A turn for the worst

Today's post involves the infamous No Turn on Red sign. You could say that this topic "grinds my gears," if you were a devout fan of Family Guy. Now, I don't know if this law applies where you, dear reader, reside; I can only hope that it does not. Where I live, it has been on the books for many years. Here's a bit of history, for those either unfamiliar with this law, or really, seriously bored:

When the law was introduced, drivers were informed that right-hand turns would be permitted during a red light, as long as one came to a complete stop at the intersection, and confirmed that it was safe to proceed. Sounds logical enough. How often do you reach an intersection and find that there is no traffic approaching perpendicular to your vehicle from the left? Quite often, I would wager. This new law was a refreshing bit of legislation! No longer would we have to helplessly and needlessly wait at an intersection for the light to allow us to continue; we could get on with our lives and use our common sense to decide whether or not it was safe to make a turn while the light was red. Fuel and time would be saved, and drivers could take pride in knowing that the powers that be trusted them with the act of simple thought followed by simple action.

Therein lies part of the problem. As Voltaire put it, "Le sens commun n'est pas si commun." Or, "Common sense is not so common." Apparently, some of us - maybe those same ones who drive with their knees while holding the Blackberry in one hand and the Egg McMuffin in the other (you know who you are) - were not making stellar decisions about the level of safety in their impending turns. I say this with just a hint of sarcasm, because I feel that there may be a darker, more diabolical reason for the sudden attachment of the No Turn on Red signs to poles on a staggering and illogical number of intersections. Do you wonder what the overall cost might be for manufacturing and installing what must be millions of those signs? Do you wonder who reaps the profit? Do you wonder whose palms got the grease?

I could delve more deeply into this issue, but I'll just let you gnaw on it. Something to consider: it would likely have been cheaper for the law to say that you CAN'T turn on red (just like before), unless there's a sign saying that you CAN. However, that would have reduced the profit somebody is making on all of those lovely signs and their installation. If you live in an area with these signs, start paying attention to how many intersections they occupy. Here's the kicker - the thing that really irritates me: take note of how many of those intersections have perfectly clear lines of sight in all directions, making it absolutely simple to see whether or not a turn is going to be safe. Then, ask yourself whether you're too stupid to decide on whether to turn or not. If you feel that you might not be intelligent enough to make that call, then please, please, please hand in your voter registration card and driver's license immediately, take public transportation, and consider wearing a helmet when you watch television.

Car questions that make me wonder

Okay, I'm guessing not many people ponder this one, but somebody has to do it. Next time you're driving someplace, take note of which vehicles around you have rear windshield wipers. You may become as puzzled as me afterward. For example, many cars on the road today have very steeply-sloped front and rear windshields - it's more aerodynamic, I reckon. My car's rear windshield is sloped at about 45 degrees. Now, the majority of those vehicles do not have rear wipers. Most SUV's seem to have them. Today, I spotted a brand new Ford Flex in front of me. Boxy little bugger. The rear windshield was maybe a foot or so in height, and - no exaggeration here - almost completely vertical. Darned if there wasn't a cute little mini-wiper back there. Rain and snow would have to be rather determined - and fall horizontally - to stick to that window. Meanwhile, how many times did you have to remove snow, slush, or other unwanted material from your rear windshield by hand because your car doesn't have a rear wiper? The bigger question may be, "Why don't ALL vehicles come with them?"

Which kind of ties into another area of vehicular ponderment of mine: Why do you suppose that many car makers feel the need to place reflectors and lights on car bumpers? Hmmm, because it's an efficient place to put them? Um, because people like them there? Er, government mandate? Nope (loud buzzing sound) - the answer we were looking for is "Because it makes repairing your car's bumper way more expensive when it gets bumped by something from which it's supposed to protect your car and it's lights and reflectors." We should all start boycotting vehicles that blatantly do things to jack up maintenance and repair costs, and let the auto makers know why, too. Now that they're scrambling to get us to start buying their products again, maybe they'll actually listen.

What about the front and back effects?

Well, this is a brief post that I just had to write. No doubt, we all enjoy being bombarded by the multitude of television commercials for drugs - that's a given. I have followed their polite suggestions repeatedly, "asking my doctor" if such-and-such is right for me. Even though they occasionally don't tell us what the darned drug is designed to do, it doesn't hurt to check with the old M.D. and see if that little pill might be the answer to my latest woes. My doctor no longer takes my calls. Maybe there's a pill for that.

Anyway, the latest drug commercial to tickle my fancy is for... well, I honestly have no recollection of that. What got my attention was the guy hawking the drug, as he spouted off the list of potential side effects. Yes, you know those disclaimers -- where they warn you that taking their drug to help with your seasonal allergies may cause nosebleeds, headaches, congestion, severe allergic reactions, or spontaneous combustion. Well, in this one particular commercial, the announcer calmly and matter-of-factly states, "If you're allergic to {whatever the hell the drug is called}, don't take it." Are you kidding me? Have we reached the point where we have to be warned not to keep ingesting something to which we're allergic? Or, is that just the coming trend in disclaimers? "Well, we told you not to take it if it makes you spontaneously combust...." I think I'm becoming allergic to these commercials. Hey, Doc, can you prescribe a pill for that?

Post Veep Debate Observations

Sarah Palin, "God love 'er," has demonstrated that she is a bobblehead (albeit a pretty one, you betcha) who is clearly ill-equipped to be second in command of our country. Her winking, folksy, "I'll answer your questions any way I want," uninformed performance left little doubt that she does not have the goods to be anything more than governmental eye-candy. Despite the die-hard Republican supporters' chants that she aced the debate and is two-legged mannah from heaven above, the facts speak for themselves. The only reason that she wasn't left floating in a pool of humiliation at the end of that debate was because Joe Biden bit his tongue for a few hours in order to avoid coming off as a big, bad bully. Had his opponent been anyone else - male or female - he would have been given the green light to expose the ignorance revealed in their responses (or lack thereof) to the questions asked by the moderator.

Let's just cut to the chase: Sarah Palin was not selected for her extensive experience or expertise. She was chosen for two reasons only. First, she exudes the "regular folk" charm and appeal that middle America seems to find soothing (by golly, we don't like it when our leaders remind us that they're smarter than us), and she does it in a package that is easy to look at. Second, she offered the Republican party a relative lock on the Evangelical vote, which is nothing short of huge. What remains to be seen at this point is whether loyalty to religious affiliation and/or party trumps common sense. If history is any indicator (and, sadly, it is), I won't be remotely surprised to see a gun-totin', Bible-thumpin', abortion-bannin' Barbie elected to the second highest office in our once-great nation.

She'll be changin' what she doesn't want people lookin' back on, drill-baby-drillin' the daylights out of our sensitive and already-damaged ecosystem for oil that the country won't benefit from for ten years, takin' target practice from Air Force 2 on whichever animals haven't been rendered extinct yet ("sorry, Ms. Vice President - there just aren't any polar bears left to plink off with your high-powered rifle"), honoring women's rights by forbidding them from aborting the baby forming inside of them as a result of incestuous rape, and stomping some more on the Constitution by having the VP given more authority and power. Be careful what you wish for, America. Be very, very careful.

Palin-drone, violence in media, and more

Just a few random thoughts that whacked me in the noggin today. First, the whiny and now seemingly invisible Sarah Palin. People, and even the press, seem to finally be tiring of the McCain camp's unmitigated ballsy refusal to let her talk to the media or provide anything more substantive than fluffy video and photo ops of her visits with foreign dignitaries. I'm personally flummoxed by her cocky claims of foreign policy experience, citing the fact that she can "see Russia from an island in Alaska." I suppose I'm qualified to be an astronaut, because I can see the moon from my back yard. I also have foreign trade experience - I've bought several imported cars, and all of my electronics are from overseas, too. I've even watched European soccer. Ridiculous, you say? Yeah, that's pretty much my point. If you choose to compete for the 2nd highest job in the United States of America, you had damned well better be ready, willing, and - dare I say it - able to answer questions about your views, experience, and the red-flocked wallpaper you just had to have in your office as part of an alleged $50,000 makeover. Face it, none of us are without flaws, eccentricities, or skeletons in our little closets. It's not that we have those things - it's how we deal with them and explain them to the good people who will be voting for us. (Yes, even those simple sheep-like saps who just had to run out and buy glasses, shoes, and outfits just like Sarah's.) Well, anyone who has witnessed her pathetic attempts at making sense during her recent interviews can understand why the McCain campaign is trying to keep her under lock and key. I don't know at this point whether she's intelligent or just a lucky, determined pit bull, but I do know that she's potentially a heartbeat away from being in control of our nation. This fact leaves me feeling rather uncomfortable - how about you? On an unrelated note, I haven't yet heard anyone talking about how the candidates seem to be abandoning the letter "g" at the end of words, but I know the point will be addressed soon enough. They're bein' extra folksy when they're discussin' those talkin' points, you get my meanin'? You betcha! Okay, enough about politics.

On to another topic near and dear to me: The effects of violence in our mass media on the general population's proclivity toward violent acts. Here's the thing that occurred to me a few moments ago: Ask the studios why they keep producing uber-violent, disgusting scenes of grotesque murder in movies, tv, and video games. They'll unabashedly admit that they do it because people like to buy and watch the stuff. Bully for people, and bully for the studios. So, following that logic, how about prostitution, then? It's been around for oh, about -- forever. Why? Because, quite simply, men like sex, and women like shiny things. On one hand, it's fine selling entertainment that has been proven (though heavily debated) to have a causal relationship with increasing a person's tendency to act violently. On the other hand, we have a business exchange where a woman voluntarily engages in sexual acts in return for money. Yet, only one of these business practices is deemed wrong, dangerous, and illegal. Am I being too black and white, or am I just guilty of making a bit of sense? There's a not-so-famous quote that says, "Why is there no crime in Germany? Because it's illegal." Why is there a problem with all of the gratuitous violence in our television shows, movies, and video games? Because it encourages violent behavior, desensitizes people to violent acts, and glorifies plain old bad behavior. What's the worst that could happen if the studios agreed to try backing off the slaughter-fest for, say, 12 months? Other than a significant drop in profit until the writers figured out a way to replace easy, lazy scriptwriting with intelligent and thought-provoking works, I can't see a downside, can you? And if it failed to effect a reduction in violent crime, then they could just start firing up the cannons once again.

One final thought: I'm constantly noticing people - intelligent ones - using the phrase, "I could care less" to describe their disinterest in something: Think about it!!! If you COULD care less, that means you care at least a little bit, doesn't it? You really want to say, "I could NOT care less," which more accurately indicates one's lack of concern. Did I really need to clarify this? Sadly, yes. And let's not forget the popular "unchartered territory" reference. I actually heard John McCain use that one in the first presidential debate. Wrong-o. It's actually "uncharted" territory, as in territory that no one has documented yet (like, on a chart), therefore it's kind of an unknown. Unchartered territory, on the other hand, might refer to the Siberian front, or some other such place where you'd have difficulty finding a chartered group tour at your local travel agent. And please, can someone explain to me why the leader of the free world for the past eight years, with all of his expert advisors and coaches, cannot seem to pronounce the word "nuclear" to save his life? C'mon, W - say "New," then say "Clear," and then say 'em together real fast-like. Heh-heh-heh. How that man has the key to the big red button machine is just uncular (read: unclear) to me.

Happy Birthday to you!

I apologize if this happens to offend some of you, but since that declaration is based upon the assumption that anyone will actually read this, it's pretty much an empty apology. My rant today involves the institution of grown adults making a big deal out of their birthdays. Look, I'm a nice guy. I hold the door for total strangers, I donate to worthy causes, I try to help others where possible, and I generally keep my bad habits to myself. So, it's not like I am a master of self-loathing or anything. However, I see no earthly reason to consider the day that I was born to be a particularly spectacular and momentous occasion, worthy of celebration and festivities. Let's face it, people - we don't really have much to do with this event, do we? If you're religious, then you attribute the manifestation of your creation and entry into the world to your parents (be they mortal creatures or laboratory equipment) and whichever deity works best for you. At any rate, our sole involvement in the process is, well... showing up. Yowser, what a remarkable feat. We get pushed out or carved out of our cozy little womb away from home, and this becomes the quintessential crowning achievement of our lifetime? Please.

Now, there are some folks who not only take great pride in that day, but feel the need to remind everyone they know about it annually. How many people do you know who use their birthday as part of their email address? Could they perhaps find a way to be more egocentric? "Hey, here's a constant reminder of when you need to make a big deal out of a random day on the calendar, and buy me stuff." Or, how about people who either covertly or overtly slip mention of the "big day" into casual conversation? "I can't believe I'm going to be 37 on Friday!" I personally know a few people who have elevated this to an art form of sorts. The challenge I've created is trying to predict when and how they'll do it. I know it's coming, but - darn it - they still surprise me with their creativity sometimes.

Don't get me wrong, now - I believe that we're all special. I also believe that we have much to celebrate about ourselves and each other (with certain obvious exceptions, of course - Charles Manson comes to mind). Still, it seems to me that most, if not all of us, have memories of specific days in our lives that are worthy of honoring each year. I don't know, let's say, that first hole in one ever, or the day we blasted our best friend in the face with a shotgun while hunting for stuff that doesn't even remotely resemble a human face. Maybe the day we lost our virginity, or the day we helped someone else to lose theirs. Or maybe a day when we actually did something meaningful and useful, like the one when we helped build a house for a homeless family, or created a few thousand homeless families by invading an oil-rich country under false pretenses. You get the idea. Life is full of potential celebrations.

In my particular case, I have always downplayed my birthday, for reasons I can't really explain any better than I have in the preceding paragraphs. I absolutely never mention it to anyone when it is nearing, and when someone says, "Hey, it's your birthday on Friday, huh?", my reply is usually something like, "Yep. Hey, did you see that story on 60 Minutes last night...?" My idea of a nice birthday celebration is when a friend or loved one calls me up and says, "Hey, let's go to dinner to celebrate your birthday." They don't even have to buy dinner for me; it's just nice to have an enjoyable dinner out with someone you like to be around, and if a birthday is the impetus for the dinner out, fine by me.

The day we individuals are born is simply not that important, in the big picture. It's not even that important in the small thumbnail picture. So, if you are completely hell-bent on believing that your birthday is very extraordinary, can you just trust your friends and loved ones to remember all on their own, without reminding them about it every year like it's news of an impending visit from a resurrected savior? Does it really mean as much when someone wishes you a happy birthday only after you conveniently reminded them that it was approaching, and on which specific day? (Well, I guess it does, if you're just after the material gain that birthdays are supposed to bring.) Just try keeping it to yourself one time. If everyone forgets, it either means that your birthday isn't quite as important to the rest of society as you assumed, or it means that you need some new friends. As for me, I'm off to celebrate the anniversary of my discovering that computers have generously given me carpal tunnel syndrome.

Awesome young band from the Isle of Man

I don't frequently get wowed by 20-year old three-piece bands. This is happily one of those rare occasions. The blues/rock band that's got my attention is called Back Door Slam. Their lead guitarist/vocalist is a 21-year-old phenom named Davey Knowles, and he can write, sing, and most definitely play beyond his years! I've caught their show twice so far, and have my tickets for their upcoming return engagement in Philly (March 25). At both prior shows (at the World Cafe Live), they received multiple standing ovations, and earned them. The crowd was impressed, and I'm pretty sure that this band will be getting major attention soon. Knowles has got this quiet confidence that you don't generally see in someone with his talent. No cockiness or arrogance, and it's truly a pleasure to watch him speak through his instrument, whether that instrument happens to be his Strat, an acoustic (which I dare say he sounds fantastic on), or the mandolin he picked up during an encore. His voice is strong, and will only continue to get better as he matures. There's also something special about the band's genuine appreciation and gratitude for the accolades they receive, and their joy in meeting with the fans after their shows. Whether Knowles' impending fame melts that away remains to be seen, but I'm enjoying watching him and his cohorts - Ross Doyle (drums) and Adam Jones (bass) - tear up the stage in the meantime. It's easy to overlook the talent that the other two band members bring to the stage while you stare transfixed at Davey in relative awe. They may be kids, but they've got the skills, and they're for real. Give them a listen!

Have a happy green New Year!

In today's headlines, we learned that the glorious ball dropped in Times Square to ring in the New Year was retrofitted to be a "green" energy saver. Oh, joy. Quoth the BBC News:

"The LEDs on the $1.1m (£550,000) New Year's Eve Ball that will descend on Monday will be able to create a kaleidoscope of colours and patterns on each of its 672 crystal triangular panels."

So, let's see... balance that 1.1 MILLION dollar retrofit against the half a gazillion dollars spent nationwide to launch pyrotechnics into the air for twenty or so minutes, so that we could say, "Oooooooh, ahhhhhhh," and wind up with a strained neck. Let's not forget the amount of pollution those fireworks needlessly belched into our ever-weakening atmosphere. Don't get me wrong - I love watching the beautiful displays as much as the next guy. Still, at some point we need to weigh the consequences of our selfish actions, don't we? You know - walk the walk? We cause needless pollution, scare the living crap out of countless pets, cause a goodly amount of injuries to amateur pyromaniacs (well, maybe that's one for the plus column....), and waste millions of dollars that could be spent to make the planet a slightly better place to live (or maybe feed some starving people).


Yeah, we're really saving some trees with that big ol' ball in NY city. I'm filled with pride - how 'bout you?

The lights ain't only bright on Broadway

A friend of mine had to return the iHome gadget that she received as a gift the other day. Why, you might ask? Because the LED display was so bright, that even on the dimmest setting, it kept her awake, illuminating the room enough to cast shadows. I though I was the only one becoming annoyed by this phenomenon, but apparently that is not the case. We are quietly being besieged by all manner of LED light pollution, and I, for one, am growing tired of it. Unfortunately, as tired as I am, I can't sleep!

I turn off the light in my bedroom, and I suddenly become aware of myriad light sources, most of which are truly unnecessary. OK, you've got your clock radio - that makes sense. But then, what's that little light glowing atop the space heater that's not even turned on. Do we really need a light telling us that something is merely plugged in? I can pretty much navigate my way through the house now in total darkness, thanks to the countless digital clocks and LED's that seem to be part of everything we buy now, just because they're cheap to add to a product. Most rooms in my house appear like dyslexic runways - I find myself saying, "OK, two steps to the left of the blue LED, then make a right up by the green digital clock, and two paces to the left of the flashing network router lights, another right. Dammit, we're not satisfied with turning our streets into nightless wonders (I could spot a quarter in the middle of the street at midnight, or have a frisbee catch at 3 am) - now we have to bring the light pollution into our homes! Enough, I say! There is a reason that the sun sets - it is part of the grand design. That's when we're supposed to be able to sleep. Is this too difficult a concept? Don't get me wrong - I'm a big fan of the Light Emitting Diode - I love 'em! Just give me a way to turn the little f'ers off!

The powers that be

Just finished watching Michael Moore's Sicko, and that's a pretty accurate description of how it made me feelo. Yes, I'm aware that Mr. Moore tends to "tailor" his footage a bit to suit his agenda, and that realities are sometimes exaggerated a bit to illustrate his points. That aside, the picture he painted of our health care system is nothing, if not demoralizing. The facts are the facts: Our medical insurers and caregivers are rewarded for finding ways to NOT treat us when we are most in need of treatment, and NOT to pay our claims for the treatment we need. Health care is one of the largest for-profit ventures in this country, and the bulk of people at the top are corrupt, as is the case with our present administration, unfortunately. The email that has been circulating around suggesting that we force our government representatives to depend on the same health care as the rest of us - well, I think they're on to something. Until the good citizens of the United States remember that it's supposed to be a government "OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people," and stop living in fear OF their government and BECAUSE of their government, our quality of life will continue to deteriorate, and that's just pathetic. We have a society of drones sucking down caffeinated beverages in order to stay awake, getting sicker from sleep deprivation, and then being denied adequate medical care. Bully for us - the richest nation in the free world, on its way to becoming a third-world nation.

But the real reason I sat down to write this was because I was considering the slight fender-bender I recently had on my way to work. It involved my car, a patch of icy road in the shape of a sharp 'S' under a railroad bridge, two guardrails, and me saying "Oh, shit." Now, I fortunately managed to avoid injuring anyone or even hitting any of the other cars in the vicinity, so overall I consider my first accident to be a minor one. Still, I am plagued by the realization that filing a claim with my insurance company might just be a huge mistake. I mean, I've been paying these people thousands upon thousands of dollars for years and years, with nary a claim ever filed, so I'd say it's safe to assume they have profited somewhat from our business relationship.

Only my car suffered damage, so all they would need to pay is whatever they convince their "recommended body repair facility" to accept for the job. It's probably less than I paid them this year alone to insure the car. Still, this is their excuse to increase my policy cost. So, in maybe a year, it will have cost me more in increased premiums than the cost of fixing the car's cosmetic damage at my own expense. In fact, when I pushed the underwriting staff for an answer, I was told that "the type of policy" I have has a threshold of $1050, beyond which my premiums get increased. You can't scratch a fender without causing a thousand dollars in repairs these days. So, car insurance is simply another means of extortion in this country.

When did it become ok for us to roll over and let our rights be trampled, all so that a handful of maniacally greed-filled sociopaths can garner yearly salaries that exceed the GNP of many thriving nations? I heard the other day that some big corporate exec just got a 67 million dollar holiday bonus. What the....?! What human being is deserving of that kind of money? Seriously, folks - did this guy cure any diseases or establish world peace? If history truly does repeat itself, I guess at some point the swelling ranks of poor folks will stage some sort of revolt.

I'm in no way suggesting a revolution, though I surely believe that one is inevitable if these conditions continue. All I'm saying is that we should start considering adding some Constitutional Amendments or something to begin reeling in the human refuse who are exploiting this country unabated and ignoring the needs of those they are sworn to serve. The fact that so many of us are literally counting the days until the Presidency changes hands -- well, the word "pathetic" pops into my mind yet again.

Condaleeza was quoted recently as saying that we haven't made any "permanent enemies." This, no doubt in response to people saying that most of the free world is slightly unhappy with our country's behavior of late. She's right, of course. We will eventually give enough money or weaponry to whomever we've pissed off to make them like us again. After the dust settles, it'll be the good ol' US of A that everyone looks up to as a beacon of hope and the best place to buy out profitable companies and real estate. Fills me with national pride - how 'bout you?

The lesser of two weevils

The title of this diatribe is the punchline of a bad joke about bugs. 'Nuff said. I'll be brief with this entry, because I'm sleepy. I just wanted to voice my consternation over the ever-increasing negative campaign ads being foisted upon us by the inspiring individuals running for public office this month. Please, someone, for the love of all that is good and decent - make them stop!

In case you're either incredibly dim or in some sort of semi-vegetative state, I'll explain just why more and more of our politicians are resorting to this disgraceful behavior in an effort to get elected to positions of power and prestige. Here's the secret that they don't want you to know: It's easier to sling mud at each other than to tell you why they'd be your best choice. Why commit to telling the voters how they plan to actually do something worthwhile, when they can just spend millions telling you that the other guy is a creep? Face it, they're pretty much all creeps. We know this. To paraphrase a famous quote, anyone who actively seeks election to public office should probably be prohibited from doing so. I'm in favor of passing a law that bans the use of negative attacks on opponents. If we're forced to watch commercial after commercial from these power-hungry jackasses, let's make them tell us what they've done so far, and what they promise to do once elected. I don't care if the other guy gave his wife a cushy government job. It doesn't matter if he gave no-bid contracts to his cronies - who wouldn't? And I don't care who he or she sleeps with - literally or figuratively speaking. If I went on a job interview and proceeded to tell the prospective employer why the other applicants were a bad choice.... well, you get the picture.

So, let's start a movement to put an end to this charade. Get the issues on the table, keep the trash talk on the basketball court, and let's elect the person with the best record and best promises. And if he or she doesn't keep those promises, let's fire them! Don't forget to vote - it doesn't really make any difference (ask Al Gore), but while we're deluding ourselves about global warming, WMD's, and our chances of ever being respected by the rest of the free world again, it's nice to think our vote matters.

Driving home a quick point

Yep, time for another brief rant about the state of the commute to and from work. Couldn't get out of my street for five minutes this morning, because two police cars decided to pull over a motorist and take up one of two lanes during the rush hour commute, as is their apparent penchant. In the one remaining open lane, the line of traffic simply ignored my ever-so-polite little turn-signal and pleading facial expressions. As I edged out in an attempt to gain access to the road, no one would stop or even slow down, even though less than 300 feet away loomed a rather obvious red light, and cars were already backing up. What has become of our society when people will no longer even consider relinquishing one car length in a gesture of humanity and simple civility? So, I did what any red-blooded American would do. I hit the gas, aimed straight for the taillights of one of the cars that had refused to let me in, and dared the next son of a bitch to hit me. No doubt, that driver cursed my very existence, and wished ill-will upon me. Good. That means, for at least a few seconds, they received karmic payback, if you will, for being an inconsiderate prick. Unfortunately, it probably didn't occur to them that I was not the asshole in the equation. Such is life.

Which brings me to a revelation which is also a melancholy sort of realization. The automatic transmission has helped ruin driving for those of us who are responsible, courteous motorists. Think about it - huge numbers of people who are rather incompetent behind the wheel to begin with would possibly avoid driving at all if they had to contend with a clutch and shifter. Car-pooling and public transportation use would likely increase. Yakking on hand-held cellular phones would definitely decrease. People would be forced to pay more attention to the road, and use both hands for their intended automotive purpose. Yep, let's go back to that ol' three-on-the-tree (crap, I am actually old enough to know what that is).

This blog kills 99.9% of all other useless blogs

We hear it every day. A mouthwash that kills 99.9% of the germs that cause bad breath. A toilet cleaner that kills 99.9% of the crud in your disgustingly grungy toilet bowl. (Hey, I'm no Mr. Clean, but if my toilet ever looked like the ones in those commercials, I'd throw it out and get a new one, and consider hiring someone to clean my toilet, due to my apparent incapacity to do so myself.) How about those hand sanitizers that kill 99.9% of the germs we sissies can't seem to survive being exposed to anymore (unfortunately, they don't tell you that we're so busy killing off the bad germs, we're also annihilating the good ones that help us fight a lot of illness). So, the burning question is this: Why can't we make a product that's 100% effective? Dammit, we get soooooooo close, time after time! One measly tenth of a percent! C'mon, guys, can't you try just a little harder?

It's even weirder than that one idiot dentist out of every ten who doesn't agree that some chewing gum helps prevent gingivitis. Or the one out of every ten Americans who still believe that George W. Bush isn't a megalomaniac with delusions of grandeur who is oblivious to the blight his administration has cast upon most of the world. But I digress.

We all know that the "99.9%" crap comes from a bunch of lawyers who advise their clients not to say "100%" in order to avoid unnecessary lawsuits. Can any of these companies prove their 99.9% claims? Has anyone asked them to do so? Maybe we should. I'd rather hear them say, "Our product kills a boatload of bad stuff in your mouth, so just use it, or you'll have lots of bad stuff in your mouth that you don't want in there." Then, of course, there'd probably be some lawyer out there who said, "Well, just how much bad stuff exactly does it kill? Inquiring minds want to know."

Studies have shown that all of this advertising nonsense is killing 99.9% of the brain cells we could be using to choose the best product for our needs, rather than the one that has the sexiest spokesmodel or slickest ad campaign. That said, I have to admit it - I love that gecko. Well, I'm 99.9% asleep now, so I'm going to bed.

Before I go, I just have a serious recommendation. Please check out www.freehugscampaign.org - here's a guy on a mission that is 100% worthwhile.

New study reveals that there are too many new studies

Seems like every day, someone manages to score a $100,000 grant to study the freakin' obvious and enlighten the masses with such shocking findings as (and these are actual examples):
"Exercise found to reduce anxiety and depression," or "Diet of high-fat foods contributes to obesity." Duh. So, how do I get me one of these grants? I've got a plethora of topics I'd like to investigate. For instance, I'd like to investigate the correlation between a person's propensity to dump his or her filthy ashtray contents out of their car window on a public street, and the likelihood that they are a self-absorbed, inconsiderate asshole in general. Or, how about a study to determine whether making a left-hand turn at an intersection with one hand on your cell phone and the other gently caressing an Egg McMuffin as you turn the wheel with your elbow has any impact on the chances of your spilling the half-caf mocha latte nestled in your lap, as you swerve to avoid the accident you just caused by cutting off the driver making a right from the other side of the intersection while shaving and watching a movie trailer on his Blackberry? Or what about this one: The connection between navigating the demilitarized zone that has become our daily commute to the office and the urge to trade in one's Subaru for a Sherman tank?

How many times have you uttered, "Jesus H. Crikey, I'm just tryin' to get to work, here, people!" as you've dodged imbecile after jackass, brake-slammed and skidded your way through the maze of semi-comatose, over-caffeinated cogs, begrudgingly motoring toward the big wheel they play some indescribably small part in turning each day? Really? So, you mean it's just me shouting that over and over? Oh, never mind, then.

Lest we forget, the word "automobile" comes from the Latin "auto" - meaning "by itself", and "mobile" - meaning "moving." This illustrates that we have no need to pay attention while operating these multi-ton ballistic missiles, as they can pretty much drive themselves. And what a waste of energy it would be to communicate the fact that a collection of cigarette butts, chewing gum, and anything else that you don't want and is small enough to fit into your ashtray is, in fact - according to a recent study - TRASH!! -- and therefore, inappropriate for deposit on local thoroughfares. Well, I'm off to go pee in my neighbor's swimming pool. Drive defensively.

ya feel lucky, punk? Well.... do ya?

Fresh off the looney press that documents my life, here's what just happened a few minutes ago. Since we had this unusually warm day in Philly today (it hit 80 degrees), I decided it would be fun to dust off the bike and take my inaugural Spring jaunt through the neighborhood streets. The wind was in my face up one street, at my back down the next. The quadriceps burned as I strained to stay in high gear up the relatively minor grade - man, am I outta shape. Anyhow, here's where it gets interesting:

I reached down for the brand new water bottle I had just minutes earlier washed and filled with Propel (yep, it's "how Gatorade does water" -- when they're not doing water with Gatorade mix in it). I took a few gulps, and dropped the bottle back into its holder, only I misjudged where the holder was, and the bottle bounced off the bike frame onto the ground. Well, from there, it took a bounce on its end, landed on its side, and went into a backspin of some sort. As I turned the bike around, figuring the bottle would find its home smack dab under the middle of a truck (Murphy's Law), I discovered yet another variation to Murphy's Law: An object dropped in the middle of the street will come to rest directly under the middle of the nearest parked truck, UNLESS THERE IS A STORM GUTTER ANYWHERE ON THE STREET. I searched under every parked car and truck, to no avail. The gutter was grinning at me, through its metal braces. Damn, I really thought that new water bottle and I were gonna be long-time buddies, too. I'm guessing if those odds had been applied to a lottery ticket, I'd be at least a thousandaire right now.

photo credit: jalexartis via photopin cc

Don't try this at home, and some other late-night ramblings

So, I'm watching tv the other night, and I see this potato chip commercial with a disclaimer on it warning the viewers not to try the crazy stunts being performed by professionals in the commercial. Yes, some people are that incredibly stupid, and yes, corporations are that worried about being sued by those very people. Meanwhile, the tv shows aired between all the commercials, the movies we watch, and countless video games depict heinous and grotesque scenes of murder and mayhem (and yes, stunts we probably shouldn't try ourselves), but you don't see any warnings there, do ya? Nothing like, "Shooting hookers in the face and stealing cars should only be attempted by professionals. Don't try these criminal acts yourself," or maybe, "Professional sluts on a closed course. Don't try these adulterous acts at home." I dunno, I'm just saying... Wouldn't you agree that if someone's dumb enough to try and imitate everything they see on tv, they kind of deserve whatever happens to them? It's survival of the fittest, not the dimmest, after all. And while we're on the subject of commercials, does anybody remember when you paid extra money to a cable company because you wanted to watch tv and movies without annoying commercials? Now you pay 100 bucks a month for the shows, and they hit you with more commercials than the non-cable stations. How stupid are we? These guys are making money from 9 different directions, and they keep raising prices because they pretty much have a monopoly. Makes me want to find a nice, shiny, wet road and drive my car sideways on it at high speed (in slow motion).

Okay, so here's another disturbing trend I'm noticing lately. If you're a fan of 24 (and who isn't), have you noticed how anyone who does anything admirable on that show gets tortured, maimed or killed? The old "no good deed goes unpunished" theory in action. More and more shows seem to be following this unwritten rule nowadays. Real life is now mirroring what's happening on screen. Be a hero, get shot in the throat. Help your fellow man, eat lead. Is it any wonder why studies have shown that people are increasingly less likely to take any form of action when they witness a potential crime? We're being programmed subtly to believe that being good Samaritans will only bring us misfortune. Nice. And, by the way, I'm still trying to figure out why Jack Bauer always sounds like he just ran up 32 flights of stairs when he talks. Must be the residual effect of being repeatedly tortured for being a good guy and saving the world.

Okay, my final midnight rant for the day. I'm in the supermarket the other day, and a young, slightly overweight, tattooed, 5 o'clock-shadowed, buzz-cut, 20-something macho dude is in the checkout line in front of me. He gingerly puts his 20 or so items on the conveyor belt, managing to spread them out sufficiently to take up the entire thing, when they could have easily taken up only a third of it. As he's rung up, he chats on his cell phone while pretending to make an attempt at bagging his groceries. He holds up the line while he fumbles for his debit card while still yakking to his friend on the phone. I'm thinking, "This kid is lacking basic manners," but I give him the benefit of the doubt. In the parking lot, I'm putting my groceries in the car and - lo and behold - there's Nimrod, a few cars over. An associate has apparently been baby-sitting his car while he shopped for cat food and frozen dinners. He loads his bags in the trunk, and instead of walking the 15 feet it would take to place his shopping cart in the little cart return area, he leaves his cart in the empty space next to his car. It waits patiently for the opportunity to ruin someone's otherwise pristine paint job. Dude, they have wheels on them. They roll. They're metal. Do the math, you moron. Mr. I'm-too-cool-to-give-a-shit hops back in his green Chevy sedan and tools out of the parking lot, on his way to making someone else's day just a little bit less pleasant. After placing Mr. Considerate's cart where it belongs, I retract the benefit of the doubt, shake my head, smile, and head home, just a little more convinced that choosing not to procreate was probably a good idea.

Penny for your thoughts...

I learned the other day that it costs the US Mint over 2 cents to crank out a penny. Now, I'm no mathematician, but that seems less than cost-effective. So why do we still make more of them? Rich folks (who generally make all the rules) have no use for pennies anymore. Joe Average is annoyed by them. Most people, I'm guessing, would no longer bother to bend over and pick one up, should they happen upon it on the street. I'll go so far as to speculate that a homeless person living in a cardboard box would turn down an offer of pennies. How many of us have a coffee can - or perhaps some larger container - taking up space in our home, chock full o' pennies, that we just wish would go away. Even most banks don't want them - less and less banks are willing to count change these days, and when it comes to pennies, I can't blame them. Nobody likes 'em, with the possible exception of numismatists (and who cares what they like, anyway?). Other than shoving a couple in one's loafers, or using one to test the tread depth on a car tire, they're bordering on being useless. So please, for the love of money, can't we just use common sense and stop making these common cents already? That's my two cents, which should probably be about a buck and a half, adjusted for inflation.

Justice for the downtrodden female tennis stars of Wimbledon, at last

So, the fine folks at Wimbledon announced that they're finally going to pay the women the same prize money as the men now. Hallelujah! Good for them. Good for the already-ridiculously-overpaid female athletes, too - they're certainly entitled to equal pay for equal work. Why should the male winner walk off with a walloping $1.28 million, while the shortchanged female winner takes home just $1.22 million. Forgive me, but I'm finding it hard to well up over the sad state of affairs befalling athletes who clear more in a year than most of us make in a lifetime. But hey, fair is fair. Equal work - equal pay.

Just one thing: I believe that the women need to start playing 5-set matches, just like the men. Tit for tat, if you will. Look, it wasn't all that long ago that common belief was that a woman could never compete against a man on the tennis court. Billie Jean King graciously proved otherwise. Now, today's athletes - both men and women - are in incredible physical condition, with trainers, coaches, and the best technology that their bloated wallets can afford. You can hardly say in good conscience that a female athlete in her late teens or early twenties can't handle a 5-set match. Why, to make such a claim would be tantamount to sexism! So, either pay those women equally to play as many sets as the men, or let the men play as few sets as the women. C'mon, fair is fair.

And, while we're talking sports for a moment, let me ask you this: Why is it that when our top American teams play their final game of the season, the winner is dubbed "World Champion"? If our championships only involve American teams, then this is a rather pompous, arrogant, and unsupported claim, isn't it? Contrary to that toe-tapping song from a charity concert of some years ago, "We are not the world." Just don't tell that to the president. Good night, and good seats.

Just trying to make my way home...

Well, as it so frequently happens here in Philly, I'm driving home from work when I hit a mile-long backup on one of the only main thoroughfares in the area, Bustleton Avenue (or, as no one affectionately refers to it - Rt. 532). And, as is so frequently the case, the cause of this backup during the rush hour drive is none other than one of Philly's finest pulling over a guy who may have been speeding on his motorcycle or something. There the motorcycle rider stands, between his bike and the police cruiser, which are both blocking the entire right lane of traffic off into the horizon.

Could the cop have pulled him off the main road, perhaps into the nearest side street, or maybe into the nearby mini-mall lot or gas station on the corner? I'm thinking "yes." Should he have done so, instead of creating a completely unnecessary traffic tie-up and adding to the number of commuters already contemplating acts of road rage? Again, affirmative. The only reasons not to do so would be - what? I dunno - the sheer joy of the power trip, a lack of simple reasoning skills, or the complete absence of giving a shit would be my guess. How about it, officers - with all due respect to those who don't get paid nearly enough to deal with criminals and put themselves in harm's way - while you're busy "protecting" and "serving," do you think maybe you could exercise a smidgen of common sense and courtesy for the benefit of all of us law-abiding folks trying to shake off another day of toil and just get home to our families, take-out dinners, or tv sets, and PLEASE STOP BLOCKING TRAFFIC JUST TO HAND OUT FRIGGIN' TICKETS? Thank you.

Eureka - why mankind is flushing itself down the hopper

I've quite possibly stumbled upon the root of all of our problems here on planet Earth. God, I suspect, has not abandoned us, as some would have you think. He has simply become preoccupied with the standings in all of our major sporting events, and the individual performance of our grossly overpaid athletes. Why should we expect the Lord to spend his time sorting out our petty differences, ending war, preventing famine and starvation, etc., when there's a game on! While many a terrorist praises his particular incarnation of the incarnate, there's nothing so satisfying as hearing a man who has lost his own son to suicide thanking the Lord Almighty for letting him adorn his finger with a gaudy but much-coveted Super Bowl ring.

So, you see, if we want God to help us right our wrongs, if we want the Almighty to deliver us from our own greed, stupidity, avarice, and plain-old evil, we just need to limit his exposure to the playoffs. Of course, this theory may be completely wrong if, in fact, the Lord is female. In that case, I'm blaming Grey's Anatomy.