Laura who muses is back from vacation (making my reading day much happier, with apologies for such a self-centered remark), and she reports that San Francisco's mayor, he of Kimberly Guilfoyle and gay marriages fame, has proposed that the City monitor people's garbage in order to be sure it is being sorted correctly. New York's Mayor Bloomberg has cracked down on notoriously appalling behaviors such as smoking and making lots of partying noise outside bars and taverns, honking too often in traffic, trans-fats, and so on. Aside from issues such as freedom even to harm oneself, many of his targets are so subjective that it's impossible to know how one measures "ok" vs. "sanctionable."

Meanwhile, some other cities seem to be jumping on this wave. Canton (Ohio) and Poughkeepsie (NY),for example, have new city ordinances that threaten homeowners with fines that increase from $250 to $1000 for insufficiently short grass. One wonders what the job description looks like of the person who has the responsibility of measuring the glass. And talk about subjective!

Did I miss noticing that these cities have all become crime-free and dirtless and perfect from a quality-of-life standpoint?? Because, here's the thing: if there are still murders and burglaries and robberies, if there are still rodents biting children and landlords who fail to make basic repairs to plumbing and heat, if there are still inequities in hiring practices and courtroom proceedings, then these procedures are not merely foolish but actually out of line and downright unethical and wrong.

Labels: modern culture, ranting, ridiculousness

In case any CRRs thought my rant about Curtis and Kuby was chiefly my own opinion, check this out, from last week's generally reliable (about New York City, anyway) Daily News:

The morning slot at WABC is currently occupied by Curtis Sliwa and Ron Kuby, who have been one of program director Phil Boyce's best success stories.

So the good news is that a deal may not actually be signed and sealed about Imus' taking the morning radio show at ABC. Plus, this morning Curtis was razzing Kuby about taking gossip as fact because apparently Kuby saw the same story I did yesterday and went into surprised farewell speech mode. (By the way, imagine a world in which you get information about your own career by reading news reports. Must be fun. Not.) Anyway, the implications of the tease were obvious: it's not a done deal yet. So I searched online this morning and although it is heavily rumored that Imus will take the morning slot at ABC, it's not definite, particularly since, as everyone points out, Curtis and Kuby are ABC radio's pre-eminent locally focused show and "their ratings have been higher than Imus' for several years." On the other hand, "Imus would [probably] be syndicated, which increases his worth [and] could also, in theory, draw a more elusive and potentially more valuable audience in the city itself: the higher levels of the political, corporate, publishing and media worlds." But - as I said yesterday - this assumes advertisers would come and/or return to Imus, not to mention that "his ongoing appeal also could depend to an extent on how many of his regular guests would return, since some indicated during the Rutgers furor that they would be hesitant." Hesitant??? How about sooner slit their wrists, if they have brains or hearts or measurable i.q.'s?

Since the current program director at ABC is the same guy who has won kudos for putting C&K together, maybe he doesn't want to silence that success story now, or be the one to sell out two wonderful guys and their listeners and fans in order to hire one disgusting one, just for the chance of bigger bucks. Here's hoping.

Labels: about me, disappointments, headlines, ranting, reflections

It's official: Imus will be on WABC radio in early December. I am furious and sad and very angry. ABC is tossing one of the best shows on radio and replacing it with an unpleasant nasty old man. Sometimes it's awfully hard to resist thinking the world is a mess. Kids are fined for drawing flowers on sidewalks with chalk and two energetic, smart, engaged personalities are being replaced by an argumentative, racist, disagreeable, mean-spirited and not at all funny nincompoop.

Curtis & Kuby are fantastic. Theirs is one of the liveliest and most interesting shows on radio, without being one of those shouting talk-radio things, on the one hand, or a how-many-people-can-we-insult morning drive show, on the other. And you'd never have expected it to work. Ron Kuby's background and appearance suggest he'd be doctrinaire and completely impossible to argue with - let alone engage thoughtfully in conversations about headline topics with someone with a different philosophy and outlook. And everything about Curtis Sliwa is the essence of a belligerent New Yorker, from his Guardian Angels to his sports loyalties. Yet they never rant or rave or hurl angry insults at each other. They are entertaining and informed about current topics, and they're nice to each other. There's never a whiff of mean-spiritedness between them and I often have marveled at how well they maintain gentility and grace even when intensely disagreeing. They provide a model for how to discuss important and charged topics while keeping a sense of humor and decorum, even when strongly disagreeing.

C&K have been together since 1996 and in the morning slot since 2000. Listening to them has been a joy. They share intense concern for people and society, as well as respect for each other, intelligence and wit. Their points of view are politically divergent, to say the least, but they apparently like each other enough or are professional enough so their conversations are always interesting and amusing. They each have enormous personal warmth and style which is telegraphed in each of their amazingly distinctive and mellifluous voices. Yes, somehow, despite the strength of their differences, they have always been entertaining as well as informative.

It is absolutely ludicrous that ABC thinks it makes sense - or will make them any money rather than lose them advertisers and listeners - to have that nasty vitriolic blowhard on the air for the election year, when they could have had Ron and Curtis discussing things with their customarily well-expressed and interesting opinions. There's nothing for it but to boycott ABC radio and, perhaps, ABC-tv as well.

Labels: about me, disappointments, headlines, ranting

Fox News just won't give up with Courtney Friel, no matter how many times she flubs lines or forgets them or reads them inappropriately. She reminds me of kids in school when we had to read out loud, kids who couldn't see far enough ahead at the same time they were reading, so the inflections sounded as if they were new to English and/or the whole concept of reading with expression. They didn't have half as much make-up on, nor skirts as short, though. I suppose it's obvious but - although the other Fox women, while overly made-up and short-skirted, are intelligent and well spoken - it's awfully hard to understand why Fox is so determined to hang on to her.

Labels: ranting, silliness, tv

I live in a fairly small (~65,000) halfway upstate city in New York State where the current mayor was defeated in the recent primary election. This morning, what to our wondering eyes should appear on the local newspaper's front page but a blaring headline announcing that said defeated incumbent is urging a property tax raise of slightly less than 9%, to be effectuated before the death knell stops knelling for the regime and the term actually comes to an end. Given the timing, one assumes the motivation is either red-angry fury or simple vengeance, neither of which are reasoned or good for anything except the city's coffers. In any case, I heard a voice in my head saying "anyone wonder why she lost the primary?!" You know, I must say that I'm beginning to think politicians really are the relatively scummy entities some people (whom heretofore I thought were mostly raving lunatics) have been saying. I hate to think so, but it's hard to avoid or resist.

Labels: headlines, politics, ranting, silliness

Oh boy, it's Eleanor Roosevelt's birthday today. I wonder whether Billary will have some big séance or declaration or anything. I'm sorry, am I getting too constantly and publicly sarcastic about her? It just makes me crazy that someone so visibly and blatantly manipulative and phony is doing so well. The emperor has no clothes (ick, what a ghastly image) and isn't even an emperor, come to think of it.

'Course, it's also Claes Tulip's birthday (in 1593), the mayor of Amsterdam from 1654 to 1671 and he for whom the gorgeous flower was named. Also Francois Mauriac's, Jerome Robbins', Elmore Leonard's, Luke Perry's, and Kellie Martin's, among many other stalwarts. HB, all.

Labels: juxtapositions, people, politics, ranting