Well, NBC has completed their journey to the dark side. They have gone completely over to the side of inanity and gimmickry and announced the cancellation of Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. What have they decided to keep? Well, you can be thrilled with more episodes of shows like Deal or No Deal. Even Heroes, which is higher quality than Deal, is still more geared towards shock value than quality, but at least there are a few redeeming features.
Why the big deal about Studio 60? Let me take you back in time. Way back in the "old days", there was a little show with a little following. In many cases, this show would have been canceled, but NBC decided to give it time to find an audience, because the president of the network thought that quality should count for something. The title of that series was Hill Street Blues, and it did find an audience and became one of the most appreciated police dramas in television. Want another example? How about a show that focused on the happenings in the White House? It was given time to find its legs, and became another hit. It was a quality show that assumed that the public was smart enough to "get it". That show was, of course, The West Wing, an Aaron Sorkin masterpiece.
Sorkin came back this season with another intelligent series, with witty, quick-moving banter and story lines. Instead of giving it a chance to find its audience, NBC kept pre-empting it with other programs (a special Deal or No Deal??) and making people go weeks between episodes. Is it any wonder that it couldn't find an audience? Now, after no opportunity whatsoever, NBC is pulling the plug.
What does this tell us about network television? It tells us that corporations are running the networks with nothing more than dollar signs in their eyes and no concern about quality. Is it really a surprise that cable networks are killing the free networks? It isn't because they have more money or sponsors. It's because they take a chance on quality. Shows like Monk, Psych, or even Mythbusters wouldn't have a chance on NBC, but are huge hits for USA and Discovery. Frankly, I'm insulted that NBC thinks that my intelligence is lower than theirs. I long for the days when a network president would give quality a chance. I miss West Wing. NBC...you've lost a viewer.
Let's be careful out there.
Monday, May 14, 2007
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
How Stupid Can French Protesters Be?
OK...just a quickie here.
Sarkozy elected president. Claims he will be a president for all of France. Vacations on a billionaire's yacht. Not too bright, but hey, he's the President-elect and won't be recalled for it. Just not a big public relations coup.
My main thing is the protesters. Once again, they start burning cars and clashing with police, calling Sarkozy a facist. (Have they already forgotten what a facist really is? I don't think Sarkozy is looking to put any Jews, Roma, or Jehovah's Witnesses in a death camp.) But on top of it...this:
OK, guys. You're calling someone a fascist and then torching a nursery school??? There are some people in this world that truly qualify as idiots. Congratulations, protesting youths...you are overqualified for the word.
Sarkozy elected president. Claims he will be a president for all of France. Vacations on a billionaire's yacht. Not too bright, but hey, he's the President-elect and won't be recalled for it. Just not a big public relations coup.
My main thing is the protesters. Once again, they start burning cars and clashing with police, calling Sarkozy a facist. (Have they already forgotten what a facist really is? I don't think Sarkozy is looking to put any Jews, Roma, or Jehovah's Witnesses in a death camp.) But on top of it...this:
In Paris, about 150 protesters shouting "Sarko, fascist!" clashed with police in the Bastille district. In the suburbs, youths set fire to a nursery school and torched cars in a garage.
In Lyon, some 200 demonstrators clashed with police, while UMP party offices were set ablaze in the nearby town of Villeurbanne.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6638301.stm
OK, guys. You're calling someone a fascist and then torching a nursery school??? There are some people in this world that truly qualify as idiots. Congratulations, protesting youths...you are overqualified for the word.
Monday, May 07, 2007
France Has Chosen
I just finished listening to the BBC World Report. They had a special edition on the French elections. After hearing the different reactions from the French politicos and people, I have a few thoughts to relate:
1) Nicolas Sarkozy is a driven man. He has wanted the presidency for a long time, and now he has it. There have been some negative comparisons to Napoleon - a short man driven to rule - and feel that while negative, they do have some merit. Not the "short" part, mind you, but the driven part. Even though Napoleon is viewed by many today as a crazy, power-hungry loon, the fact is that Napoleon was largely responsible for the look of Paris today, as well as the Codes that are still used to govern France. Sarkozy is driven, that's for sure. But no one can really say what direction he will ultimately take the country. One of the main problems that he sees in France is the business climate, and he sees that as causing many other problems that are offshoots from that one. He isn't wrong. When a country has high unemployment and bored youth, as well as poor immigrants who can't find work, there are bound to be social and criminal problems. Put people to work, and problems diminish. The only way that will happen is to remove some of the burdens that the Socialist governments have put on business. That's one of Sarkozy's main goals. Will he be able to implement it? That leads to item #2.
2) The Leglislative elections that are coming up are vital for any chance of success for Sarkozy's programs. If the French really wanted Sarkozy to do something, then the people are going to have to follow up the presidential elections with a legislative group that is in favor of change. The problem with France's multi-party system is that it is very difficult for the Assembly to speak with a single voice, or even two voices. The multitude of platforms makes it tough for a leader to get what he needs to implement policy. Sarkozy needs a majority to make it happen.
3) The Socialists still don't get it. Listening to the comments of one of the Socialist leaders, I realize that they don't really see what's happening. They see France as a left-leaning country and Sarkozy as a dangerous villain. But when asked if they need to change, the interviewee stated that they need to examine the reasons for the loss, but just need to find a new candidate with experience. Hello? Are you hearing what the people are telling you? They are tired of eight percent unemployment! They are tired of strikes interfering with their daily lives! The Socialist agenda didn't work. That isn't to say that Sarkozy's agenda will. No human government can ultimately succeed, because humans aren't capable of guiding their own steps, as the Bible tells us. Still, this is three losses in a row for the Socialists. If a dog gets swatted on the nose with a newspaper often enough, he learns not to use the carpeting as his personal toilet. The Socialists have been swatted several times now. They need to stop wetting themselves and take an honest look at their failures.
OK...enough politics. I'm sick of it. This old system keeps proving the Bible's point and that we need the Kingdom to rule. Want more proof? The Dems and Republicans have been debating in the U.S. Watch...learn...gag...
1) Nicolas Sarkozy is a driven man. He has wanted the presidency for a long time, and now he has it. There have been some negative comparisons to Napoleon - a short man driven to rule - and feel that while negative, they do have some merit. Not the "short" part, mind you, but the driven part. Even though Napoleon is viewed by many today as a crazy, power-hungry loon, the fact is that Napoleon was largely responsible for the look of Paris today, as well as the Codes that are still used to govern France. Sarkozy is driven, that's for sure. But no one can really say what direction he will ultimately take the country. One of the main problems that he sees in France is the business climate, and he sees that as causing many other problems that are offshoots from that one. He isn't wrong. When a country has high unemployment and bored youth, as well as poor immigrants who can't find work, there are bound to be social and criminal problems. Put people to work, and problems diminish. The only way that will happen is to remove some of the burdens that the Socialist governments have put on business. That's one of Sarkozy's main goals. Will he be able to implement it? That leads to item #2.
2) The Leglislative elections that are coming up are vital for any chance of success for Sarkozy's programs. If the French really wanted Sarkozy to do something, then the people are going to have to follow up the presidential elections with a legislative group that is in favor of change. The problem with France's multi-party system is that it is very difficult for the Assembly to speak with a single voice, or even two voices. The multitude of platforms makes it tough for a leader to get what he needs to implement policy. Sarkozy needs a majority to make it happen.
3) The Socialists still don't get it. Listening to the comments of one of the Socialist leaders, I realize that they don't really see what's happening. They see France as a left-leaning country and Sarkozy as a dangerous villain. But when asked if they need to change, the interviewee stated that they need to examine the reasons for the loss, but just need to find a new candidate with experience. Hello? Are you hearing what the people are telling you? They are tired of eight percent unemployment! They are tired of strikes interfering with their daily lives! The Socialist agenda didn't work. That isn't to say that Sarkozy's agenda will. No human government can ultimately succeed, because humans aren't capable of guiding their own steps, as the Bible tells us. Still, this is three losses in a row for the Socialists. If a dog gets swatted on the nose with a newspaper often enough, he learns not to use the carpeting as his personal toilet. The Socialists have been swatted several times now. They need to stop wetting themselves and take an honest look at their failures.
OK...enough politics. I'm sick of it. This old system keeps proving the Bible's point and that we need the Kingdom to rule. Want more proof? The Dems and Republicans have been debating in the U.S. Watch...learn...gag...
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Tough Decision for France
When a country arrives at a crossroad, it's always interesting to observe which path its people takes. In the case of France, we see a clear-cut decision placed before her citizens, and it is truly fascinating to watch.
First....to be redundant and repeat what I always do...I don't get involved in politics. I don't feel that any official can truly make things better for people. Only God can do that. But, I do like to observe cultures and the way that people react to situations. That's why I'm writing about France's elections today.
For years under Mitterand, France had been careening down a Socialist path. High taxes paid for increasing social programs that served no real benefit for the economy. Then, along comes Chirac, who was supposed to be a fiscal conservative. The problem was that his p.m. was a Socialist, so that nothing could really get done. One thing that DID get done, and horribly so, was a change to a 35 hour work week. That slowed the economy farther. In addition, due to restrictions put on companies, youth unemployment sits at over 25% because companies won't hire a young person who is untested and cannot be fired. When a proposal was made that would allow a company to fire a newly hired person if they didn't work out, riots ensued. In fact, it seems as though France has been one riot after another.
So, we come to the election. There cannot be a more striking gap between the two candidates. On one side is Sarkozy, who is pro-America, pro-business, and fiscally conservative. He wants to get rid of the 35 hour work week, eliminate some of the mass of social welfare programs, and make it more difficult for public employees to strike. Sounds good, right? The problem is that for years the French people have violently opposed any proposal that might take away some of their "God-given" rights, such as the right to strike for a damaged toenail. Still, Sarkozy has the lead in the polls right now.
On the other side is Royal. She is a relative newbie to politics. She is a Socialist who wants to increase the social programs so that the youth of France will be taken care of better. Of course, that will mean increasing taxes, but what the hey? Her downfall, however, has been her self-contradictions and gaffes. People see her as too inexperienced. She is also anti-Bush, but who isn't these days?
Now the fun begins. Will France elect the conservative Sarkozy? If they do, will they allow him to implement his programs? Will they elect Royal? If they do, will France ever be relevant again? Who will the centrist voters of Bayrou turn to? So many questions. But this may turn out to be one of the most meaningful elections in France in years. It may, in fact, determine if France ever becomes a major player on the world stage again. Both candidates are from the younger, post-World War 2 era. In the end, however, the candidates will not be the ones who decide on France's path. The people of France will need to decide once and for all if they are willing to make drastic changes to fix what is holding them back. That may include giving up some of the freebies that they think they are entitled to have.
Interesting...
First....to be redundant and repeat what I always do...I don't get involved in politics. I don't feel that any official can truly make things better for people. Only God can do that. But, I do like to observe cultures and the way that people react to situations. That's why I'm writing about France's elections today.
For years under Mitterand, France had been careening down a Socialist path. High taxes paid for increasing social programs that served no real benefit for the economy. Then, along comes Chirac, who was supposed to be a fiscal conservative. The problem was that his p.m. was a Socialist, so that nothing could really get done. One thing that DID get done, and horribly so, was a change to a 35 hour work week. That slowed the economy farther. In addition, due to restrictions put on companies, youth unemployment sits at over 25% because companies won't hire a young person who is untested and cannot be fired. When a proposal was made that would allow a company to fire a newly hired person if they didn't work out, riots ensued. In fact, it seems as though France has been one riot after another.
So, we come to the election. There cannot be a more striking gap between the two candidates. On one side is Sarkozy, who is pro-America, pro-business, and fiscally conservative. He wants to get rid of the 35 hour work week, eliminate some of the mass of social welfare programs, and make it more difficult for public employees to strike. Sounds good, right? The problem is that for years the French people have violently opposed any proposal that might take away some of their "God-given" rights, such as the right to strike for a damaged toenail. Still, Sarkozy has the lead in the polls right now.
On the other side is Royal. She is a relative newbie to politics. She is a Socialist who wants to increase the social programs so that the youth of France will be taken care of better. Of course, that will mean increasing taxes, but what the hey? Her downfall, however, has been her self-contradictions and gaffes. People see her as too inexperienced. She is also anti-Bush, but who isn't these days?
Now the fun begins. Will France elect the conservative Sarkozy? If they do, will they allow him to implement his programs? Will they elect Royal? If they do, will France ever be relevant again? Who will the centrist voters of Bayrou turn to? So many questions. But this may turn out to be one of the most meaningful elections in France in years. It may, in fact, determine if France ever becomes a major player on the world stage again. Both candidates are from the younger, post-World War 2 era. In the end, however, the candidates will not be the ones who decide on France's path. The people of France will need to decide once and for all if they are willing to make drastic changes to fix what is holding them back. That may include giving up some of the freebies that they think they are entitled to have.
Interesting...
Monday, April 16, 2007
Tragedy in Virginia
I was going to start this with some thoughts about Imus' firing. However, not only has that topic been beaten to a pulp, but now a news story is breaking about an incredible horror story at Virginia Tech. As of this moment, MSNBC is stating that 31 people are dead in a shooting rampage at Virginia Tech University. The gunman apparently started at a dorm around 7:30 this morning, and then moved over to an engineering and math building about 2 1/2 hours later. Details are still sketchy, but it is the worst murder spree at a school in U.S. history, and that includes Columbine.
It would be easy to rant here about gun control, safety in our schools, college life and the like. But in the end, these kinds of changes wouldn't fix the problem. The problem lies within the hearts and behavior of people.
Not all people are as wicked as this gunman. That's obvious. There are many people who give of their time, their effort, and their hearts to help others. Even those that don't actively volunteer to help others may still be nice folk and lend a hand from time to time. But people still look out their windows and are afraid. Some fear crime, some fear war and terrorism, and some fear natural disasters. There are those who live on little or no money and are hungry every day. The world is an unsafe and in general, an unkind place.
I want to tell anyone who reads this, though, that there is hope. Please take a moment and visit the following website for information:
http://www.watchtower.org/library/dg/article_09.htm
You can also go to the main page and get answers to other questions.
I can't say it any better than the site does. It's a terrible day for all who love peace, but there is still a way to enjoy safety in this troubled world.
It would be easy to rant here about gun control, safety in our schools, college life and the like. But in the end, these kinds of changes wouldn't fix the problem. The problem lies within the hearts and behavior of people.
Not all people are as wicked as this gunman. That's obvious. There are many people who give of their time, their effort, and their hearts to help others. Even those that don't actively volunteer to help others may still be nice folk and lend a hand from time to time. But people still look out their windows and are afraid. Some fear crime, some fear war and terrorism, and some fear natural disasters. There are those who live on little or no money and are hungry every day. The world is an unsafe and in general, an unkind place.
I want to tell anyone who reads this, though, that there is hope. Please take a moment and visit the following website for information:
http://www.watchtower.org/library/dg/article_09.htm
You can also go to the main page and get answers to other questions.
I can't say it any better than the site does. It's a terrible day for all who love peace, but there is still a way to enjoy safety in this troubled world.
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Foreclosures
The news is filled with stories of the rise and fall of the "Subprime Lenders".
As I understand things - I say it this way as I did not buy a home over the last few years - loan companies came out of the woodwork to offer Interest Only Loans for new homeowners. After a specified amount of time, the payments would readjust to allow for new interest rates. These loans were even being offered to those with low or downright poor credit ratings. Now, people are having great difficulty paying the new monthly amounts. Loan companies are failing. Foreclosures are growing. Thus, I ask this question: What the heck did you expect????
The problem is that people want everything right away. They aren't willing to wait. Thus, they got loans that they couldn't afford, with the idea that interest rates would stay low or they could just flip the house and make a huge profit before the payments went up. Nice dream. The reality was that the housing market began to tank because people pushed up house prices because they got into a bidding war to see who could buy the biggest and best property with the least down. Housing prices in my area are so high that I can't even begin to think of purchasing a home.
I should feel sorry for these people, I really should. And I do feel sorry for those who were badly deceived by loan companies, some of which falsified or grossly inflated applicants' income so they would qualify for a loan. These are people that I feel sorry for because they just didn't do their homework. I also feel sorry for those who were scraping by and either lost their job or had medical bills or some other tragedy crop up. But for those who were just looking to make a quick buck, to brag about what they owned, or to just let the bank foreclose when the interest went up I say: Nyahh, nyahh, nyahh. (Okay...so that was childish.) Still, I have little sympathy for those who were greedy.
What happens now? Do housing prices come down to a more realistic level? I don't know. I'm not an economist, realtor, or other form of expert. I just hope that people will learn to live within their means and be satisfied with the basic needs of life. But in California, I doubt it.
As I understand things - I say it this way as I did not buy a home over the last few years - loan companies came out of the woodwork to offer Interest Only Loans for new homeowners. After a specified amount of time, the payments would readjust to allow for new interest rates. These loans were even being offered to those with low or downright poor credit ratings. Now, people are having great difficulty paying the new monthly amounts. Loan companies are failing. Foreclosures are growing. Thus, I ask this question: What the heck did you expect????
The problem is that people want everything right away. They aren't willing to wait. Thus, they got loans that they couldn't afford, with the idea that interest rates would stay low or they could just flip the house and make a huge profit before the payments went up. Nice dream. The reality was that the housing market began to tank because people pushed up house prices because they got into a bidding war to see who could buy the biggest and best property with the least down. Housing prices in my area are so high that I can't even begin to think of purchasing a home.
I should feel sorry for these people, I really should. And I do feel sorry for those who were badly deceived by loan companies, some of which falsified or grossly inflated applicants' income so they would qualify for a loan. These are people that I feel sorry for because they just didn't do their homework. I also feel sorry for those who were scraping by and either lost their job or had medical bills or some other tragedy crop up. But for those who were just looking to make a quick buck, to brag about what they owned, or to just let the bank foreclose when the interest went up I say: Nyahh, nyahh, nyahh. (Okay...so that was childish.) Still, I have little sympathy for those who were greedy.
What happens now? Do housing prices come down to a more realistic level? I don't know. I'm not an economist, realtor, or other form of expert. I just hope that people will learn to live within their means and be satisfied with the basic needs of life. But in California, I doubt it.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Time Marches On!
Do you ever have the feeling that the day only has 12 hours instead of 24? Well, that's the way it's been lately. So, instead of apologizing once again for my failure to post for any of my one or two readers...let me move on boldly and full speed ahead.
Politics are funny. Anyone who has dared to read this blog knows that I don't get involved in them. But I do laugh at them. California has decided to move its primary up several months to have a bigger say in who gets nominated for President. But not so surprising is that a number of other states are trying to do the same thing. The law of the land says that Iowa and New Hampshire get first dibs on primaries, so none of the other states can usurp that position. But you have to ask yourself; what happens if almost all of the other states hold their primary on the same day? The answer? You get about 9 months of endless commercials and photo ops with the two winners. You think you get sick of it now? Just wait, folks.
If it comes down to that, though, can you imagine what else that means? It means that candidates will have to enter the race and start earning money almost as soon as the previous election is over! They will have less time to make their names known and get their faces in front of the public, so they'll need to start earlier and they'll need to raise more money and do it faster than ever. Imagine that. November elections are over, and you have a new President. He or she outlines what the administration hopes to accomplish in the first 100 days. After the 100 days..."oh, by the way, I'm running for re-election!" Time to throw the tv and newspaper out the window to avoid the endless campaigning.
I really don't like the way the French government operates in a number of areas. But maybe their idea for a national election would work the best. It would have to be modified for the U.S., though. Maybe a single primary election that takes place, say, on a day that would be designated a holiday or a weekend day. Then, about two weeks later...the presidential elections. Wouldn't that be interesting??
Anyway, on to other things. Over the weekend, someone got the bright idea that it would be fun to burn a railroad trestle in Sacramento, California. Yes, some bonehead arsonist decided to torch a creosote-laden wood railroad trestle. Not only did it burn for a few days, and not only did it pour pollution into the air that just hung over the city and caused no end of respiratory ills, but it will cost about $30 million to rebuild it and will delay trains by nearly a day as they have to take alternate routes. Anyone up for harsher penalties for arsonists? Pardon me...I have to cough.
Let's talk sports for a moment, shall we? Yes, I think we shall. The Sacramento Kings are looking abysmal. After looking so good for so long, this season is a wreck. But why? What happened? Since it's my blog, I'm going to chime in. First, the Maloofs should stay out of Geoff Petrie's way. Petrie is one of the best, if not THE best, GM in the league. He has an eye for talent and getting the most bang for the buck. But then, in stepped the Maloofs, who decided that Rick Adelman was too boring for them as coach. Even though it was Adelman who was able to get a bunch of average players to work together and was able to find the strengths of each player and use them to the best advantage, the Maloofs canned him. Want proof of Adelman's skill? Where are the following players now, and what are they doing: Jason Williams, Doug Christie, Yogi Stewart, etc., etc., etc. Adelman got their best and they thrived in Sacramento. Anyway, then the Maloofs demanded and got Ron-Ron Artest, who can't decide if he wants to jack up threes, starve his dogs, alienate his teammates, or hit his wife. There's a prize acquisition! And now, even if he wanted to, Petrie is going to have a hard time moving him. Joe and Gavin, please....focus on cooperating with the city and getting a new arena built. Sacramento needs one, there is no doubt. Make it happen. Work with people instead of against them. Focus on the running of the franchise and of making your paying public happy. Let Petrie make the player and coach moves. There are few better. You guys were at your best when you were into public relations and letting the GM do his job.
More soon...I hope. If anyone is actually reading this blog, drop me a comment! I would like to know if I'm just a voice crying out into the wilderness with nothing but an echo for an answer!
Politics are funny. Anyone who has dared to read this blog knows that I don't get involved in them. But I do laugh at them. California has decided to move its primary up several months to have a bigger say in who gets nominated for President. But not so surprising is that a number of other states are trying to do the same thing. The law of the land says that Iowa and New Hampshire get first dibs on primaries, so none of the other states can usurp that position. But you have to ask yourself; what happens if almost all of the other states hold their primary on the same day? The answer? You get about 9 months of endless commercials and photo ops with the two winners. You think you get sick of it now? Just wait, folks.
If it comes down to that, though, can you imagine what else that means? It means that candidates will have to enter the race and start earning money almost as soon as the previous election is over! They will have less time to make their names known and get their faces in front of the public, so they'll need to start earlier and they'll need to raise more money and do it faster than ever. Imagine that. November elections are over, and you have a new President. He or she outlines what the administration hopes to accomplish in the first 100 days. After the 100 days..."oh, by the way, I'm running for re-election!" Time to throw the tv and newspaper out the window to avoid the endless campaigning.
I really don't like the way the French government operates in a number of areas. But maybe their idea for a national election would work the best. It would have to be modified for the U.S., though. Maybe a single primary election that takes place, say, on a day that would be designated a holiday or a weekend day. Then, about two weeks later...the presidential elections. Wouldn't that be interesting??
Anyway, on to other things. Over the weekend, someone got the bright idea that it would be fun to burn a railroad trestle in Sacramento, California. Yes, some bonehead arsonist decided to torch a creosote-laden wood railroad trestle. Not only did it burn for a few days, and not only did it pour pollution into the air that just hung over the city and caused no end of respiratory ills, but it will cost about $30 million to rebuild it and will delay trains by nearly a day as they have to take alternate routes. Anyone up for harsher penalties for arsonists? Pardon me...I have to cough.
Let's talk sports for a moment, shall we? Yes, I think we shall. The Sacramento Kings are looking abysmal. After looking so good for so long, this season is a wreck. But why? What happened? Since it's my blog, I'm going to chime in. First, the Maloofs should stay out of Geoff Petrie's way. Petrie is one of the best, if not THE best, GM in the league. He has an eye for talent and getting the most bang for the buck. But then, in stepped the Maloofs, who decided that Rick Adelman was too boring for them as coach. Even though it was Adelman who was able to get a bunch of average players to work together and was able to find the strengths of each player and use them to the best advantage, the Maloofs canned him. Want proof of Adelman's skill? Where are the following players now, and what are they doing: Jason Williams, Doug Christie, Yogi Stewart, etc., etc., etc. Adelman got their best and they thrived in Sacramento. Anyway, then the Maloofs demanded and got Ron-Ron Artest, who can't decide if he wants to jack up threes, starve his dogs, alienate his teammates, or hit his wife. There's a prize acquisition! And now, even if he wanted to, Petrie is going to have a hard time moving him. Joe and Gavin, please....focus on cooperating with the city and getting a new arena built. Sacramento needs one, there is no doubt. Make it happen. Work with people instead of against them. Focus on the running of the franchise and of making your paying public happy. Let Petrie make the player and coach moves. There are few better. You guys were at your best when you were into public relations and letting the GM do his job.
More soon...I hope. If anyone is actually reading this blog, drop me a comment! I would like to know if I'm just a voice crying out into the wilderness with nothing but an echo for an answer!
Monday, February 19, 2007
Wii were just wondering...
OK...so I didn't live up to my billing. I didn't improve my blog record. Mea culpa. I guess I could say I've been so busy with school, family, and spiritual life that I just didn't have time. Well...I will say it! So there.
Around October of 2K6, the big question was whether the PS3 or Nintendo Wii would rule the video game world in December. I think it's been decided that the Wii has taken the crown. (the wii-ner?) But why? Why would such a strange little system beat the powerful PS3? The answer, I think, is playability. As the years have gone by, I have found little to like in video game systems. Not that the graphics were bad or anything like that. I just wonder how in the world I'm supposed to remember a 10-button code to throw a forward pass! Along comes the Wii, with its controller and nunchuck. If you haven't seen it, go to Nintendo's website. This thing detects motion, and is bundled with the system and the Wii Sports game. I couldn't believe that I was bowling with this thing, and the controller was reading everything from the speed that I threw to the twist of the wrist. Amazing.
And fun. My son had a graduation party at a friend's home, and as things died down a little, one of the guys hooked up the Wii. Very quickly, a crowd gathered, as they took turns playing tennis, bowling, and any of the other games. But it wasn't just the players having fun. The spectators were having a blast commenting and kibbitzing. In the end, it was a hit.
No, I didn't really want one. But now I do. The problem is...I just can't find one! I've found them in bundle deals, where instead of $250 you have to pay $650 and choose 6 or 7 games to bundle with it. I don't want 6 or 7 games! I want the Wii (and everything that comes with it), an extra controller and nunchuck, and maybe Madden 07. That's all for now! Why can't I find that?? The reason is that Nintendo just can't pump them out fast enough, and retailers figure that they can make more by forcing folks to buy games. That's just low. If people want games, they'll buy them. Don't make us do it.
In the meantime, I'll keep hoping that Nintendo can ramp up their production. I'll be patient. Really. But I'm also disabling ebay from my computer for now. Less temptation.
Around October of 2K6, the big question was whether the PS3 or Nintendo Wii would rule the video game world in December. I think it's been decided that the Wii has taken the crown. (the wii-ner?) But why? Why would such a strange little system beat the powerful PS3? The answer, I think, is playability. As the years have gone by, I have found little to like in video game systems. Not that the graphics were bad or anything like that. I just wonder how in the world I'm supposed to remember a 10-button code to throw a forward pass! Along comes the Wii, with its controller and nunchuck. If you haven't seen it, go to Nintendo's website. This thing detects motion, and is bundled with the system and the Wii Sports game. I couldn't believe that I was bowling with this thing, and the controller was reading everything from the speed that I threw to the twist of the wrist. Amazing.
And fun. My son had a graduation party at a friend's home, and as things died down a little, one of the guys hooked up the Wii. Very quickly, a crowd gathered, as they took turns playing tennis, bowling, and any of the other games. But it wasn't just the players having fun. The spectators were having a blast commenting and kibbitzing. In the end, it was a hit.
No, I didn't really want one. But now I do. The problem is...I just can't find one! I've found them in bundle deals, where instead of $250 you have to pay $650 and choose 6 or 7 games to bundle with it. I don't want 6 or 7 games! I want the Wii (and everything that comes with it), an extra controller and nunchuck, and maybe Madden 07. That's all for now! Why can't I find that?? The reason is that Nintendo just can't pump them out fast enough, and retailers figure that they can make more by forcing folks to buy games. That's just low. If people want games, they'll buy them. Don't make us do it.
In the meantime, I'll keep hoping that Nintendo can ramp up their production. I'll be patient. Really. But I'm also disabling ebay from my computer for now. Less temptation.
Friday, December 29, 2006
French and American: Really so different?
My wife and son just got back from Paris, and from what they told me and what has been going on lately, I'm beginning to think that the French aren't as different from Americans as many may think. I'm going to give just four examples here, and you can decide for yourself.
McDonald's: There are more and more of the restaurants in Paris. Surprisingly, it isn't just the food that attracts Parisians. In Paris, if you want to use the bathroom of a cafe or restaurant, you almost invariably have to buy something. Not at McD's. You can walk in and use a clean bathroom without buying. Americans take that for granted, but it's new in France and is a very popular idea. Unfortunately, it seems that artery clogging is becoming more common as well. The fast food craze is leading to higher levels of heart disease in France. How American is that?
Starbucks: Yes, that's right. Starbucks is in Paris and is growing by leaps and bounds. My son counted three within a few blocks of each other. Now why, you may ask, would Starbucks be so popular when you can get some of the world's best coffee at any sidewalk cafe? Besides the drinks, one reason is a very un-French reason: the drinks cost the same whether you drink it there or take it to go. In Paris, if you want to eat or drink at the restaurant or cafe, the price is higher because you are basically renting the table. However, that isn't the way in the U.S., and it isn't the way at Starbucks. You pay the same price for your beverage no matter where you're going to drink it. So, even though it goes against tradition, the Parisians are leaping at the idea. (Starbucks also does the bathroom thing that McDonald's does, but I won't go into that.)
Smoking: The French are getting ready for a ban on smoking in public places. Seems that Chirac stopped smoking a while ago and wants others to do the same. Very American, eh? Even though some are protesting the idea, chew on this fact. Another reason that Starbucks is popular in Paris is...that it is a non-smoking establishment! The French seem to be ready for the ban on smoking and there appear to be many who are already embracing it.
Politics: If you've read any of my previous posts, you know that I don't get involved in politics. But there is something similar going on in France and the U.S. that struck me, and I had to point it out. The most popular candidate for president of France right now is a woman named Segolene Royal. She is the Socialist candidate (leftist), is very attractive, has little real political experience, is a media darling, and has hoards of fans to the point where she is almost a rock star.
Where's the similarity? I present to you one Barack Obama. Let's see...left wing, attractive, little political experience, is a media darling, and has hoards of fans to the point...you get the picture.
So...are the Parisians and Americans really so far apart, or is it just another form of "let's hate someone who isn't just like us" going on? Time to quit picking on the French, folks. They're more like you than you might like to admit!
McDonald's: There are more and more of the restaurants in Paris. Surprisingly, it isn't just the food that attracts Parisians. In Paris, if you want to use the bathroom of a cafe or restaurant, you almost invariably have to buy something. Not at McD's. You can walk in and use a clean bathroom without buying. Americans take that for granted, but it's new in France and is a very popular idea. Unfortunately, it seems that artery clogging is becoming more common as well. The fast food craze is leading to higher levels of heart disease in France. How American is that?
Starbucks: Yes, that's right. Starbucks is in Paris and is growing by leaps and bounds. My son counted three within a few blocks of each other. Now why, you may ask, would Starbucks be so popular when you can get some of the world's best coffee at any sidewalk cafe? Besides the drinks, one reason is a very un-French reason: the drinks cost the same whether you drink it there or take it to go. In Paris, if you want to eat or drink at the restaurant or cafe, the price is higher because you are basically renting the table. However, that isn't the way in the U.S., and it isn't the way at Starbucks. You pay the same price for your beverage no matter where you're going to drink it. So, even though it goes against tradition, the Parisians are leaping at the idea. (Starbucks also does the bathroom thing that McDonald's does, but I won't go into that.)
Smoking: The French are getting ready for a ban on smoking in public places. Seems that Chirac stopped smoking a while ago and wants others to do the same. Very American, eh? Even though some are protesting the idea, chew on this fact. Another reason that Starbucks is popular in Paris is...that it is a non-smoking establishment! The French seem to be ready for the ban on smoking and there appear to be many who are already embracing it.
Politics: If you've read any of my previous posts, you know that I don't get involved in politics. But there is something similar going on in France and the U.S. that struck me, and I had to point it out. The most popular candidate for president of France right now is a woman named Segolene Royal. She is the Socialist candidate (leftist), is very attractive, has little real political experience, is a media darling, and has hoards of fans to the point where she is almost a rock star.
Where's the similarity? I present to you one Barack Obama. Let's see...left wing, attractive, little political experience, is a media darling, and has hoards of fans to the point...you get the picture.
So...are the Parisians and Americans really so far apart, or is it just another form of "let's hate someone who isn't just like us" going on? Time to quit picking on the French, folks. They're more like you than you might like to admit!
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Online Translator Programs Crack Me Up!
Many years ago, there was a concern that computers would take over from humans. It's true that computers have changed life in many ways. Still, there's one area where computer software needs work: web-based translation programs. Why am I bringing this up? Not because I'm picking on those who are trying to succeed at this incredibly difficult task. No, it's just to point out some funny things that happen when you translate pages with Google.
I'm just going to give a few examples, but if you want to laugh, try using Google Translate on any page. (Mind you, it helps if you have at least some knowledge of the language you are translating to get the full humor.)
Here is some odd stuff from the front page of the web site for the Le Monde newspaper. (www.lemonde.fr)
In a section of the website focused on the Presidential election coming up in 2007, the headline is: La Campagne Heure par Heure, which means "The campaign hour by hour". Instead, it translates it "The countryside hour by hour". hmmmmm
Some other odd sentences:
Business the Russet-red one: silence, one doubts (huh??)
In Vernon, flamers of five and seven years (arsonists...not flamers )
Mr. the PEN does not see "not a disadvantage" with the pacs, promised with abrogation in the program of the FN. (Yikes!!! Let's start of with the man's name, Mr. LePen. The rest just gives me a headache!)
One more: Raffarin gives her support for Sarkozy for 2007 (In French, it's Raffarin apporte son soutien... how they got that Raffarin is a female, I'll never know, and I'm sure he wouldn't appreciate that!)
Anyway, it's fun to do. Try it! You never know what you'll get. And to those who are working so hard to get these programs working...keep working at it! You've made incredible strides. The problem is that it really takes the human element to really fine tune it. I'm not sure a computer will ever be able to handle the complexities of human language. That's a little comforting, isn't it?
I'm just going to give a few examples, but if you want to laugh, try using Google Translate on any page. (Mind you, it helps if you have at least some knowledge of the language you are translating to get the full humor.)
Here is some odd stuff from the front page of the web site for the Le Monde newspaper. (www.lemonde.fr)
In a section of the website focused on the Presidential election coming up in 2007, the headline is: La Campagne Heure par Heure, which means "The campaign hour by hour". Instead, it translates it "The countryside hour by hour". hmmmmm
Some other odd sentences:
Business the Russet-red one: silence, one doubts (huh??)
In Vernon, flamers of five and seven years (arsonists...not flamers )
Mr. the PEN does not see "not a disadvantage" with the pacs, promised with abrogation in the program of the FN. (Yikes!!! Let's start of with the man's name, Mr. LePen. The rest just gives me a headache!)
One more: Raffarin gives her support for Sarkozy for 2007 (In French, it's Raffarin apporte son soutien... how they got that Raffarin is a female, I'll never know, and I'm sure he wouldn't appreciate that!)
Anyway, it's fun to do. Try it! You never know what you'll get. And to those who are working so hard to get these programs working...keep working at it! You've made incredible strides. The problem is that it really takes the human element to really fine tune it. I'm not sure a computer will ever be able to handle the complexities of human language. That's a little comforting, isn't it?
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
A Shout Out to "Count Your Sheep"
Out in Internetland there are more online comics than you can shake a keyboard at. Some are quite good, while others....eh....
One of the absolute best, in my humble opinion, is a good-natured comic called "Count Your Sheep". The author and artist is Adrian Ramos, but he goes by Adis.
Link to "Count Your Sheep"
Now, I don't always see eye to eye with Adis, as my religious beliefs are obviously different than his. That having been said, Adis has created a webcomic that is charming, insightful, and just downright fun. I won't go into details...you have to see it for yourself. I'll give you a quick overview, though.
The main characters are Katie ( a little girl with a hatred for school and a love for soccer), Laurie (her widowed mother who is raising Katie on her own), and Ship the sheep. Ship is an imaginary sheep (as much as Hobbes was imaginary in Calvin's opinion). Ship is typical for his type of animal, as all Katie has to do is count him and she falls asleep. However, Ship is far more than that. He is a friend and confidant for Katie, but is also the same for Laurie, as Ship was Laurie's imaginary friend first. Laurie can still see him, so Ship is the family friend.
Anyway, I can't even begin to describe this comic except to say that you should take a look. Go back to the archives. Then, prepare to be won over.
As Adis concludes all his postings....now go to bed.
One of the absolute best, in my humble opinion, is a good-natured comic called "Count Your Sheep". The author and artist is Adrian Ramos, but he goes by Adis.
Link to "Count Your Sheep"
Now, I don't always see eye to eye with Adis, as my religious beliefs are obviously different than his. That having been said, Adis has created a webcomic that is charming, insightful, and just downright fun. I won't go into details...you have to see it for yourself. I'll give you a quick overview, though.
The main characters are Katie ( a little girl with a hatred for school and a love for soccer), Laurie (her widowed mother who is raising Katie on her own), and Ship the sheep. Ship is an imaginary sheep (as much as Hobbes was imaginary in Calvin's opinion). Ship is typical for his type of animal, as all Katie has to do is count him and she falls asleep. However, Ship is far more than that. He is a friend and confidant for Katie, but is also the same for Laurie, as Ship was Laurie's imaginary friend first. Laurie can still see him, so Ship is the family friend.
Anyway, I can't even begin to describe this comic except to say that you should take a look. Go back to the archives. Then, prepare to be won over.
As Adis concludes all his postings....now go to bed.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Excuses, excuses!
OK...so it's been awhile. Can I call it laziness? Yes. Will I? Yes, and no.
I can't really blame this on work. Even if things are crazy, they aren't crazy enough to keep me from writing something now and then.
Home life? Well, other than a car being stolen and recovered, (and having two teen sons), I can't really say that this part of my world is interfering.
My spiritual life? Busy...very busy. New assignments, new responsibilities...but again, does it keep me from writing a little blurb now and then? No.
So...the only choice left seems to be laziness. I will take that as one reason. The other is that I just plain don't have a lot to say. Except this: I take full responsibility for not posting. Isn't that refreshing? Someone taking responsibility for themselves? This leads to my rant for the day.
So many people want to blame anyone but themselves for things that happen. Someone spills hot coffee on their lap and blames the fast food chain for the coffee being hot. You know how it goes.
In the end, though, we need to be responsible for our own actions. If someone makes a mistake, admit it! Then, the one who was on the receiving end should forgive and forget. Isn't that easy? Could you imagine the reduction in lawsuits, anger, road rage, and the like if people just applied the Golden Rule and its corollary, self-responsibility? Imagine! "Sir, I'm sorry that I forgot my turn signal. It was irresponsible and it won't happen again. You have my apologies." "That's okay. We all make mistakes." No guns. No loud arguments. And everyone moves on.
So, the next time you make a mistake, don't cover it up. Just admit it, apologize if anyone was hurt or inconvenienced, and learn from it. What a concept.
To all who actually read these posts...I apologize. I'll try to post more often. (I feel better now. Don't you?)
I can't really blame this on work. Even if things are crazy, they aren't crazy enough to keep me from writing something now and then.
Home life? Well, other than a car being stolen and recovered, (and having two teen sons), I can't really say that this part of my world is interfering.
My spiritual life? Busy...very busy. New assignments, new responsibilities...but again, does it keep me from writing a little blurb now and then? No.
So...the only choice left seems to be laziness. I will take that as one reason. The other is that I just plain don't have a lot to say. Except this: I take full responsibility for not posting. Isn't that refreshing? Someone taking responsibility for themselves? This leads to my rant for the day.
So many people want to blame anyone but themselves for things that happen. Someone spills hot coffee on their lap and blames the fast food chain for the coffee being hot. You know how it goes.
In the end, though, we need to be responsible for our own actions. If someone makes a mistake, admit it! Then, the one who was on the receiving end should forgive and forget. Isn't that easy? Could you imagine the reduction in lawsuits, anger, road rage, and the like if people just applied the Golden Rule and its corollary, self-responsibility? Imagine! "Sir, I'm sorry that I forgot my turn signal. It was irresponsible and it won't happen again. You have my apologies." "That's okay. We all make mistakes." No guns. No loud arguments. And everyone moves on.
So, the next time you make a mistake, don't cover it up. Just admit it, apologize if anyone was hurt or inconvenienced, and learn from it. What a concept.
To all who actually read these posts...I apologize. I'll try to post more often. (I feel better now. Don't you?)
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
I'm still alive...I think...
It occurred to me that it's been a whole month since my last post. That isn't good form for a blog, is it? So, I struggled and struggled to figure out what to write today, and to be honest, I haven't the vaguest idea. Thus, I'm going to go to my old standby of writing whatever comes to mind, which could be very dangerous or, at the least, very boring.
SPORTS
I'm not a huge fan of the professional game these days. There is so much free agency that it's tough to keep up with a team. Add to that the drug accusations and the incredible amount of money some of these guys make, and it's enough to make a bookworm out of any fan. That having been said, there are a few things of note lately.
The Oakland A's are in the playoffs. Why is that interesting? Look at the payroll. They get by on less money than just about any team in the league, yet they are always right up there. It's nice to see young guys playing their hearts out and having fun, so go A's!!!
The two Bay Area teams are going to meet this weekend in the Ho-Hum Bowl. Does anyone really care which team wins? Who actually wants bragging rights in this case? San Francisco has one win, and the Raiders have none. Again...who cares?
The Sacramento Bee recently did a poll showing that two ballot measures designed to pay for a new arena for the city is failing miserably. As anyone knows, I'm not political. But I do have to ask what the people of Sacramento are thinking. A sales tax hike of one quarter of one percent? Big deal! Half of that money goes to community services, and the other half goes to building a new arena on some horrible looking railyards to replace an arena that has outlived its useful life. The new arena will not only make downtown look great, but if we don't get it, I don't want to hear any of these yo-yos whining that we never get any concerts or events in town. Where do they want these events held; a local park?? These whiners need to get real and understand that if they want to play, they need to play. It isn't about how much money the Maloofs have. It's about taking care of the city that doesn't want to be called a Cowtown anymore.
SCHOOL SHOOTINGS
Sad. Nothing else to say. Just sad.
CONGRESSMEN
Sick. Nothing else to say. Actually, a lot to say, but I'm not going to say it.
HOUSING BUBBLE
What in the world did people THINK would happen? They overextend themselves, take out interest only loans, pay double what a house is worth and think that they will resell it...did they think it would go on forever???
FINALLY...
I'm still in my Sociology class and I hate it. I'll be glad when this semester is done. It's important to reassess priorities in life, and I think that mine may be to not worry so much about finishing a stupid Associate's degree. I think I'll focus on learning French, studying my Bible, becoming a better minister, and taking care of my family. Far more important than a lousy degree, don't you think?
SPORTS
I'm not a huge fan of the professional game these days. There is so much free agency that it's tough to keep up with a team. Add to that the drug accusations and the incredible amount of money some of these guys make, and it's enough to make a bookworm out of any fan. That having been said, there are a few things of note lately.
The Oakland A's are in the playoffs. Why is that interesting? Look at the payroll. They get by on less money than just about any team in the league, yet they are always right up there. It's nice to see young guys playing their hearts out and having fun, so go A's!!!
The two Bay Area teams are going to meet this weekend in the Ho-Hum Bowl. Does anyone really care which team wins? Who actually wants bragging rights in this case? San Francisco has one win, and the Raiders have none. Again...who cares?
The Sacramento Bee recently did a poll showing that two ballot measures designed to pay for a new arena for the city is failing miserably. As anyone knows, I'm not political. But I do have to ask what the people of Sacramento are thinking. A sales tax hike of one quarter of one percent? Big deal! Half of that money goes to community services, and the other half goes to building a new arena on some horrible looking railyards to replace an arena that has outlived its useful life. The new arena will not only make downtown look great, but if we don't get it, I don't want to hear any of these yo-yos whining that we never get any concerts or events in town. Where do they want these events held; a local park?? These whiners need to get real and understand that if they want to play, they need to play. It isn't about how much money the Maloofs have. It's about taking care of the city that doesn't want to be called a Cowtown anymore.
SCHOOL SHOOTINGS
Sad. Nothing else to say. Just sad.
CONGRESSMEN
Sick. Nothing else to say. Actually, a lot to say, but I'm not going to say it.
HOUSING BUBBLE
What in the world did people THINK would happen? They overextend themselves, take out interest only loans, pay double what a house is worth and think that they will resell it...did they think it would go on forever???
FINALLY...
I'm still in my Sociology class and I hate it. I'll be glad when this semester is done. It's important to reassess priorities in life, and I think that mine may be to not worry so much about finishing a stupid Associate's degree. I think I'll focus on learning French, studying my Bible, becoming a better minister, and taking care of my family. Far more important than a lousy degree, don't you think?
Saturday, September 02, 2006
Sociology 1 Begins
Well, summer session is over, and I can proclaim my Cultural Anthropology class a success. For those of you who have any interest in learning how to view other cultures from a non-nationalistic viewpoint, give a class like this a try. If a person really makes an effort, a class like this can change how one views others, and perhaps make one a bit more understanding.
This term, I get to try my hand at Sociology. Even though I prefer the premise of Cultural Anthropology more, this class also seems to focus on seeing society with different eyes. However, if the first chapter of the textbook is any indication, this class is going to be a struggle. Which leads me to my rant: textbook writers.
Textbooks for college students are supposed to be challenging. They are supposed to make a student think. But that doesn't mean that the presentation is to be so wordy and obtuse that a student new to the subject is confounded and annoyed. I consider myself a well-read individual with a good vocabulary and a decent brain. Yet the first chapter of my Sociology text is written as though the authors are just trying to show the reader how much smarter the writers are compared to the students. How about this; try to make a difficult subject easier, and save the complex descriptions until after an intro? Do that, and you won't make your subject sound like the domain of a bunch of snotty-nosed egotists. Instead, you might be talking with some future enthusiasts of your subject.
Enough rant. I'm going to try to reprogram my stupid cellphone now. Word of warning: you might want to avoid the Sony Ericsson w600i. It's a pain.
This term, I get to try my hand at Sociology. Even though I prefer the premise of Cultural Anthropology more, this class also seems to focus on seeing society with different eyes. However, if the first chapter of the textbook is any indication, this class is going to be a struggle. Which leads me to my rant: textbook writers.
Textbooks for college students are supposed to be challenging. They are supposed to make a student think. But that doesn't mean that the presentation is to be so wordy and obtuse that a student new to the subject is confounded and annoyed. I consider myself a well-read individual with a good vocabulary and a decent brain. Yet the first chapter of my Sociology text is written as though the authors are just trying to show the reader how much smarter the writers are compared to the students. How about this; try to make a difficult subject easier, and save the complex descriptions until after an intro? Do that, and you won't make your subject sound like the domain of a bunch of snotty-nosed egotists. Instead, you might be talking with some future enthusiasts of your subject.
Enough rant. I'm going to try to reprogram my stupid cellphone now. Word of warning: you might want to avoid the Sony Ericsson w600i. It's a pain.
Saturday, August 05, 2006
Race isn't race
I have been working my way through a class in cultural anthropology this summer. As part of the class, we considered the meaning of "race". Now, like many, I was opposed to "racism" in all of its forms. But I have come to realize that this is not only a misnomer but is also damaging to improving the relationships between the so-called "races". How do I figure this? Let me explain.
Race, when considered in an anthropological sense, refers to different species. Thus, when we consider humans, we consider the human "race" as a whole. Now, that is the correct way to use the word. All people on earth are a part of this race. White, black...all are a part of the human race. When we classify a person's color as race, we are stating that they are of a different species, and thus make it easier to consider another person as less than human. That's where the danger and the difficulty comes in. In reality, most of us can trace ourselves to a different culture. Here is where we can differentiate, but we do so on an even keel. If an American considers someone from England, he generally doesn't view the English person as lower class or beneath him. (That is, if he looks at things fairly and reasonably.) Instead, he simply views the British person as from a different culture. In a similar vein, someone from Mali would be from a Malian culture. The race is still human, but the culture is different. Even within a city, a white man might come from, say, the Italian part of town and be of the Italian-American culture while an inner-city black man might consider himself of the African American or even the hip-hop culture. In this, there is no lowering of a person to a lesser race...just a different culture.
Is this making sense? If we were to regard people in this way, we wouldn't use the terms "racism" or "racist". Instead, someone could be a "culture snob" or a "cultural elitist" or a "culturalist" to coin a new phrase. Now we are saying things as they are. A black man is not lower than a white man or higher than a white man. Instead, anyone who tries to treat such a man as different is saying that they just don't like him because of his color and culture, and must therefore admit that he has no grounds for his prejudice. With the idea of race, a white supremicist would think himself justified in hating a black man because he sees the black man as a lower species, or race. With calling things as they are, the white supremicist hasn't a leg to stand on. He merely shows himself to be the cultural bigot that he is and should be mocked for such behavior.
Let's get rid of the race card. Instead, let's recognize that all people are equal and of the same race, and enjoy cultural differences the same way that world travellers do when they voyage with an open mind and an adventurous spirit.
Race, when considered in an anthropological sense, refers to different species. Thus, when we consider humans, we consider the human "race" as a whole. Now, that is the correct way to use the word. All people on earth are a part of this race. White, black...all are a part of the human race. When we classify a person's color as race, we are stating that they are of a different species, and thus make it easier to consider another person as less than human. That's where the danger and the difficulty comes in. In reality, most of us can trace ourselves to a different culture. Here is where we can differentiate, but we do so on an even keel. If an American considers someone from England, he generally doesn't view the English person as lower class or beneath him. (That is, if he looks at things fairly and reasonably.) Instead, he simply views the British person as from a different culture. In a similar vein, someone from Mali would be from a Malian culture. The race is still human, but the culture is different. Even within a city, a white man might come from, say, the Italian part of town and be of the Italian-American culture while an inner-city black man might consider himself of the African American or even the hip-hop culture. In this, there is no lowering of a person to a lesser race...just a different culture.
Is this making sense? If we were to regard people in this way, we wouldn't use the terms "racism" or "racist". Instead, someone could be a "culture snob" or a "cultural elitist" or a "culturalist" to coin a new phrase. Now we are saying things as they are. A black man is not lower than a white man or higher than a white man. Instead, anyone who tries to treat such a man as different is saying that they just don't like him because of his color and culture, and must therefore admit that he has no grounds for his prejudice. With the idea of race, a white supremicist would think himself justified in hating a black man because he sees the black man as a lower species, or race. With calling things as they are, the white supremicist hasn't a leg to stand on. He merely shows himself to be the cultural bigot that he is and should be mocked for such behavior.
Let's get rid of the race card. Instead, let's recognize that all people are equal and of the same race, and enjoy cultural differences the same way that world travellers do when they voyage with an open mind and an adventurous spirit.
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
OK...So Nobody is Perfect
Well, as you probably have read over and over again, Italy won the Cup. Yes, I confess, I had the wrong score. And yet, I take some small comfort in thinking how close to being correct I really was! It could have easily been 2 - 1 France. But a salute to Italy for their victory.
I can't close this without commenting on the Zidane situation briefly. I'm not sure at this time what was said to Zidane to cause him to explode the way that he did. It couldn't have been just harmless banter, however. Despite what Materazzi of Italy claims, there is no doubt that he DOES know what a terrorist is (give me a break...does he think that anyone believes him that he doesn't know???), and he wouldn't be one to avoid insulting another player in any way possible if it could win his team the Cup. And Zidane wouldn't have gone off, possibly costing his team the cup and himself his reputation, unless Materazzi said something so heinous to Zidane that he couldn't let it go.
Zidane's mother has been sick. If Materazzi had insulted Zizou's mother and sister, then it would explain the outburst. Nonetheless, it doesn't excuse the outburst. Zidane is a pro, who has been penalized for just such an attack in the past. Did he really think he wouldn't get penalized in the World Cup? Maybe the answer was that in the heat of the moment, he just wasn't thinking at all. And because of that, France may have missed out on a golden opportunity to send Zizou out as a hero, with a second star on their uniform.
I can't close this without commenting on the Zidane situation briefly. I'm not sure at this time what was said to Zidane to cause him to explode the way that he did. It couldn't have been just harmless banter, however. Despite what Materazzi of Italy claims, there is no doubt that he DOES know what a terrorist is (give me a break...does he think that anyone believes him that he doesn't know???), and he wouldn't be one to avoid insulting another player in any way possible if it could win his team the Cup. And Zidane wouldn't have gone off, possibly costing his team the cup and himself his reputation, unless Materazzi said something so heinous to Zidane that he couldn't let it go.
Zidane's mother has been sick. If Materazzi had insulted Zizou's mother and sister, then it would explain the outburst. Nonetheless, it doesn't excuse the outburst. Zidane is a pro, who has been penalized for just such an attack in the past. Did he really think he wouldn't get penalized in the World Cup? Maybe the answer was that in the heat of the moment, he just wasn't thinking at all. And because of that, France may have missed out on a golden opportunity to send Zizou out as a hero, with a second star on their uniform.
Thursday, July 06, 2006
Les Bleus Making Me Look Good!
Okay everyone. This is getting weird. My picks for the semifinals of the World Cup? Exactly right! I mean exactly!!! Take a look at the previous post and see.
I picked Italy to win in overtime over Germany. What happened? Italy scores two goals at the end of OT to beat Germany 2 - 0. I also picked France to beat Portugal in regular time, which they did 1 - 0. I'm not saying that I'm perfect or that I can predict the future, but pretty good guesses, eh?
Will my finals pick come true? Who knows? Remember, I said France 2 - 1 over Italy.
On a side note, let's hear it for Zizou! Proof positive that old guys can show the younger ones how it's done.
My wife is of Sicilian ancestry, so she can play both sides of the field. If Italy wins, she can be happy because of her Italian blood. If France wins, she can be happy because of her French birth. However, I told her that if I catch her voting for Italy, she's sleeping on the couch. I won't really make her do that, but you get the picture. ;-)
In the end, I really am cheering for France. They have had a lot of grief there lately, and it would be nice for the people to have something to cheer about for a change.
ALLEZ LES BLEUS!!! ALLEZ ZIZOU! ALLEZ THURAM! ALLEZ HENRY! ALLEZ RIBARY! ETC., ETC., ETC.
I picked Italy to win in overtime over Germany. What happened? Italy scores two goals at the end of OT to beat Germany 2 - 0. I also picked France to beat Portugal in regular time, which they did 1 - 0. I'm not saying that I'm perfect or that I can predict the future, but pretty good guesses, eh?
Will my finals pick come true? Who knows? Remember, I said France 2 - 1 over Italy.
On a side note, let's hear it for Zizou! Proof positive that old guys can show the younger ones how it's done.
My wife is of Sicilian ancestry, so she can play both sides of the field. If Italy wins, she can be happy because of her Italian blood. If France wins, she can be happy because of her French birth. However, I told her that if I catch her voting for Italy, she's sleeping on the couch. I won't really make her do that, but you get the picture. ;-)
In the end, I really am cheering for France. They have had a lot of grief there lately, and it would be nice for the people to have something to cheer about for a change.
ALLEZ LES BLEUS!!! ALLEZ ZIZOU! ALLEZ THURAM! ALLEZ HENRY! ALLEZ RIBARY! ETC., ETC., ETC.
Saturday, July 01, 2006
Wrong Score...Right Result
Well...I was wrong. I freely admit that. My guess about the quarterfinals of the World Cup was wrong.
I predicted a final score of 3 - 1. It was, in fact, 1 - 0. But unlike the vast majority of those who thought to predict the results of this match...I was right...simply, plainly, clearly...RIGHT!!!
OK, so gloating isn't the most becoming image. Still, when I look at the predictions on ESPN.com, SI.com, MSNBC.com, etc., etc., and see how many so-called experts predicted an easy victory for Brazil, my arm aches with patting myself on the back.
Yes..I predicted a France victory, against so many others' guesses. Not to gloat more, but according to my fantasy picks on ESPN.com, even though I did rather poorly in the group stage, I have predicted every single winner in the knockout stages up to this point. Yes, I even predicted a Portugal victory over England, as well as a German victory and an Italian victory. What does this mean? Absolutely nothing. I don't gamble. But boy...if I did!
Nonetheless, I just want to say how awesome Zinedine Zidane was. His elegance on a football field is nothing short of artistry. Ever since I saw the man play on television in 1998, I have been amazed at his ability to pass, control, fake, and see out of the back of his head. He is the premier soccer player of his generation, bar none. At age 34, in today's match he made Ronaldo and Ronaldinho look ancient. I also have a new player to support: Ribery. Now that he has his nerves under control, he has been nothing but trouble for other teams. His speed, his energy, and his drive make him a joy to watch. Keep it up, monsieur.
So what will happen in the semis? Well, I'm not changing horses now. Here's my guess:
Italy upsets the home town heroes Germany in overtime, and France defeats Portugal in regular time, setting up a rematch from the European Cup of 2000, France vs. Italy. And in the finals? Who else? France defeats Italy 2 - 1, with Zizou holding the trophy up high as the champion that he is. Will I be right? I don't know...but I sure hope so...ALLEZ LES BLEUS!!!
I predicted a final score of 3 - 1. It was, in fact, 1 - 0. But unlike the vast majority of those who thought to predict the results of this match...I was right...simply, plainly, clearly...RIGHT!!!
OK, so gloating isn't the most becoming image. Still, when I look at the predictions on ESPN.com, SI.com, MSNBC.com, etc., etc., and see how many so-called experts predicted an easy victory for Brazil, my arm aches with patting myself on the back.
Yes..I predicted a France victory, against so many others' guesses. Not to gloat more, but according to my fantasy picks on ESPN.com, even though I did rather poorly in the group stage, I have predicted every single winner in the knockout stages up to this point. Yes, I even predicted a Portugal victory over England, as well as a German victory and an Italian victory. What does this mean? Absolutely nothing. I don't gamble. But boy...if I did!
Nonetheless, I just want to say how awesome Zinedine Zidane was. His elegance on a football field is nothing short of artistry. Ever since I saw the man play on television in 1998, I have been amazed at his ability to pass, control, fake, and see out of the back of his head. He is the premier soccer player of his generation, bar none. At age 34, in today's match he made Ronaldo and Ronaldinho look ancient. I also have a new player to support: Ribery. Now that he has his nerves under control, he has been nothing but trouble for other teams. His speed, his energy, and his drive make him a joy to watch. Keep it up, monsieur.
So what will happen in the semis? Well, I'm not changing horses now. Here's my guess:
Italy upsets the home town heroes Germany in overtime, and France defeats Portugal in regular time, setting up a rematch from the European Cup of 2000, France vs. Italy. And in the finals? Who else? France defeats Italy 2 - 1, with Zizou holding the trophy up high as the champion that he is. Will I be right? I don't know...but I sure hope so...ALLEZ LES BLEUS!!!
Friday, June 30, 2006
France - The Good (World Cup), and the Ugly (Apple)
As you can tell from my previous postings, (if you have read them), I have a soft spot in my heart for France. My wife is French, my wife's family still lives there, and I have visited several times and love it. Therefore, I tend to comment frequently on France and things French.
Today I read a news report that the French legislature has once again done the stupid and are on the verge of shooting themselves in the figurative foot, especially in the areas of business and collecting taxes.
According to an MSNBC report (www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13630757/), the French legislature has decided that Apple must open up its iTunes music format to allow it to be played on other mp3 players. That basically means that Apple must give up its proprietory information to every other mp3 manufacturer on the block because France thinks that it is unfair that people are choosing iPods and iTunes by the thousands over any other player. What this means for Apple is that they must do one of two things: either give the information out and thus open up their music store for every other mp3 manufacturer on earth (not just France...do you really think that Sony is going to only manufacture such players for France?), or they will simply close up shop in France and stop selling their iPods and allowing iTunes downloads in that country. Guess which one Apple will choose? Which one would you choose? (DUH!)
What does this mean for France? First of all, they are going to have a whole lot of unhappy current iPod owners out there who can no longer download music for their device legally. In addition, France is going to be losing out on a huge amount of sales tax that these downloads and iPod sales generate. And for what? To appear morally superior? To appear to be dedicated to fair business practices? Give us all a break. France is so ridiculously unfair to businesses that they are bailing out of that country in droves. Between obscene taxes, ridiculous laws about hours to be worked, insane vacation requirements, and ludicrous strikes, the French government has made their country one of the least business-friendly countries on earth! The French people need to get a grip on their country and their economy, quit thinking they are entitled to everything they want, quit striking over every perceived slight, and grow up and join the 21st century economy. As for Apple, they have no choice. They will leave France if this law is signed. As well they should. They will simply be joining the exodus out of that quagmire of economic quicksand.
On a lighter note: To all those people who thought that Spain would destroy France in the group of 16 matches at the World Cup....nyah, nyah, nyah! And that includes my FRENCH brother-in-law who didn't give them a chance. It's pretty sad that an American citizen living in California had more insight into the French team than a French football fan. Now the French citizens are jumping, nay, stampeding onto the bandwagon! After a dismal 2002 World Cup performance followed by a dismal Europe 2004 performance, Les Bleus are challenging again. It goes to show that experience still counts for something, and I, for one, am more convinced than ever that Zinedine Zidane belongs on the same platform with men like Pele as one of the greatest footballers ever.
As for the quarter-final match against Brazil, I have seen many predictions at various sports websites. A good ninety percent are predicting a walkover for Brazil. These are probably the same people who saw Spain crushing France. Let's admit one thing: as good as Brazil is, they have looked very beatable in their previous matches. My prediction: France 3, Brazil 1. (Looks familiar? France 3, Spain 1 you say? Yep.) World Cup 98 rematch here, same result with different score. I sincerely hope I'm right, because I LOOOVE saying "nyah nyah nyah"!
Today I read a news report that the French legislature has once again done the stupid and are on the verge of shooting themselves in the figurative foot, especially in the areas of business and collecting taxes.
According to an MSNBC report (www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13630757/), the French legislature has decided that Apple must open up its iTunes music format to allow it to be played on other mp3 players. That basically means that Apple must give up its proprietory information to every other mp3 manufacturer on the block because France thinks that it is unfair that people are choosing iPods and iTunes by the thousands over any other player. What this means for Apple is that they must do one of two things: either give the information out and thus open up their music store for every other mp3 manufacturer on earth (not just France...do you really think that Sony is going to only manufacture such players for France?), or they will simply close up shop in France and stop selling their iPods and allowing iTunes downloads in that country. Guess which one Apple will choose? Which one would you choose? (DUH!)
What does this mean for France? First of all, they are going to have a whole lot of unhappy current iPod owners out there who can no longer download music for their device legally. In addition, France is going to be losing out on a huge amount of sales tax that these downloads and iPod sales generate. And for what? To appear morally superior? To appear to be dedicated to fair business practices? Give us all a break. France is so ridiculously unfair to businesses that they are bailing out of that country in droves. Between obscene taxes, ridiculous laws about hours to be worked, insane vacation requirements, and ludicrous strikes, the French government has made their country one of the least business-friendly countries on earth! The French people need to get a grip on their country and their economy, quit thinking they are entitled to everything they want, quit striking over every perceived slight, and grow up and join the 21st century economy. As for Apple, they have no choice. They will leave France if this law is signed. As well they should. They will simply be joining the exodus out of that quagmire of economic quicksand.
On a lighter note: To all those people who thought that Spain would destroy France in the group of 16 matches at the World Cup....nyah, nyah, nyah! And that includes my FRENCH brother-in-law who didn't give them a chance. It's pretty sad that an American citizen living in California had more insight into the French team than a French football fan. Now the French citizens are jumping, nay, stampeding onto the bandwagon! After a dismal 2002 World Cup performance followed by a dismal Europe 2004 performance, Les Bleus are challenging again. It goes to show that experience still counts for something, and I, for one, am more convinced than ever that Zinedine Zidane belongs on the same platform with men like Pele as one of the greatest footballers ever.
As for the quarter-final match against Brazil, I have seen many predictions at various sports websites. A good ninety percent are predicting a walkover for Brazil. These are probably the same people who saw Spain crushing France. Let's admit one thing: as good as Brazil is, they have looked very beatable in their previous matches. My prediction: France 3, Brazil 1. (Looks familiar? France 3, Spain 1 you say? Yep.) World Cup 98 rematch here, same result with different score. I sincerely hope I'm right, because I LOOOVE saying "nyah nyah nyah"!
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Cell Phone Safety
Today's Sacramento Bee posted an editorial about cell phone safety.
http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/story/14272361p-15082704c.html
Now, I'm not opposed to people being safe on cell phones while driving. I, myself, use a Bluetooth earpiece and voice-activated dialing while driving. That's especially important as I use a stick shift! But to get back to the commentary, the editorial stated the following:
"Researchers have found that it is not just the act of pushing a key pad or answering the phone that causes distractions that lead to accidents. A person conversing on the phone while driving loses cognitive awareness, which impairs his ability to drive. And that happens whether the driver holds the cell phone in his hands or uses some kind of hands-free device."
The editorial is basically condemning all forms of cell phone communication while driving. It is stating that the act of talking itself is a large part of the danger of cell phone use. Well, let's take this one step further. Since talking while driving is a distraction, let's make it illegal to drive with a passenger. Rarely do drivers and passengers proceed to their destination in silence, unless a husband is in the doghouse with his wife. Therefore, since this conversation is a hazard, let's ban passengers. If that's the case, then let's get rid of all cars with more than one seat! And don't bring your baby or children in the car with you, as we all know that these little distractions are even worse than cell phones!
My point is this: driving while using a hands free set and voice dialing is no more dangerous than speaking with passengers in a car. Let's keep our eye on the ball, Sacramento Bee. There are so many more dangerous behaviors out there. Frankly, I'd like to see cops really ticket those who: 1) speak on cell phones without a hands-free device while driving, 2) blast their stereos so loud that they rattle the windows on 2nd floor apartments across the street, 3) speed through neighborhoods at 55 when the limit is 25, and 4) put on makeup, drive, and drink coffee at the same time.
Anyone for sanity?
http://www.sacbee.com/content/opinion/story/14272361p-15082704c.html
Now, I'm not opposed to people being safe on cell phones while driving. I, myself, use a Bluetooth earpiece and voice-activated dialing while driving. That's especially important as I use a stick shift! But to get back to the commentary, the editorial stated the following:
"Researchers have found that it is not just the act of pushing a key pad or answering the phone that causes distractions that lead to accidents. A person conversing on the phone while driving loses cognitive awareness, which impairs his ability to drive. And that happens whether the driver holds the cell phone in his hands or uses some kind of hands-free device."
The editorial is basically condemning all forms of cell phone communication while driving. It is stating that the act of talking itself is a large part of the danger of cell phone use. Well, let's take this one step further. Since talking while driving is a distraction, let's make it illegal to drive with a passenger. Rarely do drivers and passengers proceed to their destination in silence, unless a husband is in the doghouse with his wife. Therefore, since this conversation is a hazard, let's ban passengers. If that's the case, then let's get rid of all cars with more than one seat! And don't bring your baby or children in the car with you, as we all know that these little distractions are even worse than cell phones!
My point is this: driving while using a hands free set and voice dialing is no more dangerous than speaking with passengers in a car. Let's keep our eye on the ball, Sacramento Bee. There are so many more dangerous behaviors out there. Frankly, I'd like to see cops really ticket those who: 1) speak on cell phones without a hands-free device while driving, 2) blast their stereos so loud that they rattle the windows on 2nd floor apartments across the street, 3) speed through neighborhoods at 55 when the limit is 25, and 4) put on makeup, drive, and drink coffee at the same time.
Anyone for sanity?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)