Who's on Second

During the 30 year period from 1945 through 1974, three men (Truman, Johnson, Ford) moved up from the secondary position of Vice President to become President after, respectively, a sudden stroke, an assassination and a resignation. In the last 34 years, there have been no such events. Certainly, no one wants to see one now with only 6 months left of the disastrous presidency of George W. Bush (see the latest hilarious JibJab cartoon) with Darth Vader waiting in the wings as #2. But with the nominating conventions just around the corner, it is important to analyze the potential choices for second place on both the Obama and McCain tickets.

Conventional wisdom is that both men will pick a governor to balance the experience factor since of course they're both Senators. Among those governors mentioned are Democrats Tim Kaine (VA), Bill Richardson (NM), Kathleen Sebelius (KS) and Ted Strickland (OH). Also, Republicans Charlie Crist (FL), Mike Easley (NC), Bobby Jindal (LA) and Tim Pawlenty (MN). Two of the latter four would bring sort of a minority presence (sexual orientation, Asian heritage) to the GOP, while Richardson would need to lose the goatee.

But why go for a more or less mainstream choice? TNB will now examine 4 much more "exotic" candidates who each would bring a certain excitement to this devastatingly long, boring campaign. Obama now has his Iraq photo op to match McCain. Yawn. But I digress. Let's consider the following:

Michael Bloomberg The New York City mayor needs no campaign funding, has done an admirable job (way better then Rudy) of running a city larger than many states and indeed nations and seems reasonably normal (like this blog). Handicap= he's a closet Democrat who would probably have to run with McCain. Exciting possibility.

Hillary Clinton Recently defeated in a marathon primary race, she has great name recognition, albeit much of it negative, plus a fervent and loyal mostly female following who probably can be convinced to pull the Democratic lever. Handicap= Bill. Very exciting possibility (if she can finally dump the handicap).

Al Gore It's highly unlikely that he would accept second place but considering his Nobel and Oscar winning environmental image, maybe if the VP position was relabeled say God, he might reconsider. Handicap= Stiff campaigner who would bore voters to death before global warming finished them. Not too exciting possibility.

Joe Lieberman Could be on both Democratic and Republican tickets within 8 years. Supports McCain and Iraq War but provides narrow margin by which Senate is organized by Democrats.
Handicap= Although an observant Jew, his name on 2000 ballot couldn't encourage elderly Jewish voters to abandon Pat Buchanan, thus resulting in mess we're now in. A strange possibility, but isn't everything?

Summer Doldrums

August historically has been the month where "dog days" are prevalent. Hot weather, not much going on, many people on vacation, etc. so that the fortnight leading up to Labor Day rarely has contained much excitement and many of us fall into the doldrums. This year, however, August has the Olympics, the Democratic convention and locally 2 Chicago teams possibly heading for a World Series clash (!) among other known events. So instead the doldrums have been moved back to July, which we're right in the middle of. The lack of hard news had been creating a sense of ennui in TNB, until he was rescued by the following:

• Another "I didn't know the mike was on" moment, this time involving the increasingly irrelevant professional camera hog Jesse Jackson. Imagine what the uproar would have been had Jesse suggested that an equally sensitive part of Hillary's anatomy be cut off. Even Bill would have sprung into action (I think). BTW, don't these guys (remember W. talking to Tony Blair over lunch in Germany?) know what an off switch looks like?
• New Yorker magazine reaching not only its normal intellectual readership but becoming popular (OK, just the cover-- nobody is reading it, God forbid) with middle and lower America as well, thanks to its somewhat heavy handed attempt at satirizing the Obama paranoia among many conservative voters. Paranoia might be a code word for something worse, but even TNB doesn't want to go there--yet.
• The usual round of breathless celebrity news. For example, TNB was confused by an Internet headline referring to C-Rod. Yes, he eventually realized that it was Cynthia Rodriguez , wife of baseball superstar Alex (A-Rod) whom she's apparently divorcing for taking kaballah lessons from Madonna (M-Rod??). This name shortening has got to stop. In baseball there's (honestly) Ivan Rodriguez (I-Rod), Frankie Rodriguez (K-Rod) and others. If you don't have a name that can be sliced off (there's Jesse again) for headlines, think of a reverse name change. It'll be worth it.
• Instances of mayhem and/or stupidity that occasionally stand out. Like the Appalachian preacher who was arrested for having 100 venomous snakes in his fundamentalist church because "the Bible told him to do it". Several parishioners have died of snake bite. Is this what they mean by speaking in tongues? As the local sheriff said, you can buy anything (e.g., the snakes) on the Internet except common sense. The latter, of course, is why you read The Normal Blog.

The Youth Culture

Merely by browsing, TNB recently noticed in a 2005 edition of The New Oxford American Dictionary that the word "blog" was partially defined as a ..."weblog run by twenty-something Americans with at least an unhealthy interest in computers". A later dictionary has gotten with the program by describing a blog as "a website for producing ongoing narratives". The earlier (only 3 years ago!) definition illustrates the frightening separation of attitudes between the more mature generation (e.g. those who write dictionairies) and today's youth or "twenty- somethings". TNB, who was last a twenty something when LBJ was president, is disturbed by the incredible obsession with being young (even if you're not), as manifested by the following:

• In advertising, the most desirable demographic is often 25-54 years of age. This means that most products (other than medicines, assisted living, etc.) are designed and marketed with the idea that people of say 55 or older are over the hill and so set in their buying habits that commercials and other ads can't penetrate their dementia ridden skulls. How then to explain all the people known to TNB who well after age 55, started to buy autos tht were not what they used to drive (Lexus, BMW, etc)? The biggest culprit is AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) which for years has welcomed people in the prime of life (50) to its benefits, thus fostering the ridiculous notion that reaching that age is synonomous with "geezer".
• The often pathetic attempts to "look younger" have caused expensive, high risk cosmetic surgery to become socially acceptable. Additionally, enough is spent on anti-aging creams, lotions and potions to probably retire the national debt. Taking care of oneself, even while suffering the ignominy of a wrinkled neck, is really far more important so that "feeling younger" can replace outward "beauty" as a worthy goal.
• The habits of the younger generation seem to be permeating all of society. The total dependence of Gen X and Gen Y on technological aids or gizmos has greatly influenced how we all live. It is proving to be increasingly difficult (if not embarrassing) to have just a simple cell phone without E-Mail, videos, Internet surfing, photos and other features (see earlier posts on the rudeness this electronic world has created.) It is entirely possible that before we all really do suffer from dementia that newspapers as we now know them will largely disappear to be replaced with real time information displayed in your hand. This will be particularly wonderful while driving.

TNB is not advocating that an "Old" culture somehow supersede the "Youth" orientation. Only that we don't rush headlong into everything new only because it has been embraced by young people. We seniors still know a thing or two, but I forgot what.

Dumb and Dumber

For some time now, there has been a lot of anguish over the apparent (better yet obvious) dumbing down of America. The pegging of standards for educational curricula to the LCD (lowest common denominator) is one reason why the Chinese and others are leaping past us in science and math--and causing oil prices to be so high, among other issues, because of their business smarts. In many quarters, it just isn't "cool" to be too smart. You know --the geeks and nerds like say Bill Gates. Who wants to be like him??

Nevertheless, it's really disturbing that for a job as important as President of the U.S. there appears to be a concerted effort to dumb down the campaign rhetoric. First, Hillary Clinton, a brilliant Ivy League law graduate, tried mightily to dumb down her image to appeal to vast swaths of LCD's. Sadly, she was moderately successful, which has now caused Barack Obama, being criticized for being an elitist, to try to almost deny that he's an intellectual and (gasp!)smart to boot. Look what's happened for the past 8 years under the ultimate LCD president(proud of his "gentleman's C's", probably paid for by Poppy). Talk about change--a smart chief executive would be quite a contrast. It's not a job for dummies, as the incumbent has painfully proven.

Also, isn't it interesting that Obama, a black man with no significant background or social status, is being criticized as too elitist by country club white Republicans who would never have accepted him in their elite environs. This is a great country after all--it's time for the July 4th reminders of this in case you've forgotten.

Speaking of dumb--could anyone really care about the fashion and makeup habits of the candidates' spouses? Recently, it was breathlessly reported that Michelle was seen at the East Bank Club pool in Chicago without makeup. Does this reflect badly on the candidate? I'm sure that if Hillary had won, there would be renewed interest in whether Bill wears boxers or briefs. Of course, that question was originally posed BM (before Monica).

When Did It Happen

WHEN DID IT HAPPEN that it became acceptable for airlines to squeeze out the last ounce of civility from air travel by introducing "a la carte"pricing? Should you need to check a bag or two, a real luxury for most travelers, how about an extra fee on top of of the greatly increased fares resulting from oil price gouging (sorry, just the "law of supply and demand" at work). Or if you're hungry on a 4 hour flight (of course delayed an hour or two) and failed to bring any food aboard, how about a bag of chips or a cookie for $3 (credit cards accepted). No doubt we will soon see a matron outside the lavatory passing out individual sheets of toilet paper for say 25 cents (credit cards accepted).

WHEN DID IT HAPPEN that it is no longer shocking to see people parading around in obscene T-shirts, incredibly revealing outfits (just love those coin slots!) and in general nauseating everyone with any taste or decorum? George Carlin, who just unfortunately died yesterday, wouldn't believe that his famous "seven dirty words that you couldn't say on TV" are now not only routinely on cable and in the movies, but often spelled out on the backs of someone sitting next to you in the airport, at the theatre, in restaurants, everywhere. And there are still parents who worry about what their kids can access on the Internet? Also, doesn't anyone use a mirror anymore? Can't a friend tell them how bad they look with their often ample middles, bosoms, etc. bared for all to see? This assumes the friend isn't just as gross.

WHEN DID IT HAPPEN that current technology has brought the rude cell phone user (see May 24 post) to a new low? The latest trend seems to be turning on your mute phone in the theatre to read the program in the dark or better yet compose text messages, check your E mails, get the baseball scores and who knows what else. Idea for Hollywood-- a horror movie where a virus (bacterial or electronic) renders all cell phones inactive for say 8 hours. Oh my God--back to the 20th Century!!! That's the horror.

It's obvious to TNB WHEN ALL THIS HAPPENED--when he wasn't looking.

Miscellany

Miscellany or mishmash, hodgepodge, potpourri, olio (great crossword puzzle word), assortment, etc. all mean a jumble of unrelated matters. So why not?

• In the May 17th post, TNB suggested (tongue in cheek as usual) that a McCain/Hillary ticket might happen. Have you noticed how much attention this possibility (???) has received in the media now that Hillary has made her rather ungracious exit? Supposedly, Obama is looking for a military man (Jim Webb, Wesley Clark) as his veep. Considering the battles Hillary has fought, she doesn't qualify? BTW, have you also noticed how many powerful women are known mostly by their first names (Hillary, Oprah, Madonna) while even men with unique first names (Barack) aren't generally referred to this way. Is this some sort of sexism?
• Speaking of sexism, the good news is that the great AMC series Mad Men returns for a second season beginning Sunday, July 27. If you don't know, the brilliantly written and acted series takes place in the early 60's and TNB is old enough to verify that it is bitingly accurate as to the rampant misogyny, smoking, racism and other facets of society that are hard to believe today were taken for granted back then. Not that everything's so perfect in 2008 (see teen drug use, massive credit card debt, America's decline as a world power).
• Since it's been a long time since the last TNB movie reviews, here are two capsule critiques for the price of one. In the interest of all you readers, TNB and Mrs. TNB attended adjoining mall showings of Sex and the City (her) and Adam Sandler's Zohan movie (him). She gave the former a solid 3 stars (great fashion, very graphic--a major change of course from the 60's mentioned above). He (of dubious low taste) roared at the coarse, filthy, rather poorly made Zohan but believes that many of the jokes are way over the heads of the core teenage audience (unbelievably a PG13) it will attract. A grudging 3 stars.
• The recent "annoyances" post has naturally elicited a lot of personal pet peeves which are being stored (!) for a future book (just kidding or am I?). On a point of personal privilege , my new heroine is a clerk at a fast food counter who told Matt Lauer that she refused to accept a taped "I'm sorry " forced by a judge on some idiots who threw a hot drink in her face yelling "fire in the hole" to be later shown on YouTube. In today's world every sort of rude, stupid and aberrant behavior is supposed to be immediately excused by an automatic "I'm sorry"? I'm sorry to say I don't buy that just mouthing those words should make the victims feel better. No punishment of any sort is meted out for any offense. This is NOT an improvement over 1961 (spanking was then acceptable).

What is Normal

Well, the poorly kept secret is out--the word "Normal" in this blog's title doesn't refer (see more below) to the usual, standard, regular, expected mental condition of TNB, but rather to the movie theater pictured (circa 1970) at left. This theater, at the corner of 119th and Normal on Chicago's far South Side, was operated by TNB's parents from 1953 to 1981 and was where TNB learned how to make popcorn, change posters and most important for his prolific literary career write incisive 4 line ads with the correct show times (not a standard practice in those days). Since we're halfway between Mother's Day and Father's Day, it's time to reveal the homage to TNB's parents to which this blog is dedicated.

As far as "normal" is concerned, don't we all believe that we each provide the most accurate measure of just what that word describes? Anybody whose outlook, demeanor, conduct, appearance, etc. varies from ours to any significant degree is thought of as "abnormal", defined generally as undesirably deviating from (naturally) our impression of "normal". Remember the preserved brain marked "abnormal" in the movie "Young Frankenstein" (shown at the Normal Theater in 1971)? After the Doctor's assistant Igor mistook it for a person's name (A. B. Normal) this apparently damaged specimen was inserted in the head of the monster created in the very non-normal lab operated by Dr. Frankenstein. Ultimately, of course, the monster has the last laugh or actually, if you recall, the next to last laugh. If there is a moral (in a Mel Brooks movie?) it's that anybody can be mislabeled as abnormal if they don't exactly conform to our expectations.

BTW (by the way for you non-hip readers) would you say Hillary Clinton's acting "normal" these days (by most standards)? Although last week's post gave 10 to 1 odds that she would magnanimously and modestly agree to be Barack Obama's running mate, nothing of the sort has yet happened. This might be the result of, among other things, Michelle Obama's not wanting Bill Clinton to be sort of "second spouse". Who can blame her, given Bill's extremely "abnormal" behavior during the campaign? This appears to be the new "normal" for him.