This was news I have long-been expecting, yet it still managed to catch me completely off guard: Bob Barker has announced that he will retire in June at the end of the current season of The Price is Right.

Even though the show will go on without Barker, daytime television will never be quite the same.

“I will be 83 years old on December 12, and I’ve decided to retire while I’m still young,” Barker quipped. He then acknowledged that he had been pondering retirement off and on for ten years or more, but kept on with the show because he has genuinely loved his job. Still, the job is taxing mentally and physically, and he now says the time is right.

It’s also a good time to step down, he says, because he will have reached two major milestones: besides wrapping 35 years of his game show, the longest-running on television, this December he will celebrate his 50th anniversary on network television. On December 31, 1956, the late Ralph Edwards put Barker on the air as host of Truth or Consequences, a job he would hold until 1974.

It may sound ridiculous, but this news makes me sad. It’s sad in an “end of an era” kind of way, like Johnny Carson’s retirement or Mike Wallace’s semi-retirement. I’ve been watching The Price is Right since I was two years old. I’ve never really known what television was like without Bob Barker. It’s another reminder that I’m getting older, and I don’t need a reminder of that, thank you.

If you haven’t seen the show in a while, there’s no better time to set your VCR for a while. It is still very much the show you remember from your childhood, which is probably a good reason that so many college kids today schedule classes around it: it’s a sort of comfort zone. And don’t we all need that every once and a while?

One of the local television stations here was running a promo about an upcoming story on one of their newscasts: is it a good idea to include the option, “None of the Above” on ballots?

I didn’t get to see the actual newscast — I was working, after all — but it seems that there are people who think it’s a fabulous idea. Are you one of them?

Vote in the poll on the sidebar, then feel free to discuss in the comments here. Is “None of the Above” a valid option for a ballot? Is it worth standing in line at a polling place to then essentially vote for no one? And what happens if that option actually wins?

What do you think?

The last Patrick’s Place Poll asked how you felt about your safety in the five years since the 9/11 terror attacks.

Most people fell right in the middle, feeling about the same about their safety now as then, or a little better. But on the extremes, slightly more people said they felt much less safe than much more safe. Here are the results:

11%: “I feel much safer now.”
29%: “I feel a little safer now.”
29%: “I feel about the same now as then.”
18%: “I feel a little less safe now.”
14%: “I feel much less safe now.”

How much of your vote goes to how much security we feel since 9/11/01? A lot, a little, or are you more focused on other issues at this point?

Fitting, I’d say, since it is my favorite of the four:

You Belong in Fall

Intelligent, introspective, and quite expressive at times… You appreciate the changes in color, climate, and mood that fall brings Whether you’re carving wacky pumpkins or taking long drives, autumn is a favorite time of year for you

Last night was the night to “Fall Back,” by setting your clock back one hour. Officially, the time change occurred at what would have been 2:00am. Just after 1:59am, the clock switched to 1:00am again, with a “second chance” at that overnight hour.

This marked the end of Daylight Saving Time. (Note that it’s “Saving,” not “Savings.”) We are now back to Eastern Standard Time (EST), having just left Eastern Daylight Time (EDT).

In 2007, the dates for the start and end of Daylight Saving Time will change, since President Bush signed a law adjusting them. We’ll “Spring Forward,” adjusting the clock ahead one hour (and, unfortunately, losing an hour of sleep) a month earlier. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 mandates that 2007’s Daylight Saving Time will begin on March 11th. We’ll get the extra hour of sleep when we “Fall Back” on November 4th. That could make Halloween a little safer in 2007, giving the trick-or-treaters a little more light late into the evening.

I took advantage of that extra hour. I think it would be nice to find a way to make for an extra hour of sleep at least once a month.

If you come up with any ideas, let me know.

Apparently, Blogger has been having some serious troubles over the past week. When I published last night’s “Saturday Six” questions, it turns out that they published, but didn’t appear anywhere. They’re up now, and now you have this Sunday offering to go with them.

Yesterday, I visited the Coastal Carolina Fair, a carnival held annually in the Lowcountry of South Carolina. It had the typical rides, games, and attractions, plus the ever-popular food vendors. That got me thinking about this week’s question.

But first, Wil, of “The Daily Snooze” was first to play last week! Congratulations, Wil!

On to this week’s question!

THIS WEEK’S QUESTION:
Name up to seven foods popular at fairs or carnivals that you either once loved or still do.

Either answer the question in a comment or answer it in your journal and include the link in a comment. (To be considered “first to play,” a link must be to the specific entry in which you answered the question.)

My answers:
1. Polish Sausage
2. Corn Dog
3. Fried Mushrooms
4. Elephant Ears
5. Caramel Apples
6. Snowcones
7. Cotton Candy

Hope you’re having a nice weekend. It’s time for another round of questions, so get your thinking caps on!

But first, Gabrielle of “A Metamorphoself of Gabrielle” was first to play last week! Congratulations, Gabrielle!

Here are this week’s “Saturday Six” questions. Either answer the questions in a comment here, or put the answers in an entry on your journal…but either way, leave a link to your journal so that everyone else can visit! To be counted as “first to play,” you must be the first player to either answer the questions in a comment or to provide a complete link to the specific entry in your journal in which you answer the questions. A link to your journal in general cannot count. Enjoy!

1. Have you ever joined one of those “social networking” communities like “Friendster” or “Myspace?” Would you ever consider it?

2. Do you think that lasting friendships can be made solely through sites like those?

3. Has reduced prices in gasoline prompted you to drive more?

4. Take the quiz: What kind of sports car are you? (Thanks, Charley!)

5. Which phone do you use the most: your home phone, your work phone, or your cell phone? Of the remaining two, which do you use the least?

6. In the old days, telephone numbers used to be word and letter combinations. The telephone company would take the first two digits of a phone number, create a word that began with two letters corresponding to the numbers in the digits, and then follow the word with the rest of the number. So, for a number that began with 25, they might use the “A” from the 2 button and the “L” from the 5 button and create a phone number like “Alpine 2-6341. If we went back to this system, come up with a word that would work for the first two digits of your phone number. (It can be work, home or cell…just don’t post your whole number!

If you have a Reader’s Choice question you’d like to see asked (and answered), click the e-mail link in the Blogger profile and send it to me.

Mrs. Linklater has put Rush Limbaugh, co-star of the latest controversy on stem cell research, through a Reality Check. And, not surprisingly, he didn’t do very well.

The question is, why do so many still listen?

One of the big questions for unpublished writers is whether or not publishing excerpts of their work online in blogs is really considered “published” or not.

Who better to ask than Miss Snark?

Here’s her take, and note that the answer may be different, depending on what you want to contribute and to which kind of publisher.

This week, T.R. Knight, one of the stars of the ABC medical drama, Grey’s Anatomy, announced to the world that he is gay. I’m not sure why that matters to anyone other than him and his significant others, but he still went on record to say so.

The reason he went on record seems to be a heated argument between some of his colleagues on the set that made entertainment headlines.

As the story goes, Knight was apparently late to work, and while cast and company waited, a debate began over whether to film a scene without him. Costar Patrick Dempsey advocated waiting. Costar Isaiah Washington wanted to go ahead and shoot the scene without Knight. What then occurred, apparently, was some show of testosterone in which Dempsey and Washington got loud with each other, ending with Washington uttering a “homophobic slur.”

When news leaked that the argument — and in particular Washington’s comment — had occurred, Knight came forward to confirm that he was gay, adding, “I hope the fact that I’m gay isn’t the most interesting part of me.”

Following the incident, rumor mills went spinning out of control, speculating not only that Washington would likely be fired for his remark, but that ER’s Eriq La Salle might be a strong contender to replace him. Washington has since apologized for the remark, claiming that the behavior was “beneath [his] personal standards.” All indications from the set now are that everything is going along merrily, with no hard feelings among anyone.

Further, the show’s executive producer, Shonda Rhimes, says that Washington isn’t going anywhere, and told People magazine that “the (idea) that one black man was interchangeable with another seemed disturbing to me.”

It is a disturbing notion when you think about it; to suggest that one black man might be easily-interchangable with another black man is to reduce two unique human beings all the way down to one single trait. Much the way Washington reduced Knight to another single trait when he uttered the slur.

Being black or white doesn’t define anyone’s character. Being straight or gay doesn’t, either. Too often, right wing extremists are trying to play the “gay card” these days in a sad attempt to unite their base. It doesn’t matter to them that in really important issues, there’s too much disunity; what matters is that they get something in the way of support, even if it comes at the price of discrimination against people because of their sexual orientation.

There are some people, undoubtedly, who will feel that Knight’s orientation is the “most interesting part” of who he is. I have to wonder if there’s not something wrong with those people. How does that revelation change the price of gasoline or help the environment or pay a struggling family’s grocery bill or make needed drugs accessible to the sick who can’t afford them?

Washington’s own production company, Coalhouse Productions, lists on its webpage that its mission statement is to encourage everyone to “think deeper” by exploring themes of individuality, the value of art and the struggles of everyday people and events. One has to wonder what Washington’s vision of a “better world” might be like if any kind of discrimination might be part of it.

I’m pretty sure that had it been Knight and Dempsey on set waiting for Washington to arrive, with one of them uttering a racial slur, there would have been a far bigger firestorm. So if we really “think deeper” for a moment, the question we should be asking is whether it’s really acceptable to discriminate against anyone for any reason.

In other words, what differences are reason enough to be cruel?

Is your vision of a better world one in which everyone is the exact same in every way, or one in which people are still allowed to be individuals and those things that make us different — whatever they are — are celebrated for their own value and contribution to the whole?

I know my answer. Do you know yours?

Recently, actor Michael J. Fox appeared in campaign commercials in several states advocating candidates who supported stem cell research. Fox, who suffers from Parkinson’s Disease, struggles in the campaign ads to stay still, but seems to weave back and forth.

Some Republicans quickly criticized the Democrats for trying to “take advantage” of the illness’s victims for their political gain. Radio personality Rush Limbaugh then decided to go one step further, suggesting that Fox intentionally refused to take his medication so that the effects of his illness would be more pronounced on camera, and then even suggested that he must be exaggerating and putting on a performance.

Tonight, the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric had the big exclusive: Fox and Couric sat down to talk about the controversy over stem cell research, Fox’s advocacy of same, and Limbaugh’s insensitive remarks. (The whole interview can be seen online at CBSNews.com.)

Fox said that he didn’t go without medication for the spots; if anything, he was in a period of dyskenisia, in which (as he explained it) his body was reacting to the medication kicking in too hard. As for going off his medication for dramatic effect, as in the scenario Limbaugh hypothesized, Fox suggested that Parkinson’s patients would love to have the coordination required to effectively mimic a more severe case.

Couric told Fox that when she called Limbaugh, he gave her this statement:

“I believe Democrats have a long history of using victims of various things as political spokespeople because they believe they are untouchable, infallible – they are immune from criticism.”

Fox was quick to respond:

“Well, first thing, he used the word ‘victim’ and [on] other occasions I heard you use the word ‘pitiable.’ Now understand, no one in this position wants pity. We don’t want pity. I could give a damn about Rush Limbaugh’s pity or anyone else’s pity and I am not a victim.”

It was painful to watch Fox at times, but worth it because of that statement and this one he made about those who do not support stem cell research:

“If they’ve prayed on it and they’ve thought about it and they can’t get their head around it or their heart around it, then great. I mean, fantastic. And I admire them and I respect them. All I say to them respectfully is, if there’s a majority that also prayfully and thoughtfully…and emotionally…and intellectually…and in every other way weighted this and came on the other side, and said you know, I think this is the right thing to do, to very carefully tread these waters to save these lives, then you have to respect that, too. And don’t resort to name calling or inflammatory language or mocking or whatever you need to do. Just have a discussion about it…and we’ll see what happens.”

Why is it that on this issue, the people who seem to think they have religion and morality on their side, seem to be acting the least like religious people?

Errr…make that Vata, Pitta and Kapha.

We all have one. In fact, according to the 5,000 Indian science of life, we each have some of all three, and the exact formula, known as one’s Dosha, is as uniquely us as our fingerprints are.

I took two different Dosha quizzes. The simple one, over at Blogthings, says my Dosha is Kapha:

Your Dosha is Kapha

Calm and grounded, you are not prone to mood swings or anger.

However, once you do get angry, it takes a lot to cool you down.

You tend to think a little slower than most people, but your logic is astounding.

Overall, you very loyal and trustworthy.
You’re not scared of being who you really are.

With friends: You enjoy their company, but often listen more than talk

In love: You crave connection and affection. It’s hard for you to be single.

To achieve more balance: Exercise vigorously (especially in the sun)
and let go of attachments.

The more complicated one says my Dosha is Vata, which Bloglines describes this way:

Your Dosha is Vata

Creative and restless, you take in all of life’s pleasures (maybe a little too much!).

You’re quick witted and very talkative, but you also tend to have a spotty memory.

You tend to get very into ideas, people, and lifestyles… but only for a short time.

It’s difficult to hold your attention, and you sometimes feel with what life has to offer.

With friends: You are very uncomfortable in new situations or with new people

In love: You fall in and out of love very easily

To achieve more balance: Live in a warm climate and spend some quiet time in nature

You wouldn’t think that a simple test with only eight questions would do a better job than a much more complicated test with at least twice the number of questions. But in this case, it did. The first result isn’t exactly me, but it’s a good bit closer than the second description ever gets.

Anyone want to try both and see if you get different answers?

Would someone please explain to me why the concept of a National ID Card is so frightening? Really. What’s the big deal?

What information do you think a National ID Card would track that current state-issued ID cards aren’t already tracking?

When I moved back to South Carolina from Virginia, despite the fact that I was born in South Carolina, I still had to obtain a certified copy of my birth certificate just to get a new South Carolina driver’s license. It’s not like my birth-state didn’t already have a good record of me; they actually re-issued a new driver’s license with my original driver’s licence number reactivated. So clearly the Palmetto State knew exactly who I am.

I suspect that if we were talking about a National ID, I wouldn’t have had to waste all that legwork tracking down enough proof of identification to get me an overseas passport. I also suspect that if there was one source of records-keeping, rather than 50+ individual sources, there would be a lot less red tape. I still don’t know why Virginia and South Carolina can’t communicate with each other on such things. After all, a few years back, they were certainly close friends when they were battling the “damn Yankees.” I wonder what soured their relationship.

I also wonder why it was more difficult to get a driver’s licence in Virginia than it was to get one in the state where I was born. I didn’t have to jump through so many hoops four years ago, despite the fact that the Commonwealth of Virginia had clearly never heard of me. And since South Carolina, naturally, had my old driver’s license on file, they had picture-proof that I was who I claimed to be.

I just don’t see why a National ID card wouldn’t make it easier for such transactions to take place. If the Federal Government really wants to keep track of you, I think they’ll find a way whether you have a National ID or not.

What’s with morning radio talk shows lately? Many of them are funny…or at least, they contain funny moments.

But when they’re really being funny, I am generally capable of determining this on my own. If you, as a radio performer, constantly have to demonstrate that you’re being funny, then you’re definitely not as amusing as you think you are.

So what, then, is with all of the exaggerated laughing the radio performers are doing while one of their own is doing some sketch? You know the kind of laugh I’m talking about…it almost sounds like any one — or all — of them might choke to death in mid-guffaw. If they think their humor needs that much help, I’d rather hear an audience laugh track!

Talk about killing a good joke.

Let’s review, shall we?

“We’re making steady progress. A free Iraq will mean a peaceful world. And it’s very important for us to stay the course, and we will stay the course.”

–President Bush
July 10, 2003

“But we will stay the course. We will do what is right. We will make sure that a free Iraq emerges, not only for our own security, but for the sake of free peoples everywhere. A free Iraq will change the Middle East. A free Iraq will make the world more peaceful. A free Iraq will make America more secure. We will not be shaken by thugs and terrorists.”

–President Bush
April 5, 2004

“Look, this is hard work. It’s hard to advance freedom in a country that has been strangled by tyranny. And, yet, we must stay the course, because the end result is in our nation’s interest.”

–President Bush
April 13, 2004

“Iraq is the central front in this war on terror. If we leave the streets of Baghdad before the job is done, we will have to face the terrorists in our own cities. We will stay the course, we will help this young Iraqi democracy succeed, and victory in Iraq will be a major ideological triumph in the struggle of the 21st century.”

-President Bush
August 30, 2006

“Well, hey, listen, we’ve never been ’stay the course,’ George. We have been — we will complete the mission, we will do our job, and help achieve the goal, but we’re constantly adjusting to tactics. Constantly.”

–President Bush, to George Stephanopoulos
This Week

Granted, he did say this last year:

“Some critics continue to assert that we have no plan in Iraq except to, ’stay the course.’ If by ’stay the course,’ they mean we will not allow the terrorists to break our will, they are right. If by ’stay the course,’ they mean we will not permit al Qaeda to turn Iraq into what Afghanistan was under the Taliban — a safe haven for terrorism and a launching pad for attacks on America — they are right, as well. If by ’stay the course’ they mean that we’re not learning from our experiences, or adjusting our tactics to meet the challenges on the ground, then they’re flat wrong.”

–President Bush
November 30, 2005

Maybe the reason more people aren’t screaming, “Flip-Flop!” is that they’re glad that it finally appears that some re-thinking may not be beyond the realm of possibility.