Thanks to colleague and fellow partner in crime Steve Hobbs for sending this one along.
Yesterday was long—and this landing in my Inbox was just the ticket! A long winter—with still more snow forecast for tonight—and yet it is opening day for baseball (Yankees and Detroit)—with the Red Sox kicking off their 2011 campaign tomorrow.
If you wan t a chuckle, check out the following video—and the subsequent “outtakes” from Frost Heave.com :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XtX74pB-3k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFGL773I1L4
Hope you enjoyed! Spring….ya showin’ up anytime soon? If you’d like my blog in your box, just say so! It’s free!
Tim.moore@citcomm.com
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Rare Reagan Assassination Attempt
THE FOLLOWING IS AN UPDATED ENCORE TIM MOORE BLOG:
It’s a moment that all Secret Service agents train for. The President of the United States (POTUS) is being escorted in public—and shots ring out.
There is a protocol—a specific sequence of events that every agent instinctively reverts to—or at least should. The moment is fleeting, the threat always present, but rarely detected in advance. The virtual impossibility of protecting even a President is driven home in the video below. The footage is an extended version of the scene that has been replayed a million times since that fateful incident exactly 30 years ago today. Almost tossed into the garbage, it was salvaged just recently.
Here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoZeZprXnDg
The assassination attempt on President Reagan occurred on this date in 1981. A routine walk to the Presidential limousine turned into anything but that—as an assassin was able to get close enough to the leader of the free world to kill him instantly. After a labor meeting at the Washington Hilton Hotel, John Hinckley, Jr. waited patiently for the man who was his prey.
Six shots were fired, hitting the President and three of his attendants. Although the Secret Service quickly subdued the assailant, it was too late to prevent the damage from those bullets.
Reagan was hit in the lung and was immediately evacuated to George Washington University Hospital nearby. That .22 caliber bullet just missed his heart. White House Press Secretary James Brady was hit in the head and seriously wounded. Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy was hit in the side and District policeman Thomas Delahanty was shot in the neck.
Much has been made of the assailant’s obsession with actress Jodie Foster—and the notion that the shooting was a deranged attempt to impress her. Unlike the Kennedy assassination, which time and painstaking research has determined beyond a shadow of a doubt was a conspiracy, this attempt was truly the act of a solitary madman. A “not guilty by reason of insanity” verdict was returned—and Hinckley was committed to a mental hospital. Since that day, Hinckley has been allowed supervised day trips off the hospital grounds—and even UNSUPERVISED visits to his parents once a week. The Secret Service voluntarily monitors these trips, but it is amazing to think that one day, Hinckley may actually be released.
While Reagan fully recovered and returned to the White House amid a hero’s welcome, the road has been much tougher for James Brady, who is still seriously impaired.
Whether Hinckley is now mentally healthy—or for that matter was ever really “not responsible” for his actions, there has to be a measure of SANITY applied to the treatment of those who would take the life of our President. Success or failure in the attempt is irrelevant. A life sentence—without any chance for parole—whether it be from a prison or a mental hospital—is a must. When JFK was assassinated, it wasn’t even a Federal crime to assassinate the President (really).
To think that life without parole would act as a deterrent is folly. Those who commit these crimes don’t process the consequences in advance. Nevertheless, our society needs to value human life—especially that of our leaders—high enough to make sure that the door is permanently locked---and the key is thrown away. If you’d like my blog in your weekday box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
It’s a moment that all Secret Service agents train for. The President of the United States (POTUS) is being escorted in public—and shots ring out.
There is a protocol—a specific sequence of events that every agent instinctively reverts to—or at least should. The moment is fleeting, the threat always present, but rarely detected in advance. The virtual impossibility of protecting even a President is driven home in the video below. The footage is an extended version of the scene that has been replayed a million times since that fateful incident exactly 30 years ago today. Almost tossed into the garbage, it was salvaged just recently.
Here it is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoZeZprXnDg
The assassination attempt on President Reagan occurred on this date in 1981. A routine walk to the Presidential limousine turned into anything but that—as an assassin was able to get close enough to the leader of the free world to kill him instantly. After a labor meeting at the Washington Hilton Hotel, John Hinckley, Jr. waited patiently for the man who was his prey.
Six shots were fired, hitting the President and three of his attendants. Although the Secret Service quickly subdued the assailant, it was too late to prevent the damage from those bullets.
Reagan was hit in the lung and was immediately evacuated to George Washington University Hospital nearby. That .22 caliber bullet just missed his heart. White House Press Secretary James Brady was hit in the head and seriously wounded. Secret Service agent Timothy McCarthy was hit in the side and District policeman Thomas Delahanty was shot in the neck.
Much has been made of the assailant’s obsession with actress Jodie Foster—and the notion that the shooting was a deranged attempt to impress her. Unlike the Kennedy assassination, which time and painstaking research has determined beyond a shadow of a doubt was a conspiracy, this attempt was truly the act of a solitary madman. A “not guilty by reason of insanity” verdict was returned—and Hinckley was committed to a mental hospital. Since that day, Hinckley has been allowed supervised day trips off the hospital grounds—and even UNSUPERVISED visits to his parents once a week. The Secret Service voluntarily monitors these trips, but it is amazing to think that one day, Hinckley may actually be released.
While Reagan fully recovered and returned to the White House amid a hero’s welcome, the road has been much tougher for James Brady, who is still seriously impaired.
Whether Hinckley is now mentally healthy—or for that matter was ever really “not responsible” for his actions, there has to be a measure of SANITY applied to the treatment of those who would take the life of our President. Success or failure in the attempt is irrelevant. A life sentence—without any chance for parole—whether it be from a prison or a mental hospital—is a must. When JFK was assassinated, it wasn’t even a Federal crime to assassinate the President (really).
To think that life without parole would act as a deterrent is folly. Those who commit these crimes don’t process the consequences in advance. Nevertheless, our society needs to value human life—especially that of our leaders—high enough to make sure that the door is permanently locked---and the key is thrown away. If you’d like my blog in your weekday box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Viagra TV Commercials: Enough, Already!
THE FOLLOWING IS AN ENCORE TIM MOORE BLOG:
The FDA approved of the drug Viagra thirteen years ago this week.
Designed to treat men with erectile dysfunction, mercifully shortened (pardon the pun) to “ED” for the sake of the incessant TV commercials. Of course, other drugs such as Cialis and Levitra arrived “shortly” thereafter, with the same…uh…mission.
When Pfizer first developed Sildenafil (the chemical name for Viagra), it was for the treatment of high blood pressure. Chemists found that although it had little effect on hypertension, it did cause a certain “side effect”. Company officials quickly saw the commercial “upside” of this new drug—and in two short years—a very quick time for the FDA to do anything, Viagra hit the market. Getting former Senator and presidential nominee Bob Dole to endorse the drug was a huge coup as well. The History.com website says that although unconfirmed, the drug was invented by…are you ready?: PETER DUNN and ALBERT WOOD. (Very funny)
OK…so this is really about the TV ads. Frankly, no matter how “subtle” they attempt to be, there is no escaping the innuendo—and parents across America are embarrassed on what seems like an hourly basis as they endure these spots while watching TV with their children. Even when they put Mom and Dad in side-by-side bathtubs, the implication is rather obvious.
I’m waiting for my 11 year old to ask me what E.D. is. Guess “that talk” will happen sooner than I had planned….thank you, pharmaceutical companies! What’s worse is watching TV with your teenage daughter when these ads come on. Of course, they have had to survive watching TV with men when feminine hygiene products are advertised.
For Viagra, at $8-$10 a pill, the first-year take alone was in the billions of dollars. So, do any of them really NEED to advertise? Stealing market share from each other means they must feel it’s necessary, but the onslaught of ads is getting to be a bit much.
Below is one of the more creative ads—but as you’ll see, the teenage girl-in-the-house makes it all so creepy (for all of us) Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFuuHPkORsA
My advice is to have a supply of topic-changers handy whenever these spots come on TV. Having the remote in your hand to MUTE is a good idea , too. Let’s practice: When the TV man says: “Are you having trouble with….E.D.?”, you:
a) Hit the MUTE button and
b) Say, “hey, how ‘bout them Red Sox?”
Good luck!
If you’d like my blog in your inbox daily, just let me know. It won’t cure E.D., but it is FREE….and that’s “hard” to beat! (ahem) tim.moore@citcomm.com
The FDA approved of the drug Viagra thirteen years ago this week.
Designed to treat men with erectile dysfunction, mercifully shortened (pardon the pun) to “ED” for the sake of the incessant TV commercials. Of course, other drugs such as Cialis and Levitra arrived “shortly” thereafter, with the same…uh…mission.
When Pfizer first developed Sildenafil (the chemical name for Viagra), it was for the treatment of high blood pressure. Chemists found that although it had little effect on hypertension, it did cause a certain “side effect”. Company officials quickly saw the commercial “upside” of this new drug—and in two short years—a very quick time for the FDA to do anything, Viagra hit the market. Getting former Senator and presidential nominee Bob Dole to endorse the drug was a huge coup as well. The History.com website says that although unconfirmed, the drug was invented by…are you ready?: PETER DUNN and ALBERT WOOD. (Very funny)
OK…so this is really about the TV ads. Frankly, no matter how “subtle” they attempt to be, there is no escaping the innuendo—and parents across America are embarrassed on what seems like an hourly basis as they endure these spots while watching TV with their children. Even when they put Mom and Dad in side-by-side bathtubs, the implication is rather obvious.
I’m waiting for my 11 year old to ask me what E.D. is. Guess “that talk” will happen sooner than I had planned….thank you, pharmaceutical companies! What’s worse is watching TV with your teenage daughter when these ads come on. Of course, they have had to survive watching TV with men when feminine hygiene products are advertised.
For Viagra, at $8-$10 a pill, the first-year take alone was in the billions of dollars. So, do any of them really NEED to advertise? Stealing market share from each other means they must feel it’s necessary, but the onslaught of ads is getting to be a bit much.
Below is one of the more creative ads—but as you’ll see, the teenage girl-in-the-house makes it all so creepy (for all of us) Enjoy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFuuHPkORsA
My advice is to have a supply of topic-changers handy whenever these spots come on TV. Having the remote in your hand to MUTE is a good idea , too. Let’s practice: When the TV man says: “Are you having trouble with….E.D.?”, you:
a) Hit the MUTE button and
b) Say, “hey, how ‘bout them Red Sox?”
Good luck!
If you’d like my blog in your inbox daily, just let me know. It won’t cure E.D., but it is FREE….and that’s “hard” to beat! (ahem) tim.moore@citcomm.com
Monday, March 28, 2011
Three Mile Island: History Repeats Itself?
Today is the 32nd anniversary of the “accident at Three Mile Island” in Pennsylvania. What has since become the punch line for jokes about radiation was not in the least bit funny at the time.
The lives of a million people living in a radius around that nuclear plant were hanging in the balance. As it turned out, a minor technical malfunction (a valve that didn’t close) was compounded by human error (water to cool the fuel rods was INTENTIONALLY cut off). The result was a public relations nightmare and a panic the likes of which had never been seen before in the U.S.
There may not be an adequate parallel with what is now happening in Japan, since a natural disaster caused the radiation leaks that are happening at this very moment. Only time will tell if this nuclear reactor disaster rivals or exceeds that of Chernobyl, to date the worst nuclear accident.
As the only nation to have two atomic bombs dropped on its population, the stark reality of radiation and its deadly effects are not merely theoretical. Japan knows all too well what happens when humans are exposed to dangerous levels of radioactivity.
Of course, the larger question is whether we should proceed with nuclear power as an energy source—or if it is simply too dangerous to accept the consequences of another major disaster. Those who advocate for nuclear power would point to the Gulf oil spill or the Exxon Valdez as proof that disasters are potentially connected to all forms of energy production.
Opponents of nuclear power need only point to a state of the art facility like the one in Japan—and state that Mother Nature still has the final say. If an earthquake/tsunami or other natural disaster can trigger a meltdown, there are no designable failsafe features that can prevent a major catastrophe.
Both sides are right—and yet it will likely depend on dollars. As the price of oil continues to rise (making nuclear energy cheaper), the drive to increase our nuclear power “position” will grow. Here below is an excellent 6-part program on Three Mile Island—the fact that the movie “The China Syndrome” was released just DAYS before the accident clearly created more panic:
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLPAigMuBk0
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUaywLEEN9U&feature=related
Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O67dw-5MNlQ&feature=related
Part 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fv-sV5zfmhM&feature=related
Part 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAd8eSxr1Y0&feature=related
Part 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X7fi6spyXo&feature=related
I’d love to hear your comments on nuclear power—whether we should continue to improve and safeguard the process—or whether we should essentially “punt” and gravitate towards other sources of energy.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
The lives of a million people living in a radius around that nuclear plant were hanging in the balance. As it turned out, a minor technical malfunction (a valve that didn’t close) was compounded by human error (water to cool the fuel rods was INTENTIONALLY cut off). The result was a public relations nightmare and a panic the likes of which had never been seen before in the U.S.
There may not be an adequate parallel with what is now happening in Japan, since a natural disaster caused the radiation leaks that are happening at this very moment. Only time will tell if this nuclear reactor disaster rivals or exceeds that of Chernobyl, to date the worst nuclear accident.
As the only nation to have two atomic bombs dropped on its population, the stark reality of radiation and its deadly effects are not merely theoretical. Japan knows all too well what happens when humans are exposed to dangerous levels of radioactivity.
Of course, the larger question is whether we should proceed with nuclear power as an energy source—or if it is simply too dangerous to accept the consequences of another major disaster. Those who advocate for nuclear power would point to the Gulf oil spill or the Exxon Valdez as proof that disasters are potentially connected to all forms of energy production.
Opponents of nuclear power need only point to a state of the art facility like the one in Japan—and state that Mother Nature still has the final say. If an earthquake/tsunami or other natural disaster can trigger a meltdown, there are no designable failsafe features that can prevent a major catastrophe.
Both sides are right—and yet it will likely depend on dollars. As the price of oil continues to rise (making nuclear energy cheaper), the drive to increase our nuclear power “position” will grow. Here below is an excellent 6-part program on Three Mile Island—the fact that the movie “The China Syndrome” was released just DAYS before the accident clearly created more panic:
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLPAigMuBk0
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUaywLEEN9U&feature=related
Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O67dw-5MNlQ&feature=related
Part 4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fv-sV5zfmhM&feature=related
Part 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAd8eSxr1Y0&feature=related
Part 6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X7fi6spyXo&feature=related
I’d love to hear your comments on nuclear power—whether we should continue to improve and safeguard the process—or whether we should essentially “punt” and gravitate towards other sources of energy.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Elizabeth Taylor: Legend On and Off The Screen
She was a diva, a glamour girl and an icon of the “silver screen”. Elizabeth Taylor’s death at 79 this week thrust her back into the spotlight for one last time—and reminded people just how huge a star she was.
An Oscar-winning actress, Elizabeth Taylor really knew no other life than that under the microscope of the “public eye”. From her days as a child actress through her adulthood, “Liz” Taylor was as famous for her personal life as she was for the roles she played.
Stretching the limits of Hollywood’s tolerance for multiple marriages, Taylor had no less than 7 husbands—and 8 marriages, as Richard Burton walked down the aisle with her twice!
Nothing I could write would do justice to the volumes that have been penned about the woman who was legitimately Hollywood’s biggest star for years (she was the very first actress to command one million dollars for a single motion picture!)
I did come across a cute little video—her appearance as a celebrity guest on the old TV show “What’s My Line?”
Enjoy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gR-vU44gd4
Following a distinguished movie career, Taylor devoted her energies to being a social activist, most notably in the cause of raising awareness and research dollars to fight AIDS.
Heaven is a more beautiful place as of this week.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
An Oscar-winning actress, Elizabeth Taylor really knew no other life than that under the microscope of the “public eye”. From her days as a child actress through her adulthood, “Liz” Taylor was as famous for her personal life as she was for the roles she played.
Stretching the limits of Hollywood’s tolerance for multiple marriages, Taylor had no less than 7 husbands—and 8 marriages, as Richard Burton walked down the aisle with her twice!
Nothing I could write would do justice to the volumes that have been penned about the woman who was legitimately Hollywood’s biggest star for years (she was the very first actress to command one million dollars for a single motion picture!)
I did come across a cute little video—her appearance as a celebrity guest on the old TV show “What’s My Line?”
Enjoy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gR-vU44gd4
Following a distinguished movie career, Taylor devoted her energies to being a social activist, most notably in the cause of raising awareness and research dollars to fight AIDS.
Heaven is a more beautiful place as of this week.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Monday, March 21, 2011
Drive Through Society: Can I Supersize?
First, it was fast food, I think.
The Drive-Through (or “Thru”, since we don’t even have time to spell it correctly) is so much a part of our lives that we don’t even think of it anymore. We now drive through for prescriptions at the drug store, drive through to drop off dry cleaning-and there are even drive-through liquor stores (huh?)
The notion of a drive-through church was laughed at initially---but it actually exists in many states across the country. Many churches without a drive-through lane still offer a Drive Through Nativity Scene during the holidays!
Below is a short film that spoofs these “religion-on-the-go” outlets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Rw75LhELKA
And god bless the workers at these drive-thru establishments, who have to put up with people like the guy below, whose only aim was to prank them…as you will see, they tried their best!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGoljjPSyBQ
As much as we order from a clown’s mouth, you’d think we would somehow be GOOD at it. And yet, we are not. Below are the Ten Commandments of the Drive-Thru, WHATEVER they offer-in no particular order:
1) Be ready to order when you arrive. If a restaurant, use the “practice menu” before the actual squawk box menu to get an idea of what you will order. No one behind you wants to pay for your indecision with their time.
2) PAY ATTENTION-There is nothing worse than the 3-car gap between the car in front of you—and the car ahead of it! Keep up!
3) Don’t let the passengers in the car order at all. The driver speaks, everyone else is silent.
4) Stay off the cell phone. The attendant cannot tell that you are speaking to your wife about Aunt Martha’s hemorrhoids…besides, we are ordering FOOD here, for God’s sake!
5) Don’t change your order after arriving at the window-they have already rung it up. Yeah, “have it your way”, but get it right the first time.
6) Don’t scream into the speaker. They can hear you
7) Don’t mumble into the speaker. They can’t hear you that well.
8) Get your money ready while you are waiting in line to pay. It shouldn’t dawn on you that the meal costs money only after you arrive at the window.
9) Don’t divide the food, put away your wallet or purse, adjust your hair or ANYTHING after the transaction is complete. GET OUT OF THE WAY! Go park the car and do that stuff. Someone is waiting behind you.
10) NEVER pay for your order with change, especially pennies!
I’m sure you can think of others….feel free to comment on this and I’ll add your pet peeves, too! If you’d like this blog in your inbox daily, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Drive on up!
The Drive-Through (or “Thru”, since we don’t even have time to spell it correctly) is so much a part of our lives that we don’t even think of it anymore. We now drive through for prescriptions at the drug store, drive through to drop off dry cleaning-and there are even drive-through liquor stores (huh?)
The notion of a drive-through church was laughed at initially---but it actually exists in many states across the country. Many churches without a drive-through lane still offer a Drive Through Nativity Scene during the holidays!
Below is a short film that spoofs these “religion-on-the-go” outlets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Rw75LhELKA
And god bless the workers at these drive-thru establishments, who have to put up with people like the guy below, whose only aim was to prank them…as you will see, they tried their best!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGoljjPSyBQ
As much as we order from a clown’s mouth, you’d think we would somehow be GOOD at it. And yet, we are not. Below are the Ten Commandments of the Drive-Thru, WHATEVER they offer-in no particular order:
1) Be ready to order when you arrive. If a restaurant, use the “practice menu” before the actual squawk box menu to get an idea of what you will order. No one behind you wants to pay for your indecision with their time.
2) PAY ATTENTION-There is nothing worse than the 3-car gap between the car in front of you—and the car ahead of it! Keep up!
3) Don’t let the passengers in the car order at all. The driver speaks, everyone else is silent.
4) Stay off the cell phone. The attendant cannot tell that you are speaking to your wife about Aunt Martha’s hemorrhoids…besides, we are ordering FOOD here, for God’s sake!
5) Don’t change your order after arriving at the window-they have already rung it up. Yeah, “have it your way”, but get it right the first time.
6) Don’t scream into the speaker. They can hear you
7) Don’t mumble into the speaker. They can’t hear you that well.
8) Get your money ready while you are waiting in line to pay. It shouldn’t dawn on you that the meal costs money only after you arrive at the window.
9) Don’t divide the food, put away your wallet or purse, adjust your hair or ANYTHING after the transaction is complete. GET OUT OF THE WAY! Go park the car and do that stuff. Someone is waiting behind you.
10) NEVER pay for your order with change, especially pennies!
I’m sure you can think of others….feel free to comment on this and I’ll add your pet peeves, too! If you’d like this blog in your inbox daily, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Drive on up!
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Green Beer: OR Tequila?
Happy St. Patrick’s Day!
I’ll take a pass on the corned beef and cabbage thank you, but will likely toss down a couple of beers today, infused of course with green food coloring. Nothing looks LESS appetizing than green beer, but I’m willing to make the sacrifice in order to honor the day and the man.
Ironically, ANOTHER beverage gets some share of the headlines today. It was on this date in 1958 that The Champs scored their one and only #1 hit, “Tequila”! In fact, it was their only hit, period. If it weren’t for a Cleveland radio DJ, this song, which is familiar to all—would never have had the chance to become part of the fabric of American pop culture.
Written as an afterthought following a recording session at Gold Star Studios in Los Angeles, it became the “B” side to a single called “Train To Nowhere” by Dave Burgess. At that time, it wasn’t unusual for the “B" side to be inspired by one of the session musicians—and that was the case this time around.
Saxophonist Danny Flores created the catchy melody—and also provided the guttural “Tequila” that probably is responsible for making the song a smash. Good trivia question, no? “What #1 song has lyrics that consist of only ONE word?
”TEQUILA!!!
It was only after this session that the musicians gave themselves a name. Since they were recording for Gene Autrey’s fledgling Challenge label, they chose a name inspired by Autrey’s horse, “Champion”—or The Champs.
A Cleveland DJ decided to treat his audience to the “B” side of “Train To Nowhere”—and the rest is musical history
I tried in vain to find a YouTube video of The Champs performing this song, but I find one of their followup, “Too Much Tequila” So, here is a video of the song itself (without the Champs in it)—and the followup:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVXSv3BltCI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLn1GXDppxg&feature=related
The first song, most definitely a smash. The second lived up to it’s title: TOO MUCH TEQUILA!
Whether it’s tequila or green beer tonight, be safe and…Happy St. Patrick’s Day!!
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
I’ll take a pass on the corned beef and cabbage thank you, but will likely toss down a couple of beers today, infused of course with green food coloring. Nothing looks LESS appetizing than green beer, but I’m willing to make the sacrifice in order to honor the day and the man.
Ironically, ANOTHER beverage gets some share of the headlines today. It was on this date in 1958 that The Champs scored their one and only #1 hit, “Tequila”! In fact, it was their only hit, period. If it weren’t for a Cleveland radio DJ, this song, which is familiar to all—would never have had the chance to become part of the fabric of American pop culture.
Written as an afterthought following a recording session at Gold Star Studios in Los Angeles, it became the “B” side to a single called “Train To Nowhere” by Dave Burgess. At that time, it wasn’t unusual for the “B" side to be inspired by one of the session musicians—and that was the case this time around.
Saxophonist Danny Flores created the catchy melody—and also provided the guttural “Tequila” that probably is responsible for making the song a smash. Good trivia question, no? “What #1 song has lyrics that consist of only ONE word?
”TEQUILA!!!
It was only after this session that the musicians gave themselves a name. Since they were recording for Gene Autrey’s fledgling Challenge label, they chose a name inspired by Autrey’s horse, “Champion”—or The Champs.
A Cleveland DJ decided to treat his audience to the “B” side of “Train To Nowhere”—and the rest is musical history
I tried in vain to find a YouTube video of The Champs performing this song, but I find one of their followup, “Too Much Tequila” So, here is a video of the song itself (without the Champs in it)—and the followup:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVXSv3BltCI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLn1GXDppxg&feature=related
The first song, most definitely a smash. The second lived up to it’s title: TOO MUCH TEQUILA!
Whether it’s tequila or green beer tonight, be safe and…Happy St. Patrick’s Day!!
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Afghanistan: Get Out Now
Why are entire countries hung up on egocentric things like “prestige”, “image” and “appearance”? The United States is blinded by this hubris—and has been at least since the Viet Nam war.
For these qualities of appearance, we are spilling the blood of young men and women every single day and are squandering our national treasury at a time when it is least affordable.
Why?
To give you an idea of the intensity of what our sons and daughters are facing in a foreign land, check out the videos below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJPPrngLCvg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pc1CcWUtuo&feature=related
I have yet to hear a coherent articulation of why we are there and what we are trying to achieve. At the risk of oversimplifying the complex issues that swirl around that entire region, the questions are stark—and the answers, I believe--- are obvious:
QUESTION: Are we there to conquer or occupy the country indefinitely?
ANSWER: No, it’s not our mission and it has no upside for either the U.S. or
Afghanistan. Has any country ever successfully done so? No. Never.
QUESTION: Will our presence in Afghanistan deter terrorism threats to the U.S. or
eliminate the Taliban?
ANSWER: No. We may suppress their activities while we are there, but both Al
Qaeda and the Taliban will re-establish themselves the instant we leave.
Some believe they will be stronger, emboldened by our exit.
QUESTION: What will we have to show for all our years there, for all the lives lost and
the billions of dollars spent?
ANSWER: Nothing? You tell me. What have we gained?
QUESTION: Has our war in Afghanistan raised our “stature” in the world community or
even in the Middle East?
ANSWER: No. The Middle East hates America more than ever. Remember it was
this hatred (and our using Saudi Arabia as a staging ground for Desert
Storm I—which was a justified war, in my view) that fueled the 9/11
terrorist attack. Osama Bin Laden confirmed this to be the reason he was
motivated to attack.
QUESTION: So, what made Desert Storm I a justifiable war?
ANSWER: Two things: it had a definable objective—ousting Iraq from it’s unjust
occupation of Kuwait, and it was an executed by a coalition of countries,
not a mostly unilateral action by the world’s remaining superpower.
QUESTION: Are we transitioning to a better system of government?
ANSWER: No, the government and President we are supporting is corrupt and we
know it.
So, did our soldiers die or get wounded in vain?
No, they are all heroes, doing their duty, obeying their commanders and serving their country.
We just need a smarter approach to dealing with our problems. If terrorism at home is the issue, then make the investment HERE—and overseas, use covert means to uncover and destroy terrorist targets without ground troops (as we are doing along the Pakistani border).
The war in Iraq was based on a lie (WMD)—and the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable if winning is defined as "ending terrorism". We are instead feeding the hatred that breeds a new generation of terrorists who hate America.
Forget about “prestige”, “appearances” and “image”.
Declare “victory” and leave.
Now.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
For these qualities of appearance, we are spilling the blood of young men and women every single day and are squandering our national treasury at a time when it is least affordable.
Why?
To give you an idea of the intensity of what our sons and daughters are facing in a foreign land, check out the videos below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJPPrngLCvg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pc1CcWUtuo&feature=related
I have yet to hear a coherent articulation of why we are there and what we are trying to achieve. At the risk of oversimplifying the complex issues that swirl around that entire region, the questions are stark—and the answers, I believe--- are obvious:
QUESTION: Are we there to conquer or occupy the country indefinitely?
ANSWER: No, it’s not our mission and it has no upside for either the U.S. or
Afghanistan. Has any country ever successfully done so? No. Never.
QUESTION: Will our presence in Afghanistan deter terrorism threats to the U.S. or
eliminate the Taliban?
ANSWER: No. We may suppress their activities while we are there, but both Al
Qaeda and the Taliban will re-establish themselves the instant we leave.
Some believe they will be stronger, emboldened by our exit.
QUESTION: What will we have to show for all our years there, for all the lives lost and
the billions of dollars spent?
ANSWER: Nothing? You tell me. What have we gained?
QUESTION: Has our war in Afghanistan raised our “stature” in the world community or
even in the Middle East?
ANSWER: No. The Middle East hates America more than ever. Remember it was
this hatred (and our using Saudi Arabia as a staging ground for Desert
Storm I—which was a justified war, in my view) that fueled the 9/11
terrorist attack. Osama Bin Laden confirmed this to be the reason he was
motivated to attack.
QUESTION: So, what made Desert Storm I a justifiable war?
ANSWER: Two things: it had a definable objective—ousting Iraq from it’s unjust
occupation of Kuwait, and it was an executed by a coalition of countries,
not a mostly unilateral action by the world’s remaining superpower.
QUESTION: Are we transitioning to a better system of government?
ANSWER: No, the government and President we are supporting is corrupt and we
know it.
So, did our soldiers die or get wounded in vain?
No, they are all heroes, doing their duty, obeying their commanders and serving their country.
We just need a smarter approach to dealing with our problems. If terrorism at home is the issue, then make the investment HERE—and overseas, use covert means to uncover and destroy terrorist targets without ground troops (as we are doing along the Pakistani border).
The war in Iraq was based on a lie (WMD)—and the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable if winning is defined as "ending terrorism". We are instead feeding the hatred that breeds a new generation of terrorists who hate America.
Forget about “prestige”, “appearances” and “image”.
Declare “victory” and leave.
Now.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Frankie Avalon: Manufactured Superstar!
The packaging of good looking and talented young people for consumption by the American public is nothing new.
Since the dawn of rock & roll—and its marriage to television, there was a market for teen idols—and record labels rarely disappointed.
One such “manufactured” star was Frankie Avalon, a trumpet player for Bobby Rydell. Luckily for him, he was a Philadelphia kid---and Philly was a hotbed of pop music. The young man was noticed—and set up to succeed, starting with his biggest #1 record, “Venus”, which hit the top spot on the charts on this date in 1959.
Here is Frankie lip-synching it on TV:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSyMxJDaK90
No doubt he was a teen idol judging by the squeals of his young fans! Frankie Avalon would go on to score a slew of chart hits, including “Bobby Sox To Stockings”, “Why” and “Just Ask Your Heart”.
Success on the radio and TV translated to the big screen, as Frankie was paired with Annette Funicello, starring in the “Beach Blanket Bingo”-type movies that further solidified their status as teen icons—and eventually brought both of them image problems they would never outgrow. His appearance as “Teen Angel” in the 1976 hot movie “Grease” (singing “Beauty School Dropout”) introduced him to a brand new audience.
He got married in 1963 to Kathryn Diebel over the objections of his agent, who warned Avalon that his “teen mystique” would be ruined. Maybe so, but the marriage is still going strong (so rare in show biz), with eight children and ten grandchildren in the family.
From the many TV appearances (often playing himself) to cameo movie roles and his own line of cosmetic and health aids, Frankie Avalon hasn’t slowed down even as he passes his 70th birthday.
Not bad for a kid from Philly.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Since the dawn of rock & roll—and its marriage to television, there was a market for teen idols—and record labels rarely disappointed.
One such “manufactured” star was Frankie Avalon, a trumpet player for Bobby Rydell. Luckily for him, he was a Philadelphia kid---and Philly was a hotbed of pop music. The young man was noticed—and set up to succeed, starting with his biggest #1 record, “Venus”, which hit the top spot on the charts on this date in 1959.
Here is Frankie lip-synching it on TV:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSyMxJDaK90
No doubt he was a teen idol judging by the squeals of his young fans! Frankie Avalon would go on to score a slew of chart hits, including “Bobby Sox To Stockings”, “Why” and “Just Ask Your Heart”.
Success on the radio and TV translated to the big screen, as Frankie was paired with Annette Funicello, starring in the “Beach Blanket Bingo”-type movies that further solidified their status as teen icons—and eventually brought both of them image problems they would never outgrow. His appearance as “Teen Angel” in the 1976 hot movie “Grease” (singing “Beauty School Dropout”) introduced him to a brand new audience.
He got married in 1963 to Kathryn Diebel over the objections of his agent, who warned Avalon that his “teen mystique” would be ruined. Maybe so, but the marriage is still going strong (so rare in show biz), with eight children and ten grandchildren in the family.
From the many TV appearances (often playing himself) to cameo movie roles and his own line of cosmetic and health aids, Frankie Avalon hasn’t slowed down even as he passes his 70th birthday.
Not bad for a kid from Philly.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Monday, March 14, 2011
"Bloody Treason": It Really Was A Conspiracy
It was on this date in 1964 that Jack Ruby was sentenced to death for the murder of accused JFK assassin Lee Harvey Oswald. It was the first time a verdict in a murder trial was broadcast to the nation. Of course, that pales in comparison to the deed itself---an actual murder broadcast on live TV.
Here is that amazing historical footage:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Awy3h5QK7WI
Ruby’s sentence would be overturned by the Texas Appeals Court—and Ruby, a nightclub owner with ties to the mob—would die in prison of cancer. It was the act of Ruby silencing the accused assassin that prompted many to wonder if JFK’s murder was not the act of a lone gunman.
It wasn’t.
While I always questioned the conclusions of the Warren Commission, I was also a bit skeptical of the wild “conspiracy” theories out there, too. Many seemed far-fetched, based on the bias of the author and/or the testimony of “witnesses” whose credibility could not be certified, nor their statements corroborated. Many of the people advancing these theories seemed like crazy folks.
There is, however, a definitive book on the JFK assassination (at least in my opinion!). I just finished reading it last night on my Kindle---and I HIGHLY recommend it to anyone with even a passing interest in the events of November 22, 1963.
The book is called “Bloody Treason” by Noel H. Twyman. It is a masterpiece of research and documentation of the murder of the century.
There are wild scenarios explored—and incredible evil deeds documented. The approach used by the author was methodical and oriented towards a courtroom trial. That is, Twyman presents his evidence to us, the reader, as if we were on a jury. Proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, presenting a preponderance of evidence, corroborated by different sources and documents whose credibility was solid was the end goal---and he achieved it.
I have been fascinated with the Kennedy assassination ever since I was a kid growing up in Washington, D.C. I was 5 years old at the time—and vividly remember sitting with my mother after kindergarten, watching TV when the dreadful bulletin was broadcast.
I went with my father to the funeral downtown. Two customers on my paper route delivering the Washington Post were connected to the succeeding administration: Bobby Baker, whose scandal as LBJ’s close aid almost torpedoed his political career, and Liz Carpenter, who I believe was Lady Bird Johnson’s Press Secretary (and the person who wrote the short statement that Johnson delivered at Andrews Air Force Base upon returning to Washington from Dallas on that fateful day).
In 1972, I had the privilege of attending a luncheon with former Texas Governor John Connolly, who headed up Richard Nixon’s “Democrats For Nixon” organization. There, he showed us the scar on his wrist from the bullet that struck him while riding with Kennedy in the motorcade. An amazing moment.
Perhaps most remarkable about Twyman’s monumental work is the sheer number of possible suspects. The author starts painting with a broad brush, listing all possible entities who would have motive to kill Kennedy.
It’s a long list.
In the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs fiasco and the Cuban Missile Crisis, Robert Kennedy’ crusade against the Mafia and the CIA and FBI’s use of underworld figures to assassinate Fidel Castro, there was no shortage of suspects.
The book’s conclusions are incredible and disturbing but it is likely they are also TRUE.
I won’t spoil the experience for those who plan to invest the time to read this book. Originally written in 1996, the book is available on Amazon and also in digital form for Kindle.
For anyone with an interest in the JFK murder, you must first suspend disbelief long enough to read the exhaustively documented “Bloody Treason”—and then decide for yourself if it is all too wild to believe.
I think you will be astounded.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Here is that amazing historical footage:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Awy3h5QK7WI
Ruby’s sentence would be overturned by the Texas Appeals Court—and Ruby, a nightclub owner with ties to the mob—would die in prison of cancer. It was the act of Ruby silencing the accused assassin that prompted many to wonder if JFK’s murder was not the act of a lone gunman.
It wasn’t.
While I always questioned the conclusions of the Warren Commission, I was also a bit skeptical of the wild “conspiracy” theories out there, too. Many seemed far-fetched, based on the bias of the author and/or the testimony of “witnesses” whose credibility could not be certified, nor their statements corroborated. Many of the people advancing these theories seemed like crazy folks.
There is, however, a definitive book on the JFK assassination (at least in my opinion!). I just finished reading it last night on my Kindle---and I HIGHLY recommend it to anyone with even a passing interest in the events of November 22, 1963.
The book is called “Bloody Treason” by Noel H. Twyman. It is a masterpiece of research and documentation of the murder of the century.
There are wild scenarios explored—and incredible evil deeds documented. The approach used by the author was methodical and oriented towards a courtroom trial. That is, Twyman presents his evidence to us, the reader, as if we were on a jury. Proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, presenting a preponderance of evidence, corroborated by different sources and documents whose credibility was solid was the end goal---and he achieved it.
I have been fascinated with the Kennedy assassination ever since I was a kid growing up in Washington, D.C. I was 5 years old at the time—and vividly remember sitting with my mother after kindergarten, watching TV when the dreadful bulletin was broadcast.
I went with my father to the funeral downtown. Two customers on my paper route delivering the Washington Post were connected to the succeeding administration: Bobby Baker, whose scandal as LBJ’s close aid almost torpedoed his political career, and Liz Carpenter, who I believe was Lady Bird Johnson’s Press Secretary (and the person who wrote the short statement that Johnson delivered at Andrews Air Force Base upon returning to Washington from Dallas on that fateful day).
In 1972, I had the privilege of attending a luncheon with former Texas Governor John Connolly, who headed up Richard Nixon’s “Democrats For Nixon” organization. There, he showed us the scar on his wrist from the bullet that struck him while riding with Kennedy in the motorcade. An amazing moment.
Perhaps most remarkable about Twyman’s monumental work is the sheer number of possible suspects. The author starts painting with a broad brush, listing all possible entities who would have motive to kill Kennedy.
It’s a long list.
In the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs fiasco and the Cuban Missile Crisis, Robert Kennedy’ crusade against the Mafia and the CIA and FBI’s use of underworld figures to assassinate Fidel Castro, there was no shortage of suspects.
The book’s conclusions are incredible and disturbing but it is likely they are also TRUE.
I won’t spoil the experience for those who plan to invest the time to read this book. Originally written in 1996, the book is available on Amazon and also in digital form for Kindle.
For anyone with an interest in the JFK murder, you must first suspend disbelief long enough to read the exhaustively documented “Bloody Treason”—and then decide for yourself if it is all too wild to believe.
I think you will be astounded.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Friday, March 11, 2011
The Birth Of Aspirin
THE FOLLOWING IS AN UPDATED ENCORE TIM MOORE BLOG:
It was called a “miracle drug”, curing everything from headaches to cramps to pain in all areas of the body. Aspirin was patented almost exactly 112 years ago—March 6,1899. A German company called Bayer gave it the name we know today—instead of its chemical name: acetylsalicylic acid (yummy!). It was originally derived from the bark of the willow tree-REALLY! While the makers of aspirin were obviously pretty good at the medicine thing, they were a bit naive when it came to patents and trademarks.
When the original patent expired after World War I, they had not protected the name “Aspirin”---and so every other drug company produced and marketed the drug under the same name-rendering it a GENERIC name instead of the BRAND that Bayer would have obviously preferred. It’s as if the original ibuprofen patent ran out and everyone started calling their product Advil. Not happening! Just ask the makers of Motrin, who originally developed the drug as a prescription medicine, but were beaten to the market by Advil, which blitzed the public with advertising as the drug became an over-the-counter medication!
Below is a TV commercial from the 1960’s for Bayer aspirin-very entertaining!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGOFMXGZapU
Here’s a cute one for Bayer Children’s Aspirin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRRq-dLWGtU&feature=related
Now, here’s an amusing one for Bayer’s competitor, Anacin. Woman yelling at her child parallels Anacin’s desperation to overtake Bayer’s market share, which they never did:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgLmqNBqFSU&NR=1
All this talk about drugs is giving me a headache! If you’d like my blog in your e-mail box daily, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Evolution Of Dance: It's Still Funny!
Posted almost 5 years ago, when YouTube was still a novelty, “The Evolution of Dance” became an instant sensation. In fact, of the Top 10 all-time most-viewed YouTube videos, this one is still in the top 10 (#8 as of today)—and is only one of two that is NOT a professional music video. The other is the “Charlie Bit My Finger” one with the two kids. In case you’re wondering, Justin Bieber holds the top spot right now.
Whatever.
“Evolution of Dance” has stood the test of time, propelling its creator and performer Judson Laipply into the public eye. Over 188 MILLION views…so far.
Let’s ramp that number up a little more by watching again, shall we?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMH0bHeiRNg
As soon as it was posted, the above video wrote the book on “viral”—and ushered in a new era where ANYONE from ANYWHERE can snatch that 15 minutes of worldwide fame.
Judson’s obvious talent—and physical flexibility makes the rest of us men look really bad. After all, most of us don’t dance—or at least not very well.
Women the world over constantly complain that their husbands and boyfriends never ask them to dance whenever the occasion presents itself.
Luckily for us men, these occasions are few and far between. Weddings are the biggest culprit, where failure to dance may be seen as an insult to the happy couple, although it’s a good bet the GROOM has no desire to dance either. Especially that FIRST dance, where everyone is looking.
And that, basically, is the problem. Men generally feel like complete dorks on the dance floor-and we are afraid of looking less than macho as we do the FUNKY CHICKEN. At least the bride-groom “First Dance” is a slow one---if the groom doesn’t step on the bride’s feet and/or the dress-and manages to get through the song without fainting, it is generally considered a success.
In the free-form, strut-apart-from-your-partner dancing, we feel like total idiots as we shake our groove thing—hopefully in time with the beat of the music. Do I high-step it? What do I do with my hands? These are all questions that fly through our heads as we simultaneously attempt to keep eye contact with our partner, whose dancing (no matter how lame) always sends us into comparison-mode, with the inevitable result of us feeling inadequate by contrast.
The only thing worse is seeing a guy next to you that dances like Michael Flatley from “Lord Of The Dance”……SHOWOFF!!!! . Now I REALLY look like an imbecile!
I’ll just leave the hoofing to guys like Flatley and Judson Laipply—and happily watch from the sidelines.
If you’d like my blog in your inbox daily, just let me know!
Tim.moore@citcomm.com
Whatever.
“Evolution of Dance” has stood the test of time, propelling its creator and performer Judson Laipply into the public eye. Over 188 MILLION views…so far.
Let’s ramp that number up a little more by watching again, shall we?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMH0bHeiRNg
As soon as it was posted, the above video wrote the book on “viral”—and ushered in a new era where ANYONE from ANYWHERE can snatch that 15 minutes of worldwide fame.
Judson’s obvious talent—and physical flexibility makes the rest of us men look really bad. After all, most of us don’t dance—or at least not very well.
Women the world over constantly complain that their husbands and boyfriends never ask them to dance whenever the occasion presents itself.
Luckily for us men, these occasions are few and far between. Weddings are the biggest culprit, where failure to dance may be seen as an insult to the happy couple, although it’s a good bet the GROOM has no desire to dance either. Especially that FIRST dance, where everyone is looking.
And that, basically, is the problem. Men generally feel like complete dorks on the dance floor-and we are afraid of looking less than macho as we do the FUNKY CHICKEN. At least the bride-groom “First Dance” is a slow one---if the groom doesn’t step on the bride’s feet and/or the dress-and manages to get through the song without fainting, it is generally considered a success.
In the free-form, strut-apart-from-your-partner dancing, we feel like total idiots as we shake our groove thing—hopefully in time with the beat of the music. Do I high-step it? What do I do with my hands? These are all questions that fly through our heads as we simultaneously attempt to keep eye contact with our partner, whose dancing (no matter how lame) always sends us into comparison-mode, with the inevitable result of us feeling inadequate by contrast.
The only thing worse is seeing a guy next to you that dances like Michael Flatley from “Lord Of The Dance”……SHOWOFF!!!! . Now I REALLY look like an imbecile!
I’ll just leave the hoofing to guys like Flatley and Judson Laipply—and happily watch from the sidelines.
If you’d like my blog in your inbox daily, just let me know!
Tim.moore@citcomm.com
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Barbie: Is She A Cougar?
THE FOLLOWING IS AN UPDATED ENCORE TIM MOORE BLOG:
My favorite Barbie joke goes something like this: “Hey, have you seen the new ‘Divorce Barbie’? Yeah, it comes with all of Ken’s things!”
The fact that a 50+ year old man (me) could HAVE a “favorite” Barbie joke shows just how much of a cultural icon Barbie has become. Imagine telling a “Beanie baby” joke….. NOT FUNNY.
Barbie was first introduced to the public on this date in 1959 at the American Toy Fair in New York. Originally modeled after a German toy aimed at MEN as a racy gag gift, the Barbie doll became the first adult doll mass marketed to little girls, making Mattel millions in the process.
Now that's she's celebrating her 52nd birthday today, I think she may be labelled officially a "cougar"!
Of course, Barbie also generated tons of negative publicity-as her proportions-if on a real woman, would have made her a 36-18-38. These dimensions were blamed for causing negative body images among young girls. On the flip side, Barbie also represented a departure from the 1950’s role models-as Barbie was represented in careers not traditionally open to women.
Below is the TV Commercial for Barbie-and the aforementioned Ken-who was actually not introduced until 1961, but this is too hilarious to wait:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5pcyHT838g
It is estimated that over 800 million Barbies have been sold in the last 52 years! That almost 3 dolls for every man, woman and child in the United States! Having had a young daughter to spoil, I think my Christina had at least a half dozen! I can’t speak to all the negative—or positive aspects of Barbie…after all, at the end of the day…it is a DOLL.
One that has made millions of girls happy for a half a century-and there’s some value in that, no?
If you’d like my blog in your in-box daily, let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
It is FREE, but some items sold separately!
My favorite Barbie joke goes something like this: “Hey, have you seen the new ‘Divorce Barbie’? Yeah, it comes with all of Ken’s things!”
The fact that a 50+ year old man (me) could HAVE a “favorite” Barbie joke shows just how much of a cultural icon Barbie has become. Imagine telling a “Beanie baby” joke….. NOT FUNNY.
Barbie was first introduced to the public on this date in 1959 at the American Toy Fair in New York. Originally modeled after a German toy aimed at MEN as a racy gag gift, the Barbie doll became the first adult doll mass marketed to little girls, making Mattel millions in the process.
Now that's she's celebrating her 52nd birthday today, I think she may be labelled officially a "cougar"!
Of course, Barbie also generated tons of negative publicity-as her proportions-if on a real woman, would have made her a 36-18-38. These dimensions were blamed for causing negative body images among young girls. On the flip side, Barbie also represented a departure from the 1950’s role models-as Barbie was represented in careers not traditionally open to women.
Below is the TV Commercial for Barbie-and the aforementioned Ken-who was actually not introduced until 1961, but this is too hilarious to wait:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5pcyHT838g
It is estimated that over 800 million Barbies have been sold in the last 52 years! That almost 3 dolls for every man, woman and child in the United States! Having had a young daughter to spoil, I think my Christina had at least a half dozen! I can’t speak to all the negative—or positive aspects of Barbie…after all, at the end of the day…it is a DOLL.
One that has made millions of girls happy for a half a century-and there’s some value in that, no?
If you’d like my blog in your in-box daily, let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
It is FREE, but some items sold separately!
Monday, March 7, 2011
Charlie Sheen: Talent Displaced By Bad Behavior
America is watching someone self-destruct before their eyes---and we’re eating it up.
While everyone is asking “What is WRONG with Charlie Sheen?”, I’m asking a different question:
“What is wrong with US?”
Really…..just how exactly are we extracting our ENTERTAINMENT from Charlie Sheen? As reminded to me in a Facebook post, there were several young and courageous American soldiers who lost their lives in Afghanistan last week. Were they honored, showcased—or even mentioned?
No.
Charlie Sheen’s antics sucked up all the air in the room.
A self-absorbed, hedonistic drug addict who believes the $2 Million he receives for every EPISODE of “Two and A Half Men” (that’s 22 minutes of performance time, folks) is somehow NOT ENOUGH. This complaint is being broadcast into the homes of millions of unemployed Americans who are struggling to keep their homes and feed their families.
And yet, we’re not turning it off, are we?
Charlie Sheen is just the latest in a never-ending stream of performers who are capturing the headlines for things having nothing to do with talent. It’s BAD BEHAVIOR that causes us to react, to fire up our search engines and keeps us glued to the TV.
Sheen is talented, to be sure, but his huge and exploding Facebook page and Twitter account has nothing to do with anything but his wild and selfish lifestyle, his “goddesses”, etc., etc.
“Winning”?
No, it’s not---and it’s a horrible example to our young people, who more and more are exposed to people who have serious addictions, character flaws or both—and somehow those "qualities" are glorified.
Before Charlie, we had (and still have) Lindsay Lohan. Can anyone name a movie she has appeared in since “The Parent Trap” when she was a kid? No, it’s her “partying”, her wild antics, her shoplifting that has news trucks parked outside of courthouses in L.A. Ditto for Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, Mel Gibson and a seeming endless parade of “stars” whose personal lives garner more attention than their supposed “talent”.
Reality shows have added to the chaos, where “real people” like the stars of “The Jersey Shore” rocket to fame on……..what is it, exactly?
We watch shows on hoarding to laugh at pathetic people with serious problems who are too stupid to realize their misery is being exploited for our…..entertainment.
Maybe our lives don’t appear to be so desperate when we see others in far worse shape than we. This comforts us. Their excesses, their neuroses and their bad behavior have trumped real talent. Christina Aguilera is a talented singer, but we have delighted in the lousy 2011 she’s had so far. From her divorce late last year to forgetting the words of the National Anthem at the Super Bowl to tripping and falling at the Grammys to her arrest a week or so ago for public intoxication. All of this has put Christina in the celebrity blogs far more extensively than if she had, say, recorded a great CD.
Why bother?
When most of today’s pop music icons are known more for their criminal records than their musical records, we are heading towards a world where there needs to be little output from a creative standpoint.
Just enough to get name recognition-----then they’re free to go out and start making mayhem. The media will do the rest and we will consume it hungrily.
Without a market, this stuff cannot exist. I propose that we collectively RESIST the urge to follow the wanton misbehavior of idiots and instead derive our entertainment from sources that uplift and inspire us.
It won’t be easy. It’s tough to NOT stare when you drive past a car wreck, but the drivel will continue (and increase) until we tell them to stop.
Enough, already!If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
While everyone is asking “What is WRONG with Charlie Sheen?”, I’m asking a different question:
“What is wrong with US?”
Really…..just how exactly are we extracting our ENTERTAINMENT from Charlie Sheen? As reminded to me in a Facebook post, there were several young and courageous American soldiers who lost their lives in Afghanistan last week. Were they honored, showcased—or even mentioned?
No.
Charlie Sheen’s antics sucked up all the air in the room.
A self-absorbed, hedonistic drug addict who believes the $2 Million he receives for every EPISODE of “Two and A Half Men” (that’s 22 minutes of performance time, folks) is somehow NOT ENOUGH. This complaint is being broadcast into the homes of millions of unemployed Americans who are struggling to keep their homes and feed their families.
And yet, we’re not turning it off, are we?
Charlie Sheen is just the latest in a never-ending stream of performers who are capturing the headlines for things having nothing to do with talent. It’s BAD BEHAVIOR that causes us to react, to fire up our search engines and keeps us glued to the TV.
Sheen is talented, to be sure, but his huge and exploding Facebook page and Twitter account has nothing to do with anything but his wild and selfish lifestyle, his “goddesses”, etc., etc.
“Winning”?
No, it’s not---and it’s a horrible example to our young people, who more and more are exposed to people who have serious addictions, character flaws or both—and somehow those "qualities" are glorified.
Before Charlie, we had (and still have) Lindsay Lohan. Can anyone name a movie she has appeared in since “The Parent Trap” when she was a kid? No, it’s her “partying”, her wild antics, her shoplifting that has news trucks parked outside of courthouses in L.A. Ditto for Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, Mel Gibson and a seeming endless parade of “stars” whose personal lives garner more attention than their supposed “talent”.
Reality shows have added to the chaos, where “real people” like the stars of “The Jersey Shore” rocket to fame on……..what is it, exactly?
We watch shows on hoarding to laugh at pathetic people with serious problems who are too stupid to realize their misery is being exploited for our…..entertainment.
Maybe our lives don’t appear to be so desperate when we see others in far worse shape than we. This comforts us. Their excesses, their neuroses and their bad behavior have trumped real talent. Christina Aguilera is a talented singer, but we have delighted in the lousy 2011 she’s had so far. From her divorce late last year to forgetting the words of the National Anthem at the Super Bowl to tripping and falling at the Grammys to her arrest a week or so ago for public intoxication. All of this has put Christina in the celebrity blogs far more extensively than if she had, say, recorded a great CD.
Why bother?
When most of today’s pop music icons are known more for their criminal records than their musical records, we are heading towards a world where there needs to be little output from a creative standpoint.
Just enough to get name recognition-----then they’re free to go out and start making mayhem. The media will do the rest and we will consume it hungrily.
Without a market, this stuff cannot exist. I propose that we collectively RESIST the urge to follow the wanton misbehavior of idiots and instead derive our entertainment from sources that uplift and inspire us.
It won’t be easy. It’s tough to NOT stare when you drive past a car wreck, but the drivel will continue (and increase) until we tell them to stop.
Enough, already!If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Friday, March 4, 2011
John Candy: Comedic Genius
There’s a long list of actors/comedians who were taken from us in their prime.
John Belushi, Chris Farley and John Candy top my list of favorites.
John Candy passed away on this day in 1994 after suffering a massive heart attack.
I suppose that no one was really surprised, since Candy was too heavy—and like Chris Farley, may have been living on “borrowed time”. The physical exertion that went along with the many comedic roles he played probably contributed to such an early demise.
I think my favorite John Candy film was “Planes, Trains And Automobiles” with Steve Martin. Hilarious—and yet with that element of sadness which made Candy’s performances deeper and more relatable.
Here’s a mini-biography of the late, great John Candy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jwm_cOXIo6U&feature=fvsr
Who knows how extensive his film repertoire would be now if he had the extra 17 years of life and were still with us today? He’d be 60 years old—and no doubt funnier than ever.
Unlike our own loved ones, who require reliance on our memories after they pass, with beloved entertainers, all we have to do is dig out an old DVD or VHS tape, pop it in and enjoy all over again their talent and their magic.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
John Belushi, Chris Farley and John Candy top my list of favorites.
John Candy passed away on this day in 1994 after suffering a massive heart attack.
I suppose that no one was really surprised, since Candy was too heavy—and like Chris Farley, may have been living on “borrowed time”. The physical exertion that went along with the many comedic roles he played probably contributed to such an early demise.
I think my favorite John Candy film was “Planes, Trains And Automobiles” with Steve Martin. Hilarious—and yet with that element of sadness which made Candy’s performances deeper and more relatable.
Here’s a mini-biography of the late, great John Candy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jwm_cOXIo6U&feature=fvsr
Who knows how extensive his film repertoire would be now if he had the extra 17 years of life and were still with us today? He’d be 60 years old—and no doubt funnier than ever.
Unlike our own loved ones, who require reliance on our memories after they pass, with beloved entertainers, all we have to do is dig out an old DVD or VHS tape, pop it in and enjoy all over again their talent and their magic.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Buffalo Springfield: For What Its Worth
The mosaic of the music business is fascinating—and today marked the formation of an influential band whose footprint in popular music was cross-pollinated in several other huge groups.
Neil Young, Stephen Stills and Richie Furay formed the group “Buffalo Springfield” on this date in 1966. Jim Messina was later a part of the band as well.
So much has happened in the 45 years since—and the travels of each member in and out of other bands have left an indelible mark on music. Although each musician is considered “cool” by almost any standard, the “gotta getta gig” mentality of the time dictated some career moves that in retrospect seem odd.
Stephen Stills, for instance, actually auditioned to be one of the Monkees! That failure probably was the best thing to ever happen to him. Buffalo Springfield’s first producers also considered Neil Young’s voice as “too weird”—and assigned vocal duties for his compositions to Furay. If they only knew what an icon Neil Young (and his weird voice) would turn out to be!
The group’s biggest hit was s song called “For What Its Worth”. Destined to be an anthem for anti-war protesters, Stephen Stills actually wrote the song about police reaction against young people protesting the closing of a NIGHTCLUB on Sunset Boulevard!
Check out a portion of Buffalo Springfield’s performance of that song on the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour in 1967----and see how Tommy Smothers cracks up Stills in mid-song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYYCiaHhnx4
Although the band broke up about 25 months after forming, the DNA of that band found its way into other huge groups. Stills went on to form Crosby, Stills & Nash with David Crosby of the Byrds and Graham Nash of the Hollies. Neil Young launched a solo career, then reunited with Stills in 1969 and tacked his name onto CS&N. Furay and Messina were founding members of the band Poco and of course, Messina later joined with Kenny Loggins to form Loggins and Messina.
In 1997, Buffalo Springfield was inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame.
If you’d like my blog in your inbox daily, let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Neil Young, Stephen Stills and Richie Furay formed the group “Buffalo Springfield” on this date in 1966. Jim Messina was later a part of the band as well.
So much has happened in the 45 years since—and the travels of each member in and out of other bands have left an indelible mark on music. Although each musician is considered “cool” by almost any standard, the “gotta getta gig” mentality of the time dictated some career moves that in retrospect seem odd.
Stephen Stills, for instance, actually auditioned to be one of the Monkees! That failure probably was the best thing to ever happen to him. Buffalo Springfield’s first producers also considered Neil Young’s voice as “too weird”—and assigned vocal duties for his compositions to Furay. If they only knew what an icon Neil Young (and his weird voice) would turn out to be!
The group’s biggest hit was s song called “For What Its Worth”. Destined to be an anthem for anti-war protesters, Stephen Stills actually wrote the song about police reaction against young people protesting the closing of a NIGHTCLUB on Sunset Boulevard!
Check out a portion of Buffalo Springfield’s performance of that song on the Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour in 1967----and see how Tommy Smothers cracks up Stills in mid-song:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYYCiaHhnx4
Although the band broke up about 25 months after forming, the DNA of that band found its way into other huge groups. Stills went on to form Crosby, Stills & Nash with David Crosby of the Byrds and Graham Nash of the Hollies. Neil Young launched a solo career, then reunited with Stills in 1969 and tacked his name onto CS&N. Furay and Messina were founding members of the band Poco and of course, Messina later joined with Kenny Loggins to form Loggins and Messina.
In 1997, Buffalo Springfield was inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame.
If you’d like my blog in your inbox daily, let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Supreme Court: Free Speech Wins, Decency Loses
Profound sadness was the overriding emotion as I read about the U.S. Supreme Court’s near unanimous decision today re: the Westboro Baptist Church. All but one of the justices upheld the First Amendment Rights of this hateful group of thugs and cowards who protest near military funerals.
Using the “I hate what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it” angle, the high court ruled that even hurtful speech is protected by the Constitution. While on that point I may agree, I will also draw the distinction that a funeral (military or otherwise) is a painful enough occasion and a unique societal event that creates an exception to the rule.
The Supreme Court should be ashamed of itself.
A Topeka, Kansas-based “Christian” church has made a habit of showing up at the military funerals of fallen soldiers—with signs that celebrate the death and make a connection between war casualties and the military’s acceptance of gays. With signs that say “God Hates Fags”, these individuals terrorize a grief-stricken family at their lowest moment.
There is legal and illegal, right and wrong—and this is just plain WRONG. Here is a short newscast clip of a protest:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UMP3AK5jwo
The case is question concerned the picketing at the funeral of Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, who was killed in Iraq. I don’t believe Snyder was gay—and in the eyes of this church, it doesn’t matter. Their protest against gays in the military cuts across the spectrum—and ALL deaths are “God’s revenge” for the military’s tolerance.
We all know that freedom of speech is not without limits. The commonly used example of shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theatre is not protected, as the incidence of danger and injury to everyone inside overrides the right to utter whatever you choose—at whatever time you choose to.
For instance, how long would my “free speech” rights be upheld if I spoke out about this decision during the Supreme Court proceedings? I would be quickly ushered out the door. Even silently holding a sign would not be tolerated.
I contend that funerals fall into this special class of protected instances.
We need more Justices like Samuel Alito, Jr., the lone dissenter. In his opinion, he wrote: “Our profound national commitment to free and open debate is not a license for the vicious verbal assault that occurred in this case”.
Well said.
The family of Corporal Snyder was awarded more than $10 Million by a Baltimore jury who agreed that the church had violated the family’s privacy, caused emotional distress and violated his rights to exercise his religion and peaceful assembly.
The original award was cut in half by a judge and then overturned by the U.S. Court of Appeals.
The Westboro Baptist Church has triumphantly declared they will now plan on picketing more military funerals---and this may cause future violence that will make screaming “fire” and its aftermath look tame.
I get it.
It’s not illegal, even though I suspect those who hate this church and all it stands for (most of America, I suspect)—will ALSO decide to show up—and the outcome could be bloody.
If ever there were a Constitutional Amendment that Democrats and Republicans would agree on, I suspect it would be one that makes this “type” of free speech illegal.
“There oughta be a law!”
We can push our representatives to pass one if we choose.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Using the “I hate what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it” angle, the high court ruled that even hurtful speech is protected by the Constitution. While on that point I may agree, I will also draw the distinction that a funeral (military or otherwise) is a painful enough occasion and a unique societal event that creates an exception to the rule.
The Supreme Court should be ashamed of itself.
A Topeka, Kansas-based “Christian” church has made a habit of showing up at the military funerals of fallen soldiers—with signs that celebrate the death and make a connection between war casualties and the military’s acceptance of gays. With signs that say “God Hates Fags”, these individuals terrorize a grief-stricken family at their lowest moment.
There is legal and illegal, right and wrong—and this is just plain WRONG. Here is a short newscast clip of a protest:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UMP3AK5jwo
The case is question concerned the picketing at the funeral of Marine Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder, who was killed in Iraq. I don’t believe Snyder was gay—and in the eyes of this church, it doesn’t matter. Their protest against gays in the military cuts across the spectrum—and ALL deaths are “God’s revenge” for the military’s tolerance.
We all know that freedom of speech is not without limits. The commonly used example of shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theatre is not protected, as the incidence of danger and injury to everyone inside overrides the right to utter whatever you choose—at whatever time you choose to.
For instance, how long would my “free speech” rights be upheld if I spoke out about this decision during the Supreme Court proceedings? I would be quickly ushered out the door. Even silently holding a sign would not be tolerated.
I contend that funerals fall into this special class of protected instances.
We need more Justices like Samuel Alito, Jr., the lone dissenter. In his opinion, he wrote: “Our profound national commitment to free and open debate is not a license for the vicious verbal assault that occurred in this case”.
Well said.
The family of Corporal Snyder was awarded more than $10 Million by a Baltimore jury who agreed that the church had violated the family’s privacy, caused emotional distress and violated his rights to exercise his religion and peaceful assembly.
The original award was cut in half by a judge and then overturned by the U.S. Court of Appeals.
The Westboro Baptist Church has triumphantly declared they will now plan on picketing more military funerals---and this may cause future violence that will make screaming “fire” and its aftermath look tame.
I get it.
It’s not illegal, even though I suspect those who hate this church and all it stands for (most of America, I suspect)—will ALSO decide to show up—and the outcome could be bloody.
If ever there were a Constitutional Amendment that Democrats and Republicans would agree on, I suspect it would be one that makes this “type” of free speech illegal.
“There oughta be a law!”
We can push our representatives to pass one if we choose.
If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Lindbergh Baby: Kidnapping Still A Mystery
THE FOLLOWING IS AN UPDATED ENCORE TIM MOORE BLOG>
It was on this date—March 1, 1932—that the infant son of aviator Charles Lindbergh was taken from his crib, triggering one of the largest manhunts in history.
Called the “crime of the century”, the nation was completely gripped by the emotional ordeal of someone who was arguably the most famous person on the planet at the time.
I recommend reading A. Scott Berg’s Pulitzer Prize winning biography, “Lindbergh”—it’s a fascinating look at the life of an American icon—and there is obviously a great deal of material on the abduction of the Lindbergh baby.
While one cannot discount the remarkable feat that Lindbergh accomplished with his solo flight from New York to Paris in 1927, it can be said that the fame, adulation and financial windfalls that accrued from that one 36 hour flight were completely out of proportion with the magnitude of the event itself.
Mass media was in its infancy—and Charles Lindbergh became the first true worldwide superstar. The newspaper headlines were a given, but the new medium of radio and sound coupled with film in the form of newsreels catapulted Lindbergh to a level of fame and intrusion of his privacy that had never occurred before.
As such, Lindbergh and his family were prime targets for kidnapping, especially as the Great Depression created economic hardship for millions of Americans.
The Lindbergh baby kidnap case didn’t have a happy ending. Although $50,000 in ransom was paid, the baby was never returned. A corpse was found about a month after the ransom drop—not far from the Lindbergh’s New Jersey home.
For a long time, it appeared the crime would not be solved…..until a marked bill from the ransom money turned up more than two years after the crime. Spent at a gas station, the operator wrote down the license plate of the driver, thinking he looked suspicious. The car belonged to a Bruno Hauptman, a German immigrant. When his home was searched, about $15,000 of the ransom money was found.
Needless to say, the conviction and execution of Hauptman was a fairly straightforward matter. However, there are those who believe the German was innocent. Here is an interesting show from the Leonard Nimoy’s “In Search Of…” series about the crime—and the allegations that Hauptman was framed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbeLVi3IuRI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cW_WpKoqxts
Although the program was interesting, I am still not convinced. Even if Hauptman was not personally involved in the abduction and/or murder of the child, it’s difficult to believe that he was an innocent bystander. Holding 15 grand of the tainted money with no plausible explanation is damning evidence to me.
Either way, it’s a fascinating story—and I highly recommend “Lindbergh” by A. Scott Berg. With exclusive access to the Lindbergh family papers, it is the definitive biography of one of America’s most complex personalities.
If you’d like my blog in your daily inbox, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
It was on this date—March 1, 1932—that the infant son of aviator Charles Lindbergh was taken from his crib, triggering one of the largest manhunts in history.
Called the “crime of the century”, the nation was completely gripped by the emotional ordeal of someone who was arguably the most famous person on the planet at the time.
I recommend reading A. Scott Berg’s Pulitzer Prize winning biography, “Lindbergh”—it’s a fascinating look at the life of an American icon—and there is obviously a great deal of material on the abduction of the Lindbergh baby.
While one cannot discount the remarkable feat that Lindbergh accomplished with his solo flight from New York to Paris in 1927, it can be said that the fame, adulation and financial windfalls that accrued from that one 36 hour flight were completely out of proportion with the magnitude of the event itself.
Mass media was in its infancy—and Charles Lindbergh became the first true worldwide superstar. The newspaper headlines were a given, but the new medium of radio and sound coupled with film in the form of newsreels catapulted Lindbergh to a level of fame and intrusion of his privacy that had never occurred before.
As such, Lindbergh and his family were prime targets for kidnapping, especially as the Great Depression created economic hardship for millions of Americans.
The Lindbergh baby kidnap case didn’t have a happy ending. Although $50,000 in ransom was paid, the baby was never returned. A corpse was found about a month after the ransom drop—not far from the Lindbergh’s New Jersey home.
For a long time, it appeared the crime would not be solved…..until a marked bill from the ransom money turned up more than two years after the crime. Spent at a gas station, the operator wrote down the license plate of the driver, thinking he looked suspicious. The car belonged to a Bruno Hauptman, a German immigrant. When his home was searched, about $15,000 of the ransom money was found.
Needless to say, the conviction and execution of Hauptman was a fairly straightforward matter. However, there are those who believe the German was innocent. Here is an interesting show from the Leonard Nimoy’s “In Search Of…” series about the crime—and the allegations that Hauptman was framed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbeLVi3IuRI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cW_WpKoqxts
Although the program was interesting, I am still not convinced. Even if Hauptman was not personally involved in the abduction and/or murder of the child, it’s difficult to believe that he was an innocent bystander. Holding 15 grand of the tainted money with no plausible explanation is damning evidence to me.
Either way, it’s a fascinating story—and I highly recommend “Lindbergh” by A. Scott Berg. With exclusive access to the Lindbergh family papers, it is the definitive biography of one of America’s most complex personalities.
If you’d like my blog in your daily inbox, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
