Spending a Week in the “House of Mouse” Part One: Surviving the Incursion

WaltDisneyWorld

Yes, I haven’t been around in about a week. The mission I undertook was one that tested every bit of training that I received in the United States Marine Corps. It pushed every fiber of my being to get through it and…oh, the hell with it. The last week was family time as we took a vacation to Walt Disney World in Orlando, FL.

Reportedly – with the reporter being my mother – I had already been to a Disney property, the California location known as Disneyland. Since I was nine months old when I allegedly did this, however, I can pretty confidently say that it wasn’t a part of my decade’s long consciousness. As such, it was safe to say that this would be my first visit to a Disney property, as it was for my son, and the first time my wife had visited the park since she became of drinking age.

You’ve got to hand it to the namesake of the property, he was a visionary. Walt Disney – yes, the man who created Mickey Mouse and his cohorts – wasn’t simply satisfied with dominating the world of cartoons and children’s films. After visiting amusement parks with his daughters in the 30s and 40s, Disney decided that he could do better and set about showing he could.

He would build Disneyland in just over a year, opening the gates to the premises in 1955 on another innovative venue – television – but it reportedly wasn’t well received. Perhaps because of the rush of getting the park opened, several bugs were apparent at the grand premiere, including asphalt that hadn’t sealed yet (and allowed women’s high heels to sink into in the 100 degree heat), non-operating water fountains (given the option of water fountains or operating toilets, I think Disney made the right choice) and traffic delays around the park.

Still, the new attraction in California would become a landmark in the United States. Reportedly Soviet premier Nikita Khrushchev wanted to visit the park when he came to the United States in 1959; he was denied due to security concerns. As of today, it has welcomed over 650 million visitors, young and old, fulfilling Walt Disney’s dream of a place where children and adults could equally have the time of their lives.

While many may think the original in the Golden State is the main attraction for the Disney organization, it is actually the Walt Disney World Resort – also called Walt Disney World or simply Disney World – that is the “flagship” of the Disney Empire. Opened in 1971, it is reportedly the most visited vacation resort in the world, with total attendance over 52 million people per year. Originally, however, it wasn’t supposed to be a huge resort and amusement park like its predecessor.

Disney’s original thoughts for the Florida property was one of discovery and experimentation. It was to include a planned community called the “Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow” (remember this, there will be a test later) where new creations and innovations in city living might be tested. Alas, after Disney passed away in 1966, the organization instead moved towards creating an East Coast version of what already existed on the West Coast.

And here I had been able to avoid it for most of my life…

When you have children, you sometimes make those sacrifices. Who hasn’t let their kid occasionally beat them at something, just once, so they don’t get discouraged? Who hasn’t done something that they really didn’t want to do just to make their tot happy? Hey, let’s be honest, if going to Walt Disney World is the toughest thing I have to do to make my little son happy, then I’ll do it every day and twice on Sunday. What you don’t realize is just how difficult it is to make the trek around the grounds of the “House of Mouse” (hereafter referred to as “WDW”) and emerge on the other side unscathed.

Day One

After landing at the Orlando International Airport – one of the nicer airports I’ve been in, honestly – you think you’re on your way to WDW. There are several ways to get there, however, and it is dependent on how you’ve created your trip to how you get out of the airport itself. There are taxis and hotel shuttles for those “off property” hotels around WDW and you can go through the burdensome task of the rental car, but most who have booked their trips through WDW will be dependent on the “Disney’s Magical Express” for their transportation to WDW.

“Disney’s Magical Express” is NOT operated by WDW, however. This is an outside contractor, Mears Transportation, who also seems to have a pretty good lock on the taxi market for the entirety of the WDW complex. The reason I bring this up is that, while efficient, they aren’t exactly looking out for the customers that are traveling via their buses. Personally, my wife and I left our son’s stroller on the bus once we arrived at our hotel; while we didn’t have it for the entirety of our trip, it “magically” appeared in the hotel’s lost and found the day we were to leave WDW. If you get on one of these buses, make DAMN sure that you grab everything upon debarking, otherwise you might not see your property again.

It isn’t a short trip from the airport to WDW, either. Be prepared, depending on which hotel you are staying in on the WDW Resort compound, for up to a 45 minute trip. For example, our bus had to make stops at four different properties on the WDW grounds. As the second stop, we took approximately 30 minutes until we were situated in our hotel room, ready to begin the grand adventure.

But what do you do when it is late in the afternoon? The best bet for Day One was to head to Disney Springs, or “Downtown Disney,” where many restaurants and shops are located. If there is anything that you want to buy, you can probably find it here. There was the Ghirardelli chocolate shops located right next to the Starbucks located right next to a jewelry store located right next to the Disney Store. After a very good dinner at the Rainforest Grill at Disney Springs our family, which had now been joined by my son’s maternal grandmother (or “Noona”), decided to get some rest before the real fun began.

Day Two

First off, write this in your memory bank:  there is NO WAY you will be able to visit the four different parks that make up the WDW compound in one day (the total size of the WDW property is 43 square miles, about the same area as San Francisco). Besides the original Magic Kingdom built in 1971, there are Disney’s Animal Kingdom, Disney’s Hollywood Studios and EPCOT (remember the original plan of Walt Disney?). None of these properties are particularly close together and you must depend on Disney Transport, the in-house bus system for the sprawling park, to get around. About the closest thing that Disney Transport has to a schedule is that “a bus will be around about every 20 minutes” so you never know when you’ll be picked up unless you happen to luck into catching one when it is in the depot.

From a planning aspect, my lovely wife did an outstanding job. I don’t think General George Patton could have put together a better plan of attack for his Sherman tank divisions than what she scheduled for our family. If you don’t think this type of preparation is necessary, it is, otherwise you won’t be able to enjoy each park AND be able to squeeze moments of sustenance around the fun.

For the first day, we attacked the Magic Kingdom as my wife admitted it was her favorite from her visits as a child. And it is easy to see why this, even after more than 40 years, is still the star attraction for WDW. The outdoor rides are pretty much all located at this park, including the popular Space Mountain and other attractions, and there are five different segments of the park that we could probably have a day spent in them alone.

For those that claim that cities such as New York, London, Paris or Munich are the “Crossroads of the World,” these people have obviously never been to WDW and, in particular, the Magic Kingdom. Languages from around the world – Portuguese, Korean, Japanese, Spanish, French, German…you get the idea – fluttered in the air of the Magic Kingdom and mingled like an exquisite jambalaya. There is a bonhomie amongst the visitors to the Magic Kingdom (and across WDW) that transcends simple nationalities, making everyone a true member of the world community, at least for their stay at WDW. It was a bit refreshing in this day and age of hyper-nationalism and the xenophobia we sometimes see in the world.

As to the rides, there is something for everyone. With a young boy who is a burgeoning daredevil, the Big Thunder Mountain Railroad was the first stop and it was a blast (he thought so too). Next on the agenda was Splash Mountain, a water flume ride that was adequate (a bit slow for my tastes and our son “got his butt wet” as he laughed) and a few other rides that were all outdoors. This is important, as you’ll learn later in our program.

If you have a young child and don’t have a stroller, you’re going to have to cut your visits short for each day you are at WDW. Our son required a nap each afternoon from the excitement and the walking (up to eight miles per day, in some cases) and it wasn’t a bad idea for the parents either. We normally were out of the park by 2PM (the hottest part of the day and a good time to take that break) and back at the hotel within a short time.

With two days down and three to go, everyone was in bed by 10PM the second night. You definitely had to be rested up for the daily workout and, as was to be expected, the excitement that would come in the future.

IN PART TWO:  Why outdoor rides are important, dining around WDW and some questions need to be asked.

NFL Week 6 Picks: Trends Aren’t Necessarily Something to Follow

NFLLogo

In the National Football League, there are some trends that occur in betting that amateurs usually get caught up in (you know, if you’re in an area where you can legally place a bet on a sporting event). Everyone loves to take a team coming off a bye week, figuring that the extra rest will have recharged the batteries of the squad and have them fresh for the first game back from the bye. As of 2013, teams coming off the bye week won 53.4% both straight up and against the spread, not as much as you might think.

One trend that does have some legs for some reason is the West Coast team traveling to the East Coast for a game. According to a study in 2013, since 2005 a West Coast team that traversed the continent to play on the East Coast had a record of 44.57 against the spread, a winning percentage of .436. If the teams were traveling to the Central Time Zone, they also had a horrible win rate against the spread, 37-44 (.457). Going to the Mountain Zone, the West Coast team was a bit better off, going 22-10 (.688).

While the average person might say “AHA!” and run with this, you still have to do the math. The West Coast teams are the Oakland Raiders (putrid for much of the last decade), San Diego Chargers (42-38 over the past five years), San Francisco 49ers (three outstanding seasons between 2011-13 with an 8-8 slate in 2014 and a 6-10 record in 2010 and dismal results prior to 2010) and the Seattle Seahawks (23-41 between 2008-11, 36-12 between 2012-14). As you can see, the teams who make up the “West Coast” franchises have had long stages where they weren’t exactly the best team to be making a difficult trek across the country to play the games. Basically, whenever you see someone spouting about a “trend” that always has to be followed, you have to put your own analysis to the test before you jump off the diving board.

This week in the NFL is a tough one, with several games that could go either way. There are some good choices, however, if you’re brave enough to take the risk (home team in CAPS, pick in bold).

Arizona Cardinals vs. PITTSBURGH STEELERS (+4); UNDER 45

Here’s an example of one of those trends that has actually been scientifically proven. When a dome team goes to play an outdoor team in conditions where the temperatures are around 40 degrees, the dome team only wins the game about 20% of the time. The forecast for Heinz Field in the Steel City on Sunday is for temps to hover around 44 degrees with a gusty wind knocking the chill down to 39 degrees. Although Cardinals WR Larry Fitzgerald has some experience playing in these conditions (he played college ball for the University of Pittsburgh), the Cardinals are that dome team that will have problems with outdoor games.

I also like the Steelers in this game because they seem to have figured out that running the ball with RBs Le’veon Bell and DeAngelo Williams might be a good way to operate the offense while QB Ben Roethlisberger is out and Michael Vick (still dangerous, by the way) is under the center. If the Steelers are able to control the pace of this game, they’ll stay close to the Cardinals and keep it under 45 total points for the game.

Chicago Bears (+3.5) vs. DETROIT LIONS; UNDER 44

This is the game that will be on the NFL Sunday Ticket bar televisions in Hell. Both teams are downright ugly and it is stunning as to why. The Lions aren’t exactly bereft of talent with QB Matthew Stafford and WR Calvin Johnson, but they are the only team in the NFL so far this season without a win. The Bears have had some injury issues, but that doesn’t explain why they are averaging slightly more than 17 points per game and seemingly have begun the “fire sale” to gut the team and rebuild for the future. The Bears have shown that, on occasion, they can stop an opposing offense, thus I’ll take the former “Monsters of the Midway” and go UNDER in what will be a torturous affair.

Miami Dolphins vs. TENNESSEE TITANS (-2); UNDER 43.5

After their game two weeks ago in the United Kingdom, the Dolphins fired head coach Joe Philbin. Whenever you are firing your coach four games into the season, that isn’t going to bode well as to your chances for the remainder of the year.

Still, we see a couple of the “trend” theories playing out here. The line originally opened at Titans (-3), so that has closed up a bit (perhaps because of the “bye week” trend?) and the O/U was set at 45.5. It’s now dropped to 43.5 as some weather conditions have arisen that could cause some issues for the teams (“warm weather” team playing in bad conditions?). The Titans are going to bring a good game against the ‘Fins, with the Titans averaging 25 points per game and QB Marcus Mariota looking very solid behind center, thus they get the pick.

Last Week:  5-0-1
Overall:  19-8-2

SO CLOSE to perfection last week! The only pick missed – and technically not missed but a push – was the Seahawks losing to the Cincinnati Bengals by three, the exact spread of the game. This week’s going to be a bit tougher to fade, but we’ll see what happens.

So Who SHOULD Be In The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame?

Last week, the nominations came out for the 2016 Rock & Roll Hall of Fame and, at the very end of my thoughts, I posited the question, “Who should have been nominated?” Mind you, the list of nominees was outstanding overall: longtime overlooked acts such as Chicago, Deep Purple and Yes getting nominated again (and three bands that I believe are long overdue the honor), newcomers like Janet Jackson, The Cars and Cheap Trick (all no votes) and outside shots such as The J.B.’s (another vote in from me), Chic (no) and N.W.A. (yes). However, there were several other artists that should have been on this year’s ballot if not already inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame.

The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame is personal to me because of my long love affair with music. Despite the factor that I could never play an instrument with any high level of competence, I admire those that can create art out of music, words, melodies and thoughts. While it could be said that writing is something like that, the songwriter and/or musician is an artist that encompasses different aspects, pulling them into one cohesive idea. Thus, I’ve always been a huge fan of music overall and rock music in particular.

My first introduction to rock music dates back to someone who, unfortunately, I don’t know if they’re still alive. The year was 1971 and, riding around in a car with my half-brother Monty (his real name could have been Montague, don’t really remember) on a hot summer day, saw him pop a cassette into the tape deck. Suddenly the mystifying tones of David Bowie’s “Space Oddity” came pounding out of the speakers and, as I listened to the words and music, I was transported (you have to remember, these were the heady days of NASA’s Apollo space program) to being “Major Tom” and traveling through space myself.

From there, it was a quick indoctrination into the world of music. My mother had the classics – Johnny Cash, Merle Haggard, Waylon and Willie and others – from the country music side, but she also had such gems as The Temptations, The Supremes and other R&B acts from the 60s in the record cabinet. My investigations in the rock music genre touched on Santana, The Who, Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young and James Taylor, then began to branch out into the harder edged rock of ZZ Top, KISS and Led Zeppelin, among others (on a personal note, was always more of a Rolling Stones guy than the Beatles).

As the mid-70s passed, punk rock became the next touchstone. The Sex Pistols, New York Dolls, The Ramones – these were the gates to pass through on the way to adulthood. As I reached high school, not only was it the disco era but it was almost time for the double shotgun-blast of the New Wave from England and MTV, opening the world even further (and we cannot go on without also recognizing the New Wave of British Heavy Metal). As I had to be a part of the music scene, I did the only logical thing a person with little to no musical talent could do – I became a DJ.

Through the 1980s and well into the 1990s, I plugged along as a DJ at pretty much every radio format that you could think of doing. Album-Oriented Rock (AOR), Top 40, easy listening, R&B, adult contemporary, news/talk – about the only thing I didn’t do was country (much like “country” music today, there’s a thin line between what was country music then and pop music). Along the way, there were some great times had in the conduct of my job and…well, let’s just save those stories for another time.

Hopefully you see that who gets in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame is important, at least to me. It isn’t “live or die” important, mind you, but it is something that I want to show my son one day and say, “Yeah, I saw them, they were great.” Maybe we will sit down and listen to a CD or, pray tell, if we still have vinyl by then, an album, and talk about music and its history. He’s got a great musical ear, however, so he may be entertaining me with his music rather than our just listening to it.

OK, getting sappy here…

My criteria for putting someone in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame would be somewhat along the lines of what poker uses for its Hall of Fame. These are the criteria that I would use in putting someone in the Rock Hall:

1. Length of career with sustained critical or commercial excellence
2. Influence on a genre of music or on several artists
3. Respect from fellow musicians

Pretty simple, wouldn’t you say? Alas, there are some glaring errors in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. How about some of these artists, bands and contributors?

Warren Zevon – The singer-songwriter born in Chicago has been overlooked for far too long when it comes to the Rock Hall. Responsible for writing such songs as “Poor, Poor Pitiful Me” (covered by far too many artists to list but most notably by Rock & Roll Hall of Fame inductee Linda Ronstadt), Zevon was a part of the California scene in the mid-70s, working with such people as Jackson Browne, Neil Young, members of the Eagles and counting Bruce Springsteen amongst his admirers.

When it came to his own efforts, Zevon was beyond compare. Along with his iconic “Werewolves of London,” Zevon penned and performed such classics as “Lawyers, Guns and Money,” “Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner,” “Accidently Like a Martyr,” and “Keep Me in Your Heart,” which was nominated for a Grammy after Zevon’s death in 2003. With a career that spanned more than 30 years, commercial and critical success and the respect of your fellow musicians, there’s no one more deserving than Zevon for induction into the Hall.

Jimmy Buffett – Another product of the singer-songwriter era of the early 70s, Buffett is notable for forging his own path in the music industry. When I say his own path, I mean he created a whole GENRE of music that didn’t exist before – let’s call it “tropical rock,” music with a Caribbean/calypso/reggae/country feel that didn’t fit neatly into any of the “categories” of music in the 1970s (and still doesn’t today, to be honest). Buffett himself has said about that period, “I wasn’t country enough to be played on those stations and I wasn’t rock enough to be played on AOR.”

The way to beat that? Write a song like “Margaritaville” that transcended any charts, genres or radio stations. Today that song has led Buffett into the world of literature, casino and hotel ownership and a “40-year summer job” that the man still enjoys to this day as he approaches 70. He’s influenced a host of country musicians (the Zac Brown Band is a prime example) and, as owner of a recording studio and a record company (Mailboat Records) is ensuring that the “tropical rock” he created will have outlets for the future.

The Runaways – While Joan Jett went in with The Blackhearts last year, she really should have gone in with The Runaways because, without them, there is no Joan Jett.

The Runaways were “created” by producer Kim Fowley who, having drummer Sandy West and guitarist Jett in the fold, was looking to create a “jailbait” band of teenaged girls who could rock out just as well as any group of guys. First found by the group was Micki Steele, who didn’t last long but went on to join The Bangles, before gold was struck with guitar virtuoso Lita Ford, vocalist Cherie Currie and bassist Jackie Fox to fill out the roster. With the group lineup set, The Runaways broke ground as one of the first female hard rock/metal acts to ever have any success in the recording industry.

From the seminal track “Cherry Bomb” to other tunes such as “Queens of Noise” and “I Love Playin’ with Fire” (covered by Jett during her Blackheart days), the band earned a great deal of attention and respect in the industry. The members of the group went on to arguably better success as solo artists or in other creative endeavors, but they were the ones who helped to get such groups as The Bangles, The Go-Gos, Vixen and rock “chicks” like Pat Benatar, Chrissie Hynde and Deborah Harry (among many others) in the door. It is arguable that, without The Runaways, some if not all of these women wouldn’t have gotten into the industry.

Judas Priest – This is one of those omissions by the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame that is inexcusable. A band that has sold 45 million albums, generated rock anthems such as “Breaking the Law,” “You’ve Got Another Thing Comin’,” “Heading Out To The Highway,” “Living After Midnight”…I could go on, but you get the point. So what has kept them out?

Over the years, the band has been targeted in various arenas outside of music. They were accused of using subliminal messages in their album British Steel that allegedly caused two men to try to kill themselves. They’ve been targeted by conservative Christian groups for their musical content and singer Rob Halford has taken some sabbaticals from the band over the decades. But when you have a list of bands that were influenced by you such as Metallica, Megadeth and Pantera (among others), you’ve done your job well.

There are a slew of other artists that could be held up for consideration – The Carpenters, Kate Bush, Slayer, Bon Jovi, Thin Lizzy, Motorhead – and maybe they are just waiting for their time. There are also those “pop” artists that I am overlooking, but this is the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, after all. If you’re waiting for a time that “works,” however, take it from someone who watches how these Halls of Fame work – if you don’t get in within your first couple of years of eligibility, your chances of getting in get worse as time goes by. All the artists listed here deserve to have their place in the pantheon of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame…now will anyone listen and induct them?

What to Expect at the First Democratic Debate

DemocraticCandidates

Just when you thought that the political world had calmed down, the first of a planned six debates from the Democratic Party will be held on Tuesday night in Las Vegas. The five announced candidates – former New York Senator and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, current Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, former Rhode Island Senator and Governor Lincoln Chafee and former Secretary of the Navy Jim Webb – will take the stage around 9PM Eastern Time on Tuesday night at the Wynn Las Vegas, presenting their reasoning for being the party’s selection for the 2016 Presidential nomination. It may not be as visually exciting as what the Republican Party have been able to put on in their previous two clashes, with their myriad of candidates all saying the same thing but trying to sound different, but these debates are just as important as those on the GOP side.

With President Barack Obama heading off into the sunset following his two terms in office, it is up to one of these five people to try to maintain the legacy of the Democratic Party for several reasons. One, the next President will probably have at least one and potentially as many as three Supreme Court justices to name in their 4-8 year term, basically allowing for a reshaping of the Court towards a more conservative or liberal bend. Two, if the next President is one of these Democrats, they will be able to firmly ensconce the Affordable Care Act – “ObamaCare” to many – as the “law of the land” and make it even more difficult to take away through repeal as it becomes more entrenched in the U. S. psyche. And three, the Democrats would be able to maintain the current foreign policy viewpoint of diplomacy before dominance – the major difference between them and the GOP, who want a war on all days that end in a “y.”

Anyone who says that the Democrats didn’t think that this would be a simple coronation for Clinton on the way to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia in July 2016 would be out-and-out lying. After getting stunningly pummeled in 2008 by Obama, Clinton did her duty in first accepting the Secretary of State role in the Obama Administration and then in not trying to usurp Obama is 2012. Her reward for this party loyalty was supposed to be a free pass to the Democratic nomination in 2016 but, along the way to the coronation party, someone threw a huge monkey wrench in the plans.

Sanders, the genial, grandfatherly Senator from the Northeast who calls himself a “democratic socialist,” has been stealing a great deal of Clinton’s thunder, especially in the early primary states of Iowa and New Hampshire. Part of the appeal of Sanders has been his Quixotic-tilt against the uber-rich, banks and corporations, which has struck a chord with the young and the downtrodden. His firm stance against all military action in the Middle East has also drawn comparisons of Sanders to fellow Kentucky Senator and Presidential hopeful Rand Paul – you know, back when Rand Paul was cool before he became a Republican.

Sanders has become so popular with some Democrats that the threats against Clinton in the early primary states have forced her into campaigning much sooner than she would like to have done. The Clinton team is looking to get her through the first few primaries in Iowa and New Hampshire, ready to take a second place finish behind Sanders, and prepare for the “SEC Primaries” at the beginning of March in the South, a traditional stronghold of the Clintons that would allow her to be able to thwart a Sanders attack through numerous victories.

There are a few differences between Clinton and Sanders, but there is more diversity when you toss the other candidates in the mix. O’Malley is a “law and order” type that, as mayor of Baltimore, was able to lower crime rates and improve the city’s image (it is also alleged that the tactics employed by O’Malley – the “stop and frisk” utilized by police officers, in particular, where officers could stop anyone for investigation despite not visually committing a crime – were a major impetus for the Baltimore riots of earlier this summer). Chafee is a former Republican who first became an independent before moving to the Democratic Party, while Webb is almost a DINO (Democrat in Name Only) as he supports the “close the border first, then maybe amnesty” program popular with Republicans as well as reining in the Environmental Protection Agency and its regulatory authority.

The 800-pound gorilla in the room will be the specter of current Vice President Joe Biden. Supposedly considering a third run for President, Biden has not committed to this debate as of Monday, but CNN has stated that a podium will be on hand should Biden state he wants to take part in the festivities. With Biden polling better than Sanders (but still behind Clinton), Biden would be an immediate (and strong) challenger to Clinton, forcing her to fend off not only Sanders but also Biden.

What exactly is going to happen in the debate? First off, Sanders and Clinton – and throw Biden into the mix should he show up – will not attack each other as the GOP candidates did in their second debate. First, moderator Anderson Cooper and his panelists, CNN reporter/anchor Dana Bash, CNN anchor Don Lemon and CNN en Espanol’s Juan Carlos Lopez, are not going to ask the “challenging” questions that saw the Republicans rip into each other during their debates. “I think it’s just as interesting to kind of learn about some of these candidates who the American public doesn’t really know much about,” Cooper stated in an interview on CNN’s Reliable Sources over the weekend, “as it is to hear from some of the candidates you do.”

There has also been a remarkable bonhomie between Sanders and Clinton in that they haven’t brought the knives out against each other. Sanders, in particular, has been given multiple opportunities to rip into Clinton over a variety of problems she has faced (her private e-mail server, her work with the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative and how it affected her time as Secretary of State, her vote for the Iraq War in 2003, etc.), but he has refused to do any mudslinging and instead concentrated on his message. That is a bit refreshing in this current day and age of politics.

Both Clinton and Sanders are going to continue with their own presentations of what their plans as President will be, which differ in some areas. Sanders in particular has made many suggestions regarding what he would do as President – free college for all students, raising the minimum wage to $15 nationwide, universal health care (going beyond ObamaCare) – but he will also have to answer about how he’s going to pay for those things; if Sanders’ plan to increase taxes on the 1% (for your information, that would be anyone who makes more than $344,000) and reduce military spending doesn’t stand up to the scrutiny, then his other plans won’t be taken seriously.

The ones who have nothing to lose are O’Malley, Chafee and Webb. Any airtime they get during the debates would be welcome as the three men currently are barely even making an impact on the polls (Webb is averaging .9%, O’Malley .6% and Chafee .2%, according to Real Clear Politics and their national polls). They also have to make viewers/voters remember them, so taking some shots at Clinton, Sanders and/or Biden (if he shows up and he’s polling at 18.6%) might help them out. If these candidates can’t get a bump out of this debate, they may not get another shot at the next debate in November, especially if Biden announces a run for the Presidency and their numbers stay the same.

One thing that will NOT happen is any of the candidates making a serious faux pas. All of them are experienced debaters and, as such, will be able to withstand the slings and arrows that come from their opponents. Only the introduction of Biden into the mix (due to preparation by the candidates for those that are currently on the dais and not an 11th hour introduction of another player) or a change in tactics by Sanders regarding his “no mudslinging” tactics with Clinton might change the game.

It might not be as electric as the GOP debates have been to this point, but the Democratic debate should provide viewers/voters with more substantive information on the candidates. It will also mark the drive towards next November when the next President of the United States will be chosen.

NFL Week 5 Picks: Some Weeks Betting ISN’T A Good Idea

NFLLogo

We’ve past the quarter pole in the 16-game race in the National Football League and there have been a few things established to this point. Don’t bet against Tom Brady and the New England Patriots; the NFC East is wide open, with three teams at .500 and the fourth only a game behind them; there is no dominant team in the NFC yet, and there are some weeks you shouldn’t be betting the games (you know, if wagering on sporting events is legal in your area)!

There are several games on today’s schedule that have seen big swings in their opening lines or have such a wide spread it is difficult to decide which end of the game to take. For example, the Buffalo/Tennessee game started out with the visiting Bills the favorite, giving up three points to the Titans and rookie Marcus Mariota. Then injuries to Bills RBs LeSean McCoy and Karlos Williams were announced and the line swung all the way over to a “pick ‘em” game.

Another good example is the New England/Dallas game. With the Patriots giving up nine points and on the road, the thought might be to take the Cowboys. With the ‘Boys’ depleted resources after the injuries to QB Tony Romo and WR Dez Bryant and the continued lackluster performance of backup QB Brandon Weeden and the rest of the ‘Pokes, however, maybe the sharps got this one right.

Normally it is a good idea to sit out weekends like this, but there are a couple of nice opportunities out there. Coming off a nice Week 4 performance, looking to continue the run.

(Home team in CAPS, pick in bold)

Chicago Bears (+9) vs. KANSAS CITY CHIEFS; UNDER 45

Neither of these teams has shown themselves to be an offensive juggernaut, especially the Bears with the injuries they’ve had. Both are “run first” oriented offenses that look to establish their big stars, Bears RB Matt Forte and Chiefs RB Jamaal Charles, and both have solid defenses that will look to stuff those running games. As such, it’s going to be a low-scoring affair and closer than the nine points that the Chiefs are giving up. Especially with QB Jay Cutler back under center, take the Bears and the under for a nice pickup.

Seattle Seahawks (+3) vs. CINCINNATI BENGALS; OVER 43.5

Even though Seahawks RB Marshawn Lynch is out for the game, I still like the Seahawks on the road in Cincy. QB Russell Wilson has plenty of other options to work with, including TE Jimmy Graham and WR Doug Baldwin, and should be able to put up some numbers against the Bengal D. The “Legion of Boom” looks like it is returning to form after the comeback of DB Kam Chancellor, also. With both teams combined averaging over 50 points per game, the OVER is also a good pick here.

Arizona Cardinals (-3.5) vs. DETROIT LIONS; OVER 46

Even though they burned me last weekend (more on that in a bit), I am going to take the road-favorite Cardinals in this game. Averaging 37 points per game, the Cardinals are coming off a shocking loss to the St. Louis Rams and looking to take their frustrations out on someone. Their victim this week, the Lions, have yet to win a game and, even with WR Calvin Johnson and QB Matthew Stafford, are only averaging 14 points per game this year. It could get ugly quickly in the Motor City, not only in this game but also in the front offices of the Lions over the next couple of weeks; to say that Lions head coach Jim Caldwell’s seat is a little warm would be a huge understatement.

Last week:  4-1 Overall:  14-8-1

The only thing that kept me from a 5-0 weekend were those previously mentioned Cardinals. Although we got the O/U right in that Cardinal/Ram game, the stunning straight up upset out of the Rams knocked off the 7-point favorite Arizona. That was the only blemish on what was otherwise a really good weekend.

2016 Rock & Roll Hall of Fame Nominations: Who Gets In?

It seems that there is a “Hall of Fame” for virtually every aspect of human existence. If you are into clowns, there is the International Clown Hall of Fame in Milwaukee, WI, that is in actuality a serious look at a funny industry. On the lighter side, there is a Recreational Vehicle and Manufactured Housing Hall of Fame in Elkhart, IN, the “Pig Hill Hall of Fame” in East Elijay, GA and the International Hamburger Hall of Fame in Daytona Beach, FL (look these up, you’ll enjoy the laugh). Whereas some of these exist with their tongue firmly planted in cheek, there are those that have the gravitas deserving of a memorial to excellence.

Where the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland, OH, lands is something that is debatable among Halls of Fame and music aficionados. In my opinion, it does honor, cherish and memorialize the greatest musicians and performers that have come through the genre. On the other hand you have my friend Mark, who believes that the Hall “is a totally lost cause and deserves to be burned to the ground…then the ground itself sewn with salt and dumped into Lake Erie.” As you can tell, just a little difference of opinion there.

Created in 1983 by a contingent of music biggest names (then-Atlantic Records founder and chairman Ahmet Ertegun, Rolling Stone founder Jann Wenner and several other prominent music executives), the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame didn’t get around to inducting members until 1986, when the inaugural class consisting of such luminaries as Chuck Berry, James Brown, Ray Charles, Fats Domino, The Everly Brothers, DJ Alan Freed, Buddy Holly, Jerry Lee Lewis and many others (here’s the list) were voted in as the inaugural class. Even after they started inducting members into the “Hall,” they lacked a physical location to properly acknowledge the inductees.

Although several cities with extensive ties to U. S. music history and the foundations of rock music, including Memphis, Detroit, Cincinnati and New York City were considered for the location, it was Cleveland that came up as the big winner in being named the home city of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame in 1986 (Wenner was disappointed that New York didn’t get the Hall). Why did Cleveland, of all places, get the Hall? As it is with most things, it was money; Cleveland ponied up $65 million in public funding and more than 600,000 residents demonstrated their desire in signing a petition to bring the Hall to “America’s North Coast.”

Even with the money and the people in place, it would take another decade before the physical Rock & Roll Hall of Fame was built. In 1995, the I. M. Pei-designed building opened amid the fanfare of a huge concert that featured such rock luminaries as Bob Dylan, Aretha Franklin, Bruce Springsteen and Iggy Pop. Since then, it is estimated that more than 9 million visitors have made the trek to the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame to pay their respects to the legends of the industry.

Now in its 33rd year of existence, the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame has caused its share of controversy as well as celebration. For every rock legend like a Buddy Holly or Chuck Berry ensconced in rock music’s Mount Olympus, there are those such as Dinah Washington (1993), Earth, Wind and Fire (2000), Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five (2007) and many others who aren’t exactly what you would think of when mentioning “rock music.” In particular, there is the Rock Hall’s recent moves toward recognizing “pop” music in its rolls (Madonna in 2008 and ABBA in 2010, to be precise) that seems to have angered rock “purists” beyond belief.

In my opinion, “rock music” is a wide encompassing umbrella. While some may not believe that the legendary bluesman Robert Johnson (an original inductee in 1986) had an influence on the genre, his exclusion from the Hall would be laughable for an organization looking to honor those who created “rock music.” Even such artists as Grandmaster Flash, one of the groundbreaking musicians in the rap genre, deserves induction into the Hall for his contributions to, yes, “rock music.” While I might have some personal preference issues with some of those in the Hall (especially Madonna), I’m more of the line that they are worthy of their inclusion in the institution due to their overall contributions to music in general and sometimes even rock music.

The list of nominees for induction in 2016 to the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame once again reach across the decades and the genres. So who will have the best chance to get in this year? I’ve broken it down into three categories:  Shouldn’t Even Be Considered, Borderline Excellence and Sure Shot Legends.

Shouldn’t Even Be Considered

Chaka Khan – A long career in the industry best identified by her work with the seminal R&B group Rufus, but not exactly what I would call an indispensable musical artist. Without the ability to actually cite someone that she has had an extreme influence on – perhaps Nora Jones, maybe Alicia Keys? – Khan loses points on the “legend” scale. Add in the lack of longevity to her career and I’d have to say Khan shouldn’t be considered.

Chic – If this were a question as to voting in two of the members of the band – guitarist/producer Nile Rodgers and drummer Tony Thompson – then I’d be more than willing to welcome them into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. The problems are that Chic didn’t last all that long – they were one of the powerhouses of the Disco Era – but both Rodgers and Thompson’s greatest work came outside of their Chic days. Rodgers has been an outstanding producer across the entirety of the musical spectrum and Thompson laid down some of his best work with the rock super group Power Station. To put the entire band in when it was really Rodgers and Thompson who are deserving of the honor is a bit much.

Los Lobos – There is more than enough room in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame to look at how different cultures had an impact on the formation of the genre. For their part, Los Lobos is one of those artists or groups that would have to be considered. Unfortunately, they fall short on several aspects, including influence on later artists and general impact in the history of rock. Their only #1 song in the U. S. was a remake of “La Bamba,” for crying out loud. Los Lobos, unfortunately, shouldn’t have even made this list.

Steve Miller – The thing about ANY “Hall of Fame” is that it isn’t a “Hall of the Pretty Good.” That same “level” of excellence needs to be used here with Steve Miller. Although Fly Like an Eagle was a legendary album and certain songs he created are very memorable, I don’t hear any artist over the past 20 years or so admitting how much of an influence Miller was on their careers. I can’t put someone in the Hall that was simply good at doing their job, as Miller was, thus he falls into this category.

The Spinners – Once again, a case of pretty good but not legendary. The Spinners actually should be praising those legendary R&B groups before them (The Temptations, The Four Tops, etc.) as there aren’t many that note them as a seminal influence in their formation. Also not very long-lived as a group.

The Smiths – This is one of those that is on the border between getting out of this ranking and into the “Borderline Excellence” grouping. The group has had a huge influence on many other rock acts following it, but to say it had a huge degree of success might be stretching the term. Morrissey probably had more of an effect as a solo artist than the band did as a whole and longevity has to be called into question.

Borderline Excellence

Cheap Trick – As a longtime fan of the band – they were a constant on radio stations and at parties when I was growing up – I’d like to give Cheap Trick more love than I believe the Hall voters are going to give them. The band was a regional act – highly successful in the Midwest – but didn’t exactly have the staying power as the 80s closed. They are also hugely overrated by VH1, who put them in at #25 of the Greatest Artists of Hard Rock. In fact, Cheap Trick has the potential to go from this category down to the previous one.

The Cars – Another one of those “great, but not immortal” bands that came out of the 1980s. Unless you count singer Ric Ocasek’s ability to pick up a stunning bride (model Paulina Porizkova), The Cars weren’t outstanding in any area. They showed up, they did the job and they took home the supermodels. There are many other people who are more deserving of a seat in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame over this band.

Janet Jackson – This was a problematic one for me. Ask three different people where she should be, according to the rankings that we have here, and each of those three different people would probably put her in each category. She didn’t exactly blaze a trail – her brothers did that for her – and her music wasn’t exactly groundbreaking or influential. For a period there in the 80s, however, it was either her or Madonna reigning as the dominant female artist on the charts. For me, she falls into this category and perhaps one day might sway me to having her in the Hall.

Nine Inch Nails – Here we have another band that is thisclose to ticking over into the “Sure Shot Legends” group. Trent Reznor’s pet project for well over two decades, the band pushed the “industrial” rock movement forward and was the catalyst for a band such as Rammstein and much of the EDM movement today. Reznor is a talented musician who has won an Oscar for his score of the film The Social Network and is the recipient of other major awards; a couple more achievements like that and Nine Inch Nails will get in if not Reznor by himself.

Sure Shot Legends

Chicago – One of those bands that you say to yourself, “You mean they aren’t already in?” Chicago pioneered the jazz fusion rock that seemed to come out of the late 60s/early 70s, something that is still heard today in some of the music (Michael Buble or Adele comes to mind). For much of the 1970s and even the early 1980s, Chicago was a dominant force on the music scene. We’ll have to cut them some slack for the Peter Cetera Years, but it is high time that Chicago was a part of the biggest club in rock music.

Deep Purple – One of the most egregious errors ever committed by the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame has been the omission of this band from its rolls. The originators of “hard rock” or “heavy metal,” the band lasted from the late 60s into the 21st century, churning out bombastic rock all the way to the end. They also inspired many hard rock and metal bands that came out of the latter half of the 20th century. The only problem with putting Deep Purple in the Hall is which “Mark” do you put in? My vote goes to Deep Purple Mark II, which featured Ian Gillan, Jon Lord, Roger Glover, Ian Paice and Ritchie Blackmore as the members of the band and originators of such classics as “Smoke on the Water” and “Highway Star.”

The J.B.’s – If you’re going to have the singer for the group – legendary R&B performer James Brown – in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, you’ve got to have the band that backed him up. While Brown was renowned for the incendiary performances that he would leave on stage, somebody had to keep up with him on the musical side of the equation. The J.B.’s did exactly that, with saxophonist Maceo Parker and the Collins Brothers – William “Bootsy” and Phelps “Catfish” – eventually moving on to another landmark group, Parliament/Funkadelic in later years.

N.W.A. – This is probably my most controversial selection for election into the Hall. The originators of “gangsta rap,” N.W.A. still has their imprints on the music scene today. When they came out in the late 80s, their fist-to-the-face depiction of life in the inner city served as a reminder of what music can do when used as a tool for social change. It may be arguable whether “gangsta rap” effected that change at all, but it wasn’t for a lack of trying from N.W.A. and others. Add in the influence that the group had on other artists and N.W.A. should have been in the Hall long ago; they’ll probably get in this year on the steam generated from the film Straight Outta Compton.

Yes – Much like Chicago, “They aren’t in already?” The two bands are quite similar in that Yes was one of the first bands to push the “progressive rock” (or “prog rock”) sound that incorporated a great deal of keyboards and operatic flourishes. Yes was a “jam band” before jam bands were cool, often putting out individual songs that seemed as long as some artists’ albums. “I’ve Seen All Good People,” “Roundabout,” “Owner of a Lonely Heart” – the band was a critical and commercial success across the ages and, as such, deserves to be in the Hall.

The Rock & Roll Hall of Fame will allow for fans to vote on their website and that “fan vote” will be tabulated alongside ballots from other musical dignitaries to determine the final five or six who will walk through the doors in Cleveland to further rock immortality come April next year. Who will earn the honors? We’ll find out at the beginning of 2016.

Who should have been nominated? That, my friends, is a subject for another time…

What’s the Problem with Gambling? The U. S. Was Built On It!

(Author’s note:  With the uproar over daily fantasy sports – or DFS – in the news right now, there are folks discussing the issue of gambling. This is something that I wrote slightly more than a year ago that is as true now as it was then.)

One of the best ways to learn about whatever country you live in is to take a lengthy drive. Last month, as part of a move from the Midwest to the East Coast, I sat behind the wheel of the family’s Mercedes-Benz and did just that, covering about 1000 miles along the way. When the only conversation that you can have in a sports car is the cat that is riding along with you (after the first ten minutes of meowing, they tend to go to sleep and, even if they are listening, aren’t exactly someone to bounce ideas off of), you have time to notice some of the oddities of the United States.

As I went by such strange things as the Creation Museum (would have loved a stop there for just the simple comedy), roadside vegetable sales and various Appalachian curios, one of the things that I noticed as the miles began to pile up was the roadside billboards that popped up as I drove. Easing out of Illinois into Indiana, I was hit with those billboards from many of the popular gaming destinations in the Hoosier State. A quick hit into Ohio saw those billboards change over to the new destinations that have been opened in Cincinnati. In Kentucky, the billboards changed over from casino gaming to racetracks and horse farms that promoted the Bluegrass State’s main industry. Even in Tennessee (where there isn’t a casino scene), the billboards promoting North Carolina’s Harrah’s Cherokee casino disturbed the natural beauty that the Great Smoky Mountains provided.

Mind you, it wasn’t just one billboard. There were more than a hundred of them, ticking down the miles until you reached the exit of said casino/racetrack/etc. It got my mind thinking (as my cat companion slumbered quietly in the passenger seat)…what’s the problem with gambling? The United States was (and is) built on it!

All you have to do to reach this conclusion is have a basic understanding of U. S. history. The very first gamble was performed from the European continent as several explorers including Leif Erickson in the 11th century and Christopher Columbus in the 15th century, decided that there was “something” where the sun was setting and (in Columbus’ case) that the earth just didn’t drop off into the Great Unknown. Erickson’s gamble was a bit bolder in that he bankrolled himself for the trip; Columbus, on the other hand, was able to get Spanish Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand II to pay for his trip (potentially the first act of “backing” in a gambling setting).

As the “New World” began to garner attention, even the bastions of religious piety showed they weren’t above taking a chance. England was the location for this as first the “Lost Colony” of Roanoke (the ultimate gamble as the residents “disappeared” in 1590) was settled. Following that, the Puritans – who were so religious they were considered more restrictive than the Church of England and whose very name means ‘against pleasure’ – rolled the dice and settled at Plymouth Colony in 1620.

By the end of the 17th century, the Colonies were thriving and so was gambling. Lotteries were the prevalent form of gambling (and were used to fund several prominent colleges such as Yale, Harvard and Princeton), but dice, cards and horse racing were also popular (even the more unpalatable gambling escapades as cockfighting and dogfighting had their audience). As the rumblings of revolution came to a head in the mid-18th century, our country’s Founding Fathers – most notably George Washington and Benjamin Franklin – enjoyed a good card game. Playing cards was so popular that the Stamp Act (one of the catapults for the American Revolution) included a clause that taxed every deck of cards.

After the Revolution, however, some of the old “puritanical” ideas began to set in. Gambling was banned in some of the fledgling states, but legal (and illegal) lotteries still flourished. The lotteries even came under attack, however, so that by the time of the Civil War, only three states permitted them. The “War Between The States” would prove to be the next catalyst for gambling in the United States.

Locked in a battle for the soul of the country, both Union and Confederate soldiers would pass the time playing poker (a recent immigrant to the United States through the port city of New Orleans) with their brothers in arms as they waited for the next wager for their lives. After the conclusion of the Civil War, that gambling mentality continues as citizens pushed westward and poker came along for the ride. Nearly every Western town could be found to have a casino (legal or otherwise), where a game of faro or poker would be ongoing, and the Mississippi River bustled with commerce and the “riverboat gamblers” that plied their trade on the paddleboats.

Although it was attempted many times, gambling still found a way around banishment. The actions of Prohibition in the early 20th century saw gambling and alcohol usage pushed underground and into the hands of organized crime. Laws to make gambling illegal in the Eastern part of the U. S. saw those organized crime figures move westward to Nevada and California, with the first casinos opened in 1931 as the Boulder Dam was being built near Las Vegas. Today, only two states (Hawaii and Utah) don’t have some sort of casino or card room in their jurisdictions.

Presidents of the United States have actively taken up the game of poker and, for some of them, been advocates for the game. Harry Truman’s “The Buck Stops Here” is directly related to his love of a game of poker. Richard Nixon allegedly financed his first political campaign with money won from playing Seven Card Stud. Even Barack Obama is thought to have an affinity for the game, playing in a weekly Senate poker game prior to entering the White House.

This is only looking at gambling as it relates to cards, dice, table games, etc. U. S. citizens have taken a gamble throughout the country’s history, dating from the Puritans to the signers of the Declaration of Independence (a bold gamble, you might say) to the westward expansion of the country into areas once thought to be foreboding and unsuitable for human habitat. Americans start businesses, sometimes failing but, most of the time, successful (Henry Ford, the Wright Brothers, the Rockefellers and Bill Gates (to name a few) ring any bells?). Americans gamble on innovations that have improved the world through industry, scientific discovery and even traveling to space. Even war, the most unfortunate invention of human society, has been impacted by American gambles.

Gambling is as inherent to the American persona as the flag, our National Anthem and our basic premise of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” Without that inner drive to take a risk, to take a chance on an unknown outcome, much of what the country has become today would have not been achieved, let alone even attempted. The United States – and much of the world, to be honest – always has to have those “dreamers,” “schemers” and gamblers to move society forward, otherwise we stagnate and, eventually, devolve.

So, as my drive ended by pulling up to our family’s new house, once again I’ll ask…why do we, not only as U. S. citizens but as an evolving species, have a problem with gambling?

Is The “American” Too Stupid To Handle The Responsibility of Guns?

HeyCongress

The United States, in its creation and its development, is one of the most brilliant experiments that has occurred in human history. Instead of a homogenous society such as many Asian nations or one of tribal dominance such as those that are found in Africa, the United States of America was a true attempt at something that many would feel is impossible:  incorporating different people, different ideologies and different cultures into a “melting pot” where the end goal is an amalgam of the world’s best into a new creature…an “American” (I must say at this point I’ve never liked the term “American” – when that term is used, I immediately wonder “North, South or Central?” How about “citizen of the United States?”). While the list of success stories from the 200-plus years of the existence of the United States of America – and another 150 years or so of settlement into this earthen laboratory – are some of the greatest in mankind’s history, there are some areas where the nation has fallen short.

One of those areas has become painfully evident as details have come out over the past few days. Last Thursday a white male walked into a community college in Oregon and, with no provocation or apparent motive, gunned down nine classmates and instructors and wounded another seven people. In the more than 72 hours since the last echo of gunshots filtered across the Oregon landscape, we’ve dredged up the old tapes of the previous arguments over past mass shooting situations rather than advancing any significant solutions for changing the climate.

The “Usual Suspects” have divided along their prescribed lines, with one side stating that further laws on guns are a necessity to prevent this from happening again. The other side states that it is their “God given right” to have weapons, as many as they want, and any move to take them away is roughly akin to an attack against the very fabric of life itself. The potential reality, however, is that this new creature we’ve created – the “American” – is too fucking stupid to handle the responsibility of guns.

In looking at it from the “law of the land” – the U. S. Constitution – there would appear to be nothing that could be done, but that would be inaccurate. The Second Amendment – “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” – was put into the Bill of Rights for the essential purpose of having each state providing its own Army – its “Militia” – for the defense of the individual State and for the purpose of providing a standing Army for the federal government. The people who would make up that “Militia” would be the citizens of the state, who would need weaponry to be able to fight in battle (not to mention that they already had these weapons for providing food for their families).

Fast forward to the 21st century and the theory of the state-run “Militia” has run its course. The federal government has the responsibility for the national defense, accepting volunteers from its citizenry, thus the theory that a person may have to join a “Militia” to defend their state or country is an antiquated one (no more so than blacks and women don’t have the right to vote, for example…that was also in the Constitution at one time). Since hunting has now also become a leisure activity for virtually everybody rather than a survival one, sane people would naturally examine the point of weapons in today’s society.

Secondly, let’s look at the situation from the evolution of weapons. In the 18th century, the weapon of choice for many in the Colonies was a musket, which took anywhere from two to five minutes to load up with a single shot. The weapon’s effective range was about 50 meters (roughly 164 feet), meaning you had to virtually be right beside your target before you squeezed the trigger (in those days, ammunition was expensive and not to be wasted). It was also fairly easy to see when you had your musket with you; at 60 inches (five feet), there wasn’t anywhere on your body to conceal the weapon.

Once again, let’s rocket through history to today. Weapons such as the AR-15 – which was the predecessor to the military usage M-16 – have become popular for ownership by civilians for their ease of use as well as their power. That weapon can be converted to be able to fire fully automatic, meaning it can spew rounds out at the rate of hundreds per minute (remember the musket was a shot every two to five minutes) and has an effective target range of 500 meters or more (in the hands of a military person or someone well trained on the weapon). Even a .45 automatic handgun can pop out rounds at around one per second (60) and has an effective range of about 100 meters, if the shooter is quick with the trigger and reloading the weapon. And this isn’t even introducing a weapon such as the M-60, a weapon with the range of 1200 meters and up to 2000 meters in a trained sniper’s hands. When comparing the two situations, any logically minded person might entertain the option, at the minimum, that the Second Amendment WASN’T written with today’s sophisticated weaponry in mind.

US Stupidity

Finally, let’s take a look at the general stupidity of those that own weapons today. In September the state of Georgia, who for some unexplainable reason allow for weapons to be carried in bars, was greeted with a shootout in a bar when several people whipped out their weapons just before 3AM in the morning. Three people were found shot there and seven others, looking to avoid police, took themselves to the hospital. Only the stupidity of not being able to aim a weapon properly prevented a significant loss of life in this instance.

Typing the search phrase “child finds gun and shoots” into Google returns over five MILLION results on the subject. Looking up “person cleaning gun shoots” returns over EIGHT MILLION hits, including a North Carolina father who shot his 10-year old son to death while wiping down his shotgun in 2013. Last year a Las Vegas gun instructor handed an Uzi to a nine-year old girl on a gun range. The girl, unable to properly control the weapon, killed the instructor immediately as she struggled with its power. These and other stories continually demonstrate the stupidity of the “American” to simply maintain their weapons safely, keep them out of the hands of those who might not know what to do with them or even momentarily pause to think if something this dangerous should be done at all.

The gun fanatics can be shot down quickly. “The only counter for a bad guy…” yeah…yeah…yeah. How many times has that “good guy” taken down the baddie? On the grounds of that community college in Oregon were several people with concealed/carry permits and at least one person who was actively carrying. What did they do to stop the situation? In such a situation, the objective is to head for cover, not open up like it’s the fucking Wild West and escalate a situation beyond what it is. The Virginia Tech shooting was done on campus in the midst of plenty of University police and security…the shooter stopped his rampage when he committed suicide. I don’t see these “good guys” civilians jumping up and, even if they could, their own personal logic and training would probably prevent them from taking action and making a situation worse.

“It’s a right…”yeah…yeah…yeah. It was previously a “right” for women not to vote, that slaves were 3/5 of a person (so much for that “all created equal” stuff), that you couldn’t drink, etc. Rights are critical to keeping society free, sure. Rights aren’t set in stone, however; recognize the end of slavery, women’s suffrage, civil rights and the end of Prohibition. Besides, if Donald Trump can debate the legality of the 14th Amendment, maybe it’s time we started to take a look at all of them in our current society.

“I’m protecting against the tyrant Obama and the New World Order…” yeah…yeah…yeah. You’re part of the problem, bub, and shouldn’t be holding a weapon if you believe in a conspiracy theory like that (the “New World Order” or Illuminati is pretty lame if it has been in existence for well over 600-700 years and hasn’t TAKEN OVER ANYTHING). Put down the weapon, step away from it slowly and pick up your tinfoil hat and binky to suck to help keep you calm. (Funny how we never heard about these armed “Militias” wanting to take down President Bush, isn’t it? Perhaps that’s a question for another time…)

The stupidity of “Americans” regarding weapons will continue until there is some change to the mentality. There are fewer restrictions on guns than there are on an automobiles; while admittedly not a right, driving an auto requires an age requirement, insurance, licensing, training on the vehicle (we just don’t allow anyone to jump into a gasoline tanker truck without the proper training) and, if they don’t abide by the rules, then people are punished both financially and with their very freedom. Why can’t the same thing be done regarding our love affair with guns? If your too stupid to be able to handle them responsibly, then you don’t need to have them at all.

I won’t go through the litany of civilized nations that have come up with the answer to the questions we United States citizens face regarding the gun issue. If we continue to let the stupid rule the issue, however, we are doomed to continual tragedy. If we cannot get this system under control, then we will continue to see (to paraphrase a Jimmy Buffett song about ignoring problems around you) “a river of blood pouring out from a wound that will not heal.”

NFL Week 4 Picks: Advent of Bye Weeks Effect Betting Lines

NFLLogo

After a tumultuous first three weeks to the National Football League season, one of the things that continually makes wagering on the games (you know, if you live in an area where you can legally do that) a more difficult endeavor is the “bye week.” The “bye week,” which came about in 1999 because of the odd number of teams in the NFL and stuck around to give teams a week off after the league went to 32 teams in 2002, is something that has an affect on every NFL team, depending when it falls in the season. If that “bye” falls in the early part of the season, you might lose out on a key late season break; if it falls too late, you may no longer be in the running and the “bye” is simply a waste of time instead of a welcome respite. Add in the fact for the game following the bye week and smart bettors know to look for some strange happenings.

With Week 4, two teams – the New England Patriots, who have roared out to a 3-0 start, and the Tennessee Titans – will take a seat. While these two teams will be ones to watch next week (and we’ll talk more about it then), the remainder of the NFL will have to wait patiently for their “bye week” – and the well-deserved rest – and hit the field this weekend. In some of these games, the East Coast weather conditions are also going to have a significant impact on the outcomes.

(Home team in CAPS, pick in bold.)

New York Giants (+5.5) vs. BUFFALO BILLS; UNDER 44

What should be a huge rivalry game, the Giants/Bills never has seemed to be able to capture the attention of New Yorkers (hell, the Giants/Jets and the Jets/Bills aren’t even strong rivalries, to be honest). Perhaps it is because the teams aren’t at their bests at the same time (the Giants are good when the Bills suck and vice versa), but the rivalry never seems to have been born. This week’s game between the two will continue that streak of a “yawn” instead of a rivalry.

The Giants got off the schneid after defeating the Washington Indigenous Persons at home last week and are attempting to get back into the race in the NFC East. Only a game behind the Dallas Cowboys (who the Giants have already lost to), a win for the Giants would keep them in the hunt. Another loss, putting them two games back of the ‘Boys, would pretty much doom the season.

The Bills have been one of the perplexing teams in the NFL this season. Under the guidance of head coach Rex Ryan and quarterback Tyrod Taylor, the Bills are 2-1 and coming off a crushing win over the Miami Dolphins. In that game, however, the Bills lost one of their big playmakers in RB LeSean McCoy, who has already been ruled out for Sunday’s tilt.

Adding in the weather conditions that could affect the game on Sunday, this is going to be a much closer affair than many people are expecting. I’m grabbing the Giants and the points this week as the weather makes sure that the two teams don’t go over 44 total points for the game.

Kansas City Chiefs vs. CINCINNATI BENGALS (-3.5)

In looking at the statistics of this game, you have to wonder why the Bengals aren’t a bigger favorite. The Bengals are ranked second overall in total offense and are going against the 24th ranked Chiefs defense. The flip side is true in examining the other matchup, with the 22nd ranked Chiefs offense going up against a sneaky strong 12th ranked defense for the Bengals. As home teams are normally given -3 points to begin with, you’re going to tell me that the 3-0 Bengals are only .5 points better than the 1-2 Chiefs? I don’t think so, especially after watching QB Andy Dalton and WR A. J. Green rip apart the Baltimore Ravens secondary last weekend. If there’s a lock on this week’s schedule, this would be the one.

St. Louis Rams vs. ARIZONA CARDINALS (-7); OVER 44

As to the O/U, two of the last three games – both at University of Phoenix Stadium in Arizona – have come close to the 44 combined points (45 in the 2014 contest, 40 in 2013). With this track record, the fifth ranked offense of the Cardinals at home that is averaging 42.0 points per game and the fact that the Rams scored all of six points at home in a loss last weekend to the Pittsburgh Steelers (don’t expect that to happen again), to take anything other than OVER on the points would be a little silly.

The Cardinals are clicking along early this season and, with the difficulties of the defending NFC Champion Seattle Seahawks, are looking to keep the boot firmly on the neck of the division. To do that, you have to win the divisional games such as this one against the Rams. The Cardinals also remember last year when QB Carson Palmer built a nice lead up for the team before getting hurt and watching as the Seahawks passed them by.

Palmer has been stellar so far this season, throwing for nine TDs to this point in the year with only two picks, but the true story on the Cardinals is the rebirth of RB Chris Johnson. After disappearing during his 2014 season with the New York Jets, Johnson has rushed for 219 yards so far this season and is an integral part of the Cardinals offense. With the 1-2 punch of Johnson and Palmer, the Cardinals could well be on their way to dethroning the Seahawks in the NFC West (should they stay healthy, that is).

Last Week:  2-4 Overall:  10-7-1

A completely disgusting Week 3 result. Despite correctly picking Atlanta over Dallas, the shootout completely destroyed our O/U pick. From there, it only got worse…the Seahawks covering the two-touchdown spread against the Chicago Bears was the only other pick we got right for the entire weekend. Time to turn that around!

“Routine” Tragedies Will Continue Until the Chain is Broken

We didn’t even wait until later into October to get our “mass shooting of the month” out of the way for the next 30 days or so. In Oregon this afternoon, a man walked onto the grounds of Umpqua Community College, entered the classrooms and, reportedly after querying his potential victims on their religious backgrounds, appears to have executed 10 people. The shooter would injure another seven people before police arrived on the scene and gunned him down.

We’ve become numb to it in the United States, these mass shootings where someone – whether for religious or racial reasons, whether they are mentally ill or completely sane – snuffs out the existences of those who are either at the beginning of what should be great lives (the Sandy Hook shootings), defending our nation (Chattanooga), joyously praising their God in a house of worship (Charleston), meeting with their Congressional district’s residents (Tucson) or just simply going to school, trying to learn something to advance themselves (Columbine).

First off, let’s define a “mass shooting.” The definition has come to be determined that which A) four or more people are victims, and B) don’t include gang killings or the death of multiple members of the same family. This criteria makes sense in that emotion (such as a familial situation) or an involuntary occurrence (killing two people at the same time by accident) wouldn’t fall into the equation. Using the criteria, this would include every one of the situations noted a couple of paragraphs previous and would also include the Aurora, CO, theater massacre, among several others. What wouldn’t make the “grade”? The recent point-blank execution of the journalists in Virginia, unless you want to count the shooter as Victim #4.

As to be expected, the respective representatives came out on both sides and began to toss their rhetoric. President Barack Obama summed up one end perhaps most concisely in saying, “Somehow this has become routine. The reporting is routine. My response here at this podium ends up being routine, the conversation in the aftermath of it. We’ve become numb to this. Our thoughts and prayers are not enough. It’s not enough. It does not capture the heartache and grief and anger that we should feel, and it does nothing to prevent this carnage from being inflicted someplace else in America — next week, or a couple months from now.” Of course, after Obama made this statement, gun advocates screamed that he was “politicizing” the situation when it “wasn’t appropriate.”

The National Rifle Association, which is about as oriented to the safe usage of weapons as Volkswagen was in creating environmentally safe vehicles, will continue to wail about how it isn’t about the guns. “It’s about the people,” they’ll sniffle as they hug their little weapon close to their chest, petting it gently. “If they weren’t bad people/high on drugs/mentally ill (choose your excuse du jour), then they wouldn’t have done something like this…It wasn’t the gun’s fault, though (Pat…Pat).” And when their paid henchmen in Congress get up and repeat this line of bullshit, they should be forced to go look at the bodies of the dead as they lie on the grounds of a college or a school playground and then try to repeat their idiocy.

Strangely enough, the rest of the world doesn’t have this problem. Using the criteria set above regarding what constitutes a mass shooting, between 1966 and 2012 (this isn’t even counting the last couple of years of this fucked-up situation) there were 292 such incidences around the world. While they weren’t all in the United States, a sizeable chunk of them were. There were 90 such mass shootings in the U. S., meaning that although the U. S. makes up 5% of the world, we have 31% of the mass shootings. Finally, in the U. S. shootings, more than half of the cases involved a shooter with more than one gun; in the foreign cases, the gunman usually had one weapon. For the gun nuts in the crowd, here’s something to hang your hat on:  the average number of victims in U. S. shootings is 6.87 per incident; internationally, it is 8.8 victims.

In another study from the Harvard School of Public Health looking at mass shooting incidences between 2011 and 2014, mental illness is examined as the cause for the attacks. While the rates of mental illness remain level for the time period, the research shows that mass shootings tripled in frequency. The study also showed that, in the previous 30 years, mass shootings occurred about every 200 days; in the three years examined closely, that rate had dropped to 64 days.

So what can we learn from this data? The problem with mass shootings isn’t about who is committing the atrocities, it IS in the choice of what they are using to complete their twisted fantasies. Weapons – handguns, rifles, shotguns, etc. – are the reason that so many people are being killed when someone decides to commit these acts. We often hear from the gun lobby, “Well, if he had a knife and did the same thing, would you ban the knife?” The answer is probably not because, with only one knife, there’s the chance that the situation could be averted and/or not as extreme in its deaths. When someone has a rack of weapons and enough ammunition to fight their way out of a Syrian village, many people are going to die or be permanently scarred from the wounds they receive.

It’s time we actually did something about this situation. The fuckheads on the opposite side of the aisle – those that suck at the teat of the National Rifle Association and spout off about how their “Second Amendment rights” are under siege when there hasn’t been a federal gun law enacted in the United States since the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban that expired under President George Bush (Bush II, as I like to say) – will spout off about how “this isn’t the time” to talk about the plague of mass shootings in the United States. If this isn’t the time – and if it wasn’t appropriate the first 100 times this occurred in this country – then what the fuck time is a good one?

The NRA needs to get the hell out of the discussion or quit being obstructionist and admit that it is time that there are strong regulations put in place on all weapons in the United States. I consistently hear that the NRA grassroots isn’t represented by the hateful, rhetoric spewing Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president of the organization, and that those “sensible gun owners” actually wouldn’t mind having some regulatory laws regarding guns on the books. It is time that this segment of the NRA shows up and forces their elected leadership to listen to them instead of allowing for a radical minority (if it is so) of the NRA to dictate the course of action.

They should acquiesce to federal licensing of weapons to individuals (we have stronger licensing principals in place for driving a fucking car, mind you, than owning a piece of military hardware created to end lives) and for all gun owners to have liability insurance on their weapon if it is used in a criminal act (that way there is some compensation outlet for the victims, at the minimum). Finally, gun show sales should be halted and a 10-day “waiting period” should be instituted for ANY gun purchase, be it a semi-automatic pistol, a pump shotgun or a pellet gun.

It’s tough to give any anger to those who are the victims of such acts, but there are some things that can be done. First off, sometimes things will happen in the course of life (easy for me to wax philosophically over) that we cannot prevent. We can never understand why certain things, especially some of the vilest crimes committed by mankind, happen in our existence. All that can be done in some cases is investigate it thoroughly and use the information to try to ensure that it doesn’t happen again.

Furthermore, even if the above laws were ALL put into place, there would still be mass shootings – they probably just wouldn’t be as prevalent as they are today. Normally sane people would still be able to stockpile weapons, even those that have no application in hunting and are created especially for the act of warfare and killing other humans, and ammunition will still be plentiful. As such, someone might be able to talk a buddy into giving, selling and/or stealing from enough guns to inflict such pain.

Finally, mental illness is a viable reason for mass shootings so, when it comes to those challenges, the U. S. should revamp the system and adequately fund and support the system. As it is now, the U. S. as a whole does NOT put enough money into education on the subject, treatment of those afflicted with the differing mental illnesses nor provide enough to adequately assist these people upon their return to public life. Without attention being paid to this area, then all the laws instituted won’t have any effect.

If six-year old children, pregnant women, members of the Armed Forces, churchgoing people, high school and college students and, yes, even the everyday Average Joe being executed by the business end of a firearm through no fault of their own doesn’t spur you to action, then you cannot be a member of the human race. It is time we end this scourge of mass shootings in the United States or, at the minimum, rein them in tremendously and reduce the number of times that the nation sheds tears for those murdered viciously.

Let’s just hope that we’re not talking about this again in a couple of weeks…