EXTRA: Leftover papers? Or souvenirs for those 5M who supposedly attended victory parade in Grant Park?

So what should we think of these piles of Thursday newspapers found Friday afternoon at a Walgreens' pharmacy in the southern part of metro Chicago.

Sox fans appalled at the front page play? Or Tribune Co. (that's Tronc, to those in the know) wanting to make as much money as they could off the Nov. 3 editions of the paper, to the point that they printed up more copies and had them shipped out to stores all over the place?

THE SALES CLERK at the Walgreens where these stacks were seen told me people were so anxious to buy the paper on Thursday that her hands were all blackened from the newsprint ink. "You'd think I worked at the printing plant," she told me. So more copies of the Thursday paper arrived Friday. Similar to how more press runs were printed up back in '08 when Barack Obama became president.

I get the idea that many people are going to want something of a keepsake of that particular date. There's just one thing to keep in mind -- with so many copies of the paper being printed, they're not going to be scarce for a long, long time - if ever!

And the only way anyone's copy of the Thursday paper will ever become worth anything is if your copy, and the copies of just about everybody else you know, wind up becoming trash throughout the years.

  -30-

Fans falling from the skies! Is a genuine major league baseball worth it?

First, Arlington, Texas. Now Phoenix. Is it destined to happen someday in Chicago?

I’d like to think that it is just a Southwestern U.S. phenomenon that makes those people go too far to try to catch a foul ball while attending a professional baseball game.

BUT THE REALITY is that it isn’t. If anything, I’m surprised we haven’t had more incidents, including at the two ballparks right here in Chicago.

At stake is the concept of people in the upper decks of seating at stadiums who are so eager to catch a stray baseball hit into the stands that they wind up falling over the railings.

Just this weekend, a Texas Rangers game turned tragic when a fan who supposedly was trying to catch a baseball as a souvenir for his six-year-old son tumbled out of the stands and fell to his death.

Then on Monday at the festivities leading up to the All Star Game, a fan nearly fell out of the stands. Only the fact that his brother and a friend were able to grab him and pull him back up kept him from taking a 20-foot plunge – which could have been crippling, if not fatal.

IN THAT CASE, the fan was present to catch balls hit during the Home Run Derby that is part of the All Star celebration He and his buddies had already managed to get three baseballs.

It was the attempt to catch Ball Number Four – a ball hit into the stands by Milwaukee Brewers slugger Prince Fielder – that caused the near-fall.

Now I’m sure there will be some people who will claim that the fans in Arlington and Phoenix were being absurd in their desire to get a baseball, and that somehow it is their own fault. We may well hear that canard from the ideologues about “taking responsibility for one’s actions” who won’t want to hear any sympathy for these two.

Yet I can’t help but think that these two are merely among those types who let themselves get swept up in the moment when a stray baseball gets hit in their vicinity. Throughout the years in various stadiums, I have seen this kind far too often. Something like this will happen again.

NOW IN ALL the years I have attended ballgames, I have never caught a foul ball or home run ball (I prefer to sit near the infield, so the latter is less likely for me). But I have seen the types of people who get all excited at the scramble that inevitably results when a ball winds up in the stands.

I even recall the closest I ever came to such a catch of my own. It was the one  game I watched at U.S. Cellular Field from the club level – those mid-level seats intermixed with the private boxes that some people swear is the only way to watch a sporting event; and other people just swear at.

I was in a seat overlooking home plate and to the left of me was open air. If I had been sitting about five feet further to the left, I would have caught this particular foul ball.

But nobody was sitting there. I would have had to make a seriously-risky reach to come close to catching it. I probably would have come crashing down on a fan sitting in the lower deck, so I let it go. Which got me an inning’s worth of derision from the people sitting around me, many of whom thought I should have made something resembling a dive to try to get the ball.

I HAVE NO doubt that some of those people, if they had been in my particular seat, would have made the dive.

All to get a baseball with no particular significance to that particular game – which in and of itself was merely one of 81 games the White Sox played in their home stadium that particular season.

It’s not like the ball would have had any particular value to a collector of sports memorabilia. It would merely be one of thousands of foul balls that get hit into the stands at major league games every year.



Which is why I was pleased to see on Saturday that when Derek Jeter of the New York Yankees got that 3000^th base hit of his career with a home run to the left field seats, there wasn’t some massive scramble that resulted in somebody getting hurt.



THAT BALL COULD have had some value to Yankees fans, at least one of whom would have been enough of a sucker to pay for it if given the chance. But would it have been worth getting hurt? I can’t see it.

So as we prepare for the baseball season to resume on Thursday (following the American League’s 5-1 loss Tuesday to the National League in the All Star Game), perhaps we should be giving some thought to the way we behave while sitting in the stands.

That is, if we're not obsessing with the beginning Wednesday of the perjury trial of former star pitcher Roger Clemens.

We ought to be agonizing about why the White Sox can’t get their act together and play up to their potential (I’d argue the Cubs ARE playing to their potential). Not about which fan is going to lose his (or her) balance and come crashing down upon me sitting in the lower deck, all in pursuit of a souvenir whose market value is $169.99 per dozen.

  -30-

Chia Obama just tacky, not offensive

I’m starting to think I made a mistake earlier this week when I was at a Walgreen’s pharmacy.

While waiting in line to pay for a newspaper, I happened to look up and see a row of boxes containing the “Chia Obama,” the takeoff on the Chia Pet that is made to look like a bust of our nation’s 44th president.

IF I HAD known then what I know now, I would seriously have considered walking up to the row, taking all of them and making a large purchase.

Of course, I would have made sure to do nothing that would construe opening the boxes. I wouldn’t have even removed the price stickers from the boxes, and I would have kept my receipt. For I would have wanted it to be clearly evident to anyone who looked closely that these particular “Chia Obama” figurines were purchased from a Walgreen’s.

Because now, Walgreen’s has stopped selling the items.

One can purchase all kinds of souvenir magazines, designer plates, caps and t-shirts depicting Obama’s visage or his campaign logo at a Walgreen’s – and not just the one located in the Hyde Park neighborhood.

SOME OF THESE items are extremely tacky looking and cheap (in quality, not in price). Walgreen’s stores throughout the Chicago area are a goldmine for people looking to find all kinds of pseudo-souvenirs of this city’s first president (and no, I don’t count Ronald Reagan).

But Walgreen’s officials think it is the “Chia Obama” that reaches the level of potential offensiveness that they decided this week to take a stand and remove the item from their shelves.

It appears some people think the light brown Obama figurine with mossy green hair think is offensive to the president’s reputation. Some think it is borderline racist.

The company that manufactures the figurine are not offensive, but are, “hope, courage and pro-American.”

PERSONALLY, I THINK the truth lies in between these two extremes.

My initial reaction to learning of the “Chia Obama” was that it was a ridiculous concept, in large part because I don’t think the figurine looks anylike like Barack Obama. In fact, it barely looks human.

It looks like a generic face with green-dyed hair. In fact, my first reaction was to think that the figurine was supposed to be some sort of pop musician – rather than a political figure (be honest, most political people try to hide the photographs that show they once had dyed hair).

I didn’t think it offensive as much as just silly. And if being “pro-American” means being silly, then I suppose it is – although I personally would prefer to think that our nation stands for ideals greater than having a hair-like substance that is mossy green.

NOW I REALIZE that the “Chia Obama” will be available for those people who enjoy shopping on the Internet, and I wouldn’t be surprised to find some other retail chain that eventually agrees to carry the item.

It is the perfect impulse purchase for people who want to think they are making some sort of financial investment by buying a piece of memorabilia that will appreciate in value.

Actually, all this will appreciate in is kitsch. But buying this thing is no more ridiculous than buying one of those souvenir plates (complete with its own stand) that depicts Obama in all his presidential glory.

None of these items is ever going to be worth more than the $19.95 (plus tax) that one has to pay for it these days. It may someday be worth exactly that much (but in an era where inflation will make $20 of the future worth about as much as a buck or two is now).

SO PERHAPS NOT even all the Walgreen’s stickers and receipts in the world would add to the value of a “Chia Obama.” It probably is a good think that I just shook my head, moved ahead in line, and plunked down a couple of quarters for my copy of the Chicago Sun-Times (the cash registers at this particular Walgreen’s were not functioning properly, and the paper scanned at its old price).

Then, there’s always the most important reason why I should not have purchased even one of those “Chia Obama” figurines. I would have felt incredibly ridiculous having people see me toss away a perfectly good $20 bill and some change to purchase an item that fits the very definition of absurdity.

I would have been the person with the “Chia Obama” cradled under one arm, while holding my newly purchased newspaper over my face so that perhaps no one would recognize me.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Not only can you read all about the “Chia Obama” here, you also can (http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2009/04/08/Walgreens-says-no-to-Ch-Ch-Chia-Obama/UPI-73961239200664/) watch the television commercials that promote the tacky item.

What will archeologists of 1,000 years from now think of us if they find a “Chia Obama” figurine (http://www.chiaobama.com/) among the rubble of our society.