First Day of School, 2006 Edition

Weekend Photos

We had a lot of activity this past weekend. To begin with, I had to go out and brave the heat and sun for two consecutive football games. Here's the first. Rah Rah Ree! Kick 'em in the knee! Etc.


Here's the second. Go get 'em Three-Six! (Back in my day, we tucked in our shirts. I'm not sure why the coach told them not to tuck them in.) Also, you can see the result of my camera's "Sports Scene Mode". It can take photos in rapid succession, but they seem to be in high-ISO mode and a little grainy. On the bright side, you get action you would have missed. On the not-so-bright side, the quality is not as high as with single photo modes.


And here is Sunday's family reunion. Last year was the 50th -- a lot fewer people came for the 51st!

It's Time To End the Baseball Season

Hey, as of today, my fantasy baseball team is in first place, for the first time in a long time. Can we end the season now?

2009 Chevrolet Camaro

I saw today that the plant in Oshawa, Ontario will be producing the Chevrolet Camaro, which will reappear for the 2009 model year. Here's what the new Camaro will look like:


It's kind of cool, I guess. However, I wouldn't be mentioning it if I didn't have a complaint, right? Like the current Ford Mustang, it obviously takes styling cues its namesake from the 1960's. Here's a 1969 model:


Now, I suppose I could ask how you can have a Camaro without a Firebird, but I won't. Instead, it seems like history is repeating itself. In the 1960's, the Camaro was a late response to the popularity of the Ford Mustang, which debuted in 1964; whereas the Camaro's first model was for 1967. Now, maybe it's just me, but I think the early Mustangs were a superior-looking car.

It seems obvious to me that GM is targeting the '09 model at "old people". By this, I mean specifically people who remember the '67 to '69 Camaros, and maybe drove one. Thus, it's probably aimed at empty-nesters and recent "baby boomer" retirees. "Kids" won't be able to afford one. While this may make business sense, I think it's a stylistic mistake. As I said, current Mustangs take obvious styling clues from the Mustangs of the 60's and early 70's. GM seems to be again using the Camaro as an answer to the popularity of the Mustang.

Maybe it's because my mother drove a '66 Mustang for a while (I remember being able to see the road through the holes in the floor), but I remember the 60's and early 70's Mustangs much more fondly than Camaros of the same time period. But there was an era when the Camaro was unarguably the better-looking car. That's from 1982 until 1993. That's the Camaro that I remember, and that's the Camaro that I'd like to see brought back!

Here's a 1990 model:


(Caveat: I've never owned a sports car, and the odds are that I won't for a long time.)

I Can't Drive 75

(Well, I can, but I don't really like to.)

I did a bunch of driving around on my motorcycle today, definitely the most distance traveled in one day this year. After work, I first hustled over to the Street Fair, to catch some exciting dance studio action:


After that, I hopped on the freeway and rode to my investment club meeting. On the way, I found I had to go about 120 km/h (75 mph) just so that the traffic wouldn't pass me as if I were riding my Trek. While the near-antique 550 cc Kawasaki seems willing to go that speed with no complaints, it's just a little fast for my tastes. At that speed, I have the fear that the whole bike is just going to fall apart or something. It's not that I'm getting old, but the bike is!

Economical, lower carbon emissions transportation; not a lifestyle:

Toothless People

Not Excited About Softball

I ran in a 5K race today. I felt I did well, and was satisfied with my time. (Though it does leave plenty of room for improvement.) There is not a whole lot to say about it. If I get a copy of some photos, I'll post them and maybe talk a little more about the run.

The other "sporting event" is that a friend is trying to bring back the co-ed softball team at our church, where we play in a community recreational league. My wife and I are an in-demand commodity when it comes to softball, primarily because my wife has some interest and ability when it comes to the sport. In the league we're in, fully-staffed teams play 5 females and 5 males, and it tends to be easier to find males that are interested in playing. In other words, everyone wants her, and I'm just additional baggage. :-)

Our first game is tomorrow afternoon. I mentioned that I would prefer to stay home with the kids while my wife goes to play, assuming that there are enough men to field a team. On-and-off, I've been playing softball all my adult life. I've come to a point where I realise that I'm not very good, and I'm not getting any better. I mean, I'm sure I could improve if I worked at it, but I'm not going to work at it.

I may be young and athletic compared to the rest of my team. But it gets a little frustrating playing against teams comprised of athletes in their early 20's, or just against people who are good softball players in general. I think the best summary of me and softball is this: More than a decade ago, I was playing first base. I don't remember the details of the game situation, but either there were some bad throws that came my way, or maybe some difficult-to-field balls. I also don't remember if I made the plays or not. But I do remember the other team's first base coach say that he'd never seen a player work as hard at playing first base as I was. To which I responded, "You know what they say: The good ones make it look easy."

Another issue is dealing with keeping track of kids who aren't mature enough to keep track of themselves while I'm in the middle of a game (not that I expect it of them at their ages.) In general, I end up putting a lot of pressure on myself. I suppose losing could be a chance to be humble. But, while I still like playing softball at the recreational level, I'll be happy to sit back and let others do the playing.

Since I've been posting a photo with each post lately, here's one from 2004. You're on your own in identifying who is me.

Second Day of Cheerleading

Since I mentioned I would yesterday, here's a photo from the second day of cheerleading practice. There's not yet a whole lot of exciting action to photograph.

Hold On To The Ball!

Today was the first day of cheerleading practice. Unfortunately, I got there too late to take any photos (I'll post one soon), so here's a close-up football action shot. The first thing I see is an explanation for all the fumbles! (To be fair, he's not normally a ball carrier, except in a few drills in practice.) He had a few good hits too. I'll have to get some video.

The Not-Quite Blue Ribbon

We spent a good deal of Saturday at the fairgrounds. It would have been nice if they gave awards at the conclusion of each category, or if they would tell people when to be back for awards. But they didn't. So, after arriving at 7:30 AM and talking to the judge at 9:30, the awards ceremony began at around 3:30 PM. (I replaced my wife as chaperone at 1:00 PM or so.) I suppose it was worth the wait. However, the ribbon isn't exactly blue. It's for Fifth Place in Junior Dog Care. And, yes, there were more than 5 contestants. There were something like 11. I'm proud of her. She did a good job!

I hear that the livestock categories don't force kids and families to wait around all day. We're not going to do dogs again next year.

In case you were wondering, D.D. was judged not guilty by reason of insanity.

Napoleon (Penguin Lives) by Paul Johnson

Here's a book club selection: Napoleon from the "Penguin Lives" series, written by Paul Johnson. The author claims that only Jesus Christ has had more books written about him than Napoleon Bonaparte. So why write another? A big reason is that they sell, I suppose.

Don't you hate it when an author refuses to take a stand on an issue? For example, he may try to present both sides, and leave it to the reader to make up his own mind. If you do, you're in luck. Johnson is not afraid to express an opinion, and his opinion is very Anti-Napoleon. A few of Johnson's views are as follows:

• Napoleon was an opportunist who had no guiding principles besides the growth of his own power, which directly resulted in the deaths of millions of people.
  
• By constructing the world's first totalitarian state, utilizing a secret police, propaganda, faked plebiscites, and so on, his was the model of the totalitarian states of the 20th century, such as Stalin's U.S.S.R.
• He awakened a sense of German nationalism, resulting in the creation of the Second, and thus, the Third Reich.
• For more than a century before Bonaparte's time, France was the largest and most powerful nation in Europe. One of Napoleon's legacies is the relative decline of France, from which it hasn't recovered.
• Johnson also points out that the United States of America was a lasting beneficiary of Napoleon's short-sightedness. By the sale of Louisiana to the US for what was then considered a very low price, he paved the way towards making America a world power. Frankly, I have a hard time envisioning a large, lasting French-speaking power in what is today the Central US. But if anyone could make it happen, it would be Nappy.

Johnson does look at Napoleon's life and explains some of the reasons for his successes. For example, he was apparently better with maps and logistics than any military man before him. But, to the author, the successes are far outweighed by the failures.

People who aren't history buffs will likely be bored, and the book did have a few annoying aspects. For example, it seems that a working knowledge of French is assumed, as Johnson will quote sentences such as, "Non, assurément, c'est un jeune homme trop bien elévé pour cela," without a translation. Johnson also showed off his knowledge of the English language. As an example, one word I learned was Sangfroid. I'll give it a relucant three stars out of five. I'd give it a lower rating, but I can't suggest a better book on the subject, and the book is memorable at least by the author's opinion of the subject matter.

A Discussion Between Two Cubans

[Note: I first heard this one a long time ago.]

Two Cubans were walking along a beach near their homes, and had the following conversation:

"Look at the beautiful sunset! I thank God for sharing this beauty with us."

"You may thank God, but as for me, I will thank Fidel."

"Thank Fidel? When I look at the beautiful land or my house or my family or the food I have to eat, I want to thank God."

"You may thank God, but as for me, I will thank Fidel."

"Amigo! Fidel is just a man. He will not live forever. One day, he will dead and gone. Then who will you thank?"

"God."