Terry Francona: Thanks For The Titles, Tito!

How soon we forget.

A man who can arguably lay claim to the title “best Red Sox manager ever” will likely not be back next year.

As I write this, reports are swirling that Terry Francona will be exiting stage left. Although John Henry and company met with Tito today, they are not making an announcement on whether they’ll pick up his option next year. As for Francona himself? Reports are stating that he’s already told team members that he’s going…going…gone!

Eight years at the helm—and two World Series Championships to his credit.

I think he’s getting a raw deal.

He didn’t swing a bat or throw a pitch in Boston’s horrible September. He wasn’t responsible for the injuries, the errors or the slumps. But…he’s the guy at the top—and even he admitted that his control over the players in the clubhouse was not what it should have been.

Perhaps a fresh face would inspire the players to dig deep. I would think that sheer pride would be sufficient. After all, put another guy in that situation—and ask yourself---what would anyone else have done?

Does it come down to a pep talk during a slump? I don’t think it’s that simple.
If Francona gets the blame for September and also the dreadful 2-10 season start, then he must also get the credit for the part in-between, when the Red Sox had the best record in baseball.

Here’s a TV segment from earlier today on the swirling reports of Francona’s exit:




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTBxZGB1kW4

The name most mentioned as Francona’s replacement is one Joe Torre. As Tito-haters salivate over the prospect, it should be noted that Torre is not particularly good at managing conflict (his own admission), a talent that may have been the missing managerial ingredient this year.

I should come clean and admit that I am not a huge Francona fan. It’s been said that a manager will cost his team a few games each year. God knows that Terry filled his quota. Many times, I think he left pitchers in too long---presumably because he didn’t want to “embarrass them” by yanking them mid-inning. While I don’t agree with the logic, there is a human side to it that made his excesses forgivable----because his players loved him and the team was a winner.

He’s forgotten more about baseball than I know, so I won’t second-guess the many decisions he made that I railed against from the comfort of my easy chair.
Keep in mind, however, that only your players can make you look good—or competent—and that baseball is a game of inches.

The manager touted for breaking “the curse” and delivering the Red Sox their first title since 1918 might not have made it past that inaugural season if a certain throw to second in the fourth game of the ALCS had nailed Dave Roberts. The Yankees would have swept the Red Sox in four straight and the “Idiots” would have cemented that nickname in the most deplorable way.

Likewise, had the Red Sox won 2 more games than they did—at ANYTIME in that 162 game season, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. There had to be hundreds, if not thousands of game situations in 2011 where one fewer out or one more foot of distance would have meant another one in the win column.

Had the Sox won another 2 games—maybe opening 4-8 instead of 2-10, we would be headed to the post-season. It’s likely that with the riddled pitching staff, the Sox would have been unable to hit their way past the first round anyway.

Many have called for Theo Epstein’s head as well. While I likewise disagree here too, at least there is a plausible argument to lay alot of blame on the GM. To quote Bill Parcell’s famous statement about his desire to be coach AND General Manager, “If I’m gonna be making dinner, I want to buy the groceries!”

Yet for every bonehead acquisition Theo paid big bucks for (John Lackey, J.D. Drew, et al), there were some terrific pickups, too.

As in all things, a man should be judged for his body of work, not the snapshot that is one season----or in this case, one MONTH.

I hope the Red Sox have the sense to retain Tito, but I fear that things have already unraveled to the point of no return.

If that’s the case, then we can at least thank Terry Francona for bringing to Boston not one but two World Championships. I think most of the fans are grateful for that—and are also distressed to think he won’t be in the dugout next season.

Thanks, Tito.


If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@cumulus.com

Google And Facebook As Big Brother?

It’s a bit pompous to say that this blog is IMPORTANT, but I think I will anyway.

The credit is not mine to take, as this one is all about the video. Thanks to Q97.9 Night-time star Rob Steele for sending me the link yesterday.

Did you think “search” was created equal? I did.
Did you think that the internet was the great leveler of the playing field? I did too.

You may be in for a rude awakening after watching the following video. Watch it before YouTube (owned by Google) takes it down:




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLXa1kEMooU

The founders of Google had as their core mantra, “Don’t Be Evil”. What may have started as an earnest attempt to “personalize” the feeds for users has turned into a filter that not only can you not control---you are not even AWARE that content is being kept from you.

Scary. And, in a way....evil.

Your thoughts welcome-either as a comment or an e-mail, which you can also use to subscribe for free (and UNFILTERED!) daily: tim.moore@cumulus.com

TV’s Worst Show—Almost

It was on this date in 1967 that an American TV flop started airing in France—in the hope that maybe it would fare better in Europe.

It didn’t.

“My Mother, The Car”, starring Jerry Van Dyke (Dick’s brother) was a sitcom that had as its premise, a talking automobile that was the reincarnation of the main character’s mother.

Alrighty then.

How this idea made it past the first round of network brainstorming is beyond me. Small-town lawyer David Crabtree discovers that a 1928 Porter sitting in a used car lot is his Mom. The car starts talking to him—and the rest is TV history, infamous as it may be.

Below are the first few minutes of the debut episode—you may not be able to watch more than a minute or so!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cix204cWnWA

Jerry Van Dyke lived in the shadow of his famous brother—and had the hard luck to prove it. The enormously successful “Dick Van Dyke Show” was still airing when “My Mother, The Car” made its debut. Further, Jerry turned down the lead role for another sitcom, this one about a small group of people stranded on a desert island----“Gilligan’s Island”.

When “My Mother, The Car” landed on American television in 1965, one critic predicted it would be an “Edsel with the critics, but a hot rod with the public”.

It lasted just one season, proving that it was a lemon with just about everyone.

In 2002, TV Guide named “My Mother, The Car” the SECOND worst show in TV history.

The absolute worst? “The Jerry Springer Show”

Who can argue with that?

If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@cumulus.com

Debates Are Overrated, But Still Important

It is only in retrospect that we know how important this day in history was.

The very first Kennedy-Nixon Presidential Debate took place on this date in 1960. The incredible influence of the visual medium of television was first demonstrated—and dramatically at that.

Regardless of the content of their responses, the national audience was exposed to the far more impactful NON-VERBAL communication from the candidates. What was the turning point in presidential politics may not have even been in the thought process of then Vice President Richard Nixon and his team.

Namely, that pictures-images DO matter. Consider the mistakes made:

1) Nixon refused to wear makeup. Uninitiated in the effects of the TV lights on human complexion, he was unwilling to be made up. The effect? John F. Kennedy looked tanned and healthy. Nixon looked pale, pasty and ill. Further, the hot lights caused him to sweat.

2) No apparent effort was made to address the posture of the Republican candidate. While Kennedy largely looked relaxed and comfortable, Nixon appeared nervous and ill-at-ease.

Did these things matter?

Absolutely.

What was for many the very first national exposure to the challenger Kennedy, his team was well aware that Kennedy’s mission was to appear “Presidential”, essentially refuting the charges from the Nixon campaign that the Democratic nominee was young and inexperienced.

Here is the original Kennedy-Nixon debate. Watch it and decide for yourself!



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbrcRKqLSRw

Fast-forward to 2011 and the recent Republican debates. Despite the huge excitement from the conservative base over the entrance of Texas Governor Rick Perry into the race, it is abundantly clear that Mr. Perry’s very candidacy is starting to crumble---due to his debate performance---or lack thereof.

Republican consultant Mike Murphy said of Perry: “Listening to Perry try to put a complicated policy sentence together…is like watching a chimp play with a locked suitcase”

Funny, but true.

Brit Hume said that Perry “threw up all over himself” in the last debate. As a result of this and other assessments, Perry’s fundraising has been hit and Herman Cain (in my view the very best performer so far in the debates)—actually won the Florida Straw Poll with 37% of the vote—compared to 15% for Perry and 14% for Romney.

While pundits call this a vote for “none of the above”, perhaps Cain shouldn’t be so roundly dismissed. So far, Cain is the only one who has spoken plainly, directly and with a genuine sense of humor. You get the feeling that (unlike the other candidates), he doesn’t have an arsenal of verbal “gotcha!” comebacks or one-liners ready for delivery. Maybe he does—I wouldn’t blame him. It just seems as if he is generating it all on the spot.

The TV age has made everyone more adept at on-camera situations, but Rick Perry had better get a lot better—and soon.

Meanwhile, Perry’s team says he is not running for “Debater-In-Chief”, but “Commander-In-Chief”. While this may be true, the ability to communicate has never been more important. That deer-in-the-headlights look we routinely got from George W. Bush cannot possibly cut it any longer. President Obama’s detractors will cite his ability to speak as his ONLY attribute.

While I dispute that notion, it is true that his ability to communicate, motivate and explain may have been the deciding factor in his win over the verbal bumbling of John McCain.

The debates do matter. The ability to think on your feet, to articulate ideas and simplify complex issues will be central to the skill set of any President. If the Republicans aren’t on their game, it may dictate the outcome in 2012, just as it did in 2008----and 1960.

Richard Nixon, were he here, would agree.


If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@cumulus.com

Songwriter Turned Performer

Ok, so it was kind of a conceited and chauvinistic tune, but it made it to #1 and propelled an obscure songwriter into stardom.

The song was “Baby, Don’t Get Hooked On Me” and the singer was Mac Davis. It was on this date in 1972 that the song topped the charts, sending this country boy from Lubbock, Texas into the winners circle as a performer in his own right.

Not that success was foreign to Mr. Davis. It’s just that the songs he wrote became hits for someone else. If you recall Elvis Presley’s hits “A Little Less Conversation”, “In The Ghetto” , “Memories” and “Don’t Cry Daddy”, you have Mac Davis to thank. How about the sappy “Watching Scotty Grow”? That Mac Davis tune was a huge hit for Bobby Goldsboro.

After starting out with Nancy Sinatra’s band, where he performed on stage with her many times, a career in songwriting—and eventually performing took over.

In a year where the Equal Rights Amendment was in the headlines—and Helen Reddy’s “I Am Woman” typified the emerging independence of women, here was a song about a guy who doesn’t want a relationship to lead into any kind of commitment! If you don’t remember the song…well….here it is:




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UauHDIlhvTk

Mac Davis became one of the most successful performers in the 70’s and 80’s, following this #1 hit with songs like: “One Hell Of A Woman”, “Stop And Smell The Roses” and the amusing “It’s Hard To Be Humble”.

Davis was also an actor, starring in several movies, including opposite Nick Nolte in “North Dallas Forty”. He also had his own musical variety show from 1974-1976 on NBC.

Hell, he even appeared as himself on “The Muppet Show”. You know you’ve arrived when on-camera with Miss Piggy.

If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@cumulus.com

Chubby Checker: The Twist

THE FOLLOWING IS AN UPDATED ENCORE TIM MOORE BLOG:

My very first radio interview with a “big star” occurred in 1983 with the legendary Chubby Checker, who, believe it or not-was scheduled to play a very small club called The Roundup in Ellsworth, Maine.

I admit that I was a bit nervous—after all, this was the man who made “The Twist” a huge hit and started a dance craze across the nation. It was on this date in 1960 that “The Twist” hit Number One. It stayed there for…..an entire week.

Chubby couldn’t have been any nicer or gracious to a young and inexperienced broadcaster like me, but for awhile, I thought he was pulling my leg. He stated that “The Twist” was a turning point in American history!

Of course I chuckled at this---thinking the man was joking.

He was not.

Indeed, he elevated the song and the dance that inspired it to levels that approached the importance of the moon landing and the polio vaccine.

Really.

It was only after a few minutes of hearing him compare this pop song with cultural, historical and scientific advancements of far greater impact that I realized that Chubby had perhaps smoked a few too many chubbies himself.

At any rate, the show at this little club in Ellsworth was a tour de force of nonstop music and dancing, with zero breaks in between songs. The man was still a bit “chubby”, but could he ever move!

Here’s clip of the Chubster himself---grinding away on “American Bandstand”:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbK0C9AYMd8


Chubby’s appearance on Ed Sullivan two years later boosted sales of the single so much that it reached #1 AGAIN –still the only song to top the chart TWICE. It is considered one of the most successful singles of all time-having stayed in the Top 100 charts for 39 weeks!

Did the Salk polio vaccine ever do THAT? I don’t think so!

If you’d like my blog in your weekday box, just drop me an e-mail (FREE!) tim.moore@cumulus.com

Where’s All the Money?

By the time you’re finished reading this, the country of Greece may default. Some analysts are predicting the likelihood of that occurring is 98%. Who will follow?

Italy seems likely. Many say the Euro is doomed as a currency---and Germany is livid as much of the debt of these and other floundering nations are held by its banks.

The ripple effect of these collapses on OUR already-weak economy is certain, although the magnitude can only be guessed at.

Debt, debt, debt.

Low interest rates for mortgages, but nobody is buying houses. Institutions like the Bank Of America in trouble.

If there is a way out, it would appear that most countries would be on board for a complete “re-set” of the global economy. The problems we are facing cannot be blamed on the current Administration—or the last ten. Instead, I suppose they are ALL to blame.

But then again, I have no idea what I’m talking about.

Maybe it’s ignorance or maybe it’s just confusion. The adage that if you ask ten economists the same question, you’ll get ten different answers has truth to it.

Unlike chemistry, physics and math, there seem to be no absolutes in economics.

For conservatives, removing government spending and turning the American capitalist free enterprise system loose is the only way to prosperity. For liberals, government oversight and regulation is necessary—and a safety net for society’s most vulnerable is equally necessary. Unchecked capalism, with all of its derivatives and sub-prime loans was partof the problem. The needed oversight and benefit programs like Medicaid and Social Secuirty all costs dough--YOUR dough.

Perhaps most frightening is the thought that one person—in this case, the embattled Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke---may be sending us down the path of destruction. A Bush appointee, he was retained by President Obama and has manipulated the money supply to keep inflation down and try to spur growth. Some say it’s exactly the right path—and others say he is dead wrong.

So.....who is right?

Check out this vintage program featuring noted economist Milton Friedman on the Great Depression. Looks like it was produced in the late 70’s,when, if I’m not mistaken, runaway inflation was the chief economic woe. It is three parts in length, but well worth the time. Understanding the SEEMINGLY minor actions of a few individuals and banks that led to a cascading effect in the 30’s is downright scary. Have we learned anything since?

Understanding the Great Depression (if you accept the explanation of Friedman) can give us insight on what is happening now. His view of the gold standard—and its role in the worsening of conditions in the early 1930’s—makes you take pause as well.

There are those stridently advocating a return to the gold standard---the act of tying our paper money to a precious metal. Some assert that the U.S. Government’s unbridled and continual printing of money will only last for as long as the dollar remains the world’s dominant reserve currency—and those days are numbered. Then, inflation will be extraordinary, the literal bushel-baskets of dollars needed to buy a loaf of bread.

This video may be over 30 years old, but are there lessons here? Watch this segment—and then click on Parts 2 & 3:




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_svuPVKiwjs&feature=related


I’d love to know your thoughts. The idea that Keynesian economics is dead may be true, but Friedman’s last thoughts on that video are centered on how disciples of his may have taken things a bit too far.

Can there be another global Bretton Woods conference? Can we avoid the domino effect of crashing currencies (and economies) WITHOUT taking decisive action?

All of the band-aids being applied to stem the bleeding don’t appear to be healing the wound.


If you’d like this blog in your box daily, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com

Gilligan’s Island: Farewell Little Buddy

THE FOLLOWING IS AN UPDATED ENCORE TIM MOORE BLOG:

Of all the TV shows ever produced-and the thousands of “intros” or theme songs that launched an episode, isn’t it likely that “Gilligan’s Island” takes the prize as #1 most memorable, most quoted, most parodied-and most beloved?

I think so.

The “Mister Ed” opener is up there, but “Gilligan’s Island” has to be first.

The final episode of “Gilligan’s Island” aired this week in 1967- some 44 years ago—and yet it remains part of our collective culture, especially to those of us “north of 40”.

The show itself only ran for three seasons—it was probably difficult to come up with new and different story ideas with that original (and limiting) premise. After so many failed schemes to get off the island, where do you go? Despite its relatively short “first-run” life, it was, however, a HUGE hit in syndication, still airing today as a classic rerun.

If you’re like me, you have fond memories of laughter at the hapless Gilligan, played by Bob Denver, who, like it or not was defined by the role for the rest of his life. A star in the “Dobie Gillis” TV show earlier, he used the Gilligan role as a way to escape from THAT previous stereotype. Little did he know that he—and in fact all of the cast members—would have trouble landing other, more serious roles “post-Gilligan”.

Perhaps the show’s success lay in the character development of each of the players. We each saw a little of ourselves in all of the castaways.

Guys would be defined by their answer to the question: “Ginger or Mary Anne?” The excesses of wealth were personified by Thurston Howell and his wife—and we all wondered why, if the Professor was smart enough to build a radio out of a coconut, why couldn’t he build a boat to get off that damn island?

Here, for your viewing and listening pleasure, is the opener to the show-this, I believe is from the 3rd and final season--the link (embedding diabled) is the ORIGINAL show open. As you’ll notice, later versions included in song “the Professor and Mary Anne”, replacing “and all the rest” in the theme. Guess those two felt a bit left out at first!





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfR7qxtgCgY

The SS Minnow is gone (although still a popular name for registered boats the world over). Alan Hale, the Skipper, Bob Denver, Jim Backus (Thurston Howell) and Natalie Shafer (Mrs. Howell) are also gone—but through the magic of reruns, we still get to enjoy their comic genius! In addition to the never-ending reruns, the characters were resurrected in THREE made-for-TV movies.

Not bad for a sitcom that came and went on and OFF the air so relatively fast.

If you’d like my blog in your inbox daily, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com

9-11: A Decade Later

The question has become almost a cliché:

“Where were you on 9-11?”

Sadly, there is no need to qualify with the follow-up question: “Which year?” Although 9-11 happens every year, the force of a decade has not diminished the 9-11 of 2001, where not only the United States—but the entire world—was changed forever.

Here is a short tribute video:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDh_pvv1tUM

Everyone knows where they were—and exactly the specific things they did on that fateful day. Watching the 10th anniversary coverage has alarmingly brought to the surface the same emotions we experienced a decade ago. It is still difficult to view the footage of the twin towers coming down—and the uncertainty evident in the voices of all those news people whom we entrust daily to reassure us. No one was reassured on that day.

Perhaps it is true to say that we haven’t felt totally safe since.

So, what has happened in the ten years since the attack?

Although we used Al Qaeda as the reason for attacking two countries, intelligence experts have estimated the total “membership” of that terrorist organization to have been no more than one thousand—and likely much less at the time of the attack.

The entire force and might of the United States of America was deployed to find and destroy “weapons of mass destruction” (which apparently didn’t exist) and to destroy both the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Much of the former was wiped out within a month of entering Afghanistan—and much of the Al Qaeda destruction has been credited to targeted strikes by U.S. Special Forces, drone attacks and covert intelligence—as opposed to ground troops stationed within the borders of suspected countries harboring the bad guys.

Two wars still rage on. Thousands of lives—American men and women, civilians and non-combatants are the cost---so far. Billions upon billions of dollars. And there are those who state we are no safer now than we were in 2001.

It’s not unpatriotic to question the strategy—and response to 9-11. It certainly isn’t today, with ten years in the rear view mirror. I do believe that some of those who opposed this strategy a decade ago were accused of being unpatriotic. Unfortunate.

I sometimes wonder what the world would be like if we had decided NOT to strike back in the manner we did. If, instead of deploying tens of thousands of troops and engaging in the “shock and awe” campaign (remember that?), we had taken a more measured response, namely:

1) The aforementioned targeted Special Forces attacks-like the ones we employed to find and kill Osama Bin Laden, and
2) A focus more on the internal threats—not just airports, but bridges, rail and mass transportation, our water supply and electric grid (all of which except airports are said to still be extremely vulnerable)


Had this course of action been taken, the following landscape would be likely:

A) Saddam Hussein would still be in power—and would still be a threat to the world
B) Thousands of American families would not have an empty seat at the dinner table.
C) Our economy would likely not be in such fragile shape.
D) Our National Debt would be much smaller
E) Our internal security would be better—as resources employed for warfare would instead have been diverted to domestic security


Would we have been better off?

Hard to say, as we could never predict the behavior of Saddam Hussein. I can’t help but think that we would have been better off—and stronger as a country—to not respond in the way we did.

My oldest son was 12 years old at the time. Had there been a draft-as was the case in Viet Nam, it is amazing to think that the wars that came out of that one day could have resulted in his deployment to combat six years later. Here we are a decade later—and now, my youngest son—who was one year old on 9-11----could be a soldier should this pair of wars extend another seven years. Unbelievable as it is, that thought occurs to me often.

We cannot take back the events that have unfolded in the ten years since 9-11. We can, however, honor the lives of the victims of that terrible day—and all those who have given their lives since----by resolving to approach future attacks with a response that is measured and appropriate.

As the saying goes: “War never determines who is right, just who is left”.

God bless the victims of 9-11 and their families—and God Bless the U.S.A.



If you’d like my blog in your box, let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com

Republican Roundup

It’s always fun to hear the pundits make their pronouncements following a political debate.

Such was the case last night, as a baker’s half-dozen plus one crowded the stage at the Reagan Library in an attempt to stand out from the pack.
If you missed the debate, here it is:





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uM174emEhak

Time will tell if these political talking heads have nailed it, but after the debate, I listened to the largely left-leaning MSNBC to hear how folks like Rachel Maddow and Ed Shultz and Chris Matthews scored the sparring.

With some deviations, the thumbnails are as follows:

RICK PERRY- The newest entrant and instant frontrunner did not perform all that well, particularly when characterizing Social Security as a “Ponzi scheme”. He may be dead-on, but that statement won’t play well with the typically older electorate that shows up to Republican primaries. Some pundits declared him dead in the water, others said it was just a rather large speed bump. Everyone agreed that his Texas style and shoot-from-the-hip rhetoric will play well to the base, but may be a real stumbling block in the general election (should he be nominated). His denial of the science behind climate change and evolution exposes Perry as a narrow-minded leader whose millions of like-minded minions will gravitate to. Failing to take a more expansive (and rational) viewpoint is nothing short of a critical missed opportunity.

MITT ROMNEY- To me, he looked to be the most at ease and comfortable under the glare of the national spotlight. He pounced on Perry’s Social Security gaffes and in doing so, perhaps created the space needed to draw the clear distinction he needs. As the former front-runner, he didn’t look intimidated at all by Perry, who seemed a bit jumpy to me. The content was good-and the tone was more statesmanlike than Perry.

MICHELLE BACHMAN- Clearly in need of political resuscitation following Rick Perry’s entry into the race, I thought she needed to really hit it out of the park. She didn’t.
She did OK in my view, but the Tea Party’s debutante has been left at the dance without a date. Many pundits declared Bachman’s candidacy DOA. They may be right.

RICK SANTORUM- I don’t know whose money he is wasting by continuing in the race, but were I a donor, I’d be asking for my money back. Basically Newt Gingrich-Light, he adds very little to the discussion.

JOHN HUNTSMAN- I was surprised at the talking heads collective dismissal of Huntsman, who I thought did very well. He was well spoken, critical without being mean-spirited and seems to have the resume that makes him qualified. He even seemed, dare I say…”presidential”? That said, there was something about him that seemed just a tad too “slick”. In fact, he reminded me a bit of failed Democratic candidate John Edwards. No one wants to be compared to that loser.

NEWT GINGRICH- This man is an enigma to me. He is at once highly intelligent and articulate—and a complete buffoon. Past inflammatory statements follow him around so much that his cogent thoughts often get lost in the baggage. His attack on the media last night (sometimes a justified strategy) seemed planned to evoke a rise out of the conservative audience—and in this case was unwarranted. The clashing of Republicans on that stage was clearly destined to happen—and was unprovoked by the moderators.
When Newt’s entire campaign leadership walked out on him some months ago, it should have been a hint to get out of the race. That he hasn’t taken it means this ongoing campaign is merely an ego trip. Newt, go away.

RON PAUL- Perhaps the most outspoken candidate in 2008, Paul last night seemed to me to be a cranky old man. With views that were so out in left field, he too has little reason to stay in, except for one aspect. The entertainment value he provides as he needles everyone else is priceless. I may even contribute to his campaign.

HERMAN CAIN- I’ve saved my favorite for last. As a former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza and a Baptist preacher, he has ZERO chance of getting the nomination. Too bad, as he was the most straightforward, direct and articulate of the bunch. Aside from the “Ponzi” comments, his proposal for “9-9-9” seemed to stand out from the pack—and make more sense than most anything I’ve heard from anyone from any party. Nine percent corporate tax, nine percent income tax and nine percent sales tax---without any loopholes, exemptions or exceptions was refreshingly sensible. The revelation that General Electric made BILLIONS of dollars in profits and paid NO corporate income tax underscores a system that is functionally broken. Cain’s assertion that the federal government must get out of the business of “picking winners and losers” makes intuitive sense.

The U.S. President is becoming more of a CEO. Managing revenues—and leading Congress in the allocation of assets is Job 1. Rhetoric without funding equals empty words.

Whomever is nominated, one thing is clear: Ronald Reagan, whom each of the candidates virtually worshipped last night---couldn’t possibly be nominated by the Republican Party today. His embrace of Social Security and a host of other social programs would make him a flaming liberal when stacked against this year’s slate of candidates.

If it weren’t so pathetic, it would be amusing.

If you’d like my blog in your box, let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com

Buddy Holly: An Original

It was on this date in 1936 that Charles Harden Holley was born in Lubbock, Texas.

Although the birthplace of rock and roll was along the Mississippi River, it would appear that this Texas town had its contribution to make, as Charles, better known as Buddy Holly—would become one of music’s true pioneers.

Schooled in piano, violin, banjo and guitar, Buddy Holly started his journey of live performances while still in junior high school, forming his first band.

So what was it about Buddy Holly (and his later band The Crickets) that made them so influential? Unlike Elvis Presley, Buddy Holly wasn’t the sex symbol that The King achieved so effortlessly. John Lennon so admired Buddy Holly that he named The Beatles (originally “Beetles”) after the Crickets.

Essentially, Buddy Holly blazed the trail of the performer who composed their own songs. By 1956, Elvis Presley was a star, but he was singing tunes written by others. Buddy Holly wrote—and produced his own material.

While Holly’s recording career spanned only about a year and a half, his impact on the rock and roll scene was profound. The Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan cite Holly as significantly influential in their respective careers.

Here’s a clip of Buddy Holly doing his thing:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWCIqCSyFhc


Killed in the most famous airplane crash in music history—the “day the music died”, Buddy Holly lost his life along with Ritchie Valens and The Big Bopper in 1958.

So short a career, but with hits like “Peggy Sue”, “That’ll Be The Day”, “It’s So Easy”, “Maybe Baby” and of course, “Oh Boy”, his legacy was huge.

If you’d like to receive my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com

Golf Trick Shot Artist

As Labor Day passes and September really starts to look like a month other than August, I begin to have my yearly golf withdrawal symptoms.

Still plenty of good days to whack that sucker, but those days are getting shorter. Where before it was easy to play until 8:30pm, nowadays you need night vision goggles anytime past 7:30.

It’s not easy to be a golfer in Northern New England. Maybe that’s why we’re all so passionate about the limited time we get to swing those sticks.

For duffers like myself, moments of greatness are few and far between, but sometimes they do occur. And for me, maybe my greatest happened this past Saturday in Rangeley.
While playing Mingo Springs, I EAGLED the second hardest hole on the course, a 419 yard Par 4. A dogleg right with an elevated tee to a valley fairway and then back uphill to an elevated green, I hammered a drive 271 yards to the middle of the fairway (which was, in itself, cause for celebration)—then, I took deadly aim with my 7-iron from 148 yards out. I knew the instant I stuck that sucker that the shot was good, but from my vantage point, only the top of the flagstick was visible.

Imagine my disappointment when arriving at the green to initially not see my ball. It wasn’t behind the green in the fringe and, my goodness; it COULDN’T have skipped into the woods, could it have?

I nonchalantly declared, “Just for the hell of it, I’m going to look in the hole!”

Presto.

My little Pinnacle was resting comfortably, nestled up against the flagstick, yielding a 2 on a Par 4.

For those with better hand-eye coordination (maybe 95 percent of the public), this might not be a big deal. Stories of holes-in-one abound and the sheer number of aces, eagles and even double-eagles are common.

But not for me! Moments like these can lead to delusions of greatness—and I always entertain these fantasies after a particularly good round. Luckily, my playing partner, former boss and witness to it all, Bob Fuller kept me grounded by reminding me not to quit my day job.

Enjoy this short video clip, sent by Lorenzo Rozzi, proprietor of the One City Center News, honorary Mayor of Portland and fellow golf nut.

Now here’s a guy who can make the shots!



http://www.youtube.com/user/sportsrisq?blend=2&ob=5

Most amazing is the last guy, putting his face in the line of fire. Even an excellent golfer could chunk a shot—and the distance between knocking the Coke can off and putting an eye out was about 6 inches! Simply amazing!

You won’t see me trying that—and if I do, you won’t see any volunteers step forward to be my stooge!

If you’d like my blog in your box, just let me know: tim.moore@citcomm.com