I know I'm being pedantic, but...

I heard TV newscasters say this on TV the other night, and again read it online in the New York Times. "Warren Buffett is buying the Burlington Northern."

No, he isn't. That is, unless he invented a time machine, went back to the mid '90s, and bought it before it could merge with the Santa Fe, in which case I would think the development of time travel would be the main focus of the story. Berkshire Hathaway is buying the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation. At least get the railroad's name right.

Old English/New Mistake

"Monday on 'Good Morning Jacksonville,' the works of Shakespeare were done in Old English, but one performance troupe has found a way to translate it into hip hop."

The above quote is from a commercial that aired during Saturday's "Jeopardy!" I caught one grammatical error (the antecedent for "it" is "the works of Shakespeare") and one factual error (Shakespeare wrote in Early Modern English). I don't think I can deal with journalism such as this at 6AM on Monday.

Black friday run amok...

I will defend the commercialism of the holidays as much as anyone. Gift giving is an ancient way to reinforce friendships, and goes back to the very origins of Christmas. (I'd like to think the wise men bought their gifts.)

However, I don't participate in Black Friday. The malls and stores are too crowded--and it's not like there aren't other chances to buy Christmas presents.

The story about the Wal-Mart worker trampled to death really, really disturbs me. I have one very close friend who works in Wal-Mart in the Daytona area, and another in Indiana who recently quit her job with the store, so the thought of a worker at the chain being killed is especially chilling to me. What the HELL was wrong with the shoppers who burst into the store? Never mind the employee who was killed--once he fell, shoppers further back wouldn't have known he was there, and could have tripped over him unaware it was a person. It's horrible that the man was killed, but it was arguably an accident. But the shoppers who wouldn't leave are deeply disturbing--the shoppers who refused to leave the store and said "I've been on line since yesterday morning," are just insane--they not only apparently blew off Thanksgiving with their families to go to Wal-Mart (hello--Wal-Mart will be open again between Friday morning and Christmas), but they wouldn't leave even after someone had died! I'm cheap, but a Ferrari for $1 isn't a big enough bargain to make that behavior to seem reasonable to me.

I'd also add my condolences to the family of Jdimytai Damour; whether it was an accident or homicide, what happened to him is undeniably a tragedy.

Lipstick on a pig

If you're wondering why I'm already sick to death of the election cycle, this whole "lipstick on a pig" brouhaha is a perfect example. Let me share a few thoughts on the subject.

1. I don't for one moment believe McCain, Palin, or any of their partisans actually believe that Obama called Palin a pig, or meant to. Cut the crap. If this is a comment that merits an apology, then let's also demand to hear one from McCain, Cheney, Petraeus, and everyone else who has used this expression also.

2. As long as I'm questioning the sincerity of the Republicans' indignation, I would note that Palin compared herself to a dog with the original joke. "Pig" is not much better or worse than "dog." "Bitch" and "dog" are insults themselves. At this point, I would wonder if the whole point of that stupid joke was to create a lipstick reference so that if Obama used the cliche, they could cry foul over nothing.

3. Being fair to both sides, if Obama is as great a rhetorician as his partisans claim he is, why on earth is he using such a hackneyed old cliche?

4. Getting back to McCain and Palin, if they're really this mad over such a trivial perceived insult, then you certainly shouldn't want either in the oval office. It would be extraordinarily dangerous to the human race to have such a sensitive temper in control of the nuclear trigger. If these two get elected, you can count on four years of Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Castro, etc., using the word pig to excess.

5. Am I the only person who has noticed that there is very little discussion of agricultural policy in all this discussion of pigs? Or any real issue, for that matter?

Don't tell me this is news.

Pretty much ALL of ABC's 6:30 nightly newscast was devoted to the Democratic National Convention. Specifically, to the fact that they nominated Obama to be their presidential candidate.

If they had nominated (either) Clinton, that would be news. If that had nominated Richardson, that would be news. If they had nominated Ron Paul, it would REALLY be news since he's a Republican. The fact that they nominated Obama--the apparent candidate for several months--simply makes it an orchestrated and ridiculous formality to confirm what had previously been decided. Not news. It merits a one-sentence mention on the news broadcast; it doesn't warrant more than 24 minutes of live coverage.

The only news on the show was the story about Olympian Dara Torres getting surgery on her shoulder. So we're talking about six minutes. Give me a break!

The only interesting thing about such fluff is is thet don't do it again for the Republican Convention, does it reveal bias or learning that it was a waste of time with the Democrats?

Two (somewhat belated) thoughts about Sen. Edwards

I watched Sen Edwards' interview on ABC's Nightline on August 8. The truth be known, I did so more from habit than desire. I don't like him (or most politicians) and didn't really care what he had to say about his adultery. However, having done so, I did have two quickthoughts on the interview. Cheap shots, perhaps, but I feel they're fair.

1. I have a hard time thinking of a case where a politician seemed sleazier to me than that interview. Being in the Senate alone is usually enough to earn my mistrust, but in this case, the feeling I had after watching the interview wasscuzzy in the same way, but to a worse degree, that I felt after dealing with the flood when the toilet overflowed.

2. Although John Edwards said in the interview that, “My Lord and my wife have forgiven me.” I would note that neither of them actually appeared on the program to confirm this. We have only the word of an admitted liar.

Fielding questions

Some news stories just leave me skeptical. The recent investigations about lead in AstroTurf is a case in point.

On the one hand, I don't trust the government to look honestly into the safety of AstroTurf. Not with who know how many public schools on the hook to replace the stuff if it were dangerous.

On the other hand, I question whether this might not be a tempest in a teapot. After all, it's not like people are eating the stuff. You walk or run on it, wearing shoes typically. Isn't it possible, even if there is lead in the stuff, that it still might not be worth the expense to remove it?

They're fast--like Greyhounds

The headline "Six Arrested in Alleged Brothel Bus" pretty much says it all.

This redefines the whole concept of "Pimp My Ride."

On the other hand, it could get more people to ride mass transit. And I do mean ride.

And I'm not going to read anything else into the closing paragraph's line, "The three-day initiative led to the ultimate arrest of 69 other people..." just that it's an interesting number of arrests.

Chef's plans are hard to stomach.

According to a recent Reuters story, chef Gordon Ramsay is advocating fining restaurants that serve out-of-season produce. I don't know anything else significant about Ramsay's business plan or political views (I've seen ads for "Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares" which is/was hosted by him--that's all); so this could be a sarcastic comment, or a proposal suggesting a law where he doesn't really want the law, but does want to push people into eating only in-season fruits and vegetables. However, the report from Reuters seemed to indicate this was a serious proposal, I'm taking it as such, and on that basis, using it as a perfect example of someone wanting to misuse the law for personal benefit.

Ramsay is perfectly entitled to not want imported, out-of-season produce for any reason he may want. I'm sure he has his reasons to choose not to eat such fruits and vegetables: he may feel the energy used to import those products is wasteful and bad for the environment; he may feel that foreign agricultural workers are mistreated; he may feel it undermines traditional culture in some way. He is free to refrain from eating, buying, or serving that food he finds offensive for those reasons. No one should stop him from advocating the same course to others, either.

What is distressing about his desire to impose new laws and fines is that it goes beyond those choices. Everything I mentioned in the previous paragraph is something he is within his rights to do, but others are within their rights to do differently. Ramsay is trying to take away the choice. His reasons may be aesthetic--i.e., he simply finds it distasteful that people are eating foods in ways he doesn't like. Or they could be economic--i.e., his restaurants are losing business to other establishments because he won't serve foods that others will and that the public wants. Or they could be a combination of those reasons, or others I'm not thinking of. However, whichever of those motivations is behind his position is irrelevant. Others should be as free to make their culinary choices as Ramsay is to make his, but if the law he is advocating ever went into effect, the British public would have Ramsay's choices imposed upon them.

The bottom line is this: freedom requires tolerance. Other people will certainly do things that we think are stupid, wasteful, annoying, distasteful, or otherwise wrong. However, if those poor choices don't hurt us or others, then the proper course is to try and dissuade people from making such poor choices, but accept it and move on if they do anyway. Just because you or I don't like something doesn't mean it should be illegal.

Bubbles in the oil?

While I was watching the news tonight, I caught a comment that intrigued me. George Soros testified before the Senate last Tuesday that part of the run-up in oil prices was due to a speculative bubble.

I had always accepted what seemed to be the conventional wisdom about the high prices: that strong demand (economic growth in China, India, etc., Americans' refusal to drive more fuel efficient vehicles), and tight and uncertain supplies (instability/tension/war in Iraq, Sudan, Nigeria, Iran, Columbia, etc.; price manipulation by places like Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Russia, etc.; our own government's ridiculous refusal to drill in ANWR and offshore despite the presence of known oil reserves) lead to high prices just due to the laws of supply and demand. Since oil is relatively inelastic--people can't stop going to work, heating their homes in winter, buying food grown using diesel-powered machinery and petrochemical-based fertilizer and pesticides, etc.--the price was destined to rise until something gave; i.e., supply increased because the price was too high to resist entering the market, and/or demand dropped because the gas or whatever was simply unaffordable.

However, if part of the equation is pure speculation, then it suggests three things: first, it means that prices could go much higher than they otherwise might--in part because it's not rational forces controlling the market, but rather simple greed. Second, it suggests that at least prices won't stabilize anywhere higher than they are now--if part of the price now is due to speculation, and the speculators give up, then prices should drop. Third, it means it's going to be a lot harder to predict where prices are going, since it'll be hard to tell when when the bubble will burst.

I'm not sure Soros is right about this, but I'm not sure he's wrong, either. We'll see what happens in the future. It is something to think about, either way.

Random thoughts on the Green Line crashes

Last Wednesday, there was a crash on the el in Chicago, and also a crash on Boston's trolley system. Curiously, both crashes were on their respective cities' Green Line route.

1. I didn't catch any mix-ups where reporters made claims about one city's crash when they meant the other (such as referring to a trolley in Chicago). This is not to say it didn't happen, but I didn't catch it.

2. If you're looking for a real-life example of a true coincidence, this seems to be it: there is no common cause between the two accidents. (Also note: nothing happened on Washington, D.C.'s Green Line.) It is certainly odd that both accidents were on the "Green Line." (I should note that both cities use letter codes to indicate the final destination of the train; I suspect those codes were different, but I'm not 100% sure of that, either way; so, in some sense, it might not have been the same line.)

3. I'd worry if two crashes in one day will discourage mass transit use; in this day of rising gas prices, that would only make things worse.

The flying prince

A couple of weeks ago, Prince William flew a military helicopter to his girlfriend's house. There's nothing more romantic than a whirlybird on the front lawn.

What I find interesting about the story is that while critics called the flight "ridiculous and inappropriate," the government defended it, claiming "he achieved essential training objectives," that it was "fully authorized," and that the RAF claimed, "Battlefield helicopter crews routinely practice landing in fields and confined spaces away from their airfields as a vital part of their training for operations." Granted, helicopters in battle don't have great choices for landing sites, so picking oddball sites makes some sense. However, the obvious question that, it seems at least, no one has asked: when have RAF pilots previously flown to their girlfriends' homes?

This mistake always leaves me shaken up.

No! No! No!

In an article about the recent Mt. Carmel, IL, earthquake, CNN wrote, "The epicenter of the earthquake -- the strongest in the region in 40 years -- was about seven miles below ground and 38 miles north-northwest of Evansville, Indiana, the USGS said."

That was wrong. CNN was wrong, period. The epicenter was probably 38 miles north-northwest of Evansville, but it was not seven miles below the ground. The focus likely was seven miles below ground. However, the epicenter is ALWAYS on the SURFACE of the earth. Without exception. Ever. That's what "epicenter" means.

FAA--Fouling American Aviation

American Airlines, at the order of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has canceled thousands of flights this week, inconveniencing many thousands of passengers and costing the company tens of millions of dollars.

So, what exactly was wrong with the MD-80s. One would think that the engines were about to blow up or the wings fall off or something equally dramatic. One would be wrong. The twist ties holding bundles of wires together are a quarter of an inch too far apart.

How much do you want to bet that if McCain and Bush are still buddy-buddy in October, that the FAA won't be enforcing rules this disruptively right before the election?

A train wreck of fact checking

I know I'm nitpicking, but I'm still disappointed--apparently, no one at the Boston Herald knows the difference between a boxcar and a bulkhead flatcar. It wasn't a boxcar that hit the train near Canton Jct., and you can see that clearly in the slideshow with this story. Just get the facts right, please!

They also apparently have a buggy comment program also--I tried to post the above as a comment with the story, but I kept getting an "Invalid security code" error--I'm guessing their webpage doesn't like Firefox.

On the positive side--it seems the engineer of the commuter train in the wreck deserves some kudos.

Not Egg-aggerating

ABC News mentioned that Cadbury Eggs--a product I enjoy (perhaps too much) have gotten smaller. They think it's a way of increasing the price, as many products will do.

I, however, blame environmental problems. There's more bull these days. I think the heightened levels of bull have had an impact on the Easter Bunnies' habitat. This has lead to the clucking rabbits laying smaller eggs, and perhaps--though ABC News said nothing about this--fewer eggs, which will end with fewer egg-laying rabbits if we keep taking as many eggs as we have in the past.
The situation is dire!

Happy Easter.

Perhaps prostitution is exploitation

In the scandal that has resulted from Eliot Spitzer's tryst with a prostitute, the person I feel sorry for is Kristen. Kristen had to have sex with that self-righteous sleazeball for only $4300 without even the benefit of a bag on his head. Talk about an indecent proposal!

Land of the free?

As Americans, we tend to think of ourselves as living in a free country. The phrase "land of the free" is still in our national anthem. And I still believe we can certainly do things that people in many countries can't do.

However, there is one persistent fact that calls our free status into serious question: a VERY large number of Americans are in prison. By "a VERY large number," I mean more in either raw numbers or per capita than ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! Any other--that includes brutal tyrannies like Burma, North Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Cuba. (And, before you say "well, the tyrannies execute you instead of imprisoning you, the story linked to above mentions that we rank sixth worldwide in the number of executions--so that's not the explanation.) If the prison population were in a single city, it would be the fourth largest city in the nation.

Still feel free?

Specter haunting the Patriots

I would like to set the record straight--I am NOT a fan of the New England Patriots. Mind you, I can't prove any of this: however I believe the "Spygate" scandal was the tip of the iceberg. I do not for one moment believe that an otherwise honest team cheated only once against a much weaker team. I think the cheating was endemic, that it was partly what led to their successes in past years, and that continuing cheating was responsible for their "16-0" regular season and playoff success this year. Even though I had long wanted to see a team go undefeated, I was very sad when New England did it this year because I don't believe they did it honestly. As harsh as the NFL's penalties were, I believe they should have fined the team far, far more. My personal name for the team is the "New England Cameramen." I hope the Giants tear them to shreds in the Super Bowl this Sunday.

As much as I dislike the New England Cameramen, there is one thing I unquestionably hate more: showboating politicians. Sen. Arlen Specter chose the week before the Super Bowl to make a stink about the Spygate scandal. I cannot conceive how this could in any way be a matter appropriate for congressional investigation; at the absolute worst possible case, it may rise to a simple criminal case; and I'm not even sure it's that bad. (I'm not fond of grandstanding D.A.'s either, but if fraud laws were broken by high-profile entities, what can you do?) I don't see Specter as standing up for the integrity of the NFL, I see him as unproductively trying to get his name in the news.

Sen. Specter: instead of focusing on the Patriots, why don't you work to repeal the Patriot Act? Do something good for a change!

Sweet, new Chinese food?

I stumbled on a blurb on a local news website about Dunkin' Donuts opening its first franchise in mainland China. Buried deep in that story (well, as deep as possible in a seven paragraph blurb) was the comment, "The shops also will serve items customized for local tastes such as green tea and honeydew melon doughnuts..."

I can't speak for the local tastes of Shanghai, but I for one would like to try honeydew melon doughnuts--those sound good!