the more colorful substitutions for "death" come from the family member who composed the notice.
I decided to go through today's local newspaper (The Times Picayune) to see what the obits said in place of the word "death". There were many non mentions of the death with instead a mere recanting of the life instead. It was almost as if the person didn't die, but just "disappeared" from earth. That's weird! Either announce the death or don't place an obituary notice. Also, many causes of death were omitted. I can remember when that was always the first thing mentioned in a death notice (why have we also stopped calling obituaries, "death notices"?).
The formats of the obituary looked little changed from years ago, as do the photo selections for the "departed". But some novelties were revealed in the death notices that I read. One, for example, mentioned the person was gay and left a "partner". That never would have appeared in an obituary even 15 years ago. I am glad that it did. In death there should be dignity, including recognizing love of all kinds.
But as to my original comment about the absence of "death" or "died" in those notices. Here are some of the alternatives used in the newspaper that I perused today: passed away, departed this life, was called home, entered into eternal rest, was welcomed by his savior, met her heavenly father, joined Him as his guardian angel, slipped away quietly, and at peace and sailed into the sunset. I estimate fewer than 15% of the death notices I saw used the old fashioned "died". "Passed away" was the most popular way of saying the dead won't be reading anymore E mails.
Funerals themselves are going out of style as more and more people choose not have them after death. I like that idea because I think funerals are way overdone. but that is a subject for another day. It's not surprising that the mere mention of the word death is also less common. This is a youth oriented culture, and it follows that death makes its members uncomfortable. Could it be that just the mention of death might make us feel more mortal?
Not I! I want my obituary to say that I "died". Make it clear so the celebrants are certain I finally have shut up. It will be a delicious irony at my expense if I die at the keyboard. I can imagine my obituary opening line..."Died of ranting too much about too little of consequence".
Maybe they should attach this rubbish to my obituary too....
Why are we so often now "dancing around death" in our obituary notices? Could it be that this generation is more afraid or apprehensive about dying, so much so that it practices avoidance in not even using the word or giving the cause of the person's death in the death announcement. Most death notices are pre written by the dead "guy", written by a close relative, or by the funeral home that shows his or her lifeless body for view to friends and foe alike. The funeral homes usually say "passed away" while the more colorful substitutions for "death" come from the family member who composed the notice.
I decided to go through today's local newspaper (The Times Picayune) to see what the obits said in place of the word "death". There were many non mentions of the death with instead a mere recanting of the life instead. It was almost as if the person didn't die, but just "disappeared" from earth. That's weird! Either announce the death or don't place an obituary notice. Also, many causes of death were omitted. I can remember when that was always the first thing mentioned in a death notice (why have we also stopped calling obituaries, "death notices"?).
The formats of the obituary looked little changed from years ago, as do the photo selections for the "departed". But some novelties were revealed in the death notices that I read. One, for example, mentioned the person was gay and left a "partner". That never would have appeared in an obituary even 15 years ago. I am glad that it did. In death there should be dignity, including recognizing love of all kinds.
But as to my original comment about the absence of "death" or "died" in those notices. Here are some of the alternatives used in the newspaper that I perused today: passed away, departed this life, was called home, entered into eternal rest, was welcomed by his savior, met her heavenly father, joined Him as his guardian angel, slipped away quietly, and at peace and sailed into the sunset. I estimate fewer than 15% of the death notices I saw used the old fashioned "died". "Passed away" was the most popular way of saying the dead won't be reading anymore E mails.
Funerals themselves are going out of style as more and more people choose not have them after death. I like that idea because I think funerals are way overdone. but that is a subject for another day. It's not surprising that the mere mention of the word death is also less common. This is a youth oriented culture, and it follows that death makes its members uncomfortable. Could it be that just the mention of death might make us feel more mortal?
Not I! I want my obituary to say that I "died". Make it clear so the celebrants are certain I finally have shut up. It will be a delicious irony at my expense if I die at the keyboard. I can imagine my obituary opening line..."Died of ranting too much about too little of consequence".
Maybe they should attach this rubbish to my obituary too....
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
No Silence
I have a theory on the excessive noise present in society today. In particular, I refer to the constant cell phone chatter we see and hear as often in public places as heard in the home or other refuge. I think the constant chattering about "nothing" on those phones has greatly damaged the quality of speech today. A mind which has no time to quietly think thoughts, formulate ideas and prepare speech becomes one that speaks merely to be heard, not to orate wisely.
If a cluttered mind is one that makes for cluttered behavior, then those who have surrendered their quiet times for noise have lives as much in disarray as the constant bombardment of noise itself is disorganized. I hear people speaking, but what they say is more often trivial, disorganized, and uninteresting. They have lost their ability to speak wisely. Might their addiction to phones and electronic "talk' be causing this loss of the ability to speak meaningfully? Surely, people behave in as disorganized a manner as the disorganized world commands them to do so. And the world today is highly disorganized. The result of the loss of cogent speech is speech that is less than pleasant or meaningful to hear.
Today's typical human (anywhere in the industrialized parts of world, as the problem of noise and poor speech is universal today) speech is often mean spirited, idle and empty of substance, is ritualistic, perfunctory, cruel, too personal etc. It reflects the fact that today people speak too much and think too little, producing a vacuous chatter that we so often see in the cell phone addict screaming into his or her phone. True, we can't stop others from abusing silence with their noise (Why do we need music in elevators or while we hold on line during a business phone call?). But we can stop abusing ourselves.
Good speech that enlightens us is being replaced with silly speech that is meant only to entertain, and often it does not even do that. Human beings need quiet time to think and reflect on matters important to themselves and others. When they don't get that time (because they never stop their idle chattering) communication as a whole suffers. Maybe, for example, that's why news outlets today speak about the octomom instead of about the death of millions of starving and diseased moms in impoverished and neglected areas of the world.
We might be both better off as a people and be able to better understand each other if we sought quiet times each day. We should use those quiet times to think about what is important for us and for others, not about the every day mundane chatter subjects we are bombarded with. Silence is a rich and fertile soil in which many things grow and flourish, not the least being an awareness of everything outside oneself and apart from oneself. We need to depersonalize much of our world if we are to lose the selfish nature that humans no display. And to do that we just need to shut up more often.
Do you hear me?
If a cluttered mind is one that makes for cluttered behavior, then those who have surrendered their quiet times for noise have lives as much in disarray as the constant bombardment of noise itself is disorganized. I hear people speaking, but what they say is more often trivial, disorganized, and uninteresting. They have lost their ability to speak wisely. Might their addiction to phones and electronic "talk' be causing this loss of the ability to speak meaningfully? Surely, people behave in as disorganized a manner as the disorganized world commands them to do so. And the world today is highly disorganized. The result of the loss of cogent speech is speech that is less than pleasant or meaningful to hear.
Today's typical human (anywhere in the industrialized parts of world, as the problem of noise and poor speech is universal today) speech is often mean spirited, idle and empty of substance, is ritualistic, perfunctory, cruel, too personal etc. It reflects the fact that today people speak too much and think too little, producing a vacuous chatter that we so often see in the cell phone addict screaming into his or her phone. True, we can't stop others from abusing silence with their noise (Why do we need music in elevators or while we hold on line during a business phone call?). But we can stop abusing ourselves.
Good speech that enlightens us is being replaced with silly speech that is meant only to entertain, and often it does not even do that. Human beings need quiet time to think and reflect on matters important to themselves and others. When they don't get that time (because they never stop their idle chattering) communication as a whole suffers. Maybe, for example, that's why news outlets today speak about the octomom instead of about the death of millions of starving and diseased moms in impoverished and neglected areas of the world.
We might be both better off as a people and be able to better understand each other if we sought quiet times each day. We should use those quiet times to think about what is important for us and for others, not about the every day mundane chatter subjects we are bombarded with. Silence is a rich and fertile soil in which many things grow and flourish, not the least being an awareness of everything outside oneself and apart from oneself. We need to depersonalize much of our world if we are to lose the selfish nature that humans no display. And to do that we just need to shut up more often.
Do you hear me?
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Rapidly Changing Times
Ecclesiastics says that "For everything there is a season". But the everything's seem to change much faster now than they did in former times. It's true that the world is losing the familiar at a more rapid rate as, technology, communication and transportation bring obsolescence to us in an instant. I can remember my childhood as a time in which things were constant. Change was an event, not an everyday happening. I think we were more grounded then as a result.
How can people form a sense of community, even a sense of self if change becomes the routine rather than the exception? In my opinion, too many changes brings on estrangement from the norms society sets. If one looks at the 20 years of time, for instance, he or she sees a different world from the beginning to the end. Uh, I know that whatever begins must end and be replaced. The heresy of one age becomes the orthodoxy of the next. That is the story of humanity. But why so fast? Is it healthy for us or is it good to be forced to adapt so often in order to improve our lives?
Well, we have no choice in the matter of the rapidity of change. It is with us and will remain, the old times of the familiar are gone. The art of progress is to preserve order amid change and to preserve change amid order. It appears to be a lost art at the moment.In the past twenty years we have seen the beginning of the death or the death of the following and replacement by.... black and white tv replaced with color tv, land line phones replaced by mobile ones, manners replaced with "me" first", reading replaced by video, maps replaced by the GPS, typewriters replaced by word processors, face to face communication replaced by communication by computers, personal letters replaced by chat on line, slow food (home cooked meals) replaced by fast food, moral absolutes to political correctness, "dressing up" to "dressing down", "our" community to the world community, males sports heroes to male and female sports heroes (oh, those women athletes are so muscled today), global cooling hysteria to global warming hysteria, glass soda pop bottle to aluminum cans, am radio to the ipod...
Those are just a few off the top of my head. In isolation they are insignificant, but in totality they do impact us and in some cause dislocation and isolation from others and the world at large. But in the end, an old traditionalist if ever one, Henry Thoreau had it right when he wrote that "Things do not change, we change."
Do you think the changes we have had are are having are good , bad, or a combination? Is the world amore pleasant place today or as it was 20 years ago? Oh...feel free to CHANGE your answers anytime you wish. It's what we do these days.
How can people form a sense of community, even a sense of self if change becomes the routine rather than the exception? In my opinion, too many changes brings on estrangement from the norms society sets. If one looks at the 20 years of time, for instance, he or she sees a different world from the beginning to the end. Uh, I know that whatever begins must end and be replaced. The heresy of one age becomes the orthodoxy of the next. That is the story of humanity. But why so fast? Is it healthy for us or is it good to be forced to adapt so often in order to improve our lives?
Well, we have no choice in the matter of the rapidity of change. It is with us and will remain, the old times of the familiar are gone. The art of progress is to preserve order amid change and to preserve change amid order. It appears to be a lost art at the moment.In the past twenty years we have seen the beginning of the death or the death of the following and replacement by.... black and white tv replaced with color tv, land line phones replaced by mobile ones, manners replaced with "me" first", reading replaced by video, maps replaced by the GPS, typewriters replaced by word processors, face to face communication replaced by communication by computers, personal letters replaced by chat on line, slow food (home cooked meals) replaced by fast food, moral absolutes to political correctness, "dressing up" to "dressing down", "our" community to the world community, males sports heroes to male and female sports heroes (oh, those women athletes are so muscled today), global cooling hysteria to global warming hysteria, glass soda pop bottle to aluminum cans, am radio to the ipod...
Those are just a few off the top of my head. In isolation they are insignificant, but in totality they do impact us and in some cause dislocation and isolation from others and the world at large. But in the end, an old traditionalist if ever one, Henry Thoreau had it right when he wrote that "Things do not change, we change."
Do you think the changes we have had are are having are good , bad, or a combination? Is the world amore pleasant place today or as it was 20 years ago? Oh...feel free to CHANGE your answers anytime you wish. It's what we do these days.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Donation Campaign Scams
Whenever there is a high profile natural disaster there are spammer scanners too. And after the Haitian earthquake tragedy the scammers have descended on the Internet in an all out effort to dupe people into sending them money that they claim is intended for victims. The most successful swindle was an e-mail that said it came from the British Red Cross. It asked readers to send 250 British pounds or more, included the address of the Red Cross in London and implored that donations be wired there by Western Union. But the e-mail contact for the British Red Cross was wrong, and the Red Cross organization does not collect donations using Western Union. Chalk up a huge profit for the crooks on that one. They made huge amounts of money with that ploy.Besides that single scam there are hundreds more of the "donate to Haiti relief fund" scams out there on line. Cybercrooks are also manipulating online searches so that results for terms such as "Haitian relief fund" and "Haiti donations" direct people to phishing sites or pages infected with viruses like malware. And there are the phony web sites that ask for money also. Most of those last short term, as the inevitable discovery of the fraud quickly shuts them down. But they do collect a huge amount of money from the gullible donators before that happens. I remember the many similar scams after Hurricane Katrina destroyed so much of this area.
It brings to question, "Why do so many people fall for those donation appeals?" I think one reason is the basic goodness of humans and the instinct to help others after a disaster. People become caught up in the emotions of the story, the video, the media blitz and rush to give before thinking about who the agent for their cash actually is. The same kind of phony con is frequent off line too. So many donation campaigns are out-right fraudulent or wasteful (sometimes more money is kept by the appealing party than given to the victims) one would think people would be more careful about handing out money. They are not.
I never give money to a solicitor of whom I have no knowledge. That means no street donations and no donations for those organizations I haven't checked as to their validity and as to how much of the total donation actually reaches the intended person in need. I always tell solicitors that before I will give to their cause they must snail mail me their organization information, including the required financial disclosure statement. None has ever complied!
As for on-line donation sites, for me there are too many phony ones to even consider donating that way. But most legitimate organizations recommend the following when solicited on line:
Don't respond to unsolicited e-mail or click on links contained within those messages
Make contributions directly to established organizations
Be wary of claims that 100% of donations will assist victims
Do not give your personal or financial information to anyone soliciting contributions.
Oh, by the way....can you send me a few dollars for the "Keep Me Ranting " campaign? It's a worthwhile cause
It brings to question, "Why do so many people fall for those donation appeals?" I think one reason is the basic goodness of humans and the instinct to help others after a disaster. People become caught up in the emotions of the story, the video, the media blitz and rush to give before thinking about who the agent for their cash actually is. The same kind of phony con is frequent off line too. So many donation campaigns are out-right fraudulent or wasteful (sometimes more money is kept by the appealing party than given to the victims) one would think people would be more careful about handing out money. They are not.
I never give money to a solicitor of whom I have no knowledge. That means no street donations and no donations for those organizations I haven't checked as to their validity and as to how much of the total donation actually reaches the intended person in need. I always tell solicitors that before I will give to their cause they must snail mail me their organization information, including the required financial disclosure statement. None has ever complied!
As for on-line donation sites, for me there are too many phony ones to even consider donating that way. But most legitimate organizations recommend the following when solicited on line:
Don't respond to unsolicited e-mail or click on links contained within those messages
Make contributions directly to established organizations
Be wary of claims that 100% of donations will assist victims
Do not give your personal or financial information to anyone soliciting contributions.
Oh, by the way....can you send me a few dollars for the "Keep Me Ranting " campaign? It's a worthwhile cause
Friday, January 22, 2010
Sweetheart Candy
Do you have Sweethearts at Valentine season there? No, no. Not the human sweetheart. I mean the candy Sweethearts. Those little bits of sugar and imagination are more reliable than any breathing sweetheart could be. They have been around for more than a hundred years as small heart shaped candies printed with a message such as "Be Mine" or "Kiss Me".
Necco, the company that has been making them for more than 150 years, manufactures nearly 8 billion sweethearts a year in several sugary flavors. According to the package labeling the recipe includes sugar, corn syrup, gelatin, gums, colorings, and flavorings. They uh..are not a candy snobs favorite sweet and are an more of an acquired taste because they are basically merely little sugar shaped hearts. But almost ever year Sweethearts are the best selling Valentine candy.
I have a bag of them right here next to my computer and these Sweethearts look and taste just as they did when I was a child. The only difference might be the imprinted messages on them, some have been updated to fit the times. There's an "E Mail Me" and a "Fax Me" Sweetheart in my bag of little goodies that reflect the new way we communicate to lovers and friends. I guess the Fax Me Sweetheart isn't a lover selection. Who would Fax a lover? None with any sense. I think it better to hand that Sweetheart to a business associate at work, not to your human sweetheart.
Any young man who has a bag of Sweethearts and his best girl next to knows to NEVER give the wrong Sweetheart to her. There's even one that says "Marry Me". It's smart to open the bag of Sweethearts first and remove potential problem sayings. "Marry Me" is big trouble. But most of those stamped Sweetheart messages are just cute. The range from the innocent- "Be Good", "You And Me", "Angel", Sweet Talk", "Number 1 Fan", "Smile"- to the more intimate- "Be Mine", "Yu And Me", "I Hope", "Sweet Talk", "Adore Me"- to the lovey dovey- "Kiss Me", "My Baby", "I Love You", "True Love", "You're Mine".
There are many other Sweetheart messages but the most recent one the company stamped on its Sweetheart candy has to be the green one I just ate while typing. It says "Tweet Me". I remember in elementary school at Valentine's time (February). The teachers used to reward the students with Sweethearts when they answered correctly in class. And we always gave a mini box of Sweethearts to our classmates on Valentine's Day. In those days small kids had yet to develop any sexual awareness, so it was ok to give that cute little babe in the next row a box of sweethearts with a Valentine's Day card attached.
Sadly, if I gave a babe a Sweetheart now it might bring a slap and a sexual harassment suit. Better to just eat all the sweethearts myself.
Necco, the company that has been making them for more than 150 years, manufactures nearly 8 billion sweethearts a year in several sugary flavors. According to the package labeling the recipe includes sugar, corn syrup, gelatin, gums, colorings, and flavorings. They uh..are not a candy snobs favorite sweet and are an more of an acquired taste because they are basically merely little sugar shaped hearts. But almost ever year Sweethearts are the best selling Valentine candy.
I have a bag of them right here next to my computer and these Sweethearts look and taste just as they did when I was a child. The only difference might be the imprinted messages on them, some have been updated to fit the times. There's an "E Mail Me" and a "Fax Me" Sweetheart in my bag of little goodies that reflect the new way we communicate to lovers and friends. I guess the Fax Me Sweetheart isn't a lover selection. Who would Fax a lover? None with any sense. I think it better to hand that Sweetheart to a business associate at work, not to your human sweetheart.
Any young man who has a bag of Sweethearts and his best girl next to knows to NEVER give the wrong Sweetheart to her. There's even one that says "Marry Me". It's smart to open the bag of Sweethearts first and remove potential problem sayings. "Marry Me" is big trouble. But most of those stamped Sweetheart messages are just cute. The range from the innocent- "Be Good", "You And Me", "Angel", Sweet Talk", "Number 1 Fan", "Smile"- to the more intimate- "Be Mine", "Yu And Me", "I Hope", "Sweet Talk", "Adore Me"- to the lovey dovey- "Kiss Me", "My Baby", "I Love You", "True Love", "You're Mine".
There are many other Sweetheart messages but the most recent one the company stamped on its Sweetheart candy has to be the green one I just ate while typing. It says "Tweet Me". I remember in elementary school at Valentine's time (February). The teachers used to reward the students with Sweethearts when they answered correctly in class. And we always gave a mini box of Sweethearts to our classmates on Valentine's Day. In those days small kids had yet to develop any sexual awareness, so it was ok to give that cute little babe in the next row a box of sweethearts with a Valentine's Day card attached.
Sadly, if I gave a babe a Sweetheart now it might bring a slap and a sexual harassment suit. Better to just eat all the sweethearts myself.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Cell Drivers
The cell phone carnage on the highways continue to increase in the U.S. (and almost everywhere else as well). According to a study just released by the National Safety Council, twenty eight percent of all traffic accidents in the U.S. occur when people talk on cell phones or send text messages while driving.
The vast majority of those crashes, 1.4 million annually, are caused by cell phone conversations, and 200,000 are blamed on text messaging. Kind of sad, huh? Those who chat or text when driving know they are less capable of driving safely, but the addiction of the cell phone may be as strong as the addiction to drugs. Essentially, the risk their lives and the lives of others because they are allowed to do it. Those jurisdictions that have laws banning that behavior say it is very hard to nab so many cell addicts who drive carelessly. In numbers (of abusers) there is safety from being caught chatting or texting while driving.
Take the "hands-free"cell phone or texting as examples of this enforcement problem.. Enforcement of a texting ban requires police to physically observe an act that usually is conducted in a driver's lap, and hands free devices make it possible to talk on cell phones without being observed. More than 120 studies of cell phone use suggest that using hands free devices doesn't eliminate the distraction caused by a phone conversation. It's just as bad as driving with the phone in one's hand.
The main reason people talk on their cell phones is because they can get away with it. Eventually signal blocking technology could eliminate the cell driver. But "privacy" and "constitutional rights of privacy" come into question if technology on cars that prohibits cell use while the car is in motion is implemented. The more feasible way of stopping cell driving is through education about the dangers that would make cell driving as socially unacceptable as smoking cigarettes is today.
That is a possibility. I can remember as a child when almost 80% of adults smoked cigarettes and smoking was considered "cool" and normal. Every teen went through a passage of right in which he or she was expected to smoke, just as teens today see their cell phones as the pathway to being adult. But now, the smoker is seen as a weakling to his or her craving, often is shunned and is made to feel a certain deviancy to his puffing.
It did take almost 50 years to change that attitude. I wonder how long it will be before cell abuse is also seen as socially unacceptable. A concerted media ad campaign to emphasize the dangers of driving when chatting or texting would be a first step to achieving that end. Whether the political will to enforce bans on cell phone use while driving exists is another matter. Politicians blow with the wind and right now the wind is behind the cell addicts. But once cell driving is seen by most as dangerous and senseless, the politicians should follow step and start enacting real legislation that is ardently enforced.
In the meantime, give those cell addicts plenty of room when you see them driving like the fools they are
The vast majority of those crashes, 1.4 million annually, are caused by cell phone conversations, and 200,000 are blamed on text messaging. Kind of sad, huh? Those who chat or text when driving know they are less capable of driving safely, but the addiction of the cell phone may be as strong as the addiction to drugs. Essentially, the risk their lives and the lives of others because they are allowed to do it. Those jurisdictions that have laws banning that behavior say it is very hard to nab so many cell addicts who drive carelessly. In numbers (of abusers) there is safety from being caught chatting or texting while driving.
Take the "hands-free"cell phone or texting as examples of this enforcement problem.. Enforcement of a texting ban requires police to physically observe an act that usually is conducted in a driver's lap, and hands free devices make it possible to talk on cell phones without being observed. More than 120 studies of cell phone use suggest that using hands free devices doesn't eliminate the distraction caused by a phone conversation. It's just as bad as driving with the phone in one's hand.
The main reason people talk on their cell phones is because they can get away with it. Eventually signal blocking technology could eliminate the cell driver. But "privacy" and "constitutional rights of privacy" come into question if technology on cars that prohibits cell use while the car is in motion is implemented. The more feasible way of stopping cell driving is through education about the dangers that would make cell driving as socially unacceptable as smoking cigarettes is today.
That is a possibility. I can remember as a child when almost 80% of adults smoked cigarettes and smoking was considered "cool" and normal. Every teen went through a passage of right in which he or she was expected to smoke, just as teens today see their cell phones as the pathway to being adult. But now, the smoker is seen as a weakling to his or her craving, often is shunned and is made to feel a certain deviancy to his puffing.
It did take almost 50 years to change that attitude. I wonder how long it will be before cell abuse is also seen as socially unacceptable. A concerted media ad campaign to emphasize the dangers of driving when chatting or texting would be a first step to achieving that end. Whether the political will to enforce bans on cell phone use while driving exists is another matter. Politicians blow with the wind and right now the wind is behind the cell addicts. But once cell driving is seen by most as dangerous and senseless, the politicians should follow step and start enacting real legislation that is ardently enforced.
In the meantime, give those cell addicts plenty of room when you see them driving like the fools they are
The Statistical Viewpoint
The Statistical Abstract of the United States, published since 1878, is already out for view this year. It is a comprehensive summary of statistics on the social, political, and economic organization of the United States. That is, it gives stats on just about all "stuff" in the country. This makes it fun to read, for as we all know statistics both lie and tell the truth. Which it does in a specific instance probably depends on what you believe the truth to be.
Every year the Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bureau of Economic Analysis, and many other Federal agencies and private organizations put together this huge document and it's all suppose to tell us the trends the country is leaning toward. According to the Census Bureau the most popular reads of the statistics are in the areas of population, death, income and the labor force. That's odd, given the fact that sex is one of the categories in it. I have always read that we think about sex too much. Well, maybe men do. I think the stated purpose (help guide the nation in the right direction) of the Statistical Analysis is less real than the actual one, which is to amuse ourselves with or provide evidence for our discussions about anything that can be argued with a statistical reference as an aid.
I decided to have a look at some of the information contained in the SA. It would be impossible to try to cite all or even a tiny part of it as validation or refutation of the SA. First I went to the population section. When I opened the 'Population by Selected Ancestry Group and Region' section to get an idea of where so many of our immigrants come from I saw something missing from the list of nations and percent of our population who have ancestors from them. It was the fact that no Hispanic ancestry was listed. Instead in a footnote at the bottom it said, 'Excludes Hispanic origin groups'. Hmm statistics not only lie..they hide things too. But why hide this? The SA lists Germany as the nation with the greatest number of ancestors in the U.S. But I suspect it is or soon will be Mexico. When I dial my phone and reach a number it never says to me "Press one to speak German".
Having been a teacher I was curious about the number of foreign born students. It seems to be exploding in numbers. So I went to look at 'Students Who Are Foreign Born or Who Have Foreign-Born Parents'. The SA says that Asian and Hispanic students are the most likely ones to have a parent who was born outside the country.
In the case of Asians it is 92 % and Hispanics 65%. There are also about 55 million white elementary and secondary school students, about 11 million black students and about 14 million Hispanic school kids. This tells me for sure that the largest minority group in the country is and will be the Hispanic. Of course, it is just a matter of time before the Hispanic illegal invasion of the U.S will make that group the majority race rather than a minority one. One more category to mention....the age of our death. I clicked the 'Life Expectancy' table to find that from the past 30 years to today we are all living a longer time. Whites have the longest life expectancy in the U.S. with white women living on average to age 81. White men live only to about 78 years of age. I assume it is because all the nagging from the females takes on average about two years of life from us. (Hehe But by age 78 we are mostly glad to go just to escape the constant hectoring). On average, for all races, people are living 8-10 years longer than in 1970.
The Statistical Analysis does have many facts. But what matters to most people is which ones we want to believe and how we interpret them. Have I got my facts right?
Every year the Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bureau of Economic Analysis, and many other Federal agencies and private organizations put together this huge document and it's all suppose to tell us the trends the country is leaning toward. According to the Census Bureau the most popular reads of the statistics are in the areas of population, death, income and the labor force. That's odd, given the fact that sex is one of the categories in it. I have always read that we think about sex too much. Well, maybe men do. I think the stated purpose (help guide the nation in the right direction) of the Statistical Analysis is less real than the actual one, which is to amuse ourselves with or provide evidence for our discussions about anything that can be argued with a statistical reference as an aid.
I decided to have a look at some of the information contained in the SA. It would be impossible to try to cite all or even a tiny part of it as validation or refutation of the SA. First I went to the population section. When I opened the 'Population by Selected Ancestry Group and Region' section to get an idea of where so many of our immigrants come from I saw something missing from the list of nations and percent of our population who have ancestors from them. It was the fact that no Hispanic ancestry was listed. Instead in a footnote at the bottom it said, 'Excludes Hispanic origin groups'. Hmm statistics not only lie..they hide things too. But why hide this? The SA lists Germany as the nation with the greatest number of ancestors in the U.S. But I suspect it is or soon will be Mexico. When I dial my phone and reach a number it never says to me "Press one to speak German".
Having been a teacher I was curious about the number of foreign born students. It seems to be exploding in numbers. So I went to look at 'Students Who Are Foreign Born or Who Have Foreign-Born Parents'. The SA says that Asian and Hispanic students are the most likely ones to have a parent who was born outside the country.
In the case of Asians it is 92 % and Hispanics 65%. There are also about 55 million white elementary and secondary school students, about 11 million black students and about 14 million Hispanic school kids. This tells me for sure that the largest minority group in the country is and will be the Hispanic. Of course, it is just a matter of time before the Hispanic illegal invasion of the U.S will make that group the majority race rather than a minority one. One more category to mention....the age of our death. I clicked the 'Life Expectancy' table to find that from the past 30 years to today we are all living a longer time. Whites have the longest life expectancy in the U.S. with white women living on average to age 81. White men live only to about 78 years of age. I assume it is because all the nagging from the females takes on average about two years of life from us. (Hehe But by age 78 we are mostly glad to go just to escape the constant hectoring). On average, for all races, people are living 8-10 years longer than in 1970.
The Statistical Analysis does have many facts. But what matters to most people is which ones we want to believe and how we interpret them. Have I got my facts right?
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Google's Censorship War
There is a mini war going on now between the search engine master Google and the Chinese government. Have you noticed what I call the "War of Censorship" that pits a nation, China, which does not believe in individual freedoms verses a business, Goggle, that has made profits by operating blithely in China in an undemocratic mode. Google.com is a Chinese version of its basic search engine. It was launched four years ago in China but omits results the Chinese government finds "objectionable", such as references to Tiananmen Square or anything promoting a view not in line with the Chinese dictators.
The problem is that Google's willingness to bow to control by China when operating there has helped the totalitarian regime muzzle free expression, hold back human rights and punish the Chinese citizens who tried to promote both. It is selling out freedom in return for profits. But Goggle is not alone. The always shameful Microsoft, which has never missed an opportunity to make money at the expense of decency, some time back agreed to block certain words, democracy, freedom and human rights, for example, by users on its Chinese Internet portal.
And last year Yahoo, after being threatened with expulsion from the Chinese cyber spaces, turned over data to Chinese officials that helped convict journalist Shi Tao for leaking a propaganda directive. Shi was sent to prison for 10 years while Yahoo collected profits from its Chinese operations.However, Google says it has had enough meddling after a series of cyber attacks (presumably conducted by the Chinese government) originating in China and stole Google secrets and also targeted the Gmail accounts of human rights activists. Google said that if China won't allow uncensored searches, it will pull out. I hope Google isn't blowing hot air this time. To be effective the Internet must be as free and unfettered as possible. Governments have the first responsibility in seeing that it is. Here is the Goggle announcement link.http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-china.html?utm_campaign=en&utm_source=en-ha-ww-ww-bk-cn&utm_medium=ha&utm_term=google%20china
Too, if Google's threat inspires other companies to show some spine, China would have less clout to impose its demands on businesses operating within China.The world's largest market for Internet users is in China, with about 340 million users. China has shown itself to be a thug when it comes to the free flow of information. If it pushes one of the world's most successful and popular companies out the door, the Chinese people will notice and mistrust the government controlled search engine server, Baidu, even less than now. Perhaps Microsoft and Yahoo would be inspired to forget the all mighty profit for a while and instead locate their spinal columns and depart from the Chinese market.
And does it matter why a business withdraws from a controlled information market? That Google might leave in protest would send a good message about the importance of free idea exchange, even if the Goggle motive for leaving is not as moral as it claims.Cynics of Google's announcement of a withdrawal possibility might say Google wants to go because it either isn't making enough money (because Baidu, though untrusted politically, is very popular in China due to it's emphasis on local content) or it wants to make more money, and that this is cover for a way to expand profitability in China.
What do you think?
The problem is that Google's willingness to bow to control by China when operating there has helped the totalitarian regime muzzle free expression, hold back human rights and punish the Chinese citizens who tried to promote both. It is selling out freedom in return for profits. But Goggle is not alone. The always shameful Microsoft, which has never missed an opportunity to make money at the expense of decency, some time back agreed to block certain words, democracy, freedom and human rights, for example, by users on its Chinese Internet portal.
And last year Yahoo, after being threatened with expulsion from the Chinese cyber spaces, turned over data to Chinese officials that helped convict journalist Shi Tao for leaking a propaganda directive. Shi was sent to prison for 10 years while Yahoo collected profits from its Chinese operations.However, Google says it has had enough meddling after a series of cyber attacks (presumably conducted by the Chinese government) originating in China and stole Google secrets and also targeted the Gmail accounts of human rights activists. Google said that if China won't allow uncensored searches, it will pull out. I hope Google isn't blowing hot air this time. To be effective the Internet must be as free and unfettered as possible. Governments have the first responsibility in seeing that it is. Here is the Goggle announcement link.http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-china.html?utm_campaign=en&utm_source=en-ha-ww-ww-bk-cn&utm_medium=ha&utm_term=google%20china
Too, if Google's threat inspires other companies to show some spine, China would have less clout to impose its demands on businesses operating within China.The world's largest market for Internet users is in China, with about 340 million users. China has shown itself to be a thug when it comes to the free flow of information. If it pushes one of the world's most successful and popular companies out the door, the Chinese people will notice and mistrust the government controlled search engine server, Baidu, even less than now. Perhaps Microsoft and Yahoo would be inspired to forget the all mighty profit for a while and instead locate their spinal columns and depart from the Chinese market.
And does it matter why a business withdraws from a controlled information market? That Google might leave in protest would send a good message about the importance of free idea exchange, even if the Goggle motive for leaving is not as moral as it claims.Cynics of Google's announcement of a withdrawal possibility might say Google wants to go because it either isn't making enough money (because Baidu, though untrusted politically, is very popular in China due to it's emphasis on local content) or it wants to make more money, and that this is cover for a way to expand profitability in China.
What do you think?
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Religious Tolerance Level
Can you tolerate some Can you tolerate some religious intolerance comments? Many people of religious persuasion can't theses days, as religious fervor for one's one belief system has been gradually spiraling back to the days of crusades and holy wars when humans had little science and more than enough "faith' in their religion. I wonder if the dumbing down of humans is reflected in the lack of tolerance among religions today. It is indisputable that tolerance goes hand in hand with education, and in the age of electronic gratification at the lowest level we are losing our traditional educational achievements.
No need to chronicle the intolerance out there the past 10 years or so. It's on all fronts, from all religions, though Islam is clearly the most intolerant and most often carries a persecution complex that manifests itself through intolerant behavior toward the perceived transgressors of Islam. But the interception by Malaysian authorities of thousands of Bibles bound for Christians in the country has produced the latest intolerant slant. Allegedly, to Muslims in Malaysia( 2/3 of the population there is Muslim) the Bibles use the word Allah to describe God, and that's been banned by the government. It says the risk of causing upset to Muslims is too great. Strange perception indeed..I am not sure why the once tolerant Islamic faith, the one centuries which used to allow captured Christians in Europe to practice their faith in whatever way they desired, is now so think skinned, paranoid about being slighted, and almost fervent in dislike of Non Muslim populations. Perhaps it is a reaction defense against the way technology has assaulted the old ways and beliefs in islamic sects.
Today's young Muslim has a much greater opportunity ti escape old Muslim mindsets than previous generations. Since most of the temptations Muslims face today are from western technological and communication advancements and from Christendom, it is not unusual that the west and Christianity has been transformed into an enemy almost equal to the traditional "Jewish threat".
When the treatment of Christians in Muslim majority countries today becomes an issue, Christian majority countries are apt to compare it unfavorably with the equality they give to Muslims. But that equality too has limits. One only look at France to see the Burka banning crusades and the limits on Muslim religious expression to see a backlash against the growing Muslim populations there. I wonder if Christians are practicing a backlash against muslim intolerance that will make the dispute even worse.
The problem in stopping the intolerance among religions today is that for the most part the spokespersons and advocates for Christianity and Islam are the extremists, not the traditional leadership. As Christianity fades in appeal to westerners who have left or are leaving the religion in droves what remains is hardly tolerant toward Islamists. Too, the Islamic sects have long been kidnapped and remade in the image of the menacing terrorists who would love to die "defending Islam".
Apparently no mainstream religious leaders can speak loudly enough to recapture it, given the apathy by the flock to do so.The great irony of religious intolerance is that it almost always does one thing- injures those who practice it as well as those who are victims of it. At least someone benefits from it all....the atheists must be smiling and cheering on the battle.
As I am a lit comments? Many people of religious persuasion can't theses days, as religious fervor for one's one belief system has been gradually spiraling back to the days of crusades and holy wars when humans had little science and more than enough "faith' in their religion. I wonder if the dumbing down of humans is reflected in the lack of tolerance among religions today. It is indisputable that tolerance goes hand in hand with education, and in the age of electronic gratification at the lowest level we are losing our traditional educational achievements.
No need to chronicle the intolerance out there the past 10 years or so. It's on all fronts, from all religions, though Islam is clearly the most intolerant and most often carries a persecution complex that manifests itself through intolerant behavior toward the perceived transgressors of Islam. But the interception by Malaysian authorities of thousands of Bibles bound for Christians in the country has produced the latest intolerant slant. Allegedly, to Muslims in Malaysia (2/3 of the population there is Muslim) the Bibles use the word Allah to describe God, and that's been banned by the government. It says the risk of causing upset to Muslims is too great. Strange perception indeed.
I am not sure why the once tolerant Islamic faith, the one centuries which used to allow captured Christians in Europe to practice their faith in whatever way they desired, is now so think skinned, paranoid about being slighted, and almost fervent in dislike of Non Muslim populations. Perhaps it is a reaction defense against the way technology has assaulted the old ways and beliefs in islamic sects. Today's young Muslim has a much greater opportunity ti escape old Muslim mindsets than previous generations. Since most of the temptations Muslims face today are from western technological and communication advancements and from Christendom, it is not unusual that the west and Christianity has been transformed into an enemy almost equal to the traditional "Jewish threat".
When the treatment of Christians in Muslim majority countries today becomes an issue, Christian majority countries are apt to compare it unfavorably with the equality they give to Muslims. But that equality too has limits. One only look at France to see the Burka banning crusades and the limits on Muslim religious expression to see a backlash against the growing Muslim populations there. I wonder if Christians are practicing a backlash against muslim intolerance that will make the dispute even worse.
The problem in stopping the intolerance among religions today is that for the most part the spokespersons and advocates for Christianity and Islam are the extremists, not the traditional leadership. As Christianity fades in appeal to westerners who have left or are leaving the religion in droves what remains is hardly tolerant toward Islamists. Too, the Islamic sects have long been kidnapped and remade in the image of the menacing terrorists who would love to die "defending Islam". Apparently no mainstream religious leaders can speak loudly enough to recapture it, given the apathy by the flock to do so.
The great irony of religious intolerance is that it almost always does one thing- injures those who practice it as well as those who are victims of it. At least someone benefits from it all....the atheists must be smiling and cheering on the battle
No need to chronicle the intolerance out there the past 10 years or so. It's on all fronts, from all religions, though Islam is clearly the most intolerant and most often carries a persecution complex that manifests itself through intolerant behavior toward the perceived transgressors of Islam. But the interception by Malaysian authorities of thousands of Bibles bound for Christians in the country has produced the latest intolerant slant. Allegedly, to Muslims in Malaysia( 2/3 of the population there is Muslim) the Bibles use the word Allah to describe God, and that's been banned by the government. It says the risk of causing upset to Muslims is too great. Strange perception indeed..I am not sure why the once tolerant Islamic faith, the one centuries which used to allow captured Christians in Europe to practice their faith in whatever way they desired, is now so think skinned, paranoid about being slighted, and almost fervent in dislike of Non Muslim populations. Perhaps it is a reaction defense against the way technology has assaulted the old ways and beliefs in islamic sects.
Today's young Muslim has a much greater opportunity ti escape old Muslim mindsets than previous generations. Since most of the temptations Muslims face today are from western technological and communication advancements and from Christendom, it is not unusual that the west and Christianity has been transformed into an enemy almost equal to the traditional "Jewish threat".
When the treatment of Christians in Muslim majority countries today becomes an issue, Christian majority countries are apt to compare it unfavorably with the equality they give to Muslims. But that equality too has limits. One only look at France to see the Burka banning crusades and the limits on Muslim religious expression to see a backlash against the growing Muslim populations there. I wonder if Christians are practicing a backlash against muslim intolerance that will make the dispute even worse.
The problem in stopping the intolerance among religions today is that for the most part the spokespersons and advocates for Christianity and Islam are the extremists, not the traditional leadership. As Christianity fades in appeal to westerners who have left or are leaving the religion in droves what remains is hardly tolerant toward Islamists. Too, the Islamic sects have long been kidnapped and remade in the image of the menacing terrorists who would love to die "defending Islam".
Apparently no mainstream religious leaders can speak loudly enough to recapture it, given the apathy by the flock to do so.The great irony of religious intolerance is that it almost always does one thing- injures those who practice it as well as those who are victims of it. At least someone benefits from it all....the atheists must be smiling and cheering on the battle.
As I am a lit comments? Many people of religious persuasion can't theses days, as religious fervor for one's one belief system has been gradually spiraling back to the days of crusades and holy wars when humans had little science and more than enough "faith' in their religion. I wonder if the dumbing down of humans is reflected in the lack of tolerance among religions today. It is indisputable that tolerance goes hand in hand with education, and in the age of electronic gratification at the lowest level we are losing our traditional educational achievements.
No need to chronicle the intolerance out there the past 10 years or so. It's on all fronts, from all religions, though Islam is clearly the most intolerant and most often carries a persecution complex that manifests itself through intolerant behavior toward the perceived transgressors of Islam. But the interception by Malaysian authorities of thousands of Bibles bound for Christians in the country has produced the latest intolerant slant. Allegedly, to Muslims in Malaysia (2/3 of the population there is Muslim) the Bibles use the word Allah to describe God, and that's been banned by the government. It says the risk of causing upset to Muslims is too great. Strange perception indeed.
I am not sure why the once tolerant Islamic faith, the one centuries which used to allow captured Christians in Europe to practice their faith in whatever way they desired, is now so think skinned, paranoid about being slighted, and almost fervent in dislike of Non Muslim populations. Perhaps it is a reaction defense against the way technology has assaulted the old ways and beliefs in islamic sects. Today's young Muslim has a much greater opportunity ti escape old Muslim mindsets than previous generations. Since most of the temptations Muslims face today are from western technological and communication advancements and from Christendom, it is not unusual that the west and Christianity has been transformed into an enemy almost equal to the traditional "Jewish threat".
When the treatment of Christians in Muslim majority countries today becomes an issue, Christian majority countries are apt to compare it unfavorably with the equality they give to Muslims. But that equality too has limits. One only look at France to see the Burka banning crusades and the limits on Muslim religious expression to see a backlash against the growing Muslim populations there. I wonder if Christians are practicing a backlash against muslim intolerance that will make the dispute even worse.
The problem in stopping the intolerance among religions today is that for the most part the spokespersons and advocates for Christianity and Islam are the extremists, not the traditional leadership. As Christianity fades in appeal to westerners who have left or are leaving the religion in droves what remains is hardly tolerant toward Islamists. Too, the Islamic sects have long been kidnapped and remade in the image of the menacing terrorists who would love to die "defending Islam". Apparently no mainstream religious leaders can speak loudly enough to recapture it, given the apathy by the flock to do so.
The great irony of religious intolerance is that it almost always does one thing- injures those who practice it as well as those who are victims of it. At least someone benefits from it all....the atheists must be smiling and cheering on the battle
Hammond
I left the house yesterday at 5 am and didn't get back until about 8 p.m. long day and not suitable to writing insults toward you at the end of it. Instead of driving they had me walking in some scenes. No excitement in this production but it was shot in Hammond, Louisiana. Hammond is one of those small cities in Louisiana with nice charm and old buildings.
We shot the scenes in which I participated in the old historic district of Hammond, a curious thing given the film is supposed to be set in Oklahoma, which looks nothing like Hammond. But that is the way Hollywood works sometimes. It reconstructs the city of the film to fit the locale when entertainment value is upped or the economy of the shoot makes it advantageous to do so.Hammond has about 20,000 residents an increase since the great Hurricane of 2005 chased so many of the citizens of the New Orleans area northward to Hammond and other places that are safe from future flooding.
It's biggest industry is Southeastern University (with a famed research department on mosquitoes and other insects). During the Civil War the southern army got many of its shoes from Hammond, which was the leading manufacturer of shoes for the Confederate army. That was also the time when Hammond became famous for producing sweet strawberries. it no bills itself as the strawberry capital of the U.S.That is essentially the a story of Hammond, a similar one to many other cites across the country.
I like to drink in the ambiance of a place I do not know and when there I did that, noticing the atavistic nature of the city. I saw signs of businesses that once were once bade in and New Orleans staples but no long gone. Whether they are related to those today or new ones who kept only the name I do not know, but seeing the signs made me flash back to when I remembered those same ones here in New Orleans. Small cities like this one hold a historical treasure for us, keeping alive and even idealizing things we have forgotten but are reminded again when visiting those places.
But you may ask, "What is there to do in a small city like Hammond?" The same thing there is in a large city. There are the same books, the same movies, the same sports, and for the most part the same social activities.
Hammond is really just a microcosm of New Orleans and a reminder that little or big most cities are more alike than dissimilar
We shot the scenes in which I participated in the old historic district of Hammond, a curious thing given the film is supposed to be set in Oklahoma, which looks nothing like Hammond. But that is the way Hollywood works sometimes. It reconstructs the city of the film to fit the locale when entertainment value is upped or the economy of the shoot makes it advantageous to do so.Hammond has about 20,000 residents an increase since the great Hurricane of 2005 chased so many of the citizens of the New Orleans area northward to Hammond and other places that are safe from future flooding.
It's biggest industry is Southeastern University (with a famed research department on mosquitoes and other insects). During the Civil War the southern army got many of its shoes from Hammond, which was the leading manufacturer of shoes for the Confederate army. That was also the time when Hammond became famous for producing sweet strawberries. it no bills itself as the strawberry capital of the U.S.That is essentially the a story of Hammond, a similar one to many other cites across the country.
I like to drink in the ambiance of a place I do not know and when there I did that, noticing the atavistic nature of the city. I saw signs of businesses that once were once bade in and New Orleans staples but no long gone. Whether they are related to those today or new ones who kept only the name I do not know, but seeing the signs made me flash back to when I remembered those same ones here in New Orleans. Small cities like this one hold a historical treasure for us, keeping alive and even idealizing things we have forgotten but are reminded again when visiting those places.
But you may ask, "What is there to do in a small city like Hammond?" The same thing there is in a large city. There are the same books, the same movies, the same sports, and for the most part the same social activities.
Hammond is really just a microcosm of New Orleans and a reminder that little or big most cities are more alike than dissimilar
Last Gadget Standing
There is something called the "Last Gadget Standing" competition held each year at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. Since I am a dinosaur when it comes to technology I normally don't pay attention to such things. But I did read about it and think quite a few of the new products that received votes for best will soon be produced and sold to all those tech addicted consumers soon.
'The Boxee Box', a cube like device that shares Internet content with your TV, won the competition this year. According to reports from the show the Boxee Box plugs into a TV and allows the person to search and store Web content, play it on your television and and share it with your friends on social networks via a keyboard in the device's remote control. Sounds like a version of the old Web TV in which the TV was turned into a computer, minus a hard drive to store data. But the Boxee has a hard drive. It is scheduled to go on sale this spring and cost about $200. Hmmmmmmmm Could this mean the eventual end of the desktop computer?
Plastic Logic's Que e-reader and the Intel Reader, a device that scans printed text and reads it aloud was voted as the second best new product. I am not sure I would be interested in that one. But it is the lazy man/woman's reading device and another indication that electronic gurus are trying hard to make us a part of the computer or electronic device we use. Are we being integrated into the new technology that is being produced? On the emotional level we already have, as seen by the addiction so many have to their electronic devices. It's interesting how we are first made emotionally dependent on the devices, and then gradually physically integrated into them.
Perhaps those cell phone addicts will one day have their phones implanted under their skin on their arms. Past winners at the last Gadget contest have included the OnStar vehicle security system, the Roomba robotic vacuum and Eye-Fi wireless memory cards for cameras. On that note look at the other finalists in this years competition:
*Motorola Droid, the new multitasking smartphone that runs on Google's Android system.*Que proReader, Plastic Logic's forthcoming touchscreen e-reader that delivers newspapers and magazines wirelessly.
*Haier Ibiza Trainer, a Web-enabled workout gizmo that clips on your belt and combines an MP3 player, pedometer, heart rate monitor, stopwatch and calorie counter.
*Neato Vacuum Cleaner, a robotic vacuum with a square jaw for getting into corners and a mapping system that prevents it from wandering aimlessly.
*Acer Aspire 3D notebook, which combines portable computing power with a 3D display.
*Intel Reader, a handheld device that scans text, converts text to voice and reads it aloud -- a potential aid to the dyslexic or vision-impaired
*Sony Dash Personal Internet Viewer, a small, Web-enabled device that seeks to replace the bedside alarm clock by offering news, weather, video, Internet radio and other services.
*Nvidia Ultra Android Tablet, which packs a gaming PC and a multimedia player into the body of a portable tablet less than an inch thick.
Nice gadgets, but do they really improve in our lives if we use them? I still prefer the first communication device ever invented...the human voice....and all the imperfections of humanity that go with it.
'The Boxee Box', a cube like device that shares Internet content with your TV, won the competition this year. According to reports from the show the Boxee Box plugs into a TV and allows the person to search and store Web content, play it on your television and and share it with your friends on social networks via a keyboard in the device's remote control. Sounds like a version of the old Web TV in which the TV was turned into a computer, minus a hard drive to store data. But the Boxee has a hard drive. It is scheduled to go on sale this spring and cost about $200. Hmmmmmmmm Could this mean the eventual end of the desktop computer?
Plastic Logic's Que e-reader and the Intel Reader, a device that scans printed text and reads it aloud was voted as the second best new product. I am not sure I would be interested in that one. But it is the lazy man/woman's reading device and another indication that electronic gurus are trying hard to make us a part of the computer or electronic device we use. Are we being integrated into the new technology that is being produced? On the emotional level we already have, as seen by the addiction so many have to their electronic devices. It's interesting how we are first made emotionally dependent on the devices, and then gradually physically integrated into them.
Perhaps those cell phone addicts will one day have their phones implanted under their skin on their arms. Past winners at the last Gadget contest have included the OnStar vehicle security system, the Roomba robotic vacuum and Eye-Fi wireless memory cards for cameras. On that note look at the other finalists in this years competition:
*Motorola Droid, the new multitasking smartphone that runs on Google's Android system.*Que proReader, Plastic Logic's forthcoming touchscreen e-reader that delivers newspapers and magazines wirelessly.
*Haier Ibiza Trainer, a Web-enabled workout gizmo that clips on your belt and combines an MP3 player, pedometer, heart rate monitor, stopwatch and calorie counter.
*Neato Vacuum Cleaner, a robotic vacuum with a square jaw for getting into corners and a mapping system that prevents it from wandering aimlessly.
*Acer Aspire 3D notebook, which combines portable computing power with a 3D display.
*Intel Reader, a handheld device that scans text, converts text to voice and reads it aloud -- a potential aid to the dyslexic or vision-impaired
*Sony Dash Personal Internet Viewer, a small, Web-enabled device that seeks to replace the bedside alarm clock by offering news, weather, video, Internet radio and other services.
*Nvidia Ultra Android Tablet, which packs a gaming PC and a multimedia player into the body of a portable tablet less than an inch thick.
Nice gadgets, but do they really improve in our lives if we use them? I still prefer the first communication device ever invented...the human voice....and all the imperfections of humanity that go with it.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Global Warming Entitlements
I have a quote from a black writer of some prominence, Julianne Malveaux. Just read it and I'll comment after"Climate change is more than an environmental issue. It is a human rights and economic justice issue. The rich and powerful nations, particularly the U.S. and members of the European Union dictate the debate at the expense of poorer countries. That needs to change. African Americans have a dog in this fight. We produce less greenhouse gas emissions (about 20% less than other Americans, according to a Congressional Black Caucus Foundation study), but we bear a greater in terms of pollution and climate change."
Here we go again. It's another case of making the phony threat of "climate change" (or "global warming" , as they formerly called it) to obtain favor for a special interest and an indication of why global warming isn't about science as much as it is about power and control. How ridiculous! Skin color and poverty has nothing to do with "climate change" or how it (if it exists art all) is affects any one race or income more than another. Instead, might this be just another set of excuses to be self-righteous, play the victim card as in "I am from a different race than you and you are wealthy, so you owe me money".
Blacks in Africa and the poor elsewhere put out less "carbon", not because they are more "responsible" but because their societies there are poor and less industrialized. To equate their condition to a superiority is ludicrous and shows how the stupidity of global warming is sued to bring on individual or group entitlements. In fact, the poor countries "suffer" more because of their lack of advancement economically. And for that they have only themselves to blame.
As for black Americans :"suffering" more than non black, perhaps it is the behavior of the group itself that accounts for much of that imbalance. If single parenthood (the number one factor accounting for poverty in the U.S.) numbers would drop, so would the poverty. If education levels of the group would rise, so would poverty levels. Those are two of the many real factors of poverty that can be changed by the members of the group themselves, yet are seemingly not addressed often enough by them.
Haha Now we a new politically correct global warming theory..."climate justice" A good translation of "climate justice might be that poorer countries should be able to force, preferably via international treaty, richer countries to give them more "global-warming" money, but with no strings attached, so they can actually spend it any way they chose. It's using a phony theory as an excuse to redistribute wealth and garner more entitlements for the one particular group.
It's enough to make me hot under my collar..
Here we go again. It's another case of making the phony threat of "climate change" (or "global warming" , as they formerly called it) to obtain favor for a special interest and an indication of why global warming isn't about science as much as it is about power and control. How ridiculous! Skin color and poverty has nothing to do with "climate change" or how it (if it exists art all) is affects any one race or income more than another. Instead, might this be just another set of excuses to be self-righteous, play the victim card as in "I am from a different race than you and you are wealthy, so you owe me money".
Blacks in Africa and the poor elsewhere put out less "carbon", not because they are more "responsible" but because their societies there are poor and less industrialized. To equate their condition to a superiority is ludicrous and shows how the stupidity of global warming is sued to bring on individual or group entitlements. In fact, the poor countries "suffer" more because of their lack of advancement economically. And for that they have only themselves to blame.
As for black Americans :"suffering" more than non black, perhaps it is the behavior of the group itself that accounts for much of that imbalance. If single parenthood (the number one factor accounting for poverty in the U.S.) numbers would drop, so would the poverty. If education levels of the group would rise, so would poverty levels. Those are two of the many real factors of poverty that can be changed by the members of the group themselves, yet are seemingly not addressed often enough by them.
Haha Now we a new politically correct global warming theory..."climate justice" A good translation of "climate justice might be that poorer countries should be able to force, preferably via international treaty, richer countries to give them more "global-warming" money, but with no strings attached, so they can actually spend it any way they chose. It's using a phony theory as an excuse to redistribute wealth and garner more entitlements for the one particular group.
It's enough to make me hot under my collar..
Travel Resolutions
Trip Adviser had some questions for readers about their travel resolutions this coming year, things like: Will you 1) Go somewhere I've never been 2) explore your own region better 3) take up a new activity 4) spend less, but keep traveling 5) spend more and live large and so on...Those may be noble travel resolution questions, but not realistic and specific ones. They, uh, only touch the edge of the traveler's concerns. So today I will give you a few you might better identify with and which might make your own travel focus more specific.
I hereby resolve in 2010 to.....
1) not to sit next to that fat, smelly guy with bad breath who always seems to choose the seat next to mine
2) to get a hotel room without those mysterious stains on the carpet.
3) to not to ask what the stains are
4) after passing though airport screening, resist the temptation to say to the security agent, "Are you SURE there isn't a bomb in my luggage"
5) not paying over $10 for a bottle of water at any of those kiosks in the airport
6) finding the right airport shuttle gate, riding the right train and making it to my gate on time
7) to say to the obnoxious self absorbed, pretentious cell addict who is screaming into his or her phone, "Could you spell the name of your bank. I know I have your account number already."
8) not to enter any tour bus where the passengers are singing the "Viva Viagra" song
9) when an annoying seat mate won't stop questioning me, chant "Allah Akbar" and take out Islamic funeral prayer beads
10) when in the aircraft give those crying children a real reason to cry
11) find a place somewhere in the overhead bins for my one small carry-on....oh wait...it is an impossible resolution....never mind
12) never to go on a cruise, visit Singapore or it in an American fast food restaurant.
13) when asking the stewardess for a coke, not remarking when served it, "This isn't the kind of coke I usually use on a lousy flight like this".
Thirteen is an appropriate number of resolutions for me. Happy Traveling in 2010!
I hereby resolve in 2010 to.....
1) not to sit next to that fat, smelly guy with bad breath who always seems to choose the seat next to mine
2) to get a hotel room without those mysterious stains on the carpet.
3) to not to ask what the stains are
4) after passing though airport screening, resist the temptation to say to the security agent, "Are you SURE there isn't a bomb in my luggage"
5) not paying over $10 for a bottle of water at any of those kiosks in the airport
6) finding the right airport shuttle gate, riding the right train and making it to my gate on time
7) to say to the obnoxious self absorbed, pretentious cell addict who is screaming into his or her phone, "Could you spell the name of your bank. I know I have your account number already."
8) not to enter any tour bus where the passengers are singing the "Viva Viagra" song
9) when an annoying seat mate won't stop questioning me, chant "Allah Akbar" and take out Islamic funeral prayer beads
10) when in the aircraft give those crying children a real reason to cry
11) find a place somewhere in the overhead bins for my one small carry-on....oh wait...it is an impossible resolution....never mind
12) never to go on a cruise, visit Singapore or it in an American fast food restaurant.
13) when asking the stewardess for a coke, not remarking when served it, "This isn't the kind of coke I usually use on a lousy flight like this".
Thirteen is an appropriate number of resolutions for me. Happy Traveling in 2010!
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Made In China
Capitalism has won the war it has waged with socialism and communism. I know this now. How can I tell? It's because of what China is doing as a result of the scandals involving Chinese made products. This has consumers in China and elsewhere worried because of the bad reputation threatens to derail China's status as No. 1 exporter in the world. Sooooooooooo, what is China doing? It's hiring a New York based advertising agency to clean up that bad image with snake oil, western style, capitalist propaganda to make the consumer think China makes only good products."
Made in China, made with the world" is the theme of the ad campaign masterminded by DDB Guoan, the Chinese branch of Manhattan ad agency. Commercials for the campaign just ended a six week run on cable TV networks in the United States, Europe and Asia. One of the 30-second spots shows a couple of teen girls dancing at a bus stop using an MP3 player "Made in China with software from Silicon Valley", to make consumers associate the Chinese player with American made ones. It replaces the image of tainted Chinese goods with those of more pure ones.
Another of the ads shows a jogger tying his sneakers that say "Made in China with American sports technology." I remember seeing that one at least once and thought about the oddity of the Chinese made product trying to identify with American manufacturing. Perhaps all borders end at the manufacturing site and at cash registers of retail outlets who are interested in making a sale, not in nationalism.
For such a nationalistic nation as China to campaign this way is a change from its long held tactic of denying any of the Chinese made products are flawed. The new mentality among Chinese manufacturers is that many products made in China are designed in cooperation with other countries, so the consumer must think that they are good products. Thus, China wants to transfer the negative image of Chinese goods to that of the more quality oriented western goods in order to create a positive, objective image for made-in-China products. The Chinese seem to agree their image has suffered, so why not employ the smooth tactics of advertising campaigns instead of those stolid, government issued denials that yet another made in China product is defective? Those denials , even the Chinese consumer never believed.
China intends to follow the model Japan used in the late 50's. using that one Japan, which entered the U.S. market at the lower end with cheap products, eventually entered a move up-market that today associates Japanese goods with quality ones. If this works most consumers outside of China could wind up having a Chinese TV or washing machine and won't think twice about whether it is a defective product. Japan used the same strategy, and today Japanese made products are prized as top of the line in many categories. That's a far cry from the old mentality that, "Japan only makes those cheap am transistor radios".
In effect, his ad campaign is an act of throwing the gauntlet down to the west and to Japan that China is ready to manufacture quality at the same level as other nations, and that they will use modern advertising techniques to relay to consumers that Chinese goods not only are cheaper, but of high quality.
Capitalism is in full bloom in China. May the old socialist ways be buried forever there.
Made in China, made with the world" is the theme of the ad campaign masterminded by DDB Guoan, the Chinese branch of Manhattan ad agency. Commercials for the campaign just ended a six week run on cable TV networks in the United States, Europe and Asia. One of the 30-second spots shows a couple of teen girls dancing at a bus stop using an MP3 player "Made in China with software from Silicon Valley", to make consumers associate the Chinese player with American made ones. It replaces the image of tainted Chinese goods with those of more pure ones.
Another of the ads shows a jogger tying his sneakers that say "Made in China with American sports technology." I remember seeing that one at least once and thought about the oddity of the Chinese made product trying to identify with American manufacturing. Perhaps all borders end at the manufacturing site and at cash registers of retail outlets who are interested in making a sale, not in nationalism.
For such a nationalistic nation as China to campaign this way is a change from its long held tactic of denying any of the Chinese made products are flawed. The new mentality among Chinese manufacturers is that many products made in China are designed in cooperation with other countries, so the consumer must think that they are good products. Thus, China wants to transfer the negative image of Chinese goods to that of the more quality oriented western goods in order to create a positive, objective image for made-in-China products. The Chinese seem to agree their image has suffered, so why not employ the smooth tactics of advertising campaigns instead of those stolid, government issued denials that yet another made in China product is defective? Those denials , even the Chinese consumer never believed.
China intends to follow the model Japan used in the late 50's. using that one Japan, which entered the U.S. market at the lower end with cheap products, eventually entered a move up-market that today associates Japanese goods with quality ones. If this works most consumers outside of China could wind up having a Chinese TV or washing machine and won't think twice about whether it is a defective product. Japan used the same strategy, and today Japanese made products are prized as top of the line in many categories. That's a far cry from the old mentality that, "Japan only makes those cheap am transistor radios".
In effect, his ad campaign is an act of throwing the gauntlet down to the west and to Japan that China is ready to manufacture quality at the same level as other nations, and that they will use modern advertising techniques to relay to consumers that Chinese goods not only are cheaper, but of high quality.
Capitalism is in full bloom in China. May the old socialist ways be buried forever there.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Twitter For Cars
Hold on to your steering wheel. I think driving is becoming more dangerous by the day. It's not because of eroding driving skills among those with cars. Instead, the bane of driving today is now becoming....what else...too much communication technology in our cars. Ford Motors has just incorporated into new vehicles a twitter application into its next-generation Sync in-car communication system.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh those cell phone chatting, texting addicts now will be able to tweet as they steer their vehicle of death towards us all. The new tweeting app is one of three free applications in cars, the others are online entertainment services Pandora and Stitcher, in what Ford hopes will become a portfolio of cell phone like devices available for "tech-minded" motorists. Now don't you feel safer!
OpenBeak, formerly called TwitterBerry, is the name of Ford's device that makes it easy to use Twitter's from auto mobile devices. Two other annoying and accident inducing car electronic communications now already in those cars are Pandora, an Internet radio service that lets users custom tailor music in song lists that can be paused or skipped through, and Sticher, a personalized radio system in which users can pick radio programs they want to hear, and listen on their own schedules.
Hmmmmmmmmmm I am not sure those drivers with these applications will have the time or awareness need to pay attention to where they are aiming their missile of death.This is all about bringing the Internet to the car, a part of the "in-auto entertainment" system many drivers seek today. They use their cars as much as entertainment centers as for getting from grandma's house to home.
Kind of a sad perversion, I believe. Do those people ever have solitary moments in which they can actually think about something other than being amused? probably not! Most of them are passive recipients of the garbage their electronic devices feed than rather than creating their own stimuli.
The one good aspect of the new auto twitter Ford has come up with is that drivers won't be able to compose tweets (though that will probably come soon). but The system reads them as they stream in, so the driver can not only rot his or her brain with inconsequential mush, but also crash, kill and maim due to the distraction it causes. More junk for the "Gotta know now, love to be stressed out, need to be available 24/7" masses connected to a few and unconnected to the world at large.
I ask one simple question about it all..Why do we need this?
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh those cell phone chatting, texting addicts now will be able to tweet as they steer their vehicle of death towards us all. The new tweeting app is one of three free applications in cars, the others are online entertainment services Pandora and Stitcher, in what Ford hopes will become a portfolio of cell phone like devices available for "tech-minded" motorists. Now don't you feel safer!
OpenBeak, formerly called TwitterBerry, is the name of Ford's device that makes it easy to use Twitter's from auto mobile devices. Two other annoying and accident inducing car electronic communications now already in those cars are Pandora, an Internet radio service that lets users custom tailor music in song lists that can be paused or skipped through, and Sticher, a personalized radio system in which users can pick radio programs they want to hear, and listen on their own schedules.
Hmmmmmmmmmm I am not sure those drivers with these applications will have the time or awareness need to pay attention to where they are aiming their missile of death.This is all about bringing the Internet to the car, a part of the "in-auto entertainment" system many drivers seek today. They use their cars as much as entertainment centers as for getting from grandma's house to home.
Kind of a sad perversion, I believe. Do those people ever have solitary moments in which they can actually think about something other than being amused? probably not! Most of them are passive recipients of the garbage their electronic devices feed than rather than creating their own stimuli.
The one good aspect of the new auto twitter Ford has come up with is that drivers won't be able to compose tweets (though that will probably come soon). but The system reads them as they stream in, so the driver can not only rot his or her brain with inconsequential mush, but also crash, kill and maim due to the distraction it causes. More junk for the "Gotta know now, love to be stressed out, need to be available 24/7" masses connected to a few and unconnected to the world at large.
I ask one simple question about it all..Why do we need this?
Health Care Overuse
Today, some more comments regarding the health care situation we discussed here yesterday. This time I want to mention one component of the mess here that few people mention- overuse of health care in AmericaReports are the cost of health care here is slowing down "due to the economy". I am not surprised and I think it may be a good thing that Americans are using (wasting) health service less than previously. I have always suspected that a large portion of health care cost is abuse of the insured, who are addicted to doctor's visits, drug medications and who have been convinced they are 'sick' way more than they really are.
Today people rush to the doctor for things as minor as a cold, and they demand drugs for any pain they feel or imagine. Some may say this is a nation of hypochondriacs, created by HMO's, the drug companies, advertisements encouraging the concept of medical care as a panacea. And ironically, the doctors lose in the system as they have become the Wal mart caregivers of the day.
The old indemnity insurance was far superior way of receiving health care. Under that the patient goes to whatever doctor he or she wants for whatever ailment they have or imagine they have, but pay 20% or so out of pocket to the doctor. This discourages waste, and doctors are able to spend far more time than they are forced to give now under the mass care for anything system we have..
If more patients were treated at home via phone calls from physicians the system would be less clogged with senseless doctor visits. Of course, doctors would have to be compensated for their phone care services, but overall, fewer procedures would be needed and medical costs would decrease We all are aware of the common use of a particular intervention for a patient when the benefits of the intervention don't justify the potential harm or cost. Prescribing antibiotics for a probable virus because the patient wants or thinks he or she needs it is one example. Reducing doctor visit would curtail that sort of waste.
In health care, more is not always better. More spending and treatment does not translate into better patient outcomes and health. For example, when used appropriately, MRI’s and other imaging exams are valuable. But MRI’s often don't change the treatments prescribed or a patient's outcome, in which case the technology used is an expensive wasteful frill.
The health care system today would benefit if it encouraged people to act more like “consumers” when it comes to health care, so they can create demand for high-quality care rather than the current often ritualistic doctor visits. In the same way that consumers buying a new car compare prices and features to find the best value car, and then make their purchase from a place that provides good customer service, they must take similar action with health care..if the system will allow it.
But that is the rub. Real medical care overhaul is not the disgraceful charade that politicians are pushing on us. Reconnecting patients and doctors/hospitals through that most elemental vehicle, the direct payment for services, will restrain costs more effectively than anything the politicians are pushing today. When patients have to think about costs of their treks to the doctor, they will think harder as to whether the visit is really needed.
Today people rush to the doctor for things as minor as a cold, and they demand drugs for any pain they feel or imagine. Some may say this is a nation of hypochondriacs, created by HMO's, the drug companies, advertisements encouraging the concept of medical care as a panacea. And ironically, the doctors lose in the system as they have become the Wal mart caregivers of the day.
The old indemnity insurance was far superior way of receiving health care. Under that the patient goes to whatever doctor he or she wants for whatever ailment they have or imagine they have, but pay 20% or so out of pocket to the doctor. This discourages waste, and doctors are able to spend far more time than they are forced to give now under the mass care for anything system we have..
If more patients were treated at home via phone calls from physicians the system would be less clogged with senseless doctor visits. Of course, doctors would have to be compensated for their phone care services, but overall, fewer procedures would be needed and medical costs would decrease We all are aware of the common use of a particular intervention for a patient when the benefits of the intervention don't justify the potential harm or cost. Prescribing antibiotics for a probable virus because the patient wants or thinks he or she needs it is one example. Reducing doctor visit would curtail that sort of waste.
In health care, more is not always better. More spending and treatment does not translate into better patient outcomes and health. For example, when used appropriately, MRI’s and other imaging exams are valuable. But MRI’s often don't change the treatments prescribed or a patient's outcome, in which case the technology used is an expensive wasteful frill.
The health care system today would benefit if it encouraged people to act more like “consumers” when it comes to health care, so they can create demand for high-quality care rather than the current often ritualistic doctor visits. In the same way that consumers buying a new car compare prices and features to find the best value car, and then make their purchase from a place that provides good customer service, they must take similar action with health care..if the system will allow it.
But that is the rub. Real medical care overhaul is not the disgraceful charade that politicians are pushing on us. Reconnecting patients and doctors/hospitals through that most elemental vehicle, the direct payment for services, will restrain costs more effectively than anything the politicians are pushing today. When patients have to think about costs of their treks to the doctor, they will think harder as to whether the visit is really needed.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Signs of Carnival Already
The New Year has just begun and Mardi Gras Day isn't until February 17th this year (It's always 46 days before Easter Sunday), but I see signs that carnival season is here. In grocery stores the Mardi Gars King Cakes (Sweet roll-like dough is shaped into a big circle, cooked and brushed with purple, green and gold sugar or icing) started appearing On January 1st even though it begins officially on Jan. 6, which is known as Twelfth Night or Kings' Day. They call it that because it falls 12 days after Christmas on the day the Wise Men are said to have reached Bethlehem.
The Phunny Phorty Phellows also board a lavishly decorated streetcar and began their ride to "Herarld the Arrival of Carnival" down famous St. Charles Ave. Streetcar Line. The Phellows are an historic Mardi Gras organization that first took to the streets 1878 through 1898. They were known for their satirical parades and today's krewe members’ costumes often reflect topical themes. They are not really a parade, but they pretend to be.. and after they ride that streetcar in their crazy costumes, the other 75 or so parade during the New Orleans Mardi Gras season get a sort of sanction to hole their own scheduled parades.
The first Carnival ball of the season is always the Twelfth Night Ball, held on Jan. 6. I never attended a ball, nor would I want to because they are dull events the society crowd puts on to show they really do believe they are royalty and the rest of the common citizens are rabble. Besides, I don't look good in 17th century stockings and tights.
The parades, concerts and other events will all soon be here soon. The high tourist season in New Orleans is in the colder months, the opposite of most cities because during out hot and humid six months it's too uncomfortable to do much outdoors. From October through early April there are an endless array of outdoor festivals and concerts here. But after that it is spartan. I always give thanks that Mardi Gras falls in January, February and March because it wouldn't work in the summer. Who would stand in 95 degree heat and blazing sun to watch a parade? Not I.
So I already have Mardi Gras on my mind. It shows the enthusiasm for the "greatest free show on earth" hasn't waned in me, and probably never will. Now.....what filling should I get in that first king cake I'll buy? Maybe cream cheese will suffice.
Happy Mardi Gras!
The Phunny Phorty Phellows also board a lavishly decorated streetcar and began their ride to "Herarld the Arrival of Carnival" down famous St. Charles Ave. Streetcar Line. The Phellows are an historic Mardi Gras organization that first took to the streets 1878 through 1898. They were known for their satirical parades and today's krewe members’ costumes often reflect topical themes. They are not really a parade, but they pretend to be.. and after they ride that streetcar in their crazy costumes, the other 75 or so parade during the New Orleans Mardi Gras season get a sort of sanction to hole their own scheduled parades.
The first Carnival ball of the season is always the Twelfth Night Ball, held on Jan. 6. I never attended a ball, nor would I want to because they are dull events the society crowd puts on to show they really do believe they are royalty and the rest of the common citizens are rabble. Besides, I don't look good in 17th century stockings and tights.
The parades, concerts and other events will all soon be here soon. The high tourist season in New Orleans is in the colder months, the opposite of most cities because during out hot and humid six months it's too uncomfortable to do much outdoors. From October through early April there are an endless array of outdoor festivals and concerts here. But after that it is spartan. I always give thanks that Mardi Gras falls in January, February and March because it wouldn't work in the summer. Who would stand in 95 degree heat and blazing sun to watch a parade? Not I.
So I already have Mardi Gras on my mind. It shows the enthusiasm for the "greatest free show on earth" hasn't waned in me, and probably never will. Now.....what filling should I get in that first king cake I'll buy? Maybe cream cheese will suffice.
Happy Mardi Gras!
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
BeautifulPeople.Com
The internet sure is a portal with varied appeal. But I read a news story that shows how it can be an exclusionary place too. BeautifulPeople.com., a social dating/meeting site announced that it has closed the accounts of about 5000 members of the site following complaints that "they had gained too much weight". Those members were singled out after posting pictures of themselves that reportedly showed they had put on pounds over the holiday period.
Well, fat or skinny, I would never be good looking enough to make it to membership there. However....out of curiosity, I had to see what that site was about. After typing in the web address and seeing the home page I could tell right away. Posted right there on Beautiful.com was this "warning".
'TOO UGLY TO SIGN UP!Click here to browse BeautifulPeople as guest'
Haha They must have known I was coming and left that message for me. It also listed the benefits for a beauty joining, gave a "quick step" registration form that didn't ask about looks (though that was said to come later) and...at that point I stopped looking at the site. According to the web site here's why Beautiful People is supposed to be an alluringly attractive site.
Do looks matter to you, when it comes to selecting a partner?
Do you want to guarantee your dates will always be beautiful?
No more filtering through unattractive people on mainstream sites
Meet beautiful people locally and from around the world - now
Attend exclusive events and private parties
It seems rather shallow, even for a dating site. They did show photos of members when I looked at the home page and they all looked young and attractive, if many tended to show off their bodies in an almost exhibitionist style. There is a quote allegedly from cnn there also that declares Beautiful People, 'The sexist web site in the world'.
I think such sites are a good thing for those interested in that kind of clubism. In the off-line world it would be shut down by political correctness. That it exists on line is a healthy sign I think It may be silly, but at least its allowed.
Well, fat or skinny, I would never be good looking enough to make it to membership there. However....out of curiosity, I had to see what that site was about. After typing in the web address and seeing the home page I could tell right away. Posted right there on Beautiful.com was this "warning".
'TOO UGLY TO SIGN UP!Click here to browse BeautifulPeople as guest'
Haha They must have known I was coming and left that message for me. It also listed the benefits for a beauty joining, gave a "quick step" registration form that didn't ask about looks (though that was said to come later) and...at that point I stopped looking at the site. According to the web site here's why Beautiful People is supposed to be an alluringly attractive site.
Do looks matter to you, when it comes to selecting a partner?
Do you want to guarantee your dates will always be beautiful?
No more filtering through unattractive people on mainstream sites
Meet beautiful people locally and from around the world - now
Attend exclusive events and private parties
It seems rather shallow, even for a dating site. They did show photos of members when I looked at the home page and they all looked young and attractive, if many tended to show off their bodies in an almost exhibitionist style. There is a quote allegedly from cnn there also that declares Beautiful People, 'The sexist web site in the world'.
I think such sites are a good thing for those interested in that kind of clubism. In the off-line world it would be shut down by political correctness. That it exists on line is a healthy sign I think It may be silly, but at least its allowed.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Healthy Lifestyles
Apparently the Brits drink alcohol even more than the neighboring drink happy Irish. A new report that warns that Britain's notorious drinking culture is putting an unacceptable strain on hospitals and medical staff. The British health care system spends $4.4 billion each year treating patients for drink related problems, double the amount five years ago, the report said.
The British government's has suggested raising the price of alcohol to curb the country's binge drinking culture, and the government has promised to launch public awareness campaigns about the dangers of alcohol. I saw a similar alcohol problem in Australia and New Zealand when there for travel, particularly among teens and young adults. The culture of Great Britain (and the former colonies) includes a binge drinking component.
It begs the question in Britain and for every health care system everywhere that, since alcohol is the most misused drug in our society, maybe public and private insurers should stop treating those who are killing themselves with alcohol and other drugs. Alcohol abuse can be defined as a preventable disease. Can insurers be allowed also require adherence to rules about what people eat, how much they exercise, what type of sports (possibly dangerous sports) and other activities they engage in, how many people you have sex with.....the possible uninsured risks might be endless.
From the other perspective, is not a person free to adopt whatever lifestyle he or she wishes? Should not people be insured for any malady, regardless of cause? What if a person has a genetic defect that induces illness or an unhealthy life style? Surely, it is of no fault of the individual. Isn't that a factor independent of eligibility for health care?
I point out all of this to show why government should stay out of the health care business and let the free market determine who is eligible for what coverage and how much the coverage should cost each person. When universal health care is mandated and public funds used for it, the care becomes very expensive. Too, why is health care "a basic right", as so many contend? I think it is not a "right", but rather a goal for which the private sector should strive.
Perhaps putting more personal responsibility into the health equation will produce better answers than most health care delivery systems now have
The British government's has suggested raising the price of alcohol to curb the country's binge drinking culture, and the government has promised to launch public awareness campaigns about the dangers of alcohol. I saw a similar alcohol problem in Australia and New Zealand when there for travel, particularly among teens and young adults. The culture of Great Britain (and the former colonies) includes a binge drinking component.
It begs the question in Britain and for every health care system everywhere that, since alcohol is the most misused drug in our society, maybe public and private insurers should stop treating those who are killing themselves with alcohol and other drugs. Alcohol abuse can be defined as a preventable disease. Can insurers be allowed also require adherence to rules about what people eat, how much they exercise, what type of sports (possibly dangerous sports) and other activities they engage in, how many people you have sex with.....the possible uninsured risks might be endless.
From the other perspective, is not a person free to adopt whatever lifestyle he or she wishes? Should not people be insured for any malady, regardless of cause? What if a person has a genetic defect that induces illness or an unhealthy life style? Surely, it is of no fault of the individual. Isn't that a factor independent of eligibility for health care?
I point out all of this to show why government should stay out of the health care business and let the free market determine who is eligible for what coverage and how much the coverage should cost each person. When universal health care is mandated and public funds used for it, the care becomes very expensive. Too, why is health care "a basic right", as so many contend? I think it is not a "right", but rather a goal for which the private sector should strive.
Perhaps putting more personal responsibility into the health equation will produce better answers than most health care delivery systems now have
Saturday, January 2, 2010
2010 New Year Resolutions
Happy 2010! This is when we are supposed to make those crazy resolutions that are intended to modify our behavior deviations. Humans have guilt complex that drives them to do such things. It's the "I shouldn't do this anymore, so I will avow that I won't do any more bad things in order to lessen my guilt about what I will do" complex. "Hey! I tried to stop it." But actually, most people look forward to a new year as away to continue old habits. Resolutions are most often a charade.
But then the new year can cause amazing changes. 'The proper behavior all through the holiday season is to be drunk. This drunkenness culminates on New Year's Eve, when you get so drunk you kiss the person you're married to." P.J. O'Rourke I think O'Rourke is on to something. Mark Twain was even more realistic about resolution futility. "Yesterday, everybody smoked his last cigar, took his last drink and swore his last oath. Today, we are a pious and exemplary community. Thirty days from now, we shall have cast our reformation to the winds and gone to cutting our ancient shortcomings considerably shorter than ever."And finally, my favorite cynic, Oscar Wilde, once wrote that, "Good resolutions are simply checks that men draw on a bank where they have no account."
So on that note, I won't make any resolutions for me. But I, uh, do have a few for some of the more famous among us. I (said party below) hereby resolve in 2009 to:
* John and Kate Gosselin- to go away and never darken the gossip pages again.
* Meryl Streep- to at least NOT appear in one new movie Hollywood makes in 2010
* "Tweeters"- to tweet in silence this year with no more of the " I just tweeted update announcements"
* Barack Obama- FINALLY run out of debt limits and stop spending money to buy voter's support.* Sarah Palin- to go away..as soon as possible.
* Tiger Woods- Keep swinging..but only on the golf course.
* Reality TV- disappear for something more realistic.
* Cell Phone Providers- shut up! Your commercial advertisements are more ubiquitous and annoying than are the idiot callers who use your services.
* Daily Newspapers- pretend to be what you once were, a provider of information readers should know, not a gossip source
* Illegal Immigrants. No, you are not "undocumented workers". You are invaders who bleed the society you invade. Stay home this year.
* Mainstream Culture- forget rap music, Lady Gaga, and the all the other teen sub cultural icons. Return to the adult world.
* Me- Display tact once in a while. (OOPs! This resolution has already killed my resolution)
Happy New Year....May all your problems in 2010 last as long as your resolutions................
But then the new year can cause amazing changes. 'The proper behavior all through the holiday season is to be drunk. This drunkenness culminates on New Year's Eve, when you get so drunk you kiss the person you're married to." P.J. O'Rourke I think O'Rourke is on to something. Mark Twain was even more realistic about resolution futility. "Yesterday, everybody smoked his last cigar, took his last drink and swore his last oath. Today, we are a pious and exemplary community. Thirty days from now, we shall have cast our reformation to the winds and gone to cutting our ancient shortcomings considerably shorter than ever."And finally, my favorite cynic, Oscar Wilde, once wrote that, "Good resolutions are simply checks that men draw on a bank where they have no account."
So on that note, I won't make any resolutions for me. But I, uh, do have a few for some of the more famous among us. I (said party below) hereby resolve in 2009 to:
* John and Kate Gosselin- to go away and never darken the gossip pages again.
* Meryl Streep- to at least NOT appear in one new movie Hollywood makes in 2010
* "Tweeters"- to tweet in silence this year with no more of the " I just tweeted update announcements"
* Barack Obama- FINALLY run out of debt limits and stop spending money to buy voter's support.* Sarah Palin- to go away..as soon as possible.
* Tiger Woods- Keep swinging..but only on the golf course.
* Reality TV- disappear for something more realistic.
* Cell Phone Providers- shut up! Your commercial advertisements are more ubiquitous and annoying than are the idiot callers who use your services.
* Daily Newspapers- pretend to be what you once were, a provider of information readers should know, not a gossip source
* Illegal Immigrants. No, you are not "undocumented workers". You are invaders who bleed the society you invade. Stay home this year.
* Mainstream Culture- forget rap music, Lady Gaga, and the all the other teen sub cultural icons. Return to the adult world.
* Me- Display tact once in a while. (OOPs! This resolution has already killed my resolution)
Happy New Year....May all your problems in 2010 last as long as your resolutions................
Friday, January 1, 2010
Besides being known for obnoxious and sometimes deadly (with their cars) drunks, New Year' Eve is the time for fireworks. Every city in every country has more than one big fireworks display for the common masses on New Year's Eve....just so there is something to entertain them while they vomit that vodka they have been chugging all night. Our fireworks displays are a little like the ancient Roman gladiator fights..great spectator sports that stir the masses.
I like fireworks and fireworks displays (Has Al Gore Global Warmed fireworks shows too? I wonder). As a kid all of we kids shot fireworks in the neighborhood for weeks up to and after New Year's day. Our Christmas vacation was a time for fireworks of every imaginable style. It's been a long time since I shot any myself, because Jane didn't ever like them. So I never did shoot them with her when she was small.
Adults are only supposed to shoot fireworks with kids as a "supervisor' even though the adult usually has more fun than the kids being supervised, finances and promotes the shootings. My favorite firework were those small bottle rockets that could be ignited after being placed in a hollow tube which was aimed, not at the sky but at a target of our best amusement. To my knowledge I never maimed or killed anyone as a child when I shot them that way.
Maybe...This year the BBC web site again had a nice video showing some of the biggest New Year's Eve fireworks displays all across the world . They all looked spectacular if predictable and similar. I think the technology is so shared today that if you see one big fireworks display in one city it' probably much like a big one in another city. What is different is the setting. I liked the ones this year from Moscow and Paris because they were set off at St. Basil's Cathedral and the Eiffel Tower. The setting accentuated and perhaps even trumped the fire and explosions of the displays.
Some of the displays were much bigger than others, but it's hard to notice that. Once a huge explosions happens comparisons as to size are hard to make. But the one in Paris at the Eiffel Tower was illuminated by a pulsating, multicolor display, described by the Parisian city officials as "a giant Christmas tree with tinsel". It was somewhat different from the norm. I liked that. The one in Tokyo use big bubbles in it. Leave it to the Japanese to have an odd anything, much less an odd fireworks display. If the Japanese ever put on a normal New Year's Eve fireworks display it may be a sign that that nation has slipped into normality. How sad that would be.
Politicians usually make speeches at those big displays. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, for example, said to the crowd at St. Basil's, "The past year was not a very easy one for our country, and I want to thank you for all bearing up together". I didn't hear all the speeches by the official at the fireworks displays worldwide (than God fro that!), but they must have all sounded like a "Support me, because I am giving you this fun fireworks show and the opportunity to become deadly drunk" theme. I imagine most of the viewers would rather more enjoy igniting the politicians that the fireworks.
New York City always has it's big New Year's Eve countdown to midnight event in Times Square, Manhattan without much fireworks. Hundreds of thousands of people descend upon Times Square (one must arrive about 8 hours before midnight to secure a spot at Times Square) already mostly already drunk (viewers of the magic ball are no longer allowed to bring alcohol into the venue) or stupid because once allowed to take a spot within the barricades are not permitted to leave until 1 am. That means no bathroom passes and plenty of smells to prove it on the clothing of the drunken revelers.
Besides just wanting to "be there", what are those people looking at? A lighted ball dropping atop the One Times building on Broadway that hits the ground precisely at midnight. As the New Year draws near, giant video screens display about two minutes of sound effects and music culminating in a countdown to mark the end of each hour. At midnight there is a two minute mini fireworks display above Times Square. That's it! Just two minutes and a much smaller version of a fireworks show.
And finally, after that, New Year's Eve confetti is released from rooftops of buildings throughout Times Square as the cold, drunken revelers celebrate the New Year (and discover their pockets have been picked amidst the jostling of the crowd), creating a brilliant panorama of color that blends in nicely with the vomit they have hurled the past 8 hours.. It's a traditional New York Style new year welcome.
No wonder I like the garish fireworks shows in other cities better.
I like fireworks and fireworks displays (Has Al Gore Global Warmed fireworks shows too? I wonder). As a kid all of we kids shot fireworks in the neighborhood for weeks up to and after New Year's day. Our Christmas vacation was a time for fireworks of every imaginable style. It's been a long time since I shot any myself, because Jane didn't ever like them. So I never did shoot them with her when she was small.
Adults are only supposed to shoot fireworks with kids as a "supervisor' even though the adult usually has more fun than the kids being supervised, finances and promotes the shootings. My favorite firework were those small bottle rockets that could be ignited after being placed in a hollow tube which was aimed, not at the sky but at a target of our best amusement. To my knowledge I never maimed or killed anyone as a child when I shot them that way.
Maybe...This year the BBC web site again had a nice video showing some of the biggest New Year's Eve fireworks displays all across the world . They all looked spectacular if predictable and similar. I think the technology is so shared today that if you see one big fireworks display in one city it' probably much like a big one in another city. What is different is the setting. I liked the ones this year from Moscow and Paris because they were set off at St. Basil's Cathedral and the Eiffel Tower. The setting accentuated and perhaps even trumped the fire and explosions of the displays.
Some of the displays were much bigger than others, but it's hard to notice that. Once a huge explosions happens comparisons as to size are hard to make. But the one in Paris at the Eiffel Tower was illuminated by a pulsating, multicolor display, described by the Parisian city officials as "a giant Christmas tree with tinsel". It was somewhat different from the norm. I liked that. The one in Tokyo use big bubbles in it. Leave it to the Japanese to have an odd anything, much less an odd fireworks display. If the Japanese ever put on a normal New Year's Eve fireworks display it may be a sign that that nation has slipped into normality. How sad that would be.
Politicians usually make speeches at those big displays. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, for example, said to the crowd at St. Basil's, "The past year was not a very easy one for our country, and I want to thank you for all bearing up together". I didn't hear all the speeches by the official at the fireworks displays worldwide (than God fro that!), but they must have all sounded like a "Support me, because I am giving you this fun fireworks show and the opportunity to become deadly drunk" theme. I imagine most of the viewers would rather more enjoy igniting the politicians that the fireworks.
New York City always has it's big New Year's Eve countdown to midnight event in Times Square, Manhattan without much fireworks. Hundreds of thousands of people descend upon Times Square (one must arrive about 8 hours before midnight to secure a spot at Times Square) already mostly already drunk (viewers of the magic ball are no longer allowed to bring alcohol into the venue) or stupid because once allowed to take a spot within the barricades are not permitted to leave until 1 am. That means no bathroom passes and plenty of smells to prove it on the clothing of the drunken revelers.
Besides just wanting to "be there", what are those people looking at? A lighted ball dropping atop the One Times building on Broadway that hits the ground precisely at midnight. As the New Year draws near, giant video screens display about two minutes of sound effects and music culminating in a countdown to mark the end of each hour. At midnight there is a two minute mini fireworks display above Times Square. That's it! Just two minutes and a much smaller version of a fireworks show.
And finally, after that, New Year's Eve confetti is released from rooftops of buildings throughout Times Square as the cold, drunken revelers celebrate the New Year (and discover their pockets have been picked amidst the jostling of the crowd), creating a brilliant panorama of color that blends in nicely with the vomit they have hurled the past 8 hours.. It's a traditional New York Style new year welcome.
No wonder I like the garish fireworks shows in other cities better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)