One more random tangent for your day... yesterday was Earthday 2009. I think it came and went with very little fanfare - at least in the corporate world. I didn't see anything major happen except for the update "Google" logo. But, I'm sure that there was a lot of work going on as I definitely feel the world is starting to embrace the "greener" way of life. A few observations - and feel free to comment with your own observations or if you disagree with mine...
- I think we have actually become MORE of a disposable society. My God, how many D&D coffee cups have I thrown away? And for those responsible companies like Starbucks (ok, their marketing is more responsible) why don't they do the obvious stuff to promote being green? Like, get rid of those stupid sleeves to hold your paper coffee cup. People, suck it up. Why do you need to have a cardboard sleeve over your coffee cup? Too hot for you? Tough. Also, couldn't they install "recycling" containers for napkins and used cups? There must be some better solutions.
- Everything is plastic. I try to recycle as best as possible, but when 76.567% of my plastic waste is NOT recyclable (ie, it is labeled as recyclable, but no community outside of southern California has facilities to recycle is - so therefor it is about as recyclable as nuclear waste) it ends up in the dump (well, "transfer station"). Listen, I buy a lot of Barbie dolls (for my daughter... and collecting... hey, deal with it) and they are all encased in plastic. What can you do?
- Nobody wants kids toys back... I donate the toys when I can, but nobody wants to take the 1,786 stuffed animals. What do you do with them? They are still fine. I mean, they are still lovable poodles filled with soft stuff. How about we figure out what to do with that!!?
- How are we going to recycle 10,000,000 Webkinz 10 years from now?? That is the solution we need! Paper bio-degrades during a good rainstorm, but Coco the Monkey Webkinz is eternal.
- Speaking of paper... why is it so important that we recycle that? Isn't paper made from trees? Aren't trees regularly grown in forests? Conceivable - and call me crazy - we have an unlimited supply of paper. If I want to throw the McDonald's napkin (made with 34% post consumer material) on the ground, isn't it going disintegrate naturally during rain storms? Ok, maybe in 3 weeks? Everyone talks about going "digital" to save the environment. Aren't computers essentially made of plastic, plutonium, and mercury? Listen, my Dad has 10 Commodore 64 computers in his basement. What is he going to do with those? We churn out millions of computer components each year - to go green, I guess - and yet when those components are old or dated they get thrown away... and sometimes with hazardous materials in them. I still don't get the argument... we should be printing EVERYTHING on paper and recycling the computers!
- Small thing... but we build tons of cars every year. Why haven't people figured out how to recycle cars? They are all the same - 4 wheels, seats, gas tank... and on that same token, why does EVERY car have to have different components? I know this sounds Socialist and anti-American, but why do all my cars have to use different windshield wipers? Honestly!? I don't get it. It doesn't get more basic than the windshield wiper. It is metal, plastic, and some rubber and it goes across your windshield and wipes away the rain. Why doesn't the wiper on the BMW fit on the Hyundai? Are BMW owners such snobs that they don't want to use the same windshield wiper as my mother-in-law? That seems like the biggest no-brainer in the auto-industry. Standardize the windshield wiper. Save the planet! Have one manufacturer make one type. Then we can recycle them! If a car gets into a crash, take off the wipers and donate them to the needy to put on their Kia! Think about it! We could do the same with door lock knobs, and overhead light switches, and power window buttons. Every car has an Emergency Light switch - you know, the red triangle - why can't this be the same button across the board? Why does there need to be 10 manufacturers making different buttons for each make and model? How many buttons is that?! What if we don't use the buttons?! Where do they go!?
The transfer station.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
I'm injured... I might die...
The other day I was trying to get to our local transfer station (a nice way of saying "dump") and had to connect my utility trailer to my van to haul away this garbage. The trailer was extremely full - I hadn't make a "transfer run" since November. It had stuff from my recent family room renovation, Christmas wrapping and boxes, old pool equipment, a dead body, general trash, among other things. The sucker was HEAVY. So I ended up pinching my thumb while connecting the trailer to my hitch. It hurt quite a bit, but it looked like I was just going to have a bruised nail on the thumb. Onward! To the transfer station!
A couple hours later my thumb was just screaming! Throbbing in pain and starting to swell pretty good. A few hours after that the nail was mostly black and the thumb looked like I had taken a hammer to it. I knew it would probably be ok in a day or two, but I was amazed at the pain that a little pinch caused. I couldn't even sleep because my brain kept focusing on the throbbing.
So why am I telling you this? Because after this little episode I can't even image what a REAL injury must feel like... I mean, I'm no He-Man but I think I handle pain pretty well. (By the way, what ever happened to He-Man? When does his comeback start? Care Bears came back strong. Cabbage Patch Kids staged a revival. GI Joe has a movie coming out this summer! What about He-Man? What about that diabolical Skeletor? Don't even get me started...). When someone gets into a car accident and get real injuries does their body just absorb the pain? My theory is that the body can only deal with x-amount of pain at one time. If you have a whole bunch all at once it get aggregated into "pain" and you deal with that level of pain. When you have only one injury your brain focuses on that pain and it is perceived as greater than it really is... What do you think? I'm pretty sure that I just invented that theory. It is based on real life experience, not some pansy laboratory experiment. Anyway, my thumb feels better today, and I'm gonna use my theory to justify how much it hurt the last two days so you all don't think I'm a total wuss.
By the way, I was leafing through a science book and came across Lou Gehrig's disease. I read up on it... man, that is one crazy illness. I think we've all heard of Lou Gehrig's disease, also known as Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), but do you REALLY know what it does? It is a progressive neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and the spinal cord. Motor neurons reach from the brain to the spinal cord and from the spinal cord to the muscles throughout the body. The progressive degeneration of the motor neurons in ALS eventually leads to their death. When the motor neurons die, the ability of the brain to initiate and control muscle movement is lost. With voluntary muscle action progressively affected, patients in the later stages of the disease may become totally paralyzed.
The end game is that the muscles the KEEP YOU ALIVE stop responding to the brain and you literally stop breathing because the lungs stop responding. That, my friends, must be the worst way to die. I can't imagine it. Survival rate is 3 - 5 years. Can yo imagine knowing that in 3 - 5 years your body is just going to stop working?? Sorry to be a downer, but I thought it was interesting to understand exactly what Lou Gehrig's disease actually is since it is so well known in the world - yet most people don't know what it actually is...
A couple hours later my thumb was just screaming! Throbbing in pain and starting to swell pretty good. A few hours after that the nail was mostly black and the thumb looked like I had taken a hammer to it. I knew it would probably be ok in a day or two, but I was amazed at the pain that a little pinch caused. I couldn't even sleep because my brain kept focusing on the throbbing.
So why am I telling you this? Because after this little episode I can't even image what a REAL injury must feel like... I mean, I'm no He-Man but I think I handle pain pretty well. (By the way, what ever happened to He-Man? When does his comeback start? Care Bears came back strong. Cabbage Patch Kids staged a revival. GI Joe has a movie coming out this summer! What about He-Man? What about that diabolical Skeletor? Don't even get me started...). When someone gets into a car accident and get real injuries does their body just absorb the pain? My theory is that the body can only deal with x-amount of pain at one time. If you have a whole bunch all at once it get aggregated into "pain" and you deal with that level of pain. When you have only one injury your brain focuses on that pain and it is perceived as greater than it really is... What do you think? I'm pretty sure that I just invented that theory. It is based on real life experience, not some pansy laboratory experiment. Anyway, my thumb feels better today, and I'm gonna use my theory to justify how much it hurt the last two days so you all don't think I'm a total wuss.
By the way, I was leafing through a science book and came across Lou Gehrig's disease. I read up on it... man, that is one crazy illness. I think we've all heard of Lou Gehrig's disease, also known as Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), but do you REALLY know what it does? It is a progressive neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and the spinal cord. Motor neurons reach from the brain to the spinal cord and from the spinal cord to the muscles throughout the body. The progressive degeneration of the motor neurons in ALS eventually leads to their death. When the motor neurons die, the ability of the brain to initiate and control muscle movement is lost. With voluntary muscle action progressively affected, patients in the later stages of the disease may become totally paralyzed.
The end game is that the muscles the KEEP YOU ALIVE stop responding to the brain and you literally stop breathing because the lungs stop responding. That, my friends, must be the worst way to die. I can't imagine it. Survival rate is 3 - 5 years. Can yo imagine knowing that in 3 - 5 years your body is just going to stop working?? Sorry to be a downer, but I thought it was interesting to understand exactly what Lou Gehrig's disease actually is since it is so well known in the world - yet most people don't know what it actually is...
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Dinosaurs & Writing
So, my son is crazy about dinosaurs. All kinds. He is almost 4 years old and can pronounce the name of every dinosaur that ever lived. He has about 100 different dinosaur toys and he usually plays "dinosaurs and Barbies" with my daughter. In addition to this he loves dinosaur movies. No, not the Land Before Time - he likes Jurassic Park 1, 2, and 3. We watch those movies 7 - 10 times a week. No, he isn't afraid of the movies at all. In fact, he wants me to skip over the "nice" dinosaurs and just right to the T Rex eating the lawyer part. Crazy.
So, after watching these movies over and over I decided to read one of the books by Michael Crichten. I just so happened to have "The Lost World" in my bookshelf. I don't remember where I got it - perhaps from my sister. I never read it, but this seemed like a perfect time to crack it open. Not only did I want to read it so I could explain the movie better to Drew, but I also found the 2nd Jurassic Park movie (The Lost World) to be mediocre compared to the 1st one. It seemed WAY to Hollywood, and I couldn't believe that it was really based on a book (since the 1st one was directly based on Crichten's book and was very well written with a deep story).
Ok... so I read the book and the movie has more in common with this blog than Crichten's book. I did some digging and apparently Steven Spielberg wanted to make a second Jurassic park movie (since they all made so much money on the first one) and wanted Crichten to write a sequel novel with which he could base the movie. Crichten replied that he didn't write sequels, but after some cajoling he ended up writing the book I read. The book was very good. Very good. So good, in fact, that I am now reading a different Crichten book because I enjoyed this one so much (reading "The Sphere", which was also turned into a movie). It is really interesting how LITTLE Spielberg used of the novel in the movie. What was the point of getting Crichten to write the book? Why not just take him out for drinks, get him talking about possible book ideas, and then make the movie with your own story? Really, aside from the fact that there is a "site B" (a second island with dinosaurs) and actual dinosaurs there is very little in common between the book and the movie. Spielberg could have used the story from Ringo Starr's "Caveman" movie and it might have better aligned with the book. Suffice to say, the book was vastly superior to the movie.
One cool thing that I learned from this experience (other than the fact that Crichten was a very entertaining writer) was the depth that these authors go to understand what they are writing. The theories and formulas and hypothesis that Crichten used to bring his story to life were pretty interesting. Seemed like a lot of work! I mean, he is writing a totally made up story about dinosaurs on an island, but to make the story seem plausible he backs up the plot with some very convincing science. I don't know to what extent the information was accurate or pseudo-science, but it went a long way to bringing me into the story (and believing it was possible).
Dan Brown's work falls along the same lines. I found myself (while reading the DaVinci Code and Angels and Demons) really wondering if the history he was using to tell the story was REAL, simple HYPOTHESIS, or completely FABRICATED. I still don't know! But, I do know that he must have spent some serious time researching the information for his fiction.
This is why I will focus on writing pure science fiction/fantasy. I can make up whatever I want and nobody can challenge me. What would someone say? "Hey, your elf can't be 7 feet tall" or "Why would a dwarf use a two-handed sword"? No way. I can do whatever I want, with no research what-so-ever. Isn't that what writing is all about anyway? Just making stuff up to entertain? If I wanted to do research I'll stay in my current job.
By the way - speaking of challenging information in a science fiction/fantasy story, have you watched the 1st Jurassic Park lately? Well, I have! And I can't figure out how the T Rex gets into the building at the end of the movie to save the people from the Velociraptors. How did he get in? He couldn't have! But, hey, that's Hollywood.
So, after watching these movies over and over I decided to read one of the books by Michael Crichten. I just so happened to have "The Lost World" in my bookshelf. I don't remember where I got it - perhaps from my sister. I never read it, but this seemed like a perfect time to crack it open. Not only did I want to read it so I could explain the movie better to Drew, but I also found the 2nd Jurassic Park movie (The Lost World) to be mediocre compared to the 1st one. It seemed WAY to Hollywood, and I couldn't believe that it was really based on a book (since the 1st one was directly based on Crichten's book and was very well written with a deep story).
Ok... so I read the book and the movie has more in common with this blog than Crichten's book. I did some digging and apparently Steven Spielberg wanted to make a second Jurassic park movie (since they all made so much money on the first one) and wanted Crichten to write a sequel novel with which he could base the movie. Crichten replied that he didn't write sequels, but after some cajoling he ended up writing the book I read. The book was very good. Very good. So good, in fact, that I am now reading a different Crichten book because I enjoyed this one so much (reading "The Sphere", which was also turned into a movie). It is really interesting how LITTLE Spielberg used of the novel in the movie. What was the point of getting Crichten to write the book? Why not just take him out for drinks, get him talking about possible book ideas, and then make the movie with your own story? Really, aside from the fact that there is a "site B" (a second island with dinosaurs) and actual dinosaurs there is very little in common between the book and the movie. Spielberg could have used the story from Ringo Starr's "Caveman" movie and it might have better aligned with the book. Suffice to say, the book was vastly superior to the movie.
One cool thing that I learned from this experience (other than the fact that Crichten was a very entertaining writer) was the depth that these authors go to understand what they are writing. The theories and formulas and hypothesis that Crichten used to bring his story to life were pretty interesting. Seemed like a lot of work! I mean, he is writing a totally made up story about dinosaurs on an island, but to make the story seem plausible he backs up the plot with some very convincing science. I don't know to what extent the information was accurate or pseudo-science, but it went a long way to bringing me into the story (and believing it was possible).
Dan Brown's work falls along the same lines. I found myself (while reading the DaVinci Code and Angels and Demons) really wondering if the history he was using to tell the story was REAL, simple HYPOTHESIS, or completely FABRICATED. I still don't know! But, I do know that he must have spent some serious time researching the information for his fiction.
This is why I will focus on writing pure science fiction/fantasy. I can make up whatever I want and nobody can challenge me. What would someone say? "Hey, your elf can't be 7 feet tall" or "Why would a dwarf use a two-handed sword"? No way. I can do whatever I want, with no research what-so-ever. Isn't that what writing is all about anyway? Just making stuff up to entertain? If I wanted to do research I'll stay in my current job.
By the way - speaking of challenging information in a science fiction/fantasy story, have you watched the 1st Jurassic Park lately? Well, I have! And I can't figure out how the T Rex gets into the building at the end of the movie to save the people from the Velociraptors. How did he get in? He couldn't have! But, hey, that's Hollywood.
1st post in a while, and other random things
Sorry people... I haven't been able to post recently because of my lack of ambition. But, hey, I've returned, so sit back and enjoy.
Saw a few movies recently... I'll give you the Lima thoughts...
The Bank Job - just saw this movie the other night. A great movie. Good action and fairly likable characters. Set in London, this movie reminded me of the Guy Ritchie films. Definitely worth a rent.
Batman - the Dark Knight - I'm a little late on this one, as it seems everyone has seen it already, but it was pretty good. I enjoyed it. I will admit, though, that I don't understand the draw of Batman as a super hero. In fact, I'm not sure how Batman survives. He doesn't have any real
"super power", yet he somehow can get beat up and fall 15 stories and not get injured. The newer movies have him in that armor which would appear to totally impact is ability to fight. When you look at all the "super heroes" out now, with REAL powers like the ability to fly, pick up cars, levitate stuff, I just wonder why people like batman. I've watched a bunch of the movies (it seems like Batman is the favorite to make movies) and I don't get the draw. And another thing... I like the idea of making the movies... but when these producers and directors try to make the movie REALISTIC and then have the hero run around in a costume with a cape it just seems silly! Would a superhero really run around the city in a black and red spider outfit? Really? We want to make the movies seem dark and realistic, and then have the hero put on tights to beat the bad guys. Am I the only one that thinks that is dumb?
Tropic Thunder - I was really looking forward to this movie. I bought the DVD from Blockbuster (a used version for $12) instead of renting it. I was disappointed. Don't get me wrong... it was enjoyable... but with all the hype I was expecting Caddyshack meets Full Metal Jacket. All in all it was good, but not amazingly funny. Robert Downey Jr was awesome in the movie, however. He is a great actor, too bad he lost all that time in a drug-induced slumber. He could have really put together a great career if he were sober from 1987 - 2001. Anyway, good movie in general but falls into the Ben Stiller trap... you know, a movie that is really pretty funny but gets kinda stupid at times and stops it from being a classic.
Madagascar 2 - this was a good movie. A good continuation of the 1st movie. I think the beating up of the old woman (who, as being portrayed as a New Yorker I would usually be in favor of) is a little over the top, especially for a kid's movie. Other than that it was really fun. Definitely a keeper.
Be kind... rewind... Wow, this was a weird movie. I thought the idea was awesome when I saw commercials. Looked like it would be really funny. Instead, it was kind of a borderline depressing movie that was just plain strange. I watched the entire movie (which is more than I can say for the next movie) and was mildly entertained, but it was so far from what I expected that I think I watched more out of morbid curiosity than actual interest. It really didn't even have a good ending since the store owner lost his business anyway. This is the kind of movie that started out as a great idea, the writer starts writing it and about 1/3 of the way in doesn't like the movie any more. Unfortunately, the movie production company already bought it so the writer has to finish it and we end up with a bunch of junk wrapped around a cool idea. I honestly think the people who created the trailers for this movie had to use more creatively that the writer of the actual movie in order to get people interested in this...
Don't Mess With the Zohan - ummm... how about you take your crappy movie and give me back the $3.00 I spent renting it... this was so bad that I turned it off 20 minutes in... maybe I wasn't the target audience. I just couldn't get into this at all... I don't even know what to say, other than "don't mess with this movie".
By the way... I was searching for information about Michael Crichton on Google and came across a fascinating aberration. (At least to me.) You know how Google now starts to give you possible results from your search while you type it in? Kinda like it is guessing what you are asking about? Well, if you type in "Michael" (don't hit enter) here is the list that will show up:
michaels
michael crichton
michael jackson
michael savage
michael jordan
michael buble
michaels coupon
michaels store locator
michael kors
michael phelps
Ok, call me crazy but Michael Crichton is the 2nd thing to show up??? Are we serious??? Of all the important "Michaels" in the world Michael Crichton is the 2nd most important? He is the 2nd most relevant? Wow... in fact, I would suggest that none of the listed are that important, but Michael Cichton? In front of Michael Jordan? Michael Jackson? How about some important Michaels? What about Michael the Archangel? He was pretty special. Or, Michelangelo? I think he was kind of an important guy (ok, that is spelled differently). And let's face it - 3 of the results I listed are for Michael's Craft Store. Wow... what a world we live in.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Hasheem is overated!
Wow... I was watching the (former) #1 UConn Huskies last night and after the game (they lost) I couldn't shake the feeling that UConn's best player, Hasheen Thabeet, is extremely overrated. In fact, one could argue that Jeff Adrien is the Huskies most reliable player.
Aside from being 7'3", I don't see anything special about Hasheem. I'm sure there are basketball purists out there that will gush over his footwork and ability to alter shots in the paint, but he seems extremely rough to me. He doesn't have any offensive game aside from dunks and put backs, and unless you are Shaq in his prime I think that makes you very limited. It amazes me that this guy can't put together a few moves in the paint. He seems utterly useless with the ball.
In fact, even on the defensive end he looks average. Last night DeJuan Blair LIT HIM UP. Not only with dunks but with in your face post play. Blair simply outplayed Hasheem, and really made him look like a guy who has only played for 3 years.
Call it a gut reaction, but I don't see this team going deep unless AJ Price and Adrien shoulder the load. Thabeet is just too raw to be an all-around impact player. I see him changing the game on the defensive end against lesser teams, but against team with solid big-men (like Blair or Haragondy from ND) I think he wilts.
Let's also call out two key players for the Huskies that have been almost invisible as of late... Stanley Robinson probably has the most talent on the team, but he never seems to put it together. He is a bundle of athleticism, but can't seem to get out of his own way. His three-point shot isn't falling, and he usually "blends in" when he's on the floor - which isn't a good thing. The other guy is Craig Austrie. He looks AWFUL last night, and he needs to be a solid contributor - especially with the three-ball - now that Dyson is out for the season. The Huskies don't have any deep threat outside of AJ Price. Austrie can be an effective shooter, but he needs to find his stroke.
On the plus side, I thought freshman Kemba Walker showed no fear while playing meaningful minutes. He needs to work on his defense, but he looked like an effective slasher on offense. I haven't seen evidence of a three-point shot, but he can definitely take the ball to the basket and finish.
Anyway - back to my main point - I don't understand the love affair with Thabeet. He may turn into a solid player down the road, but he is not one right now. On the defensive end he doesn't establish proper position, and he is in love with the blocked shot. He is overzealous in trying to swat the ball, instead of playing solid defense and letting his 7'3" frame become an obstacle. Blocked shots look nice in the highlight reel and on the stat-sheet, but I'd prefer to see him play better fundamentals. On offense, he's just a train wreck.
And one final note - I think Thabeet finished with 4 points, but his only field goal was a dunk in which he was all-alone and received a great pass from Price. He dunked so emphatically you'd think he just made an amazing move and scored his 30th point. Dunks are nice, but I need more than one a game to whet my appetite.
Aside from being 7'3", I don't see anything special about Hasheem. I'm sure there are basketball purists out there that will gush over his footwork and ability to alter shots in the paint, but he seems extremely rough to me. He doesn't have any offensive game aside from dunks and put backs, and unless you are Shaq in his prime I think that makes you very limited. It amazes me that this guy can't put together a few moves in the paint. He seems utterly useless with the ball.
In fact, even on the defensive end he looks average. Last night DeJuan Blair LIT HIM UP. Not only with dunks but with in your face post play. Blair simply outplayed Hasheem, and really made him look like a guy who has only played for 3 years.
Call it a gut reaction, but I don't see this team going deep unless AJ Price and Adrien shoulder the load. Thabeet is just too raw to be an all-around impact player. I see him changing the game on the defensive end against lesser teams, but against team with solid big-men (like Blair or Haragondy from ND) I think he wilts.
Let's also call out two key players for the Huskies that have been almost invisible as of late... Stanley Robinson probably has the most talent on the team, but he never seems to put it together. He is a bundle of athleticism, but can't seem to get out of his own way. His three-point shot isn't falling, and he usually "blends in" when he's on the floor - which isn't a good thing. The other guy is Craig Austrie. He looks AWFUL last night, and he needs to be a solid contributor - especially with the three-ball - now that Dyson is out for the season. The Huskies don't have any deep threat outside of AJ Price. Austrie can be an effective shooter, but he needs to find his stroke.
On the plus side, I thought freshman Kemba Walker showed no fear while playing meaningful minutes. He needs to work on his defense, but he looked like an effective slasher on offense. I haven't seen evidence of a three-point shot, but he can definitely take the ball to the basket and finish.
Anyway - back to my main point - I don't understand the love affair with Thabeet. He may turn into a solid player down the road, but he is not one right now. On the defensive end he doesn't establish proper position, and he is in love with the blocked shot. He is overzealous in trying to swat the ball, instead of playing solid defense and letting his 7'3" frame become an obstacle. Blocked shots look nice in the highlight reel and on the stat-sheet, but I'd prefer to see him play better fundamentals. On offense, he's just a train wreck.
And one final note - I think Thabeet finished with 4 points, but his only field goal was a dunk in which he was all-alone and received a great pass from Price. He dunked so emphatically you'd think he just made an amazing move and scored his 30th point. Dunks are nice, but I need more than one a game to whet my appetite.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Quick hit on Steroids
Ok, so I just wanted to quickly post about this whole Arod thing... I won't get into too much detail here, I'll update it later at greater length.
The reason I thought about this today is because I read that Sean Avery was assigned to Hartford's AHL team (the Wolfpack). Why did Avery bring to mind Arod? Good question... I was reading the article about Avery and I started to think about the action taken by the NHL versus the action (inaction) taken by MLB regarding steroids. Think about it:
Avery made an offhand and inappropriate comment about his ex-girlfriends to the media before a game. His comments had nothing to do with the game or his playing ability. His comments were in poor taste, but my God, who cares? Go to a movie today and you can hear much worse language (and pay for it!). So the NHL and the Stars make this big deal out of Avery's comments and "indefinitely punished (suspended) him." Wow.
And now to Arod... so I imagine that since he broke the law and used an illegal substance (while also compromising the integrity and history of the game) he will face a fine and suspension, right? Wrong. Nothing with happen to Arod. Yeah, his reputation will take a hit, although he was pretty widely despised anyway, and his ranking as one of the top players in the history of baseball will probably be in doubt. But no real punishment will come his way. He'll still make his $250 million dollars. He'll play 160 games this year for the Yankees. No punishment. Even the Yankees have come out with a statement that they support him, as he is part of the family. Amazing... he BROKE THE LAW. Nobody cares about that. All the media plays up is whether or not his numbers will legitimately stack up against the others in history.
This isn't really about Arod, but about baseball. The freakin' owners and player's unions are so morally corrupt it makes you sick. Everyone knew about the drug use, but no one cared. They still don't . They only care about limiting the damage and moving on. New alert, you won't be able to move on. Every year this will come up when another member of the 1985 - 2005 baseball seasons become eligible for the Hall of Fame. This is with us for the next 20 or 30 years.
The reason I thought about this today is because I read that Sean Avery was assigned to Hartford's AHL team (the Wolfpack). Why did Avery bring to mind Arod? Good question... I was reading the article about Avery and I started to think about the action taken by the NHL versus the action (inaction) taken by MLB regarding steroids. Think about it:
Avery made an offhand and inappropriate comment about his ex-girlfriends to the media before a game. His comments had nothing to do with the game or his playing ability. His comments were in poor taste, but my God, who cares? Go to a movie today and you can hear much worse language (and pay for it!). So the NHL and the Stars make this big deal out of Avery's comments and "indefinitely punished (suspended) him." Wow.
And now to Arod... so I imagine that since he broke the law and used an illegal substance (while also compromising the integrity and history of the game) he will face a fine and suspension, right? Wrong. Nothing with happen to Arod. Yeah, his reputation will take a hit, although he was pretty widely despised anyway, and his ranking as one of the top players in the history of baseball will probably be in doubt. But no real punishment will come his way. He'll still make his $250 million dollars. He'll play 160 games this year for the Yankees. No punishment. Even the Yankees have come out with a statement that they support him, as he is part of the family. Amazing... he BROKE THE LAW. Nobody cares about that. All the media plays up is whether or not his numbers will legitimately stack up against the others in history.
This isn't really about Arod, but about baseball. The freakin' owners and player's unions are so morally corrupt it makes you sick. Everyone knew about the drug use, but no one cared. They still don't . They only care about limiting the damage and moving on. New alert, you won't be able to move on. Every year this will come up when another member of the 1985 - 2005 baseball seasons become eligible for the Hall of Fame. This is with us for the next 20 or 30 years.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Air Travel
OK my friends... I just returned from Florida and I must say that traveling has become quite a chore. I understand that we have security measures in place for our safety, but what a shame. Think about how ridiculously demeaning it is going to the airport now-a-days... we have to take off most of our clothes, we can't have any gels or liquids, and God forbid you bring a bottle of water with you through security! Man, get out the tasers!
It is truly sad that the masses have to be subject to these silly rules because of a few crazy people. think about it... one deranged lunatic tries to blow up a plane with explosives in his sneakers and now we all have to take off our shoes before we board a plane. Ok, maybe there were 3 copycats that we never heard about... and now 400 million people have to take off their shoes. Are you serious? My 3-year-old son has to take off his Sketchers before everyone plan ride. And let's face it, is a terrorist really blowing up a plane going from Tampa to Miami with 70 passengers? At what point do we realize that the terrorists aren't targeting business flights from Chicago to Dubuque?
I know, this is tongue-in-cheek, but let's take a quick look at what you have to do to take a flight now...
You have to arrive 2 hours before your flight. ANY flight. If you don't you risk getting caught up in security and missing your flight. So, that 1 hour flight to Philly just turned into 3 hours. plus the time to drive to the airport and catch the shuttle from the parking garage. Amtrack is sounding better all the time.
Ok, so you get into the airport. Now you have to check in... we do everything online now so it's just a matter of checking baggage. Hmmm, most airlines are now charging for bags... can someone direct me to the 5 vacation travelers who DON'T have baggage? Does US Airways think we buy new clothes in Phoenix and then burn them after we are done so we don't have to pay for them to come home with us? How is it that the nation isn't going crazy about these new rules? We all just shrug and move on... people, you are paying $450 to fly across the country and the airline is going to charge you for your bags!!! I guess we should just wear all our clothes on the flight. Why not...? I'm 180 pounds... I figure that if I wear 4 pairs of boxers and shorts, 8 shirts, a couple of pair of socks, two hats, my shoes (I'll drape the other pair over my shoulder) and a jacket I'll still be a slender 215 and the person sitting next to me won't mind too much. Hopefully I don't sweat too much... that could get ugly.
Honestly... I can't believe that rule - and let's hope your bags don't weigh more than 50 pounds each, otherwise its surcharge time! So, what did that rule come about, anyway? Is it the weight of the bags? The manpower to load them onto the plan? Just amazing... and what does this translate into? Some lady putting 75 pounds of clothes into a carry-on bag by using 10 of those suction bags she just got from Target.
Ok... so the bags are checked and it's time for my favorite part... security.
Rule #1, don't joke with the security people. They are actually cyborgs.
Rule #2, don't worry, it only seems like an eternity while you disrobe before using the metal detector. And yes, we all fumble with our keys and coins and feel like idiots.
Ok, so I have to show my license five times before I get to the boarding gate. Like any 15 year old can't forge a license. Give me 24 hours and I'm sure I can locate a way/person/machine to make me a fake license. I love it. All these measures only inconvenience the honest people. It is like the lock on your house. Any thief could get into your house in probably 10 minutes. The lock is there to stop that regular person who has a momentary brain-freeze and thinks he'll take your DVD player as he walks home from the bar. "Oh, it's locked... ok, I guess I'll just go home now."
Think about it... you don't even need official documents to get through security. You need a print out from your home computer - nobody is making fake documents on their computers, right? - and your license.
So you get to the conveyor belt and start loading all your crap. Take your jacket off! And your hat! And your shoes! And your belt! Load up one of those grey bins with your junk for all to see. Oh, and if you have any electronics you need to open them up and display them so any nearby thief can check out what they are going to steal from you later. So we all stand in line in our belt-less pants and shoeless feet and wait for a 57 year-old, 115 pound woman make sure we are not trying to blow up the world. Silly. Again, all this because .000009% of the world hates capitalism enough to blow themselves up to make a point.
You get through the metal detector and whoops! I guess you forgot that you can't bring shave cream and hair gel through security! Not in THOSE quantities. Listen, if you want to simply blow up 5 or 10 seats with a small amount of explosives hidden in a hair-gel container fine, but let's not go crazy and bring in 25 ounces of the stuff! Crazy American.
Ok, so now you don't have your new bottle of Canoe after-shave, but at least you got through security. On to the gate! Wait, put your shoes on first.
Great... now your are in the terminal and it is filled with... stores. Why not? You couldn't bring any luggage and what you had brought got confiscated at security, so go ahead and buy some new stuff. Hmmmm....
When it is all said and done, I find the one thing that SHOULD be monitored ISN'T. Why isn't there a process to make sure that the luggage that you pick up in baggage claim is actually YOUR luggage? How easy would it be to sit around the baggage claim and wait until 3 or 4 bags have floated by a few times with no owner and then grab them? Or what about just being that guy who stands at the opening of the conveyor belt and grab the 1st generic black bag that comes along? I guess the airlines figure that if you paid them $40 to bring the bag you'll make sure you pick it up...
It is truly sad that the masses have to be subject to these silly rules because of a few crazy people. think about it... one deranged lunatic tries to blow up a plane with explosives in his sneakers and now we all have to take off our shoes before we board a plane. Ok, maybe there were 3 copycats that we never heard about... and now 400 million people have to take off their shoes. Are you serious? My 3-year-old son has to take off his Sketchers before everyone plan ride. And let's face it, is a terrorist really blowing up a plane going from Tampa to Miami with 70 passengers? At what point do we realize that the terrorists aren't targeting business flights from Chicago to Dubuque?
I know, this is tongue-in-cheek, but let's take a quick look at what you have to do to take a flight now...
You have to arrive 2 hours before your flight. ANY flight. If you don't you risk getting caught up in security and missing your flight. So, that 1 hour flight to Philly just turned into 3 hours. plus the time to drive to the airport and catch the shuttle from the parking garage. Amtrack is sounding better all the time.
Ok, so you get into the airport. Now you have to check in... we do everything online now so it's just a matter of checking baggage. Hmmm, most airlines are now charging for bags... can someone direct me to the 5 vacation travelers who DON'T have baggage? Does US Airways think we buy new clothes in Phoenix and then burn them after we are done so we don't have to pay for them to come home with us? How is it that the nation isn't going crazy about these new rules? We all just shrug and move on... people, you are paying $450 to fly across the country and the airline is going to charge you for your bags!!! I guess we should just wear all our clothes on the flight. Why not...? I'm 180 pounds... I figure that if I wear 4 pairs of boxers and shorts, 8 shirts, a couple of pair of socks, two hats, my shoes (I'll drape the other pair over my shoulder) and a jacket I'll still be a slender 215 and the person sitting next to me won't mind too much. Hopefully I don't sweat too much... that could get ugly.
Honestly... I can't believe that rule - and let's hope your bags don't weigh more than 50 pounds each, otherwise its surcharge time! So, what did that rule come about, anyway? Is it the weight of the bags? The manpower to load them onto the plan? Just amazing... and what does this translate into? Some lady putting 75 pounds of clothes into a carry-on bag by using 10 of those suction bags she just got from Target.
Ok... so the bags are checked and it's time for my favorite part... security.
Rule #1, don't joke with the security people. They are actually cyborgs.
Rule #2, don't worry, it only seems like an eternity while you disrobe before using the metal detector. And yes, we all fumble with our keys and coins and feel like idiots.
Ok, so I have to show my license five times before I get to the boarding gate. Like any 15 year old can't forge a license. Give me 24 hours and I'm sure I can locate a way/person/machine to make me a fake license. I love it. All these measures only inconvenience the honest people. It is like the lock on your house. Any thief could get into your house in probably 10 minutes. The lock is there to stop that regular person who has a momentary brain-freeze and thinks he'll take your DVD player as he walks home from the bar. "Oh, it's locked... ok, I guess I'll just go home now."
Think about it... you don't even need official documents to get through security. You need a print out from your home computer - nobody is making fake documents on their computers, right? - and your license.
So you get to the conveyor belt and start loading all your crap. Take your jacket off! And your hat! And your shoes! And your belt! Load up one of those grey bins with your junk for all to see. Oh, and if you have any electronics you need to open them up and display them so any nearby thief can check out what they are going to steal from you later. So we all stand in line in our belt-less pants and shoeless feet and wait for a 57 year-old, 115 pound woman make sure we are not trying to blow up the world. Silly. Again, all this because .000009% of the world hates capitalism enough to blow themselves up to make a point.
You get through the metal detector and whoops! I guess you forgot that you can't bring shave cream and hair gel through security! Not in THOSE quantities. Listen, if you want to simply blow up 5 or 10 seats with a small amount of explosives hidden in a hair-gel container fine, but let's not go crazy and bring in 25 ounces of the stuff! Crazy American.
Ok, so now you don't have your new bottle of Canoe after-shave, but at least you got through security. On to the gate! Wait, put your shoes on first.
Great... now your are in the terminal and it is filled with... stores. Why not? You couldn't bring any luggage and what you had brought got confiscated at security, so go ahead and buy some new stuff. Hmmmm....
When it is all said and done, I find the one thing that SHOULD be monitored ISN'T. Why isn't there a process to make sure that the luggage that you pick up in baggage claim is actually YOUR luggage? How easy would it be to sit around the baggage claim and wait until 3 or 4 bags have floated by a few times with no owner and then grab them? Or what about just being that guy who stands at the opening of the conveyor belt and grab the 1st generic black bag that comes along? I guess the airlines figure that if you paid them $40 to bring the bag you'll make sure you pick it up...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
