- They don’t seem to go together well, an Ivy League school on Manhattan’s Upper West Side and the military, and for the past 40 years, Columbia University and the Reserve Officers' Training Corps have been mutually exclusive entities. The school has maintained a ban on the ROTC on its campus for a variety of reasons, but a push to end the ban has taken shape lately and appears to be gathering momentum. To debate the potential lifting of the ban, Columbia officials held a town hall-style meeting on campus Wednesday evening in an attempt to measure public opinion on the issue and help university administrators make the best decision. The best measure of the issue’s relevance was the packed auditorium, with people standing if they couldn’t find a seat just for the chance to weigh in on the debate. The first speaker was a Columbia student who is also a Marine and Iraq War veteran. He urged civility and civility and for the most part, that call was heeded, unlike the debacle that broke out last week at a similar meeting. That meeting thrust the issue onto the national radar largely because a disabled Iraq War veteran and Columbia freshman, Anthony Maschek, was jeered and heckled by an anti-ROTC contingent when he spoke in favor of military service. It was a classless and deplorable display, but many of those attending the most recent meeting believe that the incident has been taken out of context and blown out of proportion by the national media. You know, the same complaint athletes lodge when they say something regrettable they wish they could take back but can’t, so they try to scapegoat the media as the one creating the controversy. Columbia officials have given no indication on which direction they may be leaning in relation to lifting the ROTC ban, but sources say a final decision could come as early as April. And while I can't imagine too many smart kids paying $40,000 a year to attend an Ivy League school are going to rush to commit to military service in any way, shape or form, it might be nice to have the option………..
- For an operation that presents itself as being all about the (musically ignorant) will of the people, “American Karaoke” sure is behind the times when it comes to utilizing the Internet to help decide which of its hack karaoke-ers will be crowned the next “American Karaoke” champion and be given a record deal they do not deserve and will uphold by releasing an album that sells 53 copies before they fade off into obscurity. But alas, “AK” has finally found a way to involve the Internet in its voting mix and the show will start accepting online votes next week, Fox announced on Thursday. Voting will take place on AmericanIdol.com and will be enabled by Facebook, which will act as a security mechanism to verify the identities of voters. Using their Facebook accounts, “AK” kooks will be able to vote up to 50 times per week. That’s right, you can cast 50 votes toward the further bastardization and ruination of music as we know it. The reason this train wreck of a show is in its 10th season is because the public are a bunch of sheep who follow mindlessly along and listen to whatever Top 40 crap is on their local radio station without ever wondering if there is better music out there (which there most definitely is). “American Karaoke” then steps into that void and exploits the average person’s unquenchable desire to feel like their opinion and thoughts actually matter and bam, you have the perfect storm to create world’s largest and most preposterous karaoke contest. Adding online voting to the mix will undoubtedly cause the total number of votes for the show to skyrocket, which I’m sure “AK” producers are ecstatic about because they now have to compete with another reality karaoke show train wreck in the form of “The X-Factor,” the singing competition that “AK” creator Simon Cowell is importing to the United States from Britain. Because “X-Factor” will also have an online voting option, there is no way “American Karaoke” couldn’t have one. For those who want to kick it old school and vote for the next no-hit wonder the same way they always have, the show will continue to accept votes via toll-free phone numbers and, for AT&T customers, through text messages. I would advise everyone to stop voting so we can make this nightmare go away, but I know better…………
- This is a somewhat original tactic. If tens of thousands of your people are in the streets of cities around your nation, demonstrating and demanding your removal from office as you order your military to bomb them and unleash brutal ground attacks, then try to push blame for their uprising off on a) hallucinogenic drugs and b) Osama bin Laden. Muammar Gaddafi doesn’t have many options at this point, so he may get more leeway than normal when it comes to how he tries desperately to stay in power, but even for him these allegations not only border on the absurd but blow right past that border. Speaking Thursday about the uprising, Gaddafi attempted to pin blame for the revolt on bin Laden on Thursday while claiming the protesters were fueled by milk and Nescafe spiked with hallucinogenic drugs. As part of a typical, meandering Gaddafi speech whose core message was (I think) to appeal for calm, the embattled dictator showed a marked departure from his televised address two days ago in which he vowed to crush the revolt and fight to the end. Perhaps he simply felt that his menacing act wouldn’t translate as well in a phone interview on state television as it did when he could actually appear on screen. But let’s take a look at what the good dictator had to say: "Their ages are 17. They give them pills at night, they put hallucinatory pills in their drinks, their milk, their coffee, their Nescafe," Gaddafi theorized. "They are criminals ... is it logical that you let this phenomenon continue in any city? ... We do not see what is happening in Egypt and Tunisia happening in Libya, ever! Those (in Egypt and Tunisia) are people needing their governments and they have demands; our power is in the hands of the people.” Wait…..who is giving pills to the protestors? And if those pills are causing them to rise up against an oppressive ruler who strips away their freedoms and rules with an iron fist while insisting that he gives the power to the people, then where can I get some of those pills? My man, I don’t believe you know what hallucinogens are if that’s your take. They can make you see three-headed unicorns riding a Segway with Elvis, but they don’t plant ideas in your head about overthrowing the government. LSD may have helped the Beatles write Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds, but it’s not going to inspire the overthrow of any governments, at least not any time soon. So go back to your "Third Universal Theory," draw from your "Green Book," and find some other play call for this one because that take is weak and off-base. The one salient point Gaddafi made was calling Osama bin Laden was "the real criminal" and urging Libyans not be swayed by the al Qaeda leader. Even if Libyan officials have a habit of stereotyping anyone who challenges the ruling system under the umbrella of al Qaeda, pegging bin Laden as the real criminal is a solid move in any situation. Other parts of Gaddafi’s wandering monologue touched on the Iraq war, riots in other African and Middle East nations and the real location of Jimmy Hoffa’s body, I believe………
- Perfect. Alcoholics are always looking for another excuse to have a drink and a scientists at the University of Calgary have just served one up on a silver platter. These geniuses have pored over three decades of research and reached the conclusion that an alcoholic drink a day can help prevent heart disease. The study,
published in the British Medical Journal, showed a 14 to 25 percent reduction in heart disease in moderate drinkers compared with people who had never drunk alcohol. This some group of scientific kooks have also published a related article showing a positive correlation between alcohol and "good" cholesterol levels. They tried to mitigate their damage by insisting that these results are not a reason to begin drinking, but that’s like telling a Major League Baseball player that a new designer steroid will increase their home run numbers by 50 percent and expecting them not to take it. This is obviously not the first study suggesting positive effects from the regular, moderate consumption of alcohol, which actually worked to the benefit of the researchers for this particular study. The reviewed 84 pieces of research between 1980 and 2009 and found that the overall risk of death was lower for those consuming small quantities of alcohol, 2.5g to 14.9g, compared with non-drinkers. They also learned that regular moderate drinking reduced all forms of cardiovascular disease by up to 25 percent. As for the statement about this being an excuse to go on a drinking binge……not exactly. See, the study also found that the risk for strokes and stroke deaths increased substantially with heavier drinking. Professor William Ghali of the Institute for Population and Public Health at the University of Calgary led the research and summed it up thusly: "Our extensive review shows that drinking one or one to two drinks would be favorable. There is this potentially slippery slope, most notably with social problems and alcoholic cirrhosis of the liver, but the overall mortality including cancer and accidents shows you would be better with alcohol." Seems fair, or at least it does until you get to the part of the research team’s report in which they suggest that similar results can be achieved by being physically active and eating a balanced and healthy diet. Tell me again why you all did this study in the first place………
- Are you hopeful that the NFL and its players' union are going to reach a deal on a new collective bargaining agreement before the current one expires at 11:59 p.m. on March 3, thus averting a potential lockout? To chase that question with another question for anyone who answered in the affirmative, are you a moron? Because at this point, only someone sporting a below-average IQ or a case of extreme and incurable myopathy is holding out hope that these two far-apart sides will agree on all of the major issues facing the game in time to avoid a work stoppage. Even if the two parties have made "some progress" over seven consecutive days of face-to-face meetings, as the federal mediator overseeing the talks said Thursday, they are still miles apart on the major issues. George Cohen, director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, admitted as much in a statement shortly before noon Thursday in which he conceded that in spite of the alleged progress, “very strong differences remain." Even with negotiations scheduled to resume next week, one has to wonder how much progress Cohen could have made in seven consecutive days of mediated negotiations, covering a total of more than 40 hours. Worse still, mediation has turned the entire situation into a boring, behind-closed-doors, no-comment snore-fest. Cohen asked both sides not to comment publicly on the negotiations and by and large, they have honored that request, leading to mundane and worthless comments like the ones offered up by Indianapolis Colts center Jeff Saturday said as he got into a car after Thursday’s negotiating session. "Just continue talking, man -- that's what we're doing," Saturday stated. "I think ownership -- everybody -- needs to know that we're all committed to it and committed to getting something done." Which tells us……absolutely nothing. At least when the two sides were negotiating (or cancelling negotiation sessions) on their own, we received some entertainment from their veiled shots at one another over perceived sleights and disrespect. Now, all we have are no-comment comments from players and league officials and legal speak from Cohen himself. "During the intervening weekend, the parties have been asked by us to assess their current positions," Cohen droned when asked about the state of negotiations. "At bottom, some progress was made, but very strong differences remain on the all-important core issues that separate the parties." In other words, they still can't agree on how to split the $9 billion in revenues the league generates each year, nor have they found any middle ground on the issue of an 18-game regular season or a rookie wage scale. Seeing NFL commissioner Roger Goodell and his crew and union chief DeMaurice Smith his negotiating team stroll into Cohen's office morning after morning is getting boring in a hurry and I suspect that clandestine, gag-order meetings or not, this mess is no closer to a resolution than it was seven days ago. Union lawyer Richard Berthelsen confirmed Thursday that gag order is still in effect, which means that we’re in store for plenty more verbal gems like this one from Smith as he walked toward the union's headquarters Thursday: "We'll see you all next week." Not if you keep offering up boring, worthless remarks like that, you won't. If that’s what’s in store, I and everyone else who used to have at least a mild interest in these negotiations will be bored into a coma…………
No comments:
Post a Comment