- Uh-oh. I’ve never run for mayor of a major American city before, but I’m guessing that being told one month before the election that you do not qualify to run for mayor after quitting your job as the President of the United States chief of staff, moving back to said city and pouring millions of dollars into your campaign for mayor sucks more than a little bit. That uplifting bit of news was just handed to Rahm Emanuel, the former White House chief of staff, who according to an Illinois appeals court, does not qualify to run for mayor of Chicago. Emanuel, who has been a front-runner both in polls and in fundraising in the race to replace Richard M. Daley, will undoubtedly press the issue to the state Supreme Court, but for now he’s out of the race. It is a significant and unexpected setback for Emanuel, who was widely considered the frontrunner to succeed Daley, the city’s longest serving mayor, who will retire this spring. Emanuel’s removal from the race comes on account of his residency, i.e. whether he had lived in Chicago long enough to appear on the city’s ballot. The issue was front and center ever since Emanuel departed the White House last fall to run for mayor. He argued that he had always maintained a home in Chicago, the city where he was born, and was only at the White House as a matter of national service. That argument did little to sway his opponents, who protested that Emanuel did not meet the state’s residency requirements to run for a mayoralty. One of those requirements states that a candidate must have lived in the city for a year before the day of the election. Because Emmanuel did not return to the city until the fall, his critics argued that he was too late to qualify for a Feb. 22 ballot. Those haters found an no support from he Chicago Board of Elections, which sided with Emanuel, as had a Cook County trial judge. But keep pressing any issue long enough in the American judicial system and you’re likely to encounter a) a jury of morons dumb enough to be fooled by your arguments or b) a court that will take your side in an issue. Emanuel’s opponents found the latter when a three-judge panel of the Illinois Appellate Court ruled against him, 2 to 1. The decision comes late in the game, with ballot arrangements already being finalized. Emanuel could well be permanently sidelined in an election for which he has raised more than $10 million — significantly more than any of the other candidates. Polls put him well ahead of all other candidates, so pulling him from the ballot would have a colossal impact. Emanuel’s only hope is the Illinois Supreme Court, which may choose to hear — or not to hear — the case. Either way, the drama should be worth watching………
- Do we even care? Whether Chad Ochocinco changes his name again or not, does it even merit a blip on the NFL radar? For a player who recorded just 67 catches for 831 yards and four touchdowns on a 4-12 team this season, my vote is for no. With everything he does, Ochocinco is a publicity grab in motion, so this is certainly not surprising. Nor was it surprising when he changed his legal surname from Johnson to Ochocinco before the 2008 season in order to wear his nickname on his jersey when the league wouldn’t allow it without the legal change. He originally gave himself the Ocho moniker in 2006 as an allusion to his No. 85 even though Ochocinco is not the correct was to say or write the number 85 in Spanish. Ochocinco/Johnson even vowed to change his name back to Johnson if Jets cornerback Darrelle Revis shut him down in a regular season game in Jan. 2010 but predictably backed off after tweaking his knee in pregame warmups and being held to zero catches for zero yards in the game. Even after he chased that stellar effort with two catches for 28 yards when the teams met again a week later in the playoffs, Ochocinco refused to be a man of his word. Now, he’s making noise about changing his name again. This time, he's going back to Chad Johnson, according to remarks he made on ESPN's "NFL Live" on Tuesday. He called the name change fun, but said it's time for a change. "I don't have a choice right now," Ochocinco said. "I've done enough with the Ocho thing." You’ve done enough? Like having one of the worst seasons of your career and not win a single playoff game during that same career? If so, then I agree, you’ve done enough with the “Ocho thing.” Whatever name Chad goes by, he’d be best off spending this offseason busting his ass in the gym and on the practice field, making sure that he does everything possibly to turn in a season markedly better than the clunker he offered up this past season………
- B.Y.O.H., public servants in South Korea. Not that I need to tell any of South Korea’s government employees this by now, but that stands for bring your own heat, as in make sure that you are geared up to stay warm when you head to work this week. That advice comes directly from the South Korean government, which has instructed civil servants to come to the office in their long johns this week as the it tries to fend off blackouts during a cold snap that has led to record energy usage. Temperatures have been sold cold and energy use so high that public agencies are prohibited from using central heating for two hours during peak periods. Thermostats must be set no higher than 64.4 degrees Fahrenheit, according to a statement from the South Korean Ministry of Knowledge Economy's Energy Cooperation Division. "The government has rolled up its sleeves and called for nationwide efforts to conserve energy," the statement said. Hmm, nice to know that other governments around the world can use bad clichés in their official statements too. Rolled up its sleeves? Is that really the best you can do? Rolling up sleeves is apparently a euphemism for banning personal heaters and advising employees to put on extra clothing. "Officials working at (public organizations) are not allowed to use individual heaters during working hours, but instead are advised to wear long johns," the ministry statement said. How cold is it in Seoul right now? Well, temperatures were forecast with highs of only 22 degrees Farenheit through Friday and lows of 8 F during that time. The ban on personal heaters and high thermostat settings are the first step to combat energy usage and if those measures don’t work, level two bans decorative lighting; level three bans the use of elevators below the fifth floor of buildings, limits the use of indoor lighting and allows employees to drive to work only every other day; level four bans all driving to work and mandates early closure of public buildings. Sounds like a party to me………
- Comic book dorks, your world is about to be shattered. For 586 installments of the Fantastic Four comic books, you’ve been able to bank on the presence of Johnny "The Human Torch" Storm. The narcissistic member of the band of superheroes can turn into a giant flame at any time, but in the 587th edition of the comic, he’s going to turn into something else: a dead man. Marvel Comics has revealed that Storm will die "amid a massive battle that writer Jonathan Hickman has been scripting for a year-and-half." Not only will Storm die in issue 587, but the entire comic will take some cryptic and bizarre one issue later. A Marvel executive who wouldn’t go on the record stated that "588 is the final issue of the Fantastic Four. Beyond that, we're not ready to say exactly what we're doing. There won't be an issue 589." Maybe because you can't call something the Fantastic Four if there are only three of them? Hickman did give a slight hint about the comic’s future, saying it "will converge in a new thing that will be exciting and different and yet, very familiar and very much the same." Nice, telling us nothing at all with some fancy and eloquent words. Love that. The Human Torch won't be the first superhero to bite the big one and many of those heroes - Superman, Captain America, Phoenix etc. - have come back to life. Comic book dorks are undoubtedly hoping that the same will hold true for the Torch, but I have a sneaking suspicion that Johnny Storm doesn’t have a resurrection in him……….
- Prepare to be stunned, America. The primary reasons we, on average, do not live as long as the French or Japanese, are smoking and being FAT. According to a truly stunning report from the National Research Council, smoking and obesity among Americans leads to shorter life span than residents of many other world powers. Despite the fact that just 20 percent of Americans smoke now, more than 40 percent of U.S. adults smoked in 1960 and those cancer stick lovers are still dragging the rest of us down - at least those who are still alive. But smoking doesn’t bear all of the burden. "Other factors, such as obesity, diet, exercise, and economic inequality, also have likely played a role in the current gap and divergence between the United States and other countries," the panel of experts appointed by the council wrote. In other words, too many of us eat crappy diets and don’t exercise. Look……there’s no bigger fan of studies to unearth blatantly obvious truths that no one is actually doubting, but this one is too obvious even for me. Trying to explain why the United States, which spends more per capita on healthcare than any other country and which has a relatively wealthy and well-nourished population, ranks so poorly against other countries in terms of lifespan, seems like a noble endeavor, but the world can look at our guts hanging over our belts and the cancer sticks dangling from our lips. So very little credit is due to gerontologist Eileen Crimmins of the University of Southern California and her colleagues for their efforts on this one. "Smoking appears to be responsible for a good deal of the divergence in female life expectancy," they wrote. "Fifty years ago, smoking was much more widespread in the United States than in Europe or Japan: a greater proportion of Americans smoked and smoked more intensively than was the case in other countries." Now….not so much. Anyone who has spent even a little time in Europe knows that a much higher percentage of Europeans smoke than Americans nowadays. The impetus for the study was the world rankings for life expectancy, in which Japan ranks No. 1 and the United States ranks 36th. The difference in life expectancy isn’t that steep - 83 years for a child born today in Japan versus 78.3 years in the U.S. However, 78.3 years does rank the United States below most of Europe, South Korea, Chile and right below Cuba. Our only hope for moving up (because you know we’re not getting in better shape, that’s too much to ask)? "Smoking also has caused significant reductions in life expectancy in the Netherlands and Denmark, which ... are two other countries with relatively poor life expectancy trends," the report offers. Here’s hoping……….
No comments:
Post a Comment