Reflections on Good Friday
Tomorrow is Good Friday, the day Christians observe Jesus’s crucifixion. It can be a very depressing day, partly because the idea of anyone being crucified for any reason is abhorrent, mostly because Jesus is adjudged one of the best people who’ve ever walked the face of the Earth even by most non-Christians. (Of course, Jesus is seen as the Son of God by Christians.) But he died via crucifixion, in agony, despite his goodness/divinity.
Yet for whatever reason, most non-priests would rather speak of Easter than Good Friday. Granted, Easter is a much easier holiday to speak of as it’s a day of celebration, forgiveness, and hope. (I wrote about Easter last year.) It’s a day that should be celebrated. But we also need to consider the importance of the day that preceded Easter — the day made Easter possible. That day is Good Friday, one of the worst days in the history of the world . . . the day the Son of God was “cut down to size” and forced to endure horrible suffering, then death, mostly because the politicians of his time were afraid of him.
Without getting too much into Jesus’s story (that’s for the Bible to tell, not me), I believe the reason we still observe Good Friday is because as a people, we cannot believe that perhaps the best person ever created was treated this terribly. Most religions, aside from Judaism, see Jesus, bare minimum, as a very good man: for example, some Buddhists see Jesus as a bodhisattva — someone who’s delayed his entry into the positive afterlife because he knows people alive on Earth need his help.** Others see Jesus as an important prophet, even if not the very last Son of God; the religions who see Jesus this way include the Church of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) and all branches of the Muslim faith (including my favorite branch, the Sufis).
That the politicians of that time could see Jesus, a very, very good man who helped others and went out of his way to do so, as some sort of threat to themselves still rings true 2,000 years later. That even the Son of God could be treated this way, with such callous cruelty, does not sit well with anyone of any reputable faith.
The good news is, we haven’t forgotten what happened to Jesus, and others like him (many other Christian and non-Christians). And because we haven’t forgotten, such terrible things as crucifixions became less common in the Western World within decades, then nearly extinct within a few hundred years.
Of course, the fact that Jesus was killed in this particular fashion — the most revolting, scary, dishonorable death known to the ancient world — resonated with anyone who heard it as the disgusting, disgraceful act that it was, which might be why crucifixion eventually died out. (Yes, Emperor Constantine I abolished it throughout the Roman Empire in 337 due to his faith in Jesus. But many others were disquieted by it before Constantine took his first breath, otherwise Constantine wouldn’t have been able to outlaw this form of punishment.)
Christians view what Jesus did as transforming the worst imaginable form of death into a sacred thing. Jesus took the pain of the world on his shoulders (and hands, and feet), and was able to largely keep from bitterness. Then, he was cut down from the cross and laid in a tomb.
Jesus died on the cross and is said, by Christians, to have saved everyone else who believes in Him from sin, and that is a weighty message indeed. But to put it in plainer, more secular, terms, we should try not to lose hope no matter how bad things are. Because no matter how bad we think it is, there’s always the possibility something better can happen. Which is why the death, and resurrection, of Jesus Christ should be of interest even to non-Christians.
———
** Please excuse this very rough way of looking at Buddhism; while I know better, I can’t seem to explain it any better than this. My late husband Michael was a Buddhist, and my late best friend, Jeff, admired Buddhism also . . . I’m sure they’d do a better job explaining Buddhist views on Jesus, but I hope this will serve.
Alleged Lottery Winner in MD Says She “Hid” Winning Ticket
Supposedly, Mirlande Wilson — Maryland’s self-proclaimed Mega Millions winner of the biggest jackpot in United States history — has hidden her winning ticket at the McDonalds she works at. Wilson, 37, says in this article from the Huffington Post that she wants things to “calm down” before she goes back to the McDonalds and retrieves the ticket.
Now, what’s wrong with this picture?
First, I don’t know anyone who would do this.
Second, if someone did do it, what would keep the people of Maryland from going to this McDonalds and ripping it apart in search of the winning ticket?
Third, the ticket was apparently bought with a number of other people, thus Mirlande Wilson isn’t the only winner. So if she has hidden the ticket, she’s hiding it from the other winners to spite them — but see the previous two reasons, as I still don’t think she’d hide the ticket in a McDonalds (one she worked at, or otherwise).
And, finally, this woman’s co-workers do not believe her. So why should we?
My view is simple: either this woman’s ticket was bought as part of the “employee pool” and she somehow grabbed hold of it and hid it (not in the McDonalds), or she’s just trying to grab attention for herself for some reason and isn’t really a winner (by herself or otherwise).
And, for whatever it’s worth, I strongly suspect litigation is in Mirlande Wilson’s future if she really does have the winning ticket, as it’s highly unlikely this ticket is solely hers.
Baseball Updates: Hart to Play Opening Day; Rottino sent to AAA by Mets
Folks, I have the proverbial good news and bad news.
Tonight’s good news? Milwaukee Brewers RF Corey Hart will not start the season on the disabled list, as had been previously thought. Instead, he will be in right field for the Brewers on Opening Day on April 6.
But the bad news is that ex-Brewers farmhand, all-around good guy, and one of the most versatile players in any league, Vinny Rottino, who hit .276 in Spring Training with 5 RBI in 58 ABs — an IF/OF/C who plays just about every position except second base and pitcher — was cut a few, short hours ago by the New York Mets and was sent to AAA Buffalo (their minor-league affiliate) in what appears to be the Mets’ very last transaction before the start of the 2012 season.
Now, there is a hint of good news even to this, as Michael Baron of MetsBlog.com fame says that he doubts the Mets have “seen the last of him.” Baron’s comment, in its entirety, is available here, but here are his kind words about Rottino:
I liked what I saw from Rottino this Spring. With all of the early injuries to the outfielders, he was given every opportunity to show what he could do, and he did everything the staff asked him to do when he played. He showed he can make solid contact and is versatile – he can play both corner positions and the outfield as well. I bet we haven’t seen the last of him.
In addition, Peter Jackel of the Racine Journal-Times is reporting that Rottino impressed Mets’ manager Terry Collins. From Jackel’s article:
Rottino, a 1998 (Racine)** St. Catherine’s High School graduate, certainly has reason to be encouraged. He was informed by Collins last Thursday that he would break camp with the Mets if veteran outfielders Scott Hairston and Andres Torres, who had been battling injuries, were not healthy. But Hairston and Torres made the 25-man roster, leaving Rottino the odd man out.
“They sent everybody else down except me,” Rottino said. “I was the last position player in camp. (Collins) said, ‘You made an impression on everybody. You opened some eyes, Everything I’ve heard about you is exactly the kind of ballplayer you are.’ ”
So it sounds like Rottino impressed at least a few people with his versatility, his strong defensive skills, and his hitting. Good for him!
Now, my hope is that Rottino will go on a tear at Buffalo and hit so well that the Mets are forced to bring him up (in the same way as the Brewers had to bring up Russell Branyan in 2008 from AAA Nashville whether they liked it or not).
———–
** These stars indicate an insertion, by me, for those of you who are not from Racine, WI, who read my blog, with all apologies to Journal-Times sportswriter Peter Jackel. Jackel knows, as I do, that Rottino is from Racine; I’ve said it here at my blog more than once. But it’s possible that some of you don’t, especially if you’ve started reading my blog recently.
An Update to the Update, AKA further thoughts from yours truly:
I view Vinny Rottino’s story as a strong lesson in the value of persistence. I do my best to emulate it, as my own career as a writer/editor hasn’t exactly set the world on fire thus far. (Please don’t ask me to tell you how long I’ve been trying to do this; let’s just say that it’s longer than Rottino’s been trying to get to the majors and stay.)
Ultimately, the only thing any of us can do — myself, Rottino, anyone at all — is prepare ourselves to take the next step in our development. For Rottino, that’s playing major league ball; for me, it’s selling my novel ELFY, or perhaps another novel to start with, then selling ELFY (as I remain fully committed to the value of my worth as a funny fantasy writer).
I know Rottino has prepared himself, and will continue to be prepared; as soon as he gets that call from the Mets, he’ll be there like a jet-fueled rocket.
And I know that I’ve prepared myself, too, to see ELFY in print and to know, ultimately, that my husband’s faith in me — much less my very good friend Jeff Wilson’s faith in me, as he, too, was a huge believer in the Elfyverse — will be vindicated.
As I’ve said before, so sayeth I again: good luck, Vinny. And may the wind be at your back, always.
Quick US Figure Skating Update (Men’s and Women’s 2012 Worlds)
Folks, it annoys me severely when I can’t watch the United States Figure Skating Team compete, especially when they go to the World Figure Skating Championship — this year’s venue was in Nice, France. That makes it tough to comment on what happened, because all I know is what I can read about online, or when I’m able to see YouTube videos after the fact. And this can’t convey the energy in the arena or the circumstances of the event, as they’re just a snapshot of one person’s skating, without the context necessary in which to judge the event.
So all I can tell you is the bare facts. Which aren’t pretty.
Here goes:
The United States men’s team, comprised of the talented duo of Jeremy Abbott and Adam Rippon, did not do very well in France. This was Rippon’s first time at Worlds, so for him to finish 13th isn’t terrible — other people who’ve gone to Worlds for the first time have finished lower than that. But it also wasn’t very good, and I haven’t a clue about why except that Rippon apparently was a bit rattled (nerves, most likely) and fell on his opening jump in the free skate. This threw him off enough that he wasn’t able to get back on his game.
But while nerves can perhaps be blamed for Rippon’s 13th place finish, I really don’t know what happened with U.S. Champ Jeremy Abbott, who finished 8th. I know he battles severe problems with nerves, because he sees a sports psychologist (something I admire him for doing). And I know that when he went to the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver as the 2010 U.S. Champ, he finished 9th. This sounds a lot better than it was, as Abbott had to work hard to move up to get into the top ten, as he had a disastrous short program; apparently something similar happened in France, which is a shame.
Both of these men are lyrical, elegant skaters with excellent skating skills and technique. When they’re on, they can light up the room in a similar manner to my favorite U.S. skater, Johnny Weir; because of this, they are fan favorites (perhaps not as much as Weir, who’s attempting a comeback). That’s why it hurts so much to have to report such results.
Here’s an article from the Chicago Tribune online that describes what happened to the men, and how disappointing it is:
And the women did no better; U.S. champ Ashley Wagner finished fourth only because she worked her heart out in the free skate, pulling way up. And poor Alissa Czisny — I ache for this woman — finished a dismal 22nd after falling in the free skate five times. Czisny also fell twice in the short program, which begs the question: was she injured? And if so, why did she go and skate, especially as she has had trouble with her nerves before, and something like this would not help her at all?
Here’s the article, again from the Chicago Tribune, that explains this:
Here’s writer Philip Hersh’s assessment of what happened to Czisny:
Czisny, U.S. champion in 2009 and 2011 and second this year, wound up 22nd after what may have been the worst free skate ever by a skater with her talent and record. (emphasis mine: BC)
She fell five times in four minutes. She landed no clean triple jumps.
She had fallen twice in the short program and finished 16th. Seven falls in a competition must be some kind of record.
Czisny has so much talent that a result like this is unfathomable. I’ve written posts before about her persistence and her elegance and grace; this woman always gives it her best effort, has rallied back from huge defeats, and has apparently battled nerves throughout. When Czisny is on — and she’s on far more than she’s off — she lights up the room, especially when she spins as she’s one of the best spinners, male or female, in the world. And she’d improved her jumping technique — her only real weakness — very much in the past few years, which is why I really don’t understand how Czisny didn’t land a single triple jump.
My only guess is that Czisny was injured, but if she was injured, why was she in France at all? Why not withdraw rather than “take one for the team” and finish 22nd?
I’m well aware that the others who could’ve been sent — Caroline Zhang, Mirai Nagasu, and Agnes Zawadski — would’ve had a tough time at Worlds, too. But they’d probably have done better than 22nd as this was the lowest finish ever for an American woman — much less someone with top talent like Czisny (she finished a strong fifth last year, for pity’s sake!).
My hope for all of these skaters is that they keep at it. Abbott has tons of talent; so does Czisny. Rippon has barely scratched the surface of what he can do. Wagner has improved so much, she could be our next Olympic gold medalist — but of these four, she’s the only one who appears to be on an even keel. (Though it’s quite possible Rippon is, too. It’s not unknown to go to Worlds for the first time and finish under where your ability should put you; in fact, it’s odd when something like that doesn’t happen.)
Abbott and Czisny are both in their mid-twenties; that’s old for the sport. That makes getting a handle on whatever went wrong for them more time-sensitive than it is for Rippon or Wagner (especially as Wagner did have an excellent free skate). I sincerely hope for both of their sakes they will realize that this was just one bad day (very bad in Czisny’s case), and that the talent they embody continues, undimished. They must shake this off, and keep trying; that’s the best way to win in the only way that truly counts: being your best self, and using your talents accordingly.
Just Reviewed Maya Rodale’s “A Groom of One’s Own” at SBR
Folks, I really enjoy Maya Rodale’s writing. She has a knack for writing romances with good characterization, a nice sense of whimsy, and they’re often laugh out loud funny.
I really enjoyed her first romance in the “Writing Girls” series, A GROOM OF ONE’S OWN, and said so just now at SBR. Here’s the link:
Note that this past November, I discussed the second novel in that series, A TALE OF TWO LOVERS. I enjoyed Rodale’s writing then, too, but felt that the idea of a woman writing a gossip column in 1823 was a bit much. (Especially as one of her gossipy news items was that Lord Roxbury, the man she eventually marries, might’ve gotten bored with the female sex and have turned to his own. That wouldn’t have been discussed in public in 1823: not by a woman gossip columnist, and not by a male one, either.) Even under the name “A Lady of Distinction,” I just didn’t buy it, but I did enjoy Rodale’s writing.
This is why I decided to read the first novel, A GROOM OF ONE’S OWN. There are a few problems here, too, but not with the plot construction; mostly the very few errors center on how the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon (Rodale’s hero) was addressed: he should be addressed as “Your Grace” by those who don’t know him, publicly or privately (until the Duke tells the person, “Please call me” whatever), probably by “Brandon” by those who do as that’s what he prefers to be called (especially in private). Rodale gets the second part right but the first part is way off, as Duke Brandon is referred to as “Lord Brandon” far more often than not. I haven’t the foggiest idea how this got through Avon’s editors — they’re usually quite good — but the error did get through, it wasn’t corrected, and for a writer of British historical romance novels to get this wrong is astonishing.
Still, the writing itself is very, very good. I loved the characters. I appreciated the wit, the sensuality, and the charm Rodale used to enliven this romance; it felt like something that could, indeed, happen (albeit in the “romantic comedy” vein that’s almost, but not quite, farcical). And for whatever it’s worth, I do intend to read the third in this series, THE TATTOOED DUKE (and review it, too), whenever I’m able to get my hands on a copy.
So go read my review, then if you’re like me and want something light and funny, but with a bit of an edge to it, to read, pick up Rodale’s books. You’ll enjoy them.
Hard Luck Blues: Keith Olbermann Fired by Current TV
Tonight, I found out that Keith Olbermann had been fired by turning on what I thought was going to be Keith Olbermann’s news program on Current TV, “Countdown,” and finding former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer in his place. Spitzer did not explain what he was doing there.
Perturbed, I turned to the Internet and found out that Olbermann had been fired by Current TV because of “unexcused absences,” including the day before the March 6, 2012 primary (which must, by elimination, be March 5, 2012). Here’s a link to the story on Yahoo News, which explains what Spitzer’s doing there:
And here’s a link from Forbes Magazine, which says that Olbermann is so mad, he’s gone “ballistic” over his ouster:
Here’s Olbermann’s statement, as quoted by the Forbes article:
Editorially, Countdown had never been better. But for more than a year I have been imploring Al Gore and Joel Hyatt to resolve our issues internally, while I’ve been not publicizing my complaints, and keeping the show alive for the sake of its loyal viewers and even more loyal staff. Nevertheless, Mr. Gore and Mr. Hyatt, instead of abiding by their promises and obligations and investing in a quality news program, finally thought it was more economical to try to get out of my contract.It goes almost without saying that the claims against me implied in Current’s statement are untrue and will be proved so in the legal actions I will be filing against them presently. To understand Mr. Hyatt’s “values of respect, openness, collegiality and loyalty,” I encourage you to read of a previous occasion Mr. Hyatt found himself in court for having unjustly fired an employee. That employee’s name was Clarence B. Cain.
In due course, the truth of the ethics of Mr. Gore and Mr. Hyatt will come out. For now, it is important only to again acknowledge that joining them was a sincere and well-intentioned gesture on my part, but in retrospect a foolish one. That lack of judgment is mine and mine alone, and I apologize again for it.
Here’s a relevant quote from the Forbes.com article (explaining what Olbermann said in his press release in simpler terms):
To paraphrase: Whatever happened, the fault is every bit Gore’s and Hyatt’s and not one scintilla mine. I merely created my best show ever and selflessly said nothing while my bosses broke promises and ultimately let me go because they’re cheap bastards. The whole world knows (“it almost goes without saying”) that Gore and Hyatt are dishonest and I’m honest, and I’m suing their asses, and here’s some unrelated dirt on them, just for good measure. Poor me. My only mistake was to trust the rats. I humbly apologize.
Forbes follows this up by asking tonight’s burning question: Where will Keith Olbermann work next, considering he’s burned his bridges with Fox TV, MSNBC, Current, and ESPN (among others)?
But I think they’ve missed the point entirely. I’ve watched Olbermann for years; I didn’t like how he treated Hillary R. Clinton while she was running for President (some of his comments then were inexcusable), but other than that he’s a principled man who obviously takes pride in putting together a great show. His show, his staff, and even his substitute hosts are first-rate; while I never enjoyed having to watch David Shuster or Bill Press sub for Olbermann, they always did an outstanding job.
In addition, Olbermann was hired to help put together other shows for Current TV; since he was hired a year ago, Cenk Uygur, former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, and former Gov. of New York Spitzer have been brought on board. Olbermann had to take some time (I’m not sure how much) to get the Uygur show up to speed (Uygur had a show previously on MSNBC for a few months, so that probably wasn’t too taxing), then probably much more time to get former Gov. Granholm ready to host her own show as she’d had very little experience on the air — and most of that as a commentator, not as a host. (Come to think of it, before her show “War Room with Jennifer Granholm,” I’m not sure Gov. Granholm had any experience as a host at all.)
Then, factor in the health problems that most people who’ve followed Olbermann’s career know he has — these are a bad back, and periodic headaches (they may be migraines, maybe not, but definitely aren’t good — they’re due to an accident using mass transit years ago) — and the fact that Olbermann’s widowed mother is getting up in years and probably has many health issues of her own to deal with.
So do you see what’s really going on here? Olbermann had a great deal on his plate; he was developing shows and getting them “ramped up and ready to go” while keeping the quality high on his own show at the same time. This may have been enough additional stress to exacerbate his back problems (and the headaches, which I’m more aware of because of things Olbermann hasn’t said rather than what he has). And who knows how much Olbermann’s mother has needed him in the past year — if it’s been extensive, how can anyone blame him for that?
And all of that might explain what Current’s now calling his “excessive absenteeism.” (I’d be willing to bet this is at least part of it.)
This is why I call Olbermann’s latest endgame the “hard luck blues.” Because this time, unlike the last (which I blogged about here), I truly think Olbermann’s problems were brought on by one thing: stress. He’d taken on more responsibility than ever before; as he’s known for being meticulous, irascible, and a perfectionist, how could Al Gore (who owns Current TV) have expected Olbermann to behave any differently? (Especially as their own advertising on-line for “Countdown” says that Olbermann is known for his “provocative” commentary and is “journalism’s . . . most outspoken voice?”)
How can Current TV, or Al Gore in particular, honestly say they didn’t know what they were getting when they hired Olbermann? Especially using namby-pamby language like this (quoted from the Yahoo article):
Current was also founded on the values of respect, openness, collegiality, and loyalty to our viewers. Unfortunately these values are no longer reflected in our relationship with Keith Olbermann and we have ended it.
And from what I recall from when Olbermann was signed by Current TV last year, he had as close to an iron-clad contract as is known to mankind, which might be why his lawyer, Patty Glaser, is saying tonight that:
“Keith Olbermann’s termination is baseless,” she said. “We will sue them for their improper conduct. They made a bad decision; they can expect a bad result.”
Lawyers are never this emphatic unless they’re absolutely certain they’re right.
So here’s the upshot, folks: I’m actually sorry for Keith Olbermann tonight. Despite his millions of dollars, his high-fashion suits, and his “provocative” commentary, he’s been fired twice in two years. And that has to hurt, no matter who you are.
Walker, Kleefisch, Wanggaard Recall Dates Set; WI Rs to Put More “Fake Dems” into D Primaries
As of tonight, the recall of Governor Scott Walker and Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch has been set; the primary will be held on May 8, 2012, and the general election will be held on June 5, 2012. These are not-so-coincidentally the same dates on which the four Republican state Senators (including Racine’s own Van Wanggaard, my current Senator) will have to defend their seats; this should alleviate some of the financial problems court clerks around the state had been concerned about as all the recalls are going to be run at the same time. While I’m not fond of this — as I’ve said before, I think the state Senator recalls should already be over and done with as the 2011 Senatorial recall elections were taken care of in a far more expeditious manner — it does make logistical and financial sense.
But the GOP has decided to field obviously fake Democratic candidates — “fake Dems” — in the Senate recall races in order to give the Rs more time to raise money (due to a quirk in Wisconsin law, an incumbent facing recall may raise unlimited amounts of money so long as the recall election is forthcoming). I had predicted they’d do this very thing, but I don’t like their reasoning for it.
From tonight’s Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel article:
Within hours, the state Republican Party said it would run fake Democrats in all the races, ensuring there will be primaries.
“The protest candidates will run as Democrats to guarantee that there is one clear date for the primary election and one clear date for the general election,” said Stephan Thomas, the party’s executive director.
He said the move was made because otherwise some or all of the general elections for state senators would happen the same day as the primary for governor – when Democrats flood to the polls to pick their candidate for governor.
Note that Thomas says quite forthrightly that of course the WI Rs are going to send more “fake Dems” into the fray, just as they did in 2011. He’s using the rationale that this way, all of the “real” recall races will be held at the same time, as all of the real Democrats running to replace the four incumbent R Senators will now have to face a primary.
But is this really a good rationale for such a practice? Considering the WI Rs have a very bad reputation for not listening (except for “mavericks” like Dale Schultz of Richland Center), an even worse one for refusing to explain anything, and the worst one imaginable for failing to understand that their high-handed actions would set off massive unrest in Wisconsin, perhaps doing this again — sending in the “fake Dems,” all so their four R Senate candidates can rake in some more money before facing their day of reckoning on June 8, 2012 — wasn’t the world’s best move.
Because while you’re allowed to do such a thing under Wisconsin law, it’s not exactly ethical. Voters in the 2011 recall elections were quite perturbed about the Rs doing this, and I’d imagine they will be this time, too; because I remember just how angry people were over this “fake Dem” tactic, it’s not a place I’d want to go if I were a strategist for the WI Rs. (You can go to the well once too often, y’know. So why tempt fate?)
Anyway, the other tidbit in this article is that Lt. Gov. Kleefisch is the first ever Lieutenant Governor to be recalled in the entire United States. (I bet she feels special now!) Which just goes to show how angry much of the state is; most of the state barely knows who she is, yet she was recalled right along with Walker and the four Senators.
This is why, were I a member of the Wisconsin GOP, I’d want to tread lightly with regards to the whole issue around the “fake Dems.” Because at some point, enough’s going to be enough. Once that point is reached, it’ll be hard even for the practical politicians like Dale Schultz (who actually listen to their constituents) to hold onto their seats.
Just reviewed the last two Hines “Princess” novels at SBR
Folks, if you’re looking for some good, light reading, look no further than Jim C. Hines’s work. He is a gifted satirist, which I knew from the “Jig the Goblin” series; he’s also good at comedy, puns, and tells a really good story even when the subject is dark.
In Hines’s last two novels in the “Princess” series, we get to see Hines’s conception of what three real princesses who’d gone through what Snow White, Cinderella, and Sleeping Beauty did would be like. Hines believes all three of these women, in adulthood, would be seriously competent people — gifted fighters, mages, or possibly both.
Anyway, go take a look at my latest review at Shiny Book Review (SBR), which is for Hines’s last two novels in this series, RED HOOD’S REVENGE, and THE SNOW QUEEN’S SHADOW, and see what you think.
http://shinybookreview.wordpress.com/2012/03/29/hines-princess-series-wrap-up-fun-yet-incomplete/
Have at!
Local and State Politics: Turner to retire, Mason to run; also, a Dem. primary in Wanggaard Recall Race
The Racine Journal-Times is reporting tonight that my long-time Assemblyman, Robert Turner (D-Racine), is going to retire. Turner represented District 61 for twenty-two years; his initial plan was to run in the newly-moved District 66, but that has now changed. Here’s a link to the story:
Turner has been an outstanding Assemblyman, and I’ve deeply appreciated his service to the 61st District and to Racine (as he also served on the Racine City Council from 1976 to 2004). I’d been looking forward to casting my vote for Turner in District 66; as of a week to ten days ago, Turner’s plans were to run in this new district, but this has obviously changed.
The only good news about all this is that Cory Mason, currently the Assemblyman for the 62nd district, is going to move. This will allow him to run for the District 66 seat; because Mason has been an extremely responsible, and responsive, legislator, I know I’ll still have a quality person to vote for.
There’s good reason for Mason to move into District 66, you see — his current district was re-drawn to make it much more difficult for Mason to win. Only 10% of his previous constituents would’ve stayed with him; the rest would be all new. (This, most likely, is why Mason had been considering a run for Lieutenant Governor.)
Take a look at this map (also available at the Journal-Times link above):
As you can see by the map, only one district — the newly-moved 66 — has much of an urban presence. The other three districts that have any portion of Racine County all have a significant rural presence, meaning they’re more likely to be able to be won by Republicans (or right-leaning Independents) than by Democrats.
This re-drawing of maps — most properly called “redistricting” — is what I’d been talking about for the past few months with regards to that three-judge Federal panel. They, and they alone, had the authority to force the state Legislature to re-draw the maps in a more fair and equitable manner; they did not choose to do so, though they did admit that what the Rs did amounted to unethical, immoral, and improper behavior. But nothing rising to the level of illegality could be proven, which is why only Assembly Districts 8 and 9 (in Milwaukee) will have to be re-drawn even though much of the rest of the map is a mess, too.
Moving on, former Senator John Lehman (D-Racine) will have a challenger in the upcoming Senate recall race for District 21, which means a Democratic Primary will have to be run in May. (See this link, also from the Journal-Times, for further details.) This challenger is Andrew Mielke; he’s 28, not a registered Democrat, and didn’t sign the petitions to recall Governor Scott Walker, Lieutenant Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch, or Van Wanggaard. But Mielke insists he isn’t a “fake Dem” in the same sense as the six obviously fake Democrats who ran against the Democratic opponents in 2011’s recall races in order to give the state Republicans six more weeks to raise money and try to either retain their seats (four of the six incumbent Rs held their seats) or knock off some Democrats (all three D incumbents held their seats); he says his social views are progressive, and that the reason he’s running is because the people of Racine deserve a Democratic choice in the recall election.
The Democratic Party of Racine has endorsed former Senator Lehman, and said they’re not going to change their minds; they also said (paraphrasing from the Journal-Times article from March 22, 2012) that they’d really like this guy Mielke to get in there and register as a Democrat if he really is one. (Seems fair enough to me.)
I’ve never heard of this guy Mielke, and I’m reasonably active in local and state politics; I go to some area meetings (would go to more if circumstances allowed), I’ve met many people who wanted to recall Walker, Kleefisch, and Wanggaard, and I’ve also met people who didn’t think Wanggaard, etc., should be recalled but weren’t happy with him, either. This latter category seems to be the one Mielke is in, which is why it’s so odd that he’s running for office; as he’s completely unknown to Racine-area voters, it’s unlikely he’s going to do very well, especially as Lehman was a very good Senator (and before that was a very good Assemblyman).
Whether Mielke is a “fake Dem” or not, it really doesn’t matter; all Mielke is doing by entering the race now is to give Wanggaard six extra weeks to raise money in order to try to retain his seat. This is a crucial election for Wanggaard, because if he does retain his seat, this is the one and only shot voters have to get him out; he’ll be ensconced until 2014 if he’s retained.
Complicating matters further is the whole redistricting issue I’ve discussed above, as it also applies to the state Senate districts. Wanggaard will have a much safer seat to defend in 2014, providing he doesn’t get recalled in 2012. (Lehman, should he run and win, would most likely have to move in order to stay within the boundaries of the new District 21 as most of the city of Racine will be enclosed in the new District 22 along with most of the city of Kenosha; District 22 is presently held by Bob Wirch, D-Kenosha, who plans to run again for re-election.) So this is also the one shot Racine voters get to tell Wanggaard what we think of the terrible redistricting “process” — one that caused nearly all R legislators, including Wanggaard, to sign “non-disclosure” (read: secrecy) agreements so the public wouldn’t know what they were doing until it was too late and couldn’t be changed.
Wanggaard doesn’t seem to like to do the public’s business in the light of day, which is why you should vote to oust Wanggaard in June when we’re finally able to recall him. Regardless of party affiliation, we deserve transparency, openness, and honesty in our government at every level. Wanggaard didn’t provide that, which is why he must go.
Odds and Ends, TV-show style
Folks, the last week I’ve been dealing with something unusual: I have a writing and editing job where I’ve been hired to “pinch hit” and fix someone else’s manuscript. The book is non-fiction and is well-sourced and well-researched; what I’m doing my best to do is get it ready for publication. It’s going to take me at least two and a half more weeks, possibly three full weeks, to get this done; this will take me away from everyday blogging, but what’s to do? (This is a paying job, while blogging isn’t. :sigh:)
That being said, I have wanted to write about many things, but only have the time to touch on them briefly. So here we go.
First, if you’re not watching NBC’s “Smash” yet, you should. The singing by Katharine McPhee and Megan Hilty is superb; the writing otherwise is good and holds my interest. (“Smash,” if you haven’t heard about it or seen it yet, is about a whole bunch of people trying to ready a musical based on Marilyn Monroe’s life and bring it to Broadway. Hilty is a buxom blonde who looks more like Marilyn, while McPhee has more of Marilyn’s vulnerability.) This is one of the better TV shows I’ve ever seen about the artist’s life from nearly every perspective (including the writers of the show, the lyricist, the singers, actors, dancers, and producers), and for the most part “Smash” rings true to life.
As for other shows I’m watching (mostly “on demand” as my schedule permits), I’m enjoying the police procedural “Awake.” This is about a detective (played by Jason Isaacs) who lost part of his family in a car crash; in one reality, his wife lived and his son died, while in the other, his son lived and his wife died. The detective slips between realities whenever he goes to sleep, and to say the least, he’s confused — he’s actually seeing two psychiatrists (one in each reality). This is an interesting show that I haven’t yet figured out, but I love the SFnal concepts (the parallel worlds issues).
Of course, I’m keeping an eye on “Dancing with the Stars,” especially as Green Bay Packers wide receiver Donald Driver, 37, is among the cast (dancing with Peta Murgatroyd); last night, head judge Len Goodman actually admitted that he’d “undermarked” Driver during the first week’s performance, something Goodman has never said before on DWTS. Here’s a nice article from Yahoo about Driver, in case you’re interested:
http://news.yahoo.com/donald-driver-talks-football-injuries-versus-dancing-damage-162452356.html
As for how Driver did last night? He danced a quickstep; he was light on his feet and his “frame” (how he stands and holds his partner) was much better than most of the other football players who’ve competed on DWTS before, at least when we’re talking about the second week. (Everyone improves at different rates, but Driver’s starting out well.) I enjoyed his performance and felt it was one of the better ones of the entire evening.
My prediction for tonight? Driver will be safe.
My guess at the bottom two? Mostly likely it’ll be Melissa Gilbert and her partner, Maksim Chmerikovskiy (those two were a tad undermarked last night as their dance was probably the most difficult of the entire evening, but the difficulty also made it much harder for Gilbert to interact with the audience, which is part of the reason for the lower marks) and Martina Navritalova and her partner, Tony Dovolani, with Navritalova going home. (The Chicago Tribune has a good, but short, analysis of what happened with Navritalova last evening; take a gander here.)
Finally, the other show I’ve been watching since it debuted is the ABC fantasy “Once Upon a Time.” Here, an evil queen has banished every storybook character known to man to our world — and to the town of Storybrooke, Maine. Only a few people know what happened, including Emma Swan (Jennifer Morrison, late of “House”), Rumplestiltskin/Mr. Gold (Robert Carlyle, perhaps this show’s “breakout star”), Storybrooke’s mayor Regina (Lana Parilla), who is none other than the evil queen herself, and Regina’s adopted son, Henry (Jared Gilmore) — Emma’s natural child, given up for adoption at birth — who has a storybook that gives enigmatic hints as to who these people really are. But Emma doesn’t wholly believe, partly because the people Henry says are her parents are the same age she is, and partly because she wasn’t raised in Storybrooke at all — she was found along the side of a road.
The pluses to “Once” are that there’s some really great acting — particularly by Carlyle as Mr. Gold, who keeps everyone guessing as to whether he’s a good guy, a bad guy, or simply in it for himself — and some interesting storytelling. The minuses mostly have to do with the fact that the storytelling is not linear; episodes jump back and forth in time, and we get hints weeks before things actually happen in our “real” world that something is drastically wrong with whatever character is featured this week.
But this seeming weakness has been turned into a strength, mostly because of how Carlyle lights up the screen as the amoral “Mr. Gold.” Due to his uncertain loyalties, viewers get to see him nearly every week; he’s a constant source of mischief, humor, and oddly enough, genuine pathos. Very few actors would be able to do what Carlyle is doing, and I seriously hope when the next time the Emmys come around, he gets serious consideration as best supporting actor.
Other than that, I’m mostly awaiting the second season of “Game of Thrones,” same as most SF fans. (Isn’t everyone?)
Barb Caffrey's Blog 