Shelby Foote, noted novelist, esteemed historian, and thoroughgoing Mississippi gentleman, has died at the age of 88. I knew he'd been ill for quite some time; I had no idea just how serious it was.
He will be missed. He will not be forgotten.
Modern Library ranked his 3 volume The Civil War: A Narrative as # 15 on its top 100 list of the best nonfiction works of the 20th century. Truly a well-deserved accolade.
The best and nicest thing I can say is that it is impossible to read any of that work without actually hearing Shelby Foote's voice speaking his words.
For this we must thank Ken Burns, whose PBS series on the Civil War opened our eyes to Mr. Foote's existence in the first place.
The second best thing I can say about Shelby Foote is that he was no Southern sentimentalist: he did not approach his work with the attitude that the Confederacy was some idealized, romanticized Lost Cause. He stuck to facts. He hated slavery, racism, and all their implications. He was a voice of sanity and gentility in an increasingly crazy and stridently rude world.
As I said, he will be missed.
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Monday, June 27, 2005
Missed It By That Much!
Well, the results are in. According to Matt Lauer, the number one Greatest American, by a margin of less than one-half of one percent, or .444 %, of the votes cast, is Ronald Reagan!?!?
Yes, I lost my lunch. I told you to have a barf bag at the ready. I know I did.
Abraham Lincoln finished second; Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was third; George Washington was fourth; and Benjamin Franklin was fifth.
In an interview done during the live broadcast revealing the Number One, even Reagan's son Ron said his dad would have voted for Lincoln. Get a clue, all you people who voted for Reagan. In fact, take two. They're small.
Let's reprise "One of These Things is Not Like the Others," shall we?
Reagan does most emphatically NOT belong anywhere in the top 5, let alone at Number 1.
Why? Well, there's Iran-Contra, for starters. There's also my argument that he didn't really end the Cold War. Besides, even if he did, the consequences for us have not been universally good, now, have they? Remember, there had not been any 9/11s while the USSR kept the lid on the fanatics in the Middle East. We should have let the USSR keep doing the dirty work. It would have saved us several thousand young American lives, among other things.
There's also the simple fact that Reagan was a Grade B actor delivering his lines, and not really a leader. He didn't want to move the country forward. He wanted to go backwards, and boy, have we been paying for it ever since. He dreamed of a WWII-era America, where no one could question that we were the good guys, and battleships ruled the waves, and Norman Rockwell was a realist, not an idealist. That world vanished a long time ago (if it ever really existed at all), and there is no bringing it back.
Now JFK was a leader. "Ask not . . .," the Peace Corps, and the space program are ample examples. Reagan was everybody's easygoing grandpa. I, for one, was energized by Kennedy's vision for the country. But I wanted to curl up into a ball and hide when forced to contemplate Reagan's. "Government is the problem, but we're making it even bigger at the same time we complain about it, so we are going in hock past our eyeballs. But isn't it good to be an American?" The hypocrisy and sheer stupidity of it still stun me.
Finally, and most telling of all: it's just too soon after Reagan's presidency to judge. As recently as the 1940s, American History courses stopped at the year 1877. Anything more recent was considered not history, but political science (if that). History needs time to render its final judgments. I would say we are just now getting far enough away from JFK's 1000 days to be able to evaluate his presidency properly. Reagan's administration is much too near in time to get more than the forementioned political-science-type treatment.
Reagan's selection as the Number One "Greatest American" actually proves the point. Americans have notoriously short attention spans. Enough of them remembered Reagan to vote for him based on his having been around during their lifetimes. In the broadcast that announced the top 5 candidates, at least one woman complained that the top 5 were all dead. ("Now there's someone with a keen grasp of history," she said, sarcastically.) The woman eventually threw her support to Reagan, illustrating my point: he was alive in her lifetime, and that is what mattered to her, so she voted for him.
Besides, the whole thing most probably was rigged to begin with. One allegedly could vote up to 3 times per mechanism PER WEEK for one's choice. By the Discovery Channel's own terms, I should have been able to vote again ON the 26th . . . but every time I tried, I was locked out; this at the very moment Matt Lauer was saying that the polls were still open. I smell a big rat.
But it doesn't really matter anyway. No one is taking this for any kind of scientific, or rational, or even reasonable, evaluation of the nominees. I mean, c'mon. We're talking about the same people who voted Elvis the # 8 all-time greatest American, and who wouldn't even list Duke Ellington in the top 100. It's disappointing to me because I always thought better of Americans in general than that. I should have listened to P.T. Barnum: no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. (By the way, which way to the egress?)
But the exercise does say a lot, and nothing good, about the state of education in America today. Apparently as long as all the children are limited to the same degree, no child is considered left behind. Scary.
It's also a very useful warning to anyone who expects to get the neocons out of office come the next election. They aren't going to be able to beat the neocons by saying "we're correct and you know it." About half the populace does NOT know it. The pols are going to have to come up with other tactics.
What those tactics might be, I have no idea.
Yes, I lost my lunch. I told you to have a barf bag at the ready. I know I did.
Abraham Lincoln finished second; Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was third; George Washington was fourth; and Benjamin Franklin was fifth.
In an interview done during the live broadcast revealing the Number One, even Reagan's son Ron said his dad would have voted for Lincoln. Get a clue, all you people who voted for Reagan. In fact, take two. They're small.
Let's reprise "One of These Things is Not Like the Others," shall we?
Reagan does most emphatically NOT belong anywhere in the top 5, let alone at Number 1.
Why? Well, there's Iran-Contra, for starters. There's also my argument that he didn't really end the Cold War. Besides, even if he did, the consequences for us have not been universally good, now, have they? Remember, there had not been any 9/11s while the USSR kept the lid on the fanatics in the Middle East. We should have let the USSR keep doing the dirty work. It would have saved us several thousand young American lives, among other things.
There's also the simple fact that Reagan was a Grade B actor delivering his lines, and not really a leader. He didn't want to move the country forward. He wanted to go backwards, and boy, have we been paying for it ever since. He dreamed of a WWII-era America, where no one could question that we were the good guys, and battleships ruled the waves, and Norman Rockwell was a realist, not an idealist. That world vanished a long time ago (if it ever really existed at all), and there is no bringing it back.
Now JFK was a leader. "Ask not . . .," the Peace Corps, and the space program are ample examples. Reagan was everybody's easygoing grandpa. I, for one, was energized by Kennedy's vision for the country. But I wanted to curl up into a ball and hide when forced to contemplate Reagan's. "Government is the problem, but we're making it even bigger at the same time we complain about it, so we are going in hock past our eyeballs. But isn't it good to be an American?" The hypocrisy and sheer stupidity of it still stun me.
Finally, and most telling of all: it's just too soon after Reagan's presidency to judge. As recently as the 1940s, American History courses stopped at the year 1877. Anything more recent was considered not history, but political science (if that). History needs time to render its final judgments. I would say we are just now getting far enough away from JFK's 1000 days to be able to evaluate his presidency properly. Reagan's administration is much too near in time to get more than the forementioned political-science-type treatment.
Reagan's selection as the Number One "Greatest American" actually proves the point. Americans have notoriously short attention spans. Enough of them remembered Reagan to vote for him based on his having been around during their lifetimes. In the broadcast that announced the top 5 candidates, at least one woman complained that the top 5 were all dead. ("Now there's someone with a keen grasp of history," she said, sarcastically.) The woman eventually threw her support to Reagan, illustrating my point: he was alive in her lifetime, and that is what mattered to her, so she voted for him.
Besides, the whole thing most probably was rigged to begin with. One allegedly could vote up to 3 times per mechanism PER WEEK for one's choice. By the Discovery Channel's own terms, I should have been able to vote again ON the 26th . . . but every time I tried, I was locked out; this at the very moment Matt Lauer was saying that the polls were still open. I smell a big rat.
But it doesn't really matter anyway. No one is taking this for any kind of scientific, or rational, or even reasonable, evaluation of the nominees. I mean, c'mon. We're talking about the same people who voted Elvis the # 8 all-time greatest American, and who wouldn't even list Duke Ellington in the top 100. It's disappointing to me because I always thought better of Americans in general than that. I should have listened to P.T. Barnum: no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. (By the way, which way to the egress?)
But the exercise does say a lot, and nothing good, about the state of education in America today. Apparently as long as all the children are limited to the same degree, no child is considered left behind. Scary.
It's also a very useful warning to anyone who expects to get the neocons out of office come the next election. They aren't going to be able to beat the neocons by saying "we're correct and you know it." About half the populace does NOT know it. The pols are going to have to come up with other tactics.
What those tactics might be, I have no idea.
Thursday, June 23, 2005
My Brain Hurts!
Miscellany from the files inside my head:
I am still trying to recover from Nebraska's elimination from the College World Series. They lost on Tuesday to Arizona State, 8 to 7, in 11 innings, in a game that ESPN rightfully considers worthy of being an "Instant Classic." Lead changes, errors, dramatic three-run homers, strange decisions to steal, dropped foul balls, dramatic catches and other defensive gems . . . this game had enough excitement to replace any number of Viagra prescriptions.
My own take on why Nebraska lost is simple: they had a lot to play for; they were ranked # 3 in the nation coming into the CWS; and after previous CWS appearances both were 0-for-2 and out (also known as "oh-for-two-and barbeque"), they knew expectations were high. They didn't want to let the home state crowds down. So they were nervous, and they played like it. But they did beat Arizona State once before going down in flames to Florida then losing to ASU in the elimination game rematch.
[Just an aside: I still don't think I like this twin bracket, modified double elimination format. I much prefer the traditional round-robin double elimination, because then you didn't have to play the same team every other time you turned around. I do understand why the format was changed . . . the needs of TV. TV people must schedule with some certainty, and the old format could let things go on way too long for their abilities to plan. At least this way, we know for sure how long the CWS will last and when (w/in a 48-hour time frame) the final game will be played.--Ed.]
Arizona State, on the other hand, was not even ranked in the top 25 nationally coming into the CWS; they had nothing to lose and could play as loose as they needed to win. They are playing Florida right now in a rematch of yesterday's game to see which of them goes on to play Texas in the best of 3 Championship Series.
In watching the CWS, however, I missed the telecast of the American Film Institute's top 100 film lines of all time. I did see the list in the paper. I am pleasantly surprised to admit that with only 1 or 2 or maybe 3 exceptions, I had no quarrel with what was on the list . . . though I might have adjusted the rankings of some of them. Ferinstance: I think "You're going to need a bigger boat," from Jaws, should have been higher than # 35. I also think "Gentlemen! You can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" from Dr. Strangelove should have been much higher than # 64.
Oh, well. That's what makes all this list-making fun . . . debating the results.
Some friends have suggested that I start posting info about the books I am reading. I am taking that under advisement. Apparently people are reading this thing, even if they aren't posting comments. But I'd really like to see some comments! I started this not just to rant my rants, but to get some intelligent dialogues going. Agree w/ me, disagree w/ me, have suggestions for me--I don't care what you post as comments--just please post some comments!
Finally, don't forget to watch the Discovery Channel Sunday, the 26th, to find out who got voted as "The Greatest American." Keep a barf bag by your chair, just in case.
I am still trying to recover from Nebraska's elimination from the College World Series. They lost on Tuesday to Arizona State, 8 to 7, in 11 innings, in a game that ESPN rightfully considers worthy of being an "Instant Classic." Lead changes, errors, dramatic three-run homers, strange decisions to steal, dropped foul balls, dramatic catches and other defensive gems . . . this game had enough excitement to replace any number of Viagra prescriptions.
My own take on why Nebraska lost is simple: they had a lot to play for; they were ranked # 3 in the nation coming into the CWS; and after previous CWS appearances both were 0-for-2 and out (also known as "oh-for-two-and barbeque"), they knew expectations were high. They didn't want to let the home state crowds down. So they were nervous, and they played like it. But they did beat Arizona State once before going down in flames to Florida then losing to ASU in the elimination game rematch.
[Just an aside: I still don't think I like this twin bracket, modified double elimination format. I much prefer the traditional round-robin double elimination, because then you didn't have to play the same team every other time you turned around. I do understand why the format was changed . . . the needs of TV. TV people must schedule with some certainty, and the old format could let things go on way too long for their abilities to plan. At least this way, we know for sure how long the CWS will last and when (w/in a 48-hour time frame) the final game will be played.--Ed.]
Arizona State, on the other hand, was not even ranked in the top 25 nationally coming into the CWS; they had nothing to lose and could play as loose as they needed to win. They are playing Florida right now in a rematch of yesterday's game to see which of them goes on to play Texas in the best of 3 Championship Series.
In watching the CWS, however, I missed the telecast of the American Film Institute's top 100 film lines of all time. I did see the list in the paper. I am pleasantly surprised to admit that with only 1 or 2 or maybe 3 exceptions, I had no quarrel with what was on the list . . . though I might have adjusted the rankings of some of them. Ferinstance: I think "You're going to need a bigger boat," from Jaws, should have been higher than # 35. I also think "Gentlemen! You can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" from Dr. Strangelove should have been much higher than # 64.
Oh, well. That's what makes all this list-making fun . . . debating the results.
Some friends have suggested that I start posting info about the books I am reading. I am taking that under advisement. Apparently people are reading this thing, even if they aren't posting comments. But I'd really like to see some comments! I started this not just to rant my rants, but to get some intelligent dialogues going. Agree w/ me, disagree w/ me, have suggestions for me--I don't care what you post as comments--just please post some comments!
Finally, don't forget to watch the Discovery Channel Sunday, the 26th, to find out who got voted as "The Greatest American." Keep a barf bag by your chair, just in case.
Sunday, June 19, 2005
The Discovery Channel's Greatest American: Update
Well, it's now down to the top 5 in the Discovery Channel's search for "the Greatest American."
In alphabetical order, the top 5 are: Benjamin Franklin, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, and George Washington.
Everybody sing along: "One of these things is not like the others, . . ."
Dubya was said to be # 6. Gag me with a spoon!
Elvis was in the top 10 . . . and Walt Disney was ranked way ahead of John F. Kennedy in the top 25.
As I said earlier, many people do not seem to grasp the concept of "greatness." They're voting for some personal favorite, not for whom has done the most good for America. There is no other reason for Dubya to be anywhere on the top 100, and certainly no reason for Ronald McD--oops! I mean--Reagan to be in the top 5.
After all, Ann Coulter is defending both of them. Res ipsa loquitur.
In any event, the phone numbers with which you can vote (up to three times per week) have changed. To vote for Lincoln, call (toll free) 1-866-669-3103.
You can also vote online. Go to www.aol.com/greatestamerican and click just beneath Lincoln's picture. You can cast up to 3 votes per week by this method in addition to your telephone votes.
You can also get information at that web site on how to vote (again, up to 3 times per week in addition to the other methods) via text messaging. I am afraid I do not have a phone that text messages, so I neglected that. Mea culpa!
This is important, everyone--don't let the idiots and ideologues have their way. Cast serious votes for a proper candidate!
The final results are to be tabulated and revealed live on the Discovery Channel next Sunday, June 26th, at 9 p.m. Eastern/8 p.m. Central time.
Remember: vote early, and often!
In alphabetical order, the top 5 are: Benjamin Franklin, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, and George Washington.
Everybody sing along: "One of these things is not like the others, . . ."
Dubya was said to be # 6. Gag me with a spoon!
Elvis was in the top 10 . . . and Walt Disney was ranked way ahead of John F. Kennedy in the top 25.
As I said earlier, many people do not seem to grasp the concept of "greatness." They're voting for some personal favorite, not for whom has done the most good for America. There is no other reason for Dubya to be anywhere on the top 100, and certainly no reason for Ronald McD--oops! I mean--Reagan to be in the top 5.
After all, Ann Coulter is defending both of them. Res ipsa loquitur.
In any event, the phone numbers with which you can vote (up to three times per week) have changed. To vote for Lincoln, call (toll free) 1-866-669-3103.
You can also vote online. Go to www.aol.com/greatestamerican and click just beneath Lincoln's picture. You can cast up to 3 votes per week by this method in addition to your telephone votes.
You can also get information at that web site on how to vote (again, up to 3 times per week in addition to the other methods) via text messaging. I am afraid I do not have a phone that text messages, so I neglected that. Mea culpa!
This is important, everyone--don't let the idiots and ideologues have their way. Cast serious votes for a proper candidate!
The final results are to be tabulated and revealed live on the Discovery Channel next Sunday, June 26th, at 9 p.m. Eastern/8 p.m. Central time.
Remember: vote early, and often!
Thursday, June 16, 2005
A Correction (With A Caveat), A Postscript, And A Bit Of Foolishness
A Correction
Terri Schiavo's autopsy results show extensive brain atrophy from the lack of oxygen her brain suffered some 14 years ago, according to the medical examiner's report released yesterday. The report interprets this to mean that no amount of therapy could have helped her, seeming to vindicate her husband in his efforts to "let her die in peace."
OK, so I was wrong when I interpreted the video of Terri showing what seemed to be awareness and purposeful movement.
But I still say it was wrong to starve and dehydrate her to death. It was unnecessarily cruel. Every human will die without food and water, so withholding food and water is heinous in any circumstance where the person is otherwise alive. While I was wrong about Terri's prognosis, I maintain I was right to protest the means of her death.
A Postscript
The Bellevue Public Schools Board of Education announced at its most recent Monday meeting that it's sending a letter to College World Series, Inc., to get CWS to let the tournament teams come back to practice at BPS facilities.
Essentially, the Board of Ed. is pleading like a dog w/ its tail between its legs to get CWS to forgive its attempt to extort money from CWS this year by demanding outrageous fees for use of BPS facilities.
And oh, by the way, any grants CWS wants to give BPS for use of the facilities in 2006 and beyond will be accepted gratefully.
The motion to send the letter was passed unanimously by the Board; the letter will be signed by both the President of the Board of Education and by the Superintendent of the Bellevue Public Schools.
One of the Board of Ed. members said of its previous actions this year regarding the CWS, "I think we've been misunderstood and miscommunicated."
What's to misunderstand? As I said in a previous post, the Board tried a bit of legal extortion, got caught, and is now frantically backpedalling to undo the damage its greed caused.
But BPS is still money-grubbing; the Superintendent said BPS would in any event incur extra expenses in connection with the CWS and that the community of Bellevue should help raise the funds to offset those expenses. (This after the Mayor said "no, thank you" to BPS's suggestion that the City pay BPS the exhorbitant $10,000 per facility fee BPS initially tried to get from CWS, Inc.)
The Superintedent's position would be a lot more credible if he could state it without revealing the dollar signs in his eyes.
While I would very, very much like to see the CWS resume using BPS facilities for the tournament teams' practices, I also think it would serve BPS right if CWS never comes back.
A Bit Of Foolishness--Actually, Two Bits Of Foolishness
Bit the First: There's an alligator in Carter Lake! Carter Lake, for those who may not know, is an oxbow formed when the Missouri River changed course several decades ago; the surrounding community, also Carter Lake, is officially in Iowa though it's on the Nebraska side of the main river channel. (When the state borders were made official, Carter Lake was the main channel; after it became an oxbow, no one changed the status of the town as being in Iowa.)
Anyway, last week several fishermen discovered an alligator in the lake. Really. It's officially a 3-foot-long caiman; the informed speculation is that it was a pet that either escaped or was released when its owner tired of dealing with it. (Either way, it's illegal in both Carter Lake and Omaha to own such an animal and board it within city limits . . . unless you're the Zoo.)
No one is too worried. It may eat a few fish, but people and properly domesticated pets like dogs and cats are not at much risk. It won't survive the winter in any event, according to Dr. Lee Simmons, head of Omaha's Henry Doorly Zoo.
A humane trap was put out; the caiman was caught at one point and its jaws duct-taped shut . . . but it got away.
I do not know whether it freed itself from the duct tape; nor do I know whether further attempts have been made to recapture it. All I know is that I am not going swimming in Carter Lake in the foreseeable future.
Bit the Second: If I ever get a new (to me, at least) car, I must buy an Accord. I want to get personalized license plates that say "Fenry."
Get it? I'd then own the "Fenry Honda."
>>>ahem<<<
Terri Schiavo's autopsy results show extensive brain atrophy from the lack of oxygen her brain suffered some 14 years ago, according to the medical examiner's report released yesterday. The report interprets this to mean that no amount of therapy could have helped her, seeming to vindicate her husband in his efforts to "let her die in peace."
OK, so I was wrong when I interpreted the video of Terri showing what seemed to be awareness and purposeful movement.
But I still say it was wrong to starve and dehydrate her to death. It was unnecessarily cruel. Every human will die without food and water, so withholding food and water is heinous in any circumstance where the person is otherwise alive. While I was wrong about Terri's prognosis, I maintain I was right to protest the means of her death.
A Postscript
The Bellevue Public Schools Board of Education announced at its most recent Monday meeting that it's sending a letter to College World Series, Inc., to get CWS to let the tournament teams come back to practice at BPS facilities.
Essentially, the Board of Ed. is pleading like a dog w/ its tail between its legs to get CWS to forgive its attempt to extort money from CWS this year by demanding outrageous fees for use of BPS facilities.
And oh, by the way, any grants CWS wants to give BPS for use of the facilities in 2006 and beyond will be accepted gratefully.
The motion to send the letter was passed unanimously by the Board; the letter will be signed by both the President of the Board of Education and by the Superintendent of the Bellevue Public Schools.
One of the Board of Ed. members said of its previous actions this year regarding the CWS, "I think we've been misunderstood and miscommunicated."
What's to misunderstand? As I said in a previous post, the Board tried a bit of legal extortion, got caught, and is now frantically backpedalling to undo the damage its greed caused.
But BPS is still money-grubbing; the Superintendent said BPS would in any event incur extra expenses in connection with the CWS and that the community of Bellevue should help raise the funds to offset those expenses. (This after the Mayor said "no, thank you" to BPS's suggestion that the City pay BPS the exhorbitant $10,000 per facility fee BPS initially tried to get from CWS, Inc.)
The Superintedent's position would be a lot more credible if he could state it without revealing the dollar signs in his eyes.
While I would very, very much like to see the CWS resume using BPS facilities for the tournament teams' practices, I also think it would serve BPS right if CWS never comes back.
A Bit Of Foolishness--Actually, Two Bits Of Foolishness
Bit the First: There's an alligator in Carter Lake! Carter Lake, for those who may not know, is an oxbow formed when the Missouri River changed course several decades ago; the surrounding community, also Carter Lake, is officially in Iowa though it's on the Nebraska side of the main river channel. (When the state borders were made official, Carter Lake was the main channel; after it became an oxbow, no one changed the status of the town as being in Iowa.)
Anyway, last week several fishermen discovered an alligator in the lake. Really. It's officially a 3-foot-long caiman; the informed speculation is that it was a pet that either escaped or was released when its owner tired of dealing with it. (Either way, it's illegal in both Carter Lake and Omaha to own such an animal and board it within city limits . . . unless you're the Zoo.)
No one is too worried. It may eat a few fish, but people and properly domesticated pets like dogs and cats are not at much risk. It won't survive the winter in any event, according to Dr. Lee Simmons, head of Omaha's Henry Doorly Zoo.
A humane trap was put out; the caiman was caught at one point and its jaws duct-taped shut . . . but it got away.
I do not know whether it freed itself from the duct tape; nor do I know whether further attempts have been made to recapture it. All I know is that I am not going swimming in Carter Lake in the foreseeable future.
Bit the Second: If I ever get a new (to me, at least) car, I must buy an Accord. I want to get personalized license plates that say "Fenry."
Get it? I'd then own the "Fenry Honda."
>>>ahem<<<
Monday, June 13, 2005
California Criminal Court Conundrums, Part III
Michael Jackson was just acquitted on all 10 of the child-molestation-related charges against him.
Maybe he didn't do it, but as the Amish say, "It just doesn't look."
All that can be said with certainty is that he is not guilty--which is NOT to say that he is innocent [despite how it will be reported by the press, especially the print media--Ed.].
All that the verdicts mean is that the prosecution failed to prove its case to the jury "beyond a reasonable doubt." It doesn't even mean that the jury thinks Jackson didn't do it; it just means that the prosecution failed to convince the jury sufficiently that he did. In plain English, the DA botched the case.
[At least part of this is because the victim and his family looked like a bunch of money-grubbing extortionists . . . no one seems to care that even if they were, if Jackson did what they alleged, they were entitled to justice. Even a prostitute can say "No," and if she does but the guy proceeds anyway, it's still a rape.--Ed.]
Add this verdict to the Robert Blake and OJ Simpson verdicts, and you get a sum of poor prosecution of high-profile cases. I wonder when California DAs are going to realize that to succeed in high-profile cases, they'll have to be 100 times more thorough and careful than they'd have to be in a Joe Schmo case.
I also wonder whether the jury would have convicted Jackson if he had been Joe Schmo, and all other elements in the case were equal.
Not that any of this will matter in the popular media. There's going to be a great deal of spinning going on.
Batten down the hatches for a lot of talking head nonsense! And bring me a barf bag; I think I am going to be sick. I'm certain to be dizzy!
Maybe he didn't do it, but as the Amish say, "It just doesn't look."
All that can be said with certainty is that he is not guilty--which is NOT to say that he is innocent [despite how it will be reported by the press, especially the print media--Ed.].
All that the verdicts mean is that the prosecution failed to prove its case to the jury "beyond a reasonable doubt." It doesn't even mean that the jury thinks Jackson didn't do it; it just means that the prosecution failed to convince the jury sufficiently that he did. In plain English, the DA botched the case.
[At least part of this is because the victim and his family looked like a bunch of money-grubbing extortionists . . . no one seems to care that even if they were, if Jackson did what they alleged, they were entitled to justice. Even a prostitute can say "No," and if she does but the guy proceeds anyway, it's still a rape.--Ed.]
Add this verdict to the Robert Blake and OJ Simpson verdicts, and you get a sum of poor prosecution of high-profile cases. I wonder when California DAs are going to realize that to succeed in high-profile cases, they'll have to be 100 times more thorough and careful than they'd have to be in a Joe Schmo case.
I also wonder whether the jury would have convicted Jackson if he had been Joe Schmo, and all other elements in the case were equal.
Not that any of this will matter in the popular media. There's going to be a great deal of spinning going on.
Batten down the hatches for a lot of talking head nonsense! And bring me a barf bag; I think I am going to be sick. I'm certain to be dizzy!
Friday, June 10, 2005
On The Nature Of Greatness
I have to give it to the Discovery Channel: even when it ticks me off, it makes me think. I watched the first installment of "The Greatest American" last night, and I was appalled to see some of people included.
Actually, I should be mad not at the Discovery Channel, but at the bozos who voted some of the selectees onto the list.
In justifying my own ideas about who should not be on the list, however, I had to contemplate the nature of greatness itself. For too many people who voted, greatness seems to have more to do with being recently in the headlines or representative of some political point one wants to make--or of just being someone's favorite--than it has to do with real character or impact on the country as a whole.
It certainly is not the same as Time magazine's criterion for its Person of the Year. Time's editors require themselves to choose the person who, for good or for ill, has had the most impact on the world in the past year. Thus was Hitler selected, in 1937 I think.
Greatness is different. It necessarily implies a positive impact; the great American has done something to benefit the country and beyond that, the world, in a measurable and remarkable way.
Madonna, Michael Jackson, Brett Favre, Rush Limbaugh, and Michael Moore, among others, have all had massive effects on American society and culture . . . but those effects are not necessarily positive. They were all voted onto the Discovery Channel's list . . . none of them should have been.
Richard M. Nixon is quintessential. He'd have been an ideal Time Man of the Year, and he did do some important things, such as opening China and signing the Clean Air and Water Acts. But Watergate is his legacy. His total disregard for the true nature of our system of government and his utter disrespect for the US Constitution render him unfit to be considered a Great American.
Personal courage, dignity, and decency are all examples of American greatness in action, but I doubt anyone displaying these traits should be on the list just for showing grace under pressure. Lance Armstrong, for instance, is a man with a ton of grit, drive, competitiveness, and determination, not to mention skill and stamina . . . but is conquering his own case of cancer while winning 6 straight Tours de France enough to make him a candidate for Greatest American? I think not. His story is inspiring, but what has it done for America?
An aside: one person not on the list was Ernest Hemmingway. I am no fan of Hemmingway's work, but in my more raffish moments, I think he deserves to be on the list just because he inspired whomever first wrote: "Why did the chicken cross the road? To die. In the rain. Alone."
But that's just my sense of humor talking.
The other major question regarding the list is ranking. I find it very easy to name my own top two, and to name enough others to make for a sound list, but after the top two, ranking the others becomes impossible for me. Who can say, with comfort and certainty, that Edison belongs higher on the list than the Wright Brothers? Not I.
My top two are (1) Abraham Lincoln, and (2) Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. They both had stirring visions of what America could be, and they eloquently dragged the rest of the country along. Both were cut down for their efforts . . . and while martyrdom alone does not indicate greatness, it can indicate (by the way the country responds to an assassination) how deeply a person affected the country.
For that reason, I have no quarrel with either JFK or RFK also being on the list. And the eloquence thing means I have no quarrel with Mark Twain being on the list. The vision thing also justifies FDR's and Eleanor Roosevelt's both being on the list . . . and, I would argue, for adding Gene Roddenberry to the list (though at a lower ranking). He gave the nation a vision of a hopeful, decent, integrated, positive future in the original Star Trek that the country sorely needed at the time . . . and still does.
Thomas Edison clearly belongs on the list, just because I wouldn't be sitting here, doing this, if not for what others were able to build from his creations.
And Bill Gates does belong on the list, but more for what he has done with the ridiculous amounts of money he's made than how he made it. His and his wife's charitable foundation truly has bettered not just the country, but the world.
Ditto for Oprah Winfrey, who carries the additional cachet of being a superb role model for anyone.
Ditto for George Washington, who set the standard for the American Presidency: he would not become a king; nor would he serve more than two terms. Giving up power voluntarily is truly greatness in action.
But Martha Stewart? No way. Nor Henry Ford. No matter the effect their business empires have had on the country; they have personal shortcomings that disqualify them both. Likewise Charles Lindbergh.
Because to be a truly great American is not just to positively affect the course of America . . . it also has to do with personal decency. And for that reason, I can argue against JFK, Bill Clinton, and slave-holding Thomas Jefferson from being at the top of the list, even if I cannot keep them off it entirely.
Dubya? Not in a million years should he, his father, his mother, his wife, or anyone in his family be anywhere near the list, let alone on it. Why? If for no other reason, then try this: it is rightly said of the Bush family that its members are gracious--when they get their own way.
True greatness has a component requiring someone to be gracious especially when NOT getting his own way.
The Bushes seem to regard the country as their personal fiefdom and birthright, something they own, not something they serve. That's just wrong. And it should keep every last one of them off the list.
The Discovery Channel has fixed numbers 100-26. If you want to vote for the greatest amongst its top 25, go to www.aol.com/greatestamerican for details. You can also make a toll free call to 1-866-669-3117 to vote for Abraham Lincoln as the single greatest American.
Hey, I never claimed to be impartial!
Actually, I should be mad not at the Discovery Channel, but at the bozos who voted some of the selectees onto the list.
In justifying my own ideas about who should not be on the list, however, I had to contemplate the nature of greatness itself. For too many people who voted, greatness seems to have more to do with being recently in the headlines or representative of some political point one wants to make--or of just being someone's favorite--than it has to do with real character or impact on the country as a whole.
It certainly is not the same as Time magazine's criterion for its Person of the Year. Time's editors require themselves to choose the person who, for good or for ill, has had the most impact on the world in the past year. Thus was Hitler selected, in 1937 I think.
Greatness is different. It necessarily implies a positive impact; the great American has done something to benefit the country and beyond that, the world, in a measurable and remarkable way.
Madonna, Michael Jackson, Brett Favre, Rush Limbaugh, and Michael Moore, among others, have all had massive effects on American society and culture . . . but those effects are not necessarily positive. They were all voted onto the Discovery Channel's list . . . none of them should have been.
Richard M. Nixon is quintessential. He'd have been an ideal Time Man of the Year, and he did do some important things, such as opening China and signing the Clean Air and Water Acts. But Watergate is his legacy. His total disregard for the true nature of our system of government and his utter disrespect for the US Constitution render him unfit to be considered a Great American.
Personal courage, dignity, and decency are all examples of American greatness in action, but I doubt anyone displaying these traits should be on the list just for showing grace under pressure. Lance Armstrong, for instance, is a man with a ton of grit, drive, competitiveness, and determination, not to mention skill and stamina . . . but is conquering his own case of cancer while winning 6 straight Tours de France enough to make him a candidate for Greatest American? I think not. His story is inspiring, but what has it done for America?
An aside: one person not on the list was Ernest Hemmingway. I am no fan of Hemmingway's work, but in my more raffish moments, I think he deserves to be on the list just because he inspired whomever first wrote: "Why did the chicken cross the road? To die. In the rain. Alone."
But that's just my sense of humor talking.
The other major question regarding the list is ranking. I find it very easy to name my own top two, and to name enough others to make for a sound list, but after the top two, ranking the others becomes impossible for me. Who can say, with comfort and certainty, that Edison belongs higher on the list than the Wright Brothers? Not I.
My top two are (1) Abraham Lincoln, and (2) Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. They both had stirring visions of what America could be, and they eloquently dragged the rest of the country along. Both were cut down for their efforts . . . and while martyrdom alone does not indicate greatness, it can indicate (by the way the country responds to an assassination) how deeply a person affected the country.
For that reason, I have no quarrel with either JFK or RFK also being on the list. And the eloquence thing means I have no quarrel with Mark Twain being on the list. The vision thing also justifies FDR's and Eleanor Roosevelt's both being on the list . . . and, I would argue, for adding Gene Roddenberry to the list (though at a lower ranking). He gave the nation a vision of a hopeful, decent, integrated, positive future in the original Star Trek that the country sorely needed at the time . . . and still does.
Thomas Edison clearly belongs on the list, just because I wouldn't be sitting here, doing this, if not for what others were able to build from his creations.
And Bill Gates does belong on the list, but more for what he has done with the ridiculous amounts of money he's made than how he made it. His and his wife's charitable foundation truly has bettered not just the country, but the world.
Ditto for Oprah Winfrey, who carries the additional cachet of being a superb role model for anyone.
Ditto for George Washington, who set the standard for the American Presidency: he would not become a king; nor would he serve more than two terms. Giving up power voluntarily is truly greatness in action.
But Martha Stewart? No way. Nor Henry Ford. No matter the effect their business empires have had on the country; they have personal shortcomings that disqualify them both. Likewise Charles Lindbergh.
Because to be a truly great American is not just to positively affect the course of America . . . it also has to do with personal decency. And for that reason, I can argue against JFK, Bill Clinton, and slave-holding Thomas Jefferson from being at the top of the list, even if I cannot keep them off it entirely.
Dubya? Not in a million years should he, his father, his mother, his wife, or anyone in his family be anywhere near the list, let alone on it. Why? If for no other reason, then try this: it is rightly said of the Bush family that its members are gracious--when they get their own way.
True greatness has a component requiring someone to be gracious especially when NOT getting his own way.
The Bushes seem to regard the country as their personal fiefdom and birthright, something they own, not something they serve. That's just wrong. And it should keep every last one of them off the list.
The Discovery Channel has fixed numbers 100-26. If you want to vote for the greatest amongst its top 25, go to www.aol.com/greatestamerican for details. You can also make a toll free call to 1-866-669-3117 to vote for Abraham Lincoln as the single greatest American.
Hey, I never claimed to be impartial!
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
Bellevue Been Bery, Bery Bad To Beisbol
Or, Still More Local Governmental Greed, Ineptitude, And Folly Offered For Your Consideration And Edification
As anyone reading this [IS anyone reading this?-Ed.] probably knows, Omaha hosts one of the most fun NCAA tournaments every year, to wit: The College World Series. As part of the annual festivities, the participating teams use area high school baseball fields for practice. It's a win-win: it's fun for the players to get to know the community to which they've come, the fans get to watch some of the best college baseball there is (even if they can't make it to the actual games), and the kids get to collect autographs and otherwise dream big dreams.
For the past twenty or so years, Bellevue Public Schools has offered its facilities. In return, CWS, Inc., which runs the College World Series for the NCAA, has made donations of varying amounts (from $0 one year to $10,000 in another) to BPS as an offset for the additional wear and tear on the local facilities that their extra use entails.
This year, however, some idiot in BPS decided to REQUIRE a $10,000 fee per location from CWS, Inc., for the teams to use Bellevue's facilities. CWS, Inc., quite rightly, said, "Hasta la vista, Baby." The College World Series teams this year will practice way out west, in Millard.
So Bellevue has lost another thing that made living here special. Real bright, BPS! (Just what is it about holding a position in government that makes some people lose the few brain cells they had to begin with, anyway?)
In a lame attempt to limit the damage, Superintendent of BPS John Deegan has proposed a 10-year contract between the city, BPS, and CWS, Inc. The city will pick up the $10,000 per field cost of providing the facilities. CWS, Inc., will resume using Bellevue facilities for the annual two-week event. And if CWS, Inc., awards any grants for use of the facilities, that money will go to BPS.
This is not going to work, nor even help.
For one thing, CWS, Inc., will never agree to a 10-year term. The NCAA extends Omaha's contract for the College World Series itself on a 3-to-5-year term, max. And that's even though Omaha has hosted the thing since its inception back in the 1940s. (I mean, come on; the theme song for the tournament is "Back Home In Omaha.") Furthermore, Bellevue Mayor Jerry Ryan isn't really keen on the idea. He correctly thinks that BPS should just pick up the added expense of letting the CWS teams practice in Bellevue because of the inherent value to the community in doing so.
All I can say is that BPS stupidy and greedily tried a bit of legal extortion, got called on it, and now we've probably lost CWS, Inc.'s goodwill forever. Not to mention the loss of the delight of participating in a unique aspect of the College World Series. Not to mention the added inconvenience to the tournament players--most of them stay in downtown Omaha hotels due to their proximity to Rosenblatt Stadium, the tournament site. Practicing in Bellevue was much closer than will be practicing out in Millard. Given the weather we've had lately, if I were a CWS player, I'd not want to have to spend an extra 40 minutes or more per day on a non-air-conditioned bus going out to practice if I didn't have to do so.
I hope everyone else in Bellevue is as disgusted as I am by this entire mess. Judging from the editorial column in this week's Bellevue Leader, and judging from the published letters to the editor of both the Leader and the Omaha World-Herald, I think they are. I don't know that that will do any good for Bellevue's chances of again getting to provide the CWS practice locations, but at least it means people are paying attention to their local government's follies.
As anyone reading this [IS anyone reading this?-Ed.] probably knows, Omaha hosts one of the most fun NCAA tournaments every year, to wit: The College World Series. As part of the annual festivities, the participating teams use area high school baseball fields for practice. It's a win-win: it's fun for the players to get to know the community to which they've come, the fans get to watch some of the best college baseball there is (even if they can't make it to the actual games), and the kids get to collect autographs and otherwise dream big dreams.
For the past twenty or so years, Bellevue Public Schools has offered its facilities. In return, CWS, Inc., which runs the College World Series for the NCAA, has made donations of varying amounts (from $0 one year to $10,000 in another) to BPS as an offset for the additional wear and tear on the local facilities that their extra use entails.
This year, however, some idiot in BPS decided to REQUIRE a $10,000 fee per location from CWS, Inc., for the teams to use Bellevue's facilities. CWS, Inc., quite rightly, said, "Hasta la vista, Baby." The College World Series teams this year will practice way out west, in Millard.
So Bellevue has lost another thing that made living here special. Real bright, BPS! (Just what is it about holding a position in government that makes some people lose the few brain cells they had to begin with, anyway?)
In a lame attempt to limit the damage, Superintendent of BPS John Deegan has proposed a 10-year contract between the city, BPS, and CWS, Inc. The city will pick up the $10,000 per field cost of providing the facilities. CWS, Inc., will resume using Bellevue facilities for the annual two-week event. And if CWS, Inc., awards any grants for use of the facilities, that money will go to BPS.
This is not going to work, nor even help.
For one thing, CWS, Inc., will never agree to a 10-year term. The NCAA extends Omaha's contract for the College World Series itself on a 3-to-5-year term, max. And that's even though Omaha has hosted the thing since its inception back in the 1940s. (I mean, come on; the theme song for the tournament is "Back Home In Omaha.") Furthermore, Bellevue Mayor Jerry Ryan isn't really keen on the idea. He correctly thinks that BPS should just pick up the added expense of letting the CWS teams practice in Bellevue because of the inherent value to the community in doing so.
All I can say is that BPS stupidy and greedily tried a bit of legal extortion, got called on it, and now we've probably lost CWS, Inc.'s goodwill forever. Not to mention the loss of the delight of participating in a unique aspect of the College World Series. Not to mention the added inconvenience to the tournament players--most of them stay in downtown Omaha hotels due to their proximity to Rosenblatt Stadium, the tournament site. Practicing in Bellevue was much closer than will be practicing out in Millard. Given the weather we've had lately, if I were a CWS player, I'd not want to have to spend an extra 40 minutes or more per day on a non-air-conditioned bus going out to practice if I didn't have to do so.
I hope everyone else in Bellevue is as disgusted as I am by this entire mess. Judging from the editorial column in this week's Bellevue Leader, and judging from the published letters to the editor of both the Leader and the Omaha World-Herald, I think they are. I don't know that that will do any good for Bellevue's chances of again getting to provide the CWS practice locations, but at least it means people are paying attention to their local government's follies.
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Oops! I Did It . . .
In a recent posting [I Didn't Know Indiana Had A Wine Industry--Ed.], I mentioned that there was no longer a separate women's professional bowlers' tour. I swear I got the idea from what an ESPN announcer said. However, last night ESPN televised a WIBC match play final, so I surmise my earlier assertion was in error.
The correct situation seems to be this: the men's professional bowlers' tour has eliminated the "men only" restriction from its tournament rules. Any woman pro bowler who so wishes may compete in a PBA event against the men, and if she makes the TV finals, so much the better. But the women's tour still exists as a separate entity.
I apologize for any confusion my earlier confusion may have caused. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!
The correct situation seems to be this: the men's professional bowlers' tour has eliminated the "men only" restriction from its tournament rules. Any woman pro bowler who so wishes may compete in a PBA event against the men, and if she makes the TV finals, so much the better. But the women's tour still exists as a separate entity.
I apologize for any confusion my earlier confusion may have caused. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!
Saturday, June 04, 2005
One Less Mystery Of Life
Former FBI Deputy Director W. Mark Felt has been identified as "Deep Throat," the mysterious anonymous source of much of the Washington Post's information used to unravel Watergate. He almost single-handedly saved this country from President Nixon's obsessive desire to control all aspects of our federal government and trample the US Constitution into dust.
Nevertheless, some of Nixon's old cronies are trying to trash Mr. Felt and the service he did for his country. Pat Buchanan, for one, claims that Nixon was brought down by "a snake in the FBI." Excuse me, Mr. Buchanan, but Nixon was brought down by his own illegal acts. It's not like Felt could have gone through channels to report what he knew--his superiors, FBI Director L. Patric Gray and Attorney General John Mitchell, both were implicated in Watergate themselves.
Charles Colson and G. Gordon Liddy, who both served time for their actions connected to Watergate, complain that Felt is just trying to make money and "violated law enforcement ethics." Talk about pots calling kettles black! They both have made lucrative livings by trading on their Watergate infamy . . . and Liddy, who engineered the 1972 break-in at the Democratic Party's National HQ in the Watergate building, has no business at all complaining about someone who violates law enforcement ethics. Breaking the law is far worse than violating ethics, especially when the violation results in justice being done: i.e., that the lawbreakers are found out and punished.
Some question Felt's motives. They claim he did what he did out of bitterness. He was passed over in favor of Gray to be FBI director when J. Edgar Hoover died. However, it's not like he made up what he told Post reporters Woodward and Bernstein. Even if he was bitter, and even if his bitterness prompted any part of his actions, he was telling the truth.
As a rule, I do not believe in the "either/or" scenario. To ask the question "was Felt a hero or a villain?" is improperly to limit the terms of the debate. There are normally more than two sides to any issue.
For those who insist on framing the debate as an "either/or" question, however, I for one will come down firmly on the side of Felt as hero. Who cares what his motives were? He did the right thing for the country when the country desparately needed it.
Nevertheless, some of Nixon's old cronies are trying to trash Mr. Felt and the service he did for his country. Pat Buchanan, for one, claims that Nixon was brought down by "a snake in the FBI." Excuse me, Mr. Buchanan, but Nixon was brought down by his own illegal acts. It's not like Felt could have gone through channels to report what he knew--his superiors, FBI Director L. Patric Gray and Attorney General John Mitchell, both were implicated in Watergate themselves.
Charles Colson and G. Gordon Liddy, who both served time for their actions connected to Watergate, complain that Felt is just trying to make money and "violated law enforcement ethics." Talk about pots calling kettles black! They both have made lucrative livings by trading on their Watergate infamy . . . and Liddy, who engineered the 1972 break-in at the Democratic Party's National HQ in the Watergate building, has no business at all complaining about someone who violates law enforcement ethics. Breaking the law is far worse than violating ethics, especially when the violation results in justice being done: i.e., that the lawbreakers are found out and punished.
Some question Felt's motives. They claim he did what he did out of bitterness. He was passed over in favor of Gray to be FBI director when J. Edgar Hoover died. However, it's not like he made up what he told Post reporters Woodward and Bernstein. Even if he was bitter, and even if his bitterness prompted any part of his actions, he was telling the truth.
As a rule, I do not believe in the "either/or" scenario. To ask the question "was Felt a hero or a villain?" is improperly to limit the terms of the debate. There are normally more than two sides to any issue.
For those who insist on framing the debate as an "either/or" question, however, I for one will come down firmly on the side of Felt as hero. Who cares what his motives were? He did the right thing for the country when the country desparately needed it.
No Wonder People Are Fed Up! Or, State and Local Governmental Incompetence, Part 2
I see that Gov. Heineman chose the Chimney Rock design for the upcoming Nebraska state quarter.
Great. Not only does it represent people passing through on their way to somewhere else; not only is it a total stereotype; it's also drawn so that the covered wagon is going the wrong way. So it's not only a cliche, it's embarrassing!
Gov. Heineman had a chance to do something truly impressive and select the Standing Bear design--he had a chance to show the rest of the country something about Nebraska that they probably didn't know, but should--but he copped out to his western Congressional 3rd District constituency, and foisted a worn out stereotype on us all. He denied that politics influenced his decision. The only reason he'd have to take the initiative to deny that, however, is if it were true in the first place.
Not that the westward migration was not important. We all know it was. But why settle for the story everyone knows when one could do something truly edifying and enlightening?
If it is true that people get the government they deserve, we are being punished, big time.
Further confirmation: the Bellevue City Planning Commission just denied the request of a local restaurant to relocate 1 block east of its present location. "That's Amore," a delightful pizza and pasta restaurant, and a great success in its 18 months of operation [They have a pizza called "The Pick of the Prince," with alfredo sauce, fresh basil and spinach, ham and feta cheese, that is heavenly--Ed.], right now is located in a little strip mall. Its back door is less than 50 feet away from the back side of a local Baptist church, which means the restaurant cannot have a liquor license under state laws and regulations.
The members of the church said they had no problem with That's Amore getting a liquor license. There is no provision for exemption from the 50' requirement under the law, however. The restauranteurs wanted the license to be able to serve wine with pasta and beer with pizza, not so they could foist a lot of drunks on the city. So moving just far enough away from the church to comply with the 50' limit seemed an obvious solution. But by moving 1 block east of its present location, That's Amore would be moving to a place with "inadequate parking" and closer to a residential area that would not like the added traffic flow and hassle the restaurant would bring.
The powers that be in this city are constantly whining about the need to revitalize Bellevue's historic "Olde Towne" business district . . . but every time a successful business wants to grow/expand/increase its success, the Planning Commission shoots it down.
What's up with that? Bellevue now has an official population of nearly 46,000, and it's still being run like a podunk town of 500 by an exceedingly parochial Planning Commission that wouldn't know a good idea if it bit them on their butts.
Willie is still in the world: what fools these mortals be!
Great. Not only does it represent people passing through on their way to somewhere else; not only is it a total stereotype; it's also drawn so that the covered wagon is going the wrong way. So it's not only a cliche, it's embarrassing!
Gov. Heineman had a chance to do something truly impressive and select the Standing Bear design--he had a chance to show the rest of the country something about Nebraska that they probably didn't know, but should--but he copped out to his western Congressional 3rd District constituency, and foisted a worn out stereotype on us all. He denied that politics influenced his decision. The only reason he'd have to take the initiative to deny that, however, is if it were true in the first place.
Not that the westward migration was not important. We all know it was. But why settle for the story everyone knows when one could do something truly edifying and enlightening?
If it is true that people get the government they deserve, we are being punished, big time.
Further confirmation: the Bellevue City Planning Commission just denied the request of a local restaurant to relocate 1 block east of its present location. "That's Amore," a delightful pizza and pasta restaurant, and a great success in its 18 months of operation [They have a pizza called "The Pick of the Prince," with alfredo sauce, fresh basil and spinach, ham and feta cheese, that is heavenly--Ed.], right now is located in a little strip mall. Its back door is less than 50 feet away from the back side of a local Baptist church, which means the restaurant cannot have a liquor license under state laws and regulations.
The members of the church said they had no problem with That's Amore getting a liquor license. There is no provision for exemption from the 50' requirement under the law, however. The restauranteurs wanted the license to be able to serve wine with pasta and beer with pizza, not so they could foist a lot of drunks on the city. So moving just far enough away from the church to comply with the 50' limit seemed an obvious solution. But by moving 1 block east of its present location, That's Amore would be moving to a place with "inadequate parking" and closer to a residential area that would not like the added traffic flow and hassle the restaurant would bring.
The powers that be in this city are constantly whining about the need to revitalize Bellevue's historic "Olde Towne" business district . . . but every time a successful business wants to grow/expand/increase its success, the Planning Commission shoots it down.
What's up with that? Bellevue now has an official population of nearly 46,000, and it's still being run like a podunk town of 500 by an exceedingly parochial Planning Commission that wouldn't know a good idea if it bit them on their butts.
Willie is still in the world: what fools these mortals be!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)