text:
I am rooted in the me who is on this adventure.
When Missouri defensive end Michael Sam announced publicly over the weekend that he's gay, the negative responses predictably broke down into two groups: the proud, unrepentant homophobes who called him an abomination and a faggot, and the folks who insisted they weren't homophobic but just wondered why Sam had to be all up in their faces about his sexual orientation.
The second group would like you to believe there's plenty of daylight between themselves and the first. Do not let them get away with this. What these folks call "throwing it in people's faces," we straights just call "living normal lives." Don't we? I mean, I can post pictures of hot redheads on my blog, read (heh, "read") the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue on the bus to work, and introduce my fiancée around to everyone I know without any repercussions for these overt displays of heterosexuality. Yet all Michael Sam does is say he's gay and all of a sudden he's this flamboyant attention-seeker. Can we really not see the double-standard here?
The alternative to Michael Sam coming out and "throwing it in people's faces," of course, would be to stay in the closet, hide the truth about whom he loves … and basically act straight. In other words, do exactly the things that gay people had to do for centuries before we entered a slightly more enlightened time in which gay people aren't automatically condemned as evil perverts. Is that what the "throwing it in my face" crowd would prefer? Apparently, even having to acknowledge the existence of something they don't agree with or aren't comfortable with is too much for some people's delicate sensibilities to handle. You can call that a lot of things, but you can't call it "tolerance."
Keep a very close eye out for these people if you're a sports fan inclined to participate in comment threads or message boards. You'll hear a lot of them profess tolerance and declare that they don't care what someone's sexual orientation is, but then they'll take that a step further and wonder "why this is even a story" they have to hear about. The answer is pretty simple: It's a story because no active pro or college football player has come out before. And the reason none of them have come out before is because they feared the reactions of teammates, sportswriters and fans — i.e. members of the "stop throwing it in my face" crowd. The longer we as a society forced gay football players to live in the closet, the bigger a story we made it when one of them inevitably decided to come out.
If you're one of those folks who doesn't like reading all this news coverage of a player's homosexuality, try this: Instead of complaining to anyone who will listen about how you don't want to have to hear about it, just pipe down. The less of a fuss we make about the first gay player coming out, the sooner the next player will come out, and the next one, and the next one after that, until openly gay professional athletes are as common and non-newsworthy as the sun rising in the East. That's what a tolerant, non-homophobic person like yourself really wants … isn't it?
We can argue all day about whether Georgia's had the necessary killer instinct on the field, but do we have it off the field as well? And in the end, is that a more pertinent question?
Senator Blutarsky had a very insightful post yesterday pivoting off of Aaron Murray's complete lack of Heisman buzz to ask whether "this passiveness creeps into other areas" of the Georgia program. Even as someone who follows individual awards about as closely as I follow Canadian politics — from the silly marketing contest of the Heisman on down — I'll certainly admit to some major pangs of regret that Murray's spectacular Georgia career hasn't gotten more publicity than it has. And I, too, have wondered if maybe the Georgia football program as a whole should be willing to stand up for itself more.
Before I launch into too much of a diatribe here, let me say that as someone who is proud to hold a Georgia diploma, I am equally proud of the way our athletic department conducts itself. I'm sure Georgia Tech fans will drop their teeth when they hear me say it, but I think we operate in a pretty classy and ethical way over at Butts-Mehre. I'm proud that the "Mark Richt has lost control of…" meme has faded away as people have seen just how tight a ship Richt runs in terms of discipline. Certainly tighter than what Urban Meyer ran at Florida, as people are beginning to find out. Or to cite another example, it's been a long time since we had any Jeremy Hills on our team — Richt has cut ties with players for misconduct far less serious than either of the offenses for which Hill has been permitted to skate.
While we're holding our players accountable when they do wrong, though, are we spending equal effort promoting them when they've done right? Or defending them when they haven't done wrong at all? Here I'm thinking of the way we just meekly accepted A.J. Green's four-game suspension for selling his own property back in 2010, while other players were missing less time for shadier dealings. Does this passivity filter down to the way our players perform on the field?
And does it affect the way high-school recruits perceive our program and its place in the national hierarchy? Do they perceive Georgia as a place that will stand up for them and market them well for their achievements? With the usual caveat about how the state of Georgia has so much blue-chip talent that Mark Richt literally can't sign them all, I wonder if our don't-make-waves attitude has something to do with the ease with which coaches such as Nick Saban, Gus Malzahn and Hugh Freeze can come into this state and grab prospects Georgia desperately wants. (It's certainly not a matter of program stature — look at the state Auburn and Ole Miss were in when Malzahn and Freeze got there.)
Let me be clear: This is not a call for Georgia to be loosening the reins on discipline (well, except for our draconian marijuana policy, but we can have the drug-legalization debate another time) or to demand any less of our players when it comes to being upstanding citizens. For example: As much as it's driven me crazy this season to see Nick Marshall, a former Georgia player, leading Auburn to an out-of-nowhere national-championship bid, I wouldn't change a thing about how Georgia dealt with him back in February 2012. If I'm Mark Richt, I'm not about to stand in front of my team and tell them that they have to continue sharing locker-room space with someone who stole from them. And I certainly don't want Georgia developing a reputation as a program where QBs can go to rehab their image after they've been chased away for malfeasance elsewhere.
But I would like to see Georgia market the many good guys it has more aggressively, both for what they produce on the field and what they achieve off of it. I want more people to know what an amazing human being Aaron Murray is — not just as the SEC's all-time leader in passing yards and TDs but as someone who does stuff like this. I want people to know how involved Chris Conley is as a student leader (in addition to being a proud Star Wars nerd). I want people to know how smart Arthur Lynch is so that once his NFL career is over, he can slide right into a run for Congress.
And when the NCAA screws over players like A.J. Green — or Ray Drew and Ramik Wilson, victims of the two worst targeting calls I've ever seen during this year's Vanderbilt game — I want us raising holy hell about it. Enough of this "don't make waves, we'll handle it through official channels" stuff. So Mark Richt or Greg McGarity might get fined for speaking out too harshly against the officials? Pay the fine and move on. It's not like we can't afford it.
Mark Richt is never going to be Nick Saban and our athletic department is never going to be Alabama, or Auburn, or LSU, or [insert longtime rival here]. That's not what I'm asking for. I'm simply asking for our athletic department to stand up for its players — and itself. Nice guys don't necessarily finish last, but meek, accepting ones typically do. At times it's been tough reconciling that fact with our overwhelming emphasis on running a "classy," "proper" program, but Richt, McGarity and the rest of the folks at the top simply have to be more confident that we can promote, market and defend ourselves more aggressively without selling away our souls.
You deserved better, Aaron Murray.
In 2010, you deserved better than what the NCAA gave you, when they forced you to go without A.J. Green for the first four games of your college career. Who knows how different that first awful month and a half would've gone if you'd had a future NFL Hall of Famer to throw to. Maybe those games against South Carolina, Arkansas, Mississippi State and Colorado go differently, and instead of the worst season of Mark Richt's career, we're looking back on an inspiring 10-win campaign led by a redshirt freshman.
In 2011, you deserved better than what the fans gave you, when we were rolling our eyes and grumbling about how you "couldn't win the big one," completely ignoring the fact that you'd led us from a losing season to 10 wins, an SEC East title and Georgia's first season sweep of the Tennessee-Florida-Auburn-Georgia Tech rivalry quadrifecta in decades.
In 2012, you deserved better than what fate gave you, when you went up against Nick Saban's Alabama juggernaut in the biggest game of the season and didn't blink even once — and nearly led the Dawgs to what would've been a comeback victory for the ages, only to fall five yards short. Fifteen feet short of a massive upset, an SEC title and what almost certainly would've been a savaging of Notre Dame for the national championship.
And in 2013, you deserved better than … well, everything. You deserved better than a painfully green defense that forced you to pile the team on your back and win shootouts on practically a weekly basis. You deserved better than to have an all-world safety valve like Todd Gurley taken away from you, followed by nearly every one of your top receivers. You deserved better than to have yet another thrilling comeback win stolen away from you, this time by that fluke play at Auburn. And you deserved better than to have your Georgia career end with an ACL tear on Senior Night, for Christ's sake, turning what should've been a wonderful send-off (and our most dominating victory of the season) into a glorified memorial service.
And dammit, you deserve better than what I'm giving you right now, because you deserve to be remembered as something other than the unluckiest quarterback in Georgia history.
Here's hoping something finally goes your way and you're remembered for being a different kind of Georgia quarterback — the best one.
You always have been, are now and always will be a DGD, No. 11. Get well soon, and wherever you go next, good luck.
Is to get a QB who was kicked out of another SEC school for stealing shit.
After a one-week hiatus for the entirely expected (but much appreciated) blowout win over Appalachian State, the Manic-Depressive Preview returns for what we thought back in July and August was going to be another cruise-control win at Auburn. To the entire nation's shock, however, the Tigers are currently 9-1 and ranked No. 7 by the AP — damn you, Gus Malzahn, you brilliant fiend — so it looks like we might have an actual game on our hands. As for our individual previewers, they're approaching this unexpected development pretty much how you'd expect. Let's sit back and see whether they can keep from coming to blows as they hash out the 117th meeting of the Deep South's Oldest Rivalry.
Manic Doug: Hooo, boy, that win over Florida was really something, huh?
Depressive Doug: Yeah, something that probably took 10 or 15 years off my life. I'd really appreciate it if we didn't have any more games like that this season.
MD: Hey, it was totally worth it. Beating the Gators, whether they're good or bad, has always been the cure for what ails us. If we can carry the momentum from that game through the rest of the season, we'll end up 9-3 and in perfect shape for a decent bowl game.
DD: Already predicting us to run the table, huh. Great.
MD: Why not? Under Richt we're 14-1 in regular-season games after we've beaten Florida. Fifteen and one if you count last week's win.
DD: Sure, you focus on the 15. I'll focus on the 1 — the 2004 game at Auburn, where we got steamrolled by a Tiger team that ended up going undefeated. A team that bears a lot of similarities to this year's Auburn squad, I might add.
MD: How you figure? That team had an incredible defense and a QB who could throw. This year's Auburn squad, good as they are, has neither of those things.
DD: But they have a ground attack that's averaging 320 yards a game. That's good for third in the nation — even Georgia Tech is staring up at them in the rushing rankings right now.
MD: So what? Our defense has improved dramatically over the past few weeks — since that week we got lit up by LSU, we've decreased the number of yards we've allowed every single game. And even though our secondary is still struggling a bit, our front seven is only allowing 3.4 yards per carry, which means our defensive strength matches up perfectly with their big strength on offense.
DD: So Auburn rushing for more than 300 yards a game merits a "so what" from you, but Georgia's defense looking good against the likes of Vanderbilt, Florida and App State is significant. OK then. Glad you've got your priorities straight.
MD: So here's a question, is it "significant" that Auburn's pass defense is ranked 81st in the country? And other than Texas A&M and LSU, it's not like they've faced a bunch of juggernaut passing attacks, either.
DD: When you've been blowing people out the way Auburn has been the last few weeks, they're going to pass a lot more to try and keep up, so no, I don't think that's such a big deal.
MD: Fine. We'll see what your reaction is when Aaron Murray is lacing that defense for more than 400 yards this weekend.
DD: Murray hasn't had even a 300-yard passing game since our receiving corps was wiped out against Tennessee, but sure, have fun believing that.
MD: He also didn't have Todd Gurley for most of that stretch, either. But with Gurley back to give the Auburn defense something to think about, we've got a real shot at putting some points on the board. Against ranked opponents — LSU, Ole Miss and A&M, all of whom have balanced, productive offenses — Auburn's allowing more than 500 yards a game.
DD: OK, so best-case scenario, we have to win a shootout like we were doing the first few weeks of the season, only without Keith Marshall and the top tier of our receiving corps. You really think we can manage that, particularly with the kind of ball-control offense Auburn's capable of playing?
MD: I absolutely do, 'cause I don't know if you caught the tail end of the Florida game, but we're capable of playing a little ball control ourselves, and against a much better defense than the one we'll see this weekend, I might add. Here's the X-factor, though: While Georgia is relatively healthy and confident for the first time in more than a month, Auburn is looking ahead to the Iron Bowl. To read their blogs and message boards, they're already counting the Georgia game as a win and just biding their time until Saban comes to town. Well, fuck that. I'm thinking they're gonna come out a little flat and Georgia's gonna be on fire, and we're gonna punch them in the mouth with a few quick scoring drives just like we did against Florida. Auburn's too good to stay down for too long, and they'll eventually get their heads screwed on straight and start moving the ball, but that's when we start giving it to Gurley, Green and Douglas to grind out the clock and keep the ball out of the hands of the Auburn running backs. We'll salt it away with another one of those long, late-game drives and win by a score of 37-27.
DD: Are you kidding me? A double-digit win over a top-10 opponent on the road? When was the last time we did that?
MD: Hold on, lemme look it up.
DD: Well, trust me, it's gonna take a while, so while you're doing that, let me school everyone with the unfortunate truth: All this "motivation" and "looking ahead" talk you're putting out there is the kind of contrived mumbo-jumbo even Kirk Herbstreit wouldn't fall for. Yes, Georgia typically gets a boost from a win in Jacksonville, but not enough of one to win when the opponent is markedly superior. And no, I don't think you can just count on Auburn to be looking ahead, not after we've pasted them by 38 points each of the last two years. They're too well-coached to treat this game as an afterthought, so I think it's they who will be punching us in the mouth early on thanks to Nick Marshall, who's a much more efficient passer than you or anyone else seems to want to give him credit for. Our defense may be improving, and good for them, but I still don't like our chances against a mobile QB. So it's Georgia, not Auburn, who will be playing a futile game of catch-up in the second half against an opponent that's extremely good at handing the ball off, moving the chains and grinding out clock. Final score, Auburn 45, Georgia 30.
MD: For your information, we beat a ranked opponent on the road just two years ago. Georgia Tech was ranked 23rd when we played them and we won by two touchdowns.
DD: Seriously? That's it? Georgia Tech?
MD: You asked a question, I answered it. Now who feels stupid?
DD: Not you, clearly, since you lack both the self-awareness to know when you're wrong and the ability to feel shame.
MD: I have no idea what any of that means, so since you're such a smart guy, why don't you average up our score predictions so I can get over to the liquor store and get on with my day.
DD: Our predictions average out to an Auburn win by a score of 36-34.
MD: They do? Wait, I want to change my prediction.
DD: No, I'm not sitting through another round of this. Nor do I have any desire to have my math checked by someone who cheated his way through trigonometry in 11th grade.
MD: OK, you know that stuff is bullshit. When am I ever gonna need to know any of that?
DD: If the only education you ever received in your life was knowledge you thought you'd "need," the only classes you would've ever taken would be mixology, hairstyling and female sexuality.
MD: That sounds like a pretty awesome slate, actually. You think there are any places where I could actually set up a schedule like that?
DD: Coincidentally enough, I think your best shot would be at Auburn. You could even take a class on fingerpainting while you were at it.
MD: Owwww! Look at you! You may be a total defeatist, but you still manage to keep it frosty!
DD: Hey, I have to figure out some way to have fun this weekend.
MD: Huh. I always thought fun was a foreign concept to you.
I've flirted with this decision for years, but I think I'm finally done with being a Washington Redskins fan.
It was bad enough when being a Redskins fan just meant an incompetent garden gnome of an owner, a mausoleum of a stadium, and an unrelentingly shitty product on the field. Now, though, being a Redskins fan means you have to share oxygen with the likes of Rick Reilly and this asshole. Look, I'm no stranger to guilt by association — as a Southerner, a practicing Catholic and, hell, as a Georgia Bulldogs fan, I realize that some of the groups I belong to count some truly disgusting people among their members. But at least with those three, I get something out of it, be it Southern cooking, a feeling of inner peace, or the occasional SEC title. Other than that brief frisson of hope when RGIII was drafted, I haven't gotten anything out of my Redskins fandom in more than 20 years.
Seriously, go read the Twitter flame war at that second link: That idiot really thinks that if you want the Redskins' name changed to something less racist, you're not a "true fan." There was another dude on Twitter the other day who said if the 'Skins changed their name, he'd stop being a fan. This is basically saying the name is more important than the team itself. As personal indignation goes, that's right there on a stupidity level with "I love the taste of Starbucks coffee and have enjoyed making it a part of my daily routine for decades, but if they change their name to Seattle Brewing Company, they are DEAD to me, you hear me? DEAD!"
Not to turn this into the kind of first-world-problem pathos-fest that the New York Times would write a 5,000-word thinkpiece about, but this was a difficult decision to arrive at. I mean, I was a Redskins fan long before I was a Georgia fan, or cared about college football at all. My dad grew up in Fairfax County just across the river from D.C. and comes from an entire family of rabid 'Skins fans; he had me in a little tiny Art Monk jersey when I was just three or four years old. I remember Doug Williams and Timmy Smith stunning the Broncos in Super Bowl XXII and Mark Rypien blowing the Bills off the map in Super Bowl XXVI; I stuck with the team through Norv Turner, Jim Zorn and Steve fuckin' Spurrier. I've seen some great things from this franchise and I've eaten a lot of shit on its behalf, too.
And for the record, my continued fandom was not and is not contingent on the team changing its name. I mean, we've all known for a while now that the Redskins name is kinda racist; if that alone were my breaking point, I would've leapt off this sinking ship years ago. I figured that, like most symbols of racism in this country, the Redskins name would get killed off eventually, so instead of just dumping the team wholesale I could remain a fan, advocate for that change from the inside, and celebrate when the day finally came.
Unfortunately, this is actually looking less plausible as the days wear on. And now, if you try to advocate for that change as a Redskins fan, you get people saying you're not a true fan and should get the hell out. Meanwhile, people outside the fan base think I'm tacitly condoning racism by staying in. I'm subjecting myself to this why, exactly? So I can root for a team owned by an obnoxious bridge troll and that's only notched six winning seasons in the past two decades? No thanks, man. I got plenty of other things I can spend my Sundays doing.
For a long time now I've lamented Redskins fandom as the death of hope — the franchise has not performed well of late, and there's really no hope of things getting consistently better until the team can be wrested from Dan Snyder's kung fu grip. Sadly, the same appears to be true of the mentality of the fan base. I've been stuck among the NFL equivalent of the people who fought to keep the stars and bars on the Georgia state flag — people who not only display a symbol of racism but revel in it and attempt to justify it — and so long as Snyder is setting the example for them to follow, they're not going to stop being dicks about this, either.
With that, I'm done. It feels bad, but it's felt pretty shitty since Dan Snyder bought the team to begin with. So while I may be quitting while I'm behind, that seems like a perfectly sane act when your only other option is falling even further back. I've got a #24 Champ Bailey jersey (sniff), a very nice fitted with the old-school "R" logo and a really cool vintage-look sweatshirt with the old-old-school "R" logo on it, and if you're a Washington fan made of sterner stuff than I am, you're welcome to give them a loving home.
In the meantime, I guess it's time for me to start casting about for a new rooting interest. The Falcons would be the logical choice given my geographical location and peer group, but honestly, all options are on the table at this point.
Except the fucking Cowboys. I may be a broken man right now, but I've still got standards.
I was in the first class of Georgia high-schoolers to get a full ride to UGA thanks to the HOPE Scholarship. HOPE didn't pay for my dorm room or the meal plan, but my parents took care of that and threw me a couple hundred bucks a month for incidentals. ("Incidentals" usually turned out to be "a six-pack I got one of my 21-year-old friends to buy for me," but I bet that was a case for a lot of the kids in Athens.) Eventually I started augmenting that (minimally) by working at The Red & Black, which was as close to a real job as I had the entire time I was in college.
A high-school football player who signs with the Georgia Bulldogs gets the same free tuition I got, and (I believe) free accommodations and meals, but beyond that, nothing — nothing that translates into liquid walking-around money he can use for new clothes or a tank of gas, at least. Between classes, football practice and studying — in the library as well as the film room — he probably doesn't have enough hours in the day to work even a part-time job. And his parents may or may not have enough money to throw him some extra every month like mine did. If he's anything like former Alabama tackle D.J. Fluker, who was living out of a car after Hurricane Katrina, they almost certainly don't.
Yet I could earn as much extra cash as I wanted however I wanted without anyone saying anything about it — while Fluker, who worked and sweated harder than I ever did in college, allegedly takes some money from an agent and it's a major scandal.
It occurred to me the other day just how big a disconnect there is between how we view football players on Saturdays and Sundays and how we treat them the rest of the week. On weekends, they're gods; we pack the population of a small city into stadiums to cheer them on, live vicariously through them via fantasy teams and message boards. The other five days of the week, though, fuck those guys. Someone suggests college players should get paid, we levitate with outrage — those guys are already getting a free education, you want to give them MORE?!? NFL players sue because the league didn't level with them about the true health implications of the concussions they subject themselves to every Sunday, they get rewarded with knobs like Pete Prisco basically calling them pussies in a public forum. Look, players, we might ask you to sacrifice your bodies on a weekly basis so that we can bank our dollars and our very sense of self-worth on you, but don't go thinking that means we care about you as, you know, actual people.
It's not just football players, though. At every level in this country, every walk of life, you find people and professions we publicly claim to respect while steadfastly refusing to turn that respect into something concrete. Sure, teachers, we'll talk all day long about how important your work is and how you're shaping the minds of our future leaders and visionaries, but don't think we won't try to bust up your unions and cut your benefits. Same with you, autoworkers and manufacturing employees of all types: We'll bemoan the loss of a manufacturing base in this country and decry the fact that all those jobs have gone overseas to Third Worlders who will work for almost nothing, but that doesn't mean we want to pay your asses any more than we absolutely have to, and God forbid you try to organize. Hell, our soldiers don't even get a reprieve. "Support the Troops" has practically become a Pavlovian response anytime someone dares disagree with American foreign policy or defense spending, but when the ax finally does have to fall on the military budget, it falls on benefits and pensions — we wouldn't dare touch all those expensive Joint Strike Fighters, even if they're not actually any good.
From teachers and grunt soldiers all the way on up to football players, we'll claim to respect you, right up until the point when you suggest you deserve to get paid more — then we'll rail away at you until you're properly shamed into submission. Meanwhile, disgraced CEOs take home golden parachutes worth tens of millions of dollars after flying their companies straight into the ground. (And if you suggest executives shouldn't get paid that much, we'll call you a communist, a 47-percenter who just wants the federal government's sanction to mooch off the people who are actually "creating wealth" in this country. Whatever that means.)
Look: You cannot claim to respect work in this country if you disdain and trivialize the workers. And you certainly can't expect future generations to value gainful employment if you show them they'll only be denigrated, underpaid and cast aside once they achieve it. We have to respect workers, and that respect includes not automatically blowing them off or insulting them the minute they have the temerity to suggest they should get paid more.
No, nobody put a gun to D.J. Fluker's head and forced him to take the unlevel playing field Alabama and the NCAA offered him. Nobody put guns to the heads of the autoworkers in Detroit or the soldiers out on the battlefield. But that doesn't mean their situations were just brimming with choices. The "nobody put a gun" argument is a cop-out, an easy sidestep employed most frequently by people who did have options and haven't experienced true need. Sure, Fluker could've augmented his income with a job flipping patties at McDonald's — but so could you, and I don't see you rushing out to throw on a hairnet.
It's a nice system the NCAA has worked out: Lure high-schoolers in with the promise of a free education and the glamour of big-time college athletics, but then ensure that the liquid assets resulting from their blood, sweat and tears are reserved solely for higher-ups at their universities and, of course, the NCAA itself. In a perverse way, it's a relief to see that so-called "scandals" such as the ones swirling around Johnny Manziel and D.J. Fluker are finally opening people's eyes to what a rigged system this is. I just hope it also opens their eyes to how many other people in this country are stuck in a system rigged the exact same way.
Well, that didn't go so hot. Neither Manic Doug's in-your-face braggadocio nor Depressive Doug's uncharacteristically (and unnervingly) Zenlike nonchalance could lift the Dawgs to a victory last week, and now they head into this weekend 0-1 and in danger of being swept by the state of South Carolina, which is basically Ohio with nicer accents and a beach. How will this pressure affect their psyches? Let's preview this weekend's game and find out. IT'S TIME TO PLAY THE FEUD!
Depressive Doug: Oh, good, you're here. Quick question.
Manic Doug: Yeah, shoot.
DD: What do you think sounds better as a closer for a letter: "Thinking of you" or "With sincerest condolences"?
MD: Oh, you're writing a letter to the girl you went out with the other night? Most people just e-mail these days, dude.
DD: Ha-ha, shut up. This is serious.
MD: Who the hell are you writing to? Someone die?
DD: No, but someone's about to. And I just want Aaron Murray's mom to know how deeply I —
MD: Oh, fuck you. Fuck you. Are you fucking kidding me? We haven't even walked into the stadium and you're already —
DD: I'm just trying to be prepared, man. Look, we were both there. We saw how the offensive line left Murray unblocked like he owed them money in Clemson the other night. Now we're putting them all out there against Jadeveon Clowney and the rest of the South Carolina defense. What are the chances he even finishes the game, much less walks off the field under his own power?
MD: Stop it. You're embarrassing yourself and me. None of that's gonna happen.
DD: Why not?
MD: Because — because —
DD: Because why?
MD: Because fuck you again, it's just not! I got a good feeling about this game.
DD: Oh, well shoot, why don't I just put my entire 401(k) on Georgia and the points, then, if you've got a good feeling about it? If it's the same "good feeling" you had about Alabama in the SEC Championship Game last season, and LSU the year before that, how can I lose?
MD: You know, they say a team's biggest improvement happens between its first game and its second one.
DD: Well, we damn well better hope so. We couldn't even celebrate a touchdown last week without our top receiver blowing out his knee.
MD: Look, we had full contact drills this past week so the young'uns on defense could get better at tackling. The offensive line has been put on notice. Josh Harvey-Clemons will be back in the starting lineup. We're not gonna see the same team we saw last week.
DD: God, I hope not. Because that team would be lucky to get blown off the field 35-7 the way last year's team did against South Carolina.
MD: Um, did you not notice that even with Malcolm Mitchell out, even with Todd Gurley on the sideline for a big part of the game, and even with Aaron Murray getting knocked around every other play, we still managed to hang 500-something yards and 35 points on Clemson in front of a loud, hostile crowd? You don't think that bodes well for us this weekend?
DD: I would, if Clemson's defense was anywhere near as tough as Carolina's. But you and I both know they're not.
MD: But it's not like Clemson's a bunch of scrubs, though. They brought back nearly everyone in their front seven and blitzed like crazy from about midway through the second quarter on. Meanwhile, let's not go acting like the Gamecocks have this lockdown secondary. They were only fifth in the SEC in pass defense last year and lost arguably their best player, D.J. Swearinger.
DD: Well, that sounds great. If Aaron Murray can stay upright for more than a couple plays at a time, I'll be sure to remember you said that.
MD: But look, there's something else we can do to keep the heat off Murray, and that's run the ball. Specifically run it away from Clowney. They didn't face a running threat like Todd Gurley last week from the Tarheels — hell, they probably didn't see a running threat like Keith Marshall, either. Those two guys will give us an edge —
DD: Again, that's assuming our offensive line can open up holes for them. Which they sure as hell didn't do last week.
MD: Dude, were we even watching the same game? We rushed for more than 200 yards!
DD: Yeah, but you take out the long runs by Gurley and Quayvon Hicks and we only had 110 yards at less than three per carry.
MD: And you take out the supernatural athletic ability and Herschel Walker was just some random dude from Wrightsville who did a shitload of pushups. Trust me. We'll be fine. We started out favored by five points, people bet like crazy on South Carolina and still only managed to bring the line down to three, and the favorite has won 11 out of the last 12 in this series —
DD: Yes, I'm sure Jadeveon Clowney is paying close attention to the Wynn Las Vegas so he knows exactly how hard he's supposed to play this weekend. Do you have anything other than random trends or "I got a feeling" to point to a Bulldog win this weekend? 'Cause if not, just give your score prediction now so I can finish this condolence letter.
MD: I think we're gonna come out looking a lot more settled on the offensive line, which means we keep the Carolina defense on its toes by alternating between the run and the pass. We'll pound 'em with Gurshall in the beginning, run them away from Clowney and wear his ass out having to chase them, and then once they've gotten the idea that we're afraid to sit Murray back in the pocket, that's when we launch a few downfield to Chris Conley or Justin Scott-Wesley. On the other side of the ball, we find that the Gamecock offense isn't quite as shifty without Marcus Lattimore in the lineup, and that our defense isn't quite as helpless with some tackling practice under their belts and with Harvey-Clemons roaming the backfield. It'll be a close game, but we'll pull ahead in the second half and stop Carolina on one last desperate drive to win 28-24.
DD: That would be nice, but I don't see how anyone who watched last year's game in Columbia could come to that rosy a conclusion. Given how green our defense is — even with Harvey-Clemons on the field — there's no reason whatsoever to think Connor Shaw won't light us on fire with the play-action exactly the same way he did last season. The Gamecocks may not have Marcus Lattimore this season, but they do have Mike Davis, and he averaged nearly 10 yards a carry last week, so that's another thing our defense is gonna have to account for. South Carolina starts pulling away early, and the only reason they don't beat us worse than they did last year is because they're playing away from home. Final score, Carolina 34-14. And Aaron Murray gets sacked seven times.
MD: Ugh, that's terrible. That's basically torture porn. I can't believe you'd even say something like that.
DD: Oh, I'm not saying it's not terrible. But at this point, there is absolutely no reason to believe it won't happen.
MD: No reason other than faith in a loving God Who doesn't want to see the innocent punished unnecessarily.
DD: If we had one of those, Alabama wouldn't have tipped that last pass in the SEC title game and Malcolm Mitchell would've caught it instead of Chris Conley.
MD: Well, I can see that "I'm just happy to be alive" bullshit from last week is well and truly out the window. And your ridiculous pessimism means that our predictions average out to a 29-21 loss for the Dawgs.
DD: God. I'd be thrilled if we only lost by that much.
MD: And started the season 0-2, with LSU still on deck before we even get out of September? To hell with that, man. You go on hating life and cowering in fear of Clowney. I'm gonna be out there screaming for his head until the very last second ticks off the clock.
DD: Well, good luck with that. If he wasn't afraid of last year's offensive line, I doubt he'd going to be too concerned with the likes of you.
MD: We'll see. Anyway, here's a closing for your letter to Mrs. Murray: "Terribly sorry … "
DD: Uh-huh, OK …
MD: " … I ever doubted your son, and with sincere regret for the fact that I am a complete assface … "
DD: You know very well I'm not writing that.
If you've just joined our live WHJS 7 On Your Side coverage: SBN Atlanta, the former home of the Manic-Depressive Preview and a whole bunch of other garbage I wrote, no longer has its own dedicated writers; it's strictly an aggregator for content from local SBN team sites. Which would've left the Manic-Depressive Preview without a home, but by popular demand — and I'm talking TWO REAL LIVE ACTUAL PEOPLE here, folks — I'm bringing it back here on Tumblr. Give thanks, you lucky fucks!
For those unfamiliar with how the MDP works, there are basically two diametrically opposed personalities fighting for control of Yours Truly in the week leading up to any given Georgia football game. Manic Doug believes that we are going to romp over every opponent, from the lowliest FCS scrub to the mightiest BCS-conference powerhouse, and that every woman within earshot will be charmed by his increasingly drunken antics, from the plainest library-bound nerd to Kate frickin' Upton. Depressive Doug, by contrast, believes none of those things; he is convinced that we'll scrape half-assedly by the gimme teams on our schedule and get humiliated by any opponent awake and motivated enough to fog a mirror. The Manic-Depressive Preview is where these two disparate personalities hash out their differences and come to some sort of agreement (but not really) about how the Dawgs are gonna do that week. Join them today as they chat about the Clemson game this weekend, and probably a bunch of other topics that mainly just involve them insulting each other's intelligence and/or manhood. Fun for the whole family!
DEPRESSIVE DOUG: Even though that's an NFL-specific catch phrase as opposed to college, yes. Yes, I am ready for some football. I'm actually kind of getting excited about this season.
MD: Wait, what? You're actually excited? As opposed to dreading every last snap and convincing yourself we're going to lose every last game?
DD: I think that's overstating the case a little bit, but you know, I think I've mellowed out some. I think I've learned to enjoy football a little. Like, Georgia's at a pretty good point now — two straight 10-win seasons, two straight SEC East titles, recruiting is humming right along — I think we've pulled out of that nosedive from 2009 and 2010, so hey, why not revel in it a little bit?
MD: Yeah! That's the spirit!
DD: And if we don't win every game — so what? I mean, who does?
MD: Well — OK, I mean, I guess I can understand that —
DD: We're obviously a strong program. We drop one game, maybe two in a season, why worry about that?
MD: Well, I mean —
DD: Or three? Anyone who'd get hung up on that just doesn't know what kind of a program we are.
MD: Wait, now all of a sudden you're talking about us taking three losses this year?
DD: Or four? I mean, it happens, but that doesn't mean we're —
MD: OK, stop. You've gone from enjoying Georgia football to predicting that we could end up with four losses at the end of the season. You can't even be positive the right way!
DD: Well, look at the first month of our schedule. There's three potential losses in those first four games alone. And you don't seriously expect us to go into Clemson, with Gameday in town, against one of the most potent offenses in the country, and come out of there with a win, do you?
MD: Dude, that's exactly what I expect us to do.
[awkward pause]
DD: Oh. Well. Agree to disagree, then!
MD: No no no, fuck that, we're not "agreeing to disagree" here. That ain't how this works. At the very least — the very least — you're gonna have to explain yourself.
DD: Well, look. First of all, we've only got, what, three starters coming back on defense? Going up against an offense that averaged more than 500 yards a game last season. Second, one of the new starters who did well last year and who we were counting on to make a big impact this year, Josh Harvey-Clemons, is suspended for this game. Finally, Clemson runs a fast-paced offense that had LSU's notoriously athletic players gasping for air by the fourth quarter of the Peach Bowl last year, and that was in an air-conditioned dome. I shudder to think what's going to happen with the temperatures in the 80s and 75-percent humidity on Saturday.
MD: Well, I can see all of your points — except the heat and humidity, dude, I mean, it's gonna be a fucking night game. But as to the others: Who's to say we can't just outscore the Tigers?
DD: Well, in theory, nobody. But how are we supposed to keep up with them if they're running 80-something plays a game on offense?
MD: Simple: We keep 'em off the field. We may not run as many plays as Clemson does per game, but we're more efficient with the ones we do run — we had the highest yards-per-play average of any team in the country last year. And we're a lot more balanced to boot. We've got a Heisman-caliber quarterback, a thousand-yard rusher in Todd Gurley, and a change-of-pace back, Keith Marshall, who'd be starting at all but a handful of schools in the country right now. All operating behind the deepest and most experienced line we've had in years. As for Clemson, yes, they've got Tajh Boyd and Sammy Watkins, but could you pick their starting tailback out of a lineup?
DD: Now that you mention it, no …
MD: Then let me help you here: His name is Roderick McDowell, and he had all of 450 rushing yards last season, more than half of which came against Ball State, Duke, Maryland and N.C. State. For all the talk about how many weapons Clemson has, I still think we've got more than they do. And every second that Gurley and Marshall are out there grinding out yardage is a second they're not getting to deploy their weapons on the field.
DD: In this day and age, I don't know if "slow the game down" is really a workable strategy. Particularly against this kind of offense.
MD: Well, you were just stewing about how our conditioning would hold up, right? Go on some long drives, grind out the clock, keep their offense off the field, give our defense a chance to catch its breath … and wear out theirs, which is just as big a question mark as ours is, quite frankly.
DD: How can you say that, though? They've got nearly their entire front seven back —
MD: A front seven that allowed more than 150 yards per game rushing last year, and more yards per carry than the Georgia defense that everybody considered such a disappointment. And their own coach has admitted numerous times over the summer that their secondary is a mess. Not good when they have to go up against the guy who was the second most efficient QB in the country in 2012, and who will have a full arsenal of receivers — including Malcolm Mitchell and Michael Bennett — for the first time in months.
DD: Look, I know our offense is going to score some points. Given the choice between our defense and theirs, though? At this point? I think I'd honestly rather have theirs. They're not coming off a season that was considered a disappointment from a defensive standpoint, and they're not having to replace guys like Jarvis Jones and John Jenkins. I mean, say whatever you want about last year's D, but those guys were one-of-a-kind players who were out there wreaking havoc on nearly every single snap. I think that by the end of the season, this year's unit will be great, but I'm just not prepared to believe it yet.
MD: Is it possible that we relied too heavily on Jarvis and Big John last year, though? And is it also possible that what we've got this year is a younger, hungrier, more motivated unit that might actually play better in the clutch?
DD: Man, you know, we had this nice, good-faith debate going on, and then you had to bust out with a suggestion that our defense might actually be better without Jarvis Jones, thereby abandoning all pretense at logic or reality.
MD: Hey, I didn't exactly say that. I mean, you ask me would I like to wave my magic wand and bring Jarvis and John Jenkins back, yes or no, and obviously I'm gonna answer "yes" a hundred times out of a hundred. But don't discount the talent we managed to recruit onto this team behind them. People are already talking about Jordan Jenkins as a guy who could be as good as Jones eventually. Amarlo Herrera and Ramik Wilson have already proven themselves at the linebacker spot. Mark Richt has already gone on record as saying Tray Matthews, even as a freshman, might be the best safety prospect we've had in his entire tenure in Athens. I mean, consider two years ago when we'd recruited the first "dream team" and were putting some of those guys out on the field for the first time — they were untested too, but all things considered, that worked out pretty well, didn't it?
DD: Yeah, but not right away — we gave up 80 points in our first two games and lost both. You saying that's what's gonna happen again this year?
MD: No. What I'm saying is this: Slower pace or no, we keep up with Clemson on the scoreboard in the first half. Then in the second half — get ready, I hope you're sitting down — we actually start pulling away based on our ability to run the ball and wear out their defense, while we put two defensive backs on Sammy Watkins and disrupt the most potent weapon in Tajh Boyd's arsenal. We goad him into a big mistake in the third or fourth quarter that puts the Tigers on the heels, and then we ride Gurshall to the finish, winning 44-34.
DD: Well, I'll grant you that we manage to keep up with them score for score in the first half, but in the second I think the exact opposite happens — our defense is the one that starts to get tired and Clemson capitalizes. We're further demoralized by a blown special teams play — maybe it's allowing a big kick or punt return, which we've certainly been known to do, or maybe it's a missed field goal since our kicking situation is still up in the air. But I think Clemson pulls ahead late and we can't hit paydirt on our last drive, and the Tigers win 35-28.
MD: Well, it's certainly nice to see your optimism for this season lasted 15 whole minutes. That's an improvement, I guess.
DD: Hey. I'm optimistic! Who knows, maybe we pull a win out of our rear end and build some momentum for what turns out to be a national-title campaign. But I'm not counting on it. Whatever happens happens.
MD: Man, I think I liked you better before. You were annoying as all hell, but at least you acted like you cared about this stuff. What are you on, Prozac or something?
DD: Yeah, 20 milligrams a day, actually —
MD: Well, stop taking that shit and self-medicate the right way — with Bulleit bourbon, like I do.
DD: Yeah, it's certainly turned you into a rational, well-adjusted person.
MD: Hey, fuck you, man, I'm perfectly rational and well-adjusted. And thanks to my optimism, our predictions average out to a 36-35 squeaker victory for the Dawgs, one I think I'll be in a much better position to enjoy than your ass will be.
DD: By "much better position," I assume you mean "hollering drunkenly from the stands in Memorial Stadium and practically daring security to throw you out on your rear end"?
MD: Man, we do know each other really well, don't we?
DD: Yeah. I missed this.


text:
What are Early Intervention Services? In 1986 the US Congress passed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (Public Law 102-119), also called IDEA. The purpose of this law was to help the individual states provide services for infants and toddlers with disabilities, and their families. Early assistance for these children can improve their development. Each state must have a system for delivering these Early Intervention Services.
Who qualifies for Early Intervention Services? The children who qualify are those who are known to have delayed development. Also included are those who have a physical or mental condition that will probably result in developmental delay.
What if a parent/primary caregiver has questions about their child's development? Usually the child's healthcare professional can answer any questions about child development. If a person has no regular source of health care, each state has a program to screen infants and toddlers for developmental disabilities. In some states the program is called Healthy Families, or maybe Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies.
What happens when a child is 3 years old?If a child is still considered developmentally delayed at 3 years of age, services are still available. They might be provided by a different state agency. In some states, a written transition plan is made for moving a child to the next agency. This plan is prepared by one of the professionals working with a parent/caregiver for a child's benefit.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1991, Public Law 102-119, Part H Biennial Evaluation Report - FY 93-94, Rehabilitation Nursing Foundation, (1994). Application of Rehabilitation Concepts to Nursing Practice. Skokie, IL Association of Rehabilitation Nurses, (1998). Professional Rehabilitation Nursing. Glenview, IL Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia 2000. 1993-1999 Microsoft Corporation. Washington State Department of Social&Health Services. www.wa.gov/dshs Department of Developmental Services, State of California. www.dds.cahwnet.gov
Leverage our buying power. We serve GOV/EDU/MIL, employers, facilities & inventors.
Account set up & astute solutions guidance.
Free edu catalogs for your staff & community.
Engage in our innovative medical & health care, sales, education & marketing programs.
Publishing, marketing & lead gen programs.
Vendors/Investors: full-service solutions.
Get Discovery Digest e-news updates, discounts, and exclusive offers.
Start receiving e-discoveries & specials.
EZ Publish our Discovery Digest free.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Hate the process after you go clothes shopping where you have to decide which outfit you'll wear first >
Formal dress 11' - Approx size 16-18 Present size 10
Love love love
"Hurt" Cover by Sophie May Metcalfe (by Sophie-May Metcalfe)
One of the most amazing voices i've heard in awhile.
Brave faces.
Boom! This was a good day ;)
My only regret.
/raises hand.
(Source: thecount)
This is gold! What do you see?


text:
Used Floor Mats
Used floor mats for your car are only a few clicks away. We'll help you get in touch with multiple salvage yards, all while saving you time and money. Replacing your floor mats for your car doesn't have to cost you an arm and a leg. In this day and age it's important to save money whenever you can. Buying used floor mats just makes sense.
Locate Used Floor Mats Now
Searching for used floor mats? If so, PartRequest.com's used auto parts locating service can help you find quality used floor mats from reputable salvage yards located throughout the United States and Canada.
Get the best deal on the parts you need! Our used auto parts locator service will help you get a great deal on the used floor mats you need for your car, truck, SUV or van. Get multiple quotes from junk yards and auto wreckers who compete for your business.
Find it Fast! Our large network of salvage yards ensures that you'll be able to find used floor mats fast, all from the comfort and convenience of your computer.
Place a part request to find used floor mats now.
Used Floor Mats for Sale


text:
2 Guys & A Mic – Sports Soup VIII – EP88
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (0.0KB)
We mourn the passing of Norm Van Lier, Johnny "Red" Kerr and Paul Harvey. Also, is the television show 24 propaganda? We discuss it with Ryan Poole of powerpoole.com
A little fun with the following challenge. Can you recast The Wiz without using Beyonce' or any American Idol participants. We want to hear from you on the 2 Guys & A Mic Forums.
The NBA, where Bailouts Happen
The Search Ends and the Lions Reaction
The newest member of the WhatcaTalkinBout and TPS Radio network, please check out all of the shows there and join our message board.
You can listen, download, email, twitter us. Once again I want to say thanks and stay subscribed.


text:
Map It
Map City Services
Metro Newsroom
LouisvilleKY.gov Links
Thursday March 3, 2011
For Immediate Release:Majority Caucus Louisville Metro CouncilContact: Tony Hyatt 574-4137/526-3622Following today's announcement of a settlement with members of the River City Fraternal Order of Police concerning take home cars, some members of the Majority Caucus have issued the following statements:
"I am glad we have resolved this issue and we are ready to move forward with regard to working with the men and women of Louisville Metro Police to make our communities safe. This is a good sign of better cooperation between leaders and public workers in our city. "
Councilwoman Madonna Flood District 24 Majority Leader
"I applaud the Mayor's decision to resolve this litigation. I hope the officers of the Louisville Metro Police understand we are ready to work with them on all issues from budget to Public Safety."
Councilwoman Barbara Shanklin, District 2 Caucus Vice-Chair
"I'm pleased this has been resolved on a bilateral basis. Any time we tap into our employees' paychecks it should be by mutual agreement pursuant to collective bargaining."
Councilman Jim King, District 10 President Louisville Metro Council
"It is great to see that Mayor Fischer is actively improving negotiations with Metro Governments labor organizations. Working to improve the relationships with the Mayor's Office and the police department is a very positive thing for the safety of our city."
Councilman David James, District 6
"I support the effort to resolve this problem through negotiations and appreciate the leadership of the administration. I agree with the Mayor and others who are ready to move forward and keep our focus on cooperation in all areas of government and public safety."
Councilman David Tandy, District 4
"I am pleased that we can do something that resolves this situation and improves morale for our police officers. I applaud the Mayor's effort."
Councilman David Yates, District 25
Sponsors:Madonna Flood (D) 24Barbara Shanklin (D) 2


text:
Red Bank - Local Area Photos and Information
Local Area Photos | Local Business Directory | Local Real Estate | Local Employment Center
Red Bank is a populated place located in Boone County at latitude 36.196 and longitude -93.267.
The elevation is 2,149 feet. Red Bank appears on the Osage NE U.S. Geological Survey Map. Boone County is in the Central Time Zone (UTC -6 hours).
Boone County: Cities & Towns | ZIP Codes | Schools | Features (airports, churches, hospitals, etc.)
BOUNDARY MAPS: | Township of Summit | Boone County
Red Bank - Searchable Map, Aerial Photos & Driving Directions
|BIG Map |
Driving Directions |
Data Source - USGS GNIS FID: 58470
BOUNDARY MAPS: | Township of Summit | Boone County
Nearby Cities, Towns & Census Designated Places
Red Bank, AR
(< 0.1 mile)
Batavia, AR (4.7 miles NNE)
Delmar, AR (4.7 miles WSW)
Capps, AR (5.1 miles ENE)
Carrollton, AR (5.5 miles NNW)
Grubb Springs, AR
(6.4 miles ENE)
Gaither, AR (6.7 miles ESE)
Little Arkansaw, AR (6.7 miles NNE)
Alpena, AR (7 miles NNW)
Compton, AR (7.1 miles SSW)
Nearby Neighborhoods, Subdivisions & Other Small Populated Places
Hill Top, AR
(3.9 miles S)
The Basin, AR (9.1 miles SE)
Chapman, AR (10.5 miles E)


text:
Comments Off
Video: Karmin "Broken Hearted"
Sunday, March 25th, 2012
Boy has the Karmin duo ever blew up in the past year!? Check out their new vid for "Broken Hearted". Gaaaaah she is so hot. #TotalFanboy -Krash
Comments Off
'Hangover Part III' Set For 2013!
Sunday, March 25th, 2012
The Wolf Pack is coming back in one year! But where are they headed this time?
Comments Off
Britney Spears The 'X Factor' Once More?
Saturday, March 24th, 2012
Talks have resurfaced of Britney Spears joining X Factor as a judge. But how close is she?
Comments Off
Krashing Down 'Survivor One World' Episode #6
Friday, March 23rd, 2012
Episode 6: "Thanks for the Souvenir" Episode six of Survivor One World was yet another episode of surprises! This season is far from the best played, but the oddness of it has kept my interest. The quickly fading Manono tribe was under the rule of Colton, while Salani appeared to be dominant. However the game […]


text:
Although Samsung might be stealing headlines with its Galaxy Gear smartwatches, there's a whole world of wearable technology out there and it's expanding fast. We popped along to the Wearable Technology Show in London, taking place Tuesday and Wednesday, to take a look at some new arrivals on the scene, as well as some familiar faces.
First up is the Ora by Optinvent. Rather than use a screen, these Android KitKat-based specs beam the Android interface directly onto your retina. While that sounds terrifying, I managed to escape with my eyes unscathed and was actually quite pleased at the transparent heads-up-display effect.
18 March 2014 6:33 pm GMTUpdated: 19 March 2014 11:21 am GMT
Photo by: Andrew Hoyle/CNET
/ Caption by: Andrew Hoyle
Conversation powered by Livefyre
Get ready for iOS 8
Here's what you need to know before downloading iOS 8 on your iPhone or iPad.


text:
Shot this at 10 this morning when the natural light was nice in my room. I just turned my camera on auto, flipped it around and held it up in the air and did the typical myspace thing. I got a shot in which my eyes were reasonably in focus and developed the RAW. I was amazed at how good it came out. Keep in mind I shot this in full auto dad on vacation I have no idea how to turn this thing on o wait I took a picture oh shit my thumbs in it mode.
This is one my first times using the Canon 24-70mm 2.8f L lens, and christ its beautiful. It's not the greatest lens in the world for close up portraits like this so I had to flush out some lens distortion and vignetting in photoshop but it doesn't show any aberrations or artifacts, and the color is phenomenal. I hate that I am only going to buy L stuff from now on and probably starve to death.
Next >>>
<<< Prev


text:
During the month of February, as Americans remember the accomplishments and achievements of African Americans, the Minden Press-Herald will contribute to sponsoring the ideas held by local students as they observe African American History Month.
"In honor of African American History Month, the Minden Press-Herald is seeking short essays or poems from students in fourth through eighth grades and ninth through 12th grades," said Press-Herald Publisher Josh Beavers "We are looking forward to publishing the hard work of students in the area as we promote honoring the accomplishments of African Americans."
According to http: www.africanamericanhistorymonth.gov/, Harvard-trained historian, Carter G. Woodson, hoped to raise awareness of African American's contributions to civilization. Woodson founded the Association for the Study of Negro Life and History (ASNLH) and announced Negro History Week in 1925.
The event was first celebrated during a week in February 1926 that encompassed the birthdays of both Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass.
By the time of Woodson's death in 1950, Negro History Week had become a central part of African American life and substantial progress had been made in bringing more Americans to appreciate the celebration. At mid–century, mayors of cities nationwide issued proclamations noting Negro History Week.
The celebration was expanded to a month in 1976, the same year as the nation's bicentennial. President Gerald R. Ford urged Americans to "seize the opportunity to honor the too-often neglected accomplishments of black Americans in every area of endeavor throughout our history."
That year, 50 years after the first celebration, the association held the first African American History Month. Since then each American president has issued African American History Month proclamations.
The association – now the Association for the Study of African American Life and History (ASALH) – continues to promote the study of Black history all year.
"Essays or poems should explain why this month of observance is important," Beavers said. "Students will have to write effectively to express their thoughts, but I'm confident there will be many students who can rise to the challenge."
Essays and poems are limited to 150 words and must be submitted by February 11.


text:
Clark Gregg: The Avengers feels like a dysfunctional family
Playing Agent Phil Coulson, a character with a pivotal role in this ensemble movie piece called The Avengers
Text: Joanna Goh reporting from Los Angeles
Photos & movie stills: Disney Singapore
If there was one character we found particularly memorable in The Avengers, it'd have to be Agent Phil Coulson, hands down.
He shares a "special connection" with Tony Stark, was "in-charge of the hammer" that belongs to Thor, knows about Jane Foster, and eventually enlists himself into S.H.I.E.L.D because of his childhood hero, Captain America...
Apart from embodying humanistic qualities, looking cool and sleek in his black shades and well-pressed Dolce & Gabanna suit, Agent Coulson personally fanboys Captain America, plays nanny to a bunch of superheroes, and ultimately becomes the main catalyst for the Avengers' alliance against Thor's older brother and the show's main villain, Loki (Tom Hilddleston).
For those who have already caught Marvel's latest movie flick, The Avengers, which had a fabulous showing on Tuesday in Singapore with a record-breaking S$2.23mil on opening day (previous record set by Spider Man 3 which brought in S$1.02mil on opening day in Singapore), you'd understand how crucial and pivotal a role Agent Coulson plays in this movie.
When xinmsn caught up with the American chap who is known for his TV work on The New Adventures of Old Christine, Clark, at the Disney press junket for The Avengers in Los Angeles Beverly Hills Four Seasons Hotel, Clark made us pinky-promise that all related articles to his character will come with spoiler notes.
Before we tread on forbidden grounds and quote spoiler-esque anecdotes that were discussed in the interview, here's what Clark has to share about his favourite dysfunctional superhero family and being part of The Avengers.
And for those reading this, if you've seen the movie, are a fan of Agent Coulson, and would like to see his storyline be made into a standalone Marvel franchise, do as Clark says: "Would you please Tweet that?!"
The Avengers (3D) is now showing in all cinemas.


text:
HRC's Hyacinth Alvaran Named 2010 Next Generation Award Winner
April 22, 2010
The following post comes from HRC's Associate Director of Diversity, Donna Payne: Hyacinth Alvaran has become one of the recipients of DC Metro Weekly's 2010 Next Generation Award! The award is to honor the outstanding achievements of a select group of LGBT activists and leaders under the age of 30. Recipients will be honored for their contributions to the advancement of LGBT issues, the arts and political progress. Next Generation Award winners will receive their awards at a reception ceremony, and will be featured in a special issue of Metro Weekly on April 29, 2010. Hyacinth (aka Hy) is HRC's Diversity Coordinator, in charge of special projects with our diversity co-chairs, addressing diversity issues at the local and national level. It is not an easy job accounting for the Diversity team's whereabouts, keeping her finger on the pulse of co-chairs across the country (36 cities), coordinating meetings and conference calls to keep everyone connected. Last year, HRC entered into a partnership with the Ya Es Hora Coalition and her work expanded. Always guided by her sense of fairness and respect for others, Hy took on the challenge of building HRC's commitment to partnering with Ya Es Hora. The coalition helped immigrants apply for U.S. citizenship at workshops organized by the allied coalitions. Many HRC volunteers, along with our allies, have helped LGBT and Latino/a people increase visibility, understanding, and support for both immigration issues and LGBT issues. She has been very active in the community by becoming the co-chair of Asian/Pacific Islander Queer Sisters (APIQS), which focuses on education, community, and the sisterhood of queer API women in Washington, D.C. She was also a workshop facilitator at the First National Queer Asian Pacific Islander Alliance (NQAPIA) Conference as an APIQS representative. This was followed up by evenings canvassing and phone-banking on the 2008 Presidential Campaign for Obama, and serving on the planning committee for the 10th Annual Pride & Heritage Celebration. In November, Hy testified at the DC Council Hearing for the same-sex marriage bill that passed in March 2010.
Top Posts
Speaking at Southern Comfort 2014
September 5, 2014
Federal Judge Strikes Down Florida's Ban on Marriage Equality
August 21, 2014
Take a Look: Updates, Photos and Audio from the Seventh Circuit's Marriage Equality Cases Today
August 26, 2014
Seventh Circuit Rules Bans on Marriage Equality Unconstitutional
September 4, 2014


text:
April 1
Los Angeles Daily News: "California's bullet train loses important fan"
There's bad news for California's high-speed rail project: Even some of its biggest backers are now backing away.
Quentin Kopp, the former state senator who was one of the earliest and strongest supporters of a high-speed rail system, calls the project as it stands now "the great train robbery."
That's been the feeling all along of many of the project's detractors, including this editorial board. Kopp comes to that conclusion from a different angle.
He chaired the Senate transportation committee for years and co-wrote the bill that started the rail project. After he left the Senate, he was chairman of the state agency overseeing the rail line's construction.
But now in a civil suit by Central Valley farmers and officials aimed at halting the project, Kopp has filed a legal declaration that the current business plan violates the ballot measure passed by voters in 2008.
Kopp opposes the project because so many compromises have been made in the planning that he's afraid the term "high-speed" will no longer apply to the finished product. If that's the case, it won't draw enough riders — despite the federal Government Accountability Office's finding that its ridership and revenue forecasts are reasonable.
The whole idea is to be able to move passengers between major population centers more quickly than air travel. But Kopp says the California High Speed Rail Authority's agreement to share tracks with local commuter trains from Gilroy to San Francisco will slow the bullet trains so much that they won't satisfy the legal requirement that at least some L.A.-to-San Francisco runs take two hours and 40 minutes or less.
That means, there won't be much bullet-like about the bullet train,
Lynn Schenk, a board member of the rail authority and a longtime backer of the bullet train, opposed that deal with Bay Area transit agencies for the same reason. The agreement was struck to keep rich Silicon Valley residents from trying to stop bullet trains from running through their cities.
Kopp helped write requirements that the rail line be built in "usable segments" and that the state have the funding lined up for each such segment before it starts building it. He says the initial 130-mile track, connecting Bakersfield and Madera, does not qualify as a usable segment, and the state doesn't have the money to build a segment that would qualify.
Kopp is not the only "yes" to drop into the "no" column on the high-speed rail project — he's just the most prominent. The state's voters, who approved a project that was sold to them in a different form five years ago, now oppose the project by a 54-43 margin, according to a recent poll by the Public Policy Institute of California.
Voters approved $9.9 billion in bonds to start the project, but its projected cost has ballooned to $68 billion since then. Plus, the economic good times of 2008 are long gone, and voters would rather see the money spent on more essential needs like schools and colleges.The train has a long pull up a steep hill ahead of it, with not only the state's voters but even some of its erstwhile proponents wanting to hold it back.
March 25
Orange County Register: "Audit should dive deeply into state's books"
How much does the state government waste? Especially given that taxes in California went up by $7 billion this year, Californians want to know. This month, the Joint Legislative Audit Committee of the Legislature tasked state Auditor Elaine Howle with auditing state funds, which she said could take up to five months.
The audit request comes after several scandals involving state funds. In January, reported the Los Angeles Times, "The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection hid $3.6 million rather than depositing it into the state's cash-strapped general fund as required, interviews and documents ... show."
In December, the Sacramento Bee reported, "State officials overseeing construction of the new San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge agreed this year to pay a public-relations company nearly $10 million for services the Brown administration says it knew nothing about, including hundreds of thousands of dollars to conduct tours and to produce a video and commemorative book." Gov. Jerry Brown canceled the waste.
And, last summer, the Department of Parks and Recreation sat on "more than $54 million in unreported funds at the same time it had been soliciting private donations to keep 70 parks open," the Register reported. The scandal led to the resignation of parks chief Ruth Coleman.
"We very much agree with the audit," Jon Coupal told us; he's the president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which opposes tax increases. "We hope the auditor is given the tools to perform the job that needs to be done. And we hope that when waste and fraud has been revealed, that there are consequences for those involved. There are two problems with waste and fraud in California: finding it and doing something about it."
He added that he was "encouraged that the Legislature itself has begun to take its oversight responsibilities seriously." This also is happening after the Democratic Party gained supermajority status in both houses of the Legislature. Democrats seem to understand that Republicans no longer can be blamed for everything, so the money needs to be spent more prudently.
Mr. Coupal also urged other responsible government officials to go after waste and fraud, in particular Attorney General Kamala Harris and local district attorneys and grand juries.
Gov. Brown's fiscal 2013-14 state budget update in May will show whether his projection of a balanced budget from the tax increases still holds. But whether that happens, spending money frugally is an essential practice of government.
We encourage Ms. Howle to do a thorough job.
April 1
The (Riverside) Press-Enterprise: "Don't tinker with enterprise zones; scrap them"
The desire to spur job growth in California is not a justification for retaining a poorly structured and ineffective tax break. A new legislative proposal offers to patch some of the biggest holes in the program. But California would be better off eliminating enterprise zones and finding better ways to encourage job growth.
Sen. Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo, last week proposed legislation that would close loopholes in enterprise zone law. Hill offered a similar, and unsuccessful, bill in 2011.
State law authorizes 42 enterprise zones intended to stimulate business and job growth in economically depressed areas. The zones provide companies with tax credits for hiring and equipment purchases. The Franchise Tax Board says the program trimmed receipts to the state general fund by $732 million in 2010, the latest numbers available. The Inland region has two zones, one in San Bernardino and one in the Coachella Valley.
The new proposal targets the rules governing the hiring tax credit, which offers businesses up to $37,440 over five years for each new hire. Companies do not have to create new jobs to claim the break; they can get the tax benefit for filling existing positions. Hill points to the example of a San Mateo County laboratory supply company that moved its operations to Visalia's enterprise zone last year — where the company could get tax credits for the 150 jobs that moved with it.
Hill wants the credit only to apply when companies create net new jobs in the state. State numbers from 2011 show that companies claimed the hiring credit for filling more than 90,000 existing positions, versus only about 16,500 new ones. Hill also proposes that companies would have to claim the tax break within one year of the hiring, instead of getting a credit for hiring they did years earlier.
Such changes focus on a crucial flaw in the enterprise zone program: Rewarding businesses for hiring decisions they likely would have made anyway is poor policy and does little to provide any economic stimulus.
The proposal also calls for regular legislative review of the program, to make sure the tax break actually accomplishes its goals. Good idea. Some of the zones have existed for decades. How effective can the program be if those areas are still struggling economically?
One other part of Hill's reform plan deserves quick dismissal: It would allow the hiring credit only for jobs that pay at least $16 an hour. An arbitrary salary benchmark would do nothing but limit job creation — which would conflict with the whole rationale for the tax break. This provision would merely make an already muddled program more incoherent.
The state's legislative analyst reports that most research shows the zones do not so much create new jobs as shift existing employment from one part of the state to another. The analyst has recommended junking the program.
Indeed, cutting needless regulation and creating a tax code that encourages hiring and expansion would achieve more than additional tinkering with enterprise zones. Fixing a few shortcomings is not enough; legislators should instead look for policies that actually support job growth.
March 29
San Jose Mercury News: "California must put environment before fracking"
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper's new fracking regulations for the oil and gas industry have been hailed as a model for other states. The Colorado Democrat is so convinced that drilling will be safe that he actually drank fracking fluid. It wasn't "tasty," he said, "but I'm still alive."
Colorado's model may work along the geologically stable Rocky Mountains, but California's seismic issues set it apart from Midwest and East Coast states where oil companies use fracking — shorthand for hydraulic fracturing — to free oil from rock formations thousands of feet below the Earth's surface.
The Legislature is considering eight new measures this spring to regulate fracking. The priority has to be protecting communities' water supply — Hickenlooper's beverage choices aside — and reducing the risk of triggering a major earthquake. To date, SB4 by Sen. Fran Pavley, D-Agoura Hills, does the best job of providing for safety, transparency and accountability.
New fracking technology has oil companies giving a fresh look at the Monterey Shale, a huge Central Valley geologic formation stretching from Modesto to Bakersfield. It's believed to be the richest oil deposit in the United States, with about 15 billion barrels of recoverable oil. That's just a three-year energy supply for this country, a blip in history, but important at a time when foreign oil supplies are dicey.
Gov. Jerry Brown, his green cred notwithstanding, is practically drooling over the bonanza for the Golden State, potentially creating thousands of jobs and contributing billions to the state budget. But Brown's draft regulations leave water quality and other safety factors in doubt. They offer opponents of a fracking operation no avenue for appeal.
Brown doesn't even call for Colorado's standard requiring oil companies to disclose the pressurized chemicals they pump underground. At the other extreme, environmentalists want fracking banned outright.
Pavley's compromise bill calls on the state to complete an independent scientific study on fracking by Jan. 1, 2015. No fracking permits would be issued after that date until the study is completed.
Pavley wants an existing industry production fee to be increased to include the costs of air and water monitoring, which is critical to maintaining public trust. Her bill requires disclosure of the chemicals to be used and 30-day notification to property owners before fracking could begin.
The Legislature should also require that the independent scientific study to the impact on the state's fault lines.
California needs to move toward renewable energy sources, but it will need oil for years to come. We're confident it's possible to safely extract oil from the Monterey Shale, but safety will not be assured unless the governor and lawmakers set regulations to disclose and reduce the risks, particularly to water.
March 30
The Record Searchlight: "Proposition 8 deserves ruling on the merits"
Will the U.S. Supreme Court throw out California's 2008 voter-approved constitutional amendment barring gay marriage? Your guess is as good as ours.
But we hope the justices actually rule on the merits of the question, instead of ducking the hard question by tossing out the appeal on a technicality — especially a technicality that would undermine California's initiative system.
Yet much of last week's Supreme Court arguments suggested the justices might take the easy way out. Rather than talk about the awkward subject of the day, Chief Justice John Roberts and others reopened the seemingly settled question of whether the initiative's proponents even had the right to defend their measure in court. California officials — including Gov. Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris — declined to argue on Proposition 8's behalf in federal court, leaving that job to private political advocates.
We opposed Proposition 8. We think same-sex marriage will cause no harm to society and is ultimately nobody's business but those who want to tie the knot. But Californians voted for it. If state officials abandon a measure when it's challenged in court, and the organizers of a ballot drive are barred from hiring lawyers to defend their own work, it would make a mockery of direct democracy as we know it. After all, the whole point of initiatives is to give the people the direct authority to enact laws, while bypassing officials in Sacramento. If those same officials' opposition or apathy can orphan a controversial initiative in court, the people's power is a sham.
Yanking the standing to defend their measure from Proposition 8's proponents would, in effect, throw out the measure and allow gay marriage. Those who want to marry could celebrate.
But we hope the justices find the backbone to make a decision on the heart of the issue, and don't wiggle out of a politically charged case at the expense of California's flawed but vital initiative system.
March 28
Marin Independent Journal: "Charging to view court files a poor budget remedy"
Government is big business in California.
It is so big that officials often look for ways they can make money on what government produces.
In some cases, that product is paper — public records.
Gov. Jerry Brown's proposed budget calls for letting state courts — which have been hit hard by state budget cuts — start charging the public, businesses and the media a search fee for looking up criminal and court filings.
The proposed fee would be $10 per search. On top of that, Brown's budget plan would double the existing photocopying charge from 50 cents to $1 a page.
Court officials say the fee would help them recoup their costs in meeting public-record demands of so-called data miners, commercial enterprises that ask for large numbers of files, extract commercially viable information and then sell that information.
The proposed fee replaces a charge of $15 for searches that take longer than 10 minutes. It's unlikely that charge covers the cost of having a clerk track down dozens or hundreds of files for data miners.
It also sounds as if the state, as the producer and provider, wants a bigger piece of that action. Brown and the courts are looking for ways to reverse a recent trend of budget cuts that have led to closing courtrooms, shortening hours and laying off workers.
While officials say the fee is needed to recover costs associated with large-volume requests, the charge does not differentiate between users.
That's the problem Sen. Loni Hancock of Berkeley has with the proposal. She calls it another step toward "a fee-for-justice system," where people who cannot afford the fee don't have access to the information they need in their pursuit of justice.
The same goes for the media. Reporters, including IJ staffers, often comb through courthouse records in their reporting of local news. The proposed charge puts a chill on access to public records, especially hampering smaller papers that have to work on smaller budgets.
For the IJ, the charge, as presented, could run $800 or more every week.
In its current iteration, the charge would not apply to people seeking files regarding cases in which they are personally involved.
But the question of fair and open access to public records looms heavily over this proposed fee. In addition, there's a question about the fee being commensurate with the cost of the service, whether someone is asking for one file or hundreds.
Lawmakers, who have to approve the proposed fee, should demand the courts detail the dollars-and-cents costs of handling requests for files, both for small and large searches.
In a recent speech, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye said, "What we once counted on — that courts would be open, available and ready to dispense prompt justice, is no longer the case in California."
That is a sad indictment of the state of California's courts. But making court records — public information — less accessible by making them more costly to review and copy doesn't seem to be a logical remedy to fixing what's wrong with our courts.


text:
The General, speaking one felt with authority, always insisted that, if you bring off adequate preservation of your personal myth, nothing much else in life matters. It is not what happens to people that is significant, but what they think happens to them.
Anthony Powell, Books Do Furnish a Room
I started reading Claire Messud's The Emperor's Children and was hooked as soon as I read this incredible epigraph.
- acceptanceworld reblogged this from jeevermadness
- thumbscrumbs reblogged this from jeevermadness
- thumbscrumbs likes this
- zerts likes this
- jeevermadness posted this


text:
Good Questions: What Bold Color Should I Paint This Piano?
Los Angeles
AT reader, Brian, recently was given a free piano by friends who didn't use it anymore. While he is excited about the the function of the piano, he's not so excited about the brown color and would love some ideas for freshening up this dated piece.
"What color should we paint our piano? We were saving up for a piano when a friend gave us this one for free. Fantastic, but the color is very blah. That in-between brown color, not dark nor light. So seeing as it's no Steinway, and it'll be a learner piano for myself and our two small kids, we thought we would paint it. We are open – very open – to a bold, maybe even an unexpected color for this piano. The room has dark brown wood floors, cream wainscoting and light mocha walls. Thanks for any advice!"
- We were thinking that Brian could pull a color from one of the plates in the gallery that he has hanging on his wall. We like paint colors Exotic Red, Desert Sunset Orange or the more neutral Pewter Gray. (via Benjamin Moore). All of these would look great against the dark wood floors and the blue chairs.
- Check out the contestants in the 2008 Fall Colors contest or some Los Angeles house tours for bright color inspiration. Stephanie & Bob's SilverRidge Sanctuary is a great one to start with. (We love their kitchen!)
- Definitely do some research on the best ways to choose a paint color. While most of these ideas are for interior walls, you can pick up some tips and tricks for painting objects and furniture too.
- Although Brian is looking to go bold and paint a bright color, we also want to suggest doing a nice wax to the wood to restore the original look and feel and really make it shine.
OK, AT readers, let's give Brian's some color ideas for his piano makeover.
Check out more color ideas here:
39 Comments
an orange-red pulled from the china would be fun, especially with that blue chair.
hot pink!
yellow! very bright, very shiny
How about that apple-green from your Japanese-y plates? I love a green piano, I don't know why.
My immediate thought was orange. The same color as the cap gun(?) laying on top!
Two votes for hot pink.
Hmmm, it seems like you might be asking for trouble by painting that piano. You'll probably need to take some areas of it apart (the pull down cover for the keys, the wood surrounding the keys) to avoid getting paint into the working parts of the piano. Maybe its just my paranoia.
Just make sure the finish of the paint doesn't wind up being sticky. That could cause problems.
Also, I can't tell what kind of piano that is, but when I was growing up we had a Chickering, which wasn't in great shape, but some had become valuable collectors items, as they don't make true Chickerings any more and were somewhat unconventional.
It's probably just me and my memories from my childhood, but I just can't imagine painting that, no matter how junky the piano. I just couldn't do it. (And I don't think it's blah...its a piano!) That said, if you are going to do it, maybe a glossy glammy (but not sticky-glossy!) Black.
Actually, just out of curiosity, what kind of piano is that?
I agree with the previous commentor that if you're going to paint it, it'd probably look better if you stuck with something close to its original color or with black.
I'd maybe go with the chartruse-like green thats in your plates, it would play well with the chairs, and the rest of your decor.
I agree with Rebecca326! I think as in era's past (70's), we're all going to be sorry we painted everything with a wood finish...
Have you tried cleaning it thoroughly? Sometimes only even cleaning the object can make a huge difference.
I wouldn't paint it at all, just sand it and give it a light or very dark varnish. And brush up the copper pedals.
I'd say a pale sunny yellow or a bright yellow-green!
Although I'm not against painting precious wood objects, for some reason I am agreeing with those suggesting that you do not paint it.
Alternate suggestion: paint the walls whatever color you were going to paint the piano. I think what you are actually reacting against is the combination of blah wood color along with blah wall color.
If you painted the walls the same blue as those chairs... wow.
Of course, then you'd have to get a different color chair, probably white.
I'd have to agree that painting the whole piano would be more work than you think and a decision that you might regret later. As an alternative to painting the whole thing, maybe paint the grooves on the legs and the face with a of bright color. This would help define some of the details of the piano. My choice would be yellow. It is a tradional color for pianos as many practice or studio pianos are a warm yellow color. Or use the music ledge to display colorful art work.
Don't paint it. I generally don't agree with painting wood objects because at some point someone will want to unpaint it, which causes an environmental mess. Also, as rebecca326 pointed out, painting it may interfere with the function. Besides what she mentioned, painting may reduce clearances (I'm not very knowledgeable about pianos) where they're needed and eventually you may have to deal with peeling paint, which will gum things up.
A while back, Cottage Living magazine featured a couple who painted their piano red and it looked great. Here's a link to the article--the piano is in the second photo down:
I am sick of seeing ugly dark brown upright pianos in otherwise nice homes. Paint it! And I agree with those who have suggested taking a color from your plates: the orange from the kimono, or the lime-green, etc. I think a bright red would also look great with that chair.
But I also agree with those who say they have no idea how you'd paint it without getting paint, dust from sanding, etc. into the keys and works. I am sure it could be done by a professional piano restorer (for $$$), but if you do it yourself, please let us know what you did and how it worked out.
I think red and then do the details in a yellow. If it is not worth any money and it is distracting from the overall look you have going on in your home, why shouldn't you paint it? I would, however, not base it soley on the chair because if you bring in a teacher, they'll probably sugguest a bench.
the piano is made of wood for a reason and the last thing i would ever do is to paint a wooden musical instrument. you may not be in love with this piano, but by painting with a giant latex skin you could kill or curtail whatever ability to transmit sound that the shell has. i would seek some advice from a real piano expert before undertaking anything like this.
I thinking the same as rebecca - black would be the only way to go but maybe a black with some sparkle to it.
the wood probably won't resonate as nice with it painted, keep in mind it's an instrument not a dresser and built to sound good. BUT, it might look cool if you distress it a bit, make it look like an old saloon piano and get a cool stool to go with it.
A black lacquer-like finish with gold and red cherry blossoms in random and visible areas (if you're interested in carrying the japanese motif you seem to have going on) I think would be so nice!
Why stick wtih one color? From the plates hanging above I figure you have a fun and colorful family. Why not block out different colors in that palette like piet mondrian?
If you are serious about learning piano, you will need to invest in a piano bench or an adjustable piano stool. Part of playing properly is being at the right height - the angle of your wrists and posture are very important. I also agree that painting the piano may change its sound.
On the other hand, if aren't serious about learning to play then go ahead and paint.
Why not get an old piano bench and paint that one of the bright bold colours suggested above. The bowl of fruit and lonely candle are not strong enough elements to balance that piano against the wall. You need something larger on top. Like a boldly painted funky lamp.
I would try the painted stool and a cool lamp waaaaay before I attempted to paint that piano.
As a lifelong pianist, I too vote no paint. It's a musical instrument, not an end table. (Would you paint a saxophone???) At least research types of paints (and their effects on sound vibration) if you do.
I think if you just cleaned it up a lot it would look great. It's not blah at all to me.
Oh, and I too vote for a colorful piano bench or funky stool to jazz it up. You will NOT be able to play comfortably and move around the way you need to in the shell chair.
Nattles is right. Elvis had a beautiful Steinway that Priscilla gilded for him and it never sounded the same.
But, if it's just a box, and you like having latex all over the place, go for it. Oil stain would be better, soundwise.
1) research the name (very, smart)
2) get in a bench, with some fun color.
3) do the details w/a fun punchy color (i like hot pink/orange/lime)
4) If that doesn't work paint the bad boy in a fun glossy of the above, but i think the downers are right, its going to be a HUGE pain to paint correctly (and i love that type of work) AND the issue of sound transmittance is a genuine one.
A compromise might be stenciling, and would vibe w/the slighly distressed look.
I think you should wallpaper it!
I wouldn't paint the piano...but I would paint the wall behind it to help bring out the warmth in the wood so it doesn't seem like such a stark contrast.
Many pianos are painted. Like black ones and white ones. I say, if it's in decent shape and good working order, take it to a piano refinisher and have them paint it. A classic-piano-lacquer finish in a cool colour would be great. If it's a sticky, latexy end-table finish, it will look weird and likely sound strange too.
research how to paint it of course, and then glossy bright orange!
or intense midnight blue
The point Brian is trying to make is that he is GOING TO PAINT HIS PIANO. He didn't ask if he should paint it. He just asked for color suggestions.
My parents moved into a house that came with a painted upright grand piano. They personally didn't like its 80s color, so they stripped the paint off and refinished it. If Brian doesn't like his choice later on, he can always strip off the paint and lacquer the original wood.
I like the bright green paint idea myself.
Bright, enameled, shiny yellow!
DO NOT PAINT THAt PIANO!
Paint the walls; add upholstery to a proper piano bench; whatever- don't destroy craftsmanship with an afterthought DIY paintjob just because it doesn't match your current off-white wall paint.
1309 Moroccan Red. try it at www.DrySamples.com