User Profile Friends Calendar

Below are the 3 most recent journal entries.

	2008.04.08  07.21 I'm a cockeyed pessimist And, thanks to that, I'm not taking part in the general wallowing in gloom and doom that's occurring in Memphis this morning. Our guys lost the Big Game last night, and there is no joy in Mudville today. But, because of my incurable pessimism, I never believed that we'd win anyway, so I'm not disappointed. This is really my philosophy of life in a nutshell: pessimists never suffer disappointment. And occasionally we are delighted when something goes right. But not today.

	2008.03.20  17.34 All-time best mid-season replacement series Complete list found here: http://tv.msn.com/tv/topmidseasonshows?news=304895>1=7703&mpc=1 It's a good list, most all really good shows that I enjoyed watching. BtVS is one of them. But I have a bone to pick with the synopsis of "Moonlighting". "Moonlighting" was a midseason replacement notable for several reasons, including characters directly addressing the audience and occasionally inexplicably bursting into song. But the show is best remembered for the "will they or won't they" aspect of the lead characters' relationship and for rapidly falling apart once that question was answered. This repeats an error that has been reiterated time and again. "Moonlighting" did not fall apart because Maddie and David finally "did it". It went all to pieces because Cybill Shepherd was pregnant with twins and had so many resultant physical problems that she was forced to miss episodes or could only film limited parts of episodes. The show's writers, formerly capable of wit and humor, failed utterly in coming up with witty, humorous plots that took this happenstance into account. They suddenly decided to have Maddie marry a strange man she met on a train, and then have her pregancy turn into a "whose baby is it?" This plot twist turned off many fans of the show and ultimately killed it dead. By the way, I will be taking part in tomorrow's boycott of LJ, not because I'm anti-Semitic (I didn't even know until today that SUP's owners were Jewish) but because I think that any company that treats its customers with disdain or comtempt occasionally needs a knock upside the head, just to get its attention. Dissatisfied customers often take their business elsewhere, and SUP badly needs to be reminded of that basic aspect of Business 101.

	2007.12.03  17.04 Travel woes on planes, not trains Here is a long article on how airline passengers are crammed into full, or nearly full planes, because that's the only way airlines can make money now. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22074357/ Nowhere in the article is any mention of Amtrak. There's no comparison made between the narrow seats, packed into clusters of three or four across, on planes and the nice, wide reclining seats on Amtrak where you can sit back, spread out and relax. Or, if you like, you can even lie down in your private compartment. On a plane, either you carry along your own food or you do without. On Amtrak, you stroll to the dining car, sit at a table with a linen tablecloth on it, and order from an actual menu. You're served piping hot meals, whole, entire meals with salads to start, meat and vegetables and roll, and dessert if you like. Or you can go to the lounge car and buy sandwiches and chips, which you can eat in the observation deck, enjoying the scenery as it goes by. And, in my opinion, the clincher: if two trains collide, they don't both fall out of the sky, killing everyone on board. Why would anyone want to fly when they can take the train?