Lincolnite

Since Lincolnite's events calendar isn't very useful right now -- I'm working on it, really! -- I promised Melinda from Crescent Moon Coffee that I would post their upcoming musician schedule. Here it is:

• Wednesday, October 29th—Local Guitarist Tony Church 8-10pm
• Thursday, October 30th—Featured Musician Rachanee 6:30—8pm with Open Mic 8-10pm
• Friday, October 31st—Happy Halloween! Jazz at the Moon with Sarabande 7-10pm

Crescent Moon Coffee is in the Haymarket at 816 P Street.

Drat, this is a week I wish I had cable. Comedy Central's The Daily Show was in town recently to film a segment that will air this week. The segment will cover the study performed by a couple UNL Political Science professors (and others) that was in the news last month. If you hear the date / time that the show will air, let us know!

The Lincoln Airport is in the news a couple times this morning. First, the airport lost $3.15 million this year. That's a $600,000 "improvement" over last year. The big news appears to be that the airport's industrial park is doing quite well. In other news, the Airport Authority voted to spend about $90k to build an addition to the south end of the terminal so that security screening is out of view. It seems like a couple thousand dollars worth of cubicle walls might have done the trick just as well. Supposedly the airport "has gotten complaints" about the current security setup. I'm not sure what the problem is, but I'll bet it has something to do with people not wanting their underwear on display. Fair enough. But personally, I like having the security personnel in full view. It keeps them honest, and it helps ensure that baggage is properly handled for at least a small portion of its journey.

Here’s an interesting observation posed by Gordon Winters in one of yesterday’s LJS blog posts about the Boo at the Zoo fury: “I would hate to be the poor soul who has to draw the line between church and state,” Gordon laments, in regards to the Zoo’s decision not to allow biblical quotes to be handed out at this year’s Boo at the Zoo. He continues, noting that “I think the U.S. Supreme Court’s view on this has become pretty clear on this. Either government has to allow all religions their say in a public place, or none of them.” Well, that may be correct, but what does that have to do with Boo at the Zoo? What strikes me about his opinion, and indeed this entire debacle, is how so many people have entirely missed the point that the Zoo has no obligation to draw the line between church and state. The Zoo is not a government department. The Zoo has no obligation to allow religious speech on its property anymore than you or I do, or that DaVinci’s does, or that the gas station down the street does. In short, the establishment clause is NOT the issue here (If there is a first amendment issue here, I would argue that it is the doctrine of being free of forced speech, and not the establishment clause). Clearly, there are those in this community who view (and want to view) this entire story through “culture war” lenses. Its an understatement to say that “political discourse” in this day and age doesn’t have its share of hyperbole. Fine. But I do hope that, in the future, discourse can at least revolve around reality.

A mish-mash of food-related thoughts for your Thursday morning: I can't believe I have heard exactly zero buzz about Billy Brown's (Downtown in the former Great Wraps space on O Street), save for Jeff Korbelik's review. There was a little excitement about the possibility of a 9 South Chargrill-style restaurant long before it opened, and then ... nothing. Have any of you been there? I love 9 South, so I definitely want to give Billy Brown's a try. The building that formerly housed P.O. Pears now sports a big 9 Red (or is it Red 9?) mural on the side. Buffmeat gave Southwest Pit BBQ a try. I think that's the first I had heard about the new restaurant in the high-turnover location on Sun Valley Boulevard. I stopped at Lina's late last night on the way home from a pair of cold and wet soccer matches. Maybe I was just in the right mood, but my pollo asado burrito was awesome. The Missus and I may go to Omaha on Saturday night for supper. We have very little experience eating in Omaha. Where should we go?

I reffed two soccer matches last night. I was an AR on the first match. The weather was cool, but dry. The rain came just in time for the second match. Twenty three people -- 22 players plus me -- ran around in shorts in the cold rain for over 90 minutes. What a bunch of doofuses. Gotta love the tail end of the college soccer season in Nebraska.

If I'm not mistaken, Lincoln's third Walmart opened today on North 84th Street. I wonder if Colleen Seng cut the ribbon? Thanks to Matt Olberding from the LJS for telling us that Walmart meant next Wednesday. Sheesh, you'd think such a huge company could buy themselves a calendar. By the way, did you notice it's Walmart now, and no longer Wal-Mart? Whatever they call themselves, their new logo gets a big thumbs down. It looks like a loading indicator.

With state Senators talking about shrinking the window for parents to take advantage of the state's Safe Haven law from 19 years to 72 hours, at least one family prefers things the way they are. I'm now at the point where I wish senators would just scrap the whole thing and start over. The entire system needs a thorough review. I got to thinking this morning about one thing that hasn't been discussed very much in this kerfuffle: adoption. Adoption is the typical result of safe haven use for young children, so you might wonder what the big deal is. Currently, adoption is really more of a side effect of the safe haven process. I encourage the State to find a way to make adoption a more explicit part not only of the safe haven protocol, but also of services available beyond the safe haven window. By putting more of the focus on adoption, birth parents can have more control over what happens to their child(ren). That empowerment can prove to be an important component in helping the parents deal with the short- and long-term emotional trauma that may accompany their decision. Wouldn't you rather leave your child in the loving arms of "the Smiths" than in the sterile bureaucracy of "the State"? In addition, any modified safe haven bill must include requirements for some sort of parental accountability. For example, it is not asking too much of a birth parent to require her to provide a brief health history. A simple, fifteen-minute health questionnaire can provide a child with a wealth of information that may prove useful in diagnosing or preventing a number of health problems throughout life. The current safe haven law is absurd for its naive simplicity, but at least it did one thing well: it started some much-needed discussions. Unfortunately, the proposed 72-hour limit is likewise far too simple to be of much practical use. We do not need a massive new bureaucracy -- I'm certainly not proposing that kind of inevitable disaster -- but we do need a more complete system than that which is before us; note, please, that a more complete system need not be complex. Our primary goal ought to be to give parents tools to keep their children out of a dangerous home situation, and to place those children in healthy environments where they have the opportunity to prosper. Surely that requires more thought and energy than a 3-day abandonment period negotiated by lame duck senators via the telephone.

The Missus and I each have a cell phone through Alltel. The phones are on the same account. They are billed together. We share minutes. Several weeks ago Alltel notified us that the debit card that was automatically billed each month was about to expire. Alltel told us about this via e-mail and snail mail. When I didn't update the information right away, they also started to call. They never did call me, but they called The Missus repeatedly. They left voice mail after voice mail. They liked to call at times when The Missus couldn't answer the phone. One month before the card was actually scheduled to expire, I got off my duff and updated the card information. All should have been well, right? Not quite. The Missus continued to receive calls and voice messages from Alltel. Finally after several days of this, she answered the phone. The conversation went a little like this: The Missus: Would you please stop calling me! My husband already updated our payment information. Alltel: We need you to confirm the new payment information. TM: Confirm it? My husband did it online. He double-checked it. The information is all correct. A: Right, but we need you to confirm the new information. TM: Uhh, why? A: Because you may not have authorized the change. TM: So even though my husband and I share an account; and even though both our names are on the card being used to pay for the account; and even though I can't imagine a reason why a customer wouldn't want to let somebody else continue to pay their cell phone bill; I still have to confirm that it's ok for this new card to pay for the account? A: Yes. TM: Uhh ... OK. A: Thank you. Have a nice day! Can anybody explain that to me? Why would every person on an account have to confirm that it's ok for a new debit card to pay for that account? If Robbie one day joins our account, will he have to say "OK", too? Color me confused.

The Lincoln Children's Zoo stirred up a real bruhaha when it told daVinci's, Champions, and First Evangelical Covenant Church they can't put a Bible story on the back of coupons they planned to hand out at the Zoo's annual Boo at the Zoo event. As a result, the three groups have pulled out of the event. The zoo is of course free to have whatever policy it likes regarding religious expression. As part of their "human diversity" policy they bar religious verses and references. I don't have a problem with that. The diversity the zoo seeks is relatively shallow, yes, but there's not necessarily anything wrong with that at a facility intended for children. They want to keep things simple. That's not to say I would have made the same decision. Whether truth or fable, the story of Noah and his ark is harmless. As if to prove the point, the zoo would still permit a Noah-themed display at the event; the only problem is the printed story on the coupons. The logic in that inconsistency escapes me. This will be held up as an example of persecution against Christians. Perhaps it is, though I don't think so. But let's not pretend for a moment there wouldn't have been a huge outcry if an organization of Wiccans, Muslims, or some other non-Christian religious group had printed a similar message on an item to be handed out to the kids. I point that out not as a justification, but as a simple reminder to keep things in perspective. Glass houses and all that. Consider daVinci's own Kelly Knudson on that very topic:

Asked how he would he feel if all religions — including non-Christian ones — were allowed to hand out materials quoting verses and stories, Knudson wasn’t sure. “It would depend on what they were doing,” he said.

In the end I don't disagree with the zoo, though I do think their execution was terrible. They waited far too long to make their policy known, and the policy itself is awfully flimsy. This "controversy", such as it is, is their own fault. Worse still, because of their mistakes they have set themselves up for troubles next year as well. As for daVinci's et al., well, more power to them. Dropping out of the event is exactly what they should do if that's what their principles guide them to do. If they're smart, they'll milk this PR opportunity for all it's worth. For example, "Bring in your ticket stub from Boo at the Zoo and receive a free Noah's ark-shaped mini pizza!". Oh, and one last thing: the Lincoln Children's Zoo is private. It is not a government entity. The First Amendment does not apply to the zoo any more than it applies to the Zoo Bar.

I admit I don't have a solid grasp on the costs associated with the proposed firefighter contract. Still, I can't help but feel that the City Council's decision to vote it down is ultimately going to cost us. The question is, will the costs be short term, long term, or both?

Yeah, I know it wasn't long ago I said I wasn't ready for winter. But between Robbie starting to talk about snow and reading this news this morning, I think I'm ready. I'm sure I'll change my mind after reffing two soccer matches tomorrow night in the cold and rain.

Last Friday I joined Mr. T and Beerorkid at El Salvador Cafe in their new location at 221 South 9th Street. They were formerly located on Northwest 48th Street. In business for over 10 years now, El Salvador Cafe offers a variety of authentic Salvadorian cuisine. Or so they say. I wouldn't know; I know zilch about El Salvador. I'll leave the determination of authenticity to the folks who would actually know. The interior is nicely decorated and the restaurant definitely has a cafe feel. In fact, it reminded me a lot of the sort of small town cafe you might find all across Nebraska. It's a nice atmosphere, but it feels more Uni Place, Havelock, or College View than Downtown. If I have a complaint about the atmosphere, it's the huge television in the corner. It felt out of place to me. At least the volume was kept very low. When it comes to the menu, repeat after me: Salvadoran food is not Mexican food. The menu does include a few Mexican-style classics like enchiladas and a burrito, but that's not what El Salvador Cafe is all about. The menu features two primary sections: antojitos Salvadorenos (roughly: Salvadoran appetizers) and Salvadoran specialties. The antojitos include papusas ($2.00), tamales ($1.75 / $2.75 / $4.00), empanadas ($4.25), tostadas ($4.50), and even yucca ($6.50). Many of the specialties feature chicken, beef, or shrimp, and each is served with rice, beans, and tortillas. I ordered the camaron al mojo de ajo (garlic shrimp) ($13.50). The dish featured seven tasty shrimp served over a bed of ... crinkle-cut french fries? Yeah, that caught me off guard. The flavor was great, but the fries were an odd partner. Overall, I prefer a similar dish I tried a couple months ago at Las Margaritas. I really enjoyed the rice, which was a fluffy, lightly seasoned white rice unlike most anything I've had at any other local south-of-the-border restaurants. The meal also featured a small bowl of black beans served in a very thin, almost soupy style. Mr. T went with the camarones rancheros (shrimp rancheros) ($13.50). The shrimp were cooked with green peppers and onions, and they were served in a mild red sauce. He noted that some people may find the shrimp flavor of the sauce too strong, but being a seafood fan, Mr. T enjoyed it. He also liked his rice, especially in contrast to the overly salty mounds you receive at a lot of similar restaurants. Mr. T was also a big fan of the tortillas served with the meal. They were warm and filling without being doughy. Beerorkid ordered a combination plate ($7.00) off the antojitos side of the menu. It featured a papusa, taco, tamal, and beans. He seemed to really dig his meal, though I'll let him speak for himself on the ups and downs of it all. It certainly looked tasty. You may have noticed that the prices of the Salvadoran specialties part of the menu seem kind of high. They are. Prices range from $9.50 (pollo guisado [stewed chicken]) to $14.50 (pescado frito [fried fish] or costa azul [combo of fried fish, ranchero shrimp, and crab legs]). Those prices aren't necessarily terrible for dinner, but they're way too high to be competitive in the Downtown lunch market. In my opinion El Salvador needs to come up with five to ten lunch specialties in the $6.00 to $8.00 range. Service was excellent. The employees were universally friendly and helpful. We did experience one hiccup when Beerorkid initially received an incomplete order, but the problem was quickly fixed and he ended up receiving a free papusa as a result. Food could come out of the kitchen more quickly, especially at lunch time. Perhaps having those 5-10 lunch specials nearly ready to go would help. Overall I would rate our experience at El Salvador Cafe as enjoyable. For now the best meal for your money comes from the antojitos menu. If you're new to Salvadoran food that isn't a bad place to start anyway, since you can try several different items at a reasonable price.