It’s that time of year in Sacramento when our elected representatives
grapple with the state budget, an activity that can best be compared
to the Crusades.
This Holy War pits Democrats versus Republicans, who each try to
hammer each other into submission while believing God and Good are on
their side.
Ultimately, nobody wins. The two sides pick up their wounded and live
to disagree another day.
This year, in addition to the usual ideological stalemate, there’s a
$26 billion deficit on the table, forcing the state to desperately
seek new revenue-generating ideas.
Gov. Schwarzenegger, seizing the moment, has set up a Twitter site,
MyIdea4CA.com., that allows us all to join in the search.
A few recent entries: “More $ for higher education; less for pseudo
system of capital punishment.” “Legalize and tax marijuana. End the
war that does more harm than good.” “California has the worst
representation and the highest cost of government. There is a
correlation!”
“My idea is to give people cash incentives to move to other states.”
“$1 toll for all persons entering the state. Toll booths at I-5,
I-80, I-15, I-10, and charge airlines.” “Don't have a film school at
UC Berkeley ,at UCSD and another one at UCLA. Eliminate duplication.
Centralize.”
Noble sentiments, deeply felt, but I don’t see a billion dollar idea
in there.
All is not lost, however. Riding to the rescue is Democratic State
Sen. Curren Price of Los Angeles.
Sen. Price is proposing that the state could make a bundle of cash by
requiring digital license plates that display advertising.
It’s brilliant in its simplicity. Turn every car and truck in the
state of California into a moving billboard. Why didn’t I think of
that?
Price has introduced a bill that would allow the state to begin
researching the use of electronic license plates that would mimic a
standard plate when the vehicle is in motion but would switch to
digital ads or other messages when it is stopped for more than four
seconds, whether in traffic or at a red light.
The license plate number would remain visible at all times in some
section of the screen. In emergencies, the plates could be used to
broadcast Amber Alerts or traffic information.
"We're just trying to find creative ways of generating additional
revenues," Price told the Associated Press. "It's an exciting
marriage of technology with need, and an opportunity to keep
California in the forefront."
I can hear the police dispatcher now: “Attention all units. Be on the
lookout for a stolen vehicle with a license plate frame advertising
Tidy Bowl.”
Come to think of it, product placement could be a knotty problem. Do
you want your car to flash “Viagra” every time you hit the brakes. Or
pitch mortgage lenders? Or Scientology? Or strip clubs?
How about a Meg Whitman ad on a Democrat’s car. How would a
Republican feel about having “Re-elect Nancy Pelosi” blinking from
the rear of the family sedan?
Of course, in California, if our ballots are any indication, the ads
would have to be offered in every known language from Arabic to Zuni.
And no self-respecting advertiser is going to be satisfied with a
15-second spot. He’s going to want a full minute or more. No problem.
We’ll just adjust the signals to stay red longer. Just remember as
your blood pressure rises that it’s your civic duty to help fill the
state coffers.
Then there’s the problem of hackers. I read where a group of jokers
changed one of those computerized electronic warning signs on a Texas
highway to read, “Zombies Ahead. Run for Your Lives.” Which is funny
unless the sign originally read “Bridge Out Ahead.”
Speaking of safety, do you think flashing signs on cars would boost
the accident rate substantially? It’s a body and fender man’s dream.
Nice try, Sen. Price. Why don’t you push that toll booth idea instead?
Monday, June 28, 2010
Sunday, June 20, 2010
A License to Silence
There's a new addition to the list of really bad ideas, joining such favorites as leisure suits, wine in a box and football stadiums in the city of Industry.
This one comes from a Michigan lawmaker who wants to register journalists to ensure, among other things, that they possess "good moral character."
Republican state Sen. Bruce Patterson recently introduced a bill that would require everyone from bureau chiefs to bloggers to possess a journalism degree or other degrees substantially equivalent.
In addition, they would:
Have not less than three years experience as a reporter or any other relevant background information.
Possess awards or recognition related to being a reporter.
Submit three or more writing samples.
And as an added incentive, those who register would have to pay a fee.
Forget about the fact that Patterson, who describes himself as a "constitutional attorney," is engaged in a bit of academic self-loathing. After all, the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States prohibits the making of any law infringing on the freedom of speech or freedom of the press.
Forget the fact that a politician has the temerity to claim the moral high ground and sit in judgment of others.
Forget that there are libel laws and the court of public opinion to hold journalists in check.
Forget that I would qualify to cover Mr. Patterson, depending on who is deciding the
Advertisement "good moral character" question.
This proposed legislation is wrong on so many levels.
OK, I can hear you asking, we register barbers, plumbers and cab drivers. Why not reporters?
First and foremost, it would be open to abuses that go far beyond a bad haircut or a leaky pipe.
Simply put, it would give a government the tools to silence those who are critical of it by denying or revoking their "license." And when it comes to covering politics, no news is bad news.
Think that's far fetched?
Remember Richard Nixon's "Enemies List?" It was populated by a considerable number of reporters and editors. Less subtle but equally Draconian were the rulers of Communist Romania, who registered and licensed typewriters, to be confiscated if the writer offended the government.
Then there's that "moral character" issue. Whose moral character is the benchmark? John Wooden? Or Tiger Woods? And who is applying that standard? As Oscar Wilde once said, "Morality is simply the attitude we adopt toward people whom we personally dislike."
Journalism degrees? In my last editing stop at the Pasadena Star-News, my top reporters had degrees in history, rhetoric, law and divinity. It didn't seem to be a hindrance.
To give Mr. Patterson his due, the journalistic landscape is a lot more confounding than it used to be. In addition to the mainstream press, there are myriad bloggers, tweeters, Facebookers and other "citizen journalists" at work.
Do an Internet search on Barack Obama or Sarah Palin or Manny Ramirez and you'll find thousands of articles written from dozens of perspectives. It's soap box oratory gone electronic.
But it apparently has confused Patterson.
"What's the definition of a reporter? I haven't been able to find out? What's a reporter? What's a journalist?" he asked. "I thought you had to have a degree in journalism, but apparently not. I could retire and be a journalist."
You could, Mr. Patterson, but after this bit of legislative sleight of hand, I doubt if you'd get a lot of job offers.
I've got a better idea. Instead of registering journalists, let's register politicians.
Let's require them to be of high moral character, although Eliot Spitzer, Mark Sanford, Bill Clinton and Larry Craig might have trouble making the cut.
Let's require them to have a degree in ethics or the equivalent.
Let's have them submit three samples of intelligent legislation, free from lobbyist influence and back-room deal making.
Let's require transparency.
If we adopted those standards, there would be no need to muzzle journalists.
This one comes from a Michigan lawmaker who wants to register journalists to ensure, among other things, that they possess "good moral character."
Republican state Sen. Bruce Patterson recently introduced a bill that would require everyone from bureau chiefs to bloggers to possess a journalism degree or other degrees substantially equivalent.
In addition, they would:
Have not less than three years experience as a reporter or any other relevant background information.
Possess awards or recognition related to being a reporter.
Submit three or more writing samples.
And as an added incentive, those who register would have to pay a fee.
Forget about the fact that Patterson, who describes himself as a "constitutional attorney," is engaged in a bit of academic self-loathing. After all, the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States prohibits the making of any law infringing on the freedom of speech or freedom of the press.
Forget the fact that a politician has the temerity to claim the moral high ground and sit in judgment of others.
Forget that there are libel laws and the court of public opinion to hold journalists in check.
Forget that I would qualify to cover Mr. Patterson, depending on who is deciding the
Advertisement "good moral character" question.
This proposed legislation is wrong on so many levels.
OK, I can hear you asking, we register barbers, plumbers and cab drivers. Why not reporters?
First and foremost, it would be open to abuses that go far beyond a bad haircut or a leaky pipe.
Simply put, it would give a government the tools to silence those who are critical of it by denying or revoking their "license." And when it comes to covering politics, no news is bad news.
Think that's far fetched?
Remember Richard Nixon's "Enemies List?" It was populated by a considerable number of reporters and editors. Less subtle but equally Draconian were the rulers of Communist Romania, who registered and licensed typewriters, to be confiscated if the writer offended the government.
Then there's that "moral character" issue. Whose moral character is the benchmark? John Wooden? Or Tiger Woods? And who is applying that standard? As Oscar Wilde once said, "Morality is simply the attitude we adopt toward people whom we personally dislike."
Journalism degrees? In my last editing stop at the Pasadena Star-News, my top reporters had degrees in history, rhetoric, law and divinity. It didn't seem to be a hindrance.
To give Mr. Patterson his due, the journalistic landscape is a lot more confounding than it used to be. In addition to the mainstream press, there are myriad bloggers, tweeters, Facebookers and other "citizen journalists" at work.
Do an Internet search on Barack Obama or Sarah Palin or Manny Ramirez and you'll find thousands of articles written from dozens of perspectives. It's soap box oratory gone electronic.
But it apparently has confused Patterson.
"What's the definition of a reporter? I haven't been able to find out? What's a reporter? What's a journalist?" he asked. "I thought you had to have a degree in journalism, but apparently not. I could retire and be a journalist."
You could, Mr. Patterson, but after this bit of legislative sleight of hand, I doubt if you'd get a lot of job offers.
I've got a better idea. Instead of registering journalists, let's register politicians.
Let's require them to be of high moral character, although Eliot Spitzer, Mark Sanford, Bill Clinton and Larry Craig might have trouble making the cut.
Let's require them to have a degree in ethics or the equivalent.
Let's have them submit three samples of intelligent legislation, free from lobbyist influence and back-room deal making.
Let's require transparency.
If we adopted those standards, there would be no need to muzzle journalists.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
A Day for Dragon Slayers
Small boy's definition of Father's Day: “It's just like Mother's Day
only you don't spend so much." (Author unknown).
Another father’s day is coming. I greet it with mixed feelings.
I’ve kept a great many of the cards I received from my daughters on
Father’s Day over the years. Most of them poke gentle humor at me for
my fix-it skills, TV viewing habits or availability for light
housework.
Fair enough. I’m not exactly a hearts-and-flowers guy.
Besides, some of the sentiments are based in fact. I once severed the water line
running from the street to the house while attempting to fix a
sprinkler, flooding the entire yard. The neighbors still yell “surf’s
up” when they see me coming.
The guys at the hardware store know me on a first-name basis. I’m
Bob, the guy who needs a combination internal pipe wrench and wiz
snips with a left handed tongue and groove attachment and carbon
steel forceps so I can hang a towel rack.
I’ll watch any sports on TV, even leg wrestling from Turkestan where
the winner receives a goat.
I’m not sure of the exact location of the vacuum cleaner in our house and the controls on our new washing
machine look to me like those on a F-16 fighter/bomber.
Despite these shortcomings, once a year I’m Dear Old Dad. Over time,
I’ve gotten dozens of ties, gallons of after shave and enough soap on
a rope to scrub down the U.S.S. Missouri.
And each time, I received them with expressions of joy which, truth be told, are honestly felt.
I couldn’t help noticing, however, that on Mother’s Day, my wife
receives flowers, multiple expressions of love that make her teary
eyed all capped with an expensive champagne brunch or dinner at some
place where the menus don’t have prices.
On Father’s Day, I’m sent out to slave over a hot barbecue which, as
a matter of survival, necessitates the ingestion of cold beer.
Also fair enough. Moms deserve all the attention. They are the
nurturers, the huggers, the comforters, the ones that care and feed
for us all.
Men are the dragon slayers, the ones who defend the cave, not to
mention change the oil, move the furniture, kill the spiders and
unclog the toilet.
It’s in our biological makeup to be this way, just like we can’t help
growing beards and grilling meat.
It wasn’t long ago that we were hunter/gatherers who went out with a
spear and brought home the evening meal slung over our massive, hairy
shoulders.
Nothing says love like a sweaty guy with dirt under his nails.
But, heck yes, we deserve a day. In fact, it wasn’t easy getting one.
Mother’s Day in this country officially dates back to 1914. But while
it was met with enthusiasm, the suggestion of a Father's Day was
often met with laughter, according to several historical accounts.
It was the target of much satire, parody and derision, sort of like
National Accordion Month is now. Shockingly, many saw it as the first
step in filling the calendar with mindless promotions.
A bill to accord national recognition of the holiday was introduced
in Congress in 1913. But our elected officials resisted, fearing that
it would become commercialized.
Wikipedia, the sometimes reliable online encyclopedia, reports that
President Calvin Coolidge recommended in 1924 that the day be
observed by the nation, but stopped short of issuing a national
proclamation.
In 1957, Maine Senator Margaret Chase Smith wrote a proposal accusing
Congress of ignoring fathers for 40 years while honoring mothers,
thus "singling out just one of our two parents. " To no avail.
In 1966, President Lyndon Johnson issued the first presidential
proclamation honoring fathers, designating the third Sunday in June
as Father's Day.
Finally, the day was made a permanent national holiday when that
go-to guy Richard Nixon who signed it into law in 1972.
One other historical note: More phone calls are made in the United
States during Mother's Day than during Father's Day, but the
percentage of collect calls on Father's Day is much higher.
Best definition of a Dad? “A father carries pictures where his money
used to be.”
only you don't spend so much." (Author unknown).
Another father’s day is coming. I greet it with mixed feelings.
I’ve kept a great many of the cards I received from my daughters on
Father’s Day over the years. Most of them poke gentle humor at me for
my fix-it skills, TV viewing habits or availability for light
housework.
Fair enough. I’m not exactly a hearts-and-flowers guy.
Besides, some of the sentiments are based in fact. I once severed the water line
running from the street to the house while attempting to fix a
sprinkler, flooding the entire yard. The neighbors still yell “surf’s
up” when they see me coming.
The guys at the hardware store know me on a first-name basis. I’m
Bob, the guy who needs a combination internal pipe wrench and wiz
snips with a left handed tongue and groove attachment and carbon
steel forceps so I can hang a towel rack.
I’ll watch any sports on TV, even leg wrestling from Turkestan where
the winner receives a goat.
I’m not sure of the exact location of the vacuum cleaner in our house and the controls on our new washing
machine look to me like those on a F-16 fighter/bomber.
Despite these shortcomings, once a year I’m Dear Old Dad. Over time,
I’ve gotten dozens of ties, gallons of after shave and enough soap on
a rope to scrub down the U.S.S. Missouri.
And each time, I received them with expressions of joy which, truth be told, are honestly felt.
I couldn’t help noticing, however, that on Mother’s Day, my wife
receives flowers, multiple expressions of love that make her teary
eyed all capped with an expensive champagne brunch or dinner at some
place where the menus don’t have prices.
On Father’s Day, I’m sent out to slave over a hot barbecue which, as
a matter of survival, necessitates the ingestion of cold beer.
Also fair enough. Moms deserve all the attention. They are the
nurturers, the huggers, the comforters, the ones that care and feed
for us all.
Men are the dragon slayers, the ones who defend the cave, not to
mention change the oil, move the furniture, kill the spiders and
unclog the toilet.
It’s in our biological makeup to be this way, just like we can’t help
growing beards and grilling meat.
It wasn’t long ago that we were hunter/gatherers who went out with a
spear and brought home the evening meal slung over our massive, hairy
shoulders.
Nothing says love like a sweaty guy with dirt under his nails.
But, heck yes, we deserve a day. In fact, it wasn’t easy getting one.
Mother’s Day in this country officially dates back to 1914. But while
it was met with enthusiasm, the suggestion of a Father's Day was
often met with laughter, according to several historical accounts.
It was the target of much satire, parody and derision, sort of like
National Accordion Month is now. Shockingly, many saw it as the first
step in filling the calendar with mindless promotions.
A bill to accord national recognition of the holiday was introduced
in Congress in 1913. But our elected officials resisted, fearing that
it would become commercialized.
Wikipedia, the sometimes reliable online encyclopedia, reports that
President Calvin Coolidge recommended in 1924 that the day be
observed by the nation, but stopped short of issuing a national
proclamation.
In 1957, Maine Senator Margaret Chase Smith wrote a proposal accusing
Congress of ignoring fathers for 40 years while honoring mothers,
thus "singling out just one of our two parents. " To no avail.
In 1966, President Lyndon Johnson issued the first presidential
proclamation honoring fathers, designating the third Sunday in June
as Father's Day.
Finally, the day was made a permanent national holiday when that
go-to guy Richard Nixon who signed it into law in 1972.
One other historical note: More phone calls are made in the United
States during Mother's Day than during Father's Day, but the
percentage of collect calls on Father's Day is much higher.
Best definition of a Dad? “A father carries pictures where his money
used to be.”
Monday, June 07, 2010
Congratulations, Grads And Other Lies
Congratulations to the graduates of the Class of 2010.
So much for the platitudes. I've got some good news and bad news for you.
The good news: There are more jobs available than last year. The bad news: Last year was the worst year for college grads since the Great Depression.
Of 2010 graduates who actively applied for work, 24 percent have a job waiting for them post-graduation. This is up almost 5 percentage points from last year when only 19 percent of graduates submitting resumes and applications scored direct employment.
At this rate, we'll crack that 30percent barrier in another 10 years, leaving only 70 percent of our college grads unemployed.
And pay? Salaries for finance majors rose 1.6 percent to $50,546, while those for liberal arts majors fell 8.9 percent to $33,540. Oh, the humanities!
There are other options, like the Peace Corps or the Marine Corps. Either way, the pay is lousy but you'll develop a unique perspective on the world.
Not for you? You can always move back home. The U.S. Census estimated in 2008 that 5 million Americans aged 25 to 35 are living with their parents. Talk about social networking opportunities.
Before you slip into a funk, however, know this: That degree, unless it was in Albanian literature, will mean you won't face a life with a spatula in your hand. The job market is ultimately a lot more rewarding for college grads than it is to those without a degree.
Advertisement
More important, you will join an army of famous people whose first experience with the real world was rejection. Consider:
The Museum of Modern Art in New York rejected a young Andy Warhol's gift of a drawing due to "severely limited gallery and storage space."
The writers of the screenplay for "Casablanca" were told that their work wouldn't make the cut because it was "unacceptably sex suggestive."
Marilyn Monroe, who in 1947, after one year under contract, was dropped by 20th Century Fox because "you haven't got the sort of looks that make a movie star."
Walt Disney's first cartoon production company went bankrupt.
Edgar Allan Poe was expelled first from the University of Virginia, then from West Point.
Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team.
J.K Rowling's original Harry Potter manuscript was rejected 12 times.
Thirty-eight publishers didn't give a damn about Margaret Mitchell's "Gone With the Wind."
And if you've got a diploma in hand, you've got a leg up on Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft; Steve Jobs, co-founder of Apple Computers; David Geffen, co-founder of Dreamworks, SKG; Larry Ellison, founder of the database company Oracle; William Hanna of the cartoon producers Hanna-Barbera; Sheldon Adelson, real estate and casino owner; Jack Taylor, founder of Enterprise Rent-A-Car.
All of them were college dropouts. And all of them are billionaires.
And just in case your aspirations lead you in a different direction, add to that list Mexican drug lord Joaqu n Guzm n Loera or Dawood Ibrahim, head of an organized crime and terror syndicate in South Asia. Both are worth big bucks.
I'll leave you with a few inspirational quotes as you start your journey:
"A graduation ceremony is an event where the commencement speaker tells thousands of students dressed in identical caps and gowns that individuality is the key to success." (Robert Orben).
"Always be a first-rate version of yourself, instead of a second-rate version of somebody else." (Judy Garland).
"Excellence is not a skill. It is an attitude." (Ralph Marston)
"Try not. Do or do not. There is no try." (Yoda)
And my two favorites:
"Be as bold as the first man or woman to eat an oyster." (Shirley Chisholm)
"The true meaning of life is to plant trees under whose shade you do not expect to sit." (Nelson He
Wednesday, June 02, 2010
The Mud People
Faced with politicians who would rather destroy each other than save the state, we the people will once again trudge to the poles to seek redemption.
It wasn't that long ago that we mustered all our political wisdom and picked an Austrian body builder as our champion. Not surprisingly, we got biceps instead of brains, a Grade B performer whose on-screen heroics were no match for real-life issues.
Note to self: When an office seeker launches his campaign from the yuk factory that is the "The Tonight Show With Jay Leno" be very afraid.
So who now? Democrats are looking down the barrel of a shotgun wedding with Jerry Brown. Republicans get to choose between Meg Whitman and Steve Poizner, who seem intent on defining themselves by slinging mud.
To hear tell, here are our choices:
Meg Whitman, the former CEO of eBay, is a billionaire trying to buy her way into the governor's mansion and tried to bully Poizner out of the contest.
Her tenure at eBay was highlighted by the creation of a special site for the sale of pornography and sex paraphernalia.
She was involved with the controversial Wall Street firm Goldman Sachs and received sweetheart stock deals so unethical they were outlawed.
She refused to vote Republican for 28 years, is soft on illegal immigration, supports taxpayer funding of abortions and is, in fact, a closet liberal who supported Sen. Barbara Boxer.
Steve Poizner is way more liberal than he says he is.
He attempted to undercut Proposition 13, the 1978 ballot initiative that has kept property taxes in check. During the state budget crisis, Poizner, former treasurer, increased his department's spending by nearly 14 percent.When the governor requested furloughing some state employees, Poizner was the only Republican to stand in opposition, siding with public employee unions and liberal Democrats.
Poizner gave $10,000 to help Al Gore try to win the 2000 presidential election which calls his conservative credentials into question.
None of the preceding is necessarily true, of course, but this is all we hear when the two leading candidates are engaged in an all-out assault on each other.
The truth, as determined by a number of political fact checking websites, is far less sexy.
Whitman is indeed very wealthy. And her people did in fact asked Poizner "about the viability of his campaign" which Poizner interpreted as "criminal intimidation tactics."
EBay does have an adults only section. On the other hand, Whitman abolished gun sales on the site.
Whitman has never voiced support for "amnesty" for illegal aliens or for President Obama's position on this issue.
Whitman didn't "refuse to vote Republican." She didn't vote for anyone over the last several decades, a record she admits is "atrocious."
It's true that Whitman supports taxpayer funding of abortions. But in 2004, Poizner did too, saying so on a Planned Parenthood questionnaire.
Whitman did support Barbara Boxer, along with 14 other Silicon Valley executives because the senator opposed taxes on the Internet.
Whitman did have an involvement with the controversial Wall Street firm Goldman Sachs. She got shares in initial public stock offerings, and resold them within hours, often for a handsome profit. Goldman was essentially giving Whitman the shares as a gift - in return, she would nudge eBay business Goldman Sach's way. The practice at the time was not illegal.
Poizner "undercut" Prop. 13 by supporting a measure that allowed schools to pass bonds with 55 percent of the vote, instead of two-thirds.
The claim about his office staff spending includes a budget created by his predecessor and plays fast and loose with the numbers. Poizner didn't furlough workers but did cut his office budget by 10 percent.
Poizner claims his donations to Gore were on behalf of his wife, a Democrat, and drawn on a joint account. His signature was on the checks, however.
Whitman has spent $70 million on her campaign. Poizner has laid out $30 million. When all is said and done, we know very little more about them than we did when it started.
This is no way to make a decision. We can only hope that the next round will deal in issues and solutions, not political eye gouging.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
The Name Game
News and views:
News: Assembly Concurrent Resolution 149 by Assemblyman Isadore Hall, D-Compton, would designate a portion of the 405 Freeway as the "Kevin Murray Highway."
Views: It's good to know that our state legislators, when not watching the state circle the financial drain, have time to do good deeds.
But wait a minute. Who is Kevin Murray? Ah, yes, now I remember: Murray served in the Legislature from 1994 to 2006 before being forced out of office by term limits.
According to Sacramento Bee columnist Dan Walters his legislative career was about average. He carried a few significant bills, including one aimed at encouraging installations of solar energy panels on roofs. Murray also carried some questionable measures, such as one stemming from the messy divorce of Southern California supermarket tycoon and major political donor Ron Burkle, to close public access to legal documents in divorce cases.
Unfortunately, Murray joined the politicians-with-their-pants-down brotherhood when a Los Angeles County Park Police officer found him with a prostitute in Murray's state-leased black Corvette, parked outside John Anson Ford Theater just after he was sworn in as a state senator.
Apparently that qualifies him for everlasting commemoration, at least in Hall's eyes.
But I think his vision falls short.
If you want to name the 405 Freeway for someone, why not O.J. Simpson? He brought international attention and fame to that vast stretch of road when he fled down the slow lane after his wife was found murdered. We could call it Bronco Boulevard.
For that matter, we could name almost every street in Hollywood after some celebrity who found themselves involved in a sex scandal. Just meet me at the corner of Roman Polanski Drive and Paris Hilton Lane.
If you think that's absurd, consider this: the Transportation Committee approved ACR 149 unanimously.
News: Legendary singer Lena Horne dies.
Views: She was beautiful, graceful and talented, but the most important thing to remember about Lena Horne is her refusal to live her life as a second class citizen.
If you think segregation merely meant separate schools, consider this:
All but abandoned by her parents, Lena was passed around from relative to relative and had to endure racist slurs, beatings for minor infractions and schoolgirl mockery because she was light-skinned.
When she finally began to receive acclaim as a singer, she signed with prestigious white bandleader Charlie Barnet, but in many ballrooms she wasn't allowed to sit on the bandstand between numbers.
Her parts in most movies contained few speaking roles and usually had little to do with the storyline so her appearances could be edited out for white audiences.
Already a star, Horne wanted to be considered for the role of Julie LaVerne in MGM's 1951 version of "Show Boat" but lost the part to Ava Gardner, a personal friend in real life, due to the Production Code's ban on interracial relationships in films.
Once, when entertaining the troops during World War II, she discovered that German prisoners of war were given preferential seating over black soldiers. She refused to perform.
In the late 1940s and 1950s, she chose to focus on quietly defying segregation policies at upscale hotels in Miami Beach and Las Vegas where she performed, according to her biography. At the time, it was customary for black entertainers to stay in black neighborhoods, but Ms. Horne successfully insisted that she and her musicians be allowed to stay wherever she entertained.
One Las Vegas establishment reportedly had its chambermaids burn Ms. Horne's sheets.
A lesser person would have retreated. Instead, she rose to become an entertainment industry icon who forced her industry to be color blind.
Lena Horne's greatest hit was her triumph over injustice. Let's remember her as something more than a pretty face.
News: A third-grader at Brazos Elementary School in Orchard, Texas, was given a week's detention for possessing a Jolly Rancher.
School officials in Brazos County are defending the seemingly harsh sentence. The school's principal and superintendent said they were simply complying with a state law that limits junk food in schools.
Views: Thank God the Candy Cops in Texas are looking after the children. Of course, if her parents had made up her lunch, she could have been packing chicken fried steak and a side of onion rings. That's because in Texas, they won't restrict what a parent might provide for their child's consumption.
The irony is that many school lunch menus still feature and array of cheeseburgers, pizza, burritos and barbecue pork sandwiches.
But no candy.
Monday, May 10, 2010
The High Cost of Deportation
Down in Texas, they love their rootin' tootin,' gun totin,' flag wavin,' Obama-bashing governor Rick Perry, a down home conservative if there ever was one.
This is the guy who won the undying love of the Tea Party set when he told a rally that Texans might get so fed up with Washington, they by golly just might secede from the union.
To his credit, he stopped short of calling for a resumption of the Civil War.
But despite - or may because of - his verbal excesses, conservatives think he's Mr. Right.
That's why more than a few eyebrows rose and brows furrowed when Perry recently shared his thoughts on the tough new Arizona immigration law, which would make failure to carry immigration documents a crime and give the police broad power to detain anyone suspected of being in the country illegally.
Those who thought Perry would embrace the concept and have the Texas Rangers round up every Mexican from the Panhandle to Galveston Bay were sorely disappointed.
Instead, Perry said that while he fully recognizes and supports "a state's right and obligation to protect its citizens ... I have concerns with portions of the law passed in Arizona, and believe it would not be the right direction for Texas."
Primary among those concerns, he said, was that the local police and sheriffs would end up spending too much time corralling illegal immigrants and would neglect to catch criminals and keep the public safe.
Meanwhile, in Santa Monica, researchers at a Rand Corporation think tank were coming to the same conclusion. According to study done by Rand, a 2007 partnership between Immigrations and Customs Enforcement and the sheriff's department in Maricopa County, Ariz., resulted in deputies identifying 16,000 illegal immigrants among 106,000 jail inmates over three months.However, the effort racked up a debt of $1.3 million in only three months, the percentage of crimes the department solved dropped and police response time soared. The federal government has since canceled the agreement.
Even cities in Arizona understand the economics of this fiasco. The Tucson and Flagstaff city councils have voted to sue the state over its immigration law, citing concerns about enforcement costs.
It doesn't take a political scientist to determine why this Draconian legislation was signed into law. Arizona has become the point of entry for many illegals, drug wars rage across the border and the federal government has kicked the problem back and forth for years.
Why? Aside from the usual ideological gridlock in Washington, politicians don't want any part of immigration reform that calls for the mass deportation of illegals. It's political poison.
Republicans actively court Latinos as a swing bloc vote. No less a GOP icon than Condoleezza Rice said that not passing comprehensive immigration reform that would have legalized millions of undocumented immigrants in 2007 was her "deepest regret."
Democrats, while paying lip service to human rights concerns, understand that many illegals who come to the country and manage to establish themselves are potential union members. And without union support, the Democratic Party becomes an afterthought.
So, if the Arizona law is financially, politically and probably legally unworkable, what happens next?
Anyone who thinks that somehow the government will round up all 11million illegals in the U.S. and deport them is living in a dream world. It would cost at least $94 billion to find, detain and remove all those believed to be staying illegally in the U.S., according to federal government figures.
"It is impossible for this country to rout people out of our society and send them home. It's just not going to happen," said no less an expert than former President George Bush.
President Obama suggests removing incentives to enter the country illegally by cracking down on employers who hire illegal immigrants. It would offer citizenship to undocumented workers who would need to register, pay taxes and pay a penalty for violating the law. Failure to comply might result in deportation.
Those ideas, along with a major increase in border security, are a good start.
Unfortunately, the future of immigration reform rests with the politicians in Washington. And unless elected officials rise to the occasion, more Arizona laws, as wrong-headed as they may be, are inevitable.
Sunday, May 02, 2010
Foot ball Games
If there's anything more loopy than the history of professional football in Los Angeles, I don't know what it would be. Maybe a Marx Brothers movie.
First, the Rams win the hearts and minds of fans during their 34-year run at the Coliseum, where they are almost always a winner. Then the team is inherited by a brassy ex-showgirl who dumps her fans for the garden of delights that is Anaheim. Unfortunately, Knott's Berry Farm draws better crowds. And L.A. is left with a bad case of the St. Louis blues.
But wait. Here come the Raiders, who leave their ancestral home in Oakland and end up in the Coliseum much to the delight of gang-bangers, devil worshipers and drunks who make up most of their fan base. Al Davis can't get a new stadium deal done so he moves back to Oakland, leaving behind more lawsuits than victories.
Years pass. The Coliseum tries to lure back the NFL which, after the Ram and Raider debacles, would sooner award a franchise to North Korea.
A stadium is proposed on a toxic landfill in Carson. It fails the smell test. The Rose Bowl becomes a candidate. But someone forgot to ask its owners, the people of Pasadena, if they thought it was a good idea. They didn't.
Out of the gloom emerges local billionaire Ed Roski, who has a plan. He's got the land, he's got the connections, he's got the permits. He's going to build a 75,000-seat stadium in Industry. It's shovel ready, all he needs is a team and the support of the NFL.
Advertisement
Suddenly, another proposal. Businessman Casey Wasserman along with Tim Leiweke, who built the sports and entertainment complex which includes Staples Center, L.A. Live and a 1,000-room hotel, are mulling a $1 billion domed stadium which would provide the exclamation mark for their sprawling downtown development.
Why a domed stadium in the land of endless summer? Because it would have a multitude of uses. Supporters, letting their imaginations run wild, are already envisioning it hosting the Super Bowl, the World Cup, the Final Four, the Olympics, even two, that's right two, NFL teams.
"This is the final piece to the downtown puzzle," Wasserman told the press. "It's the only chance for the city to benefit from the economic power of a stadium of this caliber."
Wasserman apparently doesn't like to sugarcoat things. Either the city gets on board or they commit economic suicide.
So L.A., which has no team and only lip service from the NFL, has instead The Battle of the Billionaires, Roski versus Leiweke/Wasserman, no holds barred. The winner gets to tango with a bunch of skeptical NFL owners, a group of gentlemen who make Goldman Sachs look like Habitat for Humanity.
This contest isn't even started yet but this we know:
Never bet against Ed Roski. His tenacity in trying to lure the NFL to Los Angeles has been remarkable. He's spent millions trying to make his dream come true.
But Industry might as well be just north of Moose Jaw, Saskatchawan, as far as the NFL is concerned. Roski's people like to say it's just a few miles from downtown L.A. but it's light years from the glitz and glitter of Hollywood. Believe it: star power makes a difference.
Industry is also a million miles from the center of power and influence in Southern California. Downtown is where the big boys in business and politics play. These people are salivating at the chance to have a big-time stadium and the money it generates in their neighborhood. Leiweke/Wasserman will have them eating out of their hands.
Downtown has history on its side. It is where most of our teams - Lakers, Kings, Dodgers, USC - have played. It's where we hold parades to salute our heroes and funerals to remember them.
Industry has freeway access. Downtown has access by light rail and subway.Downtown has high-end hotels and restaurants. Know a good place to eat in Industry?
Most important, Leiweke/Wasserman say they plan to privately finance their stadium. As for Roski, his plan is for a team and the NFL to privately finance his stadium; Roski would likely hand over the land and entitlements and keep an equity stake in the team.
This newspaper reported recently that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has concerns. "While the stadium in the City of Industry has gotten many construction approvals, it still needs to be determined how to pay for it," he said, in a classic of understatement.
Advantage, Leiweke/Wasserman.
Whatever happens, it won't happen soon. The NFL faces a contentious union contract negotiations that could cancel the 2011 season. Until that is resolved, L.A. will continue to watch pro football on television.
Monday, April 26, 2010
A Bad Act
TV political commercials have been downright boring lately. How many
times can you watch GOP gubernatorial candidates Meg Whitman and
Steve Poinzer endlessly bash each other for being “li-ber-al,”
rolling the word off their tongues as you would “ped-o-phile” or
“Tal-i-ban.”
Recently, however, Proposition 16 backers have come thundering across
the vast wasteland, reaching into their deep pockets to bombard the
airways on behalf of their Taxpayers Right to Vote Act.
Before I sorted through the messy details of this initiative, I was
curious: Don’t taxpayers already have the right to vote? Is somebody
trying to take that right away from us? Has Glenn Beck been right all
this time?
But, no. Upon closer inspection it turns out that the Taxpayers Right
to Vote Act is the most misleading ballot title since the California
Marriage Protection Act of 2008 which in fact did nothing to protect
your marriage if you are gay.
Likewise, the Taxpayers Right to Vote Act takes away more than it
gives.
Written and funded to the tune of some $30 million by Pacific Gas and
Electric, Prop. 16 would require local governments to win the
approval of two-thirds of the voters before providing electricity to
residents through a local utility.
While PG&E concedes that many municipalities do hold elections to
decide if they should get involved in the power business, it is
demanding in this initiative that all citizens should be guaranteed a
say in all cases.
Sounds democratic, right? In theory, yes. In practice, PG&E
understands that getting two-thirds approval on anything this side of
motherhood is a steep mountain to climb and that requiring such a
mandate would have a chilling effect on public officials, who lack
the financial resources to face down a big bucks private utility.
The result: PG&E gets locked in as the provider and crushes any
future competition.
We have already seen how this plays out. In Sacramento in 2006 and
San Francisco in 2008, PG&E's deep pockets helped defeat
simple-majority ballot measures that would have allowed or expanded
municipal utilities, according to media in those cities.
John Geesman, who served on the California Energy Commission from
2002-2008, sees it this way:
“If passed, Proposition 16 will actually result in less voting than
occurs under existing law – at least that's the strategy PG&E's CEO,
Peter Darbee, recently boasted about to Wall Street investors,”
Gessman wrote in the Sacramento Bee.
“In Darbee's words, ‘the idea was to diminish, you know, rather than
year after year different communities coming in as this or that and
putting this up for vote and us having to spend millions and millions
of shareholder dollars to defend it repeatedly, we thought that this
was a way that we could sort of diminish that.’”
Aha, I see. So the Taxpayers Right to Vote act is actually an attempt
to prevent voting. Worse, it’s an exploitation of the initiative
process by a greedy special interest group.
PG&E isn’t the only one playing games.
Mercury Insurance is sponsoring Prop. 17, which would allow auto
insurance companies to base their prices in part on a driver’s
history of coverage.
What that means is that state law would be revised to allow insurers
to attract new customers with discounts, as long as the drivers have
been insured for most of the previous five years.
Sounds good, right? But critics say such a discount could mean higher
rates for drivers who were not previously insured even if it was
because they didn’t own a car, had a brief lapse in coverage or were
away at college or in the military (although troops stationed
overseas would be protected).
It would also gut Prop. 103 approved in 1988 which established a
connection between policy price and risk.
I’m guessing two things would happen if this passed. (1) Mercury and
other insurers would make a lot more money boosting rates for the
previously uninsured then they would spend offering discounts and (2)
the resulting higher prices would result in more uninsured drivers.
Then everyone’s rates would rise.
Stay tuned: In November, we get to vote on the "Regulate, Control and
Tax Cannabis Act of 2010" which Los Angeles County District Attorney
Steve Cooley says " ...will not regulate, not control nor effectively
tax marijuana in California."
times can you watch GOP gubernatorial candidates Meg Whitman and
Steve Poinzer endlessly bash each other for being “li-ber-al,”
rolling the word off their tongues as you would “ped-o-phile” or
“Tal-i-ban.”
Recently, however, Proposition 16 backers have come thundering across
the vast wasteland, reaching into their deep pockets to bombard the
airways on behalf of their Taxpayers Right to Vote Act.
Before I sorted through the messy details of this initiative, I was
curious: Don’t taxpayers already have the right to vote? Is somebody
trying to take that right away from us? Has Glenn Beck been right all
this time?
But, no. Upon closer inspection it turns out that the Taxpayers Right
to Vote Act is the most misleading ballot title since the California
Marriage Protection Act of 2008 which in fact did nothing to protect
your marriage if you are gay.
Likewise, the Taxpayers Right to Vote Act takes away more than it
gives.
Written and funded to the tune of some $30 million by Pacific Gas and
Electric, Prop. 16 would require local governments to win the
approval of two-thirds of the voters before providing electricity to
residents through a local utility.
While PG&E concedes that many municipalities do hold elections to
decide if they should get involved in the power business, it is
demanding in this initiative that all citizens should be guaranteed a
say in all cases.
Sounds democratic, right? In theory, yes. In practice, PG&E
understands that getting two-thirds approval on anything this side of
motherhood is a steep mountain to climb and that requiring such a
mandate would have a chilling effect on public officials, who lack
the financial resources to face down a big bucks private utility.
The result: PG&E gets locked in as the provider and crushes any
future competition.
We have already seen how this plays out. In Sacramento in 2006 and
San Francisco in 2008, PG&E's deep pockets helped defeat
simple-majority ballot measures that would have allowed or expanded
municipal utilities, according to media in those cities.
John Geesman, who served on the California Energy Commission from
2002-2008, sees it this way:
“If passed, Proposition 16 will actually result in less voting than
occurs under existing law – at least that's the strategy PG&E's CEO,
Peter Darbee, recently boasted about to Wall Street investors,”
Gessman wrote in the Sacramento Bee.
“In Darbee's words, ‘the idea was to diminish, you know, rather than
year after year different communities coming in as this or that and
putting this up for vote and us having to spend millions and millions
of shareholder dollars to defend it repeatedly, we thought that this
was a way that we could sort of diminish that.’”
Aha, I see. So the Taxpayers Right to Vote act is actually an attempt
to prevent voting. Worse, it’s an exploitation of the initiative
process by a greedy special interest group.
PG&E isn’t the only one playing games.
Mercury Insurance is sponsoring Prop. 17, which would allow auto
insurance companies to base their prices in part on a driver’s
history of coverage.
What that means is that state law would be revised to allow insurers
to attract new customers with discounts, as long as the drivers have
been insured for most of the previous five years.
Sounds good, right? But critics say such a discount could mean higher
rates for drivers who were not previously insured even if it was
because they didn’t own a car, had a brief lapse in coverage or were
away at college or in the military (although troops stationed
overseas would be protected).
It would also gut Prop. 103 approved in 1988 which established a
connection between policy price and risk.
I’m guessing two things would happen if this passed. (1) Mercury and
other insurers would make a lot more money boosting rates for the
previously uninsured then they would spend offering discounts and (2)
the resulting higher prices would result in more uninsured drivers.
Then everyone’s rates would rise.
Stay tuned: In November, we get to vote on the "Regulate, Control and
Tax Cannabis Act of 2010" which Los Angeles County District Attorney
Steve Cooley says " ...will not regulate, not control nor effectively
tax marijuana in California."
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Finding Fault
“The grapevine reported that the California Institute of Technology
in Pasadena, home to the premier seismology laboratory in the area,
had ordered its employees to leave town. Underground water tables
were said to be dropping, a sign that the Big One was about to hit.
“Caltech received so many panicky telephone calls that seismologists
working for the university and the United States Geological Survey
called a press conference on Thursday to squelch the rumors.
"There's no reason to think that there's still some accelerating level of
stress" on the San Andreas, said Dr. Thomas Heaton, a seismologist at
the Geological Survey's Pasadena office.
“Dr. Heaton assured reporters that no one was predicting doom, no one
had been told to flee and no water tables had dropped. In any case,
he added, falling water levels are not known to be harbingers of
earthquakes. "You may have noticed that we're not able to predict
earthquakes," he said dryly. "And if we were, we'd certainly be
telling you."
--- New York Times, 1992.
I’d like to say in the 18 years since that story appeared we have
developed a healthy skepticism towards earthquake predictions.
But I’d be wrong.
This paper reported this past week that rumors spread like wildfire
on the Internet and via text messages about an impending earthquake,
triggering a rash of calls to Caltech, the U.S. Geological Survey and
the Pasadena Fire Department.
It was dismissed as a hoax. "It's a rumor that Caltech is predicting
a major earthquake and sent all employees home - not true," said Jon
Weiner, director of media relations at Caltech. "We can't predict
earthquakes, and we're not sending employees home."
So much for healthy skepticism.
The difference between now and 1992 is that rumors spread by nut jobs
now have an audience in the tens of millions thanks to the Internet,
texting and networking sites, the same folks who have given the world
unfettered access to political wackos, porn stars and spam.
Just to underscore the point: There was a rumor making the rounds on
the Internet several years back that Zero Population Growth
boobytrapped men's toilets with razors set to castrate the
unsuspecting.
I rest my case.
The quake rumor was reportedly spread on Twitter, a networking tool
whose seriousness of purpose is reflected in its name.
One such text message read, “WARNING: State of California has
released a statement that there is a possible 8.4 earthquake within
24hours. Pray, inform and be prepared. please forward this.”
An e-mail version went something like this: "My buddy's wife works at
the seismology dept. in L.A. and they called everyone in today and
said get your kids out of school and stock up on water because there
is going to be a major quake within 24 hours."
There is no seismology department in the city or county of Los
Angeles of course, and the last time I checked, the state wasn’t in
the quake prediction business. Even if it was, it would have been the
victim of budget cuts by now.
To set the record straight, anyone who predicts that an earthquake
will strike California on any given date is going to be 100 per cent
correct. We have quakes --- dozens of them --- everyday. It’s the
nature of the state we live in and the planet we live on.
It’s when predictions specify locales and magnitudes that it gets
sketchy.
Search the Internet and you’ll find dozens of sites run by people in
the earthquake prediction business. They claim psychic powers, or
insight based on physical ailments such has headaches or back spasms
or predictions based on the behavior of chickens, dogs or goldfish.
I had a woman call me on the city desk of the Los Angeles Times some
years back to tell me she often suffered bouts of diarrhea shortly
before an earthquake struck. This was after the Northridge quake
almost leveled our entire operation so I called her methodology into
question.
None of this is intended to minimize the threat of a major earthquake
in our area. It will happen eventually and we should be prepared for
it.
But when you hear a prediction, run don’t walk in the other direction.
Susan Hough, of the U.S. Geological Survey, when asked in an
interview if we will ever be able to predict earthquakes, said, “I’m
inclined to doubt it, but I think it’s possible. The question is: Are
we ever going to be able to identify something in the earth that
tells us—unmistakably—that a “big one” is coming. It’s worth keeping
the lines of investigation going, but there’s been an awful lot of
work and we haven’t found anything yet.”
in Pasadena, home to the premier seismology laboratory in the area,
had ordered its employees to leave town. Underground water tables
were said to be dropping, a sign that the Big One was about to hit.
“Caltech received so many panicky telephone calls that seismologists
working for the university and the United States Geological Survey
called a press conference on Thursday to squelch the rumors.
"There's no reason to think that there's still some accelerating level of
stress" on the San Andreas, said Dr. Thomas Heaton, a seismologist at
the Geological Survey's Pasadena office.
“Dr. Heaton assured reporters that no one was predicting doom, no one
had been told to flee and no water tables had dropped. In any case,
he added, falling water levels are not known to be harbingers of
earthquakes. "You may have noticed that we're not able to predict
earthquakes," he said dryly. "And if we were, we'd certainly be
telling you."
--- New York Times, 1992.
I’d like to say in the 18 years since that story appeared we have
developed a healthy skepticism towards earthquake predictions.
But I’d be wrong.
This paper reported this past week that rumors spread like wildfire
on the Internet and via text messages about an impending earthquake,
triggering a rash of calls to Caltech, the U.S. Geological Survey and
the Pasadena Fire Department.
It was dismissed as a hoax. "It's a rumor that Caltech is predicting
a major earthquake and sent all employees home - not true," said Jon
Weiner, director of media relations at Caltech. "We can't predict
earthquakes, and we're not sending employees home."
So much for healthy skepticism.
The difference between now and 1992 is that rumors spread by nut jobs
now have an audience in the tens of millions thanks to the Internet,
texting and networking sites, the same folks who have given the world
unfettered access to political wackos, porn stars and spam.
Just to underscore the point: There was a rumor making the rounds on
the Internet several years back that Zero Population Growth
boobytrapped men's toilets with razors set to castrate the
unsuspecting.
I rest my case.
The quake rumor was reportedly spread on Twitter, a networking tool
whose seriousness of purpose is reflected in its name.
One such text message read, “WARNING: State of California has
released a statement that there is a possible 8.4 earthquake within
24hours. Pray, inform and be prepared. please forward this.”
An e-mail version went something like this: "My buddy's wife works at
the seismology dept. in L.A. and they called everyone in today and
said get your kids out of school and stock up on water because there
is going to be a major quake within 24 hours."
There is no seismology department in the city or county of Los
Angeles of course, and the last time I checked, the state wasn’t in
the quake prediction business. Even if it was, it would have been the
victim of budget cuts by now.
To set the record straight, anyone who predicts that an earthquake
will strike California on any given date is going to be 100 per cent
correct. We have quakes --- dozens of them --- everyday. It’s the
nature of the state we live in and the planet we live on.
It’s when predictions specify locales and magnitudes that it gets
sketchy.
Search the Internet and you’ll find dozens of sites run by people in
the earthquake prediction business. They claim psychic powers, or
insight based on physical ailments such has headaches or back spasms
or predictions based on the behavior of chickens, dogs or goldfish.
I had a woman call me on the city desk of the Los Angeles Times some
years back to tell me she often suffered bouts of diarrhea shortly
before an earthquake struck. This was after the Northridge quake
almost leveled our entire operation so I called her methodology into
question.
None of this is intended to minimize the threat of a major earthquake
in our area. It will happen eventually and we should be prepared for
it.
But when you hear a prediction, run don’t walk in the other direction.
Susan Hough, of the U.S. Geological Survey, when asked in an
interview if we will ever be able to predict earthquakes, said, “I’m
inclined to doubt it, but I think it’s possible. The question is: Are
we ever going to be able to identify something in the earth that
tells us—unmistakably—that a “big one” is coming. It’s worth keeping
the lines of investigation going, but there’s been an awful lot of
work and we haven’t found anything yet.”
Flights of Fancy
Let's play pretend.
You're the CEO of a major airline company and things aren't going well. Revenues are shaky, fuel costs are up and the public ranks you slightly below Rosie O'Donnell on the likability index.
But you have to increase cash flow so what do you do? There's got to be some sort of revenue stream out there just waiting to be discovered.
American Airlines chief Bob Crandall once famously removed an olive from each salad served to passengers some years back. A single olive would never be missed, the reasoning went, and savings amounted to at least $40,000 a year.
That's the kind of inspiration you seek.
Then the light bulb goes on over your head.
Why should passengers be allowed to lug their carry-on baggage onto the plane for free? Charge the hell out of them for that coveted overhead storage space. If they don't like it, they can wear two or three changes of clothes.
It's brilliant in its simplicity. Problem is, this is no fantasy.
Spirit Airways announced last week that it intends to charge as much as a $45 fee for carry-on baggage.
That's skyway robbery.
"I didn't think anyone would go this far," Jay Sorensen, an airline consultant who specializes in airline fees, told the Associated Press.
But wait, it gets worse.
Not to be outdone, Ryanair Airlines, based in Dublin, Ireland, disclosed it is considering a plan that would require travelers to pay either 1 Euro
or a British pound (about $1.33 or $1.52) for using the bathroom on flights lasting one hour or less.The carrier said it is working with Boeing to develop a coin-operated door release so that when nature calls, passengers would need to deposit the change before being able to use the facilities.
(The good news is that if Boeing is in charge of the project, there will be a 500 percent cost overrun and it will run 10 years behind schedule).
The idea is to encourage people to use restrooms in airport terminals before boarding, Ryanair said.
And why do they want to do that? So they can remove two of the three lavatories on some of its planes and squeeze in up to six extra seats. The refurbishing would reduce fares by at least 5 percent, Ryanair claimed.
We have been advised to stay hydrated on airplanes. Drink lots of water because airplane air can dry you out, and a dehydrated person is more susceptible to contracting illness. Now Ryanair has found a way to make hydration pay.
They just don't make capitalists like this anymore.
"By charging for the toilets we are hoping to change passenger behavior so that they use the bathroom before or after," said Stephen McNamara, a Ryanair spokesman.
It will indeed change passenger behavior. Ryanair will be as devoid of customers as it is toilets.
As for Spirit airlines, if they want to charge me for carry-on luggage, I'll tell them where they can stow it.
Coming soon: Fares based on your weight. Since we're treated like cargo anyway, the next logical step is to step on a scale.
Speaking of airlines, it was reported that a 91-year-old German man was refused entry to a flight in Liverpool's John Lennon Airport because he was dead.
The recently departed man was brought to the airport by two relatives, sitting in a wheelchair and sporting a pair of sunglasses.
Staff became suspicious when the man did not respond to questions by airport workers. His relatives, two women aged 41 and 66, were arrested.
The couple were believed to be attempting to flout repatriation fees for the dead man. Bodies being repatriated by air are required to be contained inside hermetically-sealed zinc-lined coffins and require paperwork to travel in the hold.
Of course, if they were flying Spirit Airways, they could have stuck him in the overhead bin for $45.
And I thought the only dead people at airports were the handlers who took an eternity to get the baggage to the carousels.
Sunday, April 04, 2010
The Write Stuff
Are you a person who appreciates a deft turn of phrase, who revels in sparkling wordplay, who soars on the wings of language well used?
If that is you, read no further. Because today's topic is bad writing.
It's the time of year that we celebrate a man who is perhaps the most visible bad writer of all time. His name is Edward George Bulwer-Lytton and in 1830 he penned the immortal opening line, "It was a dark and stormy night."
Actually, he wrote: "It was a dark and stormy night; the rain fell in torrents, except at occasional intervals, when it was checked by a violent gust of wind which swept up the streets (for it is in London that our scene lies), rattling along the housetops, and fiercely agitating the scanty flame of the lamps that struggled against the darkness."
This kind of turgid writing is not lost on the good folks of the English department at San Jose State University who are even now accepting entries for the annual Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest in which authors are encouraged to "compose the opening sentence to the worst of all possible novels." In other words, write something truly, deliberately bad.
The contest has become legendary over the years, attracting some 10,000 entries from throughout the world. It has also produced a truly remarkable body of work.
Some personal favorites:
"Jennifer stood there, quietly ovulating."
"Fleur looked down her nose at Guilliame, something she was accomplished at, being six foot three in her stocking feet, and having one of those long French noses, not pert like Bridget Bardot's, but more like the one that Charles De Gaulle had when he was still alive and President of France and he wore that cap that was shaped like a little hatbox with a bill in the front to offset his nose, but it didn't work."
"The dual-headed Zhiltoids from Beta Quadrant in the Crab Nebula, who lived entirely on a diet of steaming hot asphalt, thought they had died and gone to heaven upon landing in the Midtown Mall of Fresno, California on the planet Earth during the month they called 'July'."
"She walked into my office on legs as long as one of those long-legged birds that you see in Florida - the pink ones, not the white ones - except that she was standing on both of them, not just one of them, like those birds, the pink ones, and she wasn't wearing pink, but I knew right away that she was trouble, which those birds usually aren't."
"Dr. Metzger turned to greet his new patient, blithely unaware he would soon become a member of a secret brotherhood as old as urology itself."
"Sylvia leaned seductively back in her chair and downed the shot of cheap gin that Brad had poured for her, and speculated once again that, even if it did taste like something you'd rub on a horse, it had the pleasant side effect of softening Brad's facial symmetry which had always reminded her of the collapsed, pocked surface of a cheese quiche that's been cooked at too high a temperature."
"It seemed the stifling summer heat would never end, and it would not, for Bob was in Hell."
"Mike Hummer had been a private detective so long he could remember Preparation A, his hair reminded everyone of a rat who'd bitten into an electrical cord, but he could still run faster than greased owl snot when he was on a bad guy's trail, and they said his friskings were a lot like getting a vasectomy at Sears."
Anyway, you get the point.
As for me, I'm not a fiction writer. I depend on real-life experiences for inspiration:
"Bob drove to work on the 210 Freeway, the engine of his car humming like a watch - a really good one like a Rolex or Patek Phillipe, not a Timex or some knock-off - and passed over the Arroyo, home of the Rose Bowl, the Granddaddy of Them All, which like many granddaddies is falling apart and needs repair, before exiting the concrete ribbon on Lake Avenue, which is near no lake anyone has ever seen and, parking his vehicle, walked into the office in Pasadena, a city that cares about only one thing: parades, football, money, sex, power, politics and bike paths. It was there he wrote about bad writing of which the preceding is a classic example."
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Cash for Quotes
Like a door-to-door proselytizer or a tax audit, checkbook journalism has once again made an unwanted appearance.
The practice involves paying big bucks for an interview or information. It’s been absolutely taboo at every stop I’ve made along my news career. And for good reason which we’ll get to presently.
It’s not taboo everywhere, however. It is sometimes practiced openly and without apology, especially in Europe. Gossip magazines often pay for access to a “star.”
But each time we learn about an incident involving the mainstream media here in the good old USA, it’s like a large pimple that has suddenly appeared on the end of your nose. It’s ugly and embarrassing.
The latest organization to step on the ethical banana peel is ABC news. According to court documents, ABC paid $200,000 to the family of murdered toddler Cayleee Anthony, whose mother, Casey, has been accused of the crime.
The money went to her legal defense team.
ABC explained, "In August 2008 we licensed exclusive rights to an extensive library of photos and home video for use by our broadcasts,platforms, affiliates and international partners. No use of the material was tied to any interview.”
Court documents showed, however, that ABC News paid for a three-night hotel stay at a Florida Ritz-Carlton for Casey's parents George and Cindy Anthony. And if the Anthonys should run into a a reporter while they’re
enjoying their luxurious accommodations, well, that’s just a coincidence, right?
NBC recently drew the wrath of the the Society of Professional Journalists and others for chartering a jet for David Goldman, who had just won a long custody battle with his Brazilian ex-wife over his son. The network generously flew father and son home to New York.
And who else was a board? If you guessed a reporter, you’d be correct.
NBC News spokeswoman Lauren Kapp said that "NBC News does not and will not pay for interviews.”
But as John Cook wrote on the Gawker website, “It's true, in the same sense it's true that Eliot Spitzer paid that nice lady to come visit him in D.C. and she threw in the sex for free.”
It also raises the question: if it’s unethical to pay for interviews, what is it to create rules then find a way to break them? Is there such a thing as felony dishonesty?
Unfortunately, editors have been writing checks for a long time. The New York Times scooped the world with an exclusive interview with the Titanic wireless operator by forking over $1,000 for his story in 1912.
The Hearst folks paid the legal bills of the defendant in the Lindbergh baby kidnapping case to ensure scoops during the trial. David Frost paid Richard Nixon to sit down. Nixon went to Frost after CBS turned down his offer to play for pay.
And in 1978, ABC gave Chuck Colson $10,000 to rat out Watergate co-conspirator H.R. Haldeman. CBS turned around at paid Haldeman $100,000 for an interview in which, to the embarrassment of the network, he said
almost nothing.
Life magazine caused a flap when it paid the original Mercury astronauts for their stories.
So why invest all that time and hard work in investigative journalism? Why not just write a check?
For one thing, people will lie and exaggerate to put a wad of cash in their pockets. A Washington reporter once wrote that he had numerous women tell him they would admit, falsely, that they had sex with President Clinton if the price was right.
Worse, if checkbook journalism becomes widespread, people will withhold information unless they are paid.
And, of course, the credibility of a news organization that has crawled into financial bed with a source hovers somewhere around zero.
As far as I’m concerned, ABC has disqualified itself from covering any aspect of the Anthony trial. They have tainted their judgment by giving money to the defendant and can’t be trusted to report truthfully.
Speaking of television, I was amused that CBS turned down a chance to interview Tiger Woods because he would only answer questions for five minutes.
That’s plenty of time for him to say again and again that his life is in the gutter, that his reputation with his wife, children, peers and the public has been damaged forever and that he only has himself to blame.
How many times do we need to ask him his feelings? How many details of his salacious affairs to we need to know?
Five minutes seems about right.
The practice involves paying big bucks for an interview or information. It’s been absolutely taboo at every stop I’ve made along my news career. And for good reason which we’ll get to presently.
It’s not taboo everywhere, however. It is sometimes practiced openly and without apology, especially in Europe. Gossip magazines often pay for access to a “star.”
But each time we learn about an incident involving the mainstream media here in the good old USA, it’s like a large pimple that has suddenly appeared on the end of your nose. It’s ugly and embarrassing.
The latest organization to step on the ethical banana peel is ABC news. According to court documents, ABC paid $200,000 to the family of murdered toddler Cayleee Anthony, whose mother, Casey, has been accused of the crime.
The money went to her legal defense team.
ABC explained, "In August 2008 we licensed exclusive rights to an extensive library of photos and home video for use by our broadcasts,platforms, affiliates and international partners. No use of the material was tied to any interview.”
Court documents showed, however, that ABC News paid for a three-night hotel stay at a Florida Ritz-Carlton for Casey's parents George and Cindy Anthony. And if the Anthonys should run into a a reporter while they’re
enjoying their luxurious accommodations, well, that’s just a coincidence, right?
NBC recently drew the wrath of the the Society of Professional Journalists and others for chartering a jet for David Goldman, who had just won a long custody battle with his Brazilian ex-wife over his son. The network generously flew father and son home to New York.
And who else was a board? If you guessed a reporter, you’d be correct.
NBC News spokeswoman Lauren Kapp said that "NBC News does not and will not pay for interviews.”
But as John Cook wrote on the Gawker website, “It's true, in the same sense it's true that Eliot Spitzer paid that nice lady to come visit him in D.C. and she threw in the sex for free.”
It also raises the question: if it’s unethical to pay for interviews, what is it to create rules then find a way to break them? Is there such a thing as felony dishonesty?
Unfortunately, editors have been writing checks for a long time. The New York Times scooped the world with an exclusive interview with the Titanic wireless operator by forking over $1,000 for his story in 1912.
The Hearst folks paid the legal bills of the defendant in the Lindbergh baby kidnapping case to ensure scoops during the trial. David Frost paid Richard Nixon to sit down. Nixon went to Frost after CBS turned down his offer to play for pay.
And in 1978, ABC gave Chuck Colson $10,000 to rat out Watergate co-conspirator H.R. Haldeman. CBS turned around at paid Haldeman $100,000 for an interview in which, to the embarrassment of the network, he said
almost nothing.
Life magazine caused a flap when it paid the original Mercury astronauts for their stories.
So why invest all that time and hard work in investigative journalism? Why not just write a check?
For one thing, people will lie and exaggerate to put a wad of cash in their pockets. A Washington reporter once wrote that he had numerous women tell him they would admit, falsely, that they had sex with President Clinton if the price was right.
Worse, if checkbook journalism becomes widespread, people will withhold information unless they are paid.
And, of course, the credibility of a news organization that has crawled into financial bed with a source hovers somewhere around zero.
As far as I’m concerned, ABC has disqualified itself from covering any aspect of the Anthony trial. They have tainted their judgment by giving money to the defendant and can’t be trusted to report truthfully.
Speaking of television, I was amused that CBS turned down a chance to interview Tiger Woods because he would only answer questions for five minutes.
That’s plenty of time for him to say again and again that his life is in the gutter, that his reputation with his wife, children, peers and the public has been damaged forever and that he only has himself to blame.
How many times do we need to ask him his feelings? How many details of his salacious affairs to we need to know?
Five minutes seems about right.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Stating the Obvious
A new study by the Norman Lear Center at USC's Annenberg School has found that an average half-hour of L.A. local television news packed all its local government coverage - including budget, law enforcement, education, layoffs, new ordinances, voting procedures, personnel changes, city and county government actions on health care, transportation and immigration - into 22 seconds.
But crime stories filled seven times more of the broadcast, averaging 2 minutes, 50 seconds. Sports and weather took the most time: 3 minutes, 36 seconds. Soft news - human interest, oddball stories and miscellaneous fluff - took up the next-largest chunk after crime, averaging 2 minutes, 26 seconds.
Who knew?
Well, most of us, actually. Anyone who has even casually tuned in to local TV news over the last several decades has witnessed the "if it bleeds, it leads" philosophy that subordinates the day's events to the grisly crime du jour.
The Annenberg people seem to have spent a lot of time and energy to state the obvious.
Indeed, a study done in 1998 by the nonpartisan Center for Media and Public Affairs concluded that murder is at the top of the agenda on local television news shows. Stories about city government activities get little attention.
A University of Delaware study in 1999 found that crime stories claim more air time than any other type of story, from public issues and human-interest features to election news.
So what's thepoint of this new study?
"All the L.A. TV stations tell the FCC that they're serving the local public interest," said Martin Kaplan, Annenberg professor and Lear Center director, who was principal investigator on the project, along with Seton Hall professor Matthew Hale.
"These numbers decode what they actually mean by that." He added, "Local television is a profitable business, despite the recession, and newscasts are a big reason why. If stations spend only 22 seconds covering local government, they must really believe it's ratings poison."
One could argue that it is in fact ratings poison. From 1978 to 2008, the average city turnout for a mayoral election was 30 percent; it was 15 percent for a municipal election that is not citywide.
Given those figures, any TV news director worth his breaking news is not about to turn his 6 o'clock news show into C-SPAN no matter how high minded he may be.
It's all about ratings, after all.
It does, however, raise an interesting chicken-and-egg debate. Is audience indifference to local government affairs the result of shoddy television programming? Or does TV merely reflect its audience's apathy?
Probably some of both. Certainly brick-and-mortar governmental coverage isn't always sexy. And TV doesn't invest a lot of time and money in investigative reporting. So local government coverage gets the short end of the television stick.
But local newspapers, public television and radio cover local government activity, so there is clearly an appetite for that kind of news.
So what's to be done?
"There is serious cause for concern here," said attorney George Kieffer, who is a member of the Los Angeles Civic Alliance, a group of community leaders. "Most people get their local news from television. If local television isn't doing the job, we can hardly expect our citizens to be aware of what is going on with our governments."
Kieffer said that he expected the civic community now to begin to weigh in on license renewals based on the degree of local hard news coverage.
Challenging licenses is not going to change the journalistic landscape for the long term, however. And unfortunately, with the decline of newspaper revenues and readership, there will be fewer and fewer watchdogs to keep an eye on our public servants.
What well-funded and resourceful organizations like the Lear Center and the Civic Alliance need to do is fill the gap.
Use their resources to form a team of reporters and editors to cover and investigate local government activities and publish and publicize their work using the latest in electronic media.
This would not only help fulfill the critical watchdog role; the competition would make other media outlets improve their coverage.
Conducting dubious surveys and waiting for local TV to step up to the plate is a no-win game.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
A Final Farewell
Come let us now remove our hats, lower our eyes and bid farewell to a piece of Americana which will be soon take its place on the slag heap of history.
Bang the muffled drum, hang the black bunting. And say your final goodbyes to the Hummer, an automotive monstrosity that clogged our streets and parking lots, sucked up our gas and polluted our air for
too many years.
So long, Hummer. May you rest in pieces.
The end came recently when General Motors pulled the plug on this street-legal tank, whose sales were declining faster than Tiger Wood’s endorsements. It was so bad, GM couldn’t even sell the brand to the Chinese, who
apparently can smell a lemon from across the Pacific Ocean.
Just who was responsible for foisting this behemoth on an unsuspecting public?
Why, no other than Arnold Schwarzenegger, the man who put the glutes in government.
It seems that while Arnold was on a movie shoot some years back he spotted a convoy of military vehicles called Humvees and fell completely, madly in love. Too bad he didn’t heed the old military saying that an elephant is a
mouse built to government specs.
His lust to own one convinced the manufacturer to have a go at offering them civilians.
Arnie ended up owning a fleet of Hummers. And the vehicle appeared to be particularly popular with status-seeking suburbanites and under-endowed males.
Great move, Governor, except this hunk of iron was to responsible driving what bacon cheeseburgers are to cardiac health.
It weighed in north of 8,000 pounds, got eight miles to the gallon, cost a fortune to buy and insure and had its fair share of mechanical problems. Riding in it was like looking out of a mailbox. If that isn’t bad enough, it had the carbon footprint of a coal-burning steel mill.
The Hummer was quite possibly America’s ultimate symbol of wretched excess.
It made its debut following the first Gulf War, a made for television conflict in which it played a starring role.
A gas guzzler? Most people assumed it ran on testosterone. Actors and athletes made it the ultimate bling.
There was also a misguided sense of patriotism in owning the vehicle that carried our boys to victory in battle.
When gas prices began to soar, GM tried to downsize the car from monstrous to merely monumental. It didn’t work. Post 9/11 Americans were beginning to understand the pitfalls of our dependence on foreign oil and the warnings about global temperature increases were causing concern.
That didn’t stop the GM folks from trying to sell ice to the Eskimos. Mark LaNeve, vice president of sales, service and marketing for GM North America, said he'd love for consumers to begin thinking of Hummers as tools to get a job done. "No one criticizes a bulldozer for its gas mileage. That's because it's built to do a job."
But as the Sierra Club's Daniel Becker remarked, "It's one thing if it's carrying soldiers to and from a fight, it's another if it'shauling lattes home from Starbucks."
So what did it all mean?
Absolutely nothing in the long run. The chromed giants of the 50s and 60s and the muscle cars of the
1970s were replaced with Japanese fuel-sippers when oil supplies were low and prices soared.
When prices went down and availability was restored, the SUV made its way onto the automotive scene where it enjoyed a long reign.
Now, with gas prices rising and petrol dollars fueling terrorism (not to mention Iran’s nuclear ambitions), we turn our eyes to hybrids and electric vehicles. And they’re coming.
But the pendulum swings. At some point, muscular vehicles will come rumbling down the street
again.
As one publication pointed out, "Being big and powerful is essential to our national identity.”
Bang the muffled drum, hang the black bunting. And say your final goodbyes to the Hummer, an automotive monstrosity that clogged our streets and parking lots, sucked up our gas and polluted our air for
too many years.
So long, Hummer. May you rest in pieces.
The end came recently when General Motors pulled the plug on this street-legal tank, whose sales were declining faster than Tiger Wood’s endorsements. It was so bad, GM couldn’t even sell the brand to the Chinese, who
apparently can smell a lemon from across the Pacific Ocean.
Just who was responsible for foisting this behemoth on an unsuspecting public?
Why, no other than Arnold Schwarzenegger, the man who put the glutes in government.
It seems that while Arnold was on a movie shoot some years back he spotted a convoy of military vehicles called Humvees and fell completely, madly in love. Too bad he didn’t heed the old military saying that an elephant is a
mouse built to government specs.
His lust to own one convinced the manufacturer to have a go at offering them civilians.
Arnie ended up owning a fleet of Hummers. And the vehicle appeared to be particularly popular with status-seeking suburbanites and under-endowed males.
Great move, Governor, except this hunk of iron was to responsible driving what bacon cheeseburgers are to cardiac health.
It weighed in north of 8,000 pounds, got eight miles to the gallon, cost a fortune to buy and insure and had its fair share of mechanical problems. Riding in it was like looking out of a mailbox. If that isn’t bad enough, it had the carbon footprint of a coal-burning steel mill.
The Hummer was quite possibly America’s ultimate symbol of wretched excess.
It made its debut following the first Gulf War, a made for television conflict in which it played a starring role.
A gas guzzler? Most people assumed it ran on testosterone. Actors and athletes made it the ultimate bling.
There was also a misguided sense of patriotism in owning the vehicle that carried our boys to victory in battle.
When gas prices began to soar, GM tried to downsize the car from monstrous to merely monumental. It didn’t work. Post 9/11 Americans were beginning to understand the pitfalls of our dependence on foreign oil and the warnings about global temperature increases were causing concern.
That didn’t stop the GM folks from trying to sell ice to the Eskimos. Mark LaNeve, vice president of sales, service and marketing for GM North America, said he'd love for consumers to begin thinking of Hummers as tools to get a job done. "No one criticizes a bulldozer for its gas mileage. That's because it's built to do a job."
But as the Sierra Club's Daniel Becker remarked, "It's one thing if it's carrying soldiers to and from a fight, it's another if it'shauling lattes home from Starbucks."
So what did it all mean?
Absolutely nothing in the long run. The chromed giants of the 50s and 60s and the muscle cars of the
1970s were replaced with Japanese fuel-sippers when oil supplies were low and prices soared.
When prices went down and availability was restored, the SUV made its way onto the automotive scene where it enjoyed a long reign.
Now, with gas prices rising and petrol dollars fueling terrorism (not to mention Iran’s nuclear ambitions), we turn our eyes to hybrids and electric vehicles. And they’re coming.
But the pendulum swings. At some point, muscular vehicles will come rumbling down the street
again.
As one publication pointed out, "Being big and powerful is essential to our national identity.”
Sunday, March 07, 2010
Sorry Excuses
In keeping with the spirit of the moment, I am proposing a new Olympic event.
The good news is that you don’t have to be swifter, higher or stronger.
The bad news is you have to be contrite, tearful and humble.
The competition? Public apologies.
We have been witness to some gold medal efforts this past week, featuring socko performances from Toyota to Tiger.
Past participants feature a rogues gallery of high profile personalities, many of whom were caught engaged in sexual activities that would make a lumberjack blush.
It seems we live in the Age of Apologies. So it’s about time we recognize those who win our hearts and minds and those who flop in the attempt.
Let the games begin.
Toyota president Akio Toyoda: Pressured into appearing before a congressional committee, he explained that "My name is on every car." He admitted that his company "lacked the customer perspective" when it came to doing recalls, instead relying on technical information.
"Customers have become uncertain about safety of Toyota vehicles and I take responsibility for that," Toyoda said. "I myself as well as Toyota am not perfect."
Well, neither are airline pilots, Mr. Toyoda, but they manage to do their job for the most part with maiming or killing people. It didn’t help Toyoda that he had to appear at a hearing largely characterized by political posturing, which delivered more theater than answers. Bronze medal.
Tiger Woods: For a man who has spent his life in the spotlight, Tiger Woods has never seemed comfortable as a celebrity. Even with the golfing press, for the most part a bunch of fawning sycophants, interviews were curt and to the point.
We thought it was because he was a private person. We now understand he is but for reasons we could not have imagined.
It came as no surprise to me that at his so-called “press conference,” in which he apologized for his promiscuous behavior, he displayed all the emotion of a man studying a tricky downhill putt.
This is a man who is complete control of himself, even when he isn’t.
Did I believe him? Heck yes. Let’s not make this more complicated than it needs to be. The guy has fallen from the peak of stardom to the pit of despair. But more than ego, there’s a lot of money involved and he has business partners who want to see him reclaim his image. Sure, he’s sorry.
Nonetheless, his act played well in Peoria. Gold medal.
Mark Sanford. The South Carolina governor told everyone he was hiking the Appalachian Trail when in fact he was winging it down to Argentina to snuggle with his “soul mate.”
It cost him his wife and family but this self-admitted liar and cheat still has his job. No medal.
Eliot Spitzer, the former governor of New York chose to spend his free time with high-priced prostitutes to the tune of some $80,000. When exposed, he tearfully resigned his office but has managed to keep his family together.
He is now writing political commentary and considering another run for office. Bronze medal.
James McGreevy: The former governor of New Jersey, with is wife at this side, completed the rare double axle by announcing he was going to resign coupled with an admission of his homosexuality. He also admitted to an affair with the man he appointed his Homeland Security advisor.
Since leaving office, he has studied to become an Episcopal priest. Silver medal.
Larry Craig. At a press conference in 2007 Sen. Craig denied allegations that he solicited gay sex in an airport restroom. He apologized, sort of.
He was sorry for pleading guilty, sorry for failing to consult with anyone beforehand and sorry for not telling
anyone he got arrested. He denied wrongdoing, stating, "I am not gay. I never have been gay." No medal.
Latrell Sprewell. The former NBA star apologized for choking his coach PJ Carlesimo. ” I’m sorry for what I did, and if you don’t believe that, I’ll kick your butt.” No medal.
And, of course, Bill Clinton. “Now, this matter is between me, the two people I love most -- my wife and our daughter -- and our God. I must put it right, and I am prepared to do whatever it takes to do so. “Nothing is more important to me personally. But it is private, and I intend to reclaim my family life for my family. It's nobody's business but ours.”
Now we know where Tiger got his script. Bronze medal.
The good news is that you don’t have to be swifter, higher or stronger.
The bad news is you have to be contrite, tearful and humble.
The competition? Public apologies.
We have been witness to some gold medal efforts this past week, featuring socko performances from Toyota to Tiger.
Past participants feature a rogues gallery of high profile personalities, many of whom were caught engaged in sexual activities that would make a lumberjack blush.
It seems we live in the Age of Apologies. So it’s about time we recognize those who win our hearts and minds and those who flop in the attempt.
Let the games begin.
Toyota president Akio Toyoda: Pressured into appearing before a congressional committee, he explained that "My name is on every car." He admitted that his company "lacked the customer perspective" when it came to doing recalls, instead relying on technical information.
"Customers have become uncertain about safety of Toyota vehicles and I take responsibility for that," Toyoda said. "I myself as well as Toyota am not perfect."
Well, neither are airline pilots, Mr. Toyoda, but they manage to do their job for the most part with maiming or killing people. It didn’t help Toyoda that he had to appear at a hearing largely characterized by political posturing, which delivered more theater than answers. Bronze medal.
Tiger Woods: For a man who has spent his life in the spotlight, Tiger Woods has never seemed comfortable as a celebrity. Even with the golfing press, for the most part a bunch of fawning sycophants, interviews were curt and to the point.
We thought it was because he was a private person. We now understand he is but for reasons we could not have imagined.
It came as no surprise to me that at his so-called “press conference,” in which he apologized for his promiscuous behavior, he displayed all the emotion of a man studying a tricky downhill putt.
This is a man who is complete control of himself, even when he isn’t.
Did I believe him? Heck yes. Let’s not make this more complicated than it needs to be. The guy has fallen from the peak of stardom to the pit of despair. But more than ego, there’s a lot of money involved and he has business partners who want to see him reclaim his image. Sure, he’s sorry.
Nonetheless, his act played well in Peoria. Gold medal.
Mark Sanford. The South Carolina governor told everyone he was hiking the Appalachian Trail when in fact he was winging it down to Argentina to snuggle with his “soul mate.”
It cost him his wife and family but this self-admitted liar and cheat still has his job. No medal.
Eliot Spitzer, the former governor of New York chose to spend his free time with high-priced prostitutes to the tune of some $80,000. When exposed, he tearfully resigned his office but has managed to keep his family together.
He is now writing political commentary and considering another run for office. Bronze medal.
James McGreevy: The former governor of New Jersey, with is wife at this side, completed the rare double axle by announcing he was going to resign coupled with an admission of his homosexuality. He also admitted to an affair with the man he appointed his Homeland Security advisor.
Since leaving office, he has studied to become an Episcopal priest. Silver medal.
Larry Craig. At a press conference in 2007 Sen. Craig denied allegations that he solicited gay sex in an airport restroom. He apologized, sort of.
He was sorry for pleading guilty, sorry for failing to consult with anyone beforehand and sorry for not telling
anyone he got arrested. He denied wrongdoing, stating, "I am not gay. I never have been gay." No medal.
Latrell Sprewell. The former NBA star apologized for choking his coach PJ Carlesimo. ” I’m sorry for what I did, and if you don’t believe that, I’ll kick your butt.” No medal.
And, of course, Bill Clinton. “Now, this matter is between me, the two people I love most -- my wife and our daughter -- and our God. I must put it right, and I am prepared to do whatever it takes to do so. “Nothing is more important to me personally. But it is private, and I intend to reclaim my family life for my family. It's nobody's business but ours.”
Now we know where Tiger got his script. Bronze medal.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Call Girls
I have a wife, two daughters, four nieces, a sister, sister-in-law
and a mother. So I consider myself somewhat of an expert on women, if such a thing
is possible.
What I’ve learned over the years is that most women want two things
out of life: (1) shoes and (2) telephones.
The second part of that equation was proved recently by a survey of
300 residents in a variety of locales that found, fairly consistently
from one city to the next, about 33 percent of women said they would
"put their sex lives on hold for a year" in order to continue to have
access to their mobile phone.
This doesn’t come as a complete surprise. As one wag once remarked,
"Women are actually like cell phones. They like to be held and talked
to, but push the wrong button, and you'll be disconnected."
I had an upclose and personal view of the relationship between women
and their cell mobile phones at a gym the other day. There were women
on each side of me as I stumbled along on a treadmill.
As I huffed and puffed, they all conversed on phones as they ran like
deer without missing a beat. It was an Olympian display of dexterity
and concentration.
Indeed, mobile phones are so important to women that Samsung, among
other manufacturers, has come up with a phone that includes an
ovulation calendar, a favorite fragrance list and biorhythms. And, of
course, it comes in pink.
“You can put in your birth date and it will tell you if you are
intelligent, attractive or emotionally stable. You can't be all three
on any day - I've played around with it," Samsung Mobile marketing
manager Jenny Goodridge was quoted as saying.
I also read a survey that stated 46 percent of women would opt to
forgo sex for two weeks rather than give up access to the Internet
for the same period.
These women are called wives.
In a related development, 43% of the respondents to a recent survey
taken in Canada said they would rather have bacon than sex.
But, of course, that’s Canada where they wear bacon after shave.
Nonetheless, applying the Law of Unintended Consequences to these
surveys, we may one day find that overpopulation is a thing of the
past thanks in large part to mobile phones, the Internet and BLT
sandwiches.
Speaking of Canada, the Great White North got off to a shaky start
with the Winter Olympics.
Bad weather (some are calling it the Spring Olympics), bad ice (in
the speedskating venue), bad planning (snafus at the opening
ceremonies) and bad luck (the death of a luger) have plagued the
games since they opened. Not a good return on a billion-dollar
investment.
Throw in NBC’s projected $200 million loss on the broadcast and we
have the sporting equivalent of the Titanic.
As for the Canadians, they could care less if Vancouver slides off
into the Pacific Ocean as long as they win the hockey gold medal.
Which they will. After all, Canada is the only place you can play
hockey 12 months of the year --- outdoors.
And speaking of mistakes, I wrote last week that we don’t have
anybody to root against anymore in the Winter Olympics with the
decline and fall of the Soviet empire. I added that those pesky
Iranians and the North Koreans were not participating.
They are. The Iranians have four skiers. North Korea has two skaters.
But don’t look for them on the victory stand.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Slip Sliding Away
Let me establish one thing right off the bat. I'm a warm weather guy, Southern California born and bred. I put a sweater on when it drops below 65 degrees.
Ski runs and hot chocolate? Not for this kid. Give me a round of golf with the sun on my face and a cold beer at the turn.
Minneapolis or Maui? There's really no choice.
That's why I view the Winter Olympics with a touch of astonishment.
Here are hundreds of our finest athletes participating in a bunch of events that are a variation on a single theme: sliding around on ice and snow.
It's a competition only an orthopedic surgeon could love.
Let's get serious. It's hard to get excited about the luge (which is German for "whose idea was this anyway?") that features the contestants lying on their backs on a small sled, flying down the mountain at breakneck speeds while steering with their calfs and shoulders). Sound like fun? Me neither.
There's a variation of luge called the skeleton in which the participant rockets down an icy track face first. It's like driving a Toyota down a ski jump.
Or consider curling. This game is brought to us by the Scots, who also gave the world haggis, an incomprehensible brogue, men in skirts and "MacBeth."
Curling is sort of like shuffleboard played on ice. Teams take turns sliding a heavy, polished rock down the ice toward the target (called the house). Two sweepers with brooms accompany each rock and, using timing and their best judgment along with direction from their teammates, help direct the stones to their resting place.
Sound boring? You bet. Although someone once pointed out that women like it since it is one the few times in their lives they see a man with a broom in his hands.
Ice Dancing? It's the same as figure skating only different. Snowboarding features a bunch of athletes who look like they were dressed by Goodwill. Short track speed skating is like watching marbles in a blender.
The biathlon consists of a race in which contestants ski around a cross-country track, and where the total distance is broken up by either two or four shooting rounds, half in prone position, the other half standing. Depending on the shooting performance, extra distance or time is added to the contestant's total running distance/time.
Edge of the seat excitement? Only if your cousin is involved.
To give the Games their due, the Winter Olympics has its moments. Figure skating remains a big draw. Downhill skiing, ski jumping and snowboarding are worth a look.
Hockey is one of the world's great sports, which unfortunately doesn't always play well on TV. Still, when a bunch of rag-tag college kids beat what was in fact a team of pros from the Soviet Union in 1980 in Lake Placid, it was a turning point in the Cold War. Now that's entertainment.
Alas, while there are good guys to root for this year, there are no bad guys to root against. The Soviet and Eastern Bloc automatons have vanished. North Korea and Iran don't field teams. And that robs the Games of much of its drama.
That didn't stop NBC from shelling out $5.7 billion for the rights to broadcast the Olympics through 2012.
The trouble is that this may not be our finest Olympic moment. Even designated star Lindsey Vonn is injured and may be a no-show.
Then there's competition. When NBC broadcasts the Nordic Combined today, for example, FOX will be airing the Daytona 500. That may not be a big deal in Finland, but it will be in Florida.
The advertisers have read the tea leaves, and NBC is already figuring on losing $250 million on the deal.
And this with the Games in our time zone.
If you think for a minute this will cool the media onslaught surrounding the Games, forget it. There will be nearly 200 hours of coverage on NBC alone. Get ready for a lot of snow on your screen.
The good news is that when the Games conclude, there's only three weeks until spring.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
The Winter of Toyota's Discontent
BATON ROUGE, La. --- A man who attempted to return his recalled
Toyota pickup truck to All Star Toyota on Airline Highway on Saturday
crashed into the dealership building when his allegedly faulty
accelerator stuck, the Baton Rouge Police Department reported.
These are trying times for Toyota.
The Japanese auto maker, the world’s largest, issued a recall in January affecting some 2.3 million vehicles, just months after a separate recall that affected nearly 4 million cars.
The problem: a defect that causes the throttle to stick open.
It’s not pleasant to contemplate the consequences of such a flaw. Many of us have heard the horrifying 911 tape of an off-duty California Highway Patrolman who was traveling with three members of his family when the car accelerated to 120 MPH and crashed, killing them all.
Equally as chilling is Toyota’s reaction. First it blamed the floor mats. Then it blamed pedal mechanisms and claimed it had a quick fix.Then the company declared a moratorium on sales. Now, many automotive experts are looking at the electronic throttle system as the culprit which, if true, would require major engineering fixes.
On top of that, the company’s showcase car, the Prius, has brake problems.
One corporate communication expert called it the worst-handled auto recall in history in terms of the consumer anxiety and the mixed messages that were being sent at the outset.
That’s because while many Toyota owners were wondering if their next ride could be their last, the company was retreating to the bunker.
More than 60 new cases of runaway Toyotas have been reported since the company said it had solved the problem with a massive recall of suspect floor mats and proposed changes to gas pedals, safety experts said.
In one dramatic incident, four people died in Southlake, Tex., when a 2008 Toyota sped off the road, crashed through a fence and landed upside down in a pond. The car's floor mats were found in the trunk of the car, where owners had been advised to put them as part of the recall.
If there’s such a thing as automotive marshall law, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood came close to invoking it this week by recommending that millions of Toyota owners affected by a massive recall "stop driving." (LaHood later amended his remarks to say, “what I meant to say or what I thought I said was, if you own one of these cars or if you're in doubt, take it to the dealer and they're going to fix it."
The beneficiaries of all this are Ford and General Motors, who have seen their sales soar in January while Toyota’s were declining.
Which is ironic since Ford and GM are the New York Yankees of automotive recalls. Consider:
-Oct 13, 2009: Ford Motor Co. adds 4.5 million older-model vehicles to a long list of those recalled due to a defective cruise controlswitch that can cause fires, pushing Ford's total recall due to faulty switches to 14.3 million.
-March, 1996: Ford recalls more than 8 million 1988-1993 cars to replace defective ignition switches in what was the largest single U.S. recall at the time. The switches can produce electrical shorts,causing engine misfires that led to stalling, as well as and brake and steering failures. The problem is implicated in hundreds of vehicle fires, and as many as 11 deaths and 31 injuries.
- April,1993: The feds ask General Motors to recall 4.7 million 1973-1987 full-size pickup trucks with side-mounted fuel tanks.
-- September, 1987: Ford recalls 4.3 million 1986-1988 model cars, trucks and vans, including some of its most popular models. Ford says the recall follows 222 reports of engine fires caused by a failure of couplings used to connect fuel lines.
-- Feb. 1981: GM recalls 5.8 million 1978-1981 cars and light trucks for replacement of two bolts which could fail and send the vehicles out of control.
And, of course, the design of Ford’s Pinto allowed its fuel tank to be easily damaged in the event of a rear-end collision which sometimes resulted in deadly fires and explosions. When Ford became aware of the flaw, it decided it was cheaper to pay off lawsuits than to redesign the car.
If you’re looking for corporate responsibility or ethical business practices, the automotive industry is a lousy place to look.
It appears that an industry increasingly focused on high-tech engineering and alternative fuels still embraces an old and corrupt business model.
Toyota is traveling a well worn path that, unfortunately, seems to extent endlessly into the horizon.
Toyota pickup truck to All Star Toyota on Airline Highway on Saturday
crashed into the dealership building when his allegedly faulty
accelerator stuck, the Baton Rouge Police Department reported.
These are trying times for Toyota.
The Japanese auto maker, the world’s largest, issued a recall in January affecting some 2.3 million vehicles, just months after a separate recall that affected nearly 4 million cars.
The problem: a defect that causes the throttle to stick open.
It’s not pleasant to contemplate the consequences of such a flaw. Many of us have heard the horrifying 911 tape of an off-duty California Highway Patrolman who was traveling with three members of his family when the car accelerated to 120 MPH and crashed, killing them all.
Equally as chilling is Toyota’s reaction. First it blamed the floor mats. Then it blamed pedal mechanisms and claimed it had a quick fix.Then the company declared a moratorium on sales. Now, many automotive experts are looking at the electronic throttle system as the culprit which, if true, would require major engineering fixes.
On top of that, the company’s showcase car, the Prius, has brake problems.
One corporate communication expert called it the worst-handled auto recall in history in terms of the consumer anxiety and the mixed messages that were being sent at the outset.
That’s because while many Toyota owners were wondering if their next ride could be their last, the company was retreating to the bunker.
More than 60 new cases of runaway Toyotas have been reported since the company said it had solved the problem with a massive recall of suspect floor mats and proposed changes to gas pedals, safety experts said.
In one dramatic incident, four people died in Southlake, Tex., when a 2008 Toyota sped off the road, crashed through a fence and landed upside down in a pond. The car's floor mats were found in the trunk of the car, where owners had been advised to put them as part of the recall.
If there’s such a thing as automotive marshall law, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood came close to invoking it this week by recommending that millions of Toyota owners affected by a massive recall "stop driving." (LaHood later amended his remarks to say, “what I meant to say or what I thought I said was, if you own one of these cars or if you're in doubt, take it to the dealer and they're going to fix it."
The beneficiaries of all this are Ford and General Motors, who have seen their sales soar in January while Toyota’s were declining.
Which is ironic since Ford and GM are the New York Yankees of automotive recalls. Consider:
-Oct 13, 2009: Ford Motor Co. adds 4.5 million older-model vehicles to a long list of those recalled due to a defective cruise controlswitch that can cause fires, pushing Ford's total recall due to faulty switches to 14.3 million.
-March, 1996: Ford recalls more than 8 million 1988-1993 cars to replace defective ignition switches in what was the largest single U.S. recall at the time. The switches can produce electrical shorts,causing engine misfires that led to stalling, as well as and brake and steering failures. The problem is implicated in hundreds of vehicle fires, and as many as 11 deaths and 31 injuries.
- April,1993: The feds ask General Motors to recall 4.7 million 1973-1987 full-size pickup trucks with side-mounted fuel tanks.
-- September, 1987: Ford recalls 4.3 million 1986-1988 model cars, trucks and vans, including some of its most popular models. Ford says the recall follows 222 reports of engine fires caused by a failure of couplings used to connect fuel lines.
-- Feb. 1981: GM recalls 5.8 million 1978-1981 cars and light trucks for replacement of two bolts which could fail and send the vehicles out of control.
And, of course, the design of Ford’s Pinto allowed its fuel tank to be easily damaged in the event of a rear-end collision which sometimes resulted in deadly fires and explosions. When Ford became aware of the flaw, it decided it was cheaper to pay off lawsuits than to redesign the car.
If you’re looking for corporate responsibility or ethical business practices, the automotive industry is a lousy place to look.
It appears that an industry increasingly focused on high-tech engineering and alternative fuels still embraces an old and corrupt business model.
Toyota is traveling a well worn path that, unfortunately, seems to extent endlessly into the horizon.
Monday, February 01, 2010
The Whole Bowl Game
OK, my fellow Americans, everyone into the pool.
It’s time for a well-earned respite from our weary world. It’s time to forget, at least temporarily, about the economy, health care, terrorism, to look away from the grim faces of Jay Leno and Conan O’Brien.
It’s time to put our brains in neutral. It’s time for the Super Bowl.
That’s right, folks. The event that defines American Excess like no other is just a week away. Starting this week, millions of our fellow countrymen will sit slack-jawed and gimlet eyed while a thousand hours of broadcast hype
rolls over them like a thick fog.
This year’s game promises to be a titanic, a game for the ages, a match so thrilling in its concept and execution that the mere act of watching it will provide an eyewitness to history. Of course, they say that every year but what the heck.
In one corner are the Indianapolis Colts, whose quarterback is the football equivalent of the Colossus of Rhodes. Peyton Manning, to hear tell, is seven feet tall, has an IQ of 200 and threw 400 touchdown passes this year.
The Colts will play the New Orleans Saints. Nobody much cares who plays for the Saints. The important thing is that they represent a city that invented jazz, the cover charge and massive public drunkenness. No real self-respecting saint would be caught dead in this town.
On the other hand, it was taxpayer dollars that put the city back together after Hurricane Katrina so I guess we all have a rooting interest here.
All Super Bowls are referred to by Roman numeral. This year’s game is Super Bowl XLIV which sounds like a personalized license plate. Personally, I think they ought to carry through the Roman numeral theme completely. First downs would be Ist and X. Game scores would be, for example, XXI to XIV. Players would wear Roman numerals on their jerseys (except the Romans forgot to include zero which is problematic).
The festivities usually start with a painfully long pre-game show in which a bunch of former players and coaches engage in verbal wet towel snapping while astounding the audience by saying nothing of substance for hours on end.
Members of the media will swarm over third string linemen, back-up long snappers and assistant trainers looking for that one that one quote, that one angle that will distinguish their story from a thousand others. And fail.
Players will say it’s “gut check time,” that they need “to give 110 per cent,” that they’re ready to “shock the world,” that they will “leave it all out on the field.” If they lose, “the other guys wanted it more.” If they win, they will insist God wrote their game plan.
Pre-game ceremonies include the entire 82nd Airborne Division parachuting into the stadium to re-create the Liberation of Paris. Halftime will feature U2 singing mournful songs about social injustice accompanied by the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, the massed musicians of the New York, Philadelphia, Chicago, Boston and Wala
Wala Symphony Orchestras and the Bolshoi Ballet.
This will be followed by Keith Olbermann and Bill O’Reilly reciting the Bill of Rights while lashed together with leather straps. As they do, a squadron of deadly Predator Drones will fly slowly over the stadium, daring anyone to leave.
The game which will be like watching paint dry because both teams will be playing not to lose rather than to win.
That’s why commercials are so popular during the Super Bowl. This year’s lineup includes beer ads aimed at 20-year-old guys, commercials for high-tech equipment or companies that nobody will understand or remember, and snack food and soft drinks ads wrapped around commercials for cholesterol lowering drugs.
But enjoy it while you can. The landscape is already changing. An anti-abortion spot and an ad for a gay dating site are already in the works. Next year, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court striking down limits on corporate spending on political advertising, guess what we’ll be watching? You’ll miss the Dorito ads.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)