$olving a Problem by Admi$$ion

Reality to Earth . . . No this isn't about Weiner and his True Confessions. It's all about the money.

For $25 there are a lot of things you can still do in this world, many of them fun, or filling, or just plain necessary. Looking to add to the list are the people who are looking to take the area below the World Trade Center memorial and turn it into a museum about the site, the legacy of 9/11 and, hopefully, who we are as a people in regards to how that event changed the face of our world.

And now for the numbers . . . All of this is to come at the price of $25.00 per person per visit (Suggested) or $20.00 (Mandatory).

The person who brought this costly ($60 Million dollars annual operating costs) little brain child to the fore compared the museum to MOMA (The Museum of Modern Art, if you're not familiar) or The American Museum of Natural History. Both of these cultural giants charge nominal admission, but to be fair, they also have membership plans which allow an individual annual unlimited access to their sites for as low as $75 and $70 respectively. (Lower per person if you take a family plan, Higher if you want all of the perks of becoming a friend or donor.)

There are other considerations to be made, especially if they wish to compare their orange with two of the giants of The Big Apple. I find it unusual, first of all, to have the WTC museum below ground, when the very essence of the site was always its presence for New Yorkers and visitors above the ground, reaching into the sky. The overall space they would also need to hold as much in display on the subterranean site as either of the aforementioned museums hold would require them to dig down far enough to cut through the site’s ‘bathtub’* and practically hit magma. (It’s a bit of poetic license, friends. This is a figurative gag, not a literal estimation.) Also, these two museums are standalone organizations, and don't have a 1700 foot tall real estate beast and other buildings going up as part of the same site, all of which are fully capable of assisting in generating the revenue required to open their doors.

To charge admission of some sort for a museum, suggested or not, is not an unreasonable request, but the price ‘suggested’ seems out of touch with the fiscal reality of its potential visitors. To visit the memorial will be free. I find it hard to believe the museum space beneath will be getting as much use or as many visitors as it would take to keep it open. That would be 2.4 million people a year (suggested) or 3 million people a year (mandatory) . . . An average of over 8200 visitors per day. It’s the paradox of pricing, but the prices which will help increase attendance are going to have to be lower; low enough to bring the most possible visitors.

The bottom line to this story of bottom lines would be to take a good hard look at how the people putting this museum together are making their decisions. It would be a damned shame to get something this important wrong.

* Subterranean concrete wall sealing off the site within the original landfill.

Le End of Le Season

Reality to Earth . . . Miami Heat, I watched George Steinbrenner at work for well over 30 years. You are no Yankees.

Last night proof was handed down in a rather emphatic manner that sometimes buying a championship team isn't as easy as signing the paychecks. Since the "Lebron-In" which preceded NBA training camps, it had been a foregone conclusion in many eyes that the Miami Heat had done just that, working within the salary cap structure to build a team with three All-Stars up front and in the starting line-up.

The Dallas Mavericks have an All-Star, a former All-Star, a load of team players, a slightly crazy owner* (Oops, forgot . . . He's rich so he's 'eccentric') and a plan to weave all of the other elements which make up a winning team together into one capable unit.

Ask the Heat if they succeeded. Ask the Lakers if they succeeded. Just don't ask me; I'm not a particular fan of either team, but I found myself smiling because the guy with the sinus infection and high fever for a few games was holding up the championship trophy. To be fair, he had a rotten first half in yesterday's game, but there was that 'team' thing going on with Dallas, so he had plenty of time to get his act together before it was time to take his bows in this little drama.

The other team . . . Wasn't. I've seen my share of championship teams, and the Heat, for all their talent, isn't one of those; not yet, at least. Great teams not only have great groups of players; they know how to win the big games.

Dwayne Wade? He's got the ring to prove he can be part of a team which can get the job done. Chris Bosh? A lot to learn yet, but not a lot of time to learn it. Lebron James . . .?

Everyone's going to be piling on, so I won't add much to the debate, but I will say this. If he's to be the best of the best, he's got to be all-in when he hits the stage. The game we saw wasn't a match for the stage he played it on, and if he doesn't want to be "The Man" he isn't going to do that team a hell of a lot of good in the long run.

We all know who "The Man" is (Or "The Woman" depending on the team). It's the player with the talent to either back up his mouth or to do the talking for him, and he's a vital part of any championship team. He steps up. He takes his game to another level, no matter what that game is. He wants the rock in crunch time (See the pantheon from Bill Russell to Michael Jordan), the puck in a tie game with time running down (Howe, Richard, Gretzky and a particularly forceful Messier come to mind), the ball handed or passed to him with the Super Bowl on the line (I could name a few dozen and we'd be here all day), or the bases loaded in the ninth with two outs and his team down a run (And to be fair, George bought a lot of those, and raised a few from the minors up).

I didn't see that person on the Heat. If they want the trophy, someone has to find that person in him (If there's a season next year). You don't win a title by just showing up. You have to take it.

Dallas took it.

*Don't take offense, Mark. I've seen the Monday Night Raw wrestling footage. If you're a bit crazy, you at least have fun with it. ;)

Reality TV 1 – Really, Ladies? Really?

Reality to Earth . . . Don’t expect me to believe anyone would want to intentionally call themselves something ending in ‘Zilla’ unless they’re a hundred feet tall and breathe radioactive fire.

Let’s be precise about what you’re seeing here folks. I’m talking about an odd little corner of the world of Reality Television and I want your opinions. For what I see here, I honestly prefer the term ‘unscripted television’ and if you want me to believe something’s real, I’d like to see an effort to take the patently astounding and make it a little more believable.

The itch in my hitch today comes from a jaw-dropping creation known as “Bridezillas’, a parade of fluffy car wrecks which has its season premiere this Sunday on the “WE” (Women’s Entertainment) network. Like many car wrecks, be they NASCAR or INDY car, I find a certain vulgar fascination at what I see on the screen, so long as no one gets hurt, but while I can believe there are people who will act like one might see them on this show, and there are some who are so bold as to do so on camera, I cannot figure out for the life of me how the producers get the ladies on this show (Seven seasons down, the eighth on approach) to agree to appear on it, knowing they’re going to be held up as the apex of bad pre-marital behavior . . . Complete with a cute, snarky voiceover narrator whose obviously having fun in the studio while watching another Weddingeddon go down.

Just how do they find them? Is there a nationwide network of wedding planners, dressmakers and caterers who keep their eyes open to cull the herd, giggling with their phones in their hands and contacting the producers when they find one of these shy, retiring darlings? Or is it an all-volunteer army, with the brides contacting the network with the enticement ‘Bring the cameras; you ain’t seen nothing yet?’*

“It is puzzlement” as the King of Siam (with his dozen or so wives) sung in his musical of years gone by; as is the ability of the husbands-to-be to resist the urge to run for the nearest available hills during the wide range of histrionics displayed. Love and patience only accounts for their hanging in so much . . . I’d love to see the green room where the Valium dispenser is kept.

One thing for sure, the divorce rate can't be very high for this crowd. If they get past the wedding, I quake at the thought of what it would take to split them up.

* For those who know the answer to this mystery, please share it if you're not giving away a trade secret.

The Advent of the Weeping Politician

Reality to Earth . . . What a wiener!

The same old tune has come around again, in its usual sequence and with all of the notes we expect to be hit in such a song. It goes as follows:

"I'm innocent, I'm innocent
(Though I may be slightly guilty)
I'm innocent, but it was not my fault.
Alright, my dear constituents, in fact I really did it!
And now it's time to cry my tears of salt . . ."

Representative Anthony Wiener, who's been accused of displaying the casings on his sausage through his twitter account, as well as a few dirty jokes to the young and pretty who didn't mind seeing them, started out by crying 'hacker' with the sort of brio the boy who cried wolf . . . Cried wolf with.

In short, he lied in public. He tried to get away with something which, while of certainly questionable taste for a recently married man, wasn't particularly illegal. The problem with this, of course, is that by his actions he simply reinforced the image of 'Politician as lecherous, lying sack of slag' . . . As if we needed further reinforcement of the image when it's been, to be quite frank, done better. (The hot dog puns will stop here.)

In watching the public self-flogging, complete with the sort of eye-wiping, wife-praising insincerity we've come to expect in these cases, a certain boredom at the representative's performance starting to overcome me; a sort of "Yeah, we get it, you're sorry, now can we get back to watching the real news now?" feeling. Politics or not, I've been watching this show for years . . . Saw the Tidal Basin Bombshell case, saw Teddy when his driving skills failed him, saw Clinton after Monica, even saw Falwell carry the Ark of Tears after he sinned . . . Been there, done that. Now get it over with and go tweet yourself.

I'd like to say I don't care about this sort of thing, but there is something deep down at the base of this which bothers me. People voted for this nimrod, just like scores of other nimrods; placed their trust in him to do his job for the period of his term. They didn't sign on for this. They asked for two things when they elected him; to do his job and not make them look like morons for trusting him with the seat.

Maybe that's the problem. A good deal of the elected officials of this, and to be fair, other countries, don't seem to give a damn about how their personal behavior reflects on the people who put them in office. I'm not saying they have to act like perfect little "Miss Manners" robots while they're on the job, that's not going to happen, but maybe they should be reminded of their responsibility when they swear to uphold the constitution on the day they take office.

How about that? When the public servants we elect take the oath of their office, a line should be added somewhere in the text where they promise not to make grand, tear-stained asses of themselves and embarrass the people who trusted them while they're on the job they were elected to fill. I think I'd be willing to follow the leader willing to raise his right hand to that.

To be sure, no one's going to take the initiative on such a measure. That would involve the usual finger-pointing nonsense and a session or two of barking across the aisle at them. It would also require a level of common sense few in the political arena seem to want to display. It would be nice, though.

A Little Addendum - The Veruca Salt Driving School

Reality to Earth . . . You're making my point for me. Stop it, will you?

Local news put a slight twist in my recent tale of poor driving and people who must have gotten their licenses as golden tickets out of a Wonka Bar. I'm drifting through an eleven o'clock newscast when I hear what's an unfortunately common occurrence; an accident where a small child was killed near a stop sign which was taken as more a suggestion than a potential breach of traffic law.

The typical story points were hit; among them how the neighborhood has been trying to do something about the fact people weren't stopping at that particular sign, and then comes the coup de grace . . . As the local reporter is standing near the sign talking through the story a series of cars passes the sign, many of which did so without pausing, hesitating or, as one might hope right after an incident at the same spot, stopping.

On camera. I hope they got a few license plates in the footage. It's another example of something that's funny about something that's not funny.

When you're out on the road, you might want to consider it's a good idea not to hit anything when you're out driving. A lack of blood smeared across the hood keeps the finish on your car looking good, and in case you're thinking of ignoring something larger, not having another car's front fender engine come through your side door does wonders for vehicle life.

We're supposed to know better. Give it a try.