Can I wake up yet?

I'm not inspired to write much about last night's VP debate in Cleveland.  Somebody needs to tell me why this event is even necessary.  All it has become is a cheerleading session for each respective party.  They should liven it up and make both candidates wear cheerleading uniforms of their boss.

Neither guy impressed me, I had trouble staying awake, and I hope I never have to watch a VP debate ever again.

If you want to read more, this is a good reaction to the debate.  Read the second entry (by Keith Olbermann) to find out that Cheney has indeed met Edwards before.

A geological confession

I'm a volcano junkie.

I've been following the news on the recent activity at Mt. St. Helens recently.  I'm familiar with the area, having visited the observation center there in June of 2003.

I remember clearly what started my fascination with volcanoes.  I was six, and before it became a fascination, it was a short, terrifying obsession.  I read a book at the local library called "Hill of Fire."  It was a children's book about the 1943 formation of the Paricutin volcano west of Mexico City.  Apparently one day the Earth cracked open in the middle of a farmer's field, an eruption began and a few days later the volcano was built up several thousand feet.  The book was vivid in the description of how a farmer was out working in the fields when the eruption started and had to take evasive action to save his family and the people who lived in the nearby village.  Miraculously no one was killed, though everybody lost all they owned.

So I was a six year old reading about how a volcano just popped up one day in the middle of a field, and left the library convinced that one was going to sprout up in our own back yard any day.  It made for some sleepless nights there for a bit.  What was that rumbling noise?  What's that orangish bright light I can see out the window?  Wait, more rumbling...it certainly did not help that we lived half a block from railroad tracks that had frieght trains running all night long.  I had mental evacuation plans ready for about a month.  I think I eventually confessed to my father my fears that we were living on a geological event and he calmly reassured me that the possibility of our backyard transforming into the next Mt. Vesuvius, and that America wasn't exactly the hotbed (HA!  I KILL MYSELF!) of volcanic activity.  I can only wonder what he must have thought about his paranoid delusional son!  And I haven't even mentioned the time period where I thought any sprinkle of rain meant a devastating tornado was on the way...

I remember St. Helens erupting in 1980, the first and only eruption in my lifetime that occured in the continental US.  It was the day before my thirteenth birthday.  I couldn't believe something that devastating and spectacular was happening in the US.  I'll never forget the video footage of the devastation, and the time lapse pictures of the mountain exploding.

I was out west in June of 2003 and on the day that I was driving from Portland to Seattle I decided to head over to Mt. St. Helens.  It was a beautiful day, clear and warm, and the mountain was about an hour or so west of Interstate 5.  I first went to the visitor's center, which had a lot of information pertaining to the area, what it was like before and after the eruption, and a general history of volcanic activity in the Pacific Northwest.  There were park rangers there giving presentations on some of these things, but I decided not to stick around for that and drove up to the observation point.  It was about a twenty minute drive and took me up into the area within five miles of the mountain itself.

As I winded up the road towards the observation area, clouds moved in.  By the time I was halfway there, it was pouring rain.  When I reached the center and got out of my car, the temperature was about thirty degrees lower than it was when I started driving.  And there was fog everywhere, I couldn't see a thing.

Inside the observation center there was more info on St. Helens, but the highlight was a movie theater that screened a twenty minute film that detailed the 1980 eruption beter than anything I have ever heard or read about it.  The only word to describe it is "awesome", its energy, its devastation, its complete control over the area surrounding the mountain.  It took my breath away.  By the time the movie was over, I had forgotten that it was cloudy outside and I was not going to be able to see anything for myself.

Then there was a cruel twist of irony, and I suppose I should say here that if you ever plan on visiting the center, you should probably skip this paragraph, as it will reveal a surprise.

At the end of the movie, the screen went black, and then in big red letters said "please remain seated."  A few seconds later the screen pulled back from the sides, revealing nothing but huge glass windows.  The theater faces the volcano in the direction that the eruption occured and theoretically at the end of the movie you are treated to the best possible picture of what the area looks like today.

If you happen to go there on a day that has no fog and clouds. 

While it was disappointing to have been there and not be able to see anything, the presentation atboth centers made it worth the time and effort.  And as I drove back down the area towards the visitor's center, the clouds parted somewhat and I could see the downed timber that still lines the edge of the blast zone, along with the barren edges where the blast destroyed everything.  I was able to spend some time off to the side of the road and observe, though when I tried to take a picture I found that the batteries in my digital camera were dead.

Which is just as well, as the images I saw that day couldn't be reproduced.  It has to be seen to be comprehended, if you go for that stuff.  I am not rooting for the mountain to erupt again, but if it does there can't be the destruction there was before, because there's nothing there to destroy. 

Seeing Mt. Hood in Oregon and Mt. Rainier in Washington during that trip, I realize that if those mountains, which are volcanoes, someday erupt there will be tremendous damage and undoubtedly loss of life.  Yet they are so dominantly beautiful that you almost feel priviledged to be there, to see these things.  They are so majestic that you don't sense the unknown danger.

Speaking of which, is there any movie genre worse than the "dormant volcano that comes to life, threatening the population of the ski resort town/island/Los Angeles because no one bothered to listen to the wise geologist who knew that this was going to happen?"

No offense to runners, of course...

This has really been creeping me out lately.

I'm not sure this will work, but if you go to this page, (you may have to refresh once or twice, the ads seem to be random) you might see what I am talking about.  The Chicago Marathon is this weekend, and various local on line news sources have been running ads on their web pages.  It uses the idea that "ordinary people" participate in the race.  I just think it's odd to see how the person runs after they have ripped off their everyday clothing.

Who runs like this, bobbing their shoulders back and forth without moving their heads?  Wouldn't you topple over before you finished the first ten yards?

And it just looks creepy to me.  I keep expecting one of these freaks to jump out at me from my laptop and beat me to death with their shoulders.

Only four days left!

Same time next year

Memo to all Chicago Cubs fans:

GET OVER IT! (REPEATED SLAPPING SOUNDS HERE)

Watching the news last night and reading the paper today, you'd think people died at Wrigley Field Saturday afternoon.  The Cubs lost.  They aren't going to the playoffs this year.  The will continue the longest streak in baseball, 96 consecutive years without a World Series championship.

Last I checked, I still have all my limbs, I doubt I have reached the halfway point of my life, and the sun still has several billion years to go before it burns itself out, leaving all of us behind in eternal darkness.

C'mon people, get a grip.  Do you know why folks in St. Louis are laughing at you today?  Not because the Cardinals were sixteen games better than the Cubs this year.  No, Redbird Nation is in stitches because of the pictures that undoubtedly ran in the Post-Dispatch today of legions Cubs fans ready to leap over the edge of the stadium and plummet to their demise.

After all, what's more lovable than a legion of fans absolutely distraught over their team's misery?

I can think of maybe 4,161 more important reasons to off yourself than baseball.

I may not be the greatest Cubs fan in the world, but I'd be willing to bet that I am in the top 100.  I have two constants in my thirty-seven years on this planet: my family and the Chicago Cubs.  This team is a part of my life, and it will always be that way.  If I were to die tomorrow, I know that my loved ones would place some type of Cubs memorabilia in my casket.  But I am not and will not shed any tears over this team.

I know how to lose.

The late, great Mike Royko once said "everybody loses in life eventually, that's why they have cemeteries."  Same goes for baseball.  Your team is going to lose.  Statistically speaking, there's only slightly more than a three percent chance (1 in 32) that any one team will win the World Series.  Those are losing odds.  Even the Yankees lose.

Let's take a stroll back a few years, shall we?  In 1971 and 1972, the Cubs won more than 81 games, which is what a team has to do if it wins more than it loses during a season.  I was four and five years old back then, and don't remember all that much of it.  Fast forward to 2003 and 2004, when the Cubs won 88 and 89 games.

That's back-to-back winning seasons.  When was the last time that happened?  Try 1971 and 1972.  Baseball has changed a lot in that thirty year time frame, but aside from a few trips to the post-season, the Cubs did not evolve.  They were mostly terrible.  There were many reasons for this, but we can wrap it all up nice and neat in a package and call it mismanagement.  They were a horribly run organization.

All that changed a few years ago.  Now upper management wants to win, and it has spent the last few seasons putting together the resources to do so.  2003 was supposed to be a building season, one where the team started to play better and work towards contending for many years.  They overachieved, went to the playoffs, and came within a well-fielded gound ball of reaching the World Series.

That was one of the worst things that could have happened.  This year, when fans should have been excited about having a legitimate chance at contending, people expected the ultimate, a championship.  As a result, you couldn't get a ticket for any games, and the fans got nasty.  Did you strikeout with the bases loaded?  BOO!  Did you give up a hit that let the other team score two runs?  BOO!  Did they cut off beer sales after the seventh inning?  BOO!

Morons.  This team contended for the playoffs this year, just like last year.  When was the last time that happened?  How about 1907 and 1908.  And guess what-they are going to contend next year as well, and probably several more years after that.  And you probably won't be able to get tickets for the rest of this decade.

1984-the Cubs won 96 games and came oh so close to the World Series.  Next year the team was heavily favored but was decimated by injuries and only won 75.  In 2004, the Cubs suffered as many serious injuries as the '85 team did, and still almost made it to the playoffs.  The '85 team used injuries as an excuse to roll over, while this year's team fought through it.  That is what is different about this organization now.  They want to win.

So please, lighten up.  Stop perpetuating the stereotype that all we do is cry in our beer every fall when the inevitable happens.  Rest up for a month or so, then start thinking about 2005.  The Cardinals and the Astros are old, there's no way they will be as good as they were this year, and when was the last time the Reds, Pirates and Brewers were any good?  The Cubs are set up for a long and successful run.

Perspective, people!  Of course I want to see the Cubs win a title, and it's going to happen sooner rather than later.  It's just not going to happen this year, and maybe not next year either.  In the meantime, there are other things that need our attention.  Work, family, school maybe, the list can go on and on.

And let's not forget about rooting for the Dodgers...to beat the Cardinals...in four.

(Only four months until spring training...)

 

Weekend assignment

What's my favorite month?

It's tough to pick one.  There are things that happen in every month that I look forward to, but I can eliminate the winter months from contention because the cold and gray that accompanies that season gets to me after a while.

I love the warmth of summer, getting outdoors and doing things, but my favorite time of year to be outside is early fall, when the temperatures are still warm enough to enjoy and the colors are in peak.  So I have to go with October as my favorite month.  I spent two weeks in New Enlgand during October of 2002, and I have never seen such sustained natural beauty like I saw then.

October is also when the majoe league baseball playoffs occur.  As a longtime Chicago Cubs fan, you might think I would hate this month.  It can be a little bittersweet at times, but I love baseball, and the World Series is the sporting highlight of the year for me.

I'll go with May as my second favorite month.  For the most part the cold weather is gone for another six or seven months, the baseball season is in full swing, and I can get out and play golf on a regular basis.  It's a great month, knowing that summer is just around the corner.  My birthday is in May as well, though that is not much of a factor as to why I like it.

Worst month (did you ask?) is January, hands down.  I am crying just thinking about it.

'Tis Saturday

Go here if you want to know why I do this (non-AOL)

1. Which of the following do you trust more:  a politician, a televangelist, a lawyer, a reporter, or a doctor? Doctor-I have only had three or four my whole life, and they were very honest and trustworthy.  I am sure that there are others in each group that are as well, but it's impossible not to label those professions as less than trustworthy.

2. What's the last song you liked enough thatyou actually took the time to look up the lyrics?  "Detox Mansion" by Warren Zevon

3. Which deceased relative would you most like to spend one more afternoon with?  Now that my father has passed away, I'd like to spend an afternoon with him AND his father.  I don't remember my grandfather (I was less than a year old when he died) but my father told me so many great stories about him that I feel like I do know him.  Seeing my father once more and my grandfather for the first time would be the best thing I could ever ask for.

4. What is your preferred brand for:  a) toothpaste, b) soap, c) shampoo, d) laundry detergent a) crest b) irish spring c) finesse d) tide
 
5. What is your favorite poem? "Jenny Kissed Me" by Leigh Hunt

Jenny kissed me when we met,

Jumping from the chair she sat in.

Time, you thief! who love to get

Sweets into your list, put that in.

Say I'm weary, say I'm sad;

Say that health and wealth have missed me;

Say I'm growing old, but add-

Jenny kissed me!

6. READER'S CHOICE QUESTION #25 from Tara:  How did your parents select your first name? Were you named after a particular friend/relative/fictional character or did they just like the name?  I was named after my grandfather, though my father has the same nameas well.

And the winner is...

Yes, I realize that I am hardly qualified to give an objective opinion over who did the better job in tonight's debate.  I am a solid Democrat and thus want Kerry to win, and there is very little that anyone could do or say that would make me change my mind.

I did watch the entire debate.  I was surprised at how quickly the hour and a half went by, which tells me that both men were able to keep my attention and were well prepared.  I have been bored by many a debate in the past.  Honestly, I was prepared for tonight to be nothing more than safety spin by both sides, especially from the President.

Before taking the time to give my opinions, I felt it would be the right thing to check out reaction in varying types of media, so I watched a little television, read news websites, and checked out what I consider to be honest, independent political blogs.

The consensus is that John Kerry won this debate.

I agree, of course, and my reactions to follow reflect what I took from tonight's event.

Frankly, this debate concerned me the most, because the issues of homeland security and the war on terror are this president's strongest attributes, or I should say that the electorate seems to think that this is where he is strongest.  People seem comfortable with his abilities to succeed here, and it has been such a dominating factor in the campaign, especially from the GOP side.  I felt that Kerry had no chance at performing better than the President tonight, a feeling that I attribute to the fear factor that has permeated GOP thought since 9/11.  As I said in my earlier post today, I felt all that was necessary for Bush to win tonight was a couple of well-timed screams of "BOO!"

The President did not study the tapes of Al Gore from 2000, and I was stunned to see him visibly smirking and frowning in reaction to what Kerry was saying.  I certainly do not believe that normal human reactions such as those should be detrimental to evaluation, but I know that the average voter reacts to that type of stuff.  He should have known better.  He also looked tired and withdrawn at times, and he was far too repititive.  Memo to the Prez: we know you think Kerry changes his mind as often as we change our fruit-of-the-looms, and it wasn't necessary to start every response tonight with that.  I also thought he used the "wrong war, wrong time" reference in regard to Kerry's supposed non-support of world leaders and US troops too much, and we already know that being President is a tough job.  I kept waiting for him to quote Will Ferrel on SNL: "Presidenting is hard."

And did he say that the insurgents in Iraq were fighting "vociferously?"  Can someone tell me what that means?  Mr. Webster doesn't seem to know that one.  Neither do Mr. Funk and Mr. Wagnalls

Kerry wasn't perfect.  I did not want to hear "Vietnam" at all tonight.  Please, please read the memo.  And the fact that he said he visited "Treblinka" Square in Moscow instead of Lubyanka is embarrassing (Treblinka was a Nazi death camp in World War II).  I thought it was genius though to pull out the quote from Bush 41 on why he did not go after Saddam in 1991, that it would have led to chaos (I'm paraphrasing).  Subsequently, I would have liked to see Bush bring up that Kerry voted against that war yet voted for this one.  Why?  I am surprised that the President missed that opportunity.

It's clear that Kerry was fortunate tonight; Bush fumbled away his biggest trophy and he will have to work extra hard on the two remaining debates.  His entire re-election campaign has been focused on terror, fear and security.  He spent much of the first fifteen minutes talking about Saddam in jail, 9/11, keeping WMD away from terrorists, and his will to do what he believes is right.  For some reason, he lost it then, deciding to pound the flip-flop idea back upon us.  We get it already. 

And if I may be nitpicky, it drove me nuts that Bush continually addressed Kerry as "my opponent."  He's standing three feet away from you.  Call him what he is, a Senator.  No one will think any less compassionate.  Not once did Kerry refer to Bush as anything other than "President."

There have been many, many times in this campaign where I have had to stop myself from pounding my head into the wall until I fall unconscious, primarily for two reasons.  First, this idea that if Bush is not re-elected, we're all going to die.  It's ridiculous.  Any man or woman who is the elected leader of this country is going to be commited to keeping us protected.  Who in their right mind would not be?  The second thing is Kerry's inability to pound on that issue, to be more assertive in telling America that he will remain steadfast on terrorism and remind us that there are DOMESTIC issues that need to be addressed in this campaign as well.  Bush has a horrible record on domestic issues and Kerry has done little to bring that up.

So I have waited, and waited, and waited, and with each passing day, the spot where I am going to put my head through the wall becomes a little more appealing, a little more comforting...until tonight.  My forehead will not be getting flatter in the foreseeable future, because for the first time since they became opponents, I feel that John Kerry has done a decent job of convincing the electorate that he is as qualified to handle these safety and war issues as the President is.

Dare I say it, that he looked and sounded "presidential"?

And this issue goes away now, at least partially, because the next debate is open for any and all issues, and the last one is solely economic.

After tonight, I pictured John Kerry locked in a room somewhere with several leaking water pipes.  The water has risen to just a few feet beneath the ceiling and Kerry doesn't have much room left to breathe.  I feared this debate could be the last gasp, the water that fills the rest of the room and leaves this a one man race.  Instead, Bush punched a hole in the ceiling and threw a rope down to Kerry, who was able to climb out to safety.

The rules say that by November 2, someone has to go back into that water-filled room. 

Your rhetoric may also be used as a flotation device.