Shot In The Dark: 59 Factoids And One Unwarranted Conclusion (That Will Give Certain Commenters The Vapors)

February 15, 2006

59 Factoids And One Unwarranted Conclusion (That Will Give Certain Commenters The Vapors)

As an odd little side note; I'll occasionally post little tidbits about my life and my past. Little, scarcely consequential things - I play ten musical instruments, I speak a couple of languages, I used to occasionally busk for beer money, I'm a Springsteen fan, I'm the best conservative among anyone I know) that, for some inexplicable reason, cause certain readers and commenters to leave increasingly strident (dare I say, "Peebish") comments disputing or at least heckling the statement. Something about these little factoids seem to act on these commenters like red banners affect bulls; he/she/they charge (through the virtual bull ring of my comment section), gets skewered, charges again, etc, etc.

So in the interest of flushing this behavior by pure catharsis, I present virtually every factoid about myself I could think of in one sitting. Hopefully the exercise will cause these commenters to realize the error of their ways and the futility of their reasoning, assuming there's any of that going on.

This will borrow from the example set by my blog friend Sheila O'Malley in her wonderful "74 Facts And One Lie"; in that spirit, I entitle this piece "59 Factoids and One Unwarranted Conclusion".

Onward:

I get around in a couple of languages; I took seven years of German (three in high school, four in college), one each of Latin and Spanish.
I also figured out how to get around in Holland and France to the point where nobody ever made me out as a Yank if I didn’t want ‘em to.
I have wanted to learn Russian for years – but at the moment, I’m leaning toward Polish. I’d also kill to learn Vietnamese.
I have a BA in English, and I minored in History, Computer Science and German. I also had enough classes in Music and Theatre to get minors, but the credits were almost all performance and stagecraft, so it didn’t pan out. Yes, I was crazy in college; I averaged over 20 credits a semester. I also slept like four hours a night.
While in Europe, I snuck into the Netherlands illegally. It’s a long story.
In a perfect world, I'd be (among a few other things) a full time language geek. My senior linguistics project? A study on the differences in dialect, accent and vocabulary between the Dakotas, Montana and Minnesota. And yes, there is a difference in accent. Minnesotans talk more through their nose, while people from the Dakotas' accents are generally throatier. I attributed it to the difference in anscestors; Minnesotans had more scandinavians (more nasal) while the Dakotas are more German and Slavic (along with Scandinavians).
I get around, or have gotten around, on ten musical instruments; cello, guitar, bass, drums, keyboards (mostly badly – everything I need to know, I learned from Benmont Tench and Danny Federici - and I’m terribly out of practice for now), harmonica, mandolin (rusty), pennywhistle (rustier), curan (a Turkish instrument for which I can’t find strings at the moment) and bagpipes.
Pedal steel is next.
I used to play the bars around the Twin Cities. The First Avenue main room was the peak of it all; the Cabooze, the Uptown, the Seventh Street Entry and the 400 Bar were all great. McCready’s, the Terminal and Mr. B’s on University were not. Worst of all, of course, had to be Fernando’s on Lake Street, a dive that was TRYING to become a music destination, but just sucked horribly in every possible way. There is a post to be written about playing ‘nando’s.
I used to busk. Not a lot – a couple of times in Europe in ’83, and a few times with the guys from my band in ’87. It was fun, though I can’t say I’d like to do it for a living. The story from the other day - the cops busting a sax player I was busking with - was utterly true, even if fairly short on denouement.
I'm happy that I can use a word like denouement in a sentence and still look like a badass.
I’ve never had a job that involved handling food. Never been a waiter, never worked at McDonald’s – nothing.
Well, not before the food was eaten, anyway. In college I worked for a summer as a bellhop at a Holiday Inn in North Dakota, which involved cleaning the pool, serving as night maid, setting up/tearing down banquet rooms, bouncing at the lounge, tossing bums out of the pool shower, and one glorious Sunday morning, cleaning up a sewer break.
I have not had a week off from work that didn’t involve job hunting (being out of work with two kids is no vacation) or house painting since 1987.
Although I grew up in the public schools (my maternal grandparents and my father were all public school teachers), I ended up attending Catholic schools for six month via a weird chain of events. The experience left me not especially impressed with Catholic schools. Your mileage – especially all of you who send your kids to catholic schools – may certainly vary. I’m just saying.
My parents could both be fairly described as Democrats; Dad the more moderate of the two. As a result, I grew up pretty much believing in liberalism.
As noted at several points in this blog, Jimmy Carter’s “malaise” speech started my journey from left to right.
Yes, I do believe that former liberals make the best conservatives. Ronald Reagan? Helloooo?
I am on my third career.
My first career was radio. I started when I was 16 years old (as noted elsewhere) at KEYJ in Jamestown, ND. Since then I worked at KQDJ, KDAK, KQDJ again (different management), KSTP-AM, KDWB AM/FM, WDGY-AM, KFAI, and now WWTC (AM1280).
KDAK and WDGY were country/western stations. While working there, I learned the immutable law of country music; when it's bad, it's horrible; when it's mediocre, it's horrible; when it's good, it's pretty amazing. That was where I became an Emmylou Harris, Rosanne Cash, Rodney Crowell and Willie Nelson fan.
To the best of my knowledge, in 1986 I was the youngest major-market political talk show host in the business. I wasn't very good at it, but it was a lot of fun.
Which is good, because the most money I ever earned in a year in my radio career was around $12,000.
That was if I was lucky enough to be working at a station. Which had its gaps, let’s just say. To pay the bills, I worked for a stretch – like, three years – as a nightclub DJ. I spent some of that time working in more R’nB oriented bars, including a few with a sizeable rap audience. So I learned first how to beat-mix (mix two records together so that you barely know the song has changed, and the beat just goes on) and then how to scratch, cut and do a bunch of the other funky rap turntable stuff. I even played behind a couple of (amateur) rappers back in the day. At one point, I was known as the best bald, white, father-of-two rap DJ in the Twin Cities.
Celebs who came to my bars: Janet Jackson, Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis (Mermaid, 1989); a couple of Minnesota Vikings (Eddie Webster's, 1990), Belinda Carlisle (KDWB Beach Party, St. Paul Civic Center, 1989; I know, it's not a bar. Take it up with Ms. Carlisle); a guy who was famous for looking just like Prince, only about a foot too tall, Mermaid, 1988-2001.
One day, around the time I left the nightclub racket, I was walking down a street with a friend of mine – let’s call that friend “Tim Wonderbread”. Another guy – a short, afro-American guy in a starter jacket – walked up to us, and looked like he was paying attention to us. Tim tensed up. “Hey”, said the black guy, “You was the MC at the Mermaid?” “Yep”. “Yo!”, he replied, shaking our hands. “You were the flyest MC around!”. Tim almost had a heart attack.
I have worked for 36 different companies in the past 20 years on a level that paid my family’s bills. Most were short-hop contract jobs; I’m on my fourth full-time permanent job since 1995.
I left radio – the first time – in 1993, about the time my youngest was born and making $12K a year ceased to be an option.
I became a technical writer.
Technical writing is an incredibly detailed field, which usually involves cleaning up other peoples’ messes. Those happen to be things I’m fundamentally temperamentally unsuited to do. That said, tech writing was fairly good to me.
Nowadays, am a User Interface Designer. Not a “Website designer” – I don’t do graphics, and I don’t make things look cool or cute. I make software of all kinds usable. It’s a pretty arcane field, which is just the way I like it; if it were easier to explain, it’d be easier to do, and then I wouldn’t make as much money. So you really don’t need to know any more, now, do you?
I taught myself how to do the job. Completely. I met a guy who was doing more or less what I’m doing now at Cray Research – he had just built a Usability testing lab – and put two and two together; “Hm – I can use the same basic skills I use as a technical writer, but get more money, more respect, and not be bored out of my skull? Where do I sign up?” It took me four years of self-education and constant insinuation of the practice into one project or another until I got a real job in the field, but I did it.
I like my gig quite a bit. I’m designing a customer portal for a HUGE system for a very large company. The challenge is, yes, immense. I love it. Oh, if I could have a full-time job as a talk show host or a film director or run a recording studio, I’d do it – but since those are all firmly in the realm of fantasy I’ll stick with what I have for now.
A former boss of mine once called me “The Highlander”, because I’ve done a zillion things and you have to cut my head off to kill me.
Or so I hope.
I believe Christ is my lord and savior.
Perforce, I believe in an omniscient God.
While I believe in God with all my heart, I have little empirical evidence that atheists exist.
I don't happen to think evolution takes away from either the existence of God or the glory of his creation one iota. In fact, the endless intricacies of evolution to me glorify God in a way that saying "It all happened in seven days, like it or lump it" never could. Which, indeed, speaks more eloquently of God - the infinitely variegated creation that surrounds us all, or the Dewey Decimal category of a book written about it all over the course of a couple of thousand years?
I met my ex-wife in a really sleazy bar.
It wasn’t what you’re thinking; I was the DJ, she was a waitress. For ex-spouses, we get along moderately well.
I probably just jinxed things.
I’ve been single for six years. In that time, I’ve had at least a first date with 92 different women; yes, I kept track. Most of them were first dates and nothing else. But it’s enough that I periodically run into one or another of them, out and about the town, which thankfully hasn’t led to too many awkward scenes yet. A few – OK, quite a few – were “Dates from Hell”. Haven’t run across any of them yet. I write this knowing that writing it will make it inevitable.
Part of the reason, as I’ve noted elsewhere in this blog, I love blind dates. The vast majority of my “first dates” - and one fourth date, don't ask - have been blind ones. And going to just about every one of them has felt like walking down the stairs on Christmas morning, wondering what was waiting under the tree. Of course, the vast majority of the dates were akin to getting hand-knit socks from great-aunt Alice – but hope always sprang eternal.
I don’t believe in Karma.
I do believe that what goes around comes around.
I have immense respect for Dennis Prager. His Happiness Hour is among the coolest things on radio today. However, he's wrong about the Death Penalty.
By the way, I support the death penalty in every possible way.
Except one; the likelihood (indeed, inevitability) of executing the innocent. The state-sanctioned judicial killing of an innocent person - even one - is a moral crime that can perhaps be rationalized by earthly logic, but I have to believe can not be by any higher law or reasoning, as long as a viable alternative exists. Life without parole is viable.
"But what if the lifer escapes?" isn't a valid question, and doesn't derail my thesis. In fact, I know of a case of a man who escaped from Death Row twice; once in the eighties, when he got out of a gas station rest room while in transit (he was on the lam for five months), and again a few years back. When the courts determined via DNA evidence that he couldn't have committed the murder for which he was sentenced in the first place. Ooops.
My greatest ambition is to leave a word or saying to the English language.
My contender for “saying” is “The guy who said ‘the pen is mightier than the sword’ never had to bet his life on it”. Pass it around and credit it, please.
I got into blogging because I got tired of not having an outlet for my inner strident screedmeister.
It seems to bother JB Doubtless when bloggers mention their traffic. So I won’t say a word. A picture says a thousand of ‘em:

While I firmly believe in maintaining a sense of grounded humility in all things, I also believe in yanking the chains of those who yank mine. My traffic, at the moment, is clipping nicely along. Does it mean, perforce, that I am? That's the fun part; I don't care, and dont' need to know!
And it feels pretty darn cool being able to play every part in the band.
And getting around in a couple of languages to the point that almost nobody makes me out as a Yank if I don’t want ‘em to
And yes, us reformed Democrats are the rockinest conservatives.
For those who think “Oh, you think all of this stuff makes you cool?”, uh, no. The fact that I am who I am makes me cool (or uncool. Or both). The rest of it is just the cherry on top of the sundae.
I care deeply about what people think about any of this.

That is all.

Posted by Mitch at February 15, 2006 05:01 AM | TrackBack

Comments

Hm. Did you know a guy named Larry Hutchinson in the mid 80's? Tall, skinny, redhead, little beard, in his twenties. Lived in Columbia Heights. Wanted to be a music video producer. Used to film local bands at bars in the northern burbs of Mineapolis and St. Paul, Worked for, I think, local access cable as a producer/director/cameraman.

Posted by: Terry at February 15, 2006 07:38 AM

Doesn't ring a bell.

Posted by: mitch at February 15, 2006 07:58 AM

Good Lord. JB Doubtless is going to have a stroke.

"Technical writer? What do you think you are, James Bond?"

Posted by: angryclown at February 15, 2006 08:01 AM

Wow... That's weird...

I know Hutch... He now runs a company with his wife called Twin Cities E-media with his wife Lisa.

Interestingly enough, his company has been pretty active in getting a documentary about 1280AM produced for quite a few years.

Posted by: Doug at February 15, 2006 08:04 AM

I love it! Everyone's got a story, it's all in how you tell it...

Posted by: katie mccollow at February 15, 2006 08:38 AM

You know, JB may have a point. When you read between the lines, it's clear some of Mitch's claims must be exaggerations. Here is Mitch, in his own words. Pretty damning, don't you think?

I have wanted to … kill … Vietnamese.

I have … German … minors… four hours a night.

It’s … long.

I’ve never had … food.

I have not had a … house … since 1987.

I’m … a … film director.

I’ve been … with 92 different women. [Q]uite a few[!]

I … escaped from Death Row twice; once in … a gas station rest room … a few years back… committed … murder.

I … believe in yanking the … those who yank mine… That's … fun[!] And it feels pretty darn cool.

Democrats are the rockinest[!]

Posted by: angryclown at February 15, 2006 08:50 AM

Doug-
Yep, that sounds like Hutch. In olden days we put together a motorcycle. I bet his parent's basement is still strewn with Triumph parts. If you see him, tell him Stick says hi from Hawaii.

Posted by: Terry at February 15, 2006 09:11 AM

Mitch, I'm a little unclear on factoid #45. Could you elaborate?

Posted by: Kermit at February 15, 2006 09:55 AM

Terry,

I'll do that.

Here's his website if you want to see what they're up to...

http://www.tcemedia.com

Note to Mitch... There is a link there to the WWTC documentary if you're interested...

Posted by: Doug at February 15, 2006 09:57 AM

Wow - I'm flattered, Mitch. Really. Thanks! Hey - I'm performing 74 Facts in just a month at a fundraiser here in New York - argh! Now I have to memorize the dern thing!

I love #26 on your list. Made me smile.

Posted by: red at February 15, 2006 10:43 AM

Red, I'd love to see the show. Not that I'm going to be in NY or anything... :-P

By the way, my old friend Nuke - an actor, actually - is a big reader of yours, especially that piece. Just saying.

Posted by: mitch at February 15, 2006 10:59 AM

Wow.

Mitch, I don't know what you are more of--self-aggrandizement (and just out right bragging) or plain ol' hubris for going on the offensive for the various white lies you've tried to pull over your readers eyes over the years.

You have this great phrase you use "Get around on" as in "I can get around in 4 languages" or "I can get around on 10 instruments".

This has replaced the casual way you have referred to "Playing 10 instruments" or "knowing 2 languages".

This phrase gives you enough wiggle room should you ever be challenged. You can then say "Hey, I only said I GET AROUND ON those instruments."

Weasel words.

When you say "I play 10 instruments" (as you have several times) it doesn't mean you have at one time played and made passable noise from them. It means you play them on a regular basis and can play them with a certain level of proficiency.

So to recap, I call bullshit on you "playing" ten instruments.

I didn't get through the rest of the list, but as Seinfeld once said to George "Good luck with all that".

Posted by: JB Doubtless at February 15, 2006 12:38 PM

A masterstroke. In one post you've taken care of five or six years worth of memes yet to come down the pike!

Posted by: Night Writer at February 15, 2006 02:32 PM

Oh spittle-flecked, red-faced one,

Not a single white lie in the bunch. Zero. Zip.

"Mitch, I don't know what you are more of--self-aggrandizement"

You must be looking for the verb, "Self-aggrandizing", rather than the noun "Self-aggrandizement". One describes an action you (wrongly) think I'm doing, rather than a state of being.

Either way, you're wrong, but I figure grammar matters, lest our society be given over to the barbarians.

You have this great phrase you use "Get around on" ...Weasel words."

Er, no. Modesty. Y'know, the opposite of hubris.

"When you say "I play 10 instruments" (as you have several times) it doesn't mean you have at one time played and made passable noise from them. It means you play them on a regular basis and can play them with a certain level of proficiency."

Let's see:

I've played guitar, bass, drums, cello, harmonica and mandolin for money.

I've played cello, guitar and percussion for academic scholarships.

I've played guitar, bass, drums, harp, keys, cello, pennywhistle and mandolin in one band or another, to a level I (and everyone else) was plenty satisfied with.

Not much market - academic or vocational - for the curan. You'll have to take my word on it (especially since you wouldn't know a curan if you saw one).

As to bagpipes? Well, next time you're in town I'll drive by and give you a demo at 3AM. You're welcome in advance.

"So to recap, I call bullshit on you "playing" ten instruments."

JB: You are unqualified to call "Bulslhit" on me on *any* topic, much less this one. You are indeed an excellent guitar player, so I'll just run this past you; when I was playing every day (at one point I was in a band that practiced four hours a night, 4-5 nights a week) I was pretty fecking amazing. My proficiency varies widely by instrument; guitar and cello, I have been professional-level; others, anything from inspired amateur to pretty grungy. But as a general rule, I'm pretty presentable.

In closing; kudoes for taking the bait with metronomic predictability.

("metronomic" does not mean "wears black designer clothing, drinks foo foo drinks", by the way).

Posted by: mitch at February 15, 2006 02:42 PM

"In one post you've taken care of five or six years worth of memes"

Buy bulk and save!

Posted by: mitch at February 15, 2006 02:45 PM

So Mitch says stuff. What exactly do we know about JB?

He writes like a sixth grader. He jumps to absolute conclusions based on faulty data. He is by far the weakest member on the Fraters bench. He has an exagerated sense of his own importance.

Based on availble evidence, I'd say he's a college education professor.

Posted by: Geoff at February 15, 2006 03:51 PM

Watch me make JB's head explode:

I also used to be a qualified piano tuner.

Posted by: mitch at February 15, 2006 04:25 PM

"Jeff":

Yes, I teach at the U. I actually teach 6 subjects (Spanish, French, Russian, Art History, Womyn's Studies and Economics) I can get around in Biology and Chemistry too, but only as a fill-in basis.

But enough about me, back to Mitch!

Posted by: JB Doubtless at February 15, 2006 04:45 PM

OK, back to me.

I tire of this silly noodling. If I say it (about myself, anyway), it's true.

Oh, yeah - and I used to teach at Metro State, too. Technical writing, back in 2000.

Seriously - there's never been the faintest hint of a lie - white, black or any other - about myself in this blog; if there's something I dont' want out there, I don't write about it.

So you have three choices:
1) Set about disproving anything I've said. Good luck with that, since there is nothing untrue on the subject of yours truly anywhere in this blog, to say nothing of this post.
2) Call me a liar to my face. That'd be really dumb.
3) Let 'er drop and admit that your carping and cavilling is in error. Which is eventually inevitable anyway, the truth is the best defense.

Assuming you are ethically-grounded enough to care for little things like truth.

Posted by: mitch at February 15, 2006 06:32 PM

Interesting..

Here are a few fatoids about me that everyone so does too want to knowe:

1. I am a lesbineg (no, not the fake, lipstick kind, the real sweatpants in the hardware store and Michelle Bachmann thong on my head kind).

2. I am a Republican (I can too be a Republican if I want to!)

3. I spend 20 hours of every day surfing the internet, and the othr 4 hours flosing the space betwen my ears.

4. I like anchoviys.

5. The Star Tribune receves many press releses, but only a few from me this week. Will I relese a press relese of my fatoids? Develiping....

6. I am a x-celint wordsmith as in: I have a pletherra of blogs and websites...visit them all!

7. I do not so live in a dumpster, I only eat there.

8. I carry a belly-button lint museaum on my body at all times.

9. Peopel like me, they really like me.

10. PZ Myers and me are fellow sientists, I do too have a degree in bi0olgy!

11. I never have a problum becuse there are only six hotdogs and ate buns.

12. I can so crusch a walnut between my thies.

13. You so do want to know more about me, so read my blogs or I'll wash my boxers at yure landrymat.

Posted by: Eva Young at February 15, 2006 07:56 PM

[comment deleted. See below].

Posted by: pb at February 15, 2006 11:32 PM

You've got to be kidding me.

PBrain, given your credibility, you have no standing to call Mitch a liar.

Pathetic.

Posted by: JWW at February 16, 2006 12:30 AM

Peeb,

I deleted your comment. Too personal, too inflamed, and also completely wrong.

I'm not sure what it is about a simple little comment section that so inflames you - but I think it's ironic; you flipped off bloggers as being "like Usenet trolls"; yet you act like one pretty consistently - personalizing the impersonal, finding insult where none is intended, responding to jocularity with anger. I also whacked the other comment, for pretty much the same reasons.

I have never knowingly insulted you, Peeb (except for calling you a "blowhard", which I thought you were 20 years ago, anyway. A blowhard with many redeeming qualities, of course, which is why I've always counted you as a friend. A highly, stridently opinionated friend with a very stentorian style of delivery, but there you have it.

So I'm deleting the comment, and urging you to cool it for a while. Taking things personally is one thing; making them personal is another.

And you DO realize that this post was like the 40th time you said you were done with blogs, right?

Posted by: mitch at February 16, 2006 06:58 AM

Oh, I'll respond briefly to this bit:

"Then there was - "I work with each Constantly" regarding working with doctors, patients and clinicians. In IT, you work (mostly) with business analysts to understand the goals and desires regarding the outcome of the system. Some folks, like Mitch, work pretty directly with IT management simply to come in and do analysis of the usability of the system. You DONT work very often with the external customers of the company, but even IF you did, you sure as hell don't do it often, certainly not constantly, unless constantly suddenly means infrequently. "

When you look out the window of a car in the middle of North Dakota, you might think the world is flat. And if you look at what people like me did at our previous, mutual employer, you'd get a pretty flat picture of what my field is about.

Our previous, mutual employer had a pretty myopic (RUPP and silo-driven) view of what someone like me is supposed to do. Hence, I was bored stiff and woefully underutilized most of the time. A smart company (which our previous, mutual employer was not) uses people like me as a bridge between end-users, Biz Analysts and IT.

My previous, and current, positions were and are much more holistic (and, thankfully, non-RUPP); I do spend a lot of time with external customers - currently including doctors, clinic staff, and (above all) plan customers. The job I have now has really very little in common with the one I did at our previous, mutual company.

Just saying; you are mistaken; you built that molehill mistake (basing a conclusion on flawed information) into a mountain of personal accusation.

Seeing a pattern, here?

Posted by: mitch at February 16, 2006 07:10 AM

Actually Mitch, it was the third, but since you can't tell the truth, apparently you also can't count.

Posted by: pb at February 16, 2006 08:03 AM

The truth is ALL I EVER tell, and all I have ever told.

And since you've said it three times (?) rather than once, apprently I'm not the one with the problem...

Posted by: mitch at February 16, 2006 08:06 AM

I still want to know about factoid #45. Is it a joke I'm not getting?

Posted by: Kermit at February 16, 2006 08:22 AM

Oh, the first one was when I said that you weren't worth the time, I never said I was leaving.

The second I asked if there were any sensible righty blogs, and then went looking for them. Having found none, I occassionally look back here.

This is the third time, and candidly Mitch if you had a single set of balls, you'd have moved on, and, like any other decent human being, left me out of your rants. Since you don't and didn't, I posted, with zero interest in continuing, but you, ever in need of the last word (and you call ME a blowhard, who precisely has an edifice to his ego here?)

But let's be clear, I left your lie alone about "isn't this the 4th time you said you were leaving" in the earlier thread - because in my deluded rants, I considered giving you the last word adequate as long as IT WAS THE LAST WORD - even though it was untrue. It was, depending on how you want to count, the first or second time, (whether you count my saying you weren't worth the time) because responding to you was pointless, but somehow it was the 4th time in your last (i.e. the LAST time I commented here) and that now somehow has become became 40 in this thread. Obviously an exageration, but it does indicate that you EXAGERATE tremendously whenever you think it will score points, because of course, whining about my having said I was leaving once before really doesn't make you sound like anything but a freaking whiner - which would be true.

If you are so interested in having things "cool off" take your own medicine, stop perpetuating lies and or exagerating things regarding me personally.

As for the pattern, Mitch you deleted my comments because they pointed out your lies. I used YOUR words you used describing YOUR work, and you said I had not a clue about your job (by using YOUR words).

As for enflamed, Mitch you start of nearly every rebuttal to anyone who disagrees with you with some sort of insult, go look in a mirror, but actually Mitch, sinc I JUST made the comment that bloggers (like you) are UseNet Trolls, then clearly it was part of my commentary about WHY I left you behind. And, since you so conveniently deleted my comments, you also deleted that my only reason for returning was because you took a shot at me, aka BergShot.

As for a blowhard 20 years ago, whatever. You've taken numerous personnal shots at me, and your readership knows it, so saying otherwise just represents another lie. We were equal blowhards apparently then, the difference being, I don't lie about who I was.

BTW as CASE methodology is considered the coming wave in IT development, esp. RUP (not RUPP or RUUP) it stands for Rational Unified Process. It is also the epitome' of non-silo development - well in fact, it's a non-sequitor. I've worked enough places to know our former employer is neither on the left or right extreme of silo development. Candidly it's cetral systems are a model in it's industry, so again, you seem to be talking out your butt. As for interfacing with end-users of technology, so Mitch, in a Healthcare world, the end-user is the patient? No, most likely not, it's an administrator, sometimes a clinician, but working with the constantly, highly, extremely doubtful, another bombast, aka lie.

But the point is Mitch, my description of your job was pretty accurate, yet you said I was talking out my ass - if you weren't such a bombast, you'd have simply corrected the disconnect. You DO engage in assisting in Web Site design and you DO work on ergonomics of systems - aka, NOT talking out my ass..but instead, you lied, and insulted a friend. If you think saying someone is talking out their ass when they use your OWN words to describe your job isn't an insult, you have a sorry sense of propriety.

You've deleted my e-mail which was FAR less full of personal invective than you've routinely invested in your e-mails to me, but whatever it's your blog.

I don't need to "cool it", I was gone for two weeks, and would have happily stayed gone if you had a shred of class and left me out of your blog.

You want to "cool it", my suggestion, grow up.

Posted by: pb at February 16, 2006 08:24 AM

Mitch, your last response was nonsense.

JWW - please point out a lie i've told here. In fact, I have exposed Mitch's intentional deceptions now at least twice - many more by my count, but hey.. two =twenty in Mitch land.

Posted by: pb at February 16, 2006 08:27 AM

I won't dignify most of your little tirade with a response...

...but since you keep saying I "brought you back into" things - what on earth are you talking about?

Posted by: mitch at February 16, 2006 08:32 AM

Oh, yeah - and this bit here makes me wonder if there isn't something else going on:

"You've deleted my e-mail which was FAR less full of personal invective than you've routinely invested in your e-mails to me"

I have sent you exactly one email, Peeb, and it was about my job change. I have not emailed you regarding anything on this blog.

Point of civil order; you might get a lot further if you quit referring to jokes, intentional hyperbole, the occasional mistake, and (above all) opinions that derive from different information and perspectives as "lies". For example; you said I "lied" about what I do for a living, when in fact you really just don't know.

By your logic, I guess that makes you a liar, right?

Posted by: mtich at February 16, 2006 08:36 AM

e-mail=post, my bad...

Regarding e-mail, considering I sent YOU an e-mail on your Constitutional challenge - a lengthy, genuinely held construction which I didn't post here because it was not fair to the readers to do so. You apparently ducked it, you certainly didn't respond to it, thereby putting lie to your comment "I've responded to every one of your points".... and "I challenged you on the Constitution but you didn't take me up." well..ok, perhaps not a lie, perhaps you JUST didn't see it, but candidly, I think you just didn't care because it wasn't here and for you, things said in private don't count.

You brought me back with your snotty little appellation.. if you can't figure that out, perhaps your ever-present self-aggrandizement of your intellect is a tad overstated (especially since I pointed out the reason in posts you deleted).

As for different perspective, please explain Mitch how a different perspective can exist when it is presented with your own words. Further Mitch, please explain how whatever the differentiation exists between ergonomic analysis in IT systems and User experience in IT systems, the correct response is to say someone is talking out their ass.

Finally, Mitch please explain how occassionally interfacing with administrators of health claims equates to constantly working with doctors, patients, and other clinicians.

You see, it wasn't hyperbole, it wasn't perspective, it was lying.

Oh, btw, how DO you reconcile the fact that you attacked left activists for not having jobs (and thereby showing up at demonstrations) considering your own challenges vocationally, during which downtime you SHOWED UP AT POLITICAL EVENTS AND WERE POLITICALLY ACTIVE? aka pot, meet, kettle.

I used your words against you, and you said I was talking out my ass by doing so, aka you'd sacrifice your friendship to score some dishonest points here. Classless, and that you'd delete posts that pointed out your disengeniuousness, gutless.

Posted by: pb at February 16, 2006 09:12 AM

"As for different perspective, please explain Mitch how a different perspective can exist when it is presented with your own words."

Cute. Except that my own words are sometimes presenting facts, sometimes engaging in hyperbole, sometimes simplifying a complex point, and sometimes just plain yanking chains.

" Further Mitch, please explain how whatever the differentiation exists between ergonomic analysis in IT systems and User experience in IT systems, the correct response is to say someone is talking out their ass."

When one calls someone a "liar" based on your own erroneous perceptions, saying they're "talking out their ass" is charitable.

"Finally, Mitch please explain how occassionally interfacing with administrators of health claims equates to constantly working with doctors, patients, and other clinicians."

Y'see, there's another of your bits of erroneous information - actually, taken out of a non-existant context; I never said I "occasssionally [sic] interfaced with administrators". I constantly interview, observe and interact with users of all sorts; doctors, users, administrators, support staff, EVERYONE. You question this assertion based on...what? Your prejudices? Your desire not to be shown to be completely offbase? What? Certainly not fact.

Stop Digging!

Posted by: mitch at February 16, 2006 09:32 AM

Mitch, you didn't say I was talking out my ass when calling you a liar, you said I was talking out my ass by using your own words you used to describe your job. Also, considering you were describing your work, why the hell would you engage in hyperbole. What I said was you did ergonomic analysis in IT, and I said it was highly unlikely to bring you into contact with patients, doctors and clinicians (as far as it related to healthcare challenges)... to which you responded "shows what you know, it shows you don't have the faintest clue what I do, and you're talking out your ass again" Well, if faintest clue means using your own words, and, since I actually worked for a software development firm that developed software for clinics, insureres and hospitals, and I worked as the business manager interfacing to the software development staff, gee, I guess I MIGHT have an idea whether you were likely to be in constant contact.. but again the main point was it was your words that "didn't have the faintest clue what you did and were talking out your ass".

Again Mitch, you lied about the accuracy of the description, rather than simply correct it slightly and say, well actually Pat, I talk with clinicians to get feedback on the system... the reason of course is that if you HAD done that, your assertion that you "work in Healthcare" would have been laid bare as "hyperbole", and unfounded claim of expertise. You no more work in Healthcare - which was the original point, than you work in dairy farming. You work on IT systems, your interfacing with clinicians, such as it is, is about your SYSTEM, not thier challenges. The point is that ALL of your crap is simply distraction from your hyperbolic and FALSE claim to be WORKING IN HEALTHCARE, you don't deliver care, you don't handle the bills, you don't deal with the administrative headaches of getting referrals approved, you don't interpret contracts and make heart-wrenching decisions about covering or not covering care. Oh, btw, that was another fine insult you laid at my feet.. I recognize you THINK it was a joke, but I care a helluva lot about patients, I worked my ass off to try to get them the MAXIMUM payment I could as opposed to some collegues who simply denied claims for the slightest whim. It's one reason I became a senior auditor, because I had the capability (apparantly) to see what the law required rather than simply what the convenient denial of the day might offer. That was a thoughtless comment Mitch, and just like many others, indicated your willingness to be crass rather than admit your were full of crap about suggesting you "work" in healthcare. You "work" analyzing systems, you work with administrators and support staff to improve those systems, I never said you didn't, so I'm not sure how I was "talking out my ass", but you DON'T deal with the endemic problems facing healthcare. You tried to cover your BS claim with further BS that you "constantly work with .." yet that work isn't related to the delivery of healthcare (except extremely obliquely), but again, the primary point is I USED YOUR WORDS, so if I was talking out my ass, I was using your lips.

Here now you try to cover your previous comments by including administrators and support staff in your line of people, so by that measure, I can say I talk with Generals constantly, if I say that I talk with Generals, Sergeants, policmen and migrant workers constantly, because, I talk with some of them sometime. You again try to cover your intentional deception. That kind of obfuscation allows you to SAY you work with clinicians, when you really MEAN you work almost exclusively with support staff, since they are in the continuum of your littany of people you work with. Please tell me, when was the last time you interviewed a patient regarding their challenges paying their claims (other than perhaps idle chatter), when was it part of your work? How many did you interview in the last month? How often did your work require you to egnage in discussions of the problems endemic to healthcare?

I know the answers well enough because I work both in the field you're in now, and in the industry you currently are employed by. The doorman at your building has no claim to working in healthcare - when we were talking about understanding the challenges facing delivery of care - any more or less than you do. Like the hyperbolic exagerations above, you exagerated your involvement to give the appearance of at least some expertise, you were called on it, using your own words, and reacted like a prig.

You're a fraud, excusing your lies as hyperbole is convenient for you, but it's semantics. You intentionally deceive, in most folks books, that's called lying. If you don't like it pointed out, stop.

As for prejudice, given your rather incessant defense of biggotry (aka people on the left don't need jobs - gee Mitch, I wonder what stereotype you were playing to?), the irony of that comment is unbelievable

Regarding digging, there's an old saying, when you're stuck in a craphole, often you get crap on you.

If you want to stop digging, perhaps you should start by saying you've never insulted me (other than calling me a blow-hard), yeah, I'm sure fever-addled, wasn't one, I'm sure saying I don't care about the non-combat deaths of my fellow soldiers was just duckeys and bunneys to you.

You see Mitch, the issue is you are the ultimate hypocrite. You see offense at nearly every turn, you accuse others of not having facts, yet when you insult others, when you twist facts, when you split hairs regarding your job function and say the commenter is deluded... somehow, that's different, it's just hyperbole. Always an exception for Mitch, he can insult others for doing precisely what he did, but THAT'S DIFFERENT. He can misrepresent and/or mischaracterize his own words BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT. He can wilfully screw up someone's name (which I've never complained about until now), in a childish peevish little snotfest - like an immature 12 year-old might do (oh btw, you remember when you compared my writing to an illiterate 6th grader Mitch- but I'm sure that was just a joke) - he can engage in name-based name calling, BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT. He can lie about his past political leanings, BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT.

If you ever put a fact worth spending time on, and then actually engaged in discourse, perhaps it would be worth debating with you sincerely. But you don't, you snip out only what you want, lace it with invective, barely touch a fact in your reply, and then complain about not getting treated civily in your oh-so uncivil response. BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT.

Mitch= Much Incipid Twaddle and Confused Hypocrisy.

As I said Mitch, your blog, just like the rest, is just flame war crap. I moved on until you decided you needed to act like a 12 year old and take your churlish little twist of my name to new heights. You need to grow up, but what's more, you need to get that your opinion, except amongst a bunch of folks who sychophantically lap it up so they don't have to think, is shallow, ill-thought through, focuses on the tree while the forests fall, and nearly always counter to mountains of real research by actual scientists rather than evangalists posing as such. You also need to understand that these sort of flame-wars cheapen you, each and every time you call JB Spittle-flecked, each and every time you say I'm vapid, or lefty activists are lazy welfare cheats, you look like a fool. When you actually start proposing decent ideas for solutions and are willing to engage in real discussion (such as defining how it is tax breaks don't bring more money into an HSA system), then perhaps your blog (and others like yours) would be worth spending time on. As it is, they are cheap, childish, and crude and nothing more than insult laden hate-speech. It's your right, and unlike you, when confronted twice with medical disqualification, I found a way to serve and a right I served to preseve for you - I bring that up because if you were so all damned fired up to serve, it was possible, I just suspect that like so much else you say, that too was "hyperbole."

Posted by: pb at February 16, 2006 10:18 AM

Boy, did he tell you, Mitch! And I say you are bald-faced lying about factoid #45, too.

Posted by: Kermit at February 16, 2006 10:23 AM

Why do I feel like calling the cops to complain that my neighbors are causing a disruptance with their constant yelling back and forth?

Posted by: Dave in Pgh. at February 16, 2006 12:39 PM

Hooooboy.

"Mitch, you didn't say I was talking out my ass when calling you a liar, you said I was talking out my ass by using your own words you used to describe your job."

My own words - which were never meant, in this forum, to be an exhaustive curriculum vitae. How pedantic should I be, in talking about what I do? Who cares?

Well, you, apparently.

"Also, considering you were describing your work, why the hell would you engage in hyperbole."

Specious connection.

I was engaging in discussing what I do for a living at a level I deemed appropriate for the forum. I get to do that, y'know...???

" What I said was you did ergonomic analysis in IT, and I said it was highly unlikely to bring you into contact with patients, doctors and clinicians (as far as it related to healthcare challenges)... to which you responded "shows what you know, it shows you don't have the faintest clue what I do, and you're talking out your ass again"

What part do you object to - the fact that I rejected your description of what *I* do for a living (like you know who I talk with at my job?), or the fact that I said you were talking out your ass?

If it's the latter - well, I apologize. You're not talking out your ass. You're talking crap - blindly speculating about things you know little about - but you're talking out your mouth.

Fair enough?

" Well, if faintest clue means using your own words, and, since I actually worked for a software development firm that developed software for clinics, insureres and hospitals, and I worked as the business manager interfacing to the software development staff, gee, I guess I MIGHT have an idea whether you were likely to be in constant contact."

You might. But you wouldn't necessarily know what I do at my job (as, indeed, you showed clearly, of which more later).

" but again the main point was it was your words that "didn't have the faintest clue what you did and were talking out your ass".

Sigh.

OK. Let me rephrase.

You were talking with unwarranted authority about a subject about which you know little in overall concept and nothing in terms of specific details.

Feels like I'm writing a friggin' legal brief.

"Again Mitch, you lied about the accuracy of the description, rather than simply correct it slightly and say, well actually Pat, I talk with clinicians to get feedback on the system."

But that wouldn't have addressed your dismissive little crack about how I never work with doctors, nurses, patients, etc. Not that there's any point in addressing it; you believe what you believe, and don't care a lick about the facts, apparently.

" the reason of course is that if you HAD done that, your assertion that you "work in Healthcare" would have been laid bare as "hyperbole", and unfounded claim of expertise."

Except, of course, that I do work in healthcare, and spend quite a bit of time talking with people all through the process; doctors, management, administrators, patients, and the wretches who process claims.

"You no more work in Healthcare - which was the original point, than you work in dairy farming".

You're raving, bigfella.

" You work on IT systems, your interfacing with clinicians, such as it is, is about your SYSTEM, not thier challenges."

PB must stand for "pedantic boy".

What fucking ever. Then perhaps you should be held to your own standard. You never worked in healthcare; you worked in getting numbers and dollars and bits of paper moved from place to place.

Fair enough?

"The point is that ALL of your crap is simply distraction from your hyperbolic and FALSE claim to be WORKING IN HEALTHCARE, you don't deliver care,"

True. And neither did you. Ever.

" you don't handle the bills"

Whoah there, bigfella! So according to PB, "Handling the bills" is more "healthcare" than making sure the system by which patients, doctors, administrators, and so on interact with the care, billing and administrative processes makes actual sense to real people?

I'm starting to see how your "logic" works, here.

"Oh, btw, that was another fine insult you laid at my feet.. I recognize you THINK it was a joke, but I care a helluva lot about patients, I worked my ass off to try to get them the MAXIMUM payment I could as opposed to some collegues who simply denied claims for the slightest whim."

Um - PB? I don't believe I've ever said word one about what you thought about patients.

"Here now you try to cover your previous comments by including administrators and support staff in your line of people, so by that measure, I can say I talk with Generals constantly, if I say that I talk with Generals, Sergeants, policmen and migrant workers constantly, because, I talk with some of them sometime."

Judging by the way you're getting worked up over my 50,000 foot level job description, I'd ease off on the Generals a bit.

"You're a fraud, excusing your lies as hyperbole is convenient for you, but it's semantics. You intentionally deceive, in most folks books, that's called lying. If you don't like it pointed out, stop."

I dont' care if you "point it out", because you are talking pure, refined shit.

For example, wrapping yourself in perceived insults:

"If you want to stop digging, perhaps you should start by saying you've never insulted me (other than calling me a blow-hard), yeah, I'm sure fever-addled, wasn't one"

Wow. This'd be one of those cases when I don't believe I was referring to you specifically, y'see, but rather the whole conspiracy-mongering community.

Along those same lines...:

"I'm sure saying I don't care about the non-combat deaths of my fellow soldiers was just duckeys and bunneys to you."

It was neither duckies, bunnies NOR aimed at you in any way. You took it as a specific reference to you. Again, it was not. Period. You've been whining about that ever since it happened, despite repeated (or at least one) explanation that it did NOT refer to you, specifically, in any way, shape or form.

You made that one about you. You were wrong. Deal with it. (Preferably not by continuing to whinge about it).

"You see Mitch, the issue is you are the ultimate hypocrite."

Wow. I always wanted to be the ultimate something!

"You see offense at nearly every turn,"

SCREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEECH.

OMG. PB, I can show you several places where you've run off and taken specific offense at things that were aimed at whole groups or, in the case of this latest bit, aimed at another commenter entirely.

I can - but what's the point?

"yet when you insult others, when you twist facts, when you split hairs regarding your job function"

You're the one who seems hell-bent on proving something about what I do for a living - an issue that is important, apparently, only to you. But I'm splitting hairs?

"and say the commenter is deluded... somehow, that's different, it's just hyperbole. Always an exception for Mitch, he can insult others for doing precisely what he did, but THAT'S DIFFERENT."

Tell you what, PB. For any "insults" that you took that I'm completely unaware of, because they were thoroughly unintentional, I apologize.

" He can misrepresent and/or mischaracterize his own words BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT."

I have not.

" He can wilfully screw up someone's name (which I've never complained about until now), in a childish peevish little snotfest - like an immature 12 year-old might do"

Oh, for fuck's sake. Be a goddamn man and FUCKING SAY it bugged you, then, instead of nursing your little passive aggressive grudges! CHrist, NOBODY on this forum knows who you are, so the "screwing up" of your name means nothing to anyone - and since you are intending to remain anonymous, what difference does it make?

Christ. PB it is, then, and I apologize for having mangled the two-character abbreviation of your name. Sheesh.

"" (oh btw, you remember when you compared my writing to an illiterate 6th grader Mitch- but I'm sure that was just a joke)"

Insult? Well, I guess so. What can I say? I used to teach writing. People judge arguments by how they're presented - and you have a very fragmented style of writing. If I were a writing teacher and grading your comments, you'd be a weak C-.

"he can engage in name-based name calling, BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT."

I'm unaware that "Peeb", being a contraction of PB, has any derogatory connotation. My bad, I guess.

" He can lie about his past political leanings, BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT."

Er...huh?

I have never lied about my past political leanings. Yet again, your misunderstandings are not to be confused with reality.

"If you ever put a fact worth spending time on, and then actually engaged in discourse, perhaps it would be worth debating with you sincerely."

Well, you've gotten well past that point.

Look, if it's not worth your precious time (that you seem to have so much of), then DON'T DO IT!

Posted by: mitch at February 16, 2006 03:58 PM

arguing with pb is a lot like arguing with cliff clavin (being a glorified accountant or wtf he is makes him a KEY PLAYER on the healthcare team, up there with doctors), assuming cliff were a malignant douchebag.

pb, do you realize you sound absolutely insane in your writing? dude, i am serious, you write like you're barely clinging to sanity. get checked, man.

Posted by: spanky at February 16, 2006 06:31 PM

Peeb never bothered me, it was childish, showed your maturity level, but it certainly didn't bother me.

However, creating an aphorism of Peebish, when I quit your stupid board, was classless.

As for being a man.. this from the guy who posts 59 points of flattery about himself. My Daddy once told me that I needed to let my accomplishments speak for themselves, of course he also told me that the greatest compliment he could give was that a man had never uttered a bad word (including an obscenity) about anyone. I think both you and I have a long way to go before we declare ourselves "men" and you need to grow up a little if you think that kind of challenge/comment is the hallmark of a man.

As for the rest, you've earned your little cabal of insult prone groupies, hang out with them. I have no doubt you're the coolest of the bunch, if you think that's praise, even when you heap it on yourself, well... cool is as cool does, and you're temprance belies your coolness.

"Tell you what, PB. For any "insults" that y"ou took that I'm completely unaware of, because they were thoroughly unintentional, I apologize."

The only thing worse than no apology, is an insincere one. Mitch, if you don't get that insulting someone's fraternity with their fellow soldiers is pretty much the bottom of the freakin barrel of behavior, that it will evoke a visceral response, a bigger dolt I've ever met. For whatever reason you think that sort of thing isn't personal, and doesn't equate to being insulting..you have a strange sense of right and wrong Mitch. Most folks think pissing on someone's compassion is an insult. For you to assert that was "not intentional", well perhaps not intentional, but if I call my wife a fat-assed skank, I may assert I was kidding, but you know what, I'm still a freakin moron. You seem not to grasp that your words have import, your conduct means something, to you if not to anyone else. What would you say to your children if they read you started a post with "poor fever-addled fool"?

You turned this personal, and you kept doing it, saying things like "you poor slack-witted fool", yeah I'm sure that wasn't intentional. I certainly share that blame, unlike you I neither excuse away my conduct with hollow apologies or veneers of "but I didn't mean it" that are so thin I'm sure anyone can see through them. Don't you get that Dave was saying YOU TOO were clearly being childish, you too were clearly being insulting. The truth is, since I don't think you qualified to judge my intellect, I really couldn't give a rip if you feel that way personally, your opinion isn't worth sand on the issue (as an aside Mitch, unlike you, self-aggrandizement is rarely my particular vice so I'm not going to make comments regarding my accomplishments - suffice to say I am consistently gainfully employed making a very solid living - knock on wood), but if you EVER wanted a real debate, a real discussion, you sure as heck did EVERYTHING to make sure their never was one, saying things like "I've heard it all before", implying my, and Angry's and Doug's thoughts are neither original nor worth considering, what increadibly condescending hubris that represents. Beyond the fact that Angry is funnier than hell, and clever besides, I have ALMOST NEVER had anyone tell me my opinions were anything other than unique, you in fact said as much when we discussed tax policy. For whatever reason, on this blog, your fangs become long, and your conduct petulant in the extreme. You have NO interest in real discussion, you said yourself you've heard it all before, so why address anything. You believe the role of the press, just like Hugh Hewitt recently said, would be best served if all mainstream press dried up and were replaced by the likes of Salem Broadcasting and Washington Times - because after all the media is biased so why hide it, but you want only YOUR bias. By that standard the press, and your blog, should NOT print any facts which might disagree with the mainstream or those in power, yeah THAT sounds great... and then in the next breath nearly, after explaining why you DONT respond to every point, you come out and say you did, and then say you never lied.. your believability becomes zero.

So having a discussion with you is pointless. Once at least you were able to admit points, move toward agreement, but whether the Lee Atwater school of how to be an over-aggressive ass got to you or something else, I don't know, but now it's simply attack, insult, or ignore. What the heck would be the point in talking with you?

Anyway, as I said, I hope you find a better path. Treating people like crap is hardly christian, an admonishment directed at me as much as you. Perhaps someday you'll learn to give sincere apology, until then, I'm sorry you're life is filled with hate (aka all the people you so routinely spew bile at), it's truly sad.

In the end, you've become a sad little man who strumpets around self-aggrandizing your world. I'm sorry for you and I'm genuinely sorry for having lost my temper with you a couple of times, I shouldn't have it was unkind (beyond reflecting poorly on me), I hope you find what you're looking for, but brow-beating people, treating them like trash, being obtuse/insensitve or peevish is hardly a way toward a life more fulfilled.

And another thing I'm more than willing to do, you may have the last word.. I don't know if you're big enough to not demand it..but I'm done.

Posted by: pb at February 16, 2006 06:42 PM

Man, this is better than Godzilla vs. Mothra!

Posted by: angryclown at February 16, 2006 07:11 PM

I really have only one response for you, PB:

"I'm sorry you're [sic] life is filled with hate "

It's not. I haven't a shred of hate anywhere in my heart or life. That's one of your rationalizations. To help you justify the way you act, maybe? To make you feel superior? I dunno - but you're wrong.

I like a good discussion more than most - but this is just sad. Please stop.

Posted by: mitch at February 17, 2006 06:18 AM

Question 1: Are PB and JB really the same person? Or perhaps brothers, each of whom inherited slightly different version of the same strain of "asshole"?

Seriously, Mitch; if I had someone like PB in my comment section, I'd install extra locks and carry a gun. The guy sounds like he's about to go over the edge. I'm serious. I work with these types; you can follow their disintegration via things like this. I remember when PB started posting. Go back and look - he seemed to be a fairly reasonable, rational person. Look at him today. Tell me you're not worried, either about his sanity or, sorry to say, your safety.

Am I wrong?

Posted by: AJK at February 18, 2006 10:28 AM