The Wizard of Woz

In praise of the billionaire next door ... -- Picture courtesy of Wikipedia

by blogSpotter
2008 Election update – John McCain surprised everyone by picking a 44 year old woman, Alaska governor Susan Palin as his running mate. My initial impression is that he actually made a good choice. Yes, she’s lacking in experience but so is the headliner of the opposing party. We’ll see how she does in the debates. Look for an upcoming blog where I delve deeper into this election of historic firsts.

IN PRAISE OF WOZ …

Who is Steve Wozniak? He’s the 57 year-old cofounder of Apple Computer – a fairly shy, modest computer engineer. He recently garnered attention by dating Kathy Griffin and being filmed for a few episodes of her show, My Life on the D-List. Wozniak has primarily lived off his Apple wealth since the late 70’s, but he hasn’t been idle. He taught 5th grade for a period, and has been involved in various education, philanthropic efforts. He continued his engineering efforts working on a universal remote control in the 80’s. He’s encouraged young people to follow in his footsteps and even at one point handed out “Wozzie” awards in that pursuit.

I love Kathy Griffin (probably for all the wrong reasons), and could tell that she and the Woz were not a match. Woz is a billionaire, but he drives a Toyota Prius – one with a Segway scooter in the trunk. For a semi-formal dinner they were invited to, Woz discovered that Men’s Wearhouse had a great 2-for-1 suit sale. Kathy used Woz as material for her comedy monologue. She was horrified that a billionaire was driving a Prius and shopping at Men’s Wearhouse. What kind of billionaire is this??

Their relationship's demise was probably triggered by two or three events... Woz took Kathy out to dine exactly twice: once to Bob’s Big Boy (hamburger chain) and once to the Hickory Pit (home style cooking similar to Dickey’s in Dallas). Kathy indicated that she was embarrassed to be seen in the Hickory Pit. Shortly after, they attended an animal charity event hosted by Wozniak. The proceeds for the whole night were probably less than what Wozniak earns in interest for a single day. Griffin speculated aloud, why doesn’t Woz just write out a check for the whole thing? In Woz’s defense, he may have been raising awareness of other people – maybe he wants to spread the spirit of philanthropy itself.

What I took away in part, is that Woz is not a good-looking man – easily 50 lbs overweight. I wondered if Kathy’s reticence would have been so extreme if he were eye candy instead. In fact, Woz is “right on” in his approach to finances. He’s not about the money – he knows that you can’t take it with you and it’s just a marker on the wall. What I liked about his priorities were:

1. Helping disadvantaged children and also animals at shelters.
2. Continuing the advance of technology with research and education
3. Saving the environment with earth-friendly cars and scooters
4. Shunning pretension by purchasing food, car and clothes of good value not snob appeal

Woz also attended a gay pride “Bear Fest” with Griffin and took in all of it with good-natured aplomb. He was nonjudgmental and accepting in the extreme – probably a close relative to his friend Jobs in his California frame of mind. (A quality I like by the way).

In sum, how should a billionaire behave? Should he be a conniving materialist like Croesus of legend (or Mr. Burns on The Simpsons)? I think not. I think Wozniak has set the bar pretty damn high – we should all aspire to teach 5th grade, drive a Prius and yes – eat at the Hickory Pit. Kathy probably wants someone to sweep her off her feet with diamonds and pearls. She'll have to find a Prince Charming on the opposite end of the scale from Woz -- good luck with that.

© 2008 blogSpotter

La Belle Michelle

A Black Laura Petrie? -- Picture captured by blogSpotter

by blogSpotter
I watched Michelle Obama's speech, given on the first night of the 2008 Democratic National Convention. I must give "props" where they're due -- she is an attractive, photogenic woman. She has a vague resemblance to Laura Petrie of television fame -- albeit a black one. Michelle would be described as "high yellow" in the black community -- a woman with light mocha skin and straight, styled hair. She wore a simple teal dress and very little jewelry -- very ladylike and nothing the least bit provocative. Everything in baby steps, I guess -- America probably isn't ready for a Wanda Sykes or a Whoopie Goldberg as First Lady. Both Obama and Michelle look too much like models to me, which makes me ponder how much intellectual weight they carry. I know they went to Ivy League schools, but a school pedigree doesn't automatically translate to gravitas -- George W Bush went to Harvard.

Michelle was extremely poised and well-spoken at the podium. Her speech centered mostly on family values and cherished memories. She must have taken some heat for earlier remarks dissing America, because in this speech she talked at some length about what opportunities abounded in the good ol' U.S. of A. Some of Hillary's "pumas" were dismissive of Michelle's talk -- it was all family with no hint of feminism. I think Michelle probably stuck to the necessary talking points. The Obamas have to look like Main Street Americans, somebody you might run into at the corner McDonald's. They're not, but that's neither here nor there. Much like Julia, one of America's first black TV icons not cast as a maid or butler, the Obamas have to be pleasingly bland, partly white and all-digestible. Ex-nay on the feminism or militancy in any form.

Coming away from it, I have to say I'm unimpressed for other reasons. Barrack himself comes across as smug and superficial in the extreme. I'm thinking of the TV show, Mad About You, where I liked every character but the main one played by the somewhat obnoxious Paul Reiser. Lose that guy and you have a show. Odd that my other example is the Cosby Show, which featured the successful, adorable Huxtable family. They didn't seem real to me (or even to other blacks -- Flip Wilson said at the time, in comparison, that his show was about a black family). The Huxtables were all OK except for the slightly pompous and annoying Bill Cosby. And he was the star of the show. Lose Cosby and you would've had a show.

Lose Barrack and you have a 2008 show. What's that? Barrack is the candidate? I can't have Helen Hunt without Paul Reiser? Damn! OK, I'll probably have to move beyond superficial impressions, much as our Idol-addled public needs to do the same thing. I'll try to get beyond the veneer -- but that will be hard to do if a veneer is all there is. Obama's choice of Joe Biden as veep hasn't really changed the game very much. Biden has been implicated in plagiarism before, and shares a little of Obama's used car salesman essence. Stay tuned to this blog -- I still haven't decided how I'm going to vote.

© 2008 blogSpotter

Laziness is a Virtue

Lazy is as lazy does -- Picture courtesy of Wikipedia

by blogSpotter
If you look at the Catholics’ Seven Deadly Sins, one of them is “sloth”. Sloth is another word for laziness or a disinclination to do productive work. I’ve heard the word bandied about all my life (not always about me! ☺). Usually it’s an invective: “Lazeee!” Sometimes it’s stuational as in, “He was too lazy to help pull the weeds”. Sometimes it’s more of a lifestyle accusation – “She’s lazy – all she does is smoke and watch television all day”.

I’ve always thought the topic of laziness was interesting in that strenuous labor isn’t generally fun; how far must you cross the Rubicon to be accused of laziness? If you are employed or in a relationship, you’re part of a social contract where workloads are implied if not explicit. Your spouse or employer may have a hunch about what your share should be and how much effort should be expended. I’d like to submit that there are notable exceptions to the rules of laziness.

At TI I had a fellow employee who was brilliant. He could do his assigned work (and somewhat more) in less than two hours and then spend time on more personal pursuits. In fact, he was delivering to the company the services they wanted, at the salary he wanted. Some say he should’ve asked for more to fill his plate. I might agree, but mainly to the extent that he could help other employees leverage from his timesaving techniques.

In general, here are some caveats about laziness:

o It’s not laziness if you’re inventing a better mousetrap. If you’re trading brawn for brain, and ultimately making a task easier, you’re productively inventive – not lazy.

o It’s not laziness if the task is unpleasant sweat work and you can hire the work done. It’s a story as old as capitalism – sometimes time is better spent doing enjoyable or personally productive things. This is especially true of leisure time at home.

o It’s not laziness if you are under the thrall of a despotic regime that’s forcing quotas or making you respond to a bell timer. No one should be a slave and really, ultimately nobody should do anything they don’t want to do unless it fits some part of his or her life goals.

o It’s by far better to do something because you want to do it, rather than because you have to do it. If the balance shifts toward “have to” and away from “want to” it might be time for a change of venue.

It’s true that sometimes rote activities are good practice or good exercise. If you find yourself carrying jugs of water on your head, let’s hope that it’s to garner strength or balance – not because of an economic condition. Is someone in your life lazy? Is it because he really can’t get it in gear, or because his priorities aren’t the same as yours? Maybe he isn’t on fire to do your bidding. Or maybe he’s a “philosopher king” taking some moments to reflect. Whatever the case, we’re probably on safer ground if the subject of lazy speculations is ourselves and not the person across the room. There is such a thing as “dereliction of duty” – 5 alarm laziness. This is fairly atypical; for myself I’ll be working on some mousetraps and leave the 5 alarm designating to others.

© 2008 blogSpotter

Blade Runner Redux

Ultimate cliff-hanger -- Picture courtesy of Warner Bros.

by blogSpotter
Once in a while a movie comes along that becomes a cultural touchstone and a benchmark. Such movies will be endlessly dissected and offered for comparison. If you’re a movie buff like me, and have failed to see one of these movies, you feel left out of the conversation. The movie of which I now speak is Blade Runner, a 1982 sci-fi thriller that broke the ground in several respects.

Director Ridley Scott says the film is his greatest achievement, and he has to be right. I watched it for the first time this weekend on my Apple TV. I saw the 1992 director’s cut that’s been digitally remastered. With only minor anachronisms (an Atari ad, low-res digital prints), the movie could’ve been made yesterday.

Blade Runner is set in Los Angeles of 2019, and deals with a small uprising of human-looking extraplanetary slave robots (replicants) who’ve returned to Earth. They hope to be reprogrammed to experience full human emotions and extend their lifespans beyond 4 years; they also want to take over the humans who made them. Harrison Ford plays Rick Deckerd, a special detective (“blade runner”) hired to “retire” (i.e. kill) the uprising replicants. I won’t elaborate much further in case a reader wants to see this movie.

What makes this movie a ground-breaker? The film is considered the first in the “neo-noire” category which blends the eerie, sepia-toned ambience of 1940’s film noire with a grim, industrial future. Much of the film is cast in tones of brown, black and blue – steam comes from building vents while rain falls lightly on the pavement. There are garish flashes of color when the camera pans over a futuristic Chinatown, where bubble cars float past fish markets and all-you-can-eat buffets. There are odd overlays of future and past (a 1959 Chrysler Imperial drives by) which adds to all the weirdness.

There are at least 3 movies (or movie franchises) that owe a huge debt to Blade Runner for both style and content:

o The Matrix – this movie deals with machine uprisings in a quasi-apocalyptic future
o The entire Batman series starting with the 1989 movie – the Gotham city envisioned by Burton has to have been influenced by Blade Runner.
o Blue Velvet – I thought that David Lynch’s vision of a superhuman (or inhuman), psycho killer lurching through an abandoned apartment building was novel in 1986; it was done to perfection by Rutger Hauer in Blade Runner. You say, “other movies before that had psycho chase scenes”. Well, not quite like this.

In watching this movie, I was spell-bound by everything, not the least of which is the eerie background music. Also this movie has a highly charged erotic moment where Deckerd tells Rachael, a replicant, to say “kiss me”. She says, “I’m not programmed to say that”. He insists, and the replicant finally does as commanded. Apparently something overcomes her replicant status (overpowering love? New circuitry?). It was pointed out earlier that Rachael was a “newer model” that featured realistic memories and emotions – apparently so.

In sum, Blade Runner is an outstanding movie. The American Film Institute named it the 97th greatest movie of all time. Rent the 2007 remastered edition and find out why.

© 2008 blogSpotter

Love Child

Never meant to be? -- Picture courtesy of Wikipedia

by blogSpotter
Senator John Edwards, Senator from North Carolina has a love child. No, it's not the infant daughter of Rielle Hunter his ex-campaign aid. That may be his daughter, but the Love Child I speak of is John Edwards' own self-infatuation. By several accounts, the man is in love with himself more than anything or anyone else. The product of that Love is a Tornado that leaves several wounded hearts and wrecked campaigns in its wake.

Cards on the table -- Edwards was my pick for the 2008 Nomination. How wrong could I have been? I need a better litmus screening for character attributes, obviously. In 1998, I defended Bill Clinton mightily. "There's no way he could've diddled Monica in the Oval Office! There are cameras all over, and he would just know better!" OK, wrong about that one too. What I can say now is, "Stick a fork in him -- he's done". Edwards actually was pondering his future longevity as a 2012 presidential hopeful. With these sleazebag qualities revealed, he'll be lucky to keep his date to speak at the 2008 Denver Convention.

It's really a bad deal for Edwards. How bad? Well when you've already been caught in the cookie jar, one presumes that you're at least done with those cookies from that jar. You won't go back for more, knowing (one presumes) that a throng of hidden mikes and cameras await you. Edwards tip-toed back to the jar. On the last occasion he was chased into a hotel men's room. Edwards said, in all seriousness that his affair was over when in fact National Enquirer has nearly up-to-the-minute photos of midnight hotel visits with Rielle Hunter. Are these policy discussions?

Edwards claims not to be the father of Rielle's baby -- he's willing to take a paternity test. Earlier on, he was unwilling when the National Enquirer made the suggestion. It's now very convenient that Rielle doesn't want such a test (it would be disruptive and intrusive). Adding to this sleaziness is the possible complicity of a campaign aid, Andrew Young, claiming paternity. Adding to that sleaziness is the prospect that campaign funds were used as hush money. Adding a ton-load to all that sleaziness is the fact the Edwards' long-suffering wife is left at home to battle cancer by herself.

Conservatives have a legitimate beef about this – why did the story languish in supermarket tabloid aisles for a full year, before the mainstream media picked up on it? Is it because the Enquirer has a bottom-feeder reputation or because liberal politicians always get kid glove treatment? Either way, it’s a terrible oversight. The story didn’t receive serious treatment until Edwards recently fessed up on ABC; it would’ve been a big mess if he’d received the most delegates.

Now back to Edwards himself. My only question to him is, "Why the paternity cover-up? Why involve Andrew Young?". Mr. Edwards, it's over for you. You're as cooked as stale beef jerky. There is so much lying and duplicity here, it won't much matter who the father is. We already know that you have a Love Child and his name is John Edwards. Nothing else will make a bit of difference.

© 2008 blogSpotter

The Bitch Turn Me In

Facing the needle tonight -- Picture courtesy of Texas Department of Criminal Justice

by blogSpotter
Tonight at 6PM, Texas death row inmate Leon Dorsey will die by lethal injection. The 32 year-old black man was already serving a life sentence for killing a 51-year old convenience store clerk in 1998 when he was strongly implicated in another horrible murder in Dallas, Texas. It seems a few years earlier, in 1994 two Blockbuster Video clerks were found dead in the store office at Casa Linda Village in East Dallas, after hours. They had been slain execution-style, brutally. Dorsey apparently told his girlfriend about it; when she found out he'd gone out on her a few years later, she turned him in to the police. His famous words of remorse were:

"The bitch turn me in".

Let’s never mind the questionable morals of a girlfriend who would keep Dorsey’s gruesome secret for any misguided sense of devotion. Dorsey gave a full confession -- it turns out that it was a violently escalated robbery. The video clerks gave Dorsey $392 out of the register; he was angry at the small amount. They were unable to open the store safe, and that's when Dorsey blew them into the next world. After his girlfriend turned him in, Dorsey gave an interview to a reporter. His consoling words were something to the effect of,

"They’re dead. That’s over and done with. Why are you going to sit there and worry yourself about that? Move on".

His cold, remorseless remarks have garnered him the name of "meanest man on death row" as well as "Pistol Pete". Apparently he has made threats to all the staff, set a fire outside his cell and even tried to stab one guard with a shiv. For these actions, he is the most highly secured, locked down prisoner -- somewhat like the fictional Hannibal Lecter.

I've lived near Casa Linda since 1991. I remember back then that Casa Linda Village was an upscale shopping center with GAP, Taylor Books, Chile's, Pier One Imports and Highland Park Cafeteria. If you drive by there today, you might see a Dollar Store, some no-name shops and a CVS pharmacy. Mr. Dorsey did a great deal towards killing the neighborhood -- not just the two men so heartlessly dispatched. Is that so hard to imagine, that people don’t want to be robbed or assailed?

The Casa Linda area has historically been a nice, upper middle class neighborhood situated close to White Rock Lake. There was (and is) a "red line" that's never spoken of, but still very much there. South of I-30 and Buckner is a very poor neighborhood of section 8 apartments and pawn shops. When housing ordinances changed in 1988, it was no longer legal to discriminate against families with children -- many singles apartments along Buckner became family units, accepting section 8 vouchers. The Buckner red line crept up to Ferguson Road, and with 1994's vile killing, all the way up to Garland Road. With each encroachment, you could see the "burn" line of boarded-up buildings, stores with burglar bars and Burger Kings converted to no-name convenience stores. The neighborhood was devastated as surely as if it were a war zone (and in some ways of looking, it has become one).

Dallas is still not out of the woods. It is one of the most divisive racially, divided cities in America. Both the whites and blacks tend towards antagonistic behavior which has led to a rigid North-South divide along the Trinity River. Our weak-mayor system of governance fairly guarantees that self-interested multidistrict bickering will prevail. Without concessions from either side, the problem continues. The Dorsey story continues. Two South Dallas youths recently rode the Dart Rail to Garland. On the train they engaged two Christian missionaries in a 30 minute conversation, then shot them dead for a few dollars. A woman idling in her Ford pickup outside of North Park Mall was shot in the face by another South Dallas man who rode the Dart Rail northward. Is DART handling its security and fare-collection roles as well as it should be?

I can't, in any corner of my mind, fathom the thoughts or justification of these men. Dorsey is surely getting two scoops of what he deserves -- just be careful delivering such a dangerous man from his cell to the gurney. Dallas has many mountains to climb. We need to navigate political correctness and selfish motivations which together can create a toxic combination -- unbearable criminality that can't be discussed. Let's be civil, let's be polite and let's see why the city of Dallas is so screwed up.

© 2008 blogSpotter

Middle East Smackdown

Could there be a strange upside to Iraq? -- Picture courtesy of Wikipedia

by blogSpotter
On September 11, 2001, the United States experienced the infamous Al Quaeda attack on sites in Manhattan and Washington DC. Roughly 3,000 innocent people perished and the chief perpetrator, Osama bin Laden, has yet to be captured some 7 years later. Of the 19 operatives directly involved, 15 were Saudi Arabian, along with 4 others from places such as Lebanon, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. The attackers practiced an extremist form of Sunni Islam, Wahabism, which is militantly hostile to any western presence in the Middle East. Their Al Quaeda training base was in Afghanistan; it gained a foothold using US weapons left over from fighting the Soviet occupation 20 years earlier.

The Bush Administration did execute a military action against Al Quaeda in 2002 in Afghanistan, which served more to drive them underground than to vanquish them. As of this writing, Al Quaeda is still alive and well in the mountainous border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan. One action the U.S. did take, which has almost universally been seen as “Bush’s Folly” is the toppling of the Saddam Hussein regime in nearby Iraq. Here are some interesting things to note about these people we attacked and currently occupy:

o The majority are not Sunni Arabs, they’re Shiite.
o The Iraqi Sunnis are not the hostile Wahabi variety.
o The occupied people are Iraqis – they are not Saudis, Lebanese, Egyptians or any of the nationalities that actually attacked the U.S.
o There was never a significant Al Quaeda presence in Iraq until after our 2003 invasion opened a wound, inviting opportunists across the Middle East to come in.
o Iraq is a huge, sprawling nation strategically located at the crossroads of the Middle East, rich with oil and other natural resources.

There is something unfortunate about the U.S.A. Our state department doesn’t seem to make careful distinctions about nationalities, histories, rivalries or competing strains of someone else’s religions. If you look at that part of the world, it is kind of difficult to piece it all together even for a studious person. Virtually every Middle East nation is under authoritarian rule, enforces theocracy, and has recently experienced disruptions such as assassinations and suicide bombings.

The upside to all of this is that we now indefinitely occupy Iraq, which neighbors Saudi Arabia. We indefinitely occupy Iraq, which borders Iran. We indefinitely occupy Iraq, which is but a stone’s throw from other Middle East trouble spots such as Palestine and Lebanon. The American Tiger Paw came down – and it was rather clumsy and undiscriminating in its sweep. But had 9/11 not happened, the Tiger Paw wouldn’t be there. If Quaeda had it to do over, would they want that consequence?

This is unfair you say and you’d be right. This would be like punishing a Flemish Democrat for Nazi atrocities, simply because they both might speak German and have similar last names. One difference is that the Flemish Democrat would be more likely to vociferously condemn the actions of his crazed neighbors. Saudis and other Arabs have been almost quietly supportive to their Al Quaeda brethren. How many Madrasas schools that condemn America have been closed now? None? How many have had their curriculum changed? None?

I once had a Spanish teacher keep us all late because one person was talking and nobody would fess up. The many were punished for the action of the one. The entire Middle East is under the thrall of miscreants it allows to exist. Where my Spanish teacher merely detained us 30 minutes, the Middle East is facing a smackdown by the U.S.. Just as we wrap things up in Iraq it looks like Iran is chomping at the bit for some kind of military entanglement. You know the American tiger is clumsy, inaccurate and easy to rile. Do you really want your brethren pulling his tail? People of the Middle East, any nation, who suspect that a young relative is training to be a terrorist, you might get more attuned to the situation and its possible consequences.

© 2008 blogSpotter

Drive-Thru Nation

I'd like some more asphalt with that -- Picture courtesy of Wikipedia

by blogSpotter
When I recently visited Washington D.C., I noticed that they were proudly proclaiming themselves to be a “driver unfriendly city”. Cars are not welcome. My first reaction was to think that they need a new Chamber of Commerce. You’re deliberately closing off some streets, making others one-way and raising parking fines?? Then as I walked through the Dupont Circle area, I had to admit that I didn’t miss any of the noise or air pollution. DC also has nice, wide crosswalks and timers that tell you exactly how many seconds until the light changes – on every intersection.

I’m from Dallas, TX. Big D was founded @ 1848, but the lion’s share of our city was built after 1925, dedicated lovingly to the automobile. There is no eatery, bank, coffee house, or dry cleaner that doesn’t cater to drive-thru tastes. Motor courts and drive-in theaters are on the wane, but cars need not worry. Our AMC mega-theaters offer thousands of acres of blacktop. Our Red Roof Inns and Motel 8’s offer no less. In far-flung suburbs like Frisco and Garland, the paradigm has hardly changed. Nary a new “big box” goes up that doesn’t surround itself with an asphalt ocean.

Cards on the table – I like the convenience of cars and drive-thrus and I even like Wendy’s. But when I stroll through the walking districts of Boston, New York or Portland I have to wonder if we really need to take our 2-ton carbon monoxide belching monstrosities with us everywhere we go? When I saw smart cars and itsy little 3-seater cars in Paris and London, my first reaction was pity. “These poor souls, they’re so lacking in space”. But maybe they have an enriched sense of proportion. Since when did it become necessary for a car to be a living room or a rec room on wheels? Is it not possible to have a Wendy’s restaurant that you walk into? Think I’ve seen that somewhere.

Washington DC has thrown down the gauntlet – “a pox on your car”. You are more than welcome; your Ford Explorer is vehicle non grata. Your noisy, polluting, 2-ton fire belcher will have to stay at airport parking thanks very much. The concept has been proved in Europe, Japan and parts of the USA. You can design cities so that cars are an occasional convenience rather than a necessity. My thanks to our nation’s capital for putting cars, if nothing else, into perspective.

© 2008 blogSpotter