Usually, I don't do New Year's resolutions. It's not that I think that I'm perfect and that there is nothing upon which I can improve. It's just that I know behavior does not change overnight just because a calendar page turns over and it's a new year. But in 2016 I do plan to address my biggest weakness: I am a chronic procrastinator.
For some reason, I cannot get important things done until the last minute. Here in the electronic media, "deadline" to get a story done or an interview completed is the next half-hour--so there is that constant feeling of "I need to get this done right away". But that gives me "mental permission" to push off other things that might not need to be completed until tomorrow, or next week or sometime in the next month. And what invariably happens? Those things don't get done until they absolutely have to.
But sometimes, they don't get done at all--because some other "emergency" came up in the window of opportunity to complete the project--and the next thing you know, you've missed the deadline on the project you once had days or months to complete. One of the biggest challenges to overcoming procrastination is not having that feeling of "pressure" to get something done when you are not racing the clock. It's almost like a shot of adrenaline.
Ok, so if I'm going to do something to better my life, I'm going to ask you to do the same. And my challenge for you is to get your financial lives in order. We are slowly moving toward an improved economy--and with it the opportunity to put more money in your pocket. Rather than spending all of that with an extra cup of overpriced drive-thru coffee--why not put that money to work for your retirement? Or your child's college education?
I know you've been meaning to put together a budget, or to meet with your "financial guy" or to set up that Educational Savings Account--but you've been putting it off (sound familiar?). So instead of being one of those people who overrun the fitness clubs next week (only to disappear by the end of the month)--be the person that fills up the waiting room at a financial advisor and make 2016 the year to get out of debt and save for the future.
If you need a little help, you can tune into the Dave Ramsey Show here on WOSH from 2-5 weekdays for some positive re-inforcement. Oh--and don't say you'll start doing that....tomorrow.
Thursday, December 31, 2015
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
The Best of 2015
This week is filled with lists of the "biggest news stories" or the "most fascinating people" or "top moments" of the year. Rather than rehash all of that here, I thought I would share the three best moments of 2015 for me.
Number Three: When the Wisconsin Badgers beat the previously-undefeated Kentucky Wildcats in the NCAA National Semi-Finals. I tried hard to remember that night while watching this season's Badgers struggle to score against Purdue at home in last night's loss. This would have been moment 3B if Wisconsin would have held on to beat Duke in the National Championship game two nights later.
Number Two: This scene after the third round of the PGA Championship at Whistling Straits:
This was on the way to the scoring area where Jordan Spieth was met by his younger sister Ellie. Spieth had just shot a 65--including five birdies in his last eight holes--to move into second and get into the final group with Jason Day on Sunday. But that hug from Ellie--who is cognitively disasbled--was the highlight of his day (and for those of us lucky enough to be back there).
And the Number One Best Moment of 2015: The afternoon my wife and I spent at Polihale State Park on Kauai.
A few years ago, my mother-in-law passed away. She wanted to be cremated--with some of her ashes spread in Hawaii. In planning for our 10th anniversary trip to the islands, I looked for a place where we could do that. I didn't want it to be somewhere thousands of people would be trampling every day--but someplace quiet, beautiful and special. I read about Polihale--which is where the 1000-foot tall Na Pali Cliffs end--and where 15-miles of uninterrupted golden-sand beach begins.
It's one of the most amazing places on Earth--and few people ever see it--as only way to get there is to take a five mile, pot-holed and muddy cane road that the rental car companies want you to stay off and a two would cost you a month's pay. But we made the trek out there.
Right away, my wife knew this was the perfect spot for her Mom's ashes. And to see the smile on her face as she returned from the private moment at the point where the cliffs met the beach was far and away the best moment of 2015.
I tried to keep that in mind while I spent an hour and a half trying to clear the snow from my driveway yesterday.
Number Three: When the Wisconsin Badgers beat the previously-undefeated Kentucky Wildcats in the NCAA National Semi-Finals. I tried hard to remember that night while watching this season's Badgers struggle to score against Purdue at home in last night's loss. This would have been moment 3B if Wisconsin would have held on to beat Duke in the National Championship game two nights later.
Number Two: This scene after the third round of the PGA Championship at Whistling Straits:
And the Number One Best Moment of 2015: The afternoon my wife and I spent at Polihale State Park on Kauai.
A few years ago, my mother-in-law passed away. She wanted to be cremated--with some of her ashes spread in Hawaii. In planning for our 10th anniversary trip to the islands, I looked for a place where we could do that. I didn't want it to be somewhere thousands of people would be trampling every day--but someplace quiet, beautiful and special. I read about Polihale--which is where the 1000-foot tall Na Pali Cliffs end--and where 15-miles of uninterrupted golden-sand beach begins.
It's one of the most amazing places on Earth--and few people ever see it--as only way to get there is to take a five mile, pot-holed and muddy cane road that the rental car companies want you to stay off and a two would cost you a month's pay. But we made the trek out there.
Right away, my wife knew this was the perfect spot for her Mom's ashes. And to see the smile on her face as she returned from the private moment at the point where the cliffs met the beach was far and away the best moment of 2015.
I tried to keep that in mind while I spent an hour and a half trying to clear the snow from my driveway yesterday.
Tuesday, December 29, 2015
The Social Injustice of Marriage
The "Social Justice" warriors may have a new reason to hate rich people: they almost always marry other rich people. This week, the New York Times ran an article on the study of "assortive mating"--or what we commonly like to call "Power Couples"--and how their marriages "foster income inequality" in American society.
The study finds that high-earners are more likely to marry other high earners. And that the children of these marriages are pre-disposed to better performance in school--meaning a greater likelihood of becoming high-income earners themselves--who will then marry other high-earners, continuing the cycle.
To most folks that would make sense--people tend to marry the types of people they spend the most time with--and if you are in the corporate boardroom, or the high rise office or you hang out at the wine bar uptown, that is where you are most likely to find dates and spouses. Just like those of us who met our spouses at working class bars that have dollar beer nights. It's also why you have modern fairy tale movies like Maid in Manhattan, Pretty Woman and She's All That forever finding a home on Lifetime movie channel--where the rich man falls in love with the poor girl and sweeps her into a life of luxury.
While we heard repeatedly during the fight for same-sex marriage equality that people should be allowed to "marry whomever they want"--the Social Justice crowd sees "assortive mating" as a problem that will be (as the author of the article put it) "hardest to counter". What exactly does that mean to "counter" a marriage? Will President Bernie Sanders use an executive order to institute a new "Marriage Tax"? Will "Progressive" state legislatures limit the total assets a couple can bring into a marriage? Will public school curriculum require books on dating and marriage to feature only couples from differing "socio-economic groups" as an acceptable pairing?
I guess parents across America should be glad to see their corporate executive daughters bring home the unemployed convicted felons who still live with their mothers for the holidays. Their "little girls" are doing their part to ensure "Social Justice".
The study finds that high-earners are more likely to marry other high earners. And that the children of these marriages are pre-disposed to better performance in school--meaning a greater likelihood of becoming high-income earners themselves--who will then marry other high-earners, continuing the cycle.
To most folks that would make sense--people tend to marry the types of people they spend the most time with--and if you are in the corporate boardroom, or the high rise office or you hang out at the wine bar uptown, that is where you are most likely to find dates and spouses. Just like those of us who met our spouses at working class bars that have dollar beer nights. It's also why you have modern fairy tale movies like Maid in Manhattan, Pretty Woman and She's All That forever finding a home on Lifetime movie channel--where the rich man falls in love with the poor girl and sweeps her into a life of luxury.
While we heard repeatedly during the fight for same-sex marriage equality that people should be allowed to "marry whomever they want"--the Social Justice crowd sees "assortive mating" as a problem that will be (as the author of the article put it) "hardest to counter". What exactly does that mean to "counter" a marriage? Will President Bernie Sanders use an executive order to institute a new "Marriage Tax"? Will "Progressive" state legislatures limit the total assets a couple can bring into a marriage? Will public school curriculum require books on dating and marriage to feature only couples from differing "socio-economic groups" as an acceptable pairing?
I guess parents across America should be glad to see their corporate executive daughters bring home the unemployed convicted felons who still live with their mothers for the holidays. Their "little girls" are doing their part to ensure "Social Justice".
Monday, December 28, 2015
If You're Gonna Go At the King, You Best Not Miss
I hope for Al Jazeera America's sake they are willing to stand by the less-than-reputable sources they used for their documentary on illegal use of Human Growth Hormones and prescription painkillers in the NFL--because all hell is going to be raining down upon them. Peyton Manning--whom the report claims purchased HGH through his wife from the Indianapolis clinic--is already saying he will sue for defamation. Three Packers named in the story as well--Clay Matthews, Julius Peppers and Mike Neale--all issued denials as well (although Neale did use the old "I can neither confirm nor deny" line with reporters on Sunday).
The problem with producing a truly bullet-proof type of report on steroid and painkiller abuse like this is that the people you need to talk to about it are pretty scummy themselves. Many have criminal records. They don't keep business records--as a way of protecting their clients--and they can be paid off to later recant or even lie under oath if matters are ever brought before a court. And that has been the defense nearly all of the major American sports have used to fend off previous attempts to document drug use by players. Remember the lowlifes involved in the Barry Bonds case?
About the only thing sports fans are willing to accept are positive drug tests administered by the leagues themselves--which the drug suppliers know they can beat most of the time. But even then--as was the case with Ryan Braun--fans (and the media) are willing to give the player the benefit of the doubt if he makes strong enough denials (or makes up stuff about being framed by an anti-Semitic, Cubs fan urine sample handler).
In the case of the NFL, spreading around the billions generated by the sport provides insulation from prying eyes as well. There's a reason Al Jazerra America was willing to go public with an hour-long special on football players using hormones and painkillers--because their is no Thursday night, or Saturday night, or Sunday afternoon, or Sunday night or Monday night football on Al Jazeera America. And there was likely never going to be--so what did that network (and its parent corporation) have to lose by taking a shot at the King of All Sports?
And what will be the response of sports fans even if all of the allegations contained in the documentary are true? A slight roll of the eyes before logging back onto their fantasy football website to see who are the "best picks" for this week's games. NFL fans just plain don't care if their favorites are on the juice or are using painkillers without a doctor's prescription. Just so long as they are out there "scoring points for them" is all that matters.
The problem with producing a truly bullet-proof type of report on steroid and painkiller abuse like this is that the people you need to talk to about it are pretty scummy themselves. Many have criminal records. They don't keep business records--as a way of protecting their clients--and they can be paid off to later recant or even lie under oath if matters are ever brought before a court. And that has been the defense nearly all of the major American sports have used to fend off previous attempts to document drug use by players. Remember the lowlifes involved in the Barry Bonds case?
About the only thing sports fans are willing to accept are positive drug tests administered by the leagues themselves--which the drug suppliers know they can beat most of the time. But even then--as was the case with Ryan Braun--fans (and the media) are willing to give the player the benefit of the doubt if he makes strong enough denials (or makes up stuff about being framed by an anti-Semitic, Cubs fan urine sample handler).
In the case of the NFL, spreading around the billions generated by the sport provides insulation from prying eyes as well. There's a reason Al Jazerra America was willing to go public with an hour-long special on football players using hormones and painkillers--because their is no Thursday night, or Saturday night, or Sunday afternoon, or Sunday night or Monday night football on Al Jazeera America. And there was likely never going to be--so what did that network (and its parent corporation) have to lose by taking a shot at the King of All Sports?
And what will be the response of sports fans even if all of the allegations contained in the documentary are true? A slight roll of the eyes before logging back onto their fantasy football website to see who are the "best picks" for this week's games. NFL fans just plain don't care if their favorites are on the juice or are using painkillers without a doctor's prescription. Just so long as they are out there "scoring points for them" is all that matters.
Thursday, December 24, 2015
The REAL Carol of the Bells
I've seen plenty of on-line polls asking "What is the worst Christmas song of all time?" For me the answer is easy: Carol of the Bells by Trans-Siberian Orchestra
I can't stand more than ten seconds of the dreck--with the 53 synthesizer tracks, the electric violin overdubs and the horrendous guitar parts. There is a reason why this over-the-top edition of the song is so popular with the people who synchronize their Christmas lights to music every winter.
However, buried underneath all of the bombast and fake artistry of TSO is an incredibly beautiful song--played the right way--by pianist George Winston
It's amazing how much less is often much better at this time of year.
I can't stand more than ten seconds of the dreck--with the 53 synthesizer tracks, the electric violin overdubs and the horrendous guitar parts. There is a reason why this over-the-top edition of the song is so popular with the people who synchronize their Christmas lights to music every winter.
However, buried underneath all of the bombast and fake artistry of TSO is an incredibly beautiful song--played the right way--by pianist George Winston
It's amazing how much less is often much better at this time of year.
Wednesday, December 23, 2015
THE ANNUAL FESTIVUS AIRING OF GRIEVANCES!!!!
It's December 23rd and you know what that means, IT"S FESTIVUS!! And now is the time for the annual AIRING OF THE GRIEVANCES in which I tell you all of the ways you have disappointed me in the past year. As usual, I HAVE A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH YOU PEOPLE!!
PEOPLE WHO WALK IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LANE BETWEEN PARKING STALLS: YOU CANNOT IMAGINE THE SELF-CONTROL IT TAKES NOT TO JUST RUN YOU DOWN LIKE THE MONGREL DOGS YOU ARE. AND I KNOW THAT IF I EVER ACTED UPON THESE URGES THAT I WOULD BE ACQUITTED BECAUSE ALL 12 PEOPLE IN THE JURY BOX WOULD NOD THEIR HEADS IN AGREEMENT AS I TESTIFIED ABOUT THE RAGE THAT BUILDS WHILE YOU JUST STROLL AND PUSH YOUR LITTLE CART WHILE THE CARS PILE UP BEHIND YOU!!
INTERNET TROLLS: YOU HAVE COMPLETELY RUINED THE IDEA OF USING SOCIAL MEDIA AS A VENUE FOR ANY TYPE OF INTELLIGENT DISCUSSION OF ISSUES. YOU CONSTANTLY FILL THE TIMELINES OF OUR NEWS FEED AND THOSE OF REPUTABLE SOURCES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT WITH SNARKY AND VILE COMMENTS THAT INVARIABLY HAVE TO DELETE SO AS NOT TO APPEAR TO GIVE TACIT APPROVAL TO SUCH STATEMENTS. TAKE YOUR RACISTS ASSES BACK INTO YOUR MOTHERS' BASEMENTS AND DIE!!
FOOTBALL OFFICIALS: I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THAT WE HAVE REACHED THE NADIR OF FOOTBALL OFFICIATING--AS BLATANTLY BAD CALLS HAVE COST EACH OF MY FAVORITE TEAMS GAMES THIS YEAR--BUT FOR SOME REASON I THINK IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE BEFORE IT GETS BETTER. AND HOW CAN YOU GO TO REPLAY AND REVERSE A CORRECT CALL TO A WRONG CALL? I THOUGHT THE IDEA WAS TO USE THE VIDEO TO GET THINGS RIGHT--NOT PILE MORE BLOWN CALLS ON TOP OF OTHER BLOWN CALLS!!
DONALD TRUMP SUPPORTERS: WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO WAKE UP TO THE GIANT JOKE THAT IS BEING PLAYED ON YOU? THIS GUY IS ACTUALLY RUNNING AN EXPERIMENT TO SEE HOW BIG A BUFFOON SOMEONE CAN BE AND STILL GET POLITICAL SUPPORT--AND YOU ARE PLAYING RIGHT INTO HIS HANDS. YOU DO KNOW THAT HE HOLDS EVERY ONE OF YOU IN CONTEMPT FOR BEING STUPID ENOUGH TO BELIEVE HIS B-S?!?!
THOSE WHO WORK IN ACADEMIA: HOW DID THE CODDLING OF MILLENIALS GO--NOW THAT YOU ARE BEHOLDEN TO THEIR "FEELINGS" TO DETERMINE WHAT YOU ARE ALLOWED TO SAY IN THE CLASSROOM? DID YOU NEVER EXPECT THE FINGERS OF BLAME TO BE TURNED UPON YOU AFTER ENCOURAGING SO MANY KIDS TO BLAME OTHERS FOR EVERYTHING ELSE THEY DON'T LIKE? AND NOW YOU PASS YOUR RESOLUTIONS SUPPORTING "FREE SPEECH"--BUT THEN CONTINUE TO LIMIT THAT TO COMMENTS THAT MATCH YOUR OWN OPINIONS.
SNOWMOBILERS, SKIIERS AND ICE FISHERMEN: PLEASE SPARE US YOUR SOB STORIES ABOUT NOT GETTING TO HIT YOUR FAVORITE TRAILH, HILL OR LAKE THIS WINTER BECAUSE THERE IS NO SNOW AND ICE. THIS IS THE GREATEST WINTER IN WISCONSIN HISTORY AND THE REST OF US DON'T FEEL THE SLIGHTEST BIT SORRY FOR YOU. BESIDES, YOU HAD PLENTY OF WINTER TO ENJOY THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. OH YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT, THE POLAR VORTEX MADE IT "TOO COLD" TO BE OUTSIDE!!
Now it is time for the Feats Of Strength. Remember, Festivus is not over until you pin me!!
PEOPLE WHO WALK IN THE MIDDLE OF THE LANE BETWEEN PARKING STALLS: YOU CANNOT IMAGINE THE SELF-CONTROL IT TAKES NOT TO JUST RUN YOU DOWN LIKE THE MONGREL DOGS YOU ARE. AND I KNOW THAT IF I EVER ACTED UPON THESE URGES THAT I WOULD BE ACQUITTED BECAUSE ALL 12 PEOPLE IN THE JURY BOX WOULD NOD THEIR HEADS IN AGREEMENT AS I TESTIFIED ABOUT THE RAGE THAT BUILDS WHILE YOU JUST STROLL AND PUSH YOUR LITTLE CART WHILE THE CARS PILE UP BEHIND YOU!!
INTERNET TROLLS: YOU HAVE COMPLETELY RUINED THE IDEA OF USING SOCIAL MEDIA AS A VENUE FOR ANY TYPE OF INTELLIGENT DISCUSSION OF ISSUES. YOU CONSTANTLY FILL THE TIMELINES OF OUR NEWS FEED AND THOSE OF REPUTABLE SOURCES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT WITH SNARKY AND VILE COMMENTS THAT INVARIABLY HAVE TO DELETE SO AS NOT TO APPEAR TO GIVE TACIT APPROVAL TO SUCH STATEMENTS. TAKE YOUR RACISTS ASSES BACK INTO YOUR MOTHERS' BASEMENTS AND DIE!!
FOOTBALL OFFICIALS: I WOULD LIKE TO THINK THAT WE HAVE REACHED THE NADIR OF FOOTBALL OFFICIATING--AS BLATANTLY BAD CALLS HAVE COST EACH OF MY FAVORITE TEAMS GAMES THIS YEAR--BUT FOR SOME REASON I THINK IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE BEFORE IT GETS BETTER. AND HOW CAN YOU GO TO REPLAY AND REVERSE A CORRECT CALL TO A WRONG CALL? I THOUGHT THE IDEA WAS TO USE THE VIDEO TO GET THINGS RIGHT--NOT PILE MORE BLOWN CALLS ON TOP OF OTHER BLOWN CALLS!!
DONALD TRUMP SUPPORTERS: WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO WAKE UP TO THE GIANT JOKE THAT IS BEING PLAYED ON YOU? THIS GUY IS ACTUALLY RUNNING AN EXPERIMENT TO SEE HOW BIG A BUFFOON SOMEONE CAN BE AND STILL GET POLITICAL SUPPORT--AND YOU ARE PLAYING RIGHT INTO HIS HANDS. YOU DO KNOW THAT HE HOLDS EVERY ONE OF YOU IN CONTEMPT FOR BEING STUPID ENOUGH TO BELIEVE HIS B-S?!?!
THOSE WHO WORK IN ACADEMIA: HOW DID THE CODDLING OF MILLENIALS GO--NOW THAT YOU ARE BEHOLDEN TO THEIR "FEELINGS" TO DETERMINE WHAT YOU ARE ALLOWED TO SAY IN THE CLASSROOM? DID YOU NEVER EXPECT THE FINGERS OF BLAME TO BE TURNED UPON YOU AFTER ENCOURAGING SO MANY KIDS TO BLAME OTHERS FOR EVERYTHING ELSE THEY DON'T LIKE? AND NOW YOU PASS YOUR RESOLUTIONS SUPPORTING "FREE SPEECH"--BUT THEN CONTINUE TO LIMIT THAT TO COMMENTS THAT MATCH YOUR OWN OPINIONS.
SNOWMOBILERS, SKIIERS AND ICE FISHERMEN: PLEASE SPARE US YOUR SOB STORIES ABOUT NOT GETTING TO HIT YOUR FAVORITE TRAILH, HILL OR LAKE THIS WINTER BECAUSE THERE IS NO SNOW AND ICE. THIS IS THE GREATEST WINTER IN WISCONSIN HISTORY AND THE REST OF US DON'T FEEL THE SLIGHTEST BIT SORRY FOR YOU. BESIDES, YOU HAD PLENTY OF WINTER TO ENJOY THE PAST COUPLE OF YEARS. OH YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT, THE POLAR VORTEX MADE IT "TOO COLD" TO BE OUTSIDE!!
Now it is time for the Feats Of Strength. Remember, Festivus is not over until you pin me!!
Tuesday, December 22, 2015
The Truth Nobody Wants to Admit
Want to start an argument? The next time someone asks you what your favorite Christmas movie is tell them it's Die Hard. Invariably, you will get a look of disbelief from the asker of the question and the standard reply "Die Hard isn't a Christmas movie!!" And while they may feign disgust with your reply, deep down they know the truth: Die Hard is about Christmas as much as pretty much any other "Holiday" movie is.
First off, Die Hard takes place on December 24th--Christmas Eve. Second, why is Bruce Willis' character--John McClain--at the office tower at the time of the terrorist takeover? To attend his estranged wife's Christmas party. Third, what do McClain and the LA cop bond over while talking on the walkie-talkie? Spending Christmas with the kids. Fourth, how is Bonnie Bedelia's character blown? By the TV station airing the interview with her kids asking her to come home for Christmas. Fifth, what does McClain use to conceal the handgun behind his back before shooting Hans out the window to his death? Santa Clause masking tape. And finally, what is playing as the credit roll? Christmas music.
Say hello to a modern Christmas classic, my friends.
My wife watches the Hallmark and Lifetime movie channels almost non-stop at this time of year--which means I catch my fair share of these horrible films with repeating plot lines and in many cases--the same handful of actors--over and over again. And the only difference between those and the movies usually shown on those channels is that all of the action (or lack there of) takes place at the end of December--just like Die Hard.
And a common plot device of those movies is stolen from Die Hard 2--in which airports across the country are closed by a major snow storm. In the "holiday movies" this allows the two main character to find the other is their true love and not the lame boyfriend or girlfriend they can't get to by plane. In Die Hard 2 it provided cover for the terrorist to flee the country--until John McClain blows up their plane--providing guidance to all of the planes about to fall out of the sky due to fuel starvation (including his wife's).
So forget It's a Wonderful Life, or Holiday Inn or Santa Claus vs The Martians this year. Pop Die Hard into the bluray player and let the family enjoy some real action for Christmas. There's even a happy ending.
Yippee ki yay mother.............
First off, Die Hard takes place on December 24th--Christmas Eve. Second, why is Bruce Willis' character--John McClain--at the office tower at the time of the terrorist takeover? To attend his estranged wife's Christmas party. Third, what do McClain and the LA cop bond over while talking on the walkie-talkie? Spending Christmas with the kids. Fourth, how is Bonnie Bedelia's character blown? By the TV station airing the interview with her kids asking her to come home for Christmas. Fifth, what does McClain use to conceal the handgun behind his back before shooting Hans out the window to his death? Santa Clause masking tape. And finally, what is playing as the credit roll? Christmas music.
Say hello to a modern Christmas classic, my friends.
My wife watches the Hallmark and Lifetime movie channels almost non-stop at this time of year--which means I catch my fair share of these horrible films with repeating plot lines and in many cases--the same handful of actors--over and over again. And the only difference between those and the movies usually shown on those channels is that all of the action (or lack there of) takes place at the end of December--just like Die Hard.
And a common plot device of those movies is stolen from Die Hard 2--in which airports across the country are closed by a major snow storm. In the "holiday movies" this allows the two main character to find the other is their true love and not the lame boyfriend or girlfriend they can't get to by plane. In Die Hard 2 it provided cover for the terrorist to flee the country--until John McClain blows up their plane--providing guidance to all of the planes about to fall out of the sky due to fuel starvation (including his wife's).
So forget It's a Wonderful Life, or Holiday Inn or Santa Claus vs The Martians this year. Pop Die Hard into the bluray player and let the family enjoy some real action for Christmas. There's even a happy ending.
Yippee ki yay mother.............
Monday, December 21, 2015
Odds and Ends
I would like to thank my fellow moviegoers Saturday morning for an excellent theater experience. I'm guessing it was the 8:00 am showtime that kept the younger folks away from the Star Wars: The Force Awakens screening I attended--as it was nearly all middle-aged folks like myself filling the theater that morning. There was nobody on their cellphones talking loudly before the feature. I was about 3/4 of the way back and I didn't see the glow of smartphones in front of people's faces once the movie started. There were no attempts at humor with any catcalls or editorial comments during the screening. And I don't remember seeing anyone get up--go to the concession stand--come back--get up--go to the bathroom--and come back again either. We all came to watch our favorite movie--and that is what we did. And when those in line for the next screening asked how it was, nobody yelled out spoilers or trolled everyone by saying it "sucked--go home--don't waste your money" (it definitely didn't suck). It would be interesting to see if a theater could make it by having just "adult" movie screenings for blockbusters so we can all enjoy such an "old-fashioned" experience.
I would also like to thank the people out shopping later on Saturday for the respect they showed for each other during the absolute worst day of the year to be anywhere near a shopping center. Twice, people who had loads of items at the checkout allowed me to skip ahead--as I had just a gift card to purchase. And where lines were long, there was still amiable chatter among shoppers knowing we were all stuck in the same boat. (Now, for some people I encountered in the parking lots of said stores--you get your mention on Wednesday during the annual FESTIVUS AIRING OF THE GRIEVENCES!!)
And finally, thank you to Steve Harvey for providing us with the best television moment of 2015--giving the Miss Universe crown to the wrong contestant last night. I didn't see this live (I was already in bed) but an overnight check of my Twitter timeline showed it to be about the only thing people wanted to talk about (except the woman running over pedestrians outside the same hotel in Las Vegas a few minutes later). I can understand how Steve got mixed up--since pageants have this ridiculous tradition of naming second and first runner ups instead of third and second and first place. And for those who say they "feel so bad for Miss Colombia" what exactly did she lose? A chance to follow in the footsteps of other great Miss Universes like........uh........did Ivana Trump win this and get a marriage to Donald as part of the package? The pageant could have gone off the air, issued a short press statement saying there had been a mistake on stage a few minutes later, and none of you would have noticed--even when a different woman came out wearing the crown at the start of next year's pageant. Instead, Steve tried to fix it on "international TV"--and ended up looking like a clown. I'm just glad that the decision made by the likes of former NFL running back Emmitt Smith as to who is the most beautiful woman in the world was ultimately upheld.
I would also like to thank the people out shopping later on Saturday for the respect they showed for each other during the absolute worst day of the year to be anywhere near a shopping center. Twice, people who had loads of items at the checkout allowed me to skip ahead--as I had just a gift card to purchase. And where lines were long, there was still amiable chatter among shoppers knowing we were all stuck in the same boat. (Now, for some people I encountered in the parking lots of said stores--you get your mention on Wednesday during the annual FESTIVUS AIRING OF THE GRIEVENCES!!)
And finally, thank you to Steve Harvey for providing us with the best television moment of 2015--giving the Miss Universe crown to the wrong contestant last night. I didn't see this live (I was already in bed) but an overnight check of my Twitter timeline showed it to be about the only thing people wanted to talk about (except the woman running over pedestrians outside the same hotel in Las Vegas a few minutes later). I can understand how Steve got mixed up--since pageants have this ridiculous tradition of naming second and first runner ups instead of third and second and first place. And for those who say they "feel so bad for Miss Colombia" what exactly did she lose? A chance to follow in the footsteps of other great Miss Universes like........uh........did Ivana Trump win this and get a marriage to Donald as part of the package? The pageant could have gone off the air, issued a short press statement saying there had been a mistake on stage a few minutes later, and none of you would have noticed--even when a different woman came out wearing the crown at the start of next year's pageant. Instead, Steve tried to fix it on "international TV"--and ended up looking like a clown. I'm just glad that the decision made by the likes of former NFL running back Emmitt Smith as to who is the most beautiful woman in the world was ultimately upheld.
Friday, December 18, 2015
The Force Awakens
My breakfast on Saturday will consist of a giant tub of popcorn and a Dr Pepper large enough to sustain a camel for a trans-Saharan trek. I will be attending an 8:00 AM screening of Star Wars: The Force Awakens--the earliest time that my work/sports officiating schedule would allow me. I am currently on a social media boycott in order not to have some jerk spoil all of the plotlines before I can get to the theater.
For most die-hard Star Wars fans, this has been a 32-year wait for the continuation of the Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, Princess Leia storyline. While the three "prequel" movies put out in the early 2000's did give us the background story on the rise of Darth Vader, they were sadly disappointing in a number of ways. George Lucas was admittedly hamstrung by the fact that we all knew how the prequels would end--but the production relied way too much on computer generated effects so that they lacked the "human element" of the original movies. Add to that a very slow pace--like Lucas didn't really have enough story to fill out three movies--the introduction of some pointless characters (Jar Jar Binks) and stiff acting by pretty much everyone involved, and it was clear that some new blood needed to come in and resurrect the franchise.
Enter JJ Abrams--a self-described Star Wars nut--to take us 30-years farther along in our story. Unrestricted by any set storyline, Abrams had incredible freedom to take The Force Awakens in whatever direction he thought was best. And by all accounts, he has returned to what made the first three movies great--real sets, less CGI magic and more action.
So why does a 43-year old guy (and millions just like me) get so excited about this stuff? For the same reason our ancestors loved to sit around the fire at night and tell stories of demi-gods fighting multiple-headed monsters. Star Wars is our modern mythology. And who cannot relate to the internal struggle between good and evil--knowing that everyone has a little of both lying within them. And the original trilogy was about my favorite plot line--redemption. The hope that even in the worst villain, there is still some good that wins out in the end.
Now it's time to get your popcorn, put your feet up and get ready to enjoy a good story---one that we don't know the ending to this time.
For most die-hard Star Wars fans, this has been a 32-year wait for the continuation of the Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, Princess Leia storyline. While the three "prequel" movies put out in the early 2000's did give us the background story on the rise of Darth Vader, they were sadly disappointing in a number of ways. George Lucas was admittedly hamstrung by the fact that we all knew how the prequels would end--but the production relied way too much on computer generated effects so that they lacked the "human element" of the original movies. Add to that a very slow pace--like Lucas didn't really have enough story to fill out three movies--the introduction of some pointless characters (Jar Jar Binks) and stiff acting by pretty much everyone involved, and it was clear that some new blood needed to come in and resurrect the franchise.
Enter JJ Abrams--a self-described Star Wars nut--to take us 30-years farther along in our story. Unrestricted by any set storyline, Abrams had incredible freedom to take The Force Awakens in whatever direction he thought was best. And by all accounts, he has returned to what made the first three movies great--real sets, less CGI magic and more action.
So why does a 43-year old guy (and millions just like me) get so excited about this stuff? For the same reason our ancestors loved to sit around the fire at night and tell stories of demi-gods fighting multiple-headed monsters. Star Wars is our modern mythology. And who cannot relate to the internal struggle between good and evil--knowing that everyone has a little of both lying within them. And the original trilogy was about my favorite plot line--redemption. The hope that even in the worst villain, there is still some good that wins out in the end.
Now it's time to get your popcorn, put your feet up and get ready to enjoy a good story---one that we don't know the ending to this time.
Thursday, December 17, 2015
Viva El Nino!!
With all apologies to Bing Crosby, I will not be joining him in dreaming of a White Christmas this year. Barring a substantial change in the long-range forecast, it appears we will not be getting any substantial snowfall in the next week. And I could not be any happier.
As I have been saying all month, "You don't have to shovel rain". And it has been nice not to have to bundle up like you are going on an Arctic expedition just to take out the garbage. But the benefits of a "Green Christmas" don't stop there.
It makes for a much safer holiday season as well. No need to worry about hitting a patch of black ice while heading over the river and through the woods to Grandmother's house. And no need to worry about the older folks slipping and falling while walking up your driveway. Plus, there are far fewer heart attacks from trying to clear wet, heavy snow from the sidewalk.
A Green Christmas could also mean more gifts under the tree this year, too. When "Santa" gets a $100 break on the home heating bill, he might spend it on the kids or the wife. And when you throw in the lowest gas prices in seven years--fueling up "the sleigh" is much cheaper as well.
And the best part of having no snow is that it makes over-the-top yard displays--you know the one's I'm talking about, where the 3/4 scale size nativity scene where each of the figures lights up is surrounded by Santa and all eight reindeer, an inflatable Frosty the Snowman that is in a perpetual state of deflation and therefore is just laying on the ground and every edge of the house is lined with colored lights while icicle lights, not to mention the rotating holiday message display projected onto the garage door--look even more ridiculous.
So this year let's celebrate not have to run gifts and boxes to the vehicle in a cloud of our own exhaled breath. Let's not worry about tracking in that gross black water with our shoes onto the floor at other people's houses. And let's replace Feliz Navidad with a new song: Viva El Nino!!
As I have been saying all month, "You don't have to shovel rain". And it has been nice not to have to bundle up like you are going on an Arctic expedition just to take out the garbage. But the benefits of a "Green Christmas" don't stop there.
It makes for a much safer holiday season as well. No need to worry about hitting a patch of black ice while heading over the river and through the woods to Grandmother's house. And no need to worry about the older folks slipping and falling while walking up your driveway. Plus, there are far fewer heart attacks from trying to clear wet, heavy snow from the sidewalk.
A Green Christmas could also mean more gifts under the tree this year, too. When "Santa" gets a $100 break on the home heating bill, he might spend it on the kids or the wife. And when you throw in the lowest gas prices in seven years--fueling up "the sleigh" is much cheaper as well.
And the best part of having no snow is that it makes over-the-top yard displays--you know the one's I'm talking about, where the 3/4 scale size nativity scene where each of the figures lights up is surrounded by Santa and all eight reindeer, an inflatable Frosty the Snowman that is in a perpetual state of deflation and therefore is just laying on the ground and every edge of the house is lined with colored lights while icicle lights, not to mention the rotating holiday message display projected onto the garage door--look even more ridiculous.
So this year let's celebrate not have to run gifts and boxes to the vehicle in a cloud of our own exhaled breath. Let's not worry about tracking in that gross black water with our shoes onto the floor at other people's houses. And let's replace Feliz Navidad with a new song: Viva El Nino!!
Wednesday, December 16, 2015
It's Deja Vu All Over Again
When my phone started blowing up with alerts and text messages just after 10:00 last night, I knew something major was happening. I just didn't expect it to be the immediate retirement of Badgers Basketball Head Coach Bo Ryan. After quickly joining the streaming coverage of the post game press conference, I couldn't help but feel a sense of deja vu--as Badgers fans have really been here before.
Bo's mid-season departure marks the final similarity between his career arc and that of his predecessor in Madison--Dick Bennett. Both won WIAC titles--Bennett at UW-Stevens Point, Bo at UW-Platteville. Both made it to small school national championship games--Dick losing in the NAIA finals back in the '80's, Bo winning three NCAA Division III titles. Both moved on to one of the "satellite" UW programs--Bennett at UW-Green Bay, Ryan at UW-Milwaukee. Dick made it to 3 NCAA Tournaments with the Phoenix. Bo never took the Panthers to the big dance--but all of the kids he recruited brought Bruce Pearl success in the Big Dance that he parlayed into big-time job offers (and failure).
And after paying their dues in the hinterlands, Bennett and Ryan were both finally selected to lead the Badgers. It took Dick five years to get Bucky into the Final Four. Bo needed a little bit longer--making it there after 13-seasons--but then taking the most-talented team in program history there in back-to-back years and missing out on a National Championship due to Duke getting all of the calls in the second half (no, I am not still bitter).
And those career arcs both ended the same way--with Bennett and Ryan leaving part-way through a post-Final Four season. Dick retired after a Big Ten-ACC Showdown win over Virginia that was played at the Bradley Center in Milwaukee for some stupid reason. Bo hung up the whistle last night after a sluggish win over Texas A&M-Corpus Christi. And both retired the way they did for the same reason: they wanted long-time assistants to succeed them--and because UW-Madison officials like to follow rules like posting a job for x-number of months and interviewing minority candidates, the "appointed successor" thing doesn't fly down there.
So now Greg Gard tries to avoid the same career arc as Dick Bennett's mid-season successor--Brad Soderberg. Soderberg took what was basically the same team that had made the Final Four the year before and lost in the first round of the NCAA Tournament to Georgia State--and then was shown the door. Who was hired to replace him? Bo Ryan.
Hopefully, Athletic Director Barry Alvarez didn't delete Tony Bennett's number from his phone. In a way, that would bring this whole thing full circle, don't you think?
Bo's mid-season departure marks the final similarity between his career arc and that of his predecessor in Madison--Dick Bennett. Both won WIAC titles--Bennett at UW-Stevens Point, Bo at UW-Platteville. Both made it to small school national championship games--Dick losing in the NAIA finals back in the '80's, Bo winning three NCAA Division III titles. Both moved on to one of the "satellite" UW programs--Bennett at UW-Green Bay, Ryan at UW-Milwaukee. Dick made it to 3 NCAA Tournaments with the Phoenix. Bo never took the Panthers to the big dance--but all of the kids he recruited brought Bruce Pearl success in the Big Dance that he parlayed into big-time job offers (and failure).
And after paying their dues in the hinterlands, Bennett and Ryan were both finally selected to lead the Badgers. It took Dick five years to get Bucky into the Final Four. Bo needed a little bit longer--making it there after 13-seasons--but then taking the most-talented team in program history there in back-to-back years and missing out on a National Championship due to Duke getting all of the calls in the second half (no, I am not still bitter).
And those career arcs both ended the same way--with Bennett and Ryan leaving part-way through a post-Final Four season. Dick retired after a Big Ten-ACC Showdown win over Virginia that was played at the Bradley Center in Milwaukee for some stupid reason. Bo hung up the whistle last night after a sluggish win over Texas A&M-Corpus Christi. And both retired the way they did for the same reason: they wanted long-time assistants to succeed them--and because UW-Madison officials like to follow rules like posting a job for x-number of months and interviewing minority candidates, the "appointed successor" thing doesn't fly down there.
So now Greg Gard tries to avoid the same career arc as Dick Bennett's mid-season successor--Brad Soderberg. Soderberg took what was basically the same team that had made the Final Four the year before and lost in the first round of the NCAA Tournament to Georgia State--and then was shown the door. Who was hired to replace him? Bo Ryan.
Hopefully, Athletic Director Barry Alvarez didn't delete Tony Bennett's number from his phone. In a way, that would bring this whole thing full circle, don't you think?
Tuesday, December 15, 2015
Haters Gonna Hate
When did we as a society decide that all recognition of personal achievement was going to be met with derision and outrage? The latest example came Monday after Sports Illustrated named Serena Williams as its "Sportsperson of the Year" for 2015. Williams was the dominant force in women's tennis this year. Winning the first three Grand Slam events before losing in a shocking upset in the semi-finals at the US Open to fall just short of a slam. For the season, she went 55-3--never losing before the semis of any event. And she did it at the age of 34--in a sport usually dominated by teens and twenty-somethings.
But based on the social media and sports talk feedback--you would have thought that Serena had played just one match for the entire year and lost that in straight sets. One argument was that Novak Djokovic had a better tennis year than Williams--as he also won three of the four Grand Slam titles--losing the fourth in the Finals--and he went 82-6 in singles this year. But he is 28--and in the prime of his career.
And then you had those who believed that American Pharoah didn't win the award. They made their impassioned pleas to consider that he won the first Triple Crown in 37-years plus the Breeder Cup. But let's be honest, if you were to take away gambling, horse racing would be deader than dead and maybe ten people would show up to watch races. What's more, it's the Sportsperson of the Year award--not Sportsanimal. I highly doubt American Pharoah is "disappointed" he didn't win the title.
The only other athlete I could see as matching Serena this year was golfer Jordan Spieth--who won the first two majors--then missed out on a playoff at the British Open by just one shot--and then finished second (albeit a distant second) to Jason Day at the PGA Championships at Whistling Straits. Plus he won the Tour Championship and the $10-million FedEx Cup Playoffs to set a single season money earning record--all at the age of 22. And unlike Serena, he had to beat 136-guys a week--not just the six or so in a draw. But still, he'll have plenty of chances to compete again in the future.
But the real "outrage" was saved for the cover of the magazine--in which Serena is looking hot in a short black dress while sitting on a throne. That got the feminists all worked up--as to them, Serena was being treated as "just another sex object". Nevermind that Miss Williams herself signed off on the photo shoot and likely selected her apparel herself--as she considers herself and her sister, Venus, to be "fashion mavens". Nonetheless, it gave the trolls more to complain about.
Serena Williams had a great year late in a perhaps the greatest career in her sport's history--all while breaking down barriers (real and perceived). Can't we just be happy for someone who has achieved so much--and is comfortable with who they are?
But based on the social media and sports talk feedback--you would have thought that Serena had played just one match for the entire year and lost that in straight sets. One argument was that Novak Djokovic had a better tennis year than Williams--as he also won three of the four Grand Slam titles--losing the fourth in the Finals--and he went 82-6 in singles this year. But he is 28--and in the prime of his career.
And then you had those who believed that American Pharoah didn't win the award. They made their impassioned pleas to consider that he won the first Triple Crown in 37-years plus the Breeder Cup. But let's be honest, if you were to take away gambling, horse racing would be deader than dead and maybe ten people would show up to watch races. What's more, it's the Sportsperson of the Year award--not Sportsanimal. I highly doubt American Pharoah is "disappointed" he didn't win the title.
The only other athlete I could see as matching Serena this year was golfer Jordan Spieth--who won the first two majors--then missed out on a playoff at the British Open by just one shot--and then finished second (albeit a distant second) to Jason Day at the PGA Championships at Whistling Straits. Plus he won the Tour Championship and the $10-million FedEx Cup Playoffs to set a single season money earning record--all at the age of 22. And unlike Serena, he had to beat 136-guys a week--not just the six or so in a draw. But still, he'll have plenty of chances to compete again in the future.
But the real "outrage" was saved for the cover of the magazine--in which Serena is looking hot in a short black dress while sitting on a throne. That got the feminists all worked up--as to them, Serena was being treated as "just another sex object". Nevermind that Miss Williams herself signed off on the photo shoot and likely selected her apparel herself--as she considers herself and her sister, Venus, to be "fashion mavens". Nonetheless, it gave the trolls more to complain about.
Serena Williams had a great year late in a perhaps the greatest career in her sport's history--all while breaking down barriers (real and perceived). Can't we just be happy for someone who has achieved so much--and is comfortable with who they are?
Monday, December 14, 2015
Lucy and the Football
That big tease--Federal Reserve Board Chairperson Janet Yellen--is back this week taunting us "savers" again. For weeks now we have heard "The Fed has to raise interest rates this time!" And so those of us with cash in reserve think we might finally see savings, CD and Money Market rates go above a measly one-percent for the first time in about seven years.
Well I'm not falling for it this time around. Janet Yellen should change her name to "Lucy" and be sitting out on our front lawn holding a football and telling us that "this time I really will let you kick the ball, Charlie Brown!" We've heard the promises before--but every meeting of the Fed results in a decision to "maintain current rates due to weakness in the economy". In the past its been a downturn in the Stock Market, or weak hiring numbers, or high gas and energy prices, or the potential collapse of Democratic Socialist economies in Europe, or a recession in China.
Until this morning, everyone was confident this would be the month where rates are nudged up slightly. But now there is concern about low commodity prices and a weak equities market--so the chance remains that money will remain cheap--and football will be pulled away from "savers" again.
Why don't we just admit that the new, new, new economy is predicated on Americans and their Government living far beyond their means? We as a nation have reduced our personal debt levels by just 12% since the high point of 2008--during a time when borrowing money was cheaper than it had ever been before. And if you listen to the 0% zealots, you would think the only solution to our economic malaise is to pile all of that debt right back on us.
Let's be honest, debt is a powerful political tool. When people are in over their heads, they live in fear of that layoff notice or that entitlement program being cut. Both sides of the political spectrum play to the fear by saying the other wants to take away those sources of income--leaving you without that house that you apparently couldn't afford in the first place. Real ownership (clear of all debt) and self-funding for economic disaster is a very powerful thing--which lessens the impact fear-mongerers can conjure up on the campaign trail. So saving is discouraged--and profligate spending is encouraged--to keep us in a well-entertained and toy-filled hole.
Perhaps Janet Yellen and her crew will stop teasing us this week and increase interest rates--setting us back on a course where savers are rewarded for their self-control--and those burning through their cash actually feel the impact. Or we'll just have the football pulled away from us again.
Well I'm not falling for it this time around. Janet Yellen should change her name to "Lucy" and be sitting out on our front lawn holding a football and telling us that "this time I really will let you kick the ball, Charlie Brown!" We've heard the promises before--but every meeting of the Fed results in a decision to "maintain current rates due to weakness in the economy". In the past its been a downturn in the Stock Market, or weak hiring numbers, or high gas and energy prices, or the potential collapse of Democratic Socialist economies in Europe, or a recession in China.
Until this morning, everyone was confident this would be the month where rates are nudged up slightly. But now there is concern about low commodity prices and a weak equities market--so the chance remains that money will remain cheap--and football will be pulled away from "savers" again.
Why don't we just admit that the new, new, new economy is predicated on Americans and their Government living far beyond their means? We as a nation have reduced our personal debt levels by just 12% since the high point of 2008--during a time when borrowing money was cheaper than it had ever been before. And if you listen to the 0% zealots, you would think the only solution to our economic malaise is to pile all of that debt right back on us.
Let's be honest, debt is a powerful political tool. When people are in over their heads, they live in fear of that layoff notice or that entitlement program being cut. Both sides of the political spectrum play to the fear by saying the other wants to take away those sources of income--leaving you without that house that you apparently couldn't afford in the first place. Real ownership (clear of all debt) and self-funding for economic disaster is a very powerful thing--which lessens the impact fear-mongerers can conjure up on the campaign trail. So saving is discouraged--and profligate spending is encouraged--to keep us in a well-entertained and toy-filled hole.
Perhaps Janet Yellen and her crew will stop teasing us this week and increase interest rates--setting us back on a course where savers are rewarded for their self-control--and those burning through their cash actually feel the impact. Or we'll just have the football pulled away from us again.
Thursday, December 10, 2015
You May As Well Play To Win
Regular listeners know that I am not at all a fan of Christmas. I will always believe that this whole gift-giving and going to see the family thing should be held on July 4th because our independence as a country is something we can all celebrate and it's much warmer at that time of year.
My disgust with Christmas this year got a real early start as Verizon decided to ruin Thanksgiving by renaming it "ThanksGETTING" in their pre-Black Friday ad campaign. As if heading to the store to buy things for others on a day that should be spent actually talking with your family members wasn't bad enough--Verizon wanted you to go out on Thanksgiving to buy a bunch of stuff for yourself.
And now Best Buy is killing me with their "Win the Holidays" ad campaign--where mothers are buying the perfect high-priced electronics to put under the tree--making them the only one worthy of their children's love. It's odd that we can no longer celebrate being faster, smarter, more successful or even just-plain luckier than someone else in today's society--but competitive gift-giving is okay. I'm surprised that Best Buy isn't providing free trophies to everyone who purchases certain items--or exceeds a minimum amount of merchandise to prove that they are in fact "Winning the Holidays".
There is one bright spot in the holiday season so far--and that is the ad from Dick's Sporting Goods called "Give the Gifts That Matter". It opens with a boy looking all excited about getting a fire truck for Christmas--which then gets pitched into a box with dozens of other toys and the banner "Some gifts are quickly forgotten". That is compared to a portable basketball hoop that is set up in the driveway and the banner "And some last for a lifetime". Then you have a crying little girl who has broken the arm off of her new doll with the banner "Some gifts will break your heart"--which is compared to a man tying up new running shoes and hitting the streets with the banner "Others break records". That is followed by a shot of a guy sitting on his couch with a video game controller and the words "Some games are meant to be played alone"--compared to a couple that has hiked up a hill to enjoy overlooking some water and the phrase "While others you will want to share" and then a family skiing with "With family and friends". The spot plays out with a family playing football in the yard and a little boy being tucked into bed wearing his Packers jersey--and Dicks holiday slogan "Give the Gifts That Matter".
I'm sorry, Best Buy, but giving the gift of activity, team-building, health and valuable life lessons would really be "winning the holidays".
My disgust with Christmas this year got a real early start as Verizon decided to ruin Thanksgiving by renaming it "ThanksGETTING" in their pre-Black Friday ad campaign. As if heading to the store to buy things for others on a day that should be spent actually talking with your family members wasn't bad enough--Verizon wanted you to go out on Thanksgiving to buy a bunch of stuff for yourself.
And now Best Buy is killing me with their "Win the Holidays" ad campaign--where mothers are buying the perfect high-priced electronics to put under the tree--making them the only one worthy of their children's love. It's odd that we can no longer celebrate being faster, smarter, more successful or even just-plain luckier than someone else in today's society--but competitive gift-giving is okay. I'm surprised that Best Buy isn't providing free trophies to everyone who purchases certain items--or exceeds a minimum amount of merchandise to prove that they are in fact "Winning the Holidays".
There is one bright spot in the holiday season so far--and that is the ad from Dick's Sporting Goods called "Give the Gifts That Matter". It opens with a boy looking all excited about getting a fire truck for Christmas--which then gets pitched into a box with dozens of other toys and the banner "Some gifts are quickly forgotten". That is compared to a portable basketball hoop that is set up in the driveway and the banner "And some last for a lifetime". Then you have a crying little girl who has broken the arm off of her new doll with the banner "Some gifts will break your heart"--which is compared to a man tying up new running shoes and hitting the streets with the banner "Others break records". That is followed by a shot of a guy sitting on his couch with a video game controller and the words "Some games are meant to be played alone"--compared to a couple that has hiked up a hill to enjoy overlooking some water and the phrase "While others you will want to share" and then a family skiing with "With family and friends". The spot plays out with a family playing football in the yard and a little boy being tucked into bed wearing his Packers jersey--and Dicks holiday slogan "Give the Gifts That Matter".
I'm sorry, Best Buy, but giving the gift of activity, team-building, health and valuable life lessons would really be "winning the holidays".
Wednesday, December 9, 2015
The Reality Show Candidate
I have to give Donald Trump credit for one thing: he certainly learned a lot from the producers and script writers for his "reality show" The Apprentice. He is taking the formula developed for successful TV programming and turning it into a successful (for the moment) Presidential campaign. And nobody seems to know how to "counter-program" that.
Think about what makes a popular TV show today: Over-the-top manufactured drama, "characters" that straddle the line of good and bad, and the ability to top last week's "shocker" with a "bigger one" next week. It works for the Real Housewives series, the Kardashians and The Bachelor.
And now it is working for Donald Trump in the reality series that is the 2016 Race for the White House. When there is no controversy in the race--he goes out and creates it on his own. And each incident has managed to top the previous effort. "Will he or won't he run?" was followed by "Everybody else is a loser", was followed by "The other candidates are ugly and stupid" was followed by "Don't let the refugees in" was followed by "Ban all the Muslims". Each decried by Republican Party hierarchy and the media, each resulting in a bump in Trump's polling numbers. In fact, the only time we've seen Trump's popularity dip has been when the campaign has focused on actual issues--a tune out factor for today's "reality audience".
Another lesson Trump has learned well is to get all the free publicity you can. While the rest of the field is paying to get the majority of their air time, Trump is calling in to every TV morning show in the country to get into shouting matches with the hosts--more manufactured drama--which is then rehashed and replayed endlessly in 24-hour news cycle. And what is the only thing every other candidate is talking about? Trump. ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX and CNN may as well be TMZ, ET and E! reporting on the latest Miley Cyrus pictures or Kardashian family crisis--they are all being used for promotional purposes.
There is a built-in problem with reality shows--eventually, you can't create more fake drama to top the last fake drama--or things become so ludicrous that the "characters" become "caricatures" and even the most die-hard fans lose interest. And that is the challenge that lies ahead of Donald Trump The Reality Show Candidate: How do you keep topping yourself for another 11-months? Stay tuned for the "Most Shocking Stump Speech Yet"!
Think about what makes a popular TV show today: Over-the-top manufactured drama, "characters" that straddle the line of good and bad, and the ability to top last week's "shocker" with a "bigger one" next week. It works for the Real Housewives series, the Kardashians and The Bachelor.
And now it is working for Donald Trump in the reality series that is the 2016 Race for the White House. When there is no controversy in the race--he goes out and creates it on his own. And each incident has managed to top the previous effort. "Will he or won't he run?" was followed by "Everybody else is a loser", was followed by "The other candidates are ugly and stupid" was followed by "Don't let the refugees in" was followed by "Ban all the Muslims". Each decried by Republican Party hierarchy and the media, each resulting in a bump in Trump's polling numbers. In fact, the only time we've seen Trump's popularity dip has been when the campaign has focused on actual issues--a tune out factor for today's "reality audience".
Another lesson Trump has learned well is to get all the free publicity you can. While the rest of the field is paying to get the majority of their air time, Trump is calling in to every TV morning show in the country to get into shouting matches with the hosts--more manufactured drama--which is then rehashed and replayed endlessly in 24-hour news cycle. And what is the only thing every other candidate is talking about? Trump. ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX and CNN may as well be TMZ, ET and E! reporting on the latest Miley Cyrus pictures or Kardashian family crisis--they are all being used for promotional purposes.
There is a built-in problem with reality shows--eventually, you can't create more fake drama to top the last fake drama--or things become so ludicrous that the "characters" become "caricatures" and even the most die-hard fans lose interest. And that is the challenge that lies ahead of Donald Trump The Reality Show Candidate: How do you keep topping yourself for another 11-months? Stay tuned for the "Most Shocking Stump Speech Yet"!
Tuesday, December 8, 2015
Frenemy of the State
One thing that is getting glossed over in the stories about the San Bernardino terror attack is that it includes yet another connection to Saudi Arabia. Syed Farook traveled to that country to pick up his wife--whom he had met on the internet. Tashfeen Malik was actually a native of Pakistan--and officials are not sure when she moved to Saudi Arabia. Her K-1 visa was issued through Saudi Arabia to join Farook as a "fiancée" in the US.
You may recall that fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were in the US on Saudi Arabian visas. Two were from the United Arab Emirates and there was one each from Egypt and Lebanon. The nationality of these terror suspects usually doesn't get played up much because Saudi Arabia (and the UAE) is one of our "friends" in the Middle East. They of course, provide us with cheap oil and military bases from which to stage our operations in the region. In return, we provide them with a lot of money and protection from the same jihadist sects that are causing unrest in the rest of the Middle East and Central Asia. We also turn a blind eye to what is one of the more oppressive societies in the world--with women enjoying few rights and criminal punishments that would lead to continuous protests here in the US.
And it is that society that is the breeding ground--and it appears, a portal to the US--for those who seek to bring their jihad to our country. I would like to think that President Obama in his address to the nation between football games on Sunday issued his challenge to Muslims to combat this militant faction as a subtle hint to the Saudis and the other emirates to bring the radicals in their own countries into line.
Bernie Sanders likes to claim that addressing global climate change will somehow reduce terrorism--like ISIS and Al Qaeda are concerned about carbon emissions and are fighting to "save the planet". In reality, moving away from a carbon-based global economy will increase the danger from militant Islam. Once the money and the infrastructure provided by oil production goes away, what do Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE have to offer the rest of the world? You can put oil on a tanker and ship it anywhere in the world for a relatively low price. If you covered the entire Arabian Peninsula with solar arrays and wind turbines it would still be far more expensive to transport that electricity anywhere else. The likelihood of increased isolation from the West is high in a post-oil world.
So as you listen to the talking heads listing the threats to our safety by our enemies around the world--don't forget that we have a few "friends" that aren't doing us any favors either.
You may recall that fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers were in the US on Saudi Arabian visas. Two were from the United Arab Emirates and there was one each from Egypt and Lebanon. The nationality of these terror suspects usually doesn't get played up much because Saudi Arabia (and the UAE) is one of our "friends" in the Middle East. They of course, provide us with cheap oil and military bases from which to stage our operations in the region. In return, we provide them with a lot of money and protection from the same jihadist sects that are causing unrest in the rest of the Middle East and Central Asia. We also turn a blind eye to what is one of the more oppressive societies in the world--with women enjoying few rights and criminal punishments that would lead to continuous protests here in the US.
And it is that society that is the breeding ground--and it appears, a portal to the US--for those who seek to bring their jihad to our country. I would like to think that President Obama in his address to the nation between football games on Sunday issued his challenge to Muslims to combat this militant faction as a subtle hint to the Saudis and the other emirates to bring the radicals in their own countries into line.
Bernie Sanders likes to claim that addressing global climate change will somehow reduce terrorism--like ISIS and Al Qaeda are concerned about carbon emissions and are fighting to "save the planet". In reality, moving away from a carbon-based global economy will increase the danger from militant Islam. Once the money and the infrastructure provided by oil production goes away, what do Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE have to offer the rest of the world? You can put oil on a tanker and ship it anywhere in the world for a relatively low price. If you covered the entire Arabian Peninsula with solar arrays and wind turbines it would still be far more expensive to transport that electricity anywhere else. The likelihood of increased isolation from the West is high in a post-oil world.
So as you listen to the talking heads listing the threats to our safety by our enemies around the world--don't forget that we have a few "friends" that aren't doing us any favors either.
Monday, December 7, 2015
The Status Quo Speech
If you're like me, you are probably wondering today why President Obama took to the airwaves last night to address the nation on terrorism. The 19-minute speech contained little more than the message "we are going to keep doing what we are doing"--which for a growing number of Americans is not enough.
President Obama asked Congress to give him a declaration of war against ISIS/ISIL--but at the same time, also reiterated that he is not going to send in ground troops to fight the terrorists in Iraq or Syria. Instead the US will continue to "destroy" terrorism with limited air strikes and drone attacks--just as we have been doing for the past several years.
The President also called for tougher screening processes for those coming to the US on the same visa provided to the woman involved in the San Bernardino shootings--but not for those awaiting refugee status from Syria. Expect that to be a rider attached to any version of a bill coming out of Congress--which President Obama will then veto saying those refugees are "not the real threat". Of course, what additional screening would have found terrorist ties to Tashfeen Malik?
And of course, the President made a call for gun control as well. Background checks for everyone and banning people on the No Fly and Terrorism Watch Lists from purchasing any weapons. The only problem is that neither Syed Farook nor Tashfeen Malik were on the No Fly or Terorrism Watch Lists--so how would that have prevented that attack? What's more, Farook was a US citizen--and had no prior criminal convictions. What background check was going to prevent him from purchasing a weapon at a gun store? When the President makes suggestions like that after a shooting incident, he reminds me of the unscrupulous auto mechanic trying to rip off a woman whose headlights don't work by telling her the transaxle is busted and it needs $3000 in repairs.
I think the President's advisors knew that there was a percentage of Americans who just wanted to hear anything from him in the wake of San Bernardino--even if it was a "classic hits" performance. And you could tell that the White House knew that the rest of the country had no interest by when the timed the speech--starting just minutes after the conclusion of the Carolina Panthers-New Orleans Saints game--and ending moments before kickoff between the Indianapolis Colts and the Pittsburgh Steelers. You wouldn't want Americans missing what they really care about.
President Obama asked Congress to give him a declaration of war against ISIS/ISIL--but at the same time, also reiterated that he is not going to send in ground troops to fight the terrorists in Iraq or Syria. Instead the US will continue to "destroy" terrorism with limited air strikes and drone attacks--just as we have been doing for the past several years.
The President also called for tougher screening processes for those coming to the US on the same visa provided to the woman involved in the San Bernardino shootings--but not for those awaiting refugee status from Syria. Expect that to be a rider attached to any version of a bill coming out of Congress--which President Obama will then veto saying those refugees are "not the real threat". Of course, what additional screening would have found terrorist ties to Tashfeen Malik?
And of course, the President made a call for gun control as well. Background checks for everyone and banning people on the No Fly and Terrorism Watch Lists from purchasing any weapons. The only problem is that neither Syed Farook nor Tashfeen Malik were on the No Fly or Terorrism Watch Lists--so how would that have prevented that attack? What's more, Farook was a US citizen--and had no prior criminal convictions. What background check was going to prevent him from purchasing a weapon at a gun store? When the President makes suggestions like that after a shooting incident, he reminds me of the unscrupulous auto mechanic trying to rip off a woman whose headlights don't work by telling her the transaxle is busted and it needs $3000 in repairs.
I think the President's advisors knew that there was a percentage of Americans who just wanted to hear anything from him in the wake of San Bernardino--even if it was a "classic hits" performance. And you could tell that the White House knew that the rest of the country had no interest by when the timed the speech--starting just minutes after the conclusion of the Carolina Panthers-New Orleans Saints game--and ending moments before kickoff between the Indianapolis Colts and the Pittsburgh Steelers. You wouldn't want Americans missing what they really care about.
Friday, December 4, 2015
A B1G Mistake
Tonight, the Wisconsin Badgers Men's Hockey team opens up B1G Ten conference play at Michigan. When it was first announced, B1G Ten hockey sounded like a sure-fire winner. Minnesota, Wisconsin and Michigan have all won national championships. Michigan State had a strong tradition and Ohio State and Penn State certainly have the resources to be good programs. Illinois and Iowa are also expected to move their programs to scholarship status sometime in the future to make it an 8-team league (yes, there is not a sport where ten teams actually compete in the B1G Ten). But entering its third year, the B1G Ten is at risk of becoming an unmitigated disaster--and the weakest league in the country.
I was among those who thought B1G Ten hockey would be great. Long-time rivals in other sports bringing that same passion to the ice after being split into separate conferences for decades. No more league trips to Anchorage, Fairbanks, Denver or Colorado Springs. No more games at dinky rinks in Mankato, Duluth, Houghton, Marquette, Sault Ste Marie or Big Rapids. High profile schools playing other high profile schools with national exposure on the B1G Ten Network as an added bonus.
But after a good start--with Wisconsin and Minnesota both getting number one seeds in the NCAA Tournament in the first year of B1G Ten hockey--there has been a precipitous drop-off in the quality of play. Last year, Minnesota was the only B1G school to even make the NCAA"s--and they got smoked in the first round. And for the 3rd year in a row, the conference had a losing record in non-conference play. Wisconsin managed to win two games against Arizona State (yes, they actually have a Division I hockey program) and what is looking like a miracle victory against then-Number One in the nation North Dakota on the road.
Unlike the centuries-old traditions of football and basketball, the B1G Ten carries no "cache" with top hockey recruits. It turns out that a lot of kids in the fertile recruiting grounds of Minnesota like being able to play every year in Duluth, Mankato, St Cloud and Bimidji. Kids from the plains of Canada don't mind Grand Forks, North Dakota as compared to Columbus, Ohio. And the Western Ontario players are comfortable at Sault Ste Marie and Marquette. And since B1G Ten schools don't travel there on a regular basis--that exposure to potential recruits has been lost.
Based on the results we are seeing so far--and the projections for the near future--B1G Ten hockey may turn out to be a major failure. Proof that B1Gger doesn't always mean better.
I was among those who thought B1G Ten hockey would be great. Long-time rivals in other sports bringing that same passion to the ice after being split into separate conferences for decades. No more league trips to Anchorage, Fairbanks, Denver or Colorado Springs. No more games at dinky rinks in Mankato, Duluth, Houghton, Marquette, Sault Ste Marie or Big Rapids. High profile schools playing other high profile schools with national exposure on the B1G Ten Network as an added bonus.
But after a good start--with Wisconsin and Minnesota both getting number one seeds in the NCAA Tournament in the first year of B1G Ten hockey--there has been a precipitous drop-off in the quality of play. Last year, Minnesota was the only B1G school to even make the NCAA"s--and they got smoked in the first round. And for the 3rd year in a row, the conference had a losing record in non-conference play. Wisconsin managed to win two games against Arizona State (yes, they actually have a Division I hockey program) and what is looking like a miracle victory against then-Number One in the nation North Dakota on the road.
Unlike the centuries-old traditions of football and basketball, the B1G Ten carries no "cache" with top hockey recruits. It turns out that a lot of kids in the fertile recruiting grounds of Minnesota like being able to play every year in Duluth, Mankato, St Cloud and Bimidji. Kids from the plains of Canada don't mind Grand Forks, North Dakota as compared to Columbus, Ohio. And the Western Ontario players are comfortable at Sault Ste Marie and Marquette. And since B1G Ten schools don't travel there on a regular basis--that exposure to potential recruits has been lost.
Based on the results we are seeing so far--and the projections for the near future--B1G Ten hockey may turn out to be a major failure. Proof that B1Gger doesn't always mean better.
Thursday, December 3, 2015
See Something, Say Something, Create an Incident
"If you see something, say something" is the new anti-terrorism, anti-mass shooting strategy being adopted by the State of Wisconsin. Governor Scott Walker is encouraging residents to contact law enforcement if they see anything "out of the ordinary"--as it could foil a planned attack. Unfortunately, this "citizen crimefighter" approach is overly-simplistic--and will likely lead to very unfortunate incidents.
As someone who monitors emergency scanner traffic all day, I can tell you there are a lot of people who are already "seeing something and saying something"--and sometimes it tells you a lot about our belief in one another. Let's start with "The caller reports a group of black men sitting in a car outside of a house and wants it checked out." What was the first thing that went through your mind when you heard that? Was it "drug deal", "strong armed robbery" or "drive-by shooting incident"? And would the caller have been as quick to dial 911 if the group of men in the car had been white?
Or let's say it's a Sunday afternoon in September and you see a bunch of cars parked in front of the house across the street and white people heading in and out? You'd assume that the neighbors were having a Packers party--and you would never think to "say something". But what if at the same time on a Sunday you saw a bunch of cars parked across the street and "Muslim-looking people" were going inside? Would that make you think about "saying something"?
And who can forget the John Henson incident in Whitefish Bay? The employees of the jewelry store that refused to let him into the building without a police presence on site certainly "said something". As do all of the people who call police the second they see someone carrying a gun--even if that person was only bringing it from their vehicle to their house or vice versa--leading to lockdowns at schools in a five mile radius. People who own a lot of guns (legally) should expect regular visits from the cops as well because someone new saw their collection.
A lot of this comes from "hindsight being 20/20". A classic example is the flight training school in Florida that was attended by several of the 9/11 hijackers. The FBI talked to the instructors who said they did find it odd that these foreigners only wanted to learn how to fly the planes once they were in the air--and not learn how to take off or land them. And anyone spotting someone wearing a ski mask on 70-degree day in San Bernardino, California should probably dial 911 immediately.
In the meantime, let's keep our noses out of other people's business.
As someone who monitors emergency scanner traffic all day, I can tell you there are a lot of people who are already "seeing something and saying something"--and sometimes it tells you a lot about our belief in one another. Let's start with "The caller reports a group of black men sitting in a car outside of a house and wants it checked out." What was the first thing that went through your mind when you heard that? Was it "drug deal", "strong armed robbery" or "drive-by shooting incident"? And would the caller have been as quick to dial 911 if the group of men in the car had been white?
Or let's say it's a Sunday afternoon in September and you see a bunch of cars parked in front of the house across the street and white people heading in and out? You'd assume that the neighbors were having a Packers party--and you would never think to "say something". But what if at the same time on a Sunday you saw a bunch of cars parked across the street and "Muslim-looking people" were going inside? Would that make you think about "saying something"?
And who can forget the John Henson incident in Whitefish Bay? The employees of the jewelry store that refused to let him into the building without a police presence on site certainly "said something". As do all of the people who call police the second they see someone carrying a gun--even if that person was only bringing it from their vehicle to their house or vice versa--leading to lockdowns at schools in a five mile radius. People who own a lot of guns (legally) should expect regular visits from the cops as well because someone new saw their collection.
A lot of this comes from "hindsight being 20/20". A classic example is the flight training school in Florida that was attended by several of the 9/11 hijackers. The FBI talked to the instructors who said they did find it odd that these foreigners only wanted to learn how to fly the planes once they were in the air--and not learn how to take off or land them. And anyone spotting someone wearing a ski mask on 70-degree day in San Bernardino, California should probably dial 911 immediately.
In the meantime, let's keep our noses out of other people's business.
Wednesday, December 2, 2015
Playing the Back Nine
What should have been a boring, sponsor love-fest type of press conference in the Bahamas yesterday is fueling speculation that Tiger Woods may be done as a golfer. Tiger is the "host" for the Hero World Challenge this week and after the CEO of Hero and another of his sponsored golfers got done talking about how cool their products are, Tiger took questions about the status of his comeback from yet another back surgery--and the answered raised concerns that there may be no comeback.
In the past, Tiger never waivered from the mantra "I'll be back quicker than the doctors think--and I will be even stronger than I was before". But for the first time yesterday, the answer was "I don't know when I'll be back". And then he admitted that he has not been able to swing a club, work on chipping and putting or even to kick the soccer ball around with his kids. "I play a lot of video games" was his answer to how he fills his time.
Even more telling were the comments that Tiger made when asked if he would be okay with his career if he never played or won again. Younger Tiger would have gotten snarky and asked right back "Who says my career might be over"--or "I don't think about the end of my career because I've got a lot of years yet to play". But yesterday, Woods actually answered the question with "I've had a great career, and any wins after this would be gravy."
What's more, the man who talked about having just one career goal: passing Jack Nicklaus and his 18-career majors--with a secondary goal of beating out Sam Snead for most career wins--suddenly reversed that--pointing out that he has surpassed Jack in overall wins, and Snead in career majors. Nevermind that until six years ago, Tiger smashing both of those records appeared to be a forgone conclusion.
And that takes us back to that fateful Thanksgiving night in 2009 when that inevitability was smashed by what seemed to be a harmless car crash outside of his house. The air of invincibility was blown by the salacious allegations and myriad of injuries that followed. And then there were the swing changes and the coaching changes and the chipping yips that turned one of the greatest athletes of our time into a regular weekend hacker.
Perhaps Tiger is giving us the Rope-a-Dope--putting out statements that lead us to start writing his sports eulogy. That would make any accomplishment beyond this point seem "greater"--and give him another of his favorite lines about "we were under-estimating him" and how he "never lost faith in himself or his game (unlike 'you guys')". But I think he realizes the end is much closer than he liked to think before the second micro-discectomy surgery two months ago.
In the past, Tiger never waivered from the mantra "I'll be back quicker than the doctors think--and I will be even stronger than I was before". But for the first time yesterday, the answer was "I don't know when I'll be back". And then he admitted that he has not been able to swing a club, work on chipping and putting or even to kick the soccer ball around with his kids. "I play a lot of video games" was his answer to how he fills his time.
Even more telling were the comments that Tiger made when asked if he would be okay with his career if he never played or won again. Younger Tiger would have gotten snarky and asked right back "Who says my career might be over"--or "I don't think about the end of my career because I've got a lot of years yet to play". But yesterday, Woods actually answered the question with "I've had a great career, and any wins after this would be gravy."
What's more, the man who talked about having just one career goal: passing Jack Nicklaus and his 18-career majors--with a secondary goal of beating out Sam Snead for most career wins--suddenly reversed that--pointing out that he has surpassed Jack in overall wins, and Snead in career majors. Nevermind that until six years ago, Tiger smashing both of those records appeared to be a forgone conclusion.
And that takes us back to that fateful Thanksgiving night in 2009 when that inevitability was smashed by what seemed to be a harmless car crash outside of his house. The air of invincibility was blown by the salacious allegations and myriad of injuries that followed. And then there were the swing changes and the coaching changes and the chipping yips that turned one of the greatest athletes of our time into a regular weekend hacker.
Perhaps Tiger is giving us the Rope-a-Dope--putting out statements that lead us to start writing his sports eulogy. That would make any accomplishment beyond this point seem "greater"--and give him another of his favorite lines about "we were under-estimating him" and how he "never lost faith in himself or his game (unlike 'you guys')". But I think he realizes the end is much closer than he liked to think before the second micro-discectomy surgery two months ago.
Tuesday, December 1, 2015
The Stalinization of American History
I've railed here before about revisionist history--changing the narrative of historical text to fit modern social mores rather than sticking to just facts and actual historic impact. The ultimate historical revisionist was former Soviet Premier Josef Stalin who took great steps to actually make people "disappear" from the historical record.
As part of his political purges, Stalin targeted pretty much anyone who did not side with him on all subjects and terrorized anyone who dared to challenge him. Those enemies--actual and perceived--were killed, exiled to Siberia or forced to leave the country altogether. And once those enemies were gone, Stalin had his "historians" actually go through public records, photographs and even films to literally "delete" any and all references to that person. It was like they never existed. Stalin also went so far as to alter the same documents, pictures and films to make it appear that he was present at all great moments of Soviet history--even when he wasn't within 500-miles of the event.
I am reminded of the Stalinization of Russian history every time I read about a new demand from college students and other liberals to erase certain aspects of American history. The latest battle comes from Princeton University--where students of color are demanding that all references to former President (and University President) Woodrow Wilson be removed from campus because he was a racist. This is particularly troubling, as Wilson is generally considered to be the Father of Modern Liberalism--a man who believed there was no problem that greater government control and spending couldn't fix, as well as a belief that multi-nationalism superceded American Exceptionalism--so now we have a case of the Left turning upon its own.
For the students of Princeton, Wilson's initial push for programs like Social Security, unemployment insurance and the League of Nations is completely trumped (an ironic word when you think about it) by his re-segregation of the Federal Government--and the division of white and blacks in the workplace. Today, walking into a building named the Woodrow Wilson School of International Affairs and Diplomacy is such a "micro-aggression" and "trigger event" that a minority student couldn't possibly be expected to learn anything.
And so, Woodrow Wilson must go--just like Leon Trotsky "disappeared" from the history of the Soviet Union under Stalin--and just like any reference to the Confederacy must be obliterated in the South. No more can his name grace the campus which he transformed from an "rich, old boys club" to the Liberal safe-haven that it is today--with "safe-spaces" and limits upon free speech and the open exchange of ideas.
It was only after the collapse of Socialism in the Soviet Union that Russians could once again learn a "full history" of them as a people and as a nation. How many historic Americans will be "lost" to the new crop of "Stalins" running amok on our college campuses before freedom is restored?
As part of his political purges, Stalin targeted pretty much anyone who did not side with him on all subjects and terrorized anyone who dared to challenge him. Those enemies--actual and perceived--were killed, exiled to Siberia or forced to leave the country altogether. And once those enemies were gone, Stalin had his "historians" actually go through public records, photographs and even films to literally "delete" any and all references to that person. It was like they never existed. Stalin also went so far as to alter the same documents, pictures and films to make it appear that he was present at all great moments of Soviet history--even when he wasn't within 500-miles of the event.
I am reminded of the Stalinization of Russian history every time I read about a new demand from college students and other liberals to erase certain aspects of American history. The latest battle comes from Princeton University--where students of color are demanding that all references to former President (and University President) Woodrow Wilson be removed from campus because he was a racist. This is particularly troubling, as Wilson is generally considered to be the Father of Modern Liberalism--a man who believed there was no problem that greater government control and spending couldn't fix, as well as a belief that multi-nationalism superceded American Exceptionalism--so now we have a case of the Left turning upon its own.
For the students of Princeton, Wilson's initial push for programs like Social Security, unemployment insurance and the League of Nations is completely trumped (an ironic word when you think about it) by his re-segregation of the Federal Government--and the division of white and blacks in the workplace. Today, walking into a building named the Woodrow Wilson School of International Affairs and Diplomacy is such a "micro-aggression" and "trigger event" that a minority student couldn't possibly be expected to learn anything.
And so, Woodrow Wilson must go--just like Leon Trotsky "disappeared" from the history of the Soviet Union under Stalin--and just like any reference to the Confederacy must be obliterated in the South. No more can his name grace the campus which he transformed from an "rich, old boys club" to the Liberal safe-haven that it is today--with "safe-spaces" and limits upon free speech and the open exchange of ideas.
It was only after the collapse of Socialism in the Soviet Union that Russians could once again learn a "full history" of them as a people and as a nation. How many historic Americans will be "lost" to the new crop of "Stalins" running amok on our college campuses before freedom is restored?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)