Not A Step

New Podcast Live

2011-10-19T10:26:00.002-04:00

Jason and I lament getting older and agree to stop talking about the NBA lockout. I think we tell some jokes as well.
www.worstideasever.com

It's the end of the world as we know it

2011-09-22T10:40:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

For a time, in my formative years, REM was my favorite band without question. They were my introduction to music that fell outside the mainstream (though they did not stay semi-known for more than a few months after I discovered them) and they were my personal soundtrack to my last two years of high school.

At a time when U2 was the accepted “alternative” mega-band, I felt, when I discovered REM (through their early-career greatest hits record Eponymous) like I was literally the only person in my high school class who knew who they were. That was likely not true, but I delighted in sharing their music with my small circle of friends.

This was 1989 and though they had had a radio hit with “The One I Love,” the real commercial breakthrough did not occur until Automatic For The People in 1992. So, in some ways, their early records including the stunning Life's Rich Pageant, were still a secret shared lovingly with people I remain close to to this day.

One of my happiest memories from that time involved an awkward bus ride to Quebec City as part of a school trip. I was more than a little nervous about the trip as I had few friends at the time and those that I did have were not on the trip.

Because of that, I sat alone wearing a too-big-for-me REM T-shirt with hair that would eventually be long, but was then cut like Ernie from Sesame Street listening to Eponymous on a yellow Sony Walkman (a tape player for those of you who don't remember a time before iTunes). Not precisely shy, but certainly not the type of young fellow who just randomly talked to pretty girls, the joyous revelation that was REM empowered me to start chatting with the girl sitting across from me whom I had never seen before (a rare thing in a school of about 600).

Jennifer would go on to become my first girlfriend and one of my closest friends to this day. It was an REM song that was my first “our song,” (with her) and it was even a line from the “It's The End Of The World As We Know It,” that provided the name for my first newspaper column (a column in which I wrote about my first date with my wife Celine).

Certainly there were other bands playing from the jury-rigged CD player in my 1982 Chevy Malibu Classic station wagon (which blew a fuse if you honked the horn while playing a CD) but REM meant more to me than the Replacements, the Pixies and countless other bands I love.

As I got older, I liked their new output less and less and they faded as my favorite band (replaced by Boston alt-rock legends Buffalo Tom). That, however, doesn't make me any less sad to hear that REM has disbanded and that I will likely never see them on-stage again and that they will never make that “return-to-glory” album that I expected each time a new record came out.

Still, that does not change that at a time when I needed something to grab onto, REM provided a path that led to me discovering a new world of music. They led to me wanting to be a music critic and meeting my best friend in the newsroom of The Chronicle at Hofstra University whose first assignment for me as a music critic was Buffalo Tom's Let Me Come Over. That was the same newsroom where I met my wife and where, for better of worse, pushed me on the path of writing and journalism that I still walk today.

I suppose I'll never again be a heartbroken teenager listening to “Country Feedback” over and over any more than I'll ever get to experience the joy of discovering something entirely new. But as REM walks quietly away, I'll know that had Bill Berry, Mike Mills, Peter Buck and Michael Stipe never played music together then my life may have been utterly worse for it.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Candidates should leave religion at home

2011-09-08T11:45:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

In general, I prefer my presidential candidates not mention their religious affiliation. I'd actually prefer they not have a religious affiliation, but, in this country, that's essentially impossible because too many voters place whatever faith they've been brainwashed into ahead of any other voting criteria.

And, before you start sending me emails about the last line, what else would you call it when we indoctrinate children from birth into a group with rigid rules where you aren't allowed to question anything? In my mind, anyone devoutly devoted to any particular religion should not be a candidate for president as it's impossible for them to be impartial when their indoctrination contradicts common sense.

Take abortion – the hottest of hot button topics – Christian religions are anti-abortion, no matter the circumstances. That flies in the face of common sense as the United States simply has more children than we can care for and bringing more unwanted children in the system represents a bad use of resources.

Because of that, a president, must support abortion remaining legal even if he or she finds it morally reprehensible. First off, we should not dictate morals to other people and second, on a practical basis we can't afford more unwanted children.

Morality has no place in public debate. It's a moving target and a definition we can't all agree on, which should not be decided by politicians. You consider abortion immoral, I consider bringing unwanted children into the world immoral.

Bringing god into politics, also allows candidates to to make arguments that sensible people – those of us who don't believe any sort of higher power micromanages daily events – can't argue with because it's rude to question religion no matter how wacky its application may be. This can perhaps best be illustrated in the actions of presidential candidate Michelle Bachman who moved from a little cuckoo to downright deranged last week when she more or less said that God had sent the earthquake and hurricane that hit the East Coast last week due to overspending by government.

"I don't know how much god has to do to get the attention of the politicians," Bachman told a crowd of Floridians over the weekend, according to the St. Petersburg Times. "We've had an earthquake; we've had a hurricane. He said, 'Are you going to start listening to me here?' Listen to the American people because the American people are roaring right now. They know government is on a morbid obesity diet and we've got to rein in the spending."

If Bachman truly believes that god sent an earthquake and a hurricane to send politicians a message about spending, perhaps she can explain exactly what he/she meant during every other natural disaster? We just had a rain storm where I live, perhaps that one was about overcrowding in the public schools?

When politicians start making decisions based on their belief in a magical man in the sky then they forfeit their right to speak for those of us who deal in reality. I know that much of the country believes – or at least pretends to believe – deeply in their religion, but facts, not faith should drive our political decisions.

Presidents, congresspeople, governors and even mayors need to make decisions they find distasteful because it's what's right for their constituents. That might mean handing out condoms in public schools, letting gay people in the military or supporting equal pay for for equal work for women. If your faith – and your inability to waver from that faith for the good of those you serve – makes it impossible to do your job, then you should not run for that job.

We're heading for an election where our woefully incompetent president runs against a Republican (take your pick of which one) whose only election platform involves religion. As a country, we'll get to pick between a guy who has no answers for our dying economy and a guy (or gal) whose first allegiance is to the fairy tales he was fed before he knew how to read.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Patching local news together won't work

2011-08-17T08:34:00.001-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Good news amateur writers with an inflated sense of your own talent, your local news Web site that nobody reads wants your contributions. Never mind that you have no actual talent – two friends and your mom (who doesn't actually read what you write) told you how much they love your work, so that should clearly result in a mass audience.

Often called “crowdsourcing,” the idea is that the idea that there are lots of local voices just dying to be heard, that people actually want to hear. This concept of turning over your “pages” to amateurs is part of the latest thoughts as to how the newspaper business will be saved/reinvented.

This bit of wishful thinking makes financial sense because actual reporters and professional opinion writers (present company excluded) actually cost money. So, if we can get the public to report and opine for free, then we won't need actual journalists.

Logically, this could work just fine except it's extremely rare to find any actual writing talent willing to participate in this particular scam. Yes, Huffington Post pulls this off, but somehow that site manged to trick celebrities and actual writers to give their work away for free.

When you try this model in hundreds of town across the country, you end up with Web sites populated by amateurs who can't write or tell an interesting story. Basically, this would be like running an upscale restaurant and realizing that the chefs really drive costs up, so you get rid of them and hand customers a pile of ingredients and a stove.

This has not stopped AOL, owners of Huffington Post, from pushing this model on its local Patch sites. In general, these local news sites have one editor who writes, assigns and handles everything else. Some Patch sites have good journalists doing good work, but most feature either overworked, burned out pros or inexperienced kids.

Now, of course, sourcing material from the community has its place. It's not impossible to find or train local talent, but aside from the occasional lucky discovery, doing this requires resources and training. The local news prototype I run has a 16-year-old intern this summer who ranks just a slight tick below my professional staff in quality and vastly exceeds them in output.

To get that intern, however, we made a significant investment in a school program where we teach teenagers how to shoot and edit video. We didn't just hand her a camera and say go report the news, we taught her the skills and then were delighted to find someone with talent who has become a significant contributor.

Simply going on the notion that because a lot of people blog on a local level that there is a log of great, or even marginally acceptable, content which news Web sites can have for free is silly. The “crowd” can enhance your reporting and it can most certainly direct you as to what to cover. But, the idea that the news bus won't be driven by paid professionals will likely end with hundreds of dead local web sites – killed because they thought that just because people are saying something that others would want to read it.

The new newspaper world will feature less walls and more contributions from the audience. Story selection and placement will largely be audience driven and the public will have unprecedented access and control of the what news gets reported. The days of crusty old editors making decisions like J. Jonah Jameson from Spiderman are over, but the day of the professional reporter has just begun.

You can't crowdsource reporting and storytelling anymore than you can crowdsource brain surgery or root canals. Sure, there might be some genius who read a book who can handle either of those, but if I need a brain surgeon or dentist – much like if I need a reporter – I'll stick with the pros.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Stop talking about jobs and start creating them

2011-08-01T08:30:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Given the current economy, every politician in the nation likes to give speeches about jobs. They talk about jobs, go on “job tours,” write legislation about jobs and do everything short of writing a Broadway musical about jobs, but, of course, very few actually create any jobs.

Our president also likes talking about jobs and he does seem to understand that it's hard to have a thriving economy with 10% unemployment, but he too has a fundamental lack of understanding as to how jobs get created. Obama plans to create jobs by taking more money away from the public through increasing taxes. (I'm pretty sure he also thinks he can create jobs by being charming and telegenic, but he has not said that out loud).

He, of course, only plans to tax the wealthy – you know, the people who pay nearly all the taxes now; the same people who buy stuff and hire people with their money. He also seems completely unaware that taking money from the public and giving it to the government has multiple negative effects on the economy.

First, government never spends our money as well as we do. Second, when you raise taxes, you remove incentive. Why would a person who already has money risk that cash in attempt to make even more if Uncle Sam will just take the lion's share of the profits?

President Barack Obama isn't interested in creating jobs any more than the blowhards in the Tea Party are. Instead, the extreme left and the extreme right want to demonize each other. The president says we don't have jobs because rich people take all the money while the Tea Partiers say we don't have jobs because the federal government wastes money on entitlement programs.

None of this rhetoric creates a single job – unless you count the talk radio hosts who live off this sort of nonsense. Then, of course, we have the ridiculous debate about the debt ceiling, which has about as much uncertainty as the NFL lockout. We don;t how they will agree or exactly when they will agree, but we all know that at some point an agreement will be reached.

Creating jobs requires that both sides of the political debate drop their rhetoric. Obama has to stop blaming the rich and the Republicans have to stop blaming the poor. We won't create jobs by raising taxes and more than we will create jobs by eliminating food stamps or other needed social programs.

Instead, the right must acknowledge that there are too many loopholes that allow those with the most to escape paying anything – let alone their fair share. The left must accept that government has an awful lot of waste and while some programs can remain, others must go.

To create jobs, we need politicians who actually want to do that instead of ones who just like talking about it. Since we don't have that, it's hard to see an end to our economic downturn. Sadly, to create jobs we need leaders and that appears to be a job opening for which nobody qualified has applied.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Lower taxes, fix the economy

2011-07-15T08:16:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

While the nation struggles with unemployment and economic problems, our delusional president clings to the idea that raising taxes will solve the problem. President Barack Obama refuses to back away from the idea that it's okay to raise taxes on “millionaires,” a word he not so subtly uses as a swear – as if success happens by accident and anyone with money does not deserve it.

Raising taxes takes money out of the economy. Whether you raise taxes on rich people, poor people or anyone in between, you take dollars out of the economy and put them into a government sinkhole.

Obama preaches the notion that rich people don't pay their fair share. Never mind that we have a graduated tax code and the more you make, the more you pay, our president wants those of us who are not millionaires to believe that our problems can be solved by confiscating more from those who have been fortunate enough to get wealthy.

Of course, we should close loopholes in the tax code that allow businesses and certain people to avoid being taxed. Everyone should pay their fair share, but nobody should pay more than that.

Our president would be better off preaching lower taxes for everyone. Historically, lower taxes equal higher revenues for the government. That's because if we put more dollars into the hands of the people who actually earn them, those people find a way to spend them.

At the bottom level that might mean some small luxury spending – maybe a movie ticket or modest meal out. As we climb up the economic chain, though, more dollars in pocket means increased spending. Perhaps a middle class couple will finish their basement or maybe they will start a small business. At the the top of the chain, we might see luxury goods purchases or larger companies being started.

Put more dollars into the our wallets and the economy cures itself. Raise taxes to fund misguided federal programs (more bailout money anyone?) and nothing improves. To fix the economy we need less government, not more.

Instead of raising taxes, how about trying something different and lowering all taxes by 10%? Cut income taxes, sales taxes, capital gains taxes, taxity taxes, the tax on taxes and any other taxes I might be forgetting.

I, for one, promise that if you put more of the money that I earn – with absolutely no help from the federal government – I will spend it. Put 10% more cash in my pocket and I'll go out to dinner more and I'll just buy more stuff.

If everyone does that (what a surprise) that money creates jobs and brings in tax revenue. Doesn't that make more sense than more confiscatory taxes where the money disappears into Washington?

If what we're doing doesn't work, why wouldn't we try something different?

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Worst Ideas might be your best idea

2011-06-30T08:47:00.001-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Sitting in my car the other day in front of a grocery store, I was about to turn off my radio and head inside, when Howard Stern began talking about me. More directly, he started talking about my book, Worst Ideas Ever.

As a long-time Stern listener, it was fairly stunning to hear him simply start talking about a book I had labored over for the best part of a year. Here I was sitting in my crummy Saturn Ion about to buy whatever ingredients I needed to make dinner and the King of All Media, for at least a minute or two, had at least some knowledge of my existence.

Now, of course, before my ego gets too large, I should mention that Stern started his talk-up of Worst Ideas Ever by getting my name wrong. His inexact quote was, “I just got handed this book, Worst Ideas Ever by David B. Kline and Jason Tomaszewski.”

Amazingly, he got Tomaszewski entirely correct, but missed Daniel. Still, he could call me Elizabeth Q. Jones and it would not lessen my amazement at hearing the most successful radio host ever read chapter headings from a book I wrote and appear to find them amusing.

The Howard Stern Show mention was followed up by an interview with Lisa G. from Stern's news team and was met with more friends congratulating me on Facebook then I've ever had notice anything I do before. The Stern mention, however, exemplifies the odd life of being a mostly unknown, published author.

Most days, I appear on the radio somewhere at least once, if not more times. For example, the other day, I did a morning show appearance for 15 minutes or so on the big talk station in Atlanta. Were you to listen to that appearance, you might think that I was, in fact, famous because I had both had a book published and was on the radio.

Sadly, you'd be mistaken as as hard as it is to get a publisher to release your book (and, wow, it's hard) it's much harder to get anyone to actually buy your book. So, while I might be mentioned by radio giants and will most likely appear on a radio station near you, I am only mildly more famous than someone who does not have a book and does not appear on radio shows.

In most cases, I would want to sell book in order to achieve more wealth and fame. And, while more of both of those would be great, in this case, I really just want people to read the book. It's funny. It's a conversation starter and, there are some bad ideas in there that you won't believe actually happened.

Consider this a naked plea for you to go to Amazon.com or your local bookstore (who can order it if they don't stock it) and buy yourself a copy of Worst Ideas Ever by Daniel B. Kline and Jason Tomaszewski. Better yet, buy one for everyone you know.

If you hate it, I'll send you a refund myself.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Science losing ground to ignorance

2011-06-24T08:43:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Only two out of 53 Miss USA beauty pageant contestants fully believe in evolution. The rest either entirely deny the possibility or simply get tripped up in hedging their bets to explain how they feel.

And, while beauty pageant contests may not represent our sharpest minds, they do, in fact, offer a pretty reasonable sampling of the state of education in the United States. Most Americans – even some educated Americans – reject the idea of evolution because they desperately want to cling to the idea that a higher power created the universe.

At the Miss USA pageant, four contestants stated flatly that they did not believe in evolution (Alabama, Arkansas, North Carolina and Tennessee) and three (Alabama, Indiana and Kentucky) said they do not think evolution should be taught in schools. Most (23) said that evolution should be taught alongside other views, with the most mentioned “other” being creationism.

Creationism is the belief that god created the Earth in seven days. It encompasses the whole biblical Adam and Eve story and basically denies all scientific evidence including some pretty obvious stuff like the existence of dinosaurs and the amount of time the Earth has been around for.

Now, let me first state, that I have no issue with anyone who believes in god. I wish I had the faith to believe in a higher power and the comfort that must come with believing in an afterlife.

I do take offense, however, when anyone tries to interpret the Bible literally. The Bible is not a historical document. It's a book of fables meant to show humanity a path to being better people. Even if you believe that book was sent by god, you have to realize that we have actual evidence that it presents an impossible timeline.

Clearly, room exists for both evolution and the concept of a higher power being in charge of everything. It's not possible though to be a strict creationist who accepts the Bible as a historical document.

It's actually frightening that in many parts of the country children do not get taught science. Yes, evolution may not tell the whole story, but it tells the science part of the story – the part we have evidence for. Whether or not you believe god led the way or that everything happened in a vacuum, the science does not change.

The Bible tells some nice stories and in most cases, it offers values and morals that anyone would do well to live by. Nowhere in the Bible, though, does it say to not use our brains or to not challenge obvious stupidity.

Standing up on a beauty pageant stage in support of creationism makes our entire nation look foolish. I don't expect Miss USA to be a leading scholar, but I do expect her to have found a way to balance faith and reality.

Having faith requires accepting that you don't have all the answers. It does not require that you embrace ignorance and reject science.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Reconsider before you hit send

2011-06-15T11:53:00.000-04:00

BY Daniel B. Kline

If we can learn one lesson from the unfortunate scandal surrounding New York Congressman Anthony Weiner it's that there are no circumstances when taking pictures of anything not visible while wearing casual clothes counts as a good idea. This goes for every man who ever thought the lady in his life would be excited be getting an picture of intimate area (she won't be).

As for women, sending us pictures of your naught bits may very well have the desired effect. It will also have that same effect on our friends as we pass around our cell phone or send the email to everyone we have ever known.

Unless you are trying to become famous but have no talent (Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian to name two) you should also avoid ever recording yourself while having sex. First of, two really good looking people in perfect share require a team of experts on a movie set to make intimate coupling look attractive.

You, at least most of you, are not quite that attractive and you do not have people handling lighting. Your sex tape will not look like a Brad Pitt/Angelina Jolie loves scene. Instead, you will likely look like two sweaty regular people fumbling around in the dark while trying to keep certain bits off-camera.

In regards to Rep. Weiner, however, the members of Congress, should stop acting like the wealthy dowager on The Simpsons who fans herself while saying “well, I never.” Did Weiner really do anything all that horrible?

He may be a scumbag and a bad husband, but he broke no laws (at least as far as we know). I know that Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the morality police want us to believe they have never had an impure thought, but any rational person knows that in most cases, everyone is up to no good, they're just better at getting away with it.

Weiner did not sleep with an intern or trade votes for money. He used Twitter to send suggestive pictures of himself to women. That makes him sort of icky. It does not in any way impact his job performance.

Sadly, it also makes him like the majority of people or, in a lot of ways better than many. An enormous amount of married people cheat on their spouses. The practice, although abhorrent, has become so common that the United States has more than one Web site entirely devoted to the concept of having discreet affairs.

Cheating no longer requires any work. You don't have go to bars or or proposition strangers. Instead, there are at least four Web sites (they advertise on satellite radio quite a bit) that help married people find partners to commit adultery with.

In a world that not only condones this behavior, but actually seems to encourage it, it's a little hypocritical for Congress to be turning up its collective nose at Weiner. It's hard to image that in that particular group, we don't have more then a few people living in glass houses who are casting stones.

My Twitter is @worstideas. Please don't send me pictures of any body parts.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Oprah's appeal remains a mystery

2011-06-01T10:47:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

With Oprah Winfrey safely off the air, the women of America need to explain to me what their fascination with this egomaniac bore was in the first place. Despite being neither entertaining nor amusing, Oprah managed to become the biggest talk show host on the planet.

Women love Oprah and, as a man, I just don't see the appeal. I get that she's flawed and faces struggles that normal women face. She's overweight and a lot of ladies are also overweight, so there's a certain solidarity there. That said, Oprah, after years of dieting with a team of experts on staff is still overweight.

Why would a normal woman who works all day, then has to take care of her kids relate to a billionaire with a private chef and personal trainer on call. Regular women gain weight because with everything they have to do, sometimes it's just easier to pick up a pizza instead of cooking healthy food. Kids, work and life can also make getting to the gym impossible.

Oprah does not face this struggle. If she wants kangaroo from that great place in Sydney for dinner, she simply has to tell someone in the morning. If she wants a gym and Richard Simmons acting as her trainer, she simply has to make a phone call.

Actually, she doesn't even have to make the call, she has people who do that for her. Given her advantages it's stunning that Oprah is fat and it speaks to the deep level of emotional disturbance she must be under no matter how self-actualized she tells us she is.

When you watch Oprah's show, the women in the audience hang on every word and scream with manic glee whenever she says anything mildly exciting. I understand the audience that got free cars freaking out. I don't understand why the audience that gets Oprah's favorite popcorn reacts the same way.

Watching Oprah actually makes me wince as her affected vocal patterns become grating very quickly. She lectures her audience as if her life offers some shining example and the people in the crowd – clearly the people in the nation – simply lap it up.

Of course, you have to salute Oprah for her book club because anyone who gets people reading deserves an amazing amount of credit. That said, can someone admit that Maya Angelou writes awful, unreadable poetry? I mean, pretty much all poetry is awful, but Angelou is the leader when it comes to stuff that isn't actually good that people like Oprah pretend is fabulous so they can seem like sensitive intellectuals.

Despite the year-long salute to herself, Oprah isn't actually leaving television, instead she's heading to her own network, the not-so-cleverly named Oprah Winfrey Network. Currently OWN – filled with shows from people in the Oprah universe – actually does worse than the network it replaced, Discovery health (a network filled with shows about enormously fat people).

That will probably change once the lady herself enters the picture, but it's hard to understand why. I know the show is not for me, but if Oprah couldn't entertain me with her talk show – the thing she supposedly does best – I can't imagine watching her travel the world (which is the premise for her OWN show, a show being produced by a close friend of mine, so I hope I'm entirely wrong). Of course, if that fails, she can always put the couch back and invite Tom Cruise to come over.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Score one for the good guys

2011-05-03T19:33:00.003-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

They go places you would never visit under conditions you would consider cruel. They leave behind family and friends to do whatever gets asked of them, never complaining or questioning their orders. We've sent them into wars in countries where the people hate us and even the civilians represent a danger to their very lives.

In exchange for all of this, the American soldier gets lousy pay and, if he or she gets hurt in the line of duty, in too many cases we don't give them the best care money could by. In addition to poor treatment our soldiers also fall victim to politics where the average citizen does not honor their service because of the political party that chooses how they serve.

Iraq and Afghanistan have been branded as bad wars by many on the left and any action President Barack Obama takes gets labelled as bad by those on the right. None of that political fighting changes anything for the soldiers. They go where they are asked and do as they are told. They don't have the luxury of questioning their orders or debating the political merits of how they are deployed.

But, no matter what hardships we heap on our military, they persevere. No matter how difficult the challenge, how steep the hill, they win the day.

They do this without individual acclaim. No one soldier wins glory for himself and though we give lip service to honoring those who serve us so well, wars are distant things and for many Americans soldiers putting their lives at risk are a vague, far-away concept.

That changed a few days ago. It changed when a brave American soldier put a bullet through the head and another through the hear of Osama bin Laden. Those two shots may not have ended terrorism or even crippled it, but they did strike a blow for everyone killed on September 11, 2001.

That was the day we all became New Yorkers. The day when any differences American had – be they racial, religious or anything else – disappeared.

We forget sometimes that no matter how much we are different what makes America beautiful is that we're all the same. It may take horror and unspeakable evil to remind us of that, but when you attack one of us, you take on all of us.

I think that every American wishes they were the one that pulled that trigger, that they were the person that wiped the perversion that was bin Laden off the face of this Earth. We're lucky though, that our soldiers – American soldiers – did their jobs in the face of incredible danger and brought some measure of vengeance that anyone who suffered on 9/11/2001 deserved.

If the horrible events of that day taught us anything, it's that we are stronger together than we are on our own. We may have different politics, different religions and different thoughts on so many things, but in the end, we are all American.

The death of a monster deserves to be celebrated, but more importantly the rise of a nation and its brave heroes who bring that about deserve our cheers. Bin Laden won't be the last to challenge what we are – our way of life – but we now know, that any who seek to harm us will meet a foe that will not bend and will not break.

Be proud to be an American and remember the sacrifices of those who make that possible. Honor them by remembering that no matter our differences, we are all on the same team.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Give us cheaper gas or get out of office

2011-05-03T19:33:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

I keep checking the news and I have yet to see the story about how Congress and the President have tendered their resignations due to their failure to keep gas prices in check. I can only assume that the paperwork for all of the Federal government quitting at once takes a while and the news is forthcoming because anyone who fails at their job so miserably would in all cases resign in shame.

Congress and the President have a basic responsibility to protect the American people. That includes protecting us from bankrupting ourselves getting to work -- a task they have failed at miserably.

While the oil companies and our Middle-Eastern “allies” (the kind of allies who hate us and want to kill us) cash enormous checks, we slowly get crushed under the weight of $4 a gallon oil. As we sink into to debt simply to make our daily commutes, the government – both Federal and state – of course, still takes its pound of flesh in taxes.

If the price of oil goes up the oil companies make more money. Because of that anyone who produces oil has exactly zero incentive to do anything that lowers prices. Until prices get so high that demand lessens, there's no reason an oil company or an oil producing nation would want lower prices.

That, of course, is where the government should get involved. Since the United States purchases so much oil, we do, in fact, have some influence with the companies and countries selling it to us. We should be using that influence to lower profit margins as prices rise – if we feel the pain, then they fail the pain.

Instead, our government has let the world walk all over us while they draft new legislation to make cars more fuel efficient or to replace 2% of our gas mixture with corn cobs or some other nonsense. Being more efficient and finding alternative fuels may be part of the long-term solution, but it does nothing to solve the short-term problems.

All of our politicians – the Republicans and the Democrats – are so beholden to the oil companies and our allies (the ones that consider us devils) that our entire oil policy involves saying please and thank you. If I bought half the gummy bears produced in the world, you would think I might be able to get the people at Haribo to make me a good deal, but the same apparently does not apply to oil.

President Obama, of course, wants lower gas prices because if gas stays at $4 a gallon, he will likely not get reelected. That, sadly means that the Republicans actually want prices to stay high so they can take the presidency and claim victory when prices randomly fall on their own somewhere down the line.

I know that I bought a Saturn Ion – a tiny fuel-efficient car with crank-up windows – to consume less gas because I have a 45 minute commute. Beyond owning an expensive non-luxury car (I couldn't afford a hybrid) there's nothing I can do to end my personal pain at the pump.

Because of that, I'm calling on the entire Federal government to either fix the problem or step aside, If you can't keep the basic staples of life in this country affordable, than you don't deserve to hold office.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

America deserves more than a novelty president

2011-04-21T07:36:00.001-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

A businessman would make an excellent president. If someone like Jack Welch who knows how to manage a complex company with varying departments, huge egos and thousands of working pieces were to run, I'd consider supporting him.

Unfortunately, no person who actually has run a successful huge company would ever consider taking on the miserable job of president of the United States. Being president pays poorly, the hours are bad and, though, the perks are pretty good, they're hardly worth having half the country question every decision you make.

We're long past the point where anyone actually runs for president out of duty or for the glory of their country. Instead, the only reason anyone runs for president is that from an ego point of view, there's no better job. No matter the downsides being president makes you the most powerful person in the world (sorry Oprah) and only someone with an outlandishly large sense of self-worth would even consider taking on the job.

That, of course, brings us to one Donald J. Trump – a cartoon businessman and a shameless self-promoter. The only difference between Trump and actual promoters like Don King and Vince McMahon is that Trump uses his personal fame to make real estate deals instead of boxing or wrestling matches.

If the United States needed someone to get other countries to change their names to variations of “United States of America,” then Trump would be our guy. Since we need someone to downsize government, figure out healthcare and, oh yeah, end the at least two, perhaps three, wars we are in, than we might want someone with a little more substance.

Being really rich and famous may make you a viable candidate for the presidency, but it does not make you qualified for the job. Trump gives good press conferences because he's an amusing buffoon who knows how to get attention.

He has done that by launching himself into the presidential election on the back of the “birther” controversy. Instead of laying out policies or explaining his positions on anything or orange friend with the bad combover has chosen to revive the debate about whether President Barack Obama was born in the United States.

Putting attention on that issue is sure to win you support from Tea Party radicals and other talk-show-fueled nut-jobs, but it has no bearing on the actual running of the country. And, realistically, Trump has about as much business running this country as he does taking over for Mick Jagger in The Rolling Stones.

Being famous does not equal being smart. Even being wealthy does not equal being smart, though, it would be hard to call Trump dumb – it's impossible to see how his particular brand of intelligence translates to being president of the United States.

We have lots of successful people in this country, but does anyone think Eminem or Snooki should hold the presidency? Kobe Bryant has a ton of money, but I wouldn't turn over the nuclear football to him just yet.

The sad thing is that if any of those folks ran, they would probably have a shot.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Consider where you are before you speak

2011-04-12T13:53:00.001-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

As my son and I left the family-friendly burger joint last Saturday, we got stuck in the exit behind two men casually talking about nothing in particular. Unfortunately, these two fellows, perhaps unaware that they were in public, chose to casually pepper their language with words that would make a sailor blush.

This, of course, led to my seven-year-old son – who calls me out if I say “butt” or “crap” – to start telling me, “he said the 'f' word, he said the 's” word” and so forth. Fortunately, if you can call it that, many of the filthy terms these men used without regard to their surroundings did not register with a first-grader as bad words, so I was spared conversations about some of the more choice language.

This would not be quite so alarming if it wasn't such a regular occurrence. Over the course of that day, my son and I visited a music recital for kids around age 6 through teenagers, ate at the aforementioned burger joint, visited a popular department store and went to the movies.

At every single one of these places, including the children's music recital, I heard words that I would not be allowed to say on the radio. Apparently the use of “swear” or “curse” words has become so common that people no longer consider the surroundings before using them.

Now, I'm not going to pretend I don't use various inappropriate words when surrounded by adults. I'll also admit to swearing if say, something heavy falls on my foot and I can remember one job where the actions of our CEO (he's dead now, deservedly so) caused me to let out a muttering string of bad words in the newsroom.

Sometimes life simply requires that you use an inappropriate word. If I get hit in the face by a frying pan, my verbal response is not likely to be, “oh, fiddlesticks,” but at times when one can control his language, I make every effort to.

It seems like not using foul language where children might be present should be a basic rule of society. That hardly seems to be the case as even when I was running a giant toy store – a place ostensibly filled with kids – I constantly had to ask people to tone down their language.

Of all the basic societal courtesies this seems like one of the easiest to abide by, yet too many people seem either unwilling, or perhaps, unable to control themselves. While people ma have varying lines for what they consider appropriate, there are a number of words we all agree should not be used in public settings.

I'd prefer to not have to explain certain vulgar anatomical terms to a seven-year-old and can think of few reasons why those terms would be used in public. It's a question of basic civility an understanding that you are not the only person in the world – a hard concept for some, but one that we should all keep in mind.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Religion has no place in politics

2011-04-06T09:02:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

The various contenders for the the 2012 Republican presidential nomination have fallen over themselves to prove to the party's right wing exactly how conservative they are. This means taking aggressive stances against gay marriage and, of course, abortion. Not one of these candidates has the courage to stand up and say the actual truth on this subject – that government has no business legislating morality.

It's perfectly fine if you – be you a candidate for office or a private citizen – find abortion and/or gay marriage morally reprehensible. The problem comes when you decide that you have the right to take your religious beliefs and impose them on other people.

I, for example, passionately dislike mayonnaise and consider its use as an ingredient horrifying. Were I to be in charge of the world, I would use that bully pulpit to lecture people on just how disgusting I find this particular condiment. I would not, however, attempt to take my personal belief and make it a law.

Government has no business deciding who can get married or who can terminate a pregnancy at what point. When politicians share there opinions on these things instead of stating that they believe government should allow the people to make their own moral choices, I immediately distrust that politician.

Government exists to protect us from each other and those who might harm us collectively. The U.S. government is not mommy and daddy telling us what choices we should make nor should it be.

The fault for this, however, lies not in the politicians who simply seek to win votes by telling the voters exactly what they want to hear. Instead, it lies in the citizens who so desperately want their way of thinking to be forced upon everybody else that they never stop to consider the danger inherent in that position.

Having strong beliefs is admirable. Trying to convince others to think the same way is similarly admirable. Attempting to make your beliefs and your moral code the law takes things too far.

The Republican presidential candidates, though, are so eager to prove that they are not in any way like President Barack Obama that they forget that they come from the party of less government. Republicans – in the true sense of the word – should be pushing for less laws and smaller government. They should be supporting personal responsibility, not a nanny state where we use the police to make people think the way we want them to.

You may very well do things I find morally reprehensible and I may do the same. Perhaps you raise your kids in a way I find repugnant and maybe I raise my child in a way you find similarly distasteful.

We're allowed to disagree and government should only get involved when my beliefs start to impinge upon your ability to live according to yours. Gay marriage or abortion – while distasteful to some – do not force your moral choices on other citizens, thereby, they should not be part of the political discussion.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Search for talent, not more karaoke singers

2011-03-30T08:39:00.001-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

While America sits transfixed as the soulless karaoke singers on American Idol butcher Motown tunes or turn timeless Beatles' songs into sonic insults, Buffalo Tom quietly released a new album. And, though you can watch TV shows that analyze the mostly talentless soon-to-be cruise ship entertainers on Idol and can read about them nearly everywhere, you would have to search awfully hard to find the limited media coverage given to Skins, the mildly legendary Boston band's new album.

The success of Idol, America's Got Talent and scores of other competition-based reality shows would be fine if these programs actually shed light on people whose immense talents actually deserved attention. Instead, with precious few exceptions Idol and the other shows of that ilk mostly find adequate performers with nothing to say.

Sure, Kelly Clarkson and Carrie Underwood became legitimate stars and Daughtry, Clay Aiken and a few others have become minor hit acts, but none of these people are actual artists. Give me the team that wrote and produced Kelly Clarkson's first album and I guarantee that I could find someone in any high school who – with the name recognition of being on the nation's most popular show – would have a few hits.

Despite the massive platform that Idol gives its winners – and even its losers – precious few people have proven to have the actual talent to become stars. I guarantee if you put Buffalo Tom on TV in front of millions of people for a few months, they would find a way to grab hold of the viewing audience and make them care.

For some reason, though, we reserve our biggest stages for our slightest performers. Buffalo Tom has written countless songs that are timeless classics for the relatively small amount of people who have heard them, but there's no television competition for middle-aged bands that write their own material.

Somehow we've made having a good voice – something that lots of people possess – the most important part of becoming a famous musician. That would be like picking someone to produce a television show because they own a camera.

The vast majority of Idol winners fail – despite an enormous audience willing to at least sample their music. Adam Lambert might be a media star because he dresses in a flashy way, but nobody buys his albums. Taylor Hicks? Ruben Studdard? Jordin Sparks? These are actually the more successful winners and at best we're talking state fairs and gimmicky guest-starring roles in dinner theater musicals.

Watch an episode of Idol this year and tell me that any of the performers actually have something special. Some of them can sing, but none of them (especially the goony-faced country kid) exude any sort of charisma and they will all be pop culture footnotes in a year or two (say hello to Justin Guarini for me as you exit the public consciousness).

Perhaps, in some ways, it's better that Buffalo Tom has managed to matter to a select group without ever quite crossing over to actual stardom. It's hard to imagine that if the boys in the band were millionaires living rock star lives that they could have had the depth of real-life experience that makes Skins so powerful.

Still, a part of me wishes, that even at this late stage where the band has settled into day jobs and families while making music and being rock stars as a sideline, that, for once, America would actually embrace something worthy of being embraced. Maybe Simon Cowell, after he finishes with his new karaoke show The X Factor, might consider creating a series where he brings attention to people who have fallen tragically under the radar.

I know that might be hard as the American TV public might welcome new faces but it seems to want to watch them doing mediocre versions of familiar things. Until then, I'll continue to be in the minority of people who don't watch Idol but do buy Buffalo Tom albums. It's sad though as while Skins struggles to find it way into the hands of thousands, that millions will be watching as we search for the next Kellie Pickler.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

NFL players and owners are not partners

2011-03-22T15:52:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

As someone who performs his job quite well, at some point after our busy season concludes, I will sit down with my bosses and attempt to make myself a better deal. I'll ask for more money, more time off and maybe some perks (one of those paper thin MacBooks would be nice).

They will likely counter by offering less of a raise than I asked for, ignoring me on the request for more time off and offering a perk closer to a new set of business cards than a new laptop. Most likely, we will bounce some proposals back and forth and I will end up getting less than I wanted while they will end up giving more than they intended.

If that does not happen or either side thinks the other is being unreasonable we both have some basic options. I could choose (as I have done many times in my career) to take my talents elsewhere. They, of course, have the same rights and could decide that despite the excellent work I deliver, I'm not worth the trouble and they could show me the door.

There's no agreement protecting either one of us. I work for them at my own choice and they employ me at theirs.

The same logic should apply to all workers included the arrogant folks who play professional football. These men have been led to believe that because they have a somewhat unique talent, the rules of free enterprise and capitalism do not apply to them.

For years, in football and every other sport, the owners have submitted to the absurd notion of collective bargaining. Instead of it being every team and every player for itself, we have long labored under the anti-capitalist concepts of salary caps, minimum salaries and other artificial constructs.

Just because their jobs pay well and their industry makes a lot of money, NFL players somehow got the notion that they are partners with the owners. The owners have, of course, encouraged this notion by engaging in collective bargaining and giving their employees a guaranteed percentage of their total income.

The NFL owners should end the lockout and institute a true free market. That means that owners like Jerry Jones (Cowboys) or Daniel Snyder (Redskins) may very well hoard great players. Similarly Al Davis (Raiders) or Ralph Wilson (Bills) might cheap out and spend dramatically less.

That said, in a free market players would have more, not less choices. With no rookie draft they would be able to decide where they want to go. With no minimum salary a veteran could lower his price to stay in the league or a rookie could work for next to nothing to get his foot in the door. Experienced players would have to decide if they should take big bucks as a backup on one team or less money to start on another.

The free market dictates things for most Americans and our athletes deserve the same system. No more unions, no more collective bargaining – and, of course, no more collusion by owners -- just an open market where everyone is free to compete.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Airport security mostly about show

2011-03-15T14:00:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Airport security insisted upon rifling through my bag and emptying out my toiletry case because I had committed the crime of traveling with shaving cream, deodorant and toothpaste. Apparently, these items must be stored in a clear plastic bag – something that had not been mentioned or noticed – on the three previous flights I had been on last week.

A silly policy designed to make people feel safe without actually protecting them, the plastic bag ruse exists ostensibly so as your bag passes through security, the person looking at the x-ray can see that it's just toothpaste. By violating the rule, I caused them the added inconvenience of having to open my bag and verify its harmless contents.

Once they have opened my case and spread out my belongings for various strangers to see, you would think that the security folks would simply verify that they were not, in fact, explosives and simply pack them back up. Instead, I was given the option of abandoning my items or being escorted to the other side of security where an airline would provide a plastic bag for me.

The entire point of the plastic bag – to allow them to see my items – had been rendered moot by security actually handling my stuff, but apparently my plane, neigh, the entire airport, would be in danger were I to simply put them back in my toiletry bag and head on my way. So, instead, I was forced to wait in line again and go through the entire scam again, taking my shoes off, taking my laptop out of my bag and, of course, having them once again search my bag.

Ultimately, I was allowed through security despite the fact that my deodorant violated some sort of size rule. Apparently the rules apply in some security lines and not in others, a fact that would bother me if I thought that TSA security checks actually made planes safer.

Security checks make plane passengers feel safer. If they actually made us safer, one would consider that three ounces of plastic explosive could easily be made to look like deodorant, toothpaste or pretty much any small liquid. If these rules were actually about safety one would at least question why I can't bring shaving cream through security, but my eight-pack of three-bladed disposable razors was perfectly permissible.

I was also not questioned about my EZ-Pass, my GPS or the container of chapped lip stuff I had in my pocket. The rules exist largely because rules and the enforcement of those rules make people feel as if the government (which must know best) is actually doing something (it isn't).

We should make it reasonably difficult for terrorists and other wackos to get on a plane with a weapon. That said, if someone wants to blow up a plane badly enough, making regular folks put their toiletries in a clear plastic bag hardly solves the problem.

Putting people through metal detectors and running our bags through X-Rays screens out the garden variety villain. These tactics, however, won't stop a determined bad guy because short of making people fly naked without luggage there's no way to guarantee safety. And, since we can't guarantee safety, I'd prefer to travel with full-size shaving cream in my toiletry bag.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Fame (and fortune) somehow elude me

2011-03-09T11:22:00.002-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Like most Americans, I would like to be famous. Unlike most Americans, I have managed to sniff around the edges of celebrity achieving a fair amount of notoriety for a nobody, but not as much as, let's say, a minor cast member on one of the less popular reality shows.

I'm not nearly as famous as one of the friends of one of the Real Housewives of pretty much anywhere. And, while I'm sure I have way more talent than any of them, the staff at the Kardashian sisters' clothing stores gets more recognition than I do.

Talent has a shockingly small relationship to success. Look how many incredibly talented people have been discovered by various reality show singing/talent competitions. Susan Boyle was a completely anonymous homely woman before being on TV – as mostly a goof – exposed her as having a voice of singular beauty.

Even for the amazingly talented, fame and success involves more than a little blind luck. I went to high school with an amazingly talented actress who has had featured roles in multiple network shows – each of which was cancelled faster than the last. This year, she had a key role on a critically beloved series. Unfortunately, nobody except critics watched the show and it died a quiet death after 13 episodes.

These shows being cancelled had absolutely nothing to with whether or not my friend had the talent or deserved to be famous. And, while she still toils looking for her big break (I actually think she's more into working than being famous) many less-talented actresses blissfully enjoy more successful careers.

My personal quest for fame has left me tied (at least until Worst Ideas Ever comes out in July) with Snooki for how many books I have had published. After 15 or so years of writing a newspaper column that theoretically could be (but in practice isn't) read by millions, I have exactly as many books to my credit as someone famous for being dumb.

Snooki became a media sensation because she can't hold her liquor and tends to throw punches or fall down when she's drunk. I will basically be standing on street corners trying to get a few thousand people to buy my book and she gets to do late night talk shows, The Today Show and basically any radio show she wants.

Perhaps my mistake comes in writing a funny book rather than being a drunken idiot. That said, I'm pretty sure nobody wants to see me fall down while wearing a skirt and not wearing underwear. Of course, nobody wants to see Snooki do that either, but when she does, somehow we can't look away.

Still, I toil under the illusion that hard work and talent might ultimately lead to a modicum of celebrity. That's perhaps why I just put the finishing touches on a chapter about the female urinal (it lets women pee while standing up and is a classic worst idea ever).

Perhaps by writing about women peeing while standing up instead of being one (not literally, I don;t have the legs for it) I have fatally erred on my path to stardom. Still, I;m hoping that amidst the drunks, the surgically enhanced and the truly baffling, that there's room for a guy from the newspaper who writes a funny book.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Unions are an idea whose time has passed

2011-03-02T17:06:00.001-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Unions have no place in a free market. All hiring, firing, promotion and compensation decisions should be made by business owners based on the needs of that business. Unions are an artificial construct that under the guise of protecting workers drives up labor costs while hampering a business owners (or a town, state or federal government) from running their business properly.

Like many people, I work for a privately held business. When I was hired my bosses had every right to pick someone else, but, they chose me, despite the fact that my desired compensation was at the top of their advertised range. Still, likely because they felt that I brought more value than the cheaper candidates, they hired me and paid more to do so.

Hopefully, I will produce the expected results and they will remain happy with that decision. Should I, however, not meet my clearly stated goals, they may well fire me. Whether I survive or don't rests entirely on how well I do the job and whether it makes financial sense to keep paying me.

I don't need a union to protect me. I simply need to do my job well. Of course, I could work hard and do everything right, but still fail and, sadly, still get fired. That would be unfortunate, but should my bosses – who risked their own money in creating my company – go out of business just to avoid the appearance of being unfair to me?

On the plus side, my bosses get to make decisions based on who works here entirely based on what they think benefits them the most. Seniority plays no role other than the fact that seniority provides experience.

I have a top-level position and supervise people who have been here for years. Some of them may have wanted my job – perhaps someone even interviewed for it – but they did not get it simply because they had gotten in line first.

Unions – mostly through collective bargaining – seek to protect the mediocre or worse while removing any semblance of actual competition in the workplace. If I'm better than you at your job and more than one company wants me than not only should I get paid more than you, I should be the one still employed if the company has to choose.

We have laws that protect workers from being fired racial or other prejudicial reasons. Unions are no longer keeping little kids out of coal mines, they are instead creating an artificially high market for workers' services – one that cannot be supported by current economic decisions.

If my company needs to save $100,000 we can lay off two people making $50,000, one making $100,000 or five making $20,000. We can make that decision based on our business needs not because of a ridiculous “last in/first out” rule.

The real world is ugly, but unions aren't helping its members by protecting them from reality. Succeeding in any meaningful financial way requires competing. It's fine if you don't want that and choose a field where the rewards reflect the lower demand, but problems arise when we allow unions to attempt to give the benefits of competition to those who won't compete.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Don't shoot those guns up in the air just yet, Egypt

2011-02-18T14:34:00.002-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Congratulations people of Egypt. After a mere 30 years of oppression, having your country as the president's personal piggy bank and plenty of religious-zealotry-fueled villainy, you managed to cast aside Hosni Mubarak.

On the plus side, you did this largely through non-violent means – mostly by standing in the street and rioting politely. On the negative side, as a people, you seem more than willing to trade this evil, thieving dictator for another one or some even worse religious nut job.

America, of course, did an awful lot to support Mubarak, mostly because Egypt has always been friendly to Israel (friendly in the way you hung out with the weird kid in fifth grade because your mom made you). Of course, not openly vowing to destroy Israel and actually believing that Jews have a right to not be murdered because they believe in a slightly different flavor of religion are entirely different things, but when dealing with the Arab world an ally is apparently anyone who doesn't openly threaten you.

Though Egypt has long-pretended that Mubarak was a democratically elected leader, the elections had less validity than American Idol voting. In addition, during Mubarak's entire reign the country has been living under “emergency law” which legalizes censorship, outlaws any non-government political activity and allows the government to imprison anyone it wants for virtually any reason

In addition to this specific governmental tyranny Egyptians live under the same preposterous religious restrictions that all Muslim nations abide by. Say a bad word about Allah or make a joke about Mohammed and you're likely to be stoned to death. Make the mistake of being a woman who expects the rights we give a house cat in the United States and, well, you will learn quickly where you stand.

Currently, Egypt still lives under “emergency law” and the military has taken over – the same military that propped up Mubarak and has held an awful lot of power. The military leaders say they support democratic elections in about six months, but getting a military to leave power is a lot like the process it took to get Larry King to step down at CNN.

Though there's a lot to celebrate in Egypt finally getting rid of its dictator, the country's people have done very little to show that they want actual democracy. Democracy means a total freedom to believe things that aren't popular. It also means having other really unpopular things in the Muslim world like free speech and free press.

In a true democracy women have equal rights and Jews get to vote too. In a democracy you can wear revealing outfits, listen to pop music and not go to the mosque. You can also kick back with a beer and a rack of pork ribs while you watch blasphemous television programs.

I'll celebrate Egypt when its people fight for real freedom. This wasn't a revolution, it was a trade – one mean dictator for a few nicer ones who still oppress the people, but less so.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Basic courtesy not quite so basic

2011-02-08T12:51:00.001-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Society has some very basic rules which everyone must follow or the whole world comes crashing down. In order to live amongst each other without falling into chaos, we all agree to a basic social contract that involves things like stopping at red lights, wearing clothes in public and other expected niceties.

We might debate all sorts of laws, rules and other aspects of how we interact, but in a few very basic areas, everyone abides by the same rules and some semblance of order exists. Basically, we all agree that if possible we will do our best to not inconvenience other people or make their lives extra difficult for no reason.

People can screw each other over if there's a reason, but if it doesn't make my life appreciably worse, I won't actively do anything to bother you. As part of this unofficial social contract, everyone agrees that certain, let's call them lifestyle rules, prevail.

One of these rules is the concept that if I invite you to a party and request that you RSVP by a certain date, you will do that. Never mind that you didn't ask to be invited to the party and sending me an email or leaving me a phone message when you know I'm at work is a little bit of effort for you, the entire system of holding parties collapses if people don't follow the instructions and let you know if they are attending.

Unfortunately, not everyone considers certain rules quite as rigid which brings about party-planning disaster for the hosts (my wife and I) who simply wanted to take my son's class bowling for his birthday. The invitations to said party, which, of course, featured Star Wars characters, contained a very specific date by which we asked people to reply. As that date passed, only three kids' parents out of 18 had let us know their child was coming.

The other 15 members of his class simply did nothing. This, of course, led us to assume that our son's birthday party was going to be a disaster with almost no attendees. Not wanting to put our child through the rejection of nobody attending his birthday party, we lined up kids we knew from places besides his class.

And then, of course, the RSVPs started flowing in up to and including the day of the party. That left us with a party where we had expected 8-12 kids ending up having close to 20 – a major expense made significantly worse by the efforts we had made to fill the party when it seemed like nobody was attending.

I'm not asking that people start being nice to each other or that we actually care about our fellow human beings, I'm simply asking for the most simple of consideration. If I offer to spend money to entertain your kid for the afternoon, you should let me know by the appointed date whether your child will attend.

If we can't count on each other for something that simple than we're rapidly heading towards lawless anarchy. Since I'd prefer to not be part of a roaming pack of hooligans hoarding gas and terrorizing the few remaining innocent people, I would rather we just show each other common courtesy. That hardly seems like a lot to ask for.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Oh, the weather outside is frightful

2011-02-02T13:54:00.002-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

The polar bear who now lives on my front lawn only seems mildly confused that the North Pole has apparently added a moderately attractive condo development. Add that to the flock of penguins panhandling on my corner and the friendly, non-abominable snowman who bought the place next to mine and I'm fairly convinced we've had enough winter weather to last a few years.

I believe I speak for nearly everyone in the snow-bound parts of the United States when I say more than ready for the snow, ice, freezing rain, freezing snow, rainy ice and icy rain to go away. What was initially quaint and pleasant – bringing about snowmen, hot chocolate and maybe a roaring fire – has now become a burden.

My two-car driveway now has so much snow piled up in it that it only fits once car and the icicles hanging off my roof look like a hazard from an Indiana Jones movie or something that Frodo would have to traverse to get the ring to safety. Driving to work has become a daily adventure and my son has missed so much school, he now wakes up confused every morning.

While anyone who lives in the northeast expects snow, we do not expect an endless barrage of the white stuff that simply piles one storm on top of the other. Normally, we have a bad storm or two, some melting and maybe the occasional icy spell.

This year, we have had a snowstorm every few days capped off with this week's “icemageddon” which left most of New England, New York, Maryland, Pennsylvania and who knows where else looking like a skating rink. My car, before I cleared it off, looked like an ice sculpture and I essentially had to use a pickaxe to get in the door.

This horrific winter – the worst in my 37 years of living in New England – has, of course, coincided with my taking a job that involves both a long commute and a fair amount of travel. So far, I have been lucky enough to avoid flying and have thereby avoiding being stranded in some random airport eating vending machine food, drinking vending machine coffee and desperately hoping to take off.

Instead, I got to spend the beginning of the ice storm in a Volvo station wagon driving from Fredrick, Maryland to Hartford, Connecticut while the world slowly froze around us. When you see “birdscicles” dropping out of the sky and truckers pulling into hotels, that's usually a sign that it's time to get off the road.

Today was so snowy that exactly nobody went to work and I'm spending the day attempting to work while sitting on my couch. And, of course, we're supposed to get two more snowstorms over the next seven days.

This should work out perfectly as I have always wanted to see what it's like living at the North Pole. I'm actually pretty sure I just saw a reindeer being led by an elf through my backyard, though that may just be cabin fever setting in.

If this keeps up my only plan is to walk to the supermarket and buy as many aerosol cans as possible, emptying their contents into the sky. If this is global warming, well, I'm hoping Al Gore has a guest room down in Tennessee.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Americans need healthcare, not politicians

2011-01-25T15:23:00.002-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

While I'm not a fan of President Barack Obama, I salute him for actually doing something about health care. It seems absurd that Republicans would attempt to repeal those efforts before we actually see whether they work.

I could understand if the Republicans in Congress had their own health care plan to offer. Instead, they seem more than willing to return the nation to the previous failed system that benefits nobody except the health insurance companies.

My health insurance has a $1,500 overall deductible and a $45 co-pay anytime I need to go to a doctor for anything other than a routine physical. Theoretically I have prescription drug coverage, but I have yet to receive a prescription that the plan actually “fully” (minus my co-pay) covers. Instead, it's more like I get a discount on prescription drugs – a discount which changes randomly and has no particular logic.

For the privilege of having this crummy coverage, I pay just under $250 a month. That number would be reasonable if my health insurance actually, you know, insured my health, but I'm most certainly not getting what I'm paying for. Under the current system, health insurance companies dictate pretty much everything and there seems to be no rules governing what they must cover and what they can exclude.

I don't get to take the stomach medicine that actually sort of works for my stomach ailments. Instead, I get to take the really popular one with the big marketing budget that has a deal with my health insurance company. I also can't go to any sort of alternative medicine practitioner even though a naturopathic doctor correctly diagnosed my wheat allergy which my traditional doctors had overlooked for years.

That picture get slightly better when the healthcare coverage from my new job kicks in, but while the deductible will go away, the the co-pays will remain high and the exclusions remain random. Clearly, this system does not work and as a nation we need something better.

Unfortunately, improving healthcare has become a political minefield. Republicans can't support Obama's plan, not necessarily because it's wrong, but because the president is a Democrat. I'm not sure anyone on either the right or the left actually knows what the president's healthcare plan actually entails.

Instead, Republicans are only interested in branding it as “Obamacare” and painting dire pictures of big brother deciding to pull the plug because you have the flu. Democrats are no better as they seem mostly interested in the idea that everyone should have healthcare not the actuality of paying for it.

Clearly our healthcare system needs a major overhaul. Obama's plan may not solve all the ills, but it seems absurd to condemn it before any of it has actually taken effect.

A responsible Congress would work with the president to make sure we have the best possible system where more people are covered and those of us with coverage, actually get what we pay for. Healthcare is not the place for politics. Frankly, I don't care which party gets to claim victory, I just want to go to the doctor without it costing me $45 on top of what I'm already paying.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

The best gifts are the unexpected ones

2011-01-18T09:48:00.002-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

It was a love affair from the moment I saw her and she slept with me on the first night.

With my wife upstairs, we shared the bedroom in the basement and though she was a little noisy, I'm pretty sure we didn't disturb anyone upstairs. Alternating between cuddly and eager to bite me, she left scratch marks on my legs and gouged a little hole in my arm.

A little gassy due to a bout with intestinal worms, she spent a fair a mount of time licking my eyes, but mostly she wanted to stretch out next to me, with her head burrowed into my shoulder. She was a little scared having spent the last few weeks in a cage, but eventually she settled down and went to sleep between my legs, purring contentedly.

White with spots of gray and some hints of brown, she's a tiny thing who entered my life most unexpectedly. My wife, not normally one for surprises had told me when we were out for dinner one Saturday night that, since we had driven separately, that if I was to arrive home first she wanted for me to wait for her before going in.

This struck me as a little odd, so she explained that she had obtained my Christmas present and it wasn't something that could wait until Christmas. I argued a bit, along the lines that Christmas was a pretty miserable day and I wanted to at least break up the boredom with a present.

She insisted, however, so I waited for her in the driveway and, upon walking into the house was escorted into the basement where we have a spare bedroom. The upstairs bedroom door was closed as I was brought downstairs and I had absolutely no idea what my wife planned.

I was taken aback a bit when upon entering the basement bedroom I was greeted by my mother-in-law and my son. My wife, who I assumed would leave to head into the closed upstairs bedroom to prepare the present simply sat down next to me.

Not wanting to be rude in the face of a present, I sat quietly making idle chitchat with my mother-in-law while my wife kept glancing at my son. Finally, my wife asked my son if he had left something under the couch.

In that moment, I put it together. “You got me a cat?” I said, shocked because when our beloved, elderly calico had passed away, my wife had insisted that our remaining cat was the last pet she would ever have.

At that moment, a scared, tiny head poked from the couch and promptly buried herself next to me under the blankets on the queen-sized bed with no frame that I was sitting on. “Her name is Caroline” my wife said, which had apparently come from my son. He explained that it was because she had caramel-colored spots (she doesn't) and that his original choice had been “Supercat,” which my wife had rejected.

Of course, from that instant, I've thought of her as Supercat and an instant love affair was born. On the list of presents I've ever received she easily tops the LEGO castle as the best gift ever and as someone who does not like being surprised, I'm more than happy at this particular surprise even if she does occasionally leave scratches on me while I'm sleeping.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Some customers are smarter than the average bear

2011-01-11T09:23:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Under no circumstances did my son and I need to see “Yogi Bear” in 3D. Though Yogi might be smarter than the average bear (he can talk, so I'd say way smarter) none of the hijinks in this movie required an added dimension. More importantly, nothing in the film justified the ridiculous up-charge that theaters charge for 3D films.

I'm a huge fan of movie theaters and going out to the movies. In general, I don't mind paying $10-11 for a ticket to a show and under most circumstances I consider it money well spent. From high school through the birth of my child, I often saw multiple movies a week and sometimes multiple movies in a day.

Whereas many of my friends prefer the much cheaper option of waiting until movies come out on DVD, OnDemand or cable, I still like going out to the movies. Though I rarely have the opportunity to do so with my wife, I take my son to pretty much every appropriate film and occasionally sneak out during the day with friends to see movies that I know my wife won't want to see later.

In recent years, however, movie theater owners have tried the patience of even the most loyal theater-goers. First, it was the slowly rising ticket prices, then it was the addition of commercials (not film trailers) airing before the movies, but the 3D price gouge has to be the worst insult yet.

Normally, my six-year-old son and I go to the movies at the earliest show on a Saturday or a Sunday. These matinee showings cost less and, for a normal movie it costs us between $12-$15 for two tickets depending upon which local theater we choose. Add in some popcorn and a bottle of water and we're around $20 for two hours of entertainment – a fair value comparable to going bowling or mini-golfing.

For 3D “Yogi Bear,” however, our two tickets cost $23 for an early afternoon “matinee” showing. Add in the fact that this particular theater only sold water in the convenient one liter size and our afternoon of entertainment featuring talking bears, a shared pack of Sour Patch Kids and a very large water, cost nearly $35.

In addition to too much water, our money also bought us a chance to wear the uncomfortable, one-size-fits-all 3D glasses. Too big for my son and too small to fit over my regular glasses, these necessary appliances pretty much guarantee anyone needing real glasses a headache.

Still, my son enjoyed the movie despite its rather absurd premise The plot was of the typical “we have to save Jellystone” variety, which they did (spoiler alert) due to the presence of an endangered turtle. Never mind the two talking bears, it took a rare turtle to save the park and end the 3D nonsense.

I love the movies and enjoy going out to the theater. That said, I can promise I will never go see a non-epic or sci-fi film in the format. That means, that if studios insist on releasing kids' movies in 3D and reducing the number of screens showing these movies in 2D than my son will have to wait for video.

I'm fine with you mildly taking advantage of me ($4.50 for Junior Mints) but at some point you're just taking advantage of a loyal customer. My TV has about five ways I can watch movies on it and none of them cost more than $4.99 for a film. Plus, at my house, the popcorn's cheaper and water is free.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Closing the book on reading in 2010

2011-01-05T07:26:00.002-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

As we struggle through such scintillating titles as “Big and Little,” which includes gripping chapters like “a kitten is little, a cat is big,” I hope fervently that my nearly seven-year-old son inherits my love of reading. After an encouraging start when he uttered his first word, “book,” we've hit a few roadblocks as the actual act of reading seems well below playing, watching TV and chasing the cat on his list.

Still, we soldier on each night before bed with him reading something to me before I read something to him, all in the hope that someday I will happen upon my son knowingly picking up a book without pictures for pleasure. I'm not foolish enough to believe that having parents who love books automatically results in a child feeling the same way, but since my son copies all of my negative behaviors, I'm hoping one of my few positive features rubs off on him as well.

Though I was a lazy student, who never saw any reason to do what the teacher asked, as I most certainly already knew all the answers, I always read. While other kids actually listened to what the teacher said, I spent most of my classroom time from elementary school through high school reading as unobtrusively as I could. Sometimes I read ahead in the text book, sometimes I read novels and in one history class in high school, I methodically worked my way through the teacher's personal library.

As a child, I got up early to read the newspaper over breakfast (which occasionally featured Pac-Man Cereal) before moving to whatever novel I was reading while waiting for my friend Matt to make his way up my parents' hill. I read at night when I should have been doing homework and in front of the television while I should have been watching “The A-Team.”

Rarely without a book in hand, I decided last year that I would keep track of every book I read in 2010. To accomplish this I obtained a bookcase which I setup outside my office door, where I would deposit every book I finished. This plan went well until October, when my mother bought me a Kindle for my birthday.

Though I still love the physical concept of books, the Kindle not only allowed me to read faster as not having to turn pages dramatically speeds things up, it also eliminated one of my greatest fears – not having “the next book.” Throughout life I had always worried about being caught without something to read and this led to my often buying books I wasn't all that excited about, just to have something.

The Kindle ended this fear as I'm no longer dependent on getting to a bookstore to have a book. Because of this convenience, whereas I thought I would mix electronic books and real ones, I have almost exclusively read e-books. That foiled my plan for having an impressive bookshelf, but it did lead to me reading even more books this year.

In adding my actual books to my electronic books, I read 123 books and 12 novellas. These included novels, non-fiction and three biographies of various members of Guns and Roses, a band I'm not a fan of.

I read literature. I read crap. I read a few things that were a struggle to get through, but mostly I just read.

Reading can entertain you. It can enrich you and it can make life wonderfully more exciting. I'm hoping that my efforts to share this with my child succeed and though I don't imagine he'll ever own many actual books, I'm hoping he fills up his electronic library and that it someday compares to my actual library.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

You'll know when you get there

2011-01-05T07:25:00.002-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Last year, as 2009 came to a close, the world appeared to be falling apart. The economy was spiraling downward, people were losing their jobs and optimism remained in short supply.

As the United States sank further into economic misery and uncertainty, I, of course, quit my enjoyable and stable job. While people around me were pushed out of work, I jumped with both feet and my eyes wide open.

This might have made sense if I had a plan. Were I going back to school or determined to make it in some specific field, my timing might have been poor, but my choice would have been defendable. Instead, I walked out the door armed only with a vague sense of wanting something more and my own completely unwarranted sense of optimism.

On the surface I'm a pessimist who tends to see the worst in everything. Internally, though, down somewhere deep, I strongly believe that everything will work out. Even when the facts say otherwise, I'm confident that somehow I will find an answer and that ultimately I will find what I'm looking for.

The last year, however, tested that resolve. I still knew I was going to get where I wanted to go, but as the months moved on, I remained less and less sure of where that was.

Upon leaving my job, I started to piece together a patchwork of freelance assignments to make ends meet. I did public relations, consulted on Web sites, did some writing and generally sold myself as a Web 2.0 expert who could help companies get more attention.

For a while, this seemed like the path I would follow. The work came fairly easily and as my client list grew I rented an office with the idea that perhaps I would become some sort of media consulting firm.

The work was easy. The money was good and the schedule was phenomenal. I was working about half as much as I had been sometimes out of my nearby tiny office, often at Starbucks and sometimes on my couch. Other than back pain from the hard wooden chairs at Starbucks I had it pretty good and nearly anyone would be happy with his lot.

I, however, was bored and still missing that elusive “something” I was looking for. Still, though, I can be foolish and make abrupt decisions, I'm not a total idiot, so while I had a relatively easy gig with no boss, no set hours and limited stress, I continued to keep my eyes open.

My career has largely been a series of dream jobs mixed up with periods of working for myself. I've had an array of positions that any 8-year-old boy would put on his wish list. I've run a toy store, edited a newspaper, written trivia and ran editorial operations for a Web site that featured photo shoots with naked women.

None of these jobs were part of any plan or on any sort of list I had, but I fell into each one and was never disappointed by the experience. This time, I only looked for those sorts of jobs. If someone wanted me to run a store, I wasn't interested. If they wanted me to run a circus, well, maybe we could talk.

The problem with dream jobs, of course, is that everyone wants them and most everyone seems to have if not a better resume than mine, at least a more logical one. That's why, when I found the job I wanted I was not overly confident that I had a real chance at landing it.

The first interview went well and I learned that I would be getting a second one, but since those interviews took place two months apart, I had more than enough time to convince myself I was only a fallback candidate. Even after having a positive second interview, I fully believed that the week the interviewers (the company's owners) waited to let me know (the exact amount of time they said it would take) meant that I had lost out to someone else.

My short-term pessimism, though it kept me up at night for weeks, ultimately was defeated by my innate optimism. On January 17 I begin as Executive Director for DayJams, a nationwide group of day camps for kids 8-15 who want to be in rock bands.

I didn't know where I was going, but I was quite certain when I got there.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Anti-Semitism probably worse than not liking Christmas music

2010-12-20T17:14:00.002-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

As the writer of an opinion column one can expect a reasonable amount of angry email. Normally, though, even the people who hate me tend to stick with name-calling regarding their perception of my political affiliation or my general dislike of something they like.

When I wrote my column about not enjoying how Starbucks – where I spend many hours a day – plays Christmas music non-stop for a month, I fully expected some negative letters. In fact, when I emailed the column to the various papers around the country that run it, my note at the top to the editors read, “Let the hate mail fly.”

I fully expected to be called a Grinch or to be regaled by tales of how much various readers enjoyed Christmas music. I figured some people would also be mad at my not-too-subtle jab at people who wear holiday-themed sweaters.

I did not expect, however, that this particular column, a mild criticism at best, would result in the single most offensive email in my over 15 years of writing some form of newspaper column. Never mind that I acknowledged that Christmas music was fun to sing and that I mentioned caroling as a child; a reader thought it fit to assume my dislike of the Starbucks Christmas music loop was due to me being Jewish.

It would be impossible for me to describe the email in all its ignorant glory, so let me offer it here for you. I’m leaving in the grammar mistakes, but redacting the name because I’m sure this fellow has more than enough problems without being identified in his community as a crude anti-Semite.

“Ive often wondered why many people do not like Jews. Your a prime example with your anti xmas music article. Helen Thomas was right when she said why dont all you kikes go back to Europe.”

I’m pretty sure my friend here does not need to do a lot of wondering as to why people don’t like Jews. If he’s willing to write this because I find Christmas music annoying, well, it’s a pretty short line for him to go from wondering to not quite liking us.

If I was Christian and didn’t like Christmas music, would that be okay? How about the fact that I’m married to a Catholic woman, is that a point in my favor on the anti-Semitism scale?

It’s not like I went after the Pope. I besmirched “Jingle Bell Rock” and “Little Drummer Boy.” This letter would be like accusing me of hating Hispanics because I don’t enjoy “Dora the Explorer.”

It’s sad that hatred like this exists – especially during this time of year when we’re supposed to be thinking about goodwill towards our fellow man. That said, it’s probably good to know that no matter how much progress we think we have made, more work remains to be done.

I ask my emailing friend to think about whether it’s really a straight line between not enjoying Christmas music and being worthy of anyone’s disdain. As I’m sure my friends, family, wife and child will tell you, there are plenty of reasons to dislike me. Fortunately, they have overlooked those faults and manage to find a few things worth liking.

Merry Christmas. May your jingle bells rock if you so desire them to.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. You can listen to his podcast or buy his upcoming book, Worst Ideas Ever, at Worstideasever.com.

Look close and offer a small kindness

2010-12-14T08:35:00.002-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

A friend of mine has a two-year-old daughter. She’s an adorable little thing, charming and delightful in a way that only little girls can be. Right in the Christmas spirit sweet spot, she knows of Santa and presents, but not of paying the rent, keeping the lights on and dealing with the grim reality of having to place food and shelter over presents.

My friend works with many other friends of mine and we all know her child. We also know a mother who has very little, but works hard and does everything she can to give her daughter the best life she possibly can.

I imagine that someday the daughter would grow to appreciate these things, but a two-year-old on Christmas morning knows nothing of sacrifice. A two-year-old on Christmas morning should know nothing of sacrifice.

Instead, even if it’s an illusion, that child should know wrapping paper and unexpected delights – dollhouses and stuffed animals, new clothes and whatever else a two-year-old girl dreams of. Children of that age may not know what they don’t have, but they certainly know what they do.

While adults strive for houses, better cars and a well-stocked pantry, a two-year-old only knows the pure joy of a cherished item and the happiness of getting something new. As adults, those of us who have things – be they meager or plentiful – have a deep responsibility to make sure that the children around us know happiness on Christmas and beyond.

I’m not talking about vaguely suffering kids in far off lands. While they deserve our supports as well, we must first make sure the children of our coworkers, neighbors and friends have some joy this holiday season. Bring some light into the houses of those close to us and we’ll all be able to bask in the glow.

In my case, few of us realized how hard our friend was working to get her daughter a handful of presents to put under the tree. She never complained, never asked for help and though we should have known it would be a struggle for her, we never stopped to consider her difficult road.

Perhaps by chance or maybe through something greater, we learned of our friend’s burden and quietly the kindness began. In small increments people helped as they could. It was subtle and secret as we were doing it out of affection, not pity.

Our friend and her daughter have not had an easy road and there’s nothing I will do this holiday season that makes me feel better than knowing I helped bring them both a smile on Christmas. To take one worry off our friend’s shoulders is a privilege I will not soon forget and I’m honored that she allowed us to help.

Whatever you have there is someone who has less. If we all share what we have with those who matter to us, than we are all wealthier for the experience.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com and you can listen to his podcast at Worstideasever.com.

Please stop the music

2010-12-07T16:38:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Like a large percentage of full-time freelancers, I spend some of my workday, nearly every day, working from a table at my local Starbucks. I do this because they not only have tasty coffee and tea drinks, they also have other humans to at least be in the physical presence of as freelancing can be extremely isolating.

I often spend whole days working entirely on my laptop and on m Blackberry, emailing and texting people, but never actually speaking to anyone. This isolation is compounded when I choose to work out of my office, a 10x8 room in a very quiet office building near my house.

Because of this, I usually begin my day at Starbucks, working from about 7-10 a.m. before heading to the gym, then either working from my couch or going to the office. Starbucks, as a chain seems aware that many people in my situation use their stores as an office as they offer free Wi-Fi, lots of outlets for plugging in laptops and cleaner bathrooms than most places (Manhattan Starbucks are a rather large exception here).

It would seem a fairly large percentage of non-morning rush business for the coffee chain comes from people that use the store as an office extension. Because of that, one would expect the stores to at least somewhat cater to this loyal clientele and normally they do.

During the holiday season, however, Starbucks, like many stores, gives over its background music to Christmas music. Instead of their normal mix of somewhat quirky offerings, Starbucks delivers a non-stop run through the wretched underbelly of Christmas songs.

Now, before you write the hate mail, let me say that Christmas songs are fun to sign. Gathering around a tree or going caroling can be quite enjoyable, and was something I liked as a child despite being Jewish.

That said, of the thousands of Christmas songs ever recorded, essentially only Bruce Springsteen covering “Santa Claus Is Coming To Town,” and RUN DMC’s “Christmas In Hollis,” deserve repeated listening. I’ll accept that everyone has their personal favorites as well, but as a category, Christmas music is to music what the sweater bedecked with reindeer and candy canes is to stylish outfits.

Taken in brief doses, Christmas songs aren’t technically harmful, but in large enough quantities they can make your ears bleed. I’m sure most people mildly enjoy the brief snippets of a song or two they hear while picking up a latte or a cappuccino.

For those of us whom actually spend large chunks of time in the store, though, the experience becomes excruciating. This must even be worse for the Starbucks employees who not only have to hear a blues cover of “Let It Snow” or an African chant version of “Jingle Bells,” they have to hear them again and again.

Like most holiday indulgences, Christmas songs are best when you have just slightly less than you want. Go just slightly over the limit and you’re the guy at the family dinner with his face covered in egg nog as he tells his family members what he really thinks of them.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com and you can listen to his podcast at Worstideasever.com.

3D movies completely unnecessary

2010-12-01T08:31:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Please, I beg of you, stop going to see movies in 3D. If we, the viewing public, stop supporting 3D films, then Hollywood will stop making them and we can put an end to this completely unnecessary technology.

I, of course, blame James Cameron for causing this craze with his plotless technology-fest “Avatar.” Cameron, who has finely crafted his skills at delivering style over substance reached a new level of craptacularity with this 3D mess of blue people moving around in a jungle.

The film may well be a triumph in creating all sorts of new techniques to deliver images in 3D. Unfortunately, the added dimension adds nothing to the story or your enjoyment of the picture. It does, of course, add to the price of a movie ticket which explains why Hollywood has eagerly shot more movies in 3D and even more reprehensibly has converted others after shooting.

Adding 3D to a movie is essentially the same as adding smell to a novel. It’s an added dimension, but the addition actually takes away from the whole. This has been especially true throughout the history of 3D as the use of the technology invariably leads to characters throwing spears or doing other things that can make the audience react.

I’ve never been one to complain about the price of a movie ticket. Around $10 a person for two hours of entertainment always seemed fair to me, though if you’re going to charge $4.50 for a box of Junior Mints, don’t be surprised if I sneak in my own candy.

The price for 3D films, though, has reached an absurd level, especially because I’m paying for something that almost never makes the movie-going experience better. My son and I normally see an early showing of whatever kids movie happens to be playing that weekend.

With child/matinee prices, this normally costs anywhere from $12-$14 depending upon the theater. Recently, though, we went to see “Megamind” before noon on a Sunday and while I had no intention of seeing it in 3D, that was the only way it was playing at this particular theater.

Those two tickets cost me $26 for which I not only got to see the movie, I was also treated to the headache that anyone who wears actual glasses gets when having to put 3D glasses on as well. I mildly enjoyed the movie, which for a kids film had a decent plot, but can honestly say that it gained nothing (aside from more box office) from being in 3D.

Unfortunately, 3D films have almost universally done well, so now pretty much all animated movies and nearly all action movies will be released in 3D. This makes it okay to have less plot and more stuff flying around “hitting” the audience.

At this rate, how far are we from 3D romantic-comedies where Julia Roberts has to spit-take into the camera so you know you’re watching a 3D movie? Is there a way for Woody Allen to be neurotic in an added dimension? Do we really need Jonah Hill or Zach Galifianakis playing the fat friend in 3D?

If I wanted a Disney ride, I’d go to Disney World. When I go to the movies, I don’t need things popping out at me or to be immersed in the experience. I know they’re putting the Star Wars movies out in 3D and I love Star Wars, but I don’t want to dodge lighsabers, I want to watch the movie.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com and you can listen to his podcast at Worstideasever.com.

Find something to say thanks for

2010-11-23T16:27:00.002-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

For the past few years Thanksgiving has been a time where many American question exactly what they have to be thankful for. Should we say thanks for the unemployment? The failing economy? Maybe offer up a big thanks to the banks foreclosing on our homes or the creditors breathing down our necks?

Perhaps we should thank the politicians whose petty sniping and party rhetoric keeps then from actually doing anything. Certainly, we should thank the Congress that can’t manage to agree on extending unemployment benefits, even though those are the only thing holding many families tenuously afloat.

If not the politicians, then perhaps we should offer up a big thanks to the folks who preach fidelity and honesty while cheating on their spouses and lying to us all. Of course, that includes some politicians, but also some religious leaders and other folks who are supposed to be paragons of virtue.

As we dole out the thanks, let’s also throw out a big thank you to the terrorists who have now made it so I need a hernia check and a rectal exam before getting on plane. Thanks for making it so we’re all suspects because nobody knows what atrocious behavior someone might attempt to commit in the name of a culture that would make a caveman think “boy, they’re a little backwards.”

We should also thank Kanye West for making it nearly impossible for anyone else to look like a jerk. He really put that beloved teenage girl who writes all her own songs and bakes cookies for her band while reading to the blind during her rare off-time (I’m guessing on the last two) in her place. Maybe next year Kanye can go after a basket of kittens or choke out a baby panda.

Thanks also must go to Bernie Madoff and the gaggle of less famous, but still equally wretched other folks who ran Ponzi schemes. Now, as I hide money under my mattress and sit up all night guarding it with a shotgun, I thank him for no longer having to worry about meetings with an investment banker or deciphering complicated mutual funds statements.

Post-Madoff, everyone has their money in gold coins, magic beans or barrels of oil. It’s like Mad Max without Tina Turner in a metal dress. Of course, while we’re saying thanks, a big thank you should go to Mad Max himself, Mel Gibson, because after his phone tirade it would be hard for my wife to get mad at anything I leave in a answering machine message.

Lastly, of course, thanks must be sent to every person who slows down to stare at an accident and the people who pretend they aren’t getting off at the exit, but then jam in front of me at the last minute. I so appreciate all the extra time in my car to ponder the great mysteries of life and I don’t at all resent your selfishness.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com and you can listen to his podcast at Worstideasever.com.

Less government, more personal responsibility

2010-11-16T09:09:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Whenever government has one of those supposedly non-partisan panels look into an issue they invariably decide we need more government. The solution is never that politicians have made a mess of things and we should dismantle the bureaucracy.

Government does nothing well. We have lousy schools, roads filled with potholes, a military engaged in unwinnable wars, a bankrupt Social Security system and a horrifying health care system.

I wouldn't trust the United States government to make me a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. After that simple request I'd likely end up with Congressional hearings, a special prosecutor, three years of delays, a $3 billion bill and no sandwich.

This makes it all the more shocking that the public continually turns to slight variants of this broken system. The Republicans won't be any better than the Democrats a fact proven by history, reinforced by our willingness to repeat history.

Fixing our economy, schools, roads and everything else requires a radically different approach. We need to stop moving three degrees to the right then two degrees to the left. Instead, we need serious, uncomfortable change that blows up the existing system. I’ll boil it down to two key platform points that will bring everything else into line.

First, we need to eliminate our absurdly complicated punitive tax code and replace it with a flat tax. Let’s call the first $20,000 an individual makes or the first $45,000 a family with kids makes tax free.

If you’re a family making less than $45,000 a year, the last thing you need is Uncle Sam taking a piece of the pie and you’ll only need him to give you some of it back in entitlement programs. If you actually had the money you earn there would be less need for those programs and we’re well on our way to making government smaller.

Any income above those amounts will be taxed at a flat rate. Every person, rich or middle class, will pay the same percentage dollar for dollar. There will be no deductions and we won’t be taxed twice. That means we stop taxing inheritances and corporate profits.

Any money in an estate was already taxed and corporate profits should go to shareholders, business owners and business leaders as taxable income. The government still gets its cut, but they should not get to take a slice off the top and then another when the cash actually makes it into your pocket.

The second piece of my platform will be decidedly unpopular, but it cuts to the core of our economic problems. It should be considered child abuse to knowingly have a child you cannot provide basic food, shelter and clothing for.

I’m not talking about the person who has a kid then loses his job or falls upon hard times. These are the people we need to help get back on their feet, because circumstances kicked them in the teeth – they did not knowingly create a life they could not provide for.

I’m instead referring to the unemployed teenagers and the people who barely have a roof over their own heads who somehow decide that having a bunch of kids makes total sense. Having a child is a responsibility, not a right. If you can’t reasonably be expected to meet that responsibility you are committing a crime against that child and society in general.

If you bring home a puppy that you can’t afford to feed, you will get arrested for animal cruelty. Do the same repeatedly with children and you get some of my money. It’s an absurd double standard built out of the notion that everyone has the “right” to have children and we’re racists/class snobs if we declare otherwise.

Cut the number of kids that the public has to pay for because their birth parents can’t support them and we pretty much solve all of our problems. The schools become less crowded, our healthcare system becomes less taxed, crime goes down and “Maury” gets cancelled.

Our society should have a safety net for bad luck and unforeseen circumstances. We should not, however, be paying for other people’s willful, repeated decisions to do things they can’t actually pay for.

What we’re doing doesn’t work. It’s time for something different. No more commissions, no more bipartisan panels and, please, no more studies. We need fair, logical solutions built on personal responsibility.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com and you can listen to his podcast at Worstideasever.com.

Will host for food

2010-11-09T08:09:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Conan O’Brien was a totally unknown (albeit successful and well regarded) writer when he turned down a position as head creative person for the new show that would take over David Letterman’s slot. He did so not because he thought he should be the host – that would be like me turning down Patriots tickets because I was holding out for Tom Brady’s job -- but because he wanted to become more of a performer and less of a behind-the scenes talent.

He had no specific plan to do this and no job as he had already let his current employer, “The Simpsons,” know he was not coming back. He didn’t even have a head shot and his previous on-air experience consisted mostly of being in the background of some sketches when he wrote for “Saturday Night Live.”

O’Brien wanted to perform and had dreamed of hosting a late night talk show, but he had no master plan. Even after “SNL” Czar Lorne Micheals, who was producing the new show, wrangled him a screen test for the job, he considered that at best the network might try to get him to take the backstage gig with vague promises of giving him the 1:35 hour should then “Later” host Bob Costas step down.

There was no power play as the idea of an unknown, who had barely performed at all taking over what at the time was one of exactly three network late-night talk shows was a fantasy beyond even his own realm of possibility. Conan taking over for Letterman would be the modern equivalent of “Snooki” taking over for Hillary Clinton except that unbeknownst to almost everyone, Conan had the skills for the job (and I’m guessing Snooki would not make a good international diplomat).

Of course, sometimes the implausible happens and after NBC made runs at Garry Shandling, a few other well-known comics and, probably, a few just plain famous people, O’Brien was given the job. At first even NBC did not trust this decision as they gave Conan a series of 13 week contracts essentially keeping a gun next to his head, but, ultimately, the show and it host went on to huge success.

This story makes me feel a little less absurd when I tell you I’m meant to a talk show host. I have never hosted professionally and have never even pursued that particular path as my wife is not too keen on the idea of us moving around the country so I could slowly assault the radio world.

My personal parallels to Conan are, of course undeniable. He was an unknown writer and I’m an even less known writer. He is not considered classically good looking and I am also not classically good looking.

The major difference, unfortunately, is that Conan knew Lorne Michaels and my biggest “producer” contact is the supportive, but incredibly overworked program director at a local radio station. Because of that, I have no delusions that I will be getting any sort of break, so, as they say, I plan to make my own luck.

For the next 12 months I will host anything for anyone. In addition to my podcast at WorstIdeasEver.com (listened to by tens of people each week) I will get behind the mic or in front of the cameras for anyone that will have me.

The Internet has made it possible for every crackpot who thinks he should be on the radio, do a radio show. Well, I should be and I’m the crackpot who will be.

Welcome back Conan. Thank you for showing me that the implausible can happen and that there are different paths to where you want to go.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com and you can listen to his podcast at Worstideasever.com.

Famous people flawed like the rest of us

2010-11-02T10:42:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

America always seems shocked when an athlete or a celebrity turns out to be different than his public image. No matter how many times this happens, we always assume that the next famous person we perceive as a ‘good guy” will live up to that billing. And, of course, we will inevitably be let down when said celebrity or athlete turns out to be just as big of a jerk as the ones before him.

So, before the entire nation goes up in arms over the next actor, quarterback or home run hitter who we find out cheats on his wife, takes drugs or does something else bad, let me explain the obvious. Most -- not all -- but most, men do bad things based on the availability of those bad things.

If a lot of women who are not your wife forcefully want to sleep with you, then not too many guys can resist the temptation. I’m not talking about the travelling businessman who might have been able to score with the flirty bartender at his hotel, I mean the guys for whom women are offering themselves up on a daily basis.

Certainly there are some men who can resist repeated temptation, but as you can see just by looking at the pant size of most Americans, we’re not generally very good at doing that in any area. If large numbers of regular, non-famous people have affairs, do drugs, steal from their employers then why would we be surprised when celebrities do the same thing?

Nothing about playing a sport well or being talented/good looking enough to become a famous actor or singer makes you a better person. Being really good at golf obviously did not make Tiger Woods less likely to cheat on his wife. Instead, it made it easier since a certain group of women value money and fame over personality and appearance.

Without fame, Woods may not have had the temptation since nerdy guys with limited personalities and odd looks don’t tend to be the real ladies’ men. Of course, the non-famous Woods would still be rotten at the core, ready to cheat on his non-supermodel wife, but the opportunities would not be as great and, perhaps, decency would win out.

Of course, when Woods’ transgressions became public the entire nation seemed surprised because some guy who was really good at golf turned out to not be the person we imagined he was. The same shock has recently been applied to Brett Favre as we learned that he might have a propensity for sending cell phone pictures of his genitalia to attractive young women.

This surprised us because Favre plays football well and seems like a decent guy in his jeans commercials. We don’t actually know Brett Favre, but he looks rugged, plays hard and that should make him a faithful husband.

Watching someone play a sport, act in a movie or sing a song does not mean we know them. Tom Hanks might seem like a nice guy, but it wouldn’t shock me if he had a collection of hobo skulls in his basement.

I don’t expect celebrities to be any better people than I expect regular people to be and experience has taught me that any expectations should be set low. Favre’s actions don’t disappoint me because I would have been shocked if he wasn’t up to no good.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or hear his podcast at Worstideasever.com. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Mid-term elections change absolutely nothing

2010-10-26T12:50:00.003-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

With the mid-term elections only a few days away, I see little hope that anything will actually be different in Washington after we finish voting. Some of the names will change and instead of vague liberal inertia, we might get vague conservative inertia, but the difference is like changing the color of your house from white to off-white.

For all the outrage and all the attack ads being run throughout the country, the two-party system makes it nearly impossible for real change to occur. Just look at the last two years – where the Democrats controlled the White House and held a large majority in Congress – and you can see that even with overwhelming majorities, it’s nearly impossible to get anything done.

Politicians in both parties care more about their political affiliation than helping their constituents. Congressmen vote along party lines on nearly all occasions with the only exception being when their vote won’t change the result and disagreeing looks good.

Both Republicans and Democrats have a distinct interest in maintaining the status quo. If they make loud statement about their political beliefs they get the publicity they need and look like they are fighting on behalf of their party.

Of course, the rhetoric rarely becomes law, so neither party has to admit defeat. Instead, most things stay the same and control just shifts subtly every two years.

Nearly every commercial being run by non-incumbent office-seekers talks about how Candidate X won’t be beholden to their party. In reality, the second Candidate X hits office, everything from his reelection chances to his locker at the congressional gym hinges on his party loyalty.

We don’t have a government, we have two fraternities with only slightly different beliefs focused on staying at the party. It doesn’t matter if you’re in the frat the prefers keg parties or the one that likes doing shots – at the end of the day you’re still drunk and not quite sure where you are or who’s in bed with you.

Real change can only come from electing actual independent thinkers not affiliated with either party in large numbers. I’m not talking about fringe groups that are really just Democrats or Republicans under a different name, but actual radical thinkers in large numbers.

We need Congressmen not beholden to any political agenda. Thoughtful people whose opinions can be swayed by strong arguments – people who know how to compromise for the greater good.

Unfortunately, we will likely elect intelligent non-party-affiliated people to Congress right around the time we let people who are not super good looking take up all the slots on TV and in the movies. As a country, we need to stop thinking, “hey this guy thinks like me” and start thinking, “hey, this guy thinks.”

Until we do that, we’ll just get more of the same from people who say they want to serve the people, but really only serve themselves, their friends and their political party.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or hear his podcast at Worstideasever.com. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Get fit, get fat, repeat

2010-10-20T08:24:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

My relationship with exercise has been an on-again/off-again affair. Generally, I work out in bunches, getting almost into shape before slacking off and sliding back into “uh oh, my pants don’t button” territory.

During the period I am hitting the gym regularly I never see my undoing. Once I get into an exercise routine it seems impossible to me that I will ultimately fall back into a period of sloth. It’s not that I so enjoy working out that I can’t imagine not doing it; it’s more that I enjoy being less fat and not wanting to wear a rain poncho in the shower.

My last run of fitness lasted exactly a year. I was running a very large toy store and since we didn’t open until ten (and I came in around seven) I had time each morning to meet a very fit coworker at they gym. Having a workout partner was very motivating and, of the first time ever, I was seriously lifting weights.

Unfortunately, while some people can lift weights and put on visible muscle, I have a body type that defies muscularity. I could certainly lift more and more each month, but aside from one freakishly large bicep, I mostly looked the same – albeit thinner.

My clothes fit better though and I genuinely felt good about my appearance making it seem impossible that I would go back to my lazy old ways. Even when my workout partner and I barely made it to the gym for the month of December we rationalized it by pointing out how hard we worked in the store during the month of December.

Certainly unloading pallet after pallet of toys for eager holiday shoppers and being on our feet for 12 hour stretches made up for a few missed workouts? In January we would get back to business pushing up stacks of weights next to the ‘roided out muscleheads and nearly dead elderly folks who populated our gym.

For the first few weeks of January, we even stuck to that promise. We managed to wade our way through the endless drooping parade of naked old people who hung out in the locker room and we even avoided a pumped up veteran who threatened to kill us when I made a joke about Kid Rock.

I was back on track and my ability to fit into my dress pants seemed safe. Then, of course, I quit my job.

Theoretically, this should have allowed me more time to exercise. No longer beholden to the clock, I was now living the glorious freelance lifestyle and should easily be able to find 45 minutes a day for exercise.

In reality, however, not having steady work sent me into a state of paralysis by electronics. Given that every phone call could be from a client and every email from a possible client, I became chained to my laptop and cell phone.

I had time to work out, but fear of missing an opportunity had me skipping trips to the gym. It wasn’t sudden, more of a gradual trail off, but by March I was not exercising at all and when we hit October, 1, well, let’s just say putting on a suit required hiring the guy Jennifer Lopez uses to get into her skinny jeans.

So, it was with a supreme desire to not have to spend the money on bigger pants that I returned to the gym. I’m two weeks into my new program which mixes weightlifting with “running” (walking a the moment, but running eventually remains a distant goal).

I struggled through the first week of soreness that always accompanies lifting weights and I can now once again brush my hair without help. I’d love to say I’ve seen some tangible benefits, but realistically, it has only been two weeks.

I’d also like to promise that this time, I have made a permanent life switch and that going to the gym will now and forever be part of my life. Unfortunately, I think we all know that I will be writing this column again two years from now.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Fame certainly has different levels

2010-10-12T11:41:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

A newspaper I read last week had an article on the woman whose hands appear holding an apple on the cover of one of the “Twilight” books. This perfectly nice-seeming lady, who also works as a foot model due to her oddly small feet, actually appears at conventions making her perhaps the least famous celebrity in America.

This almost-barely-sort of famous set of hands, of course, hopes to spin her role holding a piece of fruit while not moving into an acting career. More likely, she will spend the rest of her life signing book covers at sci-fi conventions and – if she’s lucky – basking in the glory of being the answer to a Trivial Pursuit question.

What once would have been a nice story to tell the grandkids has instead become a launching pad for fame. Never mind that acting and body part modeling have nothing to do with each other. Any whiff of celebrity seems to give nearly everyone an insatiable desire to be famous.

Fortunately, the bar for fame has been set especially low as the reality show era has created hundreds, if not thousands, of vaguely famous (and a few incredibly famous) people who possess no talent whatsoever. You no longer need to sing, dance, act or create anything to become famous, you can be a celebrity just for being a loudmouth or overly willing to take your clothes off.

We now have a famous guy whose chief appeal is his fabulous abs and dozens of “celebrities” who are well-known only because of how badly they act when drunk. Sadly, I become more reserved and careful when drunk or else I would attempt to turn tanning and alcoholism into a career.

Were I a good-looking woman or a woman with any sort of minor fame, I would, of course, accidentally misplace a tape of myself having sex with a washed up ‘80s rock star. These tapes not only bring in the bucks, they actually make you more famous.

Appearing in a sex tape (if you are a minor celebrity) lets you do the magazine cover/talk show rounds talking about how ashamed you are of the tape, which you, of course, actually fully intended the public to see. Be careful with this one because if you turn out to be not famous enough for this to work, the tape just becomes something for friends to laugh at.

Another sure path to very minor celebrity is to appear as a minor character in somebody else’s glorious achievement. This works better if that achievement happens to be a science fiction film or a horror movie.

The people who played victims in various slasher movies and every single bit player in a “Star Wars” film make money and achieve tiny bits of notoriety appearing at various conventions. I’m not sure having dorks pay $10 to sign pictures of your half second of screen time in the Jedi death montage from “Revenge of the Sith” makes you a celebrity, but it does put you way ahead of the hand model and still more famous than a writer (me) appearing in papers around the country.

I’m, of course, available as a hand model and plan to parlay that fame into a sex tape with the drummer from Vixen. After that, I plan to either gain a lot of weight so I can do “Celebrity Fit Club” or become some sort of addict so I can do “Celebrity Rehab.”

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. See new content daily at WorstIdeasEver.com and follow Kline on Twitter at @WorstIdeas.

Meaningless alert does absolutely nothing

2010-10-05T11:06:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

The federal government has issued an official terrorism alert regarding Americans travelling to Europe. This, of course, has everything to do with information gathered by intelligence sources and absolutely nothing to do with distracting the public from the failing economy.

The State Department – which, you have to assume, would have no interest in diverting attention from the president’s plummeting approval ratings and the complete failure to deliver any sort of meaningful economic recovery issued the alert. In it, they don’t recommend canceling your travel plans (as our European allies would get pretty mad about that); instead the alert calls on Americans to be vigilant when travelling.

Before the State Department issued this alert, most Americans were, of course, ignoring any signs of potential terrorists. That group of suspicious looking people abandoning luggage all over Heathrow Airport? They must just be especially forgetful. That swarthy guy with a bulky coat on a warm day with wires poking out? He’s probably a wire salesman with a naturally low body temperature.

Now that the State Department has issued an alert, I’m sure average American tourists in Europe will begin immediately increasing their vigilance which should result in all sorts of foiled terrorist plots. Evildoers beware, a guy with a camera trying to find the Eiffel Tower after a few glasses of red wine is now on the case.

The alert was issued, so the State Department says, because our intelligence sources have picked up increased activity. We don’t actually know anything, but we hear more people who may or may not be actual bad guys talking about stuff.

When this happens, of course, the correct response is to panic the public when there is absolutely nothing they can do. Like telling someone they have a better than average chance of contracting Alzheimer’s disease but that nothing they can do will increase or decrease their odds of getting it, the terror alert is panic for panic’s sake.

Essentially the alert tells us that something might happen. Of course, something always might happen. Terrorists might blow up a public building. An Englishman might start shooting Americans over our lack of respect for Benny Hill and the French might stop being subtly snooty towards us and start poisoning our croissants.

The federal government should not issue alerts based on theoretical threats because telling us they think something might happen somewhere on a pretty large continent full of tourist destinations accomplishes nothing. If we have credible information that Al Qaeda plans to take out the British Museum or that place that first started frying Mars bars, then by all means tell us.

Until you have credible evidence of an actual threat – not theoretical evidence of a possible threat—keep it to yourselves. Issuing warnings that tell people to be vigilant does absolutely nothing. At worst, it’s a government trying to distract us from the more pressing problems at home. At best, it’s a sad reminder of just how useless government can be and how out of touch with reality our leaders have become.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. See new content daily at WorstIdeasEver.com and follow Kline on Twitter at @WorstIdeas.

All our economic problems are over

2010-09-21T12:29:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Pretty much everyday the various news programs report that a bunch of financial analysts have released some very long reports that either say the economy has improved or that it has gotten slightly worse. This news will be reported and debated then used by the various talking head television shows to either bury President Barack Obama’s performance or praise it.

This will, of course, dramatically influence the life of average Americans as financial reports and the analysis of financial reports determines how things actually are. You may have no job and limited prospects for one in the future, but the Russell & Stovers 600 Index says the economy has climbed 1.3% so put away your troubles and dance for joy.

Ignore your huge credit card debt, your late mortgage payments and the fact that your 30-year-old kids now live in your basement, some guy on cable news read a study that said things are improving. This works perfectly for people who, after a horrible, undercooked meal full of hair, sand and other debris report that they enjoyed the experience because the restaurant gets good reviews.

Reality, unfortunately, does not seem to have anything to do with the financial results that the TV news seems to love so much. The minor movements of various indexes might tell us something on a gross level, but they do not reflect the actual situation.

To know the state of the economy simply spend an hour sitting in your local coffee shop and just listen to the conversation. People might feel a little more hopeful, but an awful lot of folks still need jobs and the only place the recession has ended appears to be on television.

In fact, according to my television and the fine folks at my local NBC affiliate, the recession has not only ended, it ended a year ago. Never mind the high unemployment and the fact that your house is now worth less Roger Clemens’ rookie card, our economic woes actually went away a year ago.

There’s clearly an absurd disconnect between financial data and financial reality. It’s great that a bunch of eggheads think that the economy has taken a turn for the better, but now we need for it to actually happen.

The recession will be over when everyone who wants a job has one within let’s say 20% of the income they made before the recession. When people go back to work and have hope for a better tomorrow, then the talking heads on TV can declare the recession over.

Until real people see their world improve, we have nothing to celebrate no matter what the data says.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Daytime TV pretty much a sad wasteland

2010-09-14T14:31:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

While Lady Gaga’s insufferable “Let’s Dance” played, Ellen Degeneres made her way to the stage “dancing” in the semi-awkward style she has made famous. Not merely a quick intro bit before her show begins, this went on for multiple minutes and the audience screamed with delight.

Unless you happen to love Ms. Gaga or really enjoy seeing a tomboyish middle-aged woman with a bad haircut jerking around, nothing even vaguely entertaining was happening. The crowd did not seem to notice that as they were reacting like John Lennon and George Harrison had risen from the dead to perform for Oprah while she gave out free trips, cars and it rained hundred dollar bills.

The rest of Ellen’s show was only slightly better as she repeated the dancing bit each time a new guest came on so she could ask them essentially nothing. This spectacle seemed especially sad to me since Degeneres had once been a funny standup and at one point seemed like a comic who actually had something to say.

As someone who works at home much of the time, I now see television programs I never would have watched otherwise. Clearly, a 36-year-old professional working on his couch is not the target for any of these programs, but judging by the inanity of the content pretty much across the board, I’d be scared to meet the person who is.

The most egregious offender might be the fourth hour of the “Today” show starring what appears to be an intoxicated Kathie Lee Gifford and her seemingly equally inebriated co-host Hoda Kotb. Aside from drinking on air, these two mostly seem to find ways to insult each other or make jokes at their guests’ expense.

I made the joke on Facebook recently that if “Today” thought it was logical to follow Matt Lauer and Meredith Vieira with Kathie Lee and Hoda, then look forward to hour five of “Today” starring “The Situation” and Khloe Khardashian. That would only be topped when they introduce hour six featuring Osama bin Laden and “Bombshell” McGee.

Hoda and Kathie Lee aren’t even the most annoying women on in the morning, however, as ABC stations still air “The View.” This sad end to Barbara Walters’ career features a bunch of women talking over each other with it being essentially impossible to make out any individual words. This has proven a positive for the show because whenever you can hear an opinion it’s something like Sherri Shepherd saying that she doesn’t believe the world is round or disavowing evolution.

Of course, if you want to prove the theory of evolution, you merely need to turn the channel to “Live with Regis and Kelly,” because judging by his level of coherence, Regis could give Shepherd a first-hand account. Once a pretty good performer, Regis has sunk into Larry King territory and Kelly seems nice, but has nothing to say that anyone could want to listen to.

The only constants to all these programs and the rest of their daytime ilk seems to be audiences that scream over nothing and laugh at unfunny jokes. Is it just so fun to be at a TV show that people get entertained by nothing? If that’s the case, then why pay Ellen or Regis, we should just send out the bear in a tutu on a unicycle.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Do as I say, not as I did?

2010-09-07T10:56:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

My six-year-old son -- who just entered first grade -- now has homework. As a responsible parent, I’m supposed to support this concept and dutifully encourage him to complete the required tasks pretending that I wholeheartedly endorse the idea of students being sent home with schoolwork.

I’m have to maintain this pose over the next 12 years as the workload increases and occasional assignments become nightly ones lasting for hours. Homework is supposedly a good thing, so grownups are forced to support it -- even those of us who never endorsed the concept as students and question its validity now.

For most of my academic career I devoted the time between homeroom and my first class to homework though I’m pretty sure “homeroom” was not the intended home for the work to be done in. During this seven minutes or so I scratched out answers to whatever math problems I could and maybe I studied a little for any test that might be in my future that day.

Most days, though, I didn’t bother to even fake an attempt at homework, instead spending the time talking with my friend Nicole, who – due to the miracle of sitting alphabetically – had been in close proximity since elementary school. She wasn’t much of a homework doer either, so we were eager to encourage each other to neglect our assignments in favor of a couple of minutes of discussion.

In general, I pretty much never did any homework while actually at home. I’m sure I completed a major report or two outside of school, but those were surely exceptions and in general I pretty much ignored whatever my teachers wanted me to do at night, usually to the detriment of my grades.

Not doing homework did not mean, however, that I did not do any work. I diligently read all assigned book, often accomplishing this during class where 45 minutes would be spent on a couple of text book pages. This “strategy” tended to be a failure too as by the time a test occurred on any topic, I had already read countless other things and had forgotten the minutia that made up most teachers’ tests.

I wish I could say that as a grownup, I now feel bad that I mostly didn’t do my homework. I can’t though because there’s still a large part of me that believes that in an almost eight hour school day, we should be able to create a system where very little work has to come home.

Obviously, kids need to learn how to complete work on their own and certain concepts taught in school need reinforcing at home. I wonder, though, why we want our children spending more than full-time work hours on only one part of their development?

Why not carve out an hour of the school day for studying, completing independent projects and doing other “home” work? That way, students could have the benefit of working on their own with the resources of a school and its teachers nearby.

If all homework had to be completed during this one hour period, then teachers would have to collectively gauge the value of their assignments. Of course, some studying for tests could be done at home and nothing would stop students from doing extra work, but the bulk of the assignments would be done during a student’s “work” day and not at home.

Sadly, though, I hardly see homework reform as a topic any school system seems likely to tackle and most parents take the “I had to do it, so you should too approach.” Personally, I’m fine with my son putting in an eight hour day at school then having the rest of the day for sports, Cub Scouts or whatever extracurricular activities he chooses.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Qualified is a state of mind

2010-08-31T14:18:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Having given for a time the idea of full-time employment, I now find myself, like many Americans, cobbling together a series of freelance and contract jobs. I am perhaps uniquely suited for this type of life as my working history has been so varied that I’m qualified – at least vaguely – to do pretty much anything.

Though I fancy myself an editor and a writer, I make most of my money these days as a public relations person, marketing guru and Internet consultant. Until I started doing this in February, I had never actually done any of these things, though I’d dabbled in all of them at various stops along my non-linear working past.

I’ve run magazines and Web sites aimed at hip young men, middle-aged housewives, high school band and orchestra directors and rock star wannabes to name a few. I’ve also sold ladders and scaffolding, edited newspapers, fact checked TV Guide articles and (very briefly) sold greeting cards, fancy soaps and expensive chocolates to specialty stores.

As most likely the only former toy store general manager who once worked for a Web site that was bought by Playboy, I never consider myself unqualified for any job. I mean, I’m not applying to be a brain surgeon or a refrigerator repairman – or anything else that requires actual skill – but if it seems like someone smart and resourceful might be able to do the job, then I go after it.

I’m always looking to do new things and have a pretty strong sense of confidence that I can figure out most jobs. How different could running a cruise ship be? And, do you really need an ice cream background to run a frozen desserts factory?

I always assume I can do the job and that my odd mix of past experience represents exactly the perfect mix of skills that qualifies me for positions when my actual history in no way matches the job description. Through the years I’m sure this has led to my resume being put on the throwaway pile many more times than it has gone in the callback stack.

Of course, when your qualifications match nobody else’s then it takes a special breed of hiring manager to select my resume.

“Well, he’s never done this type of work, but I’m guessing this guy could run a dairy farm,” would essentially have to be the thought process from anyone considering bringing me in for an interview.

Fortunately, those types of people do exist and while many, many jobs I (and perhaps only I) believe I would be good at, pass me by without a thought, just enough people consider my mostly preposterous resume an asset to keep me solvent. Instead of a career, I’ve chosen to have a series of careers that are not entirely related.

That may not be so good for the bottom line, but it make me eminently employable for any job that nobody would be specifically qualified for. I can do just about anything because I’ve done just about everything. Hard to put that into a cover letter, but true nonetheless.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

New law would keep Tiger Woods single

2010-08-24T14:23:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

With the ink barely dry on his divorce papers, Tiger Woods now has every right to date as many strippers, skanks and porn stars as his heart desires. If the one-time-great golfer wants to become involved with two Kardashian sisters, a handful of “Hills” castoffs and the entire the entire waitstaff of the Indianapolis Hooters, Woods can fill his every waking moment with a flood of breast implants, hot pants, spray tanner and giant sunglasses.

What Woods should not be able to do again – at least for some time – is get married. If you get convicted of drunk driving then you lose your license for a period of time. The same should apply to marriage as Woods has certainly been convicted of being a bad husband of epic proportions.

As part of any divorce decree, judges should have the right to assign blame and impose a waiting period before each divorcee can marry again. Since Woods was a serial cheater who clearly placed little value in his wedding vows, he would be banned from remarrying for, let’s say, five years. His wife, however, whose only crime was being way too trusting and ignoring some pretty obvious signs would receive a lesser sentence of perhaps six months.

This new law should also impose penalties or consequences for creating pseudo-marriages like having kids with the woman you were cheating with or immediately moving her in with you. Let’s call that rule the Mel Gibson corollary as, had it existed, it may have stopped the movie star from the events that led to his recent, very public implosion.

While this new law would probably require an amendment to the Constitution, we should move forward with it as it not only protects men from making the same mistake over and over, but it clearly protects the women who would marry them. Why would any woman think Donald Trump, Kelsey Grammer or Larry King would suddenly be a better husband the third or fourth time around?

Woods has only been single for a few days and various news outlets have reported that more than one of his “ex-girlfriends” would be interested in marrying him. While the man certainly has money, he obviously lacks even basic moral decency.

Why would any woman ever trust Woods again? The golfer not only cheated on his wives, he actually cheated on the people he was cheating with.

Woods’ being a complete jerk and his obvious desire to sleep with more than one woman concurrently will not, however, deter him from getting married again. If women are lining up to date John Gosselin (and, sadly, they are) then certainly Tiger will have more than a few choices.

If Congress won’t pass my marriage moratorium, than let’s at least mandate that if any celebrity who gets divorced after a giant scandal chooses to remarry, he has to allow a reality show camera to follow him at all times. That way we could document the 15 minutes Woods remains faithful to his second wife and get to enjoy his next 17 affairs.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Don’t build a mosque near ground zero

2010-08-17T13:02:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Building a mosque near ground zero would be like building a museum dedicated to the history of the trench coat in Columbine, Colorado. There’s nothing technically wrong with it, but everyone with common sense not blinded by political correctness understands that the fact that it feels wrong should be enough to simply not do it.

I understand that the radicals who perpetrated the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 do not represent the Muslim religion any more than the nut jobs who shot up their school in Colorado represent the long-haired teenager in a trench coat sitting across from me at Starbucks. That, however, does not mean that we should ignore that it was, in fact, radical Muslims who caused the deaths of thousands on that day and building a mosque in the shadow of where the Twin Towers once stood would be a painful reminder.

Americans need to know that the not all Muslims are terrorists any more than all Germans are Nazis. We must work to have our citizens realize that a turban does not equal a terrorist and most Muslims are peace-loving people who simply want to live their lives.

That does not mean, however, that we should ignore the fact that this particular American tragedy was perpetrated by misguided radical Muslims. If 9/11’s villains were radical Christians, extremist Jews or a misguided hockey team it would be equally appropriate to not want to build a church, a temple or an ice rink near the scene of the crime.

Political correctness as practiced by President Barack Obama dictates that we should ignore the hurt that building a mosque near ground zero would create. It’s simply impossible to pretend that with all the places a mosque could be put in Manhattan, building one in the shadow of ground zero would be done for anything other than symbolism.

Admittedly, some of the symbolism would be positive – Muslims offering a sign of peace to help fix what their deranged brethren destroyed. That, unfortunately, won’t be the only symbolism evoked by the presence of the mosque though as made painfully obvious when the head of Islamic terrorist organization Hamas spoke in favor of the project this week.

In general, any project endorsed by Hamas should be met with extreme skepticism by any rational person. The terrorist seal of approval should raise a major warning flag that even if the builders of the mosque have positive intentions, their remain those who will pervert their actions for evil.

Nobody denies that Muslims have the same rights as any other religion to build their houses of worship wherever they want. Rights and right, however, are not always the same and just because you can do something does not mean that you should do it.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Political ads make everyone look awful

2010-08-10T07:26:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Judging by the many, many political ads running in recent weeks, most candidates are not
only unfit for office, they’re likely criminals. Not only should they not be elected, but we should probably consider deporting them or at least putting them on trial for treason,

A few months ago, as the election season started, most commercials focused on the positive traits of the various candidates. “I’m John Smith and as a business leader, I created jobs, made tough choices and practiced sound fiscal management. As your next governor, I’ll do the same.”

The ads were fairly pleasant, focused on the positive and seemed generally believable. Perhaps, I thought, we have entered a new day where candidates run based on their accomplishments rather than their opponent’s alleged shortcomings.

That hope died in recent weeks as election day has approached and the campaigns have become more desperate. Now, nearly every single ad focuses on just how awful the opposing candidate is and what a horrible liar he was in his earlier positive commercials.

I’m all in favor of using advertising to publicize something negative about your opponent that the public may not know. If Candidate A raised taxes and Candidate B wants the public to know about it, that seems reasonable.

Sadly, that type of “fact” only represents a small part of the vicious commercials airing now. The body of most of these ads focus on making seemingly positive things seem horrible – even if when examined they were appropriate actions when viewed in context.

My favorite current ad involves a candidate for governor who attacks his opponent because of his actions as a CEO. Those actions, which involved laying off workers, moving jobs out of state and paying himself what sounds like a lot money, but would actually be low-end normal for his position, are painted as horrible.

In actuality, what the commercial tells me is that as CEO, this candidate acted in the best interests of his company. Despite his well-known desire to someday serve in elected office he executed his responsibilities to his business rather than serving his own ends.

Ads have become so vicious that some candidates actually accuse their opponents of committing crimes. Forget blaming them for the poor economy, or calling them “tax and spend” liberals, we have ads that actually allege fraud, misuse of public funds and outright solicitation of bribes.

I’m not precisely sure how to decide between any of these candidates because the ads make them all seem like horrible people who, if elected, will loot the treasury, have an affair with one of the Tiger Woods mistresses and change the state song to Ice T’s “Cop Killer.” Show me a few more commercials and I’ll be advocating not electing anybody and making decisions via coin toss.

I’m sure that beneath all the attacks and accusations, some truth exists, but I’m hard pressed to know who to trust. In some cases, the mandatory “I’m Candidate X and I approved this message,” makes me question the type of person who would sign off on ads filled with this much hate.

There must be someone running for some position who won’t bring about our doom either through incompetence or outright criminality but that person will not be discovered by watching TV ads.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. See new content daily at WorstIdeasEver.com and follow Kline on Twitter at @WorstIdeas.

Gentleman, start your engine

2010-08-03T12:20:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

If the term “grease monkey” had an exact opposite, I would be the physical embodiment of that entity. Next to the photo of the guy in oil-stained overalls wearing a shirt with his name on it, would be a picture of me trying to figure out where to put gas in my rental car.

My auto mechanic skills consist solely of being able to add windshield wiper fluid to one of our two cars (I haven't exactly figured it out on my vehicle yet) and knowing how to change a fuse on my former 1982 Chevrolet Malibu Classic. I got rid of that car in 1992 and, to be fair, in addition to changing its fuses, I also knew how to jam a pen in its air intake so it would start (often shooting flames into the air).

As someone who has no mechanical ability, even the most minor problem with my car scares me. If I detect a weird rattle, notice a clunking noise or hear some unexplained static on the radio I assume total disaster.

In general, my response to any suspicious noises my car makes is to turn up the radio. If I can drown out the problem with some music, perhaps it will resolve itself. Of course, that solution generally leads to louder, even more suspicious noises and the inevitable trip to the mechanic.

Not knowing anything about cars leaves you entirely vulnerable to people who have the superpowers required to change oil, replace shocks and who know the difference between the transmission and the carburetor. If a mechanic told me I needed a new flux capacitor, I could argue about that being a fictional part from Back to the Future, but ultimately, I’d have to pay the man to get a new one so I could get my car back.

It’s not that I don’t want to know about cars, it’s just that my brain tends to not be wired that way. This week, I actually paid my very nice appliance repair man $80 to tell me that my dishwasher was not in fact broken; the plug had simply come loose.

He pretended the problem might have been a bad wire, but I saw him push the plug in, causing all the lights to go back on. Prior to that, I did not even know my dishwasher had a plug despite the fact that it had been lurking under my sink for the last three years.

If a loose plug throws me for a loop then you might imagine my frustration when they key simply refused to come out of my ignition this weekend. The key would turn the car off or on, but it would not move into that last position where the radio goes off and the key slides out.

I ignored my initial instinct, which was to pry the key out and instead turned to the owner’s manual which told me there was a manual release switch in the steering wheel column. After 30 minutes or so of fumbling around looking for that, I found the switch and liberated my key. Now, of course, I was left with solving the problem which, according to the Internet, could either be a $40 lock cylinder or a mechanical problem requiring me to replace every piece of the car save for the cup holders.

Fortunately, I have a friend who runs the repair department at a local used car dealer. If I bring him my car, he can usually put his hand on the hood, whisper a few things and magically know what’s wrong. He actually still has my car, but he’s pretty sure I won’t need the full transplant and will probably just have to replace some sort of switch.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Stop playing politics and cut all taxes

2010-07-27T08:27:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

With regular people still struggling, the economy barely showing signs of life and hope being in short supply, President Barack Obama has chosen to play politics. Instead of pledging to cut taxes even further and make the tax cuts passed by his predecessor, George W. Bush, permanent, our president has chosen to stick with the liberal mantra that we should increase taxes on the so-called rich.

In 2001 and 2003 the Bush administration passed a tax package that cut Federal income taxes across the board. Those were temporary cuts and if Congress does nothing, taxes will rise for everyone – an unspeakable crime in these economic conditions.

Obama, of course, does not want that to happen. Instead, he wants a new plan that keeps the cuts for individuals making up to $125,000 and couples making up to $250,000. Anyone who makes more than that, you can practically hear him say, can afford it and deserves to be punished by having to pay more into the sinkhole that is our government.

Along the ridiculous traditional party lines, Democrats favor tax cuts for the middle class on down with an increased burden on the rich and Republicans want taxes cut on the upper end of the income scale. The liberals think the “rich” should pay for their success (no matter how hard they worked to attain it) and the conservatives blame the poor for being a drain on public resources (no matter how hard they work to escape).

This entire argument supports nobody except the politicians. By arguing for their side on the poor/rich spectrum, Republicans and Democrats get to play to their party bases. It all sounds nice in commercials where Democrats get to go after “fat cats” and Republicans can attack “wasteful social programs,” but it’s all hogwash meant to ensure the status quo.

All Americans should be fighting for lower taxes for everyone because across all levels of the economy, we can spend our money better than our elected officials can. The government has not been able to spend its way out of this recession no matter how many tax dollars it confiscates.

Only regular people, investing in the economy, building businesses, buying things and spending their dollars can fix the economy. Less money paid in taxes means more money that flows straight into the economy. It’s stimulus without the politics and the wastefulness.

Instead of letting Washington increase taxes on anyone, the people must demand accountability from their government. Where has our money gone and why do they need more of it? Why do they persist in calling for tax increases when historical data clearly shows that lowering the tax burden actually increases revenues for the government.
It’s easy to look at someone with money and assume they can afford to give the government a little more. What we can’t see when we look at someone in a nice house or driving a nice car is exactly how hard they worked to get there. We also can’t see the money they spend buying things, the people they employee and the overall impact their money has on the economy.

It’s easy to hate the rich and claim they don’t pay their fair share. That said, if Donald Trump wants to buy a diamond-crusted blimp with his name painted on it in melted gold, well, that’s a lot of jobs for a lot of people.

I trust rich people making silly purchases to fix the economy a lot more than I trust Democrats or Republicans to come up with a solution. I also trust that if you take less money from everyone – be they rich, poor or middle class – that regular people will spend it far better than any politician ever will.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

19 probably too young for making major decisions

2010-07-20T16:49:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Bristol Palin, 19, and Levi Johnston, 20 seem destined to become the poster children for youthful mistakes. First, the unmarried couple had a child -- which we’ll have to assume was by mistake, not design -- and, now, the couple plans to compound their foolishness by getting married.

I’m all in favor of Palin and Johnston trying to be a couple in order to give their child a two parent home. That’s the responsible choice and responsibility has not been a key value for Johnston for much of his time in the public eye.

There should, though, be a few interim steps between “blasting your baby’s grandmother in the press” and marrying her daughter. How about dating, co-parenting and actually dealing with the reality of life instead of living in the short-lived media frenzy “hey, we’re on the cover of US Magazine,” whirlwind?

In being a parent and being in a marriage, the only two easy parts are getting married and creating the baby. Everything else takes effort and it’s hardly glamorous or exciting the way the initial rush of getting married or having a baby is.

At 19, you essentially know nothing. My 19-year-old self would disagree with that, but he would be wrong and he would still think “Rock Me Amadeus” was a good song, so nobody should be listening to him.

At 19, I had long hair and tended to wearing ill-fitting t-shirts with unbuttoned button-down shirts over them. Add in some too loose jeans, a few skinny ties, along with glasses that came right out of the Sally Jesse Raphael collection and I looked like a poorly-tailored rock and roll Muppet.

This was not a good look then, anymore than it would be a good look now, but to my teenage self my clothing choices -- like all my choices -- seemed well thought out. In fact, at 19, I was even more sure that I was right about everything than I am right now and that’s coming from a guy who writes a newspaper column mostly to tell you how he’s right about everything.

All 19-year-olds think their love will stand the test of time. It’s part of the foolishness of youth mixed with the complete lack of knowledge of the real world that most college age kids have.

Reality, however, says that teenage love with its giddy rushes and crazy highs rarely turns into the real thing. And, when it does, it takes time, life experience and the maturity to see beyond the surface.

My 19-year-old self dated my current wife. I loved her pretty much immediately, but had we gotten married or had a child at that stage of life, we would have been making a foolish decision that would have almost certainly ended in divorce.

Pretty much everyone over the age of 19 looks back on their teenage self with a mix of laughter and cringes. The teenage years are for experimenting, finding yourself and discovering what you want to be. Bad outfits, foolish pursuits and plain old mistakes mark these years, but most of us don’t make poor choices that threaten to set the rest of our lives on the wrong path.

Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston – despite their undeserved fame – are not so different than the rest of us and that’s why it’s a pretty safe bet to say their marriage will fail. In general, if you’re not old enough to be mature enough to tell your parents you intend to marry, then the odds of a successful marriage are pretty much zero.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. See new content daily at WorstIdeasEver.com and follow Kline on Twitter at @WorstIdeas.

Loyalty should still matter, even in sports

2010-07-13T07:56:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Cleveland deserved better.

The long-suffering sports fans who fell victim to “The Drive,” “The Fumble,” “The Shot,” the loss of the Browns, the sad performance of the Browns since their return and years of futility from the Indians deserved a better man the Lebron James. They deserved for their hometown hero to go on ESPN and say, “I know it’s going to be hard, but this is my home, these are my people and I’m going to work as hard as I can to bring a title to Cleveland.”

At the very least the people of Cleveland deserved to not be blindsided and humiliated by one of their own on national television.

Sadly, James proved that while he might be a fabulously talented basketball player, he comes up short as a man. Loyalty matters and so does finishing what you started.

James had promised to win a title for Cleveland. He not only came up short in that quest, he didn’t actually seem to care very much as he let opportunity slip away the last two years.

Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert was the loudest voice actually saying it, but anyone who watched James’ performance against the Celtics this season had to wonder if he actually cared. Maybe James quit or maybe he just played without passion, but the self-anointed “King” did nothing in that series to show that winning meant anything to him.

Sure, he wants to win, but not in the way the true greats burn for victory. James wants to win because it improves his legacy or grows his brand. Michael Jordan, Larry Bird and Magic Johnson wanted to win because the pain of not winning haunted them.

There’s honor in working your hardest but coming up short. Taking the easy way out and turning your back on a town that pinned its hopes and dreams on you stinks of cowardice.

Had James stayed in Cleveland and won even one title, he would go down as an immortal. Winning in a city that has historically loses means more to the fans in that city and in the history books.

Even without winning a championship, had James stayed a Cavalier, he would have remained a lifelong icon in the place he has always lived to the people who have always supported him. Instead, he chose to betray those fans by not just leaving the team, but by humiliating the Cavaliers on the way out the door.

Lebron James did the equivalent of breaking up with his girlfriend by announcing it on stage at a pep rally the day before the prom. With the words “I’m taking my talents to South Beach,” James kicked his hometown fans in the teeth. Instead of taking the hard road and trying to bring Cleveland the title he had promised them, the young superstar turned his back on people who perhaps foolishly had held him up as their sports savior.

James might win in Miami, but stacking the deck with superstars and winning a title as Dwayne Wade’s Scottie Pippen does not make you an all-time great. “The King” had a chance to rule, a chance to matter in his community like few athletes do. Instead, he gets to hang out with his buddies in South Beach while Cleveland burns his image in effigy.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. See new content daily at WorstIdeasEver.com and follow Kline on Twitter at @WorstIdeas.

Lebron not the only free agent on the market

2010-07-06T09:31:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Lebron James has shown me the way. Instead of considering myself a freelancer scrambling to make a living, I’m declaring myself a free agent.

Rather than hustling for jobs, sending out endless resumes and doing whatever potential employers ask of me, I’m now only taking meetings with select companies. This will happen on my timetable, at the location of my choice and mostly, I’ll be making people come see me to feed my ego, not because I will actually consider working for them.

Better still, I will release no actual information about what my future plans might be. Instead, I’ll have legions of friends, hangers-on and people who don’t actually know me give interviews about what they think I might do.

Just to keep people guessing, I’ll have lunch with other “free agent” writers/PR guys/Web consultants/op-ed columnists. I’ll also talk on my phone a lot to give the impression that I’m scheming, conniving and otherwise plotting some shocking career move, when really I’m either talking to my mother or leaving myself really long voicemail messages.

Of course, Lebron has every team in the NBA scrambling to claim his services because he’s the one of the best all time at what he does. And, while I might not be an all time great, neither is Chris Bosh or Joe Johnson.

In the somewhat less covered by the press than basketball world of writer/PR guys/Web consultants. I may not be James, but I’m at least the equivalent of second tier guys like Bosh. And, of course, if you’re looking to hire me as a fairly witty columnist, I may not be Joel Stein, but given the lack of options, I’m certainly max money.

Realistically, having held a dozen jobs at the age of 36 ranging from newspaper editor to toy store manager, Internet executive to scaffold salesman, I am the best at what I do. Never mind that nobody else does what I do, I think most companies could use a guy who can do just about anything.

I’m the Swiss Army knife of employees, just as comfortable at a meeting with the CEO as I am loading a truck or going on a sales call. Currently, I do PR for a non-profit, consult on marketing for a toy store, have a book deal and am under consideration to run a trade association, overhaul a news-based Web site and deliver Web 2.0 services for a trade show company.

To further confuse matters during my self-declared free agency, I won’t be giving any interviews and I won’t be offering any hints as to what I might want to do. One company, knowing I like Star Wars might hire Mark Hamill and Chewbacca to make a video recruiting me, while another that knows how much I like dry rub barbecue might sign Bobby Flay to run the company cafeteria.

I’m from the Boston area, but live in Connecticut, so hometown loyalty might come into play. Perhaps I’m looking for a big city, or maybe I want rural. Nobody knows but me and I’m not telling because if I don’t say what I want, maybe someone will offer me something I never thought to desire.

So, as America’s premiere free agent writer/PR guy/Web consultant/op-ed columnist, I’m sitting back and waiting for the offers to come in. You can reach me at the contact info below, but I’m not promising anything.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. See new content daily at WorstIdeasEver.com and follow Kline on Twitter at @WorstIdeas.

Something ventured, something gained

2010-06-28T08:52:00.004-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

The tears came without warning the next morning while alone in my car. I wasn’t sobbing and my expression was somewhere between a grin and disbelief, but tears were trickling down my cheeks.

Only on television did people quit their jobs because they felt unfulfilled as an artist and have it actually work out. Most people who walk away from paying gigs to become singers, artists, or in my case, writers, end up penniless and begging for their old job back after learning that they weren’t quite as good as they thought they were.

Eighteen hours or so before, my writing partner Jason and I had sat in a meeting with a publishing company interested in our book proposal. We’d been in this position before and have had fawning executives tell us how great our idea was on one hand, while never calling us again on the other.

And, while unlike most authors, we have actually had a book published by a major publisher, we have also had our share of stinging rejection. Mostly, though, the rejections were of the subtle, “hey, how come that girl tells me how much she wants to get together whenever we bump into each other, but she never returns my calls?” variety.

Book publishing works too slowly for the pain to be acute because usually, by the time you actually get told no, you have given up hope of being told anything. The constant waiting for bad news had led me away from hopes of publishing another book, but a desire to write something long-form and have it actually have a chance of being read led me back to the process once more.

This time, though, Jason and I set simple rules. We would only work with people who actually wanted to work with us. We’re not new at this so we didn’t want promises of Oprah bookings or massive promotional campaigns. We wanted an editor who believed in the project at a company that would design a nice looking book, get it into stores and be supportive of our efforts to get people to buy it.

Modest goals perhaps, but very few prospective authors – even those with good ideas – ever sell a book, let alone sell one to someone they want to work with. Perhaps, that’s why when faced with the astounding fact that three companies wanted our book, we took the smallest offer.

The difference was in a simple sentence in an email where our possible future editor, asked “if we would come to New York so she could pitch us.” The upfront money was small she explained, but she loved our idea and her company “got behind” each of its projects and worked hard to design nice looking books.

Frankly, she had us the moment she returned my email taking her up on the offer of pitching us a few minutes later. The time spent a few days later around a makeshift conference table where she showed us other books in the line and we compared promotion ideas, just validated that we’d found not just someone willing to publish our book, but the right people to do it.

I never expect to make a living from writing books (freelance public relations and editing have taken care of that). And even though I quit a job I loved to do it, I was never confident that I would ever sell this particular project.

That’s why it’s hard to stop crying as I type this and harder still to resist the urge to throw my arms in the air and scream at the top of my lungs. “Worst Ideas Ever” by Daniel B. Kline and Jason Tomaszewski Spring 2011 in bookstores everywhere.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com. See new content daily at WorstIdeasEver.com and follow Kline on Twitter at @WorstIdeas.

Despite World Cup mania, soccer too dull for America

2010-06-22T08:13:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

A good showing in the World Cup by the United States will not launch soccer as a major sport in the United States anymore than the 1980s “Miracle On Ice” Olympic hockey gold medal made ice hockey mainstream. If the American team gets out of the first round, it will increase interest in the World Cup, but that will not lead to all that many people becoming Major League Soccer fans.

Soccer will stay a sport played at some point by most kids, but one that remains a fringe TV property at best. This is, of course, because soccer, no matter how much you sell it or how well you know the game, is essentially boring.

Americans already have baseball, our own slow-moving technical sport where long periods of nothing much are offset by short bursts of activity. Baseball games at least offer the possibility of high scoring and being down 2-0 does not represent a nearly insurmountable lead.

Admittedly, the World Cup transcends soccer. It’s exciting to root for the United States in a sport where we don’t dominate. That’s why we all watch Americans in the Olympics, but none of us attend local pole vaults or luge races.

The World Cup offers a story line that makes the game matter even though the actual games are mostly dull. That’s probably why the Europeans who seem to love soccer gather to watch it in pubs where there’s beer and other libations that turn a 0-0 tie from “dull” to captivating.

I also find the argument absurd that Americans don’t become soccer fanatics because we don’t understand the game. As a former high school soccer goalie, I understand the game just fine. I also understand that it’s fun to play, but not fun to watch.

High level soccer involves almost no scoring and very few shots on goal. Most of the “action” involves passing, long kicks and the ball going out of bounds. There’s limited physical contact (at least compared to football) and the giant field makes following the action – even on HDTVs – a bit of a challenge.

As each World Cup comes around – at least the ones where the United States qualifies – the American media does the same lazy stories about how perhaps a good showing by the U.S. side will ignite the sport in this country. They usually couple this stories about how Major League Soccer hopes to capitalize on this interest and how youth leagues are bracing for an explosion of new players.

The same thing happens every four years during the Olympic hockey tournament yet hockey, like soccer, remains a marginal sport. Singular televised events like the World Cup do not change overall behaviors of the public at large.
Would we see a huge explosion in horse racing fans if we got a highly viewed Triple Crown winner? Did Lance Armstrong’s unprecedented wins at the Tour de France ignite a U.S. passion for competitive cycling?

Of course not and we should not expect differently. Enjoy the World Cup. Cheer on our boys and hope we can shock the world, but, please, stop the media hype on soccer. We won’t like it more once we get exposed to it. We’ll like it exactly the same and maybe a few more kids will play the game.

The United States will never be Brazil or Italy where the fortunes of the national soccer team set the tone for nation. Soccer won’t ever be bigger than baseball or football, in fact, it won’t ever be bigger than hockey or Ultimate Fighting. The sport might catch Arena Football or get more popular than the Winter X Games, but that’s as far as it will go.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Editors and publishers, not the Internet, are to blame

2010-06-14T13:49:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

It's not the Internet that’s killing newspapers. It's the arrogance of editors and publishers who insist on clinging to the failures of the past that has brought on the slow demise of traditional media companies. It's not that people don't read, it's that the people in charge of what goes into your paper – be it in print or on the Internet – have used their view of what used to work to make choices that no longer ring true with readers.

In the community I live in, I have watched a well-intentioned owner buy the local paper and proceed to make every mistake possible. First, he fired the innovative young editor and replaced him with a crusty veteran – someone who looks good in the seat, but hardly a man in touch with how people consume news now.

The crusty veteran has his place. He could have been brought in to serve as the public face of the paper to reassure its decaying elderly readership that things would stay the course (even as they change). He may even be a good editor, but he's hardly the person to lead a paper into the future – one where readers actively create the news, and where Twitter, Facebook and technologies not yet in the mainstream shape how we “read” the news.

I watched this owner – a man I respect for his desire to save the two local dailies he bought – mostly drop coverage of the middle class suburb I live in, but add a Polish language page to serve the barely breathing never-managed-to-learn-English crowd in the fairly poor city that houses the paper. This owner presides over a paper with more editors than reporters and a news hole riddled with wire copy that anyone with a computer or a cell phone would not have any need to buy.

While the owner has his heart in the right place, he has created a newspaper that might have worked in 1975. He has a tabloid format, but the lead story never gets more compelling than what happened at the Board of Education meeting. There's no service journalism, no interaction with readers and a stubborn desire to cling to the idea that covering meetings and writing about events after the fact makes you compelling.

I'm a failure at plenty of things (like my roast that tastes like a boot and my business plan for a company that makes absorbent, pizza-shaped paper towels strictly for grease removal) but I'm the uncrowned champion of local newspaper editors. My papers – like my columns -- might make you angry and they might make you laugh, but they will make you respond.

If I sat in the editor's chair for this well-meaning, but fast on his way to bleeding-to-death owner, I would sacrifice the reader of old for the reader of today. I'd build around young families and recognize that the medium they read in – be it print, Web, iPad or hologram to the brain – matters little compared to the quality of the content.

My paper would have no wire because nobody under the age of 70 reads a local daily for national or world news. I'd mix traditional news coverage with useful service articles built from local sources. My advertisers would be active partners in the content – not in a puff piece advertorial sort of way -- but in an acknowledgment that ads pay the bills and editors have lived behind their ridiculous “church and state” wall for far too long.

My “paper” in its print and its Web editions would find columnists who say things that inspire, enrage and most importantly get readers to respond. Under my leadership, the owner’s bland op-ed page full of wire columnists and columns written by editors from other papers in the state who write serious (read boring) columns would become a place of controversy and passion

(In full disclosure, the paper I'm referring to used to run this column, but now runs a bunch of crap from the wire.)

The public still wants news, but they want it in a way that breaks all the rules the wire junky/meeting loving “traditional” editors have clung to for so long. A place exists for local media, but the people who survive will be the ones who throw out the old thinking and sacrifice the reader of yesterday to embrace the reader of today.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Complacency, not incumbency is the problem

2010-06-08T08:30:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Due to frustrations about the endless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as the country’s continued bleak economic situation, being an incumbent officeholder has become a dicey proposition. No matter what you stand for, if you’re currently a governor or a Congressperson, you’re in trouble because you’re an insider and thereby part of the problem.

Office-seekers use this anti-incumbency fever to paint their foes as “fat cats” who know nothing of the plight of the common man. Of course, no matter how rich or privileged these wannabe senators, representatives and governors are, they are not already in office, so they claim, they must be better than those who are.

Those seeking office using the incumbents stink argument always pledge to “clean things up,” “end patronage,” “reduce government waste” and do things entirely differently. If only we put them in the power seat then they would be free to correct the many wrongs which their opponents were entirely responsible for.

The exact same sentiment hit a few years ago due to anger with then President George W. Bush. The anti-incumbency fever resulted in a bunch of Republicans getting swept out and a bunch of Democrats getting voted in.

And, as we have seen, this “new” batch of legislators, governors and eventually, a new president have changed exactly nothing. Incumbent or not, the people we keep voting into office all come from the same cloth and simply changing the party in control of any one branch of the government does little to actually change anything.

If we want change, then as voters, we must stop getting swept up in the mania of anti-incumbency fever and party loyalty. Instead, we should look at each legislator, governor and presidential candidate and consider their actions, not merely their words.

It’s easy to talk about change and say you are different, but as voters we should be smart enough to look beyond a 30 second campaign commercial. If a candidate’s ad says he supports creating jobs in America, but the company he runs has shifted jobs overseas, then, well, we should be able to recognize a fraud for a fraud.

Campaign staff, media experts and poll results can tell a candidate what to say. It’s not hard to deliver the right message – in fact a candidate would have to be a fool to not know exactly what message the public wants to hear – but words should not mask past actions.

As voters, we get what we deserve, because we allow soundbites, headlines and campaign commercials to shape our opinions. Even when learning the truth would take minimal digging, we prefer to simply keep rearranging the deck chairs as our ship sinks and somehow we are surprised when we get wet.

We have many good members of Congress and a number of good governors. It’s foolish to toss the baby out with the bath water simply because we have decided that incumbency invalidates whatever record an office-holder has built.

In looking at incumbents and potential office-holders, the voting public must consider whether the person attempts to actually do what they say. No one man can make Congress bend to his will (though many have tried) but there’s a major difference between not being able to get your agenda through and abandoning your ideals.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Follow me in 140 characters or less

2010-06-01T07:56:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

No matter how many times I click “unfollow,” Twitter insists on subscribing me to the feed of “Diddy.” Though I’ll always think of him as “Puff Daddy,” or perhaps “Puffy,” I prefer not to think of the rapper/producer/huckster all that often and I most certainly don’t need to know what he’s doing on a minute-by-minute basis.

Mr. Diddy, through his @Diddy Twitter feed mixes inane bragging about his whereabouts “heading to the party with @SouljaBoy,” with ridiculous attempts at promoting his many, many projects, “New Bad Boy barbecue sauce and lawn furniture drop Tuesday at Costco.” Throw in some fortune cookie platitudes “Every new day is a chance to start again” and the occasional completely random uttering “You can never own too many hats” and you get a very unwanted and unnecessary glimpse into the cavernous mind of the man who was once known as Sean Combs.

Following Puffy’s tweets does make me wonder if he actually types these things out on a Blackberry or if he employs an underling to follow him around capturing his every thought. Like that guy who turned carrying P. Diddy’s umbrella into an actual career, perhaps this Twitter butler will someday emerge from the shadows of the Internet to write a 140 character tell-all book about the experience.

At least Diddy is famous and while nobody needs to know about his comings and goings in such exhausting (albeit poorly spelled) detail, interesting things do happen to him. I know that I’m never going to Sonic with 50 Cent or attending a party with Ke$ha while wearing a white tuxedo, so there’s at least sometimes a mildly entertaining quality to Puff’s tweets.

The same cannot be said, however, for the vast majority of other Tweeters. As a basic rule, only comedians make a real effort to entertain. Comics need fans to buy actual tickets, so they use Twitter to endlessly prove their value as comedians.

Actors and regular people though, bring little value to their Tweets. I might have liked your guest appearance on an episode of “Moesha” 15 years ago, but I don’t care what you had for breakfast or what you think about Jesus.

I’m also not sure that the news was meant to be limited to 140 characters or less. I mean, “president shot” or “space shuttle explodes” might be reasonably well conveyed via Twitter, but most news stories require at least a little more explanation.

Twitter is essentially a news and information medium for people who found skimming through Google News and checking their friends’ status updates on Facebook too taxing. It’s the absolute bare minimum one can do to be informed, entertained and appear vaguely interested in the lives of their friends.

Since, of course, I aim to entertain on all fields of reality, I also have succumbed to Twitter. When I post to my blog it now updates both my Facebook and my Twitter feed (@worstideas). This makes it possible for people who want to follow me – but only in 140 character chunks – to remain up-to-date on my latest comedic efforts.

So, if you like my work, but don’t like it enough to actually read it, I now have the perfect solution for you. Follow me on Twitter and you’ll get the first sentence or so of my daily blog posting. That may not give you the punchline, or even the whole setup, but it will give you the gist. And what more could a writer hope for?

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

BP must be held accountable for oil spill

2010-05-25T10:29:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

If my wife and I invite four people over for a dinner party, we discuss a backup plan in case I burn the roast. That makes me believe that if we were to somehow become the owners of a pipe that pumps thousands of gallons of oil from the ocean floor, we probably would have an idea what to do should something go wrong.

British Petroleum, however, has no such conversation and when its giant oil-filled pipe broke, they had no contingency plan in place. Not only was BP unprepared, the company seemed incapable of responding in any fashion.

After the pipe broke and the oil started flooding into the Gulf of Mexico, BP seemed befuddled and employed a veritable Wile E. Coyote-inspired range of solutions. I’m pretty sure they tried the ShamWow, a really big straw and using Dawn to “take grease out of the way.”

These idiots actually celebrated when one “solution,” which involved parking a boat over the spill and pumping away some of the oil, managed to siphon 40% of the spill away. Of course, the boat was siphoning out 5,000 barrels a day – the amount which BP had originally claimed was the total amount being spilled each day.

So, to review, using BP math 5,000 barrels is 100% of the spill but only 40% of the spill. And, of course, the numbers are even worse because BP now admits that the boat was not removing as much oil as the company initially claimed.

This entire affair would be amusing were it not for the hundreds of miles of ruined coast line not to mention all the dead animals. Add in the untold future problems this ecological disaster may cause and it leaves you wonder exactly how this giant international multibillion dollar oil company could have been this unprepared for disaster.

Since the pipe first broke, BP has proven its incompetence over and over and one would think that the company should no longer be in charge of the situation. In general when you both cause a problem and repeatedly fail to fix it while untold damage gets done you lose your leadership role.

BP’s failures have cast into doubt the entire prospect of drilling for oil off the coast of the United States. Think how monumental a failure this entire operation must be if it has cast an entire industry into doubt.

That would be like if McDonalds manufactured a Mad Cow burger, killing hundreds, then recalled it, announced that all was fine and released it again killing even more people. That could never happen, of course, because McDonalds – a company that sells burgers and fries – has plans for every contingency.

Even a parent leaving his child with a babysitter takes a few minutes to make a backup plan for the sitter – perhaps by dashing a few phone numbers down and posting them on the fridge. I think it’s reasonable to expect that BP should at least be as responsible as a couple leaving their child with a high school kid while they head out to Applebees.

BP should fix this situation and the company must be held responsible for its actions. That means paying – and paying dearly – for the mess it has caused now and long into the future as we have yet to see the long-term effects that endlessly pumping oil into the ocean may cause.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline. Follow him on Twitter, @worstideas.

Populism is easy, ideas are hard

2010-05-18T13:00:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

At every turn Sarah Palin moves farther away from being an actual politician and more towards being a Rush Limbaugh/Bill O’Reilly-style populist ideologue. Whether she’s appearing at a Tea Party rally or speaking out in favor of Arizona’s “show me your papers” immigration law, she has become a master of preaching to the converted.

Becoming popular by vehemently agreeing with one group while portraying another group as out to get them – or better yet out to end their way of life – has worked as a political tactic since politics evolved beyond “my sword is bigger than yours.” It’s not a uniquely Republican problem as both Al Gore and Ralph Nader have built fans bases amongst the Democrats by telling people what they want to hear and demonizing the “bad guys” who disagree.

It is, however, a problem as all thinking people should rally against politicians who seek to attain office solely by the strength of their personalities – and their willingness to cast anyone who disagrees with them as a villain – instead of the strength of their ideas. In the world of a politician like Palin who seeks to motivate voters by emotion rather than reason, there’s no room for thought, gray area or compromise.

For Palin, there’s no abortion debate, she’s right because she had god on her side. In her world all illegal immigrants are bad – no matter why they came here or what they contribute to our society and guns are always good – no matter what purpose they might ultimately be used for.

In a Palin government, like in the failed George W. Bush administration, there would be no room for coalitions or bipartisanship because Palin’s power comes from her unflinching devotion to her beliefs. Even when reality impinges upon those beliefs (like, say your teen daughter gets pregnant despite your anti-sex ed in schools stance) Palin simply plugs ahead as if nothing has changed.

Building a coalition of the weak-minded and telling them what they want to hear does not take anywhere near the talent it takes to unite people who actually disagree. I don’t agree fully on politics with my wife, my best friends or anyone else. As an individual you should distrust anyone who you agree with completely and at least consider that they might be manipulating you.

Populist politicians manipulate the public in exactly the same professional wrestlers do. With wrestlers though, they only want you to boo the bad guy and pay money to see him get his comeuppance on pay-per-view.

The populist politician, though, can’t stop at a pay day. Instead, when we elect one of these dangerous demagogues, they must actually try to implement their extremist, crackpot policies.

Even an opinionated blowhard like me sees the danger in government without compromise and of living in a world of absolutes. The real struggle lies in dilemmas like believing in personal responsibility and not allowing people to live on the public’s dime, then meeting actual homeless people and realizing the story is never as simple as we thought it was.

Populism – whether its practiced by a Republican or a Democrat – opens the door to fascism. If there’s no room for debate, than there’s no room for Democracy and a country where the majority rules at the expense of everyone else, is not the America our founding fathers envisioned.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Inspiring others leaves a lasting legacy

2010-05-11T16:12:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

I’ve never met her, which is, maybe, a little sad since my mother credits her for saving her life. Not having met her, however, does not mean I do not know her as mom has spent the last few years talking about her and the last few months talking about her aggressive illness.

She has not shared her struggle publicly and very few people know the details of her health situation, so excuse me for being vague with the details, but they are not mine to share.

My mother met her during a horrible time for much of my family. My parents, after 37 years of marriage, were separated, heading towards divorce and ugliness surrounded us.

Mom has a strong group of friends, but most of them were married and though they were sympathetic, they lacked the experience to be empathetic. She also had her sisters and a wide and varied support network, but there just aren’t a lot of people with experience in getting divorced at her particular stage in life.

Perhaps more importantly, no matter how many people care about you and listen to you, at some point, you need to stop talking and start doing. Grief, shame and self-pity had pushed my mom to her “Shawshank Redemption” moment. It was time to “get busy living or get busy dying” and while mom had taken quite a few punches to the head, kicks to the gut and maybe even a few illegal shots below the belt, she wasn’t ready to throw in the towel.

Salvation though does not often come solely from within and my mother found hers in a group of women. They got together a few times a week to engage in what, to keep it discreet, I’ll describe as a physical and artistic endeavor.

My mother did not bring any special training or talent to this particular activity, but that did not stop the teacher from encouraging her. At first for mom, it was just about doing something, but rather quickly it became a passion for the activity and a shared joy in the people she did it with.

Without the teacher that would not have happened. And, probably, in that room with my mother are quite a few other stories of despair and salvation – tales of people who needed something and found it through someone who was kind enough to offer.

So, in her time of need, the teacher is not asking for, or taking, help from my mom or any of her other students. What she should know, though, is when you save people – even if you didn’t know that’s what you were doing – they will gladly stand with you no matter what demons stand in your path.

When not by design or plan, but by the simple kindness of who you are and how you treat people, you can help them find the will to go on and restore their capacity for joy, then you never truly face anything alone. Few people possess the ability to help others find light when darkness surrounds them and I’m thankful that this woman – who probably has not given a second thought to the magic she has performed – was there when she was needed.

I hope that in her time of need, that no matter how dark it gets, she retains some comfort from knowing she didn’t just teach a class, she taught people -- my mother especially – how to be more than they were. Giving someone the gift of being able to be happy is something that cannot be repaid, but will always be appreciated.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Let’s leave television to the professionals

2010-05-04T12:17:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Regular people who have time to stand outside of a television studio holding a sign do not have anything interesting to say. While that might be too general of a statement, I challenge anyone to find a single instance where a TV show host interviewed one of these sign-waving yahoos and something compelling resulted.

Let’s take the “Today” show (by far the worst offender) as an example. Usually, Al Roker will venture outside to interview a group of people from some woebegone town who are inevitably wearing hand-printed matching t-shirts and/or poorly made matching hats.

These probably kind, but in no way entertaining, country folk will then share there reason for getting up at 4 a.m. to stake out a prime spot in front of the camera. “It was grandma’s birthday” or “we always wanted to meet Matt Lauer” is the inevitable, completely uninteresting answer answer.

Nothing compelling or funny has happened (which does not stop the host from laughing) and the “Today” show has kept alive the idea that yokels should appear on TV for no reason. This apparently keeps the dream of someday standing near Al Roker and saying nothing of interest alive for other yokels, which somehow overrides just how much time these segments waste.

While this phenomenon of putting people from the audience on air was largely popularized by “Today,” the disease has spread to other shows. Now, all the nightly entertainment/tabloid programs have segments where viewers on cheap Web cams ask questions to various celebrities.

It’s hard to imagine that the public can ask dumber questions than Mario Lopez, but at least Lopez has a team of writers behind him. The viewer-submitted questions are like the softball questions at the beginning of the “Parade” newspaper supplement. “Hey Tom Cruise, how did you get to be so great?” or the even more probing, “Tell us what it was like to work with Julia Roberts.”

It’s hard to imagine that anything could make “Extra,” “Access Hollywood” and “Entertainment Tonight” even less hard-hitting, but compared to the viewer submitted questions, Maria Menounos is Woodward and Bernstein rolled into one mini-skirt.

Regular people don’t have TV shows because regular people aren’t interesting. We want professionals (even ones hired primarily for their abs like Lopez) to ask the questions because we should want to see the interview subjects be probed a little harder than the fan club drivel that the audience questions always are.

The Internet and emerging technologies like Twitter, Web cams and phones with cameras have made it possible for everyone to have their say on everything. Possible, though, does not mean necessary and it’s time for viewer participation to go away.

I don’t want to feel like I can be part of the show. I want to feel like the producers of the show have some interest in entertaining me or informing me. The “Today” show window and entertainment program

Web cam interviewers are gimmicks that add nothing to their respective programs. Let the people in matching t-shirts with crudely-printed slogans on them send grandpa a postcard to celebrate his birthday. The rest of the nation does not need to participate.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

A prescription does not make the danger go away

2010-04-27T17:10:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

“Were you high on drugs?” shouted a reporter as Kayla Gerdes, an 18-year-old accused of killing a 69-year-old retired doctor by driving a van into her Long Island house, walked into court.

"No," she sobbed, "It was prescription drugs! It was all an accident! Please stop!"

Clear in the accused teen’s verbal defense of herself is that her actions are excusable because she was taking prescription – not street – drugs. Of course, nobody knows if the oxycodone that police say Gerdes was taking was actually prescribed for her or if she was taking it illicitly.

That technicality, of course, does not matter to the family of Rebecca Twine-Wright, who died because she decided to mow her lawn on the same day Gerdes chose to get behind the wheel while allegedly high. And, no matter the circumstances under which she allegedly took the oxycodone, that particular prescription pain medication comes with a clear warning that prohibits driving.

Whether she was taking a legal prescription written in her name or was popping pills pinched from the medicine cabinet of family or friends, nothing changes the fact that a woman lies dead because of these drugs. Prescription drugs are not safer than street drugs simply because a doctor signs off on them. In fact, according to the Centers for Disease Control, by 2006, prescription opioid painkillers were involved in more overdose deaths than heroin and cocaine combined.

Oxycodone is a powerful painkiller synthesized from the opium derivative thebaine. It resides in the same drug family as heroin and has many of the same addictive qualities, mood-altering effects and dangers as the “street” drug.

Used in specific instances of severe pain – such as in terminal cancer cases – oxycodone has its proper place in the medical world. That does not make the drug “safe” for non-prescribed or not-as-directed use. While effective under certain circumstances, oxycodone come with huge dangers when misused, including impairing one’s driving. Opioid painkillers must be treated as potentially dangerous and used only under strict conditions.

Too many of us are given a painkiller prescription for a legitimate reason – perhaps a dental surgery – and only use a portion of the prescribed pills. Instead of destroying and getting rid of the unneeded portion, we save pills at the back of the medicine cabinet for possible use later on.

Leaving these drugs in your medicine cabinet is like inviting a heroin dealer into your home. Instead of your child needing to take the scary step of obtaining illegal drugs on the street, he or she may simply decide to try what is already on hand.

Oxycodone potentially has the addictive power of heroin and once the household supply has been exhausted, painful withdrawal symptoms can lead to the newly-minted addicted seeking out the equivalent street drugs. Keeping these medicines lying around unused for “a rainy day” simply opens the door to abuse and ignores how dangerous these products can be when used improperly.

Saying that they were “only prescription drugs” does not make Twine-Wright any less dead, and it does not justify Gerdes’ alleged actions. Drugs are drugs, and we must be vigilant in their use and placement in our homes.

Daniel B. Kline works with The Governor's Prevention Partnership a not-for-profit partnership between state government and business leaders with a mission to keep Connecticut's youth safe, successful and drug-free. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com

Don’t let Iran become a nuclear power

2010-04-20T16:12:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

While we wage war in Iraq and Afghanistan -- nations that may well deserve our scorn, but countries that do not have the capacity to hurt us – the real enemy goes unchecked. Iran, a country run by an American-hating Holocaust denier, gets ever closer to having nuclear weapons while we essentially do nothing.

Not only does Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pretty openly hate the United States, but in that country he’s considered a moderate. His boss, the actual leader of the country, Ali Hoseyni Khāmene’i, dislikes America so much that in comparison he makes Osama bin Laden look like he might soften up and come over to the White House for a beer.

At least Iraq now has a government that we essentially installed as does Afghanistan. Admittedly, despite our helpful job recommendations, neither country’s leader seems to actually like America, but it seems unlikely that either one would actually attack us.

Afghanistan and Iraq likely harbor terrorists who have the ability to do harm to the United States. Unfortunately, full-scale invasions and open warfare are not only ineffective methods for rooting out these villains, our presence actually creates sympathy for the terrorists.

It’s hard to bomb a secret Al Qaeda that moves every day and lacks a conventional military profile. Hiding from armies in the mountains of Afghanistan or the anonymous sands of Iraq has not proven to be difficult for terrorist leaders specifically because their lack of organization and traditional structures specifically makes them elusive.

Taking Iran out of the nuclear arms race would be relatively simple as its fairly hard to hide full-scale nuclear facilities from detection. Sure, a country might buy some black-market plutonium and build one bomb, but actually producing your own warheads requires factories that our satellites can find.

While, the administration of George W. Bush ignored Iran as a nuclear threat and President Barack Obama continues that policy, the Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, has at least tried to sound the warning. In January, he circulated a memo that appeared in press accounts this week, which stated the following:

“If Iran obtained the fissile material, designs and triggers needed for a nuclear weapon but did not assemble a bomb, Washington would be unprepared to counter the country's emergence as a "virtual" nuclear weapon state.”

President Obama must not let Iran become a nuclear power. If that means giving them a warning and then bombing any site suspected of being part of the country’s nuclear program, then so be it.

You cannot negotiate with religious fanatics and Ahmadinejad and are most Khāmene’I will not be reasonable in their handling of nuclear weapons. These are lunatics who mean to do us harm. They are not hiding their intent and they can’t hide their weapons.

America must not strike maliciously or without warning, but if Iran refuses to abandon all efforts to obtain the ability to create nuclear weapons, then the U.S. military must take that option away. This isn’t a hidden terrorist that we can’t find or shadowy cells plotting evil below the radar, these are full-fledged comic book-style super villains who mean to kills us all.

Fortunately, we already have the weapons to stop them from ever harming the United States. It’s unclear though if we have the courage to do what must be done.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

When in doubt, add more bacon

2010-04-13T13:05:00.003-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

In a move that suggests that Homer Simpson has taken over for Colonel Sanders, Kentucky Fried Chicken has introduced a sandwhich that uses fried chicken instead of bread and bacon instead of chicken. Add a liberal helping of special sauce and a couple of slices of cheese and you have something that pretty much shows that the Colonel's gang has given up on their attempt to become known as simply "KFC" so people wouldn't associate the brand with only fried food.

KFC does not even make a tiny nod to health by including lettuce and tomato, it's just fried chicken, bacon, cheese and sauce. I suppose I should not be surprised as these are the people who combined fried chicken, cheese, gravy and mashed potatoes in one bowl -- presumably for people too lazy to stick their spork into multiple places.

This new Kentucky Fried monstrosity, called the "Double Down," continues a disturbing trend where fast food restaurants attempt to outdo each other by adding more bacon, more cheese and more mysterious "special" sauces to their fare. We now live in a world where it's not only possible, but easy, to order a quadruple burger with four layers of cheese and bacon.

If we can use fried chicken patties as the bun, why not wrap everything in two slices of pizza, then dip that into the fryolator? I'm not sure you're technically eating a sandwich once you eliminate the bread, but if you are, then we're about 15 minutes away from a "sandwich" consisting of two slices of cheesecake with a layer of fried Twinkies in the middle.

If it's not Homer Simpson making these decisions, then clearly a bunch of drunk frat boys has someohow taken over the fast food industry. Only the drunk or stoned could possibly conceive of foods like fried macaroni and cheese, the chicken fry, the 12-layer burrito and stuffed-crust pizza.

My friend Jason and I, in much fatter days, used to frequent the Dunkin' Donuts near our office. Jason (who now runs triathalons) used to eat a Dunkin' Donuts sausage, egg and cheese breakfast sandwich along with two coffee rolls. Basically a bigger donut with no hole, the coffee roll is covered in a mildly disgusting, absurdly delicious, sugary goop which makes a regular glazed donut seem practically sugar-free.

We used to regularly tease the staff behind the counter that they should just serve Jason's sausage, egg and cheese on the coffee rolls. We were kidding, but clearly we were not the only people thinking in this direction as Dunkin' Donuts now offers a sausage, egg and cheese served on two waffles. In addition, there are actually some baseball stadiums that serve a cheeseburger on two Krispie Kreme donuts, so our joke, was not that far from the truth.

The public appears to have a boundless appetite for the absurdly unhealthy and restaurants seem perfectly willing to switch from slowly killing their customers to doing it pretty quickly. I'd like to think that there won't be a demand for the "Double Down," but in a world where we add bacon to our chili cheese fries, that seems unlikely.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Church leaders must be held accountable

2010-04-13T13:05:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

If the head of a major business covered up the sexual abuse of children by his employees by simply moving the guilty workers to another location, that CEO would be held criminally accountable. The same thing would happen if a superintendent of schools covered up the rape of innocent kids by reassigning the offending teachers to another school.

In fact, in any area or field where an adult covers up the abuse of children and puts the abusers in position to commit the same crime on a new set of kids, the supervising adult would be arrested. Somehow, though, these rules do not apply to the Catholic Church.

It's important to remember that the underlying Catholic faith had nothing to do with these unspeakable crimes. The religion's basic beliefs abhor the kind of crimes committed by these rogue priests and covered up by misguided leaders. Guilt should fall not on the church as a whole, but all those who ignored the teachings of their religion to commit unspeakable acts and the church leaders who, instead of protecting the children in their care, chose to protect their own positions.

Over the past few years, we have seen a disturbing pattern of child sexual abuse emerge. A priest would abuse his position of authority to take advantage of children in his parish. The priest's transgressions would be discovered and instead of getting the police involved, Church leaders would simply move the offending priest to another parish where he could hurt more kids.

Even when the allegations of widespread sexual abuse became public, church leaders did little to punish the offending priests. Instead of openly and honestly complying with investigations, all efforts were made to protect the church at the expense of its young members.

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this sexual abuse scandal is that America's legal system has largely ignored the crimes. Why have bishops, cardinals and other church leaders who knew of these crimes not been held criminally liable for their actions? Yes, we have arrested individual priests, but we have not held their bosses accountable for covering up their actions and essentially facilitating more crimes.

Don't put Catholicism on trial, but apply the law of the land to all criminals. I don't remember there being an exception to the penal code that allows the Catholic Church to handle its own business and I don't believe Cardinals or Bishops have any special legal exemptions when it comes to the rape of children.

And, I still do not see the Pope or any other leader of the Catholic Church actually stepping up to take responsibility for what has happened. At the very least there should be widespread resignations from positions of authority and an open cooperation with the authorities to make sure all the perpetrators and those who covered up the crimes go to jail.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Something might be better than nothing

2010-04-03T08:06:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

If you get diagnosed with a disease, break your leg or find yourself facing some other medical calamity while not having health insurance, you're not likely to be too concerned with the intricate political debates that have paralyzed health care legislation for years. That's why the millions of working Americans who can't afford health insurance should be overjoyed at the massive health care reform bill that President Barack Obama pushed through Congress.

The conservative part of me wants to bash the Obama health care plan as more wasteful government spending coupled with the Democratic Party once again inserting government where it does not belong. My liberal side, however, has me wanting to praise any plan that makes having health insurance possible for people who don't.

Obama, who would not be my choice as president, saw a problem -- that millions of Americans lacked access to affordable health care -- and he acted. He did not come up with the perfect solution and the legislation he managed to pass through Congress leaves many questions to be answered, but he did something.

Usually our stict two-party system makes getting anything done in Congress nearly impossible. In general this creates an inertia that protects the people from its government as it stops the stupid laws from being passed along with the good ones.

Access to health care and affordable insurance should not be debated on strict party lines. Instead, we must consider the human aspect of the problem, then we must insert practical concerns.

Arguing the politics of health care with someone who works hard and still can't pay for health insurance would be like debating farm subsidies with a starving man. Until you've been fed, or in the case of health care, healed, nothing matters except the end result.

As Americans -- no matter which side of the aisle we fall on politically -- most of us agree that you should be able to work hard and achieve a modest level of security. I'd like to think that if an industrious fellow, even if he has no specific skills, puts in enough hours he should be able to pay for basic shelter, food and health care.

I'm not saying there should be a Porsche in every driveway, but we should all want to build a society in which even those on the bottom can survive. In the case of the basic's like food and health care, in some ways we need to feed the starving man before we debate how to pay for his meal.

I may not be not a fan of this health care plan, yet I applaud the President for getting any health care legislation passed. If the health care debate stops now, then, well, we probably have a disaster. But, if the Obama plan becomes a basis for negotiating and refining, then at least we have applied a tourniquet while we attempt to stop the bleeding.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

If it looks like snake, it probably is a snake

2010-03-23T13:46:00.002-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

With all apologies to Tom Hanks and, perhaps, Danny Devito, I think it's fair to say that the vast majority of married celebrity men have affairs. Give a guy a taste of fame and fortune -- really any sort of celebrity -- and most will "forget" their marriage with whatever bar skank points her synthetic cleavage and poorly-drawn tattoos his way.

Chris Rock has a routine about how men are as faithful as their options and, while, I think that's an exxageration, all available data shows that famous men have a very limited shot at being faithful. Despite this, the entire nation always seems truly surprised when another sleazy actor, television personaility or miscellaneous famous guy cheats on his wife.

Perhaps Tiger Woods' infidelity was a bit surprising as his carefully crafted fuddy duddy/golf Urkel image made the public think of him as someone who had sex exactly as many times as he had children. Nobody, however, should be shocked that Sandra Bullock's husband, Jesse James, -- once married to a porn star -- would be unfaithful.

Still, whether its Woods sleeping with every morally vacant woman in the country (perhaps the world) or James stepping out on Bullock with a tattoo-covered Nazi, I'm tired of it. It's hard to imagine a worse sin you could commit then betraying your spouse, yet the public never seems that outraged by it.

We certainly lap up the lascivious details in various tabloid magazines and we all want to know what happened, but in the end, as a society, we seem to treat infidelity as an "oopsie" instead of as a major character flaw. It took about ten minutes for us to forgive Kobe Bryant who had to confess to cheating on his wife to combat rape charges and nobody even seems that mad at John Edwards who cheated on his cancer-stricken wife while running for president.

I could understand our willingness to forgive if a celebrity (or a regular person) had a one-time transgression, but when a pattern emerges it's time to be angry. Woods, Edwards, James and their ilk did not get drunk at the office Christmas party and kiss their cute co-coworker, confess and apologize. They willingly betrayed their spouses, putting them at risk of public humiliation and they did it repeatedly.

We should not let the women in these affairs off the hook either as it might be possible to not know that the guy you met in a a bar at the Sheraton is married, but it's pretty easy to determine that Woods is. If someone has a Wikipedia page, appears in campaign commercials with his wife or shows up next to her at the Academy Awards, it's simple enough to know whether or not he's single.

If you don't want to be faithful, don't be married. I'm sure that having the "honey I really like you but I want to sleep around so we should get divorced" conversation would be horrible, but it can't be worse then when she finds out after the fact.

We live in a world where a Web site actually exists to help married people "have discreet affairs." This particular multimillion dollar business acts as if the problem with infidelity comes from getting caught, not from betraying the trust of your spouse and humiliating your family.

Well, let me say that it's not about whether you get away with it or not, it's about whether you are the type of person who acts this way in the first place.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Prejudice and ignorance make poor prom dates

2010-03-15T20:26:00.001-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline
In an attempt to protect their children from the horrors of watching two teenage girls dancing with one wearing a tuxedo, a Mississippi high school's administration has canceled the senior prom. That seems like a perfectly reasonable response to the terrifying prospect of a student bringing the date of her choice while wearing an outfit she felt comfortable in.

Instead of releasing a statement saying the truth -- that it had canceled the prom because of its distaste for gay people -- the school board blamed the cancellation on "the distractions to the educational process caused by recent events." This makes very little sense as a prom usually involves eating mediocre chicken, dancing and dressing up -- not really important teaching moments.

Proms do, I suppose, teach teenage girls how to buy dresses they will likely lament when looking back (pink gowns almost never seem like a good choice upon reflection). I suppose there's also the important lesson in matching a corsage to your date's dress and the even more important one in not stabbing her or groping her inappropriately while affixing it to said gown.

Proms also offer other important educational opportunities like learning how to pick a cheesy theme song and solving the mathematical problem of exactly how many people fit in a limo. Some of the more forward-thinking students might get an opportunity to "study" some anatomy later in the evening, but, in general, "the educational process" has no major role at the prom.

In making this homophobic decision, the school board has not only exposed its own prejudices it has placed on of it students in danger. As if growing up gay in a "conservative" southern town was not difficult enough, Constance McMillen -- the student at the center of this controversy -- now must face classmates who blame her for the loss of their prom.

"Thanks for ruining my senior year," McMillen told newspaper reporters was amongst the greetings she received after returning to school. One would hope that her classmates would turn their anger against their prejudiced school board, but high school students are not generally known for their enlightenment.

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit on McMillen's behalf seeking to force the school to hold the dance while allowing the 18-year-old to wear a tuxedo and bring a same sex date. In addition, area businesspeople including a nearby hotel owner have responded with offers of money, free venues and other aid to help the students stage an unofficial prom.

Those offers show that while prejudice and ignorance run deep, so to do generosity, compassion and acceptance. The school board should never have put one of its students in this position, even if the members find the prospect of a tuxedo-clad girl squiring another girl to a dance repugnant.

Grownups -- educators especially -- should be big enough to set their personal prejudices aside and realize that you must not discriminate against one student no matter how much you dislike her choices. Canceling the prom because a student wants to express her sexuality by bringing a same sex date is exactly the same a canceling it because a student wanted a vegan meal or because one has a peanut allergy.

Senior proms are for having fun with your class, sharing a few final moments together and creating a lasting memory of people with whom you have spent the last 13 years of school. The prom should not be an opportunity for some misguided grownups to push their political agenda at the expense of the kids they should be protecting.

McMillen didn't want to be at the center of a national controversy, and she most certainly did not want to earn the ill will of her classmates. She simply wanted to go to a dance dressed as she pleased with the person of her choosing. It's hard to imagine that a school board would want to stand in the way of that.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

One sign said north, one sign said east, so I went south

2010-03-08T16:47:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

With the economy failing, unemployment rising and very little good news on the near horizon, I, of course, quit my job. More importantly, I quit my well-paying, pretty cool job where I work for someone I like and respect who treats me like family (and, yes, I mean that as a positive).

Admittedly, my work history has been varied to say the least. I've held approximately 11 full-time jobs and had one major stint as a successful freelancer in the past 17 years. Those numbers got somewhat inflated during my Internet years when the life cycle for various companies were very short.

Over the past ten years, I have held four jobs for three companies. I spent nearly three years as a newspaper editor at two different papers in the same chain, then I spent four working for my family's ladder and scaffolding company and I've spent the last two running a large toy and hobby store.

In each case until now, I left for logical reasons. I walked away from the newspaper world when we decided to have a child because the demands of being a newspaper editor were not compatible with parenting. I left the family business when it became obvious that if the family wanted me there at all, it was not in the capacity I wanted to be there in.

This time. though, I'm not quitting for any quite-so-obvious reason. Instead, I'm walking away from a situation I like to try to build one that I will love. And, I'm also not exactly walking away from one paycheck into another. Instead, I'll be casting myself into the world of consulting, freelancing and commissioned sales.

These are all things that I like to do, but they are also ways to make money while allowing me the time to become what I see myself as. In my view of myself, I'm a writer and a personality, a guy who not only creates a widely-read column, but someone who writes books and appears on talk shows.

I've only succeeded in a tiny bit of that (you are reading this column) and I won't get the rest of the way there from behind a cash register or on the floor of a retail store. I want to be famous -- at least in the small way that newspaper columnists and non-fiction writers can be -- and I want people to read, see and hear me.

Most importantly, I want to take my shot before I find myself looking back and wondering why I never did. The easy path would be to do my job, collect a paycheck and remain safe and secure. I'm choosing the road less traveled because I don't want leave any of my potential on the table.

I'm not a naive kid dropping out of school because his band's going to "make it." I don't expect that magically I'll get a six figure book deal or my column will get picked up by a major chain that decides to pay me boatloads of money for sharing my opinion.

I am, though, still naive enough to believe in myself. Of course, if you believe in me too, and know anyone looking for a pretty talented freelance writer/editor/personaility, well, I'm available.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Yes, I do believe in miracles

2010-03-08T16:46:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Any footage involving the 1980 "Miracle On Ice," makes me cry. Whether it's the actual telecast complete with Al Michaels chilling "Do you believe in miracles?" call or any of the hundreds of television feature stories produced on the team, just the sight of Herb Brooks or Mike Eruzione brings tears to my eyes.

When that game actually aired, I was too young to understand its impact on our national consciousness. I knew nothing of the Iran hostage crisis or how Jimmy Carter performed as president, but I did know that our boys had beaten the bad guys and that made me proud to be an American.

As the years have passed I have gained perspective and the 1980 men's hockey team has come to symbolize the ultimate in hope and possibility -- the idea that anything can happen with hard work and faith. How can anything we face as individuals or as a nation be impossible when our boys showed us that, for Americans, the impossible was possible?

If the Miracle On Ice had been a movie, critics would call it hokey and unbelievable. A group of college kids simply cannot beat a team of older, more experienced professionals no matter how plucky they are. Reality suggests that hard work can only take you so far and that aside from the occasional lucky sling shot attack, Goliath pretty much always beats David.

Because of the 1980 Olympic team, though, we all know that what seems unattainable can happen. Miracles, even sports miracles, give us the faith to fight against impossible odds and the courage to rage against unbeatable enemies.

Every time a number 16 seed faces off against a top seed in the NCAA tourney and every time an amateur tees up against Tiger Woods, there's always the possibility for another miracle. More importantly, perhaps, every time one of us takes a risk for a dream -- whether it starting a business, writing a novel or anything else that goes against common sense -- we know that long odds do not mean impossible odds.

As a nation, we have always thrived in the underdog role. It's why we did better against the British in the Revolutionary War than we have done in any war where we took on a lesser opponent. As a people, despite our global dominance, we still envision ourselves as the 1980 hockey team -- the underdogs with barely a puncher's chance -- taking on the champ who should clean up the ice with us.

Our optimism where pessimism should be makes us great. Our ability to envision success when all signs point to failure strengthens us as a people and gives me the undying belief that no economic crisis can hold Americans down for too long.

Right now we might be down a couple of goals in the third period and, well, the economy figuratively has a pretty good goalie and a much better team. Still, I believe we have more Jim Craigs and more Mike Eruziones out there who can fashion our next miracle.

It happens every day on a small level where people reach for their dreams and manage to make them work. You, your friends, your neighbors and the people in your community live up to the spirit of the Miracle on Ice by trying to fashion your own miracles despite the odds or the opposition.

Our troubles may have a stronger lineup, but we're a nation fashioned in the vision of Herb Brooks where odds don't matter only hard work, faith and trusting in each other count for anything. Nobody on the sidelines or on the opposing bench needs to believe we can overcome as long as we do.

"Eleven seconds, you've got ten seconds, the countdown going on right now! Morrow, up to Silk. Five seconds left in the game. Do you believe in miracles? YES!"

I'm crying just reading it, because, yes, Al Michaels, I do.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Let yourself wallow, then go back to the fight

2010-02-22T15:13:00.002-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Lost in a sea of melancholy, crushed by responsibility and just generally overwhelmed, I sat listening to Bill Janovitz play a sparse, acoustic version of "Your Stripes," an obscure favorite of mine from Buffalo Tom's Sleepy Eyed. It was a Sunday morning and a rare off day had given me the opportunity to slow down, take stock and let the wave of everything left undone wash over me.

Whereas I once had little more than a computer, some clothes, a crappy car and a short-term rental apartment, I now have the mixed blessing of responsibility. In addition to my wife and son, I have a dozen or so staff members who look to me for both professional and personal guidance. I also have my boss' family which has shown enormous faith in me -- a faith which I want to reward -- as well as my parents who have needed more of me in recent years then in the past.

Add that to a just-high-enough-to-scare me-mortgage that seemed like a good idea in the ten minutes before the housing bubble burst, not to mention two car payments, plus a host of other bills and, well, sometimes I miss the simplicity of not having people rely on me. Normally, I never sit down long enough to listen to music ("Your Stripes," segued into Buffalo Tom's "Porchlight" and Janovitz doing a cover of The Replacements classic "Little Mascara") but for some reason the vast emptiness of Sunday mornings tend to make me reflective in a self-pitying sort of way.

Parenting and retailing share the fact that they never stop. Your child may sleep (a big maybe during the early years) and stores do shut down for the night and maybe the occasional holiday, but the demands of each never really recede.

Normally, I handle the complicated balance I have built between being a workaholic store manager, a reasonably involved parent of a fairly difficult (albeit incredibly endearing) child and an almost-successful, sort-of-known nationally syndicated columnist reasonably well. In the past few weeks though, my edges have started to fray a bit as a mix of professional and personal punches to the face have left me a bit shaken.

An optimist in the long run, I tend to see disaster in the short-term. I believe that with hard work everything always works out, but that has not stopped me from obsessively worrying about the journey. I know I'm going to get there, but I don't sleep at night because I'm not sure which rest stop to eat at along the way.

The current atmosphere in the country in general has made constant optimism a challenging attitude to maintain. I believe the nation on a grand level and my tiny piece of the world (consisting of my family, my friends and my store) will emerge stronger from this. But on this indulgent Sunday morning (Janovitz is covering Husker Du's "Hardly Getting Over It" now) the weight of the problem seems a little heavier than I'd like to carry.

If on Sunday I'm allowing myself to wallow in worry while my favorite musician plays in the background (he's doing Blondie's "Dreaming" now) then on Monday I'll be putting the acoustic interpretations away and turning the proverbial rock song up. You've only lost if you're behind when the final buzzer sounds and, well, we're not even at halftime yet.

(Soundtrack for this column courtesy Janovitz's excellent "Cover of the Week" project which can be found at PartTimeManOfRock.com.)

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Sorry NBC, the Olympics no longer matter

2010-02-19T14:05:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

With enough pomp and circumstance to make Lady Gaga raise an eyebrow, the Winter Olympics have returned to ruin television for two weeks. Once an eminently watchable sporting event punctuated by the occasionally dramatic real-life stories of its competitors, the Olympics has devolved into a made-for-TV event that plays like a Lifetime movie.

Because actual sports fans only watch the Olympics sparingly and most don't watch the Winter-Olympics-only events like luge or bobsledding, NBC must find a way to reach non-sports fans. That means that the competition takes a backseat to the melodrama of the competitors.

Not content to merely let real-life drama happen when it happens, NBC feels the need to shoehorn personality and back-story into every event. For NBC, every athlete offers a storyline whether or not they actually have a compelling history or are just some kid who managed to get incredibly good at something ridiculous.

Instead of sports laced with drama, we get "The Real World: Vancouver." Nobody ever bothers to explain how the made up scoring works in figure skating (extra points if you're famous seems to be the most peculiar rule) but we do get to hear about every faux dramatic stop on the major competitors' road to the Olympics.

Admittedly, sometimes an athlete has a story that makes them sympathetic. I might root for the Haitian bobsled team or get excited about a country that has no ice winning a medal in ice dancing, but mostly, I want the drama to come from the actual sport.

By building every event around the personalities and histories of the competitors we dilute the impact of the truly special stories. If NBC stopped trying to make every competitor a sports movie cliche (underdog, comeback, impossible odds, etc.) maybe we would become captivated by someone instead of bored by the whole lot.

Unfortunately (at least for NBC), for every figure skater whose cancer-stricken parents work nine jobs so she can skate we get a dozen rich kids whose folks shipped them off to private training facilities. Some athletes have incredible tales worthy of being made into movies where Dennis Quaid plays the coach who believes in them when nobody else will. Most don't and maybe the competition should sometimes speak for itself.

Whereas we once got Dan Jansen and his crushing failure to secure a medal for his five-hours-deceased sister followed by his ultimate redemption six years later, we now get downhill skiers who also manage to be good-looking. While we all remember the incredible triumph of the 1980 "Miracle On Ice" hockey team, nothing can make us deeply care about professionals barely interested in being there playing together after a few days of practice.

And, perhaps the most ridiculous pushed dramatic aspect of the Winter Olympics is the feature story done every four years about how captivating curling is. We get it, Canadians love their ridiculous non-sport because fat guys can play and you can drink beer during the game as a player.

There's a weird giant puck with a handle, lots of bad mustaches and people sweeping away with a broom. If this sport belongs in the Winter Olympics then Skee Ball should be in the Summer Olympics and I'd watch that because, well, Americans would always win.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Don't ask, don't tell, does not work

2010-02-19T14:04:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Aside from wanting Congress to pass legislation deeming me too cowardly for the military, I find it absurd that we make laws keeping willing participants out of our armed services. As a nation, we currently have two ongoing wars and not enough soldiers to fight them yet we won't let openly homosexual people take up the fight.

Technically, we do allow gay people to join the military as long as they don't mention they are gay. This would be like if we banned women from voting but chose to not ask any touchy questions to women dressed up as men who attempt to cast a ballot.

"Don't ask, don't tell" was a compromise forged out of political necessity. Republicans could not be seen supporting gay rights (you know because god/the religious right would get mad) and Democrats could not be seen backing down on the issue (might anger Barbra Streisand).

So, instead of a common sense policy based on providing equal rights for all citizens, we have one that discriminates a little less blatantly. Like all political compromises, this one left neither side happy but it protected the status quo and did nothing to loosen any incumbent's grip on his seat in Congress.

We currently ban openly gay people from the military due to a mix of ignorance, prejudice and an overt willingness to stereotype (the Rush Limbaugh cocktail). Those who oppose letting homosexuals serve would have you believe that gays want into the service so they can paint the foxholes pink while seducing "normal" god-fearing soldiers.

They would also have you believe that if we let gay people into the military then they would ruin our wars by constantly having sex with each other instead of doing their jobs. Instead of attacking the enemy, our newly mixed sexual orientation army would then be distracted by Elton John songs and Broadway musicals or so the reasoning goes.

If we're going to let stereotypes govern our nation then why not keep blonds out of the Army because, well, everyone knows they're dumb? Redheads are out too because we all know you can't trust them. I'd probably keep black-haired people out as well because they might be of Italian descent and are most likely in the Mafia.

The argument to keep gays out of the military can only be made by people that consider being gay deviant behavior. These ignorant folks don't make a distinction between a same sex relationship and pedophilia or other illegal behavior.

This ignores that most sex crimes get committed by straight people (by a wide volume) and being gay makes you no more likely to commit a crime. That is, of course, unless your church forces you to deny your sexuality and repress it until you're a grown priest stuck with the sexual desires he denied as a teen boy.

Gays in the military -- like most soldiers -- would simply do their jobs. They would have no higher a percentage of sexual misconduct issues then we already have in our straight, co-ed Armed Services today.

I salute anyone willing to put his or her life on the line for our country. I also respect that same person's ability to follow the military's regulations while in the service and to act within those parameters.

We need to let the gay people already in the Armed Services stop having to deny their true selves. We need to stand up and welcome all Americans who want to defend our freedom the freedom to do so.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Inconsistency may not be the path to fame

2010-02-01T11:45:00.001-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Getting emails from readers who love one particular column and thereby assume they will always agree with me inevitably leads to heartbreak. This person might enjoy the next one, even the next few, but ultimately, I will write something that does not agree with what he or she assumes I believe and the love affair will end.

The easiest path to popularity would be to have clear views that fit alongside the accepted norms. Most people like to have their opinions reinforced by others who think the same way. The public also seems to crave consistency.

That's why "Two and a Half Men" gets away with telling the same jokes every week. And, it's probably why Jay Leno gets more viewers with his mild, but consistent humor than Conan O'Brien did with his sometimes unpredictable act.

The obvious path to increased readership, more fans and the inevitable riches that would follow involves picking a side and sticking with it. Gaining this popularity would also require avoiding criticism of things most people like and instead focusing on stuff everyone already dislikes.

Unfortunately, just to name a few, I've never cared for Michael Jackson's music, have no interest in seeing "Avatar" -- probably because I disliked "Titanic" -- and I do not enjoy "American Idol" in any fashion. I'm also not a fan of either Rush Limbaugh or Barack Obama and, come to think of it, I'm pretty much not a fan of anyone who rigidly defines themselves as a conservative or a liberal a Democrat or a Republican.

The list of stuff I don't like and people I find hard to listen to runs a lot deeper than the list of things I find enjoyable. This greatly hampers my ability to be a nationally-known, widely beloved columnist because while people pretend they like to be challenged, most just want to be told their ideas are correct.

I could play Glen Beck or Rachel Maddow if I wanted to. Having clearly defined, unwavering beliefs makes it a lot easier to write because you always know your opinion. Keith Olbermann or Bill O'Reilly never have to think about what to say because anyone could tell you their opinions on any issue.

The same can be said when it comes to entertainment. It would be much easier if I disliked everything popular and could preach to the indie crowd about how I only watch IFC, listen to unsigned bands and see movies in art houses.

Unfortunately, I like Tom Petty and Buffalo Tom. I love gritty coffee houses with menus written on blackboards but I also love Starbucks. Sure, I like some entertainment outside the popular mainstream, but I also cry everytime Bill Pullman gives his big speech at the end of "Independence Day" and I've seen every episode of every "Law & Order" series.

In general, people like reading, watching and listening to people who either think like them or think exactly the opposite of them. With the battle lines clearly drawn, it's easy to have a rooting interest. When the columnist you agree with on the economy disagrees with you on gay marriage -- well, then it gets tougher for most people.

I, however, prefer when people have complex opinions and aren't so easily pigeonholed. I also enjoy when people passionately defend something they like that I don't (Pixar movies being the most recent example).

I've loved books by P.J. O'Rourke (a middle aged male, conservative humorist) and just finished reading a book I liked by Cheryl Peck (a 50-something, overweight lesbian humorist). I don't agree with either one on everything and I would not be that interested in them if I did.

Sometimes it's fun to read someone who agrees with you and sometimes it's fun to be outraged by what someone says. I read and watch opinion givers with hopes of experiencing both and I would never flip the channel or turn the page just because the view expressed was not the same as mine.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Part of a balanced breakfast?

2010-01-25T14:29:00.001-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

As a responsible parent, I try to fill my child up right in the morning with a healthy bowl of Lucky Charms. Filled with vitamins and minerals this seemingly unhealthy combination of sugar, marshmallows, a little grain and some more marshmallows contains both calcium and vitamin D, which, apparently make it good for you.

I am, of course, basing this decision (as I do all my decisions) on the contents of a television commercial. If General Mills (a military hero I assume) says that Lucky Charms will help my child, then who am I to question the wisdom of a multinational corporation?

The good folks at General Mills have been nice enough to spend a lot of money promoting the heretofore unknown health benefits of four of its seemingly less healthy cereals. The quartet, Lucky Charms, Trix, Cinnamon Toast Crunch and Cocoa Puffs all appear to be bad for you and even really irresponsible parents have always known to limit sugary cereal intake.

That appears to have been a mistake that may have robbed my entire generation of its proper doses of vitamin D and calcium. According to the General Mills' sponsored Web site, GrowUpStrong.com, 75% of kids do not get enough of these two important nutrients (which may explain all those kids whose bones just randomly snap on any given day).

Of course, enriched breakfast cereals -- preferably ones with mascots -- are the only logical way to get your child the proper amount of vitamin D and calcium. The site does point out alternate sources for calcium, but declares that vitamin D is hard-to-find and can only be found in such exotic foods as eggs, salmon and tuna.

Eggs? Never heard of them and they can't possibly be a good breakfast food. So, it seems that despite all evidence and common sense, children should, in fact, eat Lucky Charms, Trix, Cinnamon Toast Crunch everyday -- maybe even more than once.

We're talking about a cereal that leaves a sugar residue on your bowl (Cinnamon Toast Crunch). There's one that consists almost entirely of marshmallows (Lucky Charms) and another that drives it's mascot crazy with ecstasy (Cocoa Puffs). The last one, which contains colors not generally seen in nature (Trix), is so intoxicating that its commercial character commits acts of crime to obtain it.

Now, I am in no way a responsible parent when it comes to sugar intake. My six-year-old and I just went to a 10:15 a.m. movie and I would have gladly bought him candy because I believe that a movie requires candy (more sensible than me, he opted for popcorn). I do know, however, that any cereal involving neon colors and a wacky mascot may not be quite as healthy as say, Cheerios or Wheaties.

I'm also reasonably sure that whatever vitamins and minerals he lacks (and this is for a child who eats mostly chicken nuggets and peanut butter) can be obtained from something other than sugary cereals. Realistically, you could add calcium and vitamin D to cotton candy or fried dough, but that would not turn them into health food.

Sugary cereal has its place as a special treat or a way to get through college without spending a lot on food, but it is not part of a normal diet. You can eat sugary cereal and still be healthy, but it is most certainly not a way to be healthy.

I've been cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs and have gone after the Lucky Charms on occasion (in my pre-gluten allergy days). I've dined on the fare made by the Cinnamon Toast Crunch Baker and I've kept that silly rabbits paws off my Trix as well.

I'm guessing that I'm in reasonably good health in spite, not because of that.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Pursuing passion means accepting rejection

2010-01-19T15:10:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

When someone asks me what I do for a living, I have no satisfying answer to give them. While I’m proud of my “straight” job running a very unique toy and hobby store, there’s a part of me that always wants to answer "writer."

Of course, writing, is not how I make my living at the moment. I’ve made money as a writer, worked full-time as an editor and had a six-figure year as a freelancer, but right now, writing is, at best, a sideline. Still, there’s a romantic part of me, and perhaps an ego-driven part of me, that craves the specialness that identifying myself as a creative person provides.

I never actually intended to stop being a writer first and a business guy second. It just sort of happened as the responsibilities of being a husband, a father and the attendant mortgages and car loans piled up.

At first, the realities of parenthood pushed writing to the backburner. It’s hard to pitch freelance articles and write book proposals when you have a baby keeping you up all night. Then, it became the fact that in addition to loving writing and the associated acclaim, I also love running things -- specifically the toy and hobby store where I currently serve as general manager.

I was a passionate ladder company executive and I’m an insanely devoted toy and hobby store manager. I love the stress of managing people and the joys (and occasional hardships) of dealing with customers. I run a store that people feel connected to – a place that they revel in sharing with their children – and there’s an ego boost from that similar to the one I get when someone recognizes me from something I have written.

Still, though, nothing exactly equals the high of writing something and having it read. I've been more than willing to sacrifice money for attention as a newspaper columnist and that has to speak to my overly-inflated sense of how interesting I am.

Realistically, noboby writes a column about his life for the best part of 20 years without a healthy ego. If I did not believe I was pretty entertaining, it’s unlikely I’d expose my inner workings in who knows how many hundreds of papers and Web sites each week.

On the other hand, that same ego, enjoys being the boss of people and likes the more immediate awards that working in a store offers. Writing can be solitary whereas managing a store involves constantly interacting with people -- which can be invigorating.

For the past six years though, since I left writing and editing as a full-time profession, I have neglected that side of myself and allowed this column to be my only creative endeavor. I could say that's because my business and family takes up much of my time, but that would only be a piece of the story.

Writing in most cases involves rejection. Articles get shot down by editors and book proposals get critiqued by agents then ultimately rejected by publishers. Constant rejection does not help with the aforementioned ego, so not trying helps me maintain my creative vision of myself a lot more readily than trying and failing does.

That ends this year.

So, if you're a book publisher specifically, I'm going to bother you quite a bit this year. If my various proposals fail (nobody likes my idea to write a book where I let the Magic 8 Ball make all my decisions for 12 months) then they fail and I try again.

I'm a businessman, but I'm also a writer. I'm pretty good at both and have never figured out how to combine the two in a job. So, in 2010, I'll work two jobs if I have to, even if one offers more than its fair share of heartbreak and rejection. I've been through that before and, well, at least you're still reading.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Without jobs, it's still a recession

2010-01-11T13:17:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Good news, America. On a completely meaningless, utterly technical level, the recession has ended. It hasn't ended in a way that means you might get a job anytime soon or in a way where you won't have to to be worrying about money, but under the textbook definition of a recession, it's all over.

I'm personally relieved and plan to go on a spending spree fueled by readily available credit and easily obtainable, lucrative side-jobs. I'll also spend the money I'm saving on my government-sponsored affordable health care and perhaps I'll use a few dollars from my rapidly growing home equity.

Sadly, that does not seem to be the way things are going and even though the recession may be over as far as the politicians and eggheads are concerned, it has not stopped for us regular folks. It seems that the endless government meddling that began under President George Bush and continued under President Barack Obama has resulted in the kind of recovery where regular people do not recover.

The banks are healthier as are the insurance companies. Even the auto manufacturers have a brighter outlook, but regular Americans still face 10% unemployment, rampant underemployment and only dim prospects that things might improve.

I'm sure the unemployed factory workers and former executives now working at Starbucks take great pleasure in the fact that their bankers and insurance agents have nothing to worry about. Of course, they probably had to drop their insurance and are mostly avoiding calls from the bank because they can't afford to make their mortgage payments.

As a nation we have spent billions of dollars on an economic recovery that created no jobs. I'm against government messing with the free market, but if we're going to spend public money on anything shouldn't it be on directly creating jobs?

Instead of boondogles like "cash for clunkers" and giving billions to prop up companies that should have been allowed to go out of business, maybe we could have built some bridges or fixed up our inner cities? Or, if we're going to be in two wars, we should at least go back to bombing Iraq and Afghanistan so American factories can get back to work making more?

Once again, I prefer less government, much lower taxes and letting the free market solve its own problems, but at least public works programs actually stimulate the economy. If we're going to spend government money (i.e. our money) on anything it should be on putting people back to work.

It's absurd to call any efforts to end the economic downturn a success until companies begin to hire. I'm glad that inventories are up 2%, holiday sales showed a slight increase and whatever other meaningless stats politicians throw out in order to pat themselves on the back, but it mean nothing without a drop in unemployment.

The current situation is akin to your doctor telling you that while he can't cure your cancer, he does have a pill that will make you slightly better looking while you die. Real people don't judge the economy based on fancy reports, they judge it based what they can afford.

A mediocre economy is one in which working hard allows you to make ends meet and a good economy is one that allows you to do that, take a vacation and buy some new stuff. It's not complicated. If we have a few dollars we're doing great and if we don't, we aren't.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

NFL goes for diversity, gets a sham

2010-01-05T08:50:00.001-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

The National Football League had the best of intentions when it enacted the "Rooney Rule," which requires teams to interview a minority candidate when filling a head coach or general manager position. Unfortunately, good intentions and a dollar bill won't buy you a cup of coffee most places and this rule has accomplished little if anything.

Ostensibly, the Rooney Rule causes white team owners and general managers to look for people outside their comfort zones. Even if these candidates don't get hired on the first go round, they get publicity and become familiar to the people doing the hiring.

They also get experience in the interview process and, in theory, just being interviewed might make them a hot commodity which could lead to promotions, new contracts or other perks with their current teams. In addition, since head coaches and general managers often only last a few years, theoretically the minority person given the courtesy interview might get the job on the second pass.

This is a nice idea, but in practice it does not work. In the case of head coaches the vast majority of openings go to either previously successful head coaches (not a lot of minorities there) or "hot" coordinators (not too many minorities there either). Most teams have a strong idea of who they intend to hire before the actual interview as there bodies of work speak for themselves.

In most cases, as we just saw in Washington and in Cleveland, the teams target a well-known football figure (Mike Holmgren and Mike Shanahan respectively) and make them an offer. The interview is largely to make sure everyone gets along or maybe it helps a team decide which ex-coach or coordinator it wants from a list of two or three.

The Rooney rule interviews largely go to whatever black guy it's convenient to interview. Washington interviewed it's cornerbacks coach even though he had absolutely no chance at the job. They did this because no qualified minority coordinator or credible candidate would interview for a job that everyone knows was Mike Shanahan's to turn down.

Washington could have interviewed P. Diddy and still met the requirements. Realistically, a team could interview it's African American security guard or Bill Cosby then just go and hire the guy they wanted all along.

If the NFL wants to see more black head coaches and general managers then it should make teams apply the Rooney rule when hiring position coaches and front office assistants. The only way there will be qualified candidates who reflect the diversity of the league will be if they work there way up just like white coaches do.

Of course, there has been racism in keeping both pro and college football head coaching jobs largely in the hands of white men. But, even if a handful of owners wanted to hire minority candidates, exactly who should they hire?

More black assistants will lead to more black coordinators which will lead to more black head coaches. That will lead to more black head coaches getting fired which will lead to more black coaches becoming retreads and getting hired again.

Fixing this supposed problem starts at the bottom not at the top. Nobody is helped by obscure position coaches getting courtesy interviews. Instead, if we want real change, then we have to be patient and plant the seeds for change to come.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Make yourself slightly better in 2010

2009-12-29T09:33:00.001-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

For 2010, I resolve to always answer the question, "how are you?" (and its variants) honestly. I'm not sure that doing this will improve my life (it will likely make it worse) but I'm eager to spend the year being brutally honest with people who were just being polite.

This follows years in which I strived to "be a little nicer" (I was) and, my personal favorite, the year in which I devoted myself to eating more risotto (I did). For 2010, in addition to answering polite queries with unneeded detail, I also plan to make tiny improvements to my major faults.

Basically, I'm taking personal improvement at a very slow pace making myself incrementally better on a yearly basis. If I stick to this plan (Operation Modest Expectations is the working title) then should I live to be 100, I will likely be an absolute delight to be around

I've set this admittedly easily attainable goal based on a theory my friend Jeff and I created in college where we would always put some easy-to-do things on our to-do lists. If we added "take a shower" and "have lunch" next to "write paper for history class," we could, at the end of the day, say we had accomplished two thirds of our lists.

While I'm a decent enough fellow, the list of things that I might improve would not fit in this column. Though I'm sure my wife and my staff could fill more than a few columns listing my faults, my obvious ones are that I'm easily angered, I'm better at starting a project than finishing one and I'm unable to leave work at work.

Given my goal of only making myself incrementally better, I only plan to slightly work on these faults this year. Making huge changes is not only unrealistic, but it would be jarring for people used to the current me -- like if I started coming to work in hip hop gear or adopted a British accent.

So, let's look at what I plan to do to make myself imperceptibly better. Since I have been easily angered my entire life and see no obvious way to find more patience. Instead, I plan to only get mad about stuff that's worth getting mad about. That means perhaps I will get angry when a hotel has lost my reservation, but I will try not to get angry when Lady Gaga makes a year-end best-of list or somebody tells me they like Coldplay.

As for starting projects and not finishing them, I'm going to try to apply a reality check to any ideas I come up with. Is a Web site that houses the best work not appearing in major newspapers a good idea? Yes. Is it one I can pull of with a demanding job, a weekly column to write and a five-year-old at home? No.

When it comes to work. well, I'm not sure I'm going to be able to pull that one off. I may try to be at work a little less, but I can't promise to not obsessively watch our security cameras. I will try to turn my cell phone off a little more and maybe go away someplace during a slow week and actually put the Blackberry down for a few minutes.

It's not a whole new me for 2010, but it will be a slightly new mildly improved me. I'm not going for New Coke different, more like when they slightly change Tide and you notice the sticker on the package but your clothes seem no more or less clean.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Sometimes the little things are big

2009-12-22T08:52:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Our line snaked halfway through the store and the phone rang endlessly mostly with "customers" seeking the trendy sold-out toys we would never sell anyway. Two people had called in sick and another staff member had simply disappeared.

We were short-staffed during the start of the busiest time of the year and I was trying to keep people happy and moving through the store. I was playing a bit injured as well as my hip and knee were throbbing in pain from falling on the ice the day before. Add to that the congestion in my sinuses from a growing cold and, well, the pressure was starting to build.

We were busy -- that was good -- but my various physical hurts coupled with the ever-demanding holiday crowd left me longing for a nap. When the phone rang one more time and nobody else managed to answer it I picked it up begging the line in front of me for patience.

I had expected yet another person asking for a toy that had not been made in 20 years assuming we would have it because our name is Time Machine. This might actually be our most prevalent phone call in the month of December and people seem truly flabbergasted when we have no magical source for toys long since out of production.

Instead, though, I picked up the phone and had approximately the following exchange.

"Good afternoon, Time Machine."

"Good afternoon. Is Dan there?"

"Hey Phil, can't really talk now. There's a huge line and we're shorthanded."

"I won't keep you. I was just calling to wish you a happy holiday and say thanks for everything you did this year."

There's a little more, but the key part is above. A customer -- a regular who comes from over two hours away to shop out store a few times a year -- called just to say something nice.

One of my favorite people in the store, this customer -- a doctor with more than a few pressing things to do -- had taken the time just to reach out because it was the season to do so. It was a small gesture, but it brightened my day and reminded me of everything I like about working in retail.

It also reminded me of everything I like about the holiday season. Whether you celebrate Christmas, Chanukah or none-of-the-above, people often stop this time of year to just wish others well.

This is a time to simply let people know you care and that you appreciate them. It's a time to shake hands, clap backs and liberally dole out the hugs.

I don't really get enough time during the holiday season to tell everyone that matters to me how much I care and how much I appreciate them. That goes for my family, my friends and the people who go out of their way to be nice.

Little things matter and taking the time to say it always makes people feel better. That customer from the story above actually came in Saturday and when I saw him, my face broke into a bigger-than-usual smile.

"Phil," I called as I saw him walk in, "you really got me through a rough day."

He smiled and walked over to me and we spent a few minutes talking. He had just been in New York dealing with a recently deceased sibling's house and had stopped in the store as a bit of a mental pick-me-up on his way home.

We chatted for a while with me forgetting that my head cold was now a chest cold and that the bruise in my hip was not being helped by 14 hour days spent standing. Phil got to drop his burdens a bit too and spend a time just talking about his hobbies, our business and whatever other trivial matters we discussed that day.

It's times like this that remind me that we can't get through this life on our own and sometimes it's nice when someone shows us we don't have to. It does not take much to make someone else's day brighter and that little bit of effort might be the greatest gift we can give anyone (though an expensive helicopter or train set from your favorite toy store also makes an excellent gift).

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

God does not belong in public schools

2009-12-14T15:27:00.001-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

When my son came home a few nights ago he began randomly reciting the "Pledge of Allegiance." He did a relatively good job managing to say "indivisible" instead of "invisible" but I winced a bit when he got to the "one nation, under god" part.

The inclusion of that line inadvertently, or perhaps explicitly, endorses the idea that the existence of god is an undeniable truth. For most Americans that is what they believe. For them, a casual reference to the almighty in the Pledge makes as much sense as the shout out to "amber waves of grain" in "America the Beautiful."

Belief in god, however, is not an undeniable fact. It is an act of faith. Acts of faith, now matter how societally ingrained have no place in the public school system. Schools, at least taxpayer-funded ones, should not take a position on questions of faith. That includes casual references that imply that the existence of god is a well-understood, unquestionable fact.

I understand that as a nation we were founded by people who clearly believed in the concept of god. These folks even had the foresight to realize that since they had fled from persecution relating to exactly how they worshipped, that they should build in protections for people of different religions.

Our founding fathers even went so far as to create a formal separation between
church and state to prevent any one religion from imposing its will upon the others. What they did not consider, however, was those with no faith and those who might believe in something that does not conform to the traditional idea of "god."

The vast majority of Americans believe in god and for most, that belief is as unshakably certain as the idea that the sky is up and the sun is yellow. Having faith and believing beyond any question of doubt makes it generally impossible to consider someone who does not believe.

For many Americans the idea of someone not believing in god is as absurd as someone not believing the moon was real or a person who refused to accept that ice is cold. Still, our lawmakers and those who interpret our laws should realize that one's faith and one's relationship to any sort of higher power has no place in our school systems.

Personally, I have a murky relationship with the concept of god. I believe that there must be something bigger than us, but I don't pretend to know what that is and hesitate to label it "god."

I do believe that whatever might be out there -- if it has a consciousness -- expects us to be generally decent people who treat others well. I can't imagine an almighty god that picks one religion over another and considers good people condemnable because they worship in the wrong way. If I have faith it's in the idea that whether there's a higher power sitting in judgment or this is truly all there is, all we have is how we behave towards each other.

I'd prefer money, courthouses and every other area of public life paid for in part by me not contain references to god. Faith should be something taught by parents to their children not something preordained as part of the morning ritual at school.

Have faith and believe. Advertise your faith verbally, on t-shirts, through jewelry and on bumper stickers if you like. Preach to the unconverted and believe that your religion or your god is the only correct one. Just keep your beliefs out of government-run institutions.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Tiger's actions not so great

2009-12-08T09:19:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

As a general rule, when you pay your wife millions of dollars not to leave you, it casts doubts as to exactly how much genuine love exists in the relationship. This has not stopped the formerly bland and personality-free Tiger Woods from allegedly giving his wife $5 million simply to not divorce him.

Apparently, Woods, desperate to hold onto his public image of having nothing to say about anything and simply being an all-American success story believes that maintaining the illusion of a happy marriage may fool us all. Unfortunately, as a parade of bimbos announces their affairs with the golfer to the world it's unlikely anyone believes that everything is fine at the Woods' home.

Most likely the unfathomably wealthy golfer has an incredibly incompetent public relations team pulling his strings. This has led to the once benign product pitchman looking more and more like a talented John Gosselin.

I have never been a fan of Woods. While he has shown an incredible prowess in his chosen sport, he seems more machine than man. His complete lack of an opinion on anything in order to be a blank slate for his corporate sponsors has always annoyed me.

In some ways finding out that the golfer actually has passions (albeit illicit ones) aside from working on his putting makes him more interesting. Unfortunately, the way Woods has handled the scandal makes him the negative Governor Mark Sanford type of interesting not the much better, but still sleazy, David Letterman type.

Like so many other celebrities found with their pants down, Woods has chosen to lie, deny and offer no comment. Instead of pulling a Letterman and coming clean after realizing he was caught, the decorated golf champion has said little and what he has said may not be true.

Once he got caught and had no chance of casting reasonable doubt as to his guilt Woods had an obvious script to follow. If he had simply gotten up and apologized, admitted his guilt expressed shame at his actions, Woods would appear genuine and human.

"I have done things that have hurt my family and for that I am sorry. I'm ashamed at my behavior and regret any pain my behavior my have caused. I promise to try to be better in the future and to do better by my family."

Woods could have delivered that speech and then let his PR team quietly get the information out that yes, he was divorcing. They could also slip out that he was financially taking care of his wife well beyond the terms of his prenuptual agreement and he would be well on his way to an improved image.

Cheating on his wife makes Woods a scumbag in many eyes, but being honest and admitting that the temptations were just too great also makes him a regular guy. If the country can give Chris Brown a top-20 hit (and a wretched one at that) after he beats up Rihanna then it's hard to imagine that a contrite Woods could not go back to selling Gatorade pretty quickly.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Pretty much anything makes you famous

2009-12-01T10:26:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

My new plan to become famous involves hiding my son in a balloon and crashing a White House dinner party. If that fails, perhaps I can father nonuplets, announce that I'm pregnant, marry one of the Kardashians without even meeting her or gain or lose an enormous amount of weight.

If John Gosselin, Spencer Pratt and Omorosa can hold on to celebrity than I should be able to come up with something to have paparazzi waiting outside my door. Unfortunately, despite my best efforts to leave the house without pants and have loud drunken arguments with strangers, myself and inanimate objects, nobody wants to take my picture.

Never before has it taken so little to be famous. Most of the reality TV stars are neither good looking nor good at anything in particular. Tiny Tim at least played the ukulele and Charo had a dance. That may not have made them the Beatles or Robert DeNiro, but it's a lot more than today's tabloid celebrities bring to the table.

To name a few; Pratt is famous for being a jerk, Gosselin is known for being a jerk with a lot of kids and the Kardashians are known for being slutty. The latest round of reality show seekers have merely attempted to pull off stupid stunts or put their children at risk with the idea that it might get them on television.

Maybe we could just give a show to that guy that made Jaycee Duggard live in the hut behind his house while he repeatedly raped her? Just do some voiceovers to make the child-raping kidnapper seem like the patriarch of an unconventional family and TLC has five hours a week covered.

If we celebrate talentless idiots who do stupid things then about half of America deserves a reality show. That guy doing 100 on a two lane road while texting and drinking a latte, he's not a danger to society, he's pushing the limits for his new show "Distracted Driver." That group of women turning over their house keys and ATM cards to recently paroled violent felons, they're not foolish, they're stars on VH1's "Prisoner of Love."

Once we have put people on TV because of their willingness to have preposterous breast implants and date Flavor Flav we have reached the bottom of the barrel. Sorry Flav, but take celebrity away and women just won't be lining up for a man with bad teeth and an indeterminate amount of kids who wears a Viking helmet and a giant clock. Without TV, that's the guy you avoid at the supermarket, not someone you humiliate yourself for a chance to fake go out with.

I want to be famous. Nobody writes a newspaper column that's often about himself without some desire for fame but it seems that I do have a limit as to how far I might go to achieve celebrity.

Will I share honest details about my life? Yes. Will I marry Tara Reid or start dressing like a rodeo clown? No.

That's not a hard and fast line, because, well, I'd really like to be on the cover of US magazine even if it's in one of those little inset boxes behind a story about why Jessica Simpson has gotten fat and/or skinny again.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Be thankful for the small things this year

2009-11-24T07:02:00.001-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

With the economy struggling, unemployment peaking and the country not quite able to right itself, I'm a little more thankful for the small things this year. Sitting on the couch in our condo which is littered with toys and my son's "art projects," I find myself happy to have survived the year in relatively the same position I began it.

In 2009, I watched two friends go through unspeakable tragedies involving the loss of children. I saw others struggle to stay employed while some fought for their lives and two courageously battled against mental illness.

This was the year when I said "is there anything I can do?" often, but was rarely able to help. There's a frustration in watching those closest to you struggle without being able to do anything, but there is also a warmth that rises from knowing you would if you could and if you needed something they would be there too.

I learned this year just how many people cared and I was constantly amazed by people's willingness to give of themselves. Through the wonders of the Internet, I saw people rally around old friends and saw tattered bonds of friendship knit tightly together. Even as people struggled themselves I saw so many maintain intense compassion for others.

This was a year of worry and doubt, one where the good moments got dulled by anxiety over tomorrow. As a retailer in this frightening economy, I went to bed every night after hearing our tally for the day and whether it was good or bad, I fell asleep wondering if anyone would come tomorrow.

I'm thankful that people did and that in our very large little store, we managed to keep people employed and make our customers happy. There were countless people this year who spoke to me of buying a hobby item to fill the time while they were out of work and it's always an honor to bring a little happiness into a dark situation.

This was a tough year for many and nobody was untouched by hard times. Still, it's comforting to see how willing people were to be there for each other and to learn just how much compassion exists.

We may think of people as greedy and selfish, but that's people as a whole, not people in person. Up close, I've learned that people genuinely worry about each other and are often willing to put the happiness of others ahead of themselves.

Mostly this year, I'm thankful for people. From my immediate family where my wife put up with my work anxiety (and my tendency to solve it by working more) to my son who had to put up with a little less of me than he would like. My brother probably bore the worst of my worries this year and I'm glad he was there but wish he hadn't had to be.

Lastly, I'm thankful for my friends and that I got to be a part of their triumphs and that they allowed me to be there for their tragedies. I found that people can face anything when they don't have to face it alone and I'm proud that there are so many in my world who stand together.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Having a majority does not make you right

2009-11-17T13:21:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Letting majority rule be our main method of deciding controversial issues has left America as a country with institutionalized, mutually-agreed-upon prejudices. From slavery to denying women the right to vote to our current ban on gay marriage in most states we have made discrimination okay as long as 50% of us agree on it.

The people as a whole make bad decisions. Take a look at the most popular pretty much anything and you can easily see that the pubic should not pick a restaurant let alone decide who can marry whom.

Majority rule leads to "Two and a Half Men," "2012" and Lady Gaga. The people at large gave us the Big Mac, the Snuggie and the universal availability of the jalapeno popper. Letting the masses decide is fine when picking a prime time lineup or selecting a snack. It does not work when we confront vital issues.

People in general (not people specifically) lack the ability to govern themselves. As a voting public we are too easily swayed by our personal biases and most people make voting decisions based on their beliefs instead of actual right or wrong.

Denying someone else a right whether it be gay marriage or sitting in front on the bus because you find the idea distasteful is simply wrong. Even if you believe that a particular act or personal engagement is morally wrong, it should be easy to realize that we should not be making moral decisions for each other.

Put simply, I consider ordering well-done steak, enjoying Jay Leno and using the words "genius" and "Coldplay" in the same sentence as reprehensible. I will certainly express my opinion on those topics, but I would not vote for a law that outlaws any of those things (though Leno does make it tempting).

Even if I believed that some sort of higher power agreed with me and considered engaging in any of those three actions an affront to the heavens, I would express my thoughts but leave the punishing to whatever deity took my side. Never would I be so presumptuous to believe that my particular religious beliefs trumped all others and gave me the right to make laws that prohibit people from doing things simply because I choose to believe that they are wrong.

If the majority always ruled than American Idol would be on seven nights a week, dinner would be catered by Olive Garden and we wouldn't have things like religious freedom, the right to express unpopular opinions or minorities voting. Doing what most people want makes sense when you and your pals are picking a weekend activity. It does not usually represent good public policy.

Elected officials have become too beholden to polling data and enacting whatever policies keep them in office. Real leaders do unpopular things because they are the right thing to do. Sadly, we have no real leaders, just a sorry group desperate to stay with the in crowd even when the majority leads them in the wrong direction.

It goes to the old line, "if your friend jumped off a bridge, would you?" The answer appears to be if enough friends did then there would be a line of elected officials waiting to be in agreement with the majority.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Parenting offers no simple solutions

2009-11-10T15:36:00.001-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

My wife never calls with good news. She's not much of a telephone person, so if I see her number on my caller ID, I generally know that something bad has happened. Perhaps it's as mild as her having to work late or maybe, it's, as it was today, that our five-year-old son had misbehaved yet again at school.

Since I had missed her call and was calling her back, I greeted Celine picking up the phone with an immediate "what's wrong?" Call it conditioning from my parents who would both answer an unexpected phone call assuming bad news or call it simple logic based on my wife's normal patterns, but when her number pops up, nothing good comes from it.

I was, of course, correct and my clearly distraught wife explained to me that she had just gotten a call from the school principal. Apparently, Joshua, our not-very-well-behaved kindergartner, had had a physical altercation with another child where he drew blood.

Not exactly an imposing physical specimen, Joshua weighs about 35 pounds and has the physique of a sunflower. Most kids his age could take him down pretty easily (girls included) but his unpredictable ability to get angry with limited provocation makes him a handful to deal with.

Joshua has a complete inability to follow directions and has never handled not immediately getting what he wants well. As parents we have brought him to psychologists, had him neurologically evaluated and have met preemptively with his teacher, the principal and the school psychologist.

Though this has made us appear to be responsible, caring parents (which we are) it has done little to improve our child's behavior. This has made every school day a potential minefield as we send him off each morning unsure as to whether our day will include a call from the school, a note home or something worse.

Always a good student who never got in trouble, my wife has a harder time with Joshua's behavior than I do. While I would prefer he not hit other kids and wish he would listen to his teachers, I understand Joshua's frustrations with following directions and remember being unable to react in an appropriate manner when things did not go my way.

What has struck me most, however, is our complete helplessness as parents. We have read the books, talked to the doctors, the teachers and anyone else who might listen and nothing has made Joshua any less likely to talk back to his teacher, randomly spit on another kid or become inappropriately violent.

As much as I enjoy having a fiercely bright, independent-minded child, I would greatly prefer he fit in a little better as his current age and perhaps save some of the independence for adulthood. I want desperately to be able to provide an answer or to at least convince my wife that some of Joshua's worst qualities now, may with more maturity, be some of his best.

Sadly, I have failed utterly in that respect and Celine (a PHD in developmental psychology) remains despondent and convinced that hitting in kindergarten leads to who-knows-what horrors as the years go on. As a parent, I feel hopelessly unable to help. But as a former difficult child, who has turned out reasonably successfully, I feel pretty good about the prospect that with two loving parents, a supportive school system and the simple passage of time, Joshua will turn out okay too.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Reading should continue to be fundamental

2009-11-03T07:57:00.000-05:00

By Daniel B. Kline

In the last few weeks I read two Star Wars novels, a collection of essays by Laurie Notaro, a biography of Axl Rose, Carrie Fisher's latest memoir, a book about the stomach disorder I may or may not have as well as three non-fiction books by Ben Mezrich. During that time period I also managed to read a newspaper nearly every day, countless magazines and, yes, a variety of news found online.

For those of you in the younger generations who may be unfamiliar, novels are like a series of pretend Facebook posts strung together to tell a story. Imagine if what your friends had to say went on for longer than 140 characters and was actually compelling. I know that it's hard to compete with "having a bad day" as far as storytelling goes, but trust me, some of these novelists have really mastered the whole multiple sentence plus a story arc thing.

Though I'm teasing a little bit, I do fear that the Internet and its penchant for short, easy-to-digest information is slowly destroying our ability to read. If you can be vaguely informed (or at least not embarrassingly uninformed) by glancing at Google News then I fear most people won't dig much deeper.

Depth has been replaced by a superficial knowledge of everything. You may not write long letters to any of your old friends, but you know a sentence or two about what every person you have ever met does every day. The same logic holds for newspaper and book consumption. We won't read Andre Agassi's biography, but we will skim a few paragraphs posted online giving us the highlights (he took meth and wore a wig).

Without reading -- the kind of reading that involves sitting for long periods of time and looking at multiple pages, not simply scanning headlines -- our capacity for in-depth understanding disappears. Reading serves as the foundation for pretty much all knowledge. Reading develops our understanding of the world, enhances our vocabulary and generally gives us something to build other skills upon.

It's possible to learn without reading (reading a book about ice skating would probably not help you actually skate) but in most areas not being a good reader makes learning much harder. Reading also allows you to learn a lot of things quickly without actually experiencing them.

For example, I neither enjoy the music of Guns N' Roses nor have any particular interest in partnering with a bunch of guys who abuse heroin. Reading Axl Rose's biography, however, gave me an understanding of both. Perhaps that's not immediately useful information, but if I'm asked a question about the derivation of "Paradise City," or what happens when your heart stops from drug abuse, I now have an answer.

Reading does not come easily for some people, but the more you do the easier it gets. If we fail to give our children the ability to read (not just the technical ability, the actual acquired skill of doing it well) then we handicap them for the rest of their lives.

It's easy to pretend that the Internet has somehow made reading less important when all it has done is make those who don't read a little harder to pick out. The prevalence of really short stories and news items hasn't made these people any less uninformed or any smarter. Instead, it has just given the stupid enough superficial knowledge to hide amongst an ocean of similarly misguided folks – none of whom are likely to have read this far anyway..

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at DBKline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Learn the basics and maybe get a job

2009-10-27T14:46:00.001-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

As the email responses to my job posting came rolling in by the dozens, I searched in vain for just one that had a proper cover letter and resume. Instead, I found every manner of poorly written informal response along with the occasional generic cover letter full of nonsense words that in no way applied to the job I was attempting to fill.

My expectations for a seasonal retail job that pays poorly were not overly high. I hoped to interview a handful of people that responded with a brief cover letter that referred to at least some part of my detailed job posting. Along with the cover letter, I hoped to receive a resume even if the person had relatively little job experience.

Of the hundreds of responses I received not one person sent the proper combination. Nearly all of the responses were brief, informal notes along the lines of "I am interested in the job. Please call me if it is still available." This tells me that on a very large level our schools -- at least here in Connecticut -- have failed to prepare students for the job market.

I'm also pretty sure that at least on the lowest levels of the retail chain that any candidate that made even a reasonable effort would immediately stand out. You do not have to be a writer to prepare a proper cover letter -- one that refers to the job posting in question and contains no spelling mistakes or major grammatical errors.

Perhaps worse than the informal letters or the ones full of typos were the ones built around nonsense phrases like, "I hope to utilize my skills for the betterment of your company." That may sound like it's saying something, but a phrase like that contains no useful information.

Invariably these drivel-filled cover letters came paired with resumes that contained absurd objectives. "I want to obtain a position with your company so I can achieve my goals," or similar claptrap also says nothing. I'd prefer, "I have always liked toys and would enjoy working in a toy store." There's at least some honesty in that sentence and it suggests I might get an eager employee who would enjoy her job.

Ultimately, I selected a few people to interview based on geographic convenience. One person failed to show for her interview while another was only available to be interviewed on such a limited basis that it made me question whether he could actually work a demanding retail job.

The eventual victor got selected because she showed up on time for the interview, made an attempt at dressing appropriately and waited patiently while I finished up with a customer before speaking to her. Her cover letter had offered me nothing, but at least it was brief and avoided too many unnecessary big words.

She seems friendly, has some retail experience and had a good reason for wanting a full-time job that ends in January. I'm relatively confident in my selection and my staff seems to like her. That said, I remain appalled that not one person across the wide age range that applied for the position knows how to apply for a job.

Perhaps we don't have an unemployment problem in this country, maybe we have open jobs with no viable means to fill them. I'll be hiring some part-timers in the coming weeks and am expecting the email equivalent of "me want job" written in crayon to start showing up in my mailbox the second the ad goes live.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at DBKline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Obama's Nobel Prize not yet earned

2009-10-20T08:23:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

President Barack Obama deserves a Nobel Peace Prize only slightly more than my five-year-old son deserves the Best Screenplay Oscar. Neither has done anything particular to win those respective awards, but both theoretically have the potential to earn them at some future point.

Essentially, the Nobel committee gave Obama the prize because he seems like a nice fellow and he's not President George W. Bush. Our current president's big contribution to world peace appears to be that he picks up the phone when other countries call and he does not actively taunt our enemies.

Admittedly, that is an improvement over Bush, but not being a jingoistic jerk with an "invade first, ask questions later" policy hardly deserves a Nobel Peace prize. This would be like giving Miley Cyrus a lifetime achievement Grammy because she's better than the Jonas Brothers or awarding the World Series trophy to the Brewers for beating the Pirates in a regular season game.

Awards -- even pompous and preposterous ones like Nobel prizes -- get handed out for what you actually do, not what you might do. We give unearned awards to make people feel better at Little League banquets and Cub Scout dinners, not on the world stage. A president should not be rewarded for his potential, he instead should be judged by his actions and it remains to soon to tell about Obama.

Though there have been some embarrassing Nobel Peace Prize winners in the past (Yasser Arafat come to mind) the awarding of this one seems at best premature. Obama currently presides over two wars he has done little to end along with rising tensions with Iran. Our president seems like a fellow who wants peace whereas Bush seemed to seek out wars, but liking hockey does not make me a Stanley Cup champion.

Obama, of course, did nothing to seek out this award and one would have to imagine that he is a little bit embarassed by it. Declining a Nobel Prize because you have not yet earned it would probably create an international incident and, hopefully, the president will use this as motivation to live up to the honor he has already received.

It is somewhat encouraging that the world seems to want Obama to succeed in creating a kinder and gentler America. After years of everyone either hating us or being really scared of us, it's nice to see the possibility of at least some other countries partnering with us through affection and not because of our brute strength.

Barack Obama has the potential to be a coalition builder and a peacemaker. He can change the history of our nation and mankind. he just hasn't quite done so yet. Perhaps we should save the awards cermeony until after the actual victories and congratulate the man on furthering the cause of world peace when he has actually done that.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at DBKline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Some friendships stand the test of time

2009-10-13T12:07:00.001-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Putting my son on the bus for his first day of kindergarten caused a weird mix of pride and fear to swirl around my head. I was proud that he was going off on his own, achieving a tiny bit of freedom, and moving forward in life. The fear came from my having met my son and knowing that his unique mix of energy, curiosity and complete inability to follow directions may not endear him to his kindergarten teachers.

I also remember my own kindergarten experience including the first few weeks which I spent crying -- uncharacteristically homesick -- likely due to the fairly serious surgery I had undergone a few weeks before. Once I stopped blubbering, I began making friends who remain part of my world to this day. It was sitting with one of them recently that made me wonder which of the kids in my son's class would he still be sharing his life with 30 years later.

This did not come as an epiphany, it developed slowly as I sat a few weeks ago surrounded by long-time friends and virtual family holding one of my oldest friend's son on my lap. Lauren was not in my kindergarten class, but I did meet her that year beginning a relationship that would include a senior prom, dancing together at each others' weddings and her standing up as godmother for my child.

We were five when we met and now we were two 35 and 36 respectively; me with a five-year-old and her with a two-year-old. There remains an ease in our acquaintance, a familiarity that does not lessen because of time, distance or lack of communication.

She lives in Chicago with her husband, Patrick, while I live in Connecticut with my wife, Celine. The demands of children and work, as well the occasional need for sleep make it impossible to see each other or even speak as often as we would like. We spend most months letting email exchanges trial off, calls go unreturned and the best intentions go unfulfilled.

That makes time spent together especially precious and surprisingly conducive to sharing our deepest fears and confiding in each other. There are few people in your life you can not see face-to-face for years at a time then pick up a conversation as if you had seen each other the night before. My list of people like that numbers six and it seems unlikely to grow as the years move forward.

As we sat that day I shared with Lauren my fears about my son Joshua's impending first day of kindergarten. I wasn't the typical parent lamenting his child growing up, I was worried as to how my son's total lack of impulse control would play in classroom. Would he hit another student, or perhaps a teacher? How soon would I become a regular in the principal's office and how would I assure my wife that our son's troubles were not a reflection of her?

We walked the beach that day, pushing her son in a stroller, talking as we always had, as if we did this everyday. I'm not sure if we found any answers, but just sharing with someone who loves you without judging you lessened the weight on both our shoulders.

These moments are rare and I thought back to that day as I sat last week in the principal's office surrounded by the principal, the school psychologist, my wife and my son's teacher. Joshua would not have an easy go of kindergarten and neither would Celine and I. But, hopefully, 30 years from now, Joshua will have people to help him like I do who are always there even when they are not.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at DBKline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Fix health insurance for the paying first

2009-10-05T11:50:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

In an ideal world every American would have comprehensive health care. In that same ideal world everyone would also have a house, a car, money for vacations, an attractive spouse, well-behaved kids and a local sports team that wins a world championship every year. In this magical fantasy land, everyone would also have white teeth, good hair, a surprisingly accurate jump shot and a chance to meet with the president regularly just to share your opinions.

Here in the real world, we should not be focusing on creating an unattainable utopia. Instead, our president should be focusing on fixing the health care system for those who can actually afford coverage. While it would be wonderful to insure the uninsured, that seems like an absurdly ambitious (and ultimately impossible) goal when we can't even provide decent coverage for those who already pay.

My health insurance, which costs nearly $400 a month just for me (my wife and son have coverage through her company's plan), comes with high deductibles, random denials and an ever-increasing amount of hoops to jump through. Were I to get sick faceless insurance drones would play a significant role in deciding how I get treated, often overruling highly trained doctors.

I base this assumption on the fact for my relatively minor stomach ailment my insurance company has entirely dictated my course of treatment. They had a specific list of which medicines must be tried first -- a list which contradicted what my doctor wanted me to take.

If my insurer interferes for financial reasons over a relatively minor stomach medicine than I cannot imagine what the company might do were I to get a major disease. It seems obvious that before we start extending health coverage to those who cannot actually afford it, we must fix it for those who can.

It plays well to the populist left-wing audience to attempt to pass universal health care. Attacking the more manageable problem of making sure those who already have insurance get treated reasonably does not excite the Democratic base in the same way even though it is the more logical, more readily solvable problem.

President Obama likes to pretend that everyone can have insurance without the vast majority of people already insured paying more. Of course, he intends to tack on extra taxes for the people he consider rich, but us regular middle class folks won't feel a thing and all of our lightly more downtrodden friends will now have full coverage.

Essentially Obama wants everyone to believe that perhaps through the power of his undeniable charisma everyone can be insured and almost nobody will pay more. Unless doctors and hospitals start working for free (which they already essentially do with most Medicare payouts, sadly enough) than the tab for universal coverage will be enormous.

To make matters worse that tab will be paid by people like me who work hard to pay for fairly crummy coverage. It's hard to imagine that adding millions of nonpaying customers to the system will improve my care and, well, though you seem like nice people, at the end of the day, I'm mostly worried about me and mine.

While it would be nice for every American to have health care, we cannot provide it by further burdening those who can actually afford it. President Obama needs to stop playing Robin Hood and start solving real problems.

Fix health care the paying customers first and then see what we can do to make health coverage affordable for more people. That sentence won't win you an election, but it's practical, logical and, most importantly, achievable.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at DBKline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Demand accountability in your forecast

2009-09-29T09:36:00.001-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Like those guys that sell football picks on early morning infomercials, TV weathermen pretend to be impossibly accurate while in reality they're making little more than an educated guess. Generally, using whatever silly name they give their equipment (Accuweather 5,000, the Storm Tracking Center, etc.) your average television meteorologist appears to usually get the current day's forecast correct and sometimes he nails down tomorrow.

I'm fairly certain that most TV newsrooms have no actual forecasting equipment and that Doppler Radar is as real as those elves who make cookies. I figure the average weather guy jumps on the Internet and checks Weather.com, because no matter what he says it means lttle if he gets the forecast right.

If television news programs want to continue to offer weather predictions beyond the current 24-hour span, they should be required to post accuracy ratings. Instead of telling us how great your meteorologists are and bragging about all of your fancy forecasting equipment, simply show the percentage of days on your long-term outlook when the weatherperson actually gets it right.

If weather reports had to include this information, we would probably see a lot less stations offering weekend forecasts on Monday and some dropping the "five-day forecast" gimmick altogether. If we saw just how often these long-term forecasts are wrong, we would likely come to the conclusion that meteorlogy lets us make an educated guess and little more.

On the positive side, if a station had a weatherman who got things right a high percentage of the time, that forecaster would become more popular. A reliable weather person would bring increased ratings and perhaps restore credibility to a field that has long been reduced to acting zany and doing things like wishing old people happy birthday.

Currently, it seems that science has an ability to project what the weather might be, but no real ability to account for everything that might change. We can see storms as they develop and see their general vector, but all the possible last minute changes remain impossible to to predict no many how many "Doppler" systems we employ.

While demanding weatherman accountability in a world where politicians, parents and teachers have little real accountability seems odd, it make sense when you consider how weather impacts us. From basic things like how to dress our children in the morning or whether to carry a jacket, the weather sets the tone for our day.

In my case, during the warmer months, weather highly impacts my business. A rainy day on a weekend not only means more customers, it also means I need more staff members to serve those customers.

If the local meteorlogists all say it will rain on Saturday during Wednesday's forecast, then I must move to put more people on the schedule. Should that prediction change (usually during Saturday morning's forecast) to a sunny day with rain in the evening, I could be left with an expense not offset by extra business.

In the Winter it works the opposite way as a snowstorm not only devestates business, but it can strand staff members at the store (not a pleasant place to sleep). Advance warning lets me send people home early, but a storm that never comes leaves me understaffed.

Repeat this problem at any number of other businesses across the country and you see that not knowing if we can believe the weather forecast actually impact the economy. It's not just a question of whether I bring a coat in the morning, it's a question of business.

If you want to pretend you can predict the weather then show me how often you get it right. Without backing up your prognostication skills with actual facts, a forecast is nothing more than a guess backed by fancy graphics.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at DBKline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Judging, even on TV, should involve passing judgment

2009-09-22T11:30:00.001-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Though I know precious little about "American Idol," I have always been of the idea that judges in a singing competition should in fact pass judgment on those singing. This makes the choice of Ellen Degeneres as the show's unnecessary fourth judge somewhat perplexing.

Once funny, Degeneres has sold her soul to whatever demon made Jay Leno successful. Instead of comedy, her talk show consists of familiar bits that her audience has been conditioned to find amusing. I challenge anyone to actually be entertained by her recurring dancing or actually be compelled by her puffball interviews.

That is not so say the Degeneres does not have the capacity for comedy. She was once a funny, albeit very mild, standup, and she remains witty, but instead of humor she now relies on her trademark mannerisms and verbal ticks. It's a living and it brought her career success, but comedy by focus group and upper management notes does not give anyone hope that Degeneres will offer anything useful as a judge.

The comedian has often said in interviews since gaining the chair once held by Paula Abdul that she will represent the fans watching the show. She told USA today that "hopefully I'm the people's point of view because I'm just like you. I sit at home and I watch it and I don't have that technical... I'm not looking at it in a critical way from the producer's mind. I'm looking at it as a person who is going to buy the music and is going to relate to that person. So I'm hopefully going to be that voice of what we're all doing at home."

In saying that Degeneres misses the entire point of being a judge. First of all, aside from iTunes downloads, you are not going to buy the music from the show. That music is karaoke of other people's hits from which the judges must distill whether the performer has the ability to someday create (albeit with a team of producers) songs that might resonate with the public.

Nobody needs a judge to tell them whether they enjoyed Carrie Underwood or Adam Lambert's interpretation of some should-have-been forgotten Neil Diamond song, they need the judges to tell them whether the person actually has talent. At least three people I went to high school with sang excellent covers at various talent shows and I know I enjoyed their work. I'm unsure, however, if they had any real talent and that's when an actual judge like Simon Cowell steps in.

Degeneres adds nothing to the judging process as she clearly intends to not pass any judgment or risk offending any of the contestants. She might get in a few good quips or even some genuinely funny remarks, but they will be as out of place as Dennis Miller on "Monday Night Football."

"Idol" should have either not replaced Abdul, since four judges is overkill, or should have filled her chair with another washed up performer. Though she was nuts, the "Straight Up" singer actually was an over-produced semi-talent who survived based on teams of producers and outside songwriters.

Since that's the destiny for most "Idol" winners, she at least had something to offer. Ellen, however, brings little to the table beyond her inherent likability which makes little sense for a show that is supposed to be about finding talent.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at DBKline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

9/11 victims deserve better

2009-09-16T08:59:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline
Eight years after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and Osama bin Laden has yet to face American justice. While 2,752 Americans will never return home to their families, the man who orchestrated their deaths remains free to plot his next attack against our nation.

President George Bush failed to capture or kill bin Laden because he decided to invade Iraq and attack Saddam Hussein -- a bad guy, but not the bad guy. We might as well have invaded Libya or North Korea because those countries also have horrendous, villainous dictators who deserve to die, but did not cause the events of 9/11.

Not only have we not caught the guy who admits to planning the attacks that brought down the Twin Towers, but we no longer appear to be doing much to look for him. Most likely this is because we have a tenuous political relationship with both Pakistan and Afghanistan. If we carpet bomb the hills and mountains of those countries where bin Laden likely resides, we might commit a diplomatic faux pas.

Put succinctly, we're not catching the guy who waged open war on our country because it might offend the people who are hiding him in the first place. That's like having lunch at a friend's house while you both know her husband is molesting kids in the next room but not saying anything because it might seem impolite.

If Pakistan and Afghanistan provide safe harbor, even semi-unknowing safe harbor for a monster like bin Laden, then these countries are not our friends. I don't generally allow the people who seek to do my pals harm to live in my basement and the same rule should apply to international diplomacy.

The events of that dark day may fade in our collective consciousness but they do not not fade in the minds of people who lost loved ones. In New York, the reverberations of the attacks are still felt. It's a wound that will not heal and one that will always be a part of the fabric of the city.

New York's a little nicer now and its people are more openly supportive of each other. Through tragedy people find strength and what bin Laden thought would break us has only made us stronger.

None of this newfound strength has been put to bear to bring bin Laden to justice. Instead, while this monster remains free we still have countless American troops in a pointless war in Iraq. Instead of tearing apart the countryside to find our greatest enemy, we are spending lives in a country that does not want nor appreciate our help.

The victims of 9/11 deserve our continued vigilance. They deserve to know we left no stone unturned and did everything imaginable to catch the man who planned their deaths. Anything less is an insult to their memories.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at DBKline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Real role models hard to come by

2009-09-08T09:09:00.000-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline
With athletes doing steroids, fathering illegitimate children and committing other unspeakable crimes and politicians having affairs, getting arrested and pretty openly dipping their hands into the cookie jar, I'm lost as to who exactly my son should look up to. You can immediately discount actors, anyone appearing on a reality show, all rock stars except maybe Bono and anyone famous for no discernible reason.

Of course, it's nice to say that he should look up to me, and I'm sure he will, but they don't make posters of me, write articles about me in the newspaper (at least very often) or put my face on television. Hero worship is an important part of growing up, but today's would-be heroes seem poised to let you down.

My childhood heroes had at best a mixed success rate. Patriots quarterback Steve Grogan never quite won the Super Bowl, but he also never got arrested or involved in any sort of scandal. The same can not be said of the professional wrestlers whose careers I followed as an elementary school kid. Most of them are either dead, ravaged by steroid use or sadly appearing in high school gymnasiums as poster children for why saving your money is important.

I want my son to put his favorite Red Sox or Patriot (no, he's not getting a choice on teams) player on his wall without me wondering when that player will let him down. I'm not talking about Alex Rodriguez striking out in every key situation style letdowns, I'm talking about Alex Rodriguez cheating by taking steroids letdowns.

Athletes at least end up in their positions because of their skill in a particular sport. Nothing about being a sports star requires or even implies that you would be a good person. If you can hit the ball or throw a pass, it apparently hardly matters if you take illegal drugs or kill dogs for fun.

Politicians, however, should theoretically live up to some standard of behavior. While kids don't put posters of their senators or mayor on the wall, they should be able to look to their elected officials as role models.

Unfortunately, in these post-Monica Lewinsky days where even Republicans get embroiled in sex scandals, the political news can read like a seedy romance novel. Instead of towering figures of virtue holding many of our highest offices we have a collection of crooks, adulterers, thieves and swindlers. Some of these reprobates may very well be good office-holders (we'll miss you Ted Kennedy) but they are hardly role models for our kids.

When you live in an era where even Bill Cosby cheated on his wife it's hard to imagine any famous person not being guilty of something. Maybe Oprah has a basement full of dead hobos. Perhaps Sting robs convenience stores when he's not saving the rainforest and is it so hard to imagine Bill Gates clubbing baby seals just to blow off some steam?

Right now, my son's room contains Star Wars trilogy posters featuring Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, Princess Leia, Chewbacca and even much lesser hero, Lando Calrissian. These heroes might be fictional, but they are not likely to end up on the front page of the newspaper for having a car full of cocaine or a hotel room full of prostitutes.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at DBKline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.

Taking it slow still worth it sometimes

2009-09-01T10:50:00.001-04:00

By Daniel B. Kline

Like my mother telling me about playing with a Mr. Potato Head that was actually a potato or my father talking about working as the guy that reset the pins at the family bowling alley, I imagine I will someday be explaining to my my son about the joys of sitting down and reading the newspaper. He will likely listen for a minute or two being slightly amused before he resumes getting his news in two-word blips from whatever device delivers such things in the not-so-distant future.

As a child I used to get up early to be able to read the Boston Globe from front-to-back before anyone in my family touched the paper. I'm only 35, so we're not talking that many years ago, and there was not only no internet, there weren't really any computers. Essentially, the information you could get electronically was pretty much limited to the cut scenes between levels in Pac-Man (which, to be fair, did teach me quite a bit about the courting rituals of Pac-People).

The rise in people getting their news from Yahoo, Google and the ticker at the bottom of the TV screen leaves me wondering if we have created a generation of people with no capacity for depth. Just give them the headlines and that's enough. Nobody cares for the when, where, why or how, they just want who and what.

If John F. Kennedy were shot today, a generation of non-readers would learn "President killed" and leave it at that. The public might be interested in reading a blog post about the president's romantic dalliances or perhaps they might sit through a 140 character or less "Tweet" about his murder, but the only way he could really hold their attention is if he made a sex tape or a reality show.

Glancing at the headlines on your desktop or your cell phone screen does not count as being informed. It's great that CNN will send you a one sentence update when news breaks, but that update should at least sometimes lead to you seeking out more information.

In my generation television news started pulling people away from the more in-depth forms of knowing what was going on like newspapers or magazines. That, coupled with video games, MTV and other short-form instant gratification entertainment lowered attention spans, caused a rise in Attention Deficit Disorder and slowly started lowering the bar.

The current generation not only has all those same distractions, but their methods of social interaction no longer require any effort or depth. If I wanted to keep in touch with a friend after college, I had to call or write an actual letter. Even the addition of email still required actual writing, though it did begin the decay of formality, structure and attention to grammar.

Now, you can superficially maintain every relationship you have ever had by becoming Facebook friends with anyone who asks. You may not have any real knowledge of how your old roommate's life has gone, but you know that she's at lunch or that he went skiing. This might lead to having a lot more vague acquaintances that we label friends, but it probably actually erodes our real friendships.

Real knowledge, real friendship and knowing about anything in depth actually requires work. Today might be the day to step back a little from the technology and read the paper, call an old friend and maybe even pick up a book. Of course, if you don't remember what those are, you can always Google it or look it up on Wikipedia.

Daniel B. Kline's work appears in over 100 papers weekly. When he is not writing Kline serves as general manager of Time Machine Hobby New England's largest hobby and toy store, www.timemachinehobby.com. He can be reached at dan@notastep.com or you can see his archive at dbkline.com or befriend him at facebook.com/dankline.