Friday, 18 March 2016

The Madonna Story

I sat this morning....reading over entertainment news, and noted this oddball Madonna story from Australia.

Last week....she was supposed to show up at Melbourne's Forum Theater at 8:30 PM.  Tickets were sold and thousands were set show.  She eventually got there at 1AM....roughly four and a half hours later.

The concert itself?  It did run on to roughly 3AM.

No one says much except there a fair number that just gave up and left before midnight.  Requests for their money back?  Not much has been said yet but I'm guessing some folks expect their money back.

The reason for the delay?  Band practice. does sound pretty bogus.

The Brisbane Madonna episode.  She was two hours late on starting, and folks had some problems in getting back home because public transportation wasn't held to fit that deal.  I'm guessing taxi-drivers made a ton of money that night.

How did Melbourne deal with this?  They actually kept some tram and bus drivers on duty that night and helped folks get home.....but it was all a over-time deal, with tens of thousands given out to cover the extra cost.

What's going?  At some point, cities will start a bond deal.  You want a major concert with 20,000 people in the middle of some a bond that you start on time and end by a time.  Failure to conclude your deal.....lose your bond.

In the end, you have people who need full-time people managing them, and tells them to actually be in the building two hours ahead of time and ensure that the concert is concluded by a professional entertainer.  In this case.....what idiot would pay $75 for a ticket to a Madonna concert....if you knew she was not going to show up for four hours?

The Merrick Garland Scenario

If you sit back and view the whole Supreme Court nominee'll likely go like this.

Garland will appear before the Senate Committee.....get some some tough questions....answer with either "I don't know how I'd handle that" or just smile and grin.  After seven days of questions....they will schedule a open day or two in the Senate....probably in mid-May.

The thing need sixty votes.  Forty-four Democrats and two independents....will side with Garland, and I suspect that five Republicans will vote for him (they aren't up for re-election in 2016 or they may never go up for re-election again).  He will be voted down.

Then some debate will open up about why they can't do this with fifty-one votes, instead of sixty.  But you'd ask....back in 2010....why not make it an issue with Kagen's episode....allowing fifty-one to do the job?

The news folks will carry this fifty-one idea for two weeks.....then realize that no one really buys off on it.

A new candidate by the third week of May?  Yes.....even more moderate.....we will be told.  Around mid-June....the Senate committee will question this individual (probably a black female judge).

The first person (Garland) failed with fifty-one votes.  The second candidate will fail with fifty-five votes (another four Republicans will find some reason grin and say that they don't care about their re-election chances).

So, somewhere in prediction is a third nominee comes up and somehow, fourteen Republicans are found to support that person.  I think at least three of the Senators will then face a recall election back in their state, and they will be unable to mount enough support....thus ending their career in DC.

The thing is.....most people will agree that the political process and the judicial process in America is "broke".  They don't see transparency, and they don't think DC can fix much of anything.  If anything....this simply concretes attitudes and behaviors to be anti-Republican and anti-Democrat.  So, in a sad way.....Trump makes perfect sense.