Super Bowl Update

(David Murdoch from Great Britain strikes a pose. There's nothing to it. Curl, curl curl... )

Ahh, Curling. It's only been two weeks of competitive events, but it feels like the curling event started at least 3 and a half months ago, no? Seriously, can you remember a time when NBC was not playing a curling match this winter? I cannot. I watched a lot of curling over the past couple weeks, and I have to say I don't really have a better idea of how it is played or scored than I did before the Games. There's a shuffleboard made out of ice, and heavy discs (simply called stones), and brooms. There's a big green circle and a smaller blue circle. You want the stones to land as close to the inside of the blue circle as possible. If it is, then you get a point. There's a lot of sweeping of the ice to help guide the stone as it goes down the ice. There's also a lot of shouting involved in curling. Oh, the shouting. You can't just let the disc go and then have your teammates guide it down the board. You have to reeeeeally shout at them to get them to do the right thing. It's not an exact science though. You can shout really loud and still lose. Each game has 10 rounds called "ends" which has to be ironic because these matches go on forever.

The special thing about curling during this Olympics is that the crowds collectively lost their MINDS over the sport. It became this amazing event. People were packed in to see the Canadian men defeat Norway, claiming the gold medal with a score of 6-3. There was also an insane interest in the women's gold medal match, which ended with Sweden edging Canada 7-6 in extra ends. That turned out to be one of the few Gold medal matches in which Canada was competing and did not win.

For the past two weeks, the curling stadium has been alive with noise. The problem was that most people in the stands seemed to not understand the rules of curling any better than I did watching at home. They just cheered constantly. It didn't really matter what was going on in the curling match itself. But it certainly mattered to the players. In theory, curling fans follow a cheering code similar to that of golf and tennis, with silence regarded as golden during play.

For instance there was Madeleine Dupont from Denmark, who missed two potential winning shots against Canada in women's play early on in the tournament. Afterward the loss, she tearfully blamed the noise of the crowd on her inability to execute. It's easy to understand her point. Imagine you take part in a sport where no one has bothered to cheer nor heckle you ever before. Now suddenly you're trying to perform in a high-pressure situation, and you have all this extra stimuli you're not accustomed to experiencing. You have to want to just turn to the crowd and say, "Do shut up."

There really isn't a Chair Umpire like there is in tennis to say "thank you." and make the crowd be quiet during a player's serve. The release of the stone in curling is a lot like the tennis serve or a golfer's swing and even if you're rooting against the player who is in the hot seat, you don't shout crazy shit at them at crucial moments. The curling crowds in Vancouver took a long time to come to this understanding.

(If you don't like the pants of the Norwegian team, you and I are no longer friends.)

Still, in its way, I think curling is an essential component of the Winter Olympics. It doesn't get a ton of respect, but I think people have a lot of affection for it. Unlike the aerials or snowboarding, you look at curling and feel like you could competently play that, if someone just explained the damn rules to you. It's one sport in the Winter Games that doesn't feel extreme and that's important and very comforting.

(The Canadian Hockey Place stadium is ready to rock at the start of the men's final. The crowd is nearly 20,000 strong.)

Canada has swept two of the biggest Winter Olympic events - men's and women's ice hockey. They took each title while playing their biggest rivals, the Americans. That brings their total number of gold medals during the Games to 14. That's the most golds by a host country ever for the Winter Olympics. That's also a whole lotta gold for Team Canada, a team that had NEVER won a single gold medal on home soil before the Vancouver Games. Good work, team!

(the Canadian women brought the US team literally to their knees on the way to victory.)

First on the women's side, Canada captured a third consecutive Olympic gold against the US on Thursday. It was an intense championship match and both sides wanted the win so badly. Unfortunately for the US squad, Canada went up 2-0 early in the first period and that was all she wrote for the rest of the game. The American women, two-time reigning world champs going in, had to settle for a silver medal. Finland took bronze with a 3-2 overtime win over Sweden. The Canadians celebrated for a long time on the ice with beer and cigars, which some people didn't like, but I didn't really care. Let 'em have their fun! I recognize medalists do need to be careful about what they're doing while wearing their medals because it's a symbol of the IOC they have certain rules, and it's also something people work very hard to achieve and that should be treated with respect, like a country's flag, so I understand why some people get upset about it. In this instance, it didn't bother me.

Today was the men's hockey final and it was being hyped as the Greatest Hockey Game Ever In The History Of The Universe. I don't think it beats US vs USSR in the Miracle on Ice, but it was a thrilling game.

I'm not a huge hockey fan. I find it hard to follow the puck, the constant fighting bores me, and it always seems like the team I'm rooting for has less players on the ice than the team I'm against. I'm not talking about a power play situation. It seems like there are 18 extra players on the ice for the people I don't like. But this game was really phenomenal. I didn't think that the US was going to tie it up at the end of regulation. Midway through the second period, the US team fell behind 2-0, after having never trailed in the entire tournament. They fought like hell to get back in it and tied things up on Zach Parise’s goal with 24 seconds remaining in the game.

It was unbelievable that they got to overtime, but once there, Canada pretty much regained control. Sidney Crosby, Canada’s superstar, hit a shot past US goalie Ryan Miller and ended the game. I would've loved a US win, but it was also really kinda awesome that Canada got to celebrate their most cherished victory at home and the flag could go up in the stadium and they could all sing the anthem. I liked that. The North American Border War on Ice was a great finale to an exciting Olympics in Vancouver. The US claimed the most overall medals ever. Canada claimed the most golds ever. Everybody in North America should go home happy.

(smiles all around for the winning Canadian men's hockey team. that's what they're talkin' aboot. )

(Spectators and cameramen alike lean out onto the track to greet the USA-1 team as they cross the finish winning gold!)

Congrats to Steven Holcomb who piloted the USA-1 bobsled to winning gold in the four-man competition. It's the first gold medal for the US in the event in 62 YEARS! That's crazy! The medal also holds significance because it ensures that whether the US men’s hockey team wins gold or silver, the US team will still leave the Games with 37 overall medals. That's the most by any country at a single Winter Olympics EVER! Team USA rocks!!!

Holcomb, along with Justin Olsen, Steve Mesler and Curtis Tomasevicz raced their bobsled - aka "The Night Train" - so well over the course of their 4 runs in the final. The funny thing I noticed about bobsled during this Games is that it's very hard for the four-man team to congratulate each other after the run. They're all crammed in so tight that they can't really hug and they can't get up until the bobsled comes to a complete stop. They have to just kinda wave their hands and pat each other on the helmet. It's kind of amusing. Another funny thing I noticed is that bobsled uniforms are kinda weird looking. They almost look painted on. They remind me a little of that large guy in that commercial where he's getting a mud bath in a spa. You know the one? Where he's all in some weird green mud exfoliating? I can't remember what the commercial was for, but that's what the bobsledders kinda looked like in my opinion.

Holcomb came to the Games with an inspiring personal story, having nearly going blind after a battle with keratoconus, which is a degenerative eye disease. Luckily he's fine now and was able to achieve his dream of winning gold for his country at the Olympics. He even has his own victory dance - The Holcy Dance" which looks kinda like the Hokey Pokey set to the tune of the Humpty Dance. It's a little silly, but gold medalists can celebrate pretty much any way they want.

(She can see what's hers now. What's hers is the gold medal and the admiration of her countrymen.)

Avenue Q poses the question, "Ain't if fun to watch figure skaters fallin' on their asses?"

The answer: yes. Often times, it is. And usually the Olympics, over any other international skating competition, seems to produce the most high profile falls and blunders for the top figure skaters in the world. I think it's mostly for two reasons; 1) there is a lot of pressure to be perfect in the Olympics and 2) it's crazy difficult to spin around in the air 3 three times and then land on a thin piece of metal on the bottom of your shoe connecting you with a surface of ice. It's not easy and everyone takes a spill now and then.

This year for the women, it was a different story. The top ladies all had fantastic performances and most scored personal bests of their careers. As much fun as it is to once in a while see someone take a spill, it's much more fun and exciting to see everyone do so well.

The one who did best was South Korea's Kim Yu-Na who delivered a truly exceptional performance that won her the gold by a MILE. Her free-skate score, 150.06, destroyed her previous personal best, which was also the world record by 17 points and gave her a final overall score of 228.56. She has reset the bar for scoring in the sport.

The silver and bronze medalists were also truly impressive. Mao Asada was second, and became the first female to successfully land three triple axels in one competition. Canada's Joannie Rochette came in an inspiring third, as she skated just days after her mother died. It was incredibly emotional watching her on the ice, but she held herself together and did such a great job. It was really an amazing feat.

The American women were not really expected to medal because of their youth and relative inexperience on the world stage, but they skated clean, impressive performances nonetheless. Mirai Nagasu finished fourth, and Rachael Flatt came in seventh. Good job, ladies. Hope to see you both again in Sochi 2014!

All four of the figure skating events featured very strong skating and no gold for the Russians. Both of these things are so rare and are very satisfying. I'm glad all the top skaters did so well. It's so much pressure. In an interview, Kim suggested her home county, South Korea, would turn on her if she had failed to live up to their expectations to win gold (she's probably right too - no pressure though!). It's better to see a winner beat the best at their best, than watching people slipping and sliding and caving to the pressure.

Good job, Kim Yu-Na! Perhaps your win will calm their irrational hatred for Apolo Ohno over in South Korea. Let them focus on the positive! I think they will.

(The members of the US Olympian Nordic Combined Team. Kicking ass and taking medals.)

I have to give it up one more time for the athletes repping in the US Nordic Combined events. Before this Olympics, the United States had never medaled in a Nordic Combined event. At the end of this Olympics, we walk away with 4 medals in the sport. Job well done to Brett Camerota, Todd Lodwick, Johnny Spillane and Billy Demong (seen standing left to right in the picture above). I really enjoyed watching them race these past two weeks. They were really exicting finishes!

Their success started with Spillane taking silver in the Men's Indiviudal Normal Hill 10 K XC event last weekend. Then all four skiers took home silver in the Team Combined Event earlier this week. Lastly, Demong and Spillane gave the United States the gold and silver medals in the men’s Individual Long-Hill, 10K event a few days later. Their success getting to the podium in a sport where we have no previous Olympic medals, helped this be the most-winning Winter Olympics ever for the United States.

Even though the last race is not necessarily a team event, The United States secured its victory by having its two skiers work together strategically. They made sure to share the lead and not let any of the trailing skiers make it back up to the front group. The members of the team have been fighting the good fight and training unbelievably hard for more than a decade in an attempt to get to the podium. These particular athletes have been to the Games many times before and came away empty-handed. Their success is one of my favorite stories of this Olympics. Spillane managed a silver medal in all three events. An amazing accomplishment!

(there's no "i" in Gold... okay, there is one in silver...)

Extra congrats to Bill Demong, who on top of being the first American to win a gold medal in Nordic combined, and being chosen as the flag bearer for the US Team during the closing ceremony. also got engaged to his long-time girlfriend and former Olympian Katie Koczynski. What a great Olympics that dude is having! Here's to those two having a bunch of kids who wind up being future winter Olympians. The genetics couldn't be better suited for it. Go Team USA: The Next Generation!

A year ago, when we were all still getting comfortable with President Barack and First Lady Michelle Obama’s personal style, there was quite a lot of journalistic clucking about Michelle Obama’s arms; that they were so strong and so often on display.

And this clucking came not just from narrowly focused fashionistas, but from the astutely focused pundit—and frequent NPR presence—David Brooks. His discomfort with Ms. Obama’s public display of biceps was ratted out by fellow New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd in a Sunday column she titled "Should Michelle Cover Up?" Ms. Dowd and Mr. Brooks were on their way to the British Embassy . . .

In the taxi, when I asked David Brooks about her [Mrs. Obama's] amazing arms, he indicated it was time for her to cover up. “She’s made her point,” he said. “Now she should put away Thunder and Lightning.”

So what, exactly, was our initial problem with Ms. Obama’s naked arms? Could it have been that we, the American people, were being asked to cope with one style adjustment too many?

Barack Obama, as a candidate, had famously declared America wanted change. Obviously, we voters agreed with him, having had enough of being governed by sartorially conservative, rather prudish people. The Bush Tribe was nothing, if not predictable in their personal style. Remember Attorney General John Ashcroft draping the semi-nude statues in the Great Hall of Justice because he wasn’t comfortable being photographed with them?

First Lady Laura Bush dressed perfectly for her role as that administration’s head spouse -- no non-traditionally naked arms on display for her! Indeed, Mrs. Bush presented us with no fashion surprises of any kind. She understood First Ladies as institutions on two feet, not as fashion forward women who use clothes to give us some sense of who they are.

Of course, we didn't elect Michelle Obama, we elected her husband. And Barack Obama comes with a personal style as well; not so much in what he wears as in how he goes about doing business. We threw out a President who many thought shot from his hip (and was famously ill at ease listening to contrary opinions), for one who has positioned himself as a consensus builder, one who asks us all to be patient while he takes time to be well-informed himself and gives others time to become equally well-informed. President Barack Obama seems to really expect politicians to stop worrying about re-election long enough to actually accomplish things.

Dana Millbank, whom I think watched the entire Health Care Summit, has an interesting column in this morning's Washington Post, called "Obama needs to flex his political muscle," in which he contrasts Gordon Brown's and Bush II's political style (which he sees as bullying) with President Obama's more measured approach:

Here in America, however, we can only watch this [Gordon Brown's bullying] behavior with envy. Our president is not a bully; in fact, he is the victim of bullying. He is bullied by Republicans on health care. He is bullied by congressional Democrats on everything. He is bullied by his own Cabinet. Dick Cheney pauses in his bullying of Obama only for the occasional heart attack.

Admittedly, the allegations against Brown have only hastened his political decline, and there's no need for Obama to start kicking furniture and throwing BlackBerrys at people, as Brown stands accused of doing. Still, it wouldn't hurt for the occupant of the bully pulpit to show some force of will.

His predecessor got a narrowly divided Congress to pass his tax cuts, authorize the Iraq war and give him the Patriot Act, not through logic or eloquence but by bludgeoning, intimidating and threatening holdouts (remember Jim Jeffords or Max Cleland?). Lawmakers weren't swayed by George W. Bush's arguments; they feared retribution.

The problems that plague this country are terribly complex and terribly serious. It seems evident that "talking point" politics are unhelpful in addressing them, yet we Americans seem drastically uncomfortable with anything else. Obama's popularity numbers continue to plummet as he continues to try to work with the people who oppose his ideas, often (it seems) for purely political reasons. He began the year with a 50% approval rating down from 68% last March.

It's a given that we are all worried and all concerned about the country's future as well as our own. My question is what, exactly, do we want this President to do that he is not doing? Are we simply uncomfortable with Barack Obama's consensus-building style?  Do we really want government by political bullying?

Michelle Obama, by the way, has a 78% approval rating. Which means, I guess, that we have gotten quite comfortable with "Thunder and Lightning."

This, from WMRA's Virginia Insight host, Tom Graham:

Hey Martha --
A friend who studied social psychology once told me, “If you want to get people to tell you stories about themselves, it’s best to prime the pump by first revealing one of your own.”

I don’t know if that always works. But on “Virginia Insight” this past Monday I decided to try it.

The topic was this winter’s crazy weather.

In addition to discussion with two weather scientist guests [Stan Ulanski from JMU and Jerry Stenger from UVa], I was hoping to get listeners calling in. I thought maybe we could encourage not only questions and comments about meteorology, but also revelations about any exceptional winter weather experiences anyone had had.

This past Monday was the first time I had ever publicly revealed the story below.

And again, this does not prove my psychologist friend was right. But we certainly were overloaded with calls this past Monday.

So many that we couldn’t get to them all.

I’m curious if … after this gets posted … well, if anyone who didn’t get their call in during Monday’s broadcast might feel encouraged to share a winter survival story here on the blog. Or anyone who wasn't listening, for that matter.

[By the way, anyone who missed Monday’s program can now access it online.  The show will also be re-broadcast this Sunday at 11am. ]

Okay, here’s my long secret weather story as revealed at the beginning of the February 22, 2010, “Virginia Insight.”

Some people make fun of talking about the weather … as if it’s the thing you do when you’ve got nothing else to say. But for others of us -- there are weather-related experiences so intense it seems like they will never completely leave our mind.

I still vividly remember the time, at the age of four, when I was allowed out in the front yard of our home near Buffalo to play in the snow.

We lived on a side street, no traffic, but the plow had recently come by and there was a huge mound of white stuff at the end of the driveway.

I was bundled up in galoshes and snowpants and snow jacket with attached mittens and of course very warm knitted hat pulled low over my ears. All in blue. So looking like a sea colored miniature Michelin man -- I waddled down to the end of the drive and climbed up that mountain of snow.

And then I began to sink.

The more I tried to escape. The faster I sank.

It was still snowing. I couldn’t see very far, so I knew nobody inside could see me. I was all alone outside, and as I found myself trapped up to my shoulders in snow, the thought that actually passed through my four-year-old mind was -- “nobody’s going to find me till summer time!”

But then, on this street where there was never any traffic, a dark-colored sedan drove up and stopped at the end of the drive. A man I’d never seen before got out, walked over, picked me up out of my snow mountain prison, set me down on the driveway, smiled at me, then got back in his car and drove away.

Okay, now it's your turn. What's your weird weather story?

.

Confession time: Weeks ago, when today's televised Health Care Summit was announced, my heart lifted. I had visions of being able to watch our Congress working effectively with our president to make some progress on surmounting our arguably biggest challenge: affordable health care.

Listening to NPR and reading NPR.org; reading today's NY Times, and The Washington Post, I'm, well, a bit more cautious in my expectations -- at least about today's event all by itself. The Post's Chris Cillizza's led into his front page story about the summit with this prognostication:

Today's event is more like a pro wrestling match than a heavyweight boxing match.

Oh dear. Pro wrestling. So scripted, so full of posturing, so not the behavior we need from our elected representatives in these troubled times.

And yet I do remain stubbornly hopeful about today's summit. Why? Because we will be watching.

Today's well-publicized, fully-accessible health care debate (C-SPAN, of course, but you can also preregister for a live feed to your computer or follow the aforementioned Mr.Cillizza on Twitter) forces our elected representatives to speak directly to us about what they think should be done about health care.  I remain hopeful because you and I know baloney when we hear it; we don't like it; we vote, and our elected representatives may actually be forced to think about that fact when they're talking today. Special interests may quietly throw a lot of money at politicians, but special interests still can't vote. At least not yet.

So watch if you can, tweet if you do that, sneak regular on-line peeks if you don't have time to engage fully in today's Health Care Summit. And then loose your opinions about our politicians' behavior on-line (on the WMRA Facebook page, for example), in letters to the editor, on the phone to elected officials' Washington offices!

Power to us people!

I have been having a hard time coming up with lunch places that are nearby that aren’t all my usual standards. I frequent the same 4-5 places for lunch a lot, but I have written them up before, and I don’t want to bore you with all the same places. Most of the new places on my list are a little farther afield, so I have to have a decent amount of time to fit one of them in. So we randomly decided to try Sullivan’s for lunch and see what was up. (Not to mention a reader recently asked for a review.) We have been there for dinner a couple of times, pre-blog days, and to be honest, were never overly impressed, but I heard they have some good lunch specials.

I do like the interior of the restaurant of Sullivan’s. It is a nice open room, with the kitchen at one end, with a nice feel to it. Lots of wood and a large flower arrangement in the center. The place was not that crowded when we got there but by the time we left was pretty busy for a weekday lunch, mostly with business people I think. They have the “business lunch special” which is a pretty good deal—you get a soup or salad and either a small filet, salmon or chicken for $18.00.

I wasn’t in the mood for a straight steak, so I went with the steak salad instead. It was really nice. It was mixed greens topped with crumbled blue cheese, tomatoes, some large chunks of roasted potatoes, a filet cut into fairly large slices, and lots and lots of fried onion strings and blue cheese dressing. I liked that they asked me if I wanted the dressing tossed throughout or on the side. I said both, never trusting they will properly dress it, but in this case they did. The dressing was appropriately tossed throughout and I didn’t really need the dressing on the side (hubby liked it for dipping his fries though). The steak was good quality, and had a great flavor. It was well seasoned and cooked on the rare side of medium rare, which is great for me. There were maybe just a few too many onions on top, as they made it kind of hard to get to the rest of the stuff underneath. But a couple of them in each bite added a nice flavor as well. The only thing on the salad I did not care for were the potatoes. They were too large and too dry inside. On a salad, I liked smaller, less dry potatoes that are maybe blanched instead. Little fingerlings or red potatoes maybe. You had to cut these into smaller pieces and they didn’t really add anything to the salad.

Hubby ordered the chicken pesto sandwich with fries and was a bit disappointed in it. As is the classic problem with chicken sandwiches (in my opinion), the chicken was too dry and there wasn’t enough sauce to balance it out. Just a little bit of pesto on the bun. He thought maybe the restaurant was worried people wouldn’t like too much of the pesto or something, but if that is the case, maybe they could make a pesto mayo or something. He had several bites of my salad and also thought it was very good. Much better than his sandwich.

The thing that annoyed me the most about this place was how slow it was. For a place that sort of seems to cater to business people, you would think they would make sure the food was coming out at a fairly rapid pace. Not so. And our server seemed to disappear for long periods of time. In fact, the manager delivered our meals. The lunch took quite a bit longer than I thought it should. Had I known, I probably could have just gone ahead and gone downtown.

But, all in all, if you want a great steak salad, and you have a bit of time, this was pretty good... When the mood hits me, I will probably go back for lunch and get it again.

Sullivan’s Steakhouse
3316 East 86th Street
Indy 46240
317-580-1280
www.sullivansteakhouse.com

This is a frank plea for input. And it starts with an announcement of almost no importance: I have a different title at WMRA. Instead of reporter/producer, I am now WMRA's social media producer.

What this means is that, while I still edit Civic Soapbox, I also now run the WMRA blog, as well as manage the WMRA Facebook fan page. And that is the e-place where I dream of all of us who listen to WMRA having lots of lively discussions about things that matter; some of which I bring up, some of which you bring up.

I really, really, really dislike the term "fan" as a descriptive of those who join our Facebook page. It's a perfectly appropriate term for one who joins a rock star's or an actor's Facebook page, but much less perfect, I think, for someone who listens to and supports and interacts with WMRA. But, we gotta go with calling ourselves "fans," because it's the only term on offer.

For what it's worth: I've become a WMRA fan, and, you know, I feel perfectly okay with it, because I do love the little public radio station for which I work. Please become a fan, yourself, if you haven't already, so the rest of us fans can interact with you.

So what is the input I'm asking for from you . . .

• Please let me know (either on the WMRA Facebook page, through an e-mail to me, or by commenting at the end of this blog post, what you'd most like to see on our Facebook page: 
• notice of what's coming up on NPR and WMRA?
• information about local events, forums, and just general happenings?
• discussion forums about important issues (such as today's first Facebook post)?
• all of the above, or something I've not mentioned?
• How often would you like to hear from us on Facebook? There's so much to talk about around WMRA Land, but we don't want to be an intrusive presence in your Facebook life. 
• (perhaps most importantly) Would you be willing to post about interesting/thought-provoking/fun events you either plan to attend or have attended, that you think the rest of us would be interested in knowing about?
• In what other ways could WMRA's Facebook page be useful, informative, and/or just plain fun for you?

In my opinion, as the now official WMRA Fan Wrangler, this isn't WMRA's Facebook page, it's the WMRA Community's Facebook page.  .

Yesterday, I spent lunch time in the company of about 100 other folks, listening to a panel made up of  a defense lawyer, an assistant district attorney, the county sheriff, a retired judge, and an Eastern Mennonite University professor who was one of the founders of the field of Restorative Justice. They were talking about “better strategies against crime,” i.e. what can we do with people who break the law that’s more useful to the victim, society, and, indeed to the criminal, than just locking them up. (Harvey Yoder did last week's Civic Soapbox on the same subject, by the way)

First things first, as far as this blog post goes. Restorative Justice and victims' rights were terms that whizzed around the discussion like Tommy’s pinballs. Poking around on the EMU website this morning, I found an explanation of the term by panel member Dr. Howard Zehr: “Restorative Justice focuses on repairing the harm caused by and revealed by crime or wrongdoing. It seeks to involve those who have a stake in a specific offense (the victim, offender, family members, community, or others) to identify and address the harms, needs, and obligations of those involved in order to heal and put things as right as possible.”

HMMM. Putting things right sound great, doesn’t it?

Now, sadly, back to reality. The Rockingham County jail, which was built to house 220 inmates, regularly houses 320-350. Such an overcrowded jail is, according to Dr. Zehr (and, indeed it seemed to be the panel consensus) the result of our own societal expectations. If you build it, Dr. Zehr said, speaking of the jail, they will come. He pointed out that we spend a lot of society’s money on punishment (which may be cheaper short term), but very little investing in programs to treat substance addiction, create jobs, and attack other underlying causes of crime

Sheriff Don Farley pointed out, after listening to panel members talk, that restorative justice may indeed be the way to go, but all he can do is administer the system he’s been handed. His department, he said, works within a criminal justice system, not a victim justice system. The Rockingham County Sheriff Department doesn’t have the funds to focus on helping those injured by crime or to attack the underlying causes of crime. His department’s mandate is to identify criminals and keep them locked up

Defense attorney Gene Hart (roughly transcribed):

In tight budget times such as today, we tend to cut the programs that we know are useful in combating crime, such as drug court and drug treatment. We have to remember that the budget drives everything. It’s up to those of us who’d like to see programs such as monitored at-home sentencing and/or part-time incarceration to show they are cost effective. Some states are using federal stimulus money to expand home monitoring. If we want Sheriff Farley to run an electronic monitoring program, we have to find money. Drug treatment programs have a cost up front. We need to do a better job explaining that long-term savings ensue. We need to show policymakers that there is a cost to saving money today. Must learn not just to talk about what is good, but what is cost effective.

Assistant District Attorney Anthony Bailey (again a rough transcription):

If people want change from an existing system, they must work through their elected representatives. The people whom all of us vote for are the people who create the system. If you’re satisfied or not satisfied with the system, it’s your responsibility to fix it. Who are you voting for and what are you telling them before they go to Richmond and Washington? Don’t expect tough "law and order" elected officials to fund more treatment programs. Don’t say we in the sheriff’s office and the commonwealth attorney’s office don’t get it (the value of such alternatives to straight incarceration as treatment programs) because we do.

Judge John McGrath brought up the county’s litter collection program, started by Judge Paul, which allows lawbreakers to do community service on the weekends in lieu of jail time. It took patience and a bus, Judge McGrath said, on Judge Paul’s part to get this program going. And it's done a lot of good for both those involved in the program and the county.

Start small, he advised. Do what you can do, rather than waiting until you can do what you dream.

Any thoughts? You can also comment on WMRA’s Facebook page, as well. And, if you haven’t friended us, please do. We at WMRA need all the friends we can get.

Last day in New York; leaving tonight. Found lots of exciting new things for the Renee's at the shows! :)  Seeing other buyers, talking to reps, getting new ideas: inspirational. I am enthusiastic about getting back to Renee's, seeing you, customers and friends, and telling you about my finds! Saw trends like skinny pants and leggings, loose tops, and feminine prints. Photos to follow soon. Challenging: having enough time to implement on line marketing and keeping up with social media. Have had a great time here. Love (to visit) this city.  

(Virtue and Moir look adoringly on each other as they ice dance toward gold. They're a couple in real life, right? Tell me their love is real!)

Against my better judgment, I sorta totally fell in love with Tessa Virtue and Scott Moir as they took home gold for Canada in the Olympic Ice Dancing competition last night. I admit, with two US teams in medal contention, I was hoping the Canadians would make a mistake and land in third. That didn't happen, and as Virtue and Moir were on the ice I hoped for it less and less, until I was actively rooting for them. They really were the best out there and the win was much deserved. They are also probably the most physically adorable pair of skaters I ever did see, You'd have to be a total Malfoy not to want these kids to succeed.

Let's take a moment to break down the different rounds of competition. Ice Dancing has three rounds; Compulsory Dance, Original Dance and Free Dance. Somehow your original dance is still controlled by The Man, but you can really let loose in the Free Dance! Virtue and Moir were in second after the Compulsory Round, trailing the World Champion Russian skaters Oksana Domnina and Maxim Shabalin (boo!). Then Virtue/Moir took the lead after the Original dance when Domnina/Shabalin did this bizarro "aboriginal-inspired" dance that left them in third behind Americans Meryl Davis and Charlie White (yay!). It was really between the top two teams to win gold, and the Canadians scored a whopping 110.42 points in the Free Dance, and their final score of 221.57 secured the win.

(They spun me right round, baby. Right round. Like a record, baby. Right round round round.)

Coming into last night, the Russians or Soviets had won all but two Olympic gold medals in Ice Dancing since its Olympic debut in 1976 and no team from North America had ever won gold before. This year, however, the big question was whether North American teams would sweep the podium! They almost did - Tanith Belbin and Ben Agosto, the silver medalists from the Torin Games skating for The US, finished just behind the Russians in fourth. This turn of events means the Russians are one event away from leaving Vancouver without a single gold medal in figure skating! Only the women’s competition remains, and there really isn't a Russian skater in this year's fleid that's thought to be in the race for a medal (no American is either, but the American media is still kinda hoping for a miracle bronze). The last time Russia went without any figure skating gold was 50 years ago. I think that's kinda awesome. It's nice to see other countries having a real competitive chance to win, otherwise it gets boring.

Last night truly belonged to the Canadian pair. They were so beautiful and fluid. There was no doubt in my mind they were the best. As you can imagine, the Canadian crowd absolutely lost their minds when they finished skating the free program. They somehow managed to get even louder when their scores were announced. The medal ceremony was also really sweet with the boisterous rendition of "O Canada!" sung whole-heartedly by Tessa Virtue and Scott Moir atop the podium along with every Canadian in the stadium. What made it kind of hilarious too were Moir's facial expressions during the anthem. Clearly the euphoria of winning was washing over him after years of hard word had brought them to this awesome moment of achievement. Still... I don't think I've ever thought while watching a medal ceremony, "I bet that's what he look like while having sex." Yet, having seen him in the medal ceremony, I suspect those are the kind of faces he makes. He was really into winning the gold. Whatever, it was more goofy charming than uncomfortable. I don't blame him for feeling good. Congrats again to Virtue and Moir on their stunning achievement!

(Whoops! Get a room, you two! Seriously, tell me their love is for real. I need to know.)

Although changes can't be made in time for the women's competition, I call on the IOC to ban certain songs from being used in competition at future Olympic competitions. No more Firebird! I know we're gonna hear it for the fourth time with the ladies. I know it. And this is only in the routines they show on air! You know other skaters are using it too! Also no more Swan Lake, no more Phantom of the Opera and no more Requiem for A Dream, original version or suped up LOTR remix version.) Dance and skate to some less obvious tunes. PLEASE.

(When it comes to lifts in 2010, Scottish sisters are doin' it for themselves.)

Honorable Mention: I can't end this post without acknowledging Sinead and John Kerr, a brother-sister pair from Scotland, repping Great Britain. These two are kind of amazingly weird. If Moir's sex faces during the Canadian anthem didn't make me uncomfortable, these siblings sexy-ice-dancing to the tune of Crawling by Linkin Park certainly did. I'm not against brother sister dance partnerships. I've seen it work fine on So You Think You Can Dance. Hell, I danced the "Merry Christmas Polka" with my sister during my elementary school chorus concert in 4th grade and it was a beautiful experience for all to witness. I'm just saying these two sometimes bring it to a weird place and song selection did not help them last night. Although it should be noted that during their Free Dance, they surprised everyone by pulling off a "reverse lift." Sinead held John by his legs as he was upside down. It's a role reversal that's rare in ice dancing. Picture evidence provided above. Those kids are crazy!

(Bodie Miller zooms down the mountain. He looks focused, but he's exhausted. He can barely see straight and he's just yearning for vacation. He told us this was so right after he'd crossed the finish in first place.)

Congrats to Bodie Miller and his remarkable gold-medal performance in the super combined event on Sunday. He now has three Olympic medals in three races in Vancouver — a feat almost anyone would've thought near impossible coming into the Games.

Miller has now cemented his place among the greatest competitive skiers in history. He already had 32 World Cup victories and has held four world titles in four different events, but up until yesterday he had never won Olympic Gold. He won silver and bronze in Salt Lake City, went without reaching the podium in Torino, and no one really knew what to expect of him here. But now it's obvious to everyone that he showed up in Vancouver to compete and to win.

Bodie is known to be a strange, independeny\t character whose not always easy to read, but he was clearly elated after the race. “The way I executed, the way I skied, is something I’ll be proud of for the rest of my life." he said, "It feels amazing.”

Miller did not look great in the super combined downhill, landing himself in 7th place going into the slalom portion. But in the second half of the event, he went nuts flying down the mountain at an unbelievable pace, managing to win the event by a scant 0.33 seconds.

I have to take a quick minute to point out that NBC's coverage of the Super Combined was really weird. I'm not sure what channel was broadcasting it live, if they were showing it live anywhere. When they aired it in prime time, I found the order of events to be choppy and confusing. It was great to see Bodie win, but my context for what was going on flew out the window. Did I really need 19 hours of uninterrupted curling on Sunday, NBC? Couldn't you have jumped away for a little while to cover skiing? I'm just asking.

But that quibble really isn't the thing to focus on. Instead we should acknowledge that with this win, Bodie becomes the first American Alpine skier to win three medals in one Olympics (following his silver in the Super G and a bronze in the downhill). He has two events left at the Games, but he's noticeably tired and banged up. Asking for more from him seems like a lot, but this likely being his last Games, it seems certain he'll empty whatever is left in the tank on his way out. Good luck, Bodie! Great job!

Note: This note from WMRA Reporter and Virginia Insight Host Tom Graham came into my e-mail box over the weekend.

Hi Martha -

I wondered if WMRAers might like some behind the scenes political news.

On Morning Edition this past Friday, Bob Leweke and I reviewed some of the latest developments out of the state capitol -- now that this year’s General Assembly Session has reached its half way point.

As usual, time constraints kept us from being able to go into everything on my list.
So I’m sending some audio that did not make it on air.

The following comments come from three lawmakers whose districts fall within the WMRA service region:
----------------------

State Senator Emmett Hanger (R-Augusta County) was asked about his argument that current law is unfair to so-called “bricks and mortar” businesses because, while they have to collect sales tax, retailers who sell on the internet do not. Senator Hanger is pushing for legislation that would force internet companies like Amazon to collect Virginia sales tax.

Emmett Hanger:    It’s actually a very important issue. The law of the land, as it currently exists and the Supreme Court has interpreted it, is that if a business has a nexus, that is has some kind of physical presence in your state, then they can be required to collect sales tax. And for me it’s a matter of fairness. We certainly should not allow these large retailers to have a competitive advantage on the internet. Because they’re actually running traditional Mom and Pop, bricks and mortar businesses out of business with that advantage.

One single example, which is somewhat of a focus in the legislation I’m currently working on, is Amazon. Amazon this past holiday season, the 4th quarter of 2009, enjoyed roughly a 42% percent growth in business. Tremendous growth. A lot of people are moving that direction and we are allowing them not to collect sales tax. And they actually have a presence in Virginia. So I’m attempting to tighten up our statutes so that we say to that retailer, you will collect that tax that is already owed. It’s not a tax increase. And I think if we equate that to say WalMart, if we were to not have similar legislation for WalMart and just required everyone who made purchases all year long to compute what they’d saved in a shoe box and remit to the state, it just wouldn’t work. And the same can be said for Amazon and other like retailers. They really do need to be good corporate citizens.

Delegate Todd Gilbert (R-Shenandoah County) was asked why he favors the so-called “guns in bars” measure. This is legislation that would allow gun owners who have concealed carry permits to keep their guns with them when they go into a restaurant where alcohol is served -- as long as that gun owner does not consume any alcohol while in that restaurant.

Todd Gilbert:     I’ve always been a big advocate of the Second Amendment. I’ve always trusted law-abiding citizens to protect themselves, to avail themselves of the means of self-protection. I believe in the Second Amendment; I believe it is a fundamental right. You know while it may seem cavalier or silly to some people to suggest that folks might want to have a gun with them in a restaurant, the fact is that we trust hundreds of thousands each and every day to carry a concealed weapon on their person for themselves or for the protection of their families, and it makes absolutely no sense to me that even though we trust them everywhere else in society, we cease trusting them simply because they want to take their family out to dinner. And I think we’re well on our way to removing that impediment to folks who want to continue to protect themselves if they go out for a nice dinner with their family.

Delegate David Toscano (D-Charlottesville) spoke about his hope that efforts to create a “non-partisan commission in charge of legislative redistricting” might yet succeed. That proposal was killed in a House of Delegates committee again this year. But since the State Senate gave its unanimous approval to the same measure, the proposal is technically still alive.

David Toscano:  The non-partisan redistricting bill that I’ve supported over the years passed the Senate and would get over to the House. This is our last chance to try non-partisan redistricting before the next round. I’ve always taken the position that it shouldn’t be the legislators who are choosing their constituents; it should be constituents who are choosing their legislators.

Tom G: In the campaign, candidate McDonnell supported that. It seems like Governor McDonnell has not been active in supporting that once he got into office. Does that cause thoughts for you?

DT: Governor McDonnell has been invisible on the non-partisan redistricting issue, even though he campaigned on it. You would have thought that this was one of the important issues that he would want to push, and nobody from his administration, he didn’t come over to lobby for the legislation. He knew that the House was likely to kill it, but he did nothing to try to get it passed. That’s unfortunate.


One other note on non-partisan redistricting.

State Senator Creigh Deeds (D-Bath County) is the longtime sponsor of this measure. I spoke to him about it last week.

In past years his proposal has made it through the Senate only to be quashed in the House of Delegates.

Even though a House committee killed the House version of the bill earlier this month, the Senate version will still have to be acted on when it gets sent over to the House.

I asked Senator Deeds if he thought there was any chance that the Senate version of the bill could get approval in the House this year. His response: “Well, even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while. So I haven’t completely given up hope.”

Made me smile. Hope your day is causing you to do so as well.

Best,

Tom (Graham)

Another note: Tom actually sent me the statements from the Virginia legislators as sound files, but I couldn't figure out a way to post sound on this blog. Anyone out there have a clue if this is possible?  MW

Well, I have been giving Recess a little while to get the rough edges smoothed before heading over there to check it out. I know a few of you have been sort of annoyed that it has taken me so long to get there, but I have an informal policy of giving a new place at least a couple of weeks to get settled in since I write a review based on a single visit. (And if you want to read my review policies in detail, please go here.) Regardless, I have been pretty much chomping at the bit to get over there, as I have always enjoyed Recess chef Greg Hardesty’s cuisine, (at the now closed Elements). I actually completely love this new concept, a different menu every day, but a set menu, with sometimes no choices and sometimes just one or two choices (usually between two entrées). The ingredients are whatever the Chef decides he wants to do, based on seasonality and what he deems “superlative.” Honestly, with as much grief as I have received when I complain about restaurants never changing their menu, with people telling me repeatedly that won’t fly in Indy, I was a little worried about how it would go for Chef Hardesty. But based on the buzz, and the difficulty in getting a reservation on certain nights, it looks like, so far so good. (See, I guess Indy folks CAN handle a little variety!).

I also really enjoy the slightly industrial feel to the space, but with touches of softness to balance the heavy cement of the walls and floor. Not quite enough softness to deaden the noise of the place once it was full, but the spacing between the tables is appropriate so that you don’t feel like you are sharing your conversation with the table next to you. Also, when you can hear it, we greatly enjoyed the music playing overhead, truly modern music that obviously reflected someone’s very personal taste—I was wondering if the music changes with the Chef’s whim as well. That would be kind of fun.

I dined with a friend on this night, and on the way over, knowing there were two entrée choices, we quickly agreed to get one of each and share to make sure we could try everything offered. They also offer a wine pairing to match the first three courses (all but dessert) which are 3-4 ounce pours, so that basically they equal about half a bottle of wine (which I would say is two good glasses). I think this is a great idea, and with an ever changing menu, is the perfect way to try various items on the wine list. I did enjoy the pairing with my meal, and each wine was wonderfully matched.

Several other reviewers have not gone into great detail about their particular food items claiming that there is no point since the menu changes daily. I tend to disagree with this approach as I think hearing about the meal in detail will give people a little insight about exactly what you can expect. Well, not exactly, I guess, but the types of flavor combinations and generally the creativity being employed. Our dinner started with hamachi sashimi in a wasabi ponzu broth served with thinly sliced cucumbers and radish as well as enoki mushrooms and wakame (a type of seaweed). The fish was wonderfully tender and fresh and pretty well melted in your mouth—the broth added a nice flavor—a fairly simple preparation, but nice. Of course, if you are a frequent reader, you know cucumbers and seaweed aren’t my favorites (everyone doesn’t like something right?), so unfortunately, my veggies on this dish went begging.

The next course was crisp pork belly served with hominy, tomatillos and fried tortilla strips. The thick rectangle of pork belly (think bacon steak) was pleasantly crisp and was accented nicely by accompaniments with a Mexican flavor. The hominy continued the richness of the pork while the tomatillos added a bit of that tanginess that I love, and that balanced out the richness and saltiness. The tortillas added textural crunch which was also quite pleasing. I would say this was probably my favorite course. The portion wasn’t oversized (although I found the portions to be generous, I don’t think they are oversized, which I think is important when you are serving four courses).

For the main courses, there were two choices, a beef and a turkey dish. As I said, we each ordered one of them and shared them fairly equally, so I feel like I can tell you about them both pretty accurately. I will start with the turkey because I think it was my favorite of the two. First of all, how nice is it to see turkey being used as a white meat option on a menu for a change. I personally prefer to use turkey at home quite frequently (although I tend to have to go to Kincaid's to get turkey cutlets cut since regular grocery stores no longer seem interested in meeting customer needs, but I digress). I have a really hard time ordering chicken in a restaurant, it just seems so pedestrian, and is often so dry, but I was really excited by the turkey concept.

Anyway, the turkey was served as paillards, which are thinly pounded cutlets that were breaded and fried. They were served over a Brussels sprouts and bacon ragout (I’d say more of a warm cole slaw, and there was other things in there besides Brussels sprouts—in fact, I wished it was a little more Brussels-sprouty). There were pickled onions as well. I didn’t get a lot of this on my portion, but I love the idea. Pickled onions are one of my favorite things. There was also a side of manchego (Spanish sheep’s milk cheese) mac and cheese—this stuff was divine. Rich and creamy with a bit of sharpness. A bite of this with a bite of the turkey—yummy. All in all, this dish was unique and creative and very tasty. (By the way, sorry about the fuzzy picture, I was trying to be discreet, and this place is small.)

The beef dish was two thick slices of Fisher Farm’s ribeye with crushed potatoes, roasted poblano peppers and red onion ragout. This dish was nice as well—the beef was prepared medium rare, the chimichurri was bright and the flavors of the other sides were good. I don’t know, the meat needed a little seasoning or something—just didn’t seem to have quite enough flavor on its own. For some reason, while in theory, I liked all the things on the plate, overall, it just didn’t seem to come together quite as well as the turkey.

The dessert on this night was a Meyer lemon terrine with fig molasses drizzled on top and a little lemon poppy seed cookie on the side. This was better than both of us were expecting—cold terrine-y type things aren’t usually my first choice in a sweet or savory version, but this had a very nice Meyer lemon flavor, which is not as tart as traditional lemon. And the cookie on the side was a nice complement. There was a bit of lemon pulp on the side, which when eaten with the dish gave me the flash of a sour patch kid (yes, can you tell I have young children?). Still wouldn’t be my dessert of choice, but it was a nice refreshing thing and we both enjoyed it.

So I liked everything. Did I swoon over everything? No. But I enjoyed the experience and I love knowing that next time I go, the menu will be completely different. All in all, I think Recess is going to be quite a successful enterprise. There are, apparently, enough people in this town that can appreciate culinary creativity and can just deal with what is served. I also love the fact that hopefully continued success of Recess will actually introduce people to new flavors and foods since you cannot always go with your comfort zone here. The only thing I lament is that there wasn’t cooked seafood on the night I was there, because I think Chef Hardesty handles seafood with probably more skill than most in our city. Ahhh…but maybe next time.

And since I know Recess has been given lots of free advice about how to “improve” the concept, and I know the concept has been tweaked somewhat since its opening, here’s my two cents. I would love to see a dessert choice and a cheese choice—that would be pretty easy right? But no matter what, Recess is certainly a breath of fresh air on our dining scene and I am glad to have it. I will be back very soon.

Recess
4907 N. College Ave
Indy 46205
317/925-7529
http://www.recessindy.com/

(Apolo Anton Ohno shows off the Speed Skater equivalent of jazz hands as he indicates to the crowd how many medals he has one. Note to Ohno: Don't worry. We've actually been keeping track!)

Apolo Anton Ohno picked up his seventh career Olympic medal in short track skating on Saturday night, making him the most decorated American Winter Olympian ever, and the most decorated short-track speed skater from any country.

It was a very intense night of short track racing in the 1000m event. Both Ohno and American J.R. Celski made it through the quarterfinals to the semis, but there was a bit of a controversy in Celski's semifinal heat. During the race, Francois Hamelin of Canada bumped Celski from behind. Replays showed that the Canadian was manhandling Celski throughout the race, even briefly holding on to him, causing Celski to lose his position in the race. It also resulted in Celski shrugging Hamelin off and knocking him down. Celski then fell out of position and lost. After the race, the judge ruled that Celski knocked the Canadian Hamelin to the ground, which earned the former a disqualification. Also, even though Hamelin wasn't in scoring position when he got knocked down, he was advanced to the final. The ruling doesn't make sense to me, but it's all history now. Five skaters moved on to the final: two from hateful South Korea, Ohno, and the brothers Hamelin from Canada.

Okay, I have to be on the road by 7:30 a.m. today, heading south to Lexington, to give the second of two essay-writing workshops at Boxerwood Gardens. This means I don't have a lot of time to write this morning, so it seemed like a good time to post a picture WMRA's Terry Ward took two days ago. I thought it might be of interest to you, particularly if you've never been to the WMRA studios before.

Yesterday on Morning Edition, we aired what's called a two-way interview (i.e. a conversation) between local ME host Bob Leweke and Virginia Insight host/reporter Tom Graham discussing what's going on in the Virginia General Assembly. Tom had just gotten back from Richmond, covering what's known as cross-over day; the day when all legislative bills under consideration cross over from the House to the Senate or vice-versa.

Sometimes "2-ways" are done live, but since there was some lead time before this one and it wasn't a breaking story, we decided to record it the afternoon before. The red-headed guy in the picture is WMRA  Program Director and production wizard, Matt Bingay. He's in the on-air studio running the board (controlling sound levels and sound balance) and recording Tom Graham and Bob Leweke, whom you can see through the studio window. They are seated in what we call the talk show studio. People in the two soundproof rooms can communicate visually and through microphones.

After Matt digitally records Tom and Bob, he'll trim their conversation to fit a particular time slot in Morning Edition. That done, he'll load the digital audio file into our automation system.

All Bob has to do to air the interview is punch a button on that board in the on-air studio.

Making radio fascinates me. If the process fascinates you, as well, please come by and visit the WMRA studio. We love where we work, are very grateful to you for helping us work there, and would be so proud to show you around.

(By the way, if you look closely, you can see Terry Ward reflected in the talk show studio window.)