The Thought for Thursday, July 24, 2008 Comes from Wilma Askinas:

On Character: Don't mistake personality for character.

July 24, 2008

Stupid Is as Stupid Does

        America's CEOs Could Do Worse
        Than Heed Warren Buffett's Advice

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

Sometimes it seems obvious that too many chief executive officers at America's biggest corporations make really stupid decisions that are driven by greed and avarice rather than sound business practices.

Take for example the two mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, one of about 90 banks that are in financial trouble—Wachovia—and a former automotive giant that is in serious financial trouble—General Motors.

Our total national debt in July 2008 was $9.5 trillion. The assets of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac total $1.4 trillion and the outstanding mortgage debt of both companies in March 2008 totaled more than $5 trillion, or 48% of the United States total mortgage debt of $10.6 trillion. Craig Ferguson would react to this with a "I know" on his late night talk show!

Don't even mention the phrase "bad subprime mortgage packages" at the water coolers in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Word on the street is that it may cost $25 billion to rescue these two mortgage giants from poor thinking and stupid decision making. The government will do so, not with government money but with your hard-earned tax dollars.

Let me say that again in clearer terms: we, not our government, will bail these two troubled mortgage giants out with our tax money.

Wachovia Bank, the nation's 4th largest bank by assets, says it lost $8.86 billion in the second quarter, and will cut 6,350 jobs after losses tied to mortgages skyrocketed.

You need only to mention General Motors when talking about long-term decline. GM's workforce went from 255,000 employees in 1995 to 139,000 in 2007, a 54% reduction in a dozen years. GM's market share went from 32.6% to 23.5%, a 28% drop in a dozen years. GM's stock went from $38.88 to $9.84, a 75% loss in value in a dozen years.

Is General Motors one of the worst run companies in America? Nah, General Motors is just one of the biggest companies with really stupid managers and a lame board of directors.

So what would Warren Buffett, the world's new richest man, have to say about these negative business consequences? I do not have to call him in Omaha, Nebraska to find out.

After reading and studying The Tao of Warren Buffett by Mary Buffett and David Clark, Warren would at least say this: "The chains of habit are too light to be felt until they are too heavy to be broken." He was quoting the English philosopher Bertrand Russell.

In short, bad business habits don't become apparent until it is too late. When you see cost cutting after your business is in trouble (Wachovia Bank and General Motors are prime examples), you know the cost cutting should have been done long ago, but the executives were too busy counting their personal assets rather than taking care of the business in their charge.

Businesses that become bloated with unnecessary expenses in times of plenty will sink the fastest when the business climate turns worse.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac escape drastic measures because of their relationship to our government. At best, they are private corporations with special privileges, much like the United States Postal Service. They are expected to be self-sustaining, to make money and pay their own way, but will be bailed out of their stupidity by the government in times of need.

Warren Buffett might also say this: "When a chief executive officer is encouraged by his advisers to make deals, he responds much as would a teenage boy who is encouraged by his father to have a normal sex life. It's not a push he needs."

All of these executives would be better advised to read and study what Warren Buffett has to say, rather than showing off their own inept talent as a leader and executive. They are only where they are because a collective board of directors is dumb enough to pay them millions of dollars for their bad advice and guidance.

Read some of my other controversial articles on Business in America—because they are good—on other hot topics, including:

"So Why Should I Subsidize Any Banks Because of Their Greed and Incompetence?"

"If USA Families Ran Finances Like Their Government, They Would Go Bankrupt"

"ISP Providers Decide to Do the Right Thing Rather Than Stuff Their Pockets With Money"

"Washington's Hottest Political Issue Pits PI Attorneys and the Insurance Industry"

"Too Many Overpaid CEOs Are Really Smooth Operators Who Produce Little"

July 23, 2008

Movie Review:

    "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly" Ends
    Sergio Leone's Spaghetti Western Trilogy

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly (Il buono, il brutto, il cattivo in Italian) – 4 Stars (Excellent)

After enjoying unexpected commercial success with "A Fistful of Dollars" and "For a Few Dollars More", Italian Director Sergio Leone ends his trilogy of "Spaghetti Westerns" with "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly".

Amazingly, even at this point in his masterful direction of western movies made in Spain, Leone would not enjoy a nickel's worth of adulation from the critics as only the Laurel Awards would give a single award to Clint Eastwood for Action Performance, and that was as runner-up.

Hollywood and its stars ignored Sergio Leone just as they have Johnny Depp. They refuse to recognize that even westerns or pirate pictures can be artfully done and have unique acting performances. Clint Eastwood is The Man With No Name, and Johnny Depp is the perfect pirate as Captain Jack Sparrow. There will never be another equal of either in these roles.

At least one film director, screenwriter and actor—Quentin Tarantino—has identified Leone's The Good, The Bad and The Ugly as "the best-directed film of all time." It was Tarantino who gave moviegoers "Reservoir Dogs". "Pulp Fiction" and "Kill Bill (Vol. 1 and Vol.2)" among others.

But back to Leone, who helped write the screenplay with mostly Luciano Vincenzoni. It was Vincenzoni who came up with the premise for the film—three rogues looking for some treasure at the time of the America's Civil War—and its title.

The triangle of rogues included The Good (Clint Eastwood, a professional gunfighter referred to as "Blondie" in this film who would become The Man With No Name in subsequent western films spun off of his character), The Bad (Lee Van Cleef, a self-centered hit man referred to as "Angel Eyes") and The Ugly (Eli Wallach, a self-centered outlaw referred to as "Tuco").

Long story short, the plot involves first establishing the three rogues as bona fide killers. Blondie then becomes a pseudo bounty hunter in partnership with Tuco, turning him in for the bounty, rescuing him before he is hanged, and repeating the process until Blondie leaves Tuco in the desert to die. Tuco survives, and lives to find Blondie and return the favor.

As Blondie is about to die while being forced to walk across the desert by Tuco, they are interrupted by an out-of-control, driverless carriage loaded with dead bodies. Except one body, Bill Carson, lives long enough to tell Tuco where $200,000 in gold is buried in exchange for water. While Tuco goes for water, Carson tells Blondie the exact grave in a cemetery where the gold can be found. Suddenly they have a compelling reason to become partners again.

Dressed in the Confederate uniforms of the dead men, Tuco takes Blondie, who is near death, to a local Catholic mission run by Tuco's brother, a priest. Blondie's recovery goes well, but Tuco's reconciliation with his brother does not.

Blondie and Tuco leave the mission and end up being captured by Union soldiers, and taken to a prison camp where Angel Eyes (now a Union sergeant) takes personal charge of torturing the captives. Angle Eyes is aware of the gold, has his enforcer beat Tuco senseless, and learns the name of the cemetery. He then turns Tuco in for the bounty, frees Blondie (who knows the exact location) and he and his gang of 5 thugs head for the cemetery with Blondie.

Tuco manages to escape on the way to his hanging, turns up in a town the Union forces have bombed silly, and runs smack into Blondie, Angel Eyes and his band of 5. Blondie and Tuco manage to kill all 5 thugs as Angel Eyes escapes, and now all three are headed for the cemetery.

On their way to the cemetery, Blondie and Tuco run into a full blown Civil War battle over a bridge crossing a river to the cemetery. They witness the continual carnage, blow up the bridge, and then the soldiers from both sides—as well as Blondie and Tuco—move on.

Once in the cemetery, it is inevitable that the three rogues face off in one of the greatest western showdowns ever filmed. The confrontation is full of Leone's masterful panoramic shots, extreme close-ups and clever sequence of final events. If you have not seen this film, you must, it may be the greatest western film ever made. If you have seen it, you should see it again to better appreciate Sergio Leone's masterful direction.

There are many great moments in this film. Two of my favorites involved Tuco. In the first, while Tuco is in the bombed-out town, he manages to find a bathtub and take a bath. While doing so, a bounty hunter (remember than Tuco still has a price on his head) confronts him buck naked in the tub.

At the start of the film, the bounty hunter is one of three gunmen who confront Tuco and Tuco shoots all three. The one that confronts Tuco lost his right arm but lived and now shoots with his left arm. He reminds Tuco of his distress and, while doing so, Tuco kills him with his gun that is hidden beneath the bubble bath water. Tuco then utters this memorable line: "When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk."

The other scene I love is when Tuco walks miles and miles out of the desert and into a town with a gun shop in front of him. After dousing himself in a water trough, he confronts the proprietor, remakes a pistol out of parts from three other pistols, and then steps outside to test the weapon.

He hits three standing figures downrange, turning them sideways, and then fires three shots to cut each in half. Two figures fall immediately and the third remains standing. Tuco takes a mouthful of whiskey, and then jumps and as he lands, the third target falls. This is a guy film, and you really need to be a guy to fully appreciate what I am sharing here. Tuco's role in this scene helped invent the word cool.

Moviegoers watching this film at the time were not aware that Eli Wallach (Tuco) was nearly killed three times while playing his part.

He was almost poisoned on the set after drinking acid used to burn the bags filled with gold coin so they would rip open easier when struck with a spade. A film technician had poured the acid into a lemon soda bottle and Wallach didn't know it. He drank a lot of milk and finished the scene with a mouth full of sores.

In another scene where Wallach was about to be hanged while on a horse, the rope was severed by a pistol shot but the frightened horse galloped for almost a mile with Wallach's hands tied behind him and the noose still taut around his neck.

In a third scene, in order to cut off his handcuffs from his captor, Wallach places his captor on the railroad tracks and waits for a train to come by and break the chain attached to the cuffs. He was within a foot of track and ducks his head to the ground as the train rolls by. The entire film crew and Wallach were unaware that heavy iron steps jutted out from each box car and any of the numerous box cars with iron steps would have decapitated Wallach had he lifted up his head.

Wallach would later acknowledge and complain in his autobiography that safety on the set was not one of Leone's primary concerns in directing the picture.

For the record, Tuco's full name in the film script was Tuco Benedito Pacifico Juan Maria Ramirez.

Because Sergio Leone spoke barely any English and Eli Wallach spoke barely any Italian, the two communicated in French. Because an international cast was employed, only Eastwood, Van Cleef and Wallach spoke in English, and were dubbed in Italian for the debut release in Rome. All other international cast members spoke mostly French or Spanish and were dubbed later. This accounts for the fact that none of the dialogue in the film was completely in sync.

Here are three interesting facts from the film for guys:

1) The cache of gold in the film was $200,000, which does not seem like a lot of money today. However, gold was $20+ an ounce in 1862 and was $628 an ounce in 2006, so the gold was really worth more than $6 million in today's money.

2) In the film, Blondie (Clint Eastwood) used a Colt 1851 cartridge conversion revolver with silver snake grips, and a Winchester 1866 "yellow boy" with ladder elevated sights. Angle Eyes (Lee Van Cleef) used a Remington 1858 Army percussion revolver. Tuco (Eli Wallach) used a Colt 1851 Navy percussion revolver with a lanyard. The soldiers used Gatling guns with drum magazines and Howitzer cannons.

3) Clint Eastwood wore the same poncho without replacement or cleaning during all three of Leone's spaghetti westerns. In the second film (For a Few Dollars More) you can visibly see that his poncho was mended after being pierced by 7 bullet holes from Ramon's Winchester in A Fistful of Dollars. The mended area, originally on the left breast, is worn over Eastwood's right shoulder blade in For a Few Dollars More.

From virtually no acclaim at the time, Sergio Leone's "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly" is now regarded as a classic by many critics. It was part of Time's "100 Greatest Movies" of the last century, and it is one of the few films which enjoy a 100% certified fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes (rottentomatoes.com). The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is currently ranked no less than 5th among the Internet Movie Database Top 250, all of which is not too shabby for an Italian guy directing an American Western.

Even master movie critic Roger Exert gives Leone his just due as an excellent director, and acknowledges two other Sergio Leone films as unquestioned masterpieces—"Once Upon a Time in the West" (1968) and "Once Upon a Time in America" (1984).

Sergio Leone was born into the cinema. His father was Roberto Roberti (aka Vincenzo Leone), one of Italy's cinema pioneers, and his mother was actress Bice Valerian. Sergio Leone was born in Rome in 1929 and died in Rome in 1989 from a heart attack. He remains one of the great directors in film history.

Read more of my movie reviews on action adventure films, including:

"Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl" with Johnny Depp as Captain Jack Sparrow

"Pirates of the Caribbean: "Dead Man's Chest" with Johnny Depp as the perfect pirate

"Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" with Johnny Depp

"The Departed" with megastars Jack Nicholson, Leonardo DiCaprio and Matt Damon

July 21, 2008

Social Commentary:

        In an Educational Bureaucracy, It
        Is Hard to Weed Out Incompetence

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

My level of being appalled rose dramatically the other day; fortunately, my blood pressure remained the same. The cause of this happening was an editorial in USA Today (7-17-08) titled the "Teacher Protection Racket".

Seems that the chancellor of New York City's school system—Joel Klein—has been busy trying to weed out incompetent teachers so the students will have more effective teachers. After a year's effort, Chancellor Klein has managed to rid the system of exactly 8 teachers among the city's 55,000 teachers. Trust me when I say that it was not an easy task. Here is why:

Each firing required an average of 25 days of hearings and 150 hours of principal time, and each firing cost the school system $225,000, or a total of $1.8 million to fire 8 teachers.

If you have ever wondered why clearly incompetent teachers are allowed to continue to teach in schools, you have just learned 3 of the reasons why. There is really little incentive to get rid of them.

Chancellor Klein has the audacity to believe that outstanding teachers are the single most important factor in turning around struggling schools. Teacher unions vehemently disagree with his assessment.

It is the unions that take an oath to defend to the death incompetent, lazy and bored teachers. Years of inept contract bargaining at the district level matched by years of effective union lobbying has produced a system where all of the power lies with the accused teacher.

In effect, protecting inept union members has become far more important than properly educating our children. So much for unions and their positive effect on our educational system. In may be an exaggeration, but we are also seeing pedophile teachers popping up like weeds in the schoolyard.

Just exactly how much protection do incompetent, illegal or out-of-control teachers need? I am so glad you asked. The answer is not nearly as much as they are getting from the unions that represent and protect them.

Are we to assume, for example, that just because pedophile teachers are horny, we are obliged to satisfy their needs in a school setting with our innocent children? I was not aware that we were educating our teachers to teach our children how to have sex with them. Incompetent teachers do not add much to the equation either.

The bottom line is that our children are not getting adequately educated by incompetent, illegal or out-of-control teachers, much less properly educated to make their way in the world.

Why is it, Merrimon Cuninggim has asked, that "the teaching profession is the only profession that has no definition for malpractice?" Merrimom Cuninggim, a minister and educator who brought a fine sense of ethics to his work, asks an excellent question.

There is one huge reason why those who would perpetuate and defend teachers in public education would actively work to destroy teachers in private education. That reason is that teacher unions will not tolerate any system that would rate or reward teachers so incompetent teachers could be more easily identified and purged from the system.

The union idea is that if there is never any accountability or responsibility for teacher actions, it then becomes more difficult to hold them to standards, or discipline them for not meeting professional standards. In other words, all teachers are equal in the eyes of the union, that is, they are all wonderful, worth defending to the death, and beyond any criticism worth mentioning.

All of this is compounded by a study that showed that teacher performance evaluations can be meaningless. In Chicago, only 3 of every 1,000 teachers get an unsatisfactory rating, and about 90% of teachers get top ratings. Do I need to even point out that Chicago is one of nation's most troubled urban districts?

And if all of this is not enough to crush our educational system under its own bureaucratic weight, there is always the card in the deck that trumps all others—the victim card. Yes, victimization is everywhere.

For incompetent, illegal or lazy teachers, to all of the support groups in the educational system that support and defend them, every teacher, everywhere that is under any hint of scrutiny seems to be a victim of some kind. No teacher is apparently responsible or accountable for anything. Welcome to the public education system in America.

Why should any teacher in America be responsible or accountable or held to a standard of performance? Some would have us believe that all educational problems, as well as virtually every event know to man—from 9-11 to global warming to pregnant girls to weak financial markets to incompetent teachers—can be easily blamed on someone else.

Read more of my outrageous Social Commentary—because it is good—on other hot topics in my Lessons in Life link, including:

"Should We Be Concerned About the Apparent Violence of Our Children?

"A Disturbing Trend in Our Society – The Lack of Trust in Our Institutions"

"Is Black Liberation Theology Really Helping African Americans?"

"Facts About the Second Most Controversial Topic in America – The First Is Abortion"

"The Nation's Supreme Court Actually Makes a Correct Constitutional Decision"

July 19, 2008

Movie Review:

        "For a Few Dollars More" Establishes
        Leone as a Master of Creating Emotion

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

For a Few Dollars More (Per qualche dollaro in piu in Italian) 4 Stars - Excellent

After the unexpected, smashing success of Sergio Leone's direction in "A Fistful of Dollars" with the newly-found presence of Clint Eastwood as the gunfighter who would become The Man With No Name, Leone 's direction in "For a Few Dollars More" was even more successful, artistically and financially.

Leone's A Fistful of Dollars became the first spaghetti western to receive a major international release, and American males were ready for The Man With No Name, a new, no-nonsense hero that took care of business the old-fashioned way.

In the second of Leone's spaghetti western trilogy, Clint Eastwood's role as the loner with a purpose became even better defined as a bounty hunter. Even the prelude to the film declares that "Where life had no value, death, sometimes, had its price. That is why the bounty killers appeared." The Man With No Name hunted down and killed wanted criminals for money.

Eastwood's character in the film would be joined by another equally ambitious bounty hunter, Colonel Douglas Mortimer (played by Lee Van Cleef). They will clash and then eventually become partners in their chase to catch El Indio (Gian Maria Volonte who played Ramon Rojo in A Fistful of Dollars). El Indio is a ruthless, intelligent gang leader given to laughing when torturing his victims, and then smoking marijuana (cannabis) to relieve this stress afterward.

El Indio is one bad dude. He is being sought by The Man With No Name for the $10,000 bounty on his head. He is being sought by Colonel Mortimer—an apparent Confederate military officer in the Civil War and the best shooter in the Carolinas—for raping his sister after killing her husband in cold blood. His sister is able to take El Indio's gun and commit suicide while he is raping her.

El Indio has his gang on target to relieve the impregnable Bank of El Paso of its "special" safe containing $1 million, and does so despite the trap that The Man With No Name, who has become an insider in Indio's gang, and Colonel Mortimer have set for Indio. You must see and learn about the special safe, it is too good to give away here.

There are many great moments in this film, but two of them are at the beginning and the end of the film. This first occurs when Colonel Mortimer goes after an outlaw with a price on his head. He interrupts the bad guy while he is in the tub with a prostitute. After sliding a "Wanted" sign under the door of the room, the outlaw dashes to the balcony of the hotel and jumps from the first floor to his horse to make a getaway.

Mortimer crashes the door, assesses the situation, coolly walks downstairs and out the front door, hits a release on the side of his horse which appears to be a blanket but really holds several rifles, picks an appropriate weapon, and calmly shoots the outlaw off of his horse. The outlaw is wounded but stands upright, only to receive a second bullet in his forehead. Male moviegoers thrive on this kind of controlled violence.

The second occurs when El Indio has Colonel Mortimer outfoxed and ready to kill him when The Man With No Name makes their standoff a 3-man face-off by allowing Mortimer to have an equal draw against Indio. Mortimer easily kills Indio and retrieves the watch Indio had taken and held, which showcased a picture of his sister. Mortimer had a watch to match the one Indio had stolen.

Lee Van Cleef (Colonel Mortimer) claimed to be faster on the draw than Clint Eastwood, and in fact he was. Film shows that Lee Van Cleef took exactly 3 frames (one eighth of a second) to draw, cock and fire his weapon.

Director Sergio Leone had originally wanted Lee Marvin for the role of Colonel Douglas Mortimer, but I believe that Lee Van Cleef proved to be an excellent choice for the part.

The final scene is spectacular in its presentation. It is a huge circular area and Leone's brilliant direction captures the moment with extreme close-up views of the participants, building upon the emotions of fear and the satisfaction of vigilante justice in the process.

Leone's taciturn characters, precise filming, extreme close-ups and the haunting music of Ennio Morricone all add to making For a Few Dollars More a legend, and one of the classic westerns ever made.

For a Few Dollars More gained even more steam in the United States as it was double-billed with A Fistful of Dollars. For a Few Dollars More was released in 1965, one year after the release of A Fistful of Dollars.

Despite becoming what is now recognized as one of the greatest westerns ever filmed, For a Few Dollars More could not collect a single award. It does not really matter, as Leone' second spaghetti western keeps being replayed while other award-winners now sit in the can on a shelf.

Read more of my movie reviews on action adventure films, including:

"Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl" with Johnny Depp as Captain Jack Sparrow

"Pirates of the Caribbean: "Dead Man's Chest" with Johnny Depp as the perfect pirate

"Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End" with Johnny Depp

"The Departed" with megastars Jack Nicholson, Leonardo DiCaprio and Matt Damon

July 17, 2008

Movie Review:

    "A Fistful of Dollars" Started Sergio Leone's
    Masterpiece Trilogy of Spaghetti Westerns

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

A Fistful of Dollars (Per un pugno di dollari in Italian) – 4 Stars (Excellent)

Is it possible for an excellent, groundbreaking film in a specific genre to be overlooked at award ceremonies? Absolutely, and a perfect example is "A Fistful of Dollars" that gave rise to what we commonly identify today as "the spaghetti Western".

A Fistful of Dollars was the first of Director Sergio Leone's masterpiece trilogy that would be followed by "For A Few Dollars More" and "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly". It was Leone who realized that the American-made Westerns of the 1950s had become nothing more or less than housing developments designed with a cookie-cutter pattern of staleness.

Leone's answer was to shoot the film as if he was orchestrating an opera. The result would become the model for many Westerns to come, featuring his trademark taciturn characters, precise framing, extreme close-ups and the haunting music of Ennio Morricone.

All of this would give rise to "The Man With No Name" (Clint Eastwood), who was originally referred to as "Joe" in A Fistful of Dollars, but became The Man With No Name in the sequels.

I am very boffo on this film and for good reason. The combination of Leone's direction is excellent given Morricone's music, the cinematography by Massimo Dallamano and Federico Larraya, film editing by Roberto Cinquini and Alfonso Santacana, and sound by Elio Pacella. A Fistful of Dollars was shot in the Spanish province of Almeria.

Despite its credentials, A Fistful of Dollars would win only one award—the Italian National Syndicate of Film Journalists' Silver Ribbon for the Best Score by Ennio Morricone. You could see this film for the musical score alone and come away very impressed.

Released in 1964, A Fistful of Dollars would not make its American debut until 1967. The film's arrival here was delayed when "Yojimbo" screenwriters Akira Kurosawa and Ryuzo Kikushima sued for breach of copyright and won, receiving 15% of the film's worldwide gross and exclusive distribution rights for Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. Kurosawa said later he made more money off of this project than he did on Yojimbo, which was released 3 years earlier. The screenplay was written by A. Bonzzoni, Victor Andres Catena and Sergio Leone.

The story is about a gunfighter (Clint Eastwood) who comes to a small border town and offers his services to two rival gangs—the Rojos and the Baxters.

The Rojos include the dangerous Ramon (Gian Maria Volonte), Esteban (Sieghardt Rupp) and Don Benito (Antonio Prieto), Ramon's girlfriend Marisol (Marianne Koch), Rubio (Benito Stefanelli) and Chico (Mario Brega). The Baxters include John (Wolfgang Lukschy), his wife Consuelo (Margarita Lozano) and a bevy of additional lesser-light banditos on both sides.

The bell-ringer in the film, Juan De Dios (Raf Baldassarre) warns the gunfighter, "you'll get rich here, or you'll be killed." The gunfighter later acknowledges that the "crazy bell-ringer was right, there's money to be made in a place like this."

Neither gang is aware of The Man With No Name's ploy to play one against the other, each thinking they are using him against their rival, but the gunfighter will outwit them both.

Along the way he will personally kill at least 14 of them, get the Rojos to completely obliterate the rest of the Baxter gang, rescue the kidnapped wife and return her to her family so they can safely escape, rescue the innkeeper Silvanito (Jose Calvo), and eliminate Ramon Rojo in a classic showdown worthy of any Western movie ever made and too good to share here.

Another actor to watch in this film is Piripero the undertaker (Joseph Egger), who provides the avenue for The Man With No Name's escape when he is incapable of doing so on his own.

The genius of Sergio Leone is seen in one of the film's earliest scenes. As the gunfighter rides slowly into town, 3 Baxter gang members fire shots to scare the mule he is riding. After some food and whiskey, the gunfighter confronts his tormentors with this dialog:

"I don't think it's nice, you laughin'. You see, my mule don't like people laughing. He gets the crazy idea you're laughing at him. Now if you apologize, like I know you're going to, I might convince him that you really didn't mean it."

Properly incensed and challenged, 4 key Baxter gang members draw to fire and are cut down in a blink of an eye by The Man With No Name.

While the dialog and action in this scene are excellent, Leone's direction is even more so and here is why: In American films, when a cowboy was shot, one camera was ALWAYS focused on the shooter and a split second later, another camera cut to the victim. Leone captured the scene with the camera over Eastwood's shoulder, so the moviegoer could vicariously witness the shooting as if he was doing the shooting.

Leone's genius was as powerful today—44 years later—as an interactive web site on the Internet, both of which did not exist in 1964. No wonder it is so easy for moviegoers today to experience his genius.

A Fistful of Dollars is too good not to experience. Like so many films that are expected to be nothing and become classics in movie history, the role of The Man With No Name is littered with big names who did not play the role when an unknown like Clint Eastwood did.

This list includes Henry Fonda, James Coburn, Charles Bronson and Richard Harrison. Harrison would later acknowledge that "maybe my greatest contribution to cinema was not doing A Fistful of Dollars and recommending Clint for the part."

Eastwood had been in the television series "Rawhide" prior to being tapped for the role. He helped build the character of The Man With No Name by buying black jeans form a sport shop on Hollywood Boulevard, buying the hat he wore from a Santa Monica wardrobe firm, and buying his trademark black cigars from a Beverly Hills store. He cut the cigars into thirds to give them a more distinctive look.

Leone was reportedly taken with Eastwood's distinctive style, commenting in Italian that "I like Clint Eastwood because he has only two facial expressions: one with the hat, and one without it."

Like another tremendously successful actor Tom Hanks, Eastwood knew how to instinctively exude enormous charisma that was never evident in his low-key style. Any real man in America would be proud to strap on The Man With No Name's gun belt and pistol. Is A Fistful of Dollars a guy film? Certainly.

Leone did not direct the first spaghetti western ever made, but his was the first one to receive a major international release, not to mention the fact that it launched Clint Eastwood on an incredibly successful career as one of Hollywood's most popular, profitable and bankable actors and directors ever.

Read my articles on last year’s football season, including

“Famous Quotes by Vince Lombardi During Football's Annual Bowl Season"

“Famous Quotes by Knute Rockne During Football's Annual Bowl Season"

“Famous Quotes by Lou Holtz During Football's Annual Bowl Season"

"How to Predict When Teams Are Overrated and Due for an Unexpected Loss"

"The Sagarin Ratings: What They Are, How to Read Them and What to Do With Them"

and my 14 consecutive weekly wrap-up articles on the 2007 College Football Season as well as wrap-up articles on all 32 College Bowl Games.

July 16, 2008

They Weaken the Economy

        Too Many Overpaid CEOs Are Really
        Smooth Operators Who Produce Little

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

When you understand that the average CEO in America makes 400 times what the average worker makes, you could get upset. When you have an environment where chief executive officers of companies can rack up a pitiful financial performance and still continue to rake in millions in compensation for being essentially incompetent, it is even more upsetting. What are we to do?

Now imagine if you were a stockholder of that same company as well as an average American worker. Many employees do put a part of their 401k retirement investment funds into stocks of the company they work for, or another company. Now imagine that you are an Enron employee. Go ahead, get really upset.

If you worked for Enron you would already know what I am about to share with you.

Enron was an American energy company before its bankruptcy in late 2001. Enron claimed to be one of the world's leading electricity, natural gas, pulp and paper, and communications companies, claiming revenues of $111 billion in 2000.

Using the words "claimed" and "claiming" in the prior sentence was not an accident. Enron was about to explode. Enron executives had fooled a lot of investors. Even the prestigious business magazine Fortune named Enron "America's Most Innovative Company" for 6 consecutive years. By the end of 2001 it was clear that Enron's financial condition was sustained substantially by an institutionalized, systematic and creatively planned accounting fraud.

On a broader scale, it became fashionable in corporate America to "cook" the books in an attempt to raise stock prices to fuel exorbitant payouts for executives who were purposefully lying, cheating and stealing from customers and investors (stockholders).
This practice continues in corporate America today on a hopefully much lesser scale by those who have not already been caught.

Imagine again an environment today where chief executive officers of companies who appear to be operating legally can rack up a pitiful financial performance and still continue to rake in millions of compensation for being essentially incompetent on the job.

In June of this year the Associated Press released an article identifying the 10 highest-paid CEOs for 2007 at Standard & Poor's 500 companies. The total pay figures were rounded and were based on the AP's compensation formula, which added up salary, perks, bonuses, above-market interest on pay set aside for later, and company estimates for the value of stock options and stock awards on the day they were granted last year.

Here are the 10 best-paid chief executives for 2007:

1) John Thain of Merrill Lynch - $83+ million.

2) Leslie Moonves of CBS - $67+ million.

3) Richard Adkerson of Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold - $65+ million.

4) Bob Simpson of XTO Energy - $56+ million.

5) Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs Group - $53+ million.

6) Kenneth Chenault of American Express - $51+ million.

7) Eugene Isenberg of Nabors Industries - $44+ million.

8) John Mack of Morgan Stanley - $41+ million.

9) Glenn Murphy of Gap - $39+ million.

10) Ray Irani of Occidental Petroleum - $34+ million.

And you thought Alex Rodriguez of the New York Yankees made a lot of money at $27.5 million a year! Make no mistake, business rules and it is not even close.

So let's look at John Thain and his $83.1 million in compensation from Merrill Lynch for 2007. After all, 83.1 million is approximately $1.6 million a WEEK in compensation, or more than $300,000 a DAY for a 5-day work week.

If I were a Merrill Lynch stockholder (and I am not), I would be looking at the 2007 financial statement, which shows Merrill Lynch with a net loss from continuing operations of $8.6 billion (that is billions, not millions). Merrill Lynch had net earnings of $7.1 billion in 2006, so that is a difference of $15.7 billion in one year on the wrong side of the ledger.

Well, I am sure that Mr. Thain has a smooth answer for his performance, whatever it is. I hardly think his answer merited $83.1 million in compensation for going backwards.

If Thain's $83.1 million in annual compensation sounds really high to you, let me introduce you to Chief Executive Stephen Schwarzman of Blackstone Group LP, who received $400 million in compensation in 2006. Since there are at least 365 days in a year, that averages out to more than $1 million a DAY in compensation. Yes, some folks make a lot more than others.

Another glaring example is Bob Nardelli, who apparently did not even make the top 10 best-paid executives for 2007. He nonetheless was given a $210 million exit package (in plain language I think that means fired) by Home Depot.

Nardelli was considered a superstar CEO when Home Depot hired him 6 years earlier. All Nardelli managed to do in his 6 years was watch the company stock languish and lose market share to Lowe's. Yeah, that Nardelli is really a top executive.

"There are certain instances where pay is so excessive and the breach of trust that the board has with shareholders is so terribly broken, it's an outrage," said Rich Ferlauto of the government labor union AFSCME. Well said, Rich.

And so here we are in 2008: The subprime mortgage debacle driven by the greed and avarice by corporate executives has our economy in a free fall—Bear Stearns (a major investment banker and securities and trading brokerage firm) and IndyMac (a bank) have collapsed, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae are in serious trouble, dozens of other banks and financial institutions are on thin ice, gas prices have skyrocketed out of sight, and food costs are rising faster than a flooding river.

Is all of this the fault of Thain and Nardelli? Of course not. Thain and Nardelli are simply examples of CEOs that are overpaid and underachieved greedy executives.

It may in fact be the failed system of many corporate CEOs and a lack of government regulation that led to America's current slide into an official recession. If it is, big-time executives and politicians have some major amends to make. After all, they get big salaries and perks to run the show, we are just the workers who suffer from their greed and lack of judgment and incompetence.

Read my articles on last year’s football season, including

“Famous Quotes by Vince Lombardi During Football's Annual Bowl Season"

“Famous Quotes by Knute Rockne During Football's Annual Bowl Season"

“Famous Quotes by Lou Holtz During Football's Annual Bowl Season"

"How to Predict When Teams Are Overrated and Due for an Unexpected Loss"

"The Sagarin Ratings: What They Are, How to Read Them and What to Do With Them"

and my 14 consecutive weekly wrap-up articles on the 2007 College Football Season as well as wrap-up articles on all 32 College Bowl Games.

July 15, 2008

Latest Example: $290,000+ Per RBI

        The Silliness of Major League
        Baseball's Stupidity with Payroll

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

Richie Sexson of the woeful Seattle Mariners is simply the latest example of the silliness of Major League Baseball's love affair with high-priced superstars whose production is pathetic.

Pity the Seattle Mariners, whose 37-58 record through Sunday (7-13-08) in the American League West Division was tied for the second worst in the majors, a whopping 20 games BEHIND the league-leading Los Angeles Angels at Anaheim, who are 57-38.

Only the Washington Nationals in the National League East have a worse record at 36-60; they are 16 games behind the division-leading Philadelphia Phillies at 52-44.

The San Diego Padres in the National League West Division match the Mariners 37-58 mark, but the Padres are ONLY 10 games behind the division-leading Arizona Diamondbacks, who sport a 47-48 mark (.495 win percentage). The Diamondbacks have nothing to write home to mom about, but the Mariners are even more horrific.

Interim General Manager Lee Pelekoudas had seen enough Sunday when he gave over-priced and under-achieved Richie "The Rich Man" Sexson his walking papers. Seattle released Sexson and will pay the remaining $6,793,000+ due on his contract just to get him out of the clubhouse.

"Richie wasn't going to play regularly," said Manager Jim Riggleman, "and I saw his body language on the bench . . . that was reason enough to do this. We can't have negativity on the club. I think the players would agree—Richie needed a change of scenery."

Over the past 3.5 years, Sexson had hit 105 home runs and driven in 321 runs. This season Sexson hit the halfway mark batting .218 with 11 home runs and 30 RBIs in 74 games. His departure was prolonged by three weeks when the Mariners canned General Manager Bill Bavasi and Manager John "Johnny Mac" McLaren.

So the Mariners get nothing for Sexson because they could not even give him away to another team with his $15.5 million contract this season. Sexson has already received $8,706,000+ in pay for doing much of nothing, and will now get another $6,793,000+ for doing absolutely nothing. This is what you call a bad hiring decision. Such is the state of big-time contracts in MLB.

Sexson's lousy 30 RBIs this season have cost the Mariners $290,226 for each and every paltry one.

Will Major League Baseball, team owners and general managers ever learn how stupid this policy is that gives free agents horrendous salaries on the dare that they will produce rather than occupy space and demonstrate a bad attitude?

Whatever happened to the idea of developing the team's farm system, paying players a whole lot less and giving them more time to prove themselves at the major league level, and then bumping up their salary to keep them on board.

Raul Ibanez is the perfect example. He was picked up by the Mariners in the 36th round of the 1992 amateur draft. The Mariners would bring Ibanez up to the majors, give him a couple of weeks to prove himself and then, unhappy that he did not tear it up, send him back to the minors.

Ibanez spent 8 years in the minor league system and made all of $275,000 his last year before Seattle lost him to the Kansas City Royals, who were willing to pay him $800,000 his first year.

During his second year playing full time in Kansas City, Ibanez hit 24 home runs, drove in 103 runs and batted .294, so Seattle brought him back at a first-year cost of $3.9+ million. In his last 3 full seasons in Seattle, Ibanez hit 74 homers and drove in 317 runs.

Raul Ibanez' salary for his last 3 years COMBINED was nearly $3 million less ($2,916,666 less) than Richie Sexson's $15,500,000 salary for THIS YEAR alone. Sexson has been one overpaid, underachieved multi-millionaire with the Mariners.

We can only hope the Mariners' owners and front office staff have learned something from this experience. Paying players a lot of money does not correlate to winning world championships. If it did, the New York Yankees would win the World Series EVERY year.

Read my complete 2008 NCAA March Madness coverage, including

"First 2 Rounds in 2008 NCAA Tournament Produce 1 Major Upset in Every 6 Games"

"The Final 4 for the 2008 NCAA Tournament: North Carolina, Memphis, UCLA and Kansas"

"For Kansas Coach Bill Self, the Long Wait Is Over as His Jayhawks Outlast Memphis"

July 14, 2008

Movie Review:

        A Jewish Family Flees Germany
        and Settles "Nowhere in Africa"

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

Nowhere in Africa (Nirgendwo in Afrika in German) – 3 Stars (Good)

Only Walter could see it coming. His extended family in Germany could not see that Adolph Hitler would turn on his own German citizens who were Jewish. Walter was a professional, a judge and a German citizen, not a Jew who happened to be a German citizen. He would leave Germany and take his family to Africa in 1938. Walter was right.

During World War II from 1941 to 1945, Hitler and his Nazi regime would murder more than 6 million Jews in a program of planned extermination. Walter and his family would escape death, but many members of his extended family would not, they would be divided and scattered in concentration camps to suffer atrocities and die. "Nowhere in Africa" is Walter's story, based on the true story of a Jewish family that fled to a remote farm in Kenya.

Walter Redlich (played by Merab Ninidze) takes his wife Jettel (Julianne Kohler) and daughter Regina (Lea Kurka plays the younger part and Karoline Ecketz the older part) to Kenya over the objections of his immediate and extended family.

Upon their arrival, they realize that their destination and lodging are remote, desolate and humble. Walter is to function as a caretaker, a reduction in station that turns his wife Jettel into a miserable, whiny, untouchable presence. When she met Walter he was a judge in their homeland in once-comfortable surroundings. Now she is reduced to nothing, not to mention the fact that nearly all of her precious belongings were left behind. Her sense of values is all but absent.

Only their 5-year-old daughter Regina embraces her new surroundings, learning the local language and customs and finding a new friend in Owuor (Sidede Onyulo), the farm's cook.

The British Army will arrive at some point and he and his family will be whisked off to a hotel back in Kenyan civilization. Walter will eventually join the British Army in its fight against Germany, and his wife will have an affair with an officer that her daughter will notice.

As time has a way of healing some of us, Jettel grows more self-assured in her new life as Walter becomes more haunted by the life he left behind. When the war ends, Walter receives an offer to return to his old position and decides to do so. Jettel at this point is unmovable, and Regina will stay with her mother. Interestingly enough, Walter never is given credit for saving his family from the Holocaust.

Walter does leave, but on his way out he realizes the farm, which is now producing crops in abundance, is about to be attacked by migratory locusts. He somewhat reluctantly returns to help his wife, daughter, and the farm hands to fight off the locusts. We are left with the assumption that because Walter returns, he will stay with his family  and be reconciled.

Nowhere in Africa is a German film written and directed by Caroline Link. Released in 2001, Nowhere in Africa would win an Oscar as the Best Foreign Language Film, be nominated by the Golden Globes for the same award, pick up 17 more awards and 6 more nominations, many of them overseas.

Nowhere in Africa (Nirgendwo in Afrika in German) is based on the best-selling autobiographical novel by Stephanie Zweig.

This film is worth seeing because—despite the obstacles—it tests the strength of a marriage and a family to stay together.

Read more of my movie reviews on families, including:

"A Christmas Story"

"My Big Fat Greek Wedding"

"Secondhand Lions"

"The Chorus (Les Choristes in French)"

"Waking Ned Devine"

These are all excellent films that can make you smile, laugh, cry and feel better for the experience. Don't just live life, experience life!

July 13, 2008

14 Athletes Set 8 New Marks

    Updated USA Prep Track & Field Records
    and the New Best 2008 Top Performances

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

(Editor's Note: Twenty-four new marks were set since the original publication of this article a month ago on June 13, 2008.)

Fourteen high school athletes set 8 new records during the 2008 track and field season. The shinning star of the boys had to be German Fernandez of Riverbank (CA) High School, who set 2 new records and led all boys by taking the top spot in 5 of 6 middle distance races—the 1,500, 1,600, 3,000 and 3,200-meter runs and the 2 mile.

Fernandez set new records for the 3,000 in 7:59.83 and 3,200 in 8:34.23. He also led all comers with a 3:44.8 in the 1,500, a 4:00.29 in the 1,600 (No. 2 all-time), a 4:01.69 in the mile, and an 8:37.22 in the 2 mile.

Chris Derrick of Neuqua Valley High School in Naperville (IL) ran 5,000 meters in 13:55.96 to set the USA boys record for a high-school-only race. Jeff Demps of South Lake High School in Groveland (FL) ran 10.01 to set a new record in the 100 meter run. Conor McCullough of Chaminade High School in West Hills (CA) threw the hammer 260-0 to set a new record.

The shinning star of the girls had to be Jordan Hasay of Mission Prep High School in San Luis Obispo, who set a new record and led all girls by taking the top spot in 4 of 6 middle distance races.

Hasay ran the 1,500 in 4:14.5 to set her record. She also led all comers with a 9:19.5 in the 3,000 (setting the National Junior Record and 16-Year-Old Record), 9:52.13 in the 3,200, and 9:55.57 in the 2 Mile. Hasay also ran 4:17.36 to finish 10th in the 1500 at the U. S. Olympic Trials, very impressive for a 16-year-old high schooler.

Christine Babcock of Woodbridge High School in Irvin (CA) ran the 1,600 in 4:33.82 to set the new girls record, and ran 4:35.31 in the Mile for the No. 2 all-time performance.

Roosevelt High School set the new USA high school girls record of 8:43.12 in the 4x800-Meter Relay, breaking the current 8:50.41 record. Roosevelt is located in Greenbelt (MD). Think for a moment about how difficult it would be to find 4 girls on a high school track team that could AVERAGE less than 2:11 for the 800-meter run. This is what you would call middle distance depth on a track team.

Warwick Valley High School of Warwick (NY) set a new girls record of 11:31.81 in the Distance Medley Relay.

Hannah Carson of Rhodes Junior High (Middle) School in Mesa (AZ) threw the javelin 167-feet-11-inches to set a new USA high school freshman record. The national record is 176-feet-5-inches. Hannah Carson has an excellent chance to garner a national record before she graduates from high school.

Here are the current United States high school track and field records through 2007 followed by the best performances by high school competitors during 2008:

USA Boys High School Track and Field Records and Best 2008 Performances
Current through 7-3-08

100 Meters: 10.08 – 10.01 by Jeff Demps of South Lake High School in Groveland (FL). Sets new all-time high school record.

200 Meters: 20.13 – 20.65 by Brandon O'Connor of Southridge High School in Miami (FL).

400 Meters: 44.69 – 46.28 by Joey Hughes of Poly High School in Long Beach (CA).

800 Meters: 1:46.45 – 1:47.68 by Elijah Greer of Lake Oswego (OR) High School.

1,500 Meters: 3:38.26 – 3:44.8 by German Fernandez of Riverbank (CA) High School.

1,600 Meters: 3:53.43 record set at equivalent yards distance – 4:00.29 by German Fernandez of Riverbank (CA) High School. No. 2 all-time performer.

Mile: 3:53.43 – 4:01.09 by Rob Finnerty of Burnsville (MN) High School. No. 7 all-time performer. German Fernandez of Riverbank (CA) High School ran 4:01.69 to become the No. 8 all-time performer.

3,000 Meters: 8:03.67 – 7:59.83 by German Fernandez of Riverbank (CA) High School. New USA high school record.

3,200 Meters: 8:36.3 for 2-Mile – 8:34.23 by German Fernandez of Riverbank (CA) High School. National Federation record.

2 Miles: 8:36.3 – 8:37.22 by German Fernandez of Riverbank (CA) High School.

3,000 Meter Steeplechase: 8:50.1 – 9:07.02 by Pat Dupont of Fairport (NY) High School. No. 9 all-time performer.

5,000 Meters: 13:37.91 – 13:55.96 by Chris Derrick of Neuqua Valley High School in Naperville (IL) – Sets the USA record for a high-school-only race.

10,000 Meters: 28:32.7 – 30:50.28 by Donald Cabral of Glastonbury (CT) High School.

110-Meter High Hurdles: 13.22 record set at equivalent yards distance – 13.40 by Booker Nunley of Garner (NC) High School.

300-Meter Intermediate Hurdles: 35.28 – 35.71 by Reggie Wyatt of La Sierra High School in Riverside (CA).

400-Meter Intermediate Hurdles: 49.38 – 50.42 by William Wynne of McEachern High School in Powder Springs (GA).

4x100-Meter Relay: 39.76 – 40.26 by Rowlett (TX) High School.

4x200-Meter Relay: 1:23.31 – 1:24.06 by Hightower High School in Sugar Land (TX). No. 6 all-time high school relay performance.

4x400-Meter Relay: 3:07.40 – 3:09.59 by Dominguez High School in Compton (CA).

4x800 Meter Relay: 7:32.89 – 7:37.99 by Mumford High School in Detroit (MI).

4xMile Relay: 17:06.6 – 17:28.47 indoors by Danbury (CT) High School.

800 Medley Relay: 1:28.43 – 1:31.28 by Raytown South High School in Raytown (MO).

Sprint Medley Relay: 3:21.1 – 3:23.76 by New Bern (NC) High School.

Distance Medley Relay: 9:49.78 – 9:54.54 by Carroll High School in Southlake (TX).

4x110 Hurdle Relay: 56:32 – 58:57 by Irvington (NJ) High School.

High Jump: 7-7 – 7-3.75 indoors by Erik Kynard of Rogers High School in Toledo (OH). No. 8 all-time indoor high school performer.

Pole Vault: 18-3 – 17-4.5 by Nico Weiler of Los Gatos (CA) High School.

Long Jump: 26-9.25 – 25-6.75 indoors by Christian Taylor of Sandy Creek High School in Tyrone (GA).

Triple Jump: 54-10.25 – 52-8 by Christian Taylor of Sandy Creek High School in Tryone (GA).

Shot Put: 81-3.5 – 71-3 by Jordan Clarke of Bartlett High School in Anchorage, AK. No. 8 all-time performer.

Discus Throw: 234-3 – 222-1 by Mason Finley of Buena Vista (CO) High School. No. 3 all-time performer.

Hammer Throw: 255-11 – 260-0 by Conor McCullough of Chaminade High School in West Hills, CA. New USA high school record.

Javelin Throw: 241-11 – 223-8 by Kyle Smith of Daphne (AL) High School.

Decathlon: 7,264 – 7,262 wind-aided by Curtis Beach of Academy High School in Albuquerque (NM).

(Note: Leaders based upon marks verified as wind legal in sprints, hurdles and horizontal jumps. Only fully automatic times are listed for sprints and high hurdles.)

USA Girls High School Track and Field Records and Best 2008 Performances
Current through 7-10-08

100 Meters: 11.11 – 11.16 by Victoria Jordan of Dunbar High School in Fort Worth (TX). Equals No. 5 all-time high school performer.

200 Meters: 22.11 – 23.22 by Chalonda Goodman of Newnan (GA) High School.

400 Meters: 50.69 – 52.83 indoors by Nadonnia Rodriques of Boys & Girls High School in Brooklyn (NY). No. 4 all-time indoor performer.

800 Meters: 2:00.07 – 2:01.61 by Chanelle Price of Easton (PA) High School. No. 2 all-time performer.

1,500 Meters: 4:16.6 – 4:14.50 by Jordan Hasay of Mission Prep High School in San Luis Obispo (CA). New USA high school record.

1,600 Meters: 4:38.15 – 4:33.82 by Christine Babcock of Woodbridge High School in Irvin (CA) – New USA high school record.

Mile: 4:35.24 – 4:35.41 by Christine Babcock of Woodbridge High School in Irvin (CA). No. 2 all-time performer.

3,000 Meters: 9:08.06 – 9:19.5 by Jordan Hasay of Mission Prep High School in San Luis Obispo. National Junior Record and 16-Year-Old Record.

3,200 Meters: 9:48.59 – 9:52.13 by Jordan Hasay of Mission Prep High School in San Luis Obispo. No. 2 all-time performer.

2 Miles – 9:55.57 by Jordan Hasay of Mission Prep High School in San Luis Obispo.

5,000 Meters: 15:52.88 – 16:18.91 by Ashley Brasovan of Wellington High School in West Palm Beach (FL). No. 6 all-time performer.

2,000 Meter Steeplechase: 6:35.63 – 6:42.86 by Shelby Greaney of Suffern (NY) High School.

3,000 Meter Steeplechase: 10:15.26 – 10:42.22 by Alyssa Allison of Festus (MO) High School.

100-Meter High Hurdles: 12.95 – 13.26 by Jacquelyn Coward of West High School in Knoxville (TN).

300-Meter Hurdles: 39.98 – 40.96 by Donique Flemings of Saginaw (TX) High School.

400-Meter Hurdles: 55.20 – 57.81 by Dalilah Muhammad of Benjamin Cardozo High School in Oakland Gardens (NY).

4x100-Meter Relay: 44.50 – 45.17 by Dunbar High School in Fort Worth (TX).

4x200-Meter Relay: 1:33.87 – 1:35.94 by Dunbar High School in Fort Worth (TX). No. 11 all-time high school relay team performance.

4x400-Meter Relay: 3:35.49 – 3:37.02 by Eleanor Roosevelt High School in Greenbelt (MD). No. 7 all-time high school relay team performance.

4x800-Meter Relay: 8:50.41 – 8:43.12 by Eleanor Roosevelt High School in Greenbelt (MD). New USA high school record.

4xMile Relay: 19:56.75 – 20:09.47 by Burnt Hills-Ballston Lake High School in Burnt Hills (NY). No. 3 all-time high school relay team performance.

Distance Medley Relay: 11:33.42 – 11:31.81 by Warwick Valley High School in Warwick (NY). New USA high school record.

800 Sprint Medley Relay – 1:44.51 by Logan High School in Union City (CA).

Sprint Medley Relay – 4:00.97 by Wilson High School in Long Beach (CA).

4x100H – 61:05 by Union (NJ) High School.

High Jump: 6-4 – 6-1.25 by Shanay Briscoe of Cypress Christian High School in Houston (TX) and by Victoria Lucas of Midland (TX) High School.

Pole Vault: 14-1.25 – 14-0 by Rachel Laurent of Vanderbilt Catholic High School in Houma (LA). No. 2 all-time performer.

Long Jump: 22-3 – 20.5 by Vashti Thomas of Mr. Pleasant High School in San Jose (CA).

Triple Jump: 44-11.75 – 43-1.5 indoors by Vashti Thomas of Mt. Pleasant High School in San Jose (CA). No. 7 all-time performer.

Shot Put: 54-10.75 – 52-4 indoors by Karen Shump of Penncrest High School in Media (PA). No. 6 all-time performer.

Discus Throw: 188-4 – 183-11 by Anastasia Jelmini of Shafter (CA) High School.

Hammer Throw: 201-7 – 194.0 by Allison Horner of Lovett High School in Atlanta (GA) No. 3 all-time performance.

Javelin Throw: 176-5 – 170-3 by Roxanne Grizzle of Tonganoxie (KS) High School. No. 5 all-time performer. A 167-11 throw by Hannah Carson of Rhodes Junior High (Middle) School in Mesa (AZ) set a new USA high school freshman record.

Heptathlon: 5,533 – 5,522 wind-aided by Ryann Krais of Methacton High School in Norristown (PA). No. 2 all-time performer.

(Note: Leaders based upon marks verified as wind legal in sprints, hurdles and horizontal jumps. Only fully automatic times are listed for sprints and high hurdles.)

Performance results in track and field are easily understandable through time zones and cultures around the world. Unlike words and their pronunciation in different languages, numbers need no explanation to understand. It also helps that the metric system of measurement for distances is dominate worldwide. Track and field competitors around the world are interested in comparing their performances with the performances of athletes in other countries.

Read my 4-Part series on Mead Mania:

"The Golden Era of Prep Distance Running in Washington – Part 1"

"Pat Tyson's Arrival Starts a Run of 9 Consecutive Titles – Part 2"

"How About a State X-Country Title Where the First 3 Finishers Are Your Runners – Part 3"

"2 Mead Runners Crack 9 Minutes at the State 3200 Meter Championships – Part 4".

Read my 5-Part series on Running:

"Wheat Products and Sugar Can Be the 'Kiss of Death' When Trying to Lose Weight – Part 1"

"How Lectins (Proteins in Foods) Are Very Negative in O Positive Blood Types – Part 2"

"Gluten in Wheat Products Bind to the Small Intestine Lining and Turn to Fat – Part 3"

"How Popular Running Magazines Are Constantly Giving Very Poor Diet Advice – Part 4"

"There Is an Inescapable Correlation Between Weight and Cardiovascular Efficiency – Part 5".

June 28, 2008

Affirms Right to Bear Arms

    The Nation's Supreme Court Actually
    Makes a Correct Constitutional Decision

(Editor's Note: I posted this article under Politics in my Lessons in Life section because many of the United States Supreme Court justices seem far more concerned about activism and social engineering than applying the U. S. Constitution as it was written by the original Framers who launched this great nation. Some justices are intent on convincing themselves that we are living in different times now, as if lying, cheating, stealing, whoring, promiscuity, infidelity, drinking, killing, raping and generally being a butt end is any different now than it was when our great nation was founded. Some justices just tolerate wrong-doing more in the mistaken belief that being far more liberal and tolerant of ill behavior will result in improved behavior. These and other nutty ideas have encouraged poor behavior among our children and parents as well.)

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

For at least once in recent years, the more rational members of the United States Supreme Court outnumbered the wannabe activist judges who revel in putting their own stamp of authority on the U. S. Constitution.

The U. S. Constitution is a document that justices of the Court should be applying and not rewriting to suit their own liberal ideas and social engineering. Given the opportunity, the liberal justices of the Court could not rewrite a version of the U. S. Constitution worth spitting on, and they prove it almost every time they take up a pen or open their mouth.

In a too close 5-4 decision recently (6-26-08), the Supreme Court ruled that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense in their homes. The decision was the first in U. S. history to tackle the issue of gun rights that was so CLEARLY enunciated in the Second Amendment to the Constitution that was ratified in 1791:

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Question: What part of this Second Amendment to our Constitution did the 4 dissenting justices not understand? Answer: All of it.

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said the Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home." The Court also struck down Washington's (DC) requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.

Joining Scalia in the majority decision were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas.

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."

Perhaps Breyer would suggest taking up a wiffleball bat to defend ourselves against an armed intruder intent on taking our goods and killing us to eliminate any witnesses. Let Breyer, rather than me, be the first with the wiffleball bat defense. Breyer is trusted with upholding the Constitution and protecting me as a citizen; he is doing a better job helping promote criminal activity.

Breyer, a Harvard law grad, is seen by some as the intellectual leader of the liberal wing of the Court who is diametrically opposed Justice Scalia, who some see as a conservative member of the Court. I can certainly do without any intellectual brilliance Breyer MIGHT possess.

Justice John Paul Stevens weighed in with this dumb opinion: the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons." This is EXACTLY what the Second Amendment is implying.

Stevens would give more power to our government by taking away our individual nights, a position that Breyer and the other two dissenting justices—Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter—could easily agree with. Ginsburg may be the most bleeding heart liberal, and least effective, member of the Court. All of the dissenting justices in this case are dangerous to my rights.

Here is what was not said by the media today: The Framers of the Constitution and its Second Amendment were probably not as concerned about intruders in their home as we are in America today.

I believe that the Framers understood, as I do, that if you take away our Second Amendment right to bear arms, then the only people in society carrying guns that kill people are our government through its armed military, law enforcement and associated officers, and criminals. This circumstance is what breeds thug violence and dictatorships.

The Framers of our Constitution were much more concerned about our government and its officials becoming too powerful and dangerous, than they were with the populace our government is supposed to represent and protect.

Handgun violence in this country is a huge problem, but taking away a citizen's right to bear arms would not solve but only increase and exacerbate the problem. Criminals that want guns do not buy them at the gun store where they can be identified and sent away; they buy stolen guns from other criminals involved in burglaries.

Forty-four state constitutions contain some form of gun rights, which are not affected by the Court's consideration of Washington's (DC) restrictions.

Given the opinions in this case (District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290), it is pretty easy to see why not everyone on the U. S. Supreme Court is a bright light. Some justices have absolutely no problem taking away my individual rights as an American citizen and giving them to the government.

No wonder Thomas Jefferson said, "The government is best which governs least." Amen, Tom, amen. Let the citizens bear arms. An armed society is a more polite society. Criminals understand this concept better than some Supreme Court justices.

Read some of my outrageous Social Commentary on other hot topics, including:

"Facts About the Second Most Controversial Topic in America – The First Is Abortion"

"So Why Should I Subsidize Any Banks Because of Their Greed and Incompetence?"

"A Disturbing Trend in Our Society – The Lack of Trust in Our Institutions"

"Washington's Hottest Political Issue Pits PI Attorneys and the Insurance Industry"

June 25, 2008

Social Commentary:

        Is "Black Liberation Theology"
        Really Helping African Americans?

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

Few people who have been watching any presidential election coverage on television in recent weeks have been able to escape the so-called "out of context" messages Rev. Jeremiah Wright has delivered at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.

Rev. Wright, now officially retired as pastor of the church he built from apparently about 90 active members when he started in 1972 to 10,000+ members today, was passionate, righteous and full of conviction in his remarks. Many charismatic leaders deliver strong and controversial messages to their followers.

Rev. Wright, who earned a Doctor of Ministry Degree from the United Theological Seminary, has been a professor at theological seminaries, has been a member of the Board of Trustees at educational institutions, and is recognized as a biblical scholar in the religious community.

He apparently has spent much of his ministry staying focused on the bible, the word of God and his son Jesus Christ, and preaching "black liberation theology" to his congregation, and to all who would listen and accept his message.

Rev. Wright has sought, in his own beliefs and methods, to minister to the needs of his congregation, exhibiting a perfectly normal and natural sense about what a minister should be doing. His unexpected exposure on national television has caused umbrage with some viewers, who found his remarks to be unpatriotic, inflammatory and offensive.

One remark, in particular, may have been a lightening rod for the white community. Rev. Wright blamed "rich, white people" today for controlling and apparently suppressing the black community, and being responsible for any and all sins against the black community since they (the members of the rich, white community) have benefited most from the actions of their ancestors.

This and similar remarks have been linked by many to the "black liberation theology" Rev. Wright has studied, wrote about and preached.

It is apparent—from the televised sound bites—that the African American members of Trinity United Church of Christ are very enthusiastic in accepting Rev. Wright's message of hope for their goodwill, happiness and prosperity in America.

I take very little comfort in the fact that although I am white I am not rich. I am apparently guilty of heinous crimes and injustices committed by someone I do not even know, while there are numerous examples of extremely successful and rich black Americans who are getting on better in society than myself.

Oprah Winfrey, for example, makes more than 3,000 times the annual income that millions of African Americans do and I do. The sports and entertainment industries have thousands of examples of successful and rich blacks that have overcome whatever disadvantages and discrimination they might have encountered.

Anyone who thinks that life is fair is not paying attention. I personally have been discriminated against many times by white members of my community. I recognize that in Mexico there are Mexican factories with 100% Mexican workers who are routinely discriminated against by members of their Hispanic community.

History is full of examples of people and cultures that have been enslaved by other people and cultures. Records show us that slavery existed in Africa before the Europeans arrived. Records show us that powerful African leaders sold enslaved people for goods such as alcohol, beads and cloth.

Records show us that Britain became the world’s leading slave-trading country, that approximately 12 million Africans were enslaved in the course of the transatlantic slave trade, and that between 1640 and 1807, British ships transported approximately 3.4 million Africans across the Atlantic.

None of these records or actions excuse the reprehensible events that occurred at this time in history. All of them are reminders of how far we have come since then.

As with most things in life, I suspect that the media's characterization of Rev. Wright as a minister and man of God is hardly as unflattering as it has been portrayed. I suspect that many white Americans who treat minorities and their ethnic cultures with respect and dignity, and accept them as equals in our mutual society, are hardly as discriminatory and sinful as some would have us believe.

All of which causes me to wonder: Is "black liberation theology" really helping African Americans? Maybe it makes people feel good that they can blame others for their situation in life. I do not know or practice black liberation theology, and so I cannot speak to its effectiveness in promoting goodwill and prosperity among all peoples and cultures.

Are there other lessons to be learned in addition to "black liberation theology"?

Although I am white and not rich, I am successful, and there is one thing that I do know: when we blame others, we give up our ability to change. I also understand that if we lack the will for change, there is no one who can show us the way, not even Jesus Christ.

Read some of my outrageous Social Commentary on other hot topics, including:

"Facts About the Second Most Controversial Topic in America – The First Is Abortion"

"So Why Should I Subsidize Any Banks Because of Their Greed and Incompetence?"

"A Disturbing Trend in Our Society – The Lack of Trust in Our Institutions"

"Washington's Hottest Political Issue Pits PI Attorneys and the Insurance Industry"

June 23, 2008

Political Commentary:

    Karl Rove's Sly Deal With Fox? Wow, This
    Is Really Inside Stuff No One Could Discern

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

Imagine my surprise when I went online recently and encountered this headline: "Karl Rove's Sly Deal With Fox". Think of a conservative, right-wing political hack with sleight-of-hand magic out to pull a fast one over on American voters. You get the picture.

This incredible insight comes from Amanda Terkel and Matt Corley, who sound more like an ice-skating dance team—and now, Terkel and Corley with all of the suspense of Ravel's "Bolero"—than highly sought after investigative political commentators.

This duo is letting the voting public know that Fox News political analyst Karl Rove, disguised as a Fox News political analyst, is really "playing a strategic role that he and the network refuse to reveal to viewers."

I was stunned to learn this revelation, not that Rove is playing some hidden role, but that Terkel and Corley think the American viewers are so stupid that they could not possibly figure this out without their brilliant insight.

Terkel and Corley take pains to point out that Fox News introduces Karl Rove as a "former senior advisor to President Bush," the architect," a "political wizard" and a "famed political consultant," noting that he has never been introduced as he should be—an informal advisor and maxed-out donor to John McCain's presidential campaign.

Karl Rove is certainly as advertised by Fox News. I suspect that Dick Morris is too, as well as dozens of other spin doctors, talking heads, political consultants, hacks and mouthpieces for either major party and every one in-between.

Do Terkel and Corley really think that Democrats go on television and do not do a candidate's bidding? They give the impression that all Democrats are introduced as a backer of this or that Democratic candidate. This is sheer nonsense.

Viewers who follow politics know that Karl Rove is not on Fox News to read Bible verse to flaming, left-wing liberals. They also know that James Carville and Paul Begala are not on television to read Bible verse to flaming, right-wing conservatives.

Anyone with a modicum of sensibility can identify Sean Hannity as a flaming right-wing conservative and Alan Colmes as a flaming left-wing liberal. Both of these birds are such shills for their party that they really challenge the idea of giving them even a shred of credibility.

Both of them promote polarization in a fit of righteousness for their particular viewpoint, ignoring any understanding or consideration for the other. Their nightly debate is not so much a debate as a shouting match of sarcasm and stupidity. They seem to entertain themselves more than others.

The challenge with the majority of these disclosed and undisclosed political backers on television is that they seem to think that if they granted their opposition even one point in conversation, the would lose all of their credibility. They fail to understand that they have very little credibility to begin with.

Barack Obama, John McCain, Hillary Clinton and all of the associated parties around them are about as important as I think they are—no more and no less. I will decide whom to vote for and why, and feel very comfortable doing it without a song and dance from Terkel and Corley, or anyone else.

It is like watching a televised presidential debate, and then all of the commentators come on immediately and tell me what and how I am supposed to think about a candidate's performance. Their arrogance astounds me.

These commentators treat voters like we are silly, immature 9 to 13-year-old children without a brain in our head or the ability to use it.

Read my outrageous, controversial 5-Part Series on Politics, including:

"Giuliani Is a Pro Choice Republican – Part 1"

"News Writers Are Really Political Hacks – Part 2"

"One of the Most Lucrative Jobs in America – Part 3"

"Propaganda Is Now Disguised as News – Part 4"

"We Are a Nation Divided When It Comes to the "a" Word – Part 5"

June 15, 2008

Playing Sports Builds Character

    Several Track and Field Girl Athletes Prove
    Their Great Sportsmanship and Substance

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

Two separate events recently showed once again how incredibly impressive our young women in American can be—one an instance of pure sportsmanship at its best, and the other an instance of pure desire, determination and substance.

The first event happened at the Washington Class 4A State Girls Track & Field Championship Meet at Pasco, and the running of the 3,200-meter race with Nicole Cochran, Bellarmine Prep's outstanding middle distance runner.

Cochran won the event in 10:36, beating Shadle Park's Andrea Nelson by 3 seconds. Thirty minutes later, race officials disqualified Cochran, ruling that the Harvard-bound runner ran 3 consecutive steps inside the lane adjacent to hers. Bellarmine Prep Coach Matt Ellis appealed the infraction, but his appeal was denied.

The infraction happened on the first day of the meet, and Cochran was visibly upset because she knew she did not commit the infraction. In addition, Cochran was the defending state champion, having won both the 1,600 and 3,200 titles as a junior.

She never seemed herself after the crushing news, and the pure injustice of it all. On the second day of competition, Cochran led the 1,600 and was gunned down in the final lap when Oak Harbor's Mietra Smollack out-kicked her on the final turn to win in 4:56.44. Cochran finished 4th.

Later in the afternoon, Cochran ran the 800 meters and finished dead last in 2:24.40. "I just didn't hang with them, and kind of gave up after 450 meters," said a dejected Cochran.

Despite losing Cochran's points, her teammates were rightfully incensed and rose to the occasion by winning the team title with 76.5 points to second-place Gig Harbor's 65.

"I gave a lot of effort in the 3,200," said Cochran, "and then there was the emotional toll afterward, sitting here for a whole hour while they got the 3,200 figured out, which was unfortunate because I know I wasn't in the wrong and I got penalized for it."

In a show of pure sportsmanship, when the official 3,200 race winner Andrea Nelson was awarded her first place metal at the podium, she moments later gave her first place medal to Cochran. Redmond's Sarah Lord followed by giving Nelson her second-place medal, and the other medal winners followed suit.

"It gave me the chills," Cochran said. "It shows how much respect distance runners have for each other."

And now the story after the story: Ten days after that eventful afternoon, the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association reinstated Cochran as the rightful winner, reversing a rules infraction charge made by race officials.

Mike Colbrese, executive director of the WIAA, reviewed video of the race that showed it was Cochran's teammate who ran out of the lane, and that the officials' report also incorrectly identified the lap in question as Lap 7 when the infraction actually occurred on Lap 6. So much for that bungled officiating effort.

The officials were dead wrong on race day, but they also were absolutely sure they were right and also in charge on race day. The cat will mew and the dog will have its day (from Shakespeare's "Hamlet", Act 5, Scene 1, meaning "any given person's moment of glory is inevitable), or, as I like to say: "right will out".

The second event happened at the Texas 1A Girls State Track & Field Championship Meet in Austin, where Rochelle High School won the team title. So what is so unusual, you ask? Just this: Rochelle qualified exactly one athlete for the state meet, and she won the state title for her team by herself.

Meet Bonnie Richardson, a study in desire, determination and substance like no other girl track and field athlete in Texas high school history.

Richardson, whose middle name just might be talent, spent Friday winning the high jump at 5 foot 5 inches, placed 2nd in the long jump at 18-7, and third in the discus at 121-0.

On Saturday, Richardson ambled over to the track in the sweltering high-90-degreeTexas heat and promptly won the 200-meter dash in 25.03 and followed up the effort by nearly pulling off a huge upset in the 100 before finishing 2nd in 12.19 to defending champion Kendra Coleman of Santa Ana.

"Kendra and I have been battling all year," said Richardson. "I was amazed I stayed with her. I didn't think I was that fast." Yes, Bonnie Richardson, you ARE apparently THAT fast.

So did Richardson steal the show in Texas? Nah, she just earned her team the state title by herself. University Interscholastic League officials could not remember a girl ever winning a state team title by herself.

It did happen before in the state boys championship meet when former Balyor Bear and Pittsburgh Steeler Frank Pollard did it for Meridian Highs School in the 1970s, said UIL Athletics Director Charles Breithaupt.

Many outstanding girl athletes have dominated state meets, but few ever cross over from the sprints to the field events with Richardson's success, said Beithaupt. "The way she did it is really impressive." That is, of course, what everyone thought who was there to see it happen.

And the kicker? It turns out that Rochelle High School does not even have a track to practice on. When Richardson was asked how does she train, she jokingly replied, "Watch out for potholes," adding, "We have a track about 10 miles down the road and train there usually."

Richardson's coach, Jym Dennis, suspected she could do something special at the state meet, but wisely stayed quiet, not wanting to put any pressure on his prize athlete.
Last year, Richardson won the state long jump title, but did not medal in the high jump and discus.

And the additional great fortune for Rochelle High School? Bonnie Richardson is a junior.

Richardson also competes on Rochelle's tennis team, and led Rochelle's basketball team to the state semifinals last season.

"I'd play football if my parents would let me," said Richarson, adding "Not quarterback. Defense." Sounds like my kind of girl—spunky, competitive and willing to settle all issues on the field of battle.

Lou Holtz, one of college football's legendary coaches, was famous for many quotes, including this one: "When all is said and done, more is said than done." Somehow, I think Lou Holtz would have been a tremendous admirer of Bonnie Richardson, and her extraordinary effort on that hot Texas afternoon when she single-handedly delivered a state title to Rochelle High School.

And there you have it: Nicole Cochran, every girl on the medal stand for the 3,200-meter ceremony, Cochran's teammates, and Bonnie Richardson, all ordinary young women who did extraordinary things because they could and would.

Hollywood will probably never discover them, and we will be far better off that Hollywood does not. Do not for a minute think that we are not raising some incredible young women in America, they just are not from Hollywood and named Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan.

Read my 4-Part series on Mead Mania in Cross-Country:

"The Golden Era of Prep Distance Running in Washington – Part 1"

"Pat Tyson's Arrival Starts a Run of 9 Consecutive Titles – Part 2"

"How About a State X-Country Title Where the First 3 Finishers Are Your Runners – Part 3"

"2 Mead Runners Crack 9 Minutes at the State 3200 Meter Championships – Part 4".

Read my 5-Part series in Distance Running:

"Wheat Products and Sugar Can Be the 'Kiss of Death' When Trying to Lose Weight – Part 1"

"How Lectins (Proteins in Foods) Are Very Negative in O Positive Blood Types – Part 2"

"Gluten in Wheat Products Bind to the Small Intestine Lining and Turn to Fat – Part 3"

"How Popular Running Magazines Are Constantly Giving Very Poor Diet Advice – Part 4"

"There Is an Inescapable Correlation Between Weight and Cardiovascular Efficiency – Part 5".

June 1, 2008

Jobs & Careers:

        Before You Interview, Learn and
        Practice Ed's "Zip a Lip" Theory

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

My best advice to clients about to interview for a job is to treat the interview like an IRS audit.

When the Internal Revenue Service thinks you are cheating on your annual tax return, and they ask you a question during an audit, it is a real good idea to answer the field auditor's question and shut up.

The same strategy works during job interviews. When the interviewer asks you a job-related question, answer the question and shut up. Use my "Zip a Lip" Theory and you will more likely stay out of trouble and get an offer when all is said and done.

Too many clients answer a question and then feel compelled to explain or justify their answer. This is almost always a bad idea. You have perhaps heard the expression "better to remain silent than remove all doubt". A job interview is no time to be the life of the party or a chatty Cathy.

Once I asked a potential hire a job-related question and about 30 seconds into his answer he drifted into a discussion of his sled dog experience in Alaska. Something he had said triggered a word association in his mind and caused him to veer off track. I let him yak on and it was about 8 minutes before he shut up. He did not get a job offer.

When asked a question, answer the question and invoke Ed's Zip a Lip Theory. If the interviewer wants more information, force him or her to ask a more specific question, then answer the question and again use my Zip a Lip Theory.

Few potential hires realize that by adopting this strategy, you actually gain significant positive points doing so. The fact of the matter is that when you answer a question and remain silent when it is appropriate to do so, the smarter, the more intelligent and more accomplished you appear to the interviewer.

Again, it is only when you keep talking that you reveal too much of yourself, and run the risk of saying something out of turn that could create a seed of doubt. Creating a seed of doubt is something you simply cannot afford to do when interviewing. It causes the interviewer to start checking out something about you that could lead to a negative reaction.

When you remain silent you do not have to look sullen. You can smile without talking the interviewer to death.

Using my Zip a Lip Theory also moves the interview along, and saves time for all concerned. Be short and succinct in your answers and you will appear to be better organized, more in control of yourself and excited about the opportunity in question.

Read my 4-part series on Job Interviews: "It Is Not What You Say, But How You Say It That Counts – Part 1", "How to Answer When Asked Your Strengths and Weaknesses – Part 2", "How to Handle Job References – Part 3" and "What Do Employers Really Want When Hiring? – Part 4". Find these articles in my Jobs & Careers Section.

May 31, 2008

Jobs & Careers:

        The Biggest Mistake Potential Hires
        Make While Interviewing for a Job

Copyright © 2008 Ed Bagley

If I told a lot of potential hires that sometimes they have as much or more to do with getting a job offer as I do as the interviewer, most of them would not believe me. After all, I am the interviewer and, in many cases, I might also be the owner, manager, supervisor or personnel specialist charged with the responsibility for making an offer.

Having said this, I would also share with you that sometimes the potential hire talks himself or herself into an offer and then right back out. The reason why is they commit the biggest mistake a person could make when interviewing for a job, and this is it:

They are asked a question, they answer the question, and then they feel compelled to explain or justify the answer they have given.

I might ask, "Where are you educationally?"

They might answer, "Well, I thought about going to college but I only completed high school." Then they will launch into a big explanation of why they could not go to college because of their circumstances at the time. Too often, the reasons given are lame excuses and it becomes pretty clear that they simply did not give education any kind of priority in advancing their lot in life.

Maybe their parents thought education was a waste of time, or that it cost too much, or that they (the parents) would not pay the cost. Or perhaps the potential hire started an academic program but did not finish, or they did not like a professor they had, or needed to work to support their wife and new baby.

I might ask, "Why did you leave your last job?"

They might answer, "I was laid off" or "I quit" or "I was fired." Then they will explain the circumstances about how the company was downsizing, or they hated their boss, or the company forced them to work overtime, or the company would not allow them to work overtime.

I asked a potential hire a job-related question, and about 30 seconds into his answer, the candidate launched into the story of his sled dog trip in Alaska and droned on for about 10 minutes. Rather than interrupt him, I let him yak on. The interview was just 10 minutes shorter, I did not get my questions answered, and he did not get an offer. I would have been more interested had I been in the mushing business, delivering goods across the great tundra. Such is life.

Obviously, when allowed to talk too much, the potential hire gives the interviewer all sorts of reasons why they should not receive an offer.

The one thing you absolutely can not afford to do in an interview is to create a seed of doubt about why you should be offered a position. When you do so, the interviewer feels obligated to start checking all kinds of things about you to validate their suspicion and pretty soon, you are eliminated from consideration.

And seriously now, who among us, if put under intense scrutiny, does not have a chink in his or her armor? We all do.

The message of this reality is: keep your answers short and succinct. Interviewing is a business activity, not a social activity. Be businesslike and be professional. Save the small talk for after you are hired and not on the job.

Read my 4-part series on Job Interviews: "It Is Not What You Say, But How You Say It That Counts – Part 1", "How to Answer When Asked Your Strengths and Weaknesses – Part 2", "How to Handle Job References – Part 3" and "What Do Employers Really Want When Hiring? – Part 4". Find these articles at my Jobs and Careers link.

May 30, 2008

Movie Review:

        "Chicago" Shows Two Murderesses
        Who Beat the Rap in a Fight for Fame

Chicago - 4 Stars (Excellent)

Let me get right to it: The musical "Chicago" is absolutely everything it was cracked up to be.

Imagine a chanteuse named Velma Kelly (Catherine Zeta-Jones) who kills both her husband and her sister when she finds them in bed together.

Imagine a bored wife named Roxie Hart (Renee Zellweger) who has an affair with a man she thinks can make her a star only to find out she has been had and is so mad she kills him.

Imagine them both in jail awaiting trial for murder with the eventual prospect of death row. Their only out is to create enough of a stir in the press to become famous and desired by an insatiable public in Chicago during the Roaring Twenties with its booze, nightclubs and all that jazz.

Now you have a musical prescription for Chicago.

Add in Matron Mama Morton (Queen Latifah) who rules the jail with an iron hand that can only be greased with money, and Billy Flynn (Richard Gere), an attractive, slick attorney who always gets his client acquitted while making them into even bigger stars in jail than on the stage, and you have the ingredients for a fantastic story.

A superb cast of singers and dancers under the direction of Rob Marshall brought Chicago together in a super professional, entertaining romp that generated 13 Oscar nominations and won 6 in addition to 30 wins and 52 nominations from other award groups.

Winning Oscars at the Academy Awards were Catherine Zeta-Jones for Best Supporting Actress, Chicago for Best Picture, Best Sound, Best Editing, Best Costume Design and Best Art Direction.

Oscar nominations went to Renee Zellweger for Best Actress, John C. Reilly (as Roxie's husband Amos) for Best Supporting Actor, Queen Latifah as Best Supporting Actress, Rob Marshall as Best Director, Best Cinematography, Best Original Song "I Move On" and Best Writing.

 Watching Chicago made me realize how good Catherine Zeta-Jones is as a signer and dancer. Zeta-Jones is such a classic beauty that it is easy to get stuck just looking at her.

While I have never been a big fan of Renee Zellweger, perhaps because of her prior roles, I am now.

While Zeta-Jones had prior experience Zellweger apparently had no singing and dancing training prior to this film. Even Richard Gere surprised me. I have never thought of Gere as much of an actor, never mind a singer or dancer. He took tap dance lessons for three months to prepare for the part, and apparently won the role almost by default after John Travolta was offered the part several times.

After Chicago became Miramax's highest grossing film generating $171 million at the domestic box office, Travolta apparently deeply regretted declining the part.

I still asked myself how Chicago could have been so good. A little research revealed that Chicago could have been famous for the people who did not get key parts as those who did. In addition to Travolta, Kevin Spacey, John Cusack and Hugh Jackman were considered for the part.

Auditioning for Catherine Zeta-Jones' part as Velma Kelly were none other than Angelina Jolie and Madonna. Auditioning for Renee Zellweger's role as Roxie Hart and some other parts in the film were Goldie Hawn, Kathy Bates, Rosie O'Donnell, Nicole Kidman, Gwyneth Paltrow, Kristin Chenoweth, Cameron Diaz, Whoopi Goldberg and Britney Spears.

Director Rob Marshall wanted Catherine Zeta-Jones to wear her natural long hair in the movie, but she insisted on the short bob, explaining that she did not want her hair to fall over her face and give people a reason to doubt that she did all of the dancing herself.

 Apparently Zeta-Jones was originally approached to play the role of Roxie Hart but would not as she knew the character of Velma Kelly sang "All That Jazz" and she wanted to play that role so she could sing that song.

Charlize Theron was initially selected to play the role of Roxie Hart when another director was involved but lost out when Rob Marshall took over as director. The casting of Renee Zellweger proved to be a very wise choice.

Chicago is based on the book by Bob Fosse, the play by Maurine Dallas Watkins and the screenplay by Bill Condon.

Much of the dialog in the film is good, and funny. Here are some exhibits from the courtroom, and when the women on death row are retelling their misfortune:

Velma Kelly: Yes, it is.

Assistant District Attorney Martin Harrison: I submit this as Exhibit X – Roxie Hart's diary!

Billy Flynn: I object! My client has never held a diary! And even if she did, this would be . . . invasion of privacy, and violation of the fourth amendment, and . . . and illegal search without a warrant!

Roxie Hart: Yeah, AND she broke the lock!

Billy Flynn: Miss Kelly, did you make a deal with Assistant D. A. Harrison to drop all charges against you in exchange for your testimony?

Velma Kelly: Why, sure. I'm not a complete idiot.

Liz: You know how some people have those habits that get you down? Like Bernie. Bernie liked to chew gum. No, not chew. POP. So I come home from work one night and I'm real irritated, and I'm looking for a little sympathy. And there's Bernie, lying on the couch, drinking a beer and chewin'. No, not chewin', POPPIN'. So I said "If you pop that gum one more time . . ." And he did. So I took the shotgun off the wall and fired two warning shots . . . into his head.

June: I'm standin' in the kitchen, carving up a chicken for dinner, minding my own business, when in storms my husband, Wilbur, in a jealous rage. "You've been screwing the milkman," he said. He was crazy, and he kept on screaming, "You've been screwing the milkman." And then he ran into my knife . . . he ran into my knife ten times.

There is nothing not to like about Chicago. If you love musicals, you will love Chicago.

 May 28, 2008

Running to Win:

        Arthur Lydiard, the World's Greatest Middle
        Distance Coach, on How to Train Effectively

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

As a lifelong runner, master's and senior competitor in track and field, I have read hundreds of stories on training techniques.

These same hundreds of stories generally dealt with addressing specific aspects of training.

It was not until I bought and read Running, The Lydiard Way that training philosophy became more important than individual workouts to achieve specific results.

Lydiard was New Zealand's top marathon runner before his runners burst on the scene in the 1960 Rome Olympic Games.

Murray Halberg won the 5000 meters and became a sub-four-minute miler who went on to set a string of world records. Peter Snell won the 800 meters. Snell would win both the 800 and 1500 meters at the 1964 Tokyo Olympics, and John Davies would earn the Bronze medal in the 1500.

When Lydiard went to Finland to change the fortunes of its running program, the result was that Lasse Viren won the 5000 and 10,000 meter double at both the 1972 and 1976 Olympic Games.

It was the influence of Lydiard that led New Zealand to create the first organized jogging group in the world.

Bill Bowerman, the University of Oregon's legendary coach, went to New Zealand to see what Lydiard was doing and returned to create the jogging craze in the United States.

Arthur Lydiard's basic theory was that long, even-paced running at a strong speed increases strength and endurance, even when it is continued close to the point of collapse; it is beneficial, not harmful, to regular competition.

It is hardly a stretch to suggest that Lydiard's influence has made him the greatest coach ever. No less of a coach that Bill Bowerman said in his book, Coaching Track and Field, that "there is no better distance coach in the world (than Arthur Lydiard)."

After reading and studying Lydiard's book (written with Garth Gilmour), I condensed the following training philosophy of Lydiard's system and continue to study and use it today:

Arthur Lydiard on Running:

Aerobic exercise is 19 times more economical than anaerobic exercise.

A daily program of sustained running is essential to achieving correct respiratory and circulatory development. The longer the periods of running, the better the results of the sustained effort will be.

You should understand that it is the speed of the running that stops you, not the distance. Running that breaks the even passage of time and distance is anaerobic, not aerobic, and it must be avoided.

All this running must be steady and even, at a pace that leaves you tired at the end, but knowing you could have run faster if you had wanted to. In other words, you should be pleasantly tired.

Your aim is to find your best aerobic speed over the various courses. If, during any of these runs, you find you have to ease back a little to recover, you will know that you have moved into the anaerobic phase. This is neither economical nor desirable.

Continual creation of large oxygen debts by doing anaerobic training accumulates:

1) lactic acid and other wastes

2) upsets the nutritive system

3) reduces the benefits of vitamins

4) reduces nourishment from food

5) disrupts enzyme functions

6) slows recovery

7) makes further training difficult

8) upsets the nervous system

9) makes you disinterested and irritable

10) induces insomnia and low spirits

11) endangers your general health

12) makes you vulnerable to injuries and
illness.

My most frequent admonition to athletes and coaches is: train, do not strain.

Running is without question the best exercise for runners, and provided you watch the degree of effort, you can not really do too much of it.

Once you are moving freely over the shorter runs, you should move into one or two longer runs each week to maintain the improvement and build confidence in yourself.

The anaerobic stage of your preparation should only be tackled after you have developed your aerobic capacity and maximum steady state to the highest possible