Greg Nilsen

Unfortunately, I came across this article through CNN (through Oprah's publishing group) about a woman complaining about her husband and how much work their marriage is. In all honesty, it's a horrible piece of writing that does little more than demonstrate that the author would rather complain about her life in a public forum than do anything to improve it.

Interesting was the point she tried to make that “divorce” is no longer a dirty word and looked down upon. That may be true in her circle of New York City friends, but I'm certain that it's not so well accepted in the rest of the country. I know I still view divorce as something that never really needs to happen. Of course, there are cases where it is for the best (namely cases of battered or cheating spouses), yet most divorces result from bad decision making (because likely you didn't know the person well enough going into the relationship, or foolishly decided you could change them) or lack of effort (it's amazing how many people can't even discuss their true feelings with their spouse).

And in the end, she concludes that the real power is knowing she has a choice to stay with or leave her husband. Of course, if I were her husband and I read that, it begins to sound a lot more like blackmail. “Here's where you've screwed up, and if you keep it up, I'm leaving!” Yep, that sounds like a real solid foundation to build a close-knit emotional bond upon. I can't believe it's not working!

In the end, this is just another jet spray in the fountain of crap that is the Oprah empire, cornering the market on false women's empowerment, quasi-spirituality, and insincere charity (boy, what a farce the Big Give was…she hardly gave a crap). With quality like this, you can be certain that I will be avoiding all content with her trademark upon it.

Well, after six grueling weeks of class, our dog Jake is now an obedience school graduate!

Doesn't he sit so nice?

Congratulations Jake!

Around Pittsburgh, there are four major city parks:

• Schenley Park in the heart of Oakland by the campuses of Pitt and Carnegie Mellon
• North Park in the North hills of the city
• South Park in the South hills of the city
• and Frick Park to the East of downtown

While all of them are great parks (I've spent a fair amount of time in each of them), Frick Park is definitely the most distinct of the four. While the other three have a multitude of facilities (courts and fields for sports, numerous playgrounds, golf courses, dog parks and many other “built” features), the vast majority of Frick Park is simply woods with trails. All times of the year, it's a great place to be in the city, but still be able to “get away”.

Frick Park is named for Henry Clay Frick, a man who made his fortune by starting a company to sell coke (produced from coal) for steel manufacturing. He was also friends with banker Andrew Mellon and steel magnate Andrew Carnegie, both of whom have also left indelible marks on the city of Pittsburgh. Upon his death in 1919, he donated 150 acres to be used for a city park, and it has now grown to over 600 acres over the years since then thanks to the fund he left behind to maintain the park.

The park is truly one of the overlooked treasures of the city. It doesn't get all the recognition and events that Schenley Park does, but I find it an absolute joy to explore. My favorite thing to do in Frick Park is to take our dog Jake for a long walk, wearing him out and letting him enjoy new smells and meeting new dogs. Even on a beautiful Saturday morning, the park may be “busy” but is never crowded.

So if you're looking for a new place to explore the outdoors without having to leave the city, Frick Park is the place for you. You won't regret making the trip, wherever you're coming from.

Well, the Indianapolis Colts are preparing to debut their new stadium, and at a recent media tour, they were showing off their new surroundings. However, not everything was so spectacular:

Yep, those are actual seats in a brand new stadium. I'm not surprised when I see these things in old stadiums where the primary concerns were supporting the structures, and oftentimes seats were added to go behind poles to increase capacity.

To the credit of the Colts ticket sales teams, these tickets will normally not be sold unless demand was really high, and even then the buyer would be notified that the views from the seats are obscured. However, that begs the question, if you weren't going to sell the seats, then why build them in the first place? Ah, when bad planning meets bad engineering.

Oh, and even better is the rumor that when the Super Bowl comes to town, they'll build additional suites in place of the obscured seats. Nothing like planning ahead!

So when Tiger Woods 08 was released, some fans quickly found a glitch:

However, instead of having the glitch just stick in their craw, EA decided to play along with a commercial for the 09 edition:

Way to play along EA! That seems to be pretty much how Tiger Woods is viewed anyway!

Earlier this week, Family Force 5, one of my favorite newer bands because of their hard-edged dance-influenced music, released their second full-length album: Dance or Die. After their powerful debut, which I could probably listen to on an endless loop, I had high expectations for this album. And while it didn't quite fulfill those, it's not a horrible follow-up (unlike Panic! at the Disco's sophomore “effort”).

Dance or Die still has it's intoxicating tracks that just make you want more. “Get Your Back Off The Wall” just makes you want to jump up and dance, while “Fever” and “Wake The Dead” are nearly impossible to listen to without bobbing your head. Rounding out the solid tracks
are “Radiator” and “Rip It Up”.

However, some of the tracks just aren't up to par for the band. “The First Time” sounds like a track rejected from FM Static's debut album, “Party Foul” gets lost within itself, and the band must have lost their guitars when recording the title track. Then there's the awkward tracks that don't seem to fit the band at all. “How in the World” sounds like it was meant to be recorded by Hellogoodbye and “Share It With Me” sounds like a lost Backstreet Boys recording.

Overall, there's a lot of 80's and electronic influence here, which make for some good music, but sometimes take center stage ahead of the band. Dance or Die is definitely not the same quality album that Business Up Front/Party in the Back was, but about half it's tracks are worth adding to your collection.

Oh, and yes, Family Force 5 is a Christian band, but they actually take a lot of heat for that in the Christian community because they are not “overtly Christian” with their music. However, I have no problem with them producing clean music that you can still enjoy. Just because they don't slap you in the face with God doesn't mean they're not Christians, or that their not making a difference. However, I've already seen several negative reviews of this album mostly because of their approach as Christians.

In the end, at least check out their website/MySpace page at the link above and give some of the tracks a listen. I'm sure there's at least a few you'll be wanting to add to your collection, even if the whole album isn't as freakin' awesome as their initial release.

I've made a slight change to the FeedBurner feed I've been using, so please update your feed readers to point at:

http://feeds.feedburner.com/GregNilsen

Thanks!

Just a quick note to let you all know that my brother, Geoff, has begun blogging as well. I gave him a chance to get a few entries up for your reading pleasure, and figured now was a good time to share. Check out his blog here:

Flashback Humor

You may have seen the recent news of over 100 major college representatives calling upon Congress to have the nation's minimum drinking age reduced to less than 21. They're arguing research that shows that the previous increase of of the drinking age has done little to prevent alcohol-related deaths in that age group.

Of course, on the other side is MADD, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, is arguing that these college officials are twisting the data to make it say what they want it to. After all, there would be a signifigant shift in security needs and liabilities for these colleges were the drinking age to be lowered to 18. Then again, would putting alcohol in the hands of younger individuals make things better?
It's a debate that comes about as regularly as the legalization of marijuana, and very similarly fails to see the forest for the trees.

The factor that is left out of all these studies is history and exposure to alcohol, as age is not the sole indicator of responsible alcohol consumption. For someone who grew up in a household where one or more parents abused alcohol, it's likely that they will either grow up to abuse it themselves (and follow the examples set before them), or avoid it completely (attempting to avoid the same fate). In these cases, their experience has a polar effect.

Similarly, those who grew up in a household preaching the downfall of alcohol are likely to see this same polar effect. Either they stay the course that they have been taught, or they rebel and take alcohol consumption to it's limits.

However, those who have been exposed to responsible alcohol consumption are more likely to be able to accomplish that feat themselves. Sure, there are exceptions to this, but more often then not they are influenced by the good examples that have been set before them. In my opinion, lowering the drinking age only limits the time parents have to set a good example for their children.

In the end, I believe the only way to positively influence the current trend of irresponsible alcohol consumption in young adults is to teach parents how much they doo have an influence in their kid's lives, no matter what age. It's time for fewer parents to stop going out and getting sloshed with their friends and more to show that they can responsibly have a single glass of wine with dinner. For some, it may be quite the sacrafice. But that's what good parents do to help make their children better people.

After all, if you can't make a sacrafice for the well-being of your own offspring, it may be time to re-think your priorities…

One of the debates during these 2008 Olympics has been over the ages of several members of the Chinese gymnastics team, all in posession passports stating they are the minimum allowed age of 16 (with the ever so discreet birthdate of 1/1/1992…geesh, where'd they learn to make their fake IDs? At least they didn't give them the name McLovin). Ironically, in this highly-censored nation, it was actually a Chinese newspaper that reported team members were as young as 13.

Now, while they are breaking the rules by having underage girls competing when there is a minimum age set (supposedly for the safety and well-being of athletes all over the world), it does all seem a little silly. After all, American swimmer Amanda Beard did win a gold medal and two silvers in her first Olympics in Atlanta at the tender age of 14. What makes a 13-year-old gymnast any less fit to compete than a 14-year-old swimmer?

In my opinion, the spirit of the Olympics is to bring together a collection of the worlds greatest athletes in the sports that are represented. If that person happens to not be able to get into a PG-13 movie by themselves, does that really make them a less deserving athlete? Not in my book, even if it costs the US of A a few medals, and it's time for all the Olympic sports entities to get on the same page.