Fans of soccer love to talk about how great their game is and how Americans are too unsophisticated to appreciate it. (Yes, I know elsewhere it’s called Football. But not here. In America, we call it soccer. And, unless I suddenly get a mass of readers from outside the US, I’m going to call it soccer, so just simmer down). And since Sunday, a lot of them are talking about how exciting soccer is and how could anyone call it boring is beyond them. And as proof, they point to Sunday’s World Cup match between the United States and Portugal.
Yes it was exciting. And excruciating and heartbreaking. (30 seconds? You couldn’t hold out for 30 more seconds?). And today’s Uruguay/Italy1 match seems to have been…interesting…. what with Luis Suarez apparently going all Mike Tyson on Giorgio Chiellini.
But Sunday’s game ended in a draw. Americans dislike games ending in ties. (Especially when all Team USA needed to do was keep the effing ball away from Cristiano Bleepin’ Ronaldo for 30 more seconds). We want to win. Americans want sporting events to end with one team winning and the other team losing. Seriously, this why the NHL changed overtime to include the shoot-out. (Especially when someone realized a team could make the playoffs without ever winning a game and just tied all 82 games). The only major American league that allows games to end in ties is the NFL. And that happens so rarely, some players didn’t know it could happen. And that’s because Americans play to win.
So, if Team USA is to advance to the next round, they need to win or tie when they play Germany on Thursday. (Well, they could also advance if they lose to Germany and the Ghana/Portugal match ends in a draw). Germany would also advance to the round of 16 if they beat or tie the US. This had led to speculation amongst the soccer intelligentsia that perhaps the US and Germany will play for a tie.
In the immortal words of John McEnroe, “You cannot be serious.”
We are not taught to play to a tie. No American is going to watch Thursday thinking, “Gee let’s just tie the game.” The fact that there are soccer people who think it would be fine to play to a tie is why soccer isn’t in the top 4 of American sports.2 (And spare me the whole “Soccer is the future” spiel. Soccer has been the future sport of the US since 1952. It will always be the sport of the future). Even little kids play to win, even when their helicopter-ing parents try to pretend otherwise. Because winning and losing is important.
Americans play to win.
Consider: during the qualifying matches, the US had clinched a berth in the World Cup and had a meaningless game against Panama. If we lost, then Mexico was out. Yes, Mexico, a country that never wastes an opportunity to piss on the U.S. So, all we had to do was take a dive and the Mexicans don’t go to Brazil, missing their first World Cup since 1990. What happens? We won the game. Why?
Americans.Play.To.Win.
Perhaps if more soccer teams played to win, Americans would show more interest in the game.3
Until then, Football, real football begins in 72 days.
1Maybe someday I will understand why when I hear Mario Balotelli I automatically think of Mario Batali. It could be worse, I could confuse English soccer player Chris Smalling with President Barack Obama.
2I don’t think the Germans are going to play to tie. They apparently did this in 1982 in a World Cup match against Austria. It is now known as Schande von Gijon.
3Americans would probably show more interest if soccer players would stop flopping every time they came in contact with an opposing player. Seriously, watch Serie A play. A player gets hit and crumples to the ground in such severe agony that you expect to see instead of the medic, the team priest administered Last Rites and then the player taken off the field by pallbearers instead of a stretcher. And yet, after all of that, a few minutes later, the same player is back in the game with no hint of injury. I don’t know, maybe the players really are that injured and the teams get water shipped in from Lourdes. But it seems more likely that the players are Lebron-ing.
I have been called many names over the years. I still remember the first time I walked into a courthouse as an attorney. As I passed a Court Officer, he nodded and said, “Good morning, counselor.” At first, I thought he was being sarcastic. But then I realized, no, that was an appropriate name.
I know someone who always calls me “Wayne”. I don’t know why. Other people have gotten my name wrong, trying to get my attention by yelling, “Hey A**-hole!”
Last April, I was a given a new name. I became Uncle.
Soon, I will be called something else:
Dad.
I turned 40 yesterday.
The most often asked question I got about this birthday was: “How does it feel to be 40?”
Well, I can report being 40 feels just like being 39.
If that changes, I’ll let you know.
It’s Leap Day. It is one of the most bizarre concepts to spring from the human mind. Consider: it happens every 4 years UNLESS that year is divisible by 100 then there is no leap day UNLESS that year is also divisible by 400 then there is a Leap Day. Yeah, that clears it all up, don’t it?
As near as I can tell, this is all Julius Caesar’s fault. When he was Pontifex Maximus of the Roman Religion, responsible for keeping the calendars correct, he was so horrible, that the planting seasons were falling out alignment with the Roman Calendar. To make up for it, Caesar inserted an extra day to correct for his errors.
But we’re stuck with it. The problem is, we are simply not exploiting this extra day. It should be a national day of celebration. Sure there are some sale specials, but nothing really exciting. And that’s not just wrong, it’s un-American. We are a country that uses dead presidents to flog mattresses and created a national holiday based on waiting to see if a rodent sees its shadow.
We need wacky sales. Holiday t.v. specials. What’s Bass Rakin up to these days? How are we not doing more to exploit Leap Day?
Or maybe, because it is once every 4 years (unless that year is divisible by…. Oh never mind) we could use the day to have things in our culture cleared up, or as I like to think of it:
The Entertainment National Truth & Reconciliation Day
Think of the incredible amount of shite heaped upon America (and by extension, the world) every year by the High IQ boys (& girls) of Entertainment Industrial Complex. Jack & Jill and Toddlers & Tiaras come to mind. These shows and movies insult the intelligence of your average weather forecasting rodent, never mind a human. I say enough. Every 4 years, the Entertainment Industry should have to explain why we have been forced to suffer through the mind boggling amount of crap produced. America deserves to know why someone green-lit Work It.
There needs to be real explanations for the suffering endured. I don’t want any of this, “We’re sorry someone took offense, it wasn’t our intent” B.S. that is normally uttered. I want the real truth. Something like I want, “Look, he had nude pictures of me with the chicken, so I really had to approve the filming of Jack & Jill.” Or, “I was so high when I wrote the Smurfs. I spent my rent money on some amazing Monticello Mellow and I had this hallucination that the world would be better off if ruled by smurfs. I was going to throw out the script, but then I needed some money to pay the rent, I didn’t expect them to actually film it.”
Other things I want the entertainment industry to explain include:
1. The Spirit– (I’m still bitter that I will never get back those 2 hours of my life).
2. Jersey Shore (I want to know why they were allowed to return from Italy).
3. Toddlers & Tiaras (I also want to hear from Child Services)
4. Anything with the Kardashians (‘Nuff said).
5. The Chipmunk Movies. (One? But three? There is simply not enough controlled substances to explain the existence of three chipmunk films).
And once they explain, they need to grovel for our forgiveness.
We have four years. Let’s go America!
Last Friday, came the news of Federal Agents foiling an attack on the US Capitol Building. Since Congress has a 10% approval rating, my initial reaction was wondering if this was a real incident or this desperate attempt by Congress to garner sympathy, Munchhausen by Government.
But the more I thought about it, the more I began to realize the government missed a golden opportunity. The Feds had been investigating the would-be-bomber for over a year, tracking his movements, watching him blow things up in a quarry, etc. This survelliance culminated last Friday with his arrest which occurred just after he put on what he thought was a vest wired with explosives. (It wasn’t. I’m kinda hoping it was just road flares).
This is where I think the opportunity was lost. Imagine this scenario:
It’s morning. The Would-Be-Bomber (let’s call him Suicide Stanley) meets with whom he believes are his fellow terrorists for the final time. Or so he is led to believe. Unbeknownst to Stanley, his fellow terrorists are actually members of the FBI and Homeland Security. And they have secretly switched the explosive vest he was supposed to wear with one that, while scary looking, is in reality a dud. After receiving his co-conspirators’ well wishes (“Knock ‘em dead, Stanely”?), our man puts on his jacket, (to conceal the bomb) gets into his car, and drives to Capitol Hill. He finds parking nearby, gets out of the car, and walks to Capitol Building, finally reaching the steps of the Capitol. Once there, Stanley, with a dramatic flourish, removes his jacket, shows the world his explosive vest, utters his inspirational phrase, and pushes the detonator.
Nothing happens.
No boom.
There is silence.
There silence becomes an awkward silence as the birds in the trees look at one another as if to say, “Why did we stop chirping?”
Stanley looks at the detonator, maybe slaps it, and then pushes it a second time.
Still nothing happens. There is a pause and then, instead of a big boom, Stanley is enveloped in confetti. He’s been glitterbombed.
There is another brief, awkward moment of silence quickly replaced with the “Wa Wa Wa Waaaaa” sound effect coming from hidden speakers.
The FBI walks over to glittering Stanley, and leads him, mortified and stupefied, away in custody.
Naturally, all of this is captured on video and broadcast around the world. Suicide Stanley becomes the butt of jokes around the world.
This is basis for the greatest reality show ever. When I am pitching this to Network and Cable honchos, I’m telling them, “It’s Punk’d meets Undercover Boss.” For now, the working title is The Real Suicide Bombers of D.C. (though “Blowing up with the Khaddaffis” has a certain zing to it).
Every week we would follow some deluded fool thinking he was going to make a politcal statement and go out with a bang. He would make a statement, but the only statement he would be making would be commercial. There show will need a host to introduce each week’s “guest”. I’m sure Ryan Seacrest is too busy, but I understand Steve Jones is available and Anderson Cooper might be looking for a new gig soon. The host could do an introduction like they used to do for Candid Camera. (“We thought it would be funny to replace Stanely’s Semtex with Confetti. Let’s see what happens.”). Maybe do a behind the scene of how the bomber gets punked. That car wired to explode? Instead we watch the car getting pimped out with huge speakers so when the bomber hits the detenator, the only thing that explodes is his ear drums as the car blasts out the “Chicken Dance.” Even better: get record labels to pay for the right to have an artist’s latest single play. Once the failed terrorist is in custody, the host could do a short interview with him:
Host: So Stanley, the bomb didn’t explode. Your thoughts?
Stanley: Well Anderson, I really thought I had my “A” game today. Was total committed to killing infidels in the name of my god. So, this outcome is completely surprising. I’m so embarrassed. Felt like I let the movement down right now.
Host: Where do you think you went wrong?
Stanley: That’s the thing, I’m a big fan of this show and I never thought I would fall this. Looking back, I think I should have been more suspicious when we had the organizational meeting at the Bacon Festival.
Host: Well Stanley, for being a guest on The Real Suicide Bombers of D.C., you get this commemorative tee-shirt.
Stanley: Oh look, it has Marvin the Martian asking, “Where’s the kaboom?” Very funny. It’s not 72 virgins, but it is very nice.
Host: And Federal Authorities have confirmed they will let you wear the tee shirt while serving your sentence at ADX Florence.
Pure Comedy Gold.I’m so confident that the show would be a resounding success, I’m already thinking of the franchise opportunities around the world. (“The Real Bomber of Kabul”? Hey it worked for rich, self-absorbed trophy wives, why not self-absorbed martyrs?).
This would be the ultimate public/private partnership: a counter-terrorism program that makes a profit. It would seriously disrupt the ability of terrorists to recruit suicide bombers. Nobody wants to be the punchline. People may be willing to die for a cause, but are rather less enthusiastic to be an international symbol of ineptitude. They may not fear death, but they do fear embarrassment.
So, let’s humiliate them and make a boatload of money in the process.
Superbowl# XLVI: Patriots 17, Giants 21.
Even one week later, it still sucks. Going into the Super Bowl Sunday, I was cautiously optimistic. Not so confident that I would wear my Patriots sweatshirt in public, mind you, but I had hope. That optimism pretty much faded when the Patriots suffered a safety on their first offensive possession. That one play killed them.
(Consider this: without the safety, the score would have been Patriots 17, Giants 13 when Eli got the ball in the 4th quarter. They would have had to have gone for a touchdown with less than 2 minutes left. A touchdown makes it 20-17. The Pats then need to get a field goal to tie the game, meaning the Giants have to protect against not only a touchdown drive, but a field goal, creating more opportunities for the Patriots offense).
I didn’t see the half-time show, so I missed Ms. Ciccone’s (nee Penn, nee Ritchie) performance, including Miss “Where’s My Truffle Oil for These Chips” flipping the Bird to the American People, so I have no opinion as to how good it was. But, I have jumped on the Weird Al Yankovich for Halftime Show in 2013 bandwagon.
Even the commercials weren’t particularly inspiring this year, (Doritos’s being the main exception) And I was really surprised that Clint Eastwood was given the opportunity to clear his throat before recording the Chrysler commercial. Maybe next year Clint can appear in a Riccola commercial.
The television went off as the Hail Mary was dropped. (And for those of you who know me and wondered, I exuded a Zen-like calm throughout the game). I avoided all sports news for 24 hours. Of course, I did hear about Gisele Bundchen throwing Wes Welker under the bus. She already was developing a reputation of being Yoko Ono Bundchen and this did nothing to improve or change this view for the better.
(The Wall Street Journal has a nice defense of Gisele. And they’re probably correct. But there’s perception and there’s reality. The Journal deals in reality. Fans deal in perception. So, while it her rant may be evidence of her love for Tom Brady and her passion for the game, to most fans it just further shows that the team has not won a Superbowl since Tom dumped Bridget Monihan).
Living in New York meant being reminded of the loss up through victory parade on Tuesday. Since I don’t work downtown, I wasn’t overexposed to the celebration. But my commute was. The train was packed with folks going to the parade. I was surrounded by Snooki and Situation wannabes. (I really fear that someday, someone will make a reality show about the North Shore and there will be a sudden style craze based on “Revere Hair”).
So where does this annoying loss leave the Boston Sports fan trying to find some solace in the other professional sports? Especially one living in New York? It’s not easy. It looks bleak. The Golden Age of Boston sports is drawing to a close.
While they maybe be in playoff contention, if the defense doesn’t improve radically, the Patriots won’t be back in the Superbowl. (And the general history of NFL teams that lose the Superbowl is not comforting)
The Stanley Cup Champion Boston Bruins have been struggling of late. My biggest fear is the team will implode, possibly as a result of Tim Thomas going all Dixie Chicks and deciding to discuss his political views. They got blown out 6-0 by the Buffalo Sabres, but won against the Predators.
(As an aside, the NHL Phoenix Coyotes are now drawing well in attendance and may move. I want them to move to New Mexico, the home of Area 51 and call themselves the Albuquerque Aliens. The only reason for this would be the annual Aliens versus Predators match-up).
Assuming the Bruins make it to the playoffs, there is the possibility of a Bruins- New York Rangers playoff series to determine which will go to the Stanely Cup. But given their current state of play, is it realistic to expect them to accomplish anything once there?
The Celtics may or may not be going anywhere this season. The Big Three are aging, the window for another championship maybe closed, and it is time for the team to start rebuilding, preferably around Rondo. (If we could only get players like Kendrick Perkins!). Of course there is always the possibility that Danny Ainge could decide to trade him for some magic beans. Or worse, Paul Gasol. In the run-up to the Superbowl, the Celtics apparently won 9 of 10 and in this lockout shortened season, they may have enough to sprint to the finish and make it into the playoffs. (And if the Lin-sanity of the New York Kincks continues, there could be a Celtics-Knicks playoff series). But just like the Bruins, is there any realistic expectation of them accomplishing anything once they get there?
The Red Sox? Oh, where to begin with this disaster? After having the worst collapse in the history of Major League Baseball, the team decided the best thing to do was to show Terry Francona, the only man to lead the team to World Series glory in the post-Hapsburg Dynasty era, the door and stab him in the back on his way.
The Sox start the 2012 season with almost $51 million dollars sitting on the disabled list.# They let the closer go without a fight and without someone to take the position. They have a new GM, Ben Cherington, because Sox let Theo Epstein out of his contract a year early to become President of Baseball Operations with the Cubs. In exchange for letting Epstein out of his contract, the Cubs were to compensate the Red Sox. Of course, the Sox didn’t bother to secure the compensation from letting Theo go, losing all leverage in the negotiations.
The Red Sox then did Bob Barker proud by promptly neutering the new GM by rejecting his choice for Francona’s replacement and foisted upon him a man who that has never won a World Series, best known for managing overseas, and apparently inventing the sandwich wrap.
After overpaying for Crawford, Dice-K, John Lackey and J.D. Drew, the Red Sox have suddenly become concerned with the MLB salary cap and will not exceed it this year. The team’s starting shortstop, Marco Scutaro, was traded in order to clear cap space so pitcher Roy Oswalt could be signed. This would be fine, except Roy Oswalt doesn’t want to play for the Sox.
While New York and Tampa have strengthened their teams over the winter, Boston decided to focus on getting its fans to buy bricks at Fenway Park. While the team, who’s principal owner is John Henry, has major gaps in its pitching, outfield and short stop, (Seriously, Nick Punto?), it has instead talked up a soccer match between Liverpool FC, also owned by Henry, and AS Roma to be played this summer on the grass of Fenway Park. It’s hard to get excited about a third place team. The only reason the Red Sox will be a third place team this year is because Toronto is still rebuilding and Baltimore is still a punchline.
It’s going to be a long sports year.
Today was the first time I ever experienced an earthquake and knew it. (In 1989 there was a minor earthquake near the Vermont/Canada border, but it felt more like a truck rumble. I didn’t know until the news reported the earthquake 15 minutes later).
My office is on the 9th floor of a building in the Bronx. There was a strange rumbling, almost like ocean waves that lasted maybe 5-6 seconds…and that was that. As the rumbling happened, it crossed my mind that this was an earthquake. It was an odd sensation to feel the building swaying without any wind blowing. We like to think of the ground beneath our feet as solid, but an earthquake reminds us that it is not.
I can’t say the earthquake was entirely unpleasant. Though I would be lying if I said I wanted to experience another one, especially one that was stronger.
(The quake originatedinVirginiaandwasa 5.8 or 5.9. There are no reports of serious injuries or damage so the jokes are flying across the internet and twitterverse)
Well, I guess experiencing an earthquake is one thing more to cross off the ol’ bucket list. I’ve already experienced blizzards and hurricanes, so just need a volcano and then I think I’m good. Hope Irene realizes this and bypasses the New York City area this weekend…
I try to keep this blog up-beat and light hearted. Only rarely do I venture into the more serious realm of politics/current events. After all this blog is supposed to be about living and working in New York as a Bostonian,. But every so often something causes me to dust off the soapbox. This is one of those times.
Last week was the Casey Anthony verdict in Florida. I paid virtually no attention to the case. It was a trial, if we were honest, with real news value outside of Florida. So when the not guilty verdict was announced, I shrugged and moved on with my life. Some of you might think that because I am an attorney, I spend a lot of time watching and keeping up with the latest televised trial or criminal scandal. I don’t. Mainly I am dismayed at how certain cases garner a lot of media attention while others do not. As a general rule, when I turn on news channel and see a Nancy Grace-type hyperventilating over crime du jour, I keep moving in my quest find more enlightening programming. (This maybe why I don’t watch much cable news…).
One of the benefits of being a cynic is, since you expect the worst from people, you are rarely disappointed in their behavior. And yet, the vitriol spewed by people after this verdict caught me completely off guard. Especially on the internet. For reasons I don’t fathom, a lot of celebrities took to Twitter to express, in general, their shock at the verdict. (Even Vanilla Ice chimed in. Why, why, baby? Don’t know, don’t care). Among those who decided to express themselves was Kim Kardashian.
This is probably the only time I will ever utter the following phrase: Poor Kim Kardashian. I’m still not sure why she is famous. Her father, Robert Kardashian was part of the “Dream Team” in the OJ Simpson Trial and so he had some notoriety. Because of who her father was and his part in the so-called “Trial of the Century”, Ms. Kardashian’s comments were not well received. A lot of people mocked her and compared this case to the OJ trial. I did feel bad for how Ms. Kardashian was treated on the internet. Neither this case nor the OJ verdict were her doing. But because of her connection to that other trial, she became a lightening rod.
And while she is correct that she has a right to her opinions, perhaps someone should have told Ms. Kardashian that opining on a notorious murder trial might not be such a good thing. We may not be responsible for the actions of our parents, but sometimes discretion is the better part of valor and Ms. Kardashian should have probably found another legal case on which to comment, such as Raj Rajaratnam’s trial).
A lot of the comments on the internet and twitter about the Casey Anthony case tend to fall into two broad groups: The jury was a bunch of idiots who couldn’t find their collective backside with a map; or the defense attorney had somehow fooled the jury and somehow used Jedi Mind tricks. Either way the collective opinion has been this: The acquittal was a sad day for the American Legal System.
To which I say: Bullshit.
This idea that justice wasn’t served or that this is the jury’s fault is complete and utter bullshit. The system did its job. Yes the crime was horrific. Yes, you do not like the outcome. But that doesn’t change the fact that the system did what it was supposed to do. The evidence was presented to 12 citizens who determined that, based on the information they were given in the trial, that the accused was not guilty. And this is important point: she was found not guilty. The jury didn’t say Casey Anthony was innocent. The jury said the government failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey Anthony committed murder in the first degree. There is a world of difference between those concepts.
Consider:
To overcome the defendant’s presumption of innocence, the State has the burden of proving the crime with which the defendant is charged was committed and the defendant is the person who committed the crime. The defendant is not required to present evidence or prove anything. Whenever the words “reasonable doubt” are used you must consider the following: A reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt, a speculative, imaginary or forced doubt. Such a doubt must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have an abiding conviction of guilt. On the other hand, if, after carefully considering, comparing and weighing all the evidence, there is not an abiding conviction of guilt, or, if, having a conviction, it is one which is not stable but one which wavers and vacillates, then the charge is not proved beyond every reasonable doubt and you must find the defendant not guilty because the doubt is reasonable. It is to the evidence introduced in this trial, and to it alone, that you are to look for that proof. A reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the defendant may arise from the evidence, conflict in the evidence, or the lack of evidence. If you have a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant not guilty. If you have no reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant guilty.
(Florida Jury Instruction 7.2 Emphasis mine). The government has to present a case that proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If they don’t, the accused cannot be convicted. This jury did its job. It is clear some, if not all, of the jurors believe Casey Anthony had something to do with her daughter’s death. (This could also be inferred by the conviction of 4 counts of lying to the police). But the jury, to a person, made it clear the government didn’t prove murder. (And by the way, threatening the jury for doing its job is beyond asinine. Threatening to kill someone because they didn’t do what you wanted? Do we really want our criminal justice system to be based on mob rule? As Benjamin Franklin once observed, “Passion governs, and she never governs wisely.”). Now you would never know this by listening to the so-called experts on television. To them, Casey Anthony was guilty. No proof was needed to be given. “They” just knew it. And these talking heads were the same ones who “knew” OJ was guilty, evidence be damned. Facts such as the primary police witness was had a long history of racial incidents, and had lied under oath about them (the prosecution knew this gem and instead opted for the “hope no one notices” strategy) or that the medical examiner’s office seemed to have trouble with basic forensic science concepts. The talking heads kept insisting that OJ was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Unfortunately for the so-called experts, the jury wasn’t listening to them, but to the evidence.
And yet somehow these people managed to get their own cable channel! Listening to legal talking heads is useless. Actually it is less than useful. It is dangerous. It is legal quackery. These so-called experts are more concerned with their views and less concerned about the evidence and the law. This would be fine except our legal system is based on law and fact. I have tried a number of cases. As any real trial attorney will tell you, we listen to the evidence and gauge the jury’s reaction to the testimony. You can get a good feel for what the verdict will be by actually paying attention to the trial. Instead of educating the non-legal public to how trial work, the Legal Quacks are even acting as fashion consultants. Seriously, how much time was spent talking about the Casey Anthony’s pink faux-tux shirt? The woman was on trial for murder, not crimes against fashion. Any discussion of couture by a lawyer on TV automatically disqualifies them from being taken seriously. A child is dead and there is no one who will be convicted and punished for the crime. The State of Florida failed to prove its case. The question should be why did the government fail to prove its case. But the Quacks don’t want to do that, because that would force them to ask difficult questions, engage in meaningful debate, and educate the public about the criminal justice system. Instead They prefer to sermonize why the jury didn’t do what the “experts” wanted them to do. The it is on to the next case du jour and their auditions to be a <ahem> celebrity judge for the next season of Project Runway. Nothing good has come out of this case.
Well, maybe one. We are now one step closer to Nancy Grace’s head exploding like that dude in Scanners. And that can only improve the quality of legal debate on television.
When I was in law school, I was taking a course on Wills and Estates. We were studying a case where a woman wanted to change her Will and asked her attorney to make the changes. When he did, the lawyer told the client the new will was done, but she could wait until after the holiday to come in and sign it. Naturally, she died before she signed and the courts ruled the new will was invalid because it was not signed.
After we finished discussing the case, the professor gave us the back story. (He knew the attorney involved.) The man, our professor told us, was an alcoholic and was about to go on a bender and didn’t want to wait for the old lady to show up in his office to sign the will.
The moral, as the professor told us that day is the same one I tell you today:
DON’T CELEBRATE THE FOURTH WITH A FIFTH ON THE THIRD.
Have a happy and safe 4th of July.
I don’t begrudge fast food restaurants. I don’t. When someone tells me that a month long diet of fast food will make you fat, my initial reaction is: Only an Idiot would think otherwise. (The runner up reaction? What moron would eat 900 burger meals in a month to prove something that is self-evident?). Some years back, Anthony Bourdain wrote an article, decrying the fast food chains as evil-doers. I think that is going a bit far. I don’t think the kings, clowns and red-headed step children of the food industry are some sort of axis of evil, but my libertarian hackles get raised when I read about some city trying to ban toys in kids meals. It ain’t the toys making the kids fat, it’s the failure of the parents to feed the children proper meals. (Not that organically grown foods have covered themselves in glory recently). If people want to eat at such places, they should have every right to do so and without the government or other busybodies nagging them about their choice. It’s not these corporations fault that we eat there.
And that ignores the most basic question: Why would you want to eat there?
There are so many better options. Especially in our cities. You want something good, fast, and inexpensive? Why not try the street vendor? These are your neighbors, trying new, unusual, exciting, and often times very tasty culinary experiments. Consider the humble food truck. Once derided as the “Roach Coach”, they now offer choices that put the Fast Food Royalty and Jesters to shame.
The three in this photo, from right to left are selling ice cream; soup (including gluten & diary free); and Turkish Tacos. I don’t know about you, but nothing says the ideal of the American Melting Pot is alive and well like Turkish Tacos. Maybe somewhere else in the world, this concept has taken hold, but I doubt it.
Consider what you get at a fast food joint- An over cooked burger that has sat in fat under a heat lamp, greasy french fries (or are they still freedom fries?) with a lot of salt and a soda. And it will cost around $7.00. Is it going to be tasty? Be Honest now. Will you find it to be delicious? No, no you won’t. You will find it edible.
Now, consider Pera’s Turkish Tacos. With its meal deal, you can get a lamb taco, non-greasy fries with Mediterranean seasonings and a non-alcoholic drink (including freshly made ice-teas and lemonade). It will cost $10. But, to use a Southernism, I can guaran-dog-tee you that you will find the meal delicious.
Let’s say you’re in a hurry and want something fast and cheap. Consider the corner Hot Dog Vendors. A good New York City hot dog will set you back $2.00. That’s it. $2.00 for a good old fashion American hot dog. And it too, will be tasty. This isn’t a New York thing, Bourdain and Andrew Zimmern have showcased these mobile restaurants on the Travel Channel.
This food is prepared fast, but quality is not sacrificed in the name of speed. Somehow these trucks have been able to do what the big chains don’t. To paraphrase the great bard, “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our Clown, but in us”. At some point, we decided food didn’t have to taste good. All that was important was it could be swallowed and some small amount of it was digestible and provide a tiny amount of nutrients.
I understand the attraction for busy families. The chains offer time. Time away from the kitchen. More time to spend with the family or doing other things. It doesn’t have to be that way. We shouldn’t settle for what is edible just for the extra time we gain. We can have both.
The fast food chains know it. Their business model is based on the time versus quality argument. That is why they offer vast amounts, along with the toys and other gimmicks. It’s an acknowledgement, however tacit, that we are being served an inferior product. What they lack in quality, they make up in quantity. Look at the ads. They don’t focus on how good the food is. I don’t think they have ever, really, made the quality a selling point. It is the quantity. A triple burger for $3.
We don’t need to make this choice. We can demand to have quality food prepared quickly. We should want the food we eat, and give our children, to be not only edible, but also taste good. That is what the local truck and sidewalk vendors offer. And the more we frequent them, the louder the message will be. We can make a stand. And when this becomes known to the clowns and self-appointed kings of fast food, they will have to improve their quality. If they don’t, they will die. Not a know-it-all nanny state and not busybodies trying to legislate fun from the world; It will be the people, voting with their stomachs.
People of the World, Unite! You have nothing to lose but bland food. Let the Revolution Begin!
A Bostonian in Gotham 
