Santana

Santana was at the Excel Center this evening. We were in row 38 left on the floor, seats 5 and 6. Pretty good, actually. The stage wasn't up as high above the floor as it was when Manilow was here so when people stood up, which they did often, it was much more difficult to see. I'm not the tallest person who was there, by any means. Saw a friend from tai chi there. Small world.


The opening act had the unlikely name of The Derek Trucks Band. Derek Trucks is a pretty good guitar player and definitely liked by Carlos Santana himself. Santana came on stage during the opening act to play with Derek and also had Derek come out during Santana's show.


It's difficult taking photos in low light. I didn't have my "new" camera because I just didn't want to carry such a large thing. So my older little one sufficed. David had the great idea of setting it on "museum" so it opened up and did better. Still blurry but everyone was moving.


And here's a blurry shot of Carlos Santana playing. What I really liked about him this evening is that he didn't steal the show from the other players in the band. He'd stand in the back and let different people take the spot light. Great bone player (trombone, for those of you who don't know that slang word). Two great conga drummers. Great guitar, keyboard, and base players, too.


Santana's primary theme for this tour is peace. Stop shouting my religion is the only one, stop the war, struggle for peace. Let's all get along.

More on the Bridge

David and I attended the taping of an MPR broadcast, scheduled for Friday, August 17, noon, this evening. There was a seemingly arbitrary choice of "panelists" which included Minneapolis mayor R.T. Rybak, an economist, some sort of political "expert" from the University of Minnesota, and a few other people whose names all escape me. I'm not usually politically overt. I listen quietly, hope I don't get too riled up, and hope for the best.

Well, the best didn't happen last week when the bridge fell down. One of the questions for the evening was what does the public expect from our infrastructure?

The only consensus seemed to be that we should be able to drive across a bridge and not have it fall down.

Then there were arguments about whether we should be pouring money into rapid transit or maintenance of the roadways we currently have. Not: can we pay for both!

One panelist stated there was more than enough money if only someone would spend it to keep drivers safe from falling bridges. One panelist said there isn't enough money to do that. Mayor Rybak said there wasn't enough money to build roads to everyone's home. Another panelist said that, in fact, there has always been enough money for that because roads do, indeed, lead to everyone's home.

Show me where someone lives they can't get to or from via a roadway!

One question was what were we willing to give up for safety. I really don't believe this question was answered adequately by anyone there. I'm guilty of not raising my hand.

I'm willing not to go to the new Twins stadium that I'm already paying for. Why should I pay for a Twins stadium? Why should I have to pay for any sports stadium? I don't enjoy sports. The only times (twice since I moved here in 1972) I've actually attended a Twins game was for a "Stitch and Pitch" where a group of people get tickets through a local yarn shop like Three Kittens in St. Paul. We sat in the stands and mostly ignored the ball game and conversed with our fellow knitters (see my blog for July 22, 2007) and knitted on our various projects: socks, sweaters, shawls, etc.

And the other time I've gone to a Twins game (also twice) was with free tickets from Saturn. My dad always said, "For free take; for buy waste time." And my girl friend and I sat and knitted and chatted and ignored the game. (BTW, every game I've been to, all four, the Twins lost.)

Anyway, back to what I'd be willing to give up for safety. If I were assured that my tax dollars would actually go to fixing already existing bridges and roadways, I'd be willing to report my mileage each year when I purchase my license tabs and pay a tax on those miles. I drive 19 miles each way to and from work and also drive a few more to go to tai chi school (where I'm a student and instructor). I drive a lot of miles and if my cost would pay for the roads I use, so be it.

I'd also be willing to pay, if not per mile, per pound of car. David's SUV would pay for more road than my little 1996 Saturn. His Rav4 is very nice and has proven very useful in the work he does and in his personal life. But I have to think it wears on the roadways more than my little Saturn.

I'd also be willing to pay a toll to use our roadways. Rybak and company used a phrase something like "distance pricing." That's a euphemism if I ever heard one. It's a freeking TOLL, Mayor Rybak!

I grew up in the Chicago area. There are toll roads there. As far as I know, these roads are not paid for by tax dollars but by the people who use them. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong, please.) You drive on it. You pay for the privilege. Simple solution.

One question asked was "are you afraid to drive over bridges now?" Yes, some of them. Terri Gruca has an article on wcco.com about 8 bridges in Minnesota with bad safety ratings as bad or worse than the 35W bridge that has killed 13 and injured over 100 people. After reading this one article, I'm no longer willing to drive on the Lafayette Bridge. I'm sort of willing to drive across the bridge on Hwy. 61 in Hastings and the Stillwater bridge, but only on a motorcycle. (Granted, if either bridge came down with me on it, it would be because of the cars/trucks. David's motorcycle does not guarantee we'd be safe. Just a teeny bit safer.)

The question really is this:

Would the money actually be spent in a way that would make us safer? I fear the money would be taken in and then spent foolishly.

Time will tell. . . time will tell.

It's not supposed to happen here...

I live in a Minneapolis/St. Paul suburb. I was driving home after my martial arts class last night when a co-worker called to ask if I drive over the 35W Mississippi River bridge to get home. I said no and she said "thank God." I asked why and she told me about the bridge collapsing.

These things are not supposed to happen in "my backyard." Maybe in San Francisco where they have earthquakes. Maybe in Texas or Florida where they have hurricanes. We have tornadoes but usually there's enough warning to go hide. But it did happen here. I won't speculate on why the bridge went down. I'm not any more qualified than the experts who are themselves not ready to speculate.

My first reaction was...well...I sort of froze. I was driving at the time so I had to keep doing that. But my emotions didn't know which way to go. Anger that it could happen? Well, my anger wouldn't do anything about it. There were/are people under those bridge parts.

Right now, there's only one thing I can do. And that is pray. I pray for comfort for the injured. Comfort for the families of those who are known to have perished. Comfort for those who don't know yet if their loved ones have died or are just somewhere else, safe and sound.

I also pray for courage and safety for the people who are trying to get the bodies out of the water. I pray for their protection from the swirling waters and unstable bridge parts and rebar that could really hurt them.

I thank God for the people who were willing to risk their own lives last night and help others escape from their vehicles and get them to dry land. There were many heroes at the scene.

And I thank God my son and, so far as I know right now, my friends are all safe.

The "War" in Iraq

OK. Somebody explain it to me.

We went to Iraq because...al qaeda was there? As I understand it, that wasn't as true when the war started as it is now.

We went to Iraq because...Saddam had weapons of mass destruction? Well, that turned out not to be true. This sort of proves to me that "military intelligence" is a misnomer.

We went to Iraq because...Saddam is a bad guy? Well, that one is true but it wasn't the reason given when we first sent our young men and women there to be killed and maimed (physically and emotionally).

We went to Iraq because...we wanted to make life better for the Iraqis? As we have so often in the past, we tear down a country physically and politically, and promise to rebuild it later by supplying workers and money. In Iraq, however, the Iraqis are killing each other and killing the very American workers trying to help rebuild their economic infrastructure.

Vote "against"? -- Not "for"?

I received a piece of unsolicited mail today that is so very typical of the political ads today: "SHE'S NOT ON OUR SIDE!" It took me a while to figure out who this person was that wasn't on my side and who was responsible for the mailing. Tiny 5 point type along the fold said it was paid for by one of the two major parties and the candidate (whoever that is; I haven't a clue) did not approve of nor was responsible for the ad.

So many of our ads these days are just telling me not to vote for someone and how many terrible things that person has done. There's very little mention of why I should vote for anyone. And the negative ads are pretty non-partisan. And the national party committees are paying for more of the negative ads than the candidates are.

This sort of campaign makes me want to vote against them all. Maybe I'll just vote out all the incumbents. That's not really a good idea, but right now it doesn't seem like such a bad one, either.

The a news article on comcast.net with photos of a major snow storm around the Great Lakes region is a perfect example of why the Minnesota Twins should have stayed at the Metrodome, with it's indoor atmosphere, protected from the elements. The Detroit-located game of the World Series, played October 13, was moved from evening to afternoon because of the snow falling on the open-air field.

The Twins are based in Minneapolis, Minnesota. What makes them think it won't be cold in the spring and fall when their games begin and end? What makes them think their fans won't complain about the weather? I watched two games this summer in the Dome and thoroughly enjoyed sitting inside where it was cool (very hot outside) for one and dry (rained during game but dry when we left) for the other.

This is posted by someone who could potentially be required to pay for a second Twins stadium only about 20 years after the first one was built.

Columbus Day in America

Isn't it odd that we Americans have a day to celebrate the man in charge of the landing of a trio of boats which were lost. They thought they had landed in India.