- Auto racing still isn't a real sport, but that doesn’t mean it hasn’t inadvertently stumbled upon a way to make its little driving competition more interesting. While dudes (and some women) driving around in circles for three or four hours, making only left turns and cutting each other off will never constitute athletic competition, if NASCAR can cook up some real (or manufactured) conspiracy theories it may actually be compelling theater. For example, a conspiracy along the lines of four-time Sprint Cup champion Jeff Gordon saying there was something "fishy" about a spinout by fellow driver Paul Menard that opened the door for one of Menard’s teammates, Kevin Harvick, to win. Gordon postulated that Paul Menard deliberately brought out the caution in order to set up Harvick for the win when the race resumed and now NASCAR is looking into the accusations. "In light of the suspicions, we're going to look into it and see if there is anything," NASCAR president Mike Helton said Friday at Chicagoland Speedway. "And a lot of it is going to be interpretation. Certainly, it is on us to understand exactly what all we can find as far as facts are concerned." Team owner Richard Childress denied Friday his team ordered the Code Red, er, um, Menard to cause the intentional caution and claimed it was merely a fabrication of Gordon’s imagination. "There were no team orders despite all the speculation in the media," Childres said in a statement. "I know Paul Menard well enough that he wouldn't have spun out on purpose even if he had been asked. We are at Chicagoland Speedway to win the race and get a great start toward the championship." Making the conspiracy even better if mysterious Channel 2 audio in which Menard allegedly discussed with crew chief Slugger Labbe and Richard Childress Racing executive Mike Dillon whether he should bring out a caution that would allow Harvick to close the gap on Gordon. Add it all together and you have a solid, Grade-A conspiracy that NASCAR should embrace. Play it up, leak news that the Channel 2 audio was mysteriously erased and squeeze as much drama as possible out of this. And if at the end of this saga there is no new conspiracy to hype, then you create one. Go full-on WWE, create storylines, script them out and turn NASCAR into the full-fledged redneck soap opera it has always been destined to be……….
- Move over France, you have company. Joining you on the list of nations banning face-covering veils worn by some Muslim women is none other than the Netherlands, where Dutch people have decided the garments are incongruous with the Dutch way of life and culture. Before you wonder aloud, “Wait a minute….aren’t these the same people who have made possessing and smoking pot like it’s breakfast cereal, why are they freaking out about anything in their über-liberal culture?”, know that the country’s position as a tolerant, immigration-friendly place has changed over the last decade as voters have become increasingly concerned over a major influx of Muslim immigrants. The government seems to be reflecting those concerns with the ban on face veils and said as much in a statement announcing the decision. “The government believes the wearing of clothing that completely or almost entirely covers the face is fundamentally at odds with public life, where people are recognized by their faces,” the government said in that statement. Along with the ban on veils, Prime Minister Mark Rutte also announced tougher rules for immigrants and asylum-seekers who want to pursue Dutch nationality must prove that they have a source of income and that they have not received financial assistance or benefits for at least three years. Clearly, free loaders are not welcome in the Netherlands any longer. Many critics view the new policies are directly attributable to the influence of Geert Wilders, a populist politician whose anti-Islam, anti-immigration Freedom Party is the third-largest in the Dutch Parliament. However, the government was quick to insist that the ban on face-covering veils did not constitute a restriction on religious freedom, but was “necessary and justified in the interest of protecting the character and way of life in the Netherlands.” The ban covers niqabs, which leave the eyes uncovered, and burqas, which cover the face with a cloth grid, which are far less common on the streets of the Holland than hijabs, or head scarves, which leave the face exposed………….
- More of the act or a rare moment of lucidity for Charlie Sheen? Given Sheen’s performance over the past year, probably more of the former than the latter as he appeared “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno” and admitted he can understand why “Two And A Half Men” executives fired him, acknowledging he would have done the same had he been in their place. "I'd have fired my a** too," he caustically remarked to Leno. “Well maybe not like they did... It was bad. And I own my part in that. And I just want to make everything right... I should have been a little more responsible about the condition I was showing up in but, you know, I was hitting my marks, I was delivering, but maybe at a sub-par level. But that's all right... It is what it is, and I'm just moving forward.” Of course, the admission could have been Sheen tweaking show creator Chuck Lorre and/or offering up some false humility to make himself look better. After all, if he truly understood the firing and agreed with it, he would not have filed a $62.5 million lawsuit against Lorre in March, demanding compensation from him for the eight episodes Sheen filmed that never aired due to the dispute. The suit came one month after Sheen’s firing, right before he took off on his erratic, up-and-down “comedy” tour across the United States. Ultimately, Sheen’s presence makes no difference on a cookie-cutter, half-hour sitcom like “Two And A Half Men” because those shows are so formulaic and there is so little room for true creativity and originality, but if Sheen were truly contrite about how he handled his final few days on the show it would be good to see. The problem with Sheen, of course, is that it is impossible to tell when he’s putting on a show…………
- Finally…….AT&T is actually going to launch its 4G LTE network. After nearly a year of running its corporate mouth about its 4G plans, the phone giant will premiere the network in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio. The AT&T marketing machine has worked overtime hyping the move, but in truth the company still lags far behind Verizon's LTE network, which now covers over half of the U.S. AT&T customers have grown impatient waiting for LTE and its more advanced 4G technology and faster speeds. Even with the LTE network technically up and running in some places, most users will have to wait a while longer. While these users’ phones do have 4G, AT&T handsets like the LG Thrill 4G and Samsung Infuse 4G run on AT&T's HSPA+ network. Although HSPA+ is technically recognized as 4G, it is drastically different than the LTE network users will eventually have access to. In fact, HSPA+ is more technologically related to 3G than it is to LTE. LTE's speed thresholds are higher than HSPA+ and will bring faster downloads, richer media streaming, and quicker page load times - you know, once AT&T stops talking about having its LTE network ready and actually gets it ready. At its peak, HSPA+ can deliver a maximum of 84Mbps down. In real-world conditions, results are often a fraction of that. If the AT&T hype machine is to be believed, LTE could be more than three times faster than its HSPA+ network and up to 10 times faster than 3G. An AT&T spokesman stated that "we expect that in most markets our 4G LTE speeds will be in the 5-12Mbps downlink and 2-5Mbps uplink speed range." At their high end, those numbers compare reasonably well with Verizon's Motorola Droid Bionic, which averaged about 10.18Mbps down and 4.62Mbps during independent testing. Four LTE-ready devices are currently ready to roll for AT&T: the USBConnect Momentum 4G, the Mobile Hotspot Elevate 4G, the HTC Jetstream AND the USBConnect Adrenaline, which are two laptop cards, a tablet and a mobile hot spot. Users with old models of AT&T devices will need to upgrade to an LTE-compatible phone to access the network once it becomes available, which is expected to happen some time before the end of the year. Until then, enjoy all of the riveting 4G LTE commercials………
- A true visionary sees things in the world that no one else sees. Orlando-area physician Dr. Jeffrey Hartog is one such forward-thinker and his source of inspiration is the portly condition of the average American. Realizing that flabby, chunky, chubby, out of shape and poorly condition are the optimal terms to describe the vast majority of the American populace, Hartog is adding a new component to his plastic surgery business. Like many plastic surgeons, Hartog does a fair among of liposuction. Sucking the FAT out of people too lazy and dietetically undisciplined to eat healthier is a money maker and will continue to be for as long as the United States exists, but it does raise the question of what to do with that excised FAT. Turning it into fuel would be awesome because it could quite possibly solve all of this country’s energy problems if we could suck the excess FAT out of all adults and use it to power our cars and homes, but that would probably be too costly and logistically difficult to do. Instead, Dr. Hartog has come up with the unique concept of providing plastic surgery patients the option of keeping their fat from liposuction procedures and storing it for use later in life. Instead of having FAT removed from their thighs or love handles, for example, some patients elect to have it injected elsewhere. Now, those patients can simply freeze their FAT and have it stored at Hartog's Liquid Gold Center in Orlando. The facility houses the "fat bank," where the disgusting yellow-ish substance is placed in vials and put in deep-freeze tanks for storage until the patient wants to use it again. "This makes it possible without having to come back and have the liposuction procedure again and again. So we've had interest in it," Hartog said. Some in the medical community have criticized the concept on the basis that it is best to re-use FAT as soon as possible rather than store it for future use, but Hartog insists that even if some FAT is lost in the storage process, the end result is worth it. For those with FAT to store (and not burn), the cost to store 250 to 300 cubic centimeters of fat is $900 for the first year and $200 a year after that. Or, you could get off your lazy butt and exercise for free…………
No comments:
Post a Comment