The Jetsons Lied To Me

Though I was born in the sixities, I'm a child of the seventies. Growing up during that wacky decade, we were led to believe many things about The Future. Certainly by now, we thought during those hazy days, we'd be witness to technological marvels that we Garanimals clad little scamps could scarcely imagine, right?

Okay, I'll give you the internet. Culture altering? Sure. Revolutionary? You betcha, but excuse me if I still feel a bit cheated.

Where, for instance, are the moveable sidewalks? Oh sure, one sees them in airports, but didn't you think by know they'd be in mid-town Manhattan? Me too.

Where is my meal in pill form?

Where is my non-gas using, 100 mpg car which runs on water, or sand, or cow dung, or whatever else?

Most importantly, where the hell is my JET PACK?!? We should have jet packs by now! We were promised jet packs, weren’t we?

All that aside, the most puzzling thing we expected the future to bring, learned about in the seventies, something on which you would have bet the house, never occurred. I'm talking about, of course, The Metric System. Dear God, this was drilled into our heads year after year, so certain were our schools that the US would finally catch up to the rest of the world and use this simpler system of weights and measures based on tens. It was inevitable, and by all accounts we'd be fully Metric by the time we graduated high school, perhaps sooner. Book it. Done.

Wrong. I suppose there was no way the stubbornness of the American public could've been properly estimated, but we as a society said a pretty emphatic "no", didn't we? Our football fields are still measured in yards, our roads in miles, and our weight gains/losses in pounds. Take that, Europe!

Except for this puzzler: can anyone explain to me why the only things we have accpeted as Metric are soft drinks and cocaine? Beer? Gimme a pint. Weed? How much per ounce? Yet Diet Coke comes in 2 liter (that’s 67.6 ounces to us ‘mericans) bottles and cocaine still is measured by the gram, or kilos when a big bust is announced.

It's just weird.

I Don't Get It

Welcome to a new recurring feature, called simply "I Don't Get It" It's pretty self explanatory, though it could almost be subtitled "Get off my lawn you goddamned kids!", particularly this entry.

Guys who wear wool caps when it's 75 degrees outside. I don't get it. While typing this in a public coffee shop, I saw a guy walk in, about 30-ish. Since it's about 75 outside, he's got a T-Shirt and jeans on. So far, so good....except for the wool winter hat.

Is it fashionable? Maybe. If it was 1996, and you were 14.

Comfortable? I don't see how. The guy's head must be hot as hell.

And...how does it smell in there? My God, it must be awful once that knit cap finally comes off your head. Is it worth the alleged cool factor to smell like the inside of a gym sock? Ladies, help out here, do you find this sexy in any way?

By the same token, I see many of these same guys wearing shorts and tee shirts when it's 40.

They must be weather proof somehow. That is the only rational explanation.

Now, get the hell off my lawn!

Another Entry In The Scapegoat Sweepstakes

The blame parade continues. Now that we have a name to connect to the act, along with some background info, the rest of the idiots are coming out of the woodwork.

This guy, much like Tom DeLay post-Columbine, blames science for the VT shootings.

Wow. I'm not even sure I have words for that. How does one connect those dots? Was it even mentioned that the shooter was an atheist? Seems like this is the type of person who will blame every single wretched event on the same thing, so, again, consider thy source.

On the flip side, when someone does something awesome and good, who gets the credit, using this logic?

There is still time to delve into the man's musical tastes. I'm thinking by Tuesday we find out he was into Korn or something, and work that angle. What happens if they find Clay Aiken CD's in his backpack though? Just wondering.

And hey - breaking news - the guy was a bit of a loner. Go figure.

The Inevitable attack on science (Crooks & Liars)

Well THAT Didn't Take Long..

Shortly after posting the article below, I stumbled across this gem on Fark.

Dr. Phil Blames Video Games For Virginia Tech Massacre

Can't wait to hear from Focus On The Family, et al.

As with Imus....I say consider the source, and move on.

No Sense To Be Made...

The terrible events in Virginia yesterday will undoubtedly result in the search for some kind of rationale, which can eventually lead to finger pointing, which will result in "closure". The usual scapegoats (video games, music, the culture in general, etc.) will be paraded about and held up to intense scrutiny. People need to find a reason why something like this happened. It's simply our nature.

I'm done looking. After seeing events like this for most of my life (Jonestown, Oklahoma City, Columbine, 9/11, the list is endless), I've come to the conclusion that "reason" simply cannot be part of the equation. There is no sense which can be made here. A terribly disturbed individual or individuals did something which defies all rational thought. There is, and always has been, a proportionate number of people who feel the need to carry out heinous acts. This is an unfortunate fact of living on this planet. It doesn't mean we should lose hope, but I no longer see the value in trying to find out "why?"

Who or what will we be hearing about in the days ahead as a scapegoat is sought?

Video Games
A common choice. Have the games gotten more realistically violent in recent years? Certainly. But anyone who doesn't see the difference between blowing away a zombie on your PlayStation and killing a classmate isn't paying attention. I myself have killed more Nazi's on my computer than perhaps the entire Allied forces in WWII, yet I still recoil when killing a spider in my garage.

Music
I'm sorry, but I will not have this argument. Music and art doesn't shape culture, it reflects it, and again, because an unstable person thinks that a musician is talking to them, and carries out a crime, doesn't make the artist responsible. Next.

Culture
Yes, the culture has become coarsened, but are we as a society more or less likely to have someone snap and do things like this? I tend to think there is a proportional number, but with the instant media we are more likely to hear about them. There are more of us today than there were fifty years ago, hence more psychos.

Guns
Too many guns? Too easy to acquire them? Perhaps, but it is always noted (correctly, in my view) that the law abiding citizen who wants a gun is the only one inconvenienced by the plethora of laws and restrictions imposed. Plus, they are willing to play by the rules when required, since gun ownership is a tremendous responsibility. Enforce the laws we have before adding more. Besides, the gun lobby in this country is immensely powerful, and has weathered storms like this in the past. You are simply not going to get rid of them. Besides, there are other countries which have very similar laws, but a fraction of the violence. Why is that? Is it the Cowboy mentality still permeating our American culture?

There are too many things which don't make sense in our lives. This is one of them. There are too many questions, but no adequate answers.

Thoughts and prayers go out to all affected by this senseless tragedy.

Consider The Source, People

The Don Imus flap has now reached the media saturation point, as it manges to dip it's toes into both the Sports and News arenas, based on the "victims", the Rutgers women's basketball team coupled with the inside-the-beltway theme of his nationally syndicated morning radio show.

Imus has been working this shtick for 30-plus years, and at times his comments can seem to have emanated from some kind of 70's time warp. As you have know doubt heard, the aging radio icon referred to the Rutgers lady hoopsters as "nappy headed hos". The comment was pretty much off the cuff, as is the nature of radio, and was completely inappropriate. A few days later, here we are, the circus now in town.

Was the comment insensitive? Sure. Insulting? Yep. Racially ignorant? Definitely.

But, let's consider the source for a moment. Imus has not really been culturally relevant for quite some time. He has a national audience, but his ratings aren't exactly setting the industry on fire. He does generate decent billing numbers, which makes his show more attractive for bigger named advertisers looking to reach a more affluent demographic. Still, he is hardly the controversial shock jock he once was, and now spends as much time raising money for charity as he does snapping at his staff.

Again, it's Imus. Imus. It's like when your grandfather says something stupid - you shake your head, chalk it up to age, and move on, since you've undoubtedly tried to enlighten him in the past. If someone whose opinion I didn't give much credence to - let's use Ann Coulter as an example - said that Irish-Americans were a bunch of "whiskey infested morons", how offended would I be? Not very, since I place little to no value on her rants. Similarly, Imus' random racially insensitive comments should be seen through that type of lens.

In his defense, Imus has not hid behind anything when pressed to explain his actions. He has taken his lumps, publicly, perhaps to the point of overkill. He will be meeting face-to-face with the Rutgers team to see the faces of those he offended. He has provided numerous mea culpas on his radio show, from which he will begin serving a two week suspension starting next Monday. He even went on Al Sharpton's radio show to discuss the matter, even though the rambunctious Reverend publicly called for Imus' firing.

Here is where things get weird, to me. It's one thing for the targets of the racially insensitive comments to feel outraged, and demand either a retraction or a public apology from the perpatrator. But when media magnets like Sharpton and Jackson thrust themselves into the mix, it becomes a circus. I don't want to throw religion in the face of the two reverends, but didn't Jesus mention something about turning the other cheek? In fact, he said:

"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."

In other words, let it go, for you are not capable of judging. Forgiveness, remember?

How these two still have even a scintilla of credibility in a case like this is beyond me. Jesse "Hymietown" Jackson? Doesn't anyone remember the entire Tawanna Brawley fiasco, which turned out to be a complete hoax? Sharpton played the lead role in trying to destroy a person's life, yet today sees no repercussions. He has never apologized to Steven Pagones, even now, yet this is the man folks are forced to have represent them when searching for "justice"? The Reverend needs to be reminded what that really means.

I come not to defend what Imus said, nor to explain away his actions as simply part of who he is. It just seems like this guy has fallen on his sword so many times, and will pay a price for what was done. We've had the outrage from all corners of the media, and it is now time to move on. The market will dictate what happens to Imus from here on out - my hunch is that there will be a short term hit to his ad revenue and ratings before things return to normal.

Time for the next big story, folks. Let's move past this one.

Coming Up Rosie

Rosie O'Donnell is at it again. Having remade herself as a lightning rod for controversy, the former comedienne and current panelist on The View has reached new levels of pissing people off with her latest comments regarding the U.S. Government and, more specifically, 9/11.

Rosie, whose presence has energized (and not insignificantly) increased the ratings for The View, has never been afraid to speak her opinion. For that, she should be applauded. Whether or not one agrees with her is not the point - in a free society she has the right to say anything. Free speech is a privilege, and while there are some boundaries (yelling "fire!" in a crowded theatre comes to mind), saying things which might be considered as daffy by some should not be one of them.

Her latest "incendiary" rants concern 9/11. It seems as if she has been reading the plethora of blogs/sites which question the official version of what took pace on that fateful day. Specifically, she questioned the demise of WTC 7, a building near the towers which was not hit by any aircraft but nevertheless collapsed at free fall speed. She is certainly not the first famous person to question this (Charlie Sheen was widely mocked last year for like minded comments), but she is the most prominent. While not directly implicating the US, she continued on a "I do not trust nor believe anything this administration tells me" rant. Again, nothing that hasn't already been stated by others.

The question is not whether or not she has her facts straight - again, the constitution guarantees one the right to speak whether the facts are correct or not. She is simply asking some tough questions about what happened. Many people are determined to accept what occurred and move on. Google "9/11 conspiracy" and see how many others are equally determined to prove or find evidence that what took place was not as it seemed. Is there any validity to the questions? I don't know - I've done some poking around the net myself and found folks on both sides of the fence equally passionate about and confident of their view on the topic. Any event, when looked upon with intense scrutiny, will begin to reveal some anomalies.

I love a good conspiracy, believe me, but this one is tough to swallow. I'm not 100% convinced that everything is as it seemed, but I'm hesitant to explain it all away as a massive conspiracy.

Why, then, the angry response by some? I can understand that many people do not agree with Rosie O'Donnell, a dyed in the wool liberal if ever there was one. That's fine, we live in an allegedly free society where disagreement and dissent should not only be tolerated, but encouraged. The response of those commentators with personal attacks is simply way off base to me. I can disagree all day with folks like Bill O'Reilly (and often do), but I would disagree with the merits of his commentary, and try like hell not to resort to name calling ("Loofah Boy" comes to mind). The common complaint is that questioning 9/11 somehow is insensitive to the feelings of the families of the victims. On the contrary, if someone is of the mindset they are searching for the truth, how can that do any disservice to the victims? If anything, it is coming from a place of profound reverence and respect for said victims. Additionally, there are many families who have publicly expressed their displeasure with the 9/11 Commission report in particular and the Bush administration in general for their actions regarding 9/11, so the blowhards contention holds little water. Where was this outrage when Conservative commentator Ann Coulter publicly called out a group of 9/11 widows to "shut up and get over it"? Didn't hear a peep from Hannity, O'Reilly, et al then, did we?

Then the angry response is directed towards Barbara Walters, executive producer of The View. She has lost all of her journalistic credibility now, they wail. I point out that she has always been more focused on the entertainment end all along, what with her soft focus personal interviews with stars and inane "If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be?" questions. She is no dummy, and knew that installing Rosie in the seat vacated by Meredith Viera would be just the kick in the pants the show needed to regain its relevance. Fire Rosie for her comments? Hell no, this should result in a raise! Is allowing O'Donnell to pontificate on this topic "irresponsible"? I don't think so, not when there are others at the same table who question her comments on the spot.


Democracy and free speech are not subjected to double standards. People will say things every day with which we do not agree. That doesn't mean we need to silence them. America gives one the right to make a fool of oneself. When the responses are angry, as opposed to simply dismissive, they look foolish by comparison.

An important lesson to learn, liberals, the next time Coulter says something completely off the rails, which should happen any day now.

Again with this "War on Christmas"?

Please, can we finally put this ridiculous notion to bed? Honestly, just because some cashier at Wal-Mart doesn’t wish me a “Merry Christmas”, does that mean society is falling apart and becoming virulently anti-Christian ? Somehow I doubt it. The topic was covered here last year, and I really don’t know what else to add. I suppose self-proclaimed “Culture Warrior” Bill O’Reilly needed somewhere to vent his frustrations after just about every one of his other arguments fell by the wayside.

Enough already, here’s hoping you enjoy whatever you celebrate this season. Oh, and stop the senseless persecution of the Christian minority!

P.T. Barnum Continues to Be Right

I had almost forgotten it still existed until hearing a radio add the other day, but there is actually an International Star Registry. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

Morons, click away!

It’s on one hand hard to imagine, yet on another easy to understand the combined levels of arrogance and stupidity associated with this group. To think for one minute that not only can a company come along and claim to “own” a celestial entity which has been around for thousands of years, is just plain dumb. Dumber still are the idiots who shell out good money to receive a nice certificate stating that such and such has been registered to them. “Oooh, what an amazing, eternal gesture, having a star registered in my name!” C’mre kid, wanna buy a bridge?

Do me a favor, save your money and buy me….well, anything else. Alcohol comes immediately to mind for some reason.

Better yet, if you’re one of those who feel that this is a good thing, have I got a deal for you. Send your $40 to me (I will beat my competitor’s prices, guaranteed!), and I will send you a nice, crisp, fresh, official electronic message signifying that the star of your choice has been renamed in your honor!

This week I’m running a special on pre-owned constellations. For the budget minded consumer, there are some soon to burn out models available for only $19.95! Currently, a twinkly little number I like to call “Bucky2544” (pictured above – isn’t it just precious?) is our Star of the Week, and can be yours for the low, low price of $14.95!

Act now, before it’s gone forever, literally!

Always On?

Private time is something we all value, and with good reason. With the ability to be connected at all times available to us, the “alone” time we crave is becoming harder and harder to experience.

Cell phones, love ‘em or not, are here to stay, and have proven to be an invaluable thing to have, particularly in an emergency. They’ve since devolved into just another method of chatting aimlessly about nothing in particular, but at a much higher cost. Not to mention the fact that people, still, think that they just aren’t as good as a regular phone, thus need to speak LOUDLY whenever using one. In a public place, the desire for one to strangle these idiots grows…

Blackberries, while addictive, serve a purpose. Being able to answer an email or two while away can free up time upon returning to work. It also helps to be able to respond to another person without them having to wait until the next morning when you return to the office. Admittedly, they can become an obsession. There is nothing more geeky, however, then a room full of corporate types all tapping away on their handheld at the same time.

There is something to be said for being unreachable, though. I find the trend toward eliminating free time a disturbing one. Companies seem to provide less in the way of benefits and perks, while expecting more out of their employees. Fearing the dreaded outsourcing, employees are forced to work longer hours, and when not in the office, be responsive, even when busy, for fear of job security.

This is wrong. It forces the corporate type to envy the nine to fiver. When they punch out, work stops, and they go home. Beautiful. I tend to take it personally when I get contacted during evenings and weekends. Though that might be an immature response, it offends me that the perception exists that I can be rung up at any time when an issue arises. I have a life, and would like to enjoy it. If you need me to be available during off hours, talk to me and try to schedule it. I am under no written nor spoken obligation to make myself available, even if I am home watching crappy television shows or playing video games or, most importantly, just being with my family. My time is my own, and though my company pays me, they don’t own my ass 24/7.

Look, the Type-A corporate go-getter who is always on has a place in this world. I say let them have at it. Better them than me. Does this mean I have a bad attitude? Not at all. When I am at work, you’ve got me. I will work my tail off to make sure my job is done well, and that I’m responsive and proactive. I take pride in my work, but just cling to the notion that once I’m out the door, I’m gone. Maybe I should be working in the deli cutting meat - I bet they never get 3:00 AM phone calls!

Am I off base here? Let me know.

Rockin’ To An Early Grave, Baby

God, are we still having this discussion? This has to be a joke, right? This site produces a pretty comprehensive list of anyone who could be associated, however loosely, with Rock & Roll over the past 50 years, and who is now dead. The conclusion? Simple, really: getting involved with The Devil’s Music will lead you to an untimely demise. (Average age of the dead people on the list: 36.9). Honest. They provide scripture quotes and everything. Oh, and in case you forgot, it’s 1958.

Man, where do I begin? First of all, the list conatins such noted Demon Worshippers like John Denver, Karen Carpenter and Jim Croce. Would you even remotely consider any of those three “Rock” artists? No knock on them, but they sang nice songs, none of which would even be thought “dangerous” or “subversive”. Are they listed merely to pad the numbers, thereby making the list look more impressive? Should the really be listed anywhere on the same page as Tupac Shakur?

Second, some of the people (Promoter Bill Graham, for example, who was 60) had a pretty long life. Why didn’t this supposedly vengeful God claim these guys a lot sooner? Sure would’ve saved a few more souls, I imagine.

Finaly, how do these self righteous folks sleep at night? Thousands of “good” people die every single day, some tragically at young ages. How is this explained by these folks? “God called them home early, as He needed them.” So, presumably “good” folks (like 8 year olds with cancer) die before their 30th birthday because they are needed by God, but Jimi Hendrix died because God disapproved of his lifestyle choice? Why did He let some members of Lynrd Skynrd survive the plane crash? Why did he take Ozzy’s guitarist, Randy Rhodes, and not bird biting nutjob Ozzy himself? Why did He let Kurt marry Courtney? I have so many questions!

Most artists are people who tend to live outside the mainstream. Some of the greatest painters the world has ever known would be considered, well, a bit “off”. Van Gogh cut off his freaking ear for God’s sake! There is an obvious correlation between troubled people and good art. After all, since when do really shiny happy people create lasting, memorable art? Musicians are no different, many being troubled souls, which could lead to some pretty bad choices like drug abuse, alcoholism, or associating with some unsavory characters. This makes them human, not damned, and if the art they produce helps one person through a tough time, or just makes someone’s day better, how can that be a bad thing?

The bottom line? Shit happens. People die. Nobody really knows why. The ones who do know are dead, so they can’t enlighten us. Instead of spending time condemning people for choices they made while alive by claiming you know what God wants, why not take the time and money you’re wasting on spreading this garbage and help someone?

I plan on corresponding with these people, and will publish any responses I get. Should be fun!


------------------------------------------------

Building Security...or lack thereof

I work in downtown Hartford (that's in Connecticut, for those geographically challenged among you), in an eighteen floor building. Security here is more intense than any other building I've ever worked previously, as each person is required to carry a badge which contains a photo. The badges are coded to only allow access to the floors you are required, and are needed to move the elevator anywhere beyond the first floor. So, if I tried to flash mine and take the elevator to the 6th floor, I'd be denied.

Of course, I managed to forget mine the other day, which I didn't realize until, of course, I was getting in the elevator. D'oh! No problem, I thought, I'll just go the the Security Desk, explain the situation, and arrive at some temporary solution. I'm guessing I'll have to fill out forms, sign things, show identification, etc. in order to get to my desk.

I approached the desk, and didn't recognize the two men there. Not surprising, since I hadn't really needed to interact with any security folks recently. I explained the deal, how I work here and forgot my badge, and began reaching for my wallet...since he's gonna demand some ID and check it against some kind of master list, right? Uh, nope, he juts points to the other guy, who then takes me to the elevator and asks what floor I work on. Once we get to my floor, he asks if I'll need any help getting past the next layer of security, the doors to my office, and he opens those as well.

Now, I might look trustworthy, but I was taken aback that nobody even bothered to have me produce something, anything, that proved I was who I claimed to be. I could have been anybody, from a corporate spy to a petty theif to a real live terrorist, and these guys gave me a golden path to wherever I wanted to go. I wonder if there was some subtle reverse racism or profiling at work here - I was carrying a laptop, and perhaps most importantly, I'm white. I certainly gave all indications I was legit, but wouldn't a good criminal do the same? I wonder if I was black or middle eastern looking if I would have been afforded the same treatment?

I suppose people just become more lax the further we are from any kind of security scare. I recall visiting another one of our offices in midtown Manahttan about six months after 9/11, and getting past the security desk there was very tough. I had to show a drivers license, and they then called the office where I was visiting to make sure they were expecting me. Only then did the burly security detail allow me to pass to the elevators. About a year ago, I went to the same building, on a Saturday, and while the security looked more imposing (anything I was carrying had to be put on a conveyor belt to be inspected), the guard seemed to really not care that much. He even told me I didn't have to put my laptop bag on the belt! What?

Don't you feel safer now? I mean, your security is only as strong as its weakest point, right? If you're going to put up all these restrictions and barriers, then why don't you make sure your employees are trained to make sure they are observed?

As we've seen countless other times, the only thing that causes a reaction is when something bad occurs. Let's hope it doesn't come to that, again.

Are You Being Monitored?

Hmm…seems like President Bush is walking down the slippery slope of surveillance without using warrants. I understand the whole “we gotta root out the terrorists” angle, but does anyone really think the potential for misusing this power will go untapped? Honestly, it’s not like politicians would do stuff like monitor those deemed “political enemies”, “radicals” or anything. Sorry, but I’m too jaded to believe that this won’t be abused.

Just to see if they’re listening to you, answer the phone thusly:

“F#@* Cheney, hello?”

Not only will you freak out Telemarketers, but you’ll find out pretty quickly if you’re on the list or not. Of course, you might get tortured at some point, but sometimes you have to pay the price to make a political statement.

Herry Chrismakwanzakuh

Thank God the season is finally over, and we can stop hearing these blowhards prattling on about The War on Christmas (yes, Fox News Channel, I’m looking at you).

Look, nobody is trying to phase out or overlook the fact that December 25th is the day celebrated throughout the world as Christmas. Even though most theologians are pretty sure that Jesus wasn’t born on that date, it’s the day that’s been picked to coincide with the Pagan ritual celebrating the Winter Solstice, so that’s what we do. The funny thing is that people who don’t really practice their religion still setup trees, decorate the house, and give presents. The larger message is that it is a time of year where people try (not always successfully) to be a little bit nicer, a bit more tolerant of others, and try to spread some peace. Seems like most follow the spirit of the season, even if they don’t necessarily follow the letter of the law regarding the religious practice.

America, however, though still predominantly Christian, has undergone a degree of cultural change over the past twenty years or so. Immigration brought more people to our shores who were of different cultures and religions. Political Correctness came into vogue, and while the underlying message is sensitivity and tolerance of others, it has gotten way out of hand, like most well intentioned efforts. Any comment made about anyone, no matter how innocuos, causes a chorus of whining about Racism, Sexism, or any other -ism you can imagine. One familiar complaint is that the only acceptable form of bashing left is bashing Catholics in particular (or Christians in general). The Religious Right, which wields waaayy too much influence in this country to begin with, seemingly won’t be happy until everyone turns into a Southern Baptist, while giving their cash to Pat Robertson. Honestly, for a group of people who are (still, for now) the majority religion in this country, and for the most part have it preetty good, we Christians sure are good at whining about how bad things are and how everyone is against us. Where the hell does that come from, anyway?

Back to this recent Holiday Season, it seems like the crybabies are missing the larger point in play here. Look, stores like K-Mart and Target are not stupid. Heartless corporate bastards, perhaps, but not dumb ones. The decision to greet shoppers with a more generic “Happy Holidays” was a marketing decision, pure and simple. They understand that we have become a much more diverse country, with recent immigrants who may or may not celebrate Christmas. Rather than risk alienating a customer, whom the store would like to have return at some point, they chose to play it safe. Imagine, for a moment, if they decided to say “Happy Chanukahuh” or “Happy Kwanzaa” or heaven forbid, “Have a great Ramadan” to a hard core religious right person – I’m thinking lawsuits would be in order. Lost amidst all this is the irony that those people who complain the loudest about how commercial Christmas has become are whining about being disrespected while...shopping.

Everyone needs to relax. We have real problems in this country, over and above the language people use when trying to be nice to one another. Accept whatever greeting you’re given, smile, say “You, too” move on, and do something nice for somebody else. Isn’t that what Jesus would have done?

Stop it, Gas Man

Can we finally dispense with the charade regarding gas prices? Notice how every sign shows an additional number after the price, denoting tenths of cents. Anyone remember a time when that wasn’t a 9? Damn, I’m old enough not only to remember when that column contained other numbers, but also when the signs didn’t have the capacity to accommodate a third digit in the price.

Look, your price is 2.59 per gallon, not 2.58 9/10. You’re not fooling anyone. Cut it out. Now.

Hoodwinked By iTunes

I love iTunes. I recently was fortunate enough to win a free iPod mini, and find it to be just about the coolest thing in the world. I had tons of digital music on my hard drive, and if I wanted portability I was forced to tote my laptop around and plug headphones into it. Effective, yes, but not the best way to get the job done.

Each week, Apple puts a free single up in the itunes music store. This is a nice way to sample a new artist that you’ve likely never heard of, and if you like, maybe purchased some more music from them, or anyone else for that matter.

Anyway, the single of this week for this particular period was a song called “Let Go” by a group called BarlowGirl, who, surprise, I had not heard of. What the heck, let me take a chance. I grabbed the freebie song, listened to it, and immediately liked the guitar sound and the harmonies from the girls. Bear in mind I listened to it with the TV on, and two kids in the room, so I wasn’t able to detect the subtle nuances of the song, namely, any lyrics other than the chorus. I played it a ferw more times, and liked it more each time.

I did notice something odd when I saw the song in my iTunes list, though. Under “Genre”, where I expected to see something like “power pop” or “College” or something along those lines. This read “Inspirational”. Wha? I then popped in the ear buds and played the song, with no white noise or distractions. Holy crap, it’s freaking Christian Rock! The title refers to how the singer will “Let Go” and turn everything over to God.

Now, it would be terribly closed minded of me to dismiss a song outright because it was “Inspirational”, even though I have never made any attempt to listen to any of the various offshoots of Christian Music, from Stryper (remember them, the Christian Heavy Metal band?) to any other artists who exist outside the mainstream. I like this song, and since I am a Christian, really don’t have a problem with the message. What makes me think, however, is that nowhere in the description of the song on iTunes was it mentioned that this was an “Insprirational” song. I wonder how many people of other faiths grabbed the free download? I guess since the song never mentions which version of God things are being “Let Go” to, it can be used by just about any faith, and only an atheist would have a problem with it. I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple received a small number of complaints, though.

I guess I learned something. I'm not sure what, but it was something.

Because They’ve Solved Every Other Problem…

Saw a story last week that the US Attorney General’s Office was instituting a new “War On Pornography”. Did I miss something? Isn’t this a legal, constitutionally protected industry? Oh, right, it’s “immoral”, thus the heroic watchdogs need to swoop in and protect us from ourselves, yet again. Didn’t they try this in the 80’s, with the Meese Commission? The big epiphany from that million dollar waste of time: Detective magazines from the 40’s and 50’s could maybe lead to people raping women. Huh?

Now, I could be cynical and call this for being a diversionary tactic from an Administration who is looking to get our attention away from other, more pertinent things. For example, the ongoing mess in Iraq, the bungling of the entire Katrina mess (of which blame can actually be shared by state and local governments), or the fresh (Tom DeLay) and pending (Karl Rove) indictments. It may in fact be exactly that, but only partially.

The real aim here, in my view, is a blatant pandering to the religious right. In that case, it’s a slam dunk: play up the immorality angle to win some good PR from the Christian Right. Good times all around. Maybe they can even entice leading Democrat Joseph Lieberman to join the fight, and make it a bipartisan effort. After all, ol’ God fearing Joe was at the forefront of the whole “War on Video Games”.

Let me see if I get this straight. The Republicans, champions of the free market, supply and demand economy, are going to somehow attempt to take on an industry which rakes in, literally, billions of dollars each year? Legally? It’s not as if the people who purchase porn, in any of its forms, are doing so outside the law. Obviously, there is a ridiculously large market for the stuff, with an equally large number of consumers willing to plunk down cash for it. I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that it is possible that maybe, just maybe, a significant number of those in power, on both sides of the aisle, are porn consumers. Any group of 100 guys will contain at least 50 who go to strip bars, 20 who subscribe to Playboy, and 5 who have a stash in the closet.

Another issue which I think will doom this to failure (again), is the dirty little secret of many large corporations: they make a tidy little profit from porn too. All major hotel chains, at least every one I’ve ever stayed in, have the pay-per-view movie option on every TV in every room. Aside form the usual selection of recent mainstream films, there are usually quite a few adult choices as well. (This is a great racket – aimed mostly at males, at something like $9.95 a pop, and I’m reasonably certain nobody ever watches the whole movie, if you get my drift). Every cable system has an increasing number of pay-per-view “Spice” channels, “on demand”, which are over and above the monthly fees charged. These channels make boatloads of cash, otherwise they wouldn’t be there very long. Large corporate donations are paid out every election cycle, and I can’t imagine these politicos, who are addicted to free money like a crack whore, essentially biting the hands that feed them.

It should be noted that I am only referring to consenual, adult generated stuff here. Anything that features acts between anything otehr than consenting adults is a completely different story altogether. That is illegal, and with good reason.

Legislating morality has been attempted many times over the years, and in some cases, laws were enacted. Even amendments to the Constitution, such as the 18th which made Prohibition the law of the land, were made. Hmm…prohibition, well we know how well that turned out (see the 21st Amendment for details). The question, as always, is whose morality rules? Something you find repulsive, or distasteful (example: Christian Rap), might be the coolest thing I’ve ever seen or heard. Conversely, something I hold in the lowest regard (example: Gangsta Rap) could be the one thing that gets you through the day. Neither one should be banned, per the law.

The founding fathers thought long and hard about personal liberty when drawing up the constitution, and while they probably never anticipated the forms of entertainment we have today, they made the wording broad enough to be applied to just about everything. Something done in the privacy of ones own home, which is not seen nor heard by any other, and causes no harm to any person nor to any persons property, should be completely permitted. It’s also none of my business. Be afraid, be very afraid, that there (still) exists a large number of people in this country who would like nothing more that to take those rights away from us.

Encounters With The Homeless

Like many of you, from time to time I find myself walking through the city, from a large metropolis like New York to smaller ones like New Haven or Hartford. Spending time in most any city eventually leads me to see many people less fortunate than myself. Oftentimes, I am approached and asked to help them by giving spare change, etc. I know, I know, this is hardly a unique experience.

Why, though, does this make me so uncomfortable? Is it guilt? Maybe. Fear? Possibly….It truly sucks that people are in these situations, and many of us or one or two paychecks away from being thrown into a similar situation. I am by no means rich, but I’m comfortable I suppose. I find myself trying to avoid the encounters altogether, which in turn makes me feel more guilty. I feel fortunate that I have what I do, and that it turn leads to guilt that the person in front of you who has his or her entire wardrobe on his back, and all worldy possessions in a shopping cart. Jeez, am I freakin’ nuts or what?

Worse, part of me feels doubtful that some of these panhandlers are really being honest about their situation. Horrible, I know, but I’m just being honest. I only say this since I’ve found literal examples of this up close. Once a relatively healthy looking young man approached me while I was waiting for a bus. His clothes were clean, and in good shape, so “homeless” was the last thing I thought of as he began to speak. Then he proceeds to tell me, “Excuse me, sir, but the homeless shelter won’t let me in tonight until I give them $5.” Huh? Since when do shelters have a cover charge? Was there a band that night? I immediately activated my brain macro – I think it uses Shift-Ctrl-F8 – which is coded to say “I’m sorry, but I don’t have any change.” This was actually true, but the brain macro kicked in automatically anyway. I have never heard of a shelter asking for donations form those who would be actually using it, so I didn’t feel too guilty here. Honestly, if you’re going to panhandle, go for it, but at least don’t insult the intelligence of the potential donor (panhandlee?) with such a ridiculous cover story! The fact that there are scammers out there just compounds the issue in my mind. Will I be forced to ask for homeless credentials before I fork over some change?

People like the guy mentioned above poison it for the people who really are in need. Still the question rattles around in my head, why do I purposely work to avoid encounters with these people? It sucks that I do that! I wonder if fear plays a factor (oh man, I apologize if that reminds you of that stupid TV show). After all, it is generally accepted that a large number of homeless could be mentally ill. While this alone is a travesty in the richest country on Earth, it remains a fact. What if one of them gets violent, and smacks me in the head? Don’t laugh, I have actually seen panhandlers verbally dress down people who gave them money for not giving them enough! Which guilt trips them into giving more. “Here, take this $20 and don’t hurt me!” Unbelievable. So it’s not too much of a stretch to assume someone might take it to the next level. In this case I think of folks who are veterans, who probably have some hand-to-hand combat training…….and dammit if my mind isn’t running to some far away places now. The overwhelming majority, however, are very thankful, and express gratitude. So, my Avoid-At-All-Costs strategy protects me here against the occasional bad reaction, but is mostly based on things that could happen, but likely won’t.

My wife, who is 1000% more charitable than I, took it to another level recently when she signed up to provide bag lunches for the local shelter. She went and bought all of the food, and put together the most incredible bag lunches I’ve ever seen. I mean, I put all 15 of them into a laundry basket and practically needed a hand truck to get them into my car. These things were loaded. All she asked of me was that I do the legwork and deliver them. Easy enough. I drove to the shelter, and had to be buzzed in. As I brought in the basket, I was greeted warmly by the volunteers, and was directed to the large refrigerator. Several of the people who would be spending the evening there were gathered at the table, having dinner, and all were extremely grateful. This is where I felt like I was taking way too much credit, since all I did was deliver. That would be like falling all over the guy at the 7-11 when he sells you a winning lottery ticket – he was just the delivery mechanism, and had very little to do with you winning. Still, while there I felt uneasy, partially for being there to take credit for my wife’s good deed. Sort of like guilt-by-association, but in a good way. For reasons I still can’t figure, I really couldn’t wait to get out of there.

Writing about this topic provides a bit of a catharsis, and some self awareness. I think I am an optimist at heart, and feel like things such as homelessness just can’t happen to me. This isn’t based on any reality, just a self harbored delusion. I tend to try to avoid conflict wherever possible, and I think avoiding these situations is just another way of denying that the problem exists. Man, is that pathetic. I have absolutely no problem donating things anonymously, such as clothes, money or toys, and I’m a sucker for any televised plea for assistance. One night I found myself sucked in to a 30 minute commercial for a children’s cancer center, and within 20 minutes I had us locked into a monthly donation, which we are still paying out. (I defy anyone with a pulse to watch what I saw and not take action). I guess removing the actual victim from the equation somehow makes it easier. As I said, pathetic.

I’m curious, what do all of you do when confronted with the ugly realities of the real world, such as homelessness? I wonder if there are others who feel as I do, or if I am simply an idiot!

Civility, R.I.P.

Not to pose a ridiculously open ended question, but, what is wrong with some people these days? It has been remarked upon by people much more eloquent than I about the decrease of civility in everyday life. I could list, literally, thousands of examples of how civility has seemingly disappeared from day to day life, but let me single out two personal instances in particular. One occurred yesterday, while on the road. Indulge me for a moment, if you would.

Since gas prices are at the highest they've ever been (still over three bucks here, obviously your mileage may vary), it only stands to reason that sensible folks would decide to change some long standing habits regarding its use. For example, by using mass transit, telecommuting, car pooling, etc. I decided to make a concerted effort to drive a bit slower, around 60 - 65 MPH, and try not to exceed it. Has it worked? Probably a little, but at least I feel like I'm doing something.

The funny thing to note is that when driving the speed limit, everyone, with the exception of perhaps some old people, will pass you. (I could only imagine what would happen if the speed limits were actually enforced - the state would make boatloads of cash). Most pass with little or no fanfare, but I always wonder what the big rush is, especially when going to work.

Anyway, yesterday, I'm humming along at 62, in the center lane, when I see an eighteen wheeler two cars back. The car that was between us eventually moved aside and got off, and the truck quickly moved up on my back bumper. At this point I'm expecting him to flash his brights at me, which is the universal symbol for "I'm an arrogant a-hole, get out of my way". He didn't, which I chose to interpret as a sign that he was okay with the pace, or maybe he was aware of some state troopers on the horizon. (Do truckers still do that stuff like in the "Convoy" days, like warn other trucks when "smokey" is around? Remenber "Convoy", and when CB radios were all the rage? "Hey, I'm talking to a REAL TRUCKER!" Ah, the 70's: when entertainment was so much simpler. Think variety shows.) After a few miles, the truck decided to move to the right lane, which had been available to it for at least two miles. Okay, if he passes me, no big deal.

So what does he do? Well, he gets up to the right side of my car, and is matching my speed, and by this point I'm not really paying him alot of attention. Then, "BURT", a short, loud burst of his horn, which scared the hell out of me. I look over and see, as he begins to pull away, a meaty arm, flipping me off, from his driver side window as he pulls away and moves ahead of me. I am ashamed to admit how I reacted: with a stream of profanities, heard only by me, mostly involving how his excessive girth, which I determined by seeing his sausage like fingers, would signal an any-day-now coronary. My point is this: if he was so intent that I was ruining his day, why not just pass me, or at the very least, flip the lights? I find the light flashing to be incredibly obnoxious and annoying, but it usually does get the desired result. I continued home, pissed.

The other story I use to illustrate the death of civility occurred a few years ago. My family and I were taking part in a charity walk, along one of those linear trails that have sprang up in my area over the past few years. Normally these trails are used by people running, rollerblading, cycling, walking, etc. On the day of the walk, a Sunday morning, when approximately a thousand people are going to be walking on the trail, some very slowly, others pulling wagons and pushing strollers, using this trail to get in your morning run might not be the best idea, don't ya think?

Well, you can probably guess where this is going. I had my family, walking with two other familes, as far to the right side of the trail as I could get them, with me on the outside. I had a backpack on, loaded with stuff. As I was turning to my right, I heard a voice shout "On your left!", and as I turned I felt a "BAM" on the backpack. I was barely knocked around, but as I turned to my left I noticed a female rollerbalder going ass over teakettle and slamming into the ground. Fortunately, she hit the ground off the side of the trail and landed (mostly) on the dirt/grass area, and mostly missed the pavement. I quickly moved to help her up, and was genuinely concerned that she might be hurt. That is, until I heard the first thing out of her mouth: "You f_cking people! Always in the WAY!" Needless to say she refused my extended hand to help her get back on her feet. What really shocked not only me, but my wife, was my reaction. I smiled, waved as she sped away angrily, and said "Have a nice day!" I honestly don't know what prevented me from unloading a verbal tapestry of profanity on her; must've been the chartiable mood I was in!

Honestly, what the hell was her problem? She chose the absolute worst possible time to use the trail, and had she waited about 90 minutes the damn thing would have been cleared out. Then, after her recklessness results in her taking a fall, she blames me?

I think both examples point to a larger societal trend - that MY needs supercede anything else. I need to get here, and you're in my way, this you must move! I think this happened gradually, with the 70's being dubbed "The Me Decade", then the "Greed Is Good" self-indulgent 80's taking society down the path of "It's all about me, dammit". The only examples which run opposite, unfortunately, is when there is a catastrophe of some type, from 9/11 to the tsunami and most recently, Hurricane Katrina, which shows the generosity and compassion of most people. I guess it's easy to throw five bucks in a jar toward relief, which makes us all feel like we're doing something, then we can go back to our self-indulgent lives. I honestly hope that Sausage Fingered Trucker and Crazy Ass Rollerblader each made some donations, and felt a little better about themselves for a short while, Then they went back to cursing all who cross their paths.

Bootlegging Butts

I don't smoke, so I can't fully appreciate the addictive nature of nicotine. I mention this as a prelude to the story below, since I recently was used as a "procurement agent", to buy cigarettes "cheap" in a different state.

I don't follow the price of cigs too closely, but I see various signs in my state (Connecticut) showing them to be anywhere from $4 to $6 per pack. That is just nuts. I know that the "Sin Taxes" in this state are the easiest to levy, the thought being that people will still want to use this stuff and will pay through the nose for their particular poison, but these prices just seemed excessive.

I'm old enough to remember being able to buy cigarettes as a kid, too. My sisters used to smoke as teenagers, and since it was being kept secret from Mom, I had some good blackmail material. Couple that with their laziness, and unwillingness to schlep over to the local 7-11, and I had myself a nice little racket going, as they would often enlist my services as the courier. Not only would I buy them their cancer sticks, but was able to extort the change from them, which went a long way toward building my baseball card collection. The kicker? I would be sent to the store with $1, and get change. Granted, this was 30 years ago (God I'm old...), and the price of everything has gone up, but not to the tune of 400%!

Anyway, my family was planning to spend a long weekend in New Hampshire recently, and when my In-laws caught wind of this, they asked if we would pick up a carton of cigarettes, since they are supposedly very cheap up there. I thought it odd that they gave us $50 to work with. Again, just as in my youth, we were told we could keep the change. Sweet! I was already thinking how much beer (not baseball cards) I could end up with after buying one lousy carton of smokes. This would be a sweet deal, indeed. Keep in mind that despite having a general idea of the per pack price in CT, I didn't think to do the math and estimate that a carton would cost around $50 (or more) in the Nutmeg state.

I arrived in NH, and headed toward a grocery store to pick up some food items, and figured that would be as good a place as any to grab the smokes. Since cigarettes are now kept under lock and key, I had to walk over to the case and point out which brand I wanted. (How many freakin' brands are there? How different can they all be from one another? I defy any smokers to smoke 10 different cigarettes in a row and tell me the brand names.) I chose Vantage, low tar. Mmmm....tar. Then I saw the price - $37. Thirty seven dollars! This is a bargain? Surely I would return home, deliver the goods to my in-laws, and get a response like "That wasn't much of a deal", right?

Nope! Apparently, that is a bargain! They could barely contain their joy at this news, and regretted that they didn't ask us to pick up a few more.

How in world could someone have this habit, and afford to keep it up? At this point, crack is cheaper. At what point does the financial strain begin to outweigh the obvious health risks? These must be the most powerful, most addictive things on Earth - people use them despite 1.) knowing that they are ridiculously bad for their health, and 2.) paying an ever-increasing amount of money for them. Not to mention the impact later in life when the health issues inevitably kick in. To underscore this, I've actually seen people wheeling a portable oxygen tank to the smoking areas in an office building, and lighting up. Huh?

Get some will power people! The habit is costly, deadly, makes you smell like crap. How do you get started? By trying to look cool as a teenager, despite the fact that nobody's first experience inhaling smoke could be described as positive?

Yet the tobacco companies are virtually printing money, and have grown large enough to acquire so many other companies and products that even the most ardent anti-smoker is lining the pockets of Big Tobacco when buying products like beer and certain food. What a country!

These are very odd times indeed. Smokers (in the US anyway) have become social pariahs, being roped off and sent to specific areas to do their smoking, and being prohibited outright in most others. It seems that there are less people smoking now than before, doesn't it? I can't even think of a handful of people I come in contact with who smoke, whereas many years ago there seemed to be smokers everywhere.

Admittedly, I come off as an activist, but I'm no zealot. Smoking killed my father, and despite the fact he was hooked long before the Surgeon General's warnings were first published in 1964, he continued right up until his death six years later. I guess he was too far gone to stop by then, and quitting might not have made a difference for him. I'll never know. But cigarettes are legal in this country, and I fully support the rights of any American to do whatever they choose so long as it doesn't harm another person or another person's property. Smoke away, smokers, just don't do it around me.