Monday, September 24, 2007
Iran Has No Homosexuals, and It Don't Rain in New York City
I just about heard the most ridiculous thing ever said by a national ruler. Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad just told an audience at Columbia University that "Iran does not have homosexuals." Huhh?? And there is no steroid use in professional sports, and there is no marijuana smoking in the United States, and there are no traffic jams on I-95, and pigs have wings and the sea is hot and there are glaciers in Iran's deserts. How can he make a statement like that? If even one person in a thousand is homosexual, that makes for about 36,000 homosexuals in Iran. Oh, well, at least he can say it in this country. I wonder if people are free to make statements in his country.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Football and Doug Wilder
Last night, 2007 September 21, Mayor Doug Wilder of Richmond, Virginia ordered the eviction of the School Board and offices from four floors of Richmond City Hall and move them to 3600 W. Broad Street, a long 6-story or so building three miles to the northwest. Mayor Wilder had been telling the School Board to do this for some time, claiming that it would cost $1 million more a year for them to be in City Hall. But is this the real reason?
In any case, the eviction started late last night and caused what the local media called "chaos in City Hall". The building was closed at 5 pm, press was barred from the building, and movers came in to box everything up and take it over to the 3600 building. In addition, Mayor Wilder said that there may have been porn in City Council President William Pantele's computer. He required city council aides to interview for their own jobs or lose them. The School Board hired former mayor Henry Marsh III as their attorney, and at the request of Mr. Marsh, Richmond Circuit Court Chief Judge Margaret Spencer issued an injunction against the eviction, and the flow of School Board property from City Hall to 3600 reversed and all the stuff went back into City Hall. Still, there's the chance that Richmond city schools may not open because the School Board can't get stuff straightened out by then in their offices.
This is really weird. It reminds me of some third world country.
Further, we can't find out much about it.
Why? Step back three decades or more. I remember, but I can't find anything on the Internet about, an incident that happened in the 1970s. An important professional football playoff game was being broadcast on some major network. At 6 pm (probably Eastern time), the game was close with less than two minutes to play. The network cut off the game and presented instead a children's program called, I believe, "Giants in the Earth". Almost immediately the network's switchboards in New York City lit up like a Fourth of July gone wild. People started complaining by the thousands, and when they got busy signals, they called the police and jammed their switchboards. The team from behind scored a touchdown to win the game during those two minutes that were not presented.
I believe that that incident has helped determine network policy of sports vs other programming. The policy, simply stated, is that sports takes priority, even over news. This was just about the most misguided action that could have been taken. The Challenger disaster, the Iran hostage crisis, the crash of an airliner over Scotland, and even the charges of infidelity against a Presidential candidate all are much more important than some football game. But since then, the networks have routinely footballed, basketballed, nascarred, and golfed out the 6 o'clock news. This meant that there was scant way of knowing about local news during the weekends; the newspaper and radio were about the only ways.
They are still doing it. This weekend is especially bad. Every single network including Fox is footballing out the 6 o'clock news, and ABC is even footballing out the 11 o'clock news. We are being shut out of an important avenue for obtaining local news. The Internet does not help. The local news sites are notoriously out of date during the weekends.
I am wondering if Mayor Wilder has anything to do with the footballing out of news this weekend. Did he make some arrangement with the networks to football them out so that news of what's happening at City Hall will not reach the public? Probably not. But I think his choice of time to evict the School Board was meant to suppress the dissemination of news of the event. He chose late Friday afternoon and evening to do it, and further I believe he chose this particular weekend because he knew all the news were going to be footballed out. I tried listening for what was happening on the radio. Even that got footballed out.
The local stations need to cut into football and other programming to tell us what is happening to the school system in Richmond. In the meantime, to find out what's happening, try CBS (WTVR) or NBC (WWBT) at 11 tonight, or Fox at 10.
In any case, the eviction started late last night and caused what the local media called "chaos in City Hall". The building was closed at 5 pm, press was barred from the building, and movers came in to box everything up and take it over to the 3600 building. In addition, Mayor Wilder said that there may have been porn in City Council President William Pantele's computer. He required city council aides to interview for their own jobs or lose them. The School Board hired former mayor Henry Marsh III as their attorney, and at the request of Mr. Marsh, Richmond Circuit Court Chief Judge Margaret Spencer issued an injunction against the eviction, and the flow of School Board property from City Hall to 3600 reversed and all the stuff went back into City Hall. Still, there's the chance that Richmond city schools may not open because the School Board can't get stuff straightened out by then in their offices.
This is really weird. It reminds me of some third world country.
Further, we can't find out much about it.
Why? Step back three decades or more. I remember, but I can't find anything on the Internet about, an incident that happened in the 1970s. An important professional football playoff game was being broadcast on some major network. At 6 pm (probably Eastern time), the game was close with less than two minutes to play. The network cut off the game and presented instead a children's program called, I believe, "Giants in the Earth". Almost immediately the network's switchboards in New York City lit up like a Fourth of July gone wild. People started complaining by the thousands, and when they got busy signals, they called the police and jammed their switchboards. The team from behind scored a touchdown to win the game during those two minutes that were not presented.
I believe that that incident has helped determine network policy of sports vs other programming. The policy, simply stated, is that sports takes priority, even over news. This was just about the most misguided action that could have been taken. The Challenger disaster, the Iran hostage crisis, the crash of an airliner over Scotland, and even the charges of infidelity against a Presidential candidate all are much more important than some football game. But since then, the networks have routinely footballed, basketballed, nascarred, and golfed out the 6 o'clock news. This meant that there was scant way of knowing about local news during the weekends; the newspaper and radio were about the only ways.
They are still doing it. This weekend is especially bad. Every single network including Fox is footballing out the 6 o'clock news, and ABC is even footballing out the 11 o'clock news. We are being shut out of an important avenue for obtaining local news. The Internet does not help. The local news sites are notoriously out of date during the weekends.
I am wondering if Mayor Wilder has anything to do with the footballing out of news this weekend. Did he make some arrangement with the networks to football them out so that news of what's happening at City Hall will not reach the public? Probably not. But I think his choice of time to evict the School Board was meant to suppress the dissemination of news of the event. He chose late Friday afternoon and evening to do it, and further I believe he chose this particular weekend because he knew all the news were going to be footballed out. I tried listening for what was happening on the radio. Even that got footballed out.
The local stations need to cut into football and other programming to tell us what is happening to the school system in Richmond. In the meantime, to find out what's happening, try CBS (WTVR) or NBC (WWBT) at 11 tonight, or Fox at 10.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Right On, MoveOn!
Last week, MoveOn.org was criticized for putting out an advertisement entitled "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" and featuring a picture of this general. Candidates from both parties criticized the ad, and some asked that it be withdrawn. MoveOn refused to do that. The ad said that what Petraeus was saying, and because Petraeus, as a military man, has to obey orders, what really the Bush Administration was saying, was that the Administration's claim that things are getting better in Iraq are false, and this can be verified. I thought the ad brought out a good point; what fouled it up was this amusing homophone - "Petraeus" sounds like "Betray Us". It made MoveOn sound like it was attacking Petraeus, when I feel that Bush is the one that is betraying us.
This week MoveOn came out with another ad. This one calls Rudy Giuliani to task for not attending meetings of an Iraq task force that he was a member of. Rudy says the problem was that the meeting dates of the force conflicted with his campaign dates. So he gave up the task force that he said he would be a part of just so that he can get a few more words out to people to vote for him. This means I am not going to vote for Giuliani. If you tell someone you are going to be a part of an organization, you have the obligation to attend that organization's functions. This is especially the case when it deals with a weighty matter such as the war in Iraq. To me Giuliani has just shown that he is untrustworthy.
A YouTube video submitter urged me to give the MoveOn video five stars, the top rating. I checked out MoveOn's claims. MoveOn gives a detailed list of references for each of the statements that it makes in its ad. To me, this meant that a good deal of background research went into the ad. It was not something just thrown together. When Giuliani was confronted with the ad, he responded with an ad that said that he was "Moveon's greatest nightmare", and said absolutely nothing about whether he is right but instead engaged in campaign rhetoric. As far as I am concerned, MoveOn.org wins this one. I gave the video five stars. The greatest nightmare, in my opinion is if Giuliani gets elected.
This week MoveOn came out with another ad. This one calls Rudy Giuliani to task for not attending meetings of an Iraq task force that he was a member of. Rudy says the problem was that the meeting dates of the force conflicted with his campaign dates. So he gave up the task force that he said he would be a part of just so that he can get a few more words out to people to vote for him. This means I am not going to vote for Giuliani. If you tell someone you are going to be a part of an organization, you have the obligation to attend that organization's functions. This is especially the case when it deals with a weighty matter such as the war in Iraq. To me Giuliani has just shown that he is untrustworthy.
A YouTube video submitter urged me to give the MoveOn video five stars, the top rating. I checked out MoveOn's claims. MoveOn gives a detailed list of references for each of the statements that it makes in its ad. To me, this meant that a good deal of background research went into the ad. It was not something just thrown together. When Giuliani was confronted with the ad, he responded with an ad that said that he was "Moveon's greatest nightmare", and said absolutely nothing about whether he is right but instead engaged in campaign rhetoric. As far as I am concerned, MoveOn.org wins this one. I gave the video five stars. The greatest nightmare, in my opinion is if Giuliani gets elected.
Friday, September 07, 2007
Postal Service Is Going Bananas
The US postal rates have gone up. Now a first class mail costs 41 cents instead of 39 cents. They have made a change, hoping to mollify the public on this rate hike. They have issued the "forever" stamp with a Liberty Bell on it that will be good for first class postage forever; for example, if in 2012 the rate is 47 cents, the original stamp, costing 41 cents, will still be good without having to add a 6 cent stamp. Then they confused things by issuing 41 cent stamps that were not forever; apparently only the original ding-dong stamps were forever.
Not as well publicized is their other changes. Charges for extra ounces in a letter have gone down from 24 cents to 17 cents. This means 1-2 ounces are actually cheaper than before, at 58 cents instead of 63 cents. But then they threw something else to confuse things a bit and throw huge price increases in patron's faces. If a letter is not the right size, according to their confusing criteria, the charge for first-class postage for the first ounce is 80 cents. Further, they call such a package "flat", even though an overly thick envelope will also take that charge. Apparently they are going to charge two first-class postages for such envelopes, which include 9x12 manila envelopes. Apparently to prevent people from breaking up envelopes into two or more envelopes, they priced the extra charge at just less than a first ounce charge - 39 cents instead of 41 cents.
Recently I had to mail a package that contained a CD and was padded. It was thus "irregular" and I was afraid that it would take the 80-cent charge. It weighed between 1 and 2 ounces. Sure enough, when I went to the post office, it was charged at 97 cents; in other words, 80 + 17 cents. Therefore I wanted a cache of 80-cent stamps so if I have to do this in the future, I could do it at my house and not go to the post office and wait in a line (there was a line of about 10 at that post office). They told me that they did not have 80-cent stamps. It seems to me that if a major type of postage rated an 80-cent charge, that 80-cent stamps should be available. But they weren't. So I asked for 39-cent stamps, to combine with 41-cent stamps to make 80 cents. They kept talking as if I wanted it for this particular package. They kept asking for the item that I wanted postage for. I had to repeat over and over again that there was presently no such item. It was for future uses that I wanted it, so I did not have to go to the Post Office and wait in line to mail such an envelope.
The woman serving me said she would go back and get me some 39-cent stamps. While she was there, the other woman there kept asking if I wanted 58-cent stamps. Whaaa?? I never said that I wanted that amount. Further, 58 cents was a charge on a normal envelope, not an "irregular" one, that happened to weigh between 1 and 2 ounces. After about 3 minutes, the original woman came back with some 39-cent stamps and some 58-cent stamps. I told her I didn't want the 58-cent stamps and did not request them. I had to insist on this to get her to sell me the twenty 39-cent stamps. Why they kept insisting I buy 58-cent stamps really beats me. It seems the Postal Service has gone crazy.
There needs to be some changes in the Postal Service. They need to clarify their terms, and they need agents that will fulfill customer orders and not try to inject their own agendas into it.
Not as well publicized is their other changes. Charges for extra ounces in a letter have gone down from 24 cents to 17 cents. This means 1-2 ounces are actually cheaper than before, at 58 cents instead of 63 cents. But then they threw something else to confuse things a bit and throw huge price increases in patron's faces. If a letter is not the right size, according to their confusing criteria, the charge for first-class postage for the first ounce is 80 cents. Further, they call such a package "flat", even though an overly thick envelope will also take that charge. Apparently they are going to charge two first-class postages for such envelopes, which include 9x12 manila envelopes. Apparently to prevent people from breaking up envelopes into two or more envelopes, they priced the extra charge at just less than a first ounce charge - 39 cents instead of 41 cents.
Recently I had to mail a package that contained a CD and was padded. It was thus "irregular" and I was afraid that it would take the 80-cent charge. It weighed between 1 and 2 ounces. Sure enough, when I went to the post office, it was charged at 97 cents; in other words, 80 + 17 cents. Therefore I wanted a cache of 80-cent stamps so if I have to do this in the future, I could do it at my house and not go to the post office and wait in a line (there was a line of about 10 at that post office). They told me that they did not have 80-cent stamps. It seems to me that if a major type of postage rated an 80-cent charge, that 80-cent stamps should be available. But they weren't. So I asked for 39-cent stamps, to combine with 41-cent stamps to make 80 cents. They kept talking as if I wanted it for this particular package. They kept asking for the item that I wanted postage for. I had to repeat over and over again that there was presently no such item. It was for future uses that I wanted it, so I did not have to go to the Post Office and wait in line to mail such an envelope.
The woman serving me said she would go back and get me some 39-cent stamps. While she was there, the other woman there kept asking if I wanted 58-cent stamps. Whaaa?? I never said that I wanted that amount. Further, 58 cents was a charge on a normal envelope, not an "irregular" one, that happened to weigh between 1 and 2 ounces. After about 3 minutes, the original woman came back with some 39-cent stamps and some 58-cent stamps. I told her I didn't want the 58-cent stamps and did not request them. I had to insist on this to get her to sell me the twenty 39-cent stamps. Why they kept insisting I buy 58-cent stamps really beats me. It seems the Postal Service has gone crazy.
There needs to be some changes in the Postal Service. They need to clarify their terms, and they need agents that will fulfill customer orders and not try to inject their own agendas into it.
