Today’s commentary from the Sunday Palm Beach Post story “Elderly Man Drives onto Runway” found via the Consumerist. That’s basically the entire story: Old guy accidentally drives through a gate and into airport property.

Police do not believe Friday’s security breach was terrorism related. “It’s a possibility that this guy lost his way or was disoriented.” They quickly added, “But until they finish interviewing him, we won’t know for sure.

Ya think? Is that really necessary to reference terrorism JUST because this particular occurrence of wacky elderly driving mishaps happened at an airport?

A Consumerist reader comments: Can we PLEASE stop throwing the T-word around whenever anyone does anything remotely odd? And I agree. Throwing around “terrorism” for the slightest of security infractions dilutes was real terror is and was in our country.

Also the report says he “drove onto runway 9.” Really? Maybe. Hell i wasn’t there. But I do know that large airports have little two lane roads that run the perimeters for maintenance. You don’t just drive onto airport property and straight onto a runway.

Maybe I’m wrong, but more plausible is that he ran the gate and turned onto one of these perimeter roads - which are actually roads. Its a much more believable error. I’d dare speculate he probably wasn’t even a on a taxi way much less a runway, and not barreling headlong into an MD-11 like the bus on Speed.

This is just another article about elderly drivers. There’s zero terrorism danger. There’s no wish to plant fear and no ill-intention towards the U.S., it’s people, our government, or aviation infrastructure. This story has as much to do with terrorism as an elderly person driving through a window of an “Old Country Buffet.”

Share This

I occasionally take random photos of things I find interesting, strange, cool, or just catch my eye. Such as Chicago’s Roosevelt Metra station, this frightening U-haul, or a crap filled Target. As is the motto of Rob at Cockeyed.com “Always have your camera.”

On Tuesday, February 12th, my two co-workers and I were driving up Monaco Street in southeast Denver to lunch. At 6460 East Yale I saw this little Safeway gas station. I had never seen one before - and for some reason was fascinated that it looked just like a “BIG” Safeway. I found this structure cute in a Christmas village elf like way: The design, windows, overhang, and trim are identical to a full scale Safeway - and the disproportionate letters and logo give it an even more miniature appearance. Yes I’m a dork. I realize its just a friggen gas station, and that would have been the sum of this post. Except for what followed:

To appease my elation co-worker M.P. pulled in for gas, allowing me to step out to take a few shots. As I scouted out a good angle employee A.J. walked up to me, blocked me by standing in FRONT of me, and tersely asked what exactly I was doing. I didn’t stop to converse, but said that I just liked the building and thought it was interesting.

He became agitated at my bland answer, and I then realized that if I continued I would most likely face harassment by doing something as benign as taking a few snapshots of a gas station - the same harassment occasionally faced by those who enjoy photographing more majestic objects like bridges, airliners, and trains. Quickly processing this I then realized that in an attempt to block the sun I was actually standing on the CURB of the street, just OFF of Safeway’s lot on public property. Now it was clearly a non-issue.

Meanwhile A.J. walked back into the mini-me Safeway. I wrapped up and walked to the car as M.P. finished pumping his gas. As he started the car A.J. walked up to me on the passenger side, just after making a show of writing down my friend’s license plate number. He said that he had just spoken with his security officer (inside the “big people” Safeway I presumed,) and demanded that I delete my photos or he would confiscate my cell phone. I politely and firmly said “No. My photos were taken from the street. And while I don’t need to explain or have reason for taking photos my intentions are not nefarious.”

A.J. then said since I was not cooperating with his requests he would be forced to call the police. Um, yeah…

Hi, Denver police - some guy is taking pictures of our Safeway gas shack. Please hurry.

My other co-worker in the back seat couldn’t contain his laughter anymore, and I finally said “Go ahead and call the police. I can take a photo of any goddam thing I want from public property including you, your gas station, the sky, a bird, and your mom. Good Day.” We drove off, and thankfully there was no further escalation. As of today, February 13th, the police have not contacted my friend M.P.

This unexpected event gave us a charge jolly for the rest of the afternoon - but it bothers me that someone would actually THINK that they could prohibit one from taking photos on a PUBLIC sidewalk or street. I completely understand a business restricting photos WITHIN their private property. Usually this isn’t for knee-jerk security reasons, but rather to prevent collection of price data and retail design. For example if Target had told me to knock off these shenanigans I would comply without question. Another example is a gym extending their logical right to ban camera phones for the privacy of their members. And I haven’t argued yet about government restricting photography of self labeled “sensitive” areas like customs facilities or INSIDE high profile government buildings.

However no one (A.J.) should DARE tell someone they can’t stand on PUBLIC property and take a picture of a commercial establishment. General photography of airports, bridges, skyscrapers, and Safeway gas stations do NOT fall under the category of “security threats.” If I find something architecturally stimulating I’ll take a damn picture if I want to.

This morning I called Safeway and spoke with general manager Greg Burk. I asked him why on earth his employees would impede someone’s activity on adjacent PUBLIC property? And why your employee demanded that I surrender my personal property, (my camera phone,) and threatened me by calling the police?

Greg Burk was aware of my visit yesterday, and agreed that A.J. was out of line in asking I surrender my camera phone. However Greg explained that A.J. acted appropriately by considering police action, and that the security officer who authorized his actions was not aware that I was on public property. When prodded in further discussion he agreed that A.J. should not have harassed me or asked for my phone.

Greg was very courteous, and during my recorded call was generous enough to talk to me for almost 10 minutes. He gave expected rational for being AWARE of odd activity. But I explained that my “suspicious” behavior should also be balanced out by the fact that I was in a CAR, with a license plate, (which A.J. wrote down,) and my friend also used his credit card to pay for gas. Those elements would make it quite easy to track us to our evil lair. Furthermore any building detail could be easily viewed by the naked eye, or via Google Earth or Google Street View.

I told him its one thing to be AWARE of odd behavior, but another to overstep your bounds and harass and threaten a person with no legal grounds. For the most part we agreed, and I appreciate his attention.

It’s mortifying enough to photography hobbyists and enthusiasts when they’re wrongfully told by police and private security that they can’t photograph public structures like the Brooklyn Bridge or the Eisenhower Tunnel. Niche groups or buffs who enjoy studying things like roads and airplanes do not deserve harassment. When your personal hobbies and activities, however banal, are challenged and limited under the pretext of security - that’s just wrong.

Did I mention this is a gas station? Perhaps they should build a tiny Safeway jail for security threats like myself.

by James Van Dellen

Share This

I’m stumped today…  And here’s why: 

Last summer Dallas based pizza chain “Pizza Patron” became the focus of U.S. news and water cooler chat nationwide when they announced that they would accept the Mexico peso.  This sparked outrage and the obligatory torrent of negative comments of Mexicans, illegals, anchor babies, soft guv’mint, and electric fences.  109 pages. Count ‘em.  And that’s just one site.

Backlash and death threats - all because a pizza place knew a certain percentage of the local populace carried pesos, and wanted their pesos in exchange for a pizza. 

Yesterday several news outlets reported that more and more retail stores in New York are accepting and welcoming the Euro.  Aside from a few tired “snobby French” comments this is happy news as it means tourists, and their tourist Euros flowing into the city.

I understand the issue of “accepting pesos” comes with the burden of immigration discussion - but I don’t understand WHY.   Whether those purchasing pizza are here legally or not is not the pizza joint’s concern, nor a concern of a shop in New York.  They have a business, and like the New York shops shoving Euros into the register they are simply opening up another conduit of business.

But why aren’t we in dire straits over THIS news?  Don’t we care that some spending those Euros are students overstaying their VISAs?  Aren’t we concerned that far more terror plots originate from Europe than from Mexico?  No, we don’t care, because they aren’t Mexicans.

Is it possible to SEPARATE business issues from political concerns?  Hell PAYPAL allows me to send money in 15 different currencies including the Polish Zlotych.  No one’s up in arms about that.   Uruguay happily accepts the Argentine Peso as many Argentineans frequent their coastal cities.  Same deal with Montreal and the U.S. Dollar.

Good for New York for welcoming the Euro.  It will foster an increase of business.  And good for Pizza Patron for permanently accepting the Mexican Peso.

If we exist in a global economy where big business produces product en masse in China, BMWs and other imports roam our streets, and my calls are forwarded to India - then we shouldn’t bitch and complain when SMALL BUSINESS chooses to adopt the same international approach.

by James Van Dellen

Share This

The CLEAR registered traveler program has been in existence for a few years now.  Later this month Denver International Airport will be the next airport to introduce CLEAR lanes.  You can become a “registered traveler” for $128.  $100 for the Registered Traveler Program, and $28 to the TSA.   The Denver CLEAR lines will be located at the south security area, in the main terminal.

Opinion time…  You won’t find me signing up for the registered traveler program.  I can certainly understand the lure of business travelers wanting to shave 30 or 40 minutes off a Monday morning airport queue.   Tempting as it would be, I’ll clumsily shuffle through the maze of flimsy ropes with my nose in a book before I’ll trade my time in exchange for my biometric data. 

I don’t consider myself a privacy nut.  I don’t live on a compound and squirrel away my money in a tin box.  I use credit cards, have multiple bank accounts, and a blog with my name publicy displayed.  The government can easily find me and collect whatever info they want - but I just don’t care to volunteer more.

Until the government catches on to my secret life as an international diamond thief, I just don’t feel they merit reason to keep my fingerprints and iris scan on file.  Nor should a private company.  Should domestic U.S. flights ever require this type of scrutiny you can meet me for lunch at my new loft in Vancouver.  No wait make that Mérida - I’ll be staying at the beautiful Luz.

I like this description by a commenter on this blog:

“A program to create a database of biometric and background info, funded by the people themselves”

Has anyone become a registered traveler and use CLEAR frequently?  Even though I’m completely against it for myself I’d love to hear stories of passengers who find it justifiable.  I bite my toungue every time when I witness the TSA inconsistencies from airport to airport, so paying $128 for such nonsense to be “out of sight out of mind” would certainly be tempting…

If you are interested in giving your biometric information to a private company sanctioned by the TSA -  the Registered Traveler Program has offices at the Denver Tech Center Hyatt and downtown at the Grand Hyatt.  They’re open from 7am to 7pm.

An aside annoyance: WHY do writers and companies insist on calling Denver International Airport “DIA” when listing airport codes?  The International Civil Aviation Organization’s code for Denver is DEN.  The ONLY other name its ever had was “DVX,” which was it’s temporary assignment during construction, before Stapleton relinquished the DEN code.  However the CLEAR website, just like this Time Magazine Article I rebutted, list Denver as “DIA.”  DIA is nothing more than a local moniker used to abbreviate Denver International Airport.  I am sending CLEAR an e-mail in hopes they’ll correct their website.  (The website that I’ll probably never look at again.) 

Rant time over.  In other news Dex left ANOTHER two phone books at my doorstep last Saturday.  This time the “compact size”  Hey 33% less wasteful!  Thanks Ken Clark.

And tomorrow I’ll have a review of the Asus EEE PC.  This full functioning micro size computer is the ultimate travel tool.  And it’s not much bigger than the Radio Shack “Mr. Professor” I had as a kid.

Share This

How much crap can you stuff into one letter size envelope?  AAA Insurance attempts the world record… 

I have no problem with Triple A.  I’m not an insurance expert, but my parents and extended family have used them for years, and I was a member at some point in the past also.  As far as I know Triple A, (or is it AAA?) has a long and reputable history.  I can’t remember a family vacation without a trusty “Triptik” and motel discount book stuffed in the console of our wood paneled station wagon.

But I questioned this mess that arrived at my office last Friday from AAA Colorado (located at Colorado and Arkansas, just a hop from the Bulgarian Market.)  I receive plenty of junk mail.  Comcast, Xcel Energy, Qwest, and local menus from around the neighborhood are no stranger to my mailbox.  But this one gets the 5 star AAA award for most wasteful.  It would seem AAA doesn’t think a simple letter stating, “Hey how about joining AAA, we can save you some bucks,” will net an adequate response. I understand them wanting to create an incentive or call to action, but this is just overkill.  So grab your knife and let’s dissect it!

Top Center: A four page newsletter addressed to “member-elect” from “Rod Manuel,” summarizing via bullet points and pre-printed blue “highlighting” the full benefits of AAA membership. Ok - I can handle a letter stating they’re great for trips, travel, and roadside assistance, but the following ancillary enclosures start to look frightfully desperate.

Top Left: Actual “insurance cards” with a membership number and my name, good until February 15. The back states “AAA provides services and privileges with the exception of bail bonds.” I’m guessing they’re avoiding DUIs here.

ok - so this is a REAL AAA card good until the February 15th? I can actually USE it for roadside services?  But is this real INSURANCE covering comprehensive and liability? I doubt that if I totaled a BMW this would actually be accepted as insurance.

Middle Right: A 6″ x 6″ “personal” note from Rod telling me that he is delighted to include me in this offer. “It’s quite amazing!” writes Rod.

Bottom Center: As if Rod’s personal note doesn’t get me frothing, also included is a letter from member “John Ziegler.” This correspondence is angled to appear as if it’s been hastily slammed onto the copy machine in a mad rush to get this package out to me.  John’s letter to AAA states “days after mailing in my application, I locked my keys in my car.” He states he used his temporary card from AAA. Actual quote: “Thanks SO MUCH for mailing me the application.” I guess this answers my above question about use of cards.

Top Right: A glossy quick start guide for new members detailing benefits.  (As if anyone over 25 doesn’t know you can throw AAA around for car rental and motel discounts.)  Through even more bullet points and photos I’m shown stranded motorists receiving rapid assistance, a happy guy on a road trip, and couples and families dining and shopping with glee, all thanks to AAA.

Bottom Right: A dangerously shiny AAA rectangular sticker to be displayed on car.  At the proper angle this could be reflect the sun and blind pilots.

Left Center: Business reply envelope. “RUSH!!! Registration enclosed”

Bottom Left: The envelope in which these shenanigans arrived in- misleadingly marked “Membership Registration Enclosed.”

Whew! There you have it. Normally something like this would make a beeline for the dumpster and not even merit a second glance, but I found it utterly astounding at just how much stuff was jammed inside. 

Now - these temporary membership cards:  I examined the fine print, which states “If you USE your card you will be billed for services should you fail to send in the premium by deadline.”   I supposed that’s fair, but to play the manipulative consumer I COULD use my cards and just not pay.  I didn’t sign a contract with them.  They sent ME a service card to use.  It’s similar to the “Cash this check for $10 and you’ll be enrolled in…”  that credit card companies mail.  But what’s different here is that they have no way of charging me - All they have is my name and address.

Perhaps I should USE my temporary membership card and try to help a stranded motorist in the next month.  I’d like to make SOMETHING positive happen from all this waste.  If I can use my card to be a good Samaritan then I’ll win, a stranger wins, and AAA?   We’ll, maybe they’ll learn to be less wasteful.

By James Van Dellen

Share This

In this October post I wrote about businesses jumping on the carbon offset and green bandwagon as a vehicle in which to sell more stuff and promote themselves as conscious companies. My opinion is that being truly green means living a simple life and eschewing the trappings of over consumption. Tim Leffel of Tim’s Cheap Travel Guide also describes the mental gymnastics associated with being green in this excellent post. A thoughtful and budget conscious travel expert, he agrees that for certain business models it’s practically impossible to be “green.”

Here’s another one: Last week on the way home I listened to NPR’s “All Things Considered” interview NFL environmental director Jack Groh. Yes, the NFL has an environmental director. Groh flat out admits that the Superbowl is a giant waste of resources - power and transportation producing the highest numbers of carbon emissions. In his interview he outlines new concepts which balance out the carbon footprint of the Superbowl and their related events. Cool - so how can anyone have a problem with this? A few of his ideas are interesting, such as using wind and solar energy to power events at and leading up to the game (although he doesn’t say at what percentage.)  If a company IS trying to offset their energy use, am I being a curmudgeon by bitching about an organization planting some trees in their host city?

Something about it just doesn’t sit right. They aren’t driven by true environmental motives, only the guilt of thus far being unassociated with the green movement. Jack Groh is hired, speaks for, and is a shining “green” star for in an industry that has and never will have anything to do with environmentalism. In his defense he probably does a great job with what he has to work with. And I’m only singling out the Superbowl because of this interview. A U2 concert, cruise ship, and the Democratic Convention here in Denver are all wasteful as well, and they deserve their own respective scrutiny.

However the Superbowl and other examples are by their very nature ostentatious and excessive. It’s silly to try and pretend they’re not by using the lame tactics outlined by Groh. If it’s obvious that the “Home Depot NFL Experience mini theme park” with it’s trucked in rides, multiple food vendors, and enormous promotional displays is nothing more than a giant waste - then the real question is “should we scale it down, or even have it in the first place?” The answer we find is NO, because it gains massive revenue.” Investors and companies prefer their numbers black, not green, so to distract us from that real question they lay down some sod in hopes we’ll coo green and justify the mountains of garbage events like this create. Ideas and suggestions that are TRULY green, like bringing your own water bottles from home, simple won’t come to fruition because they don’t make money. Jack also describes the issue of how to recycle the great amounts of trash like promotional standees and giant foam fingers. Again, shouldn’t the real discussion be whether we should be producing all this throwaway crap in the first place? (I pondered this at Target over Christmas.)

Rounding out the feel good vibe Jack Groh says they’ll insist local staff and crew shop at minority and women owned business. What? That’s great that they want to support the local community, but why mandate THAT? Demographics of small business ownership in Phoenix is a completely separate issue than environmentalism. Why lump the two together? What if an old white shopkeeper just happens to have a better, cheaper, and GREENER widget? Or what if it’s an interracial couple that co-owns the store?

Back to the green: If you consume far more than you need does it really put your mind at ease knowing a company is planting a few stickly tree in the freeway median? Can anyone really take that seriously? It doesn’t sound like the NFL does either as I can’t fine ANY bit of info regarding this program on their site.

To me these types of green programs, with their eager acceptance and lack of criticism, have the potential to do more harm than good. It mocks the true meaning and roots of environmentalism by justifying the very thing environmentalists and earth conscious consumers attempt to avoid: extreme over consumption. Making ourselves feel good by doing tiny initiatives won’t curb our insane level of wants and materialistic demands. It will only WORSEN that drive - as we’re being told that it’s acceptable, because somewhere a person in the position of “environmental director” says “Trample on, it’s OK because we’re planting a tree and have a puny parking lot wind farm.”

If I may recycle one of my favorite photos… The concept is akin to the driver of this monstrosity telling me “Hey I’m earth friendly because I don’t use charcoal in my grill.” Big picture guys. Big picture.

“You can listen to Jack Groh’s complete interview at NPR, and decide for yourself this program is logical, or if I’m just an anti-capitalist jerk, or both.

James Van Dellen

Share This

I’ve blogged about invasive and intrusive advertising before, from guerrilla marketing campaigns to municipalities selling our public spaces to advertising companies. However one of my biggest complaints about “captive audience” advertising is marketing to kids.

With a captive audience, unlike radio and television, parents and children lack the option to just “TURN IT OFF.” And I find that wrong.

When I was in high school back in the early 90s our school entered into contract with a company called Channel 1. In exchange for outfitting every classroom with TVs and VCRs (whoop dee doo) our school signed an obligation to show 15 minutes of daily “news” programming. However this joke of a news service was (and still is) nothing more than entertainment, promotions, and advertising. Any national or world news is completely secondary and practically worthless in the quality and informative techniques.

One useful life tool that I DID gain from Channel 1 was my long term use of the “mute” button. During one semester we had a teacher so incensed by this deal with the devil that he muted the sound during every Channel 1 ad. To this day I keep the remote control at hand, and without thinking I instinctively mute all commercials until my show comes back on. If I’m not actively watching a show on television I don’t keep the TV on as background noise. And when I visit friends and family that maintain the practice of constantly blaring their TV whether it’s being watched or not I often need to bite my tongue.

Here’s a new one: Bus Radio is a service that pipes in programming to the captive audience of school bus riders. They produce programming for elementary, middle, and high school levels. Fun huh? Not so much. Here’s their programming clock.

Although their “sponsorship” (which is a PC word for advertising,) is only relegated to a scant sounding eight minutes per hour, we have NO idea what ads and companies are working their way into “original programming.” Much like television today marketers and companies have agreements with programmers for detailed product placement. I doubt that the 44 minutes of “original programming” is free of mentions, discussions, and products that are sold in that manner.

Here’s their “about” page:

Bus Radio is an innovative media company that reaches over one million students every day on their bus ride to and from school. By offering a superior, age-appropriate alternative to AM/FM radio programming, students are engaged and entertained in the safest way possible.

Exclusive agreements with school districts and school bus contractors in the top 40 markets mean 10,000 school buses nationwide are fitted with our customized digital radio units. These units receive new programming every day, via WiFi from our centralized programming facility, that entertains students with three separate shows specifically tailored to Elementary, Middle and High School audiences.

Students are driven to interact with the Bus Radio show on air and online at BusRadio.com through exciting contests, lively DJ banter, PSAs and age-appropriate top 40 songs. With Bus Radio, students are guaranteed to be entertained, even when they’re not on the bus.

And the kicker:

With Bus Radio on board, noise levels drop, kids stay in their seats and the bus ride is safer and more fun than ever!

No - that means HUMAN noise levels drop, as the vapid audio clutter of DJs and Top 40 music rises. To even suggest that the interaction of student chatter and life should be ceased and replaced by meaningless chatter and celebrity gossip is insulting and offensive to young people and their development. Their “proven research” pages show Bus Radio improves attention and students behavior. By “improve” they mean it dumbs them down to a quiet glazed over zombie shell of an active student. There’s been arguments that mood altering drugs have the same effect. It’s not always correct to just do the easiest thing, and Bus Radio is nothing more than “audio ritalin” for educators in order to pacify students, thus avoiding the typical challenges of youth behavior.

Shame on these school districts and cities who have sold out and decided that mindless entertainment should replace the daily interaction that kids have with one another. With all the consensus and arguments AGAINST this product I don’t understand how a school districts can cave in and STILL allow this?

Tell me what’s better? Kids laughing with each other, sharing stories and parental woes, - talking, teasing, and doing the same thing they’ve done the bus for 70 years? Or this obnoxious dribble from their demo:

If you’d like to keep this nonsense out of your school buses contact the below head company members and tell them to stay the hell out of your town.

David Briere dbriere@busradio.com
Stephen Connolly connolly@busradio.com
Sonya Luongo sluongo@busradio.com

More at busradio.net

Excellent further resources and documentation against Bus Radio:

Gary Ruskin from commercialalert.net.
Obligation.org - highlighting lyrics and content

Share This

Here’s your photo of the week.   Maybe this is why Americans don’t have passports.  Good price on eggs though.

I meant to post on this topic a month back when reading a slew of articles in the Consumerist, an excellent site for consumer issues and saving money.  They ran a series of stories about “refusing receipt checks” at retailers.    Basically rants of people who have PAID for their items at checkout, and subject to a further wait and check of their bags while having their receipts matched to their purchase.

My local Walgreens does the same thing.  Only instead of a door checker I always trip a shrill security alarm four out of five times, regardless of my purchase.   I don’t know if the sensitivity is too high, or the clerk forgets to disengage the security tag on my four dollar soap.

Personally I don’t care.  I don’t find it worth getting upset about, and usually when I’m AT Best Buy I want to get the hell out as soon as possible.  Regarding Walgreens I don’t mind showing my receipt,  but also I’m not going to stop like a dog just because an alarm goes off.  I paid for my item and I’m going to move on with my day.  I just keep walking, and I’m not going to run BACK to the store from the parking lot and hang out with the staff there.

But here’s the problem with standing up for your rights.   If you’re going to make a stink about something you can bet on being delayed.   If you want to challenge the astute minds of the TSA you had better be prepared to miss your flight.  If you want to get into an argument with a door clerk at Best Buy then prepare to make it a police issue if necessary (as described in the below posts.)  To me it’s not worth it and I’m happy to let someone else be the Rosa Parks of receipt checks.  Nonetheless I find it an interesting topic.

Here’s the Consumerist discussions:  Show your Receipts.    Adventures in Receipt check Refusals.

Share This

I’ve known about this annoying ordinance for a while, but for some reason every Sunday afternoon I still keep hiking down to the 7-Eleven at 6th and Columbine attempting to purchase a six pack of beer. And every time I’m reminded that they are not permitted to sell beer at any time, reason being they’re located within 1,000 feet of a school.

I was reminded of this reading our local community newspaper “Life on Capitol Hill.” The December issue discusses a proposed new restaurant by entrepreneur Steve Whited called “Encore,” located in the Lowenstein Theater complex. The Lowenstein Complex is a fine example of urban renewal, and home to the famous Tattered Cover Bookstore and the new “Neighborhood Flix Theatre.” Encore is seeking approval for a full bar before commencing their property construction, however the Lowenstein complex is located a long stones throw away from East High School - pictured here from their Wikipedia page. This high school, set far back from the street behind an enormous fountain and acres upon acres of lawn, may cause Encore to be denied a license. Remember Encore will be located OPPOSITE a busy street, and in a business complex frequented by and oriented to adults. A city council meeting on December 7th will give them the green or red light. Encore must overcome the obstacle of the liquor proximity issue, as well as the more logical issue of neighbor concerns about outdoor patio noise.

Other than the reactionary “For The Children” reason I don’t understand how being near a school should impede a business from selling or serving liquor. Back to my 7-Eleven: they’re near an ELEMENTARY school. An elementary school makes LESS sense than a ban near a high school. Think what you want about the intelligence fortitude of convenience store clerks, but if a nine year old girl with a “Hello Kitty” backpack sauntered up with a couple forties I think the staff on duty would quickly put the kybosh on such transaction.

And the new Encore Restaurant (location pictured left) and similar venues? Servers and wait staff already card diners. Even if a group of high school kids DID sit down to eat, (which they wouldn’t because it would be 3pm and they couldn’t afford it anyway,) the waiter would card them, see that they’re only 15, and kick them out.

The Denver rule of “No liquor within 1,000 feet of a school” is annoying and insulting to adults and a hindrance to business. Servers are personally fined and businesses are dealt stiff penalties if caught serving to underage patrons. If they’re policed enough to restrict sales to under 21 it doesn’t matter if the denied patron is 8, 18, or 20.

Give Encore their license please. Should you care to support, (or not support,) them their hearing is Monday the 7th at 10:30am - 201 West Colfax. Liquor notice here.

Share This

I read this KUSA article about local hooligans that slashed some inflatable Christmas flair and beat some plastic reindeer senseless.

Hammering the crap out of reindeer?  That’s not cool.   But here’s the stumper:   Is it really considered Scrooge like vandalism when someone deflates these hideous Christmas inflatables that laze around the front yards of mcmansions and bungalows alike?  Or is it more of a “community service” in making your neighborhood look somewhat attractive and presentable.

I comment frequently on our strange desire to buy and consume cheap plastic crap.  These things are above and beyond crap.  They’re just garbage.  And eight feel tall?  Why, why, why?   Shorter, but equally as crass is Santa lounging at the beach.

Jesus Christ.  Literally.  These aren’t pretty.  They aren’t interesting.  Why would you want your yard to look like a radio station promotion at a used car lot?

Growing up in Michigan a nearby neighborhood featured a “Christmas Card Lane.”  Every house used plywood, paint, and some lights to make a REASONABLE sized card in their front yard with a Christmas message.  Every year we’d pick up hot chocolate and slowly drive around their blocks.  Why made that special but inflatables crass?  The families on that block who created these displays worked together and actually put in family time and labor to make their creations.   They didn’t haul a monstrosity home from Wal-Mart, plug in the air pump and go watch TV.

Here’s an article from Gather.com about how to decorate without being over the top obscene.

James Van Dellen

Share This

Dear Dex Media, publisher of the “Yellow Book,”

Why are you still around? I considered this question last year when you left this dinosaur at my doorstop. I haven’t used a phone book since the 90s, and suspect many have dismissed them as well. Who would choose to page through this inky yellow mess when you can find a phone number, address, or business in seconds using Google or any other search variant - national or local. On the road? There’s Google Text, Google 411, and many others.

Point being anywhere a phone exists there’s most likely internet access or WiFi, making your product obsolete. Even in my office at work I don’t see phone books in cubicles or workstations anymore. They’re as useful and as relevant as cassette tape answering machines, VCRs, and Blockbuster Video.

Stop publishing these. It’s a waste of paper, and a waste of the plastic used to wrap them in. (Actually those make decent dog poop bags.) Also the only revenue these bring in - which is advertising, is sold under false pretenses. Just like magazines, phone book publishers base ad rates on circulation. So my handling of this book for five seconds between lifting it up, walking it to and heaving it into the recycle bin counts as an impression and/or user. Yeah right.

As with 90% of everything else I comment on I’m certainly no expert. So if you work for Dex, sell phone book ad space, or sell any other product that nobody uses - please comment and let me know how you’re able to put food on your family. I’m honestly curious.

Meanwhile if you’re not building a time capsule here is where to recycle your phone book. James Van Dellen

Share This

I found these photos compelling in a sad way. One of my dreams in life is to one day take a cruise down the Antarctic Peninsula, and view up close the immense glaciers, wildlife (penguins of course,) and magnificent landscapes of the seventh continent.

These cruises depart from Ushuaia, at the southern tip of Argentina, and navigate the Drake Passage to the South Shetland Islands before paralleling the Antarctic Peninsula. Unlike regular “cruise” cruises these ships are smaller and you only travel with about 200 other people. Onboard these renovated Russian “Explorer” ships are scientists, wildlife experts, and those experienced in the region providing lectures and first hand information. Plus fine cooks and first class service.

Now there’s one less boat. This week the G.A.P. Adventure owned “Explorer” hit an iceberg and sank. Fortunately all 154 people transferred to a nearby vessel as this rusty looking but beautiful ship made it’s way to the sea floor. Even though the ship sank slowly, the images of people packing lifeboats in the frigid Drake Passage are stunning. Now they can truly say they are “Adventure Travelers,” and I’ll bet there’s one lady on board they named Molly Brown.

Perilous voyages aside this is still my dream trip - however it’s a bit above my level of budget travel. Every so often I do visit Abercrombie and Kent to check prices, read journals, and live the adventure, even if only for five minutes at work.

Images from The Sun. Check out the slideshow as well.

p.s. If anyone loves my blog enough to fund this trip - my Paypal account is currently accepting deposits. I think cyberbegging certainly would be more fiscally responsible than cashing out my 401k.

p.p.s I just read this after posting. If you’re looking for a great pun to make your friends groan the Sidney Morning Herald headlines “Chile Rescue After Tourists’ Ice Collision.“

Share This

It’s no secret that I despise the culture of materialism, overconsumption, and wastefulness. So once again I shake my head at grown adults electing to spend their morning on the frigid side of an automatic door eagerly waiting as if Jesus himself might step out of Best Buy come 6am.

I took this photo last year when I did pop into Cherry Creek Mall on Black Friday. It just baffles me how much cheap plastic shit exists, and how people just lap it up. Rarely do I see quality merchandise available at a mall. It might be Norman Rockwellian to think of a grandfather hand carving a puzzle or game for his grandson 40 years ago, but I have that mental image when I see the amount of complete crap that’s available for purchase. Are you actually going to USE this “Shape Up” thing or whatever is pictured here? Why buy something for someone if you KNOW it will get five months of use, spend four years in the garage, and then be sold at a yard sale. Buy quality stuff, and you’ll buy it fewer times.

You can read up on the nonsense in the Rocky Mountain New’s Black Friday Blog. For today I’ll be participating in Buy Nothing Day, if only for my own convenience.

Speaking of newspaper blogs: Some of them are getting absurd. Each day the Rocky Mountain News features a list of stories where readers can discuss and comment on various articles (usually deteriorating into obscenities about immigration.) This is fine, I’ve like Mark Wolf’s list of selected articles, but as of late the daily blogs are becoming stuffed with mundane issues such as deals at various retailers and “how’s the weather today.” Basically back yard fence conversations having nothing to do with news. In a NEWSpaper. Unfortunately when you blog about nothing, it only turns into an exercise in the mundane wasting space and taking away from the real news that a NEWSpaper is supposed to offer. The Denver Post is doing the same. Wednesday’s front page blog was about going to the airport.

Yes, a diary of people going to the airport. Look - it’s Thanksgiving weekend. A lot of people are headed to the airport. It’s snowing lightly. This does not merit the coverage that a major snowstorm or massive freeway pile up would. Writing filler material like “no line getting coffee and muffins,” or “made it to gate A35 with a half hour to spare,” should remain in the blogosphere where titter users, photo bloggers, and the masses of bloggers like myself can write and read each others ramblings. They should NOT be front page of the city’s two largest newspapers.

Also the Denver Post features a “neighbors” section where people just like myself can post articles about all things important to them. Some of these article headlines are directly on the front page and until I actually open the article and read it there’s no way of knowing if “Pothole Patrol” is written by a pissed off curmudgeon or by an actual staff writer .

Being a local blogger I should think that’s great, but I don’t. I’m not a professional writer. I post commentary and biased opinion on subjects important to me and my interests. When I open a newspaper I expect to read stories written by journalistic professionals experienced in exploring all sides of an issue. Or editorials written by the roudtable of which political leanings and opinions I know.

I don’t think a newspaper should out-source their journalism to Dottie from Aurora, or James in Congress Park for that matter. It’s great to allow reader comments on stories, and provide space for reader discussion - but STOP incorporating it into the front page list of articles, and stop treating mundane activities in daily life as “news.” THAT’s what the blogosphere is for. Let’s keep them separate no?

James Van Dellen

Share This

Found this on sott.net, or “Sign of the Times,”- a collection of articles and scary rants predicting the end of the world and the human race.  (Good times.)

I do think the poster is interesting for its Orweillian characteristics.  I wonder if “the state is watching you” theme was intentional.  

I don’t support conspiracy theories, especially ones that cartwheel into borderline lunacy.  But I do find police and city monitoring an interesting trend, especially in the discussion of privacy rights versus the surveillance of public spaces.  But to me the realm of discussion terminates there.  Save for the marketing folks at Safeway and Visa I don’t think anyone else, especially a government agency, is tracking my life and examining the most microscopic details.  If anyone has a file on your life it’s companies and corporations trying to market to you, not secret government agencies. 

But should you want to read up on how 9/11, George Bush 1 and 2, Nazis, Freemasons, AA flight 77, Denver airport secret base, Gargamel, Crop circles, George Noory, Area 51, Waco, and Mel Gibson are all interconnected in a global secret society - then sott.net is the place to hang.

Oh and they have a podcast too!  Although I suspect most contributors are the voices inside their heads.   These guys should join forces with raptureready.com   

by James Van Dellen

Share This

Who hasn’t rolled their eyes upon hearing of grand rewards given to people suing for “emotional distress?” Typically these types of lawsuits are awarded to individuals for untold thousands of dollars, and we dredge up pithy lines around the water cooler about them “hogging up the system” and “wasting taxpayer dollars.”

But here’s one I’ll bet we can all appreciate: A Baltimore court has ordered Fred Phelps and friends to pay 10.9 (Dr. Evil voice) million dollars to the family of fallen Marine Matthew Snyder. More in this Reuters Article

For those not aware, Fred Phelps is the pasty looking leader of Topeka’s Westboro Baptist Church, and claims to represent God at various high profile functions informing the public through placards and megaphones that God hates our country. And fags. Phelp’s latest project has been tooling around the U.S. protesting the funerals of soldiers on the grounds that our country is immoral, hence fighting for our country supports our immorality. Or something like that. I never bothered to pollute my mind with the actual details.

Defense attorney Jonathan Katz urged jurors not to award punitive damages because the $2.9 million in compensatory damages was already three times the defendants’ net worth. It’s enough already to bankrupt them and financially destroy them,” Katz said.

Boo Hoo. Let’s hope so. I’m for free speech, and I’m for public demonstrations. From a legal point is there anything technically wrong with what Phelps and crew do outside of funeral homes? I don’t know, but the harassment charge was certainly enough to justify him guilty. Is there ONE person (barring Ann Coulter) outside of Phelp’s family who agrees with and supports his actions? Does this contradict my views that there are no limits on free speech, and free speech should not be conditional? Perhaps, but collectively I think everyone from all political and religious stances would agree that Fred Phelps is nothing more than a self-promoting insufferable asshole. I’d dare say that the overwhelming horrific emotions of Phelps and his history had more clout in the jury room than his free speech rights did.

The church, which is unaffiliated with any major denomination, is headed by Rev. Fred Phelps, who has led a campaign against homosexuality for years. Most of the estimated 70 members of the church belong to his extended family.

Outside court on Wednesday, Phelps and his children waved placards with slogans such as “Pray for more dead kids” and “God hates fag enablers,” while passing drivers and pedestrians shouted abuse at them.

If you do unfortunately happen to be attending the funeral of a serviceman or woman and don’t care for the despicable visual and audio trash of the Fred Phelps clan - then give the Patriot Guard a call. These motorcycle riders have been gathering for a few years now for the express purpose of providing escorts and public and personal buffers to families that need it at the worst times of their lives. The Patriot Guard proves that our country IS full of good people, and when one deranged lunatic takes over the press and public space, thousands gather to silence him.

Further reading: An editorial by Boston Globe’s Jeff Jacoby, and Matthew Snyder’s site at matthewsnyder.org

James Van Dellen

Share This

Thanks for reminding me that I only have 58 days to purchase cheap plastic crap in order to celebrate the “holiday” season. A season which now apparently commences well before the month of November.

I think for this Halloween I’ll dress up as a retail display full of garbage. Yes, it is garbage - I’m not just being a scrooge. No one should be obligated to spend hundreds of dollars on plastic ornaments, stupid Santa shit, and flammable ragtag easily disposed of mass produced merchandise.

Go raid your grandmother’s attic for some family heirlooms to display this Christmas. Or how about hanging up your kid’s gold macaroni and/or felt nativity scene? Those are far more important, and have far more meaning than any of these gaudy wares. Even if they do sell for the low low price of $20.

Share This

Who doesn’t love the artwork of Uhaul trucks? Their trucks highlight various scenes of American cities and towns, which provide an interesting and a visual diversion from the often monotonous highway landscapes. Even if you aren’t all that interested in seeing a photo of Lincoln’s birthplace while sweating along side a gas pump at Sunoco, it’s true some Uhaul photos and descriptions are fun and quirky too. I drove the “Roswell” Uhaul from L.A. to Denver featuring a giant alien head on the side a while back myself.

I don’t like this Uhaul however. This “United we Stand” theme features a military helicopter maneuvering towards me ready for instant obliteration via a round of automatic fire. I believe that when you scroll the words “Salute our Troops” on something - bumper sticker, t-shirt, napkin, or Uhaul - you should acknowledge that they do more than just swoop around in flying machine guns. I’d rather see some faces of the military and have us be reminded of the peace that INDIVIDUAL military members attempts to bring, rather than the collective summary of firepower that the U.S. military is often associated with. Especially an anonymous metal face of violence such as an attack helicopter.

To me this Uhaul haughtily screams “Bring It On.” How about Rosie the Riveter instead? She was nice…

Share This