Strange Places Strange Faces

Oh yeah! Bring it on. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell was sure to boil over at some point. Today was the day. He finally blasted the Bush administration for not admonishing his warnings about the Iraq war before we went to battle. In fact, he said we needed more troops. In fact, he sparred with then National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice about how to handle the war, as well as Secretary Rumsfeld and others in the Bush administration -- straight up the vine to W himself.

Rice would neither confirm nor deny Powell's allegations during interviews on this morning's national talk shows.

The genesis for this showdown came in the form of an interview given by Powell to a British television station over the weekend, in which he firmly stated that he spoke to General Tommy Franks (who led the invasion) and Secretary Rumsfeld before the President. He said he told the men that he just wasn't sure we had enough men and women to go fight in Iraq. Unfortunately, based on casualties, our length of stay and civil unrest, it looks like Secretary Powell was really on to something.

For years now, it has been speculated that Powell is actually a Democrat, and would even run for President as such. Is this another reason he is standing up against the current government? Might he be posturing himself against everything this administration stands for? Certainly, it is easy to see why he was forced out. There is no doubt he did not tow the company line on any of the shenanigans going on between the good ol' boys.

On this day, we also remember a great liberal theorist John Kenneth Galbraith, who died at the age of 97. The following is his obituary from the New York Times:

April 30, 2006

John Kenneth Galbraith, 97, Dies; Economist Held a Mirror to Society

By HOLCOMB B. NOBLE and DOUGLAS MARTIN

John Kenneth Galbraith, the iconoclastic economist, teacher and diplomat and an unapologetically liberal member of the political and academic establishment he often needled in prolific writings for more than half a century, died Saturday at a hospital in Cambridge, Mass. He was 97.
Mr. Galbraith lived in Cambridge and at an "unfarmed farm" near Newfane, Vt. His death was confirmed by his son J. Alan Galbraith.
Mr. Galbraith was one of the most widely read authors in the history of economics; among his 33 books was "The Affluent Society" (1958), one of those rare works that forces a nation to re-examine its values. He wrote fluidly, even on complex topics, and many of his compelling phrases — among them "the affluent society," "conventional wisdom" and "countervailing power" — became part of the language.
An imposing presence, lanky and angular at 6 feet 8 inches tall, Mr. Galbraith was consulted frequently by national leaders, and he gave advice freely, though it may have been ignored as often as it was taken. Mr. Galbraith clearly preferred taking issue with the conventional wisdom he distrusted.
He strived to change the very texture of the national conversation about power and its nature in the modern world by explaining how the planning of giant corporations superseded market mechanisms. His sweeping ideas, which might have gained even greater traction had he developed disciples willing and able to prove them with mathematical models, came to strike some as almost quaint in today's harsh, interconnected world where corporations devour one another for breakfast.
"The distinctiveness of his contribution appears to be slipping from view," Stephen P. Dunn wrote in The Journal of Post-Keynesian Economics in 2002.
Mr. Galbraith, a revered lecturer for generations of Harvard students, nonetheless always commanded attention.
Robert Lekachman, a liberal economist who shared many of Mr. Galbraith's views on an affluent society they both thought not generous enough to its poor nor sufficiently attendant to its public needs, once described the quality of his discourse as "witty, supple, eloquent, and edged with that sheen of malice which the fallen sons of Adam always find attractive when it is directed at targets other than themselves."
From the 1930's to the 1990's Mr. Galbraith helped define the terms of the national political debate, influencing both the direction of the Democratic Party and the thinking of its leaders.
He tutored Adlai E. Stevenson, the Democratic nominee for president in 1952 and 1956, on Keynesian economics. He advised President John F. Kennedy (often over lobster stew at the Locke-Ober restaurant in their beloved Boston) and served as his ambassador to India.
Though he eventually broke with President Lyndon B. Johnson over the war in Vietnam, he helped conceive of Mr. Johnson's Great Society program and wrote a major presidential address that outlined its purposes. In 1968, pursuing his opposition to the war, he helped Senator Eugene J. McCarthy seek the Democratic nomination for president.
In the course of his long career, he undertook a number of government assignments, including the organization of price controls in World War II and speechwriting for Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt, Kennedy and Johnson.
He drew on his experiences in government to write three satirical novels. One in 1968, "The Triumph," a best seller, was an assault on the State Department's slapstick efforts to assist a mythical banana republic, Puerto Santos. In 1990, he took on the Harvard economics department with "A Tenured Professor," ridiculing, among others, a certain outspoken character who bore no small resemblance to himself.
At his death, Mr. Galbraith was the Paul M. Warburg emeritus professor of economics at Harvard, where he had taught for most of his career. A popular lecturer, he treated economics as an aspect of society and culture rather than as an arcane discipline of numbers.
A Polarizing Figure
Mr. Galbraith was admired, envied and sometimes scorned for his eloquence and wit and his ability to make complicated, dry issues understandable to any educated reader. He enjoyed his international reputation as a slayer of sacred cows and a maverick among economists whose pronouncements became known as "classic Galbraithian heresies."
But other economists, even many of his fellow liberals, did not generally share his views on production and consumption, and he was not regarded by his peers as among the top-ranked theorists and scholars. Such criticism did not sit well with Mr. Galbraith, a man no one ever called modest, and he would respond that his critics had rightly recognized that his ideas were "deeply subversive of the established orthodoxy."
"As a matter of vested interest, if not of truth," he added, "they were compelled to resist."
Nearly 40 years after writing "The Affluent Society," Mr. Galbraith updated it in 1996 as "The Good Society." In it, he said his earlier concerns had only worsened: that if anything, America had become even more a "democracy of the fortunate."
Mr. Galbraith gave broad thought to how America changed from a nation of small farms and workshops to one of big factories and superstores, and judgments of this legacy are as broad as his ambition. Beginning with "American Capitalism" in 1952, he laid out a detailed critique of what he saw as an increasingly oligopolistic economy. Combined with works in the 1950's by writers like David Reisman, Vance Packard and William H. Whyte, the book changed people's views of the postwar world.
Mr. Galbraith argued that technology mandated long-term contracts to diminish high-stakes uncertainty. He said companies used advertising to induce consumers to buy things they had never dreamed they needed.
Other economists, like Gary S. Becker and George J. Stigler, both Nobel Prize winners, countered with proofs showing that advertising is essentially informative rather than manipulative.
Some suggested that Mr. Galbraith's liberalism crippled his influence. In a review of "John Kenneth Galbraith: His Life, His Politics, His Economics" by Richard Parker (Farrar, 2005), J. Bradford DeLong wrote in Foreign Affairs that Mr. Galbraith's lifelong sermon of social democracy was destined to fail in a land of "rugged individualism." He compared Mr. Galbraith to Sisyphus, endlessly pushing the same rock up a hill that always turns out to be too steep.
Amartya Sen, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, maintains that Mr. Galbraith not only reached but also defined the summit of his field. In the 2000 commencement address at Harvard, Mr. Parker's book recounts, Mr. Sen said the influence of "The Affluent Society," was so pervasive that its many piercing insights were taken for granted.
"It's like reading 'Hamlet' and deciding it's full of quotations," he said.
Born on a Farm
John Kenneth Galbraith was born Oct. 15, 1908, on a 150-acre farm in Dunwich Township in southern Ontario, Canada, the only son of William Archibald and Catherine Kendall Galbraith. His forebears had left Scotland years before.
His father was a farmer and schoolteacher, the head of a farm-cooperative insurance company, an organizer of the township telephone company, and a town and county auditor. His mother, whom he described as beautiful and decidedly firm, died when he was 14.
Mr. Galbraith said he inherited his liberalism, his interest in politics and his wit from his father. When he was about 8, he once recalled, he would join his father at political rallies. At one event, he wrote in his 1964 memoir "The Scotch," his father mounted a large pile of manure to address the crowd.
"He apologized with ill-concealed sincerity for speaking from the Tory platform," Mr. Galbraith related. "The effect on this agrarian audience was electric. Afterward I congratulated him on the brilliance of the sally. He said, 'It was good but it didn't change any votes.' "
At age 18 he enrolled at Ontario Agricultural College, where he took practical farming courses like poultry husbandry and basic plumbing. But as the Depression dragged down Canadian farmers, the questions of how farm products were sold and at what prices became more urgent to him than how they were produced. He completed his undergraduate work at the University of Toronto and enrolled at the University of California, Berkeley, where he received a master's degree in 1933 and a doctorate in agricultural economics in 1934.
A major influence on him was the caustic social commentary he found in Veblen's "Theory of the Leisure Class." Mr. Galbraith called Veblen one of American history's most astute social scientists, but also acknowledged that he tended to be overcritical.
"I've thought to resist this tendency," Mr. Galbraith said, "but in other respects Veblen's influence on me has lasted long. One of my greatest pleasures in my writing has come from the thought that perhaps my work might annoy someone of comfortably pretentious position. Then comes the realization that such people rarely read."
While at Berkeley, he began contributing to The Journal of Farm Economics and other publications. His writings came to the attention of Harvard, where he became an instructor and tutor from 1934 to 1939.
In those years the theories of John Maynard Keynes were exciting economists everywhere because they promised solutions to the most urgent problems of the time: the Depression and unemployment. The government must intervene in moments of crisis, Keynes maintained, and unbalance the budget if necessary to get the nation's economic machinery running again.
Keynesianism gave economic validation to what President Roosevelt was doing, Mr. Galbraith thought, and he resolved in 1937 "to go to the temple" — Cambridge University — on a fellowship grant for a year of study with the disciples of Keynes.
In 1937 Mr. Galbraith married Catherine Merriam Atwater, the daughter of a prominent New York lawyer, whom he met when she was a graduate student at Radcliffe.
In addition to his wife and his son J. Alan, of Washington, a lawyer, he is survived by Peter, a former United States ambassador to Croatia and a senior fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Nonproliferation in Washington, and James, an economist at the University of Texas; a sister, Catherine Denholm of Toronto; and six grandchildren.
The War Years
Mr. Galbraith became an American citizen, and taught economics at Princeton in 1939. But after the fall of France in 1940, Mr. Galbraith joined the Roosevelt administration to help manage an economy being prepared for war. He rose to become the administrator of wage and price controls in the Office of Price Administration. Prices remained stable, unlike in earlier wars, but he grew controversial, drawing the constant fire of industry complaints. "I reached the point that all price fixers reach," he said, "My enemies outnumbered my friends."
He was forced to resign in 1943 and was rejected by the Army as too tall when he sought to enlist. He then held a variety of government and private jobs, including director of the United States Strategic Bombing Survey in 1945, director of the Office of Economic Security Policy in the State Department in 1946 and a member of the board of editors of Fortune magazine, from 1943 to 1948. It was at Fortune, he said, that he became addicted to writing.
In 1949 he returned to Harvard as a professor of economics; his lectures were delivered before standing-room-only audiences. And he began to write with intensity.
He completed two books in 1952, "American Capitalism: The Concept of Countervailing Power" and "A Theory of Price Control." In "American Capitalism," he set out to debunk myths about the free market economy and explore concentrations of economic power. He described the pressures that corporations and unions exerted on each other for increased profits and increased wages, and said these countervailing forces kept those giant groups in equilibrium and the nation's economy prosperous and stable.
In his 1981 memoirs, he said that though the basic idea was still sound, he had been "a bit carried away" by his notion of countervailing power. "I made it far more inevitable and rather more equalizing than, in practice, it ever is," he wrote.
He summarized the lessons of his days at the Office of Price Administration in "A Theory of Price Control," later calling it the best book he ever wrote. He said: "The only difficulty is that five people read it. Maybe 10. I made up my mind that I would never again place myself at the mercy of the technical economists who had the enormous power to ignore what I had written. I set out to involve a larger community."
He wrote two more major books in the 1950's dealing with economics, both aimed at a large general audience. Both were best sellers.
In "The Great Crash 1929," he recalled the mistakes of an earlier day and suggested that some were being repeated as the book appeared, in 1955. Mr. Galbraith testified at a Senate hearing and said that another crash was inevitable. The stock market dropped sharply that day, and he was widely blamed.
"The Affluent Society" appeared in 1958, making Mr. Galbraith known around the world. In it, he depicted a consumer culture gone wild, rich in goods but poor in the social services that make for community. He argued that America had become so obsessed with overproducing consumer goods that it had increased the perils of both inflation and recession by creating an artificial demand for frivolous or useless products, by encouraging overextension of consumer credit and by emphasizing the private sector at the expense of the public sector.
Anticipating the environmental movement by nearly a decade, he asked, "Is the added production or the added efficiency in production worth its effect on ambient air, water and space — the countryside?"" Mr. Galbraith called for a change in values that would shun the seductions of advertising and champion clean air, good housing and aid for the arts.
Later, in "The New Industrial State" (1967), he tried to trace the shift of power from the landed aristocracy through the great industrialists to the technical and managerial experts of modern corporations. He called for a new class of intellectuals and professionals to determine policy. While critics, as usual, praised his ability to write compellingly, they also continued to complain that he oversimplified economic matters and either ignored or failed to keep up with corporate changes.
One of his early readers was Adlai Stevenson, the governor of Illinois, who twice ran unsuccessfully for president against Dwight D. Eisenhower. Mr. Galbraith often wrote to Mr. Stevenson, introducing him to Keynesian taxation and unemployment policies. In 1953, Mr. Galbraith and Thomas K. Finletter, the former secretary of the Air Force and later ambassador to NATO, formed a sort of brain trust for Mr. Stevenson that included Ambassador W. Averell Harriman, the historian Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. and the foreign policy specialist George W. Ball.
Although Mr. Galbraith did not at first regard Kennedy, a former student of his at Harvard, as a serious member of Congress, he began to change his view when Kennedy was elected to the Senate in 1952 and began calling him for advice. The senator's conversations became increasingly wide-ranging and well informed, Mr. Galbraith said, and his respect and affection grew.
After Mr. Kennedy won the presidency in 1960, he appointed Mr. Galbraith as United States ambassador to India. There were those, Mr. Galbraith among them, who believed that the president had done this to get a potential loose cannon out of Washington.
He said in his memoirs: "Kennedy, I always believed, was pleased to have me in his administration, but at a suitable distance such as in India." Mr. Galbraith was fascinated with India; he had spent a year there in 1956 advising its government and was eager to return.
He spent 27 months as ambassador, clashed with the State Department and was more favorably regarded as a diplomat by those outside the government. He fought for increased American military and economic aid for India and acted as a sort of informal adviser to the Indian government on economic policy. Known by his staff as the Great Mogul, he achieved an excellent rapport with Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and other senior officials in the Indian government.
When India became embroiled in a border war with China in the Himalayas in 1962, Ambassador Galbraith effectively took charge of both the American military and diplomatic response during what was a brief but potentially explosive crisis. He saw to it that India received restrained American help and took it on himself to announce that the United States recognized India's disputed northern borders.
The reason he had so much control over the American response, he said, was that the border fighting occurred during the far more consequential Cuban missile crisis, and no one at the highest levels at the White House, State Department or Pentagon was readily responding to his cables.
In 1968, Mr. Galbraith published "Indian Painting: The Scenes, Themes and Legends," which he wrote with Mohinder Singh Randhawa. An avid champion of Indian art, he donated much of his collection to the Harvard University Art Museums.
Falling Out With Johnson
After Kennedy was assassinated, Mr. Galbraith served as an adviser to President Johnson, meeting with him often at the White House or on trips to the president's ranch in Texas to talk about what could be accomplished with the Great Society programs. Mr. Galbraith said that Johnson had summoned him to write the final draft of his speech outlining the purposes of the Great Society, and that when the writing was done, said, "I'm not going to change a word. That's great."
The relationship between the two men soon broke apart over their differences over the war in Vietnam. Nevertheless, when Adlai Stevenson died in 1965, the ambassadorship to the United Nations became vacant, and word reached Mr. Galbraith that the president was considering him as Mr. Stevenson's successor.
Not wanting to be placed in the position of having to defend administration positions he was strongly against, Mr. Galbraith suggested Justice Arthur J. Goldberg of the Supreme Court. The president named Mr. Goldberg, and Mr. Galbraith later blamed himself for a mistake that "cost the court a good and liberal jurist." Others said he took too much credit for what happened.
In 1973 he published "Economics and the Public Purpose," in which he sought to extend the planning system already used by the industrial core of the economy to the market economy, to small-business owners and to entrepreneurs. Mr. Galbraith called for a "new socialism," with more steeply progressive taxes; public support of the arts; public ownership of housing, medical and transportation facilities; and the conversion of some corporations and military contractors into public corporations.
He continued to pour out magazine articles, book reviews, op-ed essays and letters to editors; he lectured everywhere, sometimes debating William F. Buckley Jr., his friend and Gstaad skiing partner.
In 1977 he wrote and narrated "The Age of Uncertainty," a 13-part television series surveying 200 years of economic theory and practice. In 1990 he wrote "A Tenured Professor," about a Harvard professor who devised a computer-assisted system for playing the stock market and used his billions in profits on programs for education and peace — only to be investigated by Congress for un-American activities and forced to shut down his operations.
In 1996, as Mr. Galbraith approached his 90th year, he wrote "The Good Society." He contended that Republicans out to roll back the welfare state made a fundamental error in thinking that politicians and their actions drive history. Liberals did not create big government; history did, he argued.
Mr. Galbraith, who received the Medal of Freedom from President Bill Clinton in 2000, continued to make his views known. Some were surprising, like his speech in 1999 praising Johnson's presidency, which he had helped to bring down by working with the 1968 McCarthy campaign.
In 2004, Mr. Galbraith, who was then 95, published "The Economics of Innocent Fraud," a short book that questioned much of standard economic wisdom.
He remained optimistic about the ability of government to improve the lot of the less fortunate. "Let there be a coalition of the concerned," he urged. "The affluent would still be affluent, the comfortable still comfortable, but the poor would be part of the political system."

Posted by Ike at 11:22 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

I am not obese, but I am not thin either. Since high school, I have always struggled with my weight. So, I am acutely aware of the people around me who are "overweight", and I am sensitive to their various situations. I am proud to admit I go to Weight Watchers, which has been extremely successful for me. I have lost 30 pounds since August. I want to lose about 20-30 more, and I will. Others won't be as fortunate as I am. They will continue to struggle, battle, and stave off daily stereotypes of being "fat".

The organization is called the National Association for the Advancement of Fat Acceptance.

So, I was surprised to learn about an organization that caters to people who are overweight. Its website is chock full of information for people who are battling weight issues. Its mission is commendable. It's one of those obscure organizations that I just didn't know existed until I read/heard about it the other day.

According to its website, "Founded in 1969, the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance is a non-profit human rights organization dedicated to improving the quality of life for fat people. NAAFA works to eliminate discrimination based on body size and provide fat people with the tools for self-empowerment through public education, advocacy, and member support."

This group even has a Hall of Fame. The group says there are 38 million of us who face biases because of our weight. Thegroup has several chapters across the country.

I write about the organization as a means of educating those of you out there who do not have problems with being overweight. I encourage you to check out the website to learn more about obesity in this country, and what this organization is doing to counteract it.

Go to: www.naafa.org for more information on the organization.

Posted by Ike at 10:02 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Okay. When I first went to college I had this friend named Rich. One of the first things I liked about this guy was his Red Honda coupe that was totally "souped up". He told me he had $12,000 alone in audio equipment, and he showed me several awards he won at shows all over the place.

I admit, his car was the very definition of cool. But, there is one thing that differentiates my old friend Rich from what I see and hear today. He didn't blast his bass so loud that I could hear it a good intersection away, as it shakes my sturdy SUV.

Today, it has become common practice for stereo systems (much less than Rich's) to blast as loud as possible with music, quite frankly, I really just don't want to hear. It gives me a headache. It interferes with the other crappy drivers' attention to the road. Basically, it pisses me off.

You never hear anyone blasting classical. Sometime, I wish someone would pull up next to one of these vehicles and give them a little taste of Brahms or Beethoven. Maybe they would tune their stuff down and take a little lesson in class(ics). Please, encourage your local governments to pass sound ordinances so that these drivers turn it down and make the roads safer for the rest of us.

Posted by Ike at 10:30 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

I had this friend who was wild about wrestling, and his favorite character was a guy named "Big Papa Pump." He talked about this guy nonstop. He idolized him. Big Papa Pump was my friend's favorite celebrity. At the time, I didn't know who Big Papa Pump was, and I didn't really give a shit. So, why does this matter now?

Posted by Ike at 9:55 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Why is it that........

Tube socks are called tube socks when there doesn't appear to be any "tubing" involved?

Retailers constantly tantalize us with sales that end in 99 cents, when we have all figured out that $19.99 means twenty dollars anyway? (I know all you marketers will disagree with this one)

"Oreo cookies" became one of the worst pejoratives for black men and women in this country?

People think of Labradoodles as "boutique dogs" or "unique dogs" when they are really just glorified mutts because of their pedigree?

There is nothing really "special" about something listed as a "special" at a restaurant?

We can cure major illnesses, but we can't crack 22 divided by 7?

Most freeways are no longer free and highways were never really high?

We constantly mistreated, abused and murdered Chiefs of Native American tribes and still think it's okay to refer to the President as the COMMANDER IN CHIEF?

Candidates are no longer candid? (and never really were)

Midwesterners, like me, refer to soda as "pop"? (I know the answer to this one)

Just some stuff to think about...a little food for thought this Wednesday. Remember, our $50.00 is still out there, and can be yours for referrals to our site. Please review our postings for details.

Posted by Ike at 5:26 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Okay. You all know what I am talking about. These days the concept of "drunk dialing" has morphed into everything from drunk text-messaging to drunk e-mailing. If you ask me, those two are a hell of a lot of worse because those are messages that can be shown to everyone. Then, you are a goner. So, if you want my advice, stick to drunk dialing (in case the person records your conversation).

I admit, I was pretty good at this whole drunk dialing game in my time. Yep. I could drunk dial with the best of them. Here was the concept: Take Nigel out to the bar. Get him as wasted as possible and drop him off somewhere on his own (preferably near a telephone since this was mostly in the pre-cellular age). Now, mind you. I was one cocky SOB, with no cares or concerns -- especially when I had a few in me. It was always easy for me to make conversation, and not always easy for me to get rejected. So, when you put me on the phone, all inhibitions were set aside.

Kim (not her real name) was this beautiful woman I worked with. She was boyfriend-less, and we used to hang out as "friends". I think we all know how that goes. I'll address that in a future blog -- about how men and women can/can't be friends. In this case, I would have given my left arm or most any other limb to step it up a notch with Kim. But, she'd rather go to dinner, movies, etc. I hate cats, and I even catsat for her once. That's a BIG step for me. That has to be love.

So, one night I am out with my buddies and we start drinking. Let's say it's 9 p.m. The fun ends around 2 in the morning (at least with them). Now, my fun is just beginning (or so I think). This is where drunk dialing turns into one of the biggest embarrassment in the world. I call Kim and get her machine. I start to babble about how our friendship is nice, but I need more and want more.... and I go on for a few minutes. Many of the "flattering" things I said can not be written in this space.

The next day we are at work. There are about half a dozen people around. Kim asks me how I am feeling. I AM THINKING UNEASY AT THIS POINT. Mighty Nigel is about to be knocked off his throne. She tells everyone she has a little something to share. You see, I had called her cell phone that night, and every last word was recorded for everyone to hear.

I carefully crawled back beneath my cubicle, tail between my legs and vowed to never drunk dial again (at least not for the remainder of that week).

P.S. We remain friends, and I am sure she would appreciate the recounting of this story.

Posted by Ike at 4:19 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

I was less than two months old when Jim Croce, the great folksy musician died in a plane crash. He was 40. I really don't fit the demographic of a guy who should love and appreciate Croce's music. That's why I want to share an easy secret with you. A great deal of the music we come to know and love is from before our time.

Music, as a great tradition (especially in America) is passed down through generations. It's no wonder I just found Croce's 1984 LP (released posthumously of course) of Greatest Hits in my record collection. By the way, I own the cassette too. And, it's one of those albums I could listen to again and again and again.

It is rich in volume, texture, meaning and importance. I like a lot of songs on that album, including "Operator", "I Got a Name", "I'll Have to Say I Love You in a Song" and, perhaps one of the greatest songs ever, "Time in a Bottle".

"Time in a Bottle" was written in 1973, and became a #1 Billboard smash shortly after Croce's death. It is one of my favorite songs to listen to, because the lyrics just strike me in a different chord each time I listen to it. My older cousin Kevin used to play guitar, and I remember how he would play the first few chords of this song. Maybe that's why I appreciate it so much. It reminds me of my childhood.

So, it's a pleasure to share the lyrics with you on my blog, so that each one of you can look around at the people you love and realize we are all just spending time in a big bottle. Love every day, love every way, and and love as you may. Our days really are treasured, and you never know when time is up.

Go out there and tell someone you love them. It's cathartic. Believe me.

Good night, for now. Tomorrow: some humor from my past.

TIME IN A BOTTLE

If I could save time in a bottle
The first thing that I'd like to do
Is to save every day
Til' eternity passes away
Just to spend them with you
If I could make days last forever
If words could make wishes come true
I'd save every day like a treasure and then
Again, I would spend them with you

Chorus:
But there never seems to be enough time
To do the things you want to do
Once you find them
I've looked around enough to know
That you're the one I want to go
Through time with

If I had a box just for wishes
And dreams that had never come true
The box would be empty
Except for the memory
Of how they were answered by you

Chorus

Posted by Ike at 10:42 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Professor Sarah Trenholm was my first college professor back in '91 at Ithaca College. She was and is a speech communications professor, and her specialty (of which she has written books) is interpersonal communication. I vividly remember one of our first lessons that semester.

Professor Trenholm, who I liked very much, taught us about the power of eye contact. She taught us that eye contact was one of the first and most important forms of communication, even when it came to crossing someone's path and looking into their eyes. By performing that simple task, you are actually "communicating" with the other person. So, imagine how many people we actually communicate with. Since that time, in particular, I have made it a habit to look into people's eyes.

It didn't hurt my parents always impressed upon me the importance of making good eye contact with people when you speak to do them. Otherwise, it could be discerned you are lying, hiding something, have a problem et al. I admit this is a problem for many people.

Often, eye contact is very difficult for many of us. It is hard to look someone in the eye, especially when you have something difficult to tell them. In fact, as far as I am concerned, this world has become more IMpersonal (no pun intended) since my class back in '91. We can now use the internet and other means to mask our eyes, our emotions and our very souls. Indeed, we really don't have to look at anyone anymore to get a point across. We can e-mail them, text message them, IM them, etc.

But, how do things still hold up when we get "out there" in the real world? Can we still look someone in the eyes and communicate with them? Is it still interpersonal communication when we cross eyes with someone in our path, or someone sitting next to us, in front of us, around us and so on? I think so.

I do think it's increasingly important to maintain eye contact with those around us -- not to freak them out or anything like that -- but to maintain a degree of honesty. At the end of the day, it's still hard for many of us to lie straight to someone's face. That's why Professor Trenholm's lesson on eye contact and interpersonal communication resounds in my mind until this very day -- nearly 15 years after the fact.

Posted by Ike at 5:35 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

First, an important note to those of you who are new to our blog, and may not have read all of its postings. There is an opportunity for you to win $50 by May 7. Please read the blogs of April 7 and 12. I am more than happy to shell out the 50 bucks.

Now, on to the matter of the day. Some Saturday morning philosophy. I recently came upon an old Samurai saying I think we should all take to heart.


My advice is to read these words slowly and aloud a few times. Let them sink in to your soul. If we truly expect nothing, we won't be disappointed at the end of the day (or any other time for that matter). If we are prepared for anything, we will be able to deal with those very disappointments (however unfortunate); but, more importantly, we'll be prepared for any goodness that comes our way too.

In essence, we become better equipped people. We free our minds and souls of anything possibly plaguing us. We can release from any inhibitions. We can put any paranoia or idiosyncrasies aside. Guilt can be cut down because we are not expecting anything -- therefore there is nothing to feel guilty about in the end. The list goes on and on.

But, undoubtedly, these two concepts are linked inextricably together. Reverse the sentence. To be prepared for anything is to expect nothing. Just think about it. Slow down your day and apply it to a bind or dilemma you currently find yourself in.

That should be some good food for thought on a Saturday morning.

Tomorrow's topic: Professor Sarah Trenholm and the art of Interpersonal Communication.

Have a happy weekend.

Posted by Ike at 11:44 AM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Okay, so it is now 11:15, and I obviously have nothing better to do than to hone my amazing Haiku skills. I have decided that I am so good at this I will enter myself into one of those lamo poetry reading things they have at bookstores and coffee houses where a bunch of boring academes go to pump themselves up and promote their CV's.

Baseball is my sport
it is played in the summer
I will mow your lawn

Your dog has rabies
the summer sunset is nice
I hate smelly feet

My hair is wavy
the cat is lost in the snow
I am not crying

Remote controls suck
Autumn leaves make me lazy
this is a bad day

The police hate me
I eat grapes off summer vines
they call me "The Man"

I hate medicine
Pot holes suck up my car wheels
in the summer sand

Enough is enough
the snow is killing the trees
I want cold water

I like rock and roll
I drink beer in the winter
Why? I just don't know.


Write about seasons
Spring, summer, winter and fall
Haiku is so dumb

Posted by Ike at 11:19 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Okay, so maybe I like this stuff. So, here are some more samples.

Tattoos and piercing
like melting summer ice cream
on my leather tongue

Kodachrome photo
taken on a winter day
all in black and white

My rabbi and priest
take a summer vacation
to my apartment

The end just begins
when winter turns into spring
I am so pissed off

I like Diet Coke
in summer I drink it most
damn it tastes so good

The winter just sucks
and the summer is too darn hot
I will wait for fall

Compact discs play music
I hear Spring music of birds
My dog hates bird feeders

I think I am nuts
Hot chocolate in winter
Bad combination

Ugly internet
I watch leaves from autumn trees
Now I must reboot

What did I do wrong
for leaves to turn these colors
I have no idea

Posted by Ike at 5:23 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Haven't done this since grade school, but here comes my idiot Haiku. Who knows? Maybe some of you will enjoy it... Here are just a few samples...

She looks very nice
I found hair in my shower
The paint is peeling


The season changes
My poodle crosses the street
Nice fire hydrant


Beware the wart hog
Summer heat has a sweat smell
Do not think it's sweet


Jicama salad
A springtime merry-go-round
I prefer hot dogs


Winter becomes spring
Cars are still stuck in the snow
Where is the tow truck?


You think you are hot
Summer is hotter than Fall
The fan blows cold air

I don't write haiku
Now most of you can see why
Spring leaves grow on trees.


So, that's my Friday's portion of Haiku -- which I claim copyright to. Boy, what great stuff. Can you guys show me your Friday Haiku? I would love to have a little Strange Places poetry slam today.

Let's Hug it Out.

Posted by Ike at 10:56 AM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

I learned something very interesting recently. It actually blew my mind, and made me more angry with Ohio state law than I have ever been before. A friend of mine, who I'll call "Oscar", was recently pulled over and accused of DUI. According to police, he blew a .20 on a breath analyzer test. Now, guilty or not, I can not condone Oscar's behavior even though he is a friend. Aside from some other repercussions, Oscar now has to drive with the dreaded 'Scarlet Plate', recognizing him as a drunk driver.

Read the last sentence. Notice how it's in the present tense. That's where my anger enters the equation. Oscar has not yet been convicted of any crime in any court of law. However, the neighbor across the street is a registered sex offender (completely convicted) with his picture placed on the county sheriff's website.

The state has the nerve to make my friend -- convicted of no crime as of yet -- use these scarlet plates in order to drive to and from work (basically). The state unfairly convicts him before a trial. He feels slighted because he recognizes that a hardened criminal -- convicted of a felony -- and living within ear shot -- suffers a fate almost less than he does.

In my opinion, sex offenders ought to have colored plates too, especially when they are convicted. Hell, Oscar has not even been convicted, and people could be staring at him all the time as if he is a bad person. That, quite frankly, is bull. Oscar is a good citizen. He has a nice family, a good job, nice friends, et al. Oscar may not even be convicted of this thing by the time all is said and done, yet he still has to live with the scarlet letter.

What is it about the laws of this state that make it seem so F'ed up? Maybe it's the juxtaposition of these two offenses, and how my friend is being treated. All I want is justice in this state and equality for my friend.

Posted by Ike at 9:44 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

"Money can't buy you class. -- Dad"

Okay. My father recently taught me an invaluable lesson that should be pretty natural for most people to understand. The Beatles once sang "Money Can't Buy You Love". But, there's one thing better than lover that money just can't buy. That's class. According to my Dad (who, I must admit, has a lot of wisdom), money can not buy a person class. He/she is either born with it or not. To my dad, it doesn't even seem as though it is something a person can really acquire. It's inherent in their blood and the essence of their being.

Recently, I had to deal with someone who, in my estimation, lacked class. The person was boorish, intolerable, mean-spirited, and pretty much a hazard to be around. Just when I thought this person was going to do the right thing, he/she got it all wrong. I severed ties with that person for all the right reasons, as far as I am concerned.

Anyway, Dad is just right on this one. Now, a lot of people could call me classless too. I guess it's just a tag or label you can throw on anyone. But I know, in my heart, what class is all about, and I know that this person flat out was born without it.

Posted by Ike at 10:15 AM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Okay, I'll admit it. I have gone on one too many online dates where the object in the mirror is not as it has appeared -- meaning that the girl I saw online in no way resembled the one I picked up for my date. I'll fess up to the fact I, myself, have even posted some old photos in order to make myself look more attractive. That's why I have made an executive decision for all of these online dating websites: END THE USE OF ONLINE DATING PHOTOS. Here's why:

1. Looks don't really account for the soul of a human being.
2. You don't know if it's the actual person anyway.
3. Some people really do want to maintain their anonymity and privacy.

Those are just a few good reasons as far as I am concerned. The most important is the first. Taking away photos would force members to learn more about potential partners before they go on a date. There could always be an option to exchange photos, even through the website, but photos should not automatically appear. It reinforces one of the worst moral problems with society: vanity. It says the only thing that matters is how you look. Don't go any further than this photo. While I must admit that physical attraction is a fundamental part of a sound relationship, it doesn't change the fact that such a relationship should begin by looking at some picture of someone over the internet. I therefore urge online dating websites to re-think the photo business, and come to a photo finish.

Posted by Ike at 5:14 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Okay. I am like most every other dude. Puzzled. What is it that two girls talk about when they go into the bathroom together and leave you sitting at the table alone (or with your buddy)? You can't tell me they just sit or stand there in silence. You can't tell me that I am just paranoid or anything like that. I know for a fact they are talking. So, what the hell are they talking about? What's going to happen later that night? The guy's personal hygiene? How drunk I am/they are? Come on, ladies. Clue me in, because I am truly stupid when it comes to this thing. And, I'd venture to say most other guys are too. Let me also say this: guys do not go into the bathroom to talk about you. We just tell you to your face, or we walk out on you, or we don't call the next day, or a combination thereof. It's as simple as that. So, when you get a chance, leave me a comment on this one, because I TRULY DO NOT KNOW. By the way, that 50 bucks is still yours for the taking. The contest ends May 7th or something like that.

Posted by Ike at 1:07 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

It's great to be home alone on a Saturday night, because it reminds me of some of the best things around that we miss when we are out on the weekends. One of those things is John Walsh's wildly popular (and successful) TV show, "America's Most Wanted". FOX's AMW -- in large part thanks to Walsh -- has captured 887 fugitives in less than 20 years on the air. It has bagged some of the biggest criminals out there, and some smaller ones who are lesser known but just as dangerous. I remember when the network was going to pull the show around 1996. I was working for a FOX station at the time, and the phone calls were endless. The show's website, www.amw.com, is just as successful in showing the American public who is out there, how bad they are, and how to turn them in without getting injured, etc. Do yourself a favor, if you haven't done so already. TiVo this show. Watch it once. You'll become hooked.

Tomorrow: An Explanation of the Scoville Scale (and how it affected my digestive tract)

Posted by Ike at 9:11 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

<<
List
Jewish Bloggers
Join
>>

Posted by Ike at 9:26 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Okay. So, I admit it. I watch and enjoy "American Idol". But lately, it's lame, it's boring, it's -- to quote Simon -- "a bit predictable" -- and it SUCKS. Last night Bucky got the boot, when anyone with half a mind could have recognized that Ace was the worst of the 8 finalists this week. He bastardized Queen, just as they had predicted. Bucky -- performing "Fat Bottom Girls" -- was much better. Queen is hard enough to pull off as it is, especially sans Freddie Mercury, but these performances sucked. No one was really an Idol this week. Or last week for that matter when they were asked to perform Kenny Rogers. Or the week before that when they worked with Manilow and the same thing when they had to work with Stevie Wonder. These tasks -- of working with such has-beens -- has been Herculean, and -- in case you missed when I said it the first time -- BORING. Next up, Rod Stewart with a string of "American Classics" a la Manilow with his fifties crap. People, don't you understand? When an unbelievable talent like Manilow or Stewart has to start covering classics and can't write their own stuff anymore, they have "jumped the shark" big time. For the love of G d, make them perform with Green Day, Howie Day -- any Day, for that matter. Make them sing something worthy of being an Idol. Dave Matthews Band. Rolling Stones (who have withstood the test of time). Annie Lenox (just came off the top of my head). Hell, I'll take the Violent Femmes at this point. Because, right now they are taking these crappy classics, making them look more awful than ever, making the recoding artists look more awful than ever, and making me want to leave the room within the first five minutes of the crummy competition. By the way, for what it's worth -- I'll see Taylor, Pickler and Chris hanging around in the end (unless someone discovers Pickler's naivete is genuinely fake)...Then, we could have Paris, too. That's it. The other three can pack it in. Especially Ace. Looks aside, he has no talent. He stinks. He makes a mess of everything coming out of his mouth. If this were a beauty pageant, even I would beat him. So, someone wake up the powers that be and turn around this dreadful ship before it hits a big (Randy Jackson sized) glacier soon. Yeah, Dawg!

Posted by Ike at 1:42 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

10. It's the easiest 50 bucks you made since selling those fake IDs in high school.

9. You can get 50 dollar menu items from McDonalds at the same time.

8. You can brag to your buddies that you got 50 bucks just for hanging out on my blog.

7. That's still a lot of lap dances these days.

6. Family of four (tickets), four hot dogs, four drinks to the ballgame (if it's being played in 1990)

5. It will get you 10 $5 chips at a table in Vegas. That's cool.

4. Google 50 dollars and click on www.50bucks.ca. I didn't do it, but you should.

3. You can trade it in $50 for 73,702.50 Iraqi Dinars (today's conversion)

2. You would have 100x the greatness of the rapper 50-Cent

1. It's at least one tank of gas for your Pinto.

Posted by Ike at 11:03 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

If writers have "writers block", then do bloggers have "bloggers block"? So, what the heck should I write about? Let me tell you a little bit about a "character" that will recur through my blogs and be threaded through many of my stories. Introducing Ike. He is my nine-year-old Rottweiler. He is the best thing that has ever happened to me. Very briefly, here is the story about how we came to each other. In May of 1997, I was dating a girl whose dog had just been struck and killed by a car. She wanted nothing more than to have a dog around, and I wanted nothing more than to do my own thing on my own time, etc., etc., even though I grew up with dogs my whole life and loved them very much. Anyway, one weekend, my girlfriend ended up getting me to go with her to this store-front pet store that amounted to nothing more than a "puppy mill." Well, they must have seen me coming, because they took me to a "special back room." There, a small black dog would stick its nose through the first cage I passed, licked my hand and the rest is history. Almost. Then, I found out Ike was $1000.00. He just licked my hand! It was fate! I couldn't let him go. So, as a stupid 23-year-old tv news producer making $10.00/hour, I financed the poor thing. Needless to say, it is the best return I have ever had on any investment. Right now, he is asleep at my feet. Certainly, I will tell more stories of our time together. But, for now, I have bloggers block, and can't go any further. To steal a damn good line, "Good night and good luck."

Posted by Ike at 11:25 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

I've been to plenty of funerals in my time, and sadly I had to go to one today. My Uncle's father-in-law, "Sonny O.", died. Let me be the first to say it was sad. He was too young to die, and cancer killed him. His diagnosis was only about six to eight weeks before his death, leaving family, friends and -- most importantly -- him time to deal with the reality of the whole thing. Today was a time to laugh and cry, love and learn, speak and hear, touch and be touched, and just about every other appropriate cliche I could throw on board right about here.

Now, let's get down to the heart of the matter. How many times do you go to a funeral and the clergy member or person giving the sermon says, "Schmuck. We were happy to see him go."? Never happens. People may think it, but it is never said. Heck, I've been to many funerals where there is no love lost. So, along comes "Sonny O," a stand-up guy if ever there has been one. He is blessed with a beautiful wife, whom he shared 52 years of his life with; He has four amazing children who played starring roles in his life in different ways; he has grandchildren who would make him light up whenever he entered the room -- kids he truly had reason to and loved to dote upon.

No one would ever think of saying, "Schmuck. We were happy to see him go." This is a man who gave back to his country and his community. He liked to golf with his buddies. The people at this funeral today were welled up because we all lost a good one. And, perhaps the saddest (and most amazing) part about the whole thing is that he created a family of absolute love. He left a family without any pettiness, any fights, any bickering, any resentment, et al. He left them more firm than he created them. Cousins, aunts, uncles, sisters, brothers, nieces, nephews. At todays' ceremony, you knew they were all together for Sonny. You knew what they were thinking. They were all on the same page. They all loved this man so much.

On his death bed, he wished for four simple things from his children. He asked that they all get along; he asked that they take care of their mother (indicative of his love for her and their life together); he asked that a man get paid for providing the simplest of services (indicative of how strong, proud and honorable he was until the very end); and he asked that a certain friend handle his final arrangements. These four things. Nothing more. Nothing less. YOU WANT TO KNOW WHY? Because, in the end, Sonny's house was clean. There were no more mountains left to climb. There were no tasks to be completed. His life was fulfilled, and those four kids could rest in knowing it the rest of their lives.

So, that is my ode to Sonny O.

(You'll have to wait for those contest details tomorrow.)

Posted by Ike at 5:36 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Monica is a new and beautiful friend who told me about blogger.com. I like her because she is sincere, smart, charming and optimistic. She never complains about anything. She never wants anything. She would much rather give than receive, and so many people could learn so much from that mentality. Here's the weird thing. I have never met Monica. She is just one of those "online friends" who add meaning to your life. In fact, I may never meet her. But, it doesn't really matter, because she gives me great hope about humankind. The internet, for all its trappings and horror stories, can also breed stories about Monica and me. There are hundreds of us who have created substantial friendships thanks to the Internet highway. I have "met" many people. They have guided me, advised me, told me great stories, exchanged great tales, laughed and cried with me, etc. Our emotions, indeed, have run the gamut. So, I implore you all to find your "Monica". He/She is definitely out there, ready and willing to add much more substance and meaning to your life.

TRUTH BE TOLD

The truth be told, my cousin is friends with the WWE's Batista. Batista and his friends (in the WWE) like Chinese food, and always make it a point to eat with me at Bo Loong on St. Clair in Cleveland when they come here. The WWE stars are very down-to-earth and they can eat a hell of a lot more than me. As part of their diet regimen, they particularly load up on rice. But, the best part is they are not at all pretentious and they always treat me like I am one of them. Another celebrity brush that has "good" written all over it.

TOMORROW: WHY YOU SHOULD ENTER THE CONTEST FOR $50! 10 REASONS MY BLOG CAN CHANGE YOUR LIFE.

Posted by Ike at 10:32 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

I met a great guy and his wife tonight while sitting alone at one of my favorite local watering holes. Turns out the guy is a Cleveland police officer who has been on the job for 19 years. He was once even in the Gang Task Force which was, at one point, disbanded due to financial concerns. Bob F. told me that things were much better 19 years ago. Benefits like health care were entirely paid for. Now, nine years away from his pension kicking in, he knows he won't be able to retire because he pays out the "yin-yang" (his words) for medical. He has a beautiful wife, and two kids -- ages 8 and 11. What the hell is wrong with this picture? I have friends in the clergy, who are wonderful men and women, but they are not putting their lives on the line every day. They can write everything off. Cars, houses, et al. Doesn't anyone, outside of Bob's family, realize there could come a day where he just doesn't come home? And, we can't provide health care for him and his family? THIS FLAT OUT SUCKS. There is no way that this is the America I am proud to live in. This makes Cleveland look like a third-class (not even second-class) city. I am embarrassed. If I actually lived in the city proper, I would go nuts. So, who is speaking up? Who is telling union bosses and the Mayor that this sucks? You all should. Each and every one of you. If ever there was a time to stand up to establishment, and tell them that things are unacceptable, this is it. Bob, who I only spent a couple hours with, is a guy who is on the up-and-up. No doubt about it. His wife, who I'll call Angela, is a sweetheart who cares only about him and their two kids. 19 years, and this guy is still a patrolman, although he could be so much more. He is somewhat content with the status quo, but that doesn't mean we should be. It's time for dramatic, drastic change. It's time to end the B.S. And, it's time to give these officers, who lay it on the line every day, their due. Please help me help them by contacting both the Mayor and the Department of Public Safety.

Mayor Frank Jackson
216-664-2220

Cleveland Department of Public Saftey
Michael McGrath, Chief
216-623-5000

TOMORROW: My friend who helped me start the Blog.

Posted by Ike at 11:22 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Fred Rogers was a fixture in American homes from 1968-2001 on his widely popular "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood". Many people don't know he was an ordained Presbyterian minister who was born and raised in and around Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. In fact, his television show was broadcast from Pittsburgh's PBS network. This amazing man was a puppeteer, entertainer, philosoper and friend to many. In my opinion, growing up with this red-sweatered wonder in my home everyday was one of the best things that happened to me. I learned almost as much from Mister Rogers as I did from anyone else. He is someone I will always hold in the highest regard, and I hope that future technology (including DVDs) will allow us to preserve his wisdom forever. I want you to know that much of this wisdom is captured in a wonderful book called "The World According to Mister Rogers: Important Things to Remember" by Fred Rogers (Hyperion 2003). There are four sections in the book which include quotes and thoughts from Rogers himself. Here is one of my favorites, from a section called "Understanding Love".

"It always helps to have people we love beside us when we have to do difficult things in life."

I think many of us can relate to this simple adage. Several years ago, I made a difficult decision to leave my chosen profession, as a TV new producer to join my family business (construction) in Cleveland. This was a difficult decision, but it was reinforced by the people closest to me -- including my family members, best friends and even clergy. It was difficult for me to give up something I loved, but their support and approval made it easier for me to make the transition.

Mr. Rogers book is full of wisdom, and I suggest it for all of you. The book can be found on Amazon.com for as little as $1.50! So, do yourself the favor, and make the small investment.

TRUTH BE TOLD

It is true that I called my mother's mother Nana Uh-Uh because, as a precocious youngster, she would tell me "Uh-Uh" when I would get into something that I shouldn't have.

WIN $50!!!! AMAZING FIRST CONTEST ANNOUNCEMENT

Many people have already visited our site. But, we are looking for many more. And, we are most especially looking for people to comment on our articles. So, the person who sends the most commentators to our site between now and May 7 will win $50. The commentator needs to say that they were recommended to the site by you. That's all. Send the most traffic my way, and win $50!

Posted by Ike at 6:30 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Before I even had time to handicap the possible co-anchors to succeed Katie Couric at NBC's brilliant "Today" show, NBC execs today hired Meredith Vieira (from "The View") to fill the spot. Quite frankly, the brass could have done a lot better. As Simon Cowell would say, this is a "safe" choice. I would call it lackluster myself. Sure, her resume speaks volumes about her as a journalist. Sure, she fits in well as the campy moderator of "The View." Sure, she is a regular Regis in the syndicated version of "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire". And sure, they got her on the cheap. The New York Times is suggesting she may be only getting $2.25 per million/year. That will certainly keep her current "Today" show ensemble happy.

Speaking of. Matt Lauer had to say something nice about the hire. So, he said, "Meredith is a real pro, and I think it speaks volumes that NBC has brought her here to "Today." I have been her fan for years and I can't wait to be her partner. She has the perfect background and personality to make a real mark on this show and in morning news in general. I'm thrilled to welcome her aboard." Please. What else was he supposed to say? Let's talk about who could have been his sidekick (here comes my late handicapping). Natalie Morales, the beautiful, bubbly and talented NBC newsperson. She is young (thirties), energetic and fits a lot of the most important demographics. Then, there's Campbell Brown -- another NBC colleague. She is a bit more stiff, but warm on the set next to Matt. She would have seemed the next obvious choice, given her fill-in roles (which I suspect will continue through the summer). Finally, Ann Curry had been mentioned to move into Katie's role. Let's be serious. She can barely read the news let alone mingle with Matt and Al. She is totally mismatched on that set day in, day out. So, in the end, in this blogger's opinion, NBC simply settled on the cheap, easy way out, hoping Vieira's morning appeal on "The View" and plethora of journalism awards would justify making her Katie's replacement. Only time will tell, but I'd be gushing right about now if I were Charlie and Dianne.

By the way, best comment of the day: Andy Rooney, 60 Minute's veteran curmudgeon telling Don Imus he wasn't happy about Katie coming aboard (CBS).

And, as promised yesterday, the beginning of a special feature I'll call "Truth Be Told".

TRUTH BE TOLD

I actually did meet Wilt Chamberlain back in 1995 at a small salsa nightclub on South Beach. He walked in right in front of me, and I was more than intimidated by his size. He is, to this day, the largest man I have ever seen. Shaq included. I wasn't however intimidated to strike up a conversation with the Stilt. He was sitting at a two person table in the bar area, and one of the seats was empty. I asked him if he would mind if I sat in the other seat. He gladly said "yes", and I didn't quite know what to say or do at that point. His legs reached under my chair. So, I simply said, "Mr. Chamberlain, you were the greatest." He thanked me. I moved on and looked for my friends. It was one of those chance meetings you'll always remember. A few years later, when he died way too young, I sat stunned at my newsroom desk, recalling how this super-sized celebrity was calm and cool with me that night. I wasn't hounding him. I never got an autograph. I just exchanged a few words. But, in the end, they are words I'll never forget.

Words are something we should treasure and never forget. That's why tomorrow you can look forward to my feelings about the late Fred Rogers and some of the important words he left behind.

Posted by Ike at 5:12 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

Many people have called on my journalism background to give a somewhat educated opinion regarding Katie curious jump from co-host of NBC's #1 rated morning show "Today" to become the anchor of the CBS Evening News. First things first. Before the announcement, which wasn't a surprise to anyone, I said she'd be committing "career suicide". I still think this is the case. The Tiffany network, once home to Edward R. Murrow, Douglas Edwards, Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather is going to break ground by becoming the first network to let a female anchor fly solo in its coveted chair. That is admirable, and I applaud them for the decision. However, Ms. Couric is no Cronkite, et al. Where do I even begin on this one? The reason I think she is committing career suicide is that her morning popularity will in no way translate to success at a sloppy CBS Evening News newscast. This is a newscast that has been slumbering for years now. Dan Rather only made it worse over time. The irony is Bob Schieffer, Rather's competent interim replacement, is driving the numbers up for the first time in ages. So, why bring in Couric? She still fits into a nice demographic. At 49, she can stick around for a while if everything goes well. She has star quality, overseeing the "Today" show's rise to inimitable success since 1991 when she was introduced simply as "Katherine Couric". It seems like everyone around her likes her. Jeffrey Zucker, former "Today" show EP and now the head of NBC Universal couldn't stop complimenting her this morning during an MSNBC appearance.

The question, though, still remains, "Did Katie Couric make the right move?" and how will it affect all three networks? That's something I'll address further this week.

I will say this. It does not appear as though money played an issue in this whole thing. It does not appear Katie was unhappy with the politics at NBC. Was it her schedule? Her kids? Something else we didn't know about? We can all just surmise at this point.

It wouldn't be fair of me to overlook Katie's amazing career. According to a CBS news release, "in May 2001, Couric was honored with a prestigious George Foster Peabody award for her series "Confronting Colon Cancer," which aired on "Today" in March 2000. Her husband, Jay Monahan, died of colon cancer in 1998 at the age of 42. She has also won six Emmys, a National Headliner Award, the Society of Professional Journalists' Sigma Delta Chi award, an Associated Press Award, a Matrix Award, two Gracie Allen Awards, the Julius B. Richmond Award by the Harvard School of Public Health, and UNICEF's Danny Kaye Humanitarian Award. Her reporting on colon cancer also contributed to NBC News' 2001 Edward R. Murrow award (ironic)for Overall Excellence for the news department."

For now, that's strange places strange faces. Tomorrow, more on Katie plus a special time-piece about how I met Wilt Chamberlain.

Posted by Ike at 11:11 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery

"Beginnings" was the name of a well-received Chicago ("Chicago Transit Authority") song in 1969 on the group's popular CD entitled, "Chicago Transit Authority." It was the third track, ran 7:54 and was written by Robert Lamm, then the keyboardist and vocalist for the band. "Beginnings" reached #7 on the Hot Position chart, and #1 on the Easy Listening chart. The song has been included in most of the group's greatest hits albums, and has won wide acclaim throughout the world, as the group continues to churn out more albums. I must confess here that I am a closet Chicago junkie, and "Beginnings" is one of my favorite songs. I saw the group in concert a few times, most notably with Al Jarreau back in '88 or so at Blossom Music Center here in Cleveland. So, when friends encouraged me to start blogging, I figured this was a good place to start. Now, I'll admit I'll have to catch up to the blog technology, but I can still write with, and intend to write with the best of them. I hope my daily musings, observations, poems, peeves, problems, happiness, sadness and general search for knowledge are something you can truly appreciate. So, remember, it's only just the beginning. Only just the start.

Posted by Ike at 11:43 PM | Permalink | From the Peanut Gallery