This is sort of a dumping ground for some odd thoughts - serious and not - which you might find interesting ... or maybe not. After enough material in a particular vein accumulates here it graduates to its own page.
Shortly after his capture in Afghanistan, American-born Taliban fighter John Walker was referred to kindly by President Bush as a "poor fellow." His comment brought to my mind the '60s "Batman" TV series in which, on more than one occasion, speaking about some young woman who had fallen in with the wrong crowd - that is to say, some arch-villain such as the Joker - Adam West uttered the line "poor, deluded girl." [BTW, when I was much younger, I thought that he was saying "poor, diluted girl."]
In my belief, Mark Green would not have lost to Rudy Giuliani had the mayor not been limited to two terms of office. Presumably, Green, too, would have been able to seek another term as Public Advocate, so he would not have run for mayor. The question then is: Who would the Democrats have sent to the slaughter, as they did with Ruth Messinger in 1997?
For the record, I have come to the conclusion that my least favorite holiday song is "We Need A Little Christmas." I can't put my finger on it - there's something phony-sounding about it - but something about it just rubs me the wrong way all around. "Hate" is too strong a word, so I'll just state that I can't stand it and leave it at that. Give me any other Christmas carol but this one. Well, maybe not "All I Want For Christmas Is My Two Front Teeth." That one's pretty grating, too.
"The Beatles/1967-1970" ("The Blue Album") contains not enough material from "The Beatles" ("The White Album") for my liking - only "Back In The USSR," "While My Guitar Gently Weeps," and "Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da." They're certainly some of the best songs of that album, but they couldn't include one or two more from the 30 of that two-disc opus? What was wrong with "Sexy Sadie" and "Helter Skelter?"
Nowhere is the artistic range of the Beatles more evident than on "The White Album." And no two back-to-back tracks on that album - or on any other one - demonstrate Paul McCartney's versatility than "Why Don't We Do It In The Road?" and "I Will."
The "ding-dong" watch-the-closing-doors warning signal of newer-model New York subway cars consists of the same two notes as Simpsons character Nelson Muntz' signature "ha-ha," as if mocking anyone who isn't quick enough to hop aboard.
Telephone numbers which are presented as words, such as 1-800-MATTRESS, are very convenient to remember but are difficult - at least for me - to dial quickly.
I eat the cereal known as müeslix, even though its name conjures up an image of the oily runoff from a mule caught in the rain.
Despite the fact that Almond Joys contain almonds, I have always preferred Mounds, because they are covered in dark chocolate. Why don't they (Hershey's) just produce a dark chocolate-covered Almond Joy?
For ease of maintenance, wouldn't it make sense to use Legos, albeit large, steel ones, to build at least some parts of bridges and other structures?
It's just a matter of time before some litigious peanut-allergic individual sues the maker of Skippy Peanut Butter for not placing on its labels a disclaimer indicating that it contains peanuts and peanut by-products ... and the frivolous lawsuit nevertheless winds up in court.
There are 24 ways to permute the order of the four letters A, B, C, and D. However, in several years of watching "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire" I have never seen the answers to a single fastest-finger question presented in the order A-B-C-D. (I'm not counting the time on one of the celebrity editions, in which Norm McDonald was the last contestant remaining. His fastest-finger question was to spell his first name, and the answers were A: "N," B: "O," C: "R," and D: "M.") Wouldn't it be something if the show did this one time, and some of the contestants didn't get it correct?
| I wouldn't trade it for all the ... | in ... |
|---|---|
| cans | Canada, Kansas |
| bras | Brazil |
| germs | Germany |
| cattle | Catalonia |
| cubes | Cuba |
| pans | Panama |
| bells | Belgium, Belize |
| oaks | Oklahoma |
| pens | Pennsylvania |
| poles | Poland |
| eyes | Iowa, Idaho |
| whisks, Wisk ® | Wisconsin |
| oars | Oregon |
| vats | Vatican City |
| bowls, bows | Bolivia |
| phlegm | Flemington |
| ties | Taiwan, Thailand |
| kooks | Cucamonga |
| Coke ™ ® | Kokomo |
| bosses | Boston |
| bars | Bahrain, Barbados |
| dens | Denmark, Denver |
| inns | India |
| balls | Baltimore |
| hoboes | Hoboken |
| guys | Guyana |
| toes | Toronto, Toledo, Topeka |
| nuts | Nutley |
| bags | Baghdad |
| paws | Pawtucket |
| sales | Salem |
| springs | Springfield |
| tights | Titusville |
| piss | Piscataway |
| yaks | Yakima |
The two serpents in the cadeuceus, the symbol which is used to represent the medical profession, form a double helix - the shape of DNA. Is this just a weird coincidence?
Movie Soundtrack Album Bummer Number 1 ("Back to the Future"): It's not exactly a pet peeve, so I'm including it on this page instead. I'm a little disappointed that this album doesn't contain the song "Mr. Sandman."
Movie Soundtrack Album Bummer Number 2 ("The Blues Brothers"): This album doesn't have "Stand By Your Man." If you've seen the movie you'll probably understand my disappointment.
Movie Soundtrack Album Bummer Number 3 ("Zelig"): As far as I can determine, this album doesn't even exist. Besides numerous songs from the 1920s and 1930s which presumably can be found elsewhere, this 1983 Woody Allen movie had some original music, including "Doin' the Chameleon."
General Album Bummer Number 1 ("The Monkees Greatest Hits"): Only one track of the twenty on this album features vocals primarily of Mike Nesmith, possibly - no, probably - the most musically-talented of the foursome: "Listen To The Band." Among his other - and, in my opinion, better - songs which could have been selected are "Sweet Young Thing," "Salesman," "The Door Into Summer," "Love Is Only Sleeping," "You Just May Be The One," and (the best) "Papa Gene's Blues."
Hematoma and glaucoma might be the only medical conditions ending in "oma" which aren't cancer-related.
I'm neither a composer nor a professional music critic, but the songs which are featured in the TV ads for Elton John and Tim Rice's "Aida" seem to me to be pretty lightweigh fare. (Are these spots shown just locally - in the New York City area - or are they aired nationally?) For example, what I believe are the show's principal characters singing with and to each other: "Who'd have thought our love could be so good? So good. Not me. Not me. Not me. Not me." And the chorus belting out: "Aida! Aida! Aida! Aida!" If these are considered to be teasers, then I'm not taking the bait. I'll even go so far as to state that the score of the purposely bad "Springtime For Hitler" in the show "The Producers" is far more engaging and listenable to me. (Caveat: I'm basing this last opinion on hearing the music in the 1968 film, not the Broadway effort. That's another matter altogether. I have heard Matthew Broderick's rendition of "I Wanna Be A Producer," and both its lyrics and its tune sound pretty lame. Sorry, Mel.)
Warner Brothers cartoon character Pepe le Pew has to be one of the least developed of that studio's characters. Every cartoon in which he appeared it was the same thing: He's strolling along, singing some French song. Meanwhile, a female black cat manages to get a stripe of white paint on its back, and - Voilà! - instant mistaken and unrequited skunk romance ensues. Oh, the hilarity! All-in-all, truly a one-joke waste of time. And not much of a joke, at that.
Although I'm a life-long New Yorker, I never visited either of the observation decks - indoor or outdoor - at the top of Two World Trade Center. I would, however, like to share this recollection: On the last leg of the return voyage of my first plane trip, for much of the journey no landmarks were discernable. I sat at a window on the right side of the aircraft, watching intently for anything recognizable. I didn't realize it at the time, but we approached the city from the south, over Staten Island. Still nothing stood out to me. Then, as we came over the harbor, I finally saw the familiar nighttime lights of the skyline, prominently featuring the Twin Towers. I clearly recall remarking to the fellow next to me that I was home. Even though we had yet to pass up the Hudson River past the Bronx and around Westchester to LaGuardia, for all it mattered I was home.
When I was a kid, we had these metal finger rings which, when you blew into one of them, would spin a circular piece inside the device attached to the ring. The shape of some holes in that piece caused it to make a silly sound similar to that of a siren. I've often wondered if that principle would work if the holed circular piece were scaled up and fitted as a car's hubcaps. If so, I'm sure that it could be marketed successfully. It probably would be outlawed, though - if it were legal in the first place.
From its TV ads, it appears to me that Kevin Costner's new movie, "Dragonfly," is yet another flop which takes itself way too seriously - like two of his other efforts, "The Postman" and "Waterworld." (Not to mention a TV series in which he wasn't involved, i.e., "The X Files." I've never watched it, but my impression is that that series has been stringing its viewers along for a good many years. We'll see if its upcoming finale will reveal all or - as I expect - will disappoint. Hey, it's only fiction.)
I am the last person in the world who should be considered an arbiter of fine fashion, but it is my humble and uncultured opinion that the interim leader of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, is currently the coolest-dressing world leader. First, the hat. (Supposedly, it's called an Astrakhan hat. Even its name sounds cool. BTW: Astrakhan is a small region in southwest Russia.) You've gotta love his hat - the shape, the texture, whatever - on his bald pate. (A handsome, nicely-trimmed beard makes up for the lack hair on top of his head.) Then there's cape. When was the last time there was a major political figure who wore a cape - and pulled it off? (I know that FDR wore one on at least several occasions. The image of him in a cape in one of those photos of him with Churchill and Stalin at Yalta sticks in my mind. Hey! Isn't Churchill sporting an Astrakhan hat in that pic? It looks like Roosevelt and Stalin might be poking fun at it.) And lastly, underneath the cape, a Western-style suit. It wouldn't seem that such a melange of fashion could work, but somehow he manages to make it all come together just right. I can't put my finger on it, but it just does. God bless 'im.
Check out "Afghanistan's Mr. Chic - Karzai's Picture Gallery" and see if you don't agree with me.
It just occurred to me that since Babe Ruth passed away in 1948 - specifically, on August 16 of that year - and Jackie Robinson made his Brooklyn Dodgeers debut in April of 1947, there was about a year and a half for the Sultan of Swat to ruminate on the advent of a black man playing in major league baseball. I wonder if the Bambino made any public statements on this development in his waning days, and what those opinions were. Hopefully, they were positive and forward-thinking ones.
You can quote me on it: "It's only [any other sport but baseball]." (For example, one of my favorites: "It's only tennis.")
We'll be one giant step closer to the end of intelligent life on this planet when some horse-racing track offers a promotion of bobble-head dolls of Triple Crown winners. It's only a matter of time.
My taste may be only in my mouth, as they say, but the more I see it the more I can't help thinking that the PT Cruiser is one heck of an ugly-looking vehicle. Retro shmetro. It's ug-a-lee!
| For symmetry, I'd have the logo of the Brooklyn Cyclones changed from |
|
to either |
|
or |
|
May 2002: Mike Piazza recently publicly declared that he is not gay. I'm sure that some newspaper folk were hoping that he would state the contrary, which would have given them the opportunity to use the headline "The Monster Is Out," a play on third-base coach John Stearns' exuberant comment "The monster is out of the cage" in 2000 on Piazza breaking out of his hitting slump.
June 7, 2002: After a jury found "Kennedy cousin" Michael Skakel guilty of the 1975 murder of Martha Moxley, Moxley's mother declared the day "Martha's day." So there we have it: June 6 - The Anniversary of D-Day, June 7 - Martha's Day.
By the way, at the trial, one of the witnesses for Skakel's defense was his brother, John. Also, another Skakel brother, Tom, was present in the coutroom to support Michael. Being related to the Kennedy clan, I wonder if they're known in their inner circle as John-John and Tom-Tom, respectively.
I'm so confused. Is the U.S. Open a tennis tournament or a golf tournament? But since it's only tennis/golf, I really couldn't care less.
As of June 25, 2002, the Colorado Rockies must have the most players named Todd on their roster than any other franchise in any professional sport ever: Todd Helton (1B), Todd Zeile (3B), Todd Hollandsworth (LF), and Todd Jones (P). Can we get the Elias Sports Bureau to verify this?
I can pretty much tell if a Beatles song - "Eleanor Rigby," "Michelle," "Yellow Submarine," "Doctor Robert," "Nowhere Man," for example - is on either "Revolver" or "Rubber Soul" or neither of those two albums, but I find it darn near impossible to tell in each case just which of the two albums it is.
June 27, 2002: At today's Met game I saw a guy wearing a t-shirt with the following:
But I still hate the Yankees. |
My sentiments exactly. Gotta get me one of those.
I find it very interesting and not just a little disturbing that in the last two years - 2001 and 2002 - pitcher Steve Karsay, who grew up in Queens "in the shadow of Shea Stadium," has managed to find his way onto the two most anti-Met teams around: the Atlanta Braves and the New York Yankees. (His move to the Braves was a trade from the Indians, over which I'm not sure he had veto power. His deal to the Yankees appears to have been a new contract, in which I presume he had some freedom. 'Nuff said?)
Carpe carassius auratus ... Seize the goldfish. (Possibly a good slogan for Pepperidge Farms ... or not.)
October 8, 2002: The first game of the ALCS is being played today, and the Yankees are nowhere to be seen. Hoo-hah! And on top of that, the Braves, too, were eliminated from the playoffs - each one in the first round, no less! I couldn't have scripted it better myself. Now who am I supposed to root against?
I wouldn't be a bit surprised to learn that there are still some Yankees in Anaheim on the top step of the visitors dugout with their mouths agape. Another thing: Any Yankees who care to watch any post-season games will probably have to do so at a venue other than the comfort of their own homes since I wouldn't doubt that they routinely cancel their cable service through the month of October, believing that they wouldn't be watching any television at that time. I'll bet most of them are getting mighty antsy, not knowing what to do with themselves during these idle weeks, and each one wondering if the ax will be falling on his head. Personally, I'd prefer to have my head roll than to play under the pressure that is put upon them. But that's just me. I guess that deep down I'm not Yankee material - and proud of it to the core.
As of the end of the 2002 season, according to Yahoo, there are only four players in Major League Baseball named Troy - not a very common name, you must admit - three of them on post-season-bound teams:
There's also pitcher LaTroy Hawkins of the Minnesota Twins, yet another post-season-bound team.
According to Yahoo, for the four teams in Major League Baseball's 2002 league championship series, there are four players commonly known by two initials. Here, with assistance from Baseball Almanac - The "Official" Baseball History Site , is the lowdown on their full names:
There is no such individual on the Anaheim Angels, the other team in the 2002 ALCS. However, there are eight two-initialed players on the 2002 rosters of other teams:
MLB pitcher Pedro Astacio ® P. Astacio ® Pastacio ® Pistachio
December 8, 2002: I read today that this year's sleeper movie hit, "My Big Fat Greek Wedding," is being turned into a midseason replacement show for CBS. No, I haven't seen the film. I guess I'm just one of the handful of people who have not. Nor do I care about seeing it. That doesn't prevent me from making the following prediction. Despite the overwhelmingly gushing praise for the theatrical release, the public will be disappointed by its small-screen translation, and its tepid ratings will cause it to last only through the end of the 2002-2003 season at best. No surprise, since very few adaptations - knockoffs might be a better word - of movies into TV series live up to expectations - "M*A*S*H" and "The Odd Couple" being only two of the few to be successful. And are we to expect a new wedding every week, or would the series be more aptly titled "My Big Fat Greek Marriage?"
Just one more related point: Kudos to the people of Greek heritage for overlooking the fact that the E's in the title's lettering are actually sigmas (S), the phonetic equivalent in the Greek alphabet of our "S." The point being that there probably are other ethnicities which would have been offended by such a casual misuse of their alphabet, and would have considered it a slap at their culture.
December 14, 2002: I'll take a wild guess what Sen. Trent Lott (R-Miss.) will be doing next month on Martin Luther King Day - and possibly every year thereafter for as long as he wants to stay in political office: Doing penance for his overly-enthusiastic remarks regarding the "what-if" scenario of then-segregationist Strom Thurmond winning his 1948 presidential bid, by attending an hours-long memorial service to the slain civil rights leader, maybe even having to endure a sermon from the Rev. Jesse Jackson or even - dare I suggest it? - the Rev. Al Sharpton. That will teach him to measure his public words more carefully from now on.
Meanwhile, I wonder if Thurmond - for his part in this whole embarrassing brouhaha - is aware of all the controversy surrounding the seemingly good-natured birthday praise. The clips of the event which I saw indicated that the gentleman wasn't in what could be referred to as tip-top condition. But, on the other hand, I should look that good after 100 years worth of living - if I'm even alive at my century mark!
December 14, 2002: Today I went to MoMA QNS (The Museum of Modern Art in Queens) - the museum's satellite location in Long Island City during the three-year renovation of its main building on West 53rd Street in Manhattan. According to Yahoo! Yellow Pages, the facility is just 0.4 miles from my residence (presumably, as the crow flies) - a mere stroll for me. I didn't even have to unsheath my MetroCard from its holder! Plus, it was "Boro Day" for residents of the borough of Queens, courtesy of the fine folks at Newsday. So the usual $12 admission fee was waived for those with proof of a Queens address. (I haven't driven in well over a decade and a half, but my driver's license came in mighty handy again. I think I'll renew it when it expires next year.)
Anyway, I got to see several exhibitions - "The Changing of the Avant-Garde: Visionary Architectural Drawings from the Howard Gilman Collection," "Drawing Now: Eight Propositions," and "Masterworks of German Expressionism" - each with some "interesting" works. (I'm no culture vulture by any means, but I know what I like - or don't like - when I see it.) But most enjoyable overall was the exhibition entitled "To Be Looked At: Painting and Sculpture from the Collection," which contained some classic - dare I say "iconic" - pieces of modern art, works that each of us has probably seen in print uncountable times. Just scratching the surface, I'm talking about Van Gogh's "The Starry Night," Dali's "The Persistence of Memory," Matisse's "The Dance," Jasper Johns' "Flag," and Andy Warhol's "Gold Marilyn Monroe." Not to mention artwork by Picasso, Seurat, Pollock, Chagall, Magritte, Liechtenstein, Miro, yada yada. Some very impressive "stuff" which I can now honestly say that I have seen first-hand.
Oh, and there's one more bonus to report: For the "trouble" of filling out a quick one-page multiple-choice survey, I got one of those handy-dandy Z-Card folding subway maps for my collection. It was a choice between that, a MetroCard holder (tempting), or a pencil. (Take what's behind Door #3. Yeah, right!) All around, the trip was a win-win - insert several more "wins" here - situation.
December 16, 2002: I can't help seeing the similarity - appearancewise only - of that guy in the butterfly costume in those MSN 8 TV ads which have been running lately, and the Patrick Warburton character in last season's short-lived Fox show, "The Tick."
December 16, 2002: I keep hearing and reading that Tareq Aziz is the Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister, but nothing about that country's Prime Minister. Can we safely assume that it's the head honcho himself, Saddam Hussein?
Increasingly frequently, I've been hearing law-enforcement authorities, after the perpetration of a crime, indicate that they would like a particular individual to come to see them because they "just want to talk to him." Nine times out of ten, if not 99 out of 100, when they finally connect with that person - either because he came to them voluntarily, or because he was tracked down - the guy is arrested for the crime.
January 1, 2003: I recently read a financial article - probably in Kiplinger's Magazine - which included an interview with some "Joe Average." What sticks in my mind was this person's gleeful statement about the declining stock market that he is now able to purchase more shares of some financial vehicle than he would have been able to buy at a higher price. Oh, joy! Maybe the stock market can please continue its slide to record-low levels so this guy can pick up some more shares at rock-bottom prices. Wake up, pinhead! The idea is to hope for your securities' prices to rise. It doesn't matter to me what the underlying price of such a security is, just as long as it is higher as time goes forward. I understand that if you are compelled to purchase a round block of stock shares it's more difficult to handle if the stock's price climbs. But if you're buying mutual-fund shares, you don't have that problem. If you want to purchase $100 worth and the NAV is $10 you get 10 shares; if the NAV is $20 you get only 5 shares. Big deal, as far as I'm concerned. You have a base value of $100 either way you look at it. As long as the value rises, you're in good shape. In the first case, a 1% gain will bring the NAV to $11; in the second case, the same gain will bring it to $22. But, regardless, you will then have $110 - at least on paper. The percent increase doesn't depend upon the base NAV. (By the way, I have an account with Buy & Hold . It allows me to purchase stock shares - granted, at market value - by dollar amounts, not by round blocks - the same as with mutual funds. Overall, I recommend this service, especially for the reason I've just given.)
Anyway, to get back to my rant about the lousy stock market these last few years, I'm tired of throwing good money after bad waiting for the this great money pit to make its eventual turnaround. So for the most part, I'm sitting on the sidelines - neither purchasing nor selling. I've heard the argument from the great soothsayers that you can't discern a market's bottom, and that if you wait until after the market takes off it's "too late." I'll take that chance and wait for some more sustained positive signs before I jump back in wholeheartedly, rather than commit some more of my finances and see them dwindle as the market takes yet another big dip. I realize that there are no guarantees with the stock market. Prices fluctuate both upward and downward - hopefully not wildly, though - but the signs aren't positive enough to get me to feel comfortable parting with money which, even though it's earning paltry interest in a bank account, isn't disappearing pretty much on a daily basis.
One last thing to ponder: As 2002 drew to a close I read and heard that the last time the stock market had three down years was back "whenever." (I forget the exact years.) I'm tired of hearing that the market just can't possibly have another losing year. Yeah, right! Will the financial "experts" guarantee that the market won't have another bad year, and that any money which I would spend on stock or mutual-fund purchases won't have a substantial chunk taken out of it again? I don't think they will. So I'll just hold off until the turnaround is more definite, even if I don't catch the bottom, thank you.
I've got a way to turn $50 into $2 quicker than any other way - even a dreadful stock market. If I use that $50 to purchase instant (scratch-off) lottery tickets, I can almost certainly make most - if not all of it - of it disappear. O.K. To be perfectly honest, several years ago I somehow got a ticket which produced a $600 winning. It had to be a major fluke. I never had anything remotely close to it - $20 tops, usually just a buck or two, on any single ticket - before it or since.
February 1, 2003: Over the last several days I have seen TV ads for two new Disney flicks, the video "101 Dalmatians II" (subtitled "Patch's London Adventure") and the theatrical release "The Jungle Book 2." It occurred to me last year, when, in quick succession, Disney released the film "Return To Never Land" and the videos "Tarzan & Jane," "The Hunchback of Notre Dame II," and "Cinderella II: Dreams Come True," that this studio is so desperate to scrape up money that it's lately involved with cheap attempts at recycling some of its former successful efforts. And then it hit me: Very few of Disney's best works are not original in themselves, either being based on fairy tales ("Cinderella" "Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs" "Sleeping Beauty") or being adapted from children's literature ("Pinocchio" "Bambi" "Peter Pan" "Mary Poppins"). So what else is new? Now they're just taking it to a new - in my opinion, lower - level, creating second-generation copies of other works.
Here, for the record, are a few - probably not all, I'm sure - of Disney's other sequels from recent years, most animated, all direct-to-video (or Disney DVD, as their TV ads like to boast), in no particular order:
For a similar take on this phenomenon, see the user comments for "Atlantis: Milo's Return" by hansbearnl and peacepoet-2 on this page .
Follow-up (January 16, 2004): According to a note at this page , a correspondent who refers to these efforts, which are produced by Disney Television Animation, as "cheapquels" (excellent term!) indicates that "Bambi II," "Mulan II," and "The Emperor's NEWER Groove" are all on the way. (Heaven help us!) He also comments that "their success and the belief that Disney has that the audience isn't smart enough to tell the difference between the official big-budget traditional films and the 'cheapquels' is why they're moving away from their animated 'classics' productions." I couldn't agree more.
Follow-up (January 27, 2005): I saw a TV ad last night for "Mulan II." So what the heck is holding up "Bambi II" and "The Emperor's NEWER Groove?"
February 3, 2003: Recently there was a news story about Saddam Hussein's oldest child, Uday. I can't help reading his name and thinking that it sounds like Pig Latin. If I remember my Pig Latin correctly, it would translate back to "Du." (As in doo-doo head?) Either that or what Eddie Murphy used to say when he played Buckwheat on "Saturday Night Live": "Otay"
February 6, 2003: It was another sh*tty day on Wall Street today.
(The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 55.88 points
February 7, 2003: It's been rolling around in my head for quite some time: ABC News anchor Peter Jennings has this extremely annoying habit of smacking his lips while reading the news. It's almost as if he's making these clicking noises as an indication of his disapproval of some element of the story he's delivering. On top of that, there's the cadence of his delivery, punctuated with what appear to me to be calculated pauses. Lastly, there is his overall air of smugness. But most grating to me is Jennings's frequent lip-smacking. Tsk tsk. One of these days I intend to count his lip smacks in one newscast.
April 4, 2003: It was many years before I came to trust the efficacy of Pepto-Bismol®. When I was a child, if I felt as if I was about to throw up, I would be given that remedy. Unfortunately, by the time I had taken it, I was already too far gone for it to have any effect. So - needless to say - for quite some time I believed that the ingestion of Pepto-Bismol® somehow caused or at least failed to prevent episodes of vomiting. As well, its taste reminded me of those uncomfortable situations. I now have a better appreciation of Pepto-Bismol®, and take it far in advance of any such incident if I have the slightest inkling that it might occur. And I use it for other minor gastrointestinal maladies - including upset stomach - with usually positive results.
April 11, 2003: Why is it that when Operation Iraqi Freedom hit even a minor snag the stock market reacted negatively? (Or at least that's what the pundits claimed was the reason for Wall Street's behavior.) However, when things went well for the Coalition forces - particularly with the fall of Baghdad - no such similar positive reaction occurred. And furthermore, in general, how do the "experts" know what the market sentiment is? Do they poll Joe Wall Street - whoever he might be - to determine why he's buying or selling? I wonder that possibly the stock market gurus might be planting such ideas in the heads of investors in order to move the markets in their favor. But maybe I'm just being cynical.
June 21, 2003: Something interesting struck me when I watched today's game between the Red Sox and the Phillies: With two outs in the 10th inning, the Red Sox brought in relief pitcher Brandon Lyon. Who was the first batter he faced? It was none other than Marlon Byrd.
September 6, 2003: I've been putting off this gripe for quite a while, but an event today has forced my hand.
Over the last several years, some of my favorite Entenmann's cakes have disappeared from store shelves. These include the Sour Cream Chip & Nut Loaf (a loaf cake, as its box used to state - duh!) and the Chocolate Crunch Cake (identical in shape to the seemingly constantly-available Louisiana Crunch Cake, but with chocolate cake and icing). A third cake, whose name escapes me - it had a crumby, fudgy top, and it came in a shallow rectangular aluminum tray - also is no longer offered. Last year, at one of Entenmann's outlet stores, I asked an employee about the availabilty of both the Sour Cream Chip & Nut Loaf and the Chocolate Crunch Cake. Sure enough, he indicated that they were no longer being made.
Fast forward to today, when eyeing the Entenmann's display at a local supermarket, I found one of my other favorites, the still-available Chocolate Chip Nut Loaf (a loaf cake). And to my utter amazement, next to it were several Sour Cream Chip & Nut Loafs! Their boxes each were festooned with "Limited Edition Classic Cake." Now, I ask you (rhetorically): If this cake is popular enough to be brought back in such a fashion, why is it no longer produced on a regular basis? Is it too costly to produce to offer it all the time? (In fact, it was never regularly available, being on shelves on only a hit-or-miss basis.) My guess is that it's just clever marketing on the part of the Entenmann's folks. Kudos to them.
Anyway, greedy little me, I picked up two cakes - one for immediate consumption, the other to be stored in the freezer for later enjoyment. It was as tasty as it ever was; fortunately, they didn't mess around with their recipe.
The moral of the story: I will continue to visit the Entenmann's display, not just for my few favorites which are still being produced regularly - the Chocolate Chip Nut Loaf and the raspberry whatchamacallit come to mind - but for the old offerings which might yet show up briefly as limited-time classic cakes. You - or at least I - never know.
And one more thing: I'm really looking forward to the reappearance of that fudgy, crumby cake. My serving suggestion is to take a piece, carefully slice it in two, forming a sort of sandwich of top and bottom, and spread peanut butter between the two halves. Yum!
September 7, 2003: Newspapers report that, seeing the resignation of Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas as creating a power vacuum on which it felt compelled to act immediately, Israel launched its latest strike against Palestinian militants with a war plane attack yesterday on a Gaza City building where Hamas officials were meeting - slightly wounding Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the Islamic terrorist group's founder and spiritual leader. Bodyguards carried Yassin, who was slightly wounded in one hand, out of the rubble and sped him away in a car. Yassin, 67, is nearly blind and is a quadriplegic who has been confined to a wheelchair since being paralyzed as a child.
Anyway, my point for bringing this up is: If, as was reported, the Israelis targeted Yassin for assassination, they did a bang-up job of botching the effort. This guy supposedly has a body which is little bigger than that of a 12-year-old boy. And yet he survived the attack virtually unscathed. Certainly the Israelis used enough firepower to properly execute their mission. The only other reason I can come up with for their failure to eliminate Yassin - and Yasser Arafat, on similar attacks on his headquarters - is the fact that these guys are members of the "undead."
September 27, 2003: An article in the New York Daily News of September 14, 2003 - O.K., so I'm way behind in my commentaries - indicates that a former city bus driver, Deborah Bynum, 38, is suing the Transit Authority for taking her off the road in 1999 because she has multiple sclerosis, which she developed after she was hired in 1997. According to court records, her symptoms included "difficulty gripping the wheel tightly," "numbness in her feet, knee, thigh" and "urinary and bowel discomfort." Supposedly, the disease is now in remission as a result of steroid treatments. And the specialists whom Bynum consulted concluded that her condition would not interfere with driving a bus. More sympathetic about her physical infirmity - which, her experts claim, is not a handicap at this time - I could not be. Nevertheless, if by some remote chance she were to lose control of a bus, I ask: Who will the victims of such an accident sue, Ms. Bynum or the Transit Authority?
Sure enough, not long after this transpired an eerily related and possibly prescient incident occurred. On October 15, 2003, a Staten Island ferry crashed into a concrete pier, killing ten and injuring several dozen - some severely. Supposedly, the assistant captain who was at the controls of the ship passed out for possibly half of the trip. Reportedly, the cause for his unconsciousness was his medication or lack thereof. In any event, within days of the tragedy lawsuits began being filed - not against any crewmember, but against the City of New York. Why, I ask? Because little would be gained monetarily by suing an individual at fault, as opposed to that which would be gained by suing the city. We'll see how this plays out. As of October 29, 2003, neither the assistant captain who, when he regained consciousness and realized the gravity of what had occurred, went home and attempted suicide, nor the captain who was reportedly absent from the ship's controls, have been forthcoming with testimony to investigators.
November 30, 2003: Generally, once a month I make a trip to Atlantic City, specifically to the Showboat Casino, and this month was no exception - I went on Friday (November 28). I can't complain. I tallied up my activity (which I keep as detailed as possible if I ever need it for tax purposes), and found that I came out down (of course) - but by only $15. Not bad for four to five hours of play. And on top of that, I accumulated enough bonus points for the year - over 3,000 - in order to retain my Platinum status in Harrah's Total Rewards program next year. Going into Friday I was short from the 3,000 mark by about 290 points; I ended up with almost 3,150. Not too bad, because I missed February and July - and will skip December. But September counts for two days, because it involved a one-night sleep-over.
Anyway, Showboat added a new area of slot machines several months ago. On each of the four visits I have made since that time, I have hit a specific high combination on a particular machine, a 25¢ five-payline Crystal Sevens slot machine. (I can tell you which machine it is, but - as they say - then I'd have to kill you.) A reel-spinner (as opposed to a video machine), it has cherries, single-, double-, and triple-bars, sevens and seven-bars, and (best of all) Crystal Sevens symbols. The five-payline version has three horizontal paylines and two diagonal ones. (Picture a three-by-three tic-tac-toe board with a line through each row and two diagonal lines from corner to corner and you get the general idea.)
Here's the pay table, bearing in mind that seven-bar symbols count as both sevens and bars:
| one cherry | 2 |
|---|---|
| two cherries | 5 |
| three cherries | 10 |
| three non-matching bars | 5 |
| three single-bars | 10 |
| three double-bars | 20 |
| three triple-bars | 30 |
| three non-matching sevens | 40 |
| three seven-bars | 50 |
| three sevens | 70 |
| three Crystal Sevens symbols on payline 1 (middle horizontal line) | 4,000 |
| three Crystal Sevens symbols on payline 2 (top horizontal line) | 8,000 |
| three Crystal Sevens symbols on payline 3 (bottom horizontal line) | 12,000 |
| three Crystal Sevens symbols on payline 4 (top-left-to-bottom-right diagonal) | 16,000 |
| three Crystal Sevens symbols on payline 5 (bottom-left-to-top-right diagonal) | 25,000 |
In addition, the Crystal Sevens symbol is wild - that is, it matches any symbol in any winning combination. But the kicker is that this symbol causes the payout to be multiplied by 7. And two Crystal Sevens symbols in a winning combination cause the payout to be multiplied by 49! In my case, on four successive visits I hit the three sevens combination - not easy in itself - but with a Crystal Sevens symbol, for a total of 490 (7 x 70) quarters ($122.50). And last month I did even better: I had sevens in the top-left and bottom-right positions, triple-bars in the top-right and bottom-left positions, and a Crystal Sevens symbol smack dab in the middle. That produced a payout of 700 (7 x 70 + 7 x 30) quarters ($175.00)! But if you think that's impressive, you ain't heard nothing yet. On that same trip I witnessed a woman on a neighboring Crystal Sevens machine get the three sevens combination with two Crystal Sevens symbols, for a total of 3,430 (7 x 7 x 70) quarters ($857.50)!!!
I've been playing similar slot machines, and I've never had such success on a regular basis. For example, I also play Double Diamond Deluxe, which features wild symbols which multiply payouts by two. In all the many times I've played Double Diamond Deluxe, I can recall hitting the three sevens combination only once, and (if I'm correct) never with the Double Diamond symbol.
Before I forget, here are the winning combinations from last Friday which kept my loss so low:
December 11, 2003: Both sides paid a large toll in the Civil War - some 360,000 Union soldiers were killed, either in battle or from disease, and about 258,000 Confederates lost their lives. Fortunately, it occurred in the 1860s. Can you imagine the number of military and civilian casualties if it had taken place after 1945, when both sides would have had nuclear weapons?
December 30, 2003: The following article appeared in the December 27, 2003 issue of Newsday, under the headline "Calif. Town Back on Block":
"A year after the rural town of Bridgeville, Calif. was ostensibly snapped up in a frenzied online auction for nearly $2 million, the town is up for bid again - this time at half the price and not on eBay.The supposed buyer, who was only ever identified as a nameless West Coast developer, disappeared soon after making the winning $1.78 million bid last December on auction site eBay. No check ever arrived. Real estate broker Denise Stuart posted the property last week on the more standard listings that brokers routinely share."
I hope that the town's eBay seller posted some really negative feedback for the item's deadbeat buyer.
January 6, 2004: I saw a story on tonight's local news that the "winning" design for the memorial to the victims of the September 11, 2001 attack at the World Trade Center was announced today. With that announcement came statements from several individuals who panned the design for various reasons. Big surprise! The same thing has happened each time the designs for the new WTC complex are unveiled. And from what I understand, the original World Trade Center were not a critical hit among the public when they were built. The bottom line: You can't please everyone, so just bite the bullet and move forward already. Sorry to sound so callous about it, but unanimous praise for this project will never come. There are too many concerned individuals for that to happen. After it is built, hopefully some of the naysayers will change their minds. If not - and I expect that there will certainly be many holdouts - then there is nothing to prevent them from honoring their lost loved ones in their own ways. In the end, isn't that what is really important?
February 13, 2004: I finally got to A.C. two days ago, not having been there in two-and-a-half months, and I had a surprisingly great day. I came out way ahead, having my best returns on the quarter slots ever. I did O.K. on a dollar machine, too - and I played only three of them. It was my best day overall since July 22, 2000. (Don't ask. I can give you the details, but - as they say - then I'd have to kill you.)
Once again, one of the 25¢ five-payline Crystal Sevens machines came through in a big way, although it wasn't the one on which I hit the two-sevens-plus-a-Crystal-Sevens combination on four successive visits (see November 30, 2003 above). This one was even better, if you can believe it. This time I got the three seven-bars combination - but with two Crystal Sevens symbols, for a total of 2,450 (7 x 7 x 50) quarters ($612.50)! So the old streak has been broken, and a new one has begun. There are no higher combinations on that machine except for a seven and two Crystal Sevens symbols, which would pay 3,430 (7 x 7 x 70) quarters ($857.50), or three Crystal Sevens symbols on one of the five paylines ($1,000, $2,000, $3,000, $4,000, or $6,250). That's what I'm shooting for now.
Here, for the record, are my two big hits of note:
March 1, 2004: What an ingrate! After we saved his sorry hide, ousted Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide concocted some cockamamie story about having been "kidnapped" by U.S. forces, rather than admit that he left willingly. I'll tell you what: We should send him back, drop him smack dab in the middle of Port-au-Prince, and see how long he would survive. True, he still had a great many supporters, but it seemed to me that there were quite a good number who were pretty jubilant when he left. If he had had the resources to have had statues of himself erected, they would have fallen upon word of his departure. By my reckoning, Aristide has now had two stints as president of Haiti. Maybe his third time will be his charm.
March 5, 2004 (revised March 12, 2004): I'm glad that they - federal prosecutors and the jury - nailed Martha Stewart's butt, finding her guilty on Friday on all four counts of lying and fraud and coverup with which she was charged. (She originally was charged with five counts, but the judge dismissed one of them midway through the trial - a move which was perceived at the time to be a big victory for her.) Here are some points on which I'd like to vent:
According to an article in the New York Daily News on March 6, 2004, one juror, Chappell Hartridge, indicated after the trial that "jurors did not appreciate it when Stewart's high-profile friends ... visited the courtroom to show support. 'If anything, it was taken as a little bit of an insult,' Hartridge said. 'Like that was supposed to sway our decision?'" Another article, in the March 8, 2004 issue of Newsday, reported that "[t]he jurors disagreed about whether Stewart was trying to sway them with ... her well-known friends who attended the trial. 'It was the celebrity seat, kind of right behind Martha,' [juror Jonathan] Laskin said. 'And every so often, there would be somebody else in that celebrity seat. And I don't know. I felt, 'Are we being manipulated here in some way?''" So it sounds as if anything the panel was swayed against Stewart by those appearances. In effect, their presence backfired. How sweet!
Needless to say that I'm pleased that Martha got a bit of comeuppance, and I hope that it sticks. May her appeal not be heard. Not that I wish her jail time to be lengthy, but that she will pay for her arrogance and her selfish behavior. Just having it come out that she's not the Miss Sweetness that she portrays herself as is something of a victory.
March 17, 2004: Prediction: Seizing upon the outcome of the recent presidential election in Spain in the wake of their commuter-train bombings, the Bush campaign will rightfully suggest that a vote for John Kerry is a vote for terrorism. You can bet that this would not go over big with Kerry, who continues to portray himself as the anti-Bush. (The Bizarro Bush?) Rather than seriously rebut the charge, he would most likely respond by just voicing in the media his extreme offense at the remark, and dismiss the idea as Bush playing the "terrorism card."
March 21, 2004: John Kerry has proclaimed that he has spoken privately with several world leaders who have voiced support for him in the upcoming presidential election. The Bush camp is eager for him to back up his claims with actual names, not so much, I suspect, that they doubt Kerry's veracity. My suspicion is that they believe - as I do - that there truly are such individuals who would prefer Kerry in the White House rather than Bush & Company, and would like to know who the two-faced phonies are. In some perverse way I respect Kerry's code of confidence towards these "leaders," but it's only a matter of time before some of their names will begin to be revealed. I also suspect that the reason for their silent Kerry-backing is at least partially based in their desire to return to the days when the U.S. would hand out foreign aid to its "allies" willy-nilly. Now such countries must not just talk the talk but walk the walk, actually joining us in our common efforts to root out terrorists, build a stable Middle East, etc.
March 22, 2004: Today was my usually-monthly trip to A.C., and again it went pretty well - my losses amounted to only $95. So I'm still ahead for the year after two visits.
I had another decent payout from a 25¢ five-payline Crystal Sevens machine. On the second such machine at which I played, on the first "pull," I got two seven-bars with a Crystal Sevens symbol, for a total of 350 (7 x 50) quarters ($87.50).
Nowhere near as good as the ones last time, but very good nonetheless, here are my other hits of note:
March 23, 2004: The stock market tumbled a bit yesterday, the sell-off supposedly driven by security fears in the wake of Israel's assassination of Hamas founder and "spiritual guide" Sheikh Ahmed Yassin this past weekend. I'd like to make several points to counter this negative response. Granted, killing should not be celebrated (However, note that it was perfectly O.K. for masses of Palestinians dancing in the streets after the 9/11 attacks on us, right?), but sometimes it is justified - for example, in the case of the dropping of atomic bombs on Japan to shorten the War and reduce further American military casualties. Yassin was integral in sowing the seeds of terrorism and hatred throughout Israel, allowing no compromise on the state's existence - he was firmly against it - so civilized people should be grateful for his elimination. Many of his own people will proclaim Yassin to be a martyr. Well, they needed no more excuse to wreak havoc when he was living than they do now that he's dead. So the height of the pedestal upon which they place him doesn't really matter. That he was wheelchair-bound should earn him no sympathy whatsoever. Even in his "debilitated" state, he effectively pulled the strings for suicide bombings as well as rallied followers to his perverse cause. Revenge killings have been threatened by his supporters, but how will they be distinguished from the usual murders which innocent Israelis routinely suffer? Lastly, if the stock market dipped a bit over this news, can we expect it to take a nose dive when Osama bin Laden is eventually eliminated - either captured or killed? The way I look at it, the removal from this world of terrorists of any stripe is a good thing. One should be rejoicing about such events - if only privately - and should not be cowering over possible retributive terrorist attacks. The stock market should rally, not sink, on such news.
March 27, 2004: Richard Clarke, the former White House counterterrorism "czar" under the Clinton and Bush administrations is lately excoriating the latter president - but not the former one - for his inability to follow through on efforts to quash terrorists. His testimony to the 9/11 investigation commission jibes with the text of his recently published book, "Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror," but not with statements he made while he was with the Bush administration. My guess is that after he resigned from his post and began peddling ideas for a tell-all book, he realized that he would get no attention from prospective publishers unless he promised to spin things the other way, to "sex it up," as they say. Well, there's a long trail of paper, tape, and e-mail being released to contradict what he's claiming now. His credibility is rightfully taking hits for this 180° change of view.
But what really galls me about Clarke is that by apologizing at the 9/11 hearings to victims' relatives for his and others' failures to stop the attacks he ingratiated himself to them. You can rest assured that if any of current Bush administration staff had done the same, they would have been slapped with lawsuits so hard up their wazoos it would have made their eyes pop. But this guy somehow is perceived as a whistleblower, a breath of fresh air, so to speak. Give me a break!
April 19, 2004: Leave it to the WB television network to take the story of young Clark Kent, aka Superboy, and turn it into what appears to the untrained eye (mine) to be yet another "Dawson's Creek" look-alike, with way-too-pretty teenagers - and not just girls, but guys. At least from their promos, it seems as if, from its inception, a good number of the network's shows - "Everwood" and "Rosswell" come to mind - fit the aforementioned pattern.
April 19, 2004: I'm not a big movie-goer (never have been), but from all the TV ads and media coverage I'm exposed to it seems as if every other major film these days must star Nicole Kidman. According to the reliable IMDb.com , she was in three 2003 flicks ("Dogville," "The Human Stain," and "Cold Mountain"). She is slated to appear in three more in 2004 ("Birth," "The Interpreter," and "The Stepford Wives") and another five scheduled for 2005 ("Bewitched," "The Producers," "Emma's War," "American Darlings," and "Untitled Alexander the Great Project"). Take a rest already, girl. Give someone else a shot at screen stardom.
April 20, 2004: Why does it seem that when the answer to a "Jeopardy!" clue regarding stages of insect growth is "larva" that nine times out of ten, the first contestant to respond says "What is a pupa?" Plus, instead of pronouncing the word correctly - "pyoo-puh" - they say "poo-puh."
May 6, 2004: Congratulations to Mike Piazza of my New York Mets who, yesterday, hit his 352nd home run as a catcher. Truth be told, in my opinion, this is a bit of an "artificial" record. I have never witnessed any player get a hit as a catcher - or an infielder, an outfielder, or a pitcher, for that matter - only as a batter. Why statistics would be or should be recorded by fielding position is a bit of a puzzlement to me.
May 20, 2004: For the previous two days the 9/11 commission was in town grilling current and former high-level New York City officials - Police and Fire Commissioners, Rudy Giuliani, etc. - about the city's preparedness against the terror attacks on us. Prominent among the spectators was Sally Regenhard, whose son - God rest his soul - was one of the firefighters who perished at the World Trade Center collapse. As has been the case at various other public forums over the last several years, she made her presence known, loud and clear. (One of the most visible and vocal of the 9/11 victims' family members, she apparently has made it her mission since September 11, 2001 to get in officials' faces and make life miserable for all them. I wonder what was her reason for living up to that day.)
On the first day of testimony, photos in the local newspapers showed her holding up a sign reading "LIES!" and wearing a scowl that could turn Medusa to stone. (Hasn't she smiled since September 11, 2001? She must be a real pleasure to be around.) On the second day, she not only held up a sign reading "FICTION," but she stood up and shouted out some rant during Giuliani's testimony to the commissioners. (Whatever you say, Ms. Self-Righteous Know-It-All.)
Granted, she has suffered for having lost one of her loved ones that fateful day - as many others did - but being loud and indignant doesn't make a person right and give him the right to dictate his will to others - as if she will ever be satisfied anyway.
While it would be extremely insensitive of me to suggest that she get over it, her ongoing excessive histrionics have long ago worn out their welcome with me - and probably with many other folks - to the extent that I believe that she should at least try to get a grip on it and lose the perpetual bitterness.
June 1, 2004: I get a lot of mail solicitations from numerous charities, one of those organizations being Doctors Without Borders. I can't help noticing that this group continues to announce throughout its mailings - both inside and out - that it was "Awarded the 1999 Nobel Peace Prize." That's all very well and good, guys, but what have you done for us lately? I mean, it's going on five years now. I think you can give the chest-thumping a rest and move on already. I don't hear Nelson Mandela, co-winner with F.W. de Klerk of the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize, continually crowing about his accomplishment. I think that it's time that you gave the braggadoccio a rest and tried a slice of humble pie for a change. (But seriously, they're a fine outfit. Still, I think that it might be nice if they were to eliminate the "Peace Prize" blurb at some time in the not-too-distant future.)
August 23, 2004: I went to Atlantic City today - no big surprise about that. On the way there, the bus driver was playing some endlessly repeating CD - something like a "roots of rock-and-roll" collection interspersed with introductions by Alan Freed, I believe. On these trips I'm always prepared with my own CDs to listen to, especially to drown out the generally awful movies that are shown. (Lucky me: There was no video presented this time - in either direction. That makes two trips in a row without that punishment.) Anyway, the driver's CD was playing rather loudly over the audio system of the bus for quite some time, for possibly as much as an hour after the last of the passengers embarked - so loudly that it was somewhat difficult for me to listen to my own CDs without also hearing the unintentional background music.
I was minding my own business, when out of the blue this elderly chap from three rows ahead of me shuffled up to my seat and began to speak to me. Taking off my headphones, I was at first unclear about what this fellow was getting at. After my Mom and I presented him what were presumably confused looks on our faces - she was sitting next to me, on the aisle - as well as a few "huh's," he repeated himself, questioning us why the music was so darn loud, intimating that it was my fault. (Of all the nerve!) Between the two of us, we managed to politely but emphatically explain to him that it was the driver's doing, and that he should speak with him. So he made the even longer shuffle up to the front of the bus, and - lo and behold! - the music was not lowered, but silenced entirely.
It's truly scary about this gent's thought process - to get so riled up, then to single out apparently the only other passenger in eyeshot who was outfitted with personal audio gear and to accuse me (At least I perceived it to be an accusation after the fact.) of transmitting my music to the rest of the bus! Or - even scarier - maybe he thought that the noise was actually emanating from my headphones. But I was so taken by surpise by this guy's ridiculous assertion that I didn't give him a much-deserved sarcastic comeback. ("Yeah, right, pal. I'm controlling the audio of the bus remotely, through my CD player. Better watch your pacemaker, buddy!") That's one of my many shortcomings, being able to think and react quickly. But the next time some geezer confronts me with that particular preposterous suggestion I'm ready to respond to him with a snappy zinger. Just you wait and see.
September 18, 2004: Last Monday (September 13), on the season premiere of her syndicated show, Oprah Winfrey orchestrated a stunt in which each of the members of her studio audience - all 276 of them - received a 2005 Pontiac G6. (Valued at around $28,000, each vehicle was loaded with extras, including OnStar and XM Satellite Radio.) Supposedly each of these individuals contacted her with a hard-luck story about their present clunker. So out of the goodness of her precious widdle heart Fairy Godmother Oprah waved her magic wand and - poof! - each one got their wish.
Ah, but all is not what it seemed to be. Although the media have casually reported that Oprah gave away these cars - several newspaper articles I read had headlines to that effect - as if she had purchased them herself, the content of those articles indicated that they were donated by their manufacturer, General Motors, to the tune of over $7.7 million. Granted, she (or, more likely, her staff) was the agent which choreographed this massive give-away - presumably, GM wouldn't have been aware of all these car-needy individuals if not for her - but this largesse did not come out of her deep pockets. Regardless, once again she comes away smelling like the proverbial rose, at no real expense to herself. And through this "gesture" her flock of sheep which fawns over her in her media empire will increase in size even more. That's what galls me.
One more thing: In a story which was presented on ABC News several days after Oprah's car give-away show, some clips from that show were aired. In one clip, the audience members were shown in the parking lot of her studio, ecstatic about their new wheels. Zooming in on one frantic recipient, I could easily lip-read her exclaiming, "Thank you, Oprah!" Not "Thank you, GM!" or "Thank you, Pontiac!" As I said, Oprah has an ever-growing flock of loyal sheep. Baa!
September 26, 2004: Recently, the WB television network premiered the series "Jack & Bobby," which it's promoting with the tagline "In 2041, one son will be President." My question: Why didn't they just call the show "Jack, Bobby & Teddy?" Supposedly, though, it has no connection to the Kennedys. The names are purely coincidental. (Yeah, right.) So if this show takes off, can we expect a spinoff - maybe "Bill & Hil?" Just a suggestion, guys.
October 27, 2004: The comic seen here is today's "Dennis The Menace" as it appeared in newspapers everywhere. I promise you that I did not alter it in any way. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it certainly looks to me as if Margaret is not wearing any panties underneath her ultra-short skirt, thus providing impressionable little Dennis with a full view of her "goodies." For shame, young lady! You should know better than to pull a sleazy stunt like that. And good for you, Dennis, for averting your gaze.
Follow-up (February 28, 2005): Hey, Margaret, don't act so shocked. Apparently, Dennis liked what he saw - or at least was curious about it - to make another inspection. And he brought his little pal Joey along, as well. ("Joey, you'll never believe what I saw today. You don't believe me? Then let's go over to Margaret's house and I'll prove it to you.") I like his lame excuse, though. He says that he's looking for a glass of water. Like he couldn't have gotten something to drink in the kitchen. Oh, puh-lease!
May 14, 2005: As I might have mentioned before, my memory is admittedly not what it could be. But I distinctively recall that a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, sometime when the first three installments of the "Star Wars" movies were in release - 1977-1983 - it was announced by George Lucas that the grand vision of his was to be a series of nine films, a trilogy of trilogies. The original three were supposed to be the middle ones, to be followed by the first three, and, lastly, episodes 7, 8, and 9. Recently, however, I've been reading and hearing that the "Star Wars" saga - at least the theatrical film interpretation of it - will terminate after the latest effort, Episode III, is released. Now I certainly don't give a hoot whether it's six, nine, or fifty-three episodes (Proof of that is the fact that I haven't bothered to see Episodes I, II, or II), but I'm extremely surprised that there hasn't been a great hue and cry from the "Star Wars" gullible, er, faithful regarding this cut-back.
Number Two: As if George Lucas & Company doesn't rake in enough money from the box-office take of his flicks, every few years they release a new version of the films to the eager public. First it was on VHS video - individually and in innumerable combinations, with and without extras. I recall that at one point two such compilations were released concurrently - a Gold version and a Silver version, or something along those lines. Then with the advent of DVD - plus several more episodes having been released - other sets have made their appearance. After Episode III has made its run, can't they just issue a definitive set of all six episodes with all the extras - commentaries, bloopers, making-of, alternate endings, director's cuts, and "lost" footage - and be done with it? Probably not, if history is any guide to the marketing machine that is Lucasfilm.
One more thing: There was a story in the news media several weeks ago about all these "Star Wars" fans - some in full costume (Hoo boy!) - were camped out outside some movie theater in Hollywood - Mann's Chinese Theater, I believe - under the mistaken impression that the latest episode would premiere at that venue. Presumably, previous episodes had made their debut there, so they mistakenly assumed that this one would, too. First of all, this was weeks in advance of the opening. Even if they had been correct, don't these people have real lives?!!! Secondly, when the word got out that Episode III would not, in fact, premiere at that location, these people continued to camp out there. Did these poor, deluded folks believe that the story about the movie being shown somewhere else was all a big fat hoax by the Empire or something?
May 22, 2005: "Soup To Nutz," is a comic strip about a family of dimwits, and is - in my opinion - just a throw-away. If it stopped appearing in my local paper (the New York Daily News), I wouldn't miss it a bit. Every so often since I've been reading this strip, Rick Stromoski, the artist - and I use that term extremely loosely - comes up with a strip in which he takes a thinly-veiled swipe at the Bush administration. And it seems that recently such shots are coming on a more frequent basis. Dissatisfaction with "four more years?" I dunno.
In today's effort - a Sunday strip, which provides him with a larger "canvas," so to speak - he presumably projects his beliefs onto Andrew, and offers a much-less-subtle and somewhat nastier dig at Republicans in general. I can only imagine what axe Stromoski has to grind, but I sense that he's just itchin' to take it up a notch or two. For now, he's flying safely under the mainstream's radar, but that might not last forever. Prediction: An emboldened Stromoski, will eventually cross the line, push the wrong person's button, and get more attention than he bargained for.
June 21, 2005: I see that 80-year-old former Ku Klux Klansman Edgar Ray Killen was convicted of manslaughter in the slayings of three civil-rights workers some 41 years ago. Do ya think a feller with the name Killen could really get a fair trial on charges of manslaughter?
And finally:
Never let it be said ...