Street Food

I drove past a restaurant the other day and noticed a line of people, maybe 20 or 30 yards long, waiting to go in. I later found out that this particular restaurant was extremely popular (it clearly was) and the food was excellent. So what? Why would anybody choose to queue up for food when they don’t have to? Why not either go back another time when the restaurant is less busy or just book a table somewhere else?

This seems to happens a lot in both the UK and the USA, where people with clearly enough money (or probably too much) think nothing of lining up like paupers for their food. I just don’t get it. No food is that good. I don’t care who owns the restaurant or how good the menu is, affluent Westerners waiting in line for food is unnecessary and demeaning.

Or maybe I’m just impatient!

Racist Rodent

Evidently “Tom and Jerry”, the cartoon series adored by children of all ages and first shown some 70 years ago, now comes with a warning that some viewers may find it racist. Oh dear, I always loved that cartoon and still do, come to think of it. Never once did I ever think that it was racist or insulting to people of colour, however.

What I remember most is the comedy and the suffering of the poor old cat as he tried in vain to get one over on the spirited little mouse. The little human involvement in the cartoon seemed to be incidental and the human characters, of whatever colour, were all made to look stupid next to little Jerry.

The modern problem seems to be the depiction of the black maid, the house cook who was constantly frustrated and flummoxed by the battle between feline and rodent. I suppose by today’s precious standards it could be deemed – by some – to be racist but, then again, couldn’t it also be deemed sexist because the character was female rather than male?

And how about the blatant cruelty to animals as evidenced by Tom the cat splattered against brick walls, crushed by falling trees and blown to smithereens by sticks of dynamite?

You would have thought the censors had better things to do. Clearly not.

It’s All in the Name

I was sat at my hotel bar in deepest Vermont the other day watching some televised baseball when the name of the coach of the Kansas City Royals team flashed on the screen. I nearly fell off my stool and then laughed uncontrollably for what felt like minutes. The name was “Rusty Kuntz” and the surname was even emblazoned on the back of his shirt. You honestly couldn’t make this up and if you find this hard to believe just Google his name.

This unintentional humour over people’s names seems to happen a lot in the US and the logical explanation is that many of the names are from immigrants in whose country of origin the names are fine but when spoken or spelt in English are often anything but. For example, I read of an athlete of Chinese origin called Kim Yoo Suk. I wonder if the crowds chant her name at athletics events?

Then there was the US lawyer, again of Chinese extraction called Susan Yoo. I hope she specialises in litigation since who wouldn’t want to be represented by a lawyer called Sue Yoo! I also read of a judge called Willie Stroker and that must get a few laughs in the courtroom too.

Closer to home I remember an estate agent in South Manchester called Richard Head. Would you really want to place your house on the market with somebody called Dick Head? Possibly not.

Parents need to think carefully before they name their children since a carelessly chosen name or a failure to connect the Christian name to the surname can lead to a life of constant embarrassment and ridicule which brings us back to poor old Rusty. What a life he must have had. Just imagine the school roll call each morning “Smith, Jones, Brown…………………….Kuntz” or the looks he must get when checking in at a hotel or producing his id. He must go through a thousand agonies every week of his life. Poor K….!

Planting the Seed

I visit the USA quite a lot and have to say I love the place. The natives may well speak our language in a manner somewhat strange to our English sensibilities and some of their mannerisms can be puzzling to us folk from the old country but that, for me at least, is part of the attraction.

Some things though throw me completely and none more so than early Sunday morning television. In the UK we don’t really do religion on television to any great extent but in the US (and in the South particularly) it is big business. You can surf the channels and find at least half a dozen stations featuring some evangelist whipping the crowds into a frenzy with his or her Christian rhetoric. A lot of it, with its dramatic presentation, seems quite uplifting and I can see that it could possibly help a lot of those taking part and maybe even a good proportion of those watching at home.

There is however a side that seems somewhat less than wholesome and one show I recently tuned into was called “Wisdom Keys” presented by a “preacher” called Dr Mike Murdock. Murdock along with his excitable and enthusiastic co-presenters constantly urged the viewers to telephone the show’s hotline and plant a $58 seed, preferably each month for a year (though you could give more if you wanted as a one off payment!). This seed was said to ensure a substantial harvest and promised that the giver would, in return for his or her donation, receive a gift from God which could and often would change their lives. Examples were given of Mr A. who within two weeks of “planting his seed” received a tax refund of $20,000 or Mrs B. who, “ten days after planting her $58 seed”, won the local lottery and so on.

It may well be that these were true stories but it struck me as rather unsavoury that these presenters, who every few minutes linked hands and prayed for their audience, were quite clearly preying (no pun intended) on the emotions of gullible, vulnerable, and desperate members of society. I wonder if anybody in authority has looked into the ultimate destination of those $58 seeds? I think they should.

Smelly People

I saw a poster the other day which, bearing in mind the name and aims of this blog, I thought quite apposite –
“Common sense is like deodorant. The people who need it the most never use it.”

I’m sure we’ve all had the experience of being stood or sat next to somebody, usually on public transport, who smells like they are strangers to soap, let alone deodorant. The question is how should you deal with that situation? Clearly you could move if there is room or if there are alternative seats but, what if you’re on an aeroplane and the flight is full?

A couple of weeks ago a man, booked on a Dallas to Paris flight, was refused permission to fly because his body odour was so unpleasant that several passengers complained about the smell.

It probably happens more often than you would think. I think I was sat next to his brother on a flight to Atlanta earlier this week!

To Recline or Not?

Last week, two commercial flights were diverted due to air rage arising out of the use of reclining seats. Actually, one of the incidents involved the use of a rather ingenious device to prevent the seat in front from reclining but the issue is still the same.

Flying is a stressful enough experience for most people these days, what with increased security, endless queues and the attitude of some of the officials but the problem of reclining seats seems to be one of the most common sources of friction. What can you do if the seat in front of you suddenly launches back causing the television screen to smack against your face, your plate of beef curry to overturn on your lap and your red wine to splash on to your nice white shirt? And should you recline your own seat without first communicating your intention to the passenger immediately behind you?

These are vexed questions and there seem to be no clear guidelines other than those of common sense and courtesy. If food and drink are being served then it is clearly selfish and thoughtless to recline your seat and many is the time that, to avoid confrontation, I have simply asked a member of the cabin crew to ask the person in front to put his or her seat back up whilst I enjoy my meal. After we’ve all eaten and most of the passengers are ready to sleep(particularly on long haul overnight flights)it’s alright, I think, to recline your seat but it’s always nice to politely indicate your intention to the person behind.

On short haul flights of up to 4 hours or so the easiest solution would be to just use planes with fixed seats so that reclining is not an option. Some airlines already do this and maybe it should become a universal practice. If people still want to recline and sleep then they should have the option of paying more to be seated in a special reclining section. Mind you, it’s easy for me to say that since, as a regular traveller in cattle class, I am lucky enough to be able to sleep in any position!

Unless something is done about the use of reclining seats the problem of passenger rage is not going to disappear and will simply remain as just another irritant of air travel. As for the fiddling pain in the butt who sits behind you, kneeing the back of your seat, shaking your headrest and pulling your hair? Well that’s another story!

Punishment?

Earlier this week the European Court of Human Rights turned down a compensation claim by 80,000 UK prisoners for the loss of their “right” to vote in the 2009 European elections.

Voting rights, colour television sets and access to mobile phones. And there I was thinking that prison was meant to be a punishment. How foolish of me.

Flight Delay

Nowadays, when booking flights, customers are usually asked to provide both their mobile telephone number and email address so that the airline can then advise of any delays or other problems affecting the flight. It’s a good idea and is one less problem for the customer to worry about when preparing to travel.

I experienced this first hand a few days back when I received both a text and an email from the airline advising me that my 14.55 departure had been put back to 15.40. Very useful, apart from the fact that the morons sent their messages out at 17.23 by which time I had been in the air for nearly one and a half hours and was virtually half way to my destination!

Bigotry in the Classroom

This week it was established beyond doubt that Birmingham City Council were complicit in the infiltration of the city’s schools by Muslim extremists. At best the councillors simply turned a blind eye to the overwhelming evidence that a substantial number of the city’s schools had been taken over by these fanatics (both school governors and teachers) who were bent on indoctrinating their pupils with bigotry and a hatred of all things western.

The Government-led inquiry revealed that children were taught, among other things, that–
– All non-Muslims will go to hell when they die.
– White children are lazy and white women have no morals.
– Women are inferior to men and wives are the property of their husbands to be used as their husbands see fit.
– Homosexuality is a crime against God and those who practice it should be jailed.
– The murder of the British soldier Lee Rigby and the Boston bombings last year were a fabrication of the truth by western governments.

In addition boys and girls were segregated in the classroom and some teachers insisted on teaching their classes Sharia Law insisting that it was superior to and should replace the law of the United Kingdom. Any teachers who objected to this indoctrination were paid off with sizeable severance cheques and made to sign non-disclosure agreements before leaving their employment.

Unsurprisingly, the nationwide response has been one of outrage that schoolchildren have not only been exposed to this blatant racism and bigotry but also anger that those who should protect them did nothing to prevent it whether through complicity, fear of the extremists or just through the muddled politically correctness of not wanting to offend a religious minority.

Perhaps the greatest irony in the whole sorry tale is that those councillors, who in a misguided attempt to show tolerance of the extremists and avoid claims of discrimination, will actually have achieved the opposite effect. The publicity generated by this scandal will not only add fuel to the fire of political parties on the extreme right but it will also have the effect of turning many previously mild and tolerant British people against Muslims. This would be unfortunate since no one doubts that the majority of Muslims are, like the rest of us, decent people who simply want to live in a climate of peace, tolerance and understanding.

Predictably, the Government has stated that this must never be allowed to happen again and that, in future, all schools throughout the land will be carefully monitored and regularly inspected. We must hope their actions are successful since no form of extremism, political, religious or otherwise, can have any part to play in the education of British children.

Choice and Responsibility

Last week a US court ordered a cigarette manufacturing company to pay damages of $23 billion (approx. £14 billion) to a woman following the death of her husband from cigarette related lung cancer. The rationale was that the company, aware that cigarette smoking was both addictive and life threatening, still persisted in selling its product to the unfortunate man.

Putting aside the incredible amount of damages awarded to the woman (no doubt her lawyers earned several million dollars too for their noble efforts) the question is why should any award be made? Cigarettes may well be addictive and harmful but even a child could work that out. Alcohol is also addictive and damaging to health. How long will it be before we read about multi-million dollar awards for deaths caused by pickled livers?

One of the greatest benefits of living in the West is that we have freedom of choice. In the main, we are free to choose whatever we want to do with our bodies and long may this continue. We also need to bear responsibility for our actions but somehow that word doesn’t seem to be so important these days.