Three names of the new circulation-generating device known as the Time 100 warrant mention.
The first is Gov. Scott Walker, whose praise comes from a fellow Republican governor, New Jersey’s Chris Christie:
Leadership takes many forms in public office. One of the most difficult challenges is standing up for what you believe in when faced with relentless public attacks. Scott Walker faced that test and passed it with flying colors.
His battle to bring fairness to the taxpayers through commonsense reform of the public-sector collective-bargaining laws brought him scorn from the special interests and a recall election. Despite these threats, he stood tall. His reforms have brought tax reductions to his citizens and economic growth to his state. They have allowed public workers the freedom to choose whether to belong to a union. They have made Wisconsin a better place to live and work.
His reward? A resounding “re-election” in 2012 after the failed recall, prosperity for his state and the satisfaction of knowing that the public does recognize and appreciate an officeholder with the courage of his convictions. Governor Scott Walker is one of those leaders.
I’m not sure that essentially the same percentage margin as in his 2010 election counts as “resounding,” but that’s restrained compared with claims you usually see in political campaigns.
Then there’s Walker’s possible GOP presidential-candidate rival, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky), introduced to us by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell:
Any political party worth its salt is always on the lookout for converts. But no one in either party today brings the level of missionary zeal to the task that Rand Paul does. From Berkeley, Calif., to Detroit, my Kentucky colleague has been cheerfully clearing a path for Republican ideals in the unlikeliest precincts. And he’s done it with rare magnanimity, making common cause with anyone who agrees that an all-powerful government in Washington is a threat to individual liberty — and to the American project itself.
He has also embraced the 11th commandment made famous by Reagan, “not to speak ill of any fellow Republican.” But the real secret to Rand’s rapid rise from a Bowling Green operating room to the center of American politics is his authenticity. It’s a trait that’s obvious to anyone who has seen him come out of a D.C. television studio in Ray-Bans and shorts, or hold the Senate floor for half a day to get answers from an imperious White House.
Spend five minutes with Rand and it’s clear he doesn’t care what you look like or where you’re from. He’s beating the bushes for anyone who prizes liberty, and he’s forcing people to rethink the Republican Party. He’s showing them we’re as serious about the Bill of Rights today as we were in 1860, when another Kentucky Republican built our party’s first great coalition. He’s having fun too. And that’s contagious.
The third is The Evil Koch Brothers, introduced by another man liberals love to hate, Karl Rove:
David and Charles Koch are patriots. By grit, persistence and hard work, they built a $100 billion-a-year business that employs tens of thousands. They give generously to medical research, the arts, education, think tanks and science. They care deeply about the values that make success in America possible — free markets, freedom, limited government and competition.
This has led them to the political arena, where they give tens of millions and raise hundreds more to back candidates and causes. For this, they have been excoriated by the left, while the left remains hypocritically quiet when George Soros, Tom Steyer and other left-of-center rich spend to influence politics.
The Kochs have answered abuse with courage, giving encouragement to others on the center-right to get into the fight. Bless them for all they do and all the liberals they send into orbit.
Of those “tens of thousands,” about 2,400 of them work in Wisconsin. That must really grate Wisconsin Democrats and liberals who stupidly parrot their Dear Leader that business is bad.
As it happens, someone from something called California Technologies has put together what must be the most exhaustive list of songs about cars, not merely from A …
… to Z …
… but from 18 …
… to 928:
This list doesn’t cover every kind of car, but it’s pretty impressive nonetheless to include Buicks …
… Chevrolets …
… Oldsmobiles …
… Pontiacs …
… Fords …
… Lincolns …
… Mercurys …
… Chrysler, Dodge and/or Plymouth …
… and, though there are no AMCs, American Motors’ predecessor brand …
… and, yes, Corvettes:
I admit that I have not heard of most of these songs. Anyone who knows Jan and Dean thinks of “Dead Man’s Curve,” but have you heard of …
This song, not recorded by the group of the same name as the title, came out about the time I really really really really really really really really really wanted to drive:
The fans of brass rock (about which I last posted) are familiar with …
The one seat in a car that gets used 100 percent of the time is …
Bruce Springsteen has two songs about Cadillacs, one with a local reference:
The list also has a song by that well known singer Robert Mitchum:
Wherever Thunder Road is, there are too many songs about roads to include here:
There are also too many songs about what one might do in a car to include here:
Drive a car too fast? There are songs about that too:
What’s that? You have a truck, not a car? We’ve got you covered, friend:
And there are far too many songs about what cars provide — transportation freedom, the ability to go where you want to go when you want to go — to list here too:
Chicago is playing in the Overture Center in Madison Monday night.
Without my being there. The two words at the end of the first sentence are why, and those implications for the four-letter word “work.”
The song “25 or 6 to 4” …
… is about the torturous process of writing a song, but the words …
Waiting for the break of day Searching for something to say Flashing lights against the sky Giving up I close my eyes …
Staring blindly into space Getting up to splash my face Wanting just to stay awake Wondering how much I can take Should I try to do some more 25 or 6 to 4
Feeling like I ought to sleep Spinning room is sinking deep Searching for something to say Waiting for the break of day
… certainly could apply to journalism on deadline too. (The song title refers to 3:34 or 3:35 a.m.)
Chicago will be at the Riverside Theatre in Milwaukee Wednesday. Yes, I won’t be there either.
The Wisconsin statewide tornado drill is this afternoon, unless there is actual severe weather. (There are thunderstorms in the forecast, but probably not severe storms.)
Regular readers know that I have a (yet another) strange interest in tornadoes and severe weather, perhaps because I’ve managed to live in almost all of Wisconsin’s Tornado Alley, such as it is, including the brown county and the three red counties in the bottom half of the map:
Though I have yet to see a tornado, I’ve spent time in a school basement during one tornado warning, did a UW journalism class story on the aftermath of the 1984 Barneveld tornado, had a tornado warning during UW Marching Band practice (the tubas helpfully started yelling “Auntie Em! Auntie Em! It’s a twister!”), lived where a tornado hit the afternoon before that evening’s tornado spotter training session (when, of course, it snowed), had an airline flight delayed by a tornado warning, live-blogged severe weather, observed the ugly clouds to the west that were part of the first tornado in the state that year (producing this classic video), showed our foreign-exchange student our basement for one tornado warning (a few days after he saw hail for the first time in his life), and, last year, broadcasted a high school baseball playoff game during a tornado warning, the weather that accompanied which forced a two-day delay in finishing the game. (The game was finished under, of course, a severe thunderstorm watch.)
The National Weather Service, which apparently is acronym-happy as are all units of government, is trying to improve its storm warnings by Forecasting a Continuum of Environmental Threats, or FACET, or maybe FACETs:
FACET #1 THREATS
FACETs will allow forecasters to improve upon standard weather watches and warnings by delivering detailed hazard information through the use of “threat grids” that are monitored and adjusted as new information becomes available.
Threat grids will be based on a rapidly updating high-resolution stream of weather information fed by current and future scientific tools. Forecasters can interpret and communicate weather threats along with the uncertainty associated with the predicted trend. Decision-makers requiring longer lead-times such as hospitals and large venues can set their own threat threshold based on their specific needs. Threat grids will also support the development of new products that address high impact but non-severe weather events such as lightning and strong winds that are below-severe limits.
FACET #2 OBSERVATIONS AND GUIDANCE
The FACETs framework will adjust to advances in satellite, radar and surface observation technology that already aid the forecasters’ decisions.
It will also introduce new computer-model predictions of storm-specific hazards such as tornadoes large hail, and extreme local rainfall from NOAA’s Warn-on-Forecast research project. Forecasters will receive real-time statistical projections of a storm’s longevity, intensity and hazards from NSSL’s database of climatological storm-scale behavior. FACETs intends for grid-based threat information to be linked from the NOAA Storm Prediction Center broad national and regional outlooks, watches and discussions, flowing downstream into local NOAA National Weather Service (NWS) forecast products and warning grids.
FACET #3: FORECASTER DECISIONS
Forecasters are essential to the warning process and they will be trained to understand use the new warning system. FACETs will also explore the decision-making process of the forecaster, how the public grasps the information, and ways the messages could be crafted so they respond safely. …
FACET #5: USEFUL OUTPUT
Under FACETs, the NWS will still issue legacy products such as watches and warnings, but their products will include more impact-specific information including urgency, confidence, and variability.
All grid-based threat forecast information would be easily transferable to various geographic formats to streamline and enhance decision support services.
FACET #6: EFFECTIVE RESPONSE
Forecasters cannot anticipate how many people are exposed to a threat and how they will respond if faced with one. FACETs will find ways to fine-tune threat output in a way that people will choose to implement their safety plan. Any progress made in the previous five facets would be for naught if peoples’ responses will be ineffective or wrong. This is where social and behavioral sciences integration will have the greatest impact, although contributions of these disciplines are essential in all facets of the threat forecasting process (see below). Likewise, FACETs development work will involve officials in emergency management, law enforcement, broadcast media, public health and other disciplines to ensure your response to hazardous weather is the most effective response. …
FACET BINDING: FULLY-INTEGRATED SOCIAL SCIENCE
Social science will strengthen the link between each facet. Anthropology, for example, might reveal important insights into the decision-making process of the forecaster or the education process of the public. Similar applications can be said of economics, human factors, sociology, communication, human geography, political science, linguistics, and law.
A few visual aids from the PowerPoint might be helpful:
It’s all interesting to weather geeks, with a couple of provisos. You should find rather creepy FACET 6, which wants to “find ways to fine-tune threat output in a way that people will choose to implement their safety plan,” as well as fully integrating “economics, human factors, sociology … political science, linguistics, and law.” So is the NWS going to try to make not going into your basement during a tornado warning illegal?
There is a quote toward the end of the PowerPoint: “Learn how people respond to weather information and threats, accept that reality, and then build the system to work within that reality and still achieve the desired outcomes.” The words “accept that reality” are key, because thinking you’re going to change people’s behavior is excessively optimistic.
To that end, the NWS is switching storm warning language from English to, shall we say, Armageddonese through its Impact Based Warnings. Here’s a comparison of tornado warnings in 1967 …
… earlier this decade …
THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE IN BIRMINGHAM HAS ISSUED A
* TORNADO WARNING FOR…
NORTHEASTERN DALLAS COUNTY IN SOUTH CENTRAL ALABAMA…
* UNTIL 345 AM CDT
* AT 311 AM CDT…THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE INDICATED A SEVERE THUNDERSTORM CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A TORNADO. THIS DANGEROUS STORM WAS LOCATED NEAR OLD CAHABA PARK…OR 8 MILES SOUTH OF SELMONT-WEST SELMONT…AND MOVING NORTHEAST AT 55 MPH.
* LOCATIONS IMPACTED INCLUDE…
SELMONT-WEST SELMONT…SELMA…VALLEY GRANDE…MEMORIAL STADIUM…TYLER…GARDNER ISLAND…BURNSVILLE…CRAIG FIELD AIPORT…SELMA DRAG STRIP AND EDMUND PETTUS BRIDGE.
PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS…
TAKE COVER NOW. FOR YOUR PROTECTION MOVE TO AN INTERIOR ROOM ON THE LOWEST FLOOR OF A STURDY BUILDING.
&&
TO REPORT SEVERE WEATHER…
CALL 1-800-856-0758 OR TWEET YOUR REPORT USING HASHTAG ALWX
… and now in Wisconsin, among other states:
This is the NWS’ attempt to deal with the other main problem with storm warning language. The most common category of tornado warning is based on a Severe Thunderstorm Capable of Producing a Tornado, or as I call it STCOPAT. (The other two categories are tornadoes seen by human eyeballs, and radar-indicated tornadoes, as opposed to radar-indicated STCOPATs.) The STCOPAT usually doesn’t result in a tornado, but adding STCOPATs as a criteria has increased the number of tornado warnings, and therefore the number of tornado warnings that don’t pan out, and therefore the number of storm warnings that get ignored. And, as my favorite online meteorologist Mike Smith wrote, too many of the latter lead to disasters like the Joplin, Mo., tornado. Joplin had plenty of advance warning; many of the 161 dead died because they ignored the tornado warnings because so many previous tornado warnings had resulted in nothing happening.
To prevent ignoring warnings, we are supposed to believe that amping up the language — “YOU ARE IN A LIFE THREATENING SITUATION!” — will get more people to pay attention. Smith doesn’t believe the second will help the first, and he’s right. Notice that the sample warning is not a confirmed tornado; it’s another STCOPAT. More warnings and more pointed language isn’t the answer, as Smith notes:
Here is an article concerning changes in strategy in tornado warnings from the National Weather Service. …
From about 1999 to 2007, the National Weather Service put a strong emphasis on increasing “lead time,” which is the interval from when thewarningis issued to when the tornado occurs. As the article mentioned, the average lead time at Birmingham (and many NWS offices) is 16 minutes. That is excellent and, in my opinion, more than sufficient.I believe the NWS needs to transition from putting much of its emphasis on increasing lead time to increasing the accuracy and reliability of tornado warnings.More accurate warnings with 12-15 minutes of lead time would be a major step forward.
Meanwhile, the NWS’ Storm Prediction Center, which issues watches (as opposed to the local NWS offices, which issue warnings) is also working on Fun with Maps:
The proposal adds more categories on the low end to delineate more exactly, or so it’s hoped, how likely severe weather is. That doesn’t change the high end …
It’s hard to see how this will improve things up here in the land of unpredictable weather. Wisconsin has had tornadoes every month of the year except February, including Jan. 7, 2008, my parents’ wedding anniversary.
The severe forecast the day of June 7, 2007 was, to use a word, apocalyptic.
That day was the first time I had ever seen a school district cancel its graduation because of forecasted severe weather. And indeed a huge tornado did carve up much of the Northwoods …
… but most of the rest of the state didn’t get severe weather at all. Not even rain or clouds.
Did the NWS screw up, or did the weather change that day? My guess is the latter. This is a state in which eight months of the year have had tornadoes or snow, and in some cases both the same day, or within one day of each other.
Today is the 100th anniversary of the first baseball game played at what now is Wrigley Field in Chicago.
Wrigley Field wasn’t known as Wrigley Field when it opened April 23, 1914; it was Weegham Park, then Cubs Park, before the Wrigley family, of chewing gum fame, purchased the Cubs. Tribune Co. didn’t change the park’s name when it purchased the Cubs in 1980, and neither has the Ricketts family, the current owners.
The Chicago Tribune, former owner of the Cubs, has a cool page of Wrigley’s past, present and proposed future.
Perhaps ironically given where I’ve lived my entire life, I have seen more Cubs games than Brewers games, between in-person attendance and watching on TV. But that’s not really ironic given the Cubs’ long relationship with WGN-TV, which formerly televised nearly all Cubs games for decades.
The important games to televise were home games. That way viewers could see how nice Chicago can be on a nice summer day — the green grass, the ivy, and, when the wind was blowing out, plenty of offense.
The games were first announced by the eternal optimist, Jack Brickhouse. After Brickhouse retired in 1981, the Cubs brought in Harry Caray, formerly of the White Sox and before that the Cardinals.
Caray’s moving across Chicago was one of the many things Tribune did after purchasing the Cubs. The other things included bringing in unprecedented, well, competence. Dallas Green, manager of the 1980 World Series champion Phillies, was hired as general manager, and raided his former team and its farm system to bring in players who could actually play — shortstop Larry Bowa, outfielders Gary Matthews and Bob Dernier, catcher Keith Moreland (who moved to right field because he could hit), pitcher dick Ruthven, and, most importantly, second baseman Ryne Sandberg. Green also traded for third baseman Ron Cey from the Dodgers and, most importantly, traded for pitcher Rick Sutcliffe at midseason.
During high school and college, when I wasn’t at work, I’d sit outside, work on my tan, and have Caray in the background, mispronouncing player names, saying names backwards, giving birthday greetings and get-well wishes, and either flying or dying with the Cubs that day. Games usually started at 1:20 p.m. after the Lead-Off Man at 1, hence the time of this post.
Caray worked with former Cub and White Sox pitcher Steve Stone. They were a great combination, because Stone would correct when necessary. Working with Caray wasn’t always the greatest experience, according to his former broadcast partner, but Stone wrote a book, Where’s Harry?, in which Stone admitted he missed Caray.
I’ve been to Wrigley a few times — happily, never when the weather has been bad there. The first time we went there, we parked at a convent, with a nun in full habit and Cubs hat taking our money. The last two times, we parked at a bowling alley and walked a few blocks past, shall we say, a leather goods store.
Following the Cubs is like having followed the Packers in the 1970s and 1980s — a few moments of joy interspersed among years of failure.
The 1984 Cubs stunned everyone by actually winning their division, then taking a two-game lead in the best-of-five National League Championship Series. And then Cubs fans’ hearts were broken by the Padres’ three straight wins, including a walk-off home run by Steve Garvey in game four, and the winning runs scoring unearned in game five.
Five years later, the 1984 manager, Jim Frey, was the general manager, and Frey hired his friend Don Zimmer to be the field manager. In some ways, 1989 was even more improbable than 1984, because it seemed as though every decision Zimmer made worked — having rookies bat leadoff and third, replacing pitchers and hitters in mid-at-bat, having Mitch “Wild Thing” Williams as your closer.
A nationally televised game against San Francisco looked like a lost cause until the Cubs scored three runs with two out in the bottom of the ninth to tie the game, then won it two innings later when pitcher Les Lancaster, career batting average .098, hit one of his four career doubles and drove in one of his five career runs. Cubs 4, Giants 3 in a game that made you think that there might be something going on this season.
Nine years after that, the Cubs essentially won a playoff berth for Caray, who died before the season began. The Cubs brought in Harry’s grandson, Chip, to work with his grandfather, but unfortunately it didn’t happen.
Then came 2003, when the Cubs not only won the NL Central and their first playoff series since their 1908 World Series win. They took a three-games-to-two lead back into game six of the National League Championship Series, leading Florida 3–0, needing five outs to clinch their first World Series berth since 1945. And then …
The collapse following the Bartman incident was epic even for the Cubs. The Marlins scored eight runs after the Bartman incident, won that game 8–3, and then won the next night 11–6. The last 11 innings of the 2003 NLCS might be an example of the one thing the 2003 Cubs apparently didn’t have — player leadership, of the Matthews/Kirk Gibson/Joe Girardi variety. (Matthews, who was known as “Sarge” during his playing career, was the Cubs’ hitting coach.) At any point after the Bartman incident, someone should have called time out, gone to the mound, gathered all the on-field players together, and told them to get their heads out of their asses and finish the inning, with as many expletives as necessary to get the point across.
That incident basically finished the Cubs as lovable losers, and made them just losers. Even though the Cubs won the NL Central in 2008 over the Brewers, the Cubs were swept in the National League Division Series. (The wild-card Brewers managed to win a game in their NLDS.) The last two seasons, the Cubs won 61 and 66 games. (That’s out of 162, for those unfamiliar with the length of a Major League Baseball season.) Harry Caray is gone, and the Cubs aren’t on free (that is, cable) TV nearly as often anyway. Renovations are planned for Wrigley Field despite substantial neighborhood opposition.
And, yes, the Cubs have no prospect of a World Series win anytime in the foreseeable future. But hey, anybody can have a bad century.
Steve Prestegard.com: The Presteblog 