Author: webuiltitblog

It is difficult to comprehend in this time of intense, some would say excessive, “political correctness,” but there was a time in the not so distant past when many entertainers were denied employment because of their political beliefs.  I am referring to the period from the late 1940s through the 1950s.  During that time, hundreds of writers, directors and actors were “blacklisted” because of their real , or even suspected, communist sympathies.  The effect of the blacklist was that these individuals were unable to find work in the entertainment industry.

At first blush, blacklisting someone based upon their political beliefs, especially without due process, seems un-American.  After all, we are not talking about spies, just Americans who sympathized with socialist or communist policies.  Keep in mind that membership in the Communist Party was not illegal, per se.  In addition, many of these people were not hardcore communists; they had merely attended a meeting or two, or were associates of left-leaning persons, or simply believed in stronger workers’ rights.   For example, former President Ronald Reagan, whom we think of as a strong conservative, had, in his youth, explored communism and attended a few meetings, before rejecting that philosophy.

In order to understand the blacklist fully, one must examine it within the context of the times.  In the late 1940s Russia had suddenly gone from being one of our allies in WWII to our arch enemy.   Concurrently, Communism, which had been more or less acceptable during WWII, was now viewed as a scourge, replacing Fascism.   America was engaged in a “cold war” with communism all over the globe.  China, North Korea and most of Eastern Europe had recently turned or were in the process of turning communist.  Americans were tense, and afraid.   Communism was viewed as the chief threat to our very existence. Being a communist in the 1930s and early 1940s was not so bad; being one in the late 1940s was about the worst thing one could be.

In addition, remember, this was a time when the few, large, powerful studios ran Hollywood with an iron fist.  A select few studio executives, such as Jack Warner and Sam Goldwyn, could make or break an actor or writer.  Many actors, writers and other entertainers thought the existing system was unfair and needed to be changed.  Two major strikes during the 1930s had exacerbated conflicts between the studios and the entertainers.

The central government organization involved in the blacklist was The House Committee on Un-American Activities (“HUAC”).  HUAC was created in 1938 to ferret out Communist sympathizers in the US.  It established the initial Hollywood Blacklist on November 25, 1947 one day after ten writers and directors had been cited for contempt of Congress for refusing to testify before HUAC.   The so-called Hollywood Ten – Alvah Bessie, Herbert Biberman, Lester Cole, Edward Dmytryk, Ring Lardner, Jr., John Howard Larson, Albert Maltz, Samuel Ornitz, Adrian Scott, and Dalton Trumbo –  were summarily fired by their studios.

HUAC was concerned that Communists and their sympathizers had infiltrated Hollywood and were incorporating the Communist philosophy in their screenplays.  Although the primary focus was on screenwriters, actors and directors were also targets.  Those under suspicion were called to testify before HUAC and subjected to intense, and sometimes hostile, questioning.  HUAC would demand that the witness provide names of friends and associates who were or might be communists.  Failure to do so would place the witness, himself, under suspicion, or, even worse, result in him being blacklisted.   This was your classic “witch hunt.”

Eventually, hundreds were blacklisted, many of which were household names.  These people were deprived of earning a livelihood without due process.  They suffered through defamation and harassment, particularly from the FBI.  They were ostracized by their friends and associates as well as by the public.   Some writers were able to earn a living by “ghost writing.”  Many industry insiders were aware of the practice, but it continued nonetheless (“don’t ask don’t tell”).  The practice was portrayed in the movie, “The Front” in which Woody Allen, in a serious role, plays a modestly-talented writer who “fronts” for blacklisted writers.  Some were able to clear their names and resume working.  Many of them were never able to work in the industry again.

CONCLUSION

The reputations and livelihoods of hundreds of blacklisted individuals were irreparably damaged.  The blacklist effectively ended in 1960 when Dalton Trumbo, one of the original “Ten,” with the strong support of Producer Otto Preminger and film star Kirk Douglas, received credit publicly for being the screenwriter for both “Exodus” and “Spartacus,”  two blockbuster hits.  In addition, it was disclosed that Trumbo had written the screenplays for “Roman Holiday” and “The Brave One,” both of which had won Oscars.

The blacklist period is ably portrayed in the movie, “Trumbo,” starring Bryan Cranston, which is currently in theatres.  The movie focuses on the experiences of Dalton Trumbo, who was probably one of the foremost screen writers of the period.

Yesterday, December 1, was the 60th anniversary of the Rosa Parks bus seat incident.  Most of us are familiar with Rosa Parks and the famous incident where she refused to give up her seat on the bus to a white person.  But, few of us are cognizant of the details of the rest of her life beyond that incident.  Who was Rosa Parks?  What kind of person was she?  What drove her to stand up to the bus driver and the police the way she did?  What did she do with the rest of her life?  Valid questions.  Read on for the answers.

Rosa Louise McCauley was born on February 4, 1913 in Tuskegee, Alabama.  Her father was a carpenter, and her mother was a teacher.  They separated when Rosa was very young and she was raised on a near-by farm with her mother and her maternal grandparents.  She was primarily of African American ancestry, although one of her great-grandfathers was Caucasian (probably, a slave owner), and one of her great-grandmothers was a slave of Native American descent.

Rosa was raised in the Jim Crow era.  Essentially, “Jim Crow” laws were state and local laws that were enacted in the former Confederate states following the end of Reconstruction.  They mandated segregation of whites and blacks in all public facilities.  The origin of the term “Jim Crow,” was a song and dance routine performed by whites in “blackface” beginning in the 1830s called “Jump Jim Crow.”  The routine became very popular, and “Jim Crow” came to symbolize a derogatory term for “Negro.”  These laws were finally abolished legally by the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Those of us who were not alive before the 1960s or who were raised in the North cannot fully comprehend what segregation was like.  “Separate but equal” was really “separate and inferior.”  For example, white kids rode school buses to relatively modern, well appointed schools; blacks walked to run-down schools with inferior or obsolete equipment.   The races were separated on public buses with blacks required to sit in the back and surrender seats to whites if need be.  It was a time of deep racial prejudice and deprivation towards blacks physically, economically and socially.  In particular, in later life Rosa recalled that she was beaten and bullied by white children repeatedly.  The schools she attended were woefully inferior to those of white children.  In addition, she recalled one occasion when the KKK marched right down her street as her grandfather guarded the front door of their house with a shotgun.

Rosa was a feisty child.  Often, she fought back against the bullies.  Her grandmother often admonished her against “talking ‘biggity’ to white folks.”  Once she picked up a brick and was about to throw it at a white child who had been bullying her when her grandmother stopped her.  Rosa replied “I would rather be lynched than live to be mistreated and not be allowed to say ‘I don’t like it.'”  Yes, Rosa was not the meek, quiet person that she has been portrayed as.  She believed in standing up for herself and speaking her mind.  This rebellious streak, which surprised some people,  came out clearly in her personal papers that were made public after her death.

In 1932 Rosa married Raymond Parks from Montgomery.  Parks was a barber, but, more importantly, he was a member of the NAACP and a racial activist for his time.  He convinced Rosa to finish high school, which was extremely rare for an African American in those days.  Also, she managed to register to vote, which was not so easy to do at that time.  In circa 1943 Rosa became active in the nascent civil rights movement.  She joined the NAACP and became secretary of the local Montgomery chapter.

The foregoing is the backdrop for the “bus seat incident.”  Rosa had worked all day.  Yes, she was tired physically, but no more than usually.  She worked hard and was tired every day.  More importantly, as she later wrote in her autobiography, she was not some old lady as described in some accounts of the incident.  She was only 42.  She was just tired of being bullied by whites all her life.  In plain parlance, she was “fed up.”  She had had enough.   So, she refused the bus driver’s demands to give up her seat.  He called the police who arrested her, and the rest, as they say, is history.

It should be denoted that Parks was not the first person to have refused to surrender her seat to a white person on a bus.  There had been a few others over the years, but her action galvanized the black community.  Perhaps, she was just the right person at the right time.  In any event, following her arrest, leaders in the black community organized a bus boycott, which was very effective.  One of the most prominent leaders of the boycott was a young, obscure minister of the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church, new to the area named Martin Luther King, Jr.  Thus, probably the greatest and most influential black civil rights leader ever first entered the national consciousness during the boycott precipitated by Rosa Parks.

Roughly 40,000 blacks who normally would have ridden the public buses, carpooled, took taxis provided by black-owned companies or simply walked (in some cases, as much as 20 miles or more).  The boycott lasted 381 days.  Dozens of buses stood idle, which no doubt severely impaired the bus company’s financial situation.  Finally, the boycott ended after the US Supreme Court, in a related case, not one involving Parks, ruled that segregation on public buses was unconstitutional.

CONCLUSION

Following the “bus seat incident” Parks became a civil rights icon, but she was harassed and also suffered economically.  Both she and her husband lost their jobs.  Later, Parks moved to Detroit where she joined her brother and other relatives.  She remained active in civil rights.  Some of her later accomplishments:

1. She assisted John Conyers, a black, win election to the Congress and became his secretary.
2. She remained active in civil rights and women’s causes, particularly those involving rape and sexual assault.  Rosa, herself, had almost been raped when she was a youngster.
3. She co-founded the “Rosa L. Parks Scholarship Foundation” to aid college-bound high school seniors.  She supported the Foundation by donating her speaking fees to it.
4. She has been the recipient of countless awards and honors.  Many streets, parks and libraries have been named after her.
5. There was a television movie of her life starring Angela Bassett.
6. The US Treasury is considering putting a woman’s likeness on the $10 bill.  Parks is one of the finalists for that honor.

Rosa Parks died of natural causes on October 24, 2005 at the age of 92. In her honor city officials in both Montgomery and Detroit ordered that the front seats of their city buses be covered in black ribbons until her funeral.

Rosa Parks was one of those few persons who truly made a difference.  Her legacy will live forever.

The title is not intended to be humorous.  This is a very serious story about one of the most notorious Nazis ever and a family of dwarfs.  For the sake of decorum and decency, I have omitted many of the most gruesome details.  Nevertheless, parts of the story will still likely turn your stomach.

Josef Mengele, aka “The Angel of Death” of Auschwitz, was infamous for conducting medical experiments on twins for his own twisted purposes and pleasures.  However, he also conducted medical experiments on other unusual persons, such as dwarfs.

The members of the Ovitz family were Romanian Jews, who made their living as travelling entertainers and musicians.  Most, but not all of them were dwarfs.

There is some confusion as to what exactly constitutes a “dwarf,” so allow me to clarify.  Briefly, according to the advocacy group Little People of America, dwarfs are defined as adults who are 4 feet 10 inches tall or less.  The average height is four feet.  Dwarfism may be caused by either a genetic or medical condition.   There are two types of dwarfism – disproportionate and proportionate.   The former type is characterized by either an average-sized torso with shorter limbs or the opposite condition.  The latter type is characterized by a body with normal proportions, but just shortened.  A few of the many outward features of dwarfism include a large head with a prominent brow, bowed legs, and/or flat, short broad feet. Dwarfism can be caused by some 200 different medical conditions, and is evident at birth.

The patriarch of the Ovitz family, Shimson Ovitz, a dwarf, fathered ten children between 1903 and 1921 with two different wives, both of whom were of average height.  Seven of the ten children were dwarfs.  The Ovitzes were entertainers, performing throughout Romania, Czechoslovakia and Hungary during the 1930s and 1940s.  They sang songs and played various musical instruments.  They were very versatile, performing in Yiddish, Hungarian, Russian and German.   Shimson died in 1923.

All twelve family members were deported to Auschwitz in May, 1944 where they attracted Mengele’s attention.  Although Mengele had access to a goodly number of twins, that was probably not the case with dwarfs.  And, here was an entire family of them!  Mengele realized that such a large family of dwarfs was unique, and he coveted them for his twisted experiments.  Some of the horrendous experiments included:

1. extracting bone marrow,
2. pulling out hair and teeth,
3. pouring hot and cold water into their ears,
4. blinding them by putting chemical drops in their eyes, and
5. in two cases, killing and boiling two dwarfs (from another family) so their bones could be extracted and exhibited in a museum.

Remember, the above experiments were being performed on little children without the benefit of anesthesia!

The Ovitz family managed to survive the war.  The Russians, who liberated the camp in January, 1945 took the Ovitzes to Russia where they were placed in a refugee camp.  Eventually, they were released.

CONCLUSION

The Ovitzes were the largest family of dwarfs ever recorded.  In addition, they were the largest family of dwarfs to be sent to Auschwitz and survive intact.

After they were released, like many refugees they went home only to find that their home had been looted and the town destroyed.  But, their harrowing story did have a happy ending.  Eventually, they emigrated to Israel, settling in Haifa.  They resumed touring and entertaining.  They became very popular and successful.  They retired in 1955 and bought a cinema.

The female dwarfs in the family were unable to have any children, probably due to their small pelvises.  Children born to the male dwarfs in the family and their average-sized wives were of normal height.  The last surviving dwarf in the family died in 2001.

One of the most devastating mining disasters ever occurred on August 5, 2010 in the San Jose gold and copper mine located in the Atacama Desert, which is about 30 miles north of Copiapo in northern Chile.  As the result of a substantial cave-in 33 miners were trapped.

The cave-in should not have been a surprise.  The mine was 121 years old at the time and had had a history of safety violations.  These violations had been responsible for several accidents, including eight deaths.   The owners of the mine had been fined and required to effect various repairs and safety upgrades.  But, due to carelessness, corruption, bribery of officials, and/or lack of follow-up by mining inspectors these had either been completed inadequately or not at all.  Nevertheless, mining operations had continued.

In view of the foregoing, little hope was held out for the miners.  Most people thought that they had not survived the cave-in.  When it was discovered that they had, indeed, survived the cave-in, rescue attempts began in earnest.  It became a race to rescue them before their air, food and water ran out.

What followed was truly compelling.  People all over the world agonized with the miners’ families and loved ones.  At first, few people thought they could survive until they could be rescued.   But, the group pulled together.  Later, we learned that they had followed a strict system of rationing, which enabled their meager supplies to last.  In addition, everything was decided by democratic vote, so that all of them had a stake in the situation.

Many of us followed the story closely for the entire 69 days until they were finally rescued.  Most dramatic of all was the manner in which the miners returned to the surface.  The rescuers had only been able to dig a narrow shaft.  Then, they lowered down a capsule in which only one person could fit at a time.  Over 1 billion people worldwide watched on live tv as they came up one by one.  The last one up was the shift foreman, Luis Urzua (played by Lou Diamond Phillips in the movie).  They all made it!

Everyone rejoiced in the rescue.

1. Doctors marveled at how well the miners had coped physically.
2. Clergy arranged a multi-denominational mass for the miners and their families.  Tragedy almost struck when a swarm of reporters and cameramen accidentally pushed and frightened Omar Reygadas’ two-year old great-granddaughter.  He told the reporters that he had had many nightmares since the ordeal, “but the worst nightmare is all of you.”
3. They  were treated to various gifts, including cash, a trip to Disneyland, a cruise of the Greek Islands and an eight-day tour of the Holy Land.
4. One of them, Daniel Herrera, even met his wife as a direct result of the ordeal.  While watching the saga on tv a German woman saw Mr. Herrera and fell in love.  She contacted him on line and eventually, they got married.
5. Even President Pinera got into the act.  He saw an opportunity to capitalize on the miners’ notoriety and, like any good politician, he took it.   He hosted a reception for them at the Presidential Palace and invited them to play an exhibition soccer match against a government team.

CONCLUSION

Unfortunately, the aftermath has not been so rosy.  Once the cameras and worldwide attention went elsewhere, problems began to surface.  Many of them remain unresolved to this day.

1.  In 2013 the Chilean government announced that it was terminating its investigation into the cave-in with no criminal charges being filed against the owners.  Obviously, this was met with disbelief and widely criticized.  One of the most vociferous critics was Laurence Golborne, the former mining minister (played by Rodrigo Santoro in the movie).  At the very least, it does not speak well for the integrity of the Chilean justice system.  A civil suit, however, is still pending.
2. The miners have been “blacklisted” from working in mines.  Mr Reygadas feels that their notoriety has been working against them.  “If there’s ever a problem everyone will immediately find out about it since we get a lot of press.”  Some of them, like Mr. Urzua, who secured a better mining job, and Mr. Sepulveda, who runs a construction business and a charitable foundation, have landed on their feet, but most have not, which has led to severe depression and other emotional problems for them.
3. Mario Sepulveda (played by Antonio Banderas in the movie) has been outspoken as to the miners’ treatment.  “The majority of us are very bad in terms of emotional health.  [P]sychiatrically and psychologically we were badly treated.”
4.  Several of the miners have filed a civil suit claiming they were tricked into signing away their royalties pertaining to the collapse and subsequent rescue.  Apparently, some signed the controversial document, which was in English, and others didn’t, so the suit has pitted the two groups against each other.

One can’t help but contrast the fate of the miners with what it would have been had the collapse occurred in the US.  But, that is another subject for, perhaps, another blog.

The enforced relocation and internment of Japanese-Americans during WWII is a stain on our history.  When viewed in retrospect from the perspective of the 21st century it is appalling to realize that the government did this to a segment of Americans regardless of the circumstances and, moreover, that it was supported by the general populace.  Yet, we did.  As Casey Stengel was fond of saying: “You could look it up.”

The time was early 1942.  On the previous December 7 Japan had launched a surprise attack on our naval base at Pearl Harbor, devastating our Pacific Fleet and plunging the US headlong into WWII.   In one of the most famous speeches in Presidential history President Franklyn Roosevelt had characterized December 7, 1941 as “a date that will live in infamy.”  Americans were shocked, furious and vengeful.  There was a strong anti-Japanese sentiment in the country.  It was focused not only on Japan, but also on the Americans of Japanese descent living in the US.

As a result of Japanese imperialism the US government was very wary of Americans of Japanese descent.  It had been secretly monitoring Japanese-Americans since the 1930’s in order to identify potential subversives.  In early 1942 it seemed to many that Japan was about to launch a follow-up attack on our West Coast, which was essentially defenseless.  The climate was right for the government to take drastic action against Japanese-American nationals.

In February 1942 FDR signed the first of a series of Executive Orders by which authority the government began the forced relocation and incarceration (“R & I”) of between 110,000 and 120,000 Japanese nationals.  This was effected without any due process.  The legality of this so-called “exclusion order” was subsequently validated by the Supreme Court (but not the incarceration without due process).   About 112,000 of the 127,000 Japanese Americans living in the US at the time were domiciled on the West Coast.  Anyone with as little as 1/16 Japanese blood was subject to enforced R &I.  Curiously, in Hawaii where the 150,000 Japanese-Americans comprised approximately 1/3 of the total population only about 1,500 were interned.  I’ll explain the reasons later.

It is important to distinguish among the three groups of Japanese involved.

1.  About 2/3 of the aforementioned total were  “Nisei,” literally “second generation.”  They were native born children of Japanese immigrants and, as such, were American citizens.
2. “Sansei,” or “third generation” were children of “Nisei,” also American citizens by birth.  Both of these groups should have been entitled to the full protections of the Constitution, just like any other US citizen.
3. “Issei” were “first generation” immigrants who had been born in Japan and, based on specific legislation, were ineligible for citizenship.

Life in the internment facilities was extremely degrading with one hardship after another.  Most detainees survived by following the principle of “gaman,” which means “endurance with dignity.”  The facilities were operated by various groups, including the Wartime Civil Control Administration, the War Relocation Authority,  the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Department of Justice.  There were three types:

1.  Civilian Assembly Centers were temporary facilities.  These were where families were sent initially.  Typically, they were located in race tracks or fairgrounds.
2. Relocation Centers, aka internment camps, were the next stop for most people.
3. Detention camps were for perceived trouble makers.  Really hard cases were sent to Citizen Isolation Centers or Federal Prisons.

As the late philosopher, Yogi Berra, would have said, “It’s ‘deja vu’ all over again.”  Yesterday, various well coordinated Islamic terrorist attacks were carried out in Paris.  The targets were various “soft” targets, such as a restaurant, a concert, a sports stadium and a couple of bars.  What did these targets have in common? Two things: (1) they were not protected or secured by law enforcement or military personnel; and (2) they were packed with tourists and residents whose only crime was a desire for an enjoyable evening’s entertainment.  Instead, hundreds of them, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, were murdered or injured, many of them critically.

In addition, the manner of attack was particularly vexing.  Witnesses have stated that, after the initial attacks, the terrorists coldly, calmly and methodically searched out survivors and executed them one by one.  Some of the survivors managed to escape; others survived by playing dead by laying among dead people.  Think of the horror.  We’re not talking about trained soldiers or policemen.  These are ordinary people like you and me who one minute were enjoying a concert, a soccer game or a meal and the next were dead, injured or forced to lie among dead people in order to survive.

As I write this, no group has claimed responsibility for these acts of terror, but the evidence points strongly towards ISIS.  Indeed, French President Hollande has identified ISIS as the culprits.  To me, it makes no difference whether it was ISIS or another Islamic terrorist group. They are all interrelated anyway.

Mr. Hollande, declaring the attacks as “an act of war,” has taken other decisive actions, such as declaring a state of emergency, placing Army troops in Paris and closing the border.  None of these actions addresses the underlying issues that led to the attacks, but that is a subject for another blog on another day.

It does not take Sherlock Holmes to deduce that there were more than eight terrorists involved.  The eight that we know about had to have an extensive support system to carry out this kind of coordinated attack.  Likely, there are many more still at large in France and other countries.  Also, it is obvious that these were well planned attacks coordinated and financed from international sources.

CONCLUSION

Once again, the Islamic terror group that the current administration has derided as a “JV” has struck a massive blow against the West.  ISIS and its partners in crime have perpetrated many, many such attacks in the last several years – the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad in 2008, Mumbai also in 2008, Oslo in 2011, Toulouse in 2012, Nairobi in 2013, Brussels in 2014 and Nigeria, Paris (Charlie Hebdo), and Ankara this year, to name a few.  By comparison, can anybody name the last time a NON-ISLAMIC group carried out a terrorist attack?  Probably not.  And yet, President Obama still refuses to identify these Islamic groups as terrorists!

Most of you are familiar with the opinion voiced by some Americans that we need to fight the terrorists in the Middle East or else we will be fighting them here eventually.  Others have derided that argument as war mongering or sticking our nose in other people’s business.  No one, except, perhaps, a few extremists, is advocating sacrificing American lives unnecessarily, however, as time goes on and more terrorist attacks are perpetrated in the West the former philosophy is gaining more and more credence and the latter seems more and more misguided.  How long before a similarly well-coordinated attack occurs on US soil?  We have countless “soft” targets – malls, schools, restaurants, etc. – from which to choose.

As I have blogged before, words, negotiations, posturing and saber-rattling haven’t and won’t work.  Terrorists only understand and respect force.  Due to the Administration’s indecisive approach what was a small problem a few years ago has now become a big problem.

I say to the leaders of the West, we need to send ISIS and its ilk a strong message.  Appeasement did not work in 1938. Throughout history, It never has and likely never will.   Let’s learn from our history and not repeat it.  We have the ability to deal with this.  Do we have the will?

The NY Mets are in the World Series!  Roll that around in your mind a few times.  At the start of the season the Mets’ ownership and management were being criticized by their own fans as cheap, incompetent and dysfunctional.  Why wouldn’t they spend to bring in talented players?  Where were the highly touted minor leaguers fans had been promised for years?  Why should fans even bother going to Citifield.  You’re all familiar with the back story and with what happened.  Key minor leaguers, such as Syndergaard and Conforto, were brought up and have contributed.  Significant players, such as Cespedes, Johnson and Uribe were acquired at the trade deadline.  The team jelled beyond all but the most optimistic expectations to win the NL East Division, beat the Dodgers and the Cubs in the playoffs, and here they are in the World Series.  As they used to say in Brooklyn, “Who’d a thunk it!”

The WS will begin on Tuesday, October 27 in Kansas City.  If it goes the full seven games it will conclude on November 4.  KC last won in 1985, the Mets in 1986.  This will be the 111th edition of the “Fall Classic,” as it is sometimes called.  Some WS facts:

1.  The first modern WS was played in 1903.  It was arranged by the owners of the two league champions.  Boston beat Pittsburgh to win the first world championship.
2. There was no WS in 1904 as the owner of the NL champion Giants refused to play the champion of the “upstart,” “inferior” AL.
3. Beginning in 1905 the two leagues arranged the WS, and it has been played every year since then, except for 1994 during the players’ strike.  Neither war nor earthquake has cancelled it.
4.  The first night game was Game 4 of the 1971 WS in Three Rivers Stadium between Pittsburgh and Baltimore.
5. In 1989 Candlestick Park in San Francisco, the site of Game 3, was damaged by a massive earthquake before the game, which shook the Bay Area.  The Series was delayed for ten days, but not cancelled.
6. The leagues used to alternate home field advantage, but beginning in 2003 the league that won that year’s All-Star Game has earned the odd home game.
7. The AL has won 63 of the previous 110 Series (58%).
8. The Yankees have made the most appearances (40) and won the most championships (27).
9. The team with the highest regular season winning percentage has only won the WS 49% of the time.
10. Only one WS MVP has been a member of the losing team (more on that later).

There have been many memorable WS.  All fans have their favorites.  Personally, I have six, which I will profile below.  These were not only exciting in their own right and featured a memorable play, but also had some significance to the sport in addition to the game itself.  So, in chronological order:

1. 1955 – Brooklyn wins its first and only WS – Despite having tremendous teams featuring various future Hall-of-Famers, every time the Dodgers played the Yankees in the WS they lost.  A key hit here, a key error there, same result.  The Dodgers were living up to (or down to) their unofficial nickname – the “Bums.”  Year after year, the Dodger fans’ famous refrain was “Wait until next year.”  Well, this year it was the Dodgers that made the key play.  In the decisive Game 7 Sandy Amoros, an unheralded utility player who had been inserted into left field as part of a “double-switch,” made one of the most amazing catches in WS history to save the game, and the Dodgers won 2-0.  “Next year” had finally arrived, and a ten year old boy on Long Island became a Dodgers fan for life.  As one NY paper touted the next day “Who’s a Bum?!”
2. 1960 –  Pirates Beat Yanks – This was an odd Series.  The Yankees were clearly the better team.  They outperformed the Bucs in every category.  They won their three games by a combined score of 38-3!  Bobby Richardson, the second baseman, was named MVP, the only time a player from a losing team has been so honored.  But, the Bucs won four close games and the Series.  The seventh game was, perhaps, the best of all WS games.  It doesn’t have the cache of other famous games, because it was played in the afternoon before a relatively small tv audience, rather then in prime time.  Not only was it close; it had several twists and turns and memorable plays.  Also, it was the deciding game and featured a “walk-off” homer by the Pirates’ Bill Mazeroski in the bottom of the 9th inning.  Ironically, Maz was a light hitter, known primarily for his fielding.  Many people believe that homer was responsible for his getting voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame.  Another outcome was that the Yanks fired their manager, Casey Stengel, which made him available to become the first manager of the Mets two years later.
3. 1969 – The Mets win their first title –  On paper this was a huge mismatch.  The AL champion Orioles had won 109 games and blown through the playoffs.  They were very strong in all three areas – pitching, hitting and defense.  The Mets, though sporting the best record in the NL, were still viewed by many as lovable losers.  Indeed, they had finished ninth the previous year.  Only the most optimistic fans gave them much of a chance.  Yet, they got the key hits and made the key plays in the field.  They not only won but did so in five games.  Many old-time Mets fans see some parallels between that team and this year’s.
4. 1975 – Fisk “pushes” his home run fair, but Reds win – The Reds were considered to be the superior team.  Known as the “Big Red Machine” because of their powerful offense they had won 108 games during the regular season and swept the Pirates in the NL playoffs.  But, Boston was a popular and exciting underdog.  The Series became memorable because of Game 6.  The Reds led three games to two and 6-3 when the “Saux” tied the game with a pinch hit three-run homer.  Then, in the bottom of the 12th Red Sox catcher Carlton Fisk led off with a drive down the left field line.  Clearly, it had the distance, but would it go fair or foul.  TV replays showed Fisk standing at home plate waving his hands to the right as if to “push” the ball fair.  It was fair winning the game.  That was a seminal WS and tv moment.  But, the Reds spoiled the Cinderella story by winning the next day 4-3.
5. 1985 – KC wins with an “assist” from the umpire –  This was known as the I-70 or “Show-Me” Series because St Louis and KC were both in Missouri and were connected by Interstate 70.  St. Louis seemed to have the Series won.  They were ahead three games to two and 1-0 in the bottom of the ninth inning when disaster struck.  The first base umpire, Don Denkinger, missed an obvious call, ruling a KC runner safe when tv replays clearly showed him to be out.  But, this was before replay reviews, and the erroneous call stood.  Given the extra out KC went on to win the game and the next day as well winning the Series.  Tough break for the Cards, but they still had their chances to win.  All they had to do was get out of the inning or win Game 7.  Champions have to be resilient.
6. 1986 – Mets win, barely –  On paper, the Mets were the better team and were big favorites.  But, they lost the first two games at home.  They won Games 3 and 4 to even the Series, but proceeded to lose Game 5 and were trailing in Game 6 by 5-3 in the bottom of the tenth with two out and none on.  Then, they staged the most unlikely of rallies.  Three straight singles with two strikes on the batters and a wild pitch tied the score.  Next Mookie Wilson hit a routine ground ball to first base, which, inexplicably, rolled between Bill Buckner’s legs and under his glove.  The winning run scored, and the Mets won Game 7 as well.  WHEW!  That rally proved the old baseball adage.  “The game is not over until the last out.”  Baseball is the only sport in which the clock does not run out on the trailing team.  Regardless, you get your “last licks.”  Many fans, especially Mets fans, consider that Game 6 to be the best WS ever.

CONCLUSION

This series will match the dominant Mets starting pitching against the equally-dominant KC bullpen.  No one knows what will happen, including the so-called “experts.”  Fans know that you play the game on the field, not on paper.  In a short series anything can happen.  History tells us that an unlikely hero or two will emerge to lead his team to victory.  Who will it be?  Your guess is as good as mine.  Enjoy the Series.

LETS GO METS!!