About Us

Name: Ed Lilly
Biography
Name: Disgruntled in NY
Email: disgruntled.blogger1@gmail.com
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Newman lives! Or does he?

While sending a much overdue Mother's Day gift yesterday (sorry again, Mom!) with my daughter, I laughed out loud at a hand-written sign posted on one of the bulletin boards at our local post office.  Perhaps as part of the USPS effort to be helpful to consumers, and perhaps as part of some of the legislation relating to consumers' ability to take their names off telemarketing and mailing lists, the sign had 2 pieces of information.  On the top of the page was an address where people could send letters to have their removed from credit card solicitation mailing lists.  Probably a good thing all in all.

The bottom portion of the page provided an address where one may send a letter to have his or her name removed from "so-called junk mail" lists.

So-called?  Well, as we all know:


Well, there really is no junk-mail...well, everybody wants to get a check or a birthday card, but it takes just as much man-power to deliver it as their precious little greeting cards...
As far as I know, there has been no word on a response from Postmaster General Henry Atkins to this potential breach of protocol here in small town New Jersey.  Though someone had taken a pencil and lined through the still readable information on taking your name off the list....

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Finally a GOOD idea from Massachusetts

In the spirit of true bipartisanship, I think that were I in the Massachusetts state legislature, I would have no problem casting a vote for the plan outlined by Prof. Paul Caron at his taxprof blog (h/t Instapundit):

Massachusetts lawmakers desperate for additional revenue are eyeing the endowments of deep-pocketed private colleges to bolster the state's coffers by more than $1 billion a year, asserting that the schools' rising fortunes undercut their nonprofit status.

Legislators have asked state finance officials to study a plan that would impose a 2.5% annual assessment on colleges with endowments over $1 billion, an amount now exceeded by nine Massachusetts institutions.


Now, if only we could Barack Obama's pastor to recognize this type of scenario as a true instance of chickens coming home to roost, we'd be getting somewhere.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

There's more than corn in Indiana

Or so the catchy tune promoting my native state taught me years ago.  Turns out, it may not be only Hoosiers who take this view.  Here's a description from Rashawn Biddle of the American Spectator that I never thought I would hear applied to the place of my birth (h/t Instapundit):

"The biggest mistake by Clinton was in presuming that Indiana was like just another Rust Belt state. The reality is that it is a microcosm of the entire nation, with the almost all the same socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. In some ways, its combination of rural and urban gives it more of a resemblance to nearby Illinois or New York than Ohio or Iowa. "

Unfortunately for those who are tied up in party politics, my understanding is that President Bush's good friend Mitch Daniels hasn't exactly won the hearts and minds of Hoosier Republicans.  Not sure what, if anything, that means for the fall elections, but there it is.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Crossover voting, open primaries, and the "Limbaugh Effect": One voter's tale

My lovely wife, a lifelong Democrat, is having a tough time of it with the current primary battle.  As a conservative who has never been much for party politics, I had never participated in a primary election before this year.  When the New Jersey primary rolled around (and I have already forgotten when it was) Romney and McCain were still the main contenders for the Republican nomination.

Because New Jersey allows anyone to declare a party at the polling station, my wife requested that I vote in the Republican primary and cast a ballot for Mitt Romney.  Being a good husband, and not really having a strong objection to Romney, I agreed to vote for him.  And for what it's worth, not long after my vote was cast, Romney dropped out of the race.  My record of backing long shots continues.

Still, did my beautiful bride make this suggestion because she wanted Romney to be a nominee or the president?  No.  She's still leaning toward Clinton as her candidate of choice, but in ranking the four leading contenders at the time of the NJ primary, she put McCain as her least favorite choice.  So she wanted me to vote for Romney to prevent McCain from getting the nomination.  Thus, she sought to manipulate the other party's nomination process.

So how did my wonderful wife react to my lifelong Republican father's crossover vote for Obama in Indiana's primary yesterday?

She decided this morning that it was ethically wrong for him to have done this, and that he should let the party members decide who the nominee will be.

When I reminded her of her own impassioned plea for me to do exactly the same thing, but in the Republican primary, she of course decided that was somehow different.

"You're SO a Republican," she explained.

"No, I'm a conservative, but I'm NOT a Republican," I pointed out.

I think she realized she wasn't going to get very far trying to parse a distinction that would sway me, but it didn't make her any happier with the thought of Republicans crossing over and mucking around in the Democrat primaries.

But it's an interesting question.  Apparently my mother, also a long-time Republican voter, declined the opportunity to vote in the Democrat primary, and instead cast a ballot for Huckabee.  She presumably thought it would be wrong to vote in the other party's primary.

Clearly, my father sees it differently, and I essentially agree with him in practice.  My own reasoning is probably more cynical than his, in that I figure there's no ethics in politics anyway, so it's silly to cite a moral or ethical prohibition against such type of scheming with one's vote.  His view was a more pragmatic one, seeking to put an end to the Clinton era once and for all by supporting a candidate who at least talks the talk of trying to bring people together to solve the country's problems.  Of course, he's also enough of a realist to not have very high expectations that, should Obama actually take office, he will deliver anything near the unity and healing he has touted in the primaries.

And for what it's worth, in talking to my father this morning, he indicated that he thinks there must have been a huge crossover vote in the Democrat primary in my hometown county.  He must have read the local papers already this morning, because he cited the following general numbers to indicate his point:

2004 presidential primary:  23,000 total votes / 15,000 Republican / 8,000 Democrat
2008 presidential primary:  43,500 total votes / 16,500 Republican / 27,000 Democrat

It's hard to know how much of the increase in turnout for the Democrat race is due to young, first-time voters and just generally higher interest, and how much may be Republicans crossing over.  But the county as a whole has voted consistently Republican as far back as I can remember, so it would be hard to believe that in the last four years there has somehow been a demographic and/or political shift of such significance that it took a predominantly Republican county to an overwhelmingly Democrat one.  Should be interesting to see what the vote totals show in the general election by way of comparison.

As for my wife's concern with crossover votes?  I keep trying to tell her it's up to the parties to make the rules.  If they want to only allow party members to vote and prevent voter shenanigans, they better change the rules rather than somehow try to deny human nature.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Where have you gone, Gale Sayers?

Actually, I know where Gale Sayers has gone.  Unfortunately, da Bears are still stuck with the buffoonish Cedric Benson at running back rather than a classier, more exemplary type of person such as Sayers or the late, great Walter Payton.  Why is Benson a buffoon?  Well, aside from his completely uninspiring on-field performance, we get the latest on the hard work he's been doing in the off-season to justify his multi-million dollar salary:

Chicago Bears running back Cedric Benson failed a sobriety test while operating a 30-foot boat, then resisted arrest before being hit with pepper spray and dragged ashore by officers.

If Benson were to never play another down for da Bears it would be ok by me.  Unfortunately, the brain trust at Halas Hall doesn't exactly have a great track record to fall back on in providing confidence that they understand how to put together a competitive offensive scheme and/or personnel, so the only upside to dumping Benson would be the satisfaction of ditching a bad character guy who sets a terrible example for young fans.

Guess I better enjoy this brief portion of the early baseball season while the Cubs have not yet been mathematically eliminated from winning the division.  August, and reality, will be here soon enough.



Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

I'm not holding my breath waiting for Universities to divest themselves from this source of funding

Perhaps a forward thinking approach to university evaluations by magazines like U.S. News and World Report would include a requirement that the universities provide transparency in disclosing the sources and amounts of all financial gifts, grants, endowments, etc., and universities should also have an office that has complete records, freely available for review online by those who may be interested, that details all correspondence, notes to the file, and program evaluations for the various projects that are funded by these gifts, grants and endowments so that the “buying public” knows exactly what kind of environment their high school graduate may expect when they get to campus.

What prompts such a sweeping suggestion of reform and full disclosure from our higher education system?  Here’s the background from The Australian (h/t Instapundit):


THE cheque from the Saudi Government for $360,000 was enclosed in an envelope.
It was a donation, a gift, a part payment to subsidise the construction of a building that would become Sydney's Muslim heartbeat: Lakemba mosque. More than 35 years after Sydney cleric Khalil Shami received the cheque, he insists it came with no strings attached. But while the cheque had no tangible conditions in the form of written instructions or binding contracts, the cleric received a message from his donors several months after depositing it.

"They said: 'Please, can you mention the tragedy of the Palestinian people and what's happened to them in your sermon?"' Shami tells Inquirer. "Which is really a very noble cause, a very noble cause, I couldn't see a negative in their request."

The message Shami received from Riyadh brings into question the influence petro-dollars can have on their recipients, whether the money is bankrolling a religious centre, a clerical allowance or Queensland's Griffith University, which was exposed by The Australian last month for seeking a $1.37million Saudi grant, of which $100,000 was received, and offering to keep elements of the deal a secret.

The Saudi Government - largely through its embassy - is believed to have funnelled at least $120 million into Australia since the 1970s to propagate hardline Islam, bankroll radical clerics and build mosques, schools and charitable organisations.

But the Saudi cash that has flowed into Australia, that also allegedly has paid the allowance of hardline Canberra cleric Mohammed Swaiti, who has publicly praised jihadists, is dwarfed by the $90 billion Riyadh is believed to have pumped into promoting Islamic fundamentalism internationally.


Ninety.  Billion.  Dollars.  So how much have American universities received?  What has been funded by it?  Who are the professors and staffers who have applied for and received grants from the Saudis?  What kind of academic work have those people done with that money?  Just a few of the many, many questions that need to be asked and answered.

I’m not sure I follow Daniel Pipes’ argument here:


US-based Middle East expert and author Daniel Pipes says it is wrong to presume that all academics would follow their donor's line merely to keep the stream of funds rolling.

"Academics have a distinct point of view and are not about to be bought and change their point of view for any sum of money," he tells Inquirer. "But they are willing to shape their work and their views. So you can't buy them but you can rent them. So someone who might have been inclined to ask tough questions will do something else. It's subtle. It's not like the Saudis come to town to buy up academics who grovel before them, as was the case with Griffith University."

Last month, Britain's MI5 director-general Jonathan Evans reportedly told his Government that the Saudi Government's multimillion-dollar donations to universities, along with other funds from Muslim organisations in countries such as Pakistan, had led to a "dangerous increase in the spread of extremism in leading university campuses".

You can’t buy them but you can rent them?  They won’t change their point of view, but they will stop asking tough questions?  Sounds to me like it, contra Mr. Pipes, it is in fact entirely correct to presume that academics who are receiving significant funding from the Saudis are in fact following the Saudis’ line in order to keep the funds rolling.  I understand that Pipes has probably forgotten more about terrorism than I may ever know, but if he is somehow trying to argue that we should still trust American academics who are getting funding from the Saudis, I think he’s about as wrong as can be, and he’ll need to expand significantly on these comments to convince me otherwise.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

As Emily Litella would say, "Never mind...."

About that urgent need for $775 million for the UN to help with the impending food crisis, here's the latest from Fox News:

 Just weeks before it announced the onset of a global food crisis and the urgent need for donors to provide at least $775 million in additional funding, the World Food Program was sitting on a cash and near-cash stockpile of more than $1.22 billion.

H/T Instapundit.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

When worlds collide...

I'm waiting for a return phone call on a document review project that was supposed to come at 12:30 (we'll see), the kids and I just finished lunch, so I figure I'll turn on a kid show to get them settled for a few minutes.

Turning on the tv and cable box, the default channel on startup is channel 8, which I think is a Comcast produced channel.

It's apparently time for "Daily Cafe," which must be some kind of interview show.

As the tv warms up and I get the picture, who do I see on the program?   Col. Oliver North being interviewed on his new book.

And who is the host of this show doing the interview?

Fred "Gopher" Grandy.

If someone in 1987 had mused on the possibility of an interview 20 years in the future conducted by "The Love Boat's" Gopher, after his time in Congress of course, and Iran Contra celeb Oliver North, they would have been laughed out of the room.

Perhaps I should look at the up-side.  As the Chinese wish for us, we live in interesting times.

Tags: Media   culture  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Mixed messages at the school library?

I have been doing some substitute teaching lately, and many of the assignments the past few weeks have been in our local middle school.  During planning periods I often spend time in the school library catching up on news and other things.  Near the bank of computers in the library are a set of posters designed to appeal to teenagers and let them know the wide variety of things they can find and/or learn in the library.

The posters build on the fundamental idea of using the "Five W's."  Thus, we have:


Say Who?  Find Biographies Here!
Say What?  Find It Here!
Say When?  Find History Here!
Say Where?  Find Your Way Here!
Say Why?  Find Answers Here!
Say How?  Find Out Here!


And centered in the display area is a poster reading:

Teens Say READ!

I'm certainly in favor of improving kids' literacy and research skills.  So I was a little disappointed to see the tagline at the bottom of each of these posters:

The Library is WHERE IT'S AT.

I understand that may be very common phraseology.  But shouldn't we do students a favor and try to use proper grammar?

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

UN wants to help with global food crisis?

Via Urgent Agenda, here’s the intro to a story on the developing "food crisis":

VIENNA, Austria - A sharp rise in food prices has developed into a global crisis, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Friday.

Ban said the U.N. and all members of the international community were very concerned and immediate action was needed.


And since the UN has done such a bang up job of solving every other problem it has deemed worthy of immediate action, we should definitely look to them in the event of a global food crisis.  Which reminds me, there’s been talk of starting a communal garden in our yard for our family, the neighbors, and my wife’s sister’s family.  Smart money says any garden we may plant has a better shot at helping address any hunger than the UN.

Of course, that’s not to say there isn’t a ray of hope buried within the article:


He spoke to reporters at U.N. offices in Austria, where he was meeting with the nation's top leaders for talks on how the United Nations and European Union can forge closer ties.

Just off the top of my head, I’d suggest they could have saved themselves the cost of traveling to Austria, and all the contributions to the “climate change crisis” such international flights may have made, and skipped the face-to-face meeting on how to force closer ties and just take the following approach:  relocate the UN to the European Union.  Brussels would be a perfect location for them.  Then when the Islamists complete their demographic transformation of Europe, we can finally be rid of the UN once and for all.

Finally, we get the unsurprising news that the UN wants money:


"This steeply rising price of food — it has developed into a real global crisis," Ban said, adding that the World Food Program has made an urgent appeal for additional $755 million.

Perhaps if the UN opens its books for a full audit, including the Oil for Food scam it ran for Saddam Hussein, and actually helps do something about the billions of dollars it has laundered in such operations I would be more sympathetic to their appeal.  There must be hundreds of honest international aid operations that would be better targets for such funding that could do more to help those who need food rather than filtering it through the UN.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Origin of the droopy pants fashion statement?

The current fashion of wearing baggy pants that hang down below the waist, exposing the wearer's boxers, butt crack, or worse, has been the subject municipalities trying, and now states, trying to enact legislation to subject such "fashion outlaws" to fines.  The latest attempt, in Louisiana, has apparently failed.  From Breitbart.com comes this AP report, but what is confusing me is the explanation given at the end of the story for the origin of the fashion trend:

The style is believed to have started in prisons, where inmates are issued ill-fitting jumpsuits but no belts to prevent hangings and beatings. The look was popularized in gangster rap videos.

I have seen this explanation of prison as the origin for baggy pants before, but in reading this explanation and thinking about it, it makes no sense.  If inmates are issued jumpsuits, that means they are not getting pants.  Sure, they aren't getting belts that can be used as weapons or for hangings, but they also are not getting separate, ill-fitting pants and shirts.

So how do we get from a jumpsuit to avoid having to wear belts to inmates preferring baggy pants?  How can the layers upon layers of editors and fact checkers at AP not have thought this through and explained the incongruity?

On a related note, I have also seen stories online about law enforcement actually liking the baggy pants look, because it is sometimes an added bonus for them in chasing suspects who wind up being tripped by their own pants.  I don't entirely believe this, but I suppose it's at least theoretically possible. Perhaps someone with law enforcement experience or connections can confirm or debunk it.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How rational are child rapists?

Ann Woolner's most recent column on Bloomberg.com discusses an appeal before the Supreme Court involving Louisiana’s death penalty statute.  Under Louisiana law, a criminal convicted of raping a child can be sentenced to death, even if the victim was not killed during the commission of the rape.

Woolner provides the basic facts of the particular case involved in the Supreme Court appeal, and acknowledges that on an emotional and visceral level, the death sentence is a satisfying and enticing option.  But she then goes on to argue that the death penalty should not be imposed in such cases, citing various arguments to support her position.

Interestingly, there is apparently a friend of the court brief on file in the case from the National Association of Social Workers and other similar organizations that argues the imposition of the death penalty is more harmful to the child victims than not imposing the death penalty.  A key argument they make is that the possibility of the death penalty means there is an incentive for the child rapist to kill the victim so that there is no surviving witness.  And even if the child is not killed, the social workers’ brief argues that there is greater potential for future harm and trauma to the child victim as they have to participate in greater pre- and post-trial hearings, appeals, etc., reliving the trauma more than they would have without the death penalty.

It’s an interesting argument, and a logically presented one.  But it doesn’t seem to answer a lot of questions for me.

Such as, should we really be assuming that child rapists are rational actors who assess their options vis a vis whether to kill their victim based on whether or not they may get the death penalty?  I understand that Ann Woolner and the National Association of Social Workers are rational people who can figure out the role of incentives and consequences in arriving at a decision.

But are child rapists that rational and calculating?  I doubt it.  Even in the example Woolner provides in outlining the facts of the case involved in the appeal, we get pretty clear evidence of what you hear from law enforcement and defense lawyers all the time - criminals generally do stupid things.  So in the case at issue, the rapist stepfather’s first act following the commission of his brutal crime (which apparently resulted in his step-daughter needing emergency surgery) was to call his boss to say he would be in late, and to ask how to get blood stains out of white carpet.

The rapist's next move?  He called a carpet cleaning company to schedule an emergency cleanup.

Over an hour an a half after making these phone calls, the guy finally calls 911 to report his stepdaughter’s rape.

Do we expect a monstrous child rapist who is so incompetent that he left this trail of evidence to be sharp enough to think about potential sentencing ramifications?  I just don’t see it.

And while the issue of greater pre-trial publicity and hearings in a death penalty case may be a consideration, I am not so sure the extended appeals argument is quite as strong as Woolner makes out.  Typically, the appellate courts are not re-hearing the entire trial, so there is no need for a rape victim, or any other crime victim, to keep having to tell their story repeatedly as the appeals keep making their way through the system.  The appeals usually involve procedural and, as in this case, constitutional arguments that would limit or negate the long-term involvement of the child victim.

Another nagging issue for me was the lack of any kind of quantification that would support the argument Woolner and the social workers are making.  If there are some states that have the death penalty for child rapists, and others that do not, there should be comparative data available that either confirms or discredits the argument.  It may in fact be true that in Louisiana, a child rapist is more likely to kill his victim than in another state where there is no death penalty.  But Woolner cites no such data, which makes me believe that the social workers similarly have not provided any such data.  So if it is simply a theoretical argument based on logic, I am still skeptical.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Who are the people still reading printed newspapers?

Much has been written about the changing marketplace for information and the migration of readers from newspapers and magazines in hard copy, printed form to electronic, online form.  My first job was delivering my hometown newspaper, an "evening" paper in those days.  Every day after school I would take my bundle of papers, fold and tuck them into a throwable form, and stack them, standing up, in the oversized baskets on the back of my Schwinn Heavy Duty affectionately known as The Black Streak.

My sister and I originally shared a route, covering most of a neighborhood near our house and surrounding the local hospital.  Later, when she moved on to junior high (remember when it was still called that?), I took a smaller route in an adjoining neighborhood.  It was essentially a circular route, there was only one road into and out of the neighborhood.  But I believe I delivered the paper to every one of the approximately 30 houses in that area.

Now, some 25 years later, I haven't had a daily newspaper delivered to the house in years.  We do get a weekly paper for our township that comes in the mail, and I have read it more frequently in the past couple of months.

But today I was surprised when we went to the grand opening of a new nature center in our township just a few minutes down the road.  There were lots of environmental organizations with displays and information, little activities for the kids, and even a "wild animal show" inside the nature center - a charming old brick house that has been restored and refurbished.  The woman with the animals had several birds and a couple of bats, and gave a very nice presentation and discussion with the children and adults.

One of the birds she had was a broad winged hawk.  In explaining that hawks use their very keen eyesight to hunt food, as opposed to owls that use their excellent hearing, she noted that hawks can see approximately 10 times better than humans.  To give people a better understanding of just what that meant, she gave a concrete example that was interesting, and also surprised me.

"How many of you still read the newspaper," she asked.  But it wasn't just the words she spoke, but the tone and body language that accompanied it that caught my attention.  She clearly asked with the expectation that no one in the group would actually still be reading a printed newspaper.  I figured if there was a target demographic for the Trenton Times, the local paper for our area, that the people at this kind of event would be it.  But no one seemed to acknowledge reading the paper.

As she went on to explain that if you put a newspaper at one end of a football field, then walked to the other end and went up into the bleachers and read it from your seat in the end zone, that would be the equivalent of a hawk's eyesight for a human.

But all I kept wondering was who in the world is still reading the Trenton Times if even the nature center staff and its grand opening visitors have given it up?

Tags: Media  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (5) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Danny Federici, RIP

I saw the news a few days ago, and hadn’t read any of the stories.  I knew the basics of Federici’s passing.  Here's the intro:

Danny Federici, the longtime keyboardist in Bruce Springsteen's E Street Band whose talents were showcased in some of the rocker's best-loved songs, has died.  He was 58.

Federici’s piano and keyboard work on many early Springsteen and the E Street Band songs really sticks in my mind.  I grew up with older cousins who listened to a lot of Springsteen.  Not that much older, but enough so that they were into Springsteen around the time Born to Run came out, whereas I was only 10 at the time.  So I wound up acquiring a taste for some of the same music just a little later.

An interesting tidbit from the story:


Federici came back for a final appearance with the band last month in Indianapolis, playing on eight songs including “4th of July, Asbury Park (Sandy),” a Springsteen classic that spotlighted Federici's accordion playing, the Star-Ledger of Newark, New Jersey, reported.

`Natural Musician'

The newspaper's official Springsteen blogger, Stan Goldstein, wrote today:  “To many of us E Street Band fans, it's like losing a member of our own family.”


It’s an amazing and interesting world where a newspaper can have an official blogger for a particular musician.  There was probably a lot of competition to get that spot, too.

One thing that, unfortunately, touches on a bit of a sore spot with some Springsteen fans is buried in this part of the story:


During his induction into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1999, Springsteen called Federici “the most instinctive and natural musician I ever met, and the only member of the band that can reduce me to a shouting mess. I love you, Danny. Your organ and accordion playing brought the boardwalks of Central and South Jersey alive in my music. Thank you.”

It’s subtle, but reading the first sentence carefully and recalling the “controversy” at the time you see that Springsteen was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1999.  For whatever reason, the E Street Band was NOT inducted into the R&RHoF with him.  A lot of Springsteen fans were unhappy with that fact at the time, and likely still are.  Given the stuff they put out as a group, and Springsteen’s efforts to portray himself as a regular guy, I’m a bit surprised that Springsteen didn’t either refuse the honor without the band, or use his standing in the world of rock and popular music to twist some arms to get an all inclusive induction for the entire band.

In any event, Federici’s contributions to the E Street Band sound will be remembered, and he will be missed.

Tags: Media   Music  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

When advertising layouts matter

Over some eggs and bacon this morning, I took a few minutes to do a preview flip-through of the most recent Money magazine that came in the mail recently.  I wasn't very far into the magazine when I laughed out loud at one of the ads.  Not because the ad itself was intentionally funny.  But because of an unintended consequence of the effect of the ad from the previous page on the ad I was looking at.

A few pages after the table of contents and index information, T. Rowe Price had a two page spread advertising its mutual funds.  Included with the ad was a tear-out postcard to fill out and send in if you want further information.  Pretty standard magazine stuff, right?

Of course, the tear-out postcard is made from heavier stock than the pages of the magazine, and was attached to a small strip of heavy stock from which it is to be separated.  The effect of this is to leave a small, heavy piece of paper stock in the binding of the magazine, which means the magazine page itself doesn't open quite as far as it would without the heavy stock blocking at least a portion of the page.

Big deal, how much can that really matter, right?

Not a whole lot.  But on the subsequent right hand page was an ad for another investment firm.  And because of the way their ad was laid out, when the page was turned with the card stock in place, there was one letter that disappeared from the ad unless you pried the magazine open to see the complete headline.  Here's the headline they wanted the reader to see:

JANUS RESEARCH MEANS GETTING MORE THAN YOUR HANDS DIRTY

Guess which letter couldn't be seen due to the card stock?

I wonder if the folks at Janus will get any kind of discount on future ads, or perhaps make sure that their ads are placed differently to avoid the humorous blip in Money.


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive