Saint Patrick’s Day is coming which means this country will engage in one of the biggest displays of hypocrisy known to man. With the pseudo-holiday falling on a Monday that means a lot of people will spend a whole weekend lying about their heritage. Some people will admit to being along for the ride but most will actually claim to have enough Irish in them to justify taking Monday off so they can start drinking early, or recover from drinking all weekend long. Irish flags will be waving and city officials will gleefully allow public waterways to be temporarily polluted with allegedly nontoxic green dye.
No protesters will line the streets to denounce this display of ethnic solidarity. Nobody will be told to go back to Ireland. You see, we’re all for ethnic pride as long as you pass the melanin test. If you’re sufficiently pale you can wave the flag of your homeland all you want but for those among you who happen to be a little on the brown side, forget it. Take pride in your African roots and you’ll be mocked for it. Wave the Mexican flag and people will call you a traitor. But get plastered by 9:00 and put on a “Kiss me I’m Irish” button and the whole country celebrates with you.
I’m told that I have a little Irish ancestry so I probably could get away with celebrating St. Patrick’s Day. My last name, Croyle, seems Irish even though it originates from France. The problem is I just don’t care. I don’t take a lot of pride in my ethnicity because it simply doesn’t define me. It's not like I earned it. I’m half Polish but aside from eating pierogi and kielbasa from time to time we never did anything to celebrate our heritage. We were non-practicing Polacks and as for the dash of Irish my dad’s side of the family contributed, it was pretty much diluted by the English, Welsh, German, Dutch and French ancestry that got thrown into that big pot of Croyle gruel over the years. We didn’t make a big deal out of what we were. It always seemed that the “who” was more important. Ethnic agnosticism.
Now don’t get me wrong. I don’t begrudge these cultural celebrations. To me it’s sad that St. Patrick’s Day has reduced being Irish to early morning drinking binges, boring parades and prolific use of the color green but when you get right down to the basic concept of understanding where you came from and keeping that history alive I think it’s great and a few people actually take the time to reflect on that during the chaotic Spring Break spectacle we’ve made out of March 17th.
Other ethnic groups celebrate their culture and heritage. We might not have a specific day for celebrating Italian lineage but there are plenty of Italian festivals around the country. Name a nationality and you’ll probably be able to find a celebration for it sometime this year. Greeks throw a big “Wrestle me I’m Greek” party every year and I know there are Hungarian, Serbian, and Yugoslavian shindigs in most of the bigger cities. Nobody seems to mind. We even embrace various Asian cultures as they engage in their celebrations throughout the year. Chinese New Year is usually a pretty big deal in various locations around the world.
Cinco de Mayo is the most notable Hispanic holiday. It’s actually Mexican Independence Day but for most Americans it’s another day to get loaded. Corona with lime, por favor. Of course in places with organized Mexican-American communities the holiday has become more of a reflection of ethnic pride and that has started to rub Americans the wrong way. It was fine when it was limited to border towns with high Latino concentrations but now that northern cities are starting to see hundreds of brown-skinned people waving Mexican flags a line had been drawn. If you want to celebrate being Mexican, you can go back to Mexico.
And it’s not just Mexicans. White people snicker at the mention of Kwanza as if it’s just some made up holiday black people came up with to feel special. Of course Kwanza doesn’t stir up hostility like festivals that promote African culture. Again, if you love Africa so much you should move back there... even though 95% of the black people living in this country were born here. In fact most African Americans come from families that have been in the US longer than most white people. Half of my ancestry hopped off a boat around 1915. The other half probably owned the ancestors of some of those people celebrating their African heritage. So these African Americans might have more of a right to celebrate where they came from than their white counterparts. Still, anything that might be labeled “Black Pride” is viewed as an example of reverse racism.
That’s a common argument tossed out by the polemicists. Why is it OK to chant “Black Power” or “Black Pride” but not OK to stand up for "White Pride"? The truth is that it would be if White Pride and White Power weren’t directly tied into hating everything that isn’t white. Aside from a very small handful of black people who make money off of racial inequality, the underlying theme of “Black Power” or “Black Pride” is to promote the positive aspects of African American culture. The underlying theme of “White Power” is hate. Black Power is saying we’re equal to you. White Power is saying no, you’re not.
That’s why celebrations of ethnicity are fair game but broad celebrations of race are, well, racist. Ethnicity is about heritage, culture and history. It’s about taking pride in where your ancestors came from and what they did. People of a particular ethnic group share similar experiences and they like to take some time to reflect on that. More importantly, they invite they rest of us along for the ride. Ethnicity is what makes this country great: People of different backgrounds finding common ground…not just respecting one another, but celebrating our differences as much as we do our similarities.
Most black people in North America don’t have a specific ethnic heritage they can trace. Slavery essentially made black an ethnic group. Our white ancestors stripped Africans, who came from different backgrounds, of their history and forced them to create a new culture from scratch. It was a covert culture hidden in field songs and locked behind the doors of black churches. So that’s why “Black Pride” isn’t racist. But that won’t change how most white people react to darker people celebrating their heritage. How dare they? Those nappy-headed Bushmen should hop on the next boat to Liberia. And any Mexican who raises a flag other than the Stars and Stripes should be sent back over the fence. If being an American isn’t good enough, get out.
But what about those red-headed Irish jerks with their stupid green beer and House of Pain mix tapes? Shouldn’t they go back to Ireland? It’s something to think about. St. Patrick’s Day is coming and we should have a plan.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Mock Congress
Congress is taking a long hard look at professional sports. A few years ago several key figures in Major League Baseball were called to testify before Congress on the proliferation of steroids and other performance enhancing substances in professional baseball. Raphael Palmiero famously called Jose Canseco a liar and wagged his finger at the Senators for wasting their time pursuing such flimsy allegations. Then he tested positive for steroids a few months later.
Recently, Baseball solicited the assistance of former Senator George Mitchell to lead an in depth investigation into the use of performance enhancing substances. The result was a detailed report based on numerous law enforcement operations that connected professional athletes to steroids and human growth hormone. Names were named and media frenzy ensued.
Now Roger Clemens, who magically became a more dominant pitcher in his 40s than he was in his 20s is in the crosshairs. He was named in the report but denies the veracity of the investigation. He will face Congress under oath and answer their questions regarding the legitimacy of his baseball legacy. Somehow it seems as though this is a job for law enforcement. Clemens broke the law. He should be arrested, convicted and punished in such a manner that he reveals the names of others involved. Just like any other druggie. Congress doesn’t usually demand testimony from crack dealers, so they shouldn’t waste time with Rocket.
Meanwhile, Arlen Spector has called for a hearing into the infamous, and poorly named, Spygate controversy involving the new England Patriots getting caught violating NFL rules. Like many NFL fans, Spector believes that the NFL might have conspired to cover up a much bigger scandal than was initially reported. That’s probably true but why should Congress care? Even if the NFL rigs its games that revelation isn’t going to impact my life any more than the high cost of health insurance.
Initially I had a hard time taking issue with Congress for probing the steroid issue. Steroids are illegal and when professional athletes use them they set the standards of performance so high that aspiring players have to use steroids to have a chance at reaching that level. That forces the next level of players to use steroids. It’s a vicious cycle that doesn’t end until you have unscrupulous fathers injecting testosterone into their unborn children. Anybody who has attended a Little League game in the past 10 years knows that’s not nearly as ridiculous as it should sound. If there wasn’t a serious effort to discourage the use of steroids in the pros, how could we expect to keep it out of everything else?
However, the subsequent investigation into the steroid problem seems opportunistic. If Congress really meant business about it they would have charged Palmiero with perjury. They could have gone after Mark McGwire with more vigor or simply ordered the FBI to start making arrests. You see steroids, though not formally banned by baseball until 2003, had been illegal since 1990. Even if a player like Mark McGwire could justify his abuse of steroids by claiming a technicality he still broke federal laws by purchasing, possessing and using controlled substances. But Congress chose to let everybody off the hook. So why round two?
More perplexing is the inquest into the NFL’s actions regarding Spygate. There are no federal laws prohibiting one team from secretly taping another team’s practices. Even if the NFL swept the issue under the rug it stands to reason that it was a business decision. Most people acknowledge that this sort of cheating is rampant in football. Teams are always looking to gain an advantage. If that means deciphering an opponents defensive signals or decoding the audible indicators quarterbacks use to change plays, so be it.
Cheating takes on different forms and while ethical puritans will not stoop so low as to make a distinction between various types of cheating, there is this pesky little thing called reality. If a receiver gets away with scooping a pass off the ground or a running back recovers a fumble through illicit acts of aggression in the pile long after the whistle has blown it’s considered to be part of the game within a game. It’s not a violation of the rules unless you get caught. So players get away with holding, pass interference and cheap shots all game long. Is Congress going to investigate that?
Maybe they should. Not from the perspective of the players getting away with it but rather why officiating seems to be inconsistent. There’s a lot more at stake if an official is conspiring to influence the outcome of a game. There’s a lot of money changing hands in Vegas and even more being wagered illegally. I could see Congress wanting to know if the fix is in for certain contests, but delving into a coach trying to gain an edge over his competition seems petty. When you think about the results produced, probing the steroid issue isn’t exactly worthwhile either. These things should be delegated.
What’s frustrating about all of this is that Congress seems to have the time, money and manpower to get to the bottom of private sector entertainment but we can’t seem to draw a bead on some of the scandals involving the Bush Administration. Oil prices are through the roof, the U.S. economy is circling the drain and our soldiers are fighting a war that was supposedly over four years ago but Congress can’t get us any straight answers on why. Instead, they’re going to talk to Roger Goodell and get to the bottom of Spygate once and for all. Are you kidding me?
There’s no clearer sign that our government is completely corrupted than this. How can anybody make sports a priority over everything else this country is coping with? It’s offensive that we have elected officials who feel that solving the problem of steroids in baseball or cheating in football is more important than, well, ANYTHING ELSE FACING CONGRESS. The ketchup viscosity studies the FDA wasted money on in the 1980s might have had more social relevance than Spygate. Why are we paying these guys?
It’s not enough to run them out of office. This dereliction of duty is nothing short of criminal. With our soldiers at war you could make a case that this is a form of treason. We elect these clowns to protect and defend us from enemies foreign and domestic, not to joust the windmills of professional sports.
You know, it’s enough to make a guy move out of the country…but what good would that do? Our government gets into everybody’s business. Too bad it never tends to its own.
Recently, Baseball solicited the assistance of former Senator George Mitchell to lead an in depth investigation into the use of performance enhancing substances. The result was a detailed report based on numerous law enforcement operations that connected professional athletes to steroids and human growth hormone. Names were named and media frenzy ensued.
Now Roger Clemens, who magically became a more dominant pitcher in his 40s than he was in his 20s is in the crosshairs. He was named in the report but denies the veracity of the investigation. He will face Congress under oath and answer their questions regarding the legitimacy of his baseball legacy. Somehow it seems as though this is a job for law enforcement. Clemens broke the law. He should be arrested, convicted and punished in such a manner that he reveals the names of others involved. Just like any other druggie. Congress doesn’t usually demand testimony from crack dealers, so they shouldn’t waste time with Rocket.
Meanwhile, Arlen Spector has called for a hearing into the infamous, and poorly named, Spygate controversy involving the new England Patriots getting caught violating NFL rules. Like many NFL fans, Spector believes that the NFL might have conspired to cover up a much bigger scandal than was initially reported. That’s probably true but why should Congress care? Even if the NFL rigs its games that revelation isn’t going to impact my life any more than the high cost of health insurance.
Initially I had a hard time taking issue with Congress for probing the steroid issue. Steroids are illegal and when professional athletes use them they set the standards of performance so high that aspiring players have to use steroids to have a chance at reaching that level. That forces the next level of players to use steroids. It’s a vicious cycle that doesn’t end until you have unscrupulous fathers injecting testosterone into their unborn children. Anybody who has attended a Little League game in the past 10 years knows that’s not nearly as ridiculous as it should sound. If there wasn’t a serious effort to discourage the use of steroids in the pros, how could we expect to keep it out of everything else?
However, the subsequent investigation into the steroid problem seems opportunistic. If Congress really meant business about it they would have charged Palmiero with perjury. They could have gone after Mark McGwire with more vigor or simply ordered the FBI to start making arrests. You see steroids, though not formally banned by baseball until 2003, had been illegal since 1990. Even if a player like Mark McGwire could justify his abuse of steroids by claiming a technicality he still broke federal laws by purchasing, possessing and using controlled substances. But Congress chose to let everybody off the hook. So why round two?
More perplexing is the inquest into the NFL’s actions regarding Spygate. There are no federal laws prohibiting one team from secretly taping another team’s practices. Even if the NFL swept the issue under the rug it stands to reason that it was a business decision. Most people acknowledge that this sort of cheating is rampant in football. Teams are always looking to gain an advantage. If that means deciphering an opponents defensive signals or decoding the audible indicators quarterbacks use to change plays, so be it.
Cheating takes on different forms and while ethical puritans will not stoop so low as to make a distinction between various types of cheating, there is this pesky little thing called reality. If a receiver gets away with scooping a pass off the ground or a running back recovers a fumble through illicit acts of aggression in the pile long after the whistle has blown it’s considered to be part of the game within a game. It’s not a violation of the rules unless you get caught. So players get away with holding, pass interference and cheap shots all game long. Is Congress going to investigate that?
Maybe they should. Not from the perspective of the players getting away with it but rather why officiating seems to be inconsistent. There’s a lot more at stake if an official is conspiring to influence the outcome of a game. There’s a lot of money changing hands in Vegas and even more being wagered illegally. I could see Congress wanting to know if the fix is in for certain contests, but delving into a coach trying to gain an edge over his competition seems petty. When you think about the results produced, probing the steroid issue isn’t exactly worthwhile either. These things should be delegated.
What’s frustrating about all of this is that Congress seems to have the time, money and manpower to get to the bottom of private sector entertainment but we can’t seem to draw a bead on some of the scandals involving the Bush Administration. Oil prices are through the roof, the U.S. economy is circling the drain and our soldiers are fighting a war that was supposedly over four years ago but Congress can’t get us any straight answers on why. Instead, they’re going to talk to Roger Goodell and get to the bottom of Spygate once and for all. Are you kidding me?
There’s no clearer sign that our government is completely corrupted than this. How can anybody make sports a priority over everything else this country is coping with? It’s offensive that we have elected officials who feel that solving the problem of steroids in baseball or cheating in football is more important than, well, ANYTHING ELSE FACING CONGRESS. The ketchup viscosity studies the FDA wasted money on in the 1980s might have had more social relevance than Spygate. Why are we paying these guys?
It’s not enough to run them out of office. This dereliction of duty is nothing short of criminal. With our soldiers at war you could make a case that this is a form of treason. We elect these clowns to protect and defend us from enemies foreign and domestic, not to joust the windmills of professional sports.
You know, it’s enough to make a guy move out of the country…but what good would that do? Our government gets into everybody’s business. Too bad it never tends to its own.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Freedom of Speech doesn't get you a free pass
Responsibility. Liberty sets us free from the shackles of governmental control but that freedom is far from being free. The price we pay is responsibility. Failure to accept responsibility can be costly. Recently we saw yet another example of somebody in the media behaving irresponsibly. And while Kelly Tilghman has been held accountable for making racially insensitive remarks regarding Tiger Woods' dominance in golf, nobody seems willing to hold her responsible. Apparently she's the victim of this horrible PC movement. The funny thing is that the story was all about Tiger Woods even though the comments weren't. She didn't say anything disparaging about Tiger. What she did was actually worse.
I don’t know Tiger Woods so I can’t tell you whether or not he was simply taking the high road when he dismissed Kelly Tilghman’s stupid comment about young golfers needing to “lynch” Tiger in some dark alley if they wanted to succeed in golf. Maybe he really doesn’t see what all the fuss is about. As a golfer the remarks are actually flattering but as an African American they're offensive.
Of course there’s a chance that Tiger finds those remarks more than a little offensive. There’s a distinct possibility that Tiger would love to see Kelly Tilghman fired. The problem is that Tiger Woods is not just a golfer he’s a brand and an icon. Tiger has more important things on his mind. So when some idiot pops off with an off color comment he just pulls his hat down and focuses on his game.
That’s why he wins. Tiger rarely says anything. He maintains a professional distance and that's why so many people dislike him but they have to respect him. And that's what counts. By the time he's finished every other golfer in the history of the game will be a footnote. Tiger has already gone where no other golfer has gone before. He is one of the richest and most famous people in the world and he's done it without pandering to the public or branching into other businesses. Instead, he has taken over golf. Every golfer on the PGA tour has seen their earnings increase since Tiger has joined the PGA Tour. Tiger's presence at an event increases sponsorships and attendance. He might be the single most important athlete in the world. Tiger doesn't have time to worry about anything else. So when somebody throws his name into an inflammatory comment he ignores it.
Fuzzy Zoeller got a pass from Tiger Woods when he trotted out some tired old joke about fried chicken and watermelon. Like Tilghman, Zoeller claimed he was a friend of Tiger’s and didn’t mean any harm. Tiger didn’t deny a friendship but actions speak louder than words. While Fuzzy was making the rounds trying to salvage his image, Tiger kept his mouth shut and played golf. Tiger and Fuzzy aren’t exactly BFFs and you probably won't see Kelly Tilghman over Tiger's house for dinner. In fact, Tiger released his statement through his agent. The personal touch speaks volumes. Tiger let's his enemies dig their own holes.
I don’t know Tiger Woods so I can’t tell you whether or not he was simply taking the high road when he dismissed Kelly Tilghman’s stupid comment about young golfers needing to “lynch” Tiger in some dark alley if they wanted to succeed in golf. Maybe he really doesn’t see what all the fuss is about. As a golfer the remarks are actually flattering but as an African American they're offensive.
Of course there’s a chance that Tiger finds those remarks more than a little offensive. There’s a distinct possibility that Tiger would love to see Kelly Tilghman fired. The problem is that Tiger Woods is not just a golfer he’s a brand and an icon. Tiger has more important things on his mind. So when some idiot pops off with an off color comment he just pulls his hat down and focuses on his game.
That’s why he wins. Tiger rarely says anything. He maintains a professional distance and that's why so many people dislike him but they have to respect him. And that's what counts. By the time he's finished every other golfer in the history of the game will be a footnote. Tiger has already gone where no other golfer has gone before. He is one of the richest and most famous people in the world and he's done it without pandering to the public or branching into other businesses. Instead, he has taken over golf. Every golfer on the PGA tour has seen their earnings increase since Tiger has joined the PGA Tour. Tiger's presence at an event increases sponsorships and attendance. He might be the single most important athlete in the world. Tiger doesn't have time to worry about anything else. So when somebody throws his name into an inflammatory comment he ignores it.
Fuzzy Zoeller got a pass from Tiger Woods when he trotted out some tired old joke about fried chicken and watermelon. Like Tilghman, Zoeller claimed he was a friend of Tiger’s and didn’t mean any harm. Tiger didn’t deny a friendship but actions speak louder than words. While Fuzzy was making the rounds trying to salvage his image, Tiger kept his mouth shut and played golf. Tiger and Fuzzy aren’t exactly BFFs and you probably won't see Kelly Tilghman over Tiger's house for dinner. In fact, Tiger released his statement through his agent. The personal touch speaks volumes. Tiger let's his enemies dig their own holes.
Tiger would probably love to see this all blow over. He's got his sites set on another season and wants to crush the latest crop of pretenders who think they can challenege him. Rumor has it Phil Mickelson is healthy and ready to win a couple of majors. Tiger would like nothing more than to humilate him on Sunday. This Tilghman issue is the last thing Tiger needs.
Thanks to Al Shaprton and a shameless cover onGolf Weekly magazine the issue is refusing to go away. Malign Al Sharpton all you like but he made a great point: if somebody had made a similar comment about gassing a Jewish sports figure there would be an international fuss. Kelly Tilghman is getting a bit of a pass partly because nobody watches the Golf Chanel and partly because she’s a sexy white chick.
Some people have gone so far as to ask why the term “lynch” is so offensive. It’s not. The context in which Tilghman used it was. The word “gas” isn’t offensive either. And while it’s true that white people were lynched there is no denying the fact that far too many African Americans were hanged in this crude manner with staggering just forty years ago. It might not have been what you would call common practice but it happened often enough to make “lynch” a pretty inflammatory word. Genocide isn't funny.
And there’s little doubt in my mind that Tilghman did not mean to imply anything malicious. She might be friends with Tiger and in a closed conversation amongst mutual friends far more offensive things might be uttered in jest. Dave Chappelle and Chris Rock make very comfortable livings crafting jokes out of much more offensive commentary. The problem is that Tilghman wasn’t in familiar company and she doesn’t get paid to make jokes. In fact, she gets paid to offer insightful commentary on golf. Jokes aren't in her job description.
Should Tilghman be fired? I think so. It’s not that her remarks are that offensive but when she assumed a position in front of a camera she accepted certain responsibilities and one of them is to have her brain engaged before she runs her mouth. Sports broadcasters have been canned for similar offenses. For me it’s not even a PC issue, it’s about professionalism. People get fired for screwing up at work all the time. Little mistakes are one thing but failing at your core responsibilities is another. We have far too many washed up jocks passing themselves off as experts. Tilghman seems to fit in that category.
The real problem I have is the context of her comment. Not the racially insensitive aspect of it, but the shameless ploy at trying to be funny. I know she was joking but she was trying to rehash a joke Nick Faldo made about younger golfers ganging up on Tiger Woods to take him on. She interjected “lynch him in a back alley”. Is she a golf bimbo? It just seems liek she was reaching for an opportunity to showcase wit that simply isn't there. Clearly Kelly was hired because she has many of the same attributes your local weather girl has. If she’s allowed to return to her position, Tilghman will likely be reminded that short skirts and form-fitting tops are what she is supposed to bring to each broadcast. Other than that, stick with the script and nod when you're lost.
It doesn’t matter whether Tiger took umbrage or not. Tilghman didn’t direct her comment to Tiger, it was made about him. It’s not a personal issue. The thing that troubles me is that we all know this. When you put something out there for the world to hear the world gets to pass judgment. Everybody stands to pay a price for putting a foot in his mouth but that price isn’t consistent. If you make a living in front of a camera chances are you simply can’t afford it.
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
Money Ball
It’s all about the money.
The NCAA crowned its national champion in football with the officially unofficial BCS Championship game. It’s unofficial because at the formerly anointed Division I-a level, bowls are not formally part of the NCAA season.
During bowl season we hear a lot of talk about student athletes. It’s designed to make us feel good about what college football represents. The NCAA would have us believe that these young men are playing football for the love of the game while they better themselves through a well-rounded college education. The reality couldn’t be further from the truth.
Nothing typifies a good thing gone bad like the two teams in the BCS Championship Game. While both Louisiana State University and The Ohio State University both excel on the field both programs leave quite a bit to be desired in the class room. An astonishing number of athletes spend more than four years on campus and yet still fail to obtain a degree and those who graduate seldom do so in a curriculum of any value. Look through the roster of either team and you’ll see a lot of players majoring in things that seem rather vague and quite impractical.
To be fair, successful programs such as Ohio State attract players who are destined to play in the NFL and many choose to leave early. While fans and educators often lament the early departure it’s hard to fault the players for being lured away. They simply want to get paid for their vocation.
You see, once you get to the collegiate level football isn’t always fun. Players are required to juggle a full academic schedule, for whatever its worth, with a full athletic schedule. Officially coaches are limited to the number of hours they can require the so-called student athletes to focus on football but unofficially the players are coerced into participating in voluntary practices and film study sessions led by team captains who report directly to the coaching staff. Even at the high school level athletes know that the term voluntary always comes with quotation marks around it.
Unlike high school, there’s money to be made at the collegiate level. Ohio State generates enough revenue to make a lot of professional franchises jealous and a big reason for the tidy profit is that the players don’t draw salaries. Like the NFL, the NCAA inks hefty television contracts and locally schools are able to negotiate radio rights. Endorsements and sponsorships roll in every year but the players take the field for free. Some equate the scholarship to a salary but when you consider the revenue generated by the NCAA a scholarship is hardly fair compensation.
That’s why the biggest and best programs cheat, and the NCAA lets them. USC encountered a shallow puddle of tepid water when stories of Reggie Bush’s financial arrangements surfaced. Officially the NCAA is investigating but anybody who has followed these investigations knows that findings aren’t always objective and the crimes are often molded to fit the punishment. The NCAA doesn’t want to disrupt its cash flow by putting the screws to a consistently profitable program and USC is the cornerstone of the NCAA’s western market. Don’t count on USC to receive much more than a firm slap on the wrist if anything.
The NCAA gave Ohio State the wink and nudge routine when Maurice Clarett encountered some trouble. Even though the paper trail led right up to Jim Tressel’s office, Ohio State was able to demonstrate plausible deniability and Clarett shouldered the blame for any and all wrong doing. Even though there were credible allegations that Clarett cheated in several classes and was violating NCAA rules when the Buckeyes beat Miami for the 2002 BCS Championship, the NCAA didn’t issue any sanctions that jeopardized the season. Was that because Ohio State was clean, or was it because Ohio State generates millions of dollars in profits for the NCAA?
Tressel, by the way, is no stranger to NCAA infractions. While coaching the Youngstown State Penguins, where he won four Division I-aa national titles, Tressel was part of a pay-to-play scandal. YSU was slapped with a minor sanction for failure to maintain institutional control over certain aspects of the program but other allegations went unexamined. The NCAA did enough to sustain the appearance of propriety.
Tressel’s not alone. Scandals have plagued big programs around the country. Bobby Bowden is notorious for looking the other way, Barry Switzer was effectively run out of the college ranks for blatantly paying his players. Dennis Erickson’s Miami teams were rife with controversy but only the most outlandish violations draw meaningful sanctions from the NCAA. It’s when schools go so far as to embarrass the NCAA that the wrath of the NCAA is felt. As long as an effort is made to maintain the image of propriety, the NCAA will skew its investigations to implicate the players and not the program.
The NCAA is a powerful monopoly. It has conspired with the NFL to prohibit players from pursuing a professional football career until they are at least three seasons removed from their graduations. While the NFL doesn’t officially require players to play three years of college football, what other choice is there?
And choice is the last thing college players have. Once a player commits to a particular school transferring to a more favorable setting is difficult. The NCAA discourages players from transferring by requiring them to sit out a full season. Some provisions make it impossible for a player to pick up a scholarship from another program. On one hand, this discourages players from behaving irrationally and transferring every time they have a problem but the NCAA doesn’t make any distinction in the reasons for transferring. The junior running back that lost his starting job to the next Barry Sanders? The pocket passer who saw the coaches who recruited him fired in favor of some yahoo with a spread offense? The linebacker who was just told to gain 50 pounds and play tackle? Too bad.
Of course the NCAA doesn’t have a problem with coaches who can’t keep commitments. Rich Rodriguez is in good standing in spite of lying about his flirtations with Michigan and then refusing to coach his team in the Fiesta Bowl. Bobby Petrino left the Louisville Cardinals in lurch to pursue an NFL job with the Falcons. Then he left the Falcons high and dry to take over the Arkansas job. If the NCAA is going to allow guys who demonstrate a track record of greed and dishonestly to continue coaching why should the players be restricted in their options. A regular student can transfer at will without penalty. A student who participates in a NCAA sanctioned sport can transfer without restriction but a football player under scholarship has to jump through hoops and sit out a year. Why?
Money. The NCAA knows that an unfettered transfer process would make it impossible for bigger programs to sit on talented players. When Troy Smith won his Heisman trophy his backup was a blue chip recruit who was considered one of the top quarterback prospects in the country. Justin Zwick patiently sat on the bench waiting for his turn and lost the starting job to Smith. The rest is history…much like Zwick’s career. If Zwick could have transferred without penalty to another Division I-a program he might have polished his game in system better suited to his skills and developed into an NFL quarterback. In the end, Zwick stayed put and faded into obscurity but you can bet Ohio State felt pretty good about having a fifth year senior riding the pine behind their star player.
And that’s not Ohio State’s fault. As an Ohio resident and a Buckeye fan I watched Zwick’s career up close. He threw a nice looking ball and had the physical attributes NFL scouts love. Maybe he was missing some of the intangibles or maybe he was mired in a program that doesn’t know how to develop great quarterbacks. Troy Smith might have won the Heisman, but he’s got a long road ahead of him in the NFL and Ohio State isn’t known for producing great signal callers at the next level.
The fact of the matter is that the last thing the NCAA cares about is the student athlete. Everything is in the best interest of money. And the players don’t see a dime. At least not officially.
The NCAA crowned its national champion in football with the officially unofficial BCS Championship game. It’s unofficial because at the formerly anointed Division I-a level, bowls are not formally part of the NCAA season.
During bowl season we hear a lot of talk about student athletes. It’s designed to make us feel good about what college football represents. The NCAA would have us believe that these young men are playing football for the love of the game while they better themselves through a well-rounded college education. The reality couldn’t be further from the truth.
Nothing typifies a good thing gone bad like the two teams in the BCS Championship Game. While both Louisiana State University and The Ohio State University both excel on the field both programs leave quite a bit to be desired in the class room. An astonishing number of athletes spend more than four years on campus and yet still fail to obtain a degree and those who graduate seldom do so in a curriculum of any value. Look through the roster of either team and you’ll see a lot of players majoring in things that seem rather vague and quite impractical.
To be fair, successful programs such as Ohio State attract players who are destined to play in the NFL and many choose to leave early. While fans and educators often lament the early departure it’s hard to fault the players for being lured away. They simply want to get paid for their vocation.
You see, once you get to the collegiate level football isn’t always fun. Players are required to juggle a full academic schedule, for whatever its worth, with a full athletic schedule. Officially coaches are limited to the number of hours they can require the so-called student athletes to focus on football but unofficially the players are coerced into participating in voluntary practices and film study sessions led by team captains who report directly to the coaching staff. Even at the high school level athletes know that the term voluntary always comes with quotation marks around it.
Unlike high school, there’s money to be made at the collegiate level. Ohio State generates enough revenue to make a lot of professional franchises jealous and a big reason for the tidy profit is that the players don’t draw salaries. Like the NFL, the NCAA inks hefty television contracts and locally schools are able to negotiate radio rights. Endorsements and sponsorships roll in every year but the players take the field for free. Some equate the scholarship to a salary but when you consider the revenue generated by the NCAA a scholarship is hardly fair compensation.
That’s why the biggest and best programs cheat, and the NCAA lets them. USC encountered a shallow puddle of tepid water when stories of Reggie Bush’s financial arrangements surfaced. Officially the NCAA is investigating but anybody who has followed these investigations knows that findings aren’t always objective and the crimes are often molded to fit the punishment. The NCAA doesn’t want to disrupt its cash flow by putting the screws to a consistently profitable program and USC is the cornerstone of the NCAA’s western market. Don’t count on USC to receive much more than a firm slap on the wrist if anything.
The NCAA gave Ohio State the wink and nudge routine when Maurice Clarett encountered some trouble. Even though the paper trail led right up to Jim Tressel’s office, Ohio State was able to demonstrate plausible deniability and Clarett shouldered the blame for any and all wrong doing. Even though there were credible allegations that Clarett cheated in several classes and was violating NCAA rules when the Buckeyes beat Miami for the 2002 BCS Championship, the NCAA didn’t issue any sanctions that jeopardized the season. Was that because Ohio State was clean, or was it because Ohio State generates millions of dollars in profits for the NCAA?
Tressel, by the way, is no stranger to NCAA infractions. While coaching the Youngstown State Penguins, where he won four Division I-aa national titles, Tressel was part of a pay-to-play scandal. YSU was slapped with a minor sanction for failure to maintain institutional control over certain aspects of the program but other allegations went unexamined. The NCAA did enough to sustain the appearance of propriety.
Tressel’s not alone. Scandals have plagued big programs around the country. Bobby Bowden is notorious for looking the other way, Barry Switzer was effectively run out of the college ranks for blatantly paying his players. Dennis Erickson’s Miami teams were rife with controversy but only the most outlandish violations draw meaningful sanctions from the NCAA. It’s when schools go so far as to embarrass the NCAA that the wrath of the NCAA is felt. As long as an effort is made to maintain the image of propriety, the NCAA will skew its investigations to implicate the players and not the program.
The NCAA is a powerful monopoly. It has conspired with the NFL to prohibit players from pursuing a professional football career until they are at least three seasons removed from their graduations. While the NFL doesn’t officially require players to play three years of college football, what other choice is there?
And choice is the last thing college players have. Once a player commits to a particular school transferring to a more favorable setting is difficult. The NCAA discourages players from transferring by requiring them to sit out a full season. Some provisions make it impossible for a player to pick up a scholarship from another program. On one hand, this discourages players from behaving irrationally and transferring every time they have a problem but the NCAA doesn’t make any distinction in the reasons for transferring. The junior running back that lost his starting job to the next Barry Sanders? The pocket passer who saw the coaches who recruited him fired in favor of some yahoo with a spread offense? The linebacker who was just told to gain 50 pounds and play tackle? Too bad.
Of course the NCAA doesn’t have a problem with coaches who can’t keep commitments. Rich Rodriguez is in good standing in spite of lying about his flirtations with Michigan and then refusing to coach his team in the Fiesta Bowl. Bobby Petrino left the Louisville Cardinals in lurch to pursue an NFL job with the Falcons. Then he left the Falcons high and dry to take over the Arkansas job. If the NCAA is going to allow guys who demonstrate a track record of greed and dishonestly to continue coaching why should the players be restricted in their options. A regular student can transfer at will without penalty. A student who participates in a NCAA sanctioned sport can transfer without restriction but a football player under scholarship has to jump through hoops and sit out a year. Why?
Money. The NCAA knows that an unfettered transfer process would make it impossible for bigger programs to sit on talented players. When Troy Smith won his Heisman trophy his backup was a blue chip recruit who was considered one of the top quarterback prospects in the country. Justin Zwick patiently sat on the bench waiting for his turn and lost the starting job to Smith. The rest is history…much like Zwick’s career. If Zwick could have transferred without penalty to another Division I-a program he might have polished his game in system better suited to his skills and developed into an NFL quarterback. In the end, Zwick stayed put and faded into obscurity but you can bet Ohio State felt pretty good about having a fifth year senior riding the pine behind their star player.
And that’s not Ohio State’s fault. As an Ohio resident and a Buckeye fan I watched Zwick’s career up close. He threw a nice looking ball and had the physical attributes NFL scouts love. Maybe he was missing some of the intangibles or maybe he was mired in a program that doesn’t know how to develop great quarterbacks. Troy Smith might have won the Heisman, but he’s got a long road ahead of him in the NFL and Ohio State isn’t known for producing great signal callers at the next level.
The fact of the matter is that the last thing the NCAA cares about is the student athlete. Everything is in the best interest of money. And the players don’t see a dime. At least not officially.
Monday, December 10, 2007
So, What Next?
It’s hard to say whether Michael Vick’s 23 month sentence fits the crime or not. On one hand, by legal definition, dogs are simply property. In recent years steps have been taken to enforce animal cruelty legislation but penalties are sometimes laughable. You would face more severe consequences for getting pulled over with a bong in your front seat than you would if you happened to be dragging a dog behind your car.
On one hand, Vick didn’t hurt anybody. He ran an illegal dog fighting ring. The 23 months he was sentenced to serves as punishment for breaking interstate commerce laws. The animal cruelty charges carried minor penalties. Ultimately Vick didn’t commit a crime against another person. He is not a threat to himself or others. So 23 months seems kind of steep, if you’re being objective.
Of course it’s hard to be objective. Like so many people, I too love dogs. It’s really hard for me to dismiss Vicks crimes as victimless when I think about what dog fighting entails. Even if Vick hadn’t been accused of brutally exterminating dogs that didn’t perform to his expectations I would still want to see a sentence of significant duration. Even if Vick walks the straight and narrow in prison the best he can hope for is to trim three months off his sentence. That means he’ll be in prison until the summer of 2009. That’s a long time. Long enough to drive home a powerful message.
I have no doubt that Vick’s days of dabbling in illegal enterprises are over. I have serious doubts as to whether or not I could handle nearly two years of incarceration. That’s a long time to sit in stir. Vick’s punishment, however, goes well beyond the prison sentence. He has become a pariah. He stands to loose millions of dollars while he is in prison while former employers and sponsors seek to recoup money paid to Vick in good faith that he would remain a respectable spokesman. Vick could emerge from prison carrying substantial debt with no means to earn an income sufficient to recoup his losses. The NFL is not obliged to reinstate him and even if he does get a nod from Commissioner Roger Goodell, Vick will not command a high salary.
The question is whether or not this is worthwhile. Vick’s punishment is fair provided it helps discourage the underground activity of dog fighting. If the Federal Court pursues less recognizable practitioners with similar zeal we might take a big step toward putting an end to the brutal endeavor. If the Court continues to treat low profile suspects with kid gloves then Vick’s punishment is nothing but window dressing and it will prove to be horrible unfair and arbitrarily punitive.
Michael Vick’s received his punishment. He is on his way to paying his debt to society. Now it’s time to let Michael Vick go about the business of earning a second chance. Rather than worrying about what will happen when Vick gets out of prison we need to focus on the criminal justice system. Was this just a good show for the cameras?
On one hand, Vick didn’t hurt anybody. He ran an illegal dog fighting ring. The 23 months he was sentenced to serves as punishment for breaking interstate commerce laws. The animal cruelty charges carried minor penalties. Ultimately Vick didn’t commit a crime against another person. He is not a threat to himself or others. So 23 months seems kind of steep, if you’re being objective.
Of course it’s hard to be objective. Like so many people, I too love dogs. It’s really hard for me to dismiss Vicks crimes as victimless when I think about what dog fighting entails. Even if Vick hadn’t been accused of brutally exterminating dogs that didn’t perform to his expectations I would still want to see a sentence of significant duration. Even if Vick walks the straight and narrow in prison the best he can hope for is to trim three months off his sentence. That means he’ll be in prison until the summer of 2009. That’s a long time. Long enough to drive home a powerful message.
I have no doubt that Vick’s days of dabbling in illegal enterprises are over. I have serious doubts as to whether or not I could handle nearly two years of incarceration. That’s a long time to sit in stir. Vick’s punishment, however, goes well beyond the prison sentence. He has become a pariah. He stands to loose millions of dollars while he is in prison while former employers and sponsors seek to recoup money paid to Vick in good faith that he would remain a respectable spokesman. Vick could emerge from prison carrying substantial debt with no means to earn an income sufficient to recoup his losses. The NFL is not obliged to reinstate him and even if he does get a nod from Commissioner Roger Goodell, Vick will not command a high salary.
The question is whether or not this is worthwhile. Vick’s punishment is fair provided it helps discourage the underground activity of dog fighting. If the Federal Court pursues less recognizable practitioners with similar zeal we might take a big step toward putting an end to the brutal endeavor. If the Court continues to treat low profile suspects with kid gloves then Vick’s punishment is nothing but window dressing and it will prove to be horrible unfair and arbitrarily punitive.
Michael Vick’s received his punishment. He is on his way to paying his debt to society. Now it’s time to let Michael Vick go about the business of earning a second chance. Rather than worrying about what will happen when Vick gets out of prison we need to focus on the criminal justice system. Was this just a good show for the cameras?
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
In the Name of God
The Golden Compass is the first book in the controversial His Dark Materials trilogy, by Phillip Pullman. The film adaptation, starring Daniel Craig and Nicole Kidman, will be coming to theaters this December. Even though nobody has had a chance to screen the movie conservative Christian groups such as the Catholic League have gone on the offensive. Bill Donohue, the Grand Inquisitor of the Catholic League is furious because Pullman is allegedly a “militant atheist” who penned his trilogy to encourage impressionable teens to question their faith. Even if the movie softens its content to deal with more abstract conventions, Donohue maintains that it will draw readers to the books where Pullman’s viscous agenda is unchecked by Hollywood executives.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, disagrees. He read the trilogy and met with Phillip Pullman. Dr. Williams sees the books as a direct challenge to dogmatism. While Pullman formally identifies himself as a humanist, he does not have an axe to grind with religion in general but the power structure within organized religion that utilizes fear to instill a sense of conformity and compliance. That’s actually a pretty common trait among atheists and agnostics.
In 1999, Kevin Smith released a brilliant exploration into his own religious background. Smith, a Catholic, examined his faith with a satirical eye and delved into the roots of spirituality. The result was a hilariously clever but poignant movie entitled Dogma. Before Dogma was even released Bill Donohue and his minions were out in force protesting the release of the film and demanding boycotts. Ultimately Smith’s film was not an indictment of religion so much as it was man’s ability to corrupt it. Kevin Smith rarely pulls punches with his writing, and casting Chris Rock as the voice of reason made it difficult for a lot of people to absorb the message but in the end Dogma lets God off the hook and indicts man for the flaws in religion. Of course most of the people who could keep the vulgar content of the movie in perspective and actually get the point were lost when they saw who Smith cast in the role of God.
The problem with people like Donohue is that they refuse to open their minds. It’s OK for Mel Gibson to rake in millions of dollars by cashing in on Christ but the minute somebody challenges the authority of organized religion they call for boycotts. These people behave like spoiled children, throwing monumental tantrums whenever anything doesn’t go their way. There’s no civility or respect, just pigheaded protests. Donohue sometimes goes beyond acts of civil disobedience filing lawsuits and even employing borderline criminal intimidation tactics to force people to comply with his agenda.
Ironically, Donohue is a perfect example of religion gone bad. He’s a blustering, beet-faced bully who spends so much time preaching from on high he doesn’t see the fact that he is the problem. Donohue is all about money, power and control…which is exactly what Jesus took issue with when he threw the merchants out of the temple.
Donohue doesn’t practice Christianity as defined by Jesus. He embodies the sort of imperialistic dogmatism that stigmatizes organized religion. Donohue’s Catholicism protects pedophiles from the criminal justice system because the Church must appear infallible. Donohue’s Catholicism has a high powered legal team. Donohue’s Catholicism spends more time waging a war on the way people express their holiday wishes rather than simply expressing his. Here’s an idea: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you. Ring a bell? Jesus approached those who denied him with open arms; Donohue, and his ilk, does it with a clenched fist.
The Golden Compass is not an attack on faith at all, it’s a critique of those who exploit faith for personal gain. For centuries religion has been used to control and oppress people. Its purpose was to consolidate power within the confines of the Church hierarchy. The reason Donohue and the Catholic League take it so personally is because no religious institution has been so corrupt for so long. That’s not an indictment of Catholics, most of whom are wonderful people; the problem is with executive branch of the Church headquartered in Rome. For more than a thousand years the Vatican has positioned itself in front of God. Critics of Catholicism believe that Catholics actually worship the Pope and for a number of years that was the case. This is why old school Catholics, like Donohue, refuse to acknowledge the fallibility in their own religion. If the Vatican is flawed so is the entire religion. It’s hard to find another religion that has been so successful at putting God’s reputed power in the hands of a few men. When it happens on a smaller scale, society calls it a cult.
That’s what makes religion dangerous. When people suspend rationality and put their faith in a dogma created by man rather than spiritual concepts they become slaves to dogmatism. That is the basis of atheism. The problem isn’t with God, it’s with man. The Golden Compass is the latest installment of an exploration into the nature of religion. It’s going to ask questions and challenge conventions. If that makes you uneasy you’re on the wrong spiritual path.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, disagrees. He read the trilogy and met with Phillip Pullman. Dr. Williams sees the books as a direct challenge to dogmatism. While Pullman formally identifies himself as a humanist, he does not have an axe to grind with religion in general but the power structure within organized religion that utilizes fear to instill a sense of conformity and compliance. That’s actually a pretty common trait among atheists and agnostics.
In 1999, Kevin Smith released a brilliant exploration into his own religious background. Smith, a Catholic, examined his faith with a satirical eye and delved into the roots of spirituality. The result was a hilariously clever but poignant movie entitled Dogma. Before Dogma was even released Bill Donohue and his minions were out in force protesting the release of the film and demanding boycotts. Ultimately Smith’s film was not an indictment of religion so much as it was man’s ability to corrupt it. Kevin Smith rarely pulls punches with his writing, and casting Chris Rock as the voice of reason made it difficult for a lot of people to absorb the message but in the end Dogma lets God off the hook and indicts man for the flaws in religion. Of course most of the people who could keep the vulgar content of the movie in perspective and actually get the point were lost when they saw who Smith cast in the role of God.
The problem with people like Donohue is that they refuse to open their minds. It’s OK for Mel Gibson to rake in millions of dollars by cashing in on Christ but the minute somebody challenges the authority of organized religion they call for boycotts. These people behave like spoiled children, throwing monumental tantrums whenever anything doesn’t go their way. There’s no civility or respect, just pigheaded protests. Donohue sometimes goes beyond acts of civil disobedience filing lawsuits and even employing borderline criminal intimidation tactics to force people to comply with his agenda.
Ironically, Donohue is a perfect example of religion gone bad. He’s a blustering, beet-faced bully who spends so much time preaching from on high he doesn’t see the fact that he is the problem. Donohue is all about money, power and control…which is exactly what Jesus took issue with when he threw the merchants out of the temple.
Donohue doesn’t practice Christianity as defined by Jesus. He embodies the sort of imperialistic dogmatism that stigmatizes organized religion. Donohue’s Catholicism protects pedophiles from the criminal justice system because the Church must appear infallible. Donohue’s Catholicism has a high powered legal team. Donohue’s Catholicism spends more time waging a war on the way people express their holiday wishes rather than simply expressing his. Here’s an idea: Do unto others as you would have others do unto you. Ring a bell? Jesus approached those who denied him with open arms; Donohue, and his ilk, does it with a clenched fist.
The Golden Compass is not an attack on faith at all, it’s a critique of those who exploit faith for personal gain. For centuries religion has been used to control and oppress people. Its purpose was to consolidate power within the confines of the Church hierarchy. The reason Donohue and the Catholic League take it so personally is because no religious institution has been so corrupt for so long. That’s not an indictment of Catholics, most of whom are wonderful people; the problem is with executive branch of the Church headquartered in Rome. For more than a thousand years the Vatican has positioned itself in front of God. Critics of Catholicism believe that Catholics actually worship the Pope and for a number of years that was the case. This is why old school Catholics, like Donohue, refuse to acknowledge the fallibility in their own religion. If the Vatican is flawed so is the entire religion. It’s hard to find another religion that has been so successful at putting God’s reputed power in the hands of a few men. When it happens on a smaller scale, society calls it a cult.
That’s what makes religion dangerous. When people suspend rationality and put their faith in a dogma created by man rather than spiritual concepts they become slaves to dogmatism. That is the basis of atheism. The problem isn’t with God, it’s with man. The Golden Compass is the latest installment of an exploration into the nature of religion. It’s going to ask questions and challenge conventions. If that makes you uneasy you’re on the wrong spiritual path.
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Due Process Compromised by Political Aspirations
Shameless self promotion and justice don't mix.
In spite of its many flaws our criminal justice system is superior to most around the world because of the presumption of innocence. Until a person pleads or is proven guilty they are presumed to be innocent. While the court of public opinion is willing to take an arresting officer at his word the court of law cannot.
In the grand scheme of things a misdemeanor charge of solicitation is not a big deal. Greater crimes are committed every day and one could make the case that prostitution is a victimless crime that really isn’t worth fighting. Why invest all that money in vice when those crimes generally involve consenting adults?
Prostitution rarely entails jail time. Public interests simply aren’t served when tax dollars are spent feeding and housing people who buy or sell sex. These cases are of such little importance most prosecutors amend the charges to petty offenses such as disorderly conduct. Small fines are paid and people are sent on their way.
Antonio Henton is a promising young football player for the Ohio State Buckeyes. He’s a third string quarterback who has athletic ability reminiscent of Heisman Trophy winner Troy Smith. Most people around the country haven’t heard of him because he doesn’t play but in the microcosm that is Columbus he is a celebrity. So when Antonio tried to solicit sex from an undercover officer late one September evening the ensuing arrest was big news.
In Columbus police often practice a catch and release tactic when it comes to vice. A wayward man will get caught trying to close a deal for a 20 dollar holler and spend 15 minutes wearing handcuffs in the back of a squad car while the police run his criminal record and humiliate him. If he’s got no priors and seems sufficiently deterred from future indiscretions they’ll let him go. No need to ruin a guy’s life over a blow job.
Not too long ago Columbus vice officers busted a full service upscale brothel just outside of downtown. Much ado was made over the operation which had been infiltrated and tracked for months. It was reported that the clients who visited the brothel were high profile businessmen and public figures in the area but prosecutors decided to drop charges against all parties except for the brothel’s owner, Tamara Flory. She was sentenced to a few months in prison and released to probation for the next several years.
So precedent has been set. Prostitution is no big deal but yet Antonio Henton was arrested and it qualified as breaking news. Local channels interrupted regular programming with a crawl that announced Henton’s arrest and temporary incarceration. He spent the night in jail and was arraigned the next morning. That’s where things took an interesting turn.
The only place a person should expect justice is in the court room. The general public will jump to conclusions, police will make mistakes and the media will sensationalize a story to draw more viewers to the 11 o’clock broadcast of the local news. The court is the only place where judgment is not passed until justice is served and the judge is the only person who can see it through. We elect judges to be fair and impartial when others are not.
Amy Salerno is the judge who presided over Antonio Henton’s arraignment. Not surprisingly Henton entered a plea of not guilty and requested bail. Instead of recording the plea and advising Henton of his obligations Salerno lambasted the young college student with an opportunistic diatribe that one can only assume she labored over until the wee hours.
"Mr. Henton: I have to tell you sir that I and many fans and graduates of Ohio State University are very disappointed to see you here today in my courtroom. Considering, sir, the fact that you are an ambassador of Ohio State University; your visibility in the community, you need to keep that in mind, sir. "As well as the fact that you need to show up at court and henceforth you need to conduct yourself and comport your actions according to your status in the community, sir. "I can tell, sir, your head is hung down and you're looking extremely sad. I know you do not wish to disappoint your team members either, sir. I will give you a $2,500 cash or surety bond or appearance bond. Gook luck, sir, both off and on the field. Thank You."
It was a fine lecture and perfectly appropriate if Henton had entered a guilty plea but given the fact that a defendant is supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, Salerno’s comments were out of line. In fact, Salerno’s comments seem prejudicial and might very well serve to compromise the prosecution’s case. How can Henton expect a fair trial when his arraigning judge opted to address him in such an inappropriate and unprecedented manner? It would not be surprising to see the case get dismissed before the trial date and if Henton is found guilty it could be overturned on appeal. Salerno should know better.
I’ve been in a courtroom. Like Henton I was arrested for a first degree misdemeanor. Unlike Henton I was able to post bond within minutes and spent only a few hours locked up where as Henton spent the night in a cell and reported to his arraignment in prison garb and handcuffs. I was able to plead not guilty in a shirt and a tie. I did not speak to a judge not did a judge address me. I entered my plea with a paralegal who handed me a paper outlining the rest of the process. While I wasn’t facing charges of soliciting I was sitting next to a man who was and he received the same treatment. So I personally think that Henton was given undue attention given the nature of the charges but I’m not a judge or an attorney so I can’t attest to it from a legal perspective. I just know my experience did not include a lecture from the judge. To be honest, I was disappointed with the assembly line manner in which everything was handled.
Even if Henton’s arraignment wasn’t out of line, the manner in which Salerno addressed him was. It resembled a closing statement after a guilty verdict. Licking County Common Pleas Judge P. Randall Knece agreed in a response to Columbus Dispatch columnist Ann Fisher’s column on the matter. The full text of his email can be read on her blog.
Salerno’s comments reveal a serious problem with our criminal justice system. Salerno is a career politician. She has been walking the streets of Columbus politics for the better part of 25 years. When she realized a prominent Ohio State athlete was on her morning docket she smelled opportunity so she loaded up those Law and Order DVDs and stayed up all night practicing her landmark statement. The only problem is that is was completely out of line for the context of that case. She laid on the heavy drama and played to the cameras, which are a rare fixture in the Franklin County Courthouse, hoping to mine that soapbox moment in November. It was a clear cut case of premature judicial ejaculation. Salerno got all excited about a high profile case and shot her legal wad all over the arraignment. Gross? You bet…a gross miscarriage of justice.
When former Ohio State superstar Maurice Clarett faced the much more severe charges of armed robbery an carrying a concealed weapon his judge didn’t go out of his way to enter a sobering statement during the arraignment. In fact, Maurice didn’t hear such strong words after he accepted a plea and faced sentencing. What compelled Salerno to make such a scene in a much less important setting?
Henton isn’t a menace to society and his crime has no victims. If Salerno sabotaged the case with her ego and Henton goes free people can still sleep at night. If Salerno’s comments end up sealing Henton’s fate and he is found guilty he’ll pay a few hundred dollars in fines and court costs and be on his merry way. The problem isn’t what Salerno did to Henton. The problem is that Salerno has made it clear that our criminal justice system is fragile and that a rogue judge with an agenda can easily compromise the one principal that sets our system apart. Can we trust a judge like Salerno to handle more serious crimes? In the end, Salerno is guilty of a much more severe crime than that which Henton is accused of. We’re fortunate the charges weren’t more severe.
Innocent until proven guilty? It’s not supposed to be conditional.
In the grand scheme of things a misdemeanor charge of solicitation is not a big deal. Greater crimes are committed every day and one could make the case that prostitution is a victimless crime that really isn’t worth fighting. Why invest all that money in vice when those crimes generally involve consenting adults?
Prostitution rarely entails jail time. Public interests simply aren’t served when tax dollars are spent feeding and housing people who buy or sell sex. These cases are of such little importance most prosecutors amend the charges to petty offenses such as disorderly conduct. Small fines are paid and people are sent on their way.
Antonio Henton is a promising young football player for the Ohio State Buckeyes. He’s a third string quarterback who has athletic ability reminiscent of Heisman Trophy winner Troy Smith. Most people around the country haven’t heard of him because he doesn’t play but in the microcosm that is Columbus he is a celebrity. So when Antonio tried to solicit sex from an undercover officer late one September evening the ensuing arrest was big news.
In Columbus police often practice a catch and release tactic when it comes to vice. A wayward man will get caught trying to close a deal for a 20 dollar holler and spend 15 minutes wearing handcuffs in the back of a squad car while the police run his criminal record and humiliate him. If he’s got no priors and seems sufficiently deterred from future indiscretions they’ll let him go. No need to ruin a guy’s life over a blow job.
Not too long ago Columbus vice officers busted a full service upscale brothel just outside of downtown. Much ado was made over the operation which had been infiltrated and tracked for months. It was reported that the clients who visited the brothel were high profile businessmen and public figures in the area but prosecutors decided to drop charges against all parties except for the brothel’s owner, Tamara Flory. She was sentenced to a few months in prison and released to probation for the next several years.
So precedent has been set. Prostitution is no big deal but yet Antonio Henton was arrested and it qualified as breaking news. Local channels interrupted regular programming with a crawl that announced Henton’s arrest and temporary incarceration. He spent the night in jail and was arraigned the next morning. That’s where things took an interesting turn.
The only place a person should expect justice is in the court room. The general public will jump to conclusions, police will make mistakes and the media will sensationalize a story to draw more viewers to the 11 o’clock broadcast of the local news. The court is the only place where judgment is not passed until justice is served and the judge is the only person who can see it through. We elect judges to be fair and impartial when others are not.
Amy Salerno is the judge who presided over Antonio Henton’s arraignment. Not surprisingly Henton entered a plea of not guilty and requested bail. Instead of recording the plea and advising Henton of his obligations Salerno lambasted the young college student with an opportunistic diatribe that one can only assume she labored over until the wee hours.
"Mr. Henton: I have to tell you sir that I and many fans and graduates of Ohio State University are very disappointed to see you here today in my courtroom. Considering, sir, the fact that you are an ambassador of Ohio State University; your visibility in the community, you need to keep that in mind, sir. "As well as the fact that you need to show up at court and henceforth you need to conduct yourself and comport your actions according to your status in the community, sir. "I can tell, sir, your head is hung down and you're looking extremely sad. I know you do not wish to disappoint your team members either, sir. I will give you a $2,500 cash or surety bond or appearance bond. Gook luck, sir, both off and on the field. Thank You."
It was a fine lecture and perfectly appropriate if Henton had entered a guilty plea but given the fact that a defendant is supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, Salerno’s comments were out of line. In fact, Salerno’s comments seem prejudicial and might very well serve to compromise the prosecution’s case. How can Henton expect a fair trial when his arraigning judge opted to address him in such an inappropriate and unprecedented manner? It would not be surprising to see the case get dismissed before the trial date and if Henton is found guilty it could be overturned on appeal. Salerno should know better.
I’ve been in a courtroom. Like Henton I was arrested for a first degree misdemeanor. Unlike Henton I was able to post bond within minutes and spent only a few hours locked up where as Henton spent the night in a cell and reported to his arraignment in prison garb and handcuffs. I was able to plead not guilty in a shirt and a tie. I did not speak to a judge not did a judge address me. I entered my plea with a paralegal who handed me a paper outlining the rest of the process. While I wasn’t facing charges of soliciting I was sitting next to a man who was and he received the same treatment. So I personally think that Henton was given undue attention given the nature of the charges but I’m not a judge or an attorney so I can’t attest to it from a legal perspective. I just know my experience did not include a lecture from the judge. To be honest, I was disappointed with the assembly line manner in which everything was handled.
Even if Henton’s arraignment wasn’t out of line, the manner in which Salerno addressed him was. It resembled a closing statement after a guilty verdict. Licking County Common Pleas Judge P. Randall Knece agreed in a response to Columbus Dispatch columnist Ann Fisher’s column on the matter. The full text of his email can be read on her blog.
Salerno’s comments reveal a serious problem with our criminal justice system. Salerno is a career politician. She has been walking the streets of Columbus politics for the better part of 25 years. When she realized a prominent Ohio State athlete was on her morning docket she smelled opportunity so she loaded up those Law and Order DVDs and stayed up all night practicing her landmark statement. The only problem is that is was completely out of line for the context of that case. She laid on the heavy drama and played to the cameras, which are a rare fixture in the Franklin County Courthouse, hoping to mine that soapbox moment in November. It was a clear cut case of premature judicial ejaculation. Salerno got all excited about a high profile case and shot her legal wad all over the arraignment. Gross? You bet…a gross miscarriage of justice.
When former Ohio State superstar Maurice Clarett faced the much more severe charges of armed robbery an carrying a concealed weapon his judge didn’t go out of his way to enter a sobering statement during the arraignment. In fact, Maurice didn’t hear such strong words after he accepted a plea and faced sentencing. What compelled Salerno to make such a scene in a much less important setting?
Henton isn’t a menace to society and his crime has no victims. If Salerno sabotaged the case with her ego and Henton goes free people can still sleep at night. If Salerno’s comments end up sealing Henton’s fate and he is found guilty he’ll pay a few hundred dollars in fines and court costs and be on his merry way. The problem isn’t what Salerno did to Henton. The problem is that Salerno has made it clear that our criminal justice system is fragile and that a rogue judge with an agenda can easily compromise the one principal that sets our system apart. Can we trust a judge like Salerno to handle more serious crimes? In the end, Salerno is guilty of a much more severe crime than that which Henton is accused of. We’re fortunate the charges weren’t more severe.
Innocent until proven guilty? It’s not supposed to be conditional.
Friday, September 28, 2007
The Great Racial Divide
Republican pundits often complain that minorities, particular African Americans, are tricked into believing that the Democrats have their best interests at heart. They counter that the Democratic Party has made the African American community dependent on handouts and softened standards that make it impossible for minorities to compete in the open market. It’s an interesting point, inherently flawed but undeniably interesting.
Most minority groups believe that Republicans just don’t care about their needs. Colin Powell once criticized the Republican Party for wanting to tell African Americans what they need rather than engage African American leaders in a discussion about what they want. And the truth is that the social programs Democrats have tried to implement fail because Republicans are consistently trying to dismantle them. Rather than offering some ideas on how to build upon affirmative action and use it to achieve true progress, Republican want to tear it down and let the open market dictate social progress. The problem is that we have already been there…it was called segregation.
Minority leaders insist that they are not biased against Republicans at all; the problem is that the Republican Party ignores them. This point was driven home Thursday night at the All-American Presidential Forum at Morgan State University. The debate was intended to showcase Republican candidates addressing issues important to the African American community. The top four Republican candidates declined to attend. According to moderator Tavis Smiley, some of the campaigns declined to participate because the crowd was expected to be hostile and unreceptive but the official excuse for skipping the event was scheduling conflicts.
Fred Thompson, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney were all busy raising money for their respective campaigns. Of course the six candidates who did show played to the crowd and took their shots at the front runners but Newt Gringrich even called them out stating that the invitations for the debate were sent out in March providing every candidate with ample opportunity to make proper arrangements. The four Republican front runners also skipped a forum earlier this summer hosted by the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials.
While everybody acknowledges that the African American community is not likely to support a Republican candidate anytime soon, the snub drives home the point that Republicans just don’t care. Former Representative J.C. Watts, a rare African American Republican, characterized the decision not to participate as stupid and said that it reinforces the belief that race is an issue with most Republican candidates. The White House even released a statement reiterating the importance of reaching out to every community.
So why would these front running candidates have the audacity to skip such an event? The simple fact of the matter is that the heart and soul of the Republican Party is the angry white male. Listen to the pundits. Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter all rail against minority groups and the programs that are designed to help them. In 2000 Karl Rove sabotaged John McCain’s campaign by calling registered Republican voters in the south and informing them that McCain was father to a biracial child. It was true that McCain had adopted a child from Asia but the implication was that McCain had a black child and McCain was slaughtered in the primaries. Republicans sell traditional values, which means life as it was before the Civil Rights movement. Yes the good old days when the blacks were at the back of the bus, the women were in the kitchen and it was perfectly legal to run queers out of town.
As much as the Republican Party wants to play up the big tent image, the money is coming from white people with white issues on their minds. Republicans don’t care about minorities. This recent snub proves it.
Most minority groups believe that Republicans just don’t care about their needs. Colin Powell once criticized the Republican Party for wanting to tell African Americans what they need rather than engage African American leaders in a discussion about what they want. And the truth is that the social programs Democrats have tried to implement fail because Republicans are consistently trying to dismantle them. Rather than offering some ideas on how to build upon affirmative action and use it to achieve true progress, Republican want to tear it down and let the open market dictate social progress. The problem is that we have already been there…it was called segregation.
Minority leaders insist that they are not biased against Republicans at all; the problem is that the Republican Party ignores them. This point was driven home Thursday night at the All-American Presidential Forum at Morgan State University. The debate was intended to showcase Republican candidates addressing issues important to the African American community. The top four Republican candidates declined to attend. According to moderator Tavis Smiley, some of the campaigns declined to participate because the crowd was expected to be hostile and unreceptive but the official excuse for skipping the event was scheduling conflicts.
Fred Thompson, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney were all busy raising money for their respective campaigns. Of course the six candidates who did show played to the crowd and took their shots at the front runners but Newt Gringrich even called them out stating that the invitations for the debate were sent out in March providing every candidate with ample opportunity to make proper arrangements. The four Republican front runners also skipped a forum earlier this summer hosted by the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials.
While everybody acknowledges that the African American community is not likely to support a Republican candidate anytime soon, the snub drives home the point that Republicans just don’t care. Former Representative J.C. Watts, a rare African American Republican, characterized the decision not to participate as stupid and said that it reinforces the belief that race is an issue with most Republican candidates. The White House even released a statement reiterating the importance of reaching out to every community.
So why would these front running candidates have the audacity to skip such an event? The simple fact of the matter is that the heart and soul of the Republican Party is the angry white male. Listen to the pundits. Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter all rail against minority groups and the programs that are designed to help them. In 2000 Karl Rove sabotaged John McCain’s campaign by calling registered Republican voters in the south and informing them that McCain was father to a biracial child. It was true that McCain had adopted a child from Asia but the implication was that McCain had a black child and McCain was slaughtered in the primaries. Republicans sell traditional values, which means life as it was before the Civil Rights movement. Yes the good old days when the blacks were at the back of the bus, the women were in the kitchen and it was perfectly legal to run queers out of town.
As much as the Republican Party wants to play up the big tent image, the money is coming from white people with white issues on their minds. Republicans don’t care about minorities. This recent snub proves it.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
McNabb Exposes harsh reality of NFL
Donovan McNabb struck a nerve when he admitted to Bryant Gumbel that he believes black quarterbacks face greater scrutiny than their white counterparts. The story broke before Tuesday’s broadcast of HBO’s Real Sport with Bryant Gumbel was aired but the full context of the interview won’t soften the blow. McNabb’s revelation is polarizing.
Not too long ago Rush Limbaugh took a shot at McNabb’s popularity asserting that the Eagles QB got more credit than he deserved. In what can only be described as an opiate-induced haze Limbaugh stated that the media was “desirous” that a black quarterback do well. Never mind the fact that Warren Moon had already done that. Rush was rightfully sent packing by ESPN and narrowly missed a thorough ass-kicking by NFL Primetime co commentator Tommy Jackson.
McNabb deftly avoided the issue. He chose to take the high road and play football which won the respect of many. He showed the same poise when the infectious Terrell Owens decided to take personal shots at his quarterback. Now people will see McNabb as a whiner who wants to blame racism for his recent on-field struggles.
But lost in the controversy is the fact that what McNabb is saying is true. Even if it’s not a conscientious disparity, there is no question that black quarterbacks have a much tougher row to hoe in the NFL. Gone are the days when teams overtly denied black quarterbacks an opportunity to play, but that window of opportunity seems much smaller. White quarterbacks appear to have a much greater margin of error and teams seem more willing to identify themselves with a white quarterback.
McNabb sees a league dominated by black athletes but only six teams have black starting quarterbacks. McNabb sees a league that celebrates aging white quarterbacks as warriors while black quarterbacks who lose a step are cut without a second thought. Steve McNair was unceremoniously let go by Tennessee because the Titans had questions about his durability, which had been compromised by the team’s refusal to build a quality offense around the former MVP.
McNabb is in a similar position. Like McNair he’s a true pocket passer who can extend plays with his remarkable athletic ability. Instead of scampering downfield at the first sign of pressure, McNabb moves around behind the line of scrimmage looking for an open receiver. The result can be remarkable and his ability has allowed Philadelphia to eschew traditional concerns such as shoring up the offensive line and developing a consistent rushing attack. Unfortunately this strategy results in the QB taking more punishment. McNabb has had two seasons derailed by injuries. He tried to play through a hernia in 2005 and in 2006 he sustained a severe knee injury that will haunt him throughout the 2007 season.
In spite of all he has done, the Eagles drafted a quarterback in the 2007 draft. Instead of acquiring a quality receiver, a power running back or a few solid offensive linemen the Eagles opted to send McNabb a message: his days are numbered. Unfortunately with the talent around him McNabb’s chances to succeed are limited.
McNabb knows this. He sees his white counterparts around the league getting help. A few hundred miles up the road Tom Brady threw a tantrum over the quality of his offense and Bob Kraft went out and found receivers for him. Instead of getting blamed for his teams struggles, people gave Brady a pass and agreed that his productivity was compromised by mediocre receivers. Now the Patriots look unbeatable.
McNabb is taking the blame for the failures of his team. If he complained about the talent around him people would label him a whiner and the Eagles would be eager to cut him loose. When Tom Brady goes to management and complains about the state of his team, he’s being a leader but if a black man does the same thing he’s selfish.
Nothing typifies the disparity like Brett Favre. People adore him but the Packers are terrible and Favre’s “gunslinger” antics don’t help. As likeable as he is, Favre is reckless and he’s lost more games with his questionable sense of judgment than he has won with his rocket arm. When asked if he plans to take it down a notch and play more conservatively Favre bristles at the notion and insists that he’s always going to be a gunslinger. It makes for a great story but the reality is that Favre is a mediocre quarterback who puts himself above the team. Sure he’s tough but he’s also rather stupid at times.
Imagine if Favre was black. Would the Packers have played his game in the off season? Would he still be a media darling after capitulating about retirement for an entire off season? The answer is no. The Packers would have replaced him as the starter five years ago if Favre was black.
You can’t compare McNabb to Peyton Manning but a couple of years ago Manning lambasted his offensive line after a dismal playoff performance. Even though people felt his public rant was out of line the criticism wasn’t as severe as it would have been if Manning was black. His brother Eli wasn’t characterized as a petulant prima donna when he refused to sign with the Chargers but if Eli was a few shades darker you can bet it would still be an issue and you can bet the Giants would be less inclined to work through his growing pains.
A great example of this double standard occurred during the 2007 draft. Throughout the process scouts thoroughly examined Brady Quinn and Troy Smith. Quinn was criticized for not playing exceptionally well against top-ranked teams. Smith was haunted by a humiliating performance in the BCS Championship game. Both players skipped portions of the scouting combine and dictated the audition process by holding private workouts.
Smith was often questioned about his height and reportedly got testy about the subject causing many to speculate that his attitude was the reason for his slide in the draft. Still, Brady Quinn was bigger news because he slipped from the top five to the 22nd pick. If Troy Smith had been white would he have fallen so far? Drew Brees struggled with many of the same issues but he was drafted in the second round. Smith waited until the second day.
The problem is that you can’t prove that race is involved. It could simply be coincidence but when it comes to these matters perception is reality. A white fan looks around the league and sees a different situation than a black fan. A white fans sees six black head coaches and thinks it’s a fair representation of our country’s racial balance. A black fan sees all of the black players in the league and wonders why so many are denied coaching opportunities.
Donovan McNabb stepped on a lot of toes when he spoke from the heart but if you look at it from his perspective he makes a valid point. He has been harshly criticized over the years. He led the Eagles to the Super Bowl only to have credit for that feat stolen by Terrell Owens who didn’t even suit up during the playoffs. It was McNabb who led the team to the Super Bowl and McNabb who threw for more than 300 yards but as a team the Eagles fell short. Instead of questioning Andy Reid’s game plan, mistake prone receivers and a confused defense, people focused on McNabb. They questioned his competitive spirit.
Peyton Manning endured similar questions but not to that degree. The focus on McNabb has always seemed malicious. Part of that is the idiotic nature of Philadelphia sports fans. Part of it is because for every legitimate critic there’s a racially biased moron rubbing salt on the wounds. Also, many people are racists without even knowing it. Much of the criticism might be the manifestation of latent racism. Nevertheless, the Colts didn’t demonstrate a lack of faith in Peyton Manning by spending their first pick in the draft on a promising young quarterback, the Colts went out and found people to help Manning get over that championship hump.
McNabb’s right, race is a big factor in the NFL and now that he’s gone out on a limb and said so, we’ll see just how awful it is.
Not too long ago Rush Limbaugh took a shot at McNabb’s popularity asserting that the Eagles QB got more credit than he deserved. In what can only be described as an opiate-induced haze Limbaugh stated that the media was “desirous” that a black quarterback do well. Never mind the fact that Warren Moon had already done that. Rush was rightfully sent packing by ESPN and narrowly missed a thorough ass-kicking by NFL Primetime co commentator Tommy Jackson.
McNabb deftly avoided the issue. He chose to take the high road and play football which won the respect of many. He showed the same poise when the infectious Terrell Owens decided to take personal shots at his quarterback. Now people will see McNabb as a whiner who wants to blame racism for his recent on-field struggles.
But lost in the controversy is the fact that what McNabb is saying is true. Even if it’s not a conscientious disparity, there is no question that black quarterbacks have a much tougher row to hoe in the NFL. Gone are the days when teams overtly denied black quarterbacks an opportunity to play, but that window of opportunity seems much smaller. White quarterbacks appear to have a much greater margin of error and teams seem more willing to identify themselves with a white quarterback.
McNabb sees a league dominated by black athletes but only six teams have black starting quarterbacks. McNabb sees a league that celebrates aging white quarterbacks as warriors while black quarterbacks who lose a step are cut without a second thought. Steve McNair was unceremoniously let go by Tennessee because the Titans had questions about his durability, which had been compromised by the team’s refusal to build a quality offense around the former MVP.
McNabb is in a similar position. Like McNair he’s a true pocket passer who can extend plays with his remarkable athletic ability. Instead of scampering downfield at the first sign of pressure, McNabb moves around behind the line of scrimmage looking for an open receiver. The result can be remarkable and his ability has allowed Philadelphia to eschew traditional concerns such as shoring up the offensive line and developing a consistent rushing attack. Unfortunately this strategy results in the QB taking more punishment. McNabb has had two seasons derailed by injuries. He tried to play through a hernia in 2005 and in 2006 he sustained a severe knee injury that will haunt him throughout the 2007 season.
In spite of all he has done, the Eagles drafted a quarterback in the 2007 draft. Instead of acquiring a quality receiver, a power running back or a few solid offensive linemen the Eagles opted to send McNabb a message: his days are numbered. Unfortunately with the talent around him McNabb’s chances to succeed are limited.
McNabb knows this. He sees his white counterparts around the league getting help. A few hundred miles up the road Tom Brady threw a tantrum over the quality of his offense and Bob Kraft went out and found receivers for him. Instead of getting blamed for his teams struggles, people gave Brady a pass and agreed that his productivity was compromised by mediocre receivers. Now the Patriots look unbeatable.
McNabb is taking the blame for the failures of his team. If he complained about the talent around him people would label him a whiner and the Eagles would be eager to cut him loose. When Tom Brady goes to management and complains about the state of his team, he’s being a leader but if a black man does the same thing he’s selfish.
Nothing typifies the disparity like Brett Favre. People adore him but the Packers are terrible and Favre’s “gunslinger” antics don’t help. As likeable as he is, Favre is reckless and he’s lost more games with his questionable sense of judgment than he has won with his rocket arm. When asked if he plans to take it down a notch and play more conservatively Favre bristles at the notion and insists that he’s always going to be a gunslinger. It makes for a great story but the reality is that Favre is a mediocre quarterback who puts himself above the team. Sure he’s tough but he’s also rather stupid at times.
Imagine if Favre was black. Would the Packers have played his game in the off season? Would he still be a media darling after capitulating about retirement for an entire off season? The answer is no. The Packers would have replaced him as the starter five years ago if Favre was black.
You can’t compare McNabb to Peyton Manning but a couple of years ago Manning lambasted his offensive line after a dismal playoff performance. Even though people felt his public rant was out of line the criticism wasn’t as severe as it would have been if Manning was black. His brother Eli wasn’t characterized as a petulant prima donna when he refused to sign with the Chargers but if Eli was a few shades darker you can bet it would still be an issue and you can bet the Giants would be less inclined to work through his growing pains.
A great example of this double standard occurred during the 2007 draft. Throughout the process scouts thoroughly examined Brady Quinn and Troy Smith. Quinn was criticized for not playing exceptionally well against top-ranked teams. Smith was haunted by a humiliating performance in the BCS Championship game. Both players skipped portions of the scouting combine and dictated the audition process by holding private workouts.
Smith was often questioned about his height and reportedly got testy about the subject causing many to speculate that his attitude was the reason for his slide in the draft. Still, Brady Quinn was bigger news because he slipped from the top five to the 22nd pick. If Troy Smith had been white would he have fallen so far? Drew Brees struggled with many of the same issues but he was drafted in the second round. Smith waited until the second day.
The problem is that you can’t prove that race is involved. It could simply be coincidence but when it comes to these matters perception is reality. A white fan looks around the league and sees a different situation than a black fan. A white fans sees six black head coaches and thinks it’s a fair representation of our country’s racial balance. A black fan sees all of the black players in the league and wonders why so many are denied coaching opportunities.
Donovan McNabb stepped on a lot of toes when he spoke from the heart but if you look at it from his perspective he makes a valid point. He has been harshly criticized over the years. He led the Eagles to the Super Bowl only to have credit for that feat stolen by Terrell Owens who didn’t even suit up during the playoffs. It was McNabb who led the team to the Super Bowl and McNabb who threw for more than 300 yards but as a team the Eagles fell short. Instead of questioning Andy Reid’s game plan, mistake prone receivers and a confused defense, people focused on McNabb. They questioned his competitive spirit.
Peyton Manning endured similar questions but not to that degree. The focus on McNabb has always seemed malicious. Part of that is the idiotic nature of Philadelphia sports fans. Part of it is because for every legitimate critic there’s a racially biased moron rubbing salt on the wounds. Also, many people are racists without even knowing it. Much of the criticism might be the manifestation of latent racism. Nevertheless, the Colts didn’t demonstrate a lack of faith in Peyton Manning by spending their first pick in the draft on a promising young quarterback, the Colts went out and found people to help Manning get over that championship hump.
McNabb’s right, race is a big factor in the NFL and now that he’s gone out on a limb and said so, we’ll see just how awful it is.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Lesson of 9-11 Yet to be Learned
September 11th has been dubbed "Patriot Day" in remembrance of those who lost their lives in the infamous terrorist attacks. Lost in all of the flag waving is a pragmatic look at what led to those attacks and what we have done to prevent them in the future.
First of all, the organization accused of the attacks is still in tact. Osama bin Laden appears to be as charismatic as ever and his ability to elude US forces has expanded the cult of his personality. Al Qaida has increased its reach and recruits members from all over the world. Millions of Muslims living in poverty and chaos see him as a hero. How can we honor those who died when the man believed to be responsible for those deaths is still at large, celebrating this day as his greatest accomplishment?
Second, we have not begun to address the root of the problem. Why did Osama bin Laden order such a devastating attack? Too many people have convinced themselves that these Muslim extremists simply hate our way of life but the reality is that Osama bin Laden's goal has always been the removal of western influence in Middle Eastern affairs. For hundreds of years European countries held loose control over tribal cultures, drawing arbitrary borders and creating imperialistic governments that failed to respect the rich cultural diversity of the area. The result has been decades of regional instability and global exploitation. How is it these countries that produce so much oil have so many people living in poverty while those of us who purchase that oil live in decadent comfort? This is the question that drives so many to hate the US. It's not our lifestyle but the fact that we appear to enjoy it at their expense.
Our current foreign policy typifies precisely what has bred the extremism that threatens stability throughout the region. We're trying to impose an American way of life on people who want nothing to do with it. In order to maintain control, political leaders must gain support of Islamic clerics while they fight to generate enough revenue to improve the quality of life for their citizens. Too often, the United States is perceived to be standing in the way of progress and anti-American sentiment grows.
September 11th 2007 marked the sixth year of this country's failure to address these issues. Thousands of Americans have lost their lives and there is no end in sight. Our military is overextended, our national budget is in the red, Osama bin Laden is still ranting, and the world is still a very dangerous place. Mission Accomplished?
Patriot Day. It's great that we have seen fit to honor the fallen in word but a shame that we have not done right by them in deed.
First of all, the organization accused of the attacks is still in tact. Osama bin Laden appears to be as charismatic as ever and his ability to elude US forces has expanded the cult of his personality. Al Qaida has increased its reach and recruits members from all over the world. Millions of Muslims living in poverty and chaos see him as a hero. How can we honor those who died when the man believed to be responsible for those deaths is still at large, celebrating this day as his greatest accomplishment?
Second, we have not begun to address the root of the problem. Why did Osama bin Laden order such a devastating attack? Too many people have convinced themselves that these Muslim extremists simply hate our way of life but the reality is that Osama bin Laden's goal has always been the removal of western influence in Middle Eastern affairs. For hundreds of years European countries held loose control over tribal cultures, drawing arbitrary borders and creating imperialistic governments that failed to respect the rich cultural diversity of the area. The result has been decades of regional instability and global exploitation. How is it these countries that produce so much oil have so many people living in poverty while those of us who purchase that oil live in decadent comfort? This is the question that drives so many to hate the US. It's not our lifestyle but the fact that we appear to enjoy it at their expense.
Our current foreign policy typifies precisely what has bred the extremism that threatens stability throughout the region. We're trying to impose an American way of life on people who want nothing to do with it. In order to maintain control, political leaders must gain support of Islamic clerics while they fight to generate enough revenue to improve the quality of life for their citizens. Too often, the United States is perceived to be standing in the way of progress and anti-American sentiment grows.
September 11th 2007 marked the sixth year of this country's failure to address these issues. Thousands of Americans have lost their lives and there is no end in sight. Our military is overextended, our national budget is in the red, Osama bin Laden is still ranting, and the world is still a very dangerous place. Mission Accomplished?
Patriot Day. It's great that we have seen fit to honor the fallen in word but a shame that we have not done right by them in deed.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Watch what you say
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The first amendment addresses all things pertaining to freedom of expression. As amendments go it seems somewhat cumbersome because it appears to have freedom of speech, press and religion all thrown together with the right to assemble and the right to petition. That does not diminish the importance of these rights. The fact of the matter is that this amendment is the cornerstone of our democratic republic. It’s sacred.
Nobody can be punished for exercising this right. People can’t be prohibited from expressing themselves. That’s why every year the KKK gets to hold rallies. There are some limits as to how one can express themselves but those limitations only apply when the rights of other people are infringed upon. When expression becomes harassment the first amendment has been abused.
However, there is no provision addressing the issue of public accountability. When you exercise your right to free expression you open yourself up to varies consequences. You can’t be imprisoned for exercising your rights but there a big difference between punishment and accountability.
In Columbus, Ohio racism doesn’t seem to be that big a problem. Mayor Mike Coleman enjoys tremendous popularity and he happens to be African American. He’s a career politician bent on climbing the political ladder so he is not nearly as effective as he should be but all things considered he is a decent mayor. He’s done a fair job and his administration’s only serious scandals have involved his alcohol dependent wife and even her struggles have been handled fairly. Nobody has passed undue judgment.
Columbus, however, is no racial utopia. Racism is alive and well. It’s practiced on a daily basis but it’s covert. White people in Columbus don’t have the guts to express their true feelings unless they believe they are in the company of like-minded people. In many ways this racism is worse than overt bigotry because it has evolved to survive the so-called politically correct era in which we live.
That’s why Susie Purtee comes as a surprise. Susie Purtee is a patrol officer for the Columbus Police Department. Recently WBNS and The Columbus Dispatch reported that Susie Purtee published some racially insensitive commentary on the internet with her sister. In this video rant Susie and her sister call themselves the “Subie Sisters” and discuss a variety of topics ranging from Jews to African Americans, to Hispanics. If there’s a problem it can be attributed to some filthy minority and the Subie Sisters explain how to make that connection with the intellectual savvy only inbred white trash can deliver. The fact that these two old war horses managed to post videos on the internet is quite a surprise. I would have pegged them as the opening act for Toby Keith.
Now Susie is a cop, a fact she believes makes her an authority on the state of affairs in the world today, which creates a public relations nightmare for the Columbus Police Department. It’s bad enough dealing with day to day complaints but now there is proof in streaming video that at least one cop on the payroll might be predisposed to prejudice. That places every case Susie Purtee has been involved with in doubt. City officials are reviewing the matter to see what action should be taken and the FOP has already stated that it supports Susie Purtee’s constitutional rights and will defend her if action is taken.
The problem is that Susie’s constitutional rights do not guarantee her continued employment. When you open your mouth you take your chances. I know that everything I publish on the internet can be reviewed by anybody at any time. I accept the fact that I can be held accountable for expressing my opinions in a public forum. That means my boss might not care for my thoughts on George W. Bush and subsequently fire me. My employment is not guaranteed under contract and even if it was there are ways to show cause. I’m a representative of my employer and my blogs could affect business if clients read them.
Police have to be held to a higher standard. They carry badges and guns. They have the ability to arrest people and enter private property. The constitutional measures that prohibit civil rights abuses by law enforcement officers are retroactive. Ultimately police are granted the authority to temporarily override the Bill of Rights. When a patrol officer asks to search your vehicle he is asking you to forfeit your rights but if you refuse he can claim exigent circumstances and conduct the search anyway. If that officer is Susie Purtee the exigent circumstances could be tied to ethnicity.
We can’t have racist cops. There’s too much at stake. A racist car salesman might not be inclined to throw in floor mats, a racist realtor might steer non-white buyers away from certain developments but a racist cop might shoot a black suspect when the similar white suspect would live to run another day. Not too long ago a warrant was served on a deranged Somali man living in Columbus. He refused to drop a knife that he was waving around and officers shot him dead. The shooting was justified but a few months later a white man was taken down with non-lethal stun guns. Race might not have been a factor but when somebody like Susie Purtee comes along you have to wonder.
Shame on the FOP for pledging support. There are too many good cops out there for the Fraternal Order to waste time defending the thugs, hooligans and bigots who besmirch the reputation of law enforcement. Instead of defending Purtee, the FOB should be lobbying to get her fired. The so-called “blue wall” is precisely why so many people lack respect for police. Americans don’t trust cops because they refuse to hold themselves to the higher standard their station demands. Susie Purtee’s rights are not being trampled.
When it comes to employment the only right we have is to pursue it. We have a right to be judged on our qualifications and our character. Potential employers aren’t supposed to allow race, gender or creed to affect the process but nobody is entitled to a job. You have to earn your living. Susie Purtee earned the privilege of working as a police officer because she passed all the tests and met all of the requirements but her continued employment is conditional. By publishing her racist views on the internet she brought shame upon her profession and betrayed the trust of the public she works for. She must be held accountable.
The first amendment addresses all things pertaining to freedom of expression. As amendments go it seems somewhat cumbersome because it appears to have freedom of speech, press and religion all thrown together with the right to assemble and the right to petition. That does not diminish the importance of these rights. The fact of the matter is that this amendment is the cornerstone of our democratic republic. It’s sacred.
Nobody can be punished for exercising this right. People can’t be prohibited from expressing themselves. That’s why every year the KKK gets to hold rallies. There are some limits as to how one can express themselves but those limitations only apply when the rights of other people are infringed upon. When expression becomes harassment the first amendment has been abused.
However, there is no provision addressing the issue of public accountability. When you exercise your right to free expression you open yourself up to varies consequences. You can’t be imprisoned for exercising your rights but there a big difference between punishment and accountability.
In Columbus, Ohio racism doesn’t seem to be that big a problem. Mayor Mike Coleman enjoys tremendous popularity and he happens to be African American. He’s a career politician bent on climbing the political ladder so he is not nearly as effective as he should be but all things considered he is a decent mayor. He’s done a fair job and his administration’s only serious scandals have involved his alcohol dependent wife and even her struggles have been handled fairly. Nobody has passed undue judgment.
Columbus, however, is no racial utopia. Racism is alive and well. It’s practiced on a daily basis but it’s covert. White people in Columbus don’t have the guts to express their true feelings unless they believe they are in the company of like-minded people. In many ways this racism is worse than overt bigotry because it has evolved to survive the so-called politically correct era in which we live.
That’s why Susie Purtee comes as a surprise. Susie Purtee is a patrol officer for the Columbus Police Department. Recently WBNS and The Columbus Dispatch reported that Susie Purtee published some racially insensitive commentary on the internet with her sister. In this video rant Susie and her sister call themselves the “Subie Sisters” and discuss a variety of topics ranging from Jews to African Americans, to Hispanics. If there’s a problem it can be attributed to some filthy minority and the Subie Sisters explain how to make that connection with the intellectual savvy only inbred white trash can deliver. The fact that these two old war horses managed to post videos on the internet is quite a surprise. I would have pegged them as the opening act for Toby Keith.
Now Susie is a cop, a fact she believes makes her an authority on the state of affairs in the world today, which creates a public relations nightmare for the Columbus Police Department. It’s bad enough dealing with day to day complaints but now there is proof in streaming video that at least one cop on the payroll might be predisposed to prejudice. That places every case Susie Purtee has been involved with in doubt. City officials are reviewing the matter to see what action should be taken and the FOP has already stated that it supports Susie Purtee’s constitutional rights and will defend her if action is taken.
The problem is that Susie’s constitutional rights do not guarantee her continued employment. When you open your mouth you take your chances. I know that everything I publish on the internet can be reviewed by anybody at any time. I accept the fact that I can be held accountable for expressing my opinions in a public forum. That means my boss might not care for my thoughts on George W. Bush and subsequently fire me. My employment is not guaranteed under contract and even if it was there are ways to show cause. I’m a representative of my employer and my blogs could affect business if clients read them.
Police have to be held to a higher standard. They carry badges and guns. They have the ability to arrest people and enter private property. The constitutional measures that prohibit civil rights abuses by law enforcement officers are retroactive. Ultimately police are granted the authority to temporarily override the Bill of Rights. When a patrol officer asks to search your vehicle he is asking you to forfeit your rights but if you refuse he can claim exigent circumstances and conduct the search anyway. If that officer is Susie Purtee the exigent circumstances could be tied to ethnicity.
We can’t have racist cops. There’s too much at stake. A racist car salesman might not be inclined to throw in floor mats, a racist realtor might steer non-white buyers away from certain developments but a racist cop might shoot a black suspect when the similar white suspect would live to run another day. Not too long ago a warrant was served on a deranged Somali man living in Columbus. He refused to drop a knife that he was waving around and officers shot him dead. The shooting was justified but a few months later a white man was taken down with non-lethal stun guns. Race might not have been a factor but when somebody like Susie Purtee comes along you have to wonder.
Shame on the FOP for pledging support. There are too many good cops out there for the Fraternal Order to waste time defending the thugs, hooligans and bigots who besmirch the reputation of law enforcement. Instead of defending Purtee, the FOB should be lobbying to get her fired. The so-called “blue wall” is precisely why so many people lack respect for police. Americans don’t trust cops because they refuse to hold themselves to the higher standard their station demands. Susie Purtee’s rights are not being trampled.
When it comes to employment the only right we have is to pursue it. We have a right to be judged on our qualifications and our character. Potential employers aren’t supposed to allow race, gender or creed to affect the process but nobody is entitled to a job. You have to earn your living. Susie Purtee earned the privilege of working as a police officer because she passed all the tests and met all of the requirements but her continued employment is conditional. By publishing her racist views on the internet she brought shame upon her profession and betrayed the trust of the public she works for. She must be held accountable.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Vick's not worthy of NAACP support.
Wow! The Atlanta NAACP has asked the NFL to refrain from banning Michael Vick. Why? The NAACP is an important organization but throwing its support behind a man who made a conscientious decision to break the law only compromises its credibility in dealing with more substantial issues.
Michael Vick is not the victim of racial discrimination. He hasn’t been singled out or treated unfairly. It’s true that this story has garnered considerable attention but that’s not because Vick happens to be black; it’s because he’s one of the most marketed players in the NFL. The world was his oyster and he had a enough money for seconds. People are fascinated because Vick chose to throw it all away.
Vicks supporters, including teammates like Fred McCrary, insist he’s a good father and a fine man but do good men associate with known criminals? People bought and sold drugs in a house Vick owned because he allowed drug dealers to live there. Do good fathers slam dogs to the ground until they stop breathing? We all make mistakes but traveling around the country to participate in the felonious act of dog fighting isn’t an indiscretion, it’s a criminal lifestyle. Good fathers don’t end up in prison.
Animal cruelty is not as serious an offense as it should be. Realistically Vick will serve less than a year behind bars. He’ll be sentenced to more but post sentencing appeals and good behavior provisions will have him out in time to start the 2008 season. Virginia is considering state charges but Vick’s attorneys will fare much better in thwarting their efforts. The real penalty will come from the NFL.
The problem the NFL faces is twofold. On one hand they have the public relations disaster Michael Vick has created. Just when Roger Goodell thought he was getting the NFL’s image restored by punishing troublemakers like Chris Henry and Pacman Jones, the Vick saga unfolds and the NFL is suddenly taking a beating. Everybody is waiting to see how Goodell handles this high profile case. Suspending Chris Henry for eight games was easy, banning Pacman for a year was understandable but Vick was an officially licensed icon. What now?
Goodell wanted to wait for the courts to determine Vick’s fate but the specter of boycotts and protests forced him to put Michael Vick on administrative leave. At the time it looked as though Vick would be mired in a high-profile trial that was scheduled to start right after Thanksgiving. It was a distraction nobody wanted so Goodell put everything on ice. Now that Vick has agreed to plead guilty to felonious criminal activities the NFL must take action. The fact that Vick has been accused of virtually torturing dogs to death makes determining the course of that action decidedly difficult.
But it might be a moot point. The NFL has never had to address the issue of dog fighting but gambling is a subject sports league commissioners know all too well. Every sport at every level has rules that spell out stiff penalties for gambling and most of them end with the words lifetime ban. Vick’s activities included illegal gambling because numerous bets were placed the dogs. It doesn’t matter how much he bet or that the betting was limited to dog fighting. The fact that Vick participated in illegal gambling might warrant a significant suspension. With the recent gambling scandal in the NBA no league can afford to take these infractions lightly. So the NFL has an easy way out.
Aside from skin color the NAACP has no basis for getting involved on Michael Vick’s behalf. Unlike Genarlow Wilson, a high school kid thrown in prison for receiving oral sex, Vick knowingly committed the crimes he is going to plead guilty to. Playing in the NFL is a privilege Michael Vick revoked when he allowed himself to become a public relations nightmare. The NFL will lose millions of dollars in revenue thanks to Vick’s decision to break the law and millions more will be lost if Vick is allowed to come back.
This isn’t about color. The NFL places a similar stake in Peyton Manning’s public appeal. Like Vick, Manning is one of the official faces of the NFL. Ladainian Tomlinson and Brian Urlacher are also go to guys when it comes to mass marketing the product that is the NFL. If any of them brought similar shame upon the league they would be facing similar circumstances. To put it in perspective OJ Simpson was found not guilty in a court of law but the NFL goes to great lengths to keep the Hall of Fame running back away from league functions. In the end it’s about money.
Racism is alive and well in this country. Genarlow Wilson is still in jail, six black kids in Louisiana are facing prison time for fighting back against racial intimidation, and somewhere somebody is being denied an opportunity because their skin is too dark. Michael Vick has his opportunity and squandered it. The NAACP should not compromise its integrity by helping him get another one. The NFL would be right to banish Vick from the league forever and the NAACP support that action.
Michael Vick is not the victim of racial discrimination. He hasn’t been singled out or treated unfairly. It’s true that this story has garnered considerable attention but that’s not because Vick happens to be black; it’s because he’s one of the most marketed players in the NFL. The world was his oyster and he had a enough money for seconds. People are fascinated because Vick chose to throw it all away.
Vicks supporters, including teammates like Fred McCrary, insist he’s a good father and a fine man but do good men associate with known criminals? People bought and sold drugs in a house Vick owned because he allowed drug dealers to live there. Do good fathers slam dogs to the ground until they stop breathing? We all make mistakes but traveling around the country to participate in the felonious act of dog fighting isn’t an indiscretion, it’s a criminal lifestyle. Good fathers don’t end up in prison.
Animal cruelty is not as serious an offense as it should be. Realistically Vick will serve less than a year behind bars. He’ll be sentenced to more but post sentencing appeals and good behavior provisions will have him out in time to start the 2008 season. Virginia is considering state charges but Vick’s attorneys will fare much better in thwarting their efforts. The real penalty will come from the NFL.
The problem the NFL faces is twofold. On one hand they have the public relations disaster Michael Vick has created. Just when Roger Goodell thought he was getting the NFL’s image restored by punishing troublemakers like Chris Henry and Pacman Jones, the Vick saga unfolds and the NFL is suddenly taking a beating. Everybody is waiting to see how Goodell handles this high profile case. Suspending Chris Henry for eight games was easy, banning Pacman for a year was understandable but Vick was an officially licensed icon. What now?
Goodell wanted to wait for the courts to determine Vick’s fate but the specter of boycotts and protests forced him to put Michael Vick on administrative leave. At the time it looked as though Vick would be mired in a high-profile trial that was scheduled to start right after Thanksgiving. It was a distraction nobody wanted so Goodell put everything on ice. Now that Vick has agreed to plead guilty to felonious criminal activities the NFL must take action. The fact that Vick has been accused of virtually torturing dogs to death makes determining the course of that action decidedly difficult.
But it might be a moot point. The NFL has never had to address the issue of dog fighting but gambling is a subject sports league commissioners know all too well. Every sport at every level has rules that spell out stiff penalties for gambling and most of them end with the words lifetime ban. Vick’s activities included illegal gambling because numerous bets were placed the dogs. It doesn’t matter how much he bet or that the betting was limited to dog fighting. The fact that Vick participated in illegal gambling might warrant a significant suspension. With the recent gambling scandal in the NBA no league can afford to take these infractions lightly. So the NFL has an easy way out.
Aside from skin color the NAACP has no basis for getting involved on Michael Vick’s behalf. Unlike Genarlow Wilson, a high school kid thrown in prison for receiving oral sex, Vick knowingly committed the crimes he is going to plead guilty to. Playing in the NFL is a privilege Michael Vick revoked when he allowed himself to become a public relations nightmare. The NFL will lose millions of dollars in revenue thanks to Vick’s decision to break the law and millions more will be lost if Vick is allowed to come back.
This isn’t about color. The NFL places a similar stake in Peyton Manning’s public appeal. Like Vick, Manning is one of the official faces of the NFL. Ladainian Tomlinson and Brian Urlacher are also go to guys when it comes to mass marketing the product that is the NFL. If any of them brought similar shame upon the league they would be facing similar circumstances. To put it in perspective OJ Simpson was found not guilty in a court of law but the NFL goes to great lengths to keep the Hall of Fame running back away from league functions. In the end it’s about money.
Racism is alive and well in this country. Genarlow Wilson is still in jail, six black kids in Louisiana are facing prison time for fighting back against racial intimidation, and somewhere somebody is being denied an opportunity because their skin is too dark. Michael Vick has his opportunity and squandered it. The NAACP should not compromise its integrity by helping him get another one. The NFL would be right to banish Vick from the league forever and the NAACP support that action.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
I made you say underwear!
I go out of my way to avoid Fox News. I guess I like the liberal propaganda foisted on society by all of the other media outlets. Last night, I stopped at a local pub and caught a closed caption version of John Gibson’s “My Word” rant.
Now Gibson is a professional polemicist. He is paid to be a pompous, self-righteous ass because there’s a lot of money to be had when there’s a heated argument. I don’t take people like Gibson or transsexual pundit Ann Coulter seriously. They don’t believe half of what they say. What I do take seriously are the people who subscribe to their positions.
Gibson’s latest rant was in support of a local ordinance in the little town of Mansfield, Louisiana. Apparently local officials have been so successful curing the ills of the world that they now have time to focus on the scourge of sagging pants. Effective September 15th Mansfield police officers will be able to write a $150 ticket to people who expose their underwear. It was not specified if there will be an exemption for plumbers and/or appliance repair technicians.
Gibson thinks that the community should enforce the ban until the courts rule against it. He said he might sound old but he doesn’t like sagging pants and he’s tired of seeing people like Britney Spears running around in her underwear. Of course he is, being staunch conservative he would rather see a congressional page completely naked and face down on a bed.
Forget about Gibson’s support of the ordinance or his homosexual procilivities. The issue at hand is the enactment of a law that is essentially a waste of time and a violation of civil rights. This battle has been fought time and time again to no avail. Back in the 1950’s the issue was plain white t-shirts and tight blue jeans. Small towns across the country futilely imposed rules and regulations mandating an acceptable dress code. Sagging pants and exposed boxers are no different. Sadly, many of the people carping about low riding pants are the same people who dared to wear jeans and t-shirts in public. Way to keep the faith, pops.
Below the surface it’s about race, not underwear. Clearly Mansfield is experiencing a little post-Katrina culture shock. Mansfield is not far from Shreveport and with New Orleans a long way from being repaired, former New Orleans residents are settling into nearby communities. Mansfield has probably seen an increase in African American residents which means that Hip Hop culture is more prevalent in a community that time somehow forgot. All of the sudden people woke up and the sharecroppers were lollygagging on the corner. Yes white kids do it to, but in the mind of these conservative nitwits that’s only because “negro culture” has been forced on them by the liberal conspirators.
Those who support the ban insist it’s about decency, contending that nobody wants to see another person’s underpants but how do you define underwear? What if somebody opts to wear swimming trunks or gym shorts under their sagging pants? And how can anybody take offense to boxers? I can see an objection when it comes to thongs but that objection is subjective. There are some people who shouldn’t wear thongs under any circumstance and others who should be required to wear nothing but a thong at all times.
Still, there’s no need for a law. If I happen to catch a glimpse of something I don’t like I tend to look the other way. If people want don saggy pants I have the option of ignoring their attire and the luxury of passing judgment on them. I never judge a person by the color of his skin but mix stripes with checks and court is in session. Throw on a “What Would Jesus Do” bracelet and I’ll cross the street to get out of harm’s way.
Generally I accept sagging pants as a passing fad. Like white T-shirts, flood pants and engineer boots, sagging pants make a statement. The whole idea is to piss off the old folks. A stupid ordinance is exactly what these kids want. It proves to them that adults are petty, small minded and ultimately powerless.
Hell, it stirs up my rebellious nature. Since the ban focuses on exposed underpants I’m tempted to drive down to Mansfield and put a pair of white briefs on the outside of my pants. Super hero style. I wonder if that would draw the attention of cops. We could get together and stage a million panty march to protest the ordinance.
The best way to get kids to pull up their pants is for adults to pull theirs down. Nothing kills a trend faster than adoption by old white people. Why do you think the Beatles broke up? As soon as old folks got past the mop tops and listened to the music the Beatles had to change their style and the band imploded. And look what happened to FUBU. My dad picked up a FUBU shirt at a thrift store and the entire brand lost its street cred.
Personally I’d rather see laws passed limiting how high pants can be hoisted. I find issues like camel toe far more offensive than whale tail. I’d much rather see junior’s boxers than the outline of grandpa’s nuts through a pair of chest high, sky blue sans-a-belts. Why not impose a ban on stretch pants too? While we’re at it, how about a complex ordinance outlining proper sock/shoe combinations? If we’re going to put an end to sagging pants we should also eradicate the practice of wearing black dress socks with white sneakers. And for crying out loud people, can we agree on a minimal amount of pigmentation before shorts can be worn in public?
Youth always wins. Every time the older generation has drawn a line the younger generation has rushed to cross it. We all know where this is headed. The underwear ordinance will fail and then kids will celebrate their victory by taking it to the next level. In fact, that trend has already started. Paris Hilton and her friends have been playing a game of celebrity hoo-hah for the past several years. If you didn’t like seeing underwear how will you feel about the full monty?
Now Gibson is a professional polemicist. He is paid to be a pompous, self-righteous ass because there’s a lot of money to be had when there’s a heated argument. I don’t take people like Gibson or transsexual pundit Ann Coulter seriously. They don’t believe half of what they say. What I do take seriously are the people who subscribe to their positions.
Gibson’s latest rant was in support of a local ordinance in the little town of Mansfield, Louisiana. Apparently local officials have been so successful curing the ills of the world that they now have time to focus on the scourge of sagging pants. Effective September 15th Mansfield police officers will be able to write a $150 ticket to people who expose their underwear. It was not specified if there will be an exemption for plumbers and/or appliance repair technicians.
Gibson thinks that the community should enforce the ban until the courts rule against it. He said he might sound old but he doesn’t like sagging pants and he’s tired of seeing people like Britney Spears running around in her underwear. Of course he is, being staunch conservative he would rather see a congressional page completely naked and face down on a bed.
Forget about Gibson’s support of the ordinance or his homosexual procilivities. The issue at hand is the enactment of a law that is essentially a waste of time and a violation of civil rights. This battle has been fought time and time again to no avail. Back in the 1950’s the issue was plain white t-shirts and tight blue jeans. Small towns across the country futilely imposed rules and regulations mandating an acceptable dress code. Sagging pants and exposed boxers are no different. Sadly, many of the people carping about low riding pants are the same people who dared to wear jeans and t-shirts in public. Way to keep the faith, pops.
Below the surface it’s about race, not underwear. Clearly Mansfield is experiencing a little post-Katrina culture shock. Mansfield is not far from Shreveport and with New Orleans a long way from being repaired, former New Orleans residents are settling into nearby communities. Mansfield has probably seen an increase in African American residents which means that Hip Hop culture is more prevalent in a community that time somehow forgot. All of the sudden people woke up and the sharecroppers were lollygagging on the corner. Yes white kids do it to, but in the mind of these conservative nitwits that’s only because “negro culture” has been forced on them by the liberal conspirators.
Those who support the ban insist it’s about decency, contending that nobody wants to see another person’s underpants but how do you define underwear? What if somebody opts to wear swimming trunks or gym shorts under their sagging pants? And how can anybody take offense to boxers? I can see an objection when it comes to thongs but that objection is subjective. There are some people who shouldn’t wear thongs under any circumstance and others who should be required to wear nothing but a thong at all times.
Still, there’s no need for a law. If I happen to catch a glimpse of something I don’t like I tend to look the other way. If people want don saggy pants I have the option of ignoring their attire and the luxury of passing judgment on them. I never judge a person by the color of his skin but mix stripes with checks and court is in session. Throw on a “What Would Jesus Do” bracelet and I’ll cross the street to get out of harm’s way.
Generally I accept sagging pants as a passing fad. Like white T-shirts, flood pants and engineer boots, sagging pants make a statement. The whole idea is to piss off the old folks. A stupid ordinance is exactly what these kids want. It proves to them that adults are petty, small minded and ultimately powerless.
Hell, it stirs up my rebellious nature. Since the ban focuses on exposed underpants I’m tempted to drive down to Mansfield and put a pair of white briefs on the outside of my pants. Super hero style. I wonder if that would draw the attention of cops. We could get together and stage a million panty march to protest the ordinance.
The best way to get kids to pull up their pants is for adults to pull theirs down. Nothing kills a trend faster than adoption by old white people. Why do you think the Beatles broke up? As soon as old folks got past the mop tops and listened to the music the Beatles had to change their style and the band imploded. And look what happened to FUBU. My dad picked up a FUBU shirt at a thrift store and the entire brand lost its street cred.
Personally I’d rather see laws passed limiting how high pants can be hoisted. I find issues like camel toe far more offensive than whale tail. I’d much rather see junior’s boxers than the outline of grandpa’s nuts through a pair of chest high, sky blue sans-a-belts. Why not impose a ban on stretch pants too? While we’re at it, how about a complex ordinance outlining proper sock/shoe combinations? If we’re going to put an end to sagging pants we should also eradicate the practice of wearing black dress socks with white sneakers. And for crying out loud people, can we agree on a minimal amount of pigmentation before shorts can be worn in public?
Youth always wins. Every time the older generation has drawn a line the younger generation has rushed to cross it. We all know where this is headed. The underwear ordinance will fail and then kids will celebrate their victory by taking it to the next level. In fact, that trend has already started. Paris Hilton and her friends have been playing a game of celebrity hoo-hah for the past several years. If you didn’t like seeing underwear how will you feel about the full monty?
Friday, August 10, 2007
Dirty Work
Illegal immigrants are criminals. End of story. The entire problem can be simplified to one issue: documentation.
If you believe that then the only thing that's simple in this discussion is your mind. It doesn't matter if Lou Dobbs has your back, failing to delve deeper into the subject is socially, ethically and morally irresponsible.
Illegal immigrants aren't stealing jobs. They are filling jobs that American citizens find disagreeable. If employers would improve working conditions, increase pay and offer benefits sufficient to support a modest existence people would fill these jobs. Of course that would require the American consumer to shell out more for goods and services that are provided thanks in part to cheap labor.
Much of that cheap labor comes from illegal immigrants but there are programs that allow employers to import workers from other countries. Illegal immigration is a convenient scapegoat but even if it's eliminated, we still have cheap foreign labor coming in. The primary provider of this labor is Mexico and the program is called H2B It essentially converts Mexico into a temporary labor provider. You can find H2B workers throughout the country performing work in seasonal operations such as landscaping, sanitation and roofing.
The H2B program sets a minimum wage (adverse effect wage rate) that the employers must adhere to and the available jobs must be publicly posted. The classified ads of your local newspaper are replete with H2B ads months before the effective recruiting season begins. This is clever because people seldom look for landscaping jobs in January so the recruiting effort is designed to fail. You can pick out an H2B ad by looking for jargon-laden spots that post an odd hourly wage. In Columbus the recent ads featured an hourly wage of $8.62 an hour. Several larger landscaping companies posted the same ad with the same hourly rate and they currently have Mexican work crews. Once the ad has run for a predetermined period of time the employer can request assistance from the H2B program to fill remaining openings.
The employers arrange for seasonal housing to accommodate this foreign workforce. The housing arrangements often violate local housing ordinances by crowding too many people into a single family home. In Columbus, Ohio one local lawn care company got into a little hot water when it was revealed that 12 men were living in a three bedroom home. The reason for this is that people making $8.62 an hour can't afford to rent an apartment or a home of their own. The H2B program exploits foreign workers, shipping them to the U.S. like some sort of economic militia.
Of course Lou Dobbs doesn't talk about this. He's worried about those illegal immigrants, many of whom secure documentation that looks legitimate enough to qualify for full time permanent jobs that pay a more realistic wage. The legal H2B program allows employers to keep wages below market value driving away natural born or naturalized candidates. The waiting list for the H2B program is long and it doesn't provide an actionable plan for gaining permanent residency status. This program actually makes illegal immigration more attractive thus exacerbating the problem.
But people don't want to pay $100 a pop to have their grass cut in order to bridge the wage gap. We like to blame the American worker for being too demanding and lazy but that's not it at all. The problem is $8.62 an hour. And that isn't even a real wage. The H2B workers are often 1099 employees which means they are subcontractors who must deduct their own taxes, cover their own workers' compensation and most importantly they are not entitled to overtime wages. Those H2B laborers will work 16 hours a day seven days a week until the assignment ends.
Employers who use the H2B program claim to see an increase in productivity, experience fewer complaints from the workers and of course they see a decrease in attendance problems. That's because they replace an empowered American workers with a captive labor pool. It's not quite slavery because these people volunteer and recieve compensation but it's not as if an H2B employee can quit for a better job.
The problem with the American worker is the fact that they have freedom of choice. If you don't want to work on Saturday you can quit and find another job, if an H2B employee doesn't want to work on Saturday INS will be there first thing Monday morning to escort him back to Mexico. The incentive for H2B workers is built in. Who needs whips when deportation is just a phone call away? H2B employees get no due process, they either do as they're told or they are rejected from the program. It's not fair.
The scam goes even deeper. The employer arranges for room and board and often deduct those expenses from the H2B payroll. In fact, many H2B employers purchase low cost housing and can write it off as an business expense while receiving remuneration for putting the employees up in those houses.. The employer also arranges for transportation and can deduct for that as well. If an H2B employee gets hurt or sick, they go back to Mexico. How can Americans compete with that? How can anybody? The H2B program allows employers to establish work conditions that haven't been legal since the early 1900's.
Instead of increassing pay and benefits to stimulate productivity in a highly competitive job market, employers sign up for the H2B program because it's cheaper. The process isn't easy and there are requirements that must be met but once the employer learns to navigate the red tape, the pipeline of cheap captive labor is open.
Illegal immigrants are actually better because they put most of their money back into the local economy when they pay rent, purchase food or acquire relaible trnasportation. H2B employees send most of their money back to Mexico as their living expenses are covered by the employer. Still, illegal immigrants drive wages down because their choices are limited by education and language barriers. The difference is that employers don't control those choices.
The H2B program was created to provide qualifying companies with a legal means of acquiring labor that was once only available through illegal immigrants. Instead of risking heavy fines and sanctions associated with violating INS regulations, employers can artificially drive American workers out of the market. It's becoming increasingly difficult for skilled and semi-skilled laborers to find gainful employment.
Corporate outsourcing is an extension of the same problem. Labor is cheaper overseas because those people live in conditions Americans find unacceptable but as long as those computer programs are packed five to a shanty in Bashur, the greedy senior executives who contracted them don't have to think about it. It's unfair to expect American workers to compete with people who live with a drastically reduced cost of living and the consequences of exporting jobs while we import cheap labor will be severe for everybody. How will companies make money when nobody can afford to buy their products?
Illegal immigration is a smoke screen. Spending more money to "secure" or borders fails to address the issue. Threatening resident aliens with prison time and deportation will not solve the problem. We have a serious problem but in order to solve it we need to take a long hard look at the actual value of the goods and services we depend on. Where do people get the money to purchase them? Yes, it's great to get your grass cut for $30 a week and a new roof for $2000 is a fantastic deal but what's the actual cost? What impact will your thriftiness have on your son's career? The economy is cyclical; if we allow that cycle to be broken everybody will pay a devastating price. We have already started making those payments.
Lou Dobbs can rant and rave from his anchor desk but has he ever stopped to wonder why those peaches were only 98 cents a pound? Does he think about who made his shoes or where his landscaper got his crew? Talk is cheap, Mr. Dobbs. Illegal immigrants aren't causing the problem…we need to address our greed. Before it consumes us.
If you believe that then the only thing that's simple in this discussion is your mind. It doesn't matter if Lou Dobbs has your back, failing to delve deeper into the subject is socially, ethically and morally irresponsible.
Illegal immigrants aren't stealing jobs. They are filling jobs that American citizens find disagreeable. If employers would improve working conditions, increase pay and offer benefits sufficient to support a modest existence people would fill these jobs. Of course that would require the American consumer to shell out more for goods and services that are provided thanks in part to cheap labor.
Much of that cheap labor comes from illegal immigrants but there are programs that allow employers to import workers from other countries. Illegal immigration is a convenient scapegoat but even if it's eliminated, we still have cheap foreign labor coming in. The primary provider of this labor is Mexico and the program is called H2B It essentially converts Mexico into a temporary labor provider. You can find H2B workers throughout the country performing work in seasonal operations such as landscaping, sanitation and roofing.
The H2B program sets a minimum wage (adverse effect wage rate) that the employers must adhere to and the available jobs must be publicly posted. The classified ads of your local newspaper are replete with H2B ads months before the effective recruiting season begins. This is clever because people seldom look for landscaping jobs in January so the recruiting effort is designed to fail. You can pick out an H2B ad by looking for jargon-laden spots that post an odd hourly wage. In Columbus the recent ads featured an hourly wage of $8.62 an hour. Several larger landscaping companies posted the same ad with the same hourly rate and they currently have Mexican work crews. Once the ad has run for a predetermined period of time the employer can request assistance from the H2B program to fill remaining openings.
The employers arrange for seasonal housing to accommodate this foreign workforce. The housing arrangements often violate local housing ordinances by crowding too many people into a single family home. In Columbus, Ohio one local lawn care company got into a little hot water when it was revealed that 12 men were living in a three bedroom home. The reason for this is that people making $8.62 an hour can't afford to rent an apartment or a home of their own. The H2B program exploits foreign workers, shipping them to the U.S. like some sort of economic militia.
Of course Lou Dobbs doesn't talk about this. He's worried about those illegal immigrants, many of whom secure documentation that looks legitimate enough to qualify for full time permanent jobs that pay a more realistic wage. The legal H2B program allows employers to keep wages below market value driving away natural born or naturalized candidates. The waiting list for the H2B program is long and it doesn't provide an actionable plan for gaining permanent residency status. This program actually makes illegal immigration more attractive thus exacerbating the problem.
But people don't want to pay $100 a pop to have their grass cut in order to bridge the wage gap. We like to blame the American worker for being too demanding and lazy but that's not it at all. The problem is $8.62 an hour. And that isn't even a real wage. The H2B workers are often 1099 employees which means they are subcontractors who must deduct their own taxes, cover their own workers' compensation and most importantly they are not entitled to overtime wages. Those H2B laborers will work 16 hours a day seven days a week until the assignment ends.
Employers who use the H2B program claim to see an increase in productivity, experience fewer complaints from the workers and of course they see a decrease in attendance problems. That's because they replace an empowered American workers with a captive labor pool. It's not quite slavery because these people volunteer and recieve compensation but it's not as if an H2B employee can quit for a better job.
The problem with the American worker is the fact that they have freedom of choice. If you don't want to work on Saturday you can quit and find another job, if an H2B employee doesn't want to work on Saturday INS will be there first thing Monday morning to escort him back to Mexico. The incentive for H2B workers is built in. Who needs whips when deportation is just a phone call away? H2B employees get no due process, they either do as they're told or they are rejected from the program. It's not fair.
The scam goes even deeper. The employer arranges for room and board and often deduct those expenses from the H2B payroll. In fact, many H2B employers purchase low cost housing and can write it off as an business expense while receiving remuneration for putting the employees up in those houses.. The employer also arranges for transportation and can deduct for that as well. If an H2B employee gets hurt or sick, they go back to Mexico. How can Americans compete with that? How can anybody? The H2B program allows employers to establish work conditions that haven't been legal since the early 1900's.
Instead of increassing pay and benefits to stimulate productivity in a highly competitive job market, employers sign up for the H2B program because it's cheaper. The process isn't easy and there are requirements that must be met but once the employer learns to navigate the red tape, the pipeline of cheap captive labor is open.
Illegal immigrants are actually better because they put most of their money back into the local economy when they pay rent, purchase food or acquire relaible trnasportation. H2B employees send most of their money back to Mexico as their living expenses are covered by the employer. Still, illegal immigrants drive wages down because their choices are limited by education and language barriers. The difference is that employers don't control those choices.
The H2B program was created to provide qualifying companies with a legal means of acquiring labor that was once only available through illegal immigrants. Instead of risking heavy fines and sanctions associated with violating INS regulations, employers can artificially drive American workers out of the market. It's becoming increasingly difficult for skilled and semi-skilled laborers to find gainful employment.
Corporate outsourcing is an extension of the same problem. Labor is cheaper overseas because those people live in conditions Americans find unacceptable but as long as those computer programs are packed five to a shanty in Bashur, the greedy senior executives who contracted them don't have to think about it. It's unfair to expect American workers to compete with people who live with a drastically reduced cost of living and the consequences of exporting jobs while we import cheap labor will be severe for everybody. How will companies make money when nobody can afford to buy their products?
Illegal immigration is a smoke screen. Spending more money to "secure" or borders fails to address the issue. Threatening resident aliens with prison time and deportation will not solve the problem. We have a serious problem but in order to solve it we need to take a long hard look at the actual value of the goods and services we depend on. Where do people get the money to purchase them? Yes, it's great to get your grass cut for $30 a week and a new roof for $2000 is a fantastic deal but what's the actual cost? What impact will your thriftiness have on your son's career? The economy is cyclical; if we allow that cycle to be broken everybody will pay a devastating price. We have already started making those payments.
Lou Dobbs can rant and rave from his anchor desk but has he ever stopped to wonder why those peaches were only 98 cents a pound? Does he think about who made his shoes or where his landscaper got his crew? Talk is cheap, Mr. Dobbs. Illegal immigrants aren't causing the problem…we need to address our greed. Before it consumes us.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Killer Coyotes Terrorize Rich People!
Powell, Ohio is home to some of the wealthiest people in the greater Columbus area. Multi-million dollar homes grow like weeds in fields that were once part of small farms. Powell also lays claim to some impressive wooded lots, many of which attract those homeowners longing to escape the claustrophobic confines of urban living. But there’s trouble in those woods…trouble of the canine variety.
Coyotes have been inexplicably vilified by people for ages. For the most part the tiny Coyote, rarely tipping the scales over 40 pounds, is a skittish animal that preys upon small rodents but in some areas where habitat and natural food sources become scarce the coyote becomes an opportunistic feeder willing to rummage through trash, raid gardens and even gobble the occasional small pet. Attacks on humans are quite rare and have only occurred in extreme conditions. Pack hunting has been observed in isolated instances but the coyote, though highly social within its species, tends to hunt alone. They are timid animals that shun human contact. Rabies is a disease that can trigger dangerous behavior in any infected animal and seems to be the cause of aggressive behavior in coyotes.
This information is readily accessible today. A quick search on the web will reveal a number of websites more than happy to offer an objective view of the coyote and people in Powell most assuredly have internet access. They should be able to disseminate the truth and figure out how to live with the coyote in their midst. http://www.clemetparks.com/updates/notices/#coyote
It’s not complicated. In fact living with wildlife rarely is. All that is required is an acceptance of certain responsibilities. Responsibilities one would think a person willing to drop 3.5 million dollars on a wooded lot could readily accept. Securing garbage, protecting gardens and keeping an eye on small pets is all it takes and those are habits everybody should practice. The underlying rule is simple: don’t feed the animals. If people avoid that, contact with coyotes is minimal.
But people in Powell can’t be troubled with such monumental tasks. People in Powell want to feed the birds and the squirrels so they can enjoy nature, but they don’t want to contend with reality. Why should they be forced to invest in animal resistant trash receptacles when it would be easier for them to have somebody extirpate the offending wildlife?
Not long ago a man in Powell lamented to the editor of the Columbus Dispatch that he was regularly accosted by an aggressive deer on his way to the top of his drive to collect the morning paper. He seemed to think that the authorities needed to do something to address the issue of deer in his yard, a yard that happened to be adjacent to a large suburban park that encourages a healthy ecosystem. His story seems rather unlikely given that millions of deer encounters occur each week with the same result: the deer bounding away at amazing speed.
The coyote, however has sparked a firestorm. Self-righteous residents want action taken. At a recent meeting one woman, surprisingly inbred-looking for the esteemed village of Powell, pointed out that she lives right next to the woods and her children are at risk. Indeed they are, but more likely that risk comes from the nearby highway or the registered sex offenders in the area. The risk from coyotes is miniscule.
Even so, who put those children at risk? It’s not as if some eco-terrorist unloaded a truck of coyotes in Powell to upset the lives of the privileged and pampered. Islamic extremists in the midwest have proven to be surpisingly inept and don't generally deal with wilf animals. Coyotes have always been there. It’s just that urban sprawl has encroached on their habitat and the poor pups haven’t figured out how to handle it. Coyotes don’t get zoning notices.
Ironically people in Powell are also the fist to complain about raccoons, geese, groundhogs and squirrels; animals that have all enjoyed explosive population growth in light of a paucity of natural predators such as the coyote and its cousins the wolf and the diminutive fox. It’s the irrational fear demonstrated by the residents of Powell that virtually eliminated the predators at the top of the food chain. During the agrarian period of this country’s economic history farmers filled that role to keep their spreads flush. Now nature is making a comeback and people are getting in the way. Some of these people are collectors of animals much more dangerous than the coyote. One Powell resident is facing charges for letting an alligator escape in a local pond and not too long ago a missing boa constrictor turned up at a construction site. Sorry, but one pet alligator is infinitely more dangerous than a million wild coyotes.
It’s unfortunate to see the same sense of entitlement that rendered so many species extinct rear its ugly head in Powell. These people are the invaders. They made the choice to build expensive homes on large wooded lots. The least they could do is take it in stride and appreciate the cycle of life.
Coyotes have been inexplicably vilified by people for ages. For the most part the tiny Coyote, rarely tipping the scales over 40 pounds, is a skittish animal that preys upon small rodents but in some areas where habitat and natural food sources become scarce the coyote becomes an opportunistic feeder willing to rummage through trash, raid gardens and even gobble the occasional small pet. Attacks on humans are quite rare and have only occurred in extreme conditions. Pack hunting has been observed in isolated instances but the coyote, though highly social within its species, tends to hunt alone. They are timid animals that shun human contact. Rabies is a disease that can trigger dangerous behavior in any infected animal and seems to be the cause of aggressive behavior in coyotes.
This information is readily accessible today. A quick search on the web will reveal a number of websites more than happy to offer an objective view of the coyote and people in Powell most assuredly have internet access. They should be able to disseminate the truth and figure out how to live with the coyote in their midst. http://www.clemetparks.com/updates/notices/#coyote
It’s not complicated. In fact living with wildlife rarely is. All that is required is an acceptance of certain responsibilities. Responsibilities one would think a person willing to drop 3.5 million dollars on a wooded lot could readily accept. Securing garbage, protecting gardens and keeping an eye on small pets is all it takes and those are habits everybody should practice. The underlying rule is simple: don’t feed the animals. If people avoid that, contact with coyotes is minimal.
But people in Powell can’t be troubled with such monumental tasks. People in Powell want to feed the birds and the squirrels so they can enjoy nature, but they don’t want to contend with reality. Why should they be forced to invest in animal resistant trash receptacles when it would be easier for them to have somebody extirpate the offending wildlife?
Not long ago a man in Powell lamented to the editor of the Columbus Dispatch that he was regularly accosted by an aggressive deer on his way to the top of his drive to collect the morning paper. He seemed to think that the authorities needed to do something to address the issue of deer in his yard, a yard that happened to be adjacent to a large suburban park that encourages a healthy ecosystem. His story seems rather unlikely given that millions of deer encounters occur each week with the same result: the deer bounding away at amazing speed.
The coyote, however has sparked a firestorm. Self-righteous residents want action taken. At a recent meeting one woman, surprisingly inbred-looking for the esteemed village of Powell, pointed out that she lives right next to the woods and her children are at risk. Indeed they are, but more likely that risk comes from the nearby highway or the registered sex offenders in the area. The risk from coyotes is miniscule.
Even so, who put those children at risk? It’s not as if some eco-terrorist unloaded a truck of coyotes in Powell to upset the lives of the privileged and pampered. Islamic extremists in the midwest have proven to be surpisingly inept and don't generally deal with wilf animals. Coyotes have always been there. It’s just that urban sprawl has encroached on their habitat and the poor pups haven’t figured out how to handle it. Coyotes don’t get zoning notices.
Ironically people in Powell are also the fist to complain about raccoons, geese, groundhogs and squirrels; animals that have all enjoyed explosive population growth in light of a paucity of natural predators such as the coyote and its cousins the wolf and the diminutive fox. It’s the irrational fear demonstrated by the residents of Powell that virtually eliminated the predators at the top of the food chain. During the agrarian period of this country’s economic history farmers filled that role to keep their spreads flush. Now nature is making a comeback and people are getting in the way. Some of these people are collectors of animals much more dangerous than the coyote. One Powell resident is facing charges for letting an alligator escape in a local pond and not too long ago a missing boa constrictor turned up at a construction site. Sorry, but one pet alligator is infinitely more dangerous than a million wild coyotes.
It’s unfortunate to see the same sense of entitlement that rendered so many species extinct rear its ugly head in Powell. These people are the invaders. They made the choice to build expensive homes on large wooded lots. The least they could do is take it in stride and appreciate the cycle of life.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Vick's got to be punished
Michael Vick has been indicted on federal charges connected to dog fighting. This has been an ongoing investigation and the indictment is the first indication that authorities have anything meaningful to connect Vick to any criminal activity. An indictment is serious business but it is still a long way from a conviction.
Even if convicted on all charges Vick won’t likely see prison walls. Animal abuse charges are minor issues and somebody with a relatively clean record will likely receive a suspended sentence, hefty fines and arduous probation. One could argue that Vick took part and murdering underperforming animals in addition to abusing those who met his expectations but the most serious component of Vick’s alleged activity is crossing state lines for the purpose of committing a crime. By federal and state standards the real problem with dog fighting is the illegal gambling that occurs around it.
Of course Vick is a rich man who can afford powerful attorneys. The odds of the charges in the indictment actually remaining intact by the time a trial begins are slim. Indictments are relatively easy to obtain because. The grand jury simply decides whether or not there is enough substance to an allegation to warrant a trial. The defense is very limited in what it can do during the grand jury proceedings but once the indictment is handed down and the trial process begins motions can be filed and charges can be amended to lesser offenses.
The most likely scenario is that Vick will use his money to squeak out of this. Somebody in his circle will fall on a sword in exchange for financial security and Vick will get off with a handful of misdemeanor charges. There simply isn’t enough meat to the indictment to really put the heat on Vick. He faces a statutory maximum of six years but with no serious legal issues in his past it would be hard for any judge to justify a significant sentence. That puts Vick in the driver’s seat when it comes to negotiating a plea agreement.
Perhaps our legal system needs to put some teeth into laws prohibiting crimes against animals. The methods with which Vick and his cohorts are accused of disposing of under-performing animals are appalling but people get away with abusing animals every day. Have you ever seen chickens transported from one place to the next via flatbed? Do you know how that Butterball Turkey came to be? Where do we draw the line?
Americans hold certain animals in higher esteem than other cultures do. In this country dogs and cats become beloved members of our families but in other parts of the world dogs and cats are beloved parts of the menu. Saint Bernard is coveted for its tender, juicy meat and raised in many Asian countries the way we raise cattle in the United States. Ultimately it’s subjective. Cows are sacred in India and delicious in Indiana.
The court of the federal government might not be able to punish Michael Vick to our satisfaction but the court of public opinion can. Michael Vick is a public figure and his livelihood depends on his marketability as much as it does his athletic ability. Sports are not all about performance. The NFL is built around money. As talented as Michael Vick is, nobody would play him if his presence on a roster had a negative impact on ticket sales. The Atlanta Falcons would cut him without hesitation if people refuse to support the team as long as Vick is on it. The NFL would suspend Vick with extreme prejudice if such an action was necessary to remain in good standing fans.
The great thing about the court of public opinion is that it doesn’t have to be fair or just. Even if Michael Vick is the innocent victim of a poor choice of friends we can hold him accountable for that. The court of public opinion doesn’t owe anybody anything. It’s totally arbitrary and decidedly cruel. There’s no due process and everything is admissible. You are either in the court’s good graces or you are not.
So while the lawyers and the reporters and commissioners all tiptoe around the legal issues the general public can render its decision and put the screws to Michael Vick. Whether the criminal charges are substantial enough to stick or not, we have enough evidence on Michael Vick to render a decision. He’s a jerk with bad judgment and he is no longer worthy of our esteem. Punish him accordingly.
Even if convicted on all charges Vick won’t likely see prison walls. Animal abuse charges are minor issues and somebody with a relatively clean record will likely receive a suspended sentence, hefty fines and arduous probation. One could argue that Vick took part and murdering underperforming animals in addition to abusing those who met his expectations but the most serious component of Vick’s alleged activity is crossing state lines for the purpose of committing a crime. By federal and state standards the real problem with dog fighting is the illegal gambling that occurs around it.
Of course Vick is a rich man who can afford powerful attorneys. The odds of the charges in the indictment actually remaining intact by the time a trial begins are slim. Indictments are relatively easy to obtain because. The grand jury simply decides whether or not there is enough substance to an allegation to warrant a trial. The defense is very limited in what it can do during the grand jury proceedings but once the indictment is handed down and the trial process begins motions can be filed and charges can be amended to lesser offenses.
The most likely scenario is that Vick will use his money to squeak out of this. Somebody in his circle will fall on a sword in exchange for financial security and Vick will get off with a handful of misdemeanor charges. There simply isn’t enough meat to the indictment to really put the heat on Vick. He faces a statutory maximum of six years but with no serious legal issues in his past it would be hard for any judge to justify a significant sentence. That puts Vick in the driver’s seat when it comes to negotiating a plea agreement.
Perhaps our legal system needs to put some teeth into laws prohibiting crimes against animals. The methods with which Vick and his cohorts are accused of disposing of under-performing animals are appalling but people get away with abusing animals every day. Have you ever seen chickens transported from one place to the next via flatbed? Do you know how that Butterball Turkey came to be? Where do we draw the line?
Americans hold certain animals in higher esteem than other cultures do. In this country dogs and cats become beloved members of our families but in other parts of the world dogs and cats are beloved parts of the menu. Saint Bernard is coveted for its tender, juicy meat and raised in many Asian countries the way we raise cattle in the United States. Ultimately it’s subjective. Cows are sacred in India and delicious in Indiana.
The court of the federal government might not be able to punish Michael Vick to our satisfaction but the court of public opinion can. Michael Vick is a public figure and his livelihood depends on his marketability as much as it does his athletic ability. Sports are not all about performance. The NFL is built around money. As talented as Michael Vick is, nobody would play him if his presence on a roster had a negative impact on ticket sales. The Atlanta Falcons would cut him without hesitation if people refuse to support the team as long as Vick is on it. The NFL would suspend Vick with extreme prejudice if such an action was necessary to remain in good standing fans.
The great thing about the court of public opinion is that it doesn’t have to be fair or just. Even if Michael Vick is the innocent victim of a poor choice of friends we can hold him accountable for that. The court of public opinion doesn’t owe anybody anything. It’s totally arbitrary and decidedly cruel. There’s no due process and everything is admissible. You are either in the court’s good graces or you are not.
So while the lawyers and the reporters and commissioners all tiptoe around the legal issues the general public can render its decision and put the screws to Michael Vick. Whether the criminal charges are substantial enough to stick or not, we have enough evidence on Michael Vick to render a decision. He’s a jerk with bad judgment and he is no longer worthy of our esteem. Punish him accordingly.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Stupid is as stupid does
You can tell that George W. Bush is the product of wealth and privilege. He refuses to take any responsibility for his mistakes and gets down right snotty when he is confronted with the mess he has made. Iraq has become such an obvious mess that most Republicans have gone to great lengths to distance themselves from Bush and the few who haven't publicly condemned his administration stop well short of supporting him. He's a true lame duck.
The entire country wants Bush to extract our troops from Iraq but Bush refuses. He characterizes a possible withdrawal as a defeat for the country but in reality he is simply too selfish to accept the fact that he was wrong. The defeat is all his. Pulling out of Iraq is not surrendering, it's just good sense. If the alleged government in Iraq isn't ready to stand on its own by now it never will. Perhaps it's best to let the rival factions wage war on each other to thin the field before we move troops back in. But Bush won't have it. He declared victory in Iraq four years ago and he's not about to abandon that vision. We will stay the course regardless of where that course goes.
This makes Bush a very dangerous man as his regime heads into its final throes. He's short on time. His political platform has been abandoned by his own party. The Rovian Republican era has come to an end. The 2008 election will be a departure from the neo-conservative theocracy that has ensnared this country in self-righteous nationalism and Bush will be held up as a scapegoat for the myriad problems this country will face in years to come. It's quite possible members of his administration will do time in prison before it's all said and done.
So count on Bush to leave a permanent mark on this country. One could argue that he's already done that with his Supreme Court nominations but with the power granted to him by the conservative majority on the high court Bush might very well be able to pull of the unthinkable. Even though he's struggling for approval, Bush managed to secure more power than his office was ever intended to hold and as a grateful public cheers his mandatory departure it would not be beyond the audacity of this petulant spoiled brat to spite us all. It could be a symbolic gesture such as replacing the Statue of Liberty with an oil derrick or something more devious like replacing the Bill of Rights with the Ten Commandments.
The frightening prospect of what this madman might do on his way out is precisely why he should be impeached. It's not uncommon for presidents to do things outrageous as they leave but those actions are generally limited to pardons. Bush might just do something really crazy like nuke Oregon or kick Massachusetts out of the Union. And then declare war on them.
The entire country wants Bush to extract our troops from Iraq but Bush refuses. He characterizes a possible withdrawal as a defeat for the country but in reality he is simply too selfish to accept the fact that he was wrong. The defeat is all his. Pulling out of Iraq is not surrendering, it's just good sense. If the alleged government in Iraq isn't ready to stand on its own by now it never will. Perhaps it's best to let the rival factions wage war on each other to thin the field before we move troops back in. But Bush won't have it. He declared victory in Iraq four years ago and he's not about to abandon that vision. We will stay the course regardless of where that course goes.
This makes Bush a very dangerous man as his regime heads into its final throes. He's short on time. His political platform has been abandoned by his own party. The Rovian Republican era has come to an end. The 2008 election will be a departure from the neo-conservative theocracy that has ensnared this country in self-righteous nationalism and Bush will be held up as a scapegoat for the myriad problems this country will face in years to come. It's quite possible members of his administration will do time in prison before it's all said and done.
So count on Bush to leave a permanent mark on this country. One could argue that he's already done that with his Supreme Court nominations but with the power granted to him by the conservative majority on the high court Bush might very well be able to pull of the unthinkable. Even though he's struggling for approval, Bush managed to secure more power than his office was ever intended to hold and as a grateful public cheers his mandatory departure it would not be beyond the audacity of this petulant spoiled brat to spite us all. It could be a symbolic gesture such as replacing the Statue of Liberty with an oil derrick or something more devious like replacing the Bill of Rights with the Ten Commandments.
The frightening prospect of what this madman might do on his way out is precisely why he should be impeached. It's not uncommon for presidents to do things outrageous as they leave but those actions are generally limited to pardons. Bush might just do something really crazy like nuke Oregon or kick Massachusetts out of the Union. And then declare war on them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)