Southwest, the gift that keeps on giving, an objective review of new boarding procedures.

My commute has ended, my wife and I have found a family to rent our home in suburban Lutz, we then rented a home with purple carpet in Plantation only 20 minutes from my office. It is wonderful. Periodic updates will follow, for now, an ode to the airline which made the last two years of my life a fiscal reality.


Oh Southwest, thou art more affordable than driving; more punctual (usually) than my family; and more profitable thanks to hedging against higher oil prices in the 1990's. Now you allow me, the traveler, to remain comfortably seated until it is time to board. "So," you say, "why should this matter," "hasn't it always been this way?" Everyone who has flown Southwest during the past decade knows about the line-up. I know this is a little late considering that Southwest changed their boarding policies many moons ago, but I still see people completely confounded by the process. It is not that complex but I often overhear complaints with regard to the confusion felt by those incapable of following instructions. The complaints regarding the new boarding process fall into three categories. They describe themselves as follows:

1. I am an idiot who is far too stupid to grasp the idea that I have been assigned a letter and a number and will be expected to stand in numerical order, nor can I be expected to listen when the gate agent explains over and over again to stand underneath the sign which encompasses the number on my boarding pass.


2. I am angry that arriving 2 hours before my flight and standing on line for an hour does not guarantee that I will be seated in the first aisle seat at the very front of the plane, and I am angry that people who have paid more for their ticket (Business Select) and people who fly 32 one way flights a year (A-Listers) will be entitled to the first 20 boarding spots, regardless of when they check in. It is unheard of that frequent customers and people who spend money on more expensive tickets should receive some special treatment.


and, 3. I hate change, despite obvious progress.


My own opinion regarding anyone unhappy with the changes in the boarding process is that they are stupid and likely to be Republican. Any perks I had with Southwest will likely disappear now that my regular Monday and Thurday flights are a memory, but I will not complain about my late boarding status, rather I will be thankful for not standing in line. Another change is that parents traveling with kids can't pre-board (but will board between the A and B groups unless they have an A pass in which case they board in their appropriate numeric position).


P.S. Did everyone see Chris Matthews berate this right wing tool.

Tim Hardaway hates the gays...

This may seem a little outdated, it is my first post in about ten months. Yet here I sit, newly rededicated to this blog with a bold mandate to blog weekly. The mandate provided by my inner sense of justice and desire for change inspired by the greatest of all corporations and their ingenious boarding system which allows me to stay on my ass for an additional 30-60 minutes while I commute back and forth between Ft. Lauderdale and Tampa. I've digressed. More on why I am always passenger #16 later, perhaps tomorrow.
One more digression, the man who invented Gatorade died today. It's sad when anyone dies but the lawyer in me can't help but wonder what idiot cut the deal that has garnered the University of Florida only $110 million in royalties since 1973 when Gatorade holds the lion's share of a $7.5 billion dollar a year industry. Seems like UF should get more, maybe that's just the homer in me talking.
On to the subject of this post,
You may be saying, "Moe, this Hardaway is a gay basher stuff is old news." I agree, but how often do we lose sight of a story without examining its ramifications.
Oh Timmy, I was a big fan of yours. The alley oops to Zo', the killer crossover (the first), the three-pointers without the slightest ball rotation, you were the man in Miami. We knew you weren't at your best, the injuries never plagued you in Golden State with Spree and Mullin spreading the floor. But you were tough for us when we needed you. All those Eastern conference playoff games against the Knicks kept us enthralled. We chuckled with you as Jeff Van Gundy hung precariously to the the tree trunk that is Alonzo Mourning's left leg while you pulled at Oak's right arm.
But you had to open your mouth. Even Dan Lebatard (horrible Miami sports writer I refer to as "Lebastard"), let you know you were out of line. Now you have apologized. The fact that John Amaechi is such a well-spoken intelligent guy made you look more foolish than the everyday homophobic jackass. I'm okay with that.
Let's look what has happened in the months since Hardaway's admission of hatred for all that is gay.

The hypocrisy of the NBA has been exposed and those opposed to gay marriage are called what they are, Hardaways (sorry Penny, Lil' Penny). Players and coaches alike have been chastised by the league for the blurting an array of comments from bad jokes (Phil Jackson's attempt at stand-up) to slurs (numerous players have made anti-gay comments).

If the NBA is going to chastise its players and coaches for making comments, the league may want to consider something stiffer for the owners of the Seattle Supersonics who spent over a million dollars to fund an anti-gay marriage group. How can you be against gay marriage and not be against gay people as a whole.

At least one other gay sports figure has come out since Mr. Amaechi's disclosure. Kyle Hawkins, club lax coach, was dismissed after coming out on a web site. After reading several articles on the subject, it's clear that Hawkins was a bit of a disciplinarian especially when you consider that lax was a club sport at the University of Missouri with each player paying about $2,000 each year to play on the team. The questions around his termination echo the underlying problem when discussing homosexuality in sports. If there wasn't such rampant homophobia and hatred of gays in sports we wouldn't even have to ask why Hawkins was fired. Instead, we are left to wonder whether his players were unhappy with their record or their coach's sexuality.

Let's be honest with ourselves, why don't some folks want gay people to get married? I know, the bible, they choose to be gay, marriage is a religious institution...blah, blah, blah, bullshit. Since when is marriage a religious institution. Can't you get married at a courthouse, didn't Captain Stubing preside over some nuptials. I'm pretty sure marriage is a legal institution but not necessarily a religious one. Maybe some folks who are against gay marriage also disapprove of atheist marriage.
It is a very black and white issue for me. Either you think that gay Americans are entitled to the same rights and benefits as the rest of us, or you hate gay people (privately or Hardaway style). If you don't care, so be it. You recognize what most of us recognize, allowing homosexuals to marry, divorce and receive marriage benefits will not change anything about your life.
Except that it might affirm that being gay is a valid acceptable way to be. Something I believe most of us already know.
One more note on the subject of homosexuality in sports: I want to like Tony Dungy but am beginning to despise everyone who lends credence to their own hatred of homosexuals by couching it in terms of their religious beliefs. It's akin to the, "I was just following orders,"defense which doesn't fly with anyone anymore, does it?

Tancredo wasn't at the Super Bowl

I previously wrote an entry about my dislike for Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo.

Dave Barry, whose Herald Hunt is alot of fun, wrote a funny article bashing Tancredo. It's slightly better than mine. Here's the link:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/living/columnists/dave_barry/16563709.htm

Standing online with the E-list...

As I previously wrote, I love Southwest Airlines, (see first post ever). I still dutifully stand in line every Monday morning and Thursday hoping for an aisle seat near the front of the plane. This past Thursday night while waiting to board my trip home I was starstruck. Two "famous" people got off the Southwest plane in Ft. Lauderdale. Go ahead and guess who I saw. Fine, I'll tell you. Rachel and Veronica from MTV's Real World/ Road Rules/ Gauntlet/ Duel/ Octagon of Doom/ Bitchfest/ Slapfight. I thought I recognized Rachel and then when I saw her with Veronica (pic) my "celebrity" sighting was confirmed. Rachel is shorter than I expected. Veronica is as short as she looks on television.

I didn't say anything or ask for any autographs recalling how my wife had tossed the autograph of The Amazing Race 2's Danny I had worked so hard to procure. Instead, I sat back and reflected on the appeal of Southwest Airlines and my own political leanings. SWA has no first class, there is no business class. The earlier you make your reservation, the cheaper your ticket is. The earlier you check-in (during the 24 hour period before your flight) , the greater the likelihood of obtaining the seat of your choice (possibly between Rachel and Veronica, we all remember the shower scene with Abe). Southwest is the people's plane. They keep it nice because you cannot fly if you smell or are too drunk, they also make you buy an extra seat if you're so fat that you spill into the seat next to you. I know this because I've seen all of these scenarios on Airline.

I guess I'm just happy to see that people like Veronica and Rachel are not too good to fly on Southwest. None of us are. I was also pleased to learn that Rachel and Veronica are traveling the lecture circuit. When I saw them, they were returning from St. Louis where they had just delivered a speech about body image. I'm not sure why they're qualified but apparently there is some pressure from MTV for the people on these shows to be skinny.

In all, this is just another tribute to SWA and their recruitment of E-list celebrities to make me feel like I'm flying a full-cost carrier. Kudos SWA. I now have only one complaint. Please make a ruling on the following certified query:

"When sitting in a row of seats near the 'A' line starting funnel are you
considered to be 'on line,' or, must one be standing 'on line.'
Furthermore, may someone use baggage to hold a place anywhere 'on line.'

On several occasions I have seen grown suited men approach fisticuffs at 7:00 AM Monday morning when a gentleman thinks he is approaching the end of the line, only to have a seated aggressor remark that the line includes his row of seats. I have never seen an SWA employee intervene in this type of struggle. Occasionally I have seen them say that someone could not leave their bag in line but I think it had more to do with the seated person's proximity to their carry-on than any kind of line etiquette. And I suppose that's what it comes down to really, we need a standard etiquette for the SWA boarding line. Here is my one and only suggestion and the simplistic reasoning behind it.

From this day forward, no person shall be deemed "in line," whether it be
A, B, or the dreaded middle seat C, without standing in their place "in
line."

Simple and to the point. If you want to be first and stand there for forty minutes, go ahead. If you would rather sit and relax, so be it. Feel confident that your "A" pass guarantees you an aisle or window. I base this rule on the truism that in no other situation can a healthy adult (preboarders have their own rules) sit somewhere near a line and retain the benefits of standing in said line, e.g., the grocery store or the post office or Disneyworld or The Wiener's Circle. I love The Wiener's Circle (don't order anything with cheese). All I ask is that we get an edict from on high. Someone at SWA needs to step up before a commuter gets hurt in the lawlessness of gate 32. Can a friend hold your place "in line?" When is it appropriate to throw a punch? If you see the same people every Monday, should you say something like, "Don't I see you every Monday?" We could all use another friend. Which reminds me, if you actually did harbor dreams of being between Veronica and Rachel, they are looking for a new friend.

Sorry it took so long to post.

Review of Volver with Interpolation

My wife and I saw "Volver" a couple of weeks ago. The Spaniards we saw it with said the subtitles did not afford us some of the foreshadowing that they picked up. We liked it anyway, even without the foreshadowing. It had its inconsistencies but it was enjoyable and I am not the kind of person that analyzes things in a fine tooth comb sort of way. I never assume standoffish rude people are really just shy, I just think they are rude. I like broad strokes. For my wife, the movie contained her two least favorite plot elements, (Caution : Spoiler) incest and adultery. This has really limited our choices in books and movies that we can enjoy together. For one, I'm a big John Irving fan, and it's just a fact that even the romantic comedies she enjoys so much often have less than faithful characters. She generally makes an exception for movies with Diane Keaton. I've digressed.

Volver is the story of three generations of Spanish women trying to cope with poverty, and the poor choices they made for men in their lives. The important male characters are dead for most of the movie and the only other male parts are peripheral. It's a movie totally driven by five female characters and the acting is really very good. Penelope Cruz is really the most beautiful actress in the world. I think that's a good sign that my tastes have matured. I used to think Eliza Dushku was the hottest, but I'm in my thirties now so it seems less appropriate to like someone associated with "Bring it On." Again, I digressed.

The bottom line is that this is a very good movie about women dealing with horrible personal histories, and Penelope Cruz is really very beautiful. The biggest problem might be that Penelope Cruz is too attractive to look like the poor character she portrayed. In the end everyone is happy but scarred for life by the nasty things men have done to them.

Interpolation regarding Penelope Cruz's Backside

Apparently it wasn't big enough. At least her director thought it wasn't big enough to play an ass of a woman who had experienced childbirth.

Almodovar told reporters at the Toronto Film Festival that the booty was integral to Cruz's role. "The arse is very important," he said. "I wanted a fake bottom like Dustin Hoffman had in Tootsie ... Having a generous ass made her look close to the ground. These are important decisions to make because once you have the physical part, you can work on the spiritual part."

Cruz apparently became attached to her new backside and felt strange giving it up.

End interpolation.

In summary, we liked the movie. I would probably not see it again. Penelope Cruz is very attractive and there are better reviews of this movie everywhere which you can read with a simple Google search. I would only ask one question of moviegoers: Is the movie really that good, or are we so excited about a movie that focuses on women and their communication that we give extra credit to the movie for being novel and important. My own opinion is that there is probably some extra credit given, but it's also deserved.

A Note on the Competitive Nature of Law School

I am decidedly not competitive when it comes to academic enterprises. I have never derived any satisfaction from a grade. It isn't that I believe grades are arbitrary, they rarely are arbitrary. I just don't get off on it. I especially don't get off on knowing I got a better grade than someone else.
Some people do.

I chose a law school where the bulk of the population had been working for a couple of years. I figured that anyone who placed a great deal of value in academic achievement would have that instinct destroyed by two years (or more) in the work force. There was still a small contingent of "gunners." Gunners have their hand raised to answer rhetorical questions. They research the cases in the textbook to become familiar with each case's procedural history. They impress themselves and nobody else.

A friend from law school is about to start teaching a class at our alma mater and he relayed a tidbit to me. On December 25 he received an e-mail from a student who was registered to be in his seminar during the spring semester. The student wanted to know if there was any reading he could do in advance of the seminar. My friend, the teacher, hated gunners passionately during our legal education and the unknowing questioner had tainted himself irreparably. My friend, the teacher, undoubtedly thought, "What kind of competitive prick is e-mailing me on Christmas to get some worthless perceived edge over another student?"

I think, "How sad that this undoubtedly awkward social outcast has nothing better to do during winter break than to try and get some worthless perceived edge over another student."

I imagine that this is the student who asks other students what grades they got, which journal has accepted them, what their LSAT score was, and which firms have called them back. This is the student who opens his grades in front of the other students and gloats, failing to realize that those other students don't care what he/she got in Contracts and that their excitement and subsequent call to their parents reveals a level of immaturity that attracts the scorn of everyone else, including my friend, the teacher.

There is no negative ramification for being the gunner. They will be as successful for those first few years after graduation as anyone else. But they are secretly hated. In study group, the gunner's name is mentioned and resounding boos drown out the name until it is never spoken again.

Go Gators!!!

As a Florida Gator, husband of a Florida Gator and father of a future Florida Gator, I hope we give the rest of America and Ohio State fans everywhere a nice serving of humble pie and a shitburger. Lets all root for the Gators tonight ( by " all, " I mean the two other people who read this blog ).

UPDATE: Florida kicked the crap out of OSU and is now the first college team to hold the National Basketball and Football Championships simultaneously.