An infrequent reader of my blog is Angela O'Neill. She'd read it more if I mentioned The Jonas Brothers, the modern-day equivalent of The Osmonds from the days when I was about the age she is now. In fact, simply by mentioning The Jonas Brothers, I've probably opened up a whole can of worms.
You see, by mentioning The Jonas Brothers, I run the risk that a search engine will actually find this blog when somebody types in "the jonas brothers" into a search engine. And won't they be disappointed when they find that this blog is not only NOT about The Jonas Brothers, it's author has never, ever heard a song sung by The Jonas Brothers.
I know ABOUT The Jonas Brothers, because channel surfing the entertainment news, you are bound to run into something about The Jonas Brothers. Apparently, The Jonas Brothers wear promise rings. Guess those are today's equivalents of the mood rings that were popular when I was a teen. I'm sure The Jonas Brothers will honour those rings as they go from (I presume) their teen years into their adult years. But if they don't, The Jonas Brothers will hardly be the only ring-wielders who break that pledge. It's not as if those rings have the record their promoters would LIKE to have us think exists. But I digress.
Family bands like The Jonas Brothers come and they go. Let's see if you all can remember the DiFrancos or the Cowsills? Even the big ones, like the Osmonds and the Carpenters, eventually fade away for one reason or another. Sometimes for tragic reasons. Or they turn into the Jacksons soap opera.
So, while I won't put down Angela's infatuation with The Jonas Brothers, I'm old enough to know it will just pass. She can burble and shriek whenever The Jonas Brothers are mentioned, seen or heard. It's annoying mostly for the dumb, vacant glazed-over look teen girls get when idols like The Jonas Brothers come onto the scene. It's survivable. And eventually, The Jonas Brothers will join other things I can stop buying themed presents for at birthday and Christmas time. Sigh.
Say, whatever happened to those MMMbop kids? The Hansons was it?
Monday, September 15, 2008
SPORTS: Thank You Mr. Shanahan
Finally! A coach has gone 'against' the book. And I bet he feels REAL GOOD about it. The coach in question? Mike Shanahan of the Denver Broncos.
Tell a football coach he's got one chance to score a winning touchdown from the opposition's two-yard line with no time on the clock and MOST of them would accept the chance and forgo playing the game. Naturally, after suffering through three hours of actual football, the coach will play for the tie and overtime, rather than risking it all on a win-0r-lose play. How stupid is that?
Denver was in a game it shouldn't have been Sunday night. The opposition San Diego Chargers were a better team on paper, and but for a computer malfunction in the first quarter and a referee malfunction in the last minute, were better on the field too. Normally, Denver should have indeed lost to the visiting squad. Despite having dodged those 'should haves', the Broncos were fourth and touchdown to go at the Charger four yard line, trailing by a converted touchdown. With no margin for error, Jay Cutler tossed a putative tying touchdown to rookie receiver Eddie Royal. The expected convert would likely tie the game and force overtime, the Chargers being out of timeouts and about a half-minute to play.
But Shanahan, god bless him, didn't blindly accept the common wisdom that you do kick the convert and hope like heck that the coin toss goes your way. This lunacy dates all the way back to 1984 when Nebraska Cornhusker coach Tom Osborne played to win rather than tie the Orange Bowl, knowing a tie would be good enough to win the national collegiate title. The two-point conversion attempt failed and Osborne was pilloried for the decision (although not by me). Since then, the mere thought of screwing up potential overtime in an attempt to win has quaked coaches in their shoes. It is just NOT DONE!
Shanahan didn't just decide out of the blue to break with convention this time. All the planets were aligned for this to be the correct call. First, the Broncos weren't likely to win overtime without the ball first. And maybe not even then. San Diego was better. Secondly, ALL the breaks were going Denver's way, including the inexcusable quick whistle in the final minute on a flummoxed Cutler fumble, which had San Diego grumbling and not at all concentrating. Thirdly, and this is important folks, there WAS a half-minute left on the clock.
Now, let me tell you what that meant. You see, Shanahan was NOT making the final decision in the game! That's right. If the play had gone cockeyed, the Broncos, having two timeouts remaining, had another shot.
An on-side kick.
Would that have been a great chance? No. But about one in five on-side kicks work and the kicking team gets possession somewhere around the midfield line. With two timeouts, a whole field to use and a kicker used to kicking in Denver's light air at high altitude (and usually successfully), it wasn't like Shanahan was moving all in with his bet. It LOOKED a lot gutsier than it was.
And it worked. Instead of Denver needing some luck on the kick-off and a pass or two to set up a winning field goal, it was SAN DIEGO facing the task of picking up about half the length of the field to arrange a winning field goal of the Chargers' own.
Way to go Mike. I hope you would have made the decision even without the on-side kick backup. But at least you coached rather than let a hoary old book decide how the game would end. Instead of an overtime deciding an exciting game, soon to be forgotten, we now have something for the ages. Maybe we'll see more coaches who see a game in their hands and don't let it go, to be decided later.
Often by a coin flip.
Tell a football coach he's got one chance to score a winning touchdown from the opposition's two-yard line with no time on the clock and MOST of them would accept the chance and forgo playing the game. Naturally, after suffering through three hours of actual football, the coach will play for the tie and overtime, rather than risking it all on a win-0r-lose play. How stupid is that?
Denver was in a game it shouldn't have been Sunday night. The opposition San Diego Chargers were a better team on paper, and but for a computer malfunction in the first quarter and a referee malfunction in the last minute, were better on the field too. Normally, Denver should have indeed lost to the visiting squad. Despite having dodged those 'should haves', the Broncos were fourth and touchdown to go at the Charger four yard line, trailing by a converted touchdown. With no margin for error, Jay Cutler tossed a putative tying touchdown to rookie receiver Eddie Royal. The expected convert would likely tie the game and force overtime, the Chargers being out of timeouts and about a half-minute to play.
But Shanahan, god bless him, didn't blindly accept the common wisdom that you do kick the convert and hope like heck that the coin toss goes your way. This lunacy dates all the way back to 1984 when Nebraska Cornhusker coach Tom Osborne played to win rather than tie the Orange Bowl, knowing a tie would be good enough to win the national collegiate title. The two-point conversion attempt failed and Osborne was pilloried for the decision (although not by me). Since then, the mere thought of screwing up potential overtime in an attempt to win has quaked coaches in their shoes. It is just NOT DONE!
Shanahan didn't just decide out of the blue to break with convention this time. All the planets were aligned for this to be the correct call. First, the Broncos weren't likely to win overtime without the ball first. And maybe not even then. San Diego was better. Secondly, ALL the breaks were going Denver's way, including the inexcusable quick whistle in the final minute on a flummoxed Cutler fumble, which had San Diego grumbling and not at all concentrating. Thirdly, and this is important folks, there WAS a half-minute left on the clock.
Now, let me tell you what that meant. You see, Shanahan was NOT making the final decision in the game! That's right. If the play had gone cockeyed, the Broncos, having two timeouts remaining, had another shot.
An on-side kick.
Would that have been a great chance? No. But about one in five on-side kicks work and the kicking team gets possession somewhere around the midfield line. With two timeouts, a whole field to use and a kicker used to kicking in Denver's light air at high altitude (and usually successfully), it wasn't like Shanahan was moving all in with his bet. It LOOKED a lot gutsier than it was.
And it worked. Instead of Denver needing some luck on the kick-off and a pass or two to set up a winning field goal, it was SAN DIEGO facing the task of picking up about half the length of the field to arrange a winning field goal of the Chargers' own.
Way to go Mike. I hope you would have made the decision even without the on-side kick backup. But at least you coached rather than let a hoary old book decide how the game would end. Instead of an overtime deciding an exciting game, soon to be forgotten, we now have something for the ages. Maybe we'll see more coaches who see a game in their hands and don't let it go, to be decided later.
Often by a coin flip.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
HARDWARE: It's Dead, Gary
Well, it appears I was wrong about the cause of my Microsoft Trackball Explorer (an original v1) problems. It's not the driver. It's the hardware. And as Spock would say, "It's dead."
So, for the time being (meaning today), I am using one of the Logitech Trackman Wheels floating around (I'm stealing it from my laptop carryall). It's letting me get by. I'm irked at it's constant desire to middle-click AND click on one depress of the scroll wheel. That tends to NOT be what I want. But being less quick on the trigger has left me with some control of the device.
I looked on the internet to see what my options were and folks, they are grim. Really, the only track device with a big finger ball and a scroll wheel leaves with one and only one choice. The Logitech Cordless Optical Trackman. I don't necessarily want a cordless device, this NOT being a mouse and all, but c'est la vie. I can buy it around the corner at Staples for 80 bucks, or detour to Tiger Direct on my next visit to my main client and save 20 bucks. After a day of working with the thumb marble type Trackman Wheel, I'll know if I have the stamina/patience to save the 20 bucks.
I've used the Explorer for four years as my main machine's pointing device. Before that, I was pretty well a Logitech trackball user. I had several and quite liked all that let me move the ball with my fingers, rather than my thumb. I still have an old Logitech trackball on my reading computer. But it doesn't have a scroll wheel and using anything without a scroll wheel on the internet is just plain too much work.
Whatever happens, it's going to a strange day using my right fingers for the the left and right buttons after all these years using my thumb!
So, for the time being (meaning today), I am using one of the Logitech Trackman Wheels floating around (I'm stealing it from my laptop carryall). It's letting me get by. I'm irked at it's constant desire to middle-click AND click on one depress of the scroll wheel. That tends to NOT be what I want. But being less quick on the trigger has left me with some control of the device.
I looked on the internet to see what my options were and folks, they are grim. Really, the only track device with a big finger ball and a scroll wheel leaves with one and only one choice. The Logitech Cordless Optical Trackman. I don't necessarily want a cordless device, this NOT being a mouse and all, but c'est la vie. I can buy it around the corner at Staples for 80 bucks, or detour to Tiger Direct on my next visit to my main client and save 20 bucks. After a day of working with the thumb marble type Trackman Wheel, I'll know if I have the stamina/patience to save the 20 bucks.
I've used the Explorer for four years as my main machine's pointing device. Before that, I was pretty well a Logitech trackball user. I had several and quite liked all that let me move the ball with my fingers, rather than my thumb. I still have an old Logitech trackball on my reading computer. But it doesn't have a scroll wheel and using anything without a scroll wheel on the internet is just plain too much work.
Whatever happens, it's going to a strange day using my right fingers for the the left and right buttons after all these years using my thumb!
Saturday, September 13, 2008
SOFTWARE: A Nice Orderly Drive Display
I forget things. Thankfully, in posting a blog entry, I have easy access to my own notes to accomplish things I rarely do.
Such as setting the display in Windows Explorer to list the name of each drive with the letter of the drive first. This is what it looks like on my computer:
I wanted to do this on another computer I was working on, but I could NOT remember how I had done this! It took some searching through Google, but I happened upon the solution again. And now I record it here for posterity (and ease of finding it again!)
Such as setting the display in Windows Explorer to list the name of each drive with the letter of the drive first. This is what it looks like on my computer:
I wanted to do this on another computer I was working on, but I could NOT remember how I had done this! It took some searching through Google, but I happened upon the solution again. And now I record it here for posterity (and ease of finding it again!)- Run REGEDIT (I assume you know how to do this. If not, get someone that does)
- Goto the HKLM\Software\Microsoft\ Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer key
- Look for a sub-key called "ShowDriveLettersFirst"
- If found, Right-Click and choose Edit. Else Right-Click and choose Create DWORD, making the new key "ShowDriveLettersFirst"
- In either case, make the value 4
- Exit RegEdit and reboot
- Happiness ensues
HARDWARE: Gotta Hand It to Microsoft
Twice over the last two months I have 'upgraded' the driver for my hoary old Microsoft Trackball Explorer. It is the pointing device of choice here at the Castle of Confusion, aka The Home for Wayward Trackballs. Each time I have upgraded, I have experienced cursor freezing by the mouse. It moves erratically, slows down and then refuses to budge.
Each time I open up the innards of the Trackball Explorer and shoo away any dust. Usually, it's surprisingly sparse. Almost non-existent. And you know, the operation doesn't solve a blessed thing. So I stick in one my Logitech Track Man Wheels (told ya I have several), use IT to roll back the Microsoft mouse driver to the 2001 version and reboot the computer.
Presto! It's like magic. As long as I resist the urge to 'upgrade' when Microsoft puts out a new Intellipoint Driver, I'm working like normal. It DOES figure that my trackball breaks when I 'upgrade.' It's a discontinued model and Microsoft doesn't make any money off me while I continue to use it. I SHOULD know that's the purpose of 'upgrading,' but I'm old and I forget sometimes.
Let's hope I'll remember NOT to upgrade next time. This shutting down and rebooting takes time!
Each time I open up the innards of the Trackball Explorer and shoo away any dust. Usually, it's surprisingly sparse. Almost non-existent. And you know, the operation doesn't solve a blessed thing. So I stick in one my Logitech Track Man Wheels (told ya I have several), use IT to roll back the Microsoft mouse driver to the 2001 version and reboot the computer.
Presto! It's like magic. As long as I resist the urge to 'upgrade' when Microsoft puts out a new Intellipoint Driver, I'm working like normal. It DOES figure that my trackball breaks when I 'upgrade.' It's a discontinued model and Microsoft doesn't make any money off me while I continue to use it. I SHOULD know that's the purpose of 'upgrading,' but I'm old and I forget sometimes.
Let's hope I'll remember NOT to upgrade next time. This shutting down and rebooting takes time!
Friday, September 12, 2008
MISC: A Prediction About the Next News Cycle
I've got a story right out of central casting. Native Canadian aboriginal girl grows up on a reserve up in the northern climes of Ontario. She hangs around with a bad crowd and does neither herself or her schoolwork proud. A stranger passes through and helps her understand the hole she is digging herself isn't impossible to climb out of. It just takes a determination to turn her life around.
Months later, she puts her past and hometown behind her and moves to the big city, moving in with a Christian family who see her determination to make something of her life, bad start in all. She's 17 and sees light where once there was doom and gloom. She spends the next two months trying to get into local schools, both public and private, for her junior year in high school. Nobody wants to let her in. Seems there's been a string of deadbeat aboriginals who move south with the specific intention of getting into a school and onto welfare. They aren't going to let themselves be victimized again.
The young lady and her landlord family make the circuit of various governmental agencies. A school trustee is particularly hostile. The federal member of parliament isn't interested, what with the general national election having been just called. Too much need for organization to spend time on a minor's problem. Various governmental bureaucracies cite the need for lengthy investigation before making rulings. In the meantime, the school calendar clicks away the new school year.
So what do you think would happen if the young lady called a press conference for first thing in the morning, announcing she was going to exercise her constitutional right to get an education. That she wasn't going to let the prejudices and biases of school officials against OTHERS of her people, blockade her in an attempt to not become just another failed aboriginal. That she was going to school, to at least audit, if not to officially attend.
Think that might bring out the press? Think that might get that MP and the MP's opponents in the national election out to promote helping the underdog fight for an education? Think that school trustee ends up back on the Board of Education?
All interesting questions. And you might be reading about them next week or watching them on TV or on YouTube.
Months later, she puts her past and hometown behind her and moves to the big city, moving in with a Christian family who see her determination to make something of her life, bad start in all. She's 17 and sees light where once there was doom and gloom. She spends the next two months trying to get into local schools, both public and private, for her junior year in high school. Nobody wants to let her in. Seems there's been a string of deadbeat aboriginals who move south with the specific intention of getting into a school and onto welfare. They aren't going to let themselves be victimized again.
The young lady and her landlord family make the circuit of various governmental agencies. A school trustee is particularly hostile. The federal member of parliament isn't interested, what with the general national election having been just called. Too much need for organization to spend time on a minor's problem. Various governmental bureaucracies cite the need for lengthy investigation before making rulings. In the meantime, the school calendar clicks away the new school year.
So what do you think would happen if the young lady called a press conference for first thing in the morning, announcing she was going to exercise her constitutional right to get an education. That she wasn't going to let the prejudices and biases of school officials against OTHERS of her people, blockade her in an attempt to not become just another failed aboriginal. That she was going to school, to at least audit, if not to officially attend.
Think that might bring out the press? Think that might get that MP and the MP's opponents in the national election out to promote helping the underdog fight for an education? Think that school trustee ends up back on the Board of Education?
All interesting questions. And you might be reading about them next week or watching them on TV or on YouTube.
TV: The Secret Life of a Degrassi Series Wannabe
Understated versus over-the-top. That's how I see Degrassi: The Next Generation as compared to this summer's American-made redo of the show, The Secret Life of The American Teenager.
The creators of Degrassi have been at the kids' TV-creation game for just shy of two decades now. They've always approached the need to entertain and inform by leaning on both equally. Just about all the hot button issues have been dealt with at one time or another in the seven-odd shows that have carried Degrassi banners. In most cases, bad things resulted in bad results. No glamourizing social ills that don't result in trips to Disneyland. Death, disease and disaster have been part of Degrassi forever.
As a result, Degrassi deserves its place amongst the great all-time TV shows for kids.
Naturally, there have been a host of imitation of the high-school versions of Degrassi state-side over the years. The successful ones have be the big-bucks school shows that take place in a universe not inhabited by you, me, most kids or the casts of Degrassi. Shows like The O.C., Beverly Hills 90210 and Gossip Girl ignore reality and make the case that money lets you get away with anything fiction-wise.
This year, the new Degrassi-wannabe has been The Secret Life of The American Teenager. There's a heart to the show, although it doesn't belong to the lead viewpoint character, Shailene Woodley's Amy. Woodley's in tough, as she has to play a wallflower, impregnated during her first and only time with the school stud. Wallflowers retreat from the spotlight by definition, so it's hard for Woodley to back away and still stand up defiantly for herself. Rather than sympathetic, she comes across as a whiner. And it's hard to see how Woodley can do any better.
On the other hand, her new boyfriend who forgives all after falling in love at first sight, Ben Boykewich, played by Kenny Baumann, IS the heart of the show. But he's too over the top, taking the high road at every turn to new heights. He wants to marry his 16-year old new beau after finding out she's pregnant by another guy. He behaves as if this situation is no big thing and makes grand gestures throughout the 11-episode run at every chance. His heart's in the right place, the response is just too much into farce to make him anything but a caricature. Ben's dad, played by Steve Schirippa, is more of the same. Both Baumann and Schirippa are extremely likeable, if not believeable.
Other characters in the story are stock characters written with broad strokes. The soon-to-be-father is a completely unsympathetic sex addict (we ARE talking about high schoolers, remember?) who you more or less hope somebody will run over with a car. EVERY girl, from plain to not-plain surrenders to his 'charm' knowing him to be a creep. Such characters do exist in less broad terms. It's just another case of the creators of the show not willing to give any character any nuance.
The school slut, the school queen virgin and the horny jock that bounces between them, don't have any sublety to their characters either. That the slut is a valedictorian candidate with daddy issues hardly qualifies as depth of character.
I could go on and on. The fact that Amy's philandering father (with the mother of the slut no less) and the school guidance counselor are the anchor poles of reasonability in this show says it all. At no point does this show ever raise to Degrassi levels.
And what's really bad about the show is the fact that Molly Ringwald, who plays Amy's mother in this show, is, well ... matronly in this show. The young high schooler herself of all those old movies and the first year of Facts of Life, looks tired and old, these 20 years later.
If nothing else, this show deserves a thumbs down for that reason alone.
The creators of Degrassi have been at the kids' TV-creation game for just shy of two decades now. They've always approached the need to entertain and inform by leaning on both equally. Just about all the hot button issues have been dealt with at one time or another in the seven-odd shows that have carried Degrassi banners. In most cases, bad things resulted in bad results. No glamourizing social ills that don't result in trips to Disneyland. Death, disease and disaster have been part of Degrassi forever.
As a result, Degrassi deserves its place amongst the great all-time TV shows for kids.
Naturally, there have been a host of imitation of the high-school versions of Degrassi state-side over the years. The successful ones have be the big-bucks school shows that take place in a universe not inhabited by you, me, most kids or the casts of Degrassi. Shows like The O.C., Beverly Hills 90210 and Gossip Girl ignore reality and make the case that money lets you get away with anything fiction-wise.
This year, the new Degrassi-wannabe has been The Secret Life of The American Teenager. There's a heart to the show, although it doesn't belong to the lead viewpoint character, Shailene Woodley's Amy. Woodley's in tough, as she has to play a wallflower, impregnated during her first and only time with the school stud. Wallflowers retreat from the spotlight by definition, so it's hard for Woodley to back away and still stand up defiantly for herself. Rather than sympathetic, she comes across as a whiner. And it's hard to see how Woodley can do any better.
On the other hand, her new boyfriend who forgives all after falling in love at first sight, Ben Boykewich, played by Kenny Baumann, IS the heart of the show. But he's too over the top, taking the high road at every turn to new heights. He wants to marry his 16-year old new beau after finding out she's pregnant by another guy. He behaves as if this situation is no big thing and makes grand gestures throughout the 11-episode run at every chance. His heart's in the right place, the response is just too much into farce to make him anything but a caricature. Ben's dad, played by Steve Schirippa, is more of the same. Both Baumann and Schirippa are extremely likeable, if not believeable.
Other characters in the story are stock characters written with broad strokes. The soon-to-be-father is a completely unsympathetic sex addict (we ARE talking about high schoolers, remember?) who you more or less hope somebody will run over with a car. EVERY girl, from plain to not-plain surrenders to his 'charm' knowing him to be a creep. Such characters do exist in less broad terms. It's just another case of the creators of the show not willing to give any character any nuance.
The school slut, the school queen virgin and the horny jock that bounces between them, don't have any sublety to their characters either. That the slut is a valedictorian candidate with daddy issues hardly qualifies as depth of character.
I could go on and on. The fact that Amy's philandering father (with the mother of the slut no less) and the school guidance counselor are the anchor poles of reasonability in this show says it all. At no point does this show ever raise to Degrassi levels.
And what's really bad about the show is the fact that Molly Ringwald, who plays Amy's mother in this show, is, well ... matronly in this show. The young high schooler herself of all those old movies and the first year of Facts of Life, looks tired and old, these 20 years later.
If nothing else, this show deserves a thumbs down for that reason alone.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
SPORTS: Let's Get a Move On!
It's happened a million times before. Thursday night's game between the Toronto Blue Jays and the Chicago White Sox included a hoary old tradition. Manager Ozzie Guillen got caught not anticipating the falling apart of his pitcher and needed extra time to warm up Matt Thornton. So he motioned for catcher A.J. Pierczynski to go out the mound and inquire as to Gavin Floyd's supper plans. And when that wasn't enough time to get Thornton sufficiently warmed up, A.J. probably asked Floyd for his picks in this weekend's football pools.
When that bantering came to an end, the umpire finally getting tired of the play-acting, Guillen jumped out of the dugout to finally make the change that was these wasted minutes in the making.
It wasn't like Guillen had invented some clever new stalling tactic. This one probably dates back to Babe Ruth's day. Before that, most pitchers started and finished. Thus, no need to make time for warming up. Does the fact that it's been around longer than Commish Bug Selig mean we should still be putting up with the antics?
No, of course not.
Time for new uber-commissioner of all things sport (that would be ME of course) to make a new rule. If a catcher goes to the mound for a visit, the pitcher must complete pitching to the current batter and cannot be replaced, except in cases of injury.
While I'm on about extinguishing the charade that was put on display again Thursday night, I'll also throw a battering ram at the constant trotting out to the pitcher that some catchers turn into a marathon. Every catcher gets ONE unaccompanied visit to a pitcher in each game. After that, when he goes out, so does the ump.
There's no privacy in baseball, to mangle a perfectly good Tom Hanks quote. What there IS is a time crunch problem that could be partially resolved by getting rid of these wastages of time with catchers and pitchers catching up on chit-chat.
Interestingly enough, Guillen would probably thrive under my rules too. Instead of the catcher going out for a civilized converstation with the soon-to-be-replaced pitcher, it will be Guillen going out to get tossed out. A good manager tantrum can go minutes.
But at least we would be entertained while Thornton or whoever warms up.
When that bantering came to an end, the umpire finally getting tired of the play-acting, Guillen jumped out of the dugout to finally make the change that was these wasted minutes in the making.
It wasn't like Guillen had invented some clever new stalling tactic. This one probably dates back to Babe Ruth's day. Before that, most pitchers started and finished. Thus, no need to make time for warming up. Does the fact that it's been around longer than Commish Bug Selig mean we should still be putting up with the antics?
No, of course not.
Time for new uber-commissioner of all things sport (that would be ME of course) to make a new rule. If a catcher goes to the mound for a visit, the pitcher must complete pitching to the current batter and cannot be replaced, except in cases of injury.
While I'm on about extinguishing the charade that was put on display again Thursday night, I'll also throw a battering ram at the constant trotting out to the pitcher that some catchers turn into a marathon. Every catcher gets ONE unaccompanied visit to a pitcher in each game. After that, when he goes out, so does the ump.
There's no privacy in baseball, to mangle a perfectly good Tom Hanks quote. What there IS is a time crunch problem that could be partially resolved by getting rid of these wastages of time with catchers and pitchers catching up on chit-chat.
Interestingly enough, Guillen would probably thrive under my rules too. Instead of the catcher going out for a civilized converstation with the soon-to-be-replaced pitcher, it will be Guillen going out to get tossed out. A good manager tantrum can go minutes.
But at least we would be entertained while Thornton or whoever warms up.
MISC: Prediction Correct. As IF it Wouldn't Pan Out!
Off to the store for a late night run, hopefully to find some of those lemon turnovers. If you recall, I predicted I would be disappointed.
Naturally, there were NO lemon turnovers. Lots of those disgusting raspberry ones. A FULL row of caramel turnovers, a rather unlikely combination in my mind. Was not tempted in the slightest to test out the theory that they were edible, yet alone tasty. I peered past the first tier of plastic boxes and found some hiding behind the front row. Each turned out to be raspberry.
With a sigh, I looked at one last hidden container. It was apple.
The anticipated reward of two weeks ago, it seemed suddenly lacking. But I get over my disappointment quick. There's only one of the original four left as of this writing. And my midnight snack is still ahead.
Naturally, there were NO lemon turnovers. Lots of those disgusting raspberry ones. A FULL row of caramel turnovers, a rather unlikely combination in my mind. Was not tempted in the slightest to test out the theory that they were edible, yet alone tasty. I peered past the first tier of plastic boxes and found some hiding behind the front row. Each turned out to be raspberry.
With a sigh, I looked at one last hidden container. It was apple.
The anticipated reward of two weeks ago, it seemed suddenly lacking. But I get over my disappointment quick. There's only one of the original four left as of this writing. And my midnight snack is still ahead.
TV: Chris Noth is My Kind of Detective
Christopher Noth is leaving the Law and Order stable of TV shows, putting his role as Detective Mike Logan behind him once again. Law and Order: Criminal Intent will be all the poorer for that decision.
First, let me point out that Jeff Goldblum is usually VERY interesting and will probably bring an entertaining persona to the constantly changing show. But Noth's departure means the male leads of the show will be Goldblum and the similarly outre Vincent D'Onofrio. D'Onofrio, who I quite enjoyed throught the first three years of the show, has been moving into weirder and weirder territory since, leaving behind all subtle Sherlockian undertones to his role. Frankly, his episodes with Kathryn Erbe have not come close to the Noth-Julianne Nicholson/Alicia Witt episodes of the last two years.
Noth is, or rather was, the everyman of the detective bureau. A well-dressed repressed thug, Noth's Logan fought short temper and political lack of savvy, to show up and solve a LOT of crimes over the last decade or so. I can forgive him his fling with that weirdly popular Sex in the City show, because Noth turned in solid, believable performances each week. You could see when he finally 'got it.' You could sympathise with his urges to punch a perp out, and be happy he didn't.
Truthfully, which TV detective would you rather have investigating your murder? I mean, they all succeed most of the time. But between you and me, dontcha think Logan would go the extra yard for somebody ordinary like you or me?
So long Logan. Noth, don't be a stranger on the small screen.
First, let me point out that Jeff Goldblum is usually VERY interesting and will probably bring an entertaining persona to the constantly changing show. But Noth's departure means the male leads of the show will be Goldblum and the similarly outre Vincent D'Onofrio. D'Onofrio, who I quite enjoyed throught the first three years of the show, has been moving into weirder and weirder territory since, leaving behind all subtle Sherlockian undertones to his role. Frankly, his episodes with Kathryn Erbe have not come close to the Noth-Julianne Nicholson/Alicia Witt episodes of the last two years.
Noth is, or rather was, the everyman of the detective bureau. A well-dressed repressed thug, Noth's Logan fought short temper and political lack of savvy, to show up and solve a LOT of crimes over the last decade or so. I can forgive him his fling with that weirdly popular Sex in the City show, because Noth turned in solid, believable performances each week. You could see when he finally 'got it.' You could sympathise with his urges to punch a perp out, and be happy he didn't.
Truthfully, which TV detective would you rather have investigating your murder? I mean, they all succeed most of the time. But between you and me, dontcha think Logan would go the extra yard for somebody ordinary like you or me?
So long Logan. Noth, don't be a stranger on the small screen.
POLITICS: Lie. See, You CAN Type It, Say it.
Facts are not always black and white, meaning true or false. Some times there are nuances that result in silliness like quibbling over the meaning of 'is.' That's politician crap for "I'm thinking, just let me sit here and think a spell. My answer needs thinking about."
On the other hand, I will be glad for the day when a politician who is being lied about and smeared (say, Barack Obama), stands up and says, "He (or she) is lying." Straight out calling a prevaricating, disassembling, factually incorrect, misinterpreting of the truth opponent, the lying weasel that he or she is, would feel satisfying. But the word liar seems impossible to utter. Why?
I don't want any politically correct words any more. If Palin's LYING, and I believe she is because she is a politician, then SAY SO! Don't induce grey where black and white exists. IF a Fox news personality is talking, they are lying. It's endemic at that organization. SAY SO!
Obama's said "ENOUGH!" Now it is time to use that other fightin' word.
On the other hand, I will be glad for the day when a politician who is being lied about and smeared (say, Barack Obama), stands up and says, "He (or she) is lying." Straight out calling a prevaricating, disassembling, factually incorrect, misinterpreting of the truth opponent, the lying weasel that he or she is, would feel satisfying. But the word liar seems impossible to utter. Why?
I don't want any politically correct words any more. If Palin's LYING, and I believe she is because she is a politician, then SAY SO! Don't induce grey where black and white exists. IF a Fox news personality is talking, they are lying. It's endemic at that organization. SAY SO!
Obama's said "ENOUGH!" Now it is time to use that other fightin' word.
SPORTS: One MORE Question That Makes You Go Hmmmm!
Okay, just one more question I have no answer for.
Let's say you are a Frenchman who enjoys his or her athletics. Let's stick with him for a second or two. The Tour de France comes through your area yearly. On the morning of the race's proximity, you prepare a picnic basket full of wine, cheese and bread, all of delightful local vintage. You take said basket and other comforts of home to a spot just off the road near the bend into town. You get there plenty early and set up for the morning's excitement. At around 10:23 am, the first cyclist zooms by, barely leading a pelaton of about seventy riders. By 10:24, even the slowest laggard of the lot has come and gone out of sight. At 10:25 am, you pull out the wine and start drinking.
What, oh what, compells ANYBODY to watch a minute-long slice of a race that lasts HOURS and finishes in some far-off locale? Can ANYBODY explain this?
Let's say you are a Frenchman who enjoys his or her athletics. Let's stick with him for a second or two. The Tour de France comes through your area yearly. On the morning of the race's proximity, you prepare a picnic basket full of wine, cheese and bread, all of delightful local vintage. You take said basket and other comforts of home to a spot just off the road near the bend into town. You get there plenty early and set up for the morning's excitement. At around 10:23 am, the first cyclist zooms by, barely leading a pelaton of about seventy riders. By 10:24, even the slowest laggard of the lot has come and gone out of sight. At 10:25 am, you pull out the wine and start drinking.
What, oh what, compells ANYBODY to watch a minute-long slice of a race that lasts HOURS and finishes in some far-off locale? Can ANYBODY explain this?
SPORTS: Will THIS Save Ricciardi and Cost Blue Jays a Fan?
If the current September rush the Toronto Blue Jays are experiencing undoes seven years of mediocrity and convinces management and deluded fans that the team is on the right track, there is a chance, a growing chance, that both Paul Godfrey and the GM jerk JP Ricciardi will return when spring training in Florida brings back baseball in 2009.
If so, I won't be amongst them. I've already decided I will throw my lot in with the Minnesota Twins. They play the game right. They win. They have a Canuck or two, depending on the health of Justin Morneau and Jesse Crain. Lots to admire about them.
For the record, I'd love for the Blue Jays to continue this improbable run up Boston's backside, hoping it isn't the Tampa Bay Rays' backsliding that keeps them in the hunt. But even a seven-for-seven Toronto sweep over the Bostonions doesn't achieve the goal of grabbing the wildcard ducat to the playoffs. No, they need Minnesota also to play no better than .500 ball during the same period to wake up in late September with October plans.
Regardless of next year, THAT would be entertainment. They'd probably show it on the Science Fiction Channel, under the banner of "Lightning Strikes Twice! Toronto Repeats Colorado Run!" I'm up for a good show, since I've stuck with the team through these nauseating Ricciardi years.
But all horror shows must end.
If so, I won't be amongst them. I've already decided I will throw my lot in with the Minnesota Twins. They play the game right. They win. They have a Canuck or two, depending on the health of Justin Morneau and Jesse Crain. Lots to admire about them.
For the record, I'd love for the Blue Jays to continue this improbable run up Boston's backside, hoping it isn't the Tampa Bay Rays' backsliding that keeps them in the hunt. But even a seven-for-seven Toronto sweep over the Bostonions doesn't achieve the goal of grabbing the wildcard ducat to the playoffs. No, they need Minnesota also to play no better than .500 ball during the same period to wake up in late September with October plans.
Regardless of next year, THAT would be entertainment. They'd probably show it on the Science Fiction Channel, under the banner of "Lightning Strikes Twice! Toronto Repeats Colorado Run!" I'm up for a good show, since I've stuck with the team through these nauseating Ricciardi years.
But all horror shows must end.
SPORTS: The Argo Bounce Gets Stubler
Surprise! No, not the one, one experienced when hearing Rich Stubler had been fired as Toronto Argo head coach. You've read it was going to happen here before. No, the surprise was the reprise (which SHOULDN'T be a surprise) of yet another former Argo head coach as its new head coach.
The third-time-around award-winner was NOT Mike Clemons being recalled from the CEO office to re-take the head coaching job. Nope. It was version 3.0 of the Don Mathews Coaching Show Comes to Toronto. The Don, the winningest CFL coach of all time, with more stops in more CFL towns and along the sidelines of the most CFL games ever, is back again.
In a way, it was almost predictable. It will also be predictable that if the Argos lost to Winnipeg on Friday, there'll be no talk of "nothing to worry about. All we have to do is to make the playoffs." That's what got Stubler canned. When a coach of a vastly under-performing team shrugs off an embarassing loss, with the team owners and front office standing close enough to the action to smell the stinko smell, his career is measured in hours. Or less.
Once again, a defensive genius has failed to grasp and hold onto the head coaching job in Toronto. That's as predictable as the fact that The Don's act will last less than three years here in Toronto. The over and under on HIM leaving, willing or otherwise, can't be much more than 20 games.
Argo fans hope a Grey Cup game will be one of them.
The third-time-around award-winner was NOT Mike Clemons being recalled from the CEO office to re-take the head coaching job. Nope. It was version 3.0 of the Don Mathews Coaching Show Comes to Toronto. The Don, the winningest CFL coach of all time, with more stops in more CFL towns and along the sidelines of the most CFL games ever, is back again.
In a way, it was almost predictable. It will also be predictable that if the Argos lost to Winnipeg on Friday, there'll be no talk of "nothing to worry about. All we have to do is to make the playoffs." That's what got Stubler canned. When a coach of a vastly under-performing team shrugs off an embarassing loss, with the team owners and front office standing close enough to the action to smell the stinko smell, his career is measured in hours. Or less.
Once again, a defensive genius has failed to grasp and hold onto the head coaching job in Toronto. That's as predictable as the fact that The Don's act will last less than three years here in Toronto. The over and under on HIM leaving, willing or otherwise, can't be much more than 20 games.
Argo fans hope a Grey Cup game will be one of them.
MISC: Questions That Make You Go Hmmmm?
I am going to cheat to catch up a bit and do a bunch of small ones. But even amongst the small posts, this one is going to be a series of questions I don't have answers to after spending a (VERY) little time investigating.
What was the last US Network show that was shot completely in black and white for a full season? And when? I 'THINK' I can remember black and white shows as late as 1967. There might be shows from 1969 and maybe even 1970. I know one of the daytime soaps (Day After Tomorrow?) went colour right about then. Could Dark Shadows be the answer? (Nope, went colour in Fall of 1967) At any rate. I DO NOT know the answer. Curious about it, since I just acquired a complete set of the British BBC show Timeslip, a sort of Dr. Who without the Doctor, shot in 1970 ... in black and white.
Has any player ever worn the red, white and blue Major League baseball uniforms ... I mean the Red Sox, White Sox and Blue Jays uniforms? Dewayne Wise, an ex -Blue Jay turned White Sox, never played for Boston. Mike Timlin never played for the Pale Hose. After that, my mind shut down for possibilities.
A Nigerian comes from Nigeria. So what do you call a citizen of Niger?
Finally for this post, I just got a book from a favourite author as a belated birthday present. So how come I've never heard of Eoin Colfer's Benny and Omar before? Turns out it's a seven-year old book that mostly predates Colfer's Artemis Fowl books. If you go to amazon.ca and type in eoin colfer, you'll get three pages of Colfer books, none of them Benny and Omar. Type in Benny and Omar and you get a page of the book, each written by, get this, Eoin Colfer. IF you click on the Eoin Colfer link at amazon.ca, you will then get TWENTY EIGHT pages of Eoin Colfer material.
Hmmmmmm.
What was the last US Network show that was shot completely in black and white for a full season? And when? I 'THINK' I can remember black and white shows as late as 1967. There might be shows from 1969 and maybe even 1970. I know one of the daytime soaps (Day After Tomorrow?) went colour right about then. Could Dark Shadows be the answer? (Nope, went colour in Fall of 1967) At any rate. I DO NOT know the answer. Curious about it, since I just acquired a complete set of the British BBC show Timeslip, a sort of Dr. Who without the Doctor, shot in 1970 ... in black and white.
Has any player ever worn the red, white and blue Major League baseball uniforms ... I mean the Red Sox, White Sox and Blue Jays uniforms? Dewayne Wise, an ex -Blue Jay turned White Sox, never played for Boston. Mike Timlin never played for the Pale Hose. After that, my mind shut down for possibilities.
A Nigerian comes from Nigeria. So what do you call a citizen of Niger?
Finally for this post, I just got a book from a favourite author as a belated birthday present. So how come I've never heard of Eoin Colfer's Benny and Omar before? Turns out it's a seven-year old book that mostly predates Colfer's Artemis Fowl books. If you go to amazon.ca and type in eoin colfer, you'll get three pages of Colfer books, none of them Benny and Omar. Type in Benny and Omar and you get a page of the book, each written by, get this, Eoin Colfer. IF you click on the Eoin Colfer link at amazon.ca, you will then get TWENTY EIGHT pages of Eoin Colfer material.
Hmmmmmm.
Monday, September 08, 2008
TV: Thumbs DOWN for At the Movies
No, I am not dead. But I wish I was after seeing the new incarnation of At the Movies, starring Ben Lyons and Ben Mankiewicz. Two thumbs down, and soooo bad, my toes curled up in negative support for this inanimate corpse of a once-great show. I caught the debut while doing some channel-hopping during a commercial on the sports news. It was such a train wreck of a TV show that I just couldn't turn away and go back to football highlights.
To think this is the successor to the shows first put on by Roger Ebert and the late, great Gene Siskel is upsetting. If you thought Ebert and Richard Roeper and then Roeper and the many Ebert stand-ins were a step down from the original classic critique, you ain't seen nothin' yet.
Lyons and Mankiewicz, who carry names familiar to movie goers (critic daddy Jeffrey Lyons and Oscar winners granddaddy Herman and uncle Joe Mankewicz), have no charisma and no chemistry. Bluntly, they're terrible. Even when they disagree, they plaster fake smiles on their faces and try to outgrin each other in the 'debate.' There doesn't seem to be any vehemence to either side of their debate on the movie, Traitor. Ten minutes after the show, I couldn't remember which was for and which was against the movie.
Ebert and Siskel's family forbade the show from using their trade-marked thumbs up/down rating system, necessitating a new See-it, Skip-it, Rent-it scale. Oddly. the ability to vacillate between yes and no does NOT work. Hope they get rid of the Rent-it rating soon. Actually, since I don't plan to see the show again anytime soon. I really don't care. It's just a suggestion for the show producers in case they catch some other unwitting soul surfing the TV at 1:30 on a Sunday night.
By the way, I think we now know why Ebert and Roeper bailed on this show. There's also a new format that includes guest 'panels,' which consist of three people I've never heard of trying to scream their bon mots over each other so that we get FIVE ratings rather than two for a couple of the movies. IF they were going to foist this on Roeper and whoever, good on Richard for telling them to shove their pile of excrement on some other career.
To think this is the successor to the shows first put on by Roger Ebert and the late, great Gene Siskel is upsetting. If you thought Ebert and Richard Roeper and then Roeper and the many Ebert stand-ins were a step down from the original classic critique, you ain't seen nothin' yet.
Lyons and Mankiewicz, who carry names familiar to movie goers (critic daddy Jeffrey Lyons and Oscar winners granddaddy Herman and uncle Joe Mankewicz), have no charisma and no chemistry. Bluntly, they're terrible. Even when they disagree, they plaster fake smiles on their faces and try to outgrin each other in the 'debate.' There doesn't seem to be any vehemence to either side of their debate on the movie, Traitor. Ten minutes after the show, I couldn't remember which was for and which was against the movie.
Ebert and Siskel's family forbade the show from using their trade-marked thumbs up/down rating system, necessitating a new See-it, Skip-it, Rent-it scale. Oddly. the ability to vacillate between yes and no does NOT work. Hope they get rid of the Rent-it rating soon. Actually, since I don't plan to see the show again anytime soon. I really don't care. It's just a suggestion for the show producers in case they catch some other unwitting soul surfing the TV at 1:30 on a Sunday night.
By the way, I think we now know why Ebert and Roeper bailed on this show. There's also a new format that includes guest 'panels,' which consist of three people I've never heard of trying to scream their bon mots over each other so that we get FIVE ratings rather than two for a couple of the movies. IF they were going to foist this on Roeper and whoever, good on Richard for telling them to shove their pile of excrement on some other career.
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
MISC: A Lemony Fresh Experience
So, I'm in a store doing my late night (past midnight) shopping and I need something dessert-y. I can go weeks without any desserts. But when I need one, I need one bad. I had my heart set on a plastic container of apple turnovers, the puffed pastry ones with the chunky sugar topping. Bad for a diabetic, but what the heck.
Naturally, they didn't have any. Row upon row of raspberry, that most wretched of all red berries. Hate them. But peeking out at the end of the row were two containers. They weren't apple turnovers, they were LEMON turnovers!
Now, let me admit a love for lemon pies. Not lemon Meringue pies. I have NO idea why people need some frothy spun sugar atop their lemon pies. If they didn't want tart greatness, than they should be eating cotton candy or something else ephemeral. I like my lemon pie (and I have TWO sources of them who deliver around holidays) plain. Not even a la mode.
But I paused looking at the lemon turnovers. It looked almost too good to be true. Tangy lemon. Puff pastry. That usually forbidden sugar overload. Pause over. I grabbed them.
The four pastries lasted exactly 27 hours. It's taken everything in my will power (and a September heat wave) not to leave the cave and buy more. Given my luck, there won't be any lemon turnovers the next time I visit the store anyway.
I'll probably have to be satisfied with apple turnovers.
Naturally, they didn't have any. Row upon row of raspberry, that most wretched of all red berries. Hate them. But peeking out at the end of the row were two containers. They weren't apple turnovers, they were LEMON turnovers!
Now, let me admit a love for lemon pies. Not lemon Meringue pies. I have NO idea why people need some frothy spun sugar atop their lemon pies. If they didn't want tart greatness, than they should be eating cotton candy or something else ephemeral. I like my lemon pie (and I have TWO sources of them who deliver around holidays) plain. Not even a la mode.
But I paused looking at the lemon turnovers. It looked almost too good to be true. Tangy lemon. Puff pastry. That usually forbidden sugar overload. Pause over. I grabbed them.
The four pastries lasted exactly 27 hours. It's taken everything in my will power (and a September heat wave) not to leave the cave and buy more. Given my luck, there won't be any lemon turnovers the next time I visit the store anyway.
I'll probably have to be satisfied with apple turnovers.
SOFTWARE: Chrome Not Good to Go
The first question about Google Chrome arrived via phone Tuesday, September 2, 2008 at 3:45 pm. "Whadidya think?" asked Ken Koyama.
So, here's what I think about Google Chrome Web Browser version 0.2x Beta. It COULD deserve a spot on your desktop, but I'm in no way thinking it will replace Firefox as the browser of choice for quite a while yet. If ever.
First, let's remember that this is a beta product. 0.2 means its a REALLY REALLY early beta, barely more than an alpha. BUT that it is usable. That said, I have one use for it that I think makes it worth having on your desktop. IF you use Google apps like Google Docs, Google Calendar, etc., than what would be more logical than to use Chrome to get to them? I'm sure that Google will have as tight an interface with them, as Microsoft Windows has with Microsoft Office. It will be pushed to the legal limit of how tight, but it will be tight. (A LOT of people think Chrome is the official Office competitor, not a competitor for Firefox and Opera)
Of course, you have to be using Google Apps to make Chrome a real asset. Not everybody does. In fact, after the downtime last month of Google Apps, fewer people are trusting their data to the Google Cloud. As convenient as it is to be able to access your data from any computer any where, if the cloud is down, your data is down with it. Right now, I use Google Apps about as minimally as anyone with an account does. And I don't see it increasing a lot. But if it were to increase, so would my use of Chrome.
Chrome does have a couple of other decent features to at least make it worthwhile investigating. The speed and memory use of the product place it ahead of Firefox (and way ahead of you know what). However long that edge lasts, it still is an edge today. There's also a privacy feature where you can type in URLs and not be tracked during and after, use of the web-site. That's a temporary advantage over Firefox and IE 7. IE 8 beta has it already too. And Firefox will inevitably have an add-in for it, if v3.1, due at the end of 2009 doesn't already have it on the drawing boards.
(This is turning into a much longer post than I thought it would be)
Summing up my reaction to the release of Chrome ... Nice toy right now. A contender in the future. A replacement for Firefox? No. Judge accordingly.
So, here's what I think about Google Chrome Web Browser version 0.2x Beta. It COULD deserve a spot on your desktop, but I'm in no way thinking it will replace Firefox as the browser of choice for quite a while yet. If ever.
First, let's remember that this is a beta product. 0.2 means its a REALLY REALLY early beta, barely more than an alpha. BUT that it is usable. That said, I have one use for it that I think makes it worth having on your desktop. IF you use Google apps like Google Docs, Google Calendar, etc., than what would be more logical than to use Chrome to get to them? I'm sure that Google will have as tight an interface with them, as Microsoft Windows has with Microsoft Office. It will be pushed to the legal limit of how tight, but it will be tight. (A LOT of people think Chrome is the official Office competitor, not a competitor for Firefox and Opera)
Of course, you have to be using Google Apps to make Chrome a real asset. Not everybody does. In fact, after the downtime last month of Google Apps, fewer people are trusting their data to the Google Cloud. As convenient as it is to be able to access your data from any computer any where, if the cloud is down, your data is down with it. Right now, I use Google Apps about as minimally as anyone with an account does. And I don't see it increasing a lot. But if it were to increase, so would my use of Chrome.
Chrome does have a couple of other decent features to at least make it worthwhile investigating. The speed and memory use of the product place it ahead of Firefox (and way ahead of you know what). However long that edge lasts, it still is an edge today. There's also a privacy feature where you can type in URLs and not be tracked during and after, use of the web-site. That's a temporary advantage over Firefox and IE 7. IE 8 beta has it already too. And Firefox will inevitably have an add-in for it, if v3.1, due at the end of 2009 doesn't already have it on the drawing boards.
(This is turning into a much longer post than I thought it would be)
Summing up my reaction to the release of Chrome ... Nice toy right now. A contender in the future. A replacement for Firefox? No. Judge accordingly.
Monday, September 01, 2008
MISC: My First Commercial
Back in the last century, even before I did a couple of commercials while in the radio biz, I did my first commercial while at Bramalea Secondary School. It was a combination of two well-known things, the Surfaris's hit song Wipe Out as the musical background and a riff on Mission Impossible's opening sequence. It went something like this:
Opening bars, complete with maniacal laugh and somebody screaming 'Wipe out!' "This is called Operation Wipe-Out. Your mission, should you accept it, and you will, is to clean up the garbage in the halls and fill the containers. This message will self-destruct in ten seconds."
Okay, it wasn't great. And it probably meant I shouldn't have wasted any time later in life with dallying in advertising. But it was fun to produce and it got a laugh at school (and not much action).
I mention this because I stumbled upon the Surfaris version of it on YouTube while looking for the special politicians' New Rules video mentioned in the last post. I won't reveal just HOW I got from searching for that to the Surfaris, but I got there nonetheless. Here's just ONE of the renditions at YouTube for the song.
It wasn't until years after I got out of school that I realized that this song is NOT the holder of the unique distinction of being the non-instrumental song with the fewest words in the song. It has either one, two, three or seven words in the song, depending on whether you spell the title as Wipeout or Wipe Out and whether you think the laugh has one word (hah) or five words (hah hah hah hah hah). I always came down on the side of one word.
But the song itself, which is covered by the Ventures in another YouTube video, really IS just an instrumental, with the Surfaris adding the word(s) to the opeinng beats.
If you haven't heard it before or not for a long time, it's worth checking out.
Opening bars, complete with maniacal laugh and somebody screaming 'Wipe out!' "This is called Operation Wipe-Out. Your mission, should you accept it, and you will, is to clean up the garbage in the halls and fill the containers. This message will self-destruct in ten seconds."
Okay, it wasn't great. And it probably meant I shouldn't have wasted any time later in life with dallying in advertising. But it was fun to produce and it got a laugh at school (and not much action).
I mention this because I stumbled upon the Surfaris version of it on YouTube while looking for the special politicians' New Rules video mentioned in the last post. I won't reveal just HOW I got from searching for that to the Surfaris, but I got there nonetheless. Here's just ONE of the renditions at YouTube for the song.
It wasn't until years after I got out of school that I realized that this song is NOT the holder of the unique distinction of being the non-instrumental song with the fewest words in the song. It has either one, two, three or seven words in the song, depending on whether you spell the title as Wipeout or Wipe Out and whether you think the laugh has one word (hah) or five words (hah hah hah hah hah). I always came down on the side of one word.
But the song itself, which is covered by the Ventures in another YouTube video, really IS just an instrumental, with the Surfaris adding the word(s) to the opeinng beats.
If you haven't heard it before or not for a long time, it's worth checking out.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
TV: He's BAAAAACK!
Well, I was going to fill this slot with a long analysis of what I liked and disliked about the Olympics, but work intrudes. So a segue to some good news.
Real Time with Bill Maher started it's seventh (or 11th... depends on some accounting irregularities) season Friday night, joyfully celebrating a return and a news present in the form of the new Republican vice-presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. The result was predictable. Maher and the panelists, Craig Ferguson, Michel Martin and New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine (a Democrat) had a field day. The funniest part was a New Rules quick joke session on tape with various Democrat bigwigs (many putative Democratic VP candidates) delivering the punch lines. They were actually pretty good.
The last bit hasn't made it to YouTube yet. But it will. At least I hope HBO will release it.
Welcome back Bill.
Real Time with Bill Maher started it's seventh (or 11th... depends on some accounting irregularities) season Friday night, joyfully celebrating a return and a news present in the form of the new Republican vice-presidential nominee, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. The result was predictable. Maher and the panelists, Craig Ferguson, Michel Martin and New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine (a Democrat) had a field day. The funniest part was a New Rules quick joke session on tape with various Democrat bigwigs (many putative Democratic VP candidates) delivering the punch lines. They were actually pretty good.
The last bit hasn't made it to YouTube yet. But it will. At least I hope HBO will release it.
Welcome back Bill.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)