Following is an email I sent to AT&T, and their response:
My name is Eric Woodard, and I have opened a case with you, #7312317.
The case involves roaming charges on my July bill. I was charged almost $200 in roaming in Bethel, AK.
I have never been to Bethel, AK, nor have I ever been within 350 miles of Bethel, AK. I have credit cards proving I was over 350 miles away each day I was charged roaming.
The story I have heard from the customer service operators I have spoken with is that my cell phone must have picked up the cell tower in Bethel. However, I cannot find one place online that shows a cell tower range of over 50 miles. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_phone_tower). Furthermore, on the days in question, my credit card records will show I was in cities that had coverage--cities over 350 miles away.
I called three weeks ago and told my story, assuming that the misunderstanding would be cleared up. Having not heard back, I called today and was told that I will not be refunded these fraudulent charges unless I switch to a more expensive plan with a two-year commitment. That is unfair.
I have been a Cingular/AT&T customer in good standing since 2001. I have never asked for a refund of roaming charges, nor have I ever missed a payment. If I tallied up how much money I have given your company over the years, I conservatively estimate the total would be over $6000. I would think you could fix this type of mistake for a customer like me.
I am very upset that I am being charged for something I can PROVE I did not do. If your company refuses to refund the charges, not only will I pay whatever fee necessary to cancel my service, I will forward this email to all of my friends, post this to my blog, and post this to my Facebook profile, makiang sure that everybody knows how dangerous it is to get their phone through AT&T.
This is a matter of principle. I am telling you the truth, and you are telling me that there is nothing you can do. That is very disappointing.
THEIR REPLY:
Dear Mr. Woodard,
Thank you for contacting AT&T because you had a case open with us for roaming charges in Bethel, Alaska on your July bill. I understand that some representative have advised you that you may have picked up a tower in Bethel, however, you are unable to locate a cell tower range of over 50 miles. You were advised three weeks ago that the charges would not be adjusted unless you went up to a higher price plan. You are now requesting that we adjust the charges as you have never been to Bethel, Alaska. My name is Carmen Rough and I am here to assist you with your concern. I am sorry to hear that you may wish to cancel service due to this issue.
I have reviewed your account and see that it was determined that the calls in question were valid. I see that you have an expired regional plan that did not cover calls made in Alaska. [Which is not true: the website and a customer service representative both told me, before I went, that I was covered in Alaska, particularly Anchorage. That's right: I called expressly to make sure I had coverage.] As such, you were billed at $.79 cents per minute for roaming.
If you would like to change your price plan to one of our current nation plans we would be more than happy to re-rate your bill as a courtesy as though you had been on the nation plan for the bill in question. With an AT&T nation plan, the entire domestic United States is included in your calling area in addition to Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands therefore preventing domestic roaming and long distance charges while travelling to these places.
Below is the two price plan that is most comparable to the price plan you now have: [etc., etc., etc.]
This is total bullshit, and there's nothing I can do about it. Tell everyone you know to be very careful before getting their cell phones thru AT&T.
Sunday, November 08, 2009
Saturday, November 07, 2009
No wonder
I can see why it's taking so long to get health care reform in this country. It's already so good!! To wit:
"A 2008 report by the Commonwealth Fund, "Deaths Before Age 75 from Donditions That Are at Least Partially Modifiable with Effective Medical Care," concluded that the United States is the worst of the developed countries on this measure. Among nineteen wealthy countries, the United States ranked nineteenth in curing people who could be cured with decent care....The number of people under seventy-five who die from curable illness was almost twice as high in the United States as in the countries that do the best on this measure: France, Japan and Spain....Americans with diabetes die younger than diabetics in any of the other countries....Among those nine rich[est] nations, the per-capita rate of "Deaths Due to Surgical or Medical Mishaps" was the highest by far in the USA...."
For "healthy life expectancy at age 60," a measure that "predicts not just how many more years a sixty-year-old can expect to live, but how long she can expect to feel pretty good...before the onset of predictable ailments of the aged, such as Alzheimer's disease and rheumatoid arthritis,...we're in the basement. Among twenty-three countries in a 2006 survey by the Commonwealth Fund, the United States was tied for last." (32-33)
The Healing of America, T. R. Reid
"A 2008 report by the Commonwealth Fund, "Deaths Before Age 75 from Donditions That Are at Least Partially Modifiable with Effective Medical Care," concluded that the United States is the worst of the developed countries on this measure. Among nineteen wealthy countries, the United States ranked nineteenth in curing people who could be cured with decent care....The number of people under seventy-five who die from curable illness was almost twice as high in the United States as in the countries that do the best on this measure: France, Japan and Spain....Americans with diabetes die younger than diabetics in any of the other countries....Among those nine rich[est] nations, the per-capita rate of "Deaths Due to Surgical or Medical Mishaps" was the highest by far in the USA...."
For "healthy life expectancy at age 60," a measure that "predicts not just how many more years a sixty-year-old can expect to live, but how long she can expect to feel pretty good...before the onset of predictable ailments of the aged, such as Alzheimer's disease and rheumatoid arthritis,...we're in the basement. Among twenty-three countries in a 2006 survey by the Commonwealth Fund, the United States was tied for last." (32-33)
The Healing of America, T. R. Reid
Wednesday, November 04, 2009
Watching sports
Paradoxically, I find that I enjoy watching sporting events more when I don't care who wins.
When I care who wins (like now, when I hope the Phillies can defeat the Evil Empire), I get much too upset when bad things happen. I just turned the TV off after Utley struck out in the 7th.
When I don't care, I am able to appreciate all aspects of the game--all of the good play on both sides.
So when I don't care, I find myself, no matter which team is pitching, cheering great athletic prowess. I enjoy it more as an aesthetic experience.
When I root, I end up hating great performances. For instance, I never got to enjoy watching Michael Jordan play, because I was so busy rooting against him.
In this world series, I have tried to watch it more aesthetically and to be less partial. In game 4, I was able to watch Mariano Rivera and, for the first time, really enjoy watching him pitch. I need to try to do that more.
When I care who wins (like now, when I hope the Phillies can defeat the Evil Empire), I get much too upset when bad things happen. I just turned the TV off after Utley struck out in the 7th.
When I don't care, I am able to appreciate all aspects of the game--all of the good play on both sides.
So when I don't care, I find myself, no matter which team is pitching, cheering great athletic prowess. I enjoy it more as an aesthetic experience.
When I root, I end up hating great performances. For instance, I never got to enjoy watching Michael Jordan play, because I was so busy rooting against him.
In this world series, I have tried to watch it more aesthetically and to be less partial. In game 4, I was able to watch Mariano Rivera and, for the first time, really enjoy watching him pitch. I need to try to do that more.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
Practicing Adults
We are accustomed to repeating the cliche, and to believing, that "our most precious resource is our children." But we have plenty of children to go around, God knows, and as with Doritos, we can always make more. The true scarcity we face is of practicing adults, of people who know how marginal, how fragile, how finite their lives and their stores and their ambitions really are but who find value in this knowledge, even a sense of strange comfort, because they know their condition is universal, is shared.
Micheal Chabon, "Cosmodemonic," Manhood for Amateurs
Micheal Chabon, "Cosmodemonic," Manhood for Amateurs
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Keep fiddling, America!!
According to Google Trends, a site that records the trends in websearches, searches for "national emergency" is the eleventh most popular search today, likely because President Obama declared the swine flu a national emergency.
Eleventh most popular search. 11th.
Let's look at what the nation thinks is more important than a national emergency.
At #10: Nebraska vs. Iowa State
#9: Baby Einstein refunds
#8: pumpkin designs
#7: club penguin
#6: time change fall 2009
At #5: Your mother
4: wvu vs uconn
3. golota adamek (a scheduled prizefight)
2. garth brooks tickets
1. college football tv schedule
Eleventh most popular search. 11th.
Let's look at what the nation thinks is more important than a national emergency.
At #10: Nebraska vs. Iowa State
#9: Baby Einstein refunds
#8: pumpkin designs
#7: club penguin
#6: time change fall 2009
At #5: Your mother
4: wvu vs uconn
3. golota adamek (a scheduled prizefight)
2. garth brooks tickets
1. college football tv schedule
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Changing our schools
I spoke with a colleague today, and she was flabbergasted at how low skilled her students were in her 11th grade Integrated Communications class. Many of the students could barely read; in fact, one student had yet to pass a class at LC--yet he is somehow in a junior class. This is social promotion gone to a ridiculous extreme. This student is failing himself, but we, as a school system, are not doing anything to help this student the way he needs it.
I, too, have had a wide range of students in my class. For instance, in my 6th period junior Advanced Placement (remember, this is AP!) class, I had two students admit that they didn't know what a pronoun was.
The fact is, our students are mishmashed together into classes and socially promoted, and from one year to the next, we have no idea what skills these kids attain.
Now that the district is moving to a standards-based grading system, we should now be moving toward a standards-based curriculum.
Here is how it might work:
First, let's make all classes have an exit test that is the same between all classes, and the student may not move on to the next English class until the previous one is completed adequately.
The first class freshman year should be reading comprehension. It should be a semester long class. By the end of the semester, the student should test out at grade level. If not, the student takes it again. Clearly the danger here is that we will have a student taking this class multiple times. But what service are we doing passing students on to another class if they CAN'T read at grade level? This model would require many of the English teachers to teach this class, but it would be so standardized that it would be a simple prep for the teachers.
If the student does pass, the second semester class would be expository writing. If the student is able to write an acceptable essay (maybe a WASL style prompt? An SAT style prompt), the student has completed the first year of English.
For those students ready to take the next step, the class could be grammar and vocabulary. The assumption is that if a student is reading at grade level and can write an essay, he should be able to pass this class, so retention will not be as much of an issue.
The fourth class (second semester of the sophomore year) could be an analytical reading class, which puts all the pieces together, presenting students with challenging texts and requiring them to read them analytically, using SAT and AP style multiple choice sections as well as having the students write analytical essays about their readings.
If a student can pass through all four classes, we can be assured the student has a solid foundation. Junior and senior year would change too, as the need for an IC class would be diminished. Students up for the extra challenge could take AP, and other students could take College Prep English. At this point, College Prep would TRULY be a college preparatory class.
I'm just thinking while I type, so I clearly haven't thought out all of the ramifications. But I think it's a discussion we need to begin.
I, too, have had a wide range of students in my class. For instance, in my 6th period junior Advanced Placement (remember, this is AP!) class, I had two students admit that they didn't know what a pronoun was.
The fact is, our students are mishmashed together into classes and socially promoted, and from one year to the next, we have no idea what skills these kids attain.
Now that the district is moving to a standards-based grading system, we should now be moving toward a standards-based curriculum.
Here is how it might work:
First, let's make all classes have an exit test that is the same between all classes, and the student may not move on to the next English class until the previous one is completed adequately.
The first class freshman year should be reading comprehension. It should be a semester long class. By the end of the semester, the student should test out at grade level. If not, the student takes it again. Clearly the danger here is that we will have a student taking this class multiple times. But what service are we doing passing students on to another class if they CAN'T read at grade level? This model would require many of the English teachers to teach this class, but it would be so standardized that it would be a simple prep for the teachers.
If the student does pass, the second semester class would be expository writing. If the student is able to write an acceptable essay (maybe a WASL style prompt? An SAT style prompt), the student has completed the first year of English.
For those students ready to take the next step, the class could be grammar and vocabulary. The assumption is that if a student is reading at grade level and can write an essay, he should be able to pass this class, so retention will not be as much of an issue.
The fourth class (second semester of the sophomore year) could be an analytical reading class, which puts all the pieces together, presenting students with challenging texts and requiring them to read them analytically, using SAT and AP style multiple choice sections as well as having the students write analytical essays about their readings.
If a student can pass through all four classes, we can be assured the student has a solid foundation. Junior and senior year would change too, as the need for an IC class would be diminished. Students up for the extra challenge could take AP, and other students could take College Prep English. At this point, College Prep would TRULY be a college preparatory class.
I'm just thinking while I type, so I clearly haven't thought out all of the ramifications. But I think it's a discussion we need to begin.
Friday, October 09, 2009
Movies about Sports
Are there any movies about sports where the actors actually do a good job of the sport? Where the action scenes seem realistic?
I honestly can't remember one that looks authentic. I just watched a movie (or part of it, anyway) called "Sugar" about a pitcher from the DR trying to make it into the bigs. The movie made a big show of not using a double for the character when he was pitching, but his fastball might have been 65 miles an hour, and the batters kept whiffing on it. Then, in his first minor league start, the third baseman made an "error," and it was painfully clear that it was an actor purposely letting a ball roll through his legs.
Looking back, I can't remember a sports movie that made the playing of the game seem real.
I honestly can't remember one that looks authentic. I just watched a movie (or part of it, anyway) called "Sugar" about a pitcher from the DR trying to make it into the bigs. The movie made a big show of not using a double for the character when he was pitching, but his fastball might have been 65 miles an hour, and the batters kept whiffing on it. Then, in his first minor league start, the third baseman made an "error," and it was painfully clear that it was an actor purposely letting a ball roll through his legs.
Looking back, I can't remember a sports movie that made the playing of the game seem real.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
AT&T is jerking me around
So, I just looked at my AT&T cell phone bill from August, and I notice it's over $400.
As I looked at the bill, I was nervous that I might actually OWE that much money, because I took a trip to Alaska in July and I thought I might have to pay roaming from Anchorage.
Weirdly, though, there was no roaming from Anchorage. The reason I was charged $250 too much was that I apparently placed a bunch of calls from Bethel, Alaska.
I was in Alaska, yes, but I've never heard of Bethel, so I looked it up. I thought maybe I had driven through it, or that I had inadvertently picked up the cell tower while in a nearby town.
I tried to find driving directions from Anchorage, but there are none. That's right, you can't drive to Bethel. It's accessible only by boat or plane. It's 350 miles west of Anchorage, so I highly doubt I was picking up the cell tower in Bethel from Anchorage, as the oh-so-helpful AT&T customer service professional suggested.
So, after trying to explain the physics of cell phones to the professional, I just gave up and asked to take my case to the next level. I will hear in 7 to 10 business days what "their decision" is. If they charge me for those calls, I'm going to come unglued. I'm going to send an email to everyone I know. I will keep you updated.
As I looked at the bill, I was nervous that I might actually OWE that much money, because I took a trip to Alaska in July and I thought I might have to pay roaming from Anchorage.
Weirdly, though, there was no roaming from Anchorage. The reason I was charged $250 too much was that I apparently placed a bunch of calls from Bethel, Alaska.
I was in Alaska, yes, but I've never heard of Bethel, so I looked it up. I thought maybe I had driven through it, or that I had inadvertently picked up the cell tower while in a nearby town.
I tried to find driving directions from Anchorage, but there are none. That's right, you can't drive to Bethel. It's accessible only by boat or plane. It's 350 miles west of Anchorage, so I highly doubt I was picking up the cell tower in Bethel from Anchorage, as the oh-so-helpful AT&T customer service professional suggested.
So, after trying to explain the physics of cell phones to the professional, I just gave up and asked to take my case to the next level. I will hear in 7 to 10 business days what "their decision" is. If they charge me for those calls, I'm going to come unglued. I'm going to send an email to everyone I know. I will keep you updated.
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Idiots in my Inbox, part two
This forward was from the same idiot. Whereas the previous forward had hatred for an entire creed, this one reserves its ire specifically for one man.
And what better time to vent your spleen than right after a man dies? This one caused a physical revulsion when I read it.
Enjoy!!!!
As soon as his cancer was detected, I noticed the immediate attempt at the "canonization" of old Teddy Kennedy by the mainstream media. They are saying what a "great American" he is. I say, let's get a couple things clear & not twist the facts to change the real history.
1. He was caught cheating at Harvard when he attended it. He was expelled twice, once for cheating on a test, and once for paying a classmate to cheat for him.
2. While expelled, Kennedy enlisted in the Army, but mistakenly signed up for four years instead of two. Oops! The man can't count to four! His father, Joseph P. Kennedy, former U.S. Ambassador to England (a step up from bootlegging liquor into the US from Canada during prohibition), pulled the necessary strings to have his enlistment shortened to two years, and to ensure that he served in Europe, not Korea , where a war was raging No preferential treatment for him! (like he charged that President Bush received).
3. Kennedy was assigned to Paris, never advanced beyond the rank of
Private, and returned to Harvard upon being discharged. Imagine a person of his "education" NEVER advancing past the rank of Private!
4. While attending law school at the University of Virginia, he was cited for reckless driving four times, including once when he was clocked driving 90 miles per hour in a residential neighborhood with his headlights off after dark... Yet his Virginia driver's license was never revoked. Coincidentally, he passed the bar exam in 1959. Amazing!
5. In 1964, he was seriously injured in a plane crash and hospitalized for several months. Test results done by the hospital at the time he was admitted had shown he was legally intoxicated. The results of those tests remained a "state secret" until in the 1980's when the report was unsealed..
Didn't hear about that from the unbiased media, did we?
6. On July 19, 1969, Kennedy attended a party on Chappaquiddick Island in Massachusetts . At about 11:00 PM, he borrowed his chauffeur's keys to his Oldsmobile limousine and offered to give a ride home to Mary Jo Kopechne, a campaign worker. Leaving the island via an unlit bridge with no guard rail, Kennedy steered the car off the bridge, flipped, and into Poucha Pond..
7. He swam to shore and walked back to the party passing several houses and a fire station. Two friends then returned with him to the scene of the accident. According to their later testimony, they told him what he already knew - that he was required by law to immediately report the accident to the authorities. Instead Kennedy made his way to his hotel, called his lawyer, and went to sleep. Kennedy called the police the next morning and by then the wreck had already been discovered. Before dying Kopechne had scratched at the upholstered floor above her head in the upside-down car.
The Kennedy family began "calling in favors", ensuring that any inquiry would be contained. Her corpse was whisked out-of-state to her family before an autopsy could be conducted. Further details are uncertain, but after the accident Kennedy says he repeatedly dove under the water trying to rescue Kopechne and he didn't call police because he was in a state of shock. It is widely assumed Kennedy was drunk, and he held off calling police in hopes that his family could fix the problem overnight. Since the accident Kennedy's "political enemies" have referred to him as the distinguished Senator from Chappaquiddick. He pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident, and was given a SUSPENDED SENTENCE OF TWO MONTHS.
Kopechne's family received a small payout from the Kennedy's insurance policy and never sued. There was later an effort to have her body exhumed and autopsied, but her family successfully fought against this in court, and Kennedy's family paid their attorney's bills.... a "token of friendship"?
8. Kennedy has held his Senate seat for more than forty years, but considering his longevity, his accomplishments seem scant. He authored or argued for legislation that ensured a variety of civil rights, increased the minimum wage in 1981, made access to health care easier for the indigent, funded Meals on Wheels for fixed-income seniors, and is widely held as the "standard-bearer for liberalism". In his very first Senate roll he was the floor manager for the bill that turned U.S. immigration policy upside down and opened the floodgate for immigrants from third world countries..
9. Since that time, he has been the prime instigator and author of every expansion of an increase in immigration up to and including the latest attempt to grant amnesty to illegal aliens. Not to mention the pious grilling he gave the last two Supreme Court nominees, as if he was the standard bearer for the nation in matters of "what is right" What a pompous ass!
10. He is known around Washington as a public drunk, loud, boisterous, and very disrespectful to ladies. JERK is a better description than "great American". "A blonde in every pond" is his motto.
Let's not allow the spin doctors to make this jerk a hero -- how quickly the American public forgets what his real legacy is.
Send this on, as a LOT of the younger people don't have a clue about all of this, and us older ones tend to forget things that happened so many years ago.
And what better time to vent your spleen than right after a man dies? This one caused a physical revulsion when I read it.
Enjoy!!!!
As soon as his cancer was detected, I noticed the immediate attempt at the "canonization" of old Teddy Kennedy by the mainstream media. They are saying what a "great American" he is. I say, let's get a couple things clear & not twist the facts to change the real history.
1. He was caught cheating at Harvard when he attended it. He was expelled twice, once for cheating on a test, and once for paying a classmate to cheat for him.
2. While expelled, Kennedy enlisted in the Army, but mistakenly signed up for four years instead of two. Oops! The man can't count to four! His father, Joseph P. Kennedy, former U.S. Ambassador to England (a step up from bootlegging liquor into the US from Canada during prohibition), pulled the necessary strings to have his enlistment shortened to two years, and to ensure that he served in Europe, not Korea , where a war was raging No preferential treatment for him! (like he charged that President Bush received).
3. Kennedy was assigned to Paris, never advanced beyond the rank of
Private, and returned to Harvard upon being discharged. Imagine a person of his "education" NEVER advancing past the rank of Private!
4. While attending law school at the University of Virginia, he was cited for reckless driving four times, including once when he was clocked driving 90 miles per hour in a residential neighborhood with his headlights off after dark... Yet his Virginia driver's license was never revoked. Coincidentally, he passed the bar exam in 1959. Amazing!
5. In 1964, he was seriously injured in a plane crash and hospitalized for several months. Test results done by the hospital at the time he was admitted had shown he was legally intoxicated. The results of those tests remained a "state secret" until in the 1980's when the report was unsealed..
Didn't hear about that from the unbiased media, did we?
6. On July 19, 1969, Kennedy attended a party on Chappaquiddick Island in Massachusetts . At about 11:00 PM, he borrowed his chauffeur's keys to his Oldsmobile limousine and offered to give a ride home to Mary Jo Kopechne, a campaign worker. Leaving the island via an unlit bridge with no guard rail, Kennedy steered the car off the bridge, flipped, and into Poucha Pond..
7. He swam to shore and walked back to the party passing several houses and a fire station. Two friends then returned with him to the scene of the accident. According to their later testimony, they told him what he already knew - that he was required by law to immediately report the accident to the authorities. Instead Kennedy made his way to his hotel, called his lawyer, and went to sleep. Kennedy called the police the next morning and by then the wreck had already been discovered. Before dying Kopechne had scratched at the upholstered floor above her head in the upside-down car.
The Kennedy family began "calling in favors", ensuring that any inquiry would be contained. Her corpse was whisked out-of-state to her family before an autopsy could be conducted. Further details are uncertain, but after the accident Kennedy says he repeatedly dove under the water trying to rescue Kopechne and he didn't call police because he was in a state of shock. It is widely assumed Kennedy was drunk, and he held off calling police in hopes that his family could fix the problem overnight. Since the accident Kennedy's "political enemies" have referred to him as the distinguished Senator from Chappaquiddick. He pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident, and was given a SUSPENDED SENTENCE OF TWO MONTHS.
Kopechne's family received a small payout from the Kennedy's insurance policy and never sued. There was later an effort to have her body exhumed and autopsied, but her family successfully fought against this in court, and Kennedy's family paid their attorney's bills.... a "token of friendship"?
8. Kennedy has held his Senate seat for more than forty years, but considering his longevity, his accomplishments seem scant. He authored or argued for legislation that ensured a variety of civil rights, increased the minimum wage in 1981, made access to health care easier for the indigent, funded Meals on Wheels for fixed-income seniors, and is widely held as the "standard-bearer for liberalism". In his very first Senate roll he was the floor manager for the bill that turned U.S. immigration policy upside down and opened the floodgate for immigrants from third world countries..
9. Since that time, he has been the prime instigator and author of every expansion of an increase in immigration up to and including the latest attempt to grant amnesty to illegal aliens. Not to mention the pious grilling he gave the last two Supreme Court nominees, as if he was the standard bearer for the nation in matters of "what is right" What a pompous ass!
10. He is known around Washington as a public drunk, loud, boisterous, and very disrespectful to ladies. JERK is a better description than "great American". "A blonde in every pond" is his motto.
Let's not allow the spin doctors to make this jerk a hero -- how quickly the American public forgets what his real legacy is.
Send this on, as a LOT of the younger people don't have a clue about all of this, and us older ones tend to forget things that happened so many years ago.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Idiots in my inbox
I love getting forwards. It reminds me of why I am such a misanthropist. I got this message of tolerance in my inbox today. Enjoy.
USPS New 44-Cent Stamp!!! Celebrates Muslim holiday.
If there is only ONE thing you forward today.... let it be this!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of Pan Am Flight 103!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the Marine Barracks in Lebanon !
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the military Barracks in Saudi Arabia !
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the American Embassies in Africa !
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the USS COLE!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM attack on 9/11/2001 !
REMEMBER all the AMERICAN lives that were lost in those vicious MUSLIM attacks!
Now President Obama has directed the United States Postal Service to REMEMBER and HONOR the EID MUSLIM holiday season with a new commemorative 42 Cent First Class Holiday Postage Stamp..
REMEMBER to adamantly & vocally BOYCOTT this stamp, when you are purchasing your stamps at the post office.
All you have to say is "No thank you, I do not want that Muslim Stamp on my letters!"
To use this stamp would be a slap in the face to all those AMERICANS who d ied at the hands of those whom this stamp honors.
REMEMBER ~
pass this along to every Patriotic AMERICAN that you know and lets get the word out !!!
Here is something to chew on...
They (MUSLIMS) don't believe in Christ, & they're getting their own Christmas stamp! BUT,don't dare to dream of posting the ten commandments on federal property! This is truly UNBELIEVABLE !!!
USPS New 44-Cent Stamp!!! Celebrates Muslim holiday.
If there is only ONE thing you forward today.... let it be this!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of Pan Am Flight 103!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the Marine Barracks in Lebanon !
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the military Barracks in Saudi Arabia !
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the American Embassies in Africa !
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the USS COLE!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM attack on 9/11/2001 !
REMEMBER all the AMERICAN lives that were lost in those vicious MUSLIM attacks!
Now President Obama has directed the United States Postal Service to REMEMBER and HONOR the EID MUSLIM holiday season with a new commemorative 42 Cent First Class Holiday Postage Stamp..
REMEMBER to adamantly & vocally BOYCOTT this stamp, when you are purchasing your stamps at the post office.
All you have to say is "No thank you, I do not want that Muslim Stamp on my letters!"
To use this stamp would be a slap in the face to all those AMERICANS who d ied at the hands of those whom this stamp honors.
REMEMBER ~
pass this along to every Patriotic AMERICAN that you know and lets get the word out !!!
Here is something to chew on...
They (MUSLIMS) don't believe in Christ, & they're getting their own Christmas stamp! BUT,don't dare to dream of posting the ten commandments on federal property! This is truly UNBELIEVABLE !!!
Friday, July 31, 2009
Politics/Sports
I was at my wife's family reunion a few weeks ago when I entered a conversation with Karyn's uncle. Let's call him Ted. Every time I talk to Ted, I find him to be interesting and intelligent. However, Ted is a Republican, and I'm not. That's not to say I can't agree with some principles of the GOP. I'm not a member of the Democratic Party; I just skew blue.
Well, when the topic of Sarah Palin arose (which happened most likely because she had just resigned and we were in Alaska), Ted began vehemently defending her. His main thread of discussion was that Sarah Palin never said she could see Russia from her back yard. He was adamant. He was ready to fight. I knew enough not to engage him in an argument (because he was probably right [and, as it turns out, he was]), but other family members were not so reluctant. It became a discussion with much heat and little light. I became frustrated and said loudly, "she may not have said it, but that doesn't mean she's not an idiot."
Afterwards, I wondered why I got so frustrated. I have had productive political discussions with my Republican brother-in-law (let's call him Bill) that lasted for hours, and we ended up with more respect for each other at the end. I was trying to figure out the difference between Bill and Ted when I thought of an analogy that might apply.
I'm frustrated with Ted because he has chosen his political party the way many people choose their favorite sports team. That is, he has chosen his team, and nothing can dissuade him from rooting for them. While his initial selection may have been based on sound reasoning, that support has moved beyond reason--it has become visceral. Trying to convince Ted that the Democrats might be right is like trying to convince a Yankees fan that he should root for the Red Sox. It's impossible. Where can you even begin a discussion with a person like that?
To wit: I used to be on Ted's email list. He would send multiple emails a day full of links and articles, some of them non-partisan (say, about astronomy), but of all the partison ones, not one--not ONE--ever acknowledged a fault in a Republican or a virtue in a Democrat. It was entirely one sided. For instance, one of the articles he sent me during the last election contained this sentence: "over the last eight years the Democratic Party has completely given itself over to unrestrained hatred." Yeah, he's that kind of Republican.
But I wondered how, if the analogy held, Bill was different from Ted. Here's the difference: Bill bases his political views on principles, not labels. That is, Bill is strongly pro-life; that is his first criterion when choosing his candidate. Thus, if the Democratic candidate had a strong pro-life voting record (or if the Republican candidate had a weak one), Bill could be convinced to vote blue. To come back to the sports-rooting analogy, Bill's politics is like a baseball fan who loves "small ball": bunting, speed, pitching and defense. Maybe his hometown team plays small ball. But if MY hometown team plays small ball too, I could convince him to begin rooting for my team as well. And if his team moves away from playing small ball, he might even switch his allegiance to my team.
The contrast can be seen most starkly by my father's dilemma the last time the Giants were in the World Series. My father grew up listening to Giants broadcasts on the radio, and his favorite player is still Willie Mays. But the modern team was fielding Barry Bonds, a man my dad (and most of America) did not respect. What is a fan to do when his favorite team has the sport's greatest villain? My dad chose to root for the Giants, and every Bonds success during that series led me to needle my father: "your guy just hit got a hit...you must be so excited."
But now I realize that we simply choose based on a different criterion. And, of course, the sports analogy is trivial, but, just like my dad rooting for Barry Bonds, it must make people feel dirty to be forced to defend the intelligence of an idiot like Sarah Palin just because she is on your team.
Well, when the topic of Sarah Palin arose (which happened most likely because she had just resigned and we were in Alaska), Ted began vehemently defending her. His main thread of discussion was that Sarah Palin never said she could see Russia from her back yard. He was adamant. He was ready to fight. I knew enough not to engage him in an argument (because he was probably right [and, as it turns out, he was]), but other family members were not so reluctant. It became a discussion with much heat and little light. I became frustrated and said loudly, "she may not have said it, but that doesn't mean she's not an idiot."
Afterwards, I wondered why I got so frustrated. I have had productive political discussions with my Republican brother-in-law (let's call him Bill) that lasted for hours, and we ended up with more respect for each other at the end. I was trying to figure out the difference between Bill and Ted when I thought of an analogy that might apply.
I'm frustrated with Ted because he has chosen his political party the way many people choose their favorite sports team. That is, he has chosen his team, and nothing can dissuade him from rooting for them. While his initial selection may have been based on sound reasoning, that support has moved beyond reason--it has become visceral. Trying to convince Ted that the Democrats might be right is like trying to convince a Yankees fan that he should root for the Red Sox. It's impossible. Where can you even begin a discussion with a person like that?
To wit: I used to be on Ted's email list. He would send multiple emails a day full of links and articles, some of them non-partisan (say, about astronomy), but of all the partison ones, not one--not ONE--ever acknowledged a fault in a Republican or a virtue in a Democrat. It was entirely one sided. For instance, one of the articles he sent me during the last election contained this sentence: "over the last eight years the Democratic Party has completely given itself over to unrestrained hatred." Yeah, he's that kind of Republican.
But I wondered how, if the analogy held, Bill was different from Ted. Here's the difference: Bill bases his political views on principles, not labels. That is, Bill is strongly pro-life; that is his first criterion when choosing his candidate. Thus, if the Democratic candidate had a strong pro-life voting record (or if the Republican candidate had a weak one), Bill could be convinced to vote blue. To come back to the sports-rooting analogy, Bill's politics is like a baseball fan who loves "small ball": bunting, speed, pitching and defense. Maybe his hometown team plays small ball. But if MY hometown team plays small ball too, I could convince him to begin rooting for my team as well. And if his team moves away from playing small ball, he might even switch his allegiance to my team.
The contrast can be seen most starkly by my father's dilemma the last time the Giants were in the World Series. My father grew up listening to Giants broadcasts on the radio, and his favorite player is still Willie Mays. But the modern team was fielding Barry Bonds, a man my dad (and most of America) did not respect. What is a fan to do when his favorite team has the sport's greatest villain? My dad chose to root for the Giants, and every Bonds success during that series led me to needle my father: "your guy just hit got a hit...you must be so excited."
But now I realize that we simply choose based on a different criterion. And, of course, the sports analogy is trivial, but, just like my dad rooting for Barry Bonds, it must make people feel dirty to be forced to defend the intelligence of an idiot like Sarah Palin just because she is on your team.
Monday, July 06, 2009
Charters Aren't Smarter
A new study from Stanford University points out that charter schools are not the cure-all for our "failing" public schools.
The study reveals that a decent fraction of charter schools, 17 percent, provide superior education opportunities for their students. Nearly half of the charter schools nationwide have results that are no different from the local public school options and over a third, 37 percent, deliver learning results that are significantly worse than their student would have realized had they remained in traditional public schools.
The study reveals that a decent fraction of charter schools, 17 percent, provide superior education opportunities for their students. Nearly half of the charter schools nationwide have results that are no different from the local public school options and over a third, 37 percent, deliver learning results that are significantly worse than their student would have realized had they remained in traditional public schools.
Sunday, July 05, 2009
Thought
It occurred to me this morning that what is necessary in a consumer--impulsiveness--is the opposite of what is required to succeed in life--self-control.
So we are bombarded with messages--on billboards, television, the internet--to treat ourselves, to consume, to give in to our desires, and that is the world we swim in. Yet to succeed in school, at work, in our marriages, we must do the opposite. We must control our desires--we must delay our gratification. We don't see many TV ads for delayed gratification.
So we are bombarded with messages--on billboards, television, the internet--to treat ourselves, to consume, to give in to our desires, and that is the world we swim in. Yet to succeed in school, at work, in our marriages, we must do the opposite. We must control our desires--we must delay our gratification. We don't see many TV ads for delayed gratification.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Sunday, May 03, 2009
Funny stuff
Every week the New Yorker runs a humor piece called "Shouts and Murmurs," and often I fail to see the humor. However, the most recent one made me laugh out loud many times. This one starts as many do, with an excerpt from a real article:
To learn more about the biochemistry of addiction, scientists in Australia dropped liquefied freebase cocaine on bees’ backs, so it entered the circulatory system and brain.
The scientists found that bees react much like humans do: cocaine alters their judgment, stimulates their behavior and makes them exaggeratedly enthusiastic about things that might not otherwise excite them.
—The Times.
To learn more about the biochemistry of addiction, scientists in Australia dropped liquefied freebase cocaine on bees’ backs, so it entered the circulatory system and brain.
The scientists found that bees react much like humans do: cocaine alters their judgment, stimulates their behavior and makes them exaggeratedly enthusiastic about things that might not otherwise excite them.
—The Times.
Oh, my God, get over here . . . hurry . . . come on come on come on. Taste this nectar, taste it, taste it. . . . Slurp. . . . Is that not, is that not the best fucking thing you’ve ever had? Like nectar of the fucking Gods! It’s like the greatest hits of nectar. A double-album greatest hits, like those red and blue Beatles records where they’re looking down at us off a balcony but they have facial hair in one of them.....
Read the rest here.Sunday, April 26, 2009
A Great Movie Online for Free
One of the funniest documentaries I have ever seen, Off the Charts: The Song-Poem Cycle, is not available in its entirety on youtube.
In the back of magazines like Writer's Digest, songwriters advertise that, for a fee, they will turn your poem into a song.
The poems, the songs, and the people themselves are too complexly weird to be described--they must be experienced.
It's less than an hour long, and will stick with you longer than most movies you've seen. Trust me.
Find the film here.
In the back of magazines like Writer's Digest, songwriters advertise that, for a fee, they will turn your poem into a song.
The poems, the songs, and the people themselves are too complexly weird to be described--they must be experienced.
It's less than an hour long, and will stick with you longer than most movies you've seen. Trust me.
Find the film here.
Sunday, April 05, 2009
Losing the War
I just read the most amazing piece. It's called "Losing the War" by Lee Sandlin, and it was published in an anthology called "The New Kings of Nonfiction."
The piece is ostensibly about World War II, and how the reality of its horror and its banality has been lost to our generation. It is one of the best essays I have ever read. What it's really about, though, is much harder to grasp.
Most of us don't know much about the war, but even if you do, you might find this fascinating. For instance, here is his description of the "battle" of Midway. It's a long excerpt, but totally worth reading.
The piece is ostensibly about World War II, and how the reality of its horror and its banality has been lost to our generation. It is one of the best essays I have ever read. What it's really about, though, is much harder to grasp.
Most of us don't know much about the war, but even if you do, you might find this fascinating. For instance, here is his description of the "battle" of Midway. It's a long excerpt, but totally worth reading.
There was a battle soon after Pearl Harbor that may, better than any other, define just what was so strange about the war. Unlike most of the war's battles, it was contained within a narrow enough area that it can be visualized clearly, yet its consequences were so large and mysterious that they rippled throughout the entire world for years afterward. It happens that no American reporters were around to witness it directly, but it has been amply documented even so. From survivors' accounts, and from a small library of academic and military histories, ranging in scope and style from Walter Lord's epic Miracle at Midway to John Keegan's brilliant tactical analysis in The Price of Admiralty: The Evolution of Naval Warfare, it's possible to work out with some precision just what happened in the open waters of the Pacific off Midway Island at 10:25 AM local time on June 4, 1942.
In the months after Pearl Harbor the driving aim of Japanese strategy was to capture a string of islands running the length of the western Pacific and fortify them against an American counterattack. This defensive perimeter would set the boundaries of their new empire -- or, as they called it, the "Greater Asia Coprosperity Sphere." Midway Island, the westernmost of the Hawaiian Islands, was one of the last links they needed to complete the chain. They sent an enormous fleet, the heart of the Japanese navy, to do the job: four enormous aircraft carriers, together with a whole galaxy of escort ships. On June 4 the attack force arrived at Midway, where they found a smaller American fleet waiting for them.
Or so the history-book version normally runs. But the sailors on board the Japanese fleet saw things differently. They didn't meet any American ships on June 4. That day, as on all the other days of their voyage, they saw nothing from horizon to horizon but the immensity of the Pacific. Somewhere beyond the horizon line, shortly after dawn, Japanese pilots from the carriers had discovered the presence of the American fleet, but for the Japanese sailors, the only indications of anything unusual that morning were two brief flyovers by American fighter squadrons. Both had made ineffectual attacks and flown off again. Coming on toward 10:30 AM, with no further sign of enemy activity anywhere near, the commanders ordered the crews on the aircraft carriers to prepare for the final assault on the island, which wasn't yet visible on the horizon.
That was when a squadron of American dive-bombers came out of the clouds overhead. They'd got lost earlier that morning and were trying to make their way back to base. In the empty ocean below they spotted a fading wake -- one of the Japanese escort ships had been diverted from the convoy to drop a depth charge on a suspected American submarine. The squadron followed it just to see where it might lead. A few minutes later they cleared a cloud deck and discovered themselves directly above the single largest "target of opportunity," as the military saying goes, that any American bomber had ever been offered.
When we try to imagine what happened next we're likely to get an image out of Star Wars -- daring attack planes, as graceful as swallows, darting among the ponderously churning cannons of some behemoth of a Death Star. But the sci-fi trappings of Star Wars disguise an archaic and sluggish idea of battle. What happened instead was this: the American squadron commander gave the order to attack, the planes came hurtling down from around 12,000 feet and released their bombs, and then they pulled out of their dives and were gone. That was all. Most of the Japanese sailors didn't even see them.
The aircraft carriers were in a frenzy just then. Dozens of planes were being refueled and rearmed on the hangar decks, and elevators were raising them to the flight decks, where other planes were already revving up for takeoff. The noise was deafening, and the warning sirens were inaudible. Only the sudden, shattering bass thunder of the big guns going off underneath the bedlam alerted the sailors that anything was wrong. That was when they looked up. By then the planes were already soaring out of sight, and the black blobs of the bombs were already descending from the brilliant sky in a languorous glide.
One bomb fell on the flight deck of the Akagi, the flagship of the fleet, and exploded amidships near the elevator. The concussion wave of the blast roared through the open shaft to the hangar deck below, where it detonated a stack of torpedoes. The explosion that followed was so powerful it ruptured the flight deck; a fireball flashed like a volcano through the blast crater and swallowed up the midsection of the ship. Sailors were killed instantly by the fierce heat, by hydrostatic shock from the concussion wave, by flying shards of steel; they were hurled overboard unconscious and drowned. The sailors in the engine room were killed by flames drawn through the ventilating system. Two hundred died in all. Then came more explosions rumbling up from below decks as the fuel reserves ignited. That was when the captain, still frozen in shock and disbelief, collected his wits sufficiently to recognize that the ship had to be abandoned.
Meanwhile another carrier, the Kaga, was hit by a bomb that exploded directly on the hangar deck. The deck was strewn with live artillery shells, and open fuel lines snaked everywhere. Within seconds, explosions were going off in cascading chain reactions, and uncontrollable fuel fires were breaking out all along the length of the ship. Eight hundred sailors died. On the flight deck a fuel truck exploded and began shooting wide fans of ignited fuel in all directions; the captain and the rest of the senior officers, watching in horror from the bridge, were caught in the spray, and they all burned to death.
Less than five minutes had passed since the American planes had first appeared overhead. The Akagi and the Kaga were breaking up. Billowing columns of smoke towered above the horizon line. These attracted another American bomber squadron, which immediately launched an attack on a third aircraft carrier, the Soryu. These bombs were less effective -- they set off fuel fires all over the ship, but the desperate crew managed to get them under control. Still, the Soryu was so badly damaged it was helpless. Shortly afterward it was targeted by an American submarine (the same one the escort ship had earlier tried to drop a depth charge on). American subs in those days were a byword for military ineffectiveness; they were notorious for their faulty and unpredictable torpedoes. But the crew of this particular sub had a large stationary target to fire at point-blank. The Soryu was blasted apart by repeated direct hits. Seven hundred sailors died.
The last of the carriers, the Hiryu, managed to escape untouched, but later that afternoon it was located and attacked by another flight of American bombers. One bomb set off an explosion so strong it blew the elevator assembly into the bridge. More than 400 died, and the crippled ship had to be scuttled a few hours later to keep it from being captured.
Now there was nothing left of the Japanese attack force except a scattering of escort ships and the planes still in the air. The pilots were the final casualties of the battle; with the aircraft carriers gone, and with Midway still in American hands, they had nowhere to land. They were doomed to circle helplessly above the sinking debris, the floating bodies, and the burning oil slicks until their fuel ran out.
This was the Battle of Midway. As John Keegan writes, it was "the most stunning and decisive blow in the history of naval warfare." Its consequences were instant, permanent and devastating. It gutted Japan's navy and broke its strategy for the Pacific war. The Japanese would never complete their perimeter around their new empire; instead they were thrown back on the defensive, against an increasingly large and better-organized American force, which grew surgingly confident after its spectacular victory. After Midway, as the Japanese scrambled to rebuild their shattered fleet, the Americans went on the attack. In August 1942 they began landing a marine force on the small island of Guadalcanal (it's in the Solomons, near New Guinea) and inexorably forced a breach in the perimeter in the southern Pacific. From there American forces began fanning out into the outer reaches of the empire, cutting supply lines and isolating the strongest garrisons. From Midway till the end of the war the Japanese didn't win a single substantial engagement against the Americans. They had "lost the initiative," as the bland military saying goes, and they never got it back.
But it seems somehow paltry and wrong to call what happened at Midway a "battle." It had nothing to do with battles the way they were pictured in the popular imagination. There were no last-gasp gestures of transcendent heroism, no brilliant counterstrategies that saved the day. It was more like an industrial accident. It was a clash not between armies, but between TNT and ignited petroleum and drop-forged steel. The thousands who died there weren't warriors but bystanders -- the workers at the factory who happened to draw the shift when the boiler exploded.
Find the entire essay here.Thursday, April 02, 2009
Algorithms (not Al Gore Rhythms)
I was reading a book about behavioral psychology, and it mentioned that, when we enter a store, studies show we tend to turn right, no matter what we are looking for. I thought that was a weird human tic, but it made me think that, at a grocery store, the shorter lines are probably on the left, since most people go right instinctively. They walk down the aisle, turn right, and get in line.
So, I determined that, from now on, I will always go to the shortest line on the left. It's an algorithm I will follow. It made me start to think of other algorithms people follow. Brands are interesting algorithms. We tend to pick a brand we like (of shoes, of cars, of soft drinks, you name it) and stick with it. It makes the sometimes overwhelming decisions much easier to make. Confronted with too many choices? Go for the algorithm. I did it just yesterday, when confronted with the decision of where to take our vehicle to get it worked on. One was a national chain and the other was a local business. One of my algorithms is always go local. Right or wrong, it makes decisions easier.
It reminded me of a great algorithm that "The Sopranos" carried through an entire season, repeated often. It said, "more is lost through indecision than through bad decision." So, the algorithm basically said, just make a decision, and stop worrying about which is best. It may not always lead to the best outcome, but it prevents a person from being paralyzed due to overanalysis.
I'd be interested to hear anybody else's algorithms.
So, I determined that, from now on, I will always go to the shortest line on the left. It's an algorithm I will follow. It made me start to think of other algorithms people follow. Brands are interesting algorithms. We tend to pick a brand we like (of shoes, of cars, of soft drinks, you name it) and stick with it. It makes the sometimes overwhelming decisions much easier to make. Confronted with too many choices? Go for the algorithm. I did it just yesterday, when confronted with the decision of where to take our vehicle to get it worked on. One was a national chain and the other was a local business. One of my algorithms is always go local. Right or wrong, it makes decisions easier.
It reminded me of a great algorithm that "The Sopranos" carried through an entire season, repeated often. It said, "more is lost through indecision than through bad decision." So, the algorithm basically said, just make a decision, and stop worrying about which is best. It may not always lead to the best outcome, but it prevents a person from being paralyzed due to overanalysis.
I'd be interested to hear anybody else's algorithms.
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
How is it solved?
I'm reading an article about poker in the most recent New Yorker magazine, and I came across a statement that seems like it can't be true.
It says: "Games for which a flawless strategy is known are said to be solved. Tic-tac-toe is solved: blackjack is solved; checkers is solved. Chess is not solved, and poker is not, either. Solutions theoretically exist; they are simply too intricate, so far, to be comprehended. Among mathematicians, chess is regarded as a game of perfect information, because nothing is hidden. If its ideal strategy were discovered, there would no longer be any reason to play it--no move could be made for which the responses was not already identified. Poker is a game of imperfect information, since so much is concealed."
So, my question is: in what way is blackjack solved? Isn't the dealer's hole card concealed? Am I missing something?
You can read the abstract of the article here. You must be a subscriber to read the entire thing.
It says: "Games for which a flawless strategy is known are said to be solved. Tic-tac-toe is solved: blackjack is solved; checkers is solved. Chess is not solved, and poker is not, either. Solutions theoretically exist; they are simply too intricate, so far, to be comprehended. Among mathematicians, chess is regarded as a game of perfect information, because nothing is hidden. If its ideal strategy were discovered, there would no longer be any reason to play it--no move could be made for which the responses was not already identified. Poker is a game of imperfect information, since so much is concealed."
So, my question is: in what way is blackjack solved? Isn't the dealer's hole card concealed? Am I missing something?
You can read the abstract of the article here. You must be a subscriber to read the entire thing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
