• Postgame schadenfreude, Big D edition

    December 16, 2013
    Packers

    Occasionally after a big win over a big Packers rival — usually the Bears or Vikings — I like to bring blog readers the perspective of the losing side’s news media, which often turn on the team they’re covering.

    That particularly is the case with Sunday’s improbable 37-36 Packers win over Dallas, in which the Cowboys blew a 26-3 halftime lead. The comeback matched the 1982 season-opening game in which the Los Angeles Rams scored the game’s first 23 points, but the Packers scored the last 35 points.

    The Cowboys are one of the Packers’ three biggest outside-the-division rivals. (The other two are San Francisco and the New York Giants.) There’s the Ice Bowl, of course (along with the NFL championship game one year earlier), and the Cowboys’ domination of the Packers in their infrequent ’70s and ’80s meetings. But when Jerry Jones bought the Cowboys, and when the Cowboys ended three consecutive postseasons, that’s what stokes a rivalry.

    Perhaps this photo of Jones should be on page 1 of today’s Metroplex newspapers:

    Or, in the words of Cowboys fan Hank Hill of Arlen, Texas:

    ESPN Dallas called the game a “Total Meltdown”:

    The Cowboys had a 23-point lead against a backup quarterback and could not close the deal as they continued to find inventive ways to lose in 2013 as well as continue their December woes.

    Tony Romo threw two fourth-quarter interceptions. The first led to Green Bay’s game-winning touchdown and the second killed any chance the Cowboys had of coming back for the win. …

    Romo’s final pass was picked off by Tramon Williams with 1:22 to play and it sent the Cowboys fans rushing to the exits and the large number of Packers fans into hysteria after Walt Coleman overturned what had been called an incomplete pass.

    Two weeks after Sports Illustrated gushed over Romo, the Dallas Morning News has a different opinion:

    1.) Another poor finish to put on Tony Romo’s resume. The Cowboys’ franchise quarterback threw two interceptions in the final minutes and he has no one to blame but himself. As great as Romo has been at times in his career, there’s no denying that his critical mistakes is what he will be forever known for. Romo had a chance to put this game on ice when he threw deep to Dez Bryant late in the fourth quarter on first down. Yes, the Cowboys should’ve ran the ball, but Bryant was wide open and Romo under threw him. The two picks followed and the Cowboys might’ve just watched a playoff berth go out the window.

    2. The defense was bad, but you shouldn’t have expected anything different. The injuries and poor scheme have done this franchise no favors. It’s not fair, but the offense has to carry this team. Sunday against a bad Green Bay club, they couldn’t get the job done. The blowout on Monday night was bad, but the way they lost Sunday is even more embarrassing.

    The Fort Worth Star-Telegram has a quote about Romo’s interception that set up the game-winning touchdown that will make Cowboys fans scream:

    Five plays later, Romo was intercepted by Sam Shields at midfield with 2:50 left in the game.

    “It’s a run call. That specific time, we should have run the ball,” Romo said. “It’s tough. They overloaded the side we were going to run the ball to. It’s my fault putting the ball in position for the defense to make a play.” …

    Two plays after the ensuing kickoff, Romo was intercepted by Tramon Williams with 1:22 left to play. On first down, Romo threw 9 yards to Beasley. On second down, Williams intercepted Romo on a similar play intended for Beasley. Beasley stopped on the route and Romo threw outside.

    The News’ Rainer Sabin pursues the failure-to-run angle:

    The Cowboys seemed determined to throw even in situations that didn’t require them to pass. Case in point: The interception that was the Cowboys’ coup de grace. The original play was a run but Tony Romo checked out of it and sealed Dallas’ fate.

    “Certainly it didn’t work out well for us,” head coach Jason Garrett said. “We’ll go back and look at what we did.”

    The film will show that the Cowboys curiously marginalized DeMarco Murray in a game he averaged 7.4 yards per carry and gained 134 yards. Murray faded in the background as the Cowboys carried the ball seven times in the second half and played like a team aiming to overcome a deficit as opposed to one trying to maintain a lead.

    It was uncertain how Murray felt about how his reduced involvement after his day began with great promise when he sliced through the Packers front during a 41-yard dash in on the team’s second possession. After carrying the ball 18 times in a game in which Tony Romo had 51 dropbacks, the third-year tailback disappeared from the locker room by the time the media invaded the premises. But the man he runs behind, newly-acquired fullback Tyler Clutts, was there. Asked to explain why the Cowboys didn’t keep feeding the ball to Murray, Clutts didn’t give a definitive answer.

    “I don’t know,” he said. “We’ve got to control what we can and we didn’t do enough to win the game. Simple as that.”

    Clutts joined the team earlier this month. By then, the Cowboys had shown that they were so committed to throwing to the ball that they sometimes paid for their allegiance to that pass-first philosophy. In a close-shave victory over Minnesota last month, Tony Romo dropped back 54 times and the Cowboys called eight running plays.

    A week later, in a blowout loss to New Orleans, they dug themselves a hole at the end of the first half when Romo misfired three consecutive times on one series. The Saints got the ball back, scored a touchdown and cruised to an easy win. Essentially the same scenario unfolded last Monday in a deflating defeat to Chicago. Near the end of the second quarter, Romo threw errantly on three straight downs, the Cowboys punted, and the Bears scored just before the break to take a commanding lead.

    Then came Sunday.

    “At different times in the second half, we probably could have run the ball more,” Garrett said.

    But they didn’t. After building a substantial lead, the Cowboys, who entered Sunday throwing 64.1 percent of the time, were reluctant to feature Murray. In the final two quarters, the Cowboys carried out 11 plays on second-down – when the decision to run or pass is usually a toss-up – and Murray was handed the ball on only one of them.

    Garrett, who hears Callahan’s play-calls through the headset he wears, acted as if he was powerless over how the offense was managed during the period when they lost control of the game.

    “We wanted to mix run and pass,” Garrett said. “…We’ll go back and evaluate and see how well we did that.”

    About clock management: In the NFL, the 40-second play clock begins after the end of the play, when the official either waves the game clock to a stop or raises his hand and blows his whistle. (In high school and college, the play clock starts when an official spots the ball at the new line of scrimmage.) So if an NFL team does nothing but hand off and gains not one single yard, that team can take 2 minutes, plus however long the plays take to run, off the clock. Given that, the only way the Packers could have stopped the clock in the fourth quarter is by using their time outs and with the two-minute warning. The bizarre thing is that, thanks to Shields’ interception, Packers fans probably thought Eddie Lacy scored too soon with 1:31 left.

    But as the News’ Brandon George reports, it wasn’t just the offense:

    The Cowboys actually forced Green Bay to punt Sunday six days after Chicago never did in a Monday night meltdown.

    But Packers punter Tim Masthay was nowhere to be found in the second half.

    After only allowing Green Bay a 57-yard field goal in the first half, the Cowboys’ NFL-worst defense showed its true colors in the second half.

    The Packers scored touchdowns on all five second-half possessions before they kneeled three consecutive times to end the Cowboys’ misery.

    After the Cowboys blew a 26-3 halftime lead, owner Jerry Jones still said he has “a lot of confidence” in defensive coordinator Monte Kiffin because of his experience.

    The Cowboys played the entire second half with their top four linebackers out with injuries. Their top two defensive linemen – DeMarcus Ware and Jason Hatcher – combined for only one tackle.

    “The second half was a complete debacle,” Cowboys cornerback Brandon Carr said, “and they took advantage of us. We couldn’t get off the field once again.”

    A Cowboys’ defense that held Green Bay to 1-for-6 on third-down attempts in the first half couldn’t get the Packers to punt in the last two quarters.

    Green Bay converted 6-of-7 third-down attempts in the second half. The only one they didn’t convert was the third-down kneel by Green Bay quarterback Matt Flynn to end the game.

    The News’ Tim Cowlishaw blames, well, everyone:

    An organizational failure of epic proportions. Sunday’s 37-36 loss to Green Bay at AT&T Stadium was nothing less and, when it comes to head coach Jason Garrett, the hot seat is back in play.

    The old “clock management” issue that troubled Garrett in seasons past was reopened Sunday…even if Garrett all but suggested he has no control over it.

    Meanwhile, the bad news for Garrett is that the Cowboys have blown four leads of 20 or more points and, while one came in 1965 before the team ever had a winning record and another in 1988 when Tom Landry was about to get fired, the top two have come on Garrett’s watch.

    Here’s another stat that isn’t pretty. The Packers tied their team record for biggest comeback (23 points), and they’ve only been in the NFL since about a decade before the Great Depression.

    What the Cowboys are experiencing is a fairly standard December recession. Still, I think the head coach has plenty of help in making these awful things happen.

    Garrett’s not the type to point fingers directly, pull a Bill Parcells and say “I’m not the one who committed all those penalties.”

    Then again when asked about the failure to protect a lead — specifically about throwing late when they should have been running and forcing Green Bay to use timeouts — Garrett could not have been more direct.

    “The idea was to run the ball and use the clock,” he said, then explained how the  system allows Tony Romo to change to pass plays if he sees nine defenders geared to stop the run.

    He also made it clear about where those play calls are coming from.

    “Bill (Callahan) calls the plays,” Garrett said. No hesitation, no suggestion that his headset gives him any more access to play calls than a Jeff Gordon fan listening to the 24 team’s radio during a NASCAR race.

    Cowboys owner Jerry Jones said last month that Garrett was coming back for 2014. That doesn’t mean it’s written in stone — he was pretty steadfast about Chan Gailey coming back in 1999 right up until he fired him two days after a playoff loss in Minnesota. …

    We are running out of things to say about how bad Monte Kiffin’s defense is, how irrelevant DeMarcus Ware has become, how many relative no-name receivers Brandon Carr can’t cover (add the Packers’ Jarrett Boykin to the roll call) and so on.

    A Green Bay team that managed three points in the first half scored five touchdowns in the second, three of them on 80-yard drives.

    The Cowboys offense could have limited the carnage had Romo avoided those (gulp) two late interceptions. Yes, the entire world should know by now that Cole Beasley cut short his route on the final ill-fated throw. Beasley, Garrett and Romo made sure of that with their post-game remarks.

    The Star–Telegram’s Randy Galloway adds:

    The easy answer is this:

    Fire everybody. Now.

    But since there’s nobody to jettison Jerry Jones, that allows his butt to wiggle off the hook. For nearly two decades, Jerry has done no time for his multiple football crimes.

    Speaking, however, of blame:

    Honk if you are guilty of having overrated Mr. Jones’ current maggot-mess of a football club.

    Personally, I’m leaning on the horn based on a seasonlong assessment that the Cowboys were the epitome of NFL mediocrity.

    The month of December, however, has totally exposed the fallacy of that theory.

    Mediocrity would be a pronounced upgrade. Instead, this is simply a decaying club, which between Chicago last Monday night and here at the Big Yard on Sunday afternoon is rotting from the head down. Jerry’s head. 

    But let’s not waste time here. We need to get right to Tony.

    Green Bay’s second half offensive tsunami swept the Cowboys into the history pages for dubious franchise deeds with a 37-36 win column rescue by the Packers, drawing the obvious question of “worst loss ever?”

    The answer is yes. Simply because it was the latest loss that defied logic.

    But at his going financial rate of $108 million, Tony Romo was outplayed for the second game in six days by a backup quarterback. This time, Matt Flynn. Last week, Josh McCown.

    In Romo’s defense, he isn’t facing the depleted Cowboys’ defense, which even outdid itself in incompetence by giving up five straight touchdown drives in Sunday’s second half as Green Bay rallied from a 26-3 intermission deficit.

    Then again, it’s not like the Packers, or the Bears last week, don’t have some serious defensive problems of their own.

    But Romo throwing interceptions on the Cowboys’ last two possessions, one pick while attempting to milk a five-point lead, the other while attempting to get into field-goal position for the trusty foot of Dan Bailey, is the way this loss closed out.

    The last pick was not Romo’s fault. Young receiver Cole Beasley simply cut off a sideline route.

    The other one? Good grief, Tony. …

    Romo dodged a defender who came loose on the play, but then his pass was a tad behind Miles Austin. Such a game-changing opportunity did not elude cornerback Sam Shields.

    But so much of the second half came down to the Cowboys not using the run game enough, particularly since it was effective all afternoon.

    Then again, when the game became a shootout, the emphasis was on the Cowboys putting up points. “It’s easy to look back now and say, ‘Run the ball, run the ball,’ but at the same time, if they are going to have numbers [the Packers stacking the defensive box], it’s a tough situation,” Romo said.

    “What I have to do is a better job of protecting the ball, and I didn’t do a good enough job of that. I will next time.”

    The News’ Barry Horn passes on the comments of Fox Sports’ Joe Buck and Troy Aikman:

    Aikman and play-by-play voice Joe Buck proved an excoriating tag team in their critique of the Cowboys play calling and clock management in Dallas’ 37-36 come-from-ahead loss to the Green Bay Packers in front of a national television audience.

    In the end, Buck concluded the loss “is going to go down as one of the worst defeats in the history of the Dallas Cowboys.”

    Added Aikman: “It’s hard to explain but the clock management by the Dallas Cowboys was about as bad as I’ve seen.”

    That would include the play calls that ran through Coach Jason Garrett, once Aikman’s backup with the Cowboys and still his friend.

    Just minutes before as the Packers were en route to their game-winning touchdown Aikman called out star defensive end DeMarcus Ware, who had been invisible all game.

    “This is where DeMarcus Ware needs to show up,” Aikman told America. “He was challenged this week. He’s been a non-factor all afternoon.”

    Ware didn’t show. …

    Recall that the Cowboys led 26-3 at the half and they still led 29-17 as the third quarter wound down. Inexplicably, the Cowboys insisted on throwing the ball despite a successful running attack by DeMarco Murray, who was running with ease. He was averaging seven yards per carry. Running eats clock. Just what the Cowboys needed most.

    After three consecutive incompletions all Aikman could say about the choice of plays had been a “big mistake.”

    In the wake of one seemingly ill-timed Romo pass, the four words America heard were: “Are you kidding me?”

    Considering the source it was a four-word indictment harsher than anything tweeted or written in its wake.

    And there was Buck coming off the top rope when Packers defensive back Sam Shields intercepted a Romo pass on a second-down-and-six at the Cowboys 35 yard-line with a little less than three minutes remaining. Murray had just rushed for four yards.

    “Why the Dallas Cowboys refused to run the ball in this situation is inexplicable,” Buck said. “The play calling of the Dallas Cowboys will come under serious question.”

    USA Today poured gasoline on the fire:

    After a furious Green Bay Packers comeback on Sunday cut a 26-3 halftime Cowboys lead to 36-31, Dallas had the ball up five points with just over two minutes remaining. On a second-and-6, when almost every other NFL team would be running the ball to milk the clock, Romo dropped back, scrambled away from a rush and threw an inexplicable, indefensible interception that led to the game-winning score for the Packers.

    Then, when he had a chance at redemption with 1:20 remaining and his team down one point, Romo threw another pick, ending the game and bailing out the Philadelphia Eagles for an earlier loss in Minnesota. Now, the NFC East is in the hands of Philly, not Dallas, because Romo couldn’t keep the ball away from the Packers.

    The Romo defenders, and there are plenty out there, will say the biggest story of the game is the absolute second-half collapse of the Dallas defense. It’s not Romo’s fault his team’s defense gave up five second-half touchdowns on the first five second-half possessions to a team that could barely win a game without Aaron Rodgers as a starter. And it’s not his fault the Dallas play calls were for passes instead of runs on the clock-killing possession at the end of the game.

    These things are all true — though, there’s criticism when teams throw late (“they’re being too reckless) and there’s criticism when they run, (they’re playing it too safe) and these gripes always fit snugly into the game narrative. The Dallas defense is terrible and the playcalling was baffling. But the defense didn’t throw behind Miles Austin on the first pick, nor did it float a pass to a wideout who stopped on his route on the second. That’s on Romo and that’s life in the NFL. Quarterbacks are the heroes and quarterbacks are the goats and there’s rarely an in between.

    The Cowboys were not the only victims Sunday:

    This police motorcycle reportedly was run over by the Packers’ team bus.

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Postgame schadenfreude, Big D edition
  • The roadblock at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

    December 16, 2013
    US politics

    Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post:

    Lefty pundits will tell you that the source of all dysfunction inside the Beltway is Republicans. Let’s concede that a segment of Republicans — the “no” crowd, the shutdown squad, the spoilers of Plan B on the fiscal cliff — have been beyond unhelpful in addressing our countries problems. But frankly the key to unlocking gridlock is taking President Obama out of the picture.

    Consider that the lopsided budget deal came about because Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) essentially shut out the White House. An immigration bill got through the Senate only because Obama was kept at arm’s length; whenever he popped up, the process tended to stall. The resolution of the shutdown came from Senate Democrats and Republicans, not Obama. The original Budget Control Act was also a bipartisan legislative solution after Obama  undid the grand bargain with the House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio).

    Even on foreign policy progress happens unless the White House intervenes. Republicans and Democrats were linked arm in arm on Iran sanctions and an additional House resolution until the White House bullied the Dems into holding off (for now). Agreement on the defense authorization act and compromise on sexual assault investigations also excluded the White House.

    Maybe the key to progress, then, is keeping both the far right and the president out of the mix.

    It is easy to see why the president is a disruptive factor. For starters, he believes opponents are stupid or evil and refuses to take their concerns as genuine. If you don’t understand the other guy it’s awfully hard to make a deal. That in turn leads to his favorite, unhelpful tactic — traveling around the country to excoriate Republicans. All this does is stiffen the spines of the left flank in his own party while annoying the Republicans.

    The problems don’t stop there. A refusal to communicate with Congress (even members of his own party), a disinclination to get into or present the nitty-gritty details of legislation, a determination to make the other guys look bad even at the expense of a deal and the predilection for second-rate yes-men who don’t give him an accurate picture of the Congress or the country all combine to make Obama one of the least effective executives in recent times. His single “achievement” is the disastrous Obamacare, jammed through on a party-line vote when he had majorities in both houses. Since then? Nothing.

    Some pundits make the case for strengthening the executive branch to avoid gridlock. Congress is so messy, so riddled with “special interests,” you see. Well, there is a reason the Founding Fathers tried to make Congress preeminent (Article I is the Congress, with top billing). Surely they were concerned with an executive who would become like the monarchs of the Old World and exercise dictatorial power. But there is another excellent reason to tip things Congress’s way: Because of staggered terms you have legislative continuity (even more so with gerrymandering) and a body of collective judgment that is broader and more diverse than a single chief executive can offer. If you have one cruddy president and an executive-heavy government, the country is out of luck for his term (need I say more?); whereas the Congress is generally not hobbled by a single defective person or rotten idea.

    You don’t want to make permanent, constitutional changes based on one president or even one era of government, but the Obama example should remind conservatives that Congress is really where the action should be. The give and take –checks and balances and legislative process — as we know, is slow and deliberate, making radical change difficult. That has generally served conservatives well. But what about the crazies on the right (especially) running amok? And how do we solve problems that need solving?

    These concerns are real, but the solution is not an institutional or constitutional one. Certainly, campaign finance laws that push money out of political parties and into the hands of extreme groups that can boost similarly extreme candidates is one problem that has a fix (repeal McCain-Feingold). But more generally, Congress can improve its output by also  strengthening leadership in both bodies. Note the difference between the shutdown and this budget fight, the latter in which an emboldened speaker of the House is willing to rhetorically and legislatively beat down the far right.

    Ironically with outside money and the end of earmarks, leaders have lost tools for keeping members in line. That leaves leaders with fewer mechanisms to move their body, but election of strong-willed leaders, seniority rules and committee assignments still offer some levers. (Telling cranks on the right that the “Hastert rule” never really existed and isn’t the way the House will run is another tool to force compromise within the majority and move legislation.)

    For the next three years, we are likely to operate with a dysfunctional and inept executive. In foreign policy that is frightening. In domestic policy it’s the perfect opportunity for Congress to reclaim institutional authority, bolster internal controls and see if real work can get done when they keep the president at bay. Perhaps in divided government and a polarized country, big issues (e.g. entitlement reform) can’t get done, but middle- and small-sized gains are possible.

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on The roadblock at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
  • A crisis goes to waste

    December 16, 2013
    US politics

    One year later, did the Newton, Conn., school shootings succeed in getting Americans to support gun control?

    John R. Lott Jr., author of More Guns, Less Crime, reports:

    President Obama has pushed hard for gun control this year and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has spent millions of dollars on ads, but the administration’s promise to coordinate “a November lobbying effort and plan events to commemorate the first anniversary of the Newtown, Connecticut” has gotten little traction.

    Last year the Newtown shooting, with it horrific slaughter, lead to an immediate national movement for gun control. But that was short-lived, and opposition to gun control is currently very strong. Indeed, it appears to be the strongest in decades.

    A recent CNN poll finds the highest level of opposition to any new gun control measures since CNN started asking about it in 1989. Rising from only 28 percent opposed to new gun control measures then to 50 percent today. And it’s not the only poll with such findings. Gallup finds that opposition to stricter laws has risen from 19 to 50 percent.

    What’s more, these polls don’t reflect that most people in favor of gun control don’t have strong feelings about it. Monthly Gallup polls from June to October this year reveal it’s just not viewed as a pressing issue. …

    Recent newspaper headlines mirror these polls. Over the last couple days the Washington Post announced “How gun control is losing, badly (in charts)” or “Gun-control groups are shifting efforts and resources to handful of states.”

    Even at the state level the New York Times paints an anemic movement, counting up the passage of state gun laws, 39 tightening restrictions and 70 liberalizing them.

    It almost seems as if gun control advocates like the New York Times are going out of their way to make their side look weak.

    The more restrictive laws are going to do a lot more to reduce gun ownership than the liberalizations will increase it.

    Maryland is now going to charge over $350 to license and register handguns and buyers will have to undergo four hours of training.

    Yet, the Times viewed that as equivalent to West Virginia’s change that exempts concealed-carry permit holders who have already undergone background checks from another background check when they buy a gun.

    A frequent claim by control advocates this year has been that 80 percent to 90 percent of Americans are in favor of expanded background-checks legislation. But the polls showing such overwhelming support really ask little more than whether people want to stop criminals from obtaining guns, not whether voters actually favor the legislation that the Senate was voting on. …

    The newest strategy by gun control advocates seems to be a stealth strategy — sneaking in fees and taxes for obtaining guns. These are penalties that will reduce gun ownership, particular for the very people who need them the most, the most likely victims of crime, the poor in high-crime urban neighborhoods.

    Hmmm. Maybe a majority of Americans don’t think gun control will work. Maybe a majority of Americans support the Constitution, unlike the Obama administration. Maybe a majority of Americans don’t believe something — anything! — must be done as knee-jerk responses to unexplainable events like Newtown.

    So Americans do not in fact support proposed gun control, and yet bureaucrats and liberals work to take guns away from people. I bet if a poll asked Americans if they were tired of being treated as infants, mental defectives, misguided or just plain evil by politicians, the Yes response would be close to 100 percent.

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on A crisis goes to waste
  • Presty the DJ for Dec. 16

    December 16, 2013
    Music

    The number one British single today in 1965 wasn’t just one song:

    Today in 1970, five Creedence Clearwater Revival singles were certified gold, along with the albums “Cosmo’s Factory,” “Willy and the Poor Boys,” “Green River,” “Bayou Country” and “Creedence Clearwater Revival”:

    (more…)

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Presty the DJ for Dec. 16
  • Presty the DJ for Dec. 15

    December 15, 2013
    Music

    The number one single today in 1973:

    The number one British single today in 1979 was the last number one British single of the 1970s:

    The number one British single today in 1984:

    (more…)

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Presty the DJ for Dec. 15
  • Presty the DJ for Dec. 14

    December 14, 2013
    Music

    It figures that after yesterday’s marathon musical compendium, today’s is much shorter.

    The number one album today in 1959 was the Kingston Trio’s “Here We Go Again!”

    The number one single today in 1968:

    Today in 1977, the movie “Saturday Night Fever” premiered in New York:

    (more…)

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Presty the DJ for Dec. 14
  • Or: Fight, fellows, fight! Fight! Fight!

    December 13, 2013
    Culture, History

    This has nothing to do with the University of Wisconsin, despite the title.

    It has to do with what some call the “culture war” on which conservatives are one side, and about which Stephen M. Klugiewicz writes:

    Conservative intellectuals tend to be a dismal sort. By natural disposition we are pessimistic people. We cannot really be blamed for this, when one considers the history of mankind and particularly the sorry history of human governance. From starting unnecessary wars to enslaving whole peoples to reducing the masses to poverty through excessive taxation, man, when clothed with the right to rule others, has shown himself to be a tyrant-in-waiting.

    Moreover, we conservatives realize that human nature is intrinsically inclined to do evil, that utopias are unachievable and their pursuit dangerous, and that we are apt, over time, to lose our moorings to the commandments of God and His laws of nature. We thus tend to hold out little hope for the future.

    As justification for our inherent pessimism we need only to look at the peculiar and sorry times in which we live: an era in which the Founding Fathers are considered “dead white men,” but in which the Constitution they made is held to be living; a time in which political compromise is valued as a priority but commitment to principle is reviled as naïve, quixotic; an age in which any kind of perverse speech or lifestyle is celebrated in the name of freedom, but in which free enterprise is stifled in the names of equality and compassion; a time in which information reigns supreme, but in which logical thinking is scarce; an era in which we have attained the greatest technological know-how but in which we have the least understanding of beauty, goodness, and truth.

    Added to all this is our conservative tendency to revel in the nobility of lost causes. This in itself is not a bad thing at all—quite the opposite in fact. As T.S. Eliot said:

    “We fight for lost causes because we know that our defeat and dismay may be the preface to our successors’ victory, though that victory itself will be temporary; we fight rather to keep something alive than in the expectation that anything will triumph.”

    But we have not taken Eliot’s words to heart. We mistakenly look for permanent victories, political and cultural, and when they do not come, we despair. We seem not to realize that it is not permanent victories that we should seek but rather the preservation of “the permanent things,” which is victory enough.

    Keeping alive the flame, however, does not mean hiding its light. After all, a flame that is not open to the air will be snuffed out. Like Isaiah we are under the Divine injunction to be “a light to the nations, to open the eyes that are blind.” This means that conservative thinkers should not talk exclusively amongst themselves, as we are prone to do. (One might recall that perennial philosophical question: “If an intellectual presents a paper at an academic conference, does it make a sound?”) Instead, we need to shine forth the light of truth, goodness, and beauty through the best available means that can reach the masses; today that means the internet, and specifically online journals like The Imaginative Conservative.

    As Sam Gamgee says in Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings: “There’s some good in this world, and it’s worth fighting for.”

    In fighting our worthy battle, American conservatives can position their forces on the ramparts of certain premises: that the Founding Fathers, despite their flaws, still have much to teach us today; that the Constitution is actually dead, in the sense that its actual written words need to be taken seriously; that free enterprise is inextricably linked to political freedom and ordered liberty; that inquiry, to be free, must be grounded in reason and must be directed to the ascertainment of truth; and that information and technology are not goods in themselves unless they serve the good and the beautiful. …

    Western Civilization is undeniably in decline and indeed its very existence is in doubt. Yet these thoughts ought not to drag us conservatives down into a morass of defeatism. Sadly, though, some conservatives are indeed calling for retreat. They say that the hour is too late, that a remnant must run to the barricades and shield itself and whatever is left of Western Civilization from the barbarians at the gates. Like Tolkien’s King Theoden, they seek a Helm’s Deep in a desperate attempt to preserve the world of men from the hour of the Orc. But I call on conservatives to refuse to cede the current hour to darkness, and I join with the Aragorn of Tolkien and Peter Jackson in declaring:

    A day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends, and break all bonds of fellowship; but it is not this day! An hour of woe, and shattered shields, when the Age of Men comes crashing down; but it is not this day! This day we fight! By all that you hold dear on this good earth, I bid you stand, Men of the West!”

    As a non-intellectual, I’m not sure conservative intellectuals should be dismal at all. Klugiewicz’s history of mankind (which also proves the importance of religion, because without it we would surely devolve into a dog-eat-dog world that would make Somalia look like Utopia in comparison) demonstrates that we should be pessimists, but because pessimists are either proven right, or things go better than they should. (Concept stolen from George Will.) The only way the fight ends is when you’re dead, and the only thing John Maynard Keynes said that made any sense at all is that in the long run we are all dead.

    Ive called politics like sports except that the season never ends. Politics is definitely a zero-sum game — one side wins, which means the other side loses. There is no final victory, but you have to keep winning. Unless, that is, you don’t think the future of your children is important.

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Or: Fight, fellows, fight! Fight! Fight!
  • Bah humbug

    December 13, 2013
    Culture, media

    Ben Bromley channels his inner Scrooge:

    A lot of people are turned off by mawkish attempts to sentimentalize Christmas, and as such attempts multiply, so does the legion of people suffering from the “Noel nasties.” …

    It all started when I heard “The Christmas Shoes” on the radio and posted on Facebook that I feared my abhorrence of the song might signal that I’m dead inside. Turns out many of us have hearts two sizes too small.

    “You’re not dead inside,” wrote my friend Bridget. “You just don’t like maudlin attempts at emotional manipulation.”

    I felt better immediately, and wondered whether my impulse to smash all Precious Moments figurines is OK, too.

    “That song is way too schmaltzy,” Jessica added, “and I’d be worried if you DID like it.”

    Some expressed support for the song, saying it tugs at their heart strings. In it, the narrator recounts an experience in a checkout aisle Christmas Eve, where he finds a boy wishing to buy an expensive pair of shoes for his terminally ill mother. The boy explains he wants his mother to appear presentable before Jesus, but can’t afford the shoes. The narrator picks up the tab and wells up with Christmas spirit.

    “A little kid who wants to help his dying mom look pretty when she passes away: How does that NOT make you a little sad?” Marianne asked.

    I’d like to think Jesus is more interested in our souls than our soles. And I can’t help but wonder whether the song — and the movie it spawned — are a marketing ploy by the nation’s shoe makers. Unless my friends represent an unusually angry subset of the population, I’m guessing many around the country find the song’s storyline abominable.

    Bridget pointed out that the narrator makes the situation all about himself: “Oh, I was having a lousy day but then I helped this sad little urchin and I feel better now. Go me.” …

    The skeptical Aimee agrees with me that the song is a ploy, but not for the shoe companies. “The song becomes a lot more tolerable when you realize that clearly the kid is a con artist scamming this guy into supporting his cross-dressing habit,” she wrote. “I mean really, what kind of people let their kid run around the mall alone and unsupervised while his mother is in the hospital dying? Clearly this kid has his own agenda and the narrator has just been duped.”

    Now THAT’s the kind of holiday storyline those of us who love “Bad Santa” could get behind. Let us watch in amazement as our hero takes the holiday’s power to turn everyone into gullible saps and uses it for nefarious purposes.

    One of the Facebook comment Scrooge — I mean, Ben — didn’t include, probably because it wasn’t very funny, was my observation that journalists are supposed to be dead inside. The old saw from an editor is that if your mother says she loves you, check it out.

    One reason why I’m not a fan of Christmas media is that there isn’t very much quality Christmas entertainment anymore. Off such classics as the original “The Grinch Who Stole Christmas” (written by Dr. Seuss, animated by Chuck Jones, narrated by Boris Karloff) and the more recent “National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation” and “A Christmas Story,” and this playlist of Christmas music, I could do without any other Christmas entertainment, particularly Christmas songs sung by contemporary artists of dubious talent recording solely to make money because consumers of dubious taste will buy anything they record.

    The other, of course, is that I hate winter.

     

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Bah humbug
  • Presty the DJ for Dec. 13

    December 13, 2013
    Music

    Today in 1961, this was the first country song to sell more than $1 million:

    The number one single today in 1962:

    The number one single today in 1970 (which sounded like it had been recorded using 1770 technology):

    The number one album today in 1975 was “Chicago IX,” which was actually “Chicago’s Greatest Hits”:

    (more…)

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Presty the DJ for Dec. 13
  • Yet another bad budget deal

    December 12, 2013
    US politics

    Nick Gillespie on the federal budget “deal,” in which Rep. Paul Ryan (R–Janesville) surrendered to Sen. Patty Murray (D–Washington), creating, to no one’s surprise, a bad deal for taxpayers:

    The deal is supposed to save the country from the dread threat of “sequestration,” or a series of automatic, generally across-the-board cuts imposed by the last budget deal, passed in the summer of 2011.

    The short version of the deal, which covers discretionary spending over the next two years? The feds will spend $45 billion more in 2014 than they would absent a deal and another $20 billion more in 2015. Various “fees” (not taxes, never taxes!) will go up too, allowing Ryan and Murray to tout this as a plan to save “$28 billion over ten years by requiring the President to sequester the same percentage of mandatory budgetary resources in 2022 and 2023 as will be sequestered in 2021 under current law.”

    Thus the following table, which shows increases in spending from current law:

    Whew, that was a close call, wasn’t it? The truly minuscule trims to mandatory spending are unaffected, meaning that all the problems with major entitlement programs still exist and will only get worse. But the important thing is that we’ve avoided the “dumb” cuts imposed by sequestration that would have truly devastated discretionary spending, right?

    Here’s a chart by Reason columnist and Mercatus Center economist Veronique de Rugy that reminds us just how draconian the cuts imposed by sequestration really were:

    She’s updated the chart to make projections through 2023. The growth rate of spending, based on Congressional Budget Office (CBO) figures, shows that the sequester wasn’t a big deal at all.

    Real federal spending has indeed flattened over the past few years, partly because of the sort of gridlock that led to sequestration and partly because it had been jacked up for so long and then with a giant burst at the very end of the Bush presidency and the start of the Obama years. Here’s a bonus chart, also courtesy of de Rugy, that shows the general trend over the past several decades:

    If you care about shrinking the size, scope, and spending of government – and you should if you care about “Free Minds and Free Markets” both – there’s not a lot of reason to cheer this latest deal and, even more sadly, what might eventually replace it. Because as the chart above shows, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of ability to flatten spending, at least since World War II, for any length of time.

    Buzzfeed feels differently, apparently thinking that the process is more important than the result:

    Under normal circumstances the deal — which appears to have enough Democratic and Republicans support to pass — would at best be considered a minor success: it does little to address either long-term spending needs or drastically reduce the deficit, and doesn’t include significant reforms to entitlement programs.

    But in a Congress that measures success in how few days its incompetence results in a government shutdown, the Ryan-Murray deal marks a legislative high-water mark.

    Indeed, Ryan has succeeded where his party’s official leadership has failed since taking control of the House three years ago: Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, all of whom are master politicians, have tried, and failed, to cut agreements large and small to avoid another round of legislating by crisis.

    “There’s nobody better than Paul Ryan. There’s nobody more knowledgeable and nobody more principled that Paul Ryan. So that gives me a lot of confidence just knowing that it’s him. The trust is high. I think everybody knows him and he’s one of the most respected individuals in Congress period. By both sides,” Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart said Tuesday, just hours before Ryan and Murray announced their deal.

    It wasn’t just mainstream Republicans like Diaz-Balart who were praising Ryan, even before the deal was cut. Conservatives — who have consistently been a thorn in the side of leadership and scuttled numerous bipartisan agreements — were also effusive in their praise.

    “I’m very supportive of Chairman Ryan and I’ve been very concerned about sequester and how it effects the military … It is a real achievement. I’m as surprised as anyone. We’ve seen the ‘Super Committee’ and how they didn’t come through,” said Rep. Joe Wilson. …

    That’s not to say everyone will vote for it, but unlike with deals past, Republican members said that a healthy amount of conservative “no” votes wouldn’t mean the death of the deal. Republicans readily acknowledge the vote will rely on a good chunk of Democratic votes, but Rep. Darrell Issa predicted the “majority” of the conference would end up supporting it despite staunch opposition from outside conservative groups.

    “Conservative groups would like to get more, I’d like to get more. But if what we want to do is keep the government open and get a trajectory of savings for now, and then argue in the 2014 elections that we should be more willing to do more than this combination then that’s the right thing to do. What Chairman Ryan has done artfully has gotten what there was to get,” Issa said.

    Out here in the real working taxpaying world, government “shutdowns” (which aren’t shutdowns at all) and sequestration are good things. That is the attitude of those who should be disgusted by government at every level (even the lowly township), not getting paychecks from government.

    Facebook Friend Ken Gardner adds:

    Budgets are not binding on any future Congress. The current deal would impose caps on future discretionary spending, but a future Congress, for better or worse, is free to change them. More to the point, GOPers currently lack the political power to get deeper cuts in discretionary spending, much less real entitlement reform. This simply won’t happen with Democrats controlling the Senate and Obama in the White House.

    There are no guarantees that our fiscal situation will improve if we elect more Republicans to Congress. I think it will, but that’s not quite the same thing. But you can be 100% certain that Democrats will only make the problem even worse. Borrowing, spending, taxing, regulating, and coercively redistributing wealth to their supporters and donors is their bread and butter and their “solution” to every problem.

    On a scale of 1 to 10, your political cynicism level should be at approximately 43. Only in politics can a “deal” that does nothing constructive other than increase reelection chances for incumbents be considered a win.

     

    Share this on …

    • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
    • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
    • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
    • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
    • Print (Opens in new window) Print
    Like Loading…
    No comments on Yet another bad budget deal
Previous Page
1 … 826 827 828 829 830 … 1,038
Next Page

Website Powered by WordPress.com.

Steve Prestegard.com: The Presteblog

The thoughts of a journalist/libertarian–conservative/Christian husband, father, Eagle Scout and aficionado of obscure rock music. Thoughts herein are only the author’s and not necessarily the opinions of his family, friends, neighbors, church members or past, present or future employers.

  • Steve
    • About, or, Who is this man?
    • Facebook
    • Twitter
    • Adventures in ruralu0026nbsp;inkBack in June 2009, I was driving somewhere through a rural area. And for some reason, I had a flashback to two experiences in my career about that time of year many years ago. In 1988, eight days after graduating from the University of Wisconsin, I started work at the Grant County Herald Independent in Lancaster as a — well, the — reporter. Four years after that, on my 27th birthday, I purchased, with a business partner, the Tri-County Press in Cuba City, my first business venture. Both were experiences about which Wisconsin author Michael Perry might write. I thought about all this after reading a novel, The Deadline, written by a former newspaper editor and publisher. (Now who would write a novel about a weekly newspaper?) As a former newspaper owner, I picked at some of it — why finance a newspaper purchase through the bank if the seller is willing to finance it? Because the mean bank lender is a plot point! — and it is much more interesting than reality, but it is very well written, with a nicely twisting plot, and quite entertaining, again more so than reality. There is something about that first job out of college that makes you remember it perhaps more…
    • Adventures in radioI’ve been in the full-time work world half my life. For that same amount of time I’ve been broadcasting sports as a side interest, something I had wanted to since I started listening to games on radio and watching on TV, and then actually attending games. If you ask someone who’s worked in radio for some time about the late ’70s TV series “WKRP in Cincinnati,” most of them will tell you that, if anything, the series understated how wacky working in radio can be. Perhaps the funniest episode in the history of TV is the “WKRP” episode, based on a true story, about the fictional radio station’s Thanksgiving promotion — throwing live turkeys out of a helicopter under the mistaken belief that, in the words of WKRP owner Arthur Carlson, “As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly.” [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ST01bZJPuE0] I’ve never been involved in anything like that. I have announced games from the roofs of press boxes (once on a nice day, and once in 50-mph winds), from a Mississippi River bluff (more on that later), and from the front row of the second balcony of the University of Wisconsin Fieldhouse (great view, but not a place to go if…
    • “Good morning/afternoon/evening, ________ fans …”
    • My biggest storyEarlier this week, while looking for something else, I came upon some of my own work. (I’m going to write a blog someday called “Things I Found While Looking for Something Else.” This is not that blog.) The Grant County Sheriff’s Department, in the county where I used to live, has a tribute page to the two officers in county history who died in the line of duty. One is William Loud, a deputy marshal in Cassville, shot to death by two bank robbers in 1912. The other is Tom Reuter, a Grant County deputy sheriff who was shot to death at the end of his 4 p.m.-to-midnight shift March 18, 1990. Gregory Coulthard, then a 19-year-old farmhand, was convicted of first-degree intentional homicide and is serving a life sentence, with his first eligibility for parole on March 18, 2015, just 3½ years from now. I’ve written a lot over the years. I think this, from my first two years in the full-time journalism world, will go down as the story I remember the most. For journalists, big stories contain a paradox, which was pointed out in CBS-TV’s interview of Andy Rooney on his last “60 Minutes” Sunday. Morley Safer said something along the line…
  • Food and drink
    • The Roesch/Prestegard familyu0026nbsp;cookbookFrom the family cookbook(s) All the families I’m associated with love to eat, so it’s a good thing we enjoy cooking. The first out-of-my-house food memory I have is of my grandmother’s cooking for Christmas or other family occasions. According to my mother, my grandmother had a baked beans recipe that she would make for my mother. Unfortunately, the recipe seems to have  disappeared. Also unfortunately, my early days as a picky, though voluminous, eater meant I missed a lot of those recipes made from such wholesome ingredients as lard and meat fat. I particularly remember a couple of meals that involve my family. The day of Super Bowl XXXI, my parents, my brother, my aunt and uncle and a group of their friends got together to share lots of food and cheer on the Packers to their first NFL title in 29 years. (After which Jannan and I drove to Lambeau Field in the snow,  but that’s another story.) Then, on Dec. 31, 1999, my parents, my brother, my aunt and uncle and Jannan and I (along with Michael in utero) had a one-course-per-hour meal to appropriately end years beginning with the number 1. Unfortunately I can’t remember what we…
    • SkålI was the editor of Marketplace Magazine for 10 years. If I had to point to one thing that demonstrates improved quality of life since I came to Northeast Wisconsin in 1994, it would be … … the growth of breweries and  wineries in Northeast Wisconsin. The former of those two facts makes sense, given our heritage as a brewing state. The latter is less self-evident, since no one thinks of Wisconsin as having a good grape-growing climate. Some snobs claim that apple or cherry wines aren’t really wines at all. But one of the great facets of free enterprise is the opportunity to make your own choice of what food and drink to drink. (At least for now, though some wish to restrict our food and drink choices.) Wisconsin’s historically predominant ethnic group (and our family’s) is German. Our German ancestors did unfortunately bring large government and high taxes with them, but they also brought beer. Europeans brought wine with them, since they came from countries with poor-quality drinking water. Within 50 years of a wave of mid-19th-century German immigration, brewing had become the fifth largest industry in the U.S., according to Maureen Ogle, author of Ambitious Brew: The Story of American Beer. Beer and wine have…
  • Wheels
    • America’s sports carMy birthday in June dawned without a Chevrolet Corvette in front of my house. (The Corvette at the top of the page was featured at the 2007 Greater Milwaukee Auto Show. The copilot is my oldest son, Michael.) Which isn’t surprising. I have three young children, and I have a house with a one-car garage. (Then again, this would be more practical, though a blatant pluck-your-eyes-out violation of the Corvette ethos. Of course, so was this.) The reality is that I’m likely to be able to own a Corvette only if I get a visit from the Corvette Fairy, whose office is next door to the Easter Bunny. (I hope this isn’t foreshadowing: When I interviewed Dave Richter of Valley Corvette for a car enthusiast story in the late great Marketplace Magazine, he said that the most popular Corvette in most fans’ minds was a Corvette built during their days in high school. This would be a problem for me in that I graduated from high school in 1983, when no Corvette was built.) The Corvette is one of those cars whose existence may be difficult to understand within General Motors Corp. The Corvette is what is known as a “halo car,” a car that drives people into showrooms, even if…
    • Barges on fouru0026nbsp;wheelsI originally wrote this in September 2008.  At the Fox Cities Business Expo Tuesday, a Smart car was displayed at the United Way Fox Cities booth. I reported that I once owned a car into which trunk, I believe, the Smart could be placed, with the trunk lid shut. This is said car — a 1975 Chevrolet Caprice coupe (ours was dark red), whose doors are, I believe, longer than the entire Smart. The Caprice, built down Interstate 90 from us Madisonians in Janesville (a neighbor of ours who worked at the plant probably helped put it together) was the flagship of Chevy’s full-size fleet (which included the stripper Bel Air and middle-of-the-road Impala), featuring popular-for-the-time vinyl roofs, better sound insulation, an upgraded cloth interior, rear fender skirts and fancy Caprice badges. The Caprice was 18 feet 1 inch long and weighed 4,300 pounds. For comparison: The midsize Chevrolet of the ear was the Malibu, which was the same approximate size as the Caprice after its 1977 downsizing. The compact Chevrolet of the era was the Nova, which was 200 inches long — four inches longer than a current Cadillac STS. Wikipedia’s entry on the Caprice has this amusing sentence: “As fuel economy became a bigger priority among Americans…
    • Behind the wheel
    • Collecting only dust or rust
    • Coooooooooooupe!
    • Corvettes on the screen
    • The garage of misfit cars
    • 100 years (and one day) of our Chevrolets
    • They built Excitement, sort of, once in a while
    • A wagon by any otheru0026nbsp;nameFirst written in 2008. You will see more don’t-call-them-station-wagons as you drive today. Readers around my age have probably had some experience with a vehicle increasingly rare on the road — the station wagon. If you were a Boy Scout or Girl Scout, or were a member of some kind of youth athletic team, or had a large dog, or had relatives approximately your age, or had friends who needed to be transported somewhere, or had parents who occasionally had to haul (either in the back or in a trailer) more than what could be fit inside a car trunk, you (or, actually, your parents) were the target demographic for the station wagon. “Station wagons came to be like covered wagons — so much family activity happened in those cars,” said Tim Cleary, president of the American Station Wagon Owners Association, in Country Living magazine. Wagons “were used for everything from daily runs to the grocery store to long summer driving trips, and while many men and women might have wanted a fancier or sportier car, a station wagon was something they knew they needed for the family.” The “station wagon” originally was a vehicle with a covered seating area to take people between train stations…
    • Wheels on theu0026nbsp;screenBetween my former and current blogs, I wrote a lot about automobiles and TV and movies. Think of this post as killing two birds (Thunderbirds? Firebirds? Skylarks?) with one stone. Most movies and TV series view cars the same way most people view cars — as A-to-B transportation. (That’s not counting the movies or series where the car is the plot, like the haunted “Christine” or “Knight Rider” or the “Back to the Future” movies.) The philosophy here, of course, is that cars are not merely A-to-B transportation. Which disqualifies most police shows from what you’re about to read, even though I’ve watched more police video than anything else, because police cars are plain Jane vehicles. The highlight in a sense is in the beginning: The car chase in my favorite movie, “Bullitt,” featuring Steve McQueen’s 1968 Ford Mustang against the bad guys’ 1968 Dodge Charger: [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMc2RdFuOxIu0026amp;fmt=18] One year before that (but I didn’t see this until we got Telemundo on cable a couple of years ago) was a movie called “Operación 67,” featuring (I kid you not) a masked professional wrestler, his unmasked sidekick, and some sort of secret agent plot. (Since I don’t know Spanish and it’s not…
    • While riding in my Cadillac …
  • Entertainments
    • Brass rocksThose who read my former blog last year at this time, or have read this blog over the past months, know that I am a big fan of the rock group Chicago. (Back when they were a rock group and not a singer of sappy ballads, that is.) Since rock music began from elements of country music, jazz and the blues, brass rock would seem a natural subgenre of rock music. A lot of ’50s musical acts had saxophone players, and some played with full orchestras … [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CPS-WuUKUE] … but it wasn’t until the more-or-less simultaneous appearances of Chicago and Blood Sweat u0026amp; Tears on the musical scene (both groups formed in 1967, both had their first charting singles in 1969, and they had the same producer) that the usual guitar/bass/keyboard/drum grouping was augmented by one or more trumpets, a sax player and a trombone player. While Chicago is my favorite group (but you knew that already), the first brass rock song I remember hearing was BSu0026amp;T’s “Spinning Wheel” — not in its original form, but on “Sesame Street,” accompanied by, yes, a giant spinning wheel. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi9sLkyhhlE] [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxWSOuNsN20] [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9U34uPjz-g] I remember liking Chicago’s “Just You ‘n Me” when it was released as a single, and…
    • Drive and Eat au0026nbsp;RockThe first UW home football game of each season also is the opener for the University of Wisconsin Marching Band, the world’s finest college marching band. (How the UW Band has not gotten the Sudler Trophy, which is to honor the country’s premier college marching bands, is beyond my comprehension.) I know this because I am an alumnus of the UW Band. I played five years (in the last rank of the band, Rank 25, motto: “Where Men Are Tall and Run-On Is Short”), marching in 39 football games at Camp Randall Stadium, the Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome in Minneapolis, Michigan Stadium in Ann Arbor, Memorial Stadium at the University of Illinois (worst artificial turf I had ever seen), the University of Nevada–Las Vegas’ Sam Boyd Silver Bowl, the former Dyche Stadium at Northwestern University, five high school fields and, in my one bowl game, Legion Field in Birmingham, Ala., site of the 1984 Hall of Fame Bowl. The UW Band was, without question, the most memorable experience of my college days, and one of the most meaningful experiences of my lifetime. It was the most physical experience of my lifetime, to be sure. Fifteen minutes into my first Registration…
    • Keep on rockin’ in the freeu0026nbsp;worldOne of my first ambitions in communications was to be a radio disc jockey, and to possibly reach the level of the greats I used to listen to from WLS radio in Chicago, which used to be one of the great 50,000-watt AM rock stations of the country, back when they still existed. (Those who are aficionados of that time in music and radio history enjoyed a trip to that wayback machine when WLS a Memorial Day Big 89 Rewind, excerpts of which can be found on their Web site.) My vision was to be WLS’ afternoon DJ, playing the best in rock music between 2 and 6, which meant I wouldn’t have to get up before the crack of dawn to do the morning show, yet have my nights free to do whatever glamorous things big-city DJs did. Then I learned about the realities of radio — low pay, long hours, zero job security — and though I have dabbled in radio sports, I’ve pretty much cured myself of the idea of working in radio, even if, to quote WAPL’s Len Nelson, “You come to work every day just like everybody else does, but we’re playing rock ’n’ roll songs, we’re cuttin’ up.…
    • Monday on the flight line, not Saturday in the park
    • Music to drive by
    • The rock ofu0026nbsp;WisconsinWikipedia begins its item “Music of Wisconsin” thusly: Wisconsin was settled largely by European immigrants in the late 19th century. This immigration led to the popularization of galops, schottisches, waltzes, and, especially, polkas. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yl7wCczgNUc] So when I first sought to write a blog piece about rock musicians from Wisconsin, that seemed like a forlorn venture. Turned out it wasn’t, because when I first wrote about rock musicians from Wisconsin, so many of them that I hadn’t mentioned came up in the first few days that I had to write a second blog entry fixing the omissions of the first. This list is about rock music, so it will not include, for instance, Milwaukee native and Ripon College graduate Al Jarreau, who in addition to having recorded a boatload of music for the jazz and adult contemporary/easy listening fan, also recorded the theme music for the ’80s TV series “Moonlighting.” Nor will it include Milwaukee native Eric Benet, who was for a while known more for his former wife, Halle Berry, than for his music, which includes four number one singles on the Ru0026amp;B charts, “Spend My Life with You” with Tamia, “Hurricane,” “Pretty Baby” and “You’re the Only One.” Nor will it include Wisconsin’s sizable contributions to big…
    • Steve TV: All Steve, All the Time
    • “Super Steve, Man of Action!”
    • Too much TV
    • The worst music of allu0026nbsp;timeThe rock group Jefferson Airplane titled its first greatest-hits compilation “The Worst of Jefferson Airplane.” Rolling Stone magazine was not being ironic when it polled its readers to decide the 10 worst songs of the 1990s. I’m not sure I agree with all of Rolling Stone’s list, but that shouldn’t be surprising; such lists are meant for debate, after all. To determine the “worst,” songs appropriate for the “Vinyl from Hell” segment that used to be on a Madison FM rock station, requires some criteria, which does not include mere overexposure (for instance, “Macarena,” the video of which I find amusing since it looks like two bankers are singing it). Before we go on: Blog posts like this one require multimedia, so if you find a song you hate on this blog, I apologize. These are also songs that I almost never listen to because my sound system has a zero-tolerance policy — if I’m listening to the radio or a CD and I hear a song I don’t like, it’s, to quote Bad Company, gone gone gone. My blonde wife won’t be happy to read that one of her favorite ’90s songs, 4 Non Blondes’ “What’s Up,” starts the list. (However,…
    • “You have the right to remain silent …”
  • Madison
    • Blasts from the Madison media past
    • Blasts from my Madison past
    • Blasts from our Madison past
    • What’s the matter with Madison?
    • Wisconsin – Madison = ?
  • Sports
    • Athletic aesthetics, or “cardinal” vs. “Big Red”
    • Choose your own announcer
    • La Follette state 1982 (u0022It was 30 years ago todayu0022)
    • The North Dakota–Wisconsin Hockey Fight of 1982
    • Packers vs. Brewers
  • Hall of Fame
    • The case(s) against teacher unions
    • The Class of 1983
    • A hairy subject, or face the face
    • It’s worse than you think
    • It’s worse than you think, 2010–11 edition
    • My favorite interview subject of all time
    • Oh look! Rural people!
    • Prestegard for president!
    • Unions vs. the facts, or Hiding in plain sight
    • When rhetoric goes too far
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Steve Prestegard.com: The Presteblog
    • Join 197 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Steve Prestegard.com: The Presteblog
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
%d