Favorite T Shirts Seen At The 2008 Indianapolis 500.

In no particular order here is a small taste of the hundreds of photos I took at the Indianapolis 500 this weekend. It will take a day or two to cull, sort and censor most of the ones suitable for posting on this family style blog. so bear with me.

For now, here are my favorite t shirts seen at the track.


This guy sat behind me. We were instant friends. When I told him the shirt should be black with white lettering he told me, “I’m from Cincinnatti, we wear red”. They hate Cubs fans more than I do. BOO-YAH!

Here’s another red t shirt that really got my attention. My aim was a little off but trust me, it was a cool shirt.


Here’s one for all you Fighting Irish fans. You’ll get it if nobody else does.

Favorite T Shirts Seen At The 2008 Indianapolis 500 Part 2

The big race draws all kinds. You take the good with the bad, sort it out and go with God.

Click on the photo to enlarge and read his brilliant contribution to society. Black shirt. lower left.


This young lady chose to wear her t shirt lower than I would.


Here is the sweet young thing that sat in front of me in turn two. She had a balcony you could do Shakespeare from.



Forgive me Lord. Just this once.

Indy 500 - Part Three

They had a great military parade before the game and the crowd was really fired up. When you are at a place like the Indianapolis 500 you can see where the troops are from and who supports them. This is also the view looking north from our seats.
After the troops drove around the track they formed up in front of the main presentation area.
Here is a view of the DirectTV blimp overhead above the "Pagoda" structure where the rich and powerful sat looking a bit north from our seats.
This is a view looking south with the cars lined up in rows of three prior to the start of the race. You can see the iconic Indy 500 leader pole, as well. The cars were going amazingly fast from my perspective as they banked that turn. It looks so much faster in "real life" from this perspective when compared to TV.

Indy 500 - Part Two

There are many Indy 500 traditions. Since I had never been to the race before, I didn't know much about them. We faced right across from the official grand stand so I was able to get a front row seat in everything. Above is a shot of Florence Henderson singing "God Bless America".
Julianne Hough sung the National Anthem in front of the soldiers gathered for the parade. She did a good job. I'd have to think that the band and soldiers gathered immediately below Julianne had an exciting view of the proceedings.
Jim Nabors came out and sang the Indiana song. I guess he was sick the previous year but he showed up this year.
Then they released the balloons and you can see them rising above the Grandstand, looking north from where we sat. Note - this balloon picture turned out really well if you click on it and see the picture at full size you can really see the details on the individual balloons.

Indy 500 - Part One

Went to the Indianapolis 500 today. It was my first time there and I had a great time. Check out the view from our seats (I was sitting separately from Gerry)...



I was amazed at how LOUD the cars were from those seats, about 20 rows up. We had ear protection and needed it.

One thing to note is that you can view these you tube videos as "low quality" or "high quality". I think it defaults to "low quality". After you watch it the option to view it in higher quality comes up and it looks much better.

Happy Memorial Day

It looks like this blog will be fairly inactive this weekend, with Gerry and Carl heading off to Indy and myself hitting the road as well. I leave you for a few days with the hope that you will take just a moment or two to remember the sacrifices that many people made for us in past wars.

Here rests in honored glory an American soldier known but to God.

NFL Looks To Improve My Gameday Experience

I have pretty much vowed not to take either of my kids to a Bear game ever (until they are legal adults, anyways) simply because of the atmosphere where my seats are located, and the atmosphere in the tailgate lot. Oh yeah, and the atmosphere anywhere else in or around the entire stadium.

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of fun, but it just isn't a place for kids. Whenever I see a kid in the South Lot or in the West Stands Upper Deck where I sit, I give sort of the same reaction as when I see a kid in Vegas. Usually the reaction is a shake of the head and me saying to myself "why are those parents doing this to the kids?"

So my close personal friend Roger Goodell, the commish of the NFL has decided to address the concerns of certain fans. I have decided to take apart this silly article that the NFL put up on NFL.com and share some certain realities about professional football games from someone who has BEEN THERE, DONE THAT, bought the (beer soaked) t-shirt.

"We look at the issue of our in-stadium experience as something that's critically important," Goodell said. "We think that the experience can be improved. We are going to be working with our clubs to improve that … making sure that (fans) feel safe, that they're comfortable, and that they can enjoy the game without being interfered with. And I think people have a right to do that. We want them to go home, safely, and when they arrive home, feel good about what they just did that day."

This bit doesn't really say anything, but here are my suggestions to improve Soldier Field anyways. I suppose they apply to many other stadiums as well.

• Eliminate all ladies restrooms except one on each side of the stadium since there are only six women attending each Bear game. Convert all other ladies restrooms to mens. Install old school troughs so we can get the show on the road instead of seeing all urinals filled and having to piss in the sink. Not that I would ever resort to that.


• Eliminate Chicago Park District involvement in anything that has to do with Soldier Field. As Carl now famously says to his nephews when he takes them to a game - don't f*ck around in school, or you will end up like that (make gesture pointing to clueless parking attendant).


• Eliminate all food vending inside Soldier Field and install more taps for beer sales. Nobody in their right mind eats there anyway and lets be real here - people who actually purchase food for consumption inside Soldier Field need to be protected from this at all costs. And lets not beat around the bush anymore, the NFL is NOT going to ban beer sales at anytime in the future.


• Stop showing the annoying "emergency evacuation plan" on the big screens before the game. It is totally silly and unrealistic. If there were an actual emergency at Soldier Field, everyone in the West Stands upper deck is D E A D. At least most won't feel bad about it as 90% of everyone up there is totally drunk. You can up that to 99% for a night game.

"And there are some new factors coming into it. The secondary ticket market is a new factor and we have to figure out how to handle that. There's not a one-size-fits-all solution."

[Insert hysterical laughter here] Oh, like the secondary markets sponsored by the NFL?

Of course, the topic raises an obvious question: With alcohol being a factor in so many fan-related problems, is the league willing to take the bold step of halting the sale of beer at its stadiums? Does the NFL even dare consider biting the hand of one of its most lucrative sources of sponsorship money? No.

Called that one, I did.

"It's very possible and likely that people can come to a game and enjoy alcoholic beverages or beer and do it very responsibly," Goodell said. "What we don't want is there to become abusive behavior. That includes foul language. That includes disrupting other people who are there to enjoy the game.

It has definitely been a long time since my friend Roger has sat in the stands for a game instead of in section la-te-da way up high. If they actually cracked down on foul language and public drunken activity, half of the west stands would be empty every single game.

Goodell cares so deeply about fans that he took it upon himself to see a game from their perspective for the sole purpose of developing a clearer understanding of what needs to be done to improve the fan experience. Last January, he traded his suit and tie for much more casual attire and attended a playoff game with his 13-year-old niece, just the way any of the thousands of other fans did that day.

"I just went through the gates, went through the whole experience, and it was a terrific experience," Goodell said. "But that varies from stadium to stadium and probably game to game and probably time to time. I sat in two locations -- all the way at the top, at about the 40-yard line, and then I sat in the end zone. They were two different experiences. I was actually quite surprised at how different they were."

Oh god I wish Roger would sit next to me for a game just one time. He would probably vote to toss the Bears out of the league.

Several fans recognized Goodell, but for the most part he was able to watch the game in mostly unassuming fashion. He didn't reveal the stadium, but it is among those that he views as providing a good model for other teams to follow. Goodell says there are other clubs that get it right, but he did not make them public.

Chuckle. Everyone just needs to know that the Bear games are fun, but you need to know what to expect - drunken, swearing fans, public urination, etc. etc. My record for "beer soaks" or the drunken person behind me soaking me with beer is three in one game. I was mad at first, but just laughed after the third time. I think that was a friend of the turtle if memory serves.

By the way, you should check out Drunk Bear Fans if you haven't already for some highlights of our Bear seasons past - or are they lowlights?

Wheels on Willy

Last Sunday I attended my first bike race, Wheels on Willy. The Cronometro boys blocked off Williamson Street and a few others, creating a square approximately a mile or two long. The crowd was relatively sparse, and a lot of people were coming and going. I stayed for about an hour. I was interested in how these races were run, and what types of equipment the riders were using. These races were forty minute sprints around the track. There were riders from several states and teams represented. I have to admit it was sort of boring. They had a car that would lead the pack of riders, then the riders would blaze by, and then nothing for a few minutes until they appeared again. I guess I don't know what I was expecting. So here it is, from the first corner - just after the lead car went by.

And repeat. That is about it. I don't think I will go to a race again unless I am in it.

Not Likely

Near my building there is a billboard for Grant Thornton, a mid-size accounting firm (it is a large firm but small compared to the US titans consisting of KPMG, PWC, Ernst & Young, and Deloitte - formerly the "Big Eight").

The funniest line is "People Who Love What They Do"... as someone intimately familiar with the accounting industry this is literally the last way I'd describe accountants. Accounting firms are famous as sweatshops with horrendous annual turnover. Exact statistics are hard to find but based on my discussions with my colleagues still in Public Accounting turnover is probably over 20% a year. By the time a new staff member makes partner (if they ever do), only a tiny fraction of the original "class" remains with the company.

You might use a lot of lines for accountants - dedicated, detail oriented, or even smart.

But not "love"...

The Greatest Spectacle In Racing. 2008 Edition.

If you live in Indiana and have never been to the Indianapolis Motor Speedway on Memorial Day at least once in your life you should be severely punished. Judge Gerry sentences you to five years of hard time living in Illinois, Crook County to be specific.

You will be cleaning Todd Stroger’s toilets and responding to 911 calls from the Englewood neighborhood armed with one small container of pepper spray.


The Indianapolis 500 may not be the Super Bowl. Then again, there is no football stadium on the planet that seats 257,325 people in the grandstands and another 100,000 in the infield. All totaled that’s 357,325 people who attend the world’s largest single day sporting event, not counting an occasional O’Bamma campaign rally.

It’s the biggest party I have ever been to.

Yours truly will be there again this year. I attend with my brother, his brother-in-law and about a dozen of their friends. It becomes a non-stop three-day tailgate party. It’s like being in Las Vegas. What happens in Indy stays in Indy.

The bro has connections. One person he is very close to works for a major sponsor of one of the racing teams. It’s as close to going first-class as you can get. Paddock passes and hospitality credentials are included too.

We won’t be in a skybox. I have been in it for time trials but I like our seats much better. They are in turn two, about halfway up and we can see the cars entering turn one, the short chute and flying down the back straight into turn three. Oh yeah, it’s loud too. Earplugs are a must.


The Indy 500 has always been a source of pride to me. In past years when I could not attend I would drag a television into the garage on race day to watch while I detailed the car or Jeep and whatever motorcycle I happened to have at the time. It’s an Indiana thing.

Motorsports is something many don’t understand. It’s almost like soccer or ice hockey. But once you “get it” you’re hooked.

I like NASCAR, watch it, and understand the popularity. But it is not a lot different than standing on the side of the Dan Ryan expressway at 35th st. just before rush hour.

Open wheel racing is true racing to me. Drivers pilot traditional race cars designed especially for racing, not something that looks like the family sedan. In stock car racing they bump each other. A lot. “Boogety-boogety, four-wide!” as Daryl Waltrip likes to say. In open wheel racing if wheels touch it could mean serious injury, dismemberment and potential death. It makes for a lot more finesse, and respect.

Speaking of respect. There have been some interesting open wheel racing developments in recent years. The kind of things that shift my stick and increase my downforce too.


While Danica Patrick gets a lot of attention and…COUGH…exposure in the media there is another driver that gets my respect these days.

I have been officially anointed to High Priest in the Milka Duno House of Worship.

Do yourself a favor...click on the photo for an enlargement. Yumm.


This is Milka (gawd, I love that name) Duno, Indy Car driver. Milka qualified in the field for the second consecutive time. I would love to get into her firesuit. Whoo-boy! It doesn’t get much hotter in the cockpit than that. Milka can take the pole position but I won’t mind if she finishes in the rear.

So I will be heading down to Indy for the weekend. I will have my camera and laptop. IF I see something interesting I may post it to LITGM on location.

Happy Memorial Day to you all in advance.

P.S. It was announced yesterday that Indianapolis will be host to the 2012 Super Bowl. I will definitely be there even if I cannot score tickets. Should be another great Indianapolis party.

P.S. II, How ‘bout those AL Central first place White Sox?

The Music Industry

A while back I was watching a television show that I enjoy called "No Reservations" with Anthony Bourdain when he traveled to Crete and Greece when I saw something completely astounding on television - an advertisement for the band "The Mars Volta" and their new disc, a CD that I actually went out and purchased (still don't understand it yet).

Why was this astounding... because despite being a semi-avid disc buyer for decades the advertisements that I have seen were usually useless and not directed at me; but for once the record business actually targeted a show I'd watch with an ad that I would have responded to. So for a brief glimmer, an instant, I could see what some of these thousands of non-musicians that make up the music industry do and how it could add value.

ABOUT THE MUSIC INDUSTRY

Over the last several years the major record labels have been undergoing constant layoffs, restructuring, and mergers in an attempt to re-invent themselves in the digital age. There are four "major labels" today which control about 80% of the industry, with independent labels covering the rest.

In this article, EMI announced recent plans to lay off 2000 staff members, approximately 1/3 of their work force. The EMI layoffs are on top of other job losses over the last few years detailed here, along with another doom-and-gloom summary of declining CD sales and closing record stores.

When I read the interviews about how the industry is contracting and CD sales are falling, the first thing I think is "so what?" The music industry is eerily similar to the newspaper and publishing industry, where career employees tangential to the mission bemoan their fates.

In the simplest model, there are three parties to the music industry:

1) the artist
2) the record company
3) the listener / fan / consumer

Note how 2) is in the middle between the artist and the fan... in the way, so to speak. The artist wants to create music (and make a living, and meet girls) and the fan wants to hear new music that they like. The record company brings everyone together, and for a long time they had a clear role to play.

In the days of record albums and pre-internet media, it took some decent logistical capacities to design, record, and distribute records all around the country. Media outlets were expensive and advertising required some level of sophistication and funding, and radio was independent and required grooming.

After records they innovated and moved on to the cassette which was more portable (for the car, the boom box, and the walkman) and everyone bought the same stuff all over again. When the disc came out, at a prodigious price (almost $20 in 1980 dollars which probably would be about $40 today) everyone bought them again, to hear high quality music in a format that was supposed to last forever.

At about that time, the industry stopped innovating and making things easier for the fans. Even though CD costs plummeted, the record labels resisted reducing the costs; essentially pressing a CD and distributing one is nearly free, but prices didn't fall hardly at all. Remember the core concept in economics that marginal revenue = marginal cost... as the cost (of incremental units) moves towards zero, the revenues should expect to move in the same direction.

On a parallel front, music information became ubiquitous. When I talk to my nieces and nephews, they get all their music information (and most of the songs) from the internet, through blogs and myspace. The value of the record company is completely invisible to them; distribution is free, information is everywhere, and songs are free while CD's (if you can find them) are an expensive pain in the rear.

A third front was the advance of DIY capabilities; anyone can create their own music with digital tools that are cheap and readily available. A friend of mine from high school was an engineer and worked on many big-name acts; he left the business because most of the work (except for the main producer and engineer) is moving to Pro-tools and away from human intervention.

To some extent it is amazing that the industry has lasted as long as it has; for most fans it is basically an impediment.

THE MODEL UNDER SIEGE

A few more critical holes have emerged in the music industry model. The Eagles released their new album only at Wal-Mart... and it became a big success. In this model the whole returns / shipping problem is resolved because Wal-Mart obviously can successfully stock this CD and ensure wide distribution. According to this link the album has sold over 4.6M copies using this model, without any record company help at all.

Meanwhile, Radiohead put their new album online and let customers "name their own price" which could be as low as zero. This one really had the record companies scratching their heads... but for Radiohead the cost of distribution is very low so even if customers only pay a fraction of what they would at the CD store they are still coming out ahead. The Economist wrote an article speculating that Radiohead realizes that music is a "free good" and they are competing with peer-to-peer versions, so fans will salve their conscience by paying what they believe the album is worth.

I recently bought "The Slip" which is the new Nine Inch Nails album. This album came out for free, like Radiohead, except that there wasn't even a "name your price" option... the only price was zero. I liked the album a lot and have been listening to it a lot on my iPod Shuffle when I work out. At the site (www.nin.com) they have the album available in many formats, including high quality MP3 files as well as formats I don't even understand... but they are much larger in size which implies that their quality must be very good.

In the past 1/2 the band Gnarls Barkley (the DJ, Danger Mouse, not the strange looking singer) made his name by releasing "The Grey Album" where he took the lyrics from Jay-Z's "Black Album" and combining it with the music from the Beatles "White Album". This CD was released out on the Internet for free, scooping up lots of free press and rave reviews.

Not coincidentally, these bands are all headliners (or top draws) at Lollapalooza here in Chicago in August. They are obviously doing well playing live and the fact that they are releasing their music for free online isn't seriously impacting their ability to make a living in music. They are clearly making the choice to get their albums out to fans cheaply (or free) and then to make money playing live and selling merchandise, which is difficult to bootleg.

Also - bands like Ghostland Observatory are being started "from scratch" without label support. They have appeared on Conan O'Brien and other shows and produced and sold their own CD's. They also have only 2 band members (which is far cheaper than a big entourage) and travel lightly which gives them a lower point to break even on touring.

INCENTIVES

Beyond the fact that you'd expect revenues to move towards marginal cost over time (i.e. zero) for incremental copies of individual music tracks, there are other negative incentives at work.

Dan, my blog-mate, indicated his surprise at the fact that the new REM album was recognizable and good, as opposed to the somnolent stuff that they'd been producing the last few years. Why is this? Why did R.E.M. suddenly change their style?

R.E.M. signed a giant deal in the 90's (after the success of many albums, including Monster) and then proceeded to create navel-gazing records devoid of hits. The albums sold fewer and fewer copies each time, but R.E.M. didn't care, because their (huge) revenues were guaranteed in the 5 album deal. R.E.M. blamed bad music trends and online file sharing but clearly they also contributed to their anemic sales by abandoning their immediately recognizable style that earned them fans in the first place. Stipe found lots of time for random liberal causes, and these didn't do anything for sales.

Once the big deal was done, however, R.E.M. had to actually "earn" their living by creating music people wanted to buy. Hence, their new album actually has songs that someone might want to buy. You can't afford to jet-set around for your favorite causes unless some big capitalist enterprise is paying the bills, after all.

The music industry is fighting back by signing "all inclusive" deals with bands such as this one (they will get traffic, unlike R.E.M. so I am not naming them) where the label supports the band but then gets a share of CD sales, online revenues (ring tones), concert revenues, and merchandise. This model gives both the band and the label similar incentives, which are to get out there and earn money. The likely problem with this model is 1) you need to start them early, so it takes years until they make money 2) it is likely more expensive than just signing up front for nascent acts 3) established bands won't "switch over" to this model unless you pay them an enormous amount of money.

THE FUTURE

Given that the costs of creating music have plummeted, it is logical that the revenues from music will also decline. A new generation of fans has been created that doesn't expect to pay for music... and this will be impossible for the industry to reverse.

On the other hand, concerts and merchandise still have a lot of appeal, and these are difficult to bootleg (the people likeliest to view the concert are also likely to attend). Thus musicians will start moving into these areas in order to make their living, and whatever they make from iTunes or CD sales is more or less gravy.

The label doesn't have a lot to add in this model. They can help produce the record and provide marketing support. But what is this worth? A lot of bands can promote themselves on the Internet, and music venues in cities across the country are hungry for bands to fill their schedule, and they can help with promotion, as well.

Like newspapers, they need to re-invent themselves to add value. Unlike newspapers, who can claim to a "public interest" in researching stories, the labels don't necessarily have any redeeming social values. They are middlemen, and they need to make money for their investors. They will need to pare back their services to what makes money, and add value to their relations with artists. This likely will result in a far smaller number of people at the major labels unless they can find a way to recover the vast riches that they lost when CD sales began falling.

Cross Posted at Chicago Boyz

Hell Freezes Over

Say it ain't so, but Pat Forde (of drop dead Pat Forde fame) has finally written a column that is pretty darned good. I was (deservedly) harsh on Mr. Forde last year, but his last pixel dump on ESPN gains a well earned pat on the back from me. I only have one problem. The column is about the BCS.

There is nothing we can do about it. All of the columns, hand wringing, letter writing, and other actions by fans will do nothing to fix it. We have already tried that, and what did we get? Several more years of the BCS, and proclamations by the muckety-mucks of the bowls and the NCAA that the BCS is the best thing since the ball point pen.

I have pretty much given up bitching, griping and complaining about it, and am just ready to accept it since there isn't anything anyone can do about it, short of insane football fans from slighted SEC teams getting their politicians to make something happen to the BCS.

Next fall I will be watching weeks 11, 12, and 13 again in college football with the same old reaction. I can't believe that the BCS is a mess and that team X's fans are screwed, just like team Y's fans were last year. I am simply shocked, shocked that this could happen.

Funnier yet, I can see the NCAA and their bowl buddies saying to themselves "I can't imagine anything that could end the season better than the BCS games - does anyone have any idea how this thing could end up better so we don't get wheelbarrows full of hate mail for Christmas?"

Cross posted at SFU.

Coconut Loaf Cake

Click any photo for larger.

Some people like coconut, some people don't. But everyone will love this cake, you gotta trust me. It is hard to believe, but the addition of coriander - yes, coriander - makes this cake have unbelievable flavor and complexity. From the book:

Ingredients:

• 1.5 cups unsweetened, finely grated dried coconut (it is important for the coconut to be ground very finely, like ground nuts - I found some organic stuff that was already ground to the perfect consistency. If you use a food processor, don't grind it too finely or you will end up with paste)
• 1-1/4 cups sugar
• 1-1/2 cups flour
• 2 tablespoons coriander
• 1 teaspoon double acting baking powder
• 1 stick plus 1 tablespoon unsalted butter, softened
• 3 large eggs at room temperature
• 1/4 cup powdered milk
• 3/4 cup whole milk at room temperature

Center a rack in the oven and preheat to 350. Sift the flour, baking powder and coriander together and set aside.

Butter a loaf pan, and sprinkle with coconut - you can see how fine it is.
Beat the butter until creamy, then add the sugar until you have a pale, thick mixture (about 2 minutes). Beat in the eggs one by one, only mixing until each egg is incorporated. Put your mixer on low and one by one add the coconut, powdered milk and whole milk, again only mixing until incorporated. By hand, use a rubber spatula and fold in the flour mixture in two or three additions.

The book says that the batter will be smooth and thick. Mine was thick, but not necessarily smooth. Dump it into the pan, and bake for 70-80 minutes (I went 75).
30 minutes into baking, put a foil tent on the cake. Remove the cake and put on a cooling rack. Brush with rum syrup (1/4 cup simple syrup, 1/4 cup water, 1/4 cup white rum).
And the results - perfect.
Believe it or not, this cake was more dense and moist than some of the others I have made. I am not sure why. The taste was truly amazing. I could hardly taste the coconut, just a blast of all kinds of complex yummy things. My wife said she could get a hint of the coconut, and that it was perfect. They coriander really took this thing to another level. It was an amazing cake and one I will certainly make again.

Full Moon

There is a Rolling Rock campaign called "Moonvertising" which is advertising on a billboard near our house. It has been pretty much a bust so far.

But the "real" moon looked great over a building under construction in River North last night.

Annual Tilt A Whirl Fun

Well, it was that time of year again last Sunday (Fitchburg Days), and I was excited to add yet another great post to the Tilt A Whirl category over on the sidebar. Until I looked at the serial number on the machine - it was the same exact one featured in this post. Oh well, can't win 'em all.
I did get this shot of the underside - the business end of the machine. You can see that it very well may be the original motor in there.
I was mercifully spared actually having to ride the Tilt A Whirl this year, but did ride some other interesting things. Nausiating video to come in a day or two.

Details

Three times each season I try to do a detail job on the bike. It takes longer than detail cleaning my Jeep or boat. Polishing chrome takes a lot of time and there are so many nooks and crannies I can go through a whole box of Q-Tips. Saturday was bright, sunny and warm and I had some time so why not?


Motorcycles offer endless opportunities for customization especially HD's. One can go nuts with chrome and leather. For Harley owners in specific, the aftermarket parts industry is enormous.

I am not a typical Harley owner. Typical Harley owners look down on Sportsters, preferring Big Twin fat-boy trailer queens and road-king garbage wagons. The aftermarket folks won’t get rich on me. I’m satisfied with my Sportster. I don’t lust for a fat bike loaded with fiberglass and a Lazy Boy strapped on the back along with a huge fairing housing a stereo and speakers on the front. I have a Jeep Wrangler for that experience. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not my intent to ridicule typical HD owners. I just like what I like. I catch some ridicule for riding a Sportster, until I open the throttle. You won’t see me riding around festooned with overpriced HD leather clothing or chaps either. Maybe an HD t-shirt but that’s about it. Typical Harley people love to display all sorts of HD logo wear from head to toe. That’s not for me. You will never, ever see a tattoo on this body, no way.

If I ever got another bike it would be an old pan head hard tail chopper like the Billy bike form EZ Rider. That was always my favorite big twin of all.


For me I like my bike accented with chrome and leather but don’t go too crazy with it. As they say, chrome won’t get you home but you just might get a B.J. along the way. Chrome requires more maintenance than I care to make time for.


I don’t tour on my bike. My destination rides are usually under 200 miles and there’s a poker run or two each year but most of the time I just ride for fun. I have no need for saddlebags or a comfortable ride. All I ask for is the rumble of some thunder between my legs as I haul ass down twisty country roads, and very rapid acceleration when I want to twist the wick as the road straightens out. Gawd, how I love two wheels.


Getting 55mpg+ makes it great for errands into town considering $4 for one gallon of gasoline. I strap on a backpack and can load up with a case of beer and a 6 lb. pork shoulder along with a bottle of Sweet Baby Ray's Hot n' Spicy BBQ sauce in one haul but not enough to make a weekly grocery run or a trip to Menard’s for lumber.

It did not reach the 70’s today but took a run east on Indiana SR2. out to Kingsbury and back. Bone chilling north wind made me build a late May fire when I got home. Probably the latest fire I ever lit here in the country bunker.

Random Act of Kindness

Yesterday while riding I had an unfortunate accident. Well, not really an accident, more of a breakdown. I came to a stop and unclipped my shoe and the pedal literally fell apart. I suppose things like that will happen when you clip in and out of a pedal thousands and thousands of times.

Nearby, a girl and her mother were having a sort of picnic. The little girl said "uh-oh" when she heard the tinkle tinkle of metal and plastic falling to the ground. I stopped and said "uh-oh indeed!". I thought my gear set had exploded at first.

Without even thinking, the woman said to me that I could go to her house down the road - her husband has every sort of bike tool in his garage and would be happy to help me if he could. I declined, only being 5 miles from home and still having one good clip. I was somewhat astonished that a total stranger would invite me to her home - but I would have probably done the same thing. That's how we roll in the Midwest.

Then the woman offered me some of their lemonade.

I was able to pedal reasonably well, all things considered. That cut my workout short, but at least I made it home in one piece.

They Lead By Example

Laura Washington is a journalism teacher at DePaul University and wrote this article in September of 2007, that I was pointed to by a link at Brillianter. Before doing a mini fisking on this, just a few words about technique.

It is easy to see why newspaper articles and articles in many online publications and magazines are poorly researched and hard to understand. When you have a teacher of journalism writing about something she clearly knows nothing about and provides no evidence to support her opinions, what does she expect her students to do?

The opening statement:

The national news polls suggest that the majority of Americans support more gun control.

Could you please, please cite the polls? How were they worded? Where were they taken? Anything? Astonishingly, in this article there isn't just no citing of the polls, there isn't one link to anything in the entire article.

The People of the Gun are beating their drums on websites from Keepandbeararms.com in Washington State, to alphecca.com in Vermont. Every time a plea for gun restrictions surfaces on the Internet, the gun stalwarts furiously post hundreds of missives in homage to the Second Amendment.

"The People of the Gun". That is a new one on me, but OK, I can handle it. It is nice to see Alphecca get a mention (I have been a reader for a long time), but hardly the one I would think would show control of the internet. According to sitemeter, Kos had over 1m visitors last Friday, where Alphecca had a little over eleven hundred. Keepandbeararms doesn't have a sitemeter, but in their ad copy it says that they had 145k visitors last month. While sitemeter isn't perfect, it is clear from this comparison that the far left sewer that Kos runs is mammoth compared to either of the sites that Washington mentions in the article. How hard would it be to rally some diary poster from Kos to write some anti-gun screeds? Alphecca and KBA, in comparison to a behemoth like Kos, may as well be shouting into a toilet, like I do at Life in the Great Midwest. I am trying to figure out how Washington picked these two sites as examples. How could she ever run into a site like Alphecca? Well, I figured out how she probably stumbled upon KBA anyway...

Through organizing, the Internet, and plunking down plenty of cold hard cash, the gun lobby has proven it is ready for primetime. Meanwhile, its opponents are languishing in the wee-hours of late-night local cable.

Cash? Really? Where is mine? The poor, poor gun control people, languishing on late night cable. Not in the New York Times, Sun Times, major networks or anywhere else. Right.

The lethal success of the gun lobby is rooted in its ability to sway legislators of both Democratic and Republican persuasion. Democratic deer hunters in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio are susceptible to NRA dictates, forcing many faint-of-heart, national Democratic candidates to eschew gun control.

To her credit, Ms. Washington nailed this part. Senators and representatives from areas that have a large population of hunters and people that enjoy firearms don't put gun control legislation at the top of their agenda. Don't take it personally Ms. Washington, it is just votes. Votes and voting blocs cut both ways.

Gun control activists: start playing the other side’s game by embracing technology. Progressives: harness the Internet and aim it at Democratic and independent voters.

Again, Kos, MoveOn, Atrios, etc. etc.

The Rev. Michael Pfleger knows the numbers. In June, Pfleger and [Jesse] Jackson were arrested for criminal trespassing during a protest outside a gun shop in a Chicago suburb. Pfleger, pastor of St. Sabina’s, an African-American Catholic Church on Chicago’s South Side, has been crusading for stricter regulation of gun shops and manufacturers.

[Insert hysterical laughter here] I would love - absolutely love - to see how many guns sold from that gun shop were involved in the murders in the Chicagoland area in 2007. My guess is close to zero. Ms. Washington is quite unaware that the cat is out of the bag. Chicago has some of the most strict gun control laws in the nation, yet people keep getting shot - how does that happen?

I could go on and on, but you get the point. If people like Ms. Washington are basing their articles on blatantly false facts and provide no links to studies or evidence that support their positions, what do they expect their students to do?

Cross posted at ChicagoBoyz.

"Good" Rooftops in River North

(Click on any pictures to enlarge). Near our condo is a rooftop condo with a fantastic garden. If you enlarge you can see the details of their little garden, all made up for the season. These people also have great parties sometimes (I'm not invited, but I can watch all the guests and waiters around the entire balcony).
McDonald's has a "green" roof, with plants and other cover. Apparently these roofs reduce cooling costs since asphalt roofs can get blazingly hot... plus they look a lot better.
A nearby new building where they attempted to cover the mechanicals with some attractive materials. I don't know what it looks like from far above, but from our angle it is better than stark machinery.

"Bad" Rooftops in River North

This morning I was on my balcony trying to get a little bit of Vitamin D (which I am apparently deficient in) when I saw workers shifting some sort of scaffold between buildings. Click on the picture to enlarge.
As I looked about I started thinking about how damn ugly most of the rooftops are. They need some sort of code for us looking down from above. This rooftop, above the restaurant Tizi Melloul, constantly has a big "lake" on the roof. This water has been there for over three years; once it dried up (apparently a drought or something) but then it came back, in full force. When the winds are high you can actually see little wavelets in the storm... this can't be a good sign for the roof, but to date there hasn't been any obvious ill effects.
Finally here are two of the most heinous roof tops around. The first addition was built atop a brick building in the shoddiest fashion imaginable; it appears to be abandoned (I have never seen anyone in there). I can't believe any architect would sully their name by creating such an eyesore. Next to that is another building (housing a sports bar / restaurant) that has had piles of debris on their roof for many years.

Next... some "good" roofs

Nuclear Power Cost Over-runs

The United States (and many other countries, such as Britain) faces an energy crisis of its own making. Due to a variety of bone-headed "deregulation" schemes, there is now no financial incentive for companies to build new large, baseload generating plants (nuclear, coal, hydro) and there are massive dis-incentives in the form of zealous greens and myopic regulators that will fight them every step of the way should they attempt to solve this problem.

While these facts are on the ground and manifestly self-evident (no new nuclear plants have been built in decades, not counting the TVA re-powering one site) and new baseload coal plants are extremely few and far between, journalists have been touting the "re-emergence" of nuclear power based on almost no hard evidence. As soon as these articles came out, I immediately pointed out the immense difficulties in building one of these plants, which range from the fact that there are 1) no financial incentives large enough to offset the massive risks 2) these estimates are "pie in the sky" and not backed up by cases of building in the USA 3) the history of these sorts of projects, on the other hand, is well documented and grim. This type of "reporting" is typical when reporters have only the barest knowledge of the facts at hand; as such they "humanize" the story and take uninformed or biased opinions verbatim without challenging the facts.

The Wall Street Journal had an article in their May 12, 2008 issue titled "New Wave of Nuclear Power Plants Faces High Costs". Per the article:

"A new generation of nuclear power plants is on the drawing boards in the U.S., but the projected cost is causing some sticker shock: $5 billion to $12 billion a plant, double to quadruple earlier estimates."

It is good that the WSJ, normally a home for fine reporting, is reporting on these new estimates, which still would turn out to be optimistic, in my opinion (but no one really knows since nothing has been built for years). However, the next sentence shows that even the WSJ has a long way to go...

"Nuclear power is regaining favor as an alternative to other sources of power generation, such as coal-fired plants, which have fallen out of favor because they are major polluters."

HUH? What does "regaining favor" mean? No one has seriously started work on even a single nuclear power plant, and the financial structure and incentives to do so aren't there. Does the fact that some greens, in between NIMBY rants, started "theoretically" comparing nuclear plants to other modes of generation imply "regaining favor"? Nuclear power in the USA is DEAD DEAD DEAD as far as new construction is concerned; a couple of studies and talk by various entities (which could be done for a variety of motives, not explored here) does not constitute "regaining favor". It is just unsupported talk, like you'd see in a message board or in an on-air candidate debate.

But let's move on, since this is a serious issue, and inter spaced with unsupported statements there are many interesting facts in this article.

"Nuclear plants haven't been built in the meaningful numbers in the U.S. since the 1980s. Part of the cost escalation is bad luck. Plants are being proposed in a period of skyrocketing costs for commodities such as cement, steel and copper, amid a growing shortage of skilled labor, and against the backdrop of a shrunken supplier network for the industry."

AARRGH! While it is a manifest fact that commodity prices like steel and cement are growing, the reporter has no grasp of the history of the PREVIOUS batch of nuclear power plants. They were built in the 70's. And what was present in the 70's? Remember stag-flation, or a combination of inflation and high interest rates? Interest rates peaked at almost 20% in that era, and building a long-term construction project in an era of high interest rates makes costs rise immensely, due to the crushing burden of "capitalized interest". Just like the "magic" of compound interest when you put your kids' money in a piggy bank, it works in reverse when you are building a major project like a nuclear plant over a ten year period - costs double during that time just due to the fact that you have to borrow large amounts of money at the front of the project and then earn those costs back out over the life of the project (once completed). I remember when I was in the industry I was told that almost 50% of the cost of those nuclear plants was in "capitalized interest", which is why there was immense sticker shock when they came on-line. Thus as far as rising commodity prices go, the situation today is probably about the same as it was in the 70's and far more favorable in terms of long term interest rates, so the author should have said that luck was OK, better than the 70's, but not perfect.

And the fact that there is no supplier network - is that bad luck? What supplier would hang around for THIRTY YEARS waiting for new orders? No one. The US deliberately abandoned nuclear construction, and all the vendors died, went overseas, or went into the replacement part business. In no way was this luck, since it is irrational to assume that vendors would somehow thrive with no new orders for thirty years.

"The price escalation is sobering because the industry and regulators have worked hard to make development more efficient, in hopes of eliminating problems that in the past produced harrowing cost overruns. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, for example, has created a streamlined licensing process... nuclear vendors have developed standardized designes for plants to reduce construction and operating costs. And utility executives, with years of operating costs behind them, are more astute buyers."

OK, there is a bit of truth here. The NRC is not trying to actively stifle plant approvals, and has taken their demented two-phase approval process down to one phase. But what has happened in the interim? NIMBY's are manifestly more powerful today than they were in the 70's, and the internet allows them to rally their supporters much more forcefully. While the NRC's efforts help make a terrible situation less bad, the rise in power of the NIMBY's (of which nothing has been done to address) more than overrides these gains.

Nuclear vendors are developing standard designs. Once I worked at a water plant built in the 70's and it was a maze of complicated pumps and piping, and also at a relatively new design, which uses gravity for most functions and was far simpler. The new designs are simpler and likely more effective, with less parts likely to fail. But unfortunately these gains are unlikely to be felt since none will be built.

As far as "utility executives" being more astute buyers, that makes NO SENSE. Let's think about this - the utility executives TODAY never participated in BUILDING these plants - the plants were completed in the 70's and early 80's and it is 30 years later - and OPERATING a previously designed plant (think your 1970's car vs. today's car, for example) is NOTHING like building a new, simplified design from scratch. One element in which they are savvier is that they are (mostly) proposing building plants on the same sites as existing plants, which reduces NIMBY risk, since the immediate neighbors already have a nuclear plant in their midst and are more likely to favor the construction jobs and higher property tax base that these plants will bring.

Later in the article they discuss PAST cost overruns at nuclear plants:

"The existing Vogtle plant, put into service in the 1980's, cost more than 10 times its original estimate, roughly $4.5 for each of two reactors" (in Georgia).

NOW we are talking. Look at the past - all of these plants had monstrous cost overruns and schedule delays, so there should be no "surprise" that today's plants are facing huge cost escalations.

"Exelon, the nation's biggest nuclear operator, is considering building two reactors on an undeveloped site in Texas, and said the cost could be $5 billion to $6.5 billion each."

Don't bet on this happening. For one - the site is not an existing nuclear power site, so the NIMBY's would be out of their minds on this one. Even though Texas is a "red" state, any trip through Austin will show that there are lots of "weird" people (their description) who would fight this tooth and nail. Another problem is that the Texas grid is effectively blocked from the rest of the country because it uses a different voltage (except for El Paso, which might as well be part of New Mexico), so they won't be able to take advantage of high power prices in neighboring states. The costs will go up, and Exelon has a bunch of financial people that will likely pull the plug as soon as the numbers won't add up. Exelon is likely just trying to keep the (illusory) momentum going since they are a massive nuclear player in the US.

"Some states are clearing a path for nuclear-power development, even before costs are fully known. they are inspired by a growing fear of climate change. 'The overwhelming feeling in Florida is that nuclear power is popular and that's why it's going to go ahead... our main fear is the tremendous cost.'

I do think that Florida is a pretty strong candidate for a nuclear plant, one of the 2-3 that MIGHT get built (a fraction of the 103 that are going to go out of service since most had a 40 year life and they were built in the 1960's - 1980's). The state is low lying so people can understand the impact of rising sea levels. And the state is (obviously) a geographic "dead end", so you can only bring so much transmission into the state. They only partially deregulated, so they have the ability to pull $ from consumers to finance construction of generation.

The article ends with a realistic comment and interview, which goes un-analyzed by the writer.

"Ralph Izzo, chief executive of Public Service Enterprise Group Inc. in New Jersey, said his company may not be big enough to build a nuclear plant even though it is a nuclear operator. 'We're concerned with the rise in construction costs,' he said.

Here is a realistic assessment of the entire situation. PSEG is major utility in a major market, operating utilities today. But do they have $10-$20 billion on hand or available via financing to build a plant? Is the regulatory structure there to help this process (of raising funds) along? He is saying no, and I guess this is what the author is referring to as a "savvy" utility executive - he is figuring out that nuclear power is a non-starter.

THIS QUOTE should have been at the start of the article, because all of the "sentiment" towards nuclear power isn't worth a hill of beans if there isn't money and dedication to match. Then the article could have talked about the latest (and sure not to be the last) cost-overrun, and how commodity prices are rising (like the 70's, partially offset by lower interest rates). And then the author could have said the obvious:

- very few (1-2) public utilities could afford to build a nuclear plant
- some strangely regulated government utilities like the TVA might build 1-2
- generally cost trends and NIMBY's will strangle even this non-rise in sentiment
- the existing plants will fall out of service at a faster rate than this, making the 'rise' of nuclear power more of a decelerating 'fall'
- our generating capacity is not rising to keep up with demand and we should expect to see impacts on reliability, such as the East Coast and California blackouts
- no "real" solutions are on the horizon

END OF STORY

Cross Posted at Chicago Boyz