The New Englander

A Wii Little Problem

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 15:01:00 +0000

"A man's home is his castle." -- Old Proverb

"Home...Is Where You Can Scratch Where it Itches." -- Saying on a Coffee Mug

"I turned up your TV and stomped on the floor just for fun." -- BNL, The Old Apartment

Before I even start this entry, let me state my full acknowledgement and recognition of the fact that there are real problems in the world. There are people without enough food to eat, there are people who suffer from physical and emotional abuse from which they can't escape, and there are addictions that ruin lives and families.

And I'm not just referring to places like Darfur, Somalia, Myanmar, or anywhere necessarily far. All of this happens within a 10-mile radius of wherever it is that you live, for certain.

Now that that's been acknowledged, I am going to jump back into the condo v. house debate. A condo is wonderful, of course, when it allows you to live in a central location that you don't have to personally maintain throughout the seasons. It gives you an energy-efficient lifestyle and, if you're in a good spot, saves you tons of trips in the car because you can often walk to whatever you need. Also, condos offer a HUGE security advantage, esp. when they're located higher than the first floor. That's a very important consideration for someone whose work could take him or her away from time to time.

But the big advantage to owning a house is that the space is really yours. That's not *really* the case in a condo for a couple of reasons. First, because you're sharing walls, ceilings, and floors with others; and second, because you can always bump into people in a way you wouldn't inside your own, private home.

The missus and I were just reminded of this during our holiday planning. As the Greater Family has been swept up in Nintendo Wii mania, we were hoping to join the bandwagon by splitting it as a joint Christmas present to each other. It would give us a fun opportunity to get in shape without having to travel to the Y, it's a chance to hone skills that could be used against cousins and nephews on the weekends, and it's just a good, interactive bonding experience in a way that movies and TV shows aren't.

But in the end, we balked.

We've got one great TV, nicely situated on our first floor.

Our first floor is someone else's ceiling. That someone else has a one year-old. Out of respect for this, and the lack of sleep it surely causes them, we are extra-super-extremely careful about noise -- TV volume can't go past 20 and goes off completely by 11 p.m., PT can only happen on the 2nd floor, socks and bare feet only, etc.

Nintendo Wii is an inherently bouncy, jumpy, run-around and get sweaty type of thing. Adults can mitigate that somewhat by keeping their feet mainly on the ground, but nieces and nephews under 10 are too much of a wildcard. In the end, we just decided to say no.

Eventually, we already know it's going to be a single-family home somewhere that we haven't figured out yet. In any case, it's a decision that's at least several years away, as we're still very underwater and I won't have a *real* civilian job until at least 2012.

As soon as we do, I'll realize all the great things about the condo life that I took for granted. I'll grunt, groan, and complain about snow, leaves, new paint jobs, and clogged gutters.

But, on the bright side, we'll have a Wii with Wii Fit. We'll stomp, scream, shriek, high-five and the whole bit.

A Ringing Phone Does Not an Emergency Make!

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:17:00 +0000

Okay, it's another blog theme day. And that theme, of course, is helpful, practical tips. What's ruled in is anything that could save you time, money, or energy. What's ruled OUT is anything that is either incomprehensibly vague and therefore useless (i.e. 'follow your dreams') or what I call Ward and June Cleaver Morality Tales (i.e. 'don't to that, just because it's bad and we say not to.') To wit, I'll caution you not to bad-mouth your colleagues because of the myriad ways it could hurt you, not because *it's just bad,* no further explanation offered.

Okay, so back to the point -- Handling a ringing phone in your office during a meeting or appointment.

I must credit the Chief Petty Officer who taught me this, for he was right -- When you are in your office meeting with someone, and your desk phone rings, treat it the way you would another PERSON dropping in to talk; essentially, tell it to "take a number."

Once this was explained to me, I definitely *got* the lesson and have stuck with it ever since. Somehow we've developed this Pavlovian response to the sound of a ringing phone, which has of course only been made WORSE in the cell phone era (and yes, if I ever write a book, I've got a whole chapter's worth of material on cell phone etiquette). But really, there's no good reason to treat a ringing phone as some type of dire emergency that MUST be addressed, while simultaneously leaving the real person who really scheduled real time to meet with you out in the cold like chopped liver.

This all came back to me yesterday during a meeting.

I had to make a 30-minute drive to head down and meet with someone to discuss a plan of events for the year ahead. The total time of this meeting could have taken less than 45 minutes, but it stretched nearly three hours because EVERY time this person's phone rang, it was answered, and all the caller's questions or issues were fully addressed before we could recommence [if this sounds passive-aggressive, I'll just say there were positional differences that would've made it near-impossible to address this at the time].

It almost became its own absurdity play. Midway through a sentence, moving towards actual progress than then BAM! there went the phone again. Thankfully, I was in no great rush, but it begs several questions.

The obvious one is what would've happened had all those callers just been real live people waiting by the person's desk. And the obvious answer to that is that a line would've formed, and each person addressed one-by-one.

The next question is why can't people just use, and trust, voicemail? This one looms largest for me (those who know me know that perhaps my single biggest pet peeve are the missed calls to the cell phone that don't get the courtesy of the benefit of the doubt and a simple voicemail). Think about it, people somehow had to get by before answering machines (YES, I can remember those), and voicemail ever existed. But now that they DO exist, we treat them as an afterthought. Still, we assume the worst sometimes -- if someone doesn't immediately answer their desk phone, they must be out goofing off on company time; and if someone doesn't immediately answer their cell phone, it's seen by some as an out-and-out affront.

I'll admit I always love hearing a real voice on the end of the line, and I hate those pesky phone trees when all I want is a real person. However, I'll also admit you can go quite far when all parties assume the best.

It's like, if I call your office and you don't answer, I can assume the best and leave a voicemail explaining what I need and why I called.

When you get that, you can assume the best, take me for my word, and get back to me when you're able.

If I'm not immediately there to answer, you can assume the best, and the cycle continues.

Unfortunately, this isn't how things always work.

But the cycle of trust will only go stronger when we can start showing some respect during live meetings by not treating every ringing phone like the equivalent of an ankle-level fire in the corner of the room.

And we can reinforce that cycle of trust when we hear four rings and a recorded message, but don't slam the phone down in frustration.

Definitely a Guy Thing

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 12:50:00 +0000

"The president misses not having to shave every day and being able to throw on his old jeans without causing a huge stir, as he did earlier this year with his 'mom jeans.'"

I can't speak to the jeans thing, but must say I concur with our Commander-in-Chief about the shaving bit. Even though shaving takes just a few minutes out of the day, there's something liberating about not having to do it, which is probably why every servicemember who goes on a long period of leave inevitably carries out some form of facial hair experimentation.

I'll even admit the beard starts to be a bit too much after about the three-day mark (when the little old ladies on Market St. stop smiling back and waving, I know it's time for a date with the Mach 3).

Still, even though the bread-and-butter hygiene doesn't get neglected on weekends and off days, there really is just something great about having that one- or two-day's worth of stubble before Monday morning comes and it's time to hack it back.

So on his toughest important decision (the plus-up of troops to Afghanistan) as well as his toughest not-so-important personal gripe (the need for a daily shave) I'm with POTUS.

Whither the Losers?

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 01:19:00 +0000

A theme I've hit on here a time or two is the long American political tradition whereby when you run for office and you don't win, you don't necessarily *lose.*

A recent local example would be Patrick Murphy building name recognition and maverick credentials with his 2007 Congressional bid, and then turning around and finishing 8th in this year's City Council election. To spread out nationally and to dig back deeper in time, there would be too many examples of *winning from losing* to fit into any blog entry, or even a lengthy book.

For now, it's fair to say the winners from Tuesday's primary are Martha Coakley and Scott Brown.

As for the losers, I think it's also fair to say Michael Capuano is the obvious *winner.* He didn't jeopardize his Congressional seat, which won't come up for election until next year; on the contrary, he massively increased his name recognition and stature within his own district. Who knows what that will mean for his political future, or even further down the road in law or business (hey, at what point do Ivy League degrees and fancy-pants law schools take away your right to refer to 'working-class roots' every five minutes?) Either way, it's safe to say he wins.

As for Alan Khazei and Steve Pagliuca, it's just too soon to say. For starters, two seemingly difficult-to-pronounce names have become household words across the state. Again, hard to exactly predict what that'll mean, but it could certainly come in handy should either try to re-involve himself in politics, get a new citizens' group/non-profit off the ground, or get involved in something that exploits name recognition (public speaking gigs, corporate boards, etc.) then the failed Senate bid is a MAJOR bonus.

Jack E. Robinson is a bit more of a wildcard. To only rack up a small percent of a much less crowded, much less star-studded field obviously doesn't say much for his statewide appeal, GOP or otherwise. But as they say, a week is a long time in politics, and I would imagine his name recognition in Duxbury is remarkable.

This Just In, Via Facebook

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Fri, 11 Dec 2009 00:09:00 +0000

Joseph M Mendonca - "I was contacted by the City Clerk today and stated that I am willing to serve for the remainder of this Council term if offered. Now it is up to a Council vote on Tuesday."

Well, I guess that answers a lot of people's questions.

Tiger, You, and Me

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 19:14:00 +0000

Anyone who's been following this blog for a while has probably come to learn what I'll say every time an Eliot Spitzer, a Larry Craig, or a John Edwards-type situation surfaces.

First, that for people who handle matters relating to our national security, compromising behavior isn't as funny as late-night talk show hosts would sometimes have us think.

And second, that for all public figures, their decision to be public is a conscious one that comes with PLENTY of upside as well as downside.

I've held my virtual breath on Tiger Woods so far, except to say that I'm surprised that Tiger, much like Michael Phelps, jeopardized millions upon millions of dollars in endorsements not just by his behavior (I'll stay judgement-neutral here on the infidelity or marijuana smoking) but by the carelessness surrounding it. A squared-away individual who acted as a combination bodyguard/administrative assistant would seem capable of preventing either PR disaster. Shoot, Gatorade or Nike could've hired the person themselves, seeing as they're losers in all this as well as Mr. Woods.

Anyway, I didn't post about Tiger's option of "just going away" because I thought it was just a rehash of earlier stuff. I realized today, however, that it's no different from what I would tell any friend, relative, neighbor, colleague, etc. who had a similar problem with his or her job.

For instance, let's say I complained to you CONSTANTLY about being a National Guardsman trying to schedule a gazillion in-person and Distance Learning courses simultaneously, or about preparing for a battery of grad school tests, or language qualifications, or volunteering for Sam Meas, or losing 20 pounds, or whatever the case may be...

..Eventually, you would (rightly) lose your patience with me and say, in essence, "If you hate it so much, why don't you just quit/stop doing it."

If Tiger Woods has such a problem with media intrusions into his personal life (driven by regular, non-media persons' interest in it, of course), he can simply stop doing endorsements and stop playing professional golf. There are movie stars and pro athletes who've created a precedent for this type of thing, too, so it's not a totally-uncharted course.

That's the same advice I would give to Eliot Spitzer, Mark Foley, or anyone else -- don't go away mad, just go away. But it's also the same advice I would give to ANY friend who hated his or her job and had the option of leaving.

Tiger doesn't need the money. Tiger doesn't need the professional stature. He already has tons of both.

YES, there will still be tons of interest in his situation no matter what he does with the rest of his life. However, that interest will slowly but surely fade, assuming he does nothing to stoke it.

If he wants to make a comeback, I'm all for it. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not in any way saying he shouldn't.

What I AM saying, however, is that he spent the past two decades benefiting from a career and life in the public spotlight. If he wishes to leave in order to have some much-needed privacy, that sounds like a good course of action.

That's the same thing I'd tell my friend who makes big bucks but hates his law firm job...Once you reach the point where you don't need it, just leave it.

But if you're just going to benefit from it whenever it suits you, but complain about it endlessly when it doesn't, I've got little to no sympathy to offer.

Yes Virginia, There Really is a Miss Landmine

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 03:28:00 +0000

Congratulations to Dos Sopheap of Battambang for receiving top honors in this year's "Miss Landmine" contest. Her crowning comes at the same time that Cambodia's government is petitioning for a 10-year extension on its Ottawa Mine Ban Treaty Compliance.

Three Quick Hits

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 15:15:00 +0000

Running out the door soon, but here are three quick thoughts for the morning:

(1) Tiger Woods -- Michael Phelps. After the famous Michael Phelps bong hit photo came out, I wondered aloud on this blog why someone like Phelps couldn't take out a small insurance policy on his multimillion-dollar endorsement deals by hiring a 'protector.' This person wouldn't just be like a bodyguard per se, but would be someone highly responsible and organized whose SOLE job in life was to keep the client out of trouble, and, failing that, to protect the client in situations that could otherwise be troublesome. Now I'm wondering why Tiger Woods couldn't have done the same thing.

(2) First reports from the field about Jim Harbaugh. One of the oldest military sayings is that the first reports from the field are always wrong. Jim Harbaugh got LAMBASTED yesterday on Facebook, Twitter, and all over the blogosphere for allegedly yelling an anti-gay slur at a referee last Saturday night. Here's the problem: Harbaugh never said it. The YouTube video had a dubbed audio track that was based on what someone thought Harbaugh had said. And there's the problem with the Internet...

(3) Premature dirge-singing for the Patriots. I know a lot of people are still upset about Monday night's thrashing in New Orleans, BUT let's look at the other three losses -- the Jets game would've turned differently if a couple drops were actually caught, the Broncos game was blown late in the second half, and the Pats never had a chance in OT, and the Colts game coulda shoulda woulda went the Pats' way, but for one fumble, one bad Pass Interference call that hasn't gotten enough attention, and then of course one famously risky coaching move. What if that pass had really been intended for Randy Moss? Who knows, but either way let's bear in mind the PRIMARY lesson from 2007 -- the regular season matters, but only so much. With five relatively-easy games ahead and a near-certainty of playoffs, let's just hold our collective breath before the weeping and wailing can commence.

Real Garbage, Vennochi-Style

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:08:00 +0000

With her column in today's Globe, Joan Vennochi has my head spinning this morning. She writes about the gender split among endorsees of either Capuano or Coakley among the Massachusetts congressional delegation, but without addressing any single issue or any reason OTHER than gender why anyone should support either candidate.

She ends on some note about how the state can either make history (i.e. move forward) or just allow history to repeat itself (i.e. move backward).

Not once is there a mention of how politics may have influenced the endorsement decisions [Correction: As Kad Barma just pointed out in a comment, the political pressure from House Leadership is mentioned in the column], or why seven members of the delegation may have buckled to pressure from the House Speaker (who, by the way, happens to be female).

I'm not particularly gung ho about either Coakley OR Capuano, but I'd like to think I can make that choice based on things like policy stances, voting records, and personal biographies. I don't need the decision framed as some type of good-versus-evil moral referendum that only allows me some stark, cartoon character-style decision between what's right and what's wrong.

When identity politics goes this far overboard, the otherwise-rational and level-headed become alienated.

Keeping it Practical: Volunteer for a Campaign

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 21:08:00 +0000

A little while back, I wrote about how graduation speeches and other means by which young people are subject to advice-giving can often be terribly platitudinous and useless.

"Follow your dreams" rings about as hollow for me as does giving a copy of "Oh, The Places You'll Go" to an enterprising young adult. "It all works out in the end" seems downright obnoxious when it comes FROM a Silicon Valley gazillionaire TO a bunch generally smart and talented people, the vast middle of which are headed towards middle-management mediocrity.

For real advice, I talked about learning a critical language (remember, not to be perfect at it, but just to be better than most anyone else, which you might be able to do with a couple weeks' practice). I've also talked on this blog about how I've come to understand that 'networking' should not be confused with 'making pen pals.' (Will write more on the subject in the future).

In the meantime, here's one more piece of practical, potentially very-useful advice for ANY person, but particularly for a young person trying to get his or her feet on the ground professionally --volunteer for a political campaign.

I had never done this until I started working for Sam Meas (technically, I couldn't have, since it's against UCMJ for active duty folks to involve themselves in campaigns in any way, shape, or form). Anyway, it's been shaping up as one of the most enriching, eye-opening, and generally interesting experiences in my life. I'll write about it more between now and next fall, but for now here are a couple bullet points to consider about volunteering for a campaign

* You'll meet tons of people. And simply put, the more people you know, the more potential professional opportunities you'll come across. Involving yourself in a campaign is a great way to shorten the paths between you (or your degrees of separation) to anyone else who lives in your area, or whatever geographical spread the campaign covers.

* You'll visit tons of places that you otherwise wouldn't. Same principles generally apply from the previous point. Again, you're gaining a ton of familiarity with, and exposure to, doors that might open for you down the road.

* You'll see a process from the inside out as opposed to the outside in. Remember that old joke about the weather -- how everyone talks about it but no one does anything about it? Politics is sort of the same way. You can never learn something from a book as well as you can by doing. Seeing the inside of a campaign staff, and appreciating just how hard it is to run for public office, offers you a new perspective. Whether it turns you off to electoral politics completely, gets you hooked for life, or leaves you somewhere in the middle, you'll get something that you couldn't have by reading "All Politics is Local" and watching Bullworth.

* Neat life experience / resume bullet. Probably doesn't rank up there with having run 26.2 miles in one shot, or climbing some major mountain, but it's still related to these in principle -- things people can do so they can say (whether just to themselves, or to others, but I'm not a psychologist so I don't care which) that they've been there and done that. Could be a cool thing to talk about during an interview, especially if you're in your early 20s and haven't really *done* anything else.

I know that overview completely glossed over other issues of policy and ideology as reasons why someone might want to get involved or why they might find it to be a good moral or ethical decision. Those are all valid, but my major point here was to include a specific, pointed piece of guidance that could be given to someone wearing a cap and gown -- no pablum about "exploring your passions" but something concrete that would be theirs to either accept or reject.

So, right after you get done learning "Where is the bathroom" in Punjabi, and you understand why e-mailing or calling people 'just to say hi' isn't really networking, your next step, young Padawan, is to volunteer for a political campaign.

When you do, great things might happen. And even if you hate it, well, now that's just one more thing you know that you didn't before.

Bob Forrant's Seven-Fold Path

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:34:00 +0000

Woodrow Wilson rated 14 points. FDR got it done with four freedoms, which is how many Noble Truths the Buddha used. For Bob Forrant today at the UML ICC, there were Seven Ways laid out for helping us get out of the current Great Recession and helping to ensure that we don't find our way back into the abyss anytime too soon.

After warming the audience up with enough dismal economic statistics to remind us how he earned the moniker "Doctor Doom," Forrant began outlining steps that the city and the Greater Merrimack Valley can take to improve our economic footing.

First, some of the most chilling statistics: That 1 in every 4 children in the U.S. today relies on food stamps for basic caloric intake; that the FDIC is now 8.2 billion dollars in the red; that the official unemployment rate in Lawrence is 18 percent; and that if under-employment and the total discouragement of former job-seekers is factored in, we're actually approaching 25 percent of able-bodied, non-institutionalized American adults out of work. Another key statistic -- repeated twice for emphasis -- was that the proportion of workers who've been out of work for 26 or more weeks is now higher than at any point since the Great Depression.

Some of the local problems (9% current unemployment here in the Commonwealth) stem from the bleeding away of manufacturing jobs. In 2000, there were 417,000 total manufacturing jobs in the state; now, there are only 295,000. Nationally, we rank behind all our industrialized peers (except France) in terms of the percentage of our workforce engaged in manufacturing.

As Bob Forrant has said before on a couple local blogs, to include Left in Lowell and richardhowe.com, a regional jobs summit involving all the key business and political "players" is needed, and it needs to happen yesterday.

Here are Dr. Forrant's seven recommendations:

I. Allow children of undocumented immigrants to pay in-state tuition at public universities like UML. This is an investment in the future that would prevent us from developing a long-term underclass by denying people an affordable education.

II. Support and expand partnerships across Lowell High School, Middlesex Community College, UMass-Lowell and other area schools, esp. in the science and health fields. Forrant called for an expansion of programs such as Governor Patrick's Commonwealth Corps. He cited programs such as the one that puts 15 UML student tutors in algebra classes at LHS. During the lecture and then during the question-and-answer session, it was agreed that there is already tremendous traction in regards to this recommendation -- it just needs to be solidified and expanded further.

III. City and university partnerships for specific 'incubator' programs. Forrant cited the example of Worcester Polytechnic Institute and the City of Worcester coming together to put the Life Science and Bioengineering Institute in downtown Worcester just off 290 as a specific case study.

IV. Dramatic expansion of nursing programs and other health career fields between the two major hospitals (LGH, Saints Memorial) and the city's educational bodies. This point wasn't re-addressed during the Q and A, but study after study shows 'health care' as a field projected to grow by leaps and bounds in the coming years.

V. Partnerships that will help foster long-term development in the 'Creative Economy.' Internships, training programs, and the use of venues like the recently-opened "The Space" on Western Avenue would help comprise a concerted effort to foster youth creativity and to retain the 'corporate knowledge' that is developed by the generations of Creative Economy participants now living in Lowell.

VI. Expanded partnerships with Merrimack Valley Groups. Forrant cited numerous non-profits and other community organizations as positive examples of citizens working together to educate others about things like how to avoid bank foreclosures and how to navigate the treacherous job market. Partnerships among the groups themselves would enable easier flow of ideas, social capital, and pooling of resources.

VII. Lowell as a center for 'Green Urbanism.' Forrant mentioned that in the past five years, several corporations have moved into Lowell and focused on green issues like building reuse, public transportation, and energy efficiency. Forrant called for Lowell to "build on that core" and see where it can help lead to a blueprint for economic recovery.

Forrant mentioned that when Lowell hit a time of crisis approximately 30 years ago, the opportunity it presented for a new way forward helped spawn things like the Lowell National Historical Park and the Lowell Plan. We may be at a similar juncture now -- with more economic woes forecast on the horizon and no clear path out of the current joblessness crisis, forward-thinking business and political leaders may be able to chart a course forward to calmer seas.

And at least on that note, even Dr. Doom broke into a smile and pointed to a half-full glass on the podium.

Thank You, Cliff

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 19:39:00 +0000

I read this Letter to the Editor in the Sun which started out defending our troops from a claim that we're "swaggering around...with loaded weapons" and continued to spell out why -- and how -- Afghanistan is different from Vietnam. I started to wonder if Cliff Krieger was the author, so I scanned right to the bottom and saw that he was.

Obviously, Afghanistan is not a simple policy problem. Many smart people have dedicated countless hours thinking about the way forward, and they can't all come to consensus. That's because any proposed solution is going to come with tons of 2nd- and 3rd-order effects that we have to try to foresee and maneuver around ahead of time.

I find there are two equally idiotic ways forward that (sort of) come from the right, and the left, respectively. The first is the people who say, "Why can't we just drop a whole bunch of nukes on them and turn the country into a parking lot." That's terribly stupid, inhumane, and would give the rest of the world a righteous reason to hate us for generations to come. The second is the mirror-image of the first, which is some variant of, "Let's just pull everyone and everything out immediately, and leave those people to their own devices." That definitely comes from a FAR better place than the first, but to me it seems equally stupid, equally inhumane, and equally likely to lead to generations of resentment from yet another set of allies we'd leave twisting in the wind.

And you know what the funny thing about people who say the first (let's nuke 'em) and the second (let's abandon 'em) have in common?

Those type of statements never come from people who've been on the ground in Afghanistan or are close to those who have.

Because the people actually doing the work realize that it's never that simple.

Gimme Dat Christian Side...What?

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:39:00 +0000

A friend wrote about this on Facebook, and curiosity led me to check it out. Apparently, there's some movement among fundamentalist Christians to restrict people to "side hugs" (i.e. hugging by putting one arm around your buddy, hip-to-hip) because front hugs carry the risk of sin, in case either party's, uhh...member might bump into the other person's body.

Anyway, I had to dig into this a little bit to make sure it was real. It is. And the gangsta rappers here in this video are being completely serious, including the particularly asinine moment at 3:35 when the rapper intones that Jesus never gave front hugs. Funny, I've read the Gospels a time or two and never saw any references to that..

If you have just four minutes to spare on this fine post-Thanksgiving Friday, give this video a look. I don't know whether you'll laugh or cry, but you won't be disappointed!

Hey Rex Ryan: Go Pound Sand

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:44:00 +0000

I just caught this blip from the AP about how NY Jets coach Rex Ryan felt "disrespected" by the Patriots' decision to throw long even after the game's outcome was more or less determined on Sunday.

I know something similar came up a couple years ago from the Redskins, and just two weeks ago, mighty USC was complaining about an opponent's go-for-two decision while they were being blown out at the Colosseum.

I'll make an exception for youth sports, where far less is on the line, but for any Division I college game, or especially for an NFL game, where this really is what all these guys do for a living, all complaints about running up scores need to cease.

Anyone who witnessed infamous collapses like the Oilers-Bills game back almost two decades ago (the one where the 35-3 halftime lead didn't prove so decisive) needs to understand that these teams play a high-stakes game where the objective is to win. A lot of crazy things can happen in short time spans, so just because you're winning by two or more scores in the fourth quarter doesn't really guarantee anything. More important than being graceful, or not hurting someone's feelings, or appearing un-gentlemanly comes the singular ambition for the "W" as shared by coaches and players whose careers and futures are always on the line.

Anyone who has ever invested their hard-earned time or money (and, yes, time is a commodity that for some is the scarcest and most-valuable thing they have) in following college or pro sports should expect nothing less than the team for which they're rooting to try to win the game.

And winning means scoring more points than the other team does.

If it's late in the game, and I'm a second- or third-stringer fighting to keep my job or get promoted, you better believe I'm not letting up.

If I'm a first-stringer who trains year-round with one goal in mind, you better believe I'm not letting up. If that means testing out a pass play, or trying something out in a game situation, I would do it.

Being Thankful in New England

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 15:06:00 +0000

The Boston Globe put together this neat slideshow about New England fixtures and artifacts for which to be thankful -- included are references to the Lowell National Historical Park and minor league sports, as well as my personal favorite, the revival of "Main Streets" all across New England (Rockland, ME and Pittsfield, MA got the explicit nods on that one).

Speaking of amazing main streets, the parade in Haverhill yesterday was quite the spectacle. I have no ability to estimate crowd sizes but I think we're talking tens of thousands, between total spectators and participants. I know it was a regional event but I think it was a majority-Haverhill crowd, who consistently amazed me by (literally) opening up not just their front yards but their homes to complete strangers who dropped by for food, grog, and good cheer.

Sam Meas in Voice of America

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:13:00 +0000

Sam Meas got a nice write-up in a Voice of America piece today which can be seen at this link.

Just as a reminder, he's doing a walking tour of Downtown Lowell and the Lower Highlands tomorrow morning, which will all kick off at Market Street Market at 8:00 a.m.

Wing, Wong, Uong, Meas, and You: A Panel in Andover

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:25:00 +0000

Last night at Phillips Academy in Andover, Jack You (PA '10) opened up with a PowerPoint presentation about political under-representation and participation of Asian Americans (they make up 4.4% of the U.S. population but hold only 1.5% of federal elected positions, and tend to vote in lower percentages than do other groups).

The reasons You cited for the lack of involvement and representation ran the gamut from a lack of exposure to politics, pre-acquired political values from countries of origin, difficulties with English, cultural passivity, and racism.

You was followed by a panel of speakers which included Rithy Uong, the first Cambodian-American to hold electoral office in the U.S. (Lowell City Council, elected in 1999, 2001, and 2003), Leverett Wing (many years of service in Mass. State Senate and a member of Deval Patrick's transition team), Lisa Wong (recently elected to her second term as mayor of Fitchburg), and Sam Meas (first Cambodian-American U.S. Congressional candidate).

Of the personal stories told by the panelists, I thought Lisa Wong's was the most interesting. She talked about how, as an undergraduate, she questioned a lot of the propaganda that came from activist groups that attempted to corral large numbers of protesters for events, but didn't necessarily attempt to inspire real debate. As a result, she held counter-protests and teach-ins with professors to try to appeal to people who sought critical discussion as opposed to just a bunch of chanting and yelling. After becoming involved in community development in Fitchburg, she looked around for forward-thinking local leadership, but didn't see it and then decided to run for mayor at age 28 (she was first elected in 2007).

I asked her afterwards about how the "triple identity" of being female, young, and a person of color affected her, and she was quick to put it in a positive light -- to many of her constituents, that makes her far more approachable than someone who came straight from Central Casting as Hizzoner, the Mayor.

Overall, the tone of the panel and the audience (mostly Phillips students) seemed very balanced and nonpartisan, which I definitely noted and appreciated -- personally, I find it offensive that as a straight white male, no one ever tells me how I *should* vote, but people who consider themselves enlightened and forward-thinking question why a woman or a person of a particular ethnicity would ever vote a certain way (in a way, that is, that runs counter to someone else's preconceived notion).

For the record, I think ANYONE of any race, gender, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or income level should be able to vote any way he or she sees fit. Any single voter's reasons for doing so are complex and individual, so far be it from me (or anyone else) to prescribe what someone *should* or *shouldn't* do based on the box into which someone else wants to put them.

Tonight: Asian American Political Panel in Andover

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:12:00 +0000

The event description is italicized below. Headliners include former Lowell City Councilor Rithy Uong, Congressional Candidate Sam Meas, and Fitchburg Mayor Lisa Wong. Event is free and open to the public.

CAMD Scholar Jack You '10 will present “The Curious Underrepresentation: Asian Americans in U.S. Politics” at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, Nov. 18, in Kemper Auditorium in the Elson Art Center on Chapel Ave. on the Phillips Academy campus. You’s presentation, as well as the panel discussion and dessert reception that will follow, is free and open to the public.

In a study of immigration history, pan-ethnic dilemma, and voter behavior, You will explore impediments to Asian American political success in the U.S. According to You, Asian Americans have found success in professional fields such as business, medicine, and engineering, but in politics Asian Americans are represented at a disproportionately lower rate compared to the general American population. In 2000, Asian Americans constituted 4.4 percent of the American population, but only 1.5 percent of the elected seats in the U.S. House and the Senate.

Following the presentation, You will present an esteemed panel of experts to discuss Asian Americans and Massachusetts politics. The panel will include Sam Meas, who is preparing for a 2010 run for the 5th Congressional District of Mass; Rithy Uong, the first Cambodian to be elected to public office in the U.S. when he became a Lowell city councilor in 1999; Leverett Wing, former executive director of the Mass. Asian American Commission and former business manager of the Mass. State Senate; and Fitchburg mayor Lisa Wong.

Wrangling with Bureaucracy

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 20:01:00 +0000

I'm dealing with a bureaucratic snafu right now.

It was not necessarily anyone's fault in the first place, so I'm not that upset about it. No one's perfect -- a paperwork mistake was made, which is a) understandable and b) something I've done in the past and will do again in the future, so I'd be a huge hypocrite for ranting and raving about it.

Which is why I won't rant and rave about it.

Where frustration reaches a boiling point, however, is in the response, or lack thereof. Like most any reasonable person who can understand the initial error, the next reasonable step I'd like to see is someone e-mailing or calling to say, "Hey, we're sorry, but here's what we're doing to fix it," or even just to acknowledge that it's being worked on.

But that's where the bureaucracy thing steps in and gets in the way. The trouble is, I can't seem to get even a single e-mail or phone call returned, despite earnest entreaties that indicate that all I'm looking to do is get the warm-and-fuzzy that something's going on (I thought that last point was worth mentioning because if I were on the other end of someone screaming or otherwise being rude, I might not return a call, either).

I don't think there's anything surprising, or even original, in my description of bureaucratic wranglings, but if there's anyone reading from the private sector, esp. someone doing something entrepreneurial where he/she has a strong personal stake in the success of the venture, there's something worth keeping in mind -- people are generally reasonable and can forgive minor mistakes. However, easily forgiveable becomes increasingly intolerable anytime you IGNORE someone, whether out of spite, indifference, or a natural tendency not to want to bear bad news.

So don't go that route! The two minutes it takes to put a real, live voice on the line that says, calmly and reassuringly, "Hey, we're working on it," might be all it takes to keep a customer happy and loyal.

Then again, if you're a large, public sector bureaucracy, that was never a concern in the first place...

Who You Callin' a Crony?

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:58:00 +0000

If you want to read a great piece of reporting about how American policies -- and American money -- can be terribly misguided and misspent, check out Farah Stockman's piece in the Globe from a couple days ago about Afghanistan's wariness to accept more U.S. 'advisors.'

The humor (if you can call it that) behind the story is that we are very quick to label the Karzai government, or virtually any government in that part of the world, as being corrupt institutions where bribery and cronyism carry the day.

At the same time, however, we dictate that the hiring of certain 'advisory' civilian positions to the Afghan government go to self-important, highly-educated but often practically useless Americans with high-level connections to the U.S. Government (i.e. our cronies). If you can believe it, the entire costs of these contracts can be as high as half a million dollars annually. The individual receives a fraction of that, and a sponsor company receives the rest, but as you can imagine, that's a huge cost of the war.

And here's why the Afghans are justifiably upset -- for a tiny, tiny fraction of the cost of those contracts, they could hire real talent from neighboring countries like India, get someone who can speak the language competetently and is able to move about the country. In many cases, the 'advisers' being sent now are stuck inside their compounds and haven't the slightest clue as to the culture, language, or customs of the people they were sent to go 'help.' Sometimes through no fault of their own (as in the case of the geologist mentioned in the piece) they're relegated to 'useless' status by their Afghan counterpart.

And sometimes the fault is theirs.

I worked with a Marine Major who was part of a PTT (Police Transition Team). He and his guys -- most very junior personnel who only made peanuts, even in a war zone in western Iraq -- were outside the wire every single day, training, traveling, sweating, and bleeding alongside their Iraqi counterparts.

Also at their FOB (Forward Operating Base) were a group of chiseled and tanned police officers from back in the states who were sent on a very lucrative contract (they were each making $250k, and that's after whatever fees their company took from Uncle Sam) and essentially did nothing. Literally, these guys watched movies and lifted weights all day for that money. There was no chain of command to get them to work, and no enforcement mechanism anywhere in sight...very different, of course, than the case would be if one of the Major's Lance Corporals decided to just 'phone it in' and stay in the rack all day.

I know that the idea of government waste is nothing new.

And I know that a military person impugning the work ethic of civilians is nothing new.

But if we're making an open-ended, long-term commitment to the people and nation of Afghanistan, it might be wise to consider their thoughts and inputs on the situation.

And if they're saying they want a little more say in the hiring of civilian advisers, or maybe if they're just offering us a few hiring pointers along the way, we might be wise to listen.

Two Holidays For the Price of One?

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:33:00 +0000

I know there's a strong movement afoot to make Veterans Day a 'true' national holiday; that is to say, to move it out of its middle ground status and place it on par with Memorial Day, Labor Day, or New Year's Day.

Democracy advocates have also been saying for years that we should make our election days national holidays. This, they say, would greatly increase voter participation rates and better-enfranchise many whose long hours and/or long commutes pose real obstacles to voting.

Since the two fall so close to one another already, why not follow through by elevating the status of Veterans Day and making it the same day that we vote?

I don't know what all the barriers here would be, but I thought it at least merited a mention.

A few Google searches before I made this entry showed me that plenty of others have wondered aloud about this, too.

Quitters and Winners

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:05:00 +0000

Any kid growing up in America who participated in anything from T-Ball to youth hockey or even just watched an 80s movie with a dramatic training montage has heard the old saw about how "winners never quit and quitters never win" or some variant thereof.

But is that really true?

Conversations with two good friends about their recent life decisions (one recently left his full-time job to pursue his dream of writing full-time, and the other is contemplating a career change of his own), coupled with recent decisions of mine to drop a martial arts class and leave another group led to some stimulating discussions about when it might be appropriate to quit something.

One thing we all agreed on, by the way, is that the hackneyed sitcom-morality-tale tripe about how it's NEVER okay to quit something is pretty bass ackwards, and ultimately serves no one. Whether it's major issues of foreign policy, really serious things like interpersonal relationships, or even just one l'il yellow belt's decision to throw in the white jumpsuit, so to speak, there has to be a time when a smart, adaptive person decides to stop banging his or her head against a wall.

Here are four points that are germane to the discussion, in no particular order:

(1) Even though the thing in question may not be going well, is it providing some useful second- or third-order benefit? The obvious case here would be a job. Even though you may hate yours, quitting might be a terrible idea because the pain of foregoing that income may outweigh the pain incurred by said employment. Of course, if you have six months' worth of *emergency money* in the till and the confidence behind a transition, that could be your ticket out.

There might be other cases where this would apply, too. You may not enjoy your Monday afternoon golf game, but if there's some contact you're making by playing, or some future benefit you think you'll derive from staying current in the sport, it might not be time to go just yet.

(2) Even though the thing in question may not be going well, is there some clear light at the end of the tunnel? To me, the obvious thing that comes to mind here is a graduate degree program. Even if you absolutely hate it, and you can't stand the costs and the foregone income, unless we're talking Ph.D. or M.D., you're at most a couple years away from being done. The degree is the clear *reward* for the current pain and suffering. Obviously, the *light* factor would not apply for something like a steady 9-to-5, or a relationship, in which there's no end date in sight or easy ticket out.

Still, if a friend was halfway towards his MBA, and told me he was thinking about quitting, I'd tell him that I think he's nuts. I might even have to bust out an old Dr. Jason Seaver teaching moment from "Growing Pains" where Mike or Carol learns the value of perseverance through adversity.

(3) Is there a commitment to others? This is probably the trickiest one to figure out, and I think if anything, people are overly likely to tip themselves into thinking there's a commitment when there might not be. Still, what's clear is clear. If you agreed to be the President of the Taunton River Valley Knitting Society for a two-year clip, and you quit after three months without an idea of who's ready to replace you, there is some type of ethical breach to consider. Ditto for anything where there's a clear delineation time/duties/duration, like coaching a youth sports team.

(4) If it's time to go, it's chest out and chin up, not tail between the legs. I know this last point kind of differs from the other three, but I think it bears mention. Many times, because people feel ashamed, or because they overestimate or otherwise misunderstand Question #3, they slink away into run and hide mode. A WAY more honorable ticket out of something is to communicate what you're doing, and why you're doing it, to whoever you report to, or meet with, at said activity. Whether that's two weeks' notice at your job, or it's telling your co-knitters why you can't lead them anymore, there's honor in doing that. However, it's hard to respect someone who goes "RF cold," "radio silent," or just plain MIA without having the cojones to say why, or at least let someone know they haven't fallen off a cliff somewhere.

Bottom Line to all this (just because I know there's a Col. reading who loves that expression) is that yes, sometimes it really is okay to quit.

It should be contemplated, discussed in the open, and certainly slept on, so as not to come across as something impulsive that will later give way to Quitter's Remorse.

And if it's done right, with respect to Conditions 1-4, sometimes quitters really do win, and the losers are the people who stick with sinking ships and the time/energy vampires around them out of a misplaced fear of letting go of a sunk cost or an imaginary fear of disappointing someone else.

Why They Invented YouTube..

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 02:59:00 +0000

Anyone who has ever played football, whether in their backyard, a park, or on a team where there were pads, helmets, and referees, or anyone who has ever WATCHED football -- in person or on TV -- will appreciate the amazing athleticism displayed by Cal's Jahvid Best and the scariness of the injury that followed. Check it out, you won't be disappointed.

Massacre Thoughts, Redux

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 22:03:00 +0000

I read the news today (oh boy?) about the Orlando, FL massacre, which seems to have involved a disgruntled employee killing one person and injuring at least five others.

Of course, I felt a stronger connection to what happened yesterday near Killeen, TX, but any death from an armed lunatic is equally tragic.

And equally unjustified.

Fort Hood Tragedy

noreply@blogger.com (The New Englander) — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 23:04:00 +0000

I just read the news about the shooting incident at Fort Hood, TX.

My thoughts and prayers are with these victims, their families, and their units.