FAVORITE TV JUDGES

I have watched this woman, Judge Judith Sheindlin, on and off, for years. I find TV Judge Shows relax me, distract me, kind of rev me up before I do my daily exercises. Judy is fascinating, but my schedule has changed, so I found two other distracting judges.

Let me introduce you to Judge Alex Ferrer, 54, married, with two children. He grew up and was educated in Miami. With his JD degree from the University of Miami School of Law, he's been a police officer, trial  lawyer, a renowned Florida judge, and presided over the "The People's Court" for nine years.

I like his looks; like the way he's always calmly in control, even when he's put off by disrespectful or seriously ignorant litigants. You'll see in this short video that his manner, and ironic sense of humor are fun.  Alas, he recently announced that August 29, 2014 will be his show. 


My new, definitely favorite judge right now is Marilyn Milian. She reminds me of me -- not just her red hair -- she's friendly, down-to-earth, often amused and unpredictable. Out of the blue, she'll expresses with a grunt (even a shout), what she's really feeling. If a litigant is fudging with the truth, she knows it and says so. She was so angry at a plaintiff recently, I wondered if the network executives, worried about losing advertisers, would fire her.

I have to admit, Marilyn isn't just a distraction that gets me exercising. I have, on a couple of occasions, postponed my workout and watched an entire segment.
 
Hey, maybe my favorite judge is a perfect distraction because so many things are annoying -- things you take for granted suddenly change -- the time, the price, the procedure changes. The rules change, and favor the sponsor much more -- intolerably more -- than what you can accept. You are forced to find something or someone else. Marilyn gives me a chance to rage against changing times.



(THIS VIDEO IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE; TRY THIS ONE)

YAY OR BOO GOOGLE GLASS?

"SPY GLASSES help you do what you want to do," said Google’s co-founder, Sergey Brin, when he announced "Project Glass" five years ago.

"The glasses work like a hands free smart phone, displaying messages, images, and maps of the world in front of you. The glasses have built-in cameras that allow you to capture moments without disrupting them."

Saying that, Brin tossed his baby son into the air and declared, “If I tried to capture that with a camera I’d drop my son.”

What a gesture, what a way to show us that Google Glass -- those eye glasses -- were something we were going to want to buy.

In 2012  I blogged about Google Glass -- the actual device really couldn't be bought yet -- it was one of those futuristic things, like driverless cars.

Can you buy Google Glass now?  Well, you could order it.  Ebay listed some "like new" Google Smart Glasses -- prices -- $1550 to $6500. In April, Google announced you can buy Google Glass, but only wear it for a day, and of course get a full refund. The wear-for-a day plan is still part of Google's pilot project.

I can't help wondering who owns the photos and recordings, and what about the folks you record without getting permission. Meanwhile, Google is ironing out another serious problem -- the battery doesn't last long enough. Their digital photography experts are working on using "nanotechnology," (using teeny batteries); experts are also  experimenting with “gesture-based” technology, that would let you take photos with the blink of your eye.

Hey, maybe Google Glass will replace smartphones, and give us more mobility -- utter Mobility -- global, universal, ultimate freedom from lots of other things that go with being a human?

Anyhow, keep your eyes wide open, and go with the flow of it -- sooner or later the price will come down and you can try it Though personally, I can't imagine why in the world I'd ever wear Google Glass, I suggest we just "row, row, row ours  boats gently, down the stream."

Row, row ... upstream? downstream? are we heading for the rapids? A waterfall? This music expresses my trepidations. 

(VIDEO) CAMELOT (revisited)

This video was made on Aug 29, 2010.

It's fun to discuss how in the world John Cullum, who was not a singer, managed to get his first job in a Broadway musical.

Back in those days, John Cullum was working mostly as an understudy, doing bit parts for Joseph Papp's "Shakespeare in the Park," and going to auditions for musicals that he invariably flubbed!

The night John went on for one of actors who was playing a rather important part, he was discovered by Allan Lerner's right hand man, and our lives changed.

IS "TIME" OUT OF DATE?

When Nancy Gibbs, long time senior editor, took over as managing editor of Time Magazine, I cheered. I like her writing. I like her point of view; her sense of what's important more or less fitted with mine.

But lately, many -- no -- most of Time's recent cover stories -- "Fake Pot," "Rape On Campus," "Last Days 'Mad Men," "Saving Preemies," "Transgender Star of a new TV show, Laverne Cox," -- do not really interest me.

I'm sure these popular topics appeal to men and women, subscribers and readers, who are mostly concerned about their own lives -- their space and place in America. Hey, what's more important, truly important and intriguing, than the territory of you?

Anyhow, I flip through the magazine's pages and rarely pause to put a check-mark on something I want to read and pursue further. Turning the pages, the topics seem ho-hum, and not in tune with what's on my mind.

I gotta say -- I don't feel safe. Night noses wake me -- a siren. a boom -- is it the bomb? Is it IT? Is our building, our block, the city, going-going gone?

Okay, in your own territory, life is less stressful, probably easier and more enjoyable, when your mind is full of the latest popular doings. But hey, are Nancy Gibbs and her bosses diverting us -- making a lot of other stuff-and-nonsense important to keep us from thinking, wondering, worrying, trying to figure out how to fix, repair, or change -- do something -- about the bad things that are going on?

Could it possibly be a way, a tactic that keeps us not focused on the doomful things that might gather momentum -- like a snow ball that could get larger and larger as it rolls around and down the mountain?

For me the snowball's melting, mushy. I don't trust Time. Aside from the cover stories, there are plenty of articles filled with details, opinions, numbers, polls, percentages -- research on top of the research -- that obscures details that prove something-or-other is a major dangerous problem.

Yes, the other urgent, festering, dangerous, unsolved issues in the territory of you and me, are tucked in between ads, photos, articles, and cover stories.

I admire Nancy Gibbs, but she's an employee controlled by her conservative, probably rich, probably Republican bosses. Am I thinking paranoically?  Hmm. Probably.

Anyway, I think Time is behind the times. I'm not renewing my subscription.