What: Lowell Downtown Neighborhood Organization and Jackson-Appleton-Middlesex Business and Resident Association co-sponsored City Council Candidate Forum
When: Monday, 26 OCT (Meet and Greet starts at 6:30 p.m., event starts 7:00 p.m.)
Where: Lowell Senior Center, 276 Broadway
Who: All incumbents and challengers have been invited
Why: Because it's interactive. You can submit questions ahead of time to info(at)jambra.org, ldna01852(at)yahoo.com, or info(at)greaterlowellchamber.org.
Candidates will have two minutes to give a prepared statement and then three minutes for responses to questions. Hope to see you there!
Monday, October 19, 2009
Friday, October 16, 2009
If 'Dumbassery' Is a Chargeable Offense..
I learned more than I ever wanted to know about the Heene family (now infamous for the Balloon Boy incident) last night while waiting through a knee MRI at Lowell General (not my own, as TV watching would've been hard to pull off). The TV was on CNN, there was no clicker in sight, and the Balloon Boy story seemed to be in a continuous news loop, before its 24-hours-and-out expiration date.
Now, I must confess, I just wrapped up my work for the day and curiosity got the best of me -- I went over to YouTube and watched the Heene brothers' rap video, which was clearly written, orchestrated, and put together by an adult (the father) for pretty exploitative purposes. Besides not being able to understand 90% of what the kids were saying, all I was able to conclude is that I'm now 3.5 minutes older and maybe an IQ point or two dumber.
The big controversy now is whether the mother and father should be charged with purporting a hoax, but that's going to be difficult to prove either way. So be it.
What I wonder, though, is whether there could be some type of child endangerment charge -- after all, if the 'flying saucer' was left in the backyard in a way that left it open to the possibility of use by one of these three rambunctious boys, shouldn't someone have foreseen this possibility?
Hoax or not, it just seems hard for me to believe that the mad scientist father didn't see the possibility of this happening.
Now, I must confess, I just wrapped up my work for the day and curiosity got the best of me -- I went over to YouTube and watched the Heene brothers' rap video, which was clearly written, orchestrated, and put together by an adult (the father) for pretty exploitative purposes. Besides not being able to understand 90% of what the kids were saying, all I was able to conclude is that I'm now 3.5 minutes older and maybe an IQ point or two dumber.
The big controversy now is whether the mother and father should be charged with purporting a hoax, but that's going to be difficult to prove either way. So be it.
What I wonder, though, is whether there could be some type of child endangerment charge -- after all, if the 'flying saucer' was left in the backyard in a way that left it open to the possibility of use by one of these three rambunctious boys, shouldn't someone have foreseen this possibility?
Hoax or not, it just seems hard for me to believe that the mad scientist father didn't see the possibility of this happening.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Dharma Buns -- Open for Business
I just got back from Dharma Buns on Market Street. It's pretty much what you'd expect from a sandwich shop, so I wouldn't say I'm overwhelmed or underwhelmed (maybe I'm just whelmed?)
Here are three nice features, though -- they've got free Wi-Fi, they've got a great beer selection, and they've got extended hours (open from 11 to 11, except for Thursdays, when they're open until 1 a.m, and Fri/Sat, when they're open until 2 a.m.) Like too many other downtown businesses, they're closed on Sunday.
Here are three nice features, though -- they've got free Wi-Fi, they've got a great beer selection, and they've got extended hours (open from 11 to 11, except for Thursdays, when they're open until 1 a.m, and Fri/Sat, when they're open until 2 a.m.) Like too many other downtown businesses, they're closed on Sunday.
Sometimes You're the Windshield...
...And sometimes you're the bug.
Straight from AR 670-1:
Authorization to wear a shoulder sleeve insignia indicating former wartime service applies only to soldiers who are assigned to U.S. Army units that meet all the following criteria. Soldiers who were prior members of other Services that participated in operations that would otherwise meet the criteria below are not authorized to wear the SSI–FWTS. Wear is reserved for individuals who were members of U.S. Army units during the operations.
To 99% of the population, this means nothing, but the naked right sleeve on the ACU is an instant credibility hit for the wearer. I came across many different answers to this question via Google searches and looking at Internet forums, but this seems pretty durned straightforward. No one cares whether you rate a Combat Action Ribbon, how many Campaign Medals you have, whether you heard real IEDs with your own two ears, or saw mortars come in with your own two eyes, or heard AK-47s fired in anger -- if you weren't in the Army, you don't rate the patch.
Just remind me not to get too cagey when someone pats me on the head and says, "Don't worry, you'll understand once you see the elephant."
Straight from AR 670-1:
Authorization to wear a shoulder sleeve insignia indicating former wartime service applies only to soldiers who are assigned to U.S. Army units that meet all the following criteria. Soldiers who were prior members of other Services that participated in operations that would otherwise meet the criteria below are not authorized to wear the SSI–FWTS. Wear is reserved for individuals who were members of U.S. Army units during the operations.
To 99% of the population, this means nothing, but the naked right sleeve on the ACU is an instant credibility hit for the wearer. I came across many different answers to this question via Google searches and looking at Internet forums, but this seems pretty durned straightforward. No one cares whether you rate a Combat Action Ribbon, how many Campaign Medals you have, whether you heard real IEDs with your own two ears, or saw mortars come in with your own two eyes, or heard AK-47s fired in anger -- if you weren't in the Army, you don't rate the patch.
Just remind me not to get too cagey when someone pats me on the head and says, "Don't worry, you'll understand once you see the elephant."
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Please Bring Me Whatever Mr. Papelbon's Having!
"I have a tendency to wear my mind on my sleeve / I have a history of taking off my shirt." -Stephen Page, BNL
I heard someone describing Jonathan Papelbon's response to his outing against the Angels on Sunday by repeatedly saying how Papelbon "just sat there, motionless and speechless" for two hours -- TWO HOURS! -- after his blown save in Game 3. Of course, Mr. Papelbon had good reason to be upset -- he was up 0-2 with two outs and no one on before five straight Angels (three of whom were a strike away from sending the series to Game 4) reached base.
I couldn't tell whether the person describing the reliever's response was critical, favorable, or just neutral towards Mr. CincoOcho, but here's what I think: That's awesome. It's all too rare in the Bigs these days, but when it happens, I appreciate it.
The entire reason that college sports are often more fun to watch than the pros is that the players actually care, and you can actually see it in their faces. This is particularly so in college football, where any one loss can be devastating for a title contender.
Apparently, the professionals used to be this way before the days of free-agency and sky-high contracts. I've heard Kevin McHale make this point a few times in interviews..."We used to HATE the Pistons. We used to HATE the Lakers...now, everyone has the same agent, they all shake hands, they're all rich, it's different." Either way, times have changed to the point that some players can't even hustle up the court for an October or November regular-season NBA game anymore.
Where there are exceptions, however, there's fun to be had in watching certain players -- point guards who pump their fist when a teammate scores, baserunners whose uniforms always end up dirty, and yes, even quarterbacks who visibly show displeasure after dropped passes in the end zone. Not only is this type of stuff okay by me, I'd say that's what makes following a team *worth it* -- the knowledge that the people you're taking time out for care, too.
So even though I'm not a huge Major League Baseball fan (I might watch if it's the World Series, but it depends), I'll always smile when I see the picture of #58 jumping for joy with Jason Varitek in 2007 (prominently displayed in the Cafe Aiello mens' room, for instance). And if the same guy takes an equally-sized roller-coaster ride in the other direction after a loss in which he frankly blew it, I'm all for it.
As I like to say, show me a man and a woman fighting and I'll show you two people who love each other. Show me a couple that claims to have never gotten heated with one another, and I'll show you a sham.
Show me someone who rides up for the highs and down with lows of their job, and I'll show you someone I'd want to hire if I were starting a company. Show me someone who just talks about how much of an unflappable Cool Guy he is, and I'll show you someone who probably just doesn't give a rip...believe me, I've even see this Cool Guy archetype sit back and make fun of the others who actually work because they can't handle stress. (Funny how easy that is to say with your feet on the desk and coffee mug in hand, isn't it?)
Show me a pro athlete who celebrates by jumping higher and smiling wider than a Little Leaguer on his way to Williamsport, and I'll show you someone I'll make that extra effort to follow. But for a guy who never gets off the bench during a brawl, and never takes a tough loss personally, well, that just doesn't sound worth it for me.
So to return to the title, find me whatver Jonathan Papelbon puts in his Kool-Aid, and serve me a stiff one, please. Somewhere, someone in the corner may be rolling his eyes, but in my mental accounting, that person just doesn't matter.
Because I keep finding that when it's time to roll up the sleeves and get down to the hard work, I can never find that guy anyway.
I heard someone describing Jonathan Papelbon's response to his outing against the Angels on Sunday by repeatedly saying how Papelbon "just sat there, motionless and speechless" for two hours -- TWO HOURS! -- after his blown save in Game 3. Of course, Mr. Papelbon had good reason to be upset -- he was up 0-2 with two outs and no one on before five straight Angels (three of whom were a strike away from sending the series to Game 4) reached base.
I couldn't tell whether the person describing the reliever's response was critical, favorable, or just neutral towards Mr. CincoOcho, but here's what I think: That's awesome. It's all too rare in the Bigs these days, but when it happens, I appreciate it.
The entire reason that college sports are often more fun to watch than the pros is that the players actually care, and you can actually see it in their faces. This is particularly so in college football, where any one loss can be devastating for a title contender.
Apparently, the professionals used to be this way before the days of free-agency and sky-high contracts. I've heard Kevin McHale make this point a few times in interviews..."We used to HATE the Pistons. We used to HATE the Lakers...now, everyone has the same agent, they all shake hands, they're all rich, it's different." Either way, times have changed to the point that some players can't even hustle up the court for an October or November regular-season NBA game anymore.
Where there are exceptions, however, there's fun to be had in watching certain players -- point guards who pump their fist when a teammate scores, baserunners whose uniforms always end up dirty, and yes, even quarterbacks who visibly show displeasure after dropped passes in the end zone. Not only is this type of stuff okay by me, I'd say that's what makes following a team *worth it* -- the knowledge that the people you're taking time out for care, too.
So even though I'm not a huge Major League Baseball fan (I might watch if it's the World Series, but it depends), I'll always smile when I see the picture of #58 jumping for joy with Jason Varitek in 2007 (prominently displayed in the Cafe Aiello mens' room, for instance). And if the same guy takes an equally-sized roller-coaster ride in the other direction after a loss in which he frankly blew it, I'm all for it.
As I like to say, show me a man and a woman fighting and I'll show you two people who love each other. Show me a couple that claims to have never gotten heated with one another, and I'll show you a sham.
Show me someone who rides up for the highs and down with lows of their job, and I'll show you someone I'd want to hire if I were starting a company. Show me someone who just talks about how much of an unflappable Cool Guy he is, and I'll show you someone who probably just doesn't give a rip...believe me, I've even see this Cool Guy archetype sit back and make fun of the others who actually work because they can't handle stress. (Funny how easy that is to say with your feet on the desk and coffee mug in hand, isn't it?)
Show me a pro athlete who celebrates by jumping higher and smiling wider than a Little Leaguer on his way to Williamsport, and I'll show you someone I'll make that extra effort to follow. But for a guy who never gets off the bench during a brawl, and never takes a tough loss personally, well, that just doesn't sound worth it for me.
So to return to the title, find me whatver Jonathan Papelbon puts in his Kool-Aid, and serve me a stiff one, please. Somewhere, someone in the corner may be rolling his eyes, but in my mental accounting, that person just doesn't matter.
Because I keep finding that when it's time to roll up the sleeves and get down to the hard work, I can never find that guy anyway.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Aggies and Their Time
I caught a clip on the TV news tonight at the Y about a group of Texas A & M students who have gone around making a hobby of videotaping stunt basketball shots; recently, what they're calling the "longest basketball shot ever" was performed and filmed by these guys at the stadium in College Station.
The clip below is actually not of the longest shot ever, but it's of a bunch of their highlights that were also shown tonight on the TV news. Inevitably, the anchor wrapped up the piece tonight on these guys with the dismissive, groan- and eyeroll-inducing "they must have too much time on their hands" line.
To me, the "Too Much Time" knee-jerker ranks somewhere up there with the "that guy's on a power trip" said reflexively any time anyone gets pulled over, told 'no,' or even shushed at a movie theater by another patron. If it's really a power trip, okay, but I think that line tends to get said too often with little thought or justification.
Ditto for the "too much time on their/his/her hands." What a quick and easy way to totally dismiss anything creative, interesting, or original that people come up with. The funny thing is, the shots you see in this video may not have required all that many takes, they may have all been done on vacation time, or on "billable time" if these guys were working as camp counselors when this was done. For all any of us know, these guys might all be 3.8 premeds with Biochem majors. Regardless, I'm sure you've heard someone say this about someone else's creative endeavor or hobby within your recent memory.
And in comes the double-barreled irony:
(1) First, because the speaker no doubt considers him or herself "open-minded" and "non-judgemental," but by saying that is anything but.
One of the big lies we've concocted for ourselves in modern society is that we're these extremely open-minded, non-judgemental, tolerant types. That may be the case compared to some other era, or some other society, but each of us is constantly making judgement calls about the world around us. The person who quickly dismisses someone else's artwork or form of expression as a waste of time, or instantly assumes the way someone else spends an afternoon proof of someone's having "too much time" would probably never be gauche enough to say something politically incorrect at a cocktail party, or to confuse, say, "Asian" with "Oriental." Judgement calls about groups you don't understand are totally not okay, but judgement calls about people you don't know are somehow totally within bounds. Who wrote that rule?
(2) Second, because the speaker's glibness doesn't leave room for introspection.
The clip below is actually not of the longest shot ever, but it's of a bunch of their highlights that were also shown tonight on the TV news. Inevitably, the anchor wrapped up the piece tonight on these guys with the dismissive, groan- and eyeroll-inducing "they must have too much time on their hands" line.
To me, the "Too Much Time" knee-jerker ranks somewhere up there with the "that guy's on a power trip" said reflexively any time anyone gets pulled over, told 'no,' or even shushed at a movie theater by another patron. If it's really a power trip, okay, but I think that line tends to get said too often with little thought or justification.
Ditto for the "too much time on their/his/her hands." What a quick and easy way to totally dismiss anything creative, interesting, or original that people come up with. The funny thing is, the shots you see in this video may not have required all that many takes, they may have all been done on vacation time, or on "billable time" if these guys were working as camp counselors when this was done. For all any of us know, these guys might all be 3.8 premeds with Biochem majors. Regardless, I'm sure you've heard someone say this about someone else's creative endeavor or hobby within your recent memory.
And in comes the double-barreled irony:
(1) First, because the speaker no doubt considers him or herself "open-minded" and "non-judgemental," but by saying that is anything but.
One of the big lies we've concocted for ourselves in modern society is that we're these extremely open-minded, non-judgemental, tolerant types. That may be the case compared to some other era, or some other society, but each of us is constantly making judgement calls about the world around us. The person who quickly dismisses someone else's artwork or form of expression as a waste of time, or instantly assumes the way someone else spends an afternoon proof of someone's having "too much time" would probably never be gauche enough to say something politically incorrect at a cocktail party, or to confuse, say, "Asian" with "Oriental." Judgement calls about groups you don't understand are totally not okay, but judgement calls about people you don't know are somehow totally within bounds. Who wrote that rule?
(2) Second, because the speaker's glibness doesn't leave room for introspection.
Perhaps the speaker spends his or her free weekend days playing golf, flying kites at the beach, or maybe at home on the couch watching the Maury Povich "You are NOT the father!" holiday marathon. As far as I'm concerned, any and all of those uses of time are quite okay...because frankly, it's none of my damned business.
The point is that we all have hobbies. Whatever yours may be -- bodybuilding, classical piano, figure skating, Bobblehead doll collecting, or professional sports watching -- I don't think I have the right to call it a "waste" or to assume that otherwise hard-working professionals or college students have "too much" of it.
Now, I'll anticipate the first-order response to a post like this -- Why can't you just let it go, the speaker is obviously just speaking tongue-in-cheek, much like someone who says "Don't quit your day job!" every time he hears a person sing?
'Not so fast,' I would say back. The problem there is someone wanting to have it both ways...having their cake and eating it too (or vice versa if that makes more sense to you). In other words, I think it's a lame defense to make reflexively snide comments, or to snipe at something someone does, and then duck back behind the "I was just KIDDING!" defense upon being called on the carpet for it.
But as the Great Ranter Dennis Miller likes to say, "...And that's just my opinion, I could be wrong."
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Mrs. Coakley, Say It Ain't So
I want to give Martha Coakley the benefit of the doubt on this. I am hoping that somehow she was speaking in jest, or didn't really mean it, or thinks she was misquoted, or something...or anything but this. I wasn't leaning too strongly in either direction in regards to the U.S. Senate election here in Massachusetts, but if Martha Coakley *really* meant this, I know which way my vote WON'T be going (Scot Lehigh in italics, Coakley in bold).
Now wait, I interject, isn’t the real reason she’s running that, just like everyone else in this race, she’s ambitious and wants to be a US senator, and not because of concerns about the quality of leadership in Washington?
“You know, that is a male approach to this thing,’’ the attorney general replies. “Men will play to fight and win. My experience is women get into causes and things they care about, that they want to make a difference.’’
As I've written many times here before, and will many times again, I cheer every time there's a significant *first* milestone in politics, professional sports coaching, business leadership, or anywhere else, for two equally important reasons: first, because in a fair society everyone should have a chance to be anything; and second, because every time there's a major *first* it means the *second* will have less to do with identity and more to do with merit.
However, one thing I'm NEVER going to buy into is the narrative line in certain circles that certain groups are inherently better than others, which is basically what it sounds like Mrs. Coakley is saying here.
HT goes, of all places, to the Sun's Column today, which was the first I had heard about this quote that I since went and looked up online.
Now wait, I interject, isn’t the real reason she’s running that, just like everyone else in this race, she’s ambitious and wants to be a US senator, and not because of concerns about the quality of leadership in Washington?
“You know, that is a male approach to this thing,’’ the attorney general replies. “Men will play to fight and win. My experience is women get into causes and things they care about, that they want to make a difference.’’
As I've written many times here before, and will many times again, I cheer every time there's a significant *first* milestone in politics, professional sports coaching, business leadership, or anywhere else, for two equally important reasons: first, because in a fair society everyone should have a chance to be anything; and second, because every time there's a major *first* it means the *second* will have less to do with identity and more to do with merit.
However, one thing I'm NEVER going to buy into is the narrative line in certain circles that certain groups are inherently better than others, which is basically what it sounds like Mrs. Coakley is saying here.
HT goes, of all places, to the Sun's Column today, which was the first I had heard about this quote that I since went and looked up online.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)