Ramblin' with Roger

BBWAA Releases 2007 Hall of Fame Ballot
Harold Baines 1st year. PRO: Six-time All-Star, 2,866 hits. CON: 1644 games played at DH (of 2830)
Albert Belle 2nd year. PRO: Named to five All-Star teams (1993-97). One season with 50-plus home runs, three seasons with 40-plus home runs, eight seasons with 30-plus home runs. Nine consecutive seasons with 100-plus runs batted in and nine seasons with 30-plus doubles. And a lot more. CON: Prickly, unlikable character.
Dante Bichette 1st year. PRO: Six seasons batting .300 or better, with a career average of .299. Named to four All-Star teams (1994-96, 1998). CON: His most productive years were in mile-high Denver.
Bert Blyleven 10th year. PRO: Ranks 5th all-time in strikeouts, 9th in starts, 9th in shutouts, 25th in wins, and 7th in innings pitched. CON: Wasn’t a dominant pitcher.
Bobby Bonilla 1st year. PRO: Named to six All-Star teams (1988-91, ’93, ’95). CON: Didn’t live up to the potential he had when he came up with Barry Bonds in Pittsburgh.
Scott Brosius 1st year. PRO: Was in four World Series, winning three. CON: Not much else to distinguish him.
Jay Buhner 1st year. PRO: Three consecutive seasons of 40-plus home runs. CON: Such potential not realized.
Ken Caminiti 1st year. PRO: Named to three All-Star teams (1994, ’96-97), Won the 1996 NL MVP. CON: A One great year, a couple very good years, but admitted to steroid use, had a drug problem, and died of a heart attack in November 2004.
Jose Canseco 1st year. PRO: Named to six All-Star teams (1986, ’88-90, ’92, ’99). Three seasons with 40-plus home runs, eight with 30-plus home runs. Became first member of baseball’s “40-40” club when he hit 42 home runs and stole 40 bases in 1988 – and I saw him steal his 40th base that year. CON: The steroids; his book about the steroids.
Dave Concepcion 14th year. PRO: Won five Gold Gloves (1974-’77, ’79). Named to nine All-Star teams (1973, ’75-’82), Four World Series (1970, ’72, ’75, ’76), member of two WS championship teams, 1975-’76. CON: Should he get in because other members of the Big Red Machine did?
Eric Davis 1st year. Lots of solid numbers early: His “20-80” season (27 home runs, 80 stolen bases; 1986) was only matched by Rickey Henderson. Won three consecutive Gold Glove Awards (1987-’89) Named to two All-Star teams (1987, ’89). CON: Middling stats after that.
Andre Dawson 6th year. PRO: Won eight Gold Glove awards (1980-’85, ’87-’88. all time: 45th in hits, 24th in total bases, 42nd in doubles, 35th in HR, 25th in RBI, 22nd in extra-base hits, and 9th in sacrifice flies. CON: Not the dominant player in his position.
Tony Fernandez 1st year. PRO: Five time All-Star (1986-87, ’89, ’92, ’99). Won four consecutive Gold Gloves at shortstop (1986-89). Four times batted better than .300. Two seasons of 40-plus doubles. CON: Only once finished as high as 8th in MVP voting, so he wasn’t a dominant player, and doesn’t hold career records either.
Steve Garvey 15th (and final) year. PRO: Ranks second all-time in fielding among first basemen (.9959). Ten All-Star teams, including eight consecutively (1974-’81, ’84-’85). Won four NL Gold Gloves, consecutively (1974-’77). Eight seasons with .300-plus batting average. Good hitter, GREAT fielder. CON: His fall from grace (two women each having a child by him at the same time) wrecked his moralist posturing.
Rich Gossage 8th year. PRO: Named to nine All-Star teams (1975-’78, ’80-’82, ’84-’85). Ranks 17th all-time in saves in an era the closer wasn’t as specialized as it’s become. CON: But only 17th?
Tony Gwynn 1st year. PRO: Eight-time National League batting champion, matching Honus Wagner for the most in NL history. Fifteen All-Star selections. Finished in Top 10 of MVP voting seven times, finishing as high as 3rd in 1984. Ranks 17th all-time with 3,141 hits, leading NL seven times in hits. Ranked among Top 10 in NL batting average during every season in which he had enough at-bats, ranking outside the top 5 only twice. Never hit lower than .309 in a full season. Five seasons with 200+ hits. A career .987 fielder. CON: (Really?) OK, not a power hitter.
Orel Hershiser 2nd year. PRO: Finished among top 5 in ERA five times (1984-’85, ’87-’89). And had one great 1988. CON: And his later years paled to his great ones.
Tommy John 13th year. Pitched 26 seasons. Three 20-win seasons. Ranks 24th on the all-time win list, 6th in games started, 18th in innings pitched, and tied for 26th in shutouts. Four All-Star teams (1968, ’78-’80). And he has a surgery named for him! CON: Seldom the dominant pitcher, even on his own teams.
Wally Joyner 1st year. PRO: All-Star selection in 1986 as a starter, the first rookie to do so since fan balloting resumed in 1970. Runner-up for AL Rookie of the Year in 1986. Six seasons of 150 hits or more. Four seasons with .300 or better average. CON: Wally World started off with such promise, but except for a mild resurgence in 1997, never lived up to his exciting start.
Don Mattingly 7th year. PRO: Won AL Gold Glove Award nine times (1985-’89, ’91-’94). Named AL Player of the Year by The Sporting News three times, consecutively (1984-’86). Named ML Player of the Year by The Sporting News (1985). Six All-Star teams, consecutively (1984-’89). Seven seasons with .300-plus batting average. Led AL in batting (.343, 1984), RBI (145, 1985), doubles three times (1984-’86), hits twice (1984, ’86), and slugging percentage (.573, 1986). Led AL in total bases twice (1985-‘86). Ranks 5th all-time in fielding percentage among first basemen (.9958). Led AL 1B in fielding percentage seven times (1984-’87, ’92-’94), in putouts and total chances (1986) and in double plays (1985, ’91). CON: I think Donnie Baseball suffers from the fact that he was a Yankee who never took his team to the World Series.
Mark McGwire 1st year. PRO: Twelve-time All-Star selection. Unanimous AL Rookie of the Year in 1987. Ranks 7th on the all-time home run list with 583. All-time leader in at-bats per home runs (10.6). Led league in home runs four times (1987, 1996, 1998, 1999), including then-major league record 70 HR in 1998, a season in which he, along with Sammy Sosa, practically saved baseball after the 1994 strike. Ranks 10th all-time with a .588 slugging percentage. Four times led league in slugging percentage. Also led league in on base percentage in 1996 and 1998. Led NL in RBI in 1999. Led league in walks twice (1990, 1998). Three times among Top 5 in total bases (1987, 1998, 1999). A career .993 fielder. Success in two leagues. Has the support, FWIW, from his former teammate, Canseco, and his former manager, Tony LaRussa. CON: Should have been a mortal lock except for this from March 17, 2005 in front of a Congressional committee regarding his use of steroids: “I’m not going to go into the past or talk about my past. I’m here to make a positive influence on this.”
Jack Morris 8th year. Three 20-win seasons, 11 seasons with 200-plus innings and three 200-strikeout campaigns. Received Cy Young Award votes seven times. Member the 1991e WS championship teams in 1984, ’91 and ’92; the 1991 10-inning 1-0 victory in Game Seven was one of the greatest pitched WS games ever. CON: None really. Maybe not a dominating enough pitcher.
Dale Murphy 9th year. Won back-to-back NL MVP awards in 1982-83. Seven All-Star teams (1980, ’82-’87); CON: Probably played too long, for he was a mediocre player in his last half dozen years.
Paul O’Neill 1st year. PRO: Five-time All-Star selection. Won AL batting title in 1994 (.359). Fourteen consecutive seasons of 100+ hits. Collected 100 or more RBI four times, consecutively, 1997-2000. Three times among league Top-10 in on-base percentage, including 2nd in 1994 (.460). Hit .300 or better six times, consecutively, 1993-’98. CON: Solid numbers, but HoF? And what a hothead.
Dave Parker 11th year. PRO: Won three Gold Gloves, consecutively (1977-’79). Elected to seven All-Star teams (1977, ’79-’81, ’85, ’86, ’90). Four 100-RBI seasons (led NL in 1985 with 125), three 100-run seasons (consecutively from 1977-’79), three seasons of 40-plus doubles (led NL in 1977 and ’85). Led the NL in slugging percentage in 1975 (.541) and ’78 (.585). Topped NL in total bases in 1978 (340), ’85 (350) and ’86 (304). Led NL in intentional walks in 1978 (23) and tied for intentional walks in ’85 (24). Led AL in sacrifice flies in 1990 (14) and tied for NL lead in 1979 (9). Plus Three World Series (1979, ’88, ’89, winning the first and last ones. CON: Definitely a player on the bubble.
Jim Rice 13th year. PRO: Eight All-Star teams (1977-’80, ’83-’86). Seven .300 seasons, four 200-plus hit seasons, three 100-plus run season (consecutively from 1977-’79),30-plus HR four times, 40-plus HR once, and 100-plus RBI eight times. ed AL in total bases four times in 1977 (382), ’78 (406), ’79 (369) and 1983 (344). One of 31 players with 350+ home runs and a .290+ career batting average. Only player in history with three straight seasons of 35+ home runs and 200+ hits. CON: Prickly relationship with the press, who would note that the one time his Red Sox got to the World Series (1986), they didn’t win.
Cal Ripken Jr. 1st year. PRO: One of eight players in ML history to amass at least 3,000 hits and 400 home runs. Two-time AL MVP (1983, 1991); Named to 19 consecutive All-Star teams (1983-2001).Four seasons of 100-plus RBI and batted better than .300 four full seasons. CON: Yeah, he played in 2,632 consecutive games, 2,216 at shortstop. But should he have?
Bret Saberhagen 1st year. Two-time AL Cy Young Award winner (1985, 1989); Three-time All-Star (1987, 1990, 1994). CON: Had some good years, but not enough.
Lee Smith 5th year. Ranks second in ML history for saves (478). Seven All-Star teams (1983, ’87, ’91-’95); Led NL in saves three times (1983, ’91, ’92) and AL in saves once (1994) Holds NL career record for most consecutive errorless games by a pitcher (546). CON: None, really, if the closer is a real position that merits HoF consideration.
Alan Trammell 6th year Seven .300 batting average seasons.Won four AL Gold Glove awards (1980, ’81, ’83, ’84). CON: Solid player with a 1984 WS ring, but is that enough?
Devon White 1st year PRO:Seven-time Gold Glove Award winner. Three-time All-Star selection. CON: Not nearly enough.
Bobby Witt 1st year. Won a World Series. CON: When “Twice ranked among AL top-10 in wins (1990, 1996)” is the most salient fact in one’s career stats…

So the questions:

1. Who should get in?

2. Who will get in?

3. Who will fail to get the requisite 5% and never be on the ballot again?

I decided to look at last year’s voting:

Name/Votes/Percentage
ELECTED
Bruce Sutter 400 76.9
STILL UNDER CONSIDERATION
Jim Rice 337 64.8
Rich Gossage 336 64.6
Andre Dawson 317 61.0
Bert Blyleven 277 53.3
Lee Smith 234 45.0
Jack Morris 214 41.2
Tommy John 154 29.6
Steve Garvey 135 26.0
Alan Trammell 92 17.7
Dave Parker 75 14.4
Dave Concepcion 65 12.5
Don Mattingly 64 12.3
Orel Hershiser 58 11.2
Dale Murphy 56 10.8
Albert Belle 40 7.7
ELIMINATED FROM CONSIDERATION
Will Clark 23 4.4
Dwight Gooden 17 3.3
Willie McGee 12 2.3
Hal Morris 5 1.0
Ozzie Guillen 5 1.0
Gary Gaetti 4 0.8
John Wetteland 4 0.8
Rick Aguilera 3 0.6
Doug Jones 2 0.4
Greg Jefferies 2 0.4
Walt Weiss 1 0.2
Gary DiSarcina 0 0.0
Alex Fernandez 0 0.0

1. Belle, Blyleven, Dawson, Gwynn, John, Morris, Parker, Rice, Ripkin, Smith – yeah, that’s liberal, picking 10 (the max), but I think the writers have been overly stingy in the past.
2. Dawson, Gossage, Gwynn, Rice, Ripkin (the first two are probably, “I hope so”)
3. FOR SURE: Brosius, Joyner, White, Witt. PROBABLY: Bonilla, Caminiti, Davis, Fernandez.
***
The least deserving to be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. I’d agree with Percy Sledge, not with the Lovin’ Spoonful.

Last week, I got an e-mail:

Dear blog author:
We recently came across your site, rogerowengreen.blogspot.com, while searching for fellow Christian bloggers.

A small group of us have started a new site called Christian Bloggers. Our prayer and intent is to bring Christians closer together, and make a positive contribution to the Internet community. While many of us have different “theologies”, we all share one true saviour.

Would you be interested in joining Christian Bloggers? Please take a few minutes to have a look at what we are trying to do, and if you are interested, there is a sign up page to get the ball rolling. We would greatly appreciate your support in this endeavour.

May God Bless you and your blogging efforts. We look forward to hearing from you.

This is fascinating to me, as I never thought of me doing Christian blogging. It’s rather like how my father used to put it: he was a “singer of folk songs”, rather than a “folk singer”, and the distinction was important to him. The former allowed for him to range into gospel or blues, which he did on occasion, while the latter seemed to box him in.

Anyway, I accepted the invitation, and a few days later, I appeared on the blogroll. There must have been a number of invitations issued, for when I first looked at the site, thee were 203 on the roll, but by the time I found myself there, there were 309. This morning, I count 536.

That said, it won’t necessarily won’t be changing the nature of the blog. They asked me to join them “just as I am”, as it were. My example for this is the ubiquitous Lefty Brown, who is Christian, not so incidentally, and is a member of the Liberal Coalition, but doesn’t always write about his politics.

I mean, I’ll throw things such as this free roundtable in DC on religious faith in DC next Tuesday, or location of Religion and Social Policy, not to mention Bioethics and lots of other topics, but I would do that anyway, as it struck my fancy.

For those of you who may have found this blog through Christian Bloggers, maybe I should note myself as a blogger who is Christian. My father would appreciate that, I think.

Carol and I went to see another movie sans child over the past weekend. It’s Stranger Than Fiction, which is a film where Harold Crick, played by Will Ferrell, hears a voice in his head. It also features Emma Thompson, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Dustin Hoffman, Queen Latifah, Linda Hunt, Tom Hulce (all but unrecognizable) and Tony Hale (Arrested Development’s “Buster” Bluth).

We liked it very much. You’ll laugh, you may cry. Go see it. I particularly related to the baker who feels cynical about her government, played by Gyllenhaal.

One of the criticisms I’ve read about this film is that the Zach Helm-penned work seems very much in the style of writer Charlie Kaufman. In fact, the CRITICAL CONSENSUS at rottentomatoes.com is:
“A fun, whimsical tale about about an office drone trying to save his life from his narrator. The cast obviously is having a blast with the script, but Stranger Than Fiction’s tidy lessons make this metaphysical movie feel like Charlie Kaufman-lite.”

Feh.

I’ve seen three Kauffman films: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004), which was my favorite movie of that year, and which Carol also loved; Adaptation (2002), which seemed to lose its way, both Carol and I felt; and the very fine Being John Malkovich (1999). Like “Stranger Than Fiction”, they’re all “quirky”, in-the- head films, but the similarities are superficial, I feel.

If anything, it is more like The Truman Show (1998), written by Andrew Niccol. Both feature a character played by an actor best known as a comedian – Jim Carrey in “Truman” – and both feature a force who controls the action, a character who is a godlike being. The powerful entity in The Truman Show with the not-insignificant name of Christof, played by Ed Harris, is a reflection of predestination, or, in the words of the Messiah in the musical Jesus Christ Superstar, “Everything is fixed, and you can’t change it.” Christof, when Truman discovers the secret, gets to say one of my all-time favorite lines in all moviedom, “Cue the sun!” (A former pastor once did a sermon entitled “Cue the Son” after this movie came out.) Christof is a remote, calculating character whose existence Truman is unaware of for most of the film.

Whereas, Ana Eiffel, the neurotic, chain-smoking novelist suffering from writer’s block, played by Thompson, is very present in Harold Crick’s life. He hears her all the time, though he doesn’t quite know what it means. As with most people who hear voices, others think he’s crazy, but ultimately, there is dialogue between creator (and especially her surrogate) and her creation. I don’t want to give away plot points, but I’ve assigned theological role for the characters played by Hoffman, Latifah, Hulce, Hunt, and even Harold’s watch. Maybe I’ll address this after the movie’s been out a while.

The other main criticisms are whether it’s a comedy or a tragedy, which I find unnecessarily reductivist (in other words, what does it matter?), and the ending, which I think the movie comes by honestly.
***
A positive review from USA Today.

Tom the Dog loved it!

The NPR reviewer is a fan, too.

I’m waiting in front of my bank Monday night for some bank officials to fix the ATM when I see the local ABC affiliate, WTEN-TV – Channel 10, taping a segment with some folks from an ambulance company. It took at least a half hour to get what was likely a 90-second segment. What struck me, though, was the ambulance pulling out with the siren going and the lights flashing JUST so the cameraman could get a good shot! The siren and lights came off a block later.
***
I’ve been enjoying the continuing saga about Tom the Dog trying to get onto a game show called 1 Vs. 100. The first and only time I’ve seen the show was for 20 minutes on CNBC on Thanksgiving night. Hey, Tom, how do those lifelines (or whatever they call them) work?
***
A show I HAVE seen once or twice, JEOPARDY!, finished their celebrity tournament last week – I finished watching it only yesterday – which was fun because I had strong rooting interests daily. In order:
R-rooting to win; T-thought would win, W-won
Carson Kressly R (who only lost because he bet poorly)
Regis Philbin TW
At least the dreadful Nancy Grace didn’t win

Jane Kaczmarek RT
Curt Shilling
Doug Savant W -I guess I shouldn’t underestimate someone named Savant

Sam Waterston RT
Kathyrn Erbe
Christopher Meloni W

Neil Patrick Harris TW
Bebe Neuwirth R
James Denton

Isaac Mizrahi
Harry Shearer RW
Soledad O’Brien T

Miguel Ferrer W
Steve Schirripa
Harry Smith RT

Brian Stokes Mitchell R
Drew Lachey
Dana Delany TW

Martin Short R -who was a TERRIBLE player
Mario Cantone W
Joely Fisher T

Scott Turrow TW
Susan Lucci
Paul Schaffer R

Hill Harper
Margaret Spellings
Michael McKean RTW

So two of my rooting interests – both from “Spinal Tap” – won, though I’ve always liked Dana Delany and Neil Patrick Harris as well. Five of the ten I thought would win actually won.
***
The folks who do the advertising rates haven’t been able to get an agreement with advertisers over how to count viewing via DVR, according to the November 13th Ad Age magazine. For adults 25 to 54 in DVR homes – comprising at least 10% of the viewers – on the prime TV battleground of Thursday at 9 pm ET, Grey’s Anatomy gets a 7.9 rating in real time, but if one adds the real time viewers PLUS those who watch it within seven days, the number jumps to 18.2. Likewise, the numbers for the original CSI are 6.2 and 14.2, respectively. For non-DVR homes, the numbers are 10.4 and 9.4, respectively. This means that viewing for this audience segment is 75% higher for Grey’s and 51% higher for CSI in DVR homes. I watch probably 95% of TV timeshifted, even the evening news, which I watch after Lydia’s gone to bed.
***
I saw 60 Minutes from a week and a half ago, all about Ed Bradley, and the ABC News piece on Bradley’s funeral, and got sad all over again. He was good friends with Jimmy Buffett? Makes me respect Jimmy Buffett a whole lot more.
***
I noticed that Elizabeth Vargas has filled in for Charles Gibson on ABC’s World News on a couple Fridays and Thanksgiving Day. I wonder if it’s awkward. If Bob Woodruff hadn’t been injured in Iraq, it’s likely he and Vargas would still be co-anchors, even with her difficult pregnancy, rather than her being the substitute anchor.
***
There are a number of DVDs out this fall. The most intriguing to me is M*A*S*H – Martinis and Medicine Complete Collection of the 11 seasons. This was one of my Top 10 shows. But it’s not the $200 (or slightly less) that’s the sticking point, it’s whether I would actually watch it enough to make it worth my while. I just haven’t watched most of my DVDs or VHS tapes much in the past three years. Surely, if I did, I’d also be inclined to get another of my Top 10 shows, Homicide: Life on the Street – Complete Series Megaset, which is retailing for nearly $300, though available for about half that.
***
I’ve been watching less and less television, still something north of 10 hours a week. But I started the season thinking: “Well, this looks interesting, and THAT looks interesting, and so-and-so recommends the other.” But the winnowing has begun, and I’m surprised by two of the dropped programs.

The one I’m not is The Nine. OK, the bank is robbed, then they get out, and live their lives. Their post-hostage lives aren’t very compelling, and I just don’t feel like being drawn back into that bank again and again, where I KNOW the guard and one of the tellers will be killed.

30 Rock: Lots of people whose opinion I respect like this show. Oddly, the best way to explain my disdain for it is to describe a scene on the OTHER Saturday Night Live-inspired show, Studio 60. Simon and Danny, at the former’s urging, go to a club to see a black comedian. Simon, who is a black performer on Studio 60, sees the schtick for less than a minute, then walks out. Watching Tracy Morgan on the second or third episode of 30 Rock doing some jivin’ riff, I said, “I don’t need this,” shut it off in mid-episode, deleted it, deleted the next yet unwatched episode, and removed it from the DVR recording schedule. I thought Tina Fey, who I really like, was pretty undefined as a character, and whatever charm Alec Baldwin brings was not enough to stay with it.

Ugly Betty: I REALLY wanted to like this show. The local TV critic likes it, Lefty likes it, Mrs. Lefty likes it. I was…bored. I think it was that I didn’t LIKE anyone on the show, really, except Betty. Her boss was a boor, her neighbor who got into a fight over a proof that Betty took home was obnoxious, her family members were cyphers. Then there are the folks we’re SUPPOSED to not like, the Vanessa Williams character, her henchman, and Betty’s office nemesis.

Conversely, my favorite show, surprisingly, is Men in Trees. It’s less because of Marin, Anne Heche’s character, who may be the least interesting major character on the show, but it’s the rich crew of supporting folks, with very interesting backstories. ABC’s moving it from the Friday night desert to Thursday after Grey’s Anatomy, at least for a while. Of course, if they move it AGAIN, as is rumored, it’ll be three time slots in one season, a good way to kill off a show.

This means that Six Degrees, which I’m still watching, is on hiatus until sometime in January. The local TV guy described this thusly: “The cast (including Jay Hernandez and Erika Christensen and several unfamiliar faces), but this series doesn’t do enough to make us care how or why these people are crossing paths.” I would say “The cast (including Hope Davis and Campbell Scott and several unfamiliar faces)…” And it is the two cast members of The Secret Lives of Dentists that have kept me interested enough, so far.
***
The other new show I’m watching is Brothers and Sisters. It’s a real family values program.
The BROTHERS:
The youngest is an Iraq war vet with a drug issues and a problem with relationships.
Another brother is a gay lawyer with a problem with relationships.
The other brother is married, nags his baby brother, but uses the sperm from both his brothers to get his wife pregnant because he’s “shooting blanks”
The SISTERS:
Republican talk show host who supported the war, but who tried to get her brother out of going back again.
The head of the family company with a VERY patient husband and a couple kids.

The father of this tribe, who owned the company, died in the first episode, and the kids try to protect their mom from her late husband’s flaws (fiscal impropriety, a long-time mistress with whom he had a child).
Oh, the widow’s brother now has a romantic feelings for his late brother-in-law’s mistress.
Can you say soap opera? Yet, the family members do love each other, try to protect each other. I’m watching it mostly for Sally Field as the matriarch.

I think the removal of Lost from the schedule in the middle of November – smack dab during that evil construct known as sweeps month – was a bold move. Its replacement, Deja Vu, I mean Day Break which I won’t watch, seems to be doing OK , ratings-wise. Will this become a new model, especially for serialized shows?

---

Some people get SO bent out of shape when their show’s pre-empted or is in rerun or doesn’t start right away. Not I. I’m perfectly happy that Scrubs won’t start until this Thursday. It’ll still be 22 episodes – and three pregnancies.

---

I’m SO happy Dancing with the Stars is over. I don’t think my wife fully realized that I was upstairs working on my blog, when she (and often, Lydia) were watching it, for a reason. So, the answer to the question, “Do you want to see Emmitt Smith’s free-style dance? It’s REALLY good!” is NO, thank you. Now, it’s skating season, during which she tells me that I’ll really want to see some woman skater lifting her male partner over her head. That answer is also in the negative.

---

There’s a new show called My Boys, which starts tonight on TBS. I’m thinking of watching the pilot because I am interested in the notion of men and women as friends. Most of my friends are female, and have been since I was 10. But the real selling point is that Jim Gaffigan appears in it. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen his stand-up that people know rave about – he’s been on Conan O’Brien and David Letterman about a dozen times each – but I have liked him in series such as “The Ellen Show” and “Ed”.

---

I’ve been reading a lot about different forms of apologies. Lots of people do the “I’m sorry if I’ve offended you” in a way that it appears that it is YOUR fault for being offended. In that context, I thought Michael Richards’ apology for his racist rant was sincere, public (already removed by YouTube at CBS’s request, alas), and quick (although not quickly enough for this columnist). The Letterman show may not have been the best venue, though, since he was not actually present in the studio, so people thought it was supposed to be a humorous bit. So he goes on Jesse Jackson’s radio show,as he did a couple days ago, he goes on something else, etc. The added benefit is that, in time, and continued honest contrition, perhaps it’ll go the way of Hugh Grant’s indiscretion, forgiven if not forgotten.

The peculiar aspect of this story, which I read Saturday, is how Kenny Kramer, the inspiration for Cosmo Kramer, Richards’ character on Seinfeld, has gotten “15 to 20 interviews” about the incident. Kenny Kramer’s statement: “I know the public is smart enough to realize that Michael Richards’ personal actions in no way reflect on the character he portrayed on television or me, Kenny Kramer, the real person that the character was based on.” So he says. Surreal.
***
Conversely, FOX’s apology over the O.J. deal reeks of “see how sensitive we are in responding to your needs, public!” as opposed to “What WERE we thinking?”

Truth is, though, when the book/TV show package was first announced, it had no appreciable effect on me, other than, “Eh, FOX being tacky again.” I received unsolicited e-mails wanting me to tell NewsCorp and/or Simpson I wasn’t going to buy the book or watch the show. Well, I wasn’t going to watch the show, and I’m not going to buy the book – they exist, and I’ve read in the Wall Street Journal that some have sold on eBay for $100 or more, with someone offering to sell it for $1000 before it was taken down – but I wasn’t moved to sign online petitions. Now, after the cancellation, there’s the post-mortem. If you look at the Amazon discussion site about this book, you’d think it was 1995 all over again, with discussions of guilt/innocence and race, with a new twist: censorship.

Oh, see what IS on e-Bay.

I have officially ODed on Rachael Ray. Those of you not from around here (Albany, NY) may only know her from her various Food Network programs, her new Oprahfied syndicated show, and her appearances on other shows, not to mention magazine articles and now boxes of Nabisco crackers, fercrinoutloud. But folks from my area have already seen her for a couple years as the spokesperson for a local food chain (Price Chopper) and a furniture store. Still, I do feel sorry for the local gal makes good, as she now appears on the cover of the National Inquirer; her husband allegedly cheated on her.

Those Capital One ads are very deceptive. Over a year ago, the Minnesota Attorney General’s office filed legal action against the company. And a recent Business Week article really lays it out:
By offering multiple cards, the lender helps land some subprime borrowers in a deep hole and boosts its earnings with fee income.

When Brad Kehn received his first credit card from Capital One Financial Corp. in 2004, it took him only three months to exceed its $300 credit limit and get socked with a $35 over-limit fee. But what surprised the Plankinton (S.D.) resident more was that Cap One then offered him another card even though he was over the limit — and another and another. By early 2006, he and his wife had six Cap One Visa and MasterCards. They were in over their heads.

The couple was late and over the limit on all six cards, despite occasionally borrowing from one to pay the other. Every month they chalked up $70 in late and over-limit fees on each card, for a total of $420, in addition to paying penalty interest rates. The couple fell further behind as their Cap One balances soared. Even so, they still received mail offers for more Cap One cards until they sought relief at a credit counseling agency this May…

Credit card experts and counselors who help overextended debtors say there’s nothing crazy about it. Cap One, they contend, is simply aiming to maximize fee income from debtors who may be less sophisticated and who may not have many options because of their credit history. By offering several cards with low limits, instead of one with a larger limit, the odds are increased that cardholders will exceed their limits, garnering over-limit fees. Juggling several cards also increases the chance consumers may be late on a payment, incurring an additional fee. And if cardholders fall behind, they pile up over-limit and late fees on several cards instead of just one. “How many more ways can I fool you?” says Elizabeth Warren, a Harvard Law School professor who has written extensively on the card industry. “That is all this is about.”

Consumers may not be the only ones who are unaware of Cap One’s ways. Its practice of issuing multiple cards to some borrowers with low credit ratings doesn’t appear well-known in the investment community. And just how much Cap One relies on fee income, vs. interest, is a mystery, since, like most lenders, it doesn’t disclose that. All credit card companies have become more reliant on fee income in recent years, but in a report issued in 2002, William Ryan, an investment analyst at Portales Partners, warned that Cap One’s earnings could be “devastated” if regulators cracked down on multiple cards or fees…

In a written response to questions, Cap One acknowledges that it offers multiple cards. “Our goal is to offer products that meet our customers’ needs and appropriately reflect their ability to pay,” it says. The company also stated: “Within our current U.S. portfolio, the vast majority of Capital One customers have only one Capital One credit card with a very small percentage choosing to have three or more cards.” Spokeswoman Tatiana Stead declined to offer precise numbers or to say whether households with three or more cards were concentrated among “subprime” borrowers, who have low credit ratings.

UNDER THE RADAR
The nation’s fifth-largest credit card issuer, with $49 billion in U.S. credit card receivables as of the end of June, McLean (Va.)-based Cap One is a major lender to the subprime market. According to Cap One’s regulatory filings, 30% of its credit card loans are subprime. Representatives of 32 credit counseling agencies contacted by BusinessWeek say that Cap One has long stood out for the number of cards it’s willing to give to subprime borrowers. “In the higher-risk market, no lender is more aggressive in offering multiple cards,” says Kathryn Crumpton, manager of Consumer Credit Counseling Service of Greater Milwaukee. Other big card-industry players that do subprime lending include Bank of America, Chase, and Citigroup. Representatives for Chase and Citigroup say they do not offer multiple cards to subprime customers. (BofA did not respond to inquiries.)

Last year, West Virginia Attorney General Darrell V. McGraw Jr. filed an action in state court seeking documents from Cap One related to its issuance of multiple cards, as well as other credit practices. Other than that, however, Cap One’s practices do not appear to have drawn regulatory scrutiny. A spokesman for the Federal Reserve, Cap One’s primary federal overseer, declined to comment about Cap One, but said that in general the regulator doesn’t object to multiple cards. Still, Fed guidelines warn multiple-card lenders to analyze the credit risk tied to all the cards before offering additional ones…

Analysts, including Carl Neff, ratings director on card securitizations for Standard & Poor’s, say Cap One tells investors that it carefully controls risk by giving such borrowers only small lines of credit. Indeed, the largest percentage of Cap One’s 28 million credit-card accounts, 43%, have balances of $1,500 or less, according to its SEC filings…

So, several states are alleging, the notion that one won’t get hit by high fees by using Capital One is not supported by Cap One practices. “What’s in YOUR wallet?” Indeed.
***
From MSNBC: A seven-minute video about The Beatles’ LOVE album that I hope you can open; I could at work, but not at home. It features George Martin and his son, the two surviving Beatles, and the two Beatle widows.