Welcome to the Rocky Top Brigade

New Recruits:

Mick at FishKite from Memphis.

LissaKay at Oh... Really? from Knoxville.

Don at Road Warrior, also from Knoxville.

Doug McDaniel, again from Knoxville.

Welcome, everyone!

TAKEOVER?

Comcast makes $54.6bn hostile bid for Disney

""The combination would create one of the world's leading entertainment and communications companies with an unparalleled distribution platform and an extraordinary portfolio of content assets. The new company would have a presence in all of the nation's top 25 markets, and would propel broadband forward, expanding current services and inspiring new ones," Comcast said.

...

Comcast's proposed deal would leave Disney shareholders owning 42 per cent of the combined company."

Also...

The Mouse without Mike?

"Much of the weakness in Disney's share price is due to the perception, merited or not, that CEO Michael Eisner has become a liability to the company. Roy Disney and Stanley Gold quit Disney's board last year over their long-running dispute with Eisner, and have called for his ouster. In another blow, late last month Pixar pulled out of talks to extend Disney's five-picture deal to distribute Pixar films.

Because Eisner has apparently rejected Comcast's advances, it is unlikely that he would have a job at the combined company."

The conspiracy theorist in me keeps wondering if Roy Disney and Stanley Gold had some behind-the-scenes talks with Comcast as well as Pixar and are working together to boot Eisner and shake up the company.

UPDATE (02/12/04):

Kevin Yee at MiceAge has a nice FAQ explaining a lot of the details of the Comcast offer in easy to understand detail....

Subliminal Thoughts

Wierd....

1. Identity:: Secret
   
2. Reveal:: Source
   
3. Live:: Aid
   
4. Attitude:: Bad
   
5. Night:: Vision
   
6. Nevada:: Las Vegas
   
7. Weekend:: Off
   
8. Write:: It Down
   
9. Friend:: In Need
   
10. Seventeen:: And Never Been Kissed
    

(Hat Tip: Missives Anonymous)

MousekeShares

Do you own stock in the Walt Disney Company? Do you actually possess a stock certificate (i.e. not through a mutual fund, 401(k) or brokerage account)?

If so, have you received your Annual Report, Proxy Statement, and Voting Ballot?

If you haven't, you're like a lot of other Disney stockholders, and with the Annual Meeting and YES/NO vote on Michael Eisner and company looming on March 3rd in Philadelphia, some folks are talking....

Here's what they're saying:

"Could Disney be attempting to influence the coming vote by shrinking the amount of time shareholders have to read and return their ballots prior to the meeting?"

Check it out, it may be a case of foot-dragging in order to influence votes....

What to Write, What to Write...

I can't do it - I just can't do it.

Many blogs I turn to these last few days has pages and pages of insightful political commentary on who's right and who's wrong (they're always right, and we're always wrong, if you're keeping score at home).

They offer scores of supporting links and background information and research and first-hand reports and interviews with their kids' nannies, and all that.

Ah, to have the time and commitment.

Well, unfortunately I don't. I'm just the average guy who wants to do the right thing and the dutiful thing when voting. Today's Primary Day in Tennessee. I plan to go to the polls this afternoon after work, and make my choice for Democratic candidate for President.

Trouble is, I'm not sure I want a Democrat as President this time.

In the past, I've always considered myself a Democrat, and have mostly identified myself with liberal causes. The Republican mindset has mostly been alien and unfathomable to me.

But things have changed in this past year. I've seen Democrats and Liberals alike shift to the left and abandon a number of the principles that the party stood for, in order to pursue a partisan agenda against George Bush and his War on Terror/Iraq War plans. For some, it has to do with Bush's National Guard record, to some it's his background as an opportunistic frat rat; for a large, large number of people it's the continuing belief that he, his brother Jeb, the Florida government and the US Supreme Court stole the 2000 election from Al Gore. But underlying all of that is the pure desire for revenge for the eight years of partisan hell the Republicans put this country through opposing Bill Clinton.

That motivation, above almost all others, is what I've seen fueling most of the anti-war movement by the Democrats/Liberals in America. And the desire for revenge and the attitude of being wronged is a very powerful one - so powerful, in fact that in my opinion it's blinded many Americans to the single greatest challenge this country has faced probably since the Cuban Missle Crisis - security of America and its interests versus foreign Islamic fundamentalist terrorists.

So far, in the wake of 9/11, we've liberated Afghanistan and Iraq. We've begun the process of introducing freedom and democracy to the people of the Middle East - people who until recently that had been simply a dream, a memory, maybe even just a legend.

We opposed Hitler in World War II because he wanted to take over the world. We were attacked by the Japanese in their bid for world conquest. Except for Pearl Harbor and a few minor engagements off the California coast, the entirety of American involvement in World War II took place overseas - in Europe, in Africa, in Asia and in the Pacific. We didn't wait for war to come to us - we went to it. We saw the threat of Nazi and Imperial expansionist plans, and allied ourselves with other nations more directly threatened to put an end to it. We knew that if we continued our isolationism policies, war would come to New York, or Washington, or L.A. or Cleveland or Kansas City or Denver. America recognized the real threat, committed itself to the cause and ultimately we and our Allies prevailed.

That same threat exists today in the Middle East. It's been brewing for many years - hostages taken in Iran in the 70's, military bunkers attacked in Beiruit in the 80's, the USS Cole attacked in the 90's. Militant Islam Fundamentalists have been planning the forced expansion of their religious doctrine over the rest of the Middle East, Europe and the Americas for years. Recently it's come to a head - the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993, and finally destroyed (along with much of the Pentagon) in 2001. The war has come to American soil, much like Pearl Harbor in 1941, and we responded. The US recognized the primary staging areaof Al Quaeda and other terrorist organizations was in Afghanistan and we took care of it, freeing their people from oppresive Taliban rule and turning over the anthill of Al Quaeda.

Terrorism continued to spread throughout the Middle East, primarily fueled by the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Suicide bombings became commonplace as the War on Terror spread. The Middle East is Europe of the 1940's, the unfortunate battleground of this new war. Finally, the worst of the Middle East dictators was given a final ultimatem - disarm or face the consequences. Saddam didn't, and then paid the price. We liberated Iraq, freeing millions more oppressed in that country. Although Iraq was not an Islamic Fundamentalist state per se, terrorist groups such as Al Quaeda were encouraged and fed by them, and Saddam financially supported Palestinian terrorists. Another bulwark in the terrorist army was defeated.

Which brings us to today, and the impending change in leadership. What would have happened in the early 40's had an anti-war movement forced the US to abandon the Allies to the Nazis? Understandably, we still would've had to deal unilaterally with the Japanese, but consider the European theatre primarily in this case. Would England and Russia have been able to hold out by themselves? Would a similar movement have kicked in in England, forcing eventual capitulation? What would the world be like today if the US hadn't pressed on through D-Day? If Germany had conquered England and Russia, would they have developed the Atomic Bomb before we did? Would NYC still exist? Would Washington? Would the US? The American citizenry had no idea at the time of even the existance of atomic weapons, much less their strategic advantages. It would have been catastrophic to world history.

Yes, Edith Keeler was right - peace is the way. But at the wrong time. (If you get the reference, great. If you don't, don't sweat it)

You should be able to see the importance of continuing what we started in the Middle East until the threat of organized Islamic militant fundamentalism is removed from prominance. That's what worries me about a Democratic candidate....

Though all seem committed to a successful end to the Iraqi occupation, what next? Will a Democratic president continue the same (to this point) successful and historically correct strategy in the Middle East, or will they bow to their party wishes and pull back, appeasing the Liberal voters?

Of all the candidates, Joe Lieberman was my first choice to be able to do what was right. Since he dropped out, it seems John Edwards is most likely of the remaining candidates to resist temptation and continue the successful campaign. At this point, he's my choice for the nomination.

But if he ultimately does not win, or even if he's on the ticket as a VP, will I be able to put support behind another candidate like Kerry or Clark or Dean? Would that mean I'd ultimately vote for Bush in November.

We may be hit by a major terrorist attack today. We may not. We may be hit tomorrow, or next month, or in October, or in 2005. Or we may not. But I'm convinced - convinced - that the only reason we have not been hit again, worse than 9/11, since that date is because the policy we're pursuing in the Middle East is the morally, historically, and strategically correct one. Can we afford to take the chance on altering that policy, that's been successful so far at preventing the loss of more American civilian lives?

Absolutely, Bush has faults. He's smug, he's arrogant - if I had to have coffee with him I'd probably want to smack him after about five minutes - and his economic and social policies are wacked out. John Ashcroft is an abomination. Dick Cheney's business dealings are suspect. The Republican establishment is elitist and bigoted.

But the Democrats are supposed to be the antithesis of those things: fair, populous, open to new ideas, dedicated to assisting the oppressed....in the last year that's the farthest thing from their minds. All because of a botched election and anger over the Clinton years.

Is that what you want to build your children's future on? Revenge? Hate? If Kerry wins in November, will you all be satisfied that you're now vindicated? What happens when you're finished clapping yourself on the back and look out the window to see a mushroom cloud where New York used to be? Will you still sleep at night?

Like I said, I'm confused. I want to be loyal to what I believe and I want to do the right thing. It's just so many people have changed the rules I don't know where to look anymore.

I'm going to go play some more Civilization III. At least there I can reboot the computer if I get nuked.

Doesn't work in real life.

Make the right decisions. Make the moral decisions. Make the just decisions.

But decide.


UPDATE (02/11/04):

Regarding Iraq - one common controversy seems to be, are we safer?

Well, since we're all (meaning civilians) still alive 2-1/2 years after 9/11, 2-1/4 years after Afghanistan and almost 1 year after Iraq I'd say yes. And no.

What about invading Iraq made the US safer? Well, like Mike said we made it clear to our enemies what we would do when we feel threatened. And when you stand up to bullies, they tend to back down and leave you alone. We introduced a democratic possibility into the region - hopefully it will become a reality. Where there's hope for a better life, there's a reason to give up on your own country's oppresive leaders. When the people of Syria, or Iran, or even the PLO see that freedom and equality and promise and hope is possible in the Middle East, maybe they'll find another idea to gravitate towards.

Third, Saddam actively supported Palestinian suicide bombers and rewarded their families monetarily. It's a small step to assume from there he might support other terrorists pursuing other similar goals elsewhere, either with money, supplies or materials. Can anyone really see a disconnect, or is it just obvious to me? He had the means to obtain WMD (whether he had them, didn't have them, lost them, forgot them, whatever) and could deliver same to the terrorists if it was to his benefit. Plus, those such as Saddam (and his sons) just can't confine themselves to one country, they get itchy and want to expand. Witness Kuwait in 1990. How much longer before Saddam started eyeing those smaller ME countries again?

Achoo

Hypothetically speaking, has anyone ever had to change a flat tire when one or more of these conditions didn't apply:

1. It's raining
2. It's freezing cold
3. You have kids in the car, and they're needing to be somewhere
4. You're sick
5. Your cell phone can't find a cell, or it's losing power
6. You curse yourself for not subscribing to AAA just a couple of weeks ago when you had the chance.

Yeah, well take all of the above, and you'll know what my morning was like ;(

PEPPERONI TO THE PEOPLE!

This is the best idea I've seen come around in a long time....

Pizza Party U.S.A.

"Every four years at the end of February, we’ve got that extra day. Is it special? Well maybe it should be. Julius Caesar may have invented Leap Day, but writer Matthew Baldwin invented Pizza Party U.S.A., and he has a petition for you to sign.

Let’s begin by stating the obvious: Leap Day should be a holiday. I mean, come on: That pretty much goes without saying. It’s not even a real day. It’s like some kind of extra-dimensional day from the Phantom Zone that only phases into Earth Prime every four years. It’s a 100 percent free 24 hours, and employers should have no claim to it. Getting stuck working on Feb. 29 is like finding five bucks on a playground and having it immediately expropriated by a passing bully."

This is like, the greatest idea ever! A holiday celebrating the most useless yet totally bonus day of the quadrennium by indulging in the most quintessentialy non-essential American food ever. What could be more patriotic!

Well, you too can participate by signing the petition. Let's show Whoever Those Guys In Charge of These Things Are that we mean business!

At this moment that I signed the petition (1:57pm EST 02/05/04) there are 750 names. I will personally take credit for all the rest, due to this blog entry.

Pepperoni to the People!! Mushrooms for the Masses!!! Onions to the Unwashed and Anchovies to the Anguished...

No, wait, hold the anchovies.

(Hat Tip: Sugarfused)

Who Am I?

Bill Hobbs (here) and Michael Williams (here) have both recently commented on the reliability and credibility of anonymous and pseudononymous blogs.

Bill's contention, and Mike's supposition, is that those bloggers who don't provide first and last names are freer to engage in, shall we say, questionable journalistic practices. Apparently to some people, your identity begins and ends with your name - if they know how to find you in the phone book, that's all that's necessary to take you seriously.

I don't quite agree with all of that, although some parts make sense. Yes, it is easier to make an accusation, sling some mud, be sarcastic or just rude when you don't have to worry about people knowing who you really are - and by extension, you don't have to physically stand by your comments. South Knox Bubba does it all the time - his reasoning being that his business contacts and customers would not take kindly to his political philosophy. But being anonymous/pseudonymous allows him to conduct his business without fear that he may lose money because of his beliefs or views.

I'm more or less anonymous/pseudonymous, just using my first name, "Barry". Several of my readers know my last name - heck, Hatamaran works across the hall from me - and that's not a big deal. The main reason I don't use my last name is because I have a young family, and don't want to possibly put them at risk. I've posted pictures of them from time to time and don't want someone who sees a picture of GiggleGirl online...well, you get the picture.

One of my favorite bloggers, James Lileks of "The Bleat", is obviously not pseudonymous. I personally think he takes a big risk because of his identification, since he talk and posts so much about his young daughter "Gnat". However, he's also a nationally syndicated columnist and gets compensated for a lack of anonymity, and he is able to use some of that national exposure and popularity to drive traffic to his blog.

So does me not releasing publicly my last name to the online world undermine the credibility of my opinions? Does it make you, Bill, less sure that I say what I actually mean? Does it make me freer to insult you? Maybe, but I'll be back here online tomorrow and if I've insulted you you won't be back - and I want you back.

I'm not someone who's going to resort to insults and profanity to bring in viewers and readers - I'll let the pros handle that. I want people to read my blog because (hopefully) I'll occasionally have something interesting or amusing to say. I want to share my opinions with you, ask questions, debate philosophy, invite commentary, and occasionally illuminate a situation I want to bring attention to.

However, since I've been blogging most every day - sometimes more than once a day - for more than a year now, I feel I've established my own online credibility. I haven't attacked people and hidden behind my first-name-only. I haven't cursed them or insulted them. I've stayed pretty true to my views and beliefs, and when there's been a wavering I've addressed it.

So, Bill, am I credible? Are you going to delink me? Do I care - probably not, because I don't think he reads here anyway...if he does, he
doesn't comment.

Sugarfused, Busy Mom, Hatamaran are all anonymous/pseudononymous (check blogroll for links - I'm getting lazy) - do you skip these fine blogs because you can't track down their address?

Does it bother anyone that I don't post my last name? Would that enhance my credibility?

Oh, another thing about comments. PLEASE add a comment to my posts - I want to know what people think!

And I promise not to have Justin Timberlake rip off my shirt to convince you :)


UDPATE: SayUncle weighs in.

Volunteer Tailgate Party - Vol. XXI

Adam of agroves is hosting the latest Volunteer Tailgate Party, a bi-weekly compilation of the best and brightest blatherings of the Rocky Top Brigade.

This edition of the VTP is the SUPER BOWL Edition - apparently the entire Brigade travelled to Houston in SKB's RV. I don't recall this, but it may have something to do with the amount of Mountain Dew I consumed on the trip. Or at least I think it was Mountain Dew...anyway, play ball! (wait, that's something else..)

Sometimes You Have to Call a Spade a Club

Bill Hobbs says Saddam and his henchmen were deluded into thinking they actually still had WMD:

WMD: The Weapon of Mass Deliverance

"Saddam, himself deluded, deluded the world into believing he had weapons of mass destruction. Hence the many UN resolutions that he must disarm. Hence the deadline. Hence the U.S. military rolling into Baghdad."

Basically, it looks like what we did was call Saddam's unintentional bluff. He was working on a Royal Flush - 10, J, Q, and K of Spades down, Ace of Spades showing - but didn't realize the 10 of Spades was actually a 10 of Clubs. Oopsy! All his advisors and flunkies and bodyguards and sons and wives said, "But of course, your excellency - it is of course the 10 of Spades! Who would not think so? Those who say it is not will be shredded instantly, sir!"

After a while, even Saddam could look at the card and convince himself it was a Spade.

What does still trouble is, looking at the reflection in his glasses, we thought he had a 10 of Spades, too. If you're going to cheat, folks, cheat well. Our Intelligence community apparently relied only on communications and interviews with defectors, etc - not actually hands-on discoveries of WMD's. They relied on what the Iraqi's told each other (and covertly, the US) about the WMD programs. And hence believed what Saddam believed - that he had WMD and was prepared to use them (or sell them).

So we took a calculated risk and called the bluff. Saddam, smiling, laid down his hand and began to rake in the pot - only to be shown, forcefully, that ole' 10 of Clubs. The smile quickly vanished like a spider down a hole.

Grocery Store Harrassment

Jay at Classless Warfare is haranguing Publix Grocery Stores over their treatment of his father-in-law due to an unfortunate but accidental shoplifting incident.

Apparently his FIL slipped a tube of Chap-Stik into his shirtpocket to hold it there for a moment and forgot to pay for it on his way out. Security saw the incident and detained him.

It looks like the Publix management and security guards went way over the line in relation to the crime(?). A simple explanation and apology were not enough, and he was tossed out. Now he's being humiliated and told to pay a hefty fine (not by the police, by the store).

Read the whole thing. (And the UPDATE).

But remember this: if you are in an area with a Publix, don't boycott it. Don't harrass the employees or the management. There's simply no point. If you feel the situation warrants it, fire off a letter to the corporate management or the local press. But don't punish rank-and-file employees and management over circumstances they have no control over. That's foolish.

His FIL was likely taken advantage of for no good reason. You'd be doing the same thing to the employees.

"Call Me Janet - Miss Jackson, if you're nasty"

How about we call you "loser"?

Lest we forget, Janet was little "Penny" on Good Times and Willis's girlfriend "Charlene" on Diff'rent Strokes. Ouch, that hurts.

She was also briefly on "Fame" for a while.

See?

Pixar pact end turns up heat on Eisner (CBS Marketwatch, 01/30/04)

'Disney's shareholder meeting, scheduled for March 3, just got a little more interesting.

Pixar's decision Thursday to end its longstanding deal with Disney means the venerable studio could see a key source of numerous revenue streams drying up in a hurry.

And the calls by Roy Disney, nephew of the company's founder and former vice chairman, for Chief Executive Michael Eisner to step down could be heard by more shareholders as they wonder where the Disney chief is leading the company.

"The market already made a judgment which isn't good news for Disney," Roy Disney said in an interview with CBS MarketWatch as the company's shares fell nearly 5 percent in after-hours trading Thursday. "That's the market's judgment and that's my judgment."

But analysts are concerned that even though the company's stock has risen dramatically in recent months, Eisner won't see as many friendly faces when he takes the stage at the company's annual gathering, scheduled to take place in Philadelphia.

"Could it heat things up [at the annual meeting]? I think it has the potential," said David Mantell, analyst at Loop Capital Markets in Chicago. "I think it's too early to tell whether it's a serious threat [to Eisner]."'

And it gets worse:

"The timing could hardly be worse for Eisner. On Tuesday, Roy Disney and his business partner, fellow ex-Disney board member Stanley Gold, filed a statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission calling upon company shareholders to oust Eisner and three board members.

Roy Disney said Eisner has been unable to maintain the growth levels achieved during the first decade of his now 20 years at the company. Disney said Eisner's management has faltered since the death of President Frank Wells in 1995.

...

Will all this be enough to settle concerns among shareholders who may be antsy, or will they follow Roy Disney's lead in calling for Eisner's head?

"I think [that's] a bit of a stretch," said Guzman's Joyce. "But it'll keep the issue front and center."'

I'll keep on top of this, so maybe there'll be something more interesting and heartening to pay attention to than all the political nonsense on a lot of other blogs...

"Hit the Road, Mike, and Don't You Come Back Nemo"

Pixar has fired Disney.

Pixar Quits Disney Talks, Seeks New Partner (Yahoo News: 01/29/04)

"Pixar Animation Studios Inc. said on Thursday it had broken off talks with Walt Disney Co. to extend their lucrative movie distribution deal that has resulted in such blockbusters as "Toy Story," "Monsters Inc." and "Finding Nemo."

The computer animation pioneer said it said it would look for another studio partner and would begin talks with other companies to distribute its films starting in 2006.

The move was a blow to Disney, which reaped a financial and critical bonanza from the partnership and has struggled with its own strategy for animation. Their deal includes two more films in production."

In related news:

After the Bell: Pixar Up, Disney Down (Yahoo News: 01/29/04)

"Shares of Walt Disney Co. fell in trade after the closing bell on Thursday while shares of Pixar Animation Studios Inc. (Nasdaq:PIXR - news) rose after Pixar said it had broken off talks with Disney to extend their movie distribution deal."

Disney CEO Michael Eisner's chief claim to fame was that Disney's stock was rising. Now it ain't, and that may be all she wrote for Mr. Eisner.

Apparently, though I haven't seen a source yet, Disney stockholder Pixar will vote NO in a no-confidence vote of shareholders at the Annual Disney Shareholder Conference in Philadelphia the first week in March. Will they steer other companies their way, and remove Eisner from his position?

Roy Disney and Stanley Gold hope so, and they're urging all stockholders to vote NO as well.

My guess is, Pixar is using their enormous clout to tip the scales against Eisner, force him out, and a few months down the road resume ties with Disney under the new management. That's what it seems like to me.

"I'm wishing....."

....

In a completely unrelated, yet strangely similar situation, Paramount may be on the verge of firing current Star Trek head guy, and Gene Roddenberry protoge Rick Berman:

"It would seem the lackluster support of ENTERPRISE by Les Moonves and Dawn Ostroff at this weekend's UPN press junket has gotten the attention of Garry Hart, President of Paramount Television Productions. Quiet for some time regarding the dismal performance of his division's most important moneymaker, it has been rumored that Hart may be planning as early as March to make concessions to UPN to help keep ENTERPRISE on the air. From an insider in John Wentworth's office at Paramount Television's Marketing and Media Relations Department, a memo has been spotted suggesting Hart may be waiting until after ENTERPRISE's February sweeps performance to announce the possible replacement of some of the show's production staff, to possibly include longtime TREK Executive Producer Rick Berman. There is no word at this time of any possible replacements."'

This is interesting only in the fact I saw the two sets of stories within about five minutes of each other on different websites.

He's Got Those Reality-Show Blues

A certain country music singer/songwriter of my long-time acquaintance recently participated in an audition for a Nashville-based reality TV show, with mixed results. Read his story:

Blame it on Wapner! Part One:

"When you look at it listed like that, it's a little easier to see the absurdity of it all -- and ourselves for watching them, and, more importantly, buying the products advertised on them. And you know who started it all?? Judge Freaking Wapner."

...and Two:

"One attendee described seeing this show at Billy Bob's quite nicely, as "somewhere just north of listening to Zamfir while drinking non-alcoholic beer and chewing tin foil." To put it diplomatically -- it was a freakshow. Some of the acts (maybe about 5 - there were 28 of us) were decent, but most of them made Kenny Chesney look like Merle Freakin' Haggard. I had to sit there and watch 26 teeny-bopper chickies, college-age floppy-haired model/actor slackers, redneck rockers, and cutesy singer-songwriter dudes, most of whom brought their whole families and hordes of obnoxious drunken friends to scream for them and hold up signs like "Nashville Bound" and "Mike Rocks".'

Read the whole thing. Then, when you're through read the whole site. Then when you're through with that, go buy a few of his albums - if I can just set it up so he eventually hits it real big and starts making a ton of money, he can be the one that gets to take care of our parents later on!

Just kidding, mom and dad :)

You can even listen to MP3's of some of his tunes:

• Blow Wind Blow
• The Runaround
• Don't Nobody Love Me Like My Baby

Oh, The Places I've Been

The states that I have visited are in red below, the states I have not visited are in tannish/green:



create your own visited states map
or write about it on the open travel guide

"Visited" states include those I've driven through on the way to somewhere else, but not actually stopped for any meaningful time (Iowa, Missouri, Illinois) but don't include those I've flown over in a plane.

Interestingly, I'm sure I must have visited Mississippi at some time in the past but darn if I can remember exactly when, so for now it is Unvisited.

As for living in states, the only state I've lived in other than Tennessee for any length of time was Florida, and that was for a summer when I worked as a stage manager for the Seaside Music Theatre in Daytona Beach back in 1990.

Oh, and a similar map of the world showing countries I've visited would include only several islands in the Caribbean and Mexico. That's it for that.

(Hat tip: "What Hath I Wrought!")

Gollum, Yoda. Yoda, Gollum.

Just ran across this:

What NOT to do during "Return of the King."

Some of my favorites:

5. Ask everyone around you if they think Gandalf went to Hogwarts.

13. During a wide shot of a battle, inquire, "Where's Waldo?"

18. Imitate what you think a conversation between Gollum, Dobby and Yoda would be like.

Got any more?

Encourage, Not Discourage

On honor roll? Keep it to yourself (Knoxville News Sentinel: 01/26/04)

"The school honor roll, a time-honored system for rewarding "A" students, has become an apparent source of embarrassment for some underachievers.

As a result, all Nashville schools have stopped posting honor rolls, and some are also considering a ban on hanging good work in the hallways - all at the advice of school lawyers.

I think that's your key phrase right there - "on the advice of school lawyers".

"After a few parents complained their children might be ridiculed for not making the list..."

Who are these parents? Where are they? I want to sit down with them in their living room and explain to them that they're raising children, not Cabbage Patch Kids. Kids have been disappointed at not making this or that honor roll, or this or that Dean's List for years. It's called incentive, it's called encouragement, it's called impetus. How else do those people, whose abilities may not be a natural gift to them, learn to succeed? By being continually told that their mediocre grades are ok, no big deal, don't get upset?

It's a similar situation where so many youth sports leagues these days don't keep score, and as such don't keep standings, wins&losses, etc. That's fine for younger, training leagues - the point there is to learn how to play the game and learn not to run off the field at inopportune times - but once they're old enough to know how the games are played, scorekeeping should be reintroduced immediately, as should wins & losses, records, and standings. When there's no goal to strive for, there's no growth and no advancement. Sure, it's good exercise but not allowing kids the mental reward for having scored a goal, a run, a basket, a touchdown - you're giving them nothing to play for. Except their parents vicarious thrills, apparantly.

Back to academics: Who exactly is going to ridicule these non-honor roll kids? If a kid is smart enought and/or applies himself enough, they're not going to have the temperment or crassness (in most situations) to see a need to make fun of someone who didn't make the grade. And their even worse-performing peers won't care. Who's left? The teachers? Or are the parents worried about each other demeaning their children for sub-par schoolwork? Maybe this is a crutch to absolve parents from having a guideline to measure their children's work by - if there's no honor roll, there's no sense of really where in their academic career their children are.

When I was in school, I was on the honor roll most of the time. And I know from vast experience that we were never making fun of the kids who weren't - if anything, we were the ones made fun of for succeeding. And it's the same in every school, and has been the same since grades were invented. The brains and geeks and nerds are always vilified by the under-achievers, it's so common knowledge it's unfathomable that it could be any way else.

"Some schools have since put a stop to academic pep rallies. Others think they may have to cancel spelling bees. And now schools across the state may follow Nashville's lead."

It just gets worse and worse till you have to blink and gape openmouthed at the words for a few moments, then move on.

Ok, moralistic rant out of the way. Now on to the legal stuff:

"...Nashville school system lawyers warned that state privacy laws forbid releasing any academic information, good or bad, without permission.

...

In Knoxville, school district spokesman Russ Oaks said authorities do not think posting good information about a student violates state law. He said they put such information in the same category as sports statistics.

...

...But Nashville school lawyers based their decision last month on a state privacy law dating back to the 1970s - a law that's not always followed because no one challenged the honor roll status quo.

Some school have begun requiring permission slips from parents to release academic records, but that's just a band-aid.

"Others think it might be a good idea to get rid of the honor roll altogether, as Principal Steven Baum did at Julia Green Elementary in Nashville.

"The rationale was, if there are some children that always make it and others that always don't make it, there is a very subtle message that was sent," he said. "I also understand right to privacy is the legal issue for the new century."

Yes, Mr. Principal - but the subtle message that is being sent is not, "YOU'RE STUPID", but "YOU HAVE ROOM TO IMPROVE". One phrase discourages, the other encourages. Instead of killing the messenger, re-interpret the message.

'"I discourage competitive games at school," he said. "They just don't fit my world view of what a school should be."'

What?? What??? Do some teachers, administrators, parents, school board members, legislators actually think their children will not be required to compete in the real world? From the first day after graduation, they will be competing with other people for jobs, for mates, for houses.... They will be competing against other parents on how their own children will be raised, and what their environments will be like. They will be competing with someone or something every day for the rest of their lives - and you want to deliberately not teach them how to compete? That's like awarding someone a Masters Degree in Physics, without teaching them math...

Here's the thing: Competition doesn't necessarily mean I Win/You Lose. Competition can mean everyone improves. There's the old saw that says a sports team must compete against superior opponents to get better - you think the Lady Vols play UConn, Duke, etc. every year for their health? That's one big reason they are a consistently superior program - they set high goals for themselves, they intentionally play other superior teams, they test themselves, and by time for the NCAA Tournament they're ready to compete, excel, and maybe win.

You're not necessarily trying to be better than the other guy, you're trying to be better than they person you were the day before. If you make the honor roll - congratulations, you're doing something right. If you don't make the honor roll but are trying - congratulations as well because you're better than you were yesterday. If you don't make the honor roll because it doesn't exist and you're discouraged from seeing and recognizing that higher standards and goals exist? You're being cheated, and dishonored by the same people most entrusted to care for your well-being and growth: your parents.

There is some hope:

"The change has upset many parents who want their children recognized for hard work.

"This is as backward as it gets," said Miriam Mimms, who has a son at Meigs Magnet School and helps run the Parent Teacher Association.

...

Parents at most schools, though, have been close to outrage over the new rule.

Some people do get it, apparently. This is a story that does not need to slip through the cracks.

I could go on and on (and already have). Spelling Bees aren't important who wins, but that the competitors improve their spelling. Baseball games aren't truly important who wins, but that you have a goal to reach for and develop and improve your skills to reach that goal - scoring more points than the other team, and doing it better than you would have the day before. That's it.

Encourage, don't discourage.

UPDATE (01/28/04): It was pointed out to me that I slightly misinterpreted this:

"...As a result, all Nashville schools have stopped posting honor rolls..."

...to mean they had removed the concept of honor rolls altogether. This may not be the case - I would assume with this interpretation students still make an honor roll with good school-work, it just isn't publicly acknowledged or reported. If so, I stand corrected - however this doesn't change the fact that competition is still being actively discouraged in the schools, which is a Bad Thing.

Whistling in the Dark

Oh, what fun....

U.S. ships Libyan nuclear components to Oak Ridge (Knoxville News-Sentinel: 01/27/04)

"Tons of nuclear-related equipment from Libya arrived in Knoxville this morning and reportedly were trucked to a government facility in Oak Ridge for safekeeping.

...

"These materials include both sensitive documentation and equipment," [White House spokesman Scott] McClellan said in his statement released in Washington. "On the flight was UF6 – uranium hexafluoride – which is used for feedstock to enrich uranium. Also included on the flight were centrifuge parts, which are used to enrich uranium (for weapons use). Finally, the shipment contains ballistic missile guidance sets for longer-range missiles, which Libya has voluntarily agreed to eliminate."

McClellan said the shipment was sent to a "secure facility" in Tennessee. That facility is the Y-12 National Security Complex, which is a warhead-manufacturing facility that also houses the nation’s primary stockpile of weapons-grade uranium."

So, this is like the same facility that just in the last few weeks or so failed one security test and cheated on another? This is the same facility that supposedly could allow terrorists to access and construct a nuclear weapon in half an hour? This is the same facility that's about oh, say, 25 miles from my home?

I'm checking my travel agent.... wonder what The Congo is like this time of year?

I'd Look Good on the $1 Bill...

Which Founding Father Are You?