Review: San Diego's Hornblower harbor cruise and Goldstar offer

The two-hour San Diego harbor cruise offered by Hornblower is a decent, though unspectacular, way to view the bay in this Southern California city.  Before you pay up to $28 for a ticket, be sure to look for online deals. And consider whether the tour is really worth your time and money in the first place.

I bought tickets for this tour recently for my family through Goldstar, but be careful if you go this route. Goldstar listed the tickets at $13, yet it is actually impossible to buy them for that price. Goldstar tacks on a $4.50 surcharge for each ticket, pushing the actual price up by 35% to $17.50.

A view of San Diego from the Hornblower harbor cruise

Still, $17.50 does seem like a good deal compared to the walk-up price of $26 or Hornblower's online price of $28.  But remember that those are prices for adults. Tickets for children are only $12 for walk-up customers, so the smart way to go is to buy adult tickets through Goldstar but buy kids' tickets at the window.

(Don't worry that the tour will be sold out when you get there. We went on the very busy Sunday of Memorial Day weekend, and all the tours had space available.)

There's no free parking in the area, so be prepared to pay at least $12 at a lot.

The tour itself is moderately interesting. You'll get to see A LOT of Navy ships;  very likely including some aircraft carriers. You're almost certain to see sea lions, too. We were somewhat fortunate to see two or three dolphins.

Our narrator was fairly knowledgeable, especially about the Navy ships, but he had an odd habit of describing things that were behind us. We spent a lot of time looking backward.

You should also note that you can't hear the narration in some parts of the boat. It just depends on how loud the speakers are and how much other noise there is; be prepared to move if you want to hear the narration.

The cruise is billed as "two hours" but it's actually two cruises – one of the north part of the bay and one on the south part. Annoyingly, the boat returns to the dock halfway through to discharge and take on passengers.  We spent almost half an hour just sitting at the dock.  So in the end, the "cruise" part is really only about 90 minutes.

----

(Please support this blog by clicking on an ad.)

Book review: "Instant Replay" by Jerry Kramer

 Take some pro football fans, put them in a time machine and send them back to 1967. They'll think they've landed on another planet.

They'll see a National Football League with no weight training, where quarterbacks call all the plays, where players have off-season jobs to pay the bills.

Bizarre, huh?

"Instant Replay" is Jerry Kramer's diary of his 1967 season as a guard with the Green Bay Packers. It turned out to be quite a season: The Packers won the Super Bowl, it was coach Vince Lombardi's last year with the team, and Kramer threw perhaps the most famous block in NFL history.

Still, the thing that struck me was how different things were back then.

Players showed up at training camp fat and flabby. The did calisthenics, running and "grass drills" to get in shape, but lifting weights was not even considered.

Lombardi didn't send it plays via messenger or through signals; the quarterbacks (Bart Starr and Zeke Bartkowski) called the plays in the huddle.

Today, we have all sorts of concerns about concussions. Back then, they just said you had "your bell rung" and sent you back in the game.

"Four or five years ago, against the Los Angeles Rams, I played most of a game with a concussion," Kramer writes. "Forrest Gregg told me what to do on every play. He said, 'Block the tackle,' or 'Pull and block the end,' and I I actually played fairly well. I did what I was supposed to. Between college and the pros, I've had four or five concussions noew and I suppose I'm getting used to them."

And get this: Even though the Packers were going for their third championship in a row, there was no mention of the word "threepeat."

"Instant Replay" is a great look inside a football team of the 1960s. Kramer is frank and honest, naming the players who are too cocky or don't work hard enough. He is perhaps hardest on himself – he is so critical of his performance that it seemed he was having a mediocre season. I was surprised to find near the end that he was selected for the all-pro team.

It was in closing seconds of the NFL championship game against Dallas – the famous "Ice Bowl" – that Kramer pushed open a slim hole that allowed Starr to score the winning touchdown.

Kramer gives a more nuanced portrayal of Lombardi, who is often popularly conveyed as a screaming monster of a coach. In this book, Lombardi is shown to be more of a master psychologist, who will tear a player down one day, then pick the right time to praise the player and build his confidence back up.

"I loved Vince," Kramer writes. "Sure I hated him at times during training camp and I had hated him at times during the season, but I knew how much he had done for use, and I knew how much he cared about us. ... His whippings, his cussings and his driving all fade; his good qualities endure." 

If you like this sort of book, you should also read John Eisenberg's "That First Season," which nicely recounts Lombardi's first year with the Packers.

Tournament review: The Mike Fults Memorial Beach Bash

The Mike Fults youth soccer tournament in Huntington Beach, California, is a popular competition in a nice location, but it tries to pack too many games into too little space and time, and its online operation needs a lot of improvement.


Scores of teams and hundreds of players descended upon Huntington Beach Sports Park in May 2013 for this American Youth Soccer Organization tournament.  This is a nice park, but it's not a soccer-only park. So to fit 12 fields in some compromises had to be made.

The 2013 Mike Fults Memorial tournament

The first thing I noticed when I arrived was that many of the fields were small.  And the second thing I noticed was that one of the fields was really small.
On these fields, goalie punts could easily reach the other end, and a normally hit corner kick would sail all the way across the pitch. Sometimes, it look like all the players were crowded onto a basketball court.

Playing on smaller fields distorts the game and isn't fair to teams. It's almost like playing a different game. (Puzzlingly, at least a couple of the fields had extra room on the perimeter and could have been longer or wider.)

Also, some fields had strange topography – one had such a distinct slope that players going one direction had to literally play uphill.

I also didn't like that all games were shortened.  U10 games were 40 minutes instead of 50, U12 games were 50 minutes instead of 60 and U14 games were 50 minutes instead of 70.

I know this is not the only tournament that does this, but I always feel cheated by it. Players have traveled far (and their parents have paid a fair amount of money) to play a soccer game – not 70% or 80% of a game.

Of course, by shortening games and squeezing fields, the tournament can register more teams and collect more entry fees. "Quantity over quality" might not be the best slogan for a tournament, but sometimes it's accurate.

I did like that the tournament posted the schedules nearly two weeks ahead of time so parents can plan. But beyond that the online operation was poor.

No results or standings were posted online. None. Looking at schedules required an odd three-step process of looking up a division, finding a team's number, and entering that number on separate page. There was no way online to look at a full schedule, or to look at the schedule for one division. The championship game/consolation game format was murky and unclear.

There were other issues. The organizers didn't provide enough tournament t-shirts for all the players on our team, and when the coach complained he was told nothing could be done.

Parking cost a reasonable $1 a day, but some of the pay machines were out of order, creating a long line at one that was working.

One thing I did like was that, at least in our grouping, the games were competitive and close.  I'm not sure if that was true in other divisions because, well, no scores were posted online.

----

(Please support this blog by clicking on an ad.)

How Los Angeles shortened its school year by 17 days

If a school district abruptly cut 17 days from the school year, would anyone notice?

Of course! Parents, concerned about their children's education, would object. Taxpayers would question how their money was being spent. Political leaders would worry about how such severe cuts would impact our nation's future.

But within the past year, the Los Angeles school district quietly removed 17 days worth of instructional time from many of its schools, and the public barely noticed.

In California, state law requires school districts to offer 180 days of instruction annually. Just a few years ago, when Los Angeles schools were facing a budget crisis, the district won a waiver to temporarily cut its school year by five days -- but only after extensive public debate and hand-wringing. It returned to 180 days as soon as possible.

But cutting 17 days?  How did this happen?

It all comes down to breakfast.

At the start of the 2012-13 year, Los Angeles introduced an in-classroom breakfast program at 280 schools. So now, the first 30 minutes of each school day is spent eating, not learning.

Schools in L.A. – and elsewhere – have long offered before-school breakfast programs that provide free or reduced-price meals for students from low-income families. Those programs, in which the meal was served in the cafeteria, have been replaced in Los Angeles by the new in-classroom breakfasts.

Teachers report that the breakfasts, including clean-up time, take about 30 minutes (a figure confirmed by a Los Angeles Times reporter who observed the process). And the loss of 30 minutes is hardly insignificant.

An average elementary school day in Los Angeles schools is 5 hours, 7 minutes long (some days are longer, some shorter). Thirty minutes is nearly 10% of the day. Losing 30 minutes every day adds up to 17.5 days of lost instructional time each year. Do Los Angeles schools – or any school – have the luxury of losing that much instructional time?

Supporters of the program argue that fed children learn better than hungry children. But no one is disputing that. The question is whether the in-classroom program is the best way to make sure children eat in the morning.

Strangely, no one seems to know how many children were coming to school without breakfast before the start of the in-class meal program. Supporters note that 29% of children were getting the school breakfast when it was served before class and that now almost all are (not surprising – since the breakfast is basically mandatory). But who says that those children in the other 71% weren't simply eating breakfast at home? 

Besides the lost instructional time, the in-class program raises a host of other problems.

Teachers say that time before school that they previously devoted to preparing lessons is now spent organizing the pre-packaged breakfasts. They also say the meals leave a mess that they have to clean up and that food crumbs and spills attract bugs and vermin.

It's hard enough attracting quality teachers (and keeping them) in L.A.'s troubled district but now they're being turned into part-time busboys and exterminators.

Teachers also say the meals have included rotten fruit and expired food.

Now, with breakfast in the classroom, every student eats breakfast at school, whether they're eligible for the discounted program or not. Indeed, they get school breakfast even if their parents don't want them to have it. Many students now eat two breakfasts –  one at home, one at school. Childhood obesity, anyone?

The strange result of this is that the school district is now encouraging parents not to feed their children at home. Want to serve your child a homemade breakfast?  Don't do it, says the school district. Like to have a family meal with your children in the morning? Skip it, says the school district.

There is no disputing that schoolchildren need breakfast. But the negatives of the in-classroom program are overwhelming. Rather than gutting our already overburdened educational calendar, what we need is to educate parents about the many pluses of eating breakfast, preferably at home, but in a before-school program if necessary.

-------

(Please support this blog by clicking on an ad.)

Expedia's expediant deception

Let's say you're eating at a nice restaurant. You ask the server, "How much would it be if I ordered a steak, salad and a Coke?"

"$15" says the server.

"Great," you say. "I'll take it."

"That'll cost $29," says the server.

"Wait a minute," you say. "You just said it was $15."

"Oh, that's the price for the steak," the server explains. "With the salad and the Coke, it's $29."

"But I told you I wanted the salad and the Coke when I asked the price."

"Whatever. It's $29. Do you want it or not?"

Does this seem like a ridiculous way to do business? Perhaps so, but it seems to be the practice at the travel website Expedia.

I was trying to book a hotel for my family's upcoming trip to Kenya. At Expedia, I searched for prices at the Voyager Beach Hotel for two adults and two children and entered our dates of arrival and departure. Upon prompting, I also entered the ages of our kids.

Expedia responded with a couple options including one nice room priced at $157 a night. Considering that the Voyager Beach is considered a top-notch hotel, and the price included breakfast and dinner, this seemed like a great price. But when I went to book, I was in for a surprise.

On the next page, the room cost abruptly jumped to $235 a night, and $59 more in taxes and fees were tacked on too. In all, this "$157" room would cost $294 a night.

What happened? An Expedia agent told me that the $157 price was for two people, not four. But I had already told the system that our party had four people
– why would it give me the price for two?

The agent had no answer, but I suspect it comes down to two words: bait and switch.

Sure, many people like me will be miffed, but a certain number will pay the bigger price, making the deceptive practice profitable for Expedia. Some people may even be in such a hurry they don't notice the price change.

The "taxes and fees" category also deserves a mention. On top of the room rate, they add a further 25% to the cost. Unfortunately, with this website's murky system, you can't tell whether these are truly government-imposed taxes or just pad-the-bottom-line fees going to Expedia.

Book review: "How to Disappear" by Frank M. Ahearn

"How to Disappear" presents an interesting logic problem: If a man claims to be a great liar, do you believe him?

Frank M. Ahearn's book, subtitled "Erase your digital footprint, leave false trails and vanish without a trace," is supposedly a guidebook for people who want to go into hiding. Maybe you're avoiding an abusive spouse, perhaps organized crime is looking for you, or it could be that you just feel like abandoning your old life and starting anew – whatever the case, this book is aimed at you.

I find it hard to believe that there's enough people in this category to make much of a book market, but then again, how would you know?

Caller: Hello. We're conducting a survey. Tell me, are you planning to disappear?

<Click>

Given that this book, as I write this, is sitting at a lofty ranking of No. 7,843 on the Amazon sales list, perhaps there are more people who are looking to vanish than you would think. Or maybe the book has other appeals.

What I liked about the book were the anecdotes Ahearn tells from his days as a "skip tracer." He was paid to track down people who didn't want to be found, such as debtors, criminals and paparazzi-avoiding celebrities. To do this, he often had to "pretext" – that is, lie. He was good at that, Ahearn claims. "I was the best in the business," he modestly says.

Ahearn says he could call up any business – a credit card, cable or utility company, for instance – pretend to be someone else and then talk his way into getting them to give up an address or phone number or some other helpful piece of information on the person he was pursuing. Ahearn claims he's gotten information from New York police and even Scotland Yard by calling up and pretending to be a cop. In another case, he called the mother of the person he was tracking, pretended to be a friend of her adult son and talked her into reciting the man's life story.

So, yes, Ahearn's pretty sleazy – if you believe he's as big a liar as he says he is.

As far as disappearing, Ahean has various tips, among them: Always use a pre-paid credit card and a prepaid phone. Hide assets behind a corporate name. Apply for an apartment in another city just to leave a false lead.

I'm not trying to disappear, so Ahearn's tips didn't interest me that much. And some of his recommendations for websites for finding information about people (including yourself) are so laughable you wonder if he's really a professional. He calls Zabasearch "the skip tracer's Promised Land." Seriously? Zabasearch doesn't even have my LISTED phone number.

The book can serve as something of a reminder of how much of your personal information is in others' hands. As Ahearn ticks through all the steps you need to "disappear," you realize how entangled we all are in digital recordkeeping. You leave trails every time you use a credit or debit card, make a phone call, go to a doctor, join a gym, order a prescription, send an email, surf the Internet from home, subscribe to a magazine or check out a library book.

---

(Please support this blog by clicking on an ad.)

Book review: "American Massacre" by Sally Denton

When it was done, all that was left was the screaming and crying of the children. There were 17 of them left alive, ages nine months to 7 years, in the isolated Utah valley. Now they were hysterical, having just witnessed the cold-blooded slaughter of their parents, siblings and friends. Some 140 bodies lay on the ground around them.

The Mountain Meadows Massacre of 1857 remains one of the greatest atrocities to ever occur on American soil. Yet today it is little remembered outside Utah.

In "American Massacre," author Sally Denton thoroughly outlines this tragedy and the reasons behind it. The killers were Mormons, zealous followers of Brigham Young, who somehow believed they were doing God's work.

The men, women and children who were shot or stabbed to death at Mountain Meadows were part of a wagon train heading from Arkansas on their way to start new lives in California. They were victims of both religious zeal run amok and the worst of bad timing. They entered Utah at a time when tensions were rising between the Church of Latter-Day Saints and the United States government, and Mormon leader Young was exhorting his followers to spill the blood of non-Mormons.

To explain the roots of the massacre, Denton takes us all the way back to the birth of the Church of Latter-Day Saints in 1823, and then traces the history of the Mormon movement up to 1857. At first I thought this seemed excessive, but it soon becomes apparent that it all ties together. Denton shows how the Mormons built up a history over decades of what they saw as persecution. In each place they tried to settle, they were eventually faced conflict and were run out of town.

But, as Denton describes it, the Mormons were hardly blameless. In each place they settled, the Mormons angered the locals with their arrogance, their practice of polygamy and their literal holier-than-thou attitude. They built the biggest temples and shunned those that did not share their practices and "one true God." In short, they were obnoxious.

Eventually, Brigham Young led the Mormons to Utah. A key question that has long dogged the subject of the Mountain Meadows Massacre is whether Young directly ordered the killings. The Mormon church has long denied it and there is no hard evidence proving Young's involvement. Still, given Young's dominant role in Utah at the time, Denton concludes that he must have had a role in the slayings.

"Within the context of the era and the history of Brigham Young's complete authoritarian control over his domain and his followers, it is inconceivable that a crime of this magnitude could have occurred without direct orders from him," Denton writes.

Even without a direct connection between Young and the killings, Denton makes it clear that Young set the stage for the massacre by whipping his followers into a excited frenzy, frightening them with the prospect that enemies from the East would soon be coming to attack them.

Denton has done a good job of assembling the many pieces of this story, though it's unfortunate that she sometimes relies on secondary sources rather than original documentation. Also, in her effort to bolster each key point, she is sometime over-meticulous is citing each piece of evidence. You will find places you'll want to skim ahead.

Today, the Mountain Meadows Massacre is marked only by a modest plaque that draws few visitors. Why has the episode been so forgotten? To gain a foothold in the public mind, history needs a clear and well-understood story. But for 150 years the Mormon church has done its best to stifle an accurate account of what happened at Mountain Meadows.

The church first denied any involvement in the killings, blaming Indians instead. Then the church blamed it on a renegade sub-sect of Mormons acting on its own. Church representatives, Denton says, destroyed documents and lied to handicap investigations. Brigham Young eventually gave up one of his own most ardent followers, John D. Lee, to end any further investigation of the murders. Lee, who was executed in 1877, was the only one ever punished for the massacre.

------

(Please support this blog by clicking on ad.)