Another food police report today. This time the "evil" that is being attacked is salt. The medical folks say we eat too much, and of course with that cue, politicians are jumping on the band wagon to save us from salt. It's a safe way to legislate without losing votes. Don't ban tobacco. alcohol, or the obscene proliferation of needless prescription drugs. If you area politician go after what would offend few- the amount of salt consumed in foods.
More specifically, the advisory Institute of Medicine issued a report that calls for the government to establish new federal standards that would cut the amount of salt that manufacturers and restaurants add to foods...to gradually reduce the maximum amount of salt that can be added to foods, beverages and meals. I dare them to try and take my salt shaker away! Isn't it bad enough that in the U.S. the government has taken over so much (and ruined most of it) already that I can hardly wipe my butt with toilet paper without feeling guilty about "destroying the planet" by using paper products.
Citizens should have the sole responsibility for regulating what they eat of what is a legal product (aka salt). Surely, the public needs better food education, given the widespread fast food, junk food, chemically enhanced food for sale. But if those items are legal to consume, the government should step back and allow each consumer the free choice about how much of it to eat or drink. Education about the harmfulness of a product, as in the case of how cigarette usage dramatically decreased after such programs and when social sanctions against it were common, is the democratic way to "protect" (I hate that word as the government uses it) against abusive behavior of legal products.
The American heart association is also advising the government to institute the sodium reductions. One in three Americans have high blood pressure and an additional 20% have been diagnosed with pre-hypertension. "We believe reducing sodium in the food supply in a gradual way could drastically change the eating habits of Americans, which will reduce their risk for heart disease and stroke, " was the statement issued by the AMA in conjunction with the salt reduction recommendations.
It's strange how politics guides such ides, not reason. For example, a proposal in my state legislature yesterday to make those people receiving tax payer paid for food stamps was defeated on the basis that (according to one prominent state legislator opponent) "Government shouldn't be the food police." (for people who receive free food from taxpayers) Yet at the national level politicians want to regulate what things we pay for and we eat. It's sort of inconsistent to be the food police to people who pay for their food, but contend that it's not right to be the food police to welfare recipients????
The salt attack isn't a definite plan of the politicians yet. But given it is a safe crusade and a trendy one (is there any food we can eat without being "warned" about it) food bans could become the new global warming mentality of the next day. I say, let people chose what they wish to eat and whether they will eat it in moderation as doctors recommend. Life isn't about being "saved' from everything we enjoy. It's about being free to make the personal choices the individual, not big brother government, prefers to make.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Guide To "Green" Colleges
From the "I know they are the brainwashed generation and think it is sad department" is the latest in excessive environmental worry. This year for the first time Princeton University has published a "Guide to 286 Green Colleges", a 200-page guidebook that is available free online and is supposed to steer high school grads to the Al Gore college of their choice.
It offers brief profiles and facts about 286 colleges that it says excel in three major areas: 1) Providing students a healthy and sustainable quality of life. 2) Preparing students for green jobs and responsible green citizenship. 3) Using environmentally responsible school policies. The colleges profiled all received "Green Ratings" in the 80s or 90s, on a scale from 60-99, based on Princeton Review surveys of administrators at 697 colleges. How idiotic!
College should be a preparation for the future world of work, not a feel good indoctrination into buying into the alleged "environmentally preferable" products that every snake oil salesmen sells to the gullible "Save the Planet" types.
Hmmmmmmmmm I suggest those high school grads who want to attend one of the green universities should actually fully live the green lifestyle they worship. For starters, no greener should fly or drive an auto to his or her green school. It's a carbon offense to do that. Perhaps renting a horse or walking might be the best way to go. Or..maybe daddy will buy them one of those hybrid cars that are supposed to be vastly superior to regular fossil fuel cars, but are in themselves a pollutant.
Once on campus, no products, food included, should be eaten if produced by the use of resources deemed critical or which have a bad "carbon foot print". Good lucky fighting over the handful of the organic food grown (and often processed without green etiquette as a guide). Oh, and if the student becomes ill and needs critical medication he or she will have to do without it. The Green University would not want to allow any use of drugs that were tested in animals....it's too cruel to be politically correct.
The green student will never use paper to write note on the latest green hype his or her professor teaches. It's environmentally unsound. And the semester grades must be published on recycled paper since the university owns that expensive recycling contract that tax payers pay for. A "good sustain ability education" also means an allotment of only one roll of toilet paper per month per student. Remember the motto of every Green School- "We waste your time with incredibly expensive tuition on politically correct nonsense like 'carbon neutrality' and 'sustain ability' instead of using it for a quality education."
Sign me up for one of those schools too! Err..but make sure you don't let me use any of those polluting lead pencils when I do it...
It offers brief profiles and facts about 286 colleges that it says excel in three major areas: 1) Providing students a healthy and sustainable quality of life. 2) Preparing students for green jobs and responsible green citizenship. 3) Using environmentally responsible school policies. The colleges profiled all received "Green Ratings" in the 80s or 90s, on a scale from 60-99, based on Princeton Review surveys of administrators at 697 colleges. How idiotic!
College should be a preparation for the future world of work, not a feel good indoctrination into buying into the alleged "environmentally preferable" products that every snake oil salesmen sells to the gullible "Save the Planet" types.
Hmmmmmmmmm I suggest those high school grads who want to attend one of the green universities should actually fully live the green lifestyle they worship. For starters, no greener should fly or drive an auto to his or her green school. It's a carbon offense to do that. Perhaps renting a horse or walking might be the best way to go. Or..maybe daddy will buy them one of those hybrid cars that are supposed to be vastly superior to regular fossil fuel cars, but are in themselves a pollutant.
Once on campus, no products, food included, should be eaten if produced by the use of resources deemed critical or which have a bad "carbon foot print". Good lucky fighting over the handful of the organic food grown (and often processed without green etiquette as a guide). Oh, and if the student becomes ill and needs critical medication he or she will have to do without it. The Green University would not want to allow any use of drugs that were tested in animals....it's too cruel to be politically correct.
The green student will never use paper to write note on the latest green hype his or her professor teaches. It's environmentally unsound. And the semester grades must be published on recycled paper since the university owns that expensive recycling contract that tax payers pay for. A "good sustain ability education" also means an allotment of only one roll of toilet paper per month per student. Remember the motto of every Green School- "We waste your time with incredibly expensive tuition on politically correct nonsense like 'carbon neutrality' and 'sustain ability' instead of using it for a quality education."
Sign me up for one of those schools too! Err..but make sure you don't let me use any of those polluting lead pencils when I do it...
Image Of The United States
The BBC has conducted a poll every year since 2005 that asks whether the respondents have a favorable or unfavorable view of a particular nation. From 2005-2009 the U.S ranking was not very good. The George Bush era explains that, as Bush and company practically thumbed its nose at the rest of the world, slapped it in the face and even insulted it with words and a big invasion in the Mid East. But now that Bush is gone. most countries around the world now hold a positive view of the United States. It's the first time since the BBC World Service began tracking such attitudes in 2005.
Here are the rankings of the most popular nations, from most to least.
Germany (59% of the respondents rated it as favorable)
Canada
Japan
European Union
United Kingdom
France
Brazil
India
United States
China
South Africa
Russia
Israel
North Korea
Pakistan
Iran
Iran is viewed least favorably by an average of 15%, followed by Pakistan at 16%. That's no surprise. But that Germany is ranked most favorable is a puzzle. Germany has had a low profile since it and Japan (also a surprise with the 3rd most favorable ranking) were seen as monstrous states during W.W. II. It seems that Nazism and crazed empires can be rehabilitated.
The survey did not ask why the respondents rated each nation the way they did. It just asked 29,000 adults in 28 countries whether the nation is a positive or negative force in the world. A question I have for you is whether perceptions about other countries matter much? Is a country that is disliked or feared receiving fewer or more benefits from the world than a nation that is seen as favorable? In my view, in the end, it probably means little how a nation is viewed and greatly how it impacts other nations in practical ways.
Here are the rankings of the most popular nations, from most to least.
Germany (59% of the respondents rated it as favorable)
Canada
Japan
European Union
United Kingdom
France
Brazil
India
United States
China
South Africa
Russia
Israel
North Korea
Pakistan
Iran
Iran is viewed least favorably by an average of 15%, followed by Pakistan at 16%. That's no surprise. But that Germany is ranked most favorable is a puzzle. Germany has had a low profile since it and Japan (also a surprise with the 3rd most favorable ranking) were seen as monstrous states during W.W. II. It seems that Nazism and crazed empires can be rehabilitated.
The survey did not ask why the respondents rated each nation the way they did. It just asked 29,000 adults in 28 countries whether the nation is a positive or negative force in the world. A question I have for you is whether perceptions about other countries matter much? Is a country that is disliked or feared receiving fewer or more benefits from the world than a nation that is seen as favorable? In my view, in the end, it probably means little how a nation is viewed and greatly how it impacts other nations in practical ways.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Aging
Recently I saw a clip from the 80's of the famous singer Tony Bennett. Tony looked awful in the eighties, much worse than he does today, and he is about 80 years old or so now. It got me to thinking about the way in which people age. I have concluded we age similarly, but at different paces. Does that make sense? But more simply, it means that while we all eventually get "old" and deteriorate, some people show it quickly and some slowly. Some people seem to look better at an older age than when younger (as in the case of the Tony Bennett example). That's a form of the old "he ages well" maxim. Only in Tony's case, he almost seems to suspend the aging process, reverse it, and look younger than previously.
Why is it the girl who looked awful at 22 might look gorgeous at 32? It might be a weight change, maybe some genetic change that kicked in later, a change in hairdo or clothing. I suppose there are many reasons. It's hard to say what makes a person look old because looking old is more than showing wrinkles (some wrinkles are desirable and even called "good character lines"). It's a general body appearance and personality attitude that defines whether or not we are an old woman or young one, and old man or young stud.
Most people also say that men age better than women. That is, they look older later than do women. I think that is purely expectation and bias at work. I doubt there is any scientific evidence that one sex ages faster than another. But we do have perceptions that women are older looking first. It's probably because we idealize beauty in women and because we more quickly notice any mar to a woman's beauty. Men can be considered handsome even if they have pot bellies.
Another thing about aging is that we sometimes idealize an age for a famous person. We always see them as that age. Historical figures are seen that way. Think about it. If I asked for example, "what does Hitler look like"? Everyone sees Hitler as the Nazi image we have seen in war photos. We define him as always being that age and could never imagine him as older or younger. Again our perception (or preconception ) has kept him one age for all time. It's the same with other famous people. Think of the great actor Shawn Connery. He will always be seen by most people as the fit and young James Bond, not the fat and bald old man he is today.
When you look at an old high school yearbook, the principle of aging well comes to you immediately. Just look at your own photo and you'll probably say you looked awful then, but much better when you were 30 years old.
Most of your classmates pictured would fall in the same category. But at some point in your aging process, your 17 year old photo begins to look better than your current image. The way in which we age is tricky to see. If you look at yourself in the mirror today and then one week from now there is no visible difference in appearance. But look today and 5 years later there is noticeable change. This illustrates the principal that aging is slow torture for most of us.
One thing about aging I don't personally understand is why people (mostly women) dye their hair or use wrinkle creams, plastic surgery or other tricks to keep a youthful appearance. It never works. If you dye your hair at age 50, you'll just look like an older person with dyed hair, not a younger one. Everyone knows what the trick is. You can't alter the aging of the mind and soul, even if you can change a few physical features.
I hope my remarks haven't made you feel older today. If so, just take the mirrors out of your house, and enjoy your life at whatever age you wish yourself to be.
Why is it the girl who looked awful at 22 might look gorgeous at 32? It might be a weight change, maybe some genetic change that kicked in later, a change in hairdo or clothing. I suppose there are many reasons. It's hard to say what makes a person look old because looking old is more than showing wrinkles (some wrinkles are desirable and even called "good character lines"). It's a general body appearance and personality attitude that defines whether or not we are an old woman or young one, and old man or young stud.
Most people also say that men age better than women. That is, they look older later than do women. I think that is purely expectation and bias at work. I doubt there is any scientific evidence that one sex ages faster than another. But we do have perceptions that women are older looking first. It's probably because we idealize beauty in women and because we more quickly notice any mar to a woman's beauty. Men can be considered handsome even if they have pot bellies.
Another thing about aging is that we sometimes idealize an age for a famous person. We always see them as that age. Historical figures are seen that way. Think about it. If I asked for example, "what does Hitler look like"? Everyone sees Hitler as the Nazi image we have seen in war photos. We define him as always being that age and could never imagine him as older or younger. Again our perception (or preconception ) has kept him one age for all time. It's the same with other famous people. Think of the great actor Shawn Connery. He will always be seen by most people as the fit and young James Bond, not the fat and bald old man he is today.
When you look at an old high school yearbook, the principle of aging well comes to you immediately. Just look at your own photo and you'll probably say you looked awful then, but much better when you were 30 years old.
Most of your classmates pictured would fall in the same category. But at some point in your aging process, your 17 year old photo begins to look better than your current image. The way in which we age is tricky to see. If you look at yourself in the mirror today and then one week from now there is no visible difference in appearance. But look today and 5 years later there is noticeable change. This illustrates the principal that aging is slow torture for most of us.
One thing about aging I don't personally understand is why people (mostly women) dye their hair or use wrinkle creams, plastic surgery or other tricks to keep a youthful appearance. It never works. If you dye your hair at age 50, you'll just look like an older person with dyed hair, not a younger one. Everyone knows what the trick is. You can't alter the aging of the mind and soul, even if you can change a few physical features.
I hope my remarks haven't made you feel older today. If so, just take the mirrors out of your house, and enjoy your life at whatever age you wish yourself to be.
Grade Inflation Mentality
Controversy is raging here at my state's leading public University, LSU. It seems that a biology professor of introductory courses is in trouble for doing what she is supposed to do- teaching the class and holding the students responsible for studying the material given. Dominique G. Homberger, the teacher in question, says she won't apologize for setting high expectations for her students and grading them according to what is produced. She is not an advocate of the crazy grade inflation in so many schools today.
As a result, professor Homberger has been removed her from teaching post at mid-semester, and the grades of the students in the class have been boosted to the politically correct level. In so doing, the university's administration has set off a debate about the grade inflation mentality, about the right of a teacher in a university to have due process before being demoted and about the traditional right of a teacher in a university to set standards in her own course.
Homberger teaches the once common but now long forgotten, traditional way. She gives daily quizzes on reading assignments, gives tests that measure true understanding of the material, and never grades on a curve. It is said that when she uses multiple choice questions there are 10 choices for the answer as opposed to the traditional four. Her method of insisting on personal accountability by the student clashes with the spoiled "me, me, me, do for me" mentality of society at large. Thus, many students quickly withdraw from her class and add an easier biology class instead.
Homberger and her supporters say the university's action has violated principles of academic freedom and weakened the faculty and academic reputation and effectiveness of the university (LSU has always had a good reputation for being a challenging college). They say it sends message to untenured faculty members like Homberger that if they fail too many students they will be yanked from the classroom as "punishment".
Here is the university statement explaining its decision to remove her from her teaching post. "The class in question is an entry-level biology class for non-science majors, and, at mid-term, more than 90% of the students in Dr. Homberger's class were failing or had dropped the class. The extreme nature of the grading raised a concern, and we felt it was important to take some action to ensure that our students receive a rigorous, but fair, education. Professor Homberger is not being penalized in any way; her salary has not been decreased nor has any aspect of her appointment been changed."
Its a sickening statement, in my view. American universities have always been a challenge that required hard work and study. No one has presented any evidence that Homberger was unreasonable in her demands, that her tests were unfair or that she exceeded reasonable course requirements. The students dropped their enrollment in her class because they were too lazy to meet her standards, and the university sided with them in favor of pandering and in opposition to academic integrity.
Further, Homberger said that her tough policy was already having an impact on her students, and that the grades on her second test were much higher (she was removed from teaching right after she gave that exam), and that quiz scores were up sharply. Students got the message from her first test, and were working harder, she said.
This is one example of the new Americans sense of entitlement. "I deserve to have what I want, need not earn it and expect you to give it to me." A small piece of academic integrity died at LSU when Homberger was pushed out. In my view it is sad.
As a result, professor Homberger has been removed her from teaching post at mid-semester, and the grades of the students in the class have been boosted to the politically correct level. In so doing, the university's administration has set off a debate about the grade inflation mentality, about the right of a teacher in a university to have due process before being demoted and about the traditional right of a teacher in a university to set standards in her own course.
Homberger teaches the once common but now long forgotten, traditional way. She gives daily quizzes on reading assignments, gives tests that measure true understanding of the material, and never grades on a curve. It is said that when she uses multiple choice questions there are 10 choices for the answer as opposed to the traditional four. Her method of insisting on personal accountability by the student clashes with the spoiled "me, me, me, do for me" mentality of society at large. Thus, many students quickly withdraw from her class and add an easier biology class instead.
Homberger and her supporters say the university's action has violated principles of academic freedom and weakened the faculty and academic reputation and effectiveness of the university (LSU has always had a good reputation for being a challenging college). They say it sends message to untenured faculty members like Homberger that if they fail too many students they will be yanked from the classroom as "punishment".
Here is the university statement explaining its decision to remove her from her teaching post. "The class in question is an entry-level biology class for non-science majors, and, at mid-term, more than 90% of the students in Dr. Homberger's class were failing or had dropped the class. The extreme nature of the grading raised a concern, and we felt it was important to take some action to ensure that our students receive a rigorous, but fair, education. Professor Homberger is not being penalized in any way; her salary has not been decreased nor has any aspect of her appointment been changed."
Its a sickening statement, in my view. American universities have always been a challenge that required hard work and study. No one has presented any evidence that Homberger was unreasonable in her demands, that her tests were unfair or that she exceeded reasonable course requirements. The students dropped their enrollment in her class because they were too lazy to meet her standards, and the university sided with them in favor of pandering and in opposition to academic integrity.
Further, Homberger said that her tough policy was already having an impact on her students, and that the grades on her second test were much higher (she was removed from teaching right after she gave that exam), and that quiz scores were up sharply. Students got the message from her first test, and were working harder, she said.
This is one example of the new Americans sense of entitlement. "I deserve to have what I want, need not earn it and expect you to give it to me." A small piece of academic integrity died at LSU when Homberger was pushed out. In my view it is sad.
Age Inappropriate Wear
My news from BBC.com says that British clothing chain 'Primark' responding to scathing criticism from politicians and children's groups, has withdrawn its sale of a line of padded bikini for girls as young as seven. Those little Lindsay Lohan style outfits came in candy pink with gold stars and black with white polka dots. I am wondering what person created this product and even more which store buyer could have accepted the idea and sold it in Primark stores. As usual, give the overwhelming revulsion at the idea that toddlers be turned into sex objects, the company apologized for the product and offered to give to charity any profits from idiots who bought it.
Here is the statement Primark issued on it's web site when first offering the product for sale. "Every girl wants to look her best and at Primark we make no exception for the younger ladies, all the high fashion trends can be found in our Girlswear section, no matter what age you are" Wow! What is the next aged inappropriate product to sell to parents of kids who don't want to live a normal childhood? Maybe liquor stores will offer mini vodka bottles for preteens, or small sized condoms for a 10th birthday gift? In this age of disappearing childhood it could happen.
I remember reading Shakespeare's Seven Ages of Man poem. In it there is no teenage period defined because in the time preteens graduated to adulthood immediately rather than living what is now a distinct teenage era. In earlier centuries society demand that. But now we have the economic freedom to allow kids to have a longer childhood. It is good, I think.
The mediums today, particularly those of TV, film, and music, send the "grownup immediately" message to children, and the unthinking Premark corporation merely reflects that. Thrusting small children into a sexualization as grown women is the message of much medium presentations today.
Take the child beauty pageant as an example. Is there anything worse than forcing a preteen to display her child-like body in a sexualized adult form? The degree to which parents participate in making little Suzie look like the town streetwalker says something about the values a society holds dear.
Society should realize that an age of innocence for kids is a golden one. It helps them transition into the crueler adult world better prepared for the madness of it. Otherwise we might have a generation of more Lindsay Lohans. How sad it would be.
Here is the statement Primark issued on it's web site when first offering the product for sale. "Every girl wants to look her best and at Primark we make no exception for the younger ladies, all the high fashion trends can be found in our Girlswear section, no matter what age you are" Wow! What is the next aged inappropriate product to sell to parents of kids who don't want to live a normal childhood? Maybe liquor stores will offer mini vodka bottles for preteens, or small sized condoms for a 10th birthday gift? In this age of disappearing childhood it could happen.
I remember reading Shakespeare's Seven Ages of Man poem. In it there is no teenage period defined because in the time preteens graduated to adulthood immediately rather than living what is now a distinct teenage era. In earlier centuries society demand that. But now we have the economic freedom to allow kids to have a longer childhood. It is good, I think.
The mediums today, particularly those of TV, film, and music, send the "grownup immediately" message to children, and the unthinking Premark corporation merely reflects that. Thrusting small children into a sexualization as grown women is the message of much medium presentations today.
Take the child beauty pageant as an example. Is there anything worse than forcing a preteen to display her child-like body in a sexualized adult form? The degree to which parents participate in making little Suzie look like the town streetwalker says something about the values a society holds dear.
Society should realize that an age of innocence for kids is a golden one. It helps them transition into the crueler adult world better prepared for the madness of it. Otherwise we might have a generation of more Lindsay Lohans. How sad it would be.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Treme Debuts
The premier episode of that new HBO series, Treme, was shown this weekend They cut me out of the first episode. (I was a homeless drunk asleep on the street) That might be a plus for the series. Hmmmmmmmm Next time I should skip alcohol and drink milk instead. They wouldn't dare edit out a milk drinker!
I think the pilot was way too confusing for outsiders to the culture of the city. So many unfamiliar events were thrown in the face of viewers in rapid succession It introduced all the main characters (too many) of the next 10 season episodes (the first season has all been shot now) to the extent that the viewer never grasped any of them individually. It seemed to be more instructive than entertaining. Too, some were stereotyped and an image that the city is mostly peopled with black residents and defined by them is not a correct one. But then, the series does not pretend to be an inclusive one. It purports to show one segment of it.
On the positive side, Treme showed the poor area of the city fairly well, and the traditional music culture of the city that largely emanated from that section(Treme). I think once viewers understand the city they should like the series because the people in it it are highly unusual, as New Orleans is itself. The centered of the series is the working class area called Treme, but all sections will get at least a brief glance. For example, I worked one episode that was shot entirely in the French Quarter area in Jackson Square, and another in a more upscale neighborhood near the wealthy Garden District.
Too, the day after the premier HBO announced it has renewed Treme for another season of episodes (which will start shooting after hurricane season here in October or November). It's almost unheard of to order a second season of episodes before the first has even premiered.
Some background about the "real" Treme in case you happen to watch any of the episodes should include the fact that Treme, is not only America's oldest mainly black neighborhood but was the site of significant economic, cultural, political, social and legal events that have shaped the course of events in the past two centuries. Yet, few outside of New Orleans know its enormous cultural importance to the country as a whole.
For example, Jazz was founded in Treme. Treme is named after Claude Treme, a hat maker and real estate developer who migrated from Saugivny in Burgundy, France, and settled in New Orleans in 1783. Treme section was heavily French and Spanish speaking into the 1900's since the population that lived there and in New Orleans as a whole came from those two countries (who originally settled the whole region ).
After 1800, free blacks and eventually those African slaves who either obtained, bought or bargained for their freedom were able to acquire and own property in Treme, so it became more of a "black area" of the city of New Orleans. The ability to acquire, purchase and own property during an era when America was still had slavery was remarkable and only in New Orleans did this occur with any regularity and consistency. It is one reason that people in New Orleans have always had many mixed neighborhoods of all races and income status. I think also, it is why there has always been less racial prejudice and discontent here in New Orleans.
So that is the background of both the real section of New Orleans called 'Treme' and the HBO TV series named after it. Both are a different animal from the usual stereotypical United States images.
I think the pilot was way too confusing for outsiders to the culture of the city. So many unfamiliar events were thrown in the face of viewers in rapid succession It introduced all the main characters (too many) of the next 10 season episodes (the first season has all been shot now) to the extent that the viewer never grasped any of them individually. It seemed to be more instructive than entertaining. Too, some were stereotyped and an image that the city is mostly peopled with black residents and defined by them is not a correct one. But then, the series does not pretend to be an inclusive one. It purports to show one segment of it.
On the positive side, Treme showed the poor area of the city fairly well, and the traditional music culture of the city that largely emanated from that section(Treme). I think once viewers understand the city they should like the series because the people in it it are highly unusual, as New Orleans is itself. The centered of the series is the working class area called Treme, but all sections will get at least a brief glance. For example, I worked one episode that was shot entirely in the French Quarter area in Jackson Square, and another in a more upscale neighborhood near the wealthy Garden District.
Too, the day after the premier HBO announced it has renewed Treme for another season of episodes (which will start shooting after hurricane season here in October or November). It's almost unheard of to order a second season of episodes before the first has even premiered.
Some background about the "real" Treme in case you happen to watch any of the episodes should include the fact that Treme, is not only America's oldest mainly black neighborhood but was the site of significant economic, cultural, political, social and legal events that have shaped the course of events in the past two centuries. Yet, few outside of New Orleans know its enormous cultural importance to the country as a whole.
For example, Jazz was founded in Treme. Treme is named after Claude Treme, a hat maker and real estate developer who migrated from Saugivny in Burgundy, France, and settled in New Orleans in 1783. Treme section was heavily French and Spanish speaking into the 1900's since the population that lived there and in New Orleans as a whole came from those two countries (who originally settled the whole region ).
After 1800, free blacks and eventually those African slaves who either obtained, bought or bargained for their freedom were able to acquire and own property in Treme, so it became more of a "black area" of the city of New Orleans. The ability to acquire, purchase and own property during an era when America was still had slavery was remarkable and only in New Orleans did this occur with any regularity and consistency. It is one reason that people in New Orleans have always had many mixed neighborhoods of all races and income status. I think also, it is why there has always been less racial prejudice and discontent here in New Orleans.
So that is the background of both the real section of New Orleans called 'Treme' and the HBO TV series named after it. Both are a different animal from the usual stereotypical United States images.
Global Warming Religion
I have always said the Global warming advocates have tried to frame their theory that man is changing the climate into a religion, the cult religion of 'Warmism'. I am convinced now it is so. It's a clever tactic to win support- "If you don't support the global warming hypothesis you are anti God". That trick is used in many promoting some causes because with some it works.
Today a headline in USA today asked the same. "Is climate change a moral issue? What would God say?" How idiotic! look at this quote from that story."The predominant moral issue of the 21st century, almost surely, will be climate change, comparable to Nazism faced by Churchill in the 20th century and slavery faced by Lincoln in the 19th century," said James Hansen, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies since 1981, recently in an article promoting his beliefs. To equate global warming theories to the mass murder of the holocaust is insulting and disrespectful. But that is the extent of the fervor of the global warmed nuts.
A number of religions have been pressured into making global warming a moral issue because trendy sells, even in theology. Surely nature is a creation of the force we call God. It should be respected, but to throw a theory into the theology might be a more disrespectful concept than the idea that humans are "sinning" by not becoming global warming adherents. It's ironic, science now dictates to religion what beliefs it should hold, a far cry from the days when Galileo was threatened with death for proposing a scientific explanation of the universe.
Hmmmmmmm So the global warmers are the voices of God. They know what God wants and we must listen and bow even when their global warming theory is unproved. Perhaps if God were asked to opine on this he might say, "You can't change the climate by burning the fossil fuels I gave you." But then anyone who speaks for God is ...well..Godlessly silly.
Popes and religious leaders should tend to the spiritual, not to promoting unfounded scientific guesses. There are un tended moral issues out there better addressed by religion than is the hypothesis of global warming that some scientists and many politicians and promoters are worshipping.
Oh ..by the way..that doctor Hansen that I quoted above is the same one who promoted (with absolute arrogance and surety) the coming of an "ice age" during the early seventies
Today a headline in USA today asked the same. "Is climate change a moral issue? What would God say?" How idiotic! look at this quote from that story."The predominant moral issue of the 21st century, almost surely, will be climate change, comparable to Nazism faced by Churchill in the 20th century and slavery faced by Lincoln in the 19th century," said James Hansen, director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies since 1981, recently in an article promoting his beliefs. To equate global warming theories to the mass murder of the holocaust is insulting and disrespectful. But that is the extent of the fervor of the global warmed nuts.
A number of religions have been pressured into making global warming a moral issue because trendy sells, even in theology. Surely nature is a creation of the force we call God. It should be respected, but to throw a theory into the theology might be a more disrespectful concept than the idea that humans are "sinning" by not becoming global warming adherents. It's ironic, science now dictates to religion what beliefs it should hold, a far cry from the days when Galileo was threatened with death for proposing a scientific explanation of the universe.
Hmmmmmmm So the global warmers are the voices of God. They know what God wants and we must listen and bow even when their global warming theory is unproved. Perhaps if God were asked to opine on this he might say, "You can't change the climate by burning the fossil fuels I gave you." But then anyone who speaks for God is ...well..Godlessly silly.
Popes and religious leaders should tend to the spiritual, not to promoting unfounded scientific guesses. There are un tended moral issues out there better addressed by religion than is the hypothesis of global warming that some scientists and many politicians and promoters are worshipping.
Oh ..by the way..that doctor Hansen that I quoted above is the same one who promoted (with absolute arrogance and surety) the coming of an "ice age" during the early seventies
Airlines Getting Crazy
Picking a commercial airline flight today requires a bit of study and allot of patience to find the best way to go. There are so many crazy extra fees today it's making head turn and boil in anger. The latest add on fees come from Spirit Airlines which announced that it would charge passengers for carry-on luggage stowed in overhead bins and the European low-cost airline Ryanair which has outlined a toilet fee on flights of an hour or less. Ouch...no change for the toilet and no peeing aloft would be allowed.
So to get more revenue from the artificially low fares the stupid airlines created for themselves, basic necessities that are expected on flights are now staring to become luxury items subject to charge. But how much of that foolishness will passengers accept before fleeing to an airline with fewer or no fees?
Southwest Airline is the only airline in the U.S. to be consistently profitable year to year. And it has done so with a no extra fees, a fare platform that is low and easy to understand and reliable, if bare boned, service. The industry now has a large number of failing airlines pitted again one, Southwest, successful airline that isn't playing the extra fee game.
The next extra fee the airlines will add to the fare may be the so called "fuel surcharge" that utility companies here have long used. When their fuel costs go up they will claim the need to add to the cost of the fare (yet they will never seem to lower the cost of the ticket when fuel is cheaper). It's a sad situation for both the consumer and the industry. What is needed is one (higher) fare structure, no add on fees and a way for consumers to compare airline fares,. Until then I think we could see some crazy add-ons. Hmmmmmmmm I have a few to suggest to the airlines. How about...
* Pass gas fee- that fat guy who keeps farting will now have to pay a fee for each blast.* Sexy Stewardess fee- You want a hot babe serving you your drink you pay it. Otherwise, you get your drink served by Danny Devito in a bikini. (I'll pay this one!).* Un lost luggage fee- Pay it and you can take your bag from the baggage rack after landing. Don't pay it and you can spend your vacation at Wal mart buying replacement underwear.* Boarding go round game- You pay this one to avoid the boarding go round game in which 250 passengers race on board the plane and have 1 minute to find the 249 available seats.* Water water everywhere except here fee- Want water on board? For a fee you can drink from the communal water fountain (which like the plane itself, hasn't been cleaned since year 2005).
I hope you enjoy your next flight!
So to get more revenue from the artificially low fares the stupid airlines created for themselves, basic necessities that are expected on flights are now staring to become luxury items subject to charge. But how much of that foolishness will passengers accept before fleeing to an airline with fewer or no fees?
Southwest Airline is the only airline in the U.S. to be consistently profitable year to year. And it has done so with a no extra fees, a fare platform that is low and easy to understand and reliable, if bare boned, service. The industry now has a large number of failing airlines pitted again one, Southwest, successful airline that isn't playing the extra fee game.
The next extra fee the airlines will add to the fare may be the so called "fuel surcharge" that utility companies here have long used. When their fuel costs go up they will claim the need to add to the cost of the fare (yet they will never seem to lower the cost of the ticket when fuel is cheaper). It's a sad situation for both the consumer and the industry. What is needed is one (higher) fare structure, no add on fees and a way for consumers to compare airline fares,. Until then I think we could see some crazy add-ons. Hmmmmmmmm I have a few to suggest to the airlines. How about...
* Pass gas fee- that fat guy who keeps farting will now have to pay a fee for each blast.* Sexy Stewardess fee- You want a hot babe serving you your drink you pay it. Otherwise, you get your drink served by Danny Devito in a bikini. (I'll pay this one!).* Un lost luggage fee- Pay it and you can take your bag from the baggage rack after landing. Don't pay it and you can spend your vacation at Wal mart buying replacement underwear.* Boarding go round game- You pay this one to avoid the boarding go round game in which 250 passengers race on board the plane and have 1 minute to find the 249 available seats.* Water water everywhere except here fee- Want water on board? For a fee you can drink from the communal water fountain (which like the plane itself, hasn't been cleaned since year 2005).
I hope you enjoy your next flight!
In The News
Here are the five most popular stories according to reader clicks for one day as listed by a popular national news magazine's internet site.
Camilla, wife of Prince Charles, breaks her...
Cold War warrior mysteriously snubbed at...
Woods two behind Masters leaders Poulter,...
Stevens' successor would likely come from...
Garcelle Beauvais-Nilon accuses husband of...
Do you see any trend there? The first is about the wife of a figurehead "Prince" who broke her leg. I am trying to figure out why that is newsworthy at all. The second is a reference, not to the substance of a meeting about heads of state from the U.S. and Russia about a landmark nuclear arms agreement just signed, but that the former President of the Czech Republic was excluded from attendance because Russia is mad at him for saying that Russia is a "menacing presence" in the world now. I guess we need to know the Russian leaders are mad?
Headline three is about a golfer who was caught cheating on his wife and is making a comeback. It talks more about his cheating on his wife than about cheating on the golf course. For some reason readers want to know his gossip more than his golf score. The fourth is more gossip about possible successor to the retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, solely wild speculation that is better left unsaid.
And finally, number five is about yet another 'movie star has cheating husband and reacts in shock' story. But I think that in these times I am only shocked it is only if f those stars or spouses don't cheat.
The news media surely has to accept some blame for writing and promoting mindless gossip and trivia so prominently, but the readers bear the burden, given that the mediums print what the public demands and wants. And now they more and more demand the inane and ignore the substantive. "The World is Rotting Because of Our Rotting Brains" would be a more appropriate lead story in newspapers today, but I am not sure the public would believe it or even bother reading it as it might take away time from their reality TV, cell phone chat, ipod addiction, twitter and other disconnecting (from the real world) connections.
Just as we trivialize our lives with an accentuation of the amusing and degradation of the important, we even do the same when looking at the world at large. It reflects why too many people are connected to a small few and disconnected from the essential world at large. We seek solace in the non demanding trivial world and escape from the hard bitter world of reality. I wonder if our technology has bought both our souls and minds.
It is like a full cookie jar given to starving kids..fun to eat but lacking nutritional substance. After all, dumbing down the public makes controlling it much easier.
Camilla, wife of Prince Charles, breaks her...
Cold War warrior mysteriously snubbed at...
Woods two behind Masters leaders Poulter,...
Stevens' successor would likely come from...
Garcelle Beauvais-Nilon accuses husband of...
Do you see any trend there? The first is about the wife of a figurehead "Prince" who broke her leg. I am trying to figure out why that is newsworthy at all. The second is a reference, not to the substance of a meeting about heads of state from the U.S. and Russia about a landmark nuclear arms agreement just signed, but that the former President of the Czech Republic was excluded from attendance because Russia is mad at him for saying that Russia is a "menacing presence" in the world now. I guess we need to know the Russian leaders are mad?
Headline three is about a golfer who was caught cheating on his wife and is making a comeback. It talks more about his cheating on his wife than about cheating on the golf course. For some reason readers want to know his gossip more than his golf score. The fourth is more gossip about possible successor to the retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, solely wild speculation that is better left unsaid.
And finally, number five is about yet another 'movie star has cheating husband and reacts in shock' story. But I think that in these times I am only shocked it is only if f those stars or spouses don't cheat.
The news media surely has to accept some blame for writing and promoting mindless gossip and trivia so prominently, but the readers bear the burden, given that the mediums print what the public demands and wants. And now they more and more demand the inane and ignore the substantive. "The World is Rotting Because of Our Rotting Brains" would be a more appropriate lead story in newspapers today, but I am not sure the public would believe it or even bother reading it as it might take away time from their reality TV, cell phone chat, ipod addiction, twitter and other disconnecting (from the real world) connections.
Just as we trivialize our lives with an accentuation of the amusing and degradation of the important, we even do the same when looking at the world at large. It reflects why too many people are connected to a small few and disconnected from the essential world at large. We seek solace in the non demanding trivial world and escape from the hard bitter world of reality. I wonder if our technology has bought both our souls and minds.
It is like a full cookie jar given to starving kids..fun to eat but lacking nutritional substance. After all, dumbing down the public makes controlling it much easier.
Friday, April 9, 2010
French Quarter Festival
This is the Festival season in New Orleans. Spring, before the weather is too hot, and fall when it is cooling are when most of the outdoor festivals take place. The French Quarter Festival opens today and continues through Sunday. There are more than 150 acts from across the spectrum of indigenous south Louisiana music, some of the best food anywhere and the usual New Orleans oddities all right in the middle and around the historic French Quarter of the city.
My reading about it tell me there will be 18 stages set up for the music alone. Several hundred thousand attendees, a mix of locals and national acts which lead to the claim of the title of “largest free festival in the South.” Yep! You only pay for the food you buy. All the music is free and there is no "entrance fee" since the festival is spread out over several miles in streets and parks, along the river etc. Location, location, location make this a better event for me than the more famous international Jazz Festival that starts in two weeks.
The names of some of the music acts will give you an idea of the choice offered to the listener. How about these as a sampling of what will be there....Big Sam's Funky Nation - Soul Rebels - 101 Runners - Honey Island Swamp Band - Connie Jones & the FQF All-stars - ZydePunks - The Revivalists - Ensemble Fatien - Russell Batiste & Friends Featuring Jason Neville - Audacity Brass band - Billy Iuso & the Restless Natives - Dukes Of Dixieland - Lionel Ferbos and the Louisiana Shakers - Lost Bayou Ramblers - Cullen Landry & Midnight Streetcar - Derrick Freeman & Smokers World - Bone Tone - Original Hurricane Brass Band - J' Monque D Blues Band with Creole Wild West Mardi Gras Indians -TBC Brass Band - The Victory Bells - Ernie Vincent & the Top Notes - J. J. Caillier and the Zydeco Knockouts - Steve Pistorius and his Southern Syncopators - Tornado Brass Band - Liberty Hall Stompers - Dan Venhettes & The Hot Shots, etc....
Some of these bands have sounds unique to the music industry, so tourists and even some locals often happen to stumble upon one or more and become a fan of it.And the food.....my favorite part if any New Orleans festival...it starts early each day before brunch and has been called the World's Greatest Jazz Brunch There are over 105 food and beverage booths from some of the city's best cooks serving everything the locals find dear including old time favorites like Jambalaya, Crawfish Bread, Gumbo, Red Beans and Rice, Muffalettas, Crawfish Bisque, Hot Sausage Po-boys, Cajun Meat Pies, alligator sausage and stew, Crawfish and Goat Cheese Crepes, Fish Tacos, White Chocolate Banana Bread Pudding, and Praline Crème Brulee....
I like to go from one booth to another and sample some of the better looking/smelling offerings. Now if I can just find time to make it to it one day this weekend...
My reading about it tell me there will be 18 stages set up for the music alone. Several hundred thousand attendees, a mix of locals and national acts which lead to the claim of the title of “largest free festival in the South.” Yep! You only pay for the food you buy. All the music is free and there is no "entrance fee" since the festival is spread out over several miles in streets and parks, along the river etc. Location, location, location make this a better event for me than the more famous international Jazz Festival that starts in two weeks.
The names of some of the music acts will give you an idea of the choice offered to the listener. How about these as a sampling of what will be there....Big Sam's Funky Nation - Soul Rebels - 101 Runners - Honey Island Swamp Band - Connie Jones & the FQF All-stars - ZydePunks - The Revivalists - Ensemble Fatien - Russell Batiste & Friends Featuring Jason Neville - Audacity Brass band - Billy Iuso & the Restless Natives - Dukes Of Dixieland - Lionel Ferbos and the Louisiana Shakers - Lost Bayou Ramblers - Cullen Landry & Midnight Streetcar - Derrick Freeman & Smokers World - Bone Tone - Original Hurricane Brass Band - J' Monque D Blues Band with Creole Wild West Mardi Gras Indians -TBC Brass Band - The Victory Bells - Ernie Vincent & the Top Notes - J. J. Caillier and the Zydeco Knockouts - Steve Pistorius and his Southern Syncopators - Tornado Brass Band - Liberty Hall Stompers - Dan Venhettes & The Hot Shots, etc....
Some of these bands have sounds unique to the music industry, so tourists and even some locals often happen to stumble upon one or more and become a fan of it.And the food.....my favorite part if any New Orleans festival...it starts early each day before brunch and has been called the World's Greatest Jazz Brunch There are over 105 food and beverage booths from some of the city's best cooks serving everything the locals find dear including old time favorites like Jambalaya, Crawfish Bread, Gumbo, Red Beans and Rice, Muffalettas, Crawfish Bisque, Hot Sausage Po-boys, Cajun Meat Pies, alligator sausage and stew, Crawfish and Goat Cheese Crepes, Fish Tacos, White Chocolate Banana Bread Pudding, and Praline Crème Brulee....
I like to go from one booth to another and sample some of the better looking/smelling offerings. Now if I can just find time to make it to it one day this weekend...
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Carl's Jr.
Here in Portland, I have discovered that the great desire in food is volume rather than taste. Full service restaurants serve mediocre food but the number and variety of fast food places here is enormous. When you feed them allot of food in Oregon and they are both fat and happy, something I have observed to be both cases since coming here. There are many super heavyweights here, perhaps even more of them than in New Orleans, and New Orleans has much better tasting food than what one can consume in Portland.
The favorite sign here seems to be that of fast food eateries or the omnipresent buffet restaurant that carries on the tradition everywhere of serving copious amounts of bland food at inexpensive prices. Turning one's head to glance at any of the many buffet places in Portland will surely enable you to spy a 150 plus kilo human waddling in or out of it.
I did try one of the better reviewed buffets here and can only say that it was so non memorable that I do not ever plan to return. But I also have eaten at a few fast food restaurants near my home in Portland, One of them is called 'Carls Jr.s, a west coast hamburger based fast food franchise. It is an eye opener.
When I entered Carl's that day I perused the menu on the wall behind the order counter to find something simple and light. Since it features hamburgers I spotted a listing of what is the cheapest "value meal", the "Big Car combo. "Two charbroiled beef patties, our classic sauce, two slices of American cheese, and lettuce all on a toasted sesame seed bun", says the advertisement for it. Hmmmmmmm I was in a curious and playful mood.
Here was my dialogue with the waitress who placed my order.
Jim "What is in the "special sauce"
Waitress 1- "I don't know" (Looking to her right at an associate at another register she asked him) "
Jim-"Do you know what the special sauce is"?
Waiter 2- "I don't know".
Of course this was an opportunity for mischief and I took it Jim- (with a feigned look of exasperation and slight crazed stare I loudly bellowed) "How can your sauce be special if you don't even know what is in it?"
At that point a much older and more knowledgeable supervisor came to the order site to calm the crazy (me).
Supervisor- "They are new here. They don't know. The special sauce is Thousand Island Dressing", she blurted to me.
Jim- "That's it! Plain Thousand Island"
Supervisor- "Yes"
Jim - "How can that be special? Why not call it what it is..Thousand Island Dressing?"
Supervisor- (turning and going back to her duties)- "I never asked and don't know"
Jim- (speaking now again to the cute and now amused little girl taking my order) "You need to study your menu ingredient sheets. Until you do, I am not about to ask you what's in the hamburger. I'm afraid you might know."
Waitress 1- "You want the special sauce"?
Jim- "No thanks. I'll wait before ordering that for it to earn it's reputation as special. But I have another question for you."
Waitress 1- (eyes rolling in her head) "Sure"
Jim- "I might like the special sauces at Carl Sr's better. Where is Carl Sr."? (There is in fact, and I knew, no such thing as a 'Carl Sr's')
Waitress 1- (looking like a deer in headlights) "I never thought of that!"Jim- "Thank God your healthy minded enough not to have...."
Supervisor- (Seeing her young employee in distress) "What is it now, Sir"Jim- " Sad to say, more questions...I just want to know here I can find Carl Sr"?
Supervisor- "You'll have to ask corporate offices."
Jim- "No, they probably kidnapped him and are holding him ransom until they really find out what is really in the special sauce."
At that point another customer was in line so I stopped torturing the waitress and waited at my table for my Big Carl. It came and it was huge! The Carl Jr nutritional information said it is 935 calories. With the large number of french fries (the best tasting item of what I ordered) and drink provided that meal was enough to satisfy the entire day's calorie ratio.
As to the taste of it, it was greasy and unsettling after eating half of it. More of the volume beats taste mentality found here. I couldn't finish the entire burger because the grease content put a stop to it. Looking around the restaurant I saw people eating much bigger orders, smiling and waddling away in a fast food feeding frenzy( Hey! That's nice alliteration).
Oh, if you ever see Carl Sr., tell him I want to know what's in his special sauce.
The favorite sign here seems to be that of fast food eateries or the omnipresent buffet restaurant that carries on the tradition everywhere of serving copious amounts of bland food at inexpensive prices. Turning one's head to glance at any of the many buffet places in Portland will surely enable you to spy a 150 plus kilo human waddling in or out of it.
I did try one of the better reviewed buffets here and can only say that it was so non memorable that I do not ever plan to return. But I also have eaten at a few fast food restaurants near my home in Portland, One of them is called 'Carls Jr.s, a west coast hamburger based fast food franchise. It is an eye opener.
When I entered Carl's that day I perused the menu on the wall behind the order counter to find something simple and light. Since it features hamburgers I spotted a listing of what is the cheapest "value meal", the "Big Car combo. "Two charbroiled beef patties, our classic sauce, two slices of American cheese, and lettuce all on a toasted sesame seed bun", says the advertisement for it. Hmmmmmmm I was in a curious and playful mood.
Here was my dialogue with the waitress who placed my order.
Jim "What is in the "special sauce"
Waitress 1- "I don't know" (Looking to her right at an associate at another register she asked him) "
Jim-"Do you know what the special sauce is"?
Waiter 2- "I don't know".
Of course this was an opportunity for mischief and I took it Jim- (with a feigned look of exasperation and slight crazed stare I loudly bellowed) "How can your sauce be special if you don't even know what is in it?"
At that point a much older and more knowledgeable supervisor came to the order site to calm the crazy (me).
Supervisor- "They are new here. They don't know. The special sauce is Thousand Island Dressing", she blurted to me.
Jim- "That's it! Plain Thousand Island"
Supervisor- "Yes"
Jim - "How can that be special? Why not call it what it is..Thousand Island Dressing?"
Supervisor- (turning and going back to her duties)- "I never asked and don't know"
Jim- (speaking now again to the cute and now amused little girl taking my order) "You need to study your menu ingredient sheets. Until you do, I am not about to ask you what's in the hamburger. I'm afraid you might know."
Waitress 1- "You want the special sauce"?
Jim- "No thanks. I'll wait before ordering that for it to earn it's reputation as special. But I have another question for you."
Waitress 1- (eyes rolling in her head) "Sure"
Jim- "I might like the special sauces at Carl Sr's better. Where is Carl Sr."? (There is in fact, and I knew, no such thing as a 'Carl Sr's')
Waitress 1- (looking like a deer in headlights) "I never thought of that!"Jim- "Thank God your healthy minded enough not to have...."
Supervisor- (Seeing her young employee in distress) "What is it now, Sir"Jim- " Sad to say, more questions...I just want to know here I can find Carl Sr"?
Supervisor- "You'll have to ask corporate offices."
Jim- "No, they probably kidnapped him and are holding him ransom until they really find out what is really in the special sauce."
At that point another customer was in line so I stopped torturing the waitress and waited at my table for my Big Carl. It came and it was huge! The Carl Jr nutritional information said it is 935 calories. With the large number of french fries (the best tasting item of what I ordered) and drink provided that meal was enough to satisfy the entire day's calorie ratio.
As to the taste of it, it was greasy and unsettling after eating half of it. More of the volume beats taste mentality found here. I couldn't finish the entire burger because the grease content put a stop to it. Looking around the restaurant I saw people eating much bigger orders, smiling and waddling away in a fast food feeding frenzy( Hey! That's nice alliteration).
Oh, if you ever see Carl Sr., tell him I want to know what's in his special sauce.
More Free Lunches For Spoiled Americans
First the Obama government instituted a wasteful and debt ridden bailout program for private businesses, then cash for clunkers in which the 50% of Americans who are taxpayers pay a portion of the cost of a new car for those who pay no taxes, then a Health care program that rapes taxpayers for the non taxpayer lobby and now comes the "feed the children" school lunch program additions.
I am ready to declare the U.S. "The United States Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" in honor of your adaption of full blown socialism. The U.S.S.S.R now wants to enslave the masses by dangling more free school lunch money in front of the voters...sort of like buying the police officer a dozen donuts in thanks for not writing that traffic ticket you deserved to get.
I passed by the full Congress ,The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 would commit an additional $4.5 billion to child-nutrition programs over the next 10 years in the name of free food for kids. A well fed U.S. Soviet child is an obedient one (to the socialist government who represents him or her). And of course the 50% of the nation who pay the taxes for these programs gets little benefit from the expenses of them.
This bill. .. "puts us on the path to ending childhood hunger and addressing the epidemic of childhood obesity," said one Obomite senator. Hmmmmmmm I wonder when reading that quote, how can there be both child hunger and obesity at the same time? I guess in the U.S.S.S. R. anything is possible, absent reason. And the U.S has been absent reason for years from George Bush to Commissar...err..President Obama today.
Shouldn't providing a school lunch be a parental responsibility? How costly is it for a parent to make a sandwich , add a few complimentary items and a bottle of water or other drink to a lunch box for their children? Should an alleged capitalist democratic government be in the business of feeding kids for free?
Instead of the government here becoming mommy and daddy to lazy Americans, maybe a better policy would be to educate the kids at school on personal responsibility. Oh wait....being personally responsible would be bad for the re election campaigns of the politicians who administer the U.S.S.S.R.
Better just feed them for free until their brains turn to mush and they are incapable of realizing their once democratic capitalist nation has turned into an effete, overfed welfare state.
I am ready to declare the U.S. "The United States Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" in honor of your adaption of full blown socialism. The U.S.S.S.R now wants to enslave the masses by dangling more free school lunch money in front of the voters...sort of like buying the police officer a dozen donuts in thanks for not writing that traffic ticket you deserved to get.
I passed by the full Congress ,The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 would commit an additional $4.5 billion to child-nutrition programs over the next 10 years in the name of free food for kids. A well fed U.S. Soviet child is an obedient one (to the socialist government who represents him or her). And of course the 50% of the nation who pay the taxes for these programs gets little benefit from the expenses of them.
This bill. .. "puts us on the path to ending childhood hunger and addressing the epidemic of childhood obesity," said one Obomite senator. Hmmmmmmm I wonder when reading that quote, how can there be both child hunger and obesity at the same time? I guess in the U.S.S.S. R. anything is possible, absent reason. And the U.S has been absent reason for years from George Bush to Commissar...err..President Obama today.
Shouldn't providing a school lunch be a parental responsibility? How costly is it for a parent to make a sandwich , add a few complimentary items and a bottle of water or other drink to a lunch box for their children? Should an alleged capitalist democratic government be in the business of feeding kids for free?
Instead of the government here becoming mommy and daddy to lazy Americans, maybe a better policy would be to educate the kids at school on personal responsibility. Oh wait....being personally responsible would be bad for the re election campaigns of the politicians who administer the U.S.S.S.R.
Better just feed them for free until their brains turn to mush and they are incapable of realizing their once democratic capitalist nation has turned into an effete, overfed welfare state.
Earth Day
Millions of U.S. homes, 2,200 businesses such as drug store giant Walgreens and 45 U.S. national landmarks including Seattle's Space Needle turned out the lights for an hour one Saturday night in March to draw attention to "global warming". About 30 of the 50 state Governor's mansions will also turn the lights out, as well as a score of "non essential" federal government buildings.
Yep! It was the 4th annual 'Earth Hour' charade. With all the real problems in the world we are being asked to waste our time and inconvenience ourselves in a meaningless trendy "global warming" ritual.
Supposedly, this Earth Hour ritual "reflects the conviction of people around the world that climate change is real, and we need to do something about it," says Carter Roberts, the head of the World Wildlife Fund that is sponsoring Earth Hour.
Hmmmmmmm turning out the lights and hiding in the dark as away of "saving the planet"....it's typical global warmed illogic. Environmental concerns of a real nature, as opposed to phony global warming, require more than darkened nuildings. Population control, education, technology and self restraint are better ways of dealing with real environmental stresses on this over crowded planet.
Wait!!! Doesn't it use as much electricity just to turn on a light as it does to leave it on for two hours? I am sure I have read that many times. If so, even from an energy usage standpoint turning off the lights for such a short time and then turning them back on isn't a "planet saver" after all.
But I would like to turn off the volume to the ridiculous global warmed mentality that freezes brain cells of otherwise rational humans. Besides...Since CO2 has been declared the leading global warming pollutant, it would be more affective if the 'Global Warming' nuts would just hold their breath for an hour...
Yep! It was the 4th annual 'Earth Hour' charade. With all the real problems in the world we are being asked to waste our time and inconvenience ourselves in a meaningless trendy "global warming" ritual.
Supposedly, this Earth Hour ritual "reflects the conviction of people around the world that climate change is real, and we need to do something about it," says Carter Roberts, the head of the World Wildlife Fund that is sponsoring Earth Hour.
Hmmmmmmm turning out the lights and hiding in the dark as away of "saving the planet"....it's typical global warmed illogic. Environmental concerns of a real nature, as opposed to phony global warming, require more than darkened nuildings. Population control, education, technology and self restraint are better ways of dealing with real environmental stresses on this over crowded planet.
Wait!!! Doesn't it use as much electricity just to turn on a light as it does to leave it on for two hours? I am sure I have read that many times. If so, even from an energy usage standpoint turning off the lights for such a short time and then turning them back on isn't a "planet saver" after all.
But I would like to turn off the volume to the ridiculous global warmed mentality that freezes brain cells of otherwise rational humans. Besides...Since CO2 has been declared the leading global warming pollutant, it would be more affective if the 'Global Warming' nuts would just hold their breath for an hour...
Portland's Homeless
There was an incident here in Portland a few days ago in which a police officer shot and killed a homeless man who refused to respond to the officer's command to come out of a public restroom and then later charged toward him threateningly with a butcher knife and shouts of his intention to kill the officer.
The public here seems to blame the police for the shooting, saying the incident should have been handled non violently, and that the multitude of homeless here don't receive enough mental health counseling that would prevent such incidents. This shows the weird priorities toward the homeless here. They are not just tolerated. They are enabled and encouraged to act out here.
Portland has way too many homeless, and they are here practically at the invitation of the city. Most are transient who head for Portland because the city does not enforce loitering laws.
Homeless types are allowed to sleep on sidewalks and even "ask" people for money as they pass by. Also, the city has many shelters that feed and house the homeless. It's way too much enabling that keeps them homeless and not enough demand that those who are homeless make an attempt to get off the streets.Too, security problems can arise when the many mentally ill, vulgar or violent homeless are allowed free reign. And the word out is that homeless people everywhere should head for homeless paradise- Portland, Oregon.
When I have gone into the downtown area of Portland I have noticed the flock of aggressive homeless ("whatever happened to the old "bums" term that used to be used to describe them) who mostly inhabit the poorer northern part of the city where so many shelters are. It is impossible to walk some streets there without being confronted by the presence of the or by being blocked from passing or asked for money. Police do nothing to remove them form the areas. This is unlike any city I have visited in the U.S.
After the shooting incident the Portland government wants to institute a "protected zone" on the streets in those areas in which pedestrians would be free from dealing with the homeless. No homeless would be allowed to loiter in the protected zone areas and must step out if anyone passes by.
The program the Portland city government leaders uses in "managing" the homeless is an embarrassment to the residents and threat to public safety. Better would be a strict enforcement of loitering laws common to most cities world-wide which provide that a person is to be arrested if he or she inhabits the sidewalk permanently. Once arrested the homeless cold be examined for mental health, addiction or criminal records and dealt with by the city in treatment housing or jail (depending on which fits the individual) off the streets.
Until the city stops promoting homeless crowds there will be more violent incidents involving them. What is the homeless policy in your city?
The public here seems to blame the police for the shooting, saying the incident should have been handled non violently, and that the multitude of homeless here don't receive enough mental health counseling that would prevent such incidents. This shows the weird priorities toward the homeless here. They are not just tolerated. They are enabled and encouraged to act out here.
Portland has way too many homeless, and they are here practically at the invitation of the city. Most are transient who head for Portland because the city does not enforce loitering laws.
Homeless types are allowed to sleep on sidewalks and even "ask" people for money as they pass by. Also, the city has many shelters that feed and house the homeless. It's way too much enabling that keeps them homeless and not enough demand that those who are homeless make an attempt to get off the streets.Too, security problems can arise when the many mentally ill, vulgar or violent homeless are allowed free reign. And the word out is that homeless people everywhere should head for homeless paradise- Portland, Oregon.
When I have gone into the downtown area of Portland I have noticed the flock of aggressive homeless ("whatever happened to the old "bums" term that used to be used to describe them) who mostly inhabit the poorer northern part of the city where so many shelters are. It is impossible to walk some streets there without being confronted by the presence of the or by being blocked from passing or asked for money. Police do nothing to remove them form the areas. This is unlike any city I have visited in the U.S.
After the shooting incident the Portland government wants to institute a "protected zone" on the streets in those areas in which pedestrians would be free from dealing with the homeless. No homeless would be allowed to loiter in the protected zone areas and must step out if anyone passes by.
The program the Portland city government leaders uses in "managing" the homeless is an embarrassment to the residents and threat to public safety. Better would be a strict enforcement of loitering laws common to most cities world-wide which provide that a person is to be arrested if he or she inhabits the sidewalk permanently. Once arrested the homeless cold be examined for mental health, addiction or criminal records and dealt with by the city in treatment housing or jail (depending on which fits the individual) off the streets.
Until the city stops promoting homeless crowds there will be more violent incidents involving them. What is the homeless policy in your city?
Catholic Church Does Damage Control
It's a week after Easter and the Catholic Church is in a an explaining or hiding move rather than a celebratory one. The sex scandals that have already played out in the U.S. now are a virtual tsunami in Europe now as more victims come out of the closet and more molesters in church dress have been outed all over Europe. Ireland, Austria and Germany are the latest countries to see thousands of molested adults tell their stories of how the priest or nun, or some other cleric molested them as children and how they had no recourse but to accept it due to the vast cover up the Catholic Church engages in when caught with it's pants down.
Today's Palm Sunday commemorates Christ's triumphant entry into Jerusalem, and is the start of the church's Holy Week, which includes the Good Friday re-enactment of Christ's crucifixion and death and his resurrection on Easter Sunday. But many Catholics would prefer this day to see some of those horrid child molesting priest crucified. Too, they ask their lay political leaders why molesters are free to act out if wearing church garb when those lay perverts are arrested and face criminal charges. The answer is, of course, that politicians have been in bed with the Catholic Church so long they have tended to participate in a cover-up rather than arrest and prosecute church molesters.
Even the Pope is accused of participating in covering up church official sexual predators. The Vatican has been on the defensive amid mounting questions about the pope's handling of sex abuse cases both when he was archbishop of Munich and when he headed the Vatican's doctrinal office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Pope Benedict apparently practiced the standard church policy when a molester is found in the midst- they simple transfer the pervert to another parish where he molests again and again.
Better that then have news leak out that there is a predator on the pulpit...otherwise those cash donations by parishioners might dry up. Catholic Church members have to ponder some questions. What good has the Catholic Church done in the world? What have they done to exemplify the life of Jesus Christ other than religious ceremonies, which unfortunately have been used to gain the trust of the masses to accumulate wealth and practice sexual misconduct while preaching abstinence.
Is this Pope, when obstructing justice in the endless litany of abuse cases, simply taking care of his own with no thoughts to others, other than keeping the money coming in. This might be a time for Catholics to reflect a little more this coming Easter, including a reflection on the corruption level of the church and whether blindly supporting the Catholic Church is really a "christian" thing to do in honoring the ideals of goodness and purity the church practices but has seemed to lose.
Today's Palm Sunday commemorates Christ's triumphant entry into Jerusalem, and is the start of the church's Holy Week, which includes the Good Friday re-enactment of Christ's crucifixion and death and his resurrection on Easter Sunday. But many Catholics would prefer this day to see some of those horrid child molesting priest crucified. Too, they ask their lay political leaders why molesters are free to act out if wearing church garb when those lay perverts are arrested and face criminal charges. The answer is, of course, that politicians have been in bed with the Catholic Church so long they have tended to participate in a cover-up rather than arrest and prosecute church molesters.
Even the Pope is accused of participating in covering up church official sexual predators. The Vatican has been on the defensive amid mounting questions about the pope's handling of sex abuse cases both when he was archbishop of Munich and when he headed the Vatican's doctrinal office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Pope Benedict apparently practiced the standard church policy when a molester is found in the midst- they simple transfer the pervert to another parish where he molests again and again.
Better that then have news leak out that there is a predator on the pulpit...otherwise those cash donations by parishioners might dry up. Catholic Church members have to ponder some questions. What good has the Catholic Church done in the world? What have they done to exemplify the life of Jesus Christ other than religious ceremonies, which unfortunately have been used to gain the trust of the masses to accumulate wealth and practice sexual misconduct while preaching abstinence.
Is this Pope, when obstructing justice in the endless litany of abuse cases, simply taking care of his own with no thoughts to others, other than keeping the money coming in. This might be a time for Catholics to reflect a little more this coming Easter, including a reflection on the corruption level of the church and whether blindly supporting the Catholic Church is really a "christian" thing to do in honoring the ideals of goodness and purity the church practices but has seemed to lose.
Unpacking The Past
I worked all day again here at the house unpacking all that I had repacked in December when I thought I would sell the house and move everything back to New Orleans. Since I took the house in Portland off the market and plan to stay here at least during next school year, I am spending these weeks in Portland again unpacking. It's not fun.
But today I unloaded some boxes with books and knick knaks my mom had (I took the bookcase and contents after my parents died). It provided me with a flashback to both my youth and that of my ancestors, for within the books were some interesting flashes of family history.
I discovered one of my grandfather's medical books (he was a physician) and wondered why it was in that antique bookcase that I can remember sticking my foot through (It has a glass fronting) when wrestling my brother so long ago. Perhaps someone kept it to remember him after he died. Oh.... I still have the physical scar from that gaping cut on the top of my foot.
And all my high school yearbooks are there. To see myself, yes, un bearded then, in my prime, young, athletic and innocent was euphoric. Now I can be even more delusional! Sadly, I also saw the photos of five of my high school classmates who have died (one, the "pretty and smart" girl of the class was murdered by her ex husband one night a few years ago after he burst on the scene of she and a lover dallying in bed) from everything to an auto accident at 18 years of age to aids just a few years ago.My mother kept her college yearbooks (LSU) from the 30's. Just thumbing through them shows the calmer times of that generation.
It looks serious and comforting, but I am sure college in the 1930's was probably much like it is today. We idealize the past because we can never fully understand it or see the blemishes as clearly as what we view of our lives today.
There also was a very old book of an organization my grandmother belonged to, a kind of Kiwanis group of the type that was popular before World War II. In it was a letter scolding her for not paying her 1941 dues for the year and threatening to kick her out if she didn't pay soon.
My mother loved New Orleans dearly and collected much about the city.
So it figures that I found many books about the city, including one of photographs of the last century of New Orleans life. There was also a book of poetry written by Jack Grapes (a writer, poet, and actor of some prominence today). My mother was his English teacher in high school and in the forward of the book of poems, A Savage Place, that he composed in 1965 and that he sent to my mom. He wrote in the forward of the book to her, "Thank you for turning me loose to explore the tunnel of my imagination. When it is darkest we see the stars," Jack.
Seeing that made me think all day of my mom and dad, of how much we all loved each other. It was a fortuitous find. And there were other revelatory finds, including my navy boot camp yearbook! Haha Yes, each company that graduated had a yearbook made for it and presented at graduation. I wonder if the navy was as glad to get rid of me as I was to exit it.
Furniture and contents like the old antique bookcase and it's almost forgotten memories are dear to me. They tie me to the best people, places and things of my youth and the youth of loved ones long gone. I worked hard unpacking today, but the rewarding finds in that book case gave me a spiritual renewal I treasure.
But today I unloaded some boxes with books and knick knaks my mom had (I took the bookcase and contents after my parents died). It provided me with a flashback to both my youth and that of my ancestors, for within the books were some interesting flashes of family history.
I discovered one of my grandfather's medical books (he was a physician) and wondered why it was in that antique bookcase that I can remember sticking my foot through (It has a glass fronting) when wrestling my brother so long ago. Perhaps someone kept it to remember him after he died. Oh.... I still have the physical scar from that gaping cut on the top of my foot.
And all my high school yearbooks are there. To see myself, yes, un bearded then, in my prime, young, athletic and innocent was euphoric. Now I can be even more delusional! Sadly, I also saw the photos of five of my high school classmates who have died (one, the "pretty and smart" girl of the class was murdered by her ex husband one night a few years ago after he burst on the scene of she and a lover dallying in bed) from everything to an auto accident at 18 years of age to aids just a few years ago.My mother kept her college yearbooks (LSU) from the 30's. Just thumbing through them shows the calmer times of that generation.
It looks serious and comforting, but I am sure college in the 1930's was probably much like it is today. We idealize the past because we can never fully understand it or see the blemishes as clearly as what we view of our lives today.
There also was a very old book of an organization my grandmother belonged to, a kind of Kiwanis group of the type that was popular before World War II. In it was a letter scolding her for not paying her 1941 dues for the year and threatening to kick her out if she didn't pay soon.
My mother loved New Orleans dearly and collected much about the city.
So it figures that I found many books about the city, including one of photographs of the last century of New Orleans life. There was also a book of poetry written by Jack Grapes (a writer, poet, and actor of some prominence today). My mother was his English teacher in high school and in the forward of the book of poems, A Savage Place, that he composed in 1965 and that he sent to my mom. He wrote in the forward of the book to her, "Thank you for turning me loose to explore the tunnel of my imagination. When it is darkest we see the stars," Jack.
Seeing that made me think all day of my mom and dad, of how much we all loved each other. It was a fortuitous find. And there were other revelatory finds, including my navy boot camp yearbook! Haha Yes, each company that graduated had a yearbook made for it and presented at graduation. I wonder if the navy was as glad to get rid of me as I was to exit it.
Furniture and contents like the old antique bookcase and it's almost forgotten memories are dear to me. They tie me to the best people, places and things of my youth and the youth of loved ones long gone. I worked hard unpacking today, but the rewarding finds in that book case gave me a spiritual renewal I treasure.
More Obamination
More trouble for Barrack Obama. Anxious about high unemployment, a hugely unpopular and nonsensical health care "overhaul", the expansion of the Bush war in Afghanistan and the continued presence of U.S. troops and expensive private contractors in Iraq almost a year after Obama's promises to exit there, and and an economy that President Obama sees as a giant credit card with which to accumulate devastating debt in exchange for more entitlement programs, blame is headed right on Obama's head.
A Gallop poll of voters today showed 50% of those surveyed say he doesn't deserve re-election.That is an astounding negative for a President just a little over one year in office who was given overwhelming support and trust by voters a year ago. I was one who voted for Obama. But never again!
Obama is seen by many as out of step as to the values voters hold dear and in understanding what the U.S. government should and should not do for the citizens. Americans want less government spending and intrusion in their lives, Obama and Congress want more government action and less capitalist free market activity.
Much of the working, tax paying segment of the population, the one that votes more often than does the poorer segment, see Obama as a leader who wants to redistribute wealth, taking away money from those who contribute the most economically and giving them to the people who contribute least or not at all (already half the population here pays no federal income tax).
The furor against the health care bill Obama steered through congress is a good illustration of that redistribution of wealth that has also killed Europe economically. Non working, non contributing citizens get far more benefits than any other group here. This includes free health care at the expense of the tax paying group. Most taxpayers receive nothing for the almost 1 trillion dollar cost of that health care bill.
Obama can't blame George Bush anymore for the sorry mess in which the U.S. has been led. More than one year after his election the country looks as sick as it did when Bush left office and Obama continues to borrow and spend whenever he can.
I like to refer to Obama as "Bush II"(too), and what a great irony it has turned out to be that our Presidency is still an inept, rudderless guide. But the good news is that the U.S. Congress is even more unpopular than Obama. Approximately 75% of Americans disapprove of their Congressmen, the way it is working and want new Representatives and Senators.
I wonder which will be the greater catalyst to the continued down slide of America, Obama or Congress.
A Gallop poll of voters today showed 50% of those surveyed say he doesn't deserve re-election.That is an astounding negative for a President just a little over one year in office who was given overwhelming support and trust by voters a year ago. I was one who voted for Obama. But never again!
Obama is seen by many as out of step as to the values voters hold dear and in understanding what the U.S. government should and should not do for the citizens. Americans want less government spending and intrusion in their lives, Obama and Congress want more government action and less capitalist free market activity.
Much of the working, tax paying segment of the population, the one that votes more often than does the poorer segment, see Obama as a leader who wants to redistribute wealth, taking away money from those who contribute the most economically and giving them to the people who contribute least or not at all (already half the population here pays no federal income tax).
The furor against the health care bill Obama steered through congress is a good illustration of that redistribution of wealth that has also killed Europe economically. Non working, non contributing citizens get far more benefits than any other group here. This includes free health care at the expense of the tax paying group. Most taxpayers receive nothing for the almost 1 trillion dollar cost of that health care bill.
Obama can't blame George Bush anymore for the sorry mess in which the U.S. has been led. More than one year after his election the country looks as sick as it did when Bush left office and Obama continues to borrow and spend whenever he can.
I like to refer to Obama as "Bush II"(too), and what a great irony it has turned out to be that our Presidency is still an inept, rudderless guide. But the good news is that the U.S. Congress is even more unpopular than Obama. Approximately 75% of Americans disapprove of their Congressmen, the way it is working and want new Representatives and Senators.
I wonder which will be the greater catalyst to the continued down slide of America, Obama or Congress.
The Meaning Of Painting
I took a painting of some value to a restorer in Portland. Last week I asked a framer here in Portland of he could clean it and re frame the picture (It has pulled from the frame and started to wrinkle at the top). The painting by artist A.J. Drysdale was given to my grandfather by the artist during the depression in the early 1930's. The story I have from my mother is that he paid my physician grandfather for treating him with the painting.
Drysdale was from Georgia but as a boy of 15 came to New Orleans with his family to live. He learned to paint here and became enchanted with the swamps around New Orleans. To enhance the swamp look, Drysdale mixed kerosene into his paints, giving a blurred appearance to the scenes.
My painting is of a swamp north of Louisiana and features a huge cypress tree (they grow in water and are a favored wood for homes because of their resistance to flooding) and is huge, making the value greater than most of Drysdale's paintings.The restorer said the painting is in good shape but needs cleaning varnishing and remounting in the frame. It will cost $300 dollars but the painting is more than 80 years old and has never been attended to. My mom and dad hung it in their house an after their deaths I also did the same in mine. Moving the picture caused some of the problems to it.
Having a piece of art that has value and has been passed from the artist to one's family, and continues to be handed down, from my grandfather to my parents to me, is a nice tie that binds me to my family in an abstract way. Of course art or any material object is not what is important in life, but a material thing like this painting reminds me of my family, now all departed.
I am a sentimental type and have a number of "reminders" of loved ones who are gone from my life. Do you have any familial objects you treasure because of an identification of it with them?
Drysdale was from Georgia but as a boy of 15 came to New Orleans with his family to live. He learned to paint here and became enchanted with the swamps around New Orleans. To enhance the swamp look, Drysdale mixed kerosene into his paints, giving a blurred appearance to the scenes.
My painting is of a swamp north of Louisiana and features a huge cypress tree (they grow in water and are a favored wood for homes because of their resistance to flooding) and is huge, making the value greater than most of Drysdale's paintings.The restorer said the painting is in good shape but needs cleaning varnishing and remounting in the frame. It will cost $300 dollars but the painting is more than 80 years old and has never been attended to. My mom and dad hung it in their house an after their deaths I also did the same in mine. Moving the picture caused some of the problems to it.
Having a piece of art that has value and has been passed from the artist to one's family, and continues to be handed down, from my grandfather to my parents to me, is a nice tie that binds me to my family in an abstract way. Of course art or any material object is not what is important in life, but a material thing like this painting reminds me of my family, now all departed.
I am a sentimental type and have a number of "reminders" of loved ones who are gone from my life. Do you have any familial objects you treasure because of an identification of it with them?
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Casting Calls
Since I like to work in films I have been to a few casting calls and receive phone invitations to work in various scenes of films. But the open casting call announcement is a common way to seek extra work. Most are straightforward calls, looking for specific types for whatever the film needs. Some times they can be amusing. Here is one I read the other day.
'Need: Older gentleman for partial nudity shot. Buttocks only, no face. Production guarantees only essential crew members will be present. ---The script calls for an "Old and wrinkly butt"...
Serious submissions only, please do not waste my time or the office's time with funny comments...we do not have the time!
Either send an email to jay@gloriosocasting.com or call the office at 318-751-9140...ASAP'
Haha I know you will write that I fit the part perfectly. But I swear my butt is smooth and unwrinkled. Anyway, how does one who gets the part list that as a credit on his resume? I guess "Butt displayed in major motion picture". Still, that kind of butt experience isn't again likely to be again requested.
Sometimes casting needs change completely from the time they hire the extra to the beginning or end of the film. Once I was called by a casting company to play Santa Claus. They said my face was right and they would give me extra padding with the Santa suit. I accepted, but when the film was shot they moved me form the front of the scene to a blurry background because the director said " It's too crowded up front. Let's move Santa." Later I wrote to the real Santa telling him to not give that director any presents for Christmas.
Another time I was asked to portray a German cafe owner for a TV film. I was to just stand behind a counter of a Bavarian cafe shop and serve customers, then at the end of the scene in pantomime in the background I would wag my finger and scream at the waitress for shirking her duty (How German! )because instead she was interviewed by detectives in the film about a murder.
"You look German. The director picked you out as looking right for that role," the casting company told me when they called and offered me the part. I accepted, reported to the set, put on the German cafe wardrobe, was prominently featured in the long scene....but when I watched the movie on TV later I saw that my entire scene had been edited out.
Hmmmmmmm Maybe I should have applied for the wrinkle butt role after all. Who would dare edit my butt out of a scene?
'Need: Older gentleman for partial nudity shot. Buttocks only, no face. Production guarantees only essential crew members will be present. ---The script calls for an "Old and wrinkly butt"...
Serious submissions only, please do not waste my time or the office's time with funny comments...we do not have the time!
Either send an email to jay@gloriosocasting.com or call the office at 318-751-9140...ASAP'
Haha I know you will write that I fit the part perfectly. But I swear my butt is smooth and unwrinkled. Anyway, how does one who gets the part list that as a credit on his resume? I guess "Butt displayed in major motion picture". Still, that kind of butt experience isn't again likely to be again requested.
Sometimes casting needs change completely from the time they hire the extra to the beginning or end of the film. Once I was called by a casting company to play Santa Claus. They said my face was right and they would give me extra padding with the Santa suit. I accepted, but when the film was shot they moved me form the front of the scene to a blurry background because the director said " It's too crowded up front. Let's move Santa." Later I wrote to the real Santa telling him to not give that director any presents for Christmas.
Another time I was asked to portray a German cafe owner for a TV film. I was to just stand behind a counter of a Bavarian cafe shop and serve customers, then at the end of the scene in pantomime in the background I would wag my finger and scream at the waitress for shirking her duty (How German! )because instead she was interviewed by detectives in the film about a murder.
"You look German. The director picked you out as looking right for that role," the casting company told me when they called and offered me the part. I accepted, reported to the set, put on the German cafe wardrobe, was prominently featured in the long scene....but when I watched the movie on TV later I saw that my entire scene had been edited out.
Hmmmmmmm Maybe I should have applied for the wrinkle butt role after all. Who would dare edit my butt out of a scene?
Foxfire Wins
Other than being a little tired from working the TV series the day before I left for Portland and the long plane ride to it I am fine. I had so many errands to run today and tomorrow I will start unpacking what I repacked last time.
Jane is in New Orleans now, in school. She won't come here until next school year. And I am in Portland just about 2 1/2 weeks to work on getting the house ready and also enjoying myself a little. Then I will head back to New Orleans.
Interesting comparison to make as to browsers. I am using Jane's old computer (it has only 1 /2 gig of memory and is slower as a result) which had explorer on ti as the browser. because that runs so slow I downloaded Firefox last time I was here. Now when run together Firefox is twice as fast as Explorer. Explorer seems like an old dinosaur and Firefox an eager pup. Anther thing to note in its favor is that firefox uses spell check at every site the user visits.
I never liked Explorer because it is filled with problems, too large and ambitious, and susceptible to viruses. Score a victory for Firefox. No doubt most of the other more commonly used browsers run faster and better than Explorer too.
Still I wish Netscape were alive and updating It always was the best browser and the most user friendly. Since Netscape ended about a year ago the lack of updates makes it, apart from the mail program (which is not dependent on updates due to the technical simplicity of sending and receiving E mail) almost impossible to use.
Jane is in New Orleans now, in school. She won't come here until next school year. And I am in Portland just about 2 1/2 weeks to work on getting the house ready and also enjoying myself a little. Then I will head back to New Orleans.
Interesting comparison to make as to browsers. I am using Jane's old computer (it has only 1 /2 gig of memory and is slower as a result) which had explorer on ti as the browser. because that runs so slow I downloaded Firefox last time I was here. Now when run together Firefox is twice as fast as Explorer. Explorer seems like an old dinosaur and Firefox an eager pup. Anther thing to note in its favor is that firefox uses spell check at every site the user visits.
I never liked Explorer because it is filled with problems, too large and ambitious, and susceptible to viruses. Score a victory for Firefox. No doubt most of the other more commonly used browsers run faster and better than Explorer too.
Still I wish Netscape were alive and updating It always was the best browser and the most user friendly. Since Netscape ended about a year ago the lack of updates makes it, apart from the mail program (which is not dependent on updates due to the technical simplicity of sending and receiving E mail) almost impossible to use.
No Easter Candy
Easter's over, but the politically correct crowd that has just begun is on a kids must always eat "healthy food" rampage (this cause could be the illegitimate son of the phony "Global Warming" crusade). They want to take candy out of Easter! How insane. That's like Dolly Parton with out boobs, President Obama without deficit spending, me without ranting. It's just not right.
Too many kids this Easter got their Easter basket filled with small toys, sidewalk chalk, plastic eggs with change inside...but no Chocolate rabbits, jelly beans, marshmallow eggs or even those nasty peep candies with which all kids like to sicken themselves.
I think the Michelle Obama "obesity campaign" that tries to curtail the kiddies from eating too much, has taken a misstep in assaulting the Easter candy bunny.
Just as they want to serve only "healthy food" in school cafeterias, they want to take away the kids' sweets on holidays. Easter is the second (behind Halloween) biggest day of sweet consumption in the United States. It perplexes me that parents would want to stop kids from pigging out once in a awhile. Isn't eating candy a joy of being a child? After all, a 5 year old can't go out and get drunk on weekends like mom and dad do.
The same parents who gorge on rich or heart artery clogging foei gras, cheesecake, and buttery croissants act not as reasonable guardians of nutrition but rather as the food police for their kids. Perhaps if the parents also stopped their cigarette smoking and drinking and exercised more, they would set a better example an have less time to take away a fun tradition that their kids will long remember.
I will never forget the fun of the childhood Easter candy basket. But I doubt I would have ever remembered, had I been given it, a politically correct Easter basket like the food gestapo advocates today. I think these parents should be forced to eat nothing but carrots all Easter week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)