2023

I promised to be less optimistic in my last annual list of things I'd like to see happen next year.  For the most part, that turned out to be a good idea.  Let's review the 2021 list, with comments in ALL CAPS:

More mandates and life complications for the unvaxxed, making more of them get vaxxed.

I SUPPOSE MORE GOT VAXXED, BUT NOT FOR INVOLUNTARY REASONS

Cryptocurrency regulations.

CLOSE BUT DIDN'T HAPPEN, BUT IT'S A LOT MORE LIKELY NOW THAT BIGSHOTS LOST BIG MONEY IN THE BANKRUPTCY OF FTX.

Prosecutions and convictions of Trump administration / organization officials who had roles in the 1/6/2021 insurrection.

CALLING THIS A YES, BECAUSE ALTHOUGH IT DIDN'T HAPPEN YET FOR ADMIN FOLKS, IT DID FOR MANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS.

A Winter Olympics that actually happens.

CHECK.  BUT IT WAS SORTA BORING.

An executive order, at the least, to loosen federal rules on cannabis.

YES THIS DID HAPPEN, BUT IT'S ONLY A PYRRHIC VICTORY WITHOUT ACUTAL LEGISLATIVE ACTION.

A top-tier Minnesota Vikings football team.

12-3 AS I WRITE THIS, SO I GUESS IT'S A YES?

A loss of market cap and credibility for Facebook/Meta.

A GIANT YES.

Me playing golf at a famous course / resort.

NO.

A decline in residential home buying.

ANOTHER GIANT YES, THANKS TO HIGHER INTEREST RATES.

A repeat from 2020 – me traveling to the final four U.S. states in which I’ve never set foot.

75% YES SINCE I GOT TO 3 OF THE 4.  ONLY ALASKA LEFT NOW.

Now for my new annual list of things I'd like to see happen next year.

A rising stock and bond market.

That Vladimir Putin is purged as a leader.  Any mysterious and/or violent way is acceptable.

Newly remodeled bathrooms in my house.

Me attending a major sporting event.

Elon Musk leaves Twitter, or I leave Twitter for another similar service.

Drought relief for the western U.S.

Me getting a golfing hole-in-one or eagle.

MAGA-death, and a crop of moderate presidential candidates for 2024 who aren't aged 70s or 80s.

More acceptance and usage of plant-based proteins.

FIFA Fo Fum Fake Fans Feign Fun

Once every four years, the FIFA World Cup is held.  This is a soccer (or as it's called in every other country, football) tournament that pits teams representing countries from every continent except Antarctica.  Let's just say, it's a very big deal outside of North America, and becoming a bigger deal there, too.

This is one of those contested years.  Normally it's held in June/July, but this year it's being held in November/December, to account for the fact it's being held in Qatar, one of the hottest places on earth in June/July.

[At this point, I could go on about how FIFA is an incredibly corrupt organization, and how it accepted bribes from Qatar (as it does from every host country) to agree to hold the World Cup there.  It's another sportswashing attempt by a place that openly discriminates against gays and females.  But I'm not actually going to go on about that.]

It's strange to see what happens to Americans during the World Cup.  While the vast majority will go four years without watching so much as a minute of soccer, many of those same folks suddenly take off work to watch the U.S. team play their World Cup games.

It doesn't matter that they don't know the name of a single player, much less the rules of the game.  What matters is making sure they are part of the crowd that suddenly cares about the national soccer team.  

Yes, there are avid year-round fans out there too -- tens of thousands of them -- thanks to the growth of U.S. soccer at the high school, college, and professional levels.  The most avid even traveled internationally to watch the games.

But that number still pales in comparison to the quadrennial jump-on-the-bandwagon group.  And to those people I say, like I did ten years ago in this very blog:  You are a Pretender.  You're the person who doesn't watch a baseball game all year (and I don't blame you, it's even more boring than soccer) but then becomes a huge World Series fan.

For the World Cup, that might make you feel patriotic, but that doesn't make you a fan.

Non-Thankfulness

Another Thanksgiving has arrived, full of leaf-less trees, colder weather, lots of already lit Christmas lights, and of course, my annual list of things for which I am not thankful:

The U.S. health care industrial complex

Attention-seeking billionaires

Election deniers

Multiple charging cords for electronic devices

Vehicle oil change reminder lights

Tik-Tok

Phone calls labeled ‘potential spam’ and ‘no caller ID’

Stores that don’t have an ‘email only’ receipt option

Rapidly rising interest rates

Vladimir Putin

Federal loan forgiveness of any kind without a community service requirement

Vikings playing football on Thanksgiving and messing up the day

Best Song Lyrics (Part XXIV)

It isn’t a good look for this ongoing series that I haven’t included the most successful (female) country artist of all-time – someone who also happens to be the sole writer of over 700 songs, including her own hits.

That person is Dolly Parton.  

Her decades-long career is even more remarkable than that, considering what she’s done outside of country music.  She’s become a national icon, from her movie acting credits, to her own Dollywood theme park, to the attention she’s recently received for her lifelong philanthropic efforts.

On the music side, she’s probably best known for one of her earliest efforts, Jolene.  From a strictly songwriting perspective, I Will Always Love You was her biggest hit, after it was remade as a pop ballad and popularized by Whitney Houston in the movie The Bodyguard. 

For purposes of this entry, let’s include her tremendous popular music crossover success.  Songs like Here You Come Again and 9 to 5 would be chart-toppers, but I think the best lyrics come from the song Two Doors Down.  Consider the variations of the refrain she uses in that song, moving from sad and lonely to happy and friendly:

Two doors down they're laughing and drinkin', and having a party

Two doors down they're not aware that I'm around

Cause here I am crying my heart out, feelin' sorry while

They're having a party just two doors down

I think I'll dry these useless tears and get myself together

I think I'll wonder down the hall and have a look around

'Cause I can't stay inside this lonely room and cry forever

I think I really rather join 'em two door down, yeah

Two doors down they're laughing and drinkin', and having a party

Two doors down they're not aware that I'm around

'Cause here I am no longer crying and feelin' sorry

We're having a party just two doors down

I can't believe I'm standing here dry-eyed, all smiles and talking

Making conversation with the new love I have found

I ask him if he's like to be alone and we start walking

Down the hall to my place waiting two doors down, yeah

Two doors down they're laughing and drinkin', and having a party

Two doors down we're not aware that they're around

'Cause here I am feelin' everything but sorry

We're having our own party two doors down

The Mountain West

I recently returned from a trip to one of the only areas of the continental U.S. where I'd never been.  I'd refer to it as the Mountain West, basically a corridor running from the Yellowstone National Park area south to the Arches National Park area.

So "What was it like" I'm assuming you ask?  Let's work our way from north to south, starting with NW Wyoming, which includes not only Yellowstone, but also the Grand Teton mountain range and the Jackson Hole area.

There's a lot to see in Yellowstone, because it's such a big park.  While I did see bison, elk, and even a moose (but no bears), for me the most interesting were the geysers and hot springs -- a big chunk of the park essentially sits on top of a volcano, so this encompasses much more than just the famous Old Faithful geyser.  You don't often get a chance to see or feel hot water bubbling out of the ground.  Of course, you'll also see lots of prairie, and rivers, and even river falls, but more than anything you just see trees.  Endless amounts of trees as you travel miles and miles from one attraction to another.  In that regard, much of Yellowstone can be very boring.

The Jackson Hole area, which includes the city of Jackson, would be what you get if you crossed a rural middle-class cowboy with an urban affluent multi-millionaire.  The cowboy types are there for hunting, fishing, and camping.  The millionaire types are there for skiing, golfing, and glamping.  There was generally a fun, laid-back vibe, but at the same time very expensive, and very crowded.

Driving south from there, you'll see vast stretches of irrigated Idaho farmland dedicated to growing potatoes, with some notable acres set aside for barley.  Who knew they grew so much barley in the potato capital of southern Idaho?

Now we're in Salt Lake City, which is actually a town of only a few hundred thousand people within a suburban metropolitan area of more than one million.  Its main features seemed to be Mormon headquarters buildings and temples, with the lake itself a distant second.  Having said that, I was surprised by how much diversity there was.  I figured I wouldn't see anything but conservative white people around, but that wasn't the case.  This may be because the east side of town is anchored by the University of Utah.

Finally, there was Arches National Park, which sits next to the tourist town of Moab, Utah.  (An aside, Moab was a much larger, much more hip version of the tourist town of West Yellowstone, Montana, which sits on the northwestern edge of Yellowstone National Park.)  As opposed to Yellowstone, Arches is a relatively small place, filled with natural sandstone monuments, some of which happen to be arches.  One after another they appear, on short drives between trailheads, where most people leave their vehicles to take pictures and/or walk up to a few miles to get a closer look.  Full disclosure, I found it to be a more interesting (and exhausting) place than Yellowstone.

That's my version of the Mountain West.  Epilogue:  After this trip, I've been to 48 out of the 50 United States.  Only North Dakota(!) and Alaska left. 

A Fair Comparison

For decades now, my family and I have been big fans of the Iowa State Fair.  This includes not just attending it (we usually attend more than one day), but also competing in it (usually in food / baking categories).  The sites, sounds, food, etc. continue to entertain us annually each August.

Meanwhile, we've always wanted to personally compare it to other well-known American state fairs.  The list of other fairs that would qualify is short, maybe only Minnesota and Texas come to mind.  I've always been a bit skeptical about Iowans' claims to having the greatest state fair, without having attended any others.

After many years of talking about it, I recently spent a day at the Minnesota State Fair in St. Paul.  So here, I now give you the definitive guide comparing the Iowa State Fair (ISF) with the Minnesota State Fair (MSF).

Size

MSF is larger, both in terms of grounds area and attendance -- daily and overall attendance is roughly double the size of ISF.  A big plus for MSF was the flatness of their grounds, whereas about half of the ISF is on the side of a hill.  Parking can be an issue at both places, although both have park and ride options along with side street parking (both more expensive at MSF).  Advantage MSF.

Midway

Very similar.  Both fairs have midway rides, including separate areas for children.  Both have thrill ride areas.  Both have giant slides.  Both have sky glides.  Both have Ye Olde Mills!  MSF had what looked like a permanent, very large Ferris wheel structure, as well as a tower up which one could ride in a rotating, external compartment and see the fairgrounds.  Advantage MSF.

Grandstand

Again, very similar.  They also attract basically the same national concert tours.  Advantage no one.

Livestock exhibits

MSF has the usual cattle / swine / horse facilities, but the livestock area at ISF is larger, maybe by half.  This is part of an overall trend of the ISF being much, much more focused on farming and agriculture.  A related example would be that MSF had no area devoted to farm equipment displays, while ISF has a huge area for that.  Also, there were no pork or beef producer food tents at MSF, but there was a turkey federation tent.  Advantage ISF.

Agricultural / food exhibits

ISF is much more robust in terms of competing / displaying vegetables and horticulture.  One notable exception is honey / honey production, where MSF devoted more space.  ISF also appeared to have more had a greater number and variety of food competitions / displays.  Advantage ISF.

Cultural exhibits

There wasn't much difference in how much, but there were differences in how.  For instance, MSF showed more painted art, but little photography, which is the inverse of ISF.  Also, MSF had cultural displays in more buildings, where ISF basically sticks to a single building, maybe two.  Advantage no one.

Food and beverage

Basically, you can get any deep fat fried thing you might want at either fair.  Both also have buildings devoted to selling chocolate chip cookies in a bucket.  While ISF has pork chops on a stick, MSF has walleye on a stick.  (Curiously, there seemed to be no one selling pork tenderloins at MSF, which are a veritable staple at ISF.)  ISF does have a much, much larger craft beer tent, which is probably due to Iowa's encouraging craft beer laws.  Another oddity:  MSF has a lot of vendors still only accepting cash as a form of payment.  Advantage ISF.

Free stages / entertainment

Both have numerous free stages / amphitheaters for thrill shows and music.  While the ISF tends to have more shows and limit the live music until the evening, MSF had live music starting by noon.  Conversely, MSF holds its statewide talent competition in the evening, while ISF presents theirs during the day.  Advantage no one.

Environment

A big trade-off here.  The ISF is cleaner, partially due to golf carts and other small 4-wheeled vehicles moving supplies and collecting trash all day, making for traffic which visitors have to constantly dodge.  At MSF, you rarely see any motorized vehicles, but you also tend to see more trash receptacles and a bit more uncollected trash on the grounds.  (I later learned that MSF has both external and underground avenues with which to transport supplies and trash -- do not know if this is true.)  Advantage no one.

Rest rooms

Need a separate paragraph for this.  MSF had at least four separate, huge, clean, restroom only buildings on the grounds, to go with other one-off facilities.  Since they have many more people on the grounds on any given day, maybe this is more of a necessity, but it was still nice.  Advantage MSF.

Conclusion

MSF is more diverse, both in the people attending and the things to do.  ISF is more focused on farming and competitions.  Both the ISF and MSF are wonderful state celebrations that I would recommend attending multiple times.  No one could reasonably say one was 'better' than the other, so don't believe anyone who does.

Fame, Fortune, And Sportswashing

As a golfer, I’ve been following the newly formed LIV golf tour / organization with great interest.  It’s funded by Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund, which is a fancy way of saying it’s funded by the Saudi Arabian government.

LIV (which supposedly comes from the Roman numeral for 54, the score a golfer would likely have if they birdied every hole in a round of golf) bills itself as a rival to the PGA tour / organization.  It’s been recruiting golfers to play in its limited events, in some cases paying them huge up-front money – even offering 9-figure amounts to the biggest names.

The term some are using to describe LIV is ‘sportswashing’, meaning this a way for the Saudis to cover-up their awful record on human rights.  It’s the same thing China has done recently by hosting the Olympics.  Market the country through sports, in a way that obscures how that country oppresses people.

I get the money is enticing for these golfers, even life-changing for some of them.  The PGA has always operated in a way that makes the players independent contractors, there’s nothing keeping them there.

I also get and agree that organizational competition is a good thing, and LIV has already made the PGA make changes for the better to its structure.  

Regardless of whether you call it sportswashing, I would not support LIV.  But more importantly, why do some of these players?  Why would the already famous, wealthy pro golfers choose to associate themselves with a regime like this?

They might make a greater fortune, but they'll lose their fame.  Everyone considers the LIV the minor leagues right now, with no top-20 golfers signed, and not many from even the top-100 are expected to sign.  LIV players will miss out on some major championships, and the biennial Ryder Cup.  Also, the LIV tour has no major television coverage, so no one is going to see or care about these players anymore.

That’s particularly true for the legendary ones, like my now former favorite golfer Phil Mickelson.  He says publicly he’s just trying to ‘grow the game’ by endorsing LIV (and taking a 9-figure sum) but all he’s doing is tarnishing his image.  At age 50+, he isn’t going to be much of a threat to win again anyway, even on the watered-down LIV tour.

It all sucks for golf fans, too, who want to see the best play against the best.  In terms of competition, this whole thing reminds me of Indy-car racing in the mid-90s, which split into two groups and completely watered down that sport for years.  It made even the Indianapolis 500 unwatchable.

In summary, I’d say that competition is a good thing, but not all competitors are good, and this is one of those cases.  If you want to align yourself with a new competitor, maybe make sure they don’t represent some of the worst people in the world.