The Bottom Line

Have you ever really thought about the music we've listened to over the years? Sure, we know the lyrics by heart, we know the tune, and the artists, as we've heard the same songs for decades now. But have we really ever heard the songs, and not merely listened to them?

This whole thought came from an inspiration I received while working the other day. I was the only one working in the house at the time, and I was in a back room. I had found an old Zenith Console Stereo buried under a pile of stuff. It took a while to clean it off, but what I had found was a well preserved music machine. I fired it up, and to my surprise, it worked quite well. We had found about 75 45 rpm singles a few days beforehand, and looking through them I found a Beatles recording from the mid-70's. Hearing that song again brought back memories of listening to tinny transistor radio speakers, cheap stereo sets, and even televisions playing the same tune. But there was something different here, it was the bass line Paul McCartney was laying down. The higher quality sound system had picked up the bass and brought it into the song where it belonged. It was magical! Here I was with this 30 or 40 year old machine, being reintroduced to a song I thought I knew so well!

I was enthralled by McCartney's ability. Instead of just thumping the strings, he wove an intricate line of rhythm into a familiar tune. His talent at this left me amazed!
So that's the reason for this post; I salute the unsung hero's of the Rock and Roll world...the bass players! They play with a skill and talent that largely goes unrecognized. They are merely second fiddle to the singer, and lead guitarist, yet to listen to them, they could carry the show on their own!

Looking into a few more tunes, I found another player with a skill that left me in awe. Sarah Lee (yes that's her real name) is a female bass player that you might have seen in the B-52's "Love Shack" video. (She was the woman in the bath tub). Listening to her riffs in that song with my new found appreciation of music, I was blown away at how she filled the song out with her ability, and thinking how flat it would have been without her skills. What awesome talent!

And so here's to you bass players everywhere. Keeping the music alive with your talent, and giving me a whole new appreciation of real musicianship!

"Shut Up And Drive!"

Like many of the fans across the nation, I've been following NASCAR's "secret fine" debacle, where unknown drivers were fined for unknown comments made, criticizing it's leadership. The web has been ripe with rumors of who was involved for speaking their minds. So far, we are led to believe that there were two; Denny Hamlin, and Ryan Newman. Of course none of this is official, it's all supposed to be a secret, so as not to let the news media replay the offending interviews. NASCAR has been tight lipped, merely saying the drivers were fined for "actions or comments damaging to the sport".

A quick glance at the less than optimal attendance at last Sunday's Indy race shows that the real damage to NASCAR's image is self-induced. Let's face it, calling the sport "stock car racing" is a misnomer. The cars are no more stock than a Formula One car. They are purpose-built from the ground up, with only a few decals to make them seem like an ordinary car. The cost of this, and all the other related expenses has driven ticket prices sky high. As the economy declines, fewer people have the kind of disposable income to attend the races.

But worse yet, are the plethora of rules forced upon the teams, owners, and drivers. A car 2" too high? Fine them! Too fast on pit road?
Fine them! I thought this was supposed to be racing!

When the moonshiners in the 1940's got together to see who had the fastest car, they would race on small dirt tracks. It was not unusual to see the cars driven to the track, raced, and driven home again. Mechanics turned ordinary cars into fast machines that hauled the 'shine when they weren't racing. These folks were true Rebels, running from the law one day, and running wide open on the track the next. That Rebel attitude is what started NASCAR in the first place, but over the years, things have changed. Now the rulebook is filled with things that aren't allowed, things that are mandated, and nearly every infraction carries some sort of punishment. Fans don't like rules, they pay huge amounts of money to attend the races, and want to see what they've always seen: their favorite driver tearing around the track and speaking his mind off the track. They want the sport to be like it was when it first began. Tempers, taunts, and the occasional fist fight are all ingredients to a day of racing. Take this away, and it lessens what fans came to see. They then respond by not attending the races.

NASCAR sees the sport as entertainment, not as racing. That's the key here; entertain the fans, sell them overpriced (official NASCAR) T-shirts, and make as much money as possible. Much like the WWF controversy (where the World Wrestling Federation was forced to become the WWE, or World Wrestling Entertainment) NASCAR has lost all sorts of credibility as of late.

And that brings us back to the beginning of this blog; the secret fines for speaking out about an injustice real or perceived. The heavy hand of the sanctioning body crushes the naysayers! I grew up in the 1950's, when every conversation seemed to turn to the Cold War. We believed that the Russians were somehow going to invade us, and take away all our freedoms. Secret police would take us away for speaking out against them, and we'd never be seen again! I think this image is planted in the minds of fans to this day. No free speech, no Liberty.

If this behavior is to be considered the rule NASCAR, then please stop with the singing of the National Anthem, and having the military jets fly overhead. For we, as a sport, have indeed lost our freedom!

"Grand Theft.........Peotone!"

OK, I'll admit I'm a gamer, I've been one since computers morphed into the machines we have today. We went from copies of "Pac-Man" to games far beyond what we might have imagined way back when.

However, back then, the gamer was always "The Victim". From being chased by ghosts in Pac-Man, and Ms Pac-Man, and others, your character was always the one in trouble.

Enter the "Grand Theft Auto" era. In these games, you played the street savvy gangster, who would take anything from anyone.

This pretty much defines the current state of things pertaining to the eternal white elephant known as the Peotone Airport.

This scheme is like a video game zombie; it doesn't die, but merely keeps coming after you. Residents of Eastern Will County have been threatened with this abomination for over 50 years now.

Currently, led by Jesse Jackson Jr., the scheme is starting to reflect the "Grand Theft Auto" franchise. They see nothing wrong with taking homes and farms that have been in families for generations. The entire region subsists on agriculture, but to airport supporters, it's merely vacant land. Who cares if it provides a living for it's owners? Who cares if it brings grief to thousands of people surrounding the airport site? The promoters are looking to profit from this idea, while the people who are putting up the money are left holding the bag. No doubt Jackson and his ilk will pocket the money and slink away, looking for another victim.

And, much like GTA, they are using eminent domain threats to "carjack" peoples homes. They quote laws that really don't apply in order to strip away the rights and real estate of the people. Much like the last lines of a popular limerick "It wasn't the almighty that lifted her nighty, It was Roger the lodger, by god!", they base their thefts on untruths and innuendos. Until there is approval of this airport, the state (and assorted thugs) cannot legally take anything.

All this amounts to is simply carjacking. taking what doesn't belong to you, because you can use fear and threats to get it.

Fear seems to be a big thing in politics these days, scare people enough and they'll do your bidding.

Where is Duke Nukem when we need him??

The Decline of Modern Society

I recently saw that the Supreme Court struck down Chicago's ban on handguns. I found the very idea disturbing. That we as a nation, cower in our homes with guns drawn, while the criminals roam the streets is just wrong. This isn't the Dark Ages, where Kings erected castles to protect the citizens. This is supposed to be a civilized society! Yet we as a people continue to buy handguns to protect ourselves from unknown attackers. Sadly, it's a practice that has taken many bad turns.

For example, let's take the case of John Tabutt of Winter Springs Florida. MR. Tabutt and live in girlfriend Nancy Dinsmore were to be married the next day, when Tabutt heard noises to make him think there was an intruder in his home. He assumed that Dinsmore was still sleeping beside him, and upon seeing a shadowy figure in the hall, fired a shot at it. It turns out it was Dinsmore, and she was pronounced dead at the scene. Was this an intelligent use of a weapon? Should MR. Tabutt even have had a weapon? We'll never know what MS. Dinsmore was doing out of bed, but she gave her life for it!

This is just one in a litany of handgun deaths, all committed by ordinary citizens who react without thinking of the consequences. Do we really need to continue this trend?

Another example is the story of 69 year old former Marine Charles Clements of University Park Illinois, who had previously won an award for "The Best Kept Lawn in a Chicago Suburb". MR. Clements had words with 23 year old Joshua Funches when Funches allowed his dog to urinate on Clement's lawn. According to the news story, Clements pulled a gun, and pointed it at Funches. Funches is reported to have said "Next time you pull out a pistol, why don't you use it?" Funches never lived to hear the answer. He was shot dead on the beautifully kept front lawn.

And so I have to ask the question; "WHY"? What has changed in society so much in the past 50 years that we're now a nation of gunslingers? Are we educated enough in the use of weapons to use them? Apparently not.

America has seen a change in the last 50 years that frightens me. We no longer punish our criminals, and we allow gangs to rule the streets. People hide in their homes, afraid a stray bullet will end their life. Why is this tolerated? Why doesn't society do something about it's decline? Instead of facing down the problem, we sit behind locked doors with guns drawn.

Our parents, and grandparents didn't live like this. Why should we? Are we as a people afraid to take away the right of criminals to commit crimes?

Think back to our younger years, when there was no "Gangsta Rap", no drive by shootings, and no corner drug dealers. What a bucolic time that was!

I leave you with this thought:

Imagine transposing today's reality on to 1950's TV. I'll set the scene up for you:

We open with the Cleaver family gathered around Ward, who is seen holding a smoking 9mm Glock pistol. Off to the right, we see a lifeless body.

Wally: "Gee Beav, I guess dad was really sore at Eddy"

Beaver: "I guess so Wally, he plugged him real good!"

June: "Oh Ward, now I have to clean that up!"

This is our society today, and it's time to fix it!

New Invention Uses no Common Sense!

In today's world, we are seeing more and more wireless devices. What got me to thinking about this, was another ad for Amazon's Kindle E-Book reader. What an amazing device. You can charge it's internal batteries, and read from it! Am I missing something here? You buy an expensive machine to read a book?

Seems to me we have a portable reader, and in fact, we've had it for some time now. It uses no power, and can be read in any light, even sunlight. What is it?? It's called a friggin' book! Why in hell's name would an intelligent person go out and buy a device to read a book on? Worse yet, have to buy the book as well?

I know we all love high tech items, like our huge flat-screen TV's, sat-nav systems in our cars and such, but why spend money to replace the common book?

Is it just because we want to be different, or show how we're too hip to believe? Or are we, like P.T. Barnum once said, one of those suckers born every minute?

Perhaps it's just me, finally getting sensible in my waning years. I love to read, and love the feel of a book in my hands, and the thrill of turning the page to continue the story. Simple pleasures, I know, but they're mine alone.

It just seems that in our rush to make everything complicated in order to make more money, that we've forgotten the simple pleasure of curling up with a good book. No plugging-in, no downloading, and no dead batteries. What a nice, clean energy efficient concept!

I worry that the next big thing to come along will be a rechargeable child's ball to play with. and when that day comes....I quit!

New Invention Uses no Common Sense!

In today's world, we are seeing more and more wireless devices. What got me to thinking about this, was another ad for Amazon's Kindle E-Book reader. What an amazing device. You can charge it's internal batteries, and read from it! Am I missing something here? You buy an expensive machine to read a book?

Seems to me we have a portable reader, and in fact, we've had it for some time now. It uses no power, and can be read in any light, even sunlight. What is it?? It's called a friggin' book! Why in hell's name would an intelligent person go out and buy a device to read a book on? Worse yet, have to buy the book as well?

I know we all love high tech items, like our huge flat-screen TV's, sat-nav systems in our cars and such, but why spend money to replace the common book?

Is it just because we want to be different, or show how we're too hip to believe? Or are we, like P.T. Barnum once said, one of those suckers born every minute?

Perhaps it's just me, finally getting sensible in my waning years. I love to read, and love the feel of a book in my hands, and the thrill of turning the page to continue the story. Simple pleasures, I know, but they're mine alone.

It just seems that in our rush to make everything complicated in order to make more money, that we've forgotten the simple pleasure of curling up with a good book. No plugging-in, no downloading, and no dead batteries. What a nice, clean energy efficient concept!

I worry that the next big thing to come along will be a rechargeable child's ball to play with. when that day comes....I quit!

A War of Words

Our English language is peppered with a myriad of words that can be used in more than one way, or perverted to mean something other than their true meaning.
I got to thinking about this after incessant news shows over the past decade mentioned the "War in Iraq". A quick look at a dictionary shows that the word "war" means "an open armed conflict, as between nations". I wonder why this is called a war at all? There was no formal declaration of war, no hostilities leading up to a war, just rumors of chemical weapons (which didn't exist). Could this just be a misuse of the word? Since there were no threats, nor previous hostilities, shouldn't we call this an invasion? After all, that's what it was. We Americans and allies invaded the sovereign state of Iraq without provocation. Shortly thereafter, we were treated to images from "embedded" news crews and reporters showing how the so called "war" was going. It's sad that no one told the Iraqis, because they didn't seem to know we were at war. We devastated the infrastructure if this sovereign land, and killed tens of thousands of it's citizens with air strikes. Soon after we saw the "Mission Accomplished Photo Op" for the president. It's good to be at war apparently.
For the next decade, and possibly into the far future, we will remain at "war". Not with the Iraqi government, but with the citizens themselves.

And here comes the next bastardization of a now common word: "Insurgents". We hear about attacks on our troops by insurgents, and yet we've played the role more than once as a nation.
When Northern troops invaded the South during the War of Northern Aggression, or as some call it, the Civil War, and our Rebel troops fought back, shouldn't we have been called insurgents? We had our own government after succession, our own constitution, leaders, and army. We were invaded by the North, and defended our new nation. We were called "the enemy". Now let me get this straight here, who invaded who?
And we're the enemy? Don't think so!

We've also seen insurgency in the West in the 1800's. Native Americans who didn't succumb to the invasion of the White Man, were either slaughtered, or taken off their tribal land and put into reservations. Centuries of history, and native culture were stripped from them in order to stop this insurgency. Once again, whose land was it?

Let's go back even further, to the Revolutionary War, where we fought off the British troops in order to form our nation. Weren't we the insurgents in this instance? No, thanks to the flexibility of the English language, we were "Freedom Fighters", defenders of our ideals. So I have to ask, shouldn't that very same phrase apply to our Native Americans, our Southern ancestors, and yes, even the people of Iraq?