I suppose my previous post about a gay race horse might offend someone - although since I only have about six readers, I assume it can't do too much damage.

I just thought it was a funny topic, mostly because as I flipped through my radio dial yesterday afternoon I heard it being discussed rather seriously on three different stations.

I admit that I personally waste way too many brain cells on trivial things. For instance, I probably shouldn't know how many homeruns George Foster hit in 1977. But I guess the talk radio topics I was hearing yesterday just got under my skin a little. My two posts yesterday were a result.

I can not figure out why a church minister is playing such a big role in a presidential election. I mean if Obama is anything like the majority of Americans, the reason he did not know Wright said those things in the pulpit is that he (Obama)probably either slept in and missed the service those days, or he took a little nap in church.

And if they sat down and had a frank and honest exchange of ideas and beliefs with their minister, most people I know would disagree vehemently with said minister on a host of subjects. But that wouldn't stop them from attending church again the next week, unless they were a Godless heathen like me to begin with.

I just can't understand why the media insist on pretending that Rev. Wright is important because he can shed light on what Obama believes.

I have an idea. It's a much better source of information about Obama's beliefs. Obama!

Anyway, after listening to that 'news' for a while I got sick of it and turned on a sports station, hoping to hear discussion about the 2008 Derby, or major league baseball, or the NFL draft, or even the NBA (okay, just kidding on that last one). Instead I got an intense debate concerning the social ramifications of a possibly gay horse.

election, race, religion, etc.

A lot of the political discussions I've heard lately have consisted mainly of bashing Obama because of his pastor's comments.

I'd just like to point out that the minister's ideas about current racism and especially about the government inflicting AIDS on blacks might be wrong, but they certainly aren't unfounded suspicions.

I pasted the following from infoplease.com.

For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis. These men, for the most part illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama, were never told what disease they were suffering from or of its seriousness. Informed that they were being treated for “bad blood,”1 their doctors had no intention of curing them of syphilis at all. The data for the experiment was to be collected from autopsies of the men, and they were thus deliberately left to degenerate under the ravages of tertiary syphilis—which can include tumors, heart disease, paralysis, blindness, insanity, and death. “As I see it,” one of the doctors involved explained, “we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”

You can also check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Study_of_Untreated_Syphilis_in_the_Negro_Male
if you want to read more.

Racey racing news

There has been speculation that 2002 Derby winner War Emblem may be gay. Apparently, this is old news and Jay Leno’s been making jokes about it, but it’s new to me. I heard about it on the radio today so I came home and checked it out online.

According to Outsports.com, “The Daily Racing Form has reported that Bob Baffert’s powerful colt has been presented with over 200 mares since “the breeding shed was open,” but the gallant galloper has repeatedly been claiming a headache, covering less than five mares.”

Sportspickle.com says “Thought it might be Mike Piazza? Nope. Maybe a top men’s figure skater? Wrong. It’s a horse, of course. War Emblem became the first high-profile athlete to come out of the closet when he declared on Sunday that he is homosexual.
While the Kentucky Derby and Preakness Stakes winner can’t speak, he declared himself to be gay by trying to mount Belmont Stakes winner Sarava during a press conference. Sarava managed to wriggle free.
Bob Baffert, War Emblem’s trainer, said he has suspected a high profile horse would come out, but that he didn’t know it would be his horse.
‘There has been a feeling in the horse racing community for years that a gay horse would go public,” said Baffert. “All the signs are there – the leather, the whips, the bright jockey’s uniforms … everything. Horse racing is very homoerotic.’”

Hysterically funny. What's even funnier is imagining that there are probably homophobic race fans who are even now organizing bonfires for any Derby memorabilia with War Emblem's name on it. They're probably thinking "If only the God-fearing Pat Day had the mount and not that Latin fruit Espinoza, this never would have happened."

Golf balls, and the lesser topic of Iraq

I was going to post an interesting little tidbit about a small cut on my leg, but I just posted it as a comment on Brian's blog and I don't feel like writing it again. It goes much better as a companion to his Amityville Gutter story than it does as a stand-alone on my blog, anyway.


Tonight, I went and hit 22 balls at the Derby Festival Hole-in-One contest.

I didn't even get one close enough to measure, but I do believe I got an assist. One of my shots landed just short of the pin. When it hit the ground it must have hit two other balls. One ball bounced hard off the back of the green, another ( I think it was mine) took a fairly large hop and then stopped several feet from the flag, and the third ball rolled forward just three feet or so.

The crew in the little tent jumped up immediately and went out to measure less than two minutes later. The ball they measured was less than a foot from the hole, placing it in the top 10 for the day.

I feel certain that I helped it closer to the target.


Anyway, since the blog title says I think I know everything, I guess it's time I start acting like it. So on to a short observation about Iraq:

Our leaders spend half their time insisting that we are only there to aid the Iraqi government, and the other half trying to make things go OUR way.

It seems to me that if I were offering my assistance to someone, I would expect to be doing things THEIR way. And if I don't like it then I don't have to help.

Suppose I offered to help someone move. If I came to their home(s) and insisted that the furniture be moved out in the order I wanted, and that things were packed in the way I wanted, and tried to override their decisions on the matter, the result would be that my assistance would garner very little good feelings from those I was trying to help.

I think we're seeing the same thing in Iraq, and I think we have three choices.

1) We can leave and let them sort the mess out for themselves. This obviously leads to all sorts of other problems for us and for them, but it's a viable option.

2) We can make it clear that things are going to be done OUR way, and stop half-assing it. This will lead to enormous ill-will, but if OUR way truly is the best way then it would eventually sort itself out- in say 20 years or so. And that's not really that long in the grand scheme of things, though of course most everyone would not see it that way.

3) We can put our resources completely at the disposal of the Iraqi government. This would basically consist of letting THEM decide who we kill and when, and lead most probably to our helping set up another tyrant. And it would probably lead to stability in the quickest fashion. No one of consequence in our government would ever go for this, though. They don't even want our troops under U.N. command during U.N. operations.

Happy belated anniversary to my brothers and their lovely brides.

As a result of my tardiness, you have the honor of being the first entries in my Microsoft Windows calender for 2009 and beyond.

Thus, I will never, ever, ever forget again- assuming of course that my computer never breaks, gets lost, or simply gets replaced by a newer model. But what are the odds of that, anyway?

Mixed message

For the last six months or so I have been included in a particular co-worker's emailing list. She sends me (and other lucky folk) stupid jokes, cutesy messages with pictures of cats, and other stuff of that ilk.

What really annoys me are the religious messages. She sends prayers and 'special thoughts' that I am supposed to forward to 10 people so I'll have good luck! If I don't forward them I will supposedly be hit by a bus the next day, or be devoured by hungry bears, or something. (public service message: I have so far deleted every message without forwarding them, and I'm still breat....AACK, look out, a rabid kangaroo!)

A few weeks ago she sent me an email endorsing prayer in public school and (as usual) inviting me to share the message with others. I had received quite a few such messages from her, and by this point I'd had enough. I very politely told her that I was an athiest, that I disagreed with her, and that I would appreciate not receiving these messages in the future.

This had no effect, and I have since received emails from her 1)warning me that Obama is a closet Muslim, 2) telling me I shouldn't use the new dollar coins because they don't say "In God We Trust" (I vowed privately to start using these coins exclusively, but then found out that the offending words were, in fact, just moved to the edge), and 3) declaring that the Ten Commandments should definitely be included in the courthouses and 'under God' should be in the Pledge because the Founding Fathers were all Christians.

Then yesterday she sent me an email saying the White House had called Critter Ridders because a beaver and a coon were trying to get in.

Personally, I think she must have missed a class or two at Sunday school.

Now the only thing bothering me is this: I can't stop wondering what it is about my personality that made her believe I wouldn't be offended by the White House email.

EARTHQUAKE REPORT

The earthquake woke me up this morning.

At first I thought it was an airplane. My second thought was that my neighbors were being a bit too loud, but then I realized that there wasn't much noise apart from rattling windows and stairs, and that my bed was shaking. It went on for several long seconds (I distinctly remember that I had time to recall the Great Ralston- Purina Sewer Explosion of '81), and by the time it stopped I had reached the conclusion that it was in fact an earthquake.

I left for work less than an hour later, so it was too dark to spot any damage.

However, when I returned home this evening my neighbors and I were able to conduct a more thorough survey. Luckily, there wasn't too much damage, as you can see in the photo above. That's me 2nd from the right!

Today I listened to two younger co-workers argue over which version of a particular song was better-the original or the cover. The song is irrelevant except that it made me feel old, because I’d never heard of the song or of either performer.

But the argument reminded me that I find it hugely irritating when people get song facts wrong. What is supremely irritating is when someone believes some crappy cover version is original and excellent. One good example is the song ‘Signs, ’ originally by The Five Man Electrical Band and later a hit by some other group. Although now that I think about it, even the original wasn’t all that great.

Anyway, as an experiment I went surfing to find a combination of fact and opinion about a song I chose at random (if by random I mean a song I heard today and so chose that one).

The song I chose was “The House Of The Rising Sun.” The most widely known version was recorded by the Animals.

WARNING, IF YOU JUST WANT THE FUN STUFF, SKIP ON DOWN TO THE END BECAUSE THE FACTS MIGHT BE KIND OF BORING

I "researched" and wrote all this while listening to an excellent Halloween episode of This American Life available at http://www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Episode.aspx?episode=319
I highly recommend it.


First, some facts (I hope):
According to Wikipedia.org, ‘"The House of the Rising Sun" is a folk song from the United States. Also called "House of the Rising Sun" or occasionally "Rising Sun Blues", it tells of a life gone wrong in New Orleans. Depending on the version, the song may be sung from the perspective of a woman or a man. Two of the best-known renditions of the song are by the English group The Animals in 1964, which was a number one hit in both the United States and United Kingdom, and by Joan Baez in 1959-60.
Like many classic folk ballads, the authorship of "The House of the Rising Sun" is uncertain. Musicologists say that it is based on the tradition of broadside ballads such as the Unfortunate Rake of the 18th century which were taken to America by early settlers. Many of these had the theme of "if only" and after a period of evolution, they emerge as American songs like the Streets of Laredo. The tradition of the blues combined with these in which the telling of a sad story has a therapeutic effect.
The oldest known existing recording is by versatile Smoky Mountain artists Clarence "Tom" Ashley and Gwen Foster and was made in 1933. Ashley said he had learned it from his grandfather, Enoch Ashley. Texas Alexander's The Risin' Sun, which was recorded in 1928, is sometimes mentioned as the first recording, but this is a completely different song. The Callahan Brothers recorded the song in 1934.”

That’s enough Wikipedia to be getting on with. If you need more, try here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_House_Of_The_Rising_Sun

I also found this info from www.songfacts.com:
*“This was the first song since 1962 by a British band to hit #1 in America that was not written by John Lennon and Paul McCartney. This is about a brothel in New Orleans.” *"The House Of The Rising Sun" was named after Madame Marianne LeSoleil Levant (which means "Rising Sun" in French) and was open for business from 1862 (occupation by Union troops) until 1874, when it was closed due to complaints by neighbors. It was located at 826-830 St. Louis St.”
*“The melody is a traditional English ballad, but the song became popular as an African-American Folk song. It was recorded by Texas Alexander in the 1920s, then by a number of other artists including Leadbelly, Woody Guthrie, Josh White and later Nina Simone. It was her version The Animals first heard. No one can claim rights to the song, meaning it can be recorded and sold royalty-free. Many bands recorded versions of this after it became a hit for The Animals.”
*“In the traditional Folk version, the main character is a prostitute. The Animals changed it to a gambler to make their version more radio-friendly.”

NOW THE FUN STUFF

Here are the discussion comments I found on forums:

Forum 1
Post 1: I'm confused. Didn't Dave van Ronk write it in the early 60s?

Post 2: In his book Chronicles (I think that's where I read this story) Bob Dylan tells of how he stole his version of the song from Dave Van Ronk, after which Van Ronk couldn't play it anymore without being accused of ripping off Dylan. Then the the Animals stole it from Dylan, after which, Dylan says, he couldn't play it without being accused of ripping off the Animals.

Forum 2
Post 1: who is the original composer of this song...dammit
Post 2: Is it Leadbelly, or did he just do a version of it
Post 3: The animals.
Post 4: No, the Animals made it famous, it's a traditional song, and instead of a gambling house, it was actually about a different kind of a house.
Post 5: oh my god thats easy bob dylan they have a slight variaton but its bob dylan the father of almost all rock music
Post 6: No, Bob Dylan did not write this song. He first heard it in New York where a fellow folk singer was doing it, and decided to put it on his first album. Only one or two songs on that one are written by him. It (the original lyrics, at least, which speak about a girl) was probably written by Georgia Turner and Bert Martin.
Post 7: This was a great song before Zeppelin did it; and
when they did it, it even made the song better........Great band singin' a great song
Post 8: damn it! zeppelin didnt do this song
it was the animals
Post 9: This song is about Cocaine, and the addiction and pain it brings...I forget who actually wrote the song in the first place..but eh.
Post 10: Explain to me how this song is about cocaine? Your just a cokehead like the rest of the people that believe that.
Post 11: the house of the rising sun is a whore house in new orleans
Post 18: I've got led zeppelin- house of the rising sun on my playlist. sounds like a live recording. perhaps they only ever played it live. or it was mistakenly labeled. led zeppelin. sure sounds like them though.
Post 21: I'm not sure who did it first, but i know the rolling stones do it, its on the classic rock radio chanle everyonce in a while. As for the what the songs about, i've heard its about Cocaine, a whore house, but ive also heard it's about Jail/prison. idfk.. its good song tho.

oops

I sincerely apologize to the thousands of visitors to this site who were hoping to read (or re-read, like a Harry Potter novel!) the exciting account of my damaged automobile.

A member of my staff accidently deleted this post while attempting to make some technical changes to my blog.

Sorry for the disappointment! But don't worry, the film version is due for a Christmas 2009 release date.

For Mark

Steve Tensi was a quarterback for the San Diego Chargers (1965-1966) and Denver Broncos (1967-1970)
and
Tensi Holiday Kérjen utat nászajándékba! » TENSI NÁSZUTAS SZÁMLA! ... Valutaváltás a Tensi főirodájában! Eladási árfolyamok 2008. április 9. ... ( Not at all sure what this means, but if you happen to understand Hungarian then please tell me what a Tensi Holiday is).

Rhode Island

A co-worker recently visited family in Rhode Island. Before she left, I assigned her the task of finding out how the state got its name. I didn't care too much about the "Rhode", but I was very interested in learning why it was called an island.

She brought back a newspaper article that provided lots and lots of useful information. Here's a brief summary:

Rhode Island was discovered in 1524 by Italian navigator Giovanni da Verrazano. The story is that he saw a similarity between this area and the Greek island of Rhodes. But that's a little silly because the two look nothing alike, as far as I can tell.

The Dutch explorer Adriaen Block, there in 1635, named it Roodt Eylandt or "Red Island", for the color of its soil. It seems likely that this Dutch name evolved into current one, with the spelling influenced by the Greek island name.

The idea that it was an island was apparently just a mistake which the lazy Verrazano or Block could have rectified by the simple expedient of chartering an airplane and confirming that the area was not, in fact, surrounded by water.

Stupid sixteenth and seventeenth century explorers.

I'm still not at all sure why they kept the "Island" part of the name after they discovered their mistake. Perhaps no one has told them.

Pity we can't find a mug shot...

Wednesday evening, I arrived home from work and emptied my pockets on the coffee table-phone, wallet, keys, loose change, all the usual stuff, plus a scrap of paper.
This is not at all unusual. I don’t have a PDA, so I write reminders to myself much as the cavemen must have done-with ballpoint pen on bits of yellow post-it notes or newspaper, which are then stored handily in a denim pocket for easy recall.
Cavemen loved denim.
This particular note left me flummoxed. I thought it said “GIFT JESUS,”
Hmmm… Was I supposed to buy him something? I’m pretty sure His birthday is sometime in December, so I didn’t think that was it.
Perhaps I was supposed to buy someone some sort of gift having to do with Jesus? That didn’t sound much like me, but anything is possible.
I pondered and pondered to no avail. Then tonight, after arriving home from an absolutely terrific dinner at The Comeback Inn-thank you, Mom and Dad! - I happened to see the paper again, where it was conveniently tucked away on the living room floor.
Aha! “6’ft. JESUS” it said.
And I remembered everything: Wednesday morning I had walked past two colleagues, one of whom was describing a friend to the other. “Hey, Kevin, how tall are you?” she had asked.
Blessed as I am with superior intellect, I knew the answer right away. “Six feet.” I was so proud.
Then their conversation resumed with “Okay, I think he’s a little taller than Kevin, so probably about six-two…”
But their innocent (one presumes-though I suppose they could have been setting up a drug deal, or a political assassination, or something) conversation set my mind wandering. I’ve been told in the past by a certain religious nut that ONLY JESUS was exactly six feet tall.
Being naturally suspicious, I found that hard to believe. I mean, I know God is supposed to be a pretty powerful guy who can do anything He wants, but I didn’t quite understand why He’d care if His Son’s height was a nice round number as determined by the British Weights and Measures Act of 1824. Awfully arbitrary, if you ask me.
So Wednesday morning, right then and there, I resolved to research the matter. I signaled my resolve with the aforementioned note, and then forgot about it.

Anyway, now that I’ve remembered it, I spent some time browsing. I found some vague references to the six-foot myth, but was truly surprised by how little I located concerning that particular oddity. I thought I’d find a “SIXFOOTCHRIST.COM” website or something.

I did find an interesting discussion on a Yahoo forum. Three of my favorite posts are copied and pasted here:

*I visited one of the tombs in Jerusalem Israel and i think you can find the facts on how long the bed was carved out to be! im pretty sure it was at least 6ft.

*Is he trying to be a model or something?
Cause yea...his ribcage shows a bit on those crosses so he could have a pretty good shot at modeling.
But um...how is his walk? Can he handle the runway?

*According to the statue in Rio, Jesus was 130 feet tall and probably weighed several tons.

Surfing further, I discovered a message board with these comments:



*If He was six ft, Heck, he would have been one of the tallest male Jews around in the twenty-first century! I speak from experience as a tall woman who refers to her college misfires as "Attack of the 5'2" Jewish Boys", which rather conveniently for them put them all at boob-height.

*"He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to Him, nothing in His appearance that we should desire Him." (Isaiah 53)
So Jesus was probably short and dumpy.

which was followed by…

*Yeah, Isaiah is OT, so, that's of limited utility, I think. Thanks.

I also found a few snippets of an academic discussion, which made the point that “if Jesus were really 6 feet high, his height would have been so remarkable that he would certainly have been described as a very tall person by the writers of the Christian Scriptures.
and…

Apparently, scientific analysis of the Shroud of Turin reveals the image of a man between 5’11’’ and 6’ 1’’.

Finally, I found a slightly more scientific guess in a December, 2002 Popular Mechanics article, “The Real Face of Jesus.”

“The historic record also resolved the issue of Jesus's height. From an analysis of skeletal remains, archeologists had firmly established that the average build of a Semite male at the time of Jesus was 5 ft. 1 in., with an average weight of about 110 pounds. Since Jesus worked outdoors as a carpenter until he was about 30 years old, it is reasonable to assume he was more muscular and physically fit than westernized portraits suggest. His face was probably weather-beaten, which would have made him appear older, as well.”

If this doesn’t prove I know how to have fun on a Friday night, I don’t know what will.

more office vocabulary

How about "servicing"?

That's certainly been a popular word in the WORKPLACE.

I don't know about you, but any time I hear about "servicing a customer," the mental image that pops into my head is decidedly non-corporate.

So I did a little test and typed 'servicing' into a Google image search.

Surprisingly, all the images that appeared on the first page of the search were quite innocent. I was puzzled.

Then I had the brilliant idea of repeating the search with my filter off. Wow! I'd rather work at those companies!

I suppose the term is used because 'serving' sounds demeaning. But I think it connotes something nicer and more personal. I'd rather be served than serviced, naughty pictures notwithstanding.

I guess he'll have to get to 1000 wins somewhere else

According to the Bowling Green Daily News, Bobby Knight is NOT going to be Western Kentucky's new basketball coach.

Aw, shucks.

More Monies...

Good news!

I have uncovered an exception to my self-imposed ban on the word 'monies."

The judge's decision reads as follows:

If, and only if, you find yourself on stage in a karaoke bar, and if, and only if, you are a male attempting to serenade a plurality of females at the same time, and if, and only if, you demonstrate all due respect to AC/DC, then it is acceptable, in order to maintain an ideal rhyme scheme, to adopt the following lyric:

"What do you do for monies, honies?"

I have attempted to get the ruling extended to include all gender combinations instead of just males singing to females.

Don't hold your breath on that one, though. The judge is from Alabama.


Happy Karaoking!

Office vocabulary

Warning: This might become a recurring topic.

I love language.

Well-crafted words are beautiful. If I could express myself cleverly and clearly with any degree of consistency, I would consider myself to be a...uh...a good with word thingies kind of guy.

So sometimes I fail miserably. I still enjoy trying.

I guess my own shortcomings should prevent me from being overly critical of others'.

It really should.

Anyway, you know what really irritates me? What really irritates me are some of the standard words and phrases used non-stop around offices.

Examples:

expedite---"Could you please expedite this?" Dammit, just tell me to hurry up.

workplace---Yes, it's the place you work. But workplace is just stupid.

monies--- Please just call it money. One dollar is money. Five dollars is also money. No need to get fancy when making it plural.