Sunday’s Boomer Trivia

Here’s the trivia questions from the 3/20/11 show…can you get’em all right?

Name the TV comedy set in the old west that aired from 1965-1967.

Name the sit-com about an adventure that started with a “three hour tour” that aired from 1964-1967 – still popular in reruns…

This show, which ran from 1967-1969, became one of the most controversial American TV programs of the Vietnam War era because of the host brothers’ penchant for material that was critical of the political mainstream and sympathetic to the emerging counterculture; name it.

This cop show comedy goes way back and is most familiar to Boomers born between 1946 & 1950 because it aired between 1961 & 1963; if you know this one, we’re officially impressed!

This rural sit-com was the first to have well known movie actors in the lead roles, and aired from 1965-1971.  Name it.

Here’s your last question: Name the “artiste” who has established an entire music portfolio on making fun of other people’s famous songs (most notably, Michael Jackson’s).

Send your answers to feedback@boomerradioshow.com. If you got all of them right, we’ll send you your very own “Expert in All Things Trivial” award!

3/6/11 Boomer Trivia

These were the Trivia Questions from the 3/6/11 show.  Can you get’em all right?

What was Lassie’s best friend/little owner’s name?

What was the name of the lovable puppet character on the Ed Sullivan Show?

What was the name of the logs that we used to build great play houses?

In 1970, a McDonald Hamburger cost…
A. 10 cents
B. 20 cents
C. 15 cents
D. 30 cents

What was the name of the popcorn that expanded while we shook it across a stovetop ?

Here’s your last question: What was the name of the doll that could actually speak?

Send your answers to feedback@boomerradioshow.com. If you got all of them right, we’ll send you your very own “Expert in All Things Trivial” award!

Does Making a New Year Resolution Really Make a Difference?

Here’s a few listeners’ responses to last week’s Question Du Jour – Does making a new year resolution really make a difference? Here’s what some listeners thought:

David Jones wrote:

We can make a resolution a thousand times on a thousand different days with no effect, but we only have to say it once and mean it. Say it once and mean it, and everything changes. I’m in the mood to do that, not just because it’s the New Year but because I’m very optimistic about 2011.

Matthew LaTray says:

Yes, we should make resolutions, because goal setting is important. Perhaps people use the New Year as a reason, but even if that’s the only time they set goals it’s better than never.
Hopefully the resolutions are realistic. However, even “lofty” goals and dreams can come true; maybe not this year, but if you never set the goal then for sure you’ll never reach it.

And finally, Liz Merriweather has this advice for us:

Yes, making ANY resolution makes a difference, and the New Year is a sentimental time to do so. Making a resolution is only the first step in changing. Acting on that decision is an entirely different matter!
In order to successfully make significant, lasting change, a resolution must be paired with a specific, realistic, achievable plan of action, and the necessary tools and environment in which to make change. For example, it’s hard to learn the piano without an instrument, a teacher and the discipline of a practice schedule.

Thanks everyone for weighing in on our questions du jour over the past months.  If you have one you want to have answered by other listeners, leave it on our listener line: 877-999-1172 using option #2, feedback for Terri, or email it to feedback@boomerradioshow.com.  We’ll let you know if we’ve chosen yours to air!

Are We Still Over-Commercializing Christmas?

Here’s a few of our listeners’ responses to the 12/19 show’s Question Du Jour – Do you think we’ve lost the true spirit of Christmas with over-commercialism?

Some very interesting responses:

June Kittay wrote:

The True Meaning of Christmas? We sure have lost it. Christmas is Christ’s birthday. It is so commercialized, it is sickening. However, one aspect of Christmas is still intact. Being with family and the ones we love. We boomers realize that  that’s the other part of what its all about. God bless us all this coming year. We are going to need it.

And there’s this from Carlos Merriweather:

Yes. We are over commercializing product sales, which seems to minimize human value. You can hear it in the spirit of the people that talk about the gift they did not get. In many hearts, the gift trumps time spent together.
We are not strongly promoting the strength and encouragement that results from effective demonstrations of LOVE through giving.”

Ede Manrodt-Fry says we do overcommercialize:

I have really developed a strong resistance to the overwhelming commercialism that the holiday has evolved into.  I don’t believe that giving only comes from retail outlets. And I prefer to give throughout the year and not just because it’s Christmas and the stores are competing to make the largest profits. Sometimes I feel like I have turned in to Scrooge. I just wish people could feel more like giving all of the time and not see giving as only $$$.

And finally, Dale McNeil thinks there may be a silver lining to this bad economy:

I feel that we have overcommercialized over the past 10-20 years. However this year, I truly believe that families are returning to the basics of Christmas. The true meaning.   There won’t be as many presents under the tree so they’ll have more meaning.  I believe that families will return to their traditions of years ago that their parents or grandparents practiced, or perhaps create new ones.
I also feel that the younger families have the best opportunity right now to begin traditions that reflect the true meaning of Christmas with their young ones. I think it’s a super time right now.

Do We Need to Tax Companies for Shipping Jobs Overseas?

Here’s a few of our listeners’ responses to our last Question Du Jour – Do you think we need a tax for companies that ship jobs overseas?

As usual, our very thoughtful listeners’ opinions reflected many perspectives:

Ellen V says tax ‘em!

Absolutely. As long as there is no financial incentive to keep jobs in the U.S., U.S.-based companies will continue to send them overseas. It’s pure economics.

And Patti Oriot wants them taxed, too:

Of course TAX them!!!  If we kept our dollars home here in the USA in the first place we would still be the number 1 strongest country.  Wake up AMERICA! We need to stand by each other! So many other cultures do this to gain strength in unification.

Jim McAndrew says no to such a tax, explaining it this way:

We are a free market economy. As jobs have been shipped over to other countries like Mexico where the big 3 have built auto plants, for instance, we have also been the recipients of foreign auto manufactures like Mercedes, Toyota, Honda, BMW, Hyundai etc. The playing field may not be level but a tax on companies moving jobs over seas is uncalled for.

Alan Herndon thinks another kind of tax would work better:

There is a way to encourage quality jobs to stay in America, its access to the US market. If low paying sweatshop jobs are kept, the result will only be more illegal immigrants to fill them. How about taxing employers who do not pay a decent minimal living wage?

And finally, Krystal McAllister answers our question with one of her own:

Aren’t TAX INCENTIVES one of the primary reasons corporations are so happy to send jobs overseas in the first place?