Last year I used a weed and feed on our lawn. The bag read, "Kills More than 200 Different Weeds." I may have mentioned then that I think I found 5 or 6 that it didn't kill. So this year I tried a different brand. Both were national brands and this year's switch didn't turn out any better. Oh, they both were OK on dandelions, but only OK. I still had to dig out half a dozen yellows yesterday. The grass itself, though, is green and looks nice--if we ignore the weeds. I wonder if those companies like Tru-Green work any better. Hmmm...... Maybe it's time to try.
And I finally was able to get most, not all but most, of the backyard mowed this AM. Michael does the front yard. (Is "backyard" one word and "front yard" two words?") There are still some patches that are a bit too swampy to get mowed/mown. I slopped through some areas, too. But it was so tall, well over ankle-length in most places and thick. It's supposed to rain, heavy rain, tonight and tomorrow into Mon AM. So I figured it was today or...or when?
I know it sounds crazy, but I enjoy mowing, usually. It's like winter snow shoveling for me. I get to be outside. I get to do something physical. And I like what I see when I am done. Ask me if I still enjoy it when the temperatures reach the 80s and 90s! Heh Heh.
Sometimes those old white males have things to teach us. Plato once wrote, "Wise men speak because they have something to say, fools because they have to say something." I think I have spoken to/written about that several times in a slightly different context. I was reminded of Plato a while ago when someone asked me, "What are you going to do?" in the face of a situation. I said, "Nothing." "How can you do nothing?" I was asked with some incredulity. I replied, "What should I do? Tell me." This time I was met with silence. Right. I could think of nothing to do to alleviate the situation, so I opted to do nothing. So far, doing nothing is working. During the Obamacare debacle in Congress, I remember the Wall Street Journal advising Congress, "Don't do something, just stand there." It was a great take-off of "Don't just stand there, do something."
Very few people I know like to engage in conversations like the following. OK, I do have some friends (Yes, I know that surprises a lot of people, but the emphasis is on some.) Are kindness and greatness two very different qualities? That is, would you put your life or the life of a loved one in the hands of a doctor who is a cruel person? Would you assent to having a man like Picasso, hardly a candidate for sainthood, be your king? These are some of the questions I am taking away from my re-readings of Chaim Potok's Asher Lev novels. Maybe I'm flighty, but I think they are questions well worth pondering and discussing. I think I will next week on some of my runs.
In the same vein, to extrapolate those types of ideas to reality--that is, to make them relevant (and doesn't everything we learn have to be relevant or at least on the state tests?)--does character matter? Do we or should we separate behavior from accomplishments? In studying and teaching history, I am confronted with this frequently. Let me take two recent examples: John Kennedy and Bill Clinton (perhaps two men cut from the same mold--or mould!). I happen to think that character does matter, that it should be counted in evaluations. Perhaps, though, I am old-fashioned. I guess I am willing to concede that.
How frustrating it is to see efforts, if not in vain, at least in danger of being in vain. Trying to teach right from wrong is not always easy. There are so many forces out there getting in the way. But, still, working to demonstrate, to teach, etc. what is good and what is not good and then seeing the tottering of that...... I know each person is individually responsible for such determinations and then must also be held accountable (although many people are not held accountable) for subsequent actions based on those determinations. But sometimes, when we are wavering or others are wavering with what we've tried to teach, it's not pleasant. Do we then question our own values and principles? Maybe.
I'm not one at all upset that Obama has given a Wall Street speech in return for $400,000. More power to him! I wish someone would give me $4,000 for a speech! If he can get $500,000, go get it I say. My only hang-up is what he says and what he does are two different things. But perhaps we can't all be consistent all of the time. Perhaps......
Saturday, April 29, 2017
Wednesday, April 26, 2017
Wednesday Mind Wanderings
The other day, a couple of miles down the road, I was startled during my run by a herd of 11 or 12 deer. (Why is the plural of deer deer, not deers? The plural of bear isn't bear, but bears, of dog not dog, but dogs, etc.) I've seen large herds of them around here before, namely a dozen or so swimming across the Huron River in a nearby park, oh, about 20 or more years ago. But I haven't seen that many so close to home, not in a pack. We've had a half dozen or so romp in the backyard or between houses, but...... For this city-slicker, the herd was pretty cool to see.
I've really enjoyed the Chaim Potok novels I've been re-reading. I didn't remember much of My Name Is Asher Lev, but recalled some of The Chosen and The Promise. But The Gift of Asher Lev, yes a sequel, doesn't seem to ring any bells for me. Still, I'm learning a lot, being entertained, and challenged to do some thinking. What else can one ask from a well-written novel?
I got a bit of a chuckle out of some newspapers' grousing about Supreme Gorsuch and his siding with the other four conservative justices in the recent challenge to a scheduled Arkansas execution. First and foremost, I have no sympathy for the two men who were executed, none at all. Nobody asked them to murder other people. Perhaps a bit of a contradiction, although I still waver (or is it "waiver?") sometimes, I think I oppose the death penalty. I know there are a lot of scumballs who likely deserve to be executed. But I have some problems. Namely, I don't like giving the state power over life and death, power to kill people. The state (meaning government) has far too much power over our lives now. This is the ultimate power, isn't it? And how many innocent folks have been executed over the years, that we know of? How many have been executed on the basis of eyewitness testimony, which we know is hardly 100% reliable? Courts and juries don't always get it right. If anything, is there a way to determine a test of "strength of evidence" to perhaps come closer to ensuring we aren't executing innocent people? I don't know. Perhaps I'm naive in this, but isn't there still a possibility that a person can turn around his/her life, if even still in prison? Don't we have to afford the opportunities to repent? Otherwise, where is the end of the cycle of hate, revenge, and suffering? Also, and this is the second point, why this outcry (from three different national media sources who support abortion) for the lives of convicted murders (see my views above), yet not a peep to save the lives of unborn babies? The murderers have committed heinous crimes; the babies haven't done anything wrong. To add, Gorsuch's vote did nothing but uphold Arkansas state law, which has never been ruled unconstitutional nor, except in "special circumstances," have any state laws regarding capital punishment. Perhaps I missed one or two, but I don't think so. Again, I repeat, I think I oppose the death penalty, but still...... And had Gorsuch not been confirmed, the 4-4 vote of the Supremes would have resulted in the decision of the next highest court as the ruling--and it upheld the executions. Too, Arkansas law holds that if a convict is to be executed, but lethal injection is not available (as in the lethal drugs having expired, no pun intended), the "dead men walking" get the electric chair.
This game of lacrosse is sometimes puzzling. Michael is playing it for the first time, on the high school JV team. I'm often puzzled by the rules. Why does a team that shoots the ball at the goal only to have it leave the field of play get to retain possession, while a team that passes the ball out of bounds loses it? Why can a defender club an offensive player with his stick only if his hands are together, but is penalized if his hands are apart? As least that is what I've gathered from calls by the officials after a few weeks. Is it that there's less leverage/force if the hands are together? I'm still trying to figure out the call that looks like "traveling" in basketball, but haven't yet. But I'm learning, I hope. And the kids seem to really enjoy playing the game. Michael's other grandparents were at the last game and wondered if this is a relatively "new game." No, I noted. The Indians were playing this game, or a version of it called "baggataway," hundreds of years ago. In fact, they used it as a ploy to take the British fort at Mackinac in 1763.
Speaking of sports, baseball remains a funny, funny game. That's not "ha-ha" funny, but peculiar. Last week Miguel Cabrera, who started the season very slowly, but raised his BA about 200 points in a week and a half, hit four balls in a game right the button. I didn't see the game, but the last time up the radio announcers noted that "He's squared up all four balls, but doesn't have a thing to show for it." That is, he hammered four balls, but didn't get a hit. The next game, the baseball gods evened up things, well, as much as they do. (I don't believe that well hit balls that are caught are balanced by what we called "bleeders.") Miggy got three hits, a flair to left, a pop-up that managed to find the grass just between three charging fielders, and a seeing-eye bounder (not particularly well hit) up the middle. Funny game......
I'm still not sure many folks appreciate the important of good defensive play in the outfield. I think they certainly do on the infield, esp at shortstop. But in the outfield.....? Oh, the guys on the radio or boob tube will ooh and aah at the great catches, but I wonder if they realize more ordinary plays are often made "ordinary" by great defense or that many balls that fall and look like legitimate hits could be caught with some better defense. I'm not at all saying outfield defense is easy; it's not. There's a lot that goes into outstanding defensive play in the OF; it takes a lot of work. I'd guess most spectator don't realize that. I think that goes back to little league where the worst players get stuck in the outfield. That is eventually outgrown, but maybe in the backs of people's minds, that thought is still there: the worst. People probably can tell how many games, say, Al Kaline or Ken Griffey have won with their bats. I wonder how many can tell how many games they've won with their gloves. I don't know if they have or not, but had I been running the Tigers, Kaline would have been working with all of the outfielders on a consistent basis. Here's a tip: if a centerfielder rarely makes a great catch, either he's terrible or, more likely, he's great and makes hard catches look routine.
I've really enjoyed the Chaim Potok novels I've been re-reading. I didn't remember much of My Name Is Asher Lev, but recalled some of The Chosen and The Promise. But The Gift of Asher Lev, yes a sequel, doesn't seem to ring any bells for me. Still, I'm learning a lot, being entertained, and challenged to do some thinking. What else can one ask from a well-written novel?
I got a bit of a chuckle out of some newspapers' grousing about Supreme Gorsuch and his siding with the other four conservative justices in the recent challenge to a scheduled Arkansas execution. First and foremost, I have no sympathy for the two men who were executed, none at all. Nobody asked them to murder other people. Perhaps a bit of a contradiction, although I still waver (or is it "waiver?") sometimes, I think I oppose the death penalty. I know there are a lot of scumballs who likely deserve to be executed. But I have some problems. Namely, I don't like giving the state power over life and death, power to kill people. The state (meaning government) has far too much power over our lives now. This is the ultimate power, isn't it? And how many innocent folks have been executed over the years, that we know of? How many have been executed on the basis of eyewitness testimony, which we know is hardly 100% reliable? Courts and juries don't always get it right. If anything, is there a way to determine a test of "strength of evidence" to perhaps come closer to ensuring we aren't executing innocent people? I don't know. Perhaps I'm naive in this, but isn't there still a possibility that a person can turn around his/her life, if even still in prison? Don't we have to afford the opportunities to repent? Otherwise, where is the end of the cycle of hate, revenge, and suffering? Also, and this is the second point, why this outcry (from three different national media sources who support abortion) for the lives of convicted murders (see my views above), yet not a peep to save the lives of unborn babies? The murderers have committed heinous crimes; the babies haven't done anything wrong. To add, Gorsuch's vote did nothing but uphold Arkansas state law, which has never been ruled unconstitutional nor, except in "special circumstances," have any state laws regarding capital punishment. Perhaps I missed one or two, but I don't think so. Again, I repeat, I think I oppose the death penalty, but still...... And had Gorsuch not been confirmed, the 4-4 vote of the Supremes would have resulted in the decision of the next highest court as the ruling--and it upheld the executions. Too, Arkansas law holds that if a convict is to be executed, but lethal injection is not available (as in the lethal drugs having expired, no pun intended), the "dead men walking" get the electric chair.
This game of lacrosse is sometimes puzzling. Michael is playing it for the first time, on the high school JV team. I'm often puzzled by the rules. Why does a team that shoots the ball at the goal only to have it leave the field of play get to retain possession, while a team that passes the ball out of bounds loses it? Why can a defender club an offensive player with his stick only if his hands are together, but is penalized if his hands are apart? As least that is what I've gathered from calls by the officials after a few weeks. Is it that there's less leverage/force if the hands are together? I'm still trying to figure out the call that looks like "traveling" in basketball, but haven't yet. But I'm learning, I hope. And the kids seem to really enjoy playing the game. Michael's other grandparents were at the last game and wondered if this is a relatively "new game." No, I noted. The Indians were playing this game, or a version of it called "baggataway," hundreds of years ago. In fact, they used it as a ploy to take the British fort at Mackinac in 1763.
Speaking of sports, baseball remains a funny, funny game. That's not "ha-ha" funny, but peculiar. Last week Miguel Cabrera, who started the season very slowly, but raised his BA about 200 points in a week and a half, hit four balls in a game right the button. I didn't see the game, but the last time up the radio announcers noted that "He's squared up all four balls, but doesn't have a thing to show for it." That is, he hammered four balls, but didn't get a hit. The next game, the baseball gods evened up things, well, as much as they do. (I don't believe that well hit balls that are caught are balanced by what we called "bleeders.") Miggy got three hits, a flair to left, a pop-up that managed to find the grass just between three charging fielders, and a seeing-eye bounder (not particularly well hit) up the middle. Funny game......
I'm still not sure many folks appreciate the important of good defensive play in the outfield. I think they certainly do on the infield, esp at shortstop. But in the outfield.....? Oh, the guys on the radio or boob tube will ooh and aah at the great catches, but I wonder if they realize more ordinary plays are often made "ordinary" by great defense or that many balls that fall and look like legitimate hits could be caught with some better defense. I'm not at all saying outfield defense is easy; it's not. There's a lot that goes into outstanding defensive play in the OF; it takes a lot of work. I'd guess most spectator don't realize that. I think that goes back to little league where the worst players get stuck in the outfield. That is eventually outgrown, but maybe in the backs of people's minds, that thought is still there: the worst. People probably can tell how many games, say, Al Kaline or Ken Griffey have won with their bats. I wonder how many can tell how many games they've won with their gloves. I don't know if they have or not, but had I been running the Tigers, Kaline would have been working with all of the outfielders on a consistent basis. Here's a tip: if a centerfielder rarely makes a great catch, either he's terrible or, more likely, he's great and makes hard catches look routine.
Thursday, April 20, 2017
Funny Stuff
Looking out of the front window, it was just raining cats and dogs, really coming down. It still is, although now not quite as heavily. I can easily see the big raindrops on the large puddles on the street. Yet, here near the back of the house, it is barely sprinkling. It's raining, yes, but not as hard as out front. Why is that?
Watching the Tigers last night, I was struck by a couple of things. Last week I complained that so few players, at any levels, including the MLB, actually know how to bunt for a hit. No, I'm not talking about sacrifice bunting. Even with nobody on it seems, those very few who attempt to bunt square around. It can't be a sacrifice since nobody is on base. One would think this would be a great offensive weapon. There'd be an occasional hit. It would stymie the increasingly popular shifts. It would force infielders to move in several steps, opening the possibility of sneaking ground balls or line drives past the shallower infielders. Then, last night while watching with Michael, a Tampa Bay Devil Rays' player dropped a perfect bunt for a hit. Indeed, it could be deemed a sacrifice, since there was a runner on second. But the batter didn't square around; rather he bunted for a hit. And it was perfectly placed, although the element of surprise didn't require perfection. It was great to see. The only downside was the replay only showed the ball staying fair as the Tiger fielders let it roll to see if it would go foul. I wanted to see the guy's technique again; it was a thing of beauty.
The Tiger outfielders messed up two or three fly balls, too. It may have been losing the balls in the roof--an indoor stadium. But it sure looked like miscommunication between players. In the end, the poor outfield play, along with the continued lousy relief pitching, cost the Tigers a win.
BTW, Miguel Cabrera has found his stroke. He hit a rocket--a smoking line drive--451 feet the other night. Last night he had three hits. Today the announcer (I wasn't watching.) said he "hit four balls sharply with nothing to show for it." He sure is fun to watch.
I admit if I'd be surprised if I watched that O'Reilly guy's show on Fox three times, if that. I don't remember ever watching it. I have no idea if the women's complaints against him are valid. If they are, throw the book at him. Don't try to defend him, not at all. If he's the cad that is claimed, he deserves nothing but scorn. Why did he get the millions of dollars in a buyout? Make him sue to get it so all this sordid stuff can become public. This may or may not be a different thing ("Oh, that's different......"), but why does Dollar Bill Clinton still get hundreds of thousands of dollars for speeches? And, when he speaks, where are the women's groups who should be protesting? For that matter, why don't the women's groups protest Hillary Clinton for her aiding and abetting in trying to cover up her husband's escapades?
I'm back to reading books from 30 or so years ago. This one now is a sequel to My Name Is Asher Lev--The Gift of Asher Lev. I finished My Name a month or so ago and liked it as much as I remembered liking it. I even gave it, with high recommendations, to a friend to read. If I can recall that far back, I liked The Gift even more. This is the third Chaim Potok novel I've reread and I'm glad I have done so.
BTW, now it's raining equally hard front and back. Whew!
Watching the Tigers last night, I was struck by a couple of things. Last week I complained that so few players, at any levels, including the MLB, actually know how to bunt for a hit. No, I'm not talking about sacrifice bunting. Even with nobody on it seems, those very few who attempt to bunt square around. It can't be a sacrifice since nobody is on base. One would think this would be a great offensive weapon. There'd be an occasional hit. It would stymie the increasingly popular shifts. It would force infielders to move in several steps, opening the possibility of sneaking ground balls or line drives past the shallower infielders. Then, last night while watching with Michael, a Tampa Bay Devil Rays' player dropped a perfect bunt for a hit. Indeed, it could be deemed a sacrifice, since there was a runner on second. But the batter didn't square around; rather he bunted for a hit. And it was perfectly placed, although the element of surprise didn't require perfection. It was great to see. The only downside was the replay only showed the ball staying fair as the Tiger fielders let it roll to see if it would go foul. I wanted to see the guy's technique again; it was a thing of beauty.
The Tiger outfielders messed up two or three fly balls, too. It may have been losing the balls in the roof--an indoor stadium. But it sure looked like miscommunication between players. In the end, the poor outfield play, along with the continued lousy relief pitching, cost the Tigers a win.
BTW, Miguel Cabrera has found his stroke. He hit a rocket--a smoking line drive--451 feet the other night. Last night he had three hits. Today the announcer (I wasn't watching.) said he "hit four balls sharply with nothing to show for it." He sure is fun to watch.
I admit if I'd be surprised if I watched that O'Reilly guy's show on Fox three times, if that. I don't remember ever watching it. I have no idea if the women's complaints against him are valid. If they are, throw the book at him. Don't try to defend him, not at all. If he's the cad that is claimed, he deserves nothing but scorn. Why did he get the millions of dollars in a buyout? Make him sue to get it so all this sordid stuff can become public. This may or may not be a different thing ("Oh, that's different......"), but why does Dollar Bill Clinton still get hundreds of thousands of dollars for speeches? And, when he speaks, where are the women's groups who should be protesting? For that matter, why don't the women's groups protest Hillary Clinton for her aiding and abetting in trying to cover up her husband's escapades?
I'm back to reading books from 30 or so years ago. This one now is a sequel to My Name Is Asher Lev--The Gift of Asher Lev. I finished My Name a month or so ago and liked it as much as I remembered liking it. I even gave it, with high recommendations, to a friend to read. If I can recall that far back, I liked The Gift even more. This is the third Chaim Potok novel I've reread and I'm glad I have done so.
BTW, now it's raining equally hard front and back. Whew!
Wednesday, April 12, 2017
Delta and United and......
I am bemused and amused at the kerfuffle regarding the airlines over the past week. First, l'affaire United.
I really haven't followed this as closely as much of the rest of the nation apparently has, bur from what I've read.....
Why is there any sympathy for this guy who was hauled off the plane? OK, he was upset at having to give up his seat. He didn't want to take a later flight. The airline policy, like most corporate airline polices, was not endearing to consumers/customers. But the guy acted alike a jerk! He was belligerent and petulant, throwing a tantrum like a little kid. He refused to leave the plane. I'm sure the airline personnel on board were pleasant enough in trying to explain to him the reason(s). But, of course, like so many people today, to this guy it was all about him. He couldn't be inconvenienced. That hundreds of other people might be inconvenienced if the last-minute seating of the pilots and/or crew hadn't taken place is not important. His inconvenience is. And like a little kid, he forced the issue by requiring he be physically removed from the plane. I wonder, before he was carted off, if he stamped his feet and said, "No!" I hope he's put on a no-fly list......
That said, United doesn't get off Scot-free (Is that an ethnic slur? I don't know nowadays.) either. For a long time, airlines have overbooked. I don't know if this was such an instance or if it was the pilot/crew issue. Still, airlines overbook.
In the first place, why wasn't a bidding war started? Why didn't United offer, say, $500 for ceding a seat? OK, $500 doesn't work, try $600. Keep going up until people begin to bite. They will, eventually, and my guess it might be sooner than one would imagine.
I understand the overbooking. It's all about money. I'm not sure I've ever been on a flight when there weren't offers like this, to give up seats in return for money. OK, the airlines want to make money. But haven't they made record amounts of money in each of the past several years, esp since the price of fuel took a nosedive? They still need to overbook? What about customers?
And those who are "bumped" are not "bumped" on the basis of when they purchased their tickets. Nope. Those who paid more for their tickets, even if they bought them months after others did, are given seats.
Could the disregard for customers stem from the monopolistic/oligopolistic status of the industry? If so, aren't there regulations regarding that? If the free market has been curtailed, then......
Delta doesn't escape some criticism here, too. The storms in the Southeast last week played havoc with air schedules. But it seemed after a couple of days all of the airlines were pretty much back on track, well, all except Delta. And after last summer's computer debacle that threw Delta (or its consumers/customers) for a loop, one would think the corporate-types running the show would have learned a few lessons and have the company better prepared. One would think wrong(ly!). Karen's flight from Jacksonville, connecting to Columbus, was a horror of horrors. (Columbus, instead of Detroit because it was more than $500 cheaper!) She arrived home a day late, which might not have been too bad. But her luggage arrived her today, Wed. Sat to Wed for the luggage to be found and delivered.
Coincidentally, we were caught up in last August's mess, too, stranded at Detroit Metro for about eight hours--with all three kids! Our flight was delayed, delayed, and delayed again. First, there wasn't a pilot; then one arrived. Then there weren't enough crew members; by the time the crew was filled, the pilot had "timed out." When an off-duty crew member offered to work our flight, allowing our flight to take off only four hours late, he was rebuffed for some reason by his superiors--he tried at least! Three other regularly scheduled flights left on time--before ours! Instead of making us wait eight hours, why not bump and have just an hour or two (at most) of inconvenience for all of the customers? By the time we arrived in Las Vegas we had lost a whole day; landing left room for a meal for the kids and then bed time at the hotel. I must admit we did receive some "Sky Miles" for enduring the debacle, but I'd have preferred getting there on time.
Throughout, though, the personnel were very cordial, friendly, and understanding, in the face of some pretty hostile customers--esp when they discovered other Las Vegas flights were proceeding as scheduled while we waited and waited and waited. The only problem came when a supervisor arrived--who either refused to confront questions or didn't know the answers. Hey, he was a supervisor; shouldn't he know the answers?
Aren't their laws against "gouging?" Parking lots on opening day for the Tigers were gouging. Michael paid $40 for a parking spot in a lot that we normally pay $10. Of course, a slice of pizza runs more than $6 doesn't it, a single slice?!?!?!
Airline prices. Overbooking. Parking. Ball park eats. Once again the little guy seems to take hits.
I really haven't followed this as closely as much of the rest of the nation apparently has, bur from what I've read.....
Why is there any sympathy for this guy who was hauled off the plane? OK, he was upset at having to give up his seat. He didn't want to take a later flight. The airline policy, like most corporate airline polices, was not endearing to consumers/customers. But the guy acted alike a jerk! He was belligerent and petulant, throwing a tantrum like a little kid. He refused to leave the plane. I'm sure the airline personnel on board were pleasant enough in trying to explain to him the reason(s). But, of course, like so many people today, to this guy it was all about him. He couldn't be inconvenienced. That hundreds of other people might be inconvenienced if the last-minute seating of the pilots and/or crew hadn't taken place is not important. His inconvenience is. And like a little kid, he forced the issue by requiring he be physically removed from the plane. I wonder, before he was carted off, if he stamped his feet and said, "No!" I hope he's put on a no-fly list......
That said, United doesn't get off Scot-free (Is that an ethnic slur? I don't know nowadays.) either. For a long time, airlines have overbooked. I don't know if this was such an instance or if it was the pilot/crew issue. Still, airlines overbook.
In the first place, why wasn't a bidding war started? Why didn't United offer, say, $500 for ceding a seat? OK, $500 doesn't work, try $600. Keep going up until people begin to bite. They will, eventually, and my guess it might be sooner than one would imagine.
I understand the overbooking. It's all about money. I'm not sure I've ever been on a flight when there weren't offers like this, to give up seats in return for money. OK, the airlines want to make money. But haven't they made record amounts of money in each of the past several years, esp since the price of fuel took a nosedive? They still need to overbook? What about customers?
And those who are "bumped" are not "bumped" on the basis of when they purchased their tickets. Nope. Those who paid more for their tickets, even if they bought them months after others did, are given seats.
Could the disregard for customers stem from the monopolistic/oligopolistic status of the industry? If so, aren't there regulations regarding that? If the free market has been curtailed, then......
Delta doesn't escape some criticism here, too. The storms in the Southeast last week played havoc with air schedules. But it seemed after a couple of days all of the airlines were pretty much back on track, well, all except Delta. And after last summer's computer debacle that threw Delta (or its consumers/customers) for a loop, one would think the corporate-types running the show would have learned a few lessons and have the company better prepared. One would think wrong(ly!). Karen's flight from Jacksonville, connecting to Columbus, was a horror of horrors. (Columbus, instead of Detroit because it was more than $500 cheaper!) She arrived home a day late, which might not have been too bad. But her luggage arrived her today, Wed. Sat to Wed for the luggage to be found and delivered.
Coincidentally, we were caught up in last August's mess, too, stranded at Detroit Metro for about eight hours--with all three kids! Our flight was delayed, delayed, and delayed again. First, there wasn't a pilot; then one arrived. Then there weren't enough crew members; by the time the crew was filled, the pilot had "timed out." When an off-duty crew member offered to work our flight, allowing our flight to take off only four hours late, he was rebuffed for some reason by his superiors--he tried at least! Three other regularly scheduled flights left on time--before ours! Instead of making us wait eight hours, why not bump and have just an hour or two (at most) of inconvenience for all of the customers? By the time we arrived in Las Vegas we had lost a whole day; landing left room for a meal for the kids and then bed time at the hotel. I must admit we did receive some "Sky Miles" for enduring the debacle, but I'd have preferred getting there on time.
Throughout, though, the personnel were very cordial, friendly, and understanding, in the face of some pretty hostile customers--esp when they discovered other Las Vegas flights were proceeding as scheduled while we waited and waited and waited. The only problem came when a supervisor arrived--who either refused to confront questions or didn't know the answers. Hey, he was a supervisor; shouldn't he know the answers?
Aren't their laws against "gouging?" Parking lots on opening day for the Tigers were gouging. Michael paid $40 for a parking spot in a lot that we normally pay $10. Of course, a slice of pizza runs more than $6 doesn't it, a single slice?!?!?!
Airline prices. Overbooking. Parking. Ball park eats. Once again the little guy seems to take hits.
Friday, April 7, 2017
Friday Chuckles
After a couple of days earlier this week in the lower 60s, we had snow all day yesterday. Overnight, it kept snowing, about an inch of accumulation at daybreak. Tomorrow is slated to be in the mid-60s and Sun in the mid-70s. But today, opening day for the Tigers, it will still be cold, in the mid-40s with blustery wind. I know they have to get in their 162 games, with as few double headers as possible to make ever-more money, but have any of these schedulers played in this cold stuff? I suppose many of them have and money trumps all, but still. "Fond" is not a word I use to describe my memories of playing in the winter weather.
So, "50 advertisers have pulled their ads" from Fox News due to the alleged sexual harassment of Bill O'Reilly. (BTW, I was surprised to read it is the top-rated talk show on cable TV. I don't know if that's true; I can't remember ever watching it.) And some USA Today reporter "excoriated" a well-known professional golfer (I guess "well-known" to most folks; I never heard of him and can't recall his name--nor that of the reporter.) for golfing with Don Trump. It's his treatment of women or at least what he says about them, esp in light of the golfer's comments about country clubs that still exclude or minimize the number of women members. Yet, Bill Clinton still commands hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not more, for short speeches. So does his wife. And, speaking of treatment of women--and common folks in general...... I wonder how many of those "50 advertisers" have paid either of the Clintons for speeches or, at the least, have CEOs who have attended their speeches.
A newspaper article this AM covered an attempt by local school districts to attract young males into teaching. It plays into several serious conversations I've had recently with quite a variety of folks. I think the first step those seeking to draw more youngsters into teaching would be to check how much teachers are paid. If I recall correctly, a couple weeks ago one of these fellow conversants said the average starting pay for a teacher in Michigan is $33,000. I checked online and that's pretty close to the actual figure (2015). At the same time, I checked our local district, which remains (as it has historically) one of the lowest paying districts around, not just in our country. The median teacher income is about $51,000. And very few new teachers are being hired since it is claimed student enrollment is declining and declining significantly. It really rankled me to hear a teacher tell me of a colleague who tried to rationalize the low pay with the trite and ridiculous, "But teachers have a great pension." No wonder teaching/education is in the state it's in. As I've said to many others for quite a few years, "How about paying me what teachers are worth and I'll take care of my own 'pension.?'" Nah, nobody takes that seriously, apparently not even other teachers. Another one of these guys I talked to claimed the average teacher gets out of education within five years. Is that true? I don't know, but I have no reason to doubt it. Yet the CEOs of the top two US auto-makers made more than $22 million in '16. I'm not saying they do or don't deserve it; somebody obviously thinks so. Let's just consider the comparison.
The President and his team are trying to unseat some members of the House Freedom Caucus. I'm no fan of Trump, not in the least. He's done little to change my mind that he belongs nowhere near the Presidency. And this attempt to get even with the no-voters on the deeply flawed recent health care bill is not only appalling, but revealing. For instance, I am not sure I'd vote for Justin Amash, the Michigan Congressman. He's not in my district and, besides, he's carrying some baggage I find disturbing. But for the guy who claimed he was going to "drain the Swamp," going after Amash (and other Freedom Caucus members) for actually living up to campaign promises he (and they) made to their constituents--that is, not deliberately lying!--is pathetic. Isn't it interesting that Trump has said he's going after the Democrats who opposed the bill?
The IRS has been mildly harassing us about a tax problem, a minor one at that. Let's just say, you probably spend more at the grocery store in a week that the amount over which we are scuffling. I have already used the IRS's own data to refute half of the claim. It is still "investigating." C'mon! It's not like were talking about big bucks here. Like I said, it's about $100 or so. Yet, I wonder, why doesn't the IRS go after the really big buck guys? It can't find some problems with all credits, deductions, etc, the loopholes supposedly allow them? Even more, we have rec'd several "urgent" phone calls claiming the IRS has "prepared to file a lawsuit against" us. We've had that call a number of times over the years. I did a reverse phone number check and found out this is a company pulling a scam. (Sometimes, to attract return calls, it uses "lottery winnings," "insurance benefits," etc.) So, if I can easily discover this is a scam, why isn't the IRS all over these folks?????? As I've said many times before, there is something seriously wrong when citizens (namely, my wife) are intimidated and filled with terror by their own government--at least one of its agencies. Yes, I'm sure she'll pay the $128, likely when I'm not paying attention.
It reminds me when, during Prohibition, the federal gov't ordered mercury and strychnine to be added to liquids people were drinking for their alcohol content. Oh, the liquids are revolting and disgusting, things such as auto anti-freeze, rubbing alcohol, embalming fluid, and formaldehyde. Yet, to prevent US citizens from drinking their alcohol in this manner, poisons, lethal ones, were ordered added. An activity, that is drinking, that was legal just a year before, had been an accepted practice (in moderation) for centuries, and was legal in almost every other nation in the world now threatened the lives of US citizens. Perhaps I'm just paranoid.
So, "50 advertisers have pulled their ads" from Fox News due to the alleged sexual harassment of Bill O'Reilly. (BTW, I was surprised to read it is the top-rated talk show on cable TV. I don't know if that's true; I can't remember ever watching it.) And some USA Today reporter "excoriated" a well-known professional golfer (I guess "well-known" to most folks; I never heard of him and can't recall his name--nor that of the reporter.) for golfing with Don Trump. It's his treatment of women or at least what he says about them, esp in light of the golfer's comments about country clubs that still exclude or minimize the number of women members. Yet, Bill Clinton still commands hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not more, for short speeches. So does his wife. And, speaking of treatment of women--and common folks in general...... I wonder how many of those "50 advertisers" have paid either of the Clintons for speeches or, at the least, have CEOs who have attended their speeches.
A newspaper article this AM covered an attempt by local school districts to attract young males into teaching. It plays into several serious conversations I've had recently with quite a variety of folks. I think the first step those seeking to draw more youngsters into teaching would be to check how much teachers are paid. If I recall correctly, a couple weeks ago one of these fellow conversants said the average starting pay for a teacher in Michigan is $33,000. I checked online and that's pretty close to the actual figure (2015). At the same time, I checked our local district, which remains (as it has historically) one of the lowest paying districts around, not just in our country. The median teacher income is about $51,000. And very few new teachers are being hired since it is claimed student enrollment is declining and declining significantly. It really rankled me to hear a teacher tell me of a colleague who tried to rationalize the low pay with the trite and ridiculous, "But teachers have a great pension." No wonder teaching/education is in the state it's in. As I've said to many others for quite a few years, "How about paying me what teachers are worth and I'll take care of my own 'pension.?'" Nah, nobody takes that seriously, apparently not even other teachers. Another one of these guys I talked to claimed the average teacher gets out of education within five years. Is that true? I don't know, but I have no reason to doubt it. Yet the CEOs of the top two US auto-makers made more than $22 million in '16. I'm not saying they do or don't deserve it; somebody obviously thinks so. Let's just consider the comparison.
The President and his team are trying to unseat some members of the House Freedom Caucus. I'm no fan of Trump, not in the least. He's done little to change my mind that he belongs nowhere near the Presidency. And this attempt to get even with the no-voters on the deeply flawed recent health care bill is not only appalling, but revealing. For instance, I am not sure I'd vote for Justin Amash, the Michigan Congressman. He's not in my district and, besides, he's carrying some baggage I find disturbing. But for the guy who claimed he was going to "drain the Swamp," going after Amash (and other Freedom Caucus members) for actually living up to campaign promises he (and they) made to their constituents--that is, not deliberately lying!--is pathetic. Isn't it interesting that Trump has said he's going after the Democrats who opposed the bill?
The IRS has been mildly harassing us about a tax problem, a minor one at that. Let's just say, you probably spend more at the grocery store in a week that the amount over which we are scuffling. I have already used the IRS's own data to refute half of the claim. It is still "investigating." C'mon! It's not like were talking about big bucks here. Like I said, it's about $100 or so. Yet, I wonder, why doesn't the IRS go after the really big buck guys? It can't find some problems with all credits, deductions, etc, the loopholes supposedly allow them? Even more, we have rec'd several "urgent" phone calls claiming the IRS has "prepared to file a lawsuit against" us. We've had that call a number of times over the years. I did a reverse phone number check and found out this is a company pulling a scam. (Sometimes, to attract return calls, it uses "lottery winnings," "insurance benefits," etc.) So, if I can easily discover this is a scam, why isn't the IRS all over these folks?????? As I've said many times before, there is something seriously wrong when citizens (namely, my wife) are intimidated and filled with terror by their own government--at least one of its agencies. Yes, I'm sure she'll pay the $128, likely when I'm not paying attention.
It reminds me when, during Prohibition, the federal gov't ordered mercury and strychnine to be added to liquids people were drinking for their alcohol content. Oh, the liquids are revolting and disgusting, things such as auto anti-freeze, rubbing alcohol, embalming fluid, and formaldehyde. Yet, to prevent US citizens from drinking their alcohol in this manner, poisons, lethal ones, were ordered added. An activity, that is drinking, that was legal just a year before, had been an accepted practice (in moderation) for centuries, and was legal in almost every other nation in the world now threatened the lives of US citizens. Perhaps I'm just paranoid.
Monday, April 3, 2017
Olio
That's a good word for today's post. Look up it's definition. It's also the name of the Amherst College yearbook. Well, it used to be. Who knows what it is now or if it remains the name when it will be changed?
I say that because "It's Official!" That's what my e-mail from the college reads. "Lord Jeffs" was dropped by the doo-gooders (and I mean "doo") because of some perceived slights Lord Jeffery Amherst propagated against the Indians in the French and Indian War. That there is no direct proof that he did any such thing, that there is only a vague reference in a single letter, that other commanders on both sides (including Indians) were doing worse, etc., well, that doesn't matter when facts get in the way of an agenda. Regardless, the new mascot (well, not one I will use) is "Mammoths." Just "Mammoths." Not of the Wooly kind. (At least then a new haberdashery could open in town with an ad that reads, "For your winter coat go see Wooly Mammoth or Harry Bison......") Oh, there's a lengthy rationale, which reads as silly as the name "Mammoth."
Michael had the Tigers' opening day game on when I walked in, well, it was the introduction. What a circus! All the home team White Sox were brought in, individually, by convertibles, the cars coming from CF to the dugout. It sure looked like the White Sox players were embarrassed by all that. Not me. I just turned off the boob tube.
Is Michigan a great place!?!?!? Last Tue or Wed, it was 70+ degrees, sunny at least at times, both days. I got in on my bike again--it was great! Sat and Sun, with temps flirting with 60 degrees, I threw BP to Michael and the Codester, without an L-screen, taking my life in my hands. Whew! It's rained off and on all day today and rain is forecast for all of tomorrow. Wed is back to sunny and in the upper 50s or lower 60s. The last I saw, Thur is called for snow--80-90% all day. Neither of my weather sites discloses accumulations, but...... And I don't mind any of it. Besides, the rain and snow will give my rag of an arm time to recuperate.
I'm sure it was quite coincidental, but I had two conversations last week followed by an op-ed in Sun's newspaper regarding the current state of education. The three instances weren't all the same and even took somewhat different tacks. But several things were obvious. Why, did these non-teachers want to know, are teachers always blamed for the poor state of education? Why aren't administrators and school boards, outside of the big cities, that is? And as one astute person noted, when administration and governing of the cities' schools have been taken over by the state of Michigan, things have worsened! In fact, trace the so-called decline of public schools in Michigan. Go back, go back, go back. Yep, you found it. It began when the state began to stick its nose in local control. Now this is confounding and conflicting for me, because I see how ineffective the state has been over the years, making things far worse. Yet at the same time, I also see, particularly right now, how poorly our locals are running the schools here.
The op-ed suggested steps for improvement. Most of them focused on teachers. A couple did make sense. But why, again, is the focus always on teachers? Why not their bosses? I know I know......I'm beating a dead horse. Nobody listens, not even former teachers who now sit on the local board.
The op-ed author is a member of the governor's commission to improve education. I, for one, don't think much of the governor and, in particular, his approach to schools. I think he has no clue what teaching and learning are all about. But still I wonder what this op-ed/education commissioner would say to my suggestion that his call for more and improved "student teaching" is hogwash? First, I think most student teaching is a waste of time. I know not many will agree with me. Some teachers will, though. Second, the colleges of education and the universities themselves in Michigan have created their own windfall, pushing through a full year of student teaching, not merely a semester. Wow! Talk about padding one's pocket book. So, most students coming out of college are already heavily in debt. Now the colleges are adding another year's worth of bills. But remember, "It's all about the kids." Here's my plan, one I've floated before, but usually it receives nothing but raised eyebrows. (Note, "One Man's Lonely Opinions.")
Get rid of student teaching--gone! Oh, one or two courses can be required--to teach about classroom management, test and essay creation, laws, etc., generally the administrivia. Then, instead of student teaching, require a full year, at least, of substitute teaching. (BTW, get rid of that ridiculous "guest teacher that is now being used.) There are all sorts of benefits to that. Hey, I see advertisements all over Southeast Michigan for substitute teachers. Here you go! Having some Bozo who's read all the books, but has never actually been in a classroom or, if he has, it was a long time ago, will never be as effective as learning to control a classroom as a substitute. (C'mon, tell me you don't remember, when you were a student, your eyes lighting up when word got out you were having as sub.) Make the sub cover all sorts of subjects and grade levels, his/her own area, but others, too, even music, art, business, as well as the required courses. And don't forget, require substituting in elementary, junior high (I still refuse to say "middle school."), and high schools. Plus, now instead of fattening the purses of the colleges, students will be earning money--as well as reducing their tuition/loans. Who says I don't like change??????
Here are some personal anecdotes. When I did my student teaching, I discovered I had more classroom experience than my college supervisor and some of the college teachers! Yep. I had already substituted for a full year, with my own fourth grade class for a semester. Oh, they knew the book stuff, but in the seminars they ran.....it was obvious they had little or no clue. I don't know how many times they said stuff that the other student teachers started to gobble up. I most often kept quiet but sometimes spoke up. "You know, that's not really how it is." I had a very good student teaching experience--I enjoyed my classes, had nice students, and was able to engage in school activities, football and basketball. My supervising teacher let me alone--really left me alone--knowing I had taught before. But it was very aggravating that now I, in effect, had to pay to teach after I had already been paid to teach.
I wonder if this op-ed guy would respond to my suggestions, positively or negatively? BTW, I really slopped a lot of this down. The Codester wants to play catch again and I'm in a hurry to get out there with him before the next sprinkles. The grand kids come first. Forgive any and all typos and incoherence. Maybe I'll edit tomorrow.
I say that because "It's Official!" That's what my e-mail from the college reads. "Lord Jeffs" was dropped by the doo-gooders (and I mean "doo") because of some perceived slights Lord Jeffery Amherst propagated against the Indians in the French and Indian War. That there is no direct proof that he did any such thing, that there is only a vague reference in a single letter, that other commanders on both sides (including Indians) were doing worse, etc., well, that doesn't matter when facts get in the way of an agenda. Regardless, the new mascot (well, not one I will use) is "Mammoths." Just "Mammoths." Not of the Wooly kind. (At least then a new haberdashery could open in town with an ad that reads, "For your winter coat go see Wooly Mammoth or Harry Bison......") Oh, there's a lengthy rationale, which reads as silly as the name "Mammoth."
Michael had the Tigers' opening day game on when I walked in, well, it was the introduction. What a circus! All the home team White Sox were brought in, individually, by convertibles, the cars coming from CF to the dugout. It sure looked like the White Sox players were embarrassed by all that. Not me. I just turned off the boob tube.
Is Michigan a great place!?!?!? Last Tue or Wed, it was 70+ degrees, sunny at least at times, both days. I got in on my bike again--it was great! Sat and Sun, with temps flirting with 60 degrees, I threw BP to Michael and the Codester, without an L-screen, taking my life in my hands. Whew! It's rained off and on all day today and rain is forecast for all of tomorrow. Wed is back to sunny and in the upper 50s or lower 60s. The last I saw, Thur is called for snow--80-90% all day. Neither of my weather sites discloses accumulations, but...... And I don't mind any of it. Besides, the rain and snow will give my rag of an arm time to recuperate.
I'm sure it was quite coincidental, but I had two conversations last week followed by an op-ed in Sun's newspaper regarding the current state of education. The three instances weren't all the same and even took somewhat different tacks. But several things were obvious. Why, did these non-teachers want to know, are teachers always blamed for the poor state of education? Why aren't administrators and school boards, outside of the big cities, that is? And as one astute person noted, when administration and governing of the cities' schools have been taken over by the state of Michigan, things have worsened! In fact, trace the so-called decline of public schools in Michigan. Go back, go back, go back. Yep, you found it. It began when the state began to stick its nose in local control. Now this is confounding and conflicting for me, because I see how ineffective the state has been over the years, making things far worse. Yet at the same time, I also see, particularly right now, how poorly our locals are running the schools here.
The op-ed suggested steps for improvement. Most of them focused on teachers. A couple did make sense. But why, again, is the focus always on teachers? Why not their bosses? I know I know......I'm beating a dead horse. Nobody listens, not even former teachers who now sit on the local board.
The op-ed author is a member of the governor's commission to improve education. I, for one, don't think much of the governor and, in particular, his approach to schools. I think he has no clue what teaching and learning are all about. But still I wonder what this op-ed/education commissioner would say to my suggestion that his call for more and improved "student teaching" is hogwash? First, I think most student teaching is a waste of time. I know not many will agree with me. Some teachers will, though. Second, the colleges of education and the universities themselves in Michigan have created their own windfall, pushing through a full year of student teaching, not merely a semester. Wow! Talk about padding one's pocket book. So, most students coming out of college are already heavily in debt. Now the colleges are adding another year's worth of bills. But remember, "It's all about the kids." Here's my plan, one I've floated before, but usually it receives nothing but raised eyebrows. (Note, "One Man's Lonely Opinions.")
Get rid of student teaching--gone! Oh, one or two courses can be required--to teach about classroom management, test and essay creation, laws, etc., generally the administrivia. Then, instead of student teaching, require a full year, at least, of substitute teaching. (BTW, get rid of that ridiculous "guest teacher that is now being used.) There are all sorts of benefits to that. Hey, I see advertisements all over Southeast Michigan for substitute teachers. Here you go! Having some Bozo who's read all the books, but has never actually been in a classroom or, if he has, it was a long time ago, will never be as effective as learning to control a classroom as a substitute. (C'mon, tell me you don't remember, when you were a student, your eyes lighting up when word got out you were having as sub.) Make the sub cover all sorts of subjects and grade levels, his/her own area, but others, too, even music, art, business, as well as the required courses. And don't forget, require substituting in elementary, junior high (I still refuse to say "middle school."), and high schools. Plus, now instead of fattening the purses of the colleges, students will be earning money--as well as reducing their tuition/loans. Who says I don't like change??????
Here are some personal anecdotes. When I did my student teaching, I discovered I had more classroom experience than my college supervisor and some of the college teachers! Yep. I had already substituted for a full year, with my own fourth grade class for a semester. Oh, they knew the book stuff, but in the seminars they ran.....it was obvious they had little or no clue. I don't know how many times they said stuff that the other student teachers started to gobble up. I most often kept quiet but sometimes spoke up. "You know, that's not really how it is." I had a very good student teaching experience--I enjoyed my classes, had nice students, and was able to engage in school activities, football and basketball. My supervising teacher let me alone--really left me alone--knowing I had taught before. But it was very aggravating that now I, in effect, had to pay to teach after I had already been paid to teach.
I wonder if this op-ed guy would respond to my suggestions, positively or negatively? BTW, I really slopped a lot of this down. The Codester wants to play catch again and I'm in a hurry to get out there with him before the next sprinkles. The grand kids come first. Forgive any and all typos and incoherence. Maybe I'll edit tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
