Monday, December 12, 2011
Hitler and Chamberlain at Munich
Mel Brooks famously said, "But by using the medium of comedy, we can try to rob Hitler of his posthumous power and myths." I humbly offer the notion of Adolf Hitler and Neville Chamberlain discussing something more mundane than the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia at the Munich Conference:
Mazda's Styling Cues
I've wondered for a long time where Mazda got their styling cue, first for the Mazda 3 and then incorporated into subsequent models. Here's, the Mazda 3:
Then, it dawned on me. The source was none other than:
The spaceship from the movie Heavy Metal
Then, it dawned on me. The source was none other than:
The spaceship from the movie Heavy Metal
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Liberals and Conservatives Don't Get It
This morning, 19 June, Jon Stewart was on FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace. I was struck by how little they understood each other. Repeatedly (Stewart especially), asked, do you get me now. Remarkably, they didn’t “get” each other, despite their sincere efforts. Like most Democrats and Republicans, Stewart and Wallace don’t understand that both sides have the same concerns. Both sides are concerned about the economy, health care, education, and the family. The difference between the two is that they have different ideas on what they believe will help or improve those various issues.
Stewart talked about an organized right-wing conspiracy and Wallace talked about liberal bias in the media. Neither of them “get it” or understand that they are dealing with a set of beliefs and ideologies formulated by the Democratic National Committee or Republican National Committee. There is no conspiracy so much as a standardization of beliefs manufactured by the DNC and RNC – the default spokes-vehicles for liberals and conservatives in this country.
This brings up the issue of standardized beliefs. In Europe, Parliamentary politics is based on extreme party discipline. Politicians who don’t tow the party line are stricken from candidate’s lists and can’t get elected. In the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan relaxed party discipline to broaden the appeal of the Republicans and win new voters. Then, in 1998, at the impetus of Moveon.org, the Democrats increased party discipline in order to clarify their ideas. The Republicans then followed suit. Thus, our parties have adopted, to a large extent, European parliamentary party discipline. This discipline is strong in both parties because they both have the same over-riding goal, quite apart from the economy, health care, education, or the family.
Despite their differences, the DNC and RNC now share the same primary goal – win election or seek re-election of their candidates. Our political leaders aren’t focused on serving their constituents so much as they are focused on supporting their parties. The reality of the current situation in American politics is that they can’t afford to focus on their constituents when they must focus on the interests of the party to remain in office. Our representatives rely on their respective national committees to convince their voters that their work in Washington is serving the interests of “the people.” And, if not, they argue that it’s the fault of the other party.
Ideology replaced independent thought. Now, propaganda has replaced ideology. Maybe that’s why Stewart and Wallace couldn’t “get” each other. Maybe that’s why we get the government we deserve – a government increasingly run by unelected bureaucrats.
Stewart talked about an organized right-wing conspiracy and Wallace talked about liberal bias in the media. Neither of them “get it” or understand that they are dealing with a set of beliefs and ideologies formulated by the Democratic National Committee or Republican National Committee. There is no conspiracy so much as a standardization of beliefs manufactured by the DNC and RNC – the default spokes-vehicles for liberals and conservatives in this country.
This brings up the issue of standardized beliefs. In Europe, Parliamentary politics is based on extreme party discipline. Politicians who don’t tow the party line are stricken from candidate’s lists and can’t get elected. In the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan relaxed party discipline to broaden the appeal of the Republicans and win new voters. Then, in 1998, at the impetus of Moveon.org, the Democrats increased party discipline in order to clarify their ideas. The Republicans then followed suit. Thus, our parties have adopted, to a large extent, European parliamentary party discipline. This discipline is strong in both parties because they both have the same over-riding goal, quite apart from the economy, health care, education, or the family.
Despite their differences, the DNC and RNC now share the same primary goal – win election or seek re-election of their candidates. Our political leaders aren’t focused on serving their constituents so much as they are focused on supporting their parties. The reality of the current situation in American politics is that they can’t afford to focus on their constituents when they must focus on the interests of the party to remain in office. Our representatives rely on their respective national committees to convince their voters that their work in Washington is serving the interests of “the people.” And, if not, they argue that it’s the fault of the other party.
Ideology replaced independent thought. Now, propaganda has replaced ideology. Maybe that’s why Stewart and Wallace couldn’t “get” each other. Maybe that’s why we get the government we deserve – a government increasingly run by unelected bureaucrats.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
A Modest Proposal for Mr Roger Goodell
With apologies to Jonathan Swift, I offer the following modest proposal to NFL Commissioner, Roger Goodell. Thanks to a number of currents flowing together (like noxious sewers), Goodell has the opportunity to alter football for the better.
First, marketers tell us that fans demand high-scoring games. Therefore, the NFL Rules Committee has changed the rules to ensure that the passing game is emphasized. Defensive backs cannot get near a wide receiver lest they draw a pass interference penalty. Likewise, the quarterback has become more sacrosanct than ever before. Even touching the quarterback below the knees or above the shoulders results in an immediate penalty. This is done, in part, to slow down the pass rush so the quarterback has more time to complete the long, down-field passes. Curiously, the emphasis on the passing game over the running game produces an undesired result (for advertisers) because games that are pass heavy take longer to play than running-dominated games because of clock stoppages. Advertisers want quick games. Rightly seeing that the average American has a one-hour attention span, they want the games to be over quickly so people are more likely to watch. (This, however, seems counterproductive because short games mean less overall advertising time, but I’m not in advertising). My solution will solve the nagging problem of long, low-scoring games.
Secondly, both the NFL owners and the NFL Players Association seem hell bent on destroying the goose that laid the golden egg. Football revenues are up so both sides are making more money than ever before. Unfortunately, neither side seems to be serious about renegotiating the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) which the owners opted out of last year. The owners claim that sharing 60 per cent of their revenues with the players is unfair to the owners. Apparently, the owners believe they do more than 40 per cent of the work or that 40 per cent of the football fans are paying to see really, really good ownership. The owners also claim that many of them are losing money. However, they refuse to open their books and prove they are losing money. Meanwhile, the Players Association is led by a guy whose credentials to be the lead negotiator for the NFL players includes the facts that he is a lawyer, a lobbyist, and close friend of Barack Obama. He clearly knows a great deal about wheeling and dealing in Washington, but his policy of brinksmanship in labor negotiations is deeply suspect. In any event, both sides of multi-millionaires are hell bent on destroying football (just like the respective sides did with baseball), either by the owners locking out the players or the players going on strike, again.
Luckily, I have a solution to all the NFL’s problems. Reduce all teams to 11 players and one coach. This will save the owners a great deal of money. We’ll only need 11 offensive players to ensure that there is enough scoring to keep the marketers happy. The coach only needs to have a “magic wheel” of plays – think of Wheel of Fortune, but with football plays. For example, the coach might spin the wheel and the play is a thirty yard go route. The quarterback calls the play, the offensive line pass blocks (against nobody), the receivers run their routes (against nobody), and the quarterback completes the pass (hopefully). After the play, the solitary official spins his “magic wheel” of penalties. If there is no penalty, the play stands. If, for example, there is illegal contact downfield against the defense, ten yards gets tacked onto the play. If, for a different example, there is offensive holding called, the play comes back. It doesn’t matter that there are no defensive players on the field. The officiating this year proved that a penalty doesn’t need to occur to have been called, nor are blatant penalties called (just ask James Harrison). Sure, you may get a roughing the kicker penalty when there is no kicker on the team any more, but I think most fans would agree that my system has less room for mystery calls than the current system.
This plan saves the owners money, the marketers get short, high-scoring games, and, as an added benefit, we get better officiated games. In addition, all the fantasy football fans will be pleased. They won’t have to worry about the pesky problem of rooting for one particular team or worrying about their real team screwing up their fantasy team. Instead, they can just concentrate on the truly important question -- is a system that uses whole points or one that uses fractional points for yards gained more accurately reflective of reality. Obviously, the yards themselves are not reality. Now, if I could just find Mr Goodell’s phone number, we can get the ball rolling (or “magic wheel” spinning).
First, marketers tell us that fans demand high-scoring games. Therefore, the NFL Rules Committee has changed the rules to ensure that the passing game is emphasized. Defensive backs cannot get near a wide receiver lest they draw a pass interference penalty. Likewise, the quarterback has become more sacrosanct than ever before. Even touching the quarterback below the knees or above the shoulders results in an immediate penalty. This is done, in part, to slow down the pass rush so the quarterback has more time to complete the long, down-field passes. Curiously, the emphasis on the passing game over the running game produces an undesired result (for advertisers) because games that are pass heavy take longer to play than running-dominated games because of clock stoppages. Advertisers want quick games. Rightly seeing that the average American has a one-hour attention span, they want the games to be over quickly so people are more likely to watch. (This, however, seems counterproductive because short games mean less overall advertising time, but I’m not in advertising). My solution will solve the nagging problem of long, low-scoring games.
Secondly, both the NFL owners and the NFL Players Association seem hell bent on destroying the goose that laid the golden egg. Football revenues are up so both sides are making more money than ever before. Unfortunately, neither side seems to be serious about renegotiating the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) which the owners opted out of last year. The owners claim that sharing 60 per cent of their revenues with the players is unfair to the owners. Apparently, the owners believe they do more than 40 per cent of the work or that 40 per cent of the football fans are paying to see really, really good ownership. The owners also claim that many of them are losing money. However, they refuse to open their books and prove they are losing money. Meanwhile, the Players Association is led by a guy whose credentials to be the lead negotiator for the NFL players includes the facts that he is a lawyer, a lobbyist, and close friend of Barack Obama. He clearly knows a great deal about wheeling and dealing in Washington, but his policy of brinksmanship in labor negotiations is deeply suspect. In any event, both sides of multi-millionaires are hell bent on destroying football (just like the respective sides did with baseball), either by the owners locking out the players or the players going on strike, again.
Luckily, I have a solution to all the NFL’s problems. Reduce all teams to 11 players and one coach. This will save the owners a great deal of money. We’ll only need 11 offensive players to ensure that there is enough scoring to keep the marketers happy. The coach only needs to have a “magic wheel” of plays – think of Wheel of Fortune, but with football plays. For example, the coach might spin the wheel and the play is a thirty yard go route. The quarterback calls the play, the offensive line pass blocks (against nobody), the receivers run their routes (against nobody), and the quarterback completes the pass (hopefully). After the play, the solitary official spins his “magic wheel” of penalties. If there is no penalty, the play stands. If, for example, there is illegal contact downfield against the defense, ten yards gets tacked onto the play. If, for a different example, there is offensive holding called, the play comes back. It doesn’t matter that there are no defensive players on the field. The officiating this year proved that a penalty doesn’t need to occur to have been called, nor are blatant penalties called (just ask James Harrison). Sure, you may get a roughing the kicker penalty when there is no kicker on the team any more, but I think most fans would agree that my system has less room for mystery calls than the current system.
This plan saves the owners money, the marketers get short, high-scoring games, and, as an added benefit, we get better officiated games. In addition, all the fantasy football fans will be pleased. They won’t have to worry about the pesky problem of rooting for one particular team or worrying about their real team screwing up their fantasy team. Instead, they can just concentrate on the truly important question -- is a system that uses whole points or one that uses fractional points for yards gained more accurately reflective of reality. Obviously, the yards themselves are not reality. Now, if I could just find Mr Goodell’s phone number, we can get the ball rolling (or “magic wheel” spinning).
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Cotton Hill and Edward Whitacre, Jr.
Cotton Hill and Edward Whitacre, Jr. -- separated at birth?
(http://hollywoodsnark.com/2007/11/12/a-requiem-for-cotton-hill/)
(http://www.time.com/time/quotes/0,26174,1903758,00.html)
(http://hollywoodsnark.com/2007/11/12/a-requiem-for-cotton-hill/)
(http://www.time.com/time/quotes/0,26174,1903758,00.html)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
