• How you back the Pack

    September 6, 2013
    Packers

    A site called WhooNew claims to have identified 10 different types of Packer fans, including …

    1. The Tough Guy

    These are the fans who like to call themselves “die-hards.” They prove their love of the Green Bay Packers by self-inflicting pain upon themselves.

    Most often, that pain comes from extremely cold temperatures that no human should have to endure. These guys (and girls) don’t just go to a game even if the wind chill is 40-below. They make sure to tailgate all day ahead of time.

    By halftime, they are so numb that they start stripping down. According to the Mayo Clinic, this is actually a sign of hypothermia. They will never leave the stadium early to try and beat the traffic. They’ll stay in the bleachers (never the skyboxes) until only other frozen Tough Guys are left standing gripping those little beanbag hand-warmers that ran out of heat hours ago. …

    2. The Old-Timer

    The Packers are one of the oldest teams in football history. So it makes sense that they also have a lot of geezers for fans. (Not you, Grandma)These are the old folks who constantly remind you that they were actually there at the Ice Bowl.

    They proudly proclaim that they were once seduced by Paul Hornung, Vince Lombardi cut them off in traffic, they arm-wrestled Ray Nitschke and perhaps they even watched the Acme Packers play at the old City Stadium. …

    3. The Oblivious Moron

    The moron means well – but truth be told  – these fans simply don’t understand the game of football. They just want to get caught up in all the excitement like everyone else.

    These fans are the ones who have to ask questions like”Why do they get two points for a safety?” or worse yet “Who has the ball right now?”

    If they go to the game, they’re even more confused, because they don’t have Joe Buck and Troy Aikman to help explain things. So their favorite part ends up being the chance to guess the attendance at Lambeau Field. …

    4. The Selfish Fantasy Freak

    On the opposite end of the spectrum is the fan who is obsessed with stats and history. Chances are…this number-cruncher has at least four fantasy football teams.

    Fantasy football is great. But the one problem is that it makes you focus on players’ performances instead of your favorite team.

    These types of fans often deal with an intense internal conflict because of the desire to prove they know everything about the NFL and could actually be the GM of a real team.

    The fantasy freak may quietly cheer to himself when Adrian Peterson runs for 80 yards against the Packers. Or he may yell in disgust with the rest of us, before exclaiming “Well, at least he’s on my fantasy team.” …

    5. The Bandwagon Jumper

    Any team that has success will also have bandwagon fans. But the Green Bay Packers are unique, because they are one of the few franchises to pick up bandwagon fans even when they’re having a terrible year.

    That’s simply because the passion and excitement portrayed by the real fans is so contagious.

    Bandwagon jumpers could be people who moved to the area from out of state, or people who married into a family of Packer-Backers. They had no choice but to assimilate when their father-in-law gave them a cheesehead for Christmas.

    They’ll often keep their allegiance to their home-state teams in other sports. So you’ll get St. Louis Cardinal/Packers fans or Detroit Redwing/Packers fans. …

    6. The Eternal Pessimist

    We all know fans who predict the Packers will be in the Super Bowl every single year. But for every prediction of 14-2 there is a fan of the Green & Gold who is certain they’ll be lucky to go 8-8.

    They complain about the team more than they complain about the Wisconsin weather (and we all complain about that a lot).

    If there’s a player that’s having a bad year, the Eternal Pessimist shows no mercy. “Bench him! Cut him! Tar and feather him and run him out of town on a rail!” They question every coaching decision, every draft pick, every play.

    If the team goes for it on 4th down – they should have punted. If the punter comes out – they would have gone for it.

    Don’t be fooled – these fans love the Packers. It’s just a tough love. …

    7. The Cry Baby

    Some fans get just a little bit too emotional when they watch the Packers.

    If you’ve ever been brought to tears by a regular season loss, this might be you (playoff loss crying is acceptable).

    The Cry Baby fan doesn’t only experience exaggerated emotions when the Packers lose. They feel like the world is going to end whenever Aaron Rodgers gets sacked. They stress out when the team loses yardage on 2nd and 3. But they also celebrate a lot harder than the rest of us.

    If you’ve never seen two grown men hugging each other with tears of joy streaming down their faces, you’ve never watched the Packers win on a last-minute drive with a couple of Cry Babies. …

    8. The Angry A-hole

    This fan seems capable of expressing only one emotion. And that emotion is pissed-the-hell-off!

    It works out – because there is always something to be angry about in football. You can be furious at the Packers poor performance, or at the coaching staff. You can be ticked off at the referees, or because you think Chris Collinsworth “hates us for no good reason.”

    They are a close cousin to the Eternal Pessimist. However, these guys tend to have high hopes, which get smashed into a million pieces no matter what. …

    Comments added other types (Internet smilies theirs):

    The Black Sheep. These fans are people who married into a family that cheers for a different team, and you’re the only one that cheers for the Packers and they all make fun of you for it. My husband and I have a mixed marriage: he’s a Bears fan and I’m a Packer fan. …

    The Lifer (my wife): From baby pictures in Packer gear to wallpapering their bedroom with Packer newspaper articles in high school to formulating contingency plans for if a playoff game falls on your wedding day, the Lifer has always been and will always be a fan and makes sure everyone knows it. They NEVER miss a game, though may not get to attend many in person. He or she is also incredibly superstitious, believing in lucky hats, shirts, jewelry, seats, etc. (My mother-in-law was forced to spend 3 seasons in the kitchen during games because the Pack once won at the last minute when she was in there) Typically enraged by Wisconsin residents who are not Packer fans. …

    Prob a category I’m sure I cannot be alone in something like Favre 4ever(even though i don’t care for that spelling)…I’m a die hard Favre lover. Created by my dad growing up eating our hot ham & rolls….continuing to cheer for him no matter what team he went to! Even buying their jerseys (yes i even own a special edition #4 vikings jersey,ugh). My baby girl so to be 2 has a couple favre jerseys already (one bought by her grandpa).It then became a game in my own household because it seemed to annoy my husband sooooo much so I, of course, continued on times 57285932! So much, to this day announcing “did you hear that? They’re still talking about my man brett” every single game or during any highlights. I always like to add for those scoreless slow games DRINK when they say Brett Favre :) still a PAcKeR fan the whole time too :) a*rod now not so much but he did get to watch & learn from a legend aka god lol. And I’m sure there are those out there that discredit all of him and hate him…prob good amount that spell it faRve!! No need to hear from them

    I’m not sure how you can discuss Packer fandom and not bring up the subject of owning Packer stock. The Old-Timer is most likely to own the original stock, whereas I own the late ’90s stock, so I can look at early 2000s Lambeau Field improvements and know that I contributed to that.

    I confess that I have been type number eight on occasion, for instance Brett Favre’s last Packer game. I have become sort of fan type number six, though I am not of the everybody-sucks school referred to there, and I don’t sit in gloom anticipating the next Packer loss. I’m not really fan number two, though I can say that I met Max McGee and got pounded in the chest by Ray Nitschke. (Really. At a bank branch opening in Madison, just before or after Nitschke’s retirement.)

    Part of the reason is that, contrary to fan type number three, I know more about football than many fans, having observed it at all levels for three decades or so. I have more appreciation for the success of the Packers over the last two decades because I remember what it used to be like in Green Bay, and for that matter in Madison. (In 1988, the Packers and the Badgers had a combined 5–22 record. Really.)

    But winning is hard in the NFL. (More on that momentarily.) To win a Super Bowl, nearly everything has to go your way, including things you can’t control. The most unpredictable Packers title was the last one, in 2010, Winning Super Bowl XLV required (1) winning the last two games to just get in the playoffs, (2) winning three road playoff games, and (3) beating the AFC’s best team without your best defensive player in the second half.

    Since we’re discussing fandom, I’d add one of the types of Wisconsin non-Packer fan — the Contrarian, someone who cannot merely root for a team not named the Packers, but someone who obnoxiously brings up every Packer stumbling. I’m not sure why the Contrarian feels this way — perhaps low self-esteem; perhaps the Jerk is strong in this one. In my experience they are more likely Bears fans, though there probably are some Viking fans in western Wisconsin too. (Which, by the way, is the Packers’ fault, the result of their chronic ineptitude during what a friend of mine calls the Gory Years, basically the entire 1970s and 1980s. My friends include a Steeler fan and a Dolphin fan, and I went to high school with both.)

    This is the space where I usually reveal my prediction for the upcoming Packer season. (Besides something inane like: The Packers will play 16 games this regular season.)

    The good side of predicting came in 1996, when I predicted not only the correct regular-season record (13–3), but every game correctly, and in 2008, when I channeled my inner fan type number six and predicted that, with Favre having departed, the Packers would win six games that season. I did not predict 15–1 in 2011. I predicted 13–3 last season, and they went 11–5.

    My prediction method is simple. I don’t pick postseason until the postseason, because the regular season and the postseason are really two different seasons in today’s NFL. (The 2010 season is a perfect example.) I simply go down the schedule, pick each individual game, try to avoid optimism as much as possible, and add up wins and losses. Doing so results in a 10–6 record. I have to think that’ll be good enough to win the NFC North only because, well, based on how they seem today neither Da Bears nor the Vikings nor the Lions seem very good.

    The key to the Packers’ season will be their defense. It will not be their running game, because running the football is something you now do in the NFL when you’re ahead. (I’d say that Vince “Run to Daylight” Lombardi would be rolling over in his grave, but Lombardi was more adaptable on offense than usually portrayed. Quarterback Bart Starr, not the Packers’ running backs, keyed the Packers’ first two Super Bowl wins.) Unless you’re one of the teams (including Sunday’s opponent, the 49ers, who will provide loss number one this season) running the read-option, the NFL’s flavor of the day, running is your third or fourth option on offense.

    The Packers will score enough points, even with wide receiver Greg Jennings having left and made himself, as long as he is with the Vikings, a one-championship player. (Of course, the words “rookie left tackle” should concern all NFL fans.) The first two games, with the 49ers’ Colin Kaepernick and Washington’s Robert Griffin III at quarterback, will be different from the following 14, because no other Packer opponent runs their read option. However, their run defense needs to be better anyway because Adrian Peterson is on the schedule twice.

    The schedule to me includes three no-way-in-hell-will-they-win-there road games — at San Francisco, at Baltimore and at the Giants — and they will probably lose one divisional game they shouldn’t lose and one home game they shouldn’t lose. (The number of home games you should lose is zero, but home field advantage isn’t what it used to be in the NFL.) I therefore come up with 10–6. Come back in four months to see if I’m right.

    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…
    1 comment on How you back the Pack
  • Musical familiarity breeds artistic contempt

    September 6, 2013
    Music

    My friend Todd Lohenry passes on Mental Floss‘ amusing “10 Artists Who Hated Their Biggest Hit”:

    Just because certain songs are fan favorites doesn’t mean the artists who made them famous feel the same way. Motorhead’s Lemmy isn’t terribly fond of “Ace of Spades,” Slash writes “Sweet Child o’ Mine” off disdainfully as a joke—and that’s just the tip of the self-loathing iceberg. …

    2. BOB GELDOF, “DO THEY KNOW IT’S CHRISTMAS?” AND “WE ARE THE WORLD”

    It’s tough to imagine hating a song that united Michael Jackson, Sting, and Phil Collins, but at least one season a year, Irish singer Bob Geldof apologizes profusely for co-penning “Do They Know It’s Christmas?” “I will go to the supermarket, head to the meat counter, and it will be playing,” he told the Daily Mail. “Every f***ing Christmas.”

    Geldof is busy paying double penance for his hand in a second star-studded charity singlet too: “I am responsible for two of the worst songs in history,” he admits. “One is ‘Do They Know It’s Christmas?’ and the other one is ‘We Are The World.’”

    3. LED ZEPPELIN, “STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN”

    In 2002, Robert Plant pledged a donation to a Portland, Oregon radio station that announced its refusal to play Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven,” a song Plant dubs “that bloody wedding song.” Plant’s disdain for the song put the kibosh on reunion talks for decades, simply because the singer had it up to here with singing the hit.

    Plant put up with the song for at least 17 years after he wrote it, before finally telling the Los Angeles Times, “I’d break out in hives if I had to sing that song in every show” in 1988. When the band played a one-off concert in London two decades later, Plant demanded the song not be played as a finale, and for guitarist Jimmy Page to “restrain himself from turning the song into an even more epic solo-filled noodle.”

    5. BEASTIE BOYS, “(YOU GOTTA) FIGHT FOR YOUR RIGHT (TO PARTY)”

    The Brooklyn rappers come right out and say the song “sucks” in the liner notes of their 1999 greatest hits album, The Sounds of Science. But the dislike stems more from a lost sense of irony and parody than the song itself. Some fans took the song—and its outlandish pro-partying music video—totally straight.

    Beastie Boy Mike D only had one qualm about the song that put the group on the map: “The only thing that upsets me is that we may have reinforced certain values of some people in our audience when our own values were actually totally different.”

    6. THE PRETENDERS, “BRASS IN POCKET”

    Frontwoman Chrissie Hynde thought the 1979 hit—a song she “hated with a vengeance”—was anything but special, so special. Her bandmates, manager, producer, and record label smelled a smash hit with “Brass in Pocket,” and so did Hynde; that’s precisely why she hated it. She dismissed the tune as “so obvious.”

    The song pushed the band’s self-titled album to platinum sales, but Hynde told the Observer in 2004 that she released the song very reluctantly. “I wasn’t very happy with it and told my producer that he could release it over my dead body,” she said.

    7. FLOCK OF SEAGULLS, “I RAN (SO FAR AWAY)”

    The ‘80s one-hit wonders get remembered for two things, and Flock frontman Mike Score dislikes both of them: “I Ran (So Far Away)” and Score’s eccentric hairdo. In VH1’s 100 Greatest Songs of the ‘80s, Score acknowledged his loathing for the song, saying that he only performs it live for fans: “Every time I perform live, everyone just wants to hear ‘I Ran.’ I’m sick of it.”

    The ‘do wore out its welcome quicker: Score got tired of reporters asking more questions about the haircut than the band’s music. Score, a former hairdresser, told the Daily Record that he basically shaves his head to shirk questions of whether he’ll ever bring back the signature look (and probably also because he doesn’t have much hair left). “I think that haircut owns me,” he says. “I don’t own it.”

    8. JOHN MELLENCAMP, “JACK AND DIANE”

    John Cougar can’t name two people in rock ‘n’ roll more popular than his titular pairing (at least according to a 2008 interview with The Sun), but as life goes on, even the Americana singer’s gotten tired of the duo long after the thrill of writing about them was gone. In the same interview, he said, “I am a little weary of those two.”

    “Jack and Diane” notched the only #1 in Mellencamp’s career, so the singer begrudgingly owes the fictional high school sweethearts for a sizable chunk of his 35-year career. “I’ve been able to live on my whims, that’s what Jack and Diane gave me,” he says. “So I can’t hate them too much.” …

    10. REM, “SHINY HAPPY PEOPLE”

    Lead singer Michael Stipe isn’t too fond of his group’s 1991 hit—in fact, he appeared on a 1995 episode of Space Ghost and announced “I hate that song.” Today he tempers his dislike a bit, saying that he prefers not to say anything bad about songs he doesn’t like because there might be a fan out there to whom that song is very important and has a particular meaning. Instead he now says that “Shiny Happy People” has “limited appeal” for him, and adds that it was the one song that the entire group agreed should not be included on their Greatest Hits compilation.

    This dovetails nicely with my list of The Worst Music of All Time, because of something said by Linda Clifford, the lead singer of the ’90s group 4 Non Blondes, about their only recognizable song, “What’s Up”:

    “I wasn’t really a big fan of my band,” she said. “I didn’t like the record at all. ‘Drifting’ was the only song I loved. I did love ‘What’s Up?’ but I hated the production. When I heard our record for the first time I cried. It didn’t sound like me. It made me belligerent and a real asshole. I wanted to say, ‘We’re a fucking, bad-ass cool band. We’re not that fluffy polished bullshit that you’re listening to.’ It was really difficult.”

    (It’s apparently really difficult for Clifford to speak in appropriate-for-all-ages English, too, but never mind that. And if she hated the production of the original version, her reaction to the dance mix version should be unprintable.)

    You can gue$$ the rea$on why the$e $ong$ rank as the$e $inger$’ mo$t popular $ong$. That may be part of the reason for the artists’ antipathy, sticking it to the man and all that (which means, of course, sticking it to themselves), but the comments show other potential reasons:

    From what I remember hearing from Buffett in an interview, he dislikes the fact that he has so many songs that he “has to play” at every concert (Margaritaville, Cheesburger, Fins, Volcano, etc) that he doesn’t get to play a lot of his other material. The set list gets filled up with the classics that everyone wants to hear at a Buffett concert, and he gets stuck playing the same songs for decades. …

    Warren Zevon felt that Werewolves was easy and that a lot of his music had more meaning than that song, which was basically composed in a couple of hours around a guitar riff. It wasn’t an important song for him (and I don’t think it was his best song but what do I know?) …

    Unless you’re a songwriter you won’t understand this. Anyone who creates likes to be known for their best work. For fans to go ape$hit over an embarrassingly bad song while your best work is ignored twists up the mind. It’s like an actor being typecast for one role and character. Think [Max] Baer as Jethro Bodine. Any artist wants to be able to perform each of his/her songs with passion, and to have to go through the motions on a song you don’t like or that you feel is not your best work makes you feel like a cheap hooker faking orgasms. The whole point of becoming a songwriter performer is to escape from drudgery and rote through the creative process, and for that process to put you right where you didn’t want to be in that sense is maddening. …

    Frank Sinatra hated “Strangers in the Night,” even though it was his first number-one hit in over a decade and stayed on the charts for almost four months. He tacked on that “doo-be-doo-be-doo” ending to show his contempt for the song, only to have it become a signature for him. …

    That’s a big reason I’m hesitant to go to concerts. “And here’s a little something from my NEW album!” Lots of musicians want to do the whole show on new stuff without doing a few of the songs that made them famous. Then, when they do it, they’re resentful and don’t really get into it. …

    Most of these people would be living in the gutter without this song that they hate.

    I can’t really comment on the “creative process,” since I neither write nor sing songs and I’m not very creative. (Regular readers are now thinking: Since when has that ever stopped you, Steve?) I can relate the experience of three Chicago concerts over three decades. The first, in 1987, included a combination of then-current music and what one of the members called “the old stuff.” The latter two concerts, in Fond du Lac in 1997 and in Oshkosh in 2010, featured the old stuff, which suited fans just fine.

    However: Now that I think about it, I have performed songs. Somehow I managed to forget I was in the UW Marching Band for five years. (You’d think creaking knees and feet would remind me daily.) I had no input into song selection, of course, and as a trumpet player I was, well, very replaceable. (As a marcher I was too. The UW Band continued just fine without me after I graduated in 1988.)

    The UW Band played at every home football game I attended, starting in 1972, when Mike Leckrone was on his fourth year. (UW 31, Syracuse 14, by the way. Our daughter is going to her first game Saturday.) My ambition started about the time I realized I could be in the UW Band, somewhere around 1980, and when I met real live band members, and then Leckrone himself. (One of his field assistants was our band director for two years. He brought out Mike to a rehearsal.) So watching the band got me interested; my ability, such as it is, to play and march as demonstrated by six Registration Week rehearsals in August 1983 (yes, 30 years ago) got me into the band.

    I wanted to get into the UW Band because they looked like they were having a blast. I didn’t see the hard work that went into it, but, yes, it was a blast. My enjoyment of being in the band made worthwhile all the hard work, as well as the less-than-great moments, such as playing songs you don’t like. (I’m not a huge fan of “If You Want to Be a Badger,” but it goes fast.) After graduating I discovered that I enjoyed playing in the band, being part of the musical mayhem, than watching the band.

    Back to rock and, specifically, “Brass in Pocket,” which nicely straddles the line between rock song and power ballad — good beat, memorable guitar (though not really a riff), simple girl-wants-boy theme. (The words are here for those who, like me, spent decades not knowing what Hynde was singing.)

    Hynde herself noted the irony of her quote several paragraphs ago when she said, “I was a single mom with two kids. What else was I going to do? It was either be in a band or be a waitress.” Hynde also said, “Look, as long as we can make records and sell enough so we can do some shows, that’s all I want. You know what? I just want to play guitar and be in a band.”

    That quote about creative types wanting to be known for their best work is interesting based on who’s defining “best.” That in turn poses another question: Why — or, perhaps more to the point, for whom — do you do what you do? Because you demand the right to self-expression? Because you’re good at it? Because you like making music? To do something other people enjoy? To make money at it or gain fame from it?

    I learned a long time ago that in the world of news, what the reporter/editor/publisher thinks is important is not necessarily what the reader thinks is important. That was described by my high school journalism teacher as “what you want to know vs. what you need to know.” The journalist is more plugged in than the average reader, but you ignore or dismiss the reader, or listener, or viewer at your own professional peril.

    It is possible, I suppose, that some musical artists were too idealistic and assumed that their fans would want to hear whatever the artist wanted them to hear, instead of what the fans want to hear. It’s non-monetary economics — either give your fans what they want, or they won’t be your fans, or at least won’t show up at your concerts and buy your new music. To quote a group that has five decades of songs to choose from for their concerts, you can’t always get what you want.

    In most of the cases listed, the group has, in my opinion, better songs, which you can find with the search function on this very page. (Hint: They’re in the “Presty the DJ” pages.) And whatever Plant said about “Stairway” before, his reaction to this version was quite different:

    Rick Nelson wrote about the phenomenon of wanting to play new stuff when your fans don’t want you to …

    … which ironically turned out to be one of his most popular songs.

    This is also where I express my regret that of Chicago’s three number one singles, 2½ are sappy ballads:

    Economics has a lot to do with this. Hynde once said, “Yeah, the industry has always been both the enemy and the best friend of the artist. They need each other. That’s the bottom line.” A musician unconcerned with making money can play whatever he or she wants. A musician dependent on sales of concert tickets and recordings better pay attention to his or her market — that is, fans.

    The other half it, again, comes down to the motivation for being a musician. If any part of that motivation includes others’ enjoyment of your music, then you have to include what they like, and record sales and chart numbers are reasonably good indicators of that. Chicago is still producing new music; most of its fans seem to want the older stuff, and the band seems to be reconciled to that based on the fact they’re still touring 45 years after first getting rock music’s attention.  I don’t decide whether I like something based on its popularity, but I’m announcing a football game tonight, not embarking on a concert tour.

    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 Musical familiarity breeds artistic contempt
  • Presty the DJ for Sept. 6

    September 6, 2013
    Music

    The number one single in the U.K. todayyyyyyy in 19677777777 …

    Today in 1968, the Beatles recorded Eric Clapton’s guitar part for “While My Guitar Gently Weeps,” making him the first non-Beatle on a Beatle record:

    The number one song in the U.S. today in 1975:

    (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 Sept. 6
  • Walker vs. Kind

    September 5, 2013
    US business, Wisconsin business, Wisconsin politics

    My inbox includes this from the man who apparently is my Congressman:

    U.S. Rep. Kind (D-WI) harshly criticized the release of misleading “estimates” from Governor Scott Walker’s Office of the Commissioner of Insurance (OCI), claiming insurance rates for consumers will rise under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

    “It’s disappointing, but not surprising, that the Walker Administration would release this misleading information aimed at undermining the Affordable Care Act,” said Rep. Kind. “For purely political reasons, Governor Walker has kept trying to derail the new health care reform law and the benefits it offers to consumers, and the release of this faulty data fits that pattern.”

    The “analysis” by OCI attempted to compare rates being paid today by Wisconsin consumers to projected costs after ACA implementation in 2014. The Insurance Commissioner himself acknowledges that “the truth is that comparisons are difficult” between current plans and exchange plans, but then presents the misleading comparison anyway. The actual impact on premium rates and out-of-pocket costs for individual consumers will not be fully apparent until October 1, when the Health Insurance Marketplace opens.

    (Kind’s first name is Ron, by the way. That may be news to his news release-writer(s), because the first paragraph omitted Kind’s first name.)

    What “analysis” is Kind (actually, whoever writes Kind’s news releases, including the quotes from “Kind”) referring to? From Wisconsin Reporter:

    The state Office of the Commissioner of Insurance on Tuesday announced premiums for health care plans with $2,000 deductibles and drug coverage would increase anywhere from 10 percent to 185 percent depending on a consumer’s age and location in the state.

    In the release, the OCI acknowledged it didn’t account for premium subsidies, which will vary by consumer, and that an apples-to-apples comparison was difficult because of the variables involved.

    For example, the news release cautions:

    •  It is important to note a number of factors will impact how much of an increase an individual consumer will pay.
    •  The best way to determine how much you will pay is to review the exchange when it goes live on Oct. 1.
    •  It should be noted some consumers will be eligible for a taxpayer-funded subsidy, which will offset the actual premium being charged for low-income consumers.
    • It is important to note that any increase will not impact every consumer or group in the same way.

    After summing up these factors, OCI asserts the rates will rise.

    “(F)rom our analysis, it appears premiums will increase for most consumers,”Commissioner Ted Nickel said in a statement. “And while there is no question that some consumers will have subsidies and may not pay these higher rates, someone will pay for the increased premiums whether it is the consumer or the federal government.” …

    If the Wisconsin press had bothered to verify the numbers, they may have found a similar actuarial analysis of Obamacare’s impact on Wisconsin’s individual market has been around since 2011.

    That study, conducted by Gorman Actuarial and MIT economist Jonathan Gruberfound that, overall, premiums on the individual marketplace would increase 30 percent after Obamacare. However, 41 percent of the individual market would see a decrease in premiums due to taxpayer subsidies.

    Overall, Gruber has in recent weeks said he expects insurance costs, after subsidies are factored in, to decline by 5 percent in the individual marketplace.

    But the broader point is this: Somebody is going to have to pay for those subsidies.

    As OCI points out, the premiums are what they are — regardless of final cost to an individual consumer. In other words, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. Taxpayers will pay $729 million for health care subsidies in Wisconsin, according to the early Gorman-Gruber analysis.

    Without the subsidies, 12.6 percent on the individual market would enjoy lower premiums, while 87.4 percent would face increases. Forty-one percent of Wisconsinites on the individual market will face premium increases of 50 percent or more.

    A Society of Actuariesreport earlier this year projected Wisconsin’s underlying claims costs could soar by as much as 80 percent by 2017.

    Kind is channeling various left-wing groups who claim the Walker administration is overestimating the cost of ObamaCare’s implementation. These are the same people, of course, who have been blasting the Walker administration for not taking the supposed free money from Washington to expand Medicaid, despite no evidence that (1) expanding Medicaid improves recipients’ health or (2) that the federal government, with $16 trillion in debt, will be able or willing to follow through on its funding commitments. And no one in Kind’s party should be lecturing anyone in the Walker administration about fiscal responsibility, given their respective records of fiscal responsibility.

    The news release concludes::

    “Clearly, this so-called ‘analysis’ presents incomplete information for the purpose of furthering a political agenda,” concluded Rep. Kind. “Instead of offering up distortions and misinformation, it would be nice to see the Walker Administration accept the fact that the ACA is the law of the land and start helping Wisconsin consumers get affordable health care coverage.”

    Because no one in Congress is interested in “furthering a political agenda,” right, Ron? Kind’s agenda is to make people ignore the steep increases already taking place in health insurance premiums, the businesses cutting back employee hours and not hiring new employees because of the spiraling-upward costs of health insurance, and other signs of the coming disaster ObamaCare will be. Not that Kind has to worry about that, since Congress is exempt from ObamaCare.

    (That appeal to authority thing is clever given that Kind’s party pioneered civil disobedience. Kind has apparently never heard of what happened to the 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.)

    If you had to make two bets — that ObamaCare would cost far more than estimated and result in people losing insurance coverage, with associated bad economic effects, or, well, the opposite — given the Obama administration’s record of screwing up everything it touches, which would you bet? If you had Kind’s childlike, uncritical, unobservant, mindless faith in the federal government, you’d choose the latter. (Similar to Kind’s mentor, former U.S. Sen. Herb Kohl.)

    There is, of course, an answer for the political games Kind thinks Walker is playing. Kind can run for governor next year. Of course, Kind lacks the guts to do that, since he would have to give up his safe Congressional seat (and meet the rest of Wisconsin, most of which has never heard of Kind) and would have no better than a 50–50 chance of winning.

    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 Walker vs. Kind
  • Ten months later …

    September 5, 2013
    media, US politics

    Herman Cain passes on a New York Times editorial:

    It is a sad measure of how distressingly backward this nation has fallen in just a few short months that President W. Mitt Romney now harkens back to the international lawlessness of the Bush/Cheney years by proposing a completely unauthorized, unilateral strike on Syria – and this in response to “evidence” of chemical weapons attacks we find no more compelling than the now throroughly discredited claims of WMD possession made by Bush and Cheney against Saddam Hussein.

    Is America really returning to cowboy unilateralism to this extreme?

    Mr. Romney’s insistence that Bashar Assad has used chemical weapons against his own people is far from a slam dunk, as many regional media reports dispute the U.S. version of events. What’s more, the White House insistence that it will only launch a limited aerial attack with “no boots on the ground” is laughable on its face, as the history of Republican administrations demonstrates a lust for Middle Eastern blood that will surely lead to an all-out ground assault and an inevitable quagmire as we once again undertake a quixotic pursuit of nation-building in a place where we are neither wanted nor needed.

    To the extent that Mr. Assad has been guilty of atrocities, we can’t help but wonder how Mr. Romney might have calmed the situation with a more diplomatic approach to the relationship. His choice of John Bolton as special emmisary to the region has only inflamed anti-U.S. sentiments, and his ill-advised statements of unqualified support for right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu have had the unfortunate effect of stunting useful dialogue with moderates in the region.

    We also wish Vice President Paul Ryan would stop making unhelpful pronouncements condemning Al Qaeda when we thought the emotions of post-9/11 hysteria had finally receded under the calm, realism-based leadership of former President Barack H. Obama.

    In typical Republican fashion, Mr. Romney gives little credence to international law as he pays wanton disregard to the role of the U.N. Security Council. If Russia and China threaten vetoes, that is no excuse to disdain the process. Rather, it shows Mr. Romney’s need to be a real diplomat for a change and to seek international consensus.

    America should have learned from Iraq that we cannot bomb our way to a friendly Middle East. Sadly, the Romney team of Bush re-treads and right-wing fanatics appears to have limitless faith in U.S. power, and simply cannot resist the urge to send missiles flying and bombs dropping in the delusional hope that this will somehow bring calm to the situation.

    Oh. I forgot to include Cain’s opening:

    In the real world, whether we like it or not, Barack Obama was re-elected in the 2012 presidential election. And in the real world, the one-time hero of the peaceniks is now prepared to attack Syria without UN authorization and quite possibly without authorization from Congress. Some peacenik he turned out to be! The editorial page of New York Times, which is little more than a propaganda rag for the Democratic Party, offered little more than a tepid warning that Obama needs to make his case more convincingly, etc.

     Here is the Times’ “tepid warning”:

    There is little doubt that President Obama wants to take military action. As Secretary of State John Kerry said on Sunday of Mr. Obama, “He believes we need to move. He’s made his decision. Now it’s up to the Congress of the United States to join him in affirming the international norm with respect to enforcement against the use of chemical weapons.” …

    It is unfortunate that Mr. Obama, who has been thoughtful and cautious about putting America into the Syrian conflict, has created a political situation in which his credibility could be challenged. He did that by publicly declaring that the use of chemical weapons would cross a red line that would result in an American response. Regardless, he should have long ago put in place, with our allies and partners, a plan for international action — starting with tough sanctions — if Mr. Assad used chemical weapons. It is alarming that Mr. Obama did not.

    Remember when the news media spoke truth to power and challenged presidents Democratic and Republican? I remember half of that. Apparently we are now in the empty-suit era of presidents, similar to Wisconsin’s being without U.S. Senators between 1993 and 2010, with a president who does either (1) nothing or (2) the wrong thing.

    Or, as Kevin’s Political Rantings on Facebook put it:

    To everyone who voted because they were angered by a dog on the roof of a car, terrified of Big Bird getting his federal funds cut, or duped into thinking that binders full of women were an actual thing:

    This Syria mess is on you. Thanks a lot.

     

    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 Ten months later …
  • Presty the DJ for Sept. 5

    September 5, 2013
    Music

    The number one song in Britain today in 1954 was the singer’s only number one hit, making her Britain’s first American one-hit wonder:

    The number one song in the U.S. today in 1964:

    Today in 1967, the Beatles probably felt like they were the walrus (goo goo ga joob) after needing 16 takes to get this right:

    (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 Sept. 5
  • Iraq 2003 vs. Syria 2013

    September 4, 2013
    US politics

    The Wall Street Journal’s James Taranto:

    Our initial reaction was that if we were a member of Congress, we would be inclined to vote “no.” We ultimately, and with some difficulty, changed our mind, as we shall detail below. Our resistance–and our continuing misgivings about the prospect of an attack on Syria–are informed by reflection on our errors during the 2002-03 debate that preceded the Iraq war, of which we were a strong supporter. …

    Things are not so bad today that one can say with anything approaching certainty that they would be better if Congress had voted down the authorization to use force in 2002, or if President Bush had declined to avail himself of it the following year. It is not difficult to imagine a counterfactual scenario in which Saddam Hussein is still in power and things are worse than they are today. It is easier still to imagine one in which things are bad enough that those who supported war in 2002-03, having lost the political debate, feel as justified in saying “I told you so” as those who opposed it do today. All we know–all we can know–is what happened; might-have-beens are by definition speculative.

    What we can say is that events disproved certain of our expectations–that our predictions were wrong. Three such erroneous expectations are pertinent here:

    First, that because the U.S. military was so much mightier than the Iraqi one, victory would be comparatively easy. (“Cakewalk” was a buzzword of the day.) Although that was true of the initial invasion, opponents who warned of the possibility of a lengthy and difficult terrorist/guerrilla insurgency proved to be correct.

    Second, that the liberation of Iraq from Saddam’s dictatorship would have a benevolent transformative effect on the broader Middle East. The region does appear to be undergoing a transformation–the so-called Arab Spring–but as to whether that is because of or in spite of the Iraq war, one can hardly fault the answer Paul Wolfowitz gave us in a 2011 interview: “It’s a fascinating question, and one should probably simply . . . say it’s in the category of the unknowable.” More important, it is clear by now that the transformation is very far from unambiguously benevolent.

    Third, that the breadth of domestic political support for the war–which had the contemporaneous bipartisan backing of 69% of House members, 77% of senatorsand around 70% of the public–was indicative of a durable commitment to the war effort. Some Democratic supporters–John Kerry most notable among them–switched sides even before the shooting began; and support from the broader public slowly, and it turned out irretrievably, diminished over the ensuing few years.

    All these erroneous assumptions fall into the category of wishful thinking.

    Opponents of the war were also prone to wishful thinking, as well as to the magical kind. The appeal of Barack Obama in 2008 lay not only in his status as the only serious Democratic candidate to have opposed the war from the outset, but also in the belief that his conciliatory rhetoric, along with his “multicultural” identity (black, with Muslim ancestors and an Arabic middle name to boot!) would “restore our moral standing,” as the future president put it in his nomination speech, and usher in “a new beginning,” as he announced in Cairo in June 2009.

    Obama’s supporters would now have us believe that his swaggering words are as powerful as his soothing ones were supposed to have been. The McClatchy Washington Bureau reported Saturday that “foreign policy experts questioned the wisdom of waiting at least another week for Congress to return before the U.S. could act.” In response:

    Administration officials downplayed any risk at the military level, saying they believed Obama’s strong words alone would prevent Assad or his allies from striking before the U.S. make [sic] a decision. One official simply called any future attack by Assad a “big mistake.”

    This is an example of magical thinking that is not wishful. It would indeed be a big tactical mistake for Assad either to attack U.S. forces or again to use chemical weapons while congressional action is pending. But that is because of Obama’s political weakness, not his rhetorical strength. Congressional assent to Obama’s request for military authorization is far from assured; if Assad wants to keep it that way, he will lie low as the debate plays out. …

    Obama is not making any claim that military action against Syria will have a transformative effect. His argument, instead, rests on the potential dire consequences of inaction. We find it persuasive. Maintaining the international taboo against the use of chemical weapons (and nuclear and biological ones) is a moral imperative. These armaments have the capacity to kill on a far greater scale than conventional explosives and bullets.

    But if action is necessary as a moral matter, it must also be sufficient as a practical matter. And that is where Obama’s plan falls terrifyingly short. Here is what he said on Saturday:

    This would not be an open-ended intervention. We would not put boots on the ground. Instead, our action would be designed to be limited in duration and scope.

    On Friday, before Obama made the decision to seek congressional authorization first,Secretary of State Kerry said that “whatever decision [the president] makes in Syria it will bear no resemblance to Afghanistan, Iraq or even Libya.” That’s a bizarre and illogical assertion: It will be a “resemblance” to Afghanistan and Iraq, for instance, if Obama acts with congressional authorization, and to Libya had he chosen to act without it. But Kerry elaborated in words similar to those the president used the next day:

    It will not involve any boots on the ground. It will not be open ended. And it will not assume responsibility for a civil war that is already well underway. The president has been clear: Any action that he might decide to take will be [a] limited and tailored response to ensure that a despot’s brutal and flagrant use of chemical weapons is held accountable.

    In short, the administration is promising a cakewalk: an easy strike with little American blood or treasure at stake. As we argued Friday, it is fatuous to assume that would prove sufficient to hold Assad “accountable” or to deter him and other dictators from further bad acts. …

    Which makes the president’s request for congressional authorization difficult to understand as anything but a political ploy, at best an exercise in buck-passing, at worst–and this has been suggested approvingly by some of his admirers–a strategic effort to inflict political damage on congressional Republicans. In support of the latter hypothesis one may note that Obama maintained the element of surprise with his Capitol Hill adversaries while going to ridiculous lengths to spare Bashar Assad of it. …

    There is an intellectually respectable argument that the Constitution prohibits the president from taking any military action, except in response to an imminent or actual attack on U.S. territory or armed forces, without congressional approval. But Obama himself disavowed that view on Saturday! According to him, he thinks he has the authority to act in Syria without Congress, and he thinks action is imperative. Yet he invited Congress to say “no”–or, at best, to tie his hands so that he cannot, without defying the law, take further action should his promised cakewalk fail to deliver the sweets. …

    If you believe the media stereotype of Republicans, and especially House Republicans–that they are science-hating anti-intellectuals; knaves, zealots and racists happy to put political power, ideology and hatred of the president above any concern for the good of the country–then you should view his discretionary decision to give them veto power over a matter of grave national importance as a disgraceful abdication of responsibility, if not an impeachable offense.

    Which brings us back to Iraq. In 2002 some Democrats (and perhaps a few Republicans) went against their inclinations and voted to authorize the war for reasons of political expediency. With the memory of 9/11 still fresh, the public was behind the president, and lawmakers feared being tagged as soft on terror.

    That was a political miscalculation. As the Democratic nominee in 2004, Kerry could not explain his flip-flop, and the next Democrat to be elected president was a future senator who had shown political prescience in denouncing what he called a “dumb war” in a Chicago speech in 2002.

    In that speech, it is worth noting, Barack Obama rejected precisely the moral argument he made so powerfully on Saturday:

    Now let me be clear–I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied U.N. resolutions, thwarted U.N. inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

    He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

    But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

    Unless in the next week or so he discovers a heretofore unrealized capacity to move public opinion on substantive matters of policy, the expedient thing for lawmakers of either party to do will be to vote “no” while smugly minimizing the moral stakes by noting that while Assad is of course “a bad guy,” he poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, the Syrian economy is in shambles, there are lots of other mass-murdering dictators and we can’t bomb ’em all, and so forth.

    Any opportunistic lawmaker who takes that path will be following the example set by the man who is now president of the United States.

    I’m a big fan of Taranto’s, but I’m confused after reading this. He gives better arguments to be against bombing Syria than arguments on the side he says he favors. There remains the issue of whether the Syrian government used chemical weapons. Given that the weapons were used on Syrians who were supporting Assad, the entire premise of a future attack seems dubious.

    One of the Facebook comments about Taranto’s piece explains things well:

    Tradition had it that “politics stops at the waters’ edge when it comes to war.” It’s not Congress that is playing politics with Syria, it’s our President. Shame, shame, shame on Obama and shame on all who thought this weak, vain and selfish man was what our country needed. I hated Bill Clinton because I thought he was a sleaze ball in his personal life and greedy. I never, however, thought that he didn’t love his country or that he didn’t always try to do his best when it came to foreign affairs, even if I didn’t agree with his decisions. Obama, however, makes Clinton look like George Washington. There is clearly nothing that shouldn’t and will not be used by our current President to achieve his political objectives and cover his own butt.

    In other words: No one — no one — should trust Obama’s ability to make the right decision.

    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…
    1 comment on Iraq 2003 vs. Syria 2013
  • A No vote you can trust

    September 4, 2013
    US politics

    Politico interviewed former UN Ambassador John Bolton about the forthcoming mess in Syria:

    “I think if I were a member of Congress, I would vote against an authorization to use force here. I don’t think it is in America’s interest. I don’t think we should in effect take sides in the Syrian conflict,” Bolton said on “Fox and Friends.” …

    “There’s very little to recommend either side to me, and I think the notion that a limited strike, which is what the president seems to be pursuing, will not create a deterrent effect with respect to either to Syria’s use of chemical weapons or, more seriously, Iran’s nuclear weapons program. So all in all, since I don’t see any utility to, to the use of military force in Syria in this context, I would vote no.” …

    “I just don’t think there’s a convincing argument here, and, frankly, it doesn’t matter what the intelligence shows,” Bolton said. “I don’t think there is any doubt that Assad’s regime used chemical weapons. I don’t think that will change anybody’s mind.”

    Bolton also expressed some skepticism on the strategy coming from the White House, the mind-set on the Hill and how members will vote and what exactly the authorization will look like.

    “If they agree with the use of military force, they ought to vote in favor. If they’re against it, they should vote no. That then gets to the next question: What exactly is the military force that is going to be used? John McCain came out of the White House [Monday] saying [it] looks like the president is ready to go big. That’s not the resolution they’re drafting on Capitol Hill.”

    While he does think some form of authorization will eventually be approved and “the administration will win,” Bolton added there will be one winner in the meantime: Democratic members of Congress.

    “I think the White House candy store is open. I think the ideal job to have today is to be a Democratic member of Congress. What do you need for your district or state? A post office? A new military facility? What do you want? I think anything you want you’re going to get because the White House is going to do whatever it takes to get a majority.”

     

    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 No vote you can trust
  • Presty the DJ for Sept. 4

    September 4, 2013
    Music

    The number one song in the U.S. today in 1961:

    Today in 1962, the Beatles recorded “Love Me Do,” taking 17 takes to do it right:

    Three years later, the Beatles had the number one single …

    … which referred to something The Who could have used, because on the same day the Who’s van was vandalized and $10,000 in musical equipment was stolen from them while they were buying … a guard dog:

    (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 Sept. 4
  • Things to learn that they may not

    September 3, 2013
    Culture, US business

    Today is the first day of classes at public schools and UW campuses throughout Wisconsin.

    In case students don’t learn these lessons, I present them from Finer Minds:

    However, if I had to a write a list of life lessons to add to my 15-year-old self’s class timetable now, these would be them:

    1. Not Everyone in Life Will Be Like You (Thank God!)

    The reverse side of this is, you won’t always like everyone (and sometimes you can’t even pinpoint why). All you can do is treat everyone with kindness and be yourself. If this isn’t enough, they’re not worth your time. This equally applies to friendships and dating!

    2. Be Your Own Best Friend

    This follows on from my above point, looking for other people’s continuous approval will lead you down a lonely path (particularly if you’re looking for it from the wrong kind of people). Be kind to yourself and focus on what your greatest strengths are. No one is perfect, so don’t waste time wishing you were. Where there is room for improvement, do what you can and listen to your inner voice.

    3. Don’t Beat Yourself Up

    Things will go wrong from time-to-time, it’s what makes us human. The best thing to do is dust yourself off and try again. Of course if you keep making the same mistakes, it might be time to change tactics, although sometimes our mistakes turn out to be the biggest blessings in disguise and take us down a greater path.

    4. Set Goals… And Write Them Down

    When your head is swarming with a list of everyday tasks, the bigger picture and less urgent goals can get pushed until tomorrow. And then the week after, and then maybe the year after that. Writing them down not only gives you a sense of purpose, it helps you realize what’s a priority in your life. Stick your goals up somewhere you can see them, so when you feel yourself going off track, they’ll act as gentle reminder.

    5. You Can Be Whatever You Want (Within Reason) 

    The statement “you can be whatever you want” is one I’ve always been a little skeptical about. Can I really be the next Beyonce when I really can’t sing? The truth is, not matter how hard I try, probably not (my school principal will even vouch for this). But I can find what I am really good at, or something that I am incredibly passionate about, then shoot for the stars and make it happen.

    7. Don’t Compare Yourself With Others

    There will always be people who are better at something or have more than you do. Whether they’re more attractive or smarter than you, or have the financial freedom to live a more luxurious life. Yes, it would be amazing if we could live the “dream life” we have conjured up in our heads, however the life you’re living is the one that you have. So make the most of it and follow the kind of dreams that will bring you happiness.

    8. 80% of What You Fear Will Never Happen 

    I’ve heard this statistic a lot over the years, and now that I’m 31 (gulp), it certainly feels this way (now why didn’t they teach us this in math class?). Knowing it doesn’t always take the worry away, but it can put things into perspective when your mind is going into overdrive with fears of “what if.”

    Much of this advice, well, you’ve probably already read in outstanding publications beyond this blog. For the 20-year-old set, Jason Nazar has more advice:

    Time is Not a Limitless Commodity – I so rarely find young professionals that have a heightened sense of urgency to get to the next level.  In our 20s we think we have all the time in the world to A) figure it out and B) get what we want.  Time is the only treasure we start off with in abundance, and can never get back.  Make the most of the opportunities you have today, because there will be a time when you have no more of it.

    You’re Talented, But Talent is Overrated – Congratulations, you may be the most capable, creative, knowledgeable & multi-tasking generation yet.  As my father says, “I’ll Give You a Sh-t Medal.”  Unrefined raw materials (no matter how valuable) are simply wasted potential.  There’s no prize for talent, just results.  Even the most seemingly gifted folks methodically and painfully worked their way to success.  (Tip: read “Talent is Overrated”) …

    Social Media is Not a Career – These job titles won’t exist in 5 years. Social media is simply a function of marketing; it helps support branding, ROI or both.  Social media is a means to get more awareness, more users or more revenue.  It’s not an end in itself.  I’d strongly caution against pegging your career trajectory solely to a social media job title.

    Pick Up the Phone – Stop hiding behind your computer. Business gets done on the phone and in person.  It should be your first instinct, not last, to talk to a real person and source business opportunities.  And when the Internet goes down… stop looking so befuddled and don’t ask to go home.  Don’t be a pansy, pick up the phone.

    Be the First In & Last to Leave ­– I give this advice to everyone starting a new job or still in the formative stages of their professional career.  You have more ground to make up than everyone else around you, and you do have something to prove.  There’s only one sure-fire way to get ahead, and that’s to work harder than all of your peers.

    Don’t Wait to Be Told What to Do – You can’t have a sense of entitlement without a sense of responsibility.  You’ll never get ahead by waiting for someone to tell you what to do.  Saying “nobody asked me to do this” is a guaranteed recipe for failure.  Err on the side of doing too much, not too little.  (Watch: Millennials in the Workplace Training Video)

    Take Responsibility for Your Mistakes – You should be making lots of mistakes when you’re early on in your career.  But you shouldn’t be defensive about errors in judgment or execution.  Stop trying to justify your F-ups.  You’re only going to grow by embracing the lessons learned from your mistakes, and committing to learn from those experiences.

    You Should Be Getting Your Butt Kicked –Meryl Streep in “The Devil Wears Prada” would be the most valuable boss you could possibly have.  This is the most impressionable, malleable and formative stage of your professional career.  Working for someone that demands excellence and pushes your limits every day will build the most solid foundation for your ongoing professional success. …

    People Matter More Than Perks – It’s so trendy to pick the company that offers the most flex time, unlimited meals, company massages, game rooms and team outings.  Those should all matter, but not as much as the character of your founders and managers. Great leaders will mentor you and will be a loyal source of employment long after you’ve left.  Make a conscious bet on the folks you’re going to work for and your commitment to them will pay off much more than those fluffy perks.

    Map Effort to Your Professional Gain – You’re going to be asked to do things you don’t like to do.  Keep your eye on the prize.   Connect what you’re doing today, with where you want to be tomorrow.  That should be all the incentive you need.  If you can’t map your future success to your current responsibilities, then it’s time to find a new opportunity.

    Speak Up, Not Out – We’re raising a generation of sh-t talkers.  In your workplace this is a cancer.  If you have issues with management, culture or your role & responsibilities, SPEAK UP.  Don’t take those complaints and trash-talk the company or co-workers on lunch breaks and anonymous chat boards.  If you can effectively communicate what needs to be improved, you have the ability to shape your surroundings and professional destiny. …

    You Need At Least 3 Professional Mentors – The most guaranteed path to success is to emulate those who’ve achieved what you seek.  You should always have at least 3 people you call mentors who are where you want to be.  Their free guidance and counsel will be the most priceless gift you can receive.  (TIP:  “The Secret to Finding and Keeping Mentors”). …

    Read More Books, Fewer Tweets/Texts – Your generation consumes information in headlines and 140 characters:  all breadth and no depth.  Creativity, thoughtfulness and thinking skills are freed when you’re forced to read a full book cover to cover.  All the keys to your future success, lay in the past experience of others.  Make sure to read a book a month  (fiction or non-fiction) and your career will blossom.

    You may disagree with some of those. I’m not sure about “The Devil Wears Prada” example, for instance. Independent of the fact that people are hired to do jobs, not out of the benevolence of their employer for self-actualization, bosses should demand excellence, but there is a line between pushing excellence and simply being abusive. There are bullies in the workplace, and many are bosses. It would be nice if every workplace was a meritocracy, but life isn’t fair. As for that part about getting your “butt kicked,” have too many “F-ups,” and you will get your “butt kicked” out the door.

    Dan Calabrese disagrees with some too:

    Nazar writes: “Pick Up the Phone – Stop hiding behind your computer. Business gets done on the phone and in person. It should be your first instinct, not last, to talk to a real person and source business opportunities.”

    I disagree. Phone calls still have their place, of course, but the idea of picking up the phone instead of sending a message via e-mail, text or social media does not reflect my experience in the business world of today at all. Sometimes you clearly need to talk directly, but usually in that case you use other methods of communication to schedule the call, and then you have an agenda, you get to it, and you say goodbye. Gone are the days when a blind, unexpected phone call (especially if he’s talking about prospecting by cold-calling, for crying out loud) is the most effective way to initiate business communication. No way. I’m with the 20-somethings on this one.

    Nazar also writes: “Pick an Idol & Act “As If” – You may not know what to do, but your professional idol does.  I often coach my employees to pick the businessperson they most admire, and act “as if.”  If you were (fill in the blank) how would he or she carry themselves, make decisions, organize his/her day, accomplish goals?  You’ve got to fake it until you make it, so it’s better to fake it as the most accomplished person you could imagine.   (Shout out to Tony Robbins for the tip)”

    Maybe I’m recoiling because it comes from Tony Robbins (yeah, not a fan) but I never like advice that encourages you to mimic someone else. Learn from others, sure, but making someone else an “idol”? If it’s true that you’re uniquely you, I think it’s a much better idea to recognize things you respect about others and adapt them to your own approach. If you’re always asking what X would do, you don’t learn to think for yourself. For instance, would X go to Tony Robbins seminars? Then I won’t be emulating X!

    By the time this week is done, one surmises students will be thinking fondly of this song, applicable eight to nine months from now:

    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 Things to learn that they may not
Previous Page
1 … 851 852 853 854 855 … 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