Where have you gone, hefty PB cups?

In the 1942 movie “Kings Row,” a newly legless Ronald Reagan famously asks, "Where's the rest of me?" That was sort of the feeling I had today when I bought a two-pack of the Reese's dark chocolate peanut butter cups. The package was so light that I thought they might have to tie the candy bars to the rack so a light breeze doesn't blow them away. Folks of my generation have memories, which we're only too glad to share, about the days when a kid could take a dime into a store and come out with a Hershey bar and a Coke. And in those days, a Reese's peanut butter cup was a good-sized piece of candy. Maybe I'm overdoing it a bit, but it seems like a single Reese's cup from my youth weighed more than the two in the pack I bought today. Food producers are a pretty tricky bunch. We all remember how the coffee cans started shrinking so we paid the same price for less coffee. It's been the same deal with ice cream containers. And I even noticed that a package of hash browns, which used to weigh 2 pounds, now comes in at around 34.5 ounces. On the good side of food news, we are now able to buy "throwback" Pepsi and Mountain Dew, which means they are produced with real sugar rather than the corn syrup that has been used, as far as I can recall, since the 1980s. The difference in taste is remarkable. The bad news is that Pepsi says the "throwback" versions – also known as “Mexican,” because sodas in that country still are produced with real sugar – will be available for a "limited time only." Let's see if I have this right. Pepsi puts out a product that is clearly preferable to the one that had been available, and then plans to take it back off the market. In other words, they're screwing with us. It's like McDonald's and the McRib sandwich. I rarely eat at McDonald's, but I will stop by if I see that the McRib is making one of its occasional "limited-time-only" appearances. And then, just as quickly as the McRib reappears, it is gone again. Why do they do this?

Height of irresponsibility

There was sad news out of Spain this week. Two children were orphaned at the age of 3, and the biggest shame is that it wouldn’t have happened if anyone involved had shown a shred of responsibility. Maria del Carmen Bousada died Saturday at the age of 69. You’re probably never heard of her. I hadn’t. What made her death newsworthy was that three years ago, Bousada, with the help of a fertility clinic in Los Angeles (Where else?), gave birth to twins. First, one would expect a woman in her mid-60s who was thinking about undergoing in vitro fertilization to have had enough sense to say no. But the Earth is chock full of stupid, self-centered people. At that point, it should have been up to the fertility clinic to display some ethical standards and employ some safeguards against this sort of thing happening. But Bousada said she told Pacific Fertility Center that she was 55, which apparently was the clinic’s maximum age for treating single women. And she said the clinic never asked for identification. You can see Bousada’s photo here. Ray Charles could have recognized that she was over 55 just by feeling her face. But this really shouldn’t surprise us. Look at the Octomom, a clearly deranged woman who was able to find professional help to increase her brood by eight. And will anyone among us be shocked when it comes out that Michael Jackson’s home was a virtual pharmacy, stocked with the help of doctors only too glad to look the other way? It seems the almighty dollar speaks very loudly, easily drowning out the ancient voice of Hippocrates. The central question in Bousada’s case might be, why did she do it? And the answer is: because she wanted to. “I think everyone should become a mother at the right time for them,” the woman said in a 2007 interview. “That was the only way to achieve the thing I had always dreamed of, and I did it.” I, I, I. It was all about her, of course. Now she’s dead, and the children will have little or no recollection of their mother. What about the father? Well, good luck throwing catch in the backyard with a test tube.

Overkill

Did you ever say something critical about someone who had just died, and another person told you that you should be more respectful because the person "wasn't even in the ground yet"? Well, now that Michael Jackson is presumably in the ground or headed there very shortly (unless his head is being frozen somewhere, a la Ted Williams), I'd like to say that the amount of attention paid to his death by the media was beyond ridiculous. I do understand that he "did Thriller" and was a music icon. But the level of fawning and hyperbole at Jackson's memorial service boggled the mind. Magic Johnson, who has never been the sharpest tool in the shed, said that watching Michael Jackson made him a better basketball player. Huh? And then there was this from the Rev. Al Sharpton: "Those young kids grew up from being teenage, comfortable fans of Michael’s to being 40 years old and being comfortable to vote for a person of color to be president of the United States. Michael did that. Michael made us love each other." Now, Sharpton is an idiot of epic proportion, and he and the truth have not always been on the best of terms, but really? A co-worker heard someone else say - and they weren't kidding - that Jackson was "the greatest figure of love and peace in the history of the world." Sorry, Jesus. You're No. 2 now. But I saved the best for last, and it's once again from Sharpton, who told Jackson's three children that "your daddy wasn't strange." OK, I have to call "shenanigans" on that one. What we had with Jackson was one of THE strangest people to inhabit the Earth during my lifetime. We can debate all day whether he was a child molester. But it's pretty clear that he was a druggie who probably took so much "legal" dope that he killed himself. He also was a guy who was once good-looking and black, and at the end of his life, he was a circus freak who made Clay Aiken look like 50 Cent. And while I give the guy his props as a onetime "King of Pop," those days were long gone. Jackson hadn't been a major player on the music scene for close to 20 years, during which time he became a public joke. Some called him the greatest and most influential artist in the history of popular music, but wouldn't you think the greatest artist ever would have continued to be productive and relevant past the age of 35? And there are plenty of other people - Lennon and McCartney, Buddy Holly, Kurt Cobain, Chuck Berry, Little Richard and Brian Wilson, to name a few - who were every bit as influential. It's sad that Michael Jackson is dead, and that his life since the mid-90s had been a downward spiral. But there's really no one to blame for that but Michael Jackson, and maybe those who raised him and enabled him. Just a sad story with a final act that was way too loud and long.

Stupid, stupid, stupid

I'm guessing that I'm not the only one who has noticed that some crazy, imbecilic stuff goes down in the state of California. Here's the latest: Two elementary schools in Chino had class schedules on Fridays during the past school year that were five to 10 minutes short of what is required under state law. School administrators, afraid they would lose $7 million in attendance funds, had to come up with a plan to make up for the time lost on those 34 short days. Their solution: Spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to reopen the schools this summer and require students to spend 34 more days in classes. Said Amy Nguyen-Hernandez, principal of one of the elementary schools, "We try to be rule followers here, so we'll try to do whatever needs to be done." What needs to be done is for somebody to go to the common sense store and buy some for these idiots. I did a little math (not one of my strong points) and determined that, based on each of the original days in question being, on average, 7.5 minutes short, the youngsters in the two elementary schools missed a total of 4 hours and 15 minutes of required schooling. A person with any grasp on reality would see that the obvious solution (aside from just forgetting about it, for gawd's sake) is to have the kids come in for another half day of classes, feed them lunch and send them on their way. But it seems that didn't occur to anyone in La-La Land. Their solution has proven to be an exercise in futility. One of the schools has a student population of 280, but just 40 to 60 are showing up for the make-up classes. The reason: Final report cards were issued June 7, so there's no way to enforce attendance. Also, the kids aren't exactly digging deeply into their textbooks. One kid told the AP that her class spent a whole week crafting paper airplanes in a study of aerodynamics. And now, state school officials, because of the lack of real classwork and the paltry attendance, are saying that the make-up days might not even count. But there is a lesson here for the kids: Whatever you do, don't grow up to be as stupid as the adults involved in this mess.

Orange you glad they're not doing this here?

Sometimes our government officials go a bit too far in trying to micromanage the protection of the populace. The crackdown on cigarettes is one example. Who doesn't know that sucking hot, chemical-laden smoke into your lungs is bad for you? Do we really need larger warnings on cigarette packs? But there's a town in central Pennsylvania that is really going overboard. At two busy intersections, the borough of Lemoyne has installed bins filled with bright orange flags, according to the AP and The Patriot-News of Harrisburg. Pedestrians are instructed to pick up a flag and carry it with them as they cross the street. There is no indication as to whether they should wave it vigorously as they do so, but Councilman John Judson says it's a way to make pedestrians stand out and to remind motorists that those on foot have the right of way. Police officers will make sure the supply of flags is maintained, presumably so interest in the program doesn't, um, flag. The effort reminds me of the time W&J wanted to close a city street to vehicular traffic because its sheep - I mean, students - seem to have difficulty getting from Point A to Point B without wandering out in front of passing cars. Wouldn't it be simpler, and cheaper, if everybody's Mom just issued them a reminder to look both ways before crossing?

Why not waterboard them?

A bunch of seniors at a high school in eastern Pennsylvania were suspended for five days by the school district. Were they smoking dope on school grounds? Brawling, maybe? Peeking through a hole into the girls' locker room? No. They climbed over an outer wall at Southern Lehigh High School and camped overnight in an enclosed courtyard. Yeah, they camped out. An Associated Press story gives no indication that the 17 kids caused any trouble. As best as I can tell, there was no drinking, no property damage. But the district saw fit to bar them from a week of classes, and three of the students involved in the harmless prank were stripped of their membership in the National Honor Society. Well, of course we can't have scofflaw campers in the NHS. The next thing you know, these kids might play their car radios too loud. And the next step is anarchy. The district also suspended two students who had the audacity to e-mail The Morning Call newspaper in Allentown to complain about the punishment. The district later thought better of its attempt to trample the two students' free-speech rights, and those suspensions were rescinded. Students were planning a protest outside the school following Friday classes, and I don't blame them. Our entire society seems to be losing what remains of our collective sense of humor and sense of proportion. This is like the district that suspended a grade-schooler for bringing nail clippers to school. In the old days, a janitor would have found the kids camping and told them to clean up their stuff and move on. But, sadly, those days - the ones when people in positions of authority had a little basic common sense - seem to be behind us.

When words kill

When people get riled up about something to the point of obsession, common sense and responsibility are often two of the early casualties. And when the level of their rhetoric escalates, the effects can be deadly. We've seen evidence of that in several recent cases. For years, protesters labeled abortion provider George Tiller as a murderer, despite the fact that his actions were lawful. A clearly mentally ill man who heard that message over and over and over again took matters into his own hands last weekend and allegedly gunned down Tiller in the doctor's church. Just this week, a Muslim convert named Abdulhakim Muhammed opened fire in Little Rock, killing a military recruiter. Authorities say he targeted soldiers "because of what they had done to Muslims in the past." A few weeks back, Richard Poplawski, who apparently believed the lunatics who claim the government is coming to take Americans' guns, killed three Pittsburgh police officers. Who bears the blame for these actions? Responsible abortion opponents didn't want Tiller murdered. The average Muslim would not support the random killing of innocent American soldiers. Reasonable gun-rights advocates don't support militia movements or the slayings of police officers. And yet, they are all to blame, in some measure. Why do we not hear the responsible abortion foes loudly denouncing the psychos at the fringes of their movement? Don't peace-loving Muslims have a duty to point out the hypocrisy and hatred of their brethren who believe in death to America and call for the murders of anyone guilty of the slightest insult against Islam? And why doesn't the NRA say, strongly and clearly, to the gun nuts, "Listen, we're going to fight to preserve your gun-ownership rights, but nobody is coming to take your rifles, shotguns and handguns"? Abortion opponents might claim that harsh rhetoric is justified because they're trying to save babies from being murdered, and gun-rights proponents might truly believe that they are fighting for the very survival of the Second Amendment, but would these groups also accept that radical Muslims might have some legitimacy when they say their people are dying because of U.S. actions in the Middle East? Probably not. But what they must realize is that words are powerful. And everyone, no matter their beliefs, bears responsibility when their words cause the most unhinged among their flocks to see murder as an acceptable, or even mandatory, course of action.

Why? 'Cause Bracken says so

Think for a moment or two what you would do if you had $500,000 to spend on tourism promotion in Washington County. Did buying fake grass for a minor-league baseball team's sloppy field pop into your head? Probably not. But that's exactly what the Washington County Tourism Promotion Agency did on Thursday. Its members voted, 8-3, to plunk down half a million dollars in hotel tax proceeds over the next decade in order to finance the installation of artificial turf at Consol Energy Park, home of the Washington Wild Things. Another $500,000 for the project will come from your state tax dollars. There's no debating that the Wild Things are a major draw, second only to the Meadows in terms of attracting visitors to the county. And no one really debates the fact that the current grass field has significant drainage problems and should be replaced. The objections from those who opposed the tourism spending centered mainly on the use of that particular funding source and the way in which the proposal was handled. Observer-Reporter publisher Tom Northrop, who cast one of the dissenting votes, believed it would have been better to use the local share of slots proceeds from The Meadows casino. But the artificial turf project was not among those forwarded by the county commissioners for slots funding. And the reason is becoming clear. Why use the slots money, and possibly raise the ire of local communities vying for that funding, when you can just strong-arm the tourism panel into coughing up the cash? Northrop was told by county Commissioner Bracken Burns, who was pushing the Wild Things project, "We're the ones who gave you the hotel tax money, and we can take it away, too." If that's not a threat, I don't know what is. I'm pretty sure if you look up the word "arrogant" in the dictionary, you'll find a picture of Burns. But the attempted bullying didn't stop there. Jeff Kotula, the executive director of Washington County Chamber of Commerce, who just happens to be chairman of the commissioner-appointed panel that decided on the use of slots money, allegedly called tourism panel member Jamie Johns of The Meadows to "remind" her that the commissioners appointed her to the board. Supposedly, all the newer members of the board got these "friendly reminders." And there's more. A state-level official also got into the high-pressure act, and some board members were told that if they didn't vote the "right way," they could easily be replaced because they serve at the pleasure of the commissioners. One of the affirmative votes for the $500,000 outlay came from board member Bob Gregg, perhaps better known as the WJPA play-by-play announcer for Wild Things games. Gregg might not get paid by the Wild Things or Ballpark Scholarships Inc., which owns the park and is the entity getting the money, but the average third-grader could spot the conflict of interest in his vote. At least the tourism board representatives from the Wild Things and Cal U., which plays games on the field, had the good sense to abstain. One might also complain that the reason artificial turf is needed at this juncture is that the field was not constructed properly in the first place. Now they want public money to bail them out. As I said earlier, no one is denying that the Wild Things are an asset for the community, and no one is claiming that new turf is not needed. But should $1 million in tax money be used for this? It brought to mind the time when we citizens said we didn't want our state tax money to be used to build stadiums in Pittsburgh, and our so-called "leaders" in Harrisburg stuffed it down our throats anyway. It also makes one wonder why the county even has a tourism promotion panel. Why don't Burns and his equally shameless cronies just make the decisions themselves, in a back room somewhere, and eliminate this charade.

Why are they anonymous?

Washington police have arrested three 15-year-old boys and sent them to an Ohio juvenile facility on charges that they torched the former Salisbury Auto Body on Donnan Avenue? Who are these kids? Damned if I know. The identities of juveniles who are accused of criminal activity are typically shielded from public view by police and the courts. That might be fine for a shoplifter or a kid who smacks another teen in a street fight. But when a teenager is accused of setting a blaze that destroyed one building, threatened other people's homes and put the lives of firefighters and police officers at risk, the community deserves to know their names. What if they are released into the custody of their parents until their proceedings in juvenile court? Wouldn't it be good for people who live near these three to know that they're accused of this serious crime?

Bull@#*& alert!

Nobody every accused the NRA of being a thoughtful, deliberative, common-sense organization. Rigid, reactionary and retarded are three words that quickly spring to my mind. Offer up any gun-control proposal, no matter how mild or well-intentioned, and to the NRA, it's the first slippery step toward armed members of Barack Obama's national service corps bursting through people's doors to seize their squirrel rifles. I'm against most gun controls. Rather, I favor stiff penalties and enforcement against people who use them to commit crimes. But the NRA can be so laughable. Case in point: Pittsburgh city government enacted a law requiring gun owners to make a report when they lose a weapon or have one stolen. Now, the law was ill-conceived from the get-go, and it's totally unenforceable, because there's really no way to prove that someone knew one of their weapons had gone missing. But leave it to the NRA to employ maximum overkill. The organization has, of course, sued Pittsburgh City Council and the mayor in a bid to overturn the measure. The suit argues, probably correctly, that the city is overstepping its bounds when it gets into the area of regulating weapons. But the NRA then makes the asinine claim that the law "severely restricts and/or infringes" on citizens' constitutional right to keep firearms in their homes. What? I'm sure they would try to make some twisted argument about how this infringement supposedly occurs, but "severely"? That's just ludicrous. I'm going to say this one more time, though I'm not counting on getting through the thick skulls of people who believe otherwise: No one from the government is coming to your house to take your handguns and rifles. Not today. Not tomorrow. Not next month. Not next year. Never. Ever. Ever. But just keep paying those dues to the NRA so its well-paid leaders, lawyers and lobbyists can keep acting like horse's asses on your behalf.

MLK rolling in his grave?

If you were the children of a famous, widely beloved person, and a group wanted to raise $120 million to build a memorial in their honor, how would you react? I don't know about you, but I'd be greatly honored and would ask how I could help. But the children of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. had a different reaction. They wanted money, and lots of it, in order to allow the use of their father's words and image. The cost of a proposed King monument, which is to be constructed on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., is being financed almost entirely by donations that, so far, have added up to about $104 million. That includes $10 million in taxpayers' money. And the tribute payment to the King family: $800,000. I think that's disgusting, and so does Cambridge University historian David Garrow, winner of a Pulitzer Prize for his biography of King. "I don't think the Jefferson family, the Lincoln family ... I don't think any other group of family ancestors has been paid a licensing fee for a memorial in Washington," Garrow told the AP. "One would think any family would be so thrilled to have their forefather celebrated and memorialized in D.C. that it would never dawn on them to ask for a penny." Clearly, Garrow hasn't spent much time around the King children. They've become a running joke over the years, squabbling among themselves, hiring locksmiths to keep one another out of the King Center in Atlanta and suing one another over the money they've accumulated by feasting on their father's good name. A few years back, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution ran a series of articles about the King Center finances, reporting that even though the center was in need of repairs, cut back its civil rights programming and spent more money than it took in most years, MLK son Dexter King was paid a salary of $180,000, and his brother, Martin III, took in $150,000. That doesn't count millions the center gave to a for-profit company run by Dexter King, according to the paper. It's all an unseemly mess, made worse by the appearance that the King children are willing to do anything for the almighty dollar. I hesitate to suggest this, mainly out of fear that they'll act on it, but I wonder how much the King kids would charge to have a set of Golden Arches erected over their parent's graves? It's all about the Benjamins, right?

Grab some pitchforks and torches

If anyone wants to have another tea party, boy do I have a great target: the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board. That Pennsylvania's wine and liquor stores should have been privatized years ago is obvious. But the evidence keeps mounting that the politically protected PLCB is the gang that can't shoot straight, and it's costing you and me a boatload of money. The Post-Gazette had a great story the other day by Steve Twedt that outlined the latest shenanigans at the agency. The centerpiece of the story was that the PLCB, despite the protestations of Gov. Ed Rendell, is thinking about changing the name of its Wine and Spirits stores. It may not be necessary, but I'll point out here that the PLCB has a virtual monopoly on wine and liquor sales in Pennsylvania and really doesn't need to "sell itself" to customers. Also, it seems as if calling the retail locations "Wine and Spirits" stores is pretty darned descriptive. The P-G reports that last week, PLCB chief executive Joe Conti called the possible name change just a small part of a move to "rebrand" state stores under a $3.7 million consulting contract with a San Francisco firm. Conti, who got his job in a purely political move by Rendell that forced out board Chairman Jonathan Newman (no relation), the only person at the PLCB who seemed to have any idea what he was doing, refused to offer up any potential names for the stores, but sources within the PLCB told Twedt that one name had been under serious consideration until it was leaked and criticized. Actually, I'm guessing the name was mocked. Any guess as to what it was? Never mind. You couldn't possibly guess, because you're not mentally retarded. The proposed name was ... drum roll, please ... "Table Leaf." Sadly, I'm not joking. It was "Table Leaf." As I recall, a table leaf was something my grandmother put in the middle of her dining room table to expand its size for Thanksgiving dinner. What it has to do with selling wine and booze is anybody's guess. The stupidity over the renaming of the liquor stores follows closely behind the revelation that the PLCB was spending just short of $175,000 to hire a company to train workers on how to play nice with customers. The contract, which went to a company whose president is married to a PLCB regional manager, led to a manual for agency trainers that, according to the P-G, offered the following nuggets of genius in the way of objectives: "To gain knowledge of self, others and develop techniques to utilize during facilitation"; "to enable trainers to use various skills and techniques designed to enhance effective communication and transfer of knowledge"; and "to practice and apply adult facilitation skills." In other words, you give us about $175,000, and we'll tell you how to tell your employees how to talk to customers. Brilliant. And Conti tells the P-G that even if no name change comes to pass, the PLCB is about ready to launch a really sweet Web site and is focusing on such areas as store shelving, layouts and category management. Does anyone else think this sounds a lot like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic? Enough is enough. We, the people, should demand an end to this anti-consumer joke of a government agency.

Mum's the word

Would you like to know what members of the Washington County Authority board really think about the plan to build an upscale Wal-Mart at Southpointe II? Good luck with that. Wednesday night, members of the politically appointed panel did their best impressions of attendees at a convention of deaf-mutes. Asked to approve a property sale needed to clear the way for the Wal-Mart project, the members of the authority board – Bill Burt, John Rheel, Scott Frederick, Suzanne Ewing, Lawrence Miller and Dennis Dutton - didn't utter a peep when board chairman Alan Veliky asked twice for a motion on the matter. If they wanted to vote against the plan, that's fine. But these people didn't have the guts to even put the matter up for a vote or to take a public stand one way or the other. We could assume, I guess, that they all bowed to pressure from project opponents, or maybe from the politicians who appointed them to the board. Rod Piatt, president of developer Horizon Properties, said the authority never had the right to "pick and choose" what businesses locate in Southpointe II, but the panel essentially did just that by refusing to act on the property deal. Mike Swisher, a principal with Horizon Properties, said $200 million worth of construction and 3,000 jobs were at stake. Chris West of Cullinan Properties said the apparent demise of the Wal-Mart store will have a negative trickle-down effect. "We don't have the critical mass. It's going to kill our (movie) theater deal and other associated restaurants that were going to come along with it," he said. So now, the developers are back to square one, and in the current economic climate, most other major retailers are not expanding to new sites. The opponents can talk all they want about things such as traffic concerns. I think the real reason this project drew so much opposition is that the snooty suburbanites in that area were deathly afraid that a Wal-Mart might attract "the wrong kind of people." You can bet there would have been a lot less discontent if a Macy's had been slated for the site.

Striking out at some easy targets

New Jersey has become the first state in the nation to require drivers 21 and younger to put a decal on their cars noting that a young driver is behind the wheel. Will that improve highway safety? Probably not one lick. Pam Fischer of the New Jersey Division of Highway Safety says the move will help police to determine whether young people are complying with other elements of the new law, which include a rollback of the driving curfew from midnight to 11 p.m. and banning teens from having more than one other young person in their cars. Also, the state is considering decals that would attach with Velcro so they could be removed when an older person is driving the vehicle. Is it just me, or do you think a young person who is violating one or more of the new restrictions just might pull off the decal? And if you have four teens who are going on a double date, and can no longer travel in one car, you're now putting two teenage drivers on the road instead of one. Is that a positive? And what is the state of New Jersey doing about dangerous drivers at the other end of the age spectrum? Not a damn thing. We just had more evidence of the dangers posed by elderly drivers last week, when a retired priest mowed down people outside a Pittsburgh-area church, killing one of them. His explanation? The accelerator pedal had a mind of its own. Isn't it funny that gas pedals seem to stick only on elderly people's cars? But our government leaders will continue to ignore this threat because old people vote. For the most part, kids don't, so they get the shaft.

This is not too much to ask

A proposal under consideration by the Georgia legislature would demand that new drivers take a written license test in English. Does anyone see a problem with this? Of course they do. According to an AP story, some employers and immigrant advocates fear it would keep people unfamiliar with the English language from being able to work. Well, boo hoo. If someone wants to drive in this country, they should be able to read signs that are printed, primarily, in English. I'd prefer to share the road with folks who understand such instructions and warnings as "Dangerous Curve Ahead," "Men Working" and "Children Playing." If I moved to Brazil, I wouldn't expect to be granted a driver's license until I knew enough Portuguese to understand roadside instructions. People who move here should have the same expectations.

They're at it again

Spring is a time of crocuses and robins. It's the time when a young man’s fancy is said to lightly turn to thoughts of love or, if you're my age, baseball. It's also the time when some formerly hibernating senior citizens who have no business driving get back on the road and create a menace to all of us. There were two examples of this over the weekend in the Pittsburgh area (just imagine how many occurred nationwide). A contributor to the O-R daily poll noted that on Saturday, an older driver slammed his car into a house in Penn Hills, damaging the home and rupturing a gas line. Then, on Sunday, we saw just how deadly some of these over-the-hill drivers can be. An 82-year-old woman ran over and killed an 80-year-old man who was standing in the parking lot of the DeLallo Italian Marketplace in Hempfield, Westmoreland County. The woman, who was backing up her car to leave the lot, told police she saw the man in her rear-view mirror and initially hit the brakes, but then put her foot back on the gas when she could no longer see him. In short order, the old guy was dead. And we're not talking about someone briefly hitting the accelerator, backing up a few feet and striking a pedestrian. The elderly lady must've really jammed on the gas pedal, because police say she plowed over three concrete planters before taking out the poles holding up an entranceway awning at the business. Sometime during the demolition derby, the old man was trapped under her car. My question is this: How many times does this kind of thing have to happen before those with the power to do something (your state legislators) require that drivers over a certain age must be subjected to new physicals and driving tests? As it stands now, only a couple of states require that the elderly pass new road tests to renew a license. In most states, senior citizens of any age can renew their licenses just by cutting a check and sending in a form. No questions asked. We hear people make the excuse that young drivers are dangerous, too, but that's a red herring. Young drivers, provided they survive those dangerous early years behind the wheel, will go on, on average, to become better drivers. For many elderly drivers, it's a one-way trip toward becoming a hazard to themselves and others who have the misfortune to share the roads with them. A USA Today story from 2007 cites a Carnegie Mellon University study that found the fatality rate for drivers aged 75 to 84 was equal to the rate of teens, but drivers 85 and older had a fatality rate four times that level. The story also cited a prediction by road-safety analysts who say that by 2030, when all of the baby boomers are at least 64 years old, they will account for a full quarter of all fatal crashes. That figure was 11 percent in 2005. The threat is clear. When is somebody going to do something about it? I know our state lawmakers are generally the worst kind of cowards when it comes to offending constituents (especially those who vote in large numbers), but enough is enough.

A man of peace dissed by peace conference

There aren't too many greater symbols of peace in our world than the Dalai Lama, but he's not welcome at this week's international peace conference in Johannesburg, South Africa. The conference has been called to highlight the 2010 World Cup soccer tournament, which is to be hosted by South Africa. Its aim is to gather Nobel peace laureates such as the Dalai Lama, as well as Hollywood celebrities and others for a discussion of issues including racism and how sports can serve to bring people together. Retired Cape Town Archbishop Desmond Tutu and former South African presidents F.W. de Klerk and Nelson Mandela, acting on behalf of South African soccer officials who organized the event, invited the Dalai Lama to take part. It sure seems like a perfect fit. But wait. The South African government stepped in and rescinded the invitation. Thabo Masebe, speaking for President Kgalema Motlanthe, said the Tibetan spiritual leader isn't welcome because South Africa wants to avoid being "the source of negative publicity about China." Well, of course. What sort of peace conference would it be if they somehow offended the murderous regime in Beijing? I'm sure it's just a coincidence that South Africa is China's largest trading partner on the African continent. Tutu and members of the Nobel Committee are, correctly, backing out of the conference. But the Dalai Lama hasn't been banned from South Africa for life. In fact, Masebe told the Associated Press that the Tibetan leader has been welcomed twice before in South Africa and will be invited again in the future - just not now, "when the whole world is looking at South Africa." Sure, maybe they can spirit him in sometime under cover of darkness and get him out again before daybreak. Masebe is right about one thing. The whole world is looking at South Africa, and it's disgusted by what it's seeing.

GOP sure doesn't stand for Gay Old Party

Ask most people, and they'll tell you that everyone in our communities, our state and our country deserve to be treated with equality. So you might think it would be a slam-dunk when some of our state lawmakers put forward legislation to make a form of discrimination unlawful. You'd be wrong. You forgot about the Republicans in our Legislature. The State Government Committee of the Pennsylvania House approved a measure Wednesday that would extend anti-discrimination protections to include sexual orientation, particularly in the areas of housing, employment, credit and public accommodations. The shame of this is that the bill passed on only a 12-11 vote. All 12 Democrats on the panel voted in favor of treating people equally. All 11 Republican members voted to continue casting a blind eye toward discrimination. Supporters of the legislation say it has widespread support across the state, but the opponents fear it will infringe on the religious beliefs of others. Of course, we wouldn't want to infringe on anyone's right to treat someone else as a second-class citizen, based solely on the sexual orientation they were born with. But what kind of religion would favor discrimination against people who are different from what they perceive as the norm? Oh, I forgot. That would be most of them. It's sad that we're still living in a country where a significant segment of the population holds such feelings. In my book (not the Bible, thankfully), churches that preach this kind of hatred and discrimination are no better than the Ku Klux Klan. The good news is that among the younger generations, those feelings are much less prevalent. The old haters will eventually die off. Good riddance.

Eat at your own risk

In the wake of the peanut-related salmonella outbreak, a new Associated Press investigation finds that the federal government has been cutting back on food-safety inspections and leaving that work to the states. Just a few problems with that. The AP found that the state inspectors are overburdened, lacking in training and do shoddier work than the feds. This means you and I have a greater chance of getting sick from what we eat. In the case of the Peanut Corp. of America plant in Georgia, the AP found that a state inspection last fall turned up only a couple of minor violations. However, when the feds became concerned about a link between the plant and the recent salmonella outbreak, their own, more stringent examination found roaches, mold, a leaky roof and other sanitation failures. Just in recent memory, we’ve had major outbreaks of food-borne illnesses linked to tomatoes, bad beef, green onions and now peanuts. I’m sure there are more. Those are just the ones that come to mind. My guess is that no matter how much money we throw at the problem, these things are going to occur from time to time. Our food chain is just too unwieldy. Even if we could get a handle on the food-safety issues within our own borders, we get fruit from Chile, beef from Uruguay, fish from Vietnam, etc. It makes you want to go pick some berries off a bush in the backyard.

Safety first, fellas

American Airlines is caught up in litigation over an incident in 2007 in which the pilot of a flight from San Diego to Chicago decided not to take off, and instead taxied back to the gate, because of alleged suspicious behavior by five men of Iraqi descent who were on the plane. The men, of course, hired a lawyer and sued the airline, claiming they were the victims of discrimination. The airline says the way the men acted, not their nationality, was behind the captain’s decision. The five men had raised concerns among fellow passengers and flight attendants through behavior that included one man putting a blanket over his head, another taking off his shoes, another departing for the restroom and a fourth man glaring at a crew member during safety instructions. The pilot put all those concerns together and decided it was best not to take off. Police interviewed the Iraqi men, and everyone, including the Iraqis, left the next day on another flight. The Iraqi men’s lawyer, Lawrence Garcia, says his clients just wanted to be “treated like everyone else on the plane.” He added, “One took off his shoes. One went to the bathroom, and one put a blanket on his head … If a white or African-American person had done that on a plane, it would have aroused no suspicion.” Maybe Mr. Garcia has forgotten that on 9/11, it was people from the Middle East who hijacked four planes and killed thousands of Americans. And maybe Mr. Garcia has forgotten about the guy who was trying to blow up an airline with a SHOE BOMB. There are still plenty of Arab-looking people who would be tickled to death to do great harm to America and its people. I’m not for strip-searching every Arab-looking person before they get on a plane, but is it wrong to take a little extra caution when Middle Eastern-looking people start behaving strangely on a plane? A decision is pending on the airline’s attempt to have the lawsuit thrown out. Let’s hope the judge has the good sense to do so, and that the next time this particular group of Iraqi men decides to take a trip, they have the good sense not to act goofy and draw attention to themselves.

This is just wrong

When I see couples who, through the use of fertility drugs, have six or seven children in one fell swoop, my first thought is generally, “Damn, if that were me, I’d be looking for a rope and a strong beam in the basement.” But, hey, if those couples have the patience and resources to handle it, more power to them. However, the recent story about the woman in Southern California who gave birth to octuplets provoked an entirely different emotion in me: anger. It turns out that Nadya Suleman, who already had six children through in vitro fertilization, had some “leftover” embryos implanted in her womb last year and delivered the octuplets a week ago. The initial “wow factor” of the births quickly wore off when details about Suleman emerged. Her own mother painted a picture of someone who is a little unhinged, noting that her daughter is not married and has been obsessed with having kids since her teenage years. Angela Suleman is taking care of her daughter’s six older children for now, but she says she’s bailing out when her daughter gets out of the hospital. Nadya Suleman is 33 years old and has no visible means of support, as best as I can tell. I heard that medical treatment for the octuplets will run upwards of $1 million. Wonder who’s paying for that? Also, one of her previous children is autistic. Does a person who has a special-needs child who requires lots of attention really need eight more kids to occupy her time? After reading about this woman, my guess is that she suffers from some variety of mental illness. An acquaintance said Suleman told her that she was being paid for going through the in vitro treatments that produced her first six children. Gee, no ethical concerns there. And what sort of medical people would implant more embryos in this woman, given her background and a grip on reality that clearly is tenuous? These doctors and/or technicians are borderline criminals. Two investigations are in order: one to determine whether Suleman’s children are being properly cared for and another to decide whether someone should lose his or her medical license over this mess.

Cranky old man alert

For people 30 and younger, today’s reaction to our “winter weather event” probably seemed normal. It snowed an inch, so schools across the area either had a two-hour delay, or more typically, canceled classes. For people my age (old), it’s a joke. We remember the days when 3 or 4 inches of snow wasn’t even a blip on the radar when it came to having school. We had it, and we never thought our lives were being endangered. Heck, we live in Western Pennsylvania, and it snows in the winter. Back in the '60s and '70s, when I was going to school, it seemed to snow a lot more, and if school was canceled then, kids knew there’d be enough of the white stuff to build a snow fort. We actually had someone write a letter to the editor recently complaining that their school district didn’t take action to protect the children when a storm hit. Maybe I’m suffering from short-term memory loss, but I don’t recall a single “weather event” this entire winter that should have required a cancellation, and very few that warranted any sort of delay. The letter writer said that “in the last two years, our kids have been sent out on snow- and ice-covered roads too many times.” Um, dude, grab yourself a map of the United States and check out where you are. There are going to be plenty of snowy days here between November and March. This winter, in particular, we seem to have had a lot of little snows. What are we supposed to do, shut down schools in these troubling weather times and have the kids go to school all summer? And how many hours of instruction are our children losing because of the extensive use (overuse) of two-hour delays? I have some advice for those who want to cower in fear every time we get a dusting of snow: Move to South Florida.

For gawd's sake, just pull over

Anyone who knows me well has heard me bitch repeatedly about people (mainly women, sorry) who insist on jabbering on their cell phones while driving. A Pennsylvania state lawmaker is currently seeking a ban on use of hand-held cell phones behind the wheel, and the National Safety Council went even further, calling for a ban on use of all cell phones – even hands-free models – while driving. I applaud them both, but I doubt either will succeed, because a large segment of Americans seem to be joined at the hip with their cell phones, Blackberries, etc. I also have to take issue with an editorial that appeared over the weekend in the Observer-Reporter that contends the National Safety Council proposal goes too far. The editorial stated that “there’s a difference between making a quick call and chatting for a half-hour with one hand holding a phone and the other hand on the wheel.” No, there isn’t. It only takes a split-second of paying attention to getting someone on the phone, instead of the road ahead, for a deadly accident to take place. The editorial also said that “if a phone conversation takes your attention away from the road, so also does talking with a passenger.” That statement ignores studies that have found talking on a cell phone, whether hand-held or hands-free, results in a much greater deficit of attention than talking with someone in the seat next to you, who also happens to be able to help the driver notice travel hazards they might encounter. Some say that a cell-phone ban amounts to a furtherance of the “nanny state” approach, in which government tries to protect us from all dangers, whether we want them to or not. But I have to ask those who favor a laissez-faire approach: Do you also want to allow people to be drunk behind the wheel and drive as fast as they desire? Cell phone use by drivers is a significant threat to you and me. A state police report from 2007 found that hand-held cell phones were a factor in more than 1,200 accidents across the state. Even if we pass on the ban on hands-free phones, if for no other reason than it would be nearly impossible to enforce, we should do the right thing and make it a crime to use a hand-held phone behind the wheel. The bottom line is this: Is it really asking too much for someone to pull over if they have a call they absolutely must make while traveling? Or is it really that you just want to chat with your gal pal? I’ve lived 50 years without a cell phone (I hope to never own one), and I’ve managed to struggle by in my daily life. You should try it. Just put the thing down on the ground and stomp the hell out of it. Free yourself!

Does this look like a hardened criminal?

Increasingly, we are seeing educators and parents using police to handle their discipline problems with kids. The latest example comes from Sandpoint, Idaho, where 8-year-old Evelyn Towry, who is autistic, was arrested, handcuffed and hauled off on a battery charge because she got out of hand and combative when teachers refused to allow her to wear a special sweatshirt her mother had made for her to a school assembly. Evelyn was put in a separate classroom, apparently didn’t like that and got into a confrontation with teachers. I understand that educators are afraid to put their hands on children these days for fear of lawsuits, and that’s a legitimate concern, but was it really necessary to arrest an 8-year-old? And it’s not just schools that are taking this extreme and unnecessary approach. It’s not uncommon at the paper for us to hear on the police scanner a call for an officer to come to a home because a parent can’t control his or her young child. The police have real work to do. Supervise your own kids. And, at the risk of being called a child abuser, I’ll state that there are times when I believe a swift swat on the backside can do wonders when it comes to correcting improper behavior.

Oh, say, can you just sing the song?

I've never understood why the "Star Spangled Banner" is played before sporting events in this country, and particularly why it's played pretty much ONLY at sporting events. But if it's going to be performed, is it asking to much for the "singers" to sing it as the music is written, without adding their own "touches" to the song? A good example was the woman, unknown to me, who performed the National Anthem before Thursday night's college football national championship game. Toward the end, she was warbling and wailing to the extent that I found it necessary to check the TV screen to make sure someone hadn’t sneaked up behind her and shoved a red-hot poker up her wazoo. Sadly, her histrionics are becoming the norm, as these so-called singers try to put their own imprint on the grand old song. More often than not these days, the National Anthem is butchered. What do you say we just distribute CDs of the “Star-Spangled Banner” as performed by the late, great opera star Robert Merrill, who used to perform the anthem at Yankee Stadium. He always made Francis Scott Key proud.

Doppler titillation

Fred Honsberger was talking about one of my pet peeves the other day on his KDKA radio show. Fred was ripping the three Pittsburgh TV stations for making mountains out of molehills when it comes to reporting on the weather, especially wintry weather. I couldn't agree with him more. Fred noticed the same thing I did the other night: "Team coverage" of a "winter weather event" that involved TV reporters standing in a light RAIN as temperatures in the area were RISING. These TV stations sound the bread-milk-toilet paper alert every time there's anything more than a snow flurry in the forecast. It seems to me this weather hysteria started in the early 1990s when the local forecasters badly missed the call on a major snowstorm. They called for a little snow. We got a bunch. Ever since then, they always err on the side of predicting more snow than we actually receive. Here's a pretty good rule of thumb. If they call for 6 to 8 inches, expect 2 or 3. If they call for 2 to 4 inches, expect an inch. If they call for an inch, expect a dusting. And if they call for a dusting, get out a microscope. It's winter. We live in Pennsylvania. We fully expect to see some white stuff. My request of the TV weather folks is to quit making every snow shower seem like Armageddon. Yeah, like that'll happen.

No hate cake for you

A couple of goofballs from New Jersey who gave their children hate-based names are miffed that a local supermarket refused to inscribe a birthday cake with the name of their oldest child. You see, these idiots named their boy Adolph Hitler. The folks at the ShopRite store deemed the request inappropriate, so Heath and Deborah Campbell, shown above with the 3-year-old modern-day fuhrer, had to get their cake at Wal-Mart. Hey, they'd just finished doing a Mussolini cake, so what they heck. Just for the record, the Campbells have two other children, Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell (well, that's not so bad), who turns 1 in April, and JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell (ouch, there we go again), who will be 2 in a few months. Heath Campbell professes to be amazed by the controversy. Said the dad, "I think people need to take their heads out of the cloud they've been in and start focusing on the future and not on the past." Uh huh. This from a guy who named his kid after a genocidal dictator who has been DEAD FOR 63 YEARS! Yeah, you have a lot of credibility, buddy. Campbell also noted that among the dozen guests at a birthday party for young Hitler were several children of mixed race. "If we're so racist, then why would I have them come into my home?" he asked. Hey, it's one thing to have "them" in your home for an hour of two, but answer me this: Did you throw out the utensils they used when the party was over? Just wondering. Campbell, who during an interview with the AP wore a pair of black boots he said had been worn by a German soldier during World War II, provided the stunning revelation that he had been raised to avoid mixing socially or romantically with people of other races. But, by golly, he's different. "Say (Adoph) grows up and hangs out with black people. That's fine, I really don't care," said Campbell. "That's his choice." So, if Adolph wants to grab a burger with a black kid from school, his dad won't stand in the way. What a humanitarian. Call the Nobel people. You hate to wish ill on anyone, but my thought after reading the AP story about these idiots was that the best thing that could happen to the three kids in this family would be for the parents to be taken out by a well-placed lightning bolt so that the children could be raised by people who are not world-class jackasses.

Take Grandma's keys, please

WTAE had a story this morning about an elderly woman who was rescued after spending a day in her wrecked car. It appears she hit a tree and drove into the woods. (Actual car NOT shown above) The woman told her rescuers that she had called a family member to come help her, but her family said that wasn't the case. They said the woman suffers from mild dementia. What?!?!?! And they continued to let her drive? I can understand the dynamic involved when children have to switch roles and treat their parents like kids. But there comes a time when failure to take the keys puts not only the elderly person at risk, but everyone who encounters them on the road. Which day is it when Grandpa or Grandma suddenly doesn't know the difference between the pretty green light and the pretty red light, or the brake pedal and the gas pedal? Doctors also need to do more about getting clearly incompetent people off the roads. They have a duty to protect the rest of us and report these people to the proper authorities. I know they don't want to anger a longtime patient, but hey, the rest of us don't want to die because Gramps is a couple sandwiches short of a picnic.

Did they use combines or balers?

It was quite a "harvest" for elk hunters in Pennsylvania this year. At least that's what the Pennsylvania Game Commission reported in a news release this week, saying that 40 of the 45 licensed elk hunters in the state "harvested" one of the animals during elk season earlier this month. I have no problem with hunting, especially when hunters eat what they kill, but does the Game Commission really need to use euphemisms to describe what happened during elk season, as if people won't realize the true nature of the hunt as long as it's referred to as a "harvest"? Sounds all fallish and nice, like jumping into a pile of leaves or carving pumpkins. In addition to use of the word "harvest," the Game Commission spoke of elk being "taken." Are they being held somewhere against their will? Will they be returned? Why not just tell us what really happened. Forty people went out in the woods, found the elk and shot them until they were dead. Now, isn't that better?

You poor, poor baby

There's a lady named Missy Chase Lapine (shown at left) who is involved in litigation claiming that Jerry Seinfeld's wife stole her idea for a kids cookbook, and now she's whining about a joke Seinfeld made about her. Jerry was on David Letterman's show and joked that people with three names - such as James Earl Ray and Mark David Chapman - have turned out to be assassins. In a court filing related to her lawsuit, Lapine expressed how terribly horrified she was by those comments, saying she "never felt so frightened and vulnerable" as when her 7-year-old daughter came home from school and asked "Mom, what is an assassin?" For gawd's sake. First, my BS detector is going off like nobody's business. Second, if you've never felt so frightened and vulnerable before, you've had one hell of an easy life. Third, it's hard to take seriously a grown woman who goes by the name of "Missy." Fourth, just shut up. There were two correct responses to the question purportedly posed by Missy Jr. The first: "Honey, that was just a man making a joke. Don't worry about it." The second: "If you want to know the meaning of the word, look it up in the dictionary. And, if you just look up the first three letters, that's what some people think your mother is."

Somebody needs to go to jail

An investigation is under way after an 8-year-old boy accidentally shot himself to death Sunday with a submachine gun at a gun fair in Massachusetts. The AP reports that Christopher Bizilj shot himself in the head when he lost control of the Uzi 9mm micro machine gun as it recoiled while he was trying to shoot a pumpkin during the Machine Gun Shoot and Firearms Expo at the Westfield Sportsman's Club. Hampden County District Attorney William Bennett is investigating whether firearms laws were violated and whether is was "a reckless or wanton act to allow an 8-year-old to use a fully loaded automatic weapon." Gee, do you think? Said Bennett, "At this point in the investigation, I have found no lawful authority which allows an 8-year-old to possess or fire a machine gun." The boy's father, Charles Bizilj, said Christopher had fired handguns and rifles before, but Sunday was his first experience with an automatic weapon. Supposedly, a certified instructor was with the boy at the time, but clearly he or she didn't provide sufficient instruction and/or supervision. The father said he was about 10 feet away from his son, ready to snap a photo. He's just one of the people who should be facing criminal charges in this case. Reckless endangerment would be the minimum charge, in my opinion. There was no comment on the incident from Edward Fleury, owner of COP Firearms & Training, which co-sponsored the event. A report in The Republican, a newspaper in Springfield, Mass., identified Fleury as the longtime police chief in the town of Pelham, Mass., which took administrative action against Fleury in 2003 after he discharged a loaded rifle while teaching - wait for it - a gun-safety class. The AP said Fleury's company and Westfield Sportsman's Club have held the gun expo since 2002. The Springfield newspaper said Fleury described it in a 2005 interview as a safe environment for people "to see and fire some of the guns that they've seen in the movies, or on the History Channel, or other events that involve firearms." Like maybe an 8-year-old kid blowing his head off?

Let 'em jump

One thing you learn quickly when you scan the Associated Press wires is that stupidity is not in short supply in this country. A recent report out of San Francisco (insert joke here) advised that the board that controls the Golden Gate Bridge has voted to install a stainless steel net underneath the span to keep people from jumping to their deaths. Oh, by the way, it will cost between $40 million and $50 million and, of course, will require an environmental review. Here's my free environmental review: It'll be butt ugly, and some birds are going to fly into it and die. This is just asinine. Officials say that about 20 people commit suicide from the bridge annually. So, because 20 screwed-up individuals want to take their own lives, they're going to spend as much as $50 million on a net? Do they really think people with the intent to kill themselves are suddenly going to choose life because they can't jump off the pretty bridge? I guess it would be better for them to turn on the gas in their oven and potentially cause an explosion and fire that could take their neighbors out with them. Or maybe jump off a tall building and land on innocent people below. If these people want to go bungee-jumping off the bridge without a rubber band, I say let 'em go.

Hey, Verizon man!

As recently as the late 1990s, I was proclaiming to anyone who would listen that I got my fill of computers at work and had no reason to have one in my home. Well, of course, I made a liar of myself, and my Luddite inclinations were overtaken by my yearning for instant information (and, admittedly, a little time spent viewing scantily-clad women). And now, I find it difficult to live without the gratification that only a mouse click can provide. Which brings me to my current problem: On Tuesday, I was passing some time in front of the TV when the power went out. This happens fairly regularly in our rural area, and I decided to sit back and see if it came back on in a few minutes, as it sometimes does. Well, before I became concerned enough to even place a call to Allegheny Power, two of their trucks were at the foot of my driveway. Apparently, one of my neighbors who also was without power wasn't in a wait-and-see mood, most likely because just a couple of weeks ago we were without electricity for nearly 24 hours. I went to work at mid-afternoon, and by the time the missus came home a few hours later, the lights were back on. Just one problem: The phone line, the one that also feeds the computer, was dead. The next morning, I made a couple of checks to determine that the problem was definitely outside my home. I then called Verizon to report my outage. Of course, they would be glad to fix my problem ... on MONDAY! It appears that in the vast comglomeration that is Verizon, they have so few service people that it will take five days to get my service restored. When I call one of the utility companies, they're always Johnny-on-the-spot. Same goes with the folks from DirecTV. Most other companies that have a large element of customer service actually seem to try to serve their customers. The phone company? For all of my various technological needs - or wants - I send them about $250 a month. That includes a super-duper satellite TV package. But do they give a damn about whether I actually HAVE the service I'm paying for? Not so much, in my eyes. I've dealt with many companies over the years, and not one has been as consistently customer-unfriendly as the phone company. Perhaps some of you have some customer-service horror stories you would like to share. I'm sure we'll all be able to relate.

Can someone explain this to me?

We had a brief item in the paper today noting that state driver's license centers will be closed Monday for Columbus Day. While I've given up hope of state-run enterprises actually responding to the needs of the people - The state liquor store on Main Street isn't even open on Monday, but that's a whole other area of disgust for me - why in the world does anyone need to be off on Columbus Day? For one thing, Columbus never set food on the terra firma of North America. Leif Eriksson was here nearly 500 years earlier. Also, Columbus "discovered" absolutely nothing. You can't discover a place where people already have set up shop. I'm guessing it's another case of a union bargaining to get its people an additional paid day off, no matter how inconsequential it may be.

Careful what you wish for

An AP report says the Washington Redskins football team has been ordered by a federal judge to make sure that deaf and hard-of-hearing fans receive "equal access to aural content" in the teams's stadium. That includes music lyrics, advertisements and announcements on the public address system. Judge Alexander Williams noted that since three fans filed suit, the team has captioned such things as play-by-play of the game and emergency information. One would think that would be sufficient, but Williams determined that under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the team must provide "full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations available at FedEx Field." In a statement, the Redskins said, "No one had ever before asked the Redskins to caption music. But now that the court has addressed it, we are exploring alternatives to provide the words to the songs played during cheerleader dance routines." Thank heavens. I would hate to think that deaf people were being deprived of such inalienable rights. This is a case that trivializes the true issues facing the deaf. Why not focus on important concerns for making life better for deaf Americans, rather than demanding that they get to read the lyrics to "Crazy Train" or the text from a "Gatorade" commercial? This would be comparable to black Americans, during the 1960s, targeting the racial inequities of the "Little Rascals" films rather than working to secure voting rights. Pick your spots, deaf people. I've been subjected to the dance-routine music and ads at stadiums. You're not missing anything.

The Dipsticks of the Month Award goes to ...

The folks at the National Federation of the Blind apparently have a lot - a lot - of time on their hands. They just issued a major news release condemning the new movie "Blindness" and announcing their plans to protest "across the nation" when the film opens Friday. In a nutshell, the movie's about a sudden epidemic of blindness that strikes a city. Hence, the name of the film. The newly blind people are quarantined because it's believed the affliction is contagious. Mayhem ensues. A character played by Julianne Moore, however, does not go blind, and the Federation says she is portrayed as "physically, mentally and morally superior to the others because she still has her sight." None of us has seen the film yet, so it's hard for us to argue about the "mentally and morally" part, but if she can see and everyone around her is blind, well, yes, she IS physically superior to them. Sorry about that. Dr. Marc Maurer, president of the Blind Federation, chastises the filmmakers for depicting the blind characters as being "unable to do even the simplest things like dressing, bathing and finding the bathroom." For gawd's sake, Dr. Maurer, the movie isn't portraying people who have been blind for quite some time. These characters are NEWLY blind, and they're understandably hysterical. Of course they're having some problems handling the basics of life. If I were suddenly stricken blind in the middle of a big city, I'd be panicked and lucky to find my a$$ with both hands, but I would adapt, just as your constituents have. In his statement, Maurer rambles on and on about how blind people can do the same things as sighted people, such as work, raise a family, go camping, etc. Yeah, we know that. He also claims that "portraying the blind on movie screens across America as little better than animals will reinforce the unfounded fears, misconceptions and stereotypes in the general public about blindness." No it won't, you dolt. The general public doesn't believe blind people are shambling idiots who should be locked up somewhere. The movie can't exacerbate feelings that don't exist. Perhaps Maurer's most ridiculous claim is that this movie will cause the unemployment rate of blind people to rise. Yeah, I can just hear the personnel directors now: "Hey, don't hire that blind feller. Didn't you see those crazy sightless people in that movie?" Oh, yeah, it's a movie. It's not real. You need to get a grip, Dr. Maurer. My suggestion to you and any other of your people who are worried about the effects of this movie is to have a couple of glasses of red wine. It takes the edge off for me. And, yes, I'm well aware that you can get the cork out yourself.

In the name of all that's holy, set your DVRs!

I've been down with a bad head cold today and watching a lot of college football. I've also been subjected to frequent airings of a promo on WTAE-TV about a "major story" that's coming up on Monday. Sally Wiggin will be talking with Steelers safety Troy Polamalu about ... the fact that he's going to be having a kid. You've got to be joking. If Troy's wife dropped the little bundle of joy in my driveway, I might peek outside to see how things were going. Otherwise, who gives a rat's rectum? It's not like impregnating one's significant other is, in usual circumstances, a major achievement. And even if you have to try and try and try (Hey, what's wrong with that?) or visit a fertility expert, it's still nothing out of the ordinary. For cripe's sake, Clay Aiken and Ricky Martin have kids. If the Polamalu baby is born with two heads, let me know. I'll look for WTAE's five-part series.

Let them keep their junk

Pretty much every day at the newspaper, we get a list from the AP of the latest items recalled by our government because of safety deficiencies, and my unscientific survey finds that about 80 percent of this unsafe stuff comes from China. We've also been reading of late about the tainted-milk scandal in China (empty store shelves shown above), where thousands of children have been sickened by contaminated formula. Several of them died. All the while, according to a story we ran in Thursday's O-R, the political elite in China are serviced by a special government organization that provides them with the "choicest, safest delicacies." They receive "hormone-free beef from the grasslands of Inner Mongolia, organic tea from the foothills of Tibet and rice watered by melted mountain snow." The average Chinese person, meanwhile, has been subjected to "vegetables with harmful pesticide residue, fish tainted with a cancer-causing chemical, eggs colored with industrial dye, fake liquor causing blindness or death, and holiday pastries with bacteria-laden filling." The Chinese government, one of the most brutal and corrupt in the world, clearly doesn't give a damn about its own people, so why should we expect them to care about the products that end up on our shores. The Chinese elite are reaping billions of dollars from the garbage they foist upon us. It's time we tell them to keep their tainted trash. There has to be some other Third World country that can put its 8-year-olds to work producing crappy garments, toys and other products for U.S. consumption. Or, and I know this sounds crazy, we could return to manufacturing our own stuff. I know, that's nuts, because big U.S. retailers could no longer buy stuff overseas for pennies and then turn around and sell it to us for dollars.

We, the vultures

Something to consider from our friend Priguy:
Apparently, one of the ambulances that was on the scene of the South Carolina plane crash that burned Travis Barker and that DJ (crash scene shown above)had an on-board video camera that captured much of the scene as it happened. A South Carolina TV station had the video on its Web site for a day or so before removing it. A radio station here in Richmond played an excerpt of the audio from the video, which apparently is very graphic. In fact, this morning show radio host said, “Listen closely and you can actually hear Barker screaming. And the video shows his body on fire.” He tried to sound concerned, but I don’t buy it. I think that if he had any empathy at all, he’d never have played it in the first place. My question is: Why do so many people feel compelled to see or hear this sort of thing? Why do so many people eagerly anticipate the release of 911 tapes (or cockpit audio tapes) after a tragedy? It’s a fascinating dichotomy ... These are likely the same people who have candlelight vigils and bring in grief counselors at the slightest misfortune of absolute strangers, yet they want to have intimate access to horrifying sights and sounds – like actually listening to a man scream in agony as his body burns. Or listening to the heartbreaking last words of someone facing certain death. Don’t these people in the midst of these tragedies deserve a little bit of privacy? I just don’t get it.

Shed a tear for these poor kids

Some recent complaining at a school board meeting and on one of the O-R blogs has given support to my belief that we have coddled our children to the point that even the slightest imposition is tantamount to asking them to clean Mount Rushmore with a toothbrush. When I had young children, I'll admit to trying to do what I could to make life easy for them and let them enjoy their youth as much as possible, but some of the comments made at a recent Peters Township school board meeting reflected a level of "nurturing" way beyond anything I was guilty of. At issue is a new district policy limiting student parking at the school to seniors, along with some juniors who meet certain qualifications (such as those who have to get to after-school jobs, I assume). To hear some of the students griping at the meeting, you would have thought they were being tortured in the halls of the high school. Two juniors who spoke to the board said they have to arrive at school "five to 10 minutes early" if they are forced to ride the bus. Good lord. Five to 10 minutes?!?!? One youngster also related the harrowing tale of the time he had to walk home after a school activity, in the rain, no less. He said he had been "deprived" of an hour of his life. Poor baby. Of course, after hearing these heart-wrenching stories, several board members said they would revisit the policy. I didn't drive to school regularly when I was a younster, and I didn't feel especially deprived, even though my parents didn't rush out to buy me a car the minute I turned 16. We now live in a different age, clearly. Close on the heels of the Peters Township meeting came an unexpected loss by the Canon-McMillan football team on Friday night. Mike Kovak's Varsity Letters blog was abuzz with people analyzing how the team had failed. Did they come down on the kids for not playing to the best of their abilities? Not so much. Most of the armchair analysts, including at least one person identifying him or herself as a parent of a football player, blamed the coach for working the poor little ones too hard and leaving them so tired that they just couldn't perform up to expectations. Do you remember being tired when you were 17 or 18? I don't. I'm at a loss for words. Perhaps you have some to share.

Thumbing their noses

North Korea and Iran have made it clear in recent days that they are going to press on with their nuclear programs, and they can feel pretty secure in the fact that the rest of the world isn't going to do much about it, other than threaten more sanctions. North Korea announced that it is going to restart its nuclear reactor, the same one it started to mothball last year in a deal with the United States and other countries. The North Koreans say they're reversing course because the U.S. has not removed it from a terrorism blacklist. They also claim promised aid has not been forthcoming. We should not be surprised. The North Koreans have been playing the Bush administration for years and, before that, the Clinton administration. It's much the same with Iran. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says his country has no intention of halting its nuclear program, despite the world's strong suspicions that it's geared toward producing nuclear weapons. Ahmadinejad is an absolute nutjob, but he's also a figurehead. The ayatollahs run Iran, and they're not going to drop a nuke on anyone and run the risk that their country would be turned into a parking lot. Which brings me to my main point: What gives the United States the right to determine which countries can and can't have nuclear programs? We allowed Israel to develop nuclear weapons, but we say none of its neighbors can do the same. Also, at the same time we're trying to block Iran and North Korea from nuclear activities, the Bush administration is pressing Congress to give swift approval to a nuclear cooperation deal with India. From what I've read, the agreement would not stop India from developing nuclear weapons because it has more holes than Swiss cheese. Also, we're not dealing with the most stable nation here. This is the country in which Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated. Her son, Rajiv, later because prime minister, and he was blown up by a suicide bomber. India also is wracked with religious violence and has an on-again, off-again conflict with Pakistan over Kashmir. There also was a report the other day in the Washington Post quoting a former U.N. weapons inspector who said India has been seling drawings showing the inner workings of a centrifuge - used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons - for as little as $10. That's not a typo. Ten bucks! The ex-weapons inspector, David Albright, told the Post that he shared his information with the U.S. State Department, which wasn't interested. "It didn't fit with their talking points," said Albright. "At the highest level, they were dismissive of our concerns." Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Wanna go to Speers for a ciggie?

Chancellor John Cavanaugh of the State System of Higher Education has provided our latest example of an overreaching bureaucrat who apparently doesn't have enough real issues with which to concern himself. Cavanaugh, in a twisted bit of logic, determined that because the state recently banned most indoor smoking, he should ban smoking on the campuses of the 14 state-owned colleges, not just indoors but anywhere on school property. Some students and the union representing thousands of workers on the campuses are raising heck about the ban, which came out of the blue. If Cavanaugh's concern is the health of the students, then he's not going far enough. He needs to ban Twinkies and pizzas from school property and require that all students receive regular injections of Depo-Provera to reduce the risk of unintended pregnancies. As I've said before, I'm a smoker, but I've always tried to be considerate of non-smokers because I don't want to subject them to the effects of my filthy habit. That being said, the new state law is a joke because of its many exceptions. For example, smoking is banned in restaurants, but bars that make only a small part of their profits from food sales can continue to allow their patrons to light up. Are the bar employees less worthy of protection from second-hand smoke than the restaurant workers? Smokers are an easy and popular target, so perhaps the government, which loves to tell us what to do, should just ban the sale of cigarettes entirely. Of course, with the loss of millions of dollars in cigarette taxes, you non-smokers are going to have to help us fill the budget hole.

Placing the blame

It has been seven years since a gang of foreign terrorists launched cowardly, kamikaze attacks on our country. It is a day to remember those who lost their lives, some very heroically. But we are a country that also constantly looks forward, and one thing we have to look forward to is one hell of a mess in Afghanistan. On Wednesday, a day before the 9/11 commemorations, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen told Congress that "we're running out of time" to salvage Afghanistan. "I'm not convinced we're winning it in Afghanistan," said Mullen. And the blame for that lies squarely on one person, President Bush. It was ultimately his decision to virtually abandon the real war against terror to pursue a trumped-up, ruinous war in Iraq, and now we are reaping the deadly harvest from his horrible decisions. Where does Afghanistan stand nearly seven years after our intervention? The Taliban and al-Qaida are regrouping and regaining power. Opium production continues almost unabated, and the illicit drug trade actually helps finance the resurgence of the people behind the 9/11 atrocities. Hamid Karzai's so-called national government can't exert any real authority once you get a short distance from Kabul. And while the situation in Afghanistan worsened, we lost 4,000 lives and spent hundreds of billions of dollars in Iraq. And all the while, our few allies in these fights are either refusing to send more troops or pulling their forces out entirely. Would those 4,000 American lives that were sacrificed in Iraq have been lost anyway if we had kept the focus on Afghanistan and the border area with Pakistan? Perhaps. But at least Afghanistan might not be the festering hellhole it is today, a place where we might have to spend thousands more of our soldiers' lives to clean up the mess that our own president must bear the responsiblity for creating.

This just feels icky

A local woman is hoping that a massage program that got its start in other countries will be coming to Washington County schools. I hope her hopes aren't too high. According to a story in Wednesday's O-R, Nicki Cooke, a registered nurse who runs Nicki's Magic Touch in Burgettstown, says training will take place next month in Pittsburgh for the Massage in Schools Programme. Note the fancy spelling. Ooooh, la la. Cook says the programme, or program, is for kids ages 4 to 12. Teachers can receive massage training, as can kids, with parental permission. The massages would be performed on children's backs, necks, arms and heads, but only through clothing. And, again, permission would be needed before a child could receive a massage. The O-R story says a couple of ladies from Sweden and Canada developed the program eight years ago "as a means of realizing their vision that every child in the world would receive positive nurturing touch every day." If that doesn't sound like New Age mumbo jumbo, I don't know what does. Cooke said that, thus far, no Washington County schools are participating. I'm not surprised. As we all know, it's just a few short inches from "positive touch" to "bad touch," and any school district that approves this program is setting itself up for an incredible liability situation. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the whole thing is innocuous or even beneficial to kids. But it sort of creeps me out. What do you think?