7/28/10
Will former Governor Rod Blagojevich be convicted or will he walk? God only knows and we can only speculate, and such speculation would take the arms of an octopus or perhaps a centipede, if we consider limbs interchangeable. On one hand, it doesn’t look like we saw the RodMan actually accepting any money or other consideration in exchange for political favors. On another, it sure looked like Patti’s job was to be, to use a nicer term than “bag lady,” a conduit for such payments. But the jurors might legitimately ask themselves why Patti was not on trial if it was she who did something wrong here, so perhaps she did nothing wrong and therefore was not in fact acting as a conduit and thus no money made its way to Rod. On another hand, as Assistant U.S. Attorney Chris Niewoehner pointed out, “You don’t have to be a successful criminal to be a criminal,” and, as even Blago’s defense lawyer points out, Rod has not been much of a raging success at anything, excluding buffoonery. On yet another hand, regardless of the facts and the law, a jury is a very unpredictable body, and who knows what might go into its members’ deliberations? The defendant’s effectively telling them, and the rest of the people of Illinois, to perform a physically impossible sex act (See below.) probably did not endear himself to the jurors, and the resentment he engendered may be returned in dispensing with logic and, instead, merely out of justifiable spite, sending the RodMan to a place where he could be assisted in such an act.
So all the speculation we hear on the probability of Rod’s walking is fun but unproductive. However, three are three points I would like to make:
First, if Rod does walk, he is going to be, if such a thing is possible, even more insufferable than he is now. He will be ubiquitous in the media, for at least awhile, appearing in every quarter from here to Timbuktu endlessly and piously proclaiming his innocence and his innate greatness, virtue, and humility. He will surely contemplate running for office again, perhaps in league with the likes of Scott Lee Cohen. For this reason alone, one hopes that somehow the jury will find it in their collective heart to put this man away, or at least far from a microphone.
Second, as I pointed out in my 6/23/10 post “I’M LOOKIN’ AT THE MAN IN THE MIRROR…”, Rod had no business being governor simply because he was incompetent at his job and didn’t even like his job. As I said in that already seminal work:
“To Rod or to any of our public servants who differ from that nefarious narcissist only in degree, the particular office is unimportant and fulfilling its duties and serving those who put one in that office are completely inconsequential. An office is only a stepping stone on the ladder of self-gratification that characterizes the modern politician’s life. He, or she, is not there to do a job; he or she is on a mission, a mission to impose his ego on all of us, to get our attention, to convince himself that he is somehow a great man, or at least that his existence is somehow worthwhile.”
This is a shame, and it strikes a personal note for me. When I was very young (in high school and into the first few years of college), I thought that I, too, would like to run for high office and for very similar reasons that Blago, and most professional politicians, like to run for public office: to feed my ego. I thought that running for office would be fun and gratifying. That I had very little innate interest in the particular office for which I would run didn’t matter; it was an exercise in ego-stoking. But most of us get over that, or at least I did. In fact, in my case, my attitude toward holding public office has been turned on its head. While I would very much like to hold high office, even the seemingly hopeless office of governor of Illinois, I would find running for it very distasteful, a never ending process of asking people for money, assuring voters of their undying virtue and victimhood while repeatedly assuring them that any of their problems are someone else’s fault, and engaging in the tomfoolery and glad-handing that comprises the modern political campaign. That distaste for the process, of course, insures that I will never hold high office. But my point is that most of us get over the need for endless reassurance of our self-worth and get down to serious business. But your typical politician, who is only a half brick removed from the madness that most starkly characterizes Rod Blagojevich, never grows up and therefore must run for office in order to reassure himself that he is indeed as wonderful as he, deep down somewhere in his muddled psyche, knows he is not. These are the types of people we elect to office, repeatedly, and then complain about the consequences when they become the caricatures best exemplified by Rod Blagojevich.
Finally, what I find really appalling about the RodMan, in addition to his apparently hating his job, being completely incompetent at it, and yet refusing to step aside in the interests of our state, is the following statement, and not so much for the language he uses (as revolting, immature, and evidentiary of a limited vocabulary and inability to articulate as it is) but, rather, for the attitude it represents:
“I (expletive) busted my ass and (expletive) people off and gave your grandmother a free (expletive) ride on a bus. OK? I gave your (expletive) baby a chance to have health care. I fought every one of those (expletive), including every special interest out there, who can make my life easier and better, because they wanna raise taxes on you and I won’t. I, I fight them and keep them from doing it.
“And what do I get for that? Only 13 percent of you all out there think I’m doing a good job. So (expletive) all of you.”
Nice...really nice. And it’s not necessarily the “F… all of you” attitude that so bothers me; what do I care if a poltroon like Blago wants me to f… myself? His opinion on anything is of little interest to me. What bothers me is the deeply held belief, characteristic of just about politician, that it is he, Rod Blagojevich in this case, who “gives your grandmother a free f…ing ride on a bus” or “your f---ing baby a chance to have health care.”
Politicians do not give us bus rides, health care, jobs, or anything else. It is the taxpayers, or, in the case of the state of Illinois, our apparently gullible creditors, who provide such things. It is the people who actually produce something, rather than preen for the cameras, who provide the standard of living, and even ultimately the public services, for which our political class takes the credit.
So, even if Rod Blagojevich is ultimately exonerated in court of the crimes of which he is accused, he is without a doubt guilty of the hubristic attitude endemic to the modern politician. That the degree to which he displays, and doubtless holds deeply, such an attitude is vastly disproportionate to his innate ability, judgment, or intelligence is relatively inconsequential. Just about every politician has plenty of Rod Blagojevich in him or her.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Monday, July 26, 2010
THE SHOW GOES ON!!!
7/26/10
The podcast of Milt Rosenberg’s interview of me on WGN Radio’s Extension 720 remains available, but the new link is:
http://www.wgnradio.com/shows/ext720/podcasts/
Go to that link and my podcast is about midway down the page.
You could also go to
http://www.wgnradio.com/shows/ext720/
click on Extension 720 podcasts and achieve the same objective.
Thanks.
The podcast of Milt Rosenberg’s interview of me on WGN Radio’s Extension 720 remains available, but the new link is:
http://www.wgnradio.com/shows/ext720/podcasts/
Go to that link and my podcast is about midway down the page.
You could also go to
http://www.wgnradio.com/shows/ext720/
click on Extension 720 podcasts and achieve the same objective.
Thanks.
THE NEXT TIME YOU’RE IN TROUBLE, CALL A COMMISSION
7/26/10
In response to the crime wave that seems to be overwhelming our city, our governor, Pat “No Relation” Quinn, who bills himself as a different kind of politician, has done what every similarly pusillanimous politician typically does under these circumstances: He has taken what passes in the political world as decisive action by forming an anti-violence commission to gather testimony from those affected by violence.
The end of this bold action is eminently predictable: people will talk about how violence has permeated their lives, their stories will sound eerily, and sadly, familiar. Politicians will nod their vacuous heads in mock displays of earnestness and sympathy. Some will even feign empathy. The panel will conclude that the “underlying causes” of violence must be addressed by more “programs” and “resources,” the beneficiaries of which will not be the people stuck in crime-ridden neighborhoods but the various political hacks, hangers-on, and toadies that will be awarded contracts and jobs designed to pour money into pointless, and largely counterproductive, efforts at appearing to address a growing problem while ignoring solutions that are obvious but derided by the cognoscenti as “simplistic.”
The short term solutions, or at least ameliorants, of the violence problem are indeed simple but are by no means simplistic. First, Chicago desperately needs more cops. The ranks of the police department are woefully depleted and are about to get even thinner as older officers retire. However, it looks like the force will remain undermanned because the city, after many years of fiscal mismanagement compounded by several years of severe economic difficulties, simply does not have, or is unwilling to spend, the money necessary to bring the police department to full force.
Second, the cop on the street has to have the support of the department and political hierarchy as s/he goes about his or her job. S/he has to be confident that s/he will not be thrown over the side when some lowlife thug brings up a fallacious charge of “brutality” and Commissioner Jody Weis, the Mayor, or some preening popinjay on the City Council sees an opportunity to curry the favor of what the political types consider a vital constituency that can vote and/or feign indignation at the direction of their self-appointed “leaders.” In short, police officers have to be confident that they can do their jobs without risking those jobs…or worse.
Longer term, parents have to be responsible for their children and people who have no qualifications, beyond the physiological, to be parents ought not become parents. The government could do its part by not subsidizing parenthood by those who have no business being parents. What the likes of Governor Quinn considers “vital needs” arise largely from the poor, yet heavily subsidized, choices of those whose “needs” become “vital.”
Of course, these approaches will not be attempted because they involve diverting money from the frivolous to the legitimate and necessary functions of government and telling people that not everything is someone else’s fault, that they must take some responsibilities for the actions they take and the children they create. Instead, the politicians will form commissions to display their sympathy and solidarity and otherwise take advantage of the misfortunes of others to advance their own careers and ladle out your money to their friends and cronies.
And the violence will continue, serving no one but the politicians who have no shame.
In response to the crime wave that seems to be overwhelming our city, our governor, Pat “No Relation” Quinn, who bills himself as a different kind of politician, has done what every similarly pusillanimous politician typically does under these circumstances: He has taken what passes in the political world as decisive action by forming an anti-violence commission to gather testimony from those affected by violence.
The end of this bold action is eminently predictable: people will talk about how violence has permeated their lives, their stories will sound eerily, and sadly, familiar. Politicians will nod their vacuous heads in mock displays of earnestness and sympathy. Some will even feign empathy. The panel will conclude that the “underlying causes” of violence must be addressed by more “programs” and “resources,” the beneficiaries of which will not be the people stuck in crime-ridden neighborhoods but the various political hacks, hangers-on, and toadies that will be awarded contracts and jobs designed to pour money into pointless, and largely counterproductive, efforts at appearing to address a growing problem while ignoring solutions that are obvious but derided by the cognoscenti as “simplistic.”
The short term solutions, or at least ameliorants, of the violence problem are indeed simple but are by no means simplistic. First, Chicago desperately needs more cops. The ranks of the police department are woefully depleted and are about to get even thinner as older officers retire. However, it looks like the force will remain undermanned because the city, after many years of fiscal mismanagement compounded by several years of severe economic difficulties, simply does not have, or is unwilling to spend, the money necessary to bring the police department to full force.
Second, the cop on the street has to have the support of the department and political hierarchy as s/he goes about his or her job. S/he has to be confident that s/he will not be thrown over the side when some lowlife thug brings up a fallacious charge of “brutality” and Commissioner Jody Weis, the Mayor, or some preening popinjay on the City Council sees an opportunity to curry the favor of what the political types consider a vital constituency that can vote and/or feign indignation at the direction of their self-appointed “leaders.” In short, police officers have to be confident that they can do their jobs without risking those jobs…or worse.
Longer term, parents have to be responsible for their children and people who have no qualifications, beyond the physiological, to be parents ought not become parents. The government could do its part by not subsidizing parenthood by those who have no business being parents. What the likes of Governor Quinn considers “vital needs” arise largely from the poor, yet heavily subsidized, choices of those whose “needs” become “vital.”
Of course, these approaches will not be attempted because they involve diverting money from the frivolous to the legitimate and necessary functions of government and telling people that not everything is someone else’s fault, that they must take some responsibilities for the actions they take and the children they create. Instead, the politicians will form commissions to display their sympathy and solidarity and otherwise take advantage of the misfortunes of others to advance their own careers and ladle out your money to their friends and cronies.
And the violence will continue, serving no one but the politicians who have no shame.
“IT’S A SMALL WORLD AFTER ALL”
7/26/10
We’ve just returned from a trip down the east coast visiting colleges for our oldest daughter. That part of the trip was delightful and may perhaps be the subject of a later post. Meanwhile, if you can provide any enlightenment concerning any of the following:
--Boston College
--Catholic University of America
--University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
--Clemson
--Florida Southern College
and/or the Nursing programs at any of the above, feel free to comment and/or contact me.
Now, to the meat of this particular post:
This odyssey ended up in Orlando. As those of you who know me are aware, I am not the biggest fan of the Orlando theme parks in any of their banal manifestations. But the kids, and my wife, enjoy these places, so I go to these places. At times, I even enjoy them, mostly because I am there with the people I most dearly love. So I will refrain from launching into extensive ruminations on these parks. However, something did occur to me during this latest trip that needs to be addressed on the blog.
One can notice many things about the crowds at these parks. For example, a (mercifully seemingly falling) number of those who attend these parks seem to have little familiarity with deodorant, tooth paste, mouthwash, or toilet paper, which makes waiting in the endless lines that is the most salient features of these parks even more delightful. But the most pertinent, at least for this post, characteristic of at least a substantial minority of those who vacation in Orlando is that they don’t look like they are taking a break from the trading desk at Goldman, yet have an enormous propensity to, er, urinate away copious quantities of money on the hideous, and hideously overpriced, junk offered in the “gift shops” onto which every ride empties and at the various concession stands featuring $10 hamburgers and $5 cokes. Appearances can be deceiving; perhaps the men who wear shirts emblazoned with the words “Five Dollar Footlong” and arrows pointing downward are seven figure earners off on vacation with their families. And how a man fritters away the fruits of his labor is none of my, or your, business…normally.
However, on one particular evening, upon returning to our hotel room from one of the parks, I happened upon the continuing news story of mortgage modification and saw an opportunity to marry what I saw at the park with this ongoing financial story. I hereby propose a series of questions for anyone seeking a taxpayer financed mortgage modification, and such modifications, if truth be told, are ultimately taxpayer financed one way or the other. The questions are as follows:
1. Have you ever been to an Orlando theme park?
2. Have you been to an Orlando theme park more than once?
3. Have you ever purchased a souvenir at an Orlando theme park rather than buying the identical piece of junk for one third the price at any Orlando area Walmart?
4. Have you ever eaten at an Orlando theme park rather than eat off site at one fifth the price?
5. Have you ever forsaken the many water fountains available at an Orlando theme park in favor of the $5 soft drinks (but only $12 refillable for 75 cents!) served at an impossibly lackadaisical pace at an Orlando theme park?
6. Have you ever purchased a picture at an Orlando theme park?
If anyone applying for a mortgage modification (on the taxpayers, of course) answers “Yes” to any two of the above, or “Yes” to number 2, s/he should immediately be disqualified for a mortgage modification. With such displays of financial idiocy, one is a hopeless case who will lose his house even with a modification, and one cannot expect the taxpayers to finance one’s indulgences of the excerebrosity, financial or otherwise, that these parks represent.
We’ve just returned from a trip down the east coast visiting colleges for our oldest daughter. That part of the trip was delightful and may perhaps be the subject of a later post. Meanwhile, if you can provide any enlightenment concerning any of the following:
--Boston College
--Catholic University of America
--University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
--Clemson
--Florida Southern College
and/or the Nursing programs at any of the above, feel free to comment and/or contact me.
Now, to the meat of this particular post:
This odyssey ended up in Orlando. As those of you who know me are aware, I am not the biggest fan of the Orlando theme parks in any of their banal manifestations. But the kids, and my wife, enjoy these places, so I go to these places. At times, I even enjoy them, mostly because I am there with the people I most dearly love. So I will refrain from launching into extensive ruminations on these parks. However, something did occur to me during this latest trip that needs to be addressed on the blog.
One can notice many things about the crowds at these parks. For example, a (mercifully seemingly falling) number of those who attend these parks seem to have little familiarity with deodorant, tooth paste, mouthwash, or toilet paper, which makes waiting in the endless lines that is the most salient features of these parks even more delightful. But the most pertinent, at least for this post, characteristic of at least a substantial minority of those who vacation in Orlando is that they don’t look like they are taking a break from the trading desk at Goldman, yet have an enormous propensity to, er, urinate away copious quantities of money on the hideous, and hideously overpriced, junk offered in the “gift shops” onto which every ride empties and at the various concession stands featuring $10 hamburgers and $5 cokes. Appearances can be deceiving; perhaps the men who wear shirts emblazoned with the words “Five Dollar Footlong” and arrows pointing downward are seven figure earners off on vacation with their families. And how a man fritters away the fruits of his labor is none of my, or your, business…normally.
However, on one particular evening, upon returning to our hotel room from one of the parks, I happened upon the continuing news story of mortgage modification and saw an opportunity to marry what I saw at the park with this ongoing financial story. I hereby propose a series of questions for anyone seeking a taxpayer financed mortgage modification, and such modifications, if truth be told, are ultimately taxpayer financed one way or the other. The questions are as follows:
1. Have you ever been to an Orlando theme park?
2. Have you been to an Orlando theme park more than once?
3. Have you ever purchased a souvenir at an Orlando theme park rather than buying the identical piece of junk for one third the price at any Orlando area Walmart?
4. Have you ever eaten at an Orlando theme park rather than eat off site at one fifth the price?
5. Have you ever forsaken the many water fountains available at an Orlando theme park in favor of the $5 soft drinks (but only $12 refillable for 75 cents!) served at an impossibly lackadaisical pace at an Orlando theme park?
6. Have you ever purchased a picture at an Orlando theme park?
If anyone applying for a mortgage modification (on the taxpayers, of course) answers “Yes” to any two of the above, or “Yes” to number 2, s/he should immediately be disqualified for a mortgage modification. With such displays of financial idiocy, one is a hopeless case who will lose his house even with a modification, and one cannot expect the taxpayers to finance one’s indulgences of the excerebrosity, financial or otherwise, that these parks represent.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
THE SHOW GOES ON!
7/20/10
The podcast of Milt Rosenberg’s interview of me on his Extension 720 program on WGN radio is now available. Simply go to
http://www.wgnradio.com/shows/ext720/
Find the pod cast at the top of the list, and listen. The interview took about 40 minutes in two segments. In the interview, we discuss my book, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics, and Chicago politics in general. I listened last night; it’s a great interview. Dr. Rosenberg, having practiced the craft for over 30 years, is a great interviewer.
Thanks.
The podcast of Milt Rosenberg’s interview of me on his Extension 720 program on WGN radio is now available. Simply go to
http://www.wgnradio.com/shows/ext720/
Find the pod cast at the top of the list, and listen. The interview took about 40 minutes in two segments. In the interview, we discuss my book, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics, and Chicago politics in general. I listened last night; it’s a great interview. Dr. Rosenberg, having practiced the craft for over 30 years, is a great interviewer.
Thanks.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
“FROM OUR NATON’S CAPITAL…”
7/13/10
As anyone who has read this blog for more than, oh, fifteen minutes or so can determine, I go to
I was, however, confronted by two surprises on our trip, one pleasant and one very unpleasant. Let’s get the pleasant surprise out of the way first and move on to the stuff that comes more naturally to curmudgeons like yours truly.
First, I have never met a friendlier group of people than the people we met in D.C., whether in our hotel, on the street, in the musea, or anywhere, and, remember, I spent a few years in
My children, well schooled by their father, were quick to point out that most of those we encountered were probably tourists, like us, and in many instances they were right. But I still would like to believe that Washingtonians are a pleasant lot.
Second, for the very unpleasant surprise: the national mall is appalling, a pit, a hovel, a national embarrassment. The reflecting pool is brackish, green, and odiferous. The gravel path through the mall is rocky, uneven, unkempt, and dangerous to many. The lawn is yellow, weed infested, overgrown, and can only be called a lawn in the broadest possible context. Garbage is strewn everywhere. The washroom facilities surrounding the mall are what we used to call “razor blade johns,” a term we used to describe the rest rooms in most of the bars we frequented, the kind of places where the sinks were set sufficiently high that those who could use them for an obvious alternative application were either eight feet tall, or, well, we won’t go into that in a family blog. They were called razor blade johns because one was well counseled to carry a razor blade when frequenting bars that featured such facilities so one could terminate one’s life rather than face the prospect of having to do, er, serious business in one of those johns. But I digress. In short, especially when I noticed the large number of foreign tourists around the mall, I was embarrassed by the condition of our national mall. When we have been in
Thursday, July 8, 2010
YOURS TRULY ON EXTENSION 720!
7/8/10
Last night I taped an interview with Milt Rosenberg, host of WGN’s Radio’s Extension 720. Extension 720 has long been my favorite radio talk show (I suspect many of you share the same sentiment.), so it was especially gratifying to meet Milt and his producer, Stephanie Menendez, and talk with Milt about my book, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics, and about Chicago politics in general. You will find the interview fascinating; Milt is a very good interviewer.
Extension 720 now airs from 10:00 PM to midnight on Monday through Thursday at 720 AM. WGN is a 50,000 watt station and can be heard at night in most of the country. It also streams its programming live. However, due to the show’s being preempted by Cub games so frequently, many of the programs are now exclusively podcast, as I suspect this one will be. Milt’s interview of me is not “up” yet, but should be shortly. Simply go to
http://www.wgnradio.com/shows/ext720/
and you will find a list of podcasts that will soon include that of my interview. The interview was done in two twenty minute segments. It will take a few minutes to load, but it’s worth the wait.
There is also a chance that the show will be run on the radio, in all likelihood after a Cub game wraps up, leaving some time for Extension 720 but not for a full two hour program. Unless you are a regular Extension 720 listener (which many of you are), you will have to stumble upon it sometime in the 11 PM hour over the next few weeks. In any case, the podcast should remain available for some time.
Last night I taped an interview with Milt Rosenberg, host of WGN’s Radio’s Extension 720. Extension 720 has long been my favorite radio talk show (I suspect many of you share the same sentiment.), so it was especially gratifying to meet Milt and his producer, Stephanie Menendez, and talk with Milt about my book, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics, and about Chicago politics in general. You will find the interview fascinating; Milt is a very good interviewer.
Extension 720 now airs from 10:00 PM to midnight on Monday through Thursday at 720 AM. WGN is a 50,000 watt station and can be heard at night in most of the country. It also streams its programming live. However, due to the show’s being preempted by Cub games so frequently, many of the programs are now exclusively podcast, as I suspect this one will be. Milt’s interview of me is not “up” yet, but should be shortly. Simply go to
http://www.wgnradio.com/shows/ext720/
and you will find a list of podcasts that will soon include that of my interview. The interview was done in two twenty minute segments. It will take a few minutes to load, but it’s worth the wait.
There is also a chance that the show will be run on the radio, in all likelihood after a Cub game wraps up, leaving some time for Extension 720 but not for a full two hour program. Unless you are a regular Extension 720 listener (which many of you are), you will have to stumble upon it sometime in the 11 PM hour over the next few weeks. In any case, the podcast should remain available for some time.
Monday, July 5, 2010
“YOU UNLOCK THIS DOOR WITH THE KEY OF IMAGINATION.”
7/5/10
One of the highlights of my Independence Day holiday was missing this year; the SyFy Channel (formerly the Sci-Fi channel) discontinued its semi-annual tradition of running the Twilight Zone marathon. For probably ten years, until this one, on the days surrounding Independence Day and New Year’s Day, Sci-Fi ran every episode of that greatest of American television series. One might argue that even the timing of the marathon was perfect: on Independence Day, we reflect on the greatness our nation once exhibited that my, and subsequent, generations, have managed to flush down the toilet in the last twenty or so years. What better way to consider this tragedy than to watch the best series from America’s greatest era and contrast it with the visual horse excrement that currently constipates our airwaves? On New Year’s Day, we reflect on the year, and years, gone by and look toward the future. Rod Serling’s series demands that we look with wistfulness toward that great inheritance that we squandered and with trepidation toward our doomed future. In fact, many episodes of the series predicted the ruin that we subsequently brought upon ourselves. So not only was TZ a great television series, but Sci-Fi’s showing it on these two holidays surely helped one focus, if only in an ancillary manner, on the meaning of those holidays.
But now the marathon is gone; I’m not hopeful that it will run on the days surrounding New Year’s Day, 2011. Several birthdays ago, my sister and brother-in-law gave me a DVD package of about twenty five episodes of the Twilight Zone (one of the best gifts I have ever received) and I could, and doubtless will, watch some or all of those as the “weekend” winds down. I also could rent other episodes from the video store. But it’s not the same as the former Sci-Fi marathon. The element of surprise is gone if one selects the episodes one will watch. It was nice to come home from one of the countless enjoyable holiday activities to turn on the television and discover “Walking Distance,” “To Serve Man,” “A Game of Pool,” “The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street,” or the ever creepy “It’s a Good Life” on the tube.
One’s first reaction to the discontinuance of the TZ marathon in favor of (get this) The Greatest American Hero marathon. (What does that say about the degeneration of the American mind?) would be something like (quoting yours truly in all his ironic and sarcastic glory):
“What? A television series that actually makes you think, that isn’t a discordant series of car chases, car crashes, special effects, and pathetic appeals to mindless and knee-jerk emotion? You have to be kidding; this is America in 2010!”
I suppose those of us who love TZ and the marathon should be grateful that Sci-Fi ran the marathon as long as it did. This greatest of American series, on a par with the likes of Playhouse 90, The Naked City, and The Fugitive, is hopelessly out of touch with an America fascinated by flashing lights, explosions, and poorly simulated sexuality. A network that saw fit to change its name from “Sci-Fi” to SyFy could hardly justify running such an antiquated piece of a bygone era.
Clearly, discontinuing the Twilight Zone marathon was a good business decision. The only time I ever watched the Sci-Fi Channel was during the marathon, and I suspect that I am by no means unique in this attribute. So running the marathon caused much of Sci-Fi’s demographic to go elsewhere while drawing no new viewers to Sci-Fi’s other programming. Advertisers, who see no use for people of my vintage, were probably clamoring for more “youth-oriented” (read idiotic) viewing and demanding the termination of the insufferable, black and white relic of a bygone era called the Twilight Zone. Today’s media and advertising businesses are, after all, obsessed with finding, and appealing to, the lowest common denominator…and making it lower.
One of the highlights of my Independence Day holiday was missing this year; the SyFy Channel (formerly the Sci-Fi channel) discontinued its semi-annual tradition of running the Twilight Zone marathon. For probably ten years, until this one, on the days surrounding Independence Day and New Year’s Day, Sci-Fi ran every episode of that greatest of American television series. One might argue that even the timing of the marathon was perfect: on Independence Day, we reflect on the greatness our nation once exhibited that my, and subsequent, generations, have managed to flush down the toilet in the last twenty or so years. What better way to consider this tragedy than to watch the best series from America’s greatest era and contrast it with the visual horse excrement that currently constipates our airwaves? On New Year’s Day, we reflect on the year, and years, gone by and look toward the future. Rod Serling’s series demands that we look with wistfulness toward that great inheritance that we squandered and with trepidation toward our doomed future. In fact, many episodes of the series predicted the ruin that we subsequently brought upon ourselves. So not only was TZ a great television series, but Sci-Fi’s showing it on these two holidays surely helped one focus, if only in an ancillary manner, on the meaning of those holidays.
But now the marathon is gone; I’m not hopeful that it will run on the days surrounding New Year’s Day, 2011. Several birthdays ago, my sister and brother-in-law gave me a DVD package of about twenty five episodes of the Twilight Zone (one of the best gifts I have ever received) and I could, and doubtless will, watch some or all of those as the “weekend” winds down. I also could rent other episodes from the video store. But it’s not the same as the former Sci-Fi marathon. The element of surprise is gone if one selects the episodes one will watch. It was nice to come home from one of the countless enjoyable holiday activities to turn on the television and discover “Walking Distance,” “To Serve Man,” “A Game of Pool,” “The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street,” or the ever creepy “It’s a Good Life” on the tube.
One’s first reaction to the discontinuance of the TZ marathon in favor of (get this) The Greatest American Hero marathon. (What does that say about the degeneration of the American mind?) would be something like (quoting yours truly in all his ironic and sarcastic glory):
“What? A television series that actually makes you think, that isn’t a discordant series of car chases, car crashes, special effects, and pathetic appeals to mindless and knee-jerk emotion? You have to be kidding; this is America in 2010!”
I suppose those of us who love TZ and the marathon should be grateful that Sci-Fi ran the marathon as long as it did. This greatest of American series, on a par with the likes of Playhouse 90, The Naked City, and The Fugitive, is hopelessly out of touch with an America fascinated by flashing lights, explosions, and poorly simulated sexuality. A network that saw fit to change its name from “Sci-Fi” to SyFy could hardly justify running such an antiquated piece of a bygone era.
Clearly, discontinuing the Twilight Zone marathon was a good business decision. The only time I ever watched the Sci-Fi Channel was during the marathon, and I suspect that I am by no means unique in this attribute. So running the marathon caused much of Sci-Fi’s demographic to go elsewhere while drawing no new viewers to Sci-Fi’s other programming. Advertisers, who see no use for people of my vintage, were probably clamoring for more “youth-oriented” (read idiotic) viewing and demanding the termination of the insufferable, black and white relic of a bygone era called the Twilight Zone. Today’s media and advertising businesses are, after all, obsessed with finding, and appealing to, the lowest common denominator…and making it lower.
Saturday, July 3, 2010
“UH OH, SERGIO…”
7/3/10
Today’s (i.e., Saturday, July 3’s) Wall Street Journal featured an interview of Fiat, and Chrysler, Chairman Sergio Marchionne by Paul Ingrassia, the best automotive business journalist currently plying that trade.
One can’t help but be impressed by Mr. Marchionne’s proven turnaround prowess and his keen grasp of the obvious that others refuse to see, as evidenced by his observation that “most car advertising assumes that people have IQs that are missing a digit.” (Sadly, he hasn’t yet figured out that it is that assumption that makes such advertising so effective, but I digress.)
But to be impressed by Mr. Marchionne, and to be pulling for Chrysler, is not the same as to be sanguine about Chrysler’s future. As I have pointed out numerous times in the past, the car business is about product, and Chrysler just doesn’t have, for most part, competitive products. As I have also said ad nauseam in the past, there aren’t any bad cars out there any more, but of those that are close, a disproportionate number bear one of the Chrysler nameplates (of which there are too many, by the way). This does not mean that one should not buy a Chrysler if one can get a great deal on one, but companies don’t prosper selling their products exclusively to those seeking great deals.
The hope is that the importation of Fiat technologies will invigorate the Chrysler product line in time to rescue Chrysler, but such a hope is clearly a stretch. Fiat makes some stylish, practical, and fun cars that sell well in Europe. However, Fiat is only a few years, and Sergio Marchionne, past what most thought was near certain corporate death. Further, Fiat’s past forays in this market have been monumental flops. Sure, times change, and Fiat is a vastly different company than it was in the ‘70s. But how many people do you know who are out there saying “Boy, I’d really love to have a Fiat, but, since they’re not sold in this country, I’ll have to settle for a Honda”?
If I could pick a guy to attempt a turnaround at Chrysler, it would probably be Sergio Marchionne. And I wish him well, especially in his rumored plans to rejuvenate the PT Cruiser with Fiat underpinnings. But the product well has been dry too long at Chrysler, and it may be far too late to address that problem, at least for a company like Fiat.
Today’s (i.e., Saturday, July 3’s) Wall Street Journal featured an interview of Fiat, and Chrysler, Chairman Sergio Marchionne by Paul Ingrassia, the best automotive business journalist currently plying that trade.
One can’t help but be impressed by Mr. Marchionne’s proven turnaround prowess and his keen grasp of the obvious that others refuse to see, as evidenced by his observation that “most car advertising assumes that people have IQs that are missing a digit.” (Sadly, he hasn’t yet figured out that it is that assumption that makes such advertising so effective, but I digress.)
But to be impressed by Mr. Marchionne, and to be pulling for Chrysler, is not the same as to be sanguine about Chrysler’s future. As I have pointed out numerous times in the past, the car business is about product, and Chrysler just doesn’t have, for most part, competitive products. As I have also said ad nauseam in the past, there aren’t any bad cars out there any more, but of those that are close, a disproportionate number bear one of the Chrysler nameplates (of which there are too many, by the way). This does not mean that one should not buy a Chrysler if one can get a great deal on one, but companies don’t prosper selling their products exclusively to those seeking great deals.
The hope is that the importation of Fiat technologies will invigorate the Chrysler product line in time to rescue Chrysler, but such a hope is clearly a stretch. Fiat makes some stylish, practical, and fun cars that sell well in Europe. However, Fiat is only a few years, and Sergio Marchionne, past what most thought was near certain corporate death. Further, Fiat’s past forays in this market have been monumental flops. Sure, times change, and Fiat is a vastly different company than it was in the ‘70s. But how many people do you know who are out there saying “Boy, I’d really love to have a Fiat, but, since they’re not sold in this country, I’ll have to settle for a Honda”?
If I could pick a guy to attempt a turnaround at Chrysler, it would probably be Sergio Marchionne. And I wish him well, especially in his rumored plans to rejuvenate the PT Cruiser with Fiat underpinnings. But the product well has been dry too long at Chrysler, and it may be far too late to address that problem, at least for a company like Fiat.
Friday, July 2, 2010
“I’M FROM THE GOVERNMENT, AND I’M HERE TO HELP YOU”
7/2/10
Today the Chicago City Council did its traditional imitation of the former Soviet Parliament and rubber stamped the gun law Mayor Daley and his staff threw together in response to, or in anticipation of, the Supreme Court’s striking down the outright ban on handguns that had existed in the Second City since Jane Byrne was mayor.
I have some problems with the substance of the bill. Some of its provisions are incomprehensible, e.g., the requirement that all but one handgun per person per household be secured or “broken down in a non-functioning state.” Other provisions are silly, such as guns’ being allowed only in houses, not garages or porches. Still others are absurd, especially a provision inserted by Alderman Burke that requires anyone convicted of a gun offense who lives, works, or attends school in the city to register with the Chicago Police Department. This was inserted, we are told, so that the police will know whether there is a gun in a house to which they have been called. Think about it a half second. Imagine the following scene: Two cops are headed toward a crack house and this discussion takes place:
Kowalski: “Hey, O’Brien, I wonder if we’re going to encounter any bad guys with guns as we try to arrest the occupants of this reputed crack house.”
O’Brien: “Let me check.”
O’Brien punches a few keys on the onboard computer in the patrol car.
O’Brien: “It looks like no one at that address has reported owning a handgun, and no one has registered his or her firearm with the city or state.”
Kowalski: “I guess we’re safe then.”
My major problems with the bill, however, are not so much its substance, which is bad enough, but its presentation by city Corporation Counsel Mara Georges, a long time Daley favorite. One does not get the full flavor of Ms. Georges’ presentation without actually hearing it; I hope you heard it on the television or radio news yesterday or that you can replay it on the website of one of the news or news/talk radio stations (e.g., WGN, WLS, or WBBM) in town. Since it was not printed in any of the papers, I can’t quote Ms. Georges’ directly, but I come quite close in recounting below her description of what the Mayor means when he says that a handgun can be kept “in the house”:
This means inside the dwelling unit. This does NOT mean on the porch. This does NOT mean in the hallway. This does NOT mean in the garage.
Again, while that reads bad enough, one cannot get the flavor of the attitude reflected by Ms. Georges without actually hearing the tape. She sounds like a schoolmarm warning the kids that they better behave or they will get rapped with a ruler across the knuckles, but if I made that analogy I’d have to apologize to schoolmarms.
Why was Ms. Georges’ presentation so troublesome? Because it betrays an attitude on the part of bureaucrats and “elected officials,” in this case Ms. Georges and her boss, that they know better than any of us and that they will therefore tell us what to do. And we’d better pay attention. If anyone is looking for a reason why people are currently so, er, angry with their government and the politicians who make their livings in it, one would do well to look at spending, taxes, pusillanimity, and general incompetence. But one would do better to look at the “holier, and far smarter, than thou” attitude that infects those in “public life.”
Today the Chicago City Council did its traditional imitation of the former Soviet Parliament and rubber stamped the gun law Mayor Daley and his staff threw together in response to, or in anticipation of, the Supreme Court’s striking down the outright ban on handguns that had existed in the Second City since Jane Byrne was mayor.
I have some problems with the substance of the bill. Some of its provisions are incomprehensible, e.g., the requirement that all but one handgun per person per household be secured or “broken down in a non-functioning state.” Other provisions are silly, such as guns’ being allowed only in houses, not garages or porches. Still others are absurd, especially a provision inserted by Alderman Burke that requires anyone convicted of a gun offense who lives, works, or attends school in the city to register with the Chicago Police Department. This was inserted, we are told, so that the police will know whether there is a gun in a house to which they have been called. Think about it a half second. Imagine the following scene: Two cops are headed toward a crack house and this discussion takes place:
Kowalski: “Hey, O’Brien, I wonder if we’re going to encounter any bad guys with guns as we try to arrest the occupants of this reputed crack house.”
O’Brien: “Let me check.”
O’Brien punches a few keys on the onboard computer in the patrol car.
O’Brien: “It looks like no one at that address has reported owning a handgun, and no one has registered his or her firearm with the city or state.”
Kowalski: “I guess we’re safe then.”
My major problems with the bill, however, are not so much its substance, which is bad enough, but its presentation by city Corporation Counsel Mara Georges, a long time Daley favorite. One does not get the full flavor of Ms. Georges’ presentation without actually hearing it; I hope you heard it on the television or radio news yesterday or that you can replay it on the website of one of the news or news/talk radio stations (e.g., WGN, WLS, or WBBM) in town. Since it was not printed in any of the papers, I can’t quote Ms. Georges’ directly, but I come quite close in recounting below her description of what the Mayor means when he says that a handgun can be kept “in the house”:
This means inside the dwelling unit. This does NOT mean on the porch. This does NOT mean in the hallway. This does NOT mean in the garage.
Again, while that reads bad enough, one cannot get the flavor of the attitude reflected by Ms. Georges without actually hearing the tape. She sounds like a schoolmarm warning the kids that they better behave or they will get rapped with a ruler across the knuckles, but if I made that analogy I’d have to apologize to schoolmarms.
Why was Ms. Georges’ presentation so troublesome? Because it betrays an attitude on the part of bureaucrats and “elected officials,” in this case Ms. Georges and her boss, that they know better than any of us and that they will therefore tell us what to do. And we’d better pay attention. If anyone is looking for a reason why people are currently so, er, angry with their government and the politicians who make their livings in it, one would do well to look at spending, taxes, pusillanimity, and general incompetence. But one would do better to look at the “holier, and far smarter, than thou” attitude that infects those in “public life.”
“…HE’LL TOOT HIS FLUTE FOR YOU”
7/2/10
Readers of the Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times, and doubtless of other papers throughout the world, were treated this morning to tales of the sartorial excesses of ex-Governor Rod Blagojevich and his wife, Patti “Lady Macbeth” Blagojevich. The case the prosecutors are trying to make, apparently, is that it was the financial imbecility of the Blagojeviches that led Mr. Blagojevich to try to use the powers of his office to extort money from various people in the political and politically connected business worlds. Several points are worth making here:
--First, oh where have you heard this argument before? Loyal readers will quickly answer “Of course…the Insightful Pontificator, in the 6/9/10 post I OWE, I OWE SO OFF TO EXTORT I GO.” And such readers would, as usual, be absolutely right.
--Second, the RodMan is quoted as saying that he was “screwing” his family financially by remaining governor because the heat that his office, or, more properly, his prostitution of it, was bringing on his family forced Lady Macbeth out of her “real estate” business. Some observers, noting that, at least according to prosecutors, Patti did very little real estate work and acted as little more than a conduit (Considerate choice of words on my part, don’t you think?) for payoffs to the governor, will chortle at the very notion that Patti would be out there raking in the big bucks if it weren’t for her husband’s being governor. But Blago may have a point here. Even if Rod were not governor, even if he were still a state rep or a Congressman, his wife could still act as a conduit for the sale of influence. And also bear in mind that she would still be Dick Mell’s daughter, and we all know how things work around this town. See my 6/24/10 post I DIDN’T SAY YOU SCRATCH HIS BACK AND I’LL SCRATCH YOURS and my 6/12/09 post “WE DON’T WANT NOBODY NOBODY SENT.” So Patti would have had a lucrative “real estate” career if her husband were not popinjay-in-chief and his wholesale auctioning of his office may indeed have impeded Lady Macbeth’s “earning” power.
--Third, even if Patti could have been pursuing a lucrative career trading on her political contacts, that still would not have saved the Blagojevich family from its financial plight. As I have said on numerous occasions, most recently in the aforementioned 6/9/10 post, it is not a lack of income that drives people into financial ruin but, rather, spending out of proportion to their income. This was certainly the case with the Blagojeviches. Further, I suspect that even if Patti were making millions, these two nincompoops could have managed to find some way to excrete it all away and then moan about how they are unable to send their kids to college while simultaneously talk about how they relate to the “working person” because, in his distant past, Rod experienced something approximating poverty.
--Fourth, the RodMan spent $205,707 on suits (and perhaps a few jackets and overcoats) at Oxxford over a six year period, spending as much as $5,000 on a single suit on more than one occasion.
Where does one begin here? What kind of moron spends $5,000 on a suit, even on what the Tribune calls a “fine” suit? What exactly makes such a suit “fine,” or 20 times “finer” than a $250 suit? Who, from a distance of more than six inches, can tell a $5,000 suit from a $250 suit? As readers may have picked up, I’ve never had much respect for the RodMan, but now, if this is possible, I have even less. Perhaps he and Patti thought they were impressing people by spending money they don’t have on things they don’t need and that are not worth nearly what they paid for them. Given the typical American’s attitude toward spending, perhaps the Blagojeviches were right; simple-minded people are impressed by big spending. But any objective observer could only conclude that Rod and Patti are a couple of imbeciles whose foppishness has overwhelmed what tiny ossified remnants of brains that remain ensconced under their expensive, and overrated, coiffures.
And one more note…in the first chapter of my now seminal novel, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics, I try to highlight the ostentatious displays of wealth by New York developer Jack Smith by pointing out that he wore a $3,000 suit into his meeting with Chairman Collins in the non-descript headquarters of the 15th Ward Regular Democratic Organization. Apparently, I was making Mr. Smith a piker, at least relative to our financially strapped ex-governor! I could chalk such an oversight up to the ignorance of a guy who thinks a trip to Joe Banks is a shameless extravagance…or to The Chairman’s taking place in 1988. Making the appropriate adjustments for inflation, $3,000 for Jack Smith in 1988 is about on a par with the RodMan’s spending $5,000 twenty years later. But Jack Smith could actually afford such a silly extravagance.
Readers of the Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times, and doubtless of other papers throughout the world, were treated this morning to tales of the sartorial excesses of ex-Governor Rod Blagojevich and his wife, Patti “Lady Macbeth” Blagojevich. The case the prosecutors are trying to make, apparently, is that it was the financial imbecility of the Blagojeviches that led Mr. Blagojevich to try to use the powers of his office to extort money from various people in the political and politically connected business worlds. Several points are worth making here:
--First, oh where have you heard this argument before? Loyal readers will quickly answer “Of course…the Insightful Pontificator, in the 6/9/10 post I OWE, I OWE SO OFF TO EXTORT I GO.” And such readers would, as usual, be absolutely right.
--Second, the RodMan is quoted as saying that he was “screwing” his family financially by remaining governor because the heat that his office, or, more properly, his prostitution of it, was bringing on his family forced Lady Macbeth out of her “real estate” business. Some observers, noting that, at least according to prosecutors, Patti did very little real estate work and acted as little more than a conduit (Considerate choice of words on my part, don’t you think?) for payoffs to the governor, will chortle at the very notion that Patti would be out there raking in the big bucks if it weren’t for her husband’s being governor. But Blago may have a point here. Even if Rod were not governor, even if he were still a state rep or a Congressman, his wife could still act as a conduit for the sale of influence. And also bear in mind that she would still be Dick Mell’s daughter, and we all know how things work around this town. See my 6/24/10 post I DIDN’T SAY YOU SCRATCH HIS BACK AND I’LL SCRATCH YOURS and my 6/12/09 post “WE DON’T WANT NOBODY NOBODY SENT.” So Patti would have had a lucrative “real estate” career if her husband were not popinjay-in-chief and his wholesale auctioning of his office may indeed have impeded Lady Macbeth’s “earning” power.
--Third, even if Patti could have been pursuing a lucrative career trading on her political contacts, that still would not have saved the Blagojevich family from its financial plight. As I have said on numerous occasions, most recently in the aforementioned 6/9/10 post, it is not a lack of income that drives people into financial ruin but, rather, spending out of proportion to their income. This was certainly the case with the Blagojeviches. Further, I suspect that even if Patti were making millions, these two nincompoops could have managed to find some way to excrete it all away and then moan about how they are unable to send their kids to college while simultaneously talk about how they relate to the “working person” because, in his distant past, Rod experienced something approximating poverty.
--Fourth, the RodMan spent $205,707 on suits (and perhaps a few jackets and overcoats) at Oxxford over a six year period, spending as much as $5,000 on a single suit on more than one occasion.
Where does one begin here? What kind of moron spends $5,000 on a suit, even on what the Tribune calls a “fine” suit? What exactly makes such a suit “fine,” or 20 times “finer” than a $250 suit? Who, from a distance of more than six inches, can tell a $5,000 suit from a $250 suit? As readers may have picked up, I’ve never had much respect for the RodMan, but now, if this is possible, I have even less. Perhaps he and Patti thought they were impressing people by spending money they don’t have on things they don’t need and that are not worth nearly what they paid for them. Given the typical American’s attitude toward spending, perhaps the Blagojeviches were right; simple-minded people are impressed by big spending. But any objective observer could only conclude that Rod and Patti are a couple of imbeciles whose foppishness has overwhelmed what tiny ossified remnants of brains that remain ensconced under their expensive, and overrated, coiffures.
And one more note…in the first chapter of my now seminal novel, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics, I try to highlight the ostentatious displays of wealth by New York developer Jack Smith by pointing out that he wore a $3,000 suit into his meeting with Chairman Collins in the non-descript headquarters of the 15th Ward Regular Democratic Organization. Apparently, I was making Mr. Smith a piker, at least relative to our financially strapped ex-governor! I could chalk such an oversight up to the ignorance of a guy who thinks a trip to Joe Banks is a shameless extravagance…or to The Chairman’s taking place in 1988. Making the appropriate adjustments for inflation, $3,000 for Jack Smith in 1988 is about on a par with the RodMan’s spending $5,000 twenty years later. But Jack Smith could actually afford such a silly extravagance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
