Baseball Steroid Scandal's Worst Kept Secret

Um, is ANYONE surprised at the news Monday about Mark McGwire finally admitting he used steroids and HGH during the '90s (including the year he hit 70 home runs)? I remember watching him lie, ahem, testify to Congress in 2005--I was on my lunch break back when I was delivering mail for the Post Office, and the horrible Lyndon BBQ joint I stopped at had their giant TV tuned to ESPN for the occasion. McGwire's comically huge head and rippled he-man shoulders filled the screen as crocodile tears streamed down his red, veiny cheeks and he promised that the tell-all book that the big, bad, attention whoring Jose Canseco wrote was nothing but an insidious web of lies.

Of course McGwire was the liar (could anyone have foreseen that Jose Canseco would ever be considered the most honest guy in baseball??). One by one, nearly every player Canseco outed for taking steroids and HGH has had to come forward and admit it, for one reason or another. McGwire's reason is that he wants to "come clean" so that St. Louis will hire him as a batting coach. Really, Mark? And why did you feel the need to do that? Maybe because he knew everyone saw through his embarrassing Congressional testimony for the blatant, transparent perjury that it was?

And now here he is looking for forgiveness in one of the most unforgiving organizations--baseball has doled out lifetime suspensions for criminal and/or shady behavior, and this situation should be no different (sorry, Pete Rose--I liked your hustle, but you turned out to be a pathetic lying bum, and there should be no awards for that). Additionally, his record breaker 1998 70 home runs should be expunged from the record books--an asterisk is too good for him--and all other known cheats (I'm looking at you, A-Fraud) should be tossed out in short order. Now let's hear what Barry Bonds has to say for himself (schmuck).

Librarian of the Year!

Hey, readers--you might not be aware of this, but in the field of librarianship the leading professional journal is called, well, Library Journal ('natch). It's just like the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) for doctors, or Science for scientists, or Wizard for fanboys in that it's the most prestigious and mainstream journal that you know all other American professionals in your field will be seeing and reading. So it's pretty exciting for us Louisville librarians to see our main man, Louisville Free Public Library director Craig Buthod, on the cover of this month's issue--he's just been awarded Library Journal's distinction of Librarian of the Year! Congratulations, sir!

Saturday Jim King Scandal Round-up

Faithful readers will recall my earlier posting on Louisville's wanna-be Mayor McCheese, Jim King. I recounted the dizzying array of emerging scandals surrounding King and King's blondie princess daughter: reality TV villainess and newbie judge (thanks to daddy's deep pockets) Katie King. Well, it's been a month or so, and silly me: King was just getting started with the shady behavior and questionable campaign financing, so I'm quickly falling behind in my quest to keep up with it all. In order to save time (and keep from reflexively vomiting onto my keyboard in the face of describing so much hot dirt) I'll just briefly list everything we have so far. Hopefully this will serve to both recap and get us all up to speed, so hold onto your horribly misguided expectations of gentlemanly Southern politicking, gentle readers:

1. Gave daughter Katie King an "early inheritance" of $135,000 during her 2008 campaign for judge. King claimed ignorance when he was called on this ethically questionable maneuver.
2. Sent an email out to local lawyers requesting that they grade Katie favorably on the upcoming ABA evaluation.
3. Attempted to seal 1988 divorce records from the public, records which included allegations of physical and verbal abuse against his ex-wife.
4. Allegedly manufactured a damaging mailer which attacked then-candidate for the 6th district metro council seat, Ken Herndon. The mailer was a Photoshopped image of Herndon's head atop the body of an, um, enthusiastic partaker of the Gay Pride Parade. Matt Conway, King's former chief of staff, went on record with the allegation, stating that he saw a copy of the mailer in King's office a week or so before it was mailed out.
5. Unlawfully used the St. Xavier high school logo to insinuate their endorsement of his candidacy in emails inviting members of the St. X alumni mailing list to a fundraiser event for his campaign (that's the email pictured above). St. X ordered a cease and desist, threatening King with a lawsuit. King claimed it was all just a crazy mix-up and/or misunderstanding.
6. Just before the fundraising quarter deadline, King "donated" $760,000 of his own money to his campaign in order to propel him past his rivals (who had thus far out-fundraised him), and to be able to say he had already raised $1 million.
7. On Thursday Rep. Larry Clark filed a bill that would limit spending of gifts by candidates: "[the bill] would prohibit a candidate from spending large sums of money given by a parent--or anyone else--for the purpose of funding a political campaign." (J. Gerth, Courier-Journal). The bill is inspired solely by the ethical concerns raised in Princess's 2008 campaign.

Whew! Writing about King's ethical deviations is a lot like writing about current technologies: as soon as you finish it already seems outdated. I'm sure this list will all be old news by the time I sit down and read the local paper Monday morning.

Virginia Celebrates 146 Uninterrupted Years of Civil War

Every year in America there are re-enactments of various battles from the Civil War. The men who participate--whether you describe them as "buffs" "enthusiasts" or "obsessive weirdos"--get pretty wrapped up in their parts, taking their roles so seriously that it would seem to drain any semblance of fun or lightheartedness from the whole enterprise. I've talked with a few re-enactors, and I can tell you that these guys are not fooling around--they make the most hardcore D & D nerds, fantasy role-playing "wizards" and Renaissance fair actors seem remarkably well-adjusted. So I can't say that I was particularly surprised to hear about an altercation at this year's re-enactment of the Battle of Stanardsville in Virginia.

According to the Richmond Times Dispatch, two "commanders" from the Confederacy and the Union "cavalries" ended up charging each other with assault resulting from an, um, unscripted battlefield scuffle. According to the report "Union commander" Joseph Ferguson knocked the hat off of his counterpart, "Confederate commander" Doug Nalls, who reciprocated by "shooting" Ferguson in the face with his historically accurate revolver. Although the gun was loaded only with blanks, it did contain gun powder, which caused Ferguson some nasty facial injuries. Both claimed their actions were accidental.

Civil War re-enactment clashes like this one are not without precedent, as you may imagine. In a 2008 re-enactment in Middletown, Virginia a 73-year-old retired policeman from New York was shot in the shoulder with a musket ball. About 20 years ago another "soldier" was also shot at a re-enactment of the Battle of Gettysburg. Oops.

All were claimed accidental. In the Stanardsville case, however, the Dispatch notes:

"Confederate re-enactors testified during the several-hour trial that the two had exchanged words before the violent encounter. According to Confederate witnesses, the Union commander used archaic slurs such as "blaggard" and "knave" to describe his Confederate counterpart. The prosecutor, Ronald L. Morris, said today that more contemporary insults were also exchanged." (!)

You see, even when these guys get pissed off, they stay in character (I am pretty curious about those "contemporary insults" though). Despite the eye-witness accounts, both charges were dropped by the judge--I guess the Stanardsville battle will end in a draw this time...but, as Ferguson said: "The feud on the battlefield goes on." I guess that's Yankee speak for "Watch yer back, Johnnie Reb."

"You gotta / Prada / Bag with a lotta / Stuff in it / Give it to yr friend / Let's spin"

Now that's the carefree, label conscious rap music I grew up with, friends--like so many teen-centered movies from the 80's starring Kevin Bacon, the motivating factor of nearly every song was defending the central prerogative to dance. Will Smith sums this aesthetic up nicely, I'd say.

Gen X Radio

I don't listen to much commercial radio anymore--in fact, it had been probably months since I ventured right of the dial from NPR. As a consequence, I had not kept up with the changing face of Louisville radio; I just assumed all the stations had remained pretty much the same since I was in high school.

Turns out that one of the old standards here for classic rock/new-ish scream metal anthems--100.5 The Fox--has succumbed, and has been replaced by something kind of magical called Gen X Radio. Now that's a pretty slippery handle, I'd say--does it mean music that was popular when Gen Xers were children, in the 80's? Does it mean middle school/high school era stuff from the 90's? Well, these are all interesting questions, but it turns out that they play mostly early to mid 90's dance club stuff. That's all well and good, but wait--Gen X is still a vital generation! Is In Living Color-era techno-rap really our generation's trademark music? It seems like our demographic is still an active one in the new music marketplace...some groups that identify with the Gen X label are ravenous Lady Gaga fans or big Vampire Weekend supporters, not the type to be perpetually searching the dial for a little C + C Music Factory. (or are we? Nostalgic escapism is a powerful thing, and it certainly went down pretty well with me.)

Anyway, I was in my car, slogging it through the snow (in Louisville, 4" is a pretty big deal, so my usual 10 minute drive turned into a stressful, white-knuckled, 50 minute Slip N' Slide of doom) and I needed something more appropriate to listen to besides a polite debate between well-informed experts. When I came upon 100.5 on my FM I was delighted to find exactly what I did need: C'mon 'N Ride It (The Train) by the Quad City DJs!

This sort of fun crap does hold a soft spot in my heart--it hearkens back to more innocent times when mainstream rap/hip-hop was more fun loving and ridiculous than it is today--more inclusive, more eager to embrace rhythmically challenged & dumb looking white people than it is now. But Gen X didn't stop there, it followed that old favorite up with something I hadn't heard since 1997 or so: Will Smith's Gettin' Jiggy Wit It! ha! remember that crazy Egyptian motif he went with for the video? It pretty much makes the song for me, starting out with Will and his dancers sporting the usual 90's style track suits (one leg rolled up, 'natch) but then, inexplicably, about a minute in they go full-on Walk Like an Egyptian wit it--costumes, set, dance moves, the works. Why? Why not? It was the heady days of the late 90's and Will Smith did anything he wanted, and the world na-na-na-ed along with him. So Will kept me alert on the road and saw me home safely. I'm almost positive that I'm the only person to ever say this, but Gettin' Jiggy Wit It probably saved my life yesterday.

So if you happen to be in the Louisville/Kentuckiana listening area, tune in to 100.5 FM--it may help you too.

Q & A (but mostly Q) with George Lucas

Like me, you may have listened to the Fresh Air interview today with George Lucas. Apparently, he's got a new self-aggrandizing book out called George Lucas's Blockbusting (edited by Lucy Autrey Wilson and Alex Ben Block) that he's pimping out to the usual talk show outlets (he was also on the Daily Show last night, prompting me to fall asleep for several hours on the couch). Now, to be fair, he is properly qualified to discuss what makes a movie a "blockbuster," but it seems to be the heritage of my generation (30-somethings) to backlash on the Spielberg/Lucas legacy. I mean, what was the most significant achievements of these two pop culture powerhouses as I was coming of movie-going age? AI and those gawd awful SW prequels? Backlash, I say!

As I was listening to the interview (conducted by David Bean Cooley), I actually got really anxious. I mean, how many times has Lucas been interviewed about this stuff? hundreds of times, easy. He's well rehearsed, so we're not in for any insightful answers. In fact, most of the time it was like listening to a politician--he was rambling off tangents, pushing some revisionist agenda and dodging questions most of the time. And it's well known that he surrounds himself in a protective bubble of fawning approval and flaccid yes-men. It was a little shocking that Cooley (who obviously knew plenty about Lucas and his movies) didn't ask any of the obvious hard questions.

My only conclusion is that Lucas Inc. (possibly even without George's knowledge) sends along a list of verboten questions, Tom Cruise style, in order to avoid popping the bubble and allowing reality to seep in. Below is my made-up list of blacklisted subjects for an interview with George Lucas:

1. Interviewer is not to discuss The Phantom Menace, The Clone Wars, or that other one whose title I can't remember at the moment. It is understood that when the title "Star Wars" is spoken it is referring to the original Star Wars episodes IV thru VI, and nothing else
2. Interviewer is not to suggest or insinuate that special effects/CGI are not needed to make a good movie.
3. Interviewer is not to make negative comparisons between modern action movies (e.g. Avatar) and any of Mr. Lucas's movies. In fact, comparisons between Mr. Lucas's movies and anything else is to be generally avoided.
4. Interviewer will not mention the popular YouTube video critiques Star Wars: The Phantom Menace Review (Parts 1-7).
5. Interviewer will not bring up the obvious backlash against him of the Gen X demographic, or the fact that his name is a common joke when discussing the problem of art being created in a vacuum (hint: it aint art).

Anything else is fair game. You know, as long as it is generally of a worshipful, approving nature.