Thursday, July 01, 2010
Oil spill
I'll have to talk about the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico at some point. For now, it just seems like the Iranian hostage crisis, in that it drags on for day after day, and there's always some excuse for not doing anything.
Mel Gibson -- who cares?
Is there anyone in the world (other than Mel Gibson, his ex-wife, his ex-girlfriend, his children, and all of their lawyers) who actually cares what Mel Gibson has to say? Haven't we already established that he's nuts?
We could ask the question that if you get involved with someone that the whole world knows is nuts, are you entitled to whine about how awful he was to you afterward, or should you just have to suck it up because you took an open and obvious risk?
But I don't even care enough to ask that question. Go away, celebrity gossip.
We could ask the question that if you get involved with someone that the whole world knows is nuts, are you entitled to whine about how awful he was to you afterward, or should you just have to suck it up because you took an open and obvious risk?
But I don't even care enough to ask that question. Go away, celebrity gossip.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Death of Robert Byrd
Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) died. Byrd was probably the last card-carrying Klansman to ever serve in the Senate, although that little inconvenient truth has been buried in the articles, probably because the liberal media loves him so much for rolling in on his wheelchair to vote for ObamaCare during the winter.
I do love the headline of the AP article on his death: "Bird to lie in Senate chamber where he served"
Makes sense. Now that he's dead, there's no reason for him to stop lying.
Former TV commentator Alan Colmes, who wrote this stupidity about the late Senator:
Fascinating assertion. The way I read it, Colmes has asserted that the fact that Byrd bacame a left-winer should absolve him of his "youthful" racism, while the fact that Thurmond became a right-winger should cause him to remain tainted. Maybe I'm misreading it, but I doubt it.
Perhaps I'm alone in finding that the posthumous revelation of Thurmond's half-black daughter, whom he fathered in 1925, revealed his racism to be more a matter of political opportunism than personal belief. Probably like Colmes, I think Thurmond was an opportunist and a bozo. But I see no reason not to tar Byrd with the same brush.
And the assertion that Byrd somehow uniquely understood the rules of the Senate is nothing more than gibberish. Ever since Korea, Americans have been arguing about fighting wars without a declaration of war (which have been dubbed by both Democratic and Republican administrations as "police actions" to avoid the necessity of a vote for war). In this case, Colmes conveniently forgets (assuming he has enough brainpower to even remember) to point out the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, which both Republicans and Democrats of the time felt gave G.W. Bush sufficient authority to act in Iraq. In fact, Byrd's attempts to limit the grant of authority were voted down by bipartisan margins, with the majority of Democrats voting with the Republicans against his proposed limitations.
But let the Byrd hagiography roll on among the far left. He was, after all, their champion (when he wasn't busy grabbing pork for West Virginia, that is).
I do love the headline of the AP article on his death: "Bird to lie in Senate chamber where he served"
Makes sense. Now that he's dead, there's no reason for him to stop lying.
Former TV commentator Alan Colmes, who wrote this stupidity about the late Senator:
Byrd, unlike Thurmond ..., changed his views over time. By the late 1970s, Byrd was speaking in favor of the Equal Rights Amendment. Eventually, he regarded his vote in favor of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution that led to the Vietnam War a sin. In fact, Byrd became a liberal lion who stood up to the Bush administration, invoking the rules of the Senate he knew like no one else to point out that it is illegal to fight without a declaration of war.
http://www.aolnews.com/article/opinion-robert-byrd-evolved-unlike-many-of-his-critics/19534279
Fascinating assertion. The way I read it, Colmes has asserted that the fact that Byrd bacame a left-winer should absolve him of his "youthful" racism, while the fact that Thurmond became a right-winger should cause him to remain tainted. Maybe I'm misreading it, but I doubt it.
Perhaps I'm alone in finding that the posthumous revelation of Thurmond's half-black daughter, whom he fathered in 1925, revealed his racism to be more a matter of political opportunism than personal belief. Probably like Colmes, I think Thurmond was an opportunist and a bozo. But I see no reason not to tar Byrd with the same brush.
And the assertion that Byrd somehow uniquely understood the rules of the Senate is nothing more than gibberish. Ever since Korea, Americans have been arguing about fighting wars without a declaration of war (which have been dubbed by both Democratic and Republican administrations as "police actions" to avoid the necessity of a vote for war). In this case, Colmes conveniently forgets (assuming he has enough brainpower to even remember) to point out the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, which both Republicans and Democrats of the time felt gave G.W. Bush sufficient authority to act in Iraq. In fact, Byrd's attempts to limit the grant of authority were voted down by bipartisan margins, with the majority of Democrats voting with the Republicans against his proposed limitations.
But let the Byrd hagiography roll on among the far left. He was, after all, their champion (when he wasn't busy grabbing pork for West Virginia, that is).
Hello again?
Why do I only intermittently feel like blogging? Perhaps because this year has been a total trade-off of good news and bad news? The good news of the Scott Brown election being tempered by the bad news of the bloated health care bill being passed with only Democratic support using the reconciliation gambit? Or the mixed news of the death of the estate tax (a stupid, if temporary and perhaps still to be rescinded, loss of revenue) and the continuing stall of the tax extenders bill? And the continuing stalemates on the "doc fix" and the so-called "financial reform" bill? And the foolishness on carried interest? Why don't I want to blog about this nonsense?
Perhaps I have caught Obama's pernicious indifference to what happens to America. Anyway, even if that's the cause, maybe I can find a cure.
Perhaps I have caught Obama's pernicious indifference to what happens to America. Anyway, even if that's the cause, maybe I can find a cure.
Monday, January 11, 2010
41st Vote
If Scott Brown wins the race for Massachusetts Senate, he can thank Al Franken.
For as much as I like Brown, he's been pretty much a nonentity in the State Senate ... not for any lack of vision or intelligent positions, but because the Republicans don't even have enough votes to uphold a veto. Massachusetts is a classic one-party state, even despite the widespread corruption among the Democrats here. As a result, Brown has largely been speaking to an audience of party sympathizers that isn't large enough to fill a classroom.
But when Franken won the U.S. Senate seat from Minnesota in 2008, he gave the Democrats in Congress exactly 60 votes, which is a filibuster-proof majority in Congress, because it takes 41 votes to uphold a filibuster and the Republicans only have 40. That's what "inspired" the Democrats to pass a health-care plan without any popular support. But, the entire fate of this plan rests on the Democrats retaining this Massachusetts Senate seat, since Brown's vote by itself would be enough to permit a filibuster to stop the plan.
Having been the minority leader of a one-party Senate, Brown has skillfully played his role as the potential swing vote to the hilt. Never mind the fact that he is a far, far better candidate than the deceitful Martha Coakley -- his appeal is his role as the potential "budget-buster killer." None of that would have been possible if he were the 39th or 42nd vote for the Republicans in the Senate.
For as much as I like Brown, he's been pretty much a nonentity in the State Senate ... not for any lack of vision or intelligent positions, but because the Republicans don't even have enough votes to uphold a veto. Massachusetts is a classic one-party state, even despite the widespread corruption among the Democrats here. As a result, Brown has largely been speaking to an audience of party sympathizers that isn't large enough to fill a classroom.
But when Franken won the U.S. Senate seat from Minnesota in 2008, he gave the Democrats in Congress exactly 60 votes, which is a filibuster-proof majority in Congress, because it takes 41 votes to uphold a filibuster and the Republicans only have 40. That's what "inspired" the Democrats to pass a health-care plan without any popular support. But, the entire fate of this plan rests on the Democrats retaining this Massachusetts Senate seat, since Brown's vote by itself would be enough to permit a filibuster to stop the plan.
Having been the minority leader of a one-party Senate, Brown has skillfully played his role as the potential swing vote to the hilt. Never mind the fact that he is a far, far better candidate than the deceitful Martha Coakley -- his appeal is his role as the potential "budget-buster killer." None of that would have been possible if he were the 39th or 42nd vote for the Republicans in the Senate.
Friday, January 08, 2010
Cold weather
The bitter-cold weather that the U.S. has been experiencing says nothing about the reality of global warming, let alone the possibility of man-made global warming. But I have to admit to finding myself stunned when a Washington Post weather column cited a left-wing advocacy group in discussing it:
So what, then, should the press be doing differently today? In my view, journalists should make an effort to include the broader climate context whenever it is scientifically justified. That means that it might be unnecessary to mention climate change in a story about a short-term cold snap, but could be integral to a story on heavy snowfall.
For perspective on how this might be done, I turned to Joe Romm of the liberal Center for American Progress, who has been pushing for more coverage of the links between extreme weather and climate events and global climate change.
I have to admit, I love people who refuse to let logic or scientific integrity stand in the way of a good story. In this case, discuss global warming theory when it's consistent with the weather event and ignore it when it's inconsistent.
Science has survived worse blunders, of course -- although most of those, like the current rush toward man-made global warming theory, were both politically and religiously motivated. The only good point that the global warmists make, and one which cannot be denied, is that an increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has to have an impact. No one can deny that. We can dispute whether it would produce global warming (I happen to doubt it), but it has to have an impact, just like any other chamical shift would. This is why we should be trying to reduce our CO2 output, not the overblown panic bleats from Luddites whose real objective is to return us to a secular version of the 19th Century.
More nukes!
So what, then, should the press be doing differently today? In my view, journalists should make an effort to include the broader climate context whenever it is scientifically justified. That means that it might be unnecessary to mention climate change in a story about a short-term cold snap, but could be integral to a story on heavy snowfall.
For perspective on how this might be done, I turned to Joe Romm of the liberal Center for American Progress, who has been pushing for more coverage of the links between extreme weather and climate events and global climate change.
I have to admit, I love people who refuse to let logic or scientific integrity stand in the way of a good story. In this case, discuss global warming theory when it's consistent with the weather event and ignore it when it's inconsistent.
Science has survived worse blunders, of course -- although most of those, like the current rush toward man-made global warming theory, were both politically and religiously motivated. The only good point that the global warmists make, and one which cannot be denied, is that an increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has to have an impact. No one can deny that. We can dispute whether it would produce global warming (I happen to doubt it), but it has to have an impact, just like any other chamical shift would. This is why we should be trying to reduce our CO2 output, not the overblown panic bleats from Luddites whose real objective is to return us to a secular version of the 19th Century.
More nukes!
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Patriots in the playoffs
You know, end-of-the-year football games were cold enough back when the season ended in early January. Ask Dan Fouts about playing in the Freeze Bowl in Cincinnati. Or Don Meredith about the Ice Bowl in Green Bay. But now that the NFL season goes on until February, we all but guarantee awful weather for the playoffs.
All that is a polite way of saying that the New England Patriots and the Baltimore Ravens are going to freeze their butts off this Sunday in the wild card game in Foxborough.
Health care bill
I don't have the heart to complain about the piece of crap that is being foisted on America in the health care bill. Democrats have to take the lion's share of the blame, because they're trying to pass a bill on a straight party-line vote instead of negotiating a bill that fixes the fundamental issues in U.S. health care. But Republicans come in for some blame too, although their weakness in the Senate (only 40 votes) means that they really can't do anything about the Democrats' desire for a party-line bill.
Maybe Republican Scott Brown will upset Democrat Martha Coakley for the open Massachusetts Senate seat that used to be held as a personal fiefdom by the Kennedy family. That one vote change would make all the difference, as it would require that a bill actually be negotiated between the parties instead of being imposed as a test of party discipline.
All I know is that I'm contributing to Brown, and I intend to vote for him. Not only is he the leader of the tiny Republican contingent in Massachusetts, but his daughter Ayla was on American Idol. It's about time for us to elect someone who actually understands reality TV instead of railing about its evils.
Friday, October 30, 2009
McDonald's = Losers?
The story of the four teenagers rapping their order at McDonald's would be dumb except for the outcome.
Were the kids being jerks? Unquestionably. Watch the original YouTube video and it's obvious that this is just stupid behavior. But arresting them is the type of thing that only a stupid company would do (with the help of complicit fools in the local police department), because it's such an inappropriate overreaction. Four kids behaving like jerks suddenly look like heroes of free speech.
Clearly Conny Kramer or someone else at McDonald's needed to take a Valium. OR MAYBE AN ANTIPSYCHOTIC.
You deserve a break today. Stay clear of McDonald's and you'll get one. Anyone for Burger King?
Were the kids being jerks? Unquestionably. Watch the original YouTube video and it's obvious that this is just stupid behavior. But arresting them is the type of thing that only a stupid company would do (with the help of complicit fools in the local police department), because it's such an inappropriate overreaction. Four kids behaving like jerks suddenly look like heroes of free speech.
Clearly Conny Kramer or someone else at McDonald's needed to take a Valium. OR MAYBE AN ANTIPSYCHOTIC.
You deserve a break today. Stay clear of McDonald's and you'll get one. Anyone for Burger King?
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Another baseball fraud
When Tim McClelland, supposedly the best umpire in baseball, supposedly just "blunders" -- on a play that was this obvious -- it's clear that the fix is in this postseason. I don't know whether gamblers have taken baseball over, as in 1919, or whether the league is dishonest in general, but it's just not possible that the best umpire in baseball coincidentally makes the "worst call of all time."
I'm not so paranoid that I don't believe in coincidences. But this is asking the viewing audience to believe in the impossible.
New York, start celebrating the World Series championship. You got it the old-fashioned way: somebody paid for it.
I'm not so paranoid that I don't believe in coincidences. But this is asking the viewing audience to believe in the impossible.
New York, start celebrating the World Series championship. You got it the old-fashioned way: somebody paid for it.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
59-0?
That's what the New England Patriots (4-2) beat the Tennessee Titans (0-6) by on Sunday. In a snowstorm. In Foxborough, MA. On October 18.
Wait, a snowstorm in suburban Boston on October 18? It's easy to understand why Tennessee gave up, the way they did in the game. Being from Al Gore's home area, they probably believed in global warming and were saddened by the realization that he was going to get mocked some more for his outlandish predictions about the "hockey stick" ride in temperature. No wonder they played like they had fleas.
Wait, a snowstorm in suburban Boston on October 18? It's easy to understand why Tennessee gave up, the way they did in the game. Being from Al Gore's home area, they probably believed in global warming and were saddened by the realization that he was going to get mocked some more for his outlandish predictions about the "hockey stick" ride in temperature. No wonder they played like they had fleas.
Monday, October 19, 2009
The Great Appeaser
I have to admit, I have a hard time writing a reasonably periodic blog. During this last gap, the Norwegians slipped in a surprise when they awarded Barack Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. If this wasn't so tragic for much of the world, it would be sickening.
Let me make one point clear. I'm not one of the Obama-haters out there. I love the fact that he's the second president from Harvard Law School (Rutherford B. Hayes was the first). I don't think he's the death of America. His election doesn't fill me with desire to move out of the country, as , say, the election of Mike Huckabee would have done. But this is such a pathetic award that it's become a worldwide laughing stock, and nobody deserves being laughed at more than Obama, who seems only to desire to replace Neville Chamberlain as "the Great Appeaser."
One of the pre-election comments about Obama was that he was weak in foreign affairs. Instead of asking advice from South Carolina governor Mark Sanford, who seems to be an expert (ask that Argentinean woman that he claims to be his "soul mate"), Obama claimed that his help would come from Joe Biden, whose best-known international venture was to plagiarize Neil Kinnock, the former leader of the British Labor Party. Between them, Obama and Biden are proving to be the Gang that Couldn't Think Straight.
Latest news: Obama can't make it to Berlin for the 20th anniversary of tearing down the Berlin Wall. Of course not; he's too busy trying to suck up to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin to celebrate the most important event with regard to world peace to happen in my lifetime: the fall of Communist Eastern Europe.
In fact, Obama scrapped the plans of the Bush administration to put land-based missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic. The Russians didn't like two of the three East Bloc countries that revolted against Russian hegemony having such missiles, even if they were turned toward Iran. So Obama killed them and intimated that, as a result, the Russians would help with Iran. Only ... when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went to Russia to get a joint statement, the Russians told her to pound sand. Typical Obama: appease the unappeasable. Isn't that exactly what Chamberlain did?
If Obama's ceaseless blundering leads us to war instead of peace, could we force Norwegians to man the front lines?
Let me make one point clear. I'm not one of the Obama-haters out there. I love the fact that he's the second president from Harvard Law School (Rutherford B. Hayes was the first). I don't think he's the death of America. His election doesn't fill me with desire to move out of the country, as , say, the election of Mike Huckabee would have done. But this is such a pathetic award that it's become a worldwide laughing stock, and nobody deserves being laughed at more than Obama, who seems only to desire to replace Neville Chamberlain as "the Great Appeaser."
One of the pre-election comments about Obama was that he was weak in foreign affairs. Instead of asking advice from South Carolina governor Mark Sanford, who seems to be an expert (ask that Argentinean woman that he claims to be his "soul mate"), Obama claimed that his help would come from Joe Biden, whose best-known international venture was to plagiarize Neil Kinnock, the former leader of the British Labor Party. Between them, Obama and Biden are proving to be the Gang that Couldn't Think Straight.
Latest news: Obama can't make it to Berlin for the 20th anniversary of tearing down the Berlin Wall. Of course not; he's too busy trying to suck up to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin to celebrate the most important event with regard to world peace to happen in my lifetime: the fall of Communist Eastern Europe.
In fact, Obama scrapped the plans of the Bush administration to put land-based missiles in Poland and the Czech Republic. The Russians didn't like two of the three East Bloc countries that revolted against Russian hegemony having such missiles, even if they were turned toward Iran. So Obama killed them and intimated that, as a result, the Russians would help with Iran. Only ... when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went to Russia to get a joint statement, the Russians told her to pound sand. Typical Obama: appease the unappeasable. Isn't that exactly what Chamberlain did?
If Obama's ceaseless blundering leads us to war instead of peace, could we force Norwegians to man the front lines?
Friday, September 25, 2009
The Mackenzie Phillips Story
I was a huge fan of the Mamas and the Papas. I was also a huge fan of John Phillips after the Mamas and the Papas. For Pete's sake, I have both the John Phillips solo album (featuring "Mississippi", which should have been a major hit) and the Jack of Diamonds album, featuring a collection of outtakes (some of which should have remained there). I also have a collection of items from the Monterey Pop festival, which was his brainchild and perhaps his greatest accomplishment. And I'm in awe of his songwriting talents, ranging from the Mamas & Papas hits to the much, much later "Kokomo", which he supposedly wrote with Terry Melcher (Doris Day's son and perhaps Charlie Manson's real target) while so wasted that he could barely function.
So why do I find Mackenzie Phillips' story of incest with her father absolutely, without a doubt, believable -- especially when two of her former stepmothers, Michelle Gilliam Phillips and Genevieve Waite, claim she's lying?
Well, first off, maybe it's because I'm surprised by Michelle's denials. This is a woman who has discussed her own father being attracted to her -- as she put it, she was "his type". As a result, she lived a wild bohemian lifestyle atypical of Southern California during her youth. I'm sure Mackenzie lied and deceived over the years -- what addict doesn't, including her father? But you would think she would recognize the possibility of the situation. Maybe it's denial.
As far as Genevieve Waite, her daughter with John (Bijou) filed for emancipation from her parents at 14, went into rehab a couple of times while modeling, and turned into a Scientologist, one of the creepiest of the creepy. You don't think something about that seems a little off? Like maybe there were more family troubles other than just drug addiction?
Second, I remember when Mackenzie joined the reformed Mamas & Papas. John and Denny Doherty were there. Cass Elliot was dead and replaced by Spanky MacFarland (from 60's stars "Spanky and Our Gang"). And Mackenzie was playing Michelle's part. I remember thinking at the time, in response to some joke that John made, about her taking on all of her stepmather's roles, that he was implying that he was sleeping with her. But I thought that was so creepy that he was clearly joking.
But now...
Third, we know that John had incredible problems with substance abuse. My favorite story about this was John's story of writing "Me and My Uncle", the song for which he became widely known from its constant performances by the Grateful Dead (66 performances between 1966 and 1995!). John started getting royalty checks for the song, which first appeared on a Judy Collins live album, but he hadn't written it and told Judy so. Then she reminded him about a night out with her and a couple of other young musicians named Stephen Stills and Neil Young (pre-Buffalo Springfield) in Arizona after Judy's concert. As they got drunker and drunker, they were taping themselves on a cassette recorder. During the night, among other song fragments that were composed, John came up with an entire song, preserved by the tape. Judy took the song and started performing it -- unbeknownst to John, who couldn't really remember much about the evening period, let alone about the song.
come on, if you could get so blotto that you couldn't remember anything about writing a song that became a classic, is it hard to believe that you could get drunk/high enough to lose your inhibitions about incest? Especially with a beautiful and talented daughter who was as much of a junkie as you were?
If there is any part of the story that I have doubts about, it's about Mackenzie's own reactions. I'm willing to believe her story that her father initiated their sex. But I have a hard time picturing Mackenzie as anything but an enthusiastic participant over the life of the relationship. After all, her father had dumped her, her mother and her brother when they were just kids to take off with the teenaged Michelle. In some way, this had to feel to her like she was winning him back. I know her feelings weren't quite that simple, but look at the lengths to which she would have had to go over the years to keep such a relationship a secret from everyone, including her husband at the time. Apparently the only person she told was her half-sister Chynna (John & Michelle's daughter) back in 1997, which was about 10 years after she broke off the incest.
Anyway, nothing about this seems unlikely to me. I do feel sorry for Mackenzie, because she was such a talented actress (unlike her stepmother Michelle, who did some of the worst bombs ever), and it's a shame that she wasted her most productive years with so many personal issues, from the incest to the drug addiction. On the one hand, she has so much more than most people that she has no grounds to complain, from the starring role in a classic movie (American Graffiti) as a young teen to the hit TV shows ... on the other hand, I appreciate that she probably feels that she has to be open about her past to make sense of her future (and she's only turning 50, so it's not like she doesn't have years of possible achievement in front of her).
So why do I find Mackenzie Phillips' story of incest with her father absolutely, without a doubt, believable -- especially when two of her former stepmothers, Michelle Gilliam Phillips and Genevieve Waite, claim she's lying?
Well, first off, maybe it's because I'm surprised by Michelle's denials. This is a woman who has discussed her own father being attracted to her -- as she put it, she was "his type". As a result, she lived a wild bohemian lifestyle atypical of Southern California during her youth. I'm sure Mackenzie lied and deceived over the years -- what addict doesn't, including her father? But you would think she would recognize the possibility of the situation. Maybe it's denial.
As far as Genevieve Waite, her daughter with John (Bijou) filed for emancipation from her parents at 14, went into rehab a couple of times while modeling, and turned into a Scientologist, one of the creepiest of the creepy. You don't think something about that seems a little off? Like maybe there were more family troubles other than just drug addiction?
Second, I remember when Mackenzie joined the reformed Mamas & Papas. John and Denny Doherty were there. Cass Elliot was dead and replaced by Spanky MacFarland (from 60's stars "Spanky and Our Gang"). And Mackenzie was playing Michelle's part. I remember thinking at the time, in response to some joke that John made, about her taking on all of her stepmather's roles, that he was implying that he was sleeping with her. But I thought that was so creepy that he was clearly joking.
But now...
Third, we know that John had incredible problems with substance abuse. My favorite story about this was John's story of writing "Me and My Uncle", the song for which he became widely known from its constant performances by the Grateful Dead (66 performances between 1966 and 1995!). John started getting royalty checks for the song, which first appeared on a Judy Collins live album, but he hadn't written it and told Judy so. Then she reminded him about a night out with her and a couple of other young musicians named Stephen Stills and Neil Young (pre-Buffalo Springfield) in Arizona after Judy's concert. As they got drunker and drunker, they were taping themselves on a cassette recorder. During the night, among other song fragments that were composed, John came up with an entire song, preserved by the tape. Judy took the song and started performing it -- unbeknownst to John, who couldn't really remember much about the evening period, let alone about the song.
come on, if you could get so blotto that you couldn't remember anything about writing a song that became a classic, is it hard to believe that you could get drunk/high enough to lose your inhibitions about incest? Especially with a beautiful and talented daughter who was as much of a junkie as you were?
If there is any part of the story that I have doubts about, it's about Mackenzie's own reactions. I'm willing to believe her story that her father initiated their sex. But I have a hard time picturing Mackenzie as anything but an enthusiastic participant over the life of the relationship. After all, her father had dumped her, her mother and her brother when they were just kids to take off with the teenaged Michelle. In some way, this had to feel to her like she was winning him back. I know her feelings weren't quite that simple, but look at the lengths to which she would have had to go over the years to keep such a relationship a secret from everyone, including her husband at the time. Apparently the only person she told was her half-sister Chynna (John & Michelle's daughter) back in 1997, which was about 10 years after she broke off the incest.
Anyway, nothing about this seems unlikely to me. I do feel sorry for Mackenzie, because she was such a talented actress (unlike her stepmother Michelle, who did some of the worst bombs ever), and it's a shame that she wasted her most productive years with so many personal issues, from the incest to the drug addiction. On the one hand, she has so much more than most people that she has no grounds to complain, from the starring role in a classic movie (American Graffiti) as a young teen to the hit TV shows ... on the other hand, I appreciate that she probably feels that she has to be open about her past to make sense of her future (and she's only turning 50, so it's not like she doesn't have years of possible achievement in front of her).
Thursday, September 24, 2009
Cancellara wins again
Fabian Cancellara has proven to be the reigning king of the time trial. He's not so bad outside of the time trial either.
Cancellara, riding for Switzerland instead of Saxo Bank (the former CSC) today blew out the rest of the world cyclists in the World Championships Time Trial, defeating his teammate Gustav Larsson, riding for Sweden, by 1:27. Germany's Tony Martin was third, 2:30 behind. American Tom Zirbel was fourth, 2:46 behind. Zirbel is joining Garmin-Slipstream next year, and it will be interesting to see how he does in a full international season.
Not competing were the Astana pair who were the closest competitors to the Saxo Bank duo in last year's Beijing Olympics: American Levi Leipheimer and Spaniard Alberto Contador. Of course, with Leipheimer's recovery from his wrist break and Contador's uncertain status for next year, their absence comes as no surprise.
Cancellara also was the bronze medalist in the men's road race in the Beijing Olympics. We'll see if he has a double left in him here.
In the women's time trial, American Kristin Armstrong won again, also matching her Beijing Olympics gold, and then confirmed her retirement after the women's road race. She doesn't intend to match Jeanne Longo in staying in the sport until age 50. Considering the limited sponsorship payments even to the top women, that's easy to understand.
More interestingly, UCI voted to ban the use of race radios, despite the fact that the big teams swear by them. Honestly, I think most of the European opposition to race radios is that they are seen as an American innovation (which they were, courtesy of Team Motorola, and they became an essential after former Motorola rider -- and American rider -- Lance Armstrong became the poster boy for them), and no one in Europe seems to be too happy about the presence of three American teams (plus a British team) in the top tier of cycling next year.
However, considering that UCI doesn't have control over the three Grand Tours, we'll see what happens from here. Will the Grand Tours drop the radios after the huge fight over them at the Tour de France this year (which the teams won)?
Cancellara, riding for Switzerland instead of Saxo Bank (the former CSC) today blew out the rest of the world cyclists in the World Championships Time Trial, defeating his teammate Gustav Larsson, riding for Sweden, by 1:27. Germany's Tony Martin was third, 2:30 behind. American Tom Zirbel was fourth, 2:46 behind. Zirbel is joining Garmin-Slipstream next year, and it will be interesting to see how he does in a full international season.
Not competing were the Astana pair who were the closest competitors to the Saxo Bank duo in last year's Beijing Olympics: American Levi Leipheimer and Spaniard Alberto Contador. Of course, with Leipheimer's recovery from his wrist break and Contador's uncertain status for next year, their absence comes as no surprise.
Cancellara also was the bronze medalist in the men's road race in the Beijing Olympics. We'll see if he has a double left in him here.
In the women's time trial, American Kristin Armstrong won again, also matching her Beijing Olympics gold, and then confirmed her retirement after the women's road race. She doesn't intend to match Jeanne Longo in staying in the sport until age 50. Considering the limited sponsorship payments even to the top women, that's easy to understand.
More interestingly, UCI voted to ban the use of race radios, despite the fact that the big teams swear by them. Honestly, I think most of the European opposition to race radios is that they are seen as an American innovation (which they were, courtesy of Team Motorola, and they became an essential after former Motorola rider -- and American rider -- Lance Armstrong became the poster boy for them), and no one in Europe seems to be too happy about the presence of three American teams (plus a British team) in the top tier of cycling next year.
However, considering that UCI doesn't have control over the three Grand Tours, we'll see what happens from here. Will the Grand Tours drop the radios after the huge fight over them at the Tour de France this year (which the teams won)?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)