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.

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.

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.

People as pawns

Mike Nifong is taking a rightful beating in the press. He violated the public trust when he refused to accept reality and proceeded to extend the now infamous Duke Lacrosse rape case. By now you know the gory details of how Nifong tried to parlay his diligent pursuit of the case into strong support from the black community in the Raleigh Durham area.

People have accused Nifong of bowing to pressure from the black community. As soon as this case was reported, people were worried that an African American stripper would see her right to justice overridden by the rich white parents of the boys who assaulted her. As it turns out, Crystal Gail Mangum was lying but since Nifong refused to call her on it nobody knows why. She should be charged but until Nifong is hung out to dry, she’ll remain on the back burner.

Most of the pressure came from the press, namely ESPN, who loved digging into a scandal involving spoiled rich white boys. Every once in a while sports reporters like to pretend to be real journalists. Following their lead the rest of the networks jumped aboard and the entire nation wanted to see heads roll. In Nifong’s defense, he had to press forward. If he made the call to drop the case in the midst of the media storm nobody would have bought it. Nifong had no choice but to wait. Sadly, he allowed himself to become too invested in winning and in the end he was guilty of pursuing what can only be described as malicious prosecution. The press even dropped the bone after DNA evidence all but exonerated the boys.

The press had egg on its face and everybody blamed Nifong. It didn’t matter that virtually every journalist who “covered” the story took the alleged victim’s side and nobody seemed to remember that the big concern was that the rich parents of the accused boys would bury justice under a big pile of legal currency. We all share part of the blame for the way everything snowballed but Nifong will take the fall. As well he should, he was the one with a legal obligation to drop the charges in spite of what the press and public might think. That doesn’t absolve the media of its ethical responsibility to not sensationalize a story.

Some outlets, particularly those with ultra-conservative leanings, have expressed great sympathy for the lacrosse players. While there’s no question they were subjected to excruciating public humiliation, they were not victims of some great social injustice. The system ultimately worked for them. They were wrongfully accused but they didn’t even have to stand trial. Yes, they endured scrutiny but that’s part of life. Let’s not forget that it was their own reckless behavior that put them in the position to be accused. The entire Lacrosse team had a bad reputation heading into this mess and it was their decision to have a raucous party complete with strippers. They may or may not have broken any laws but you don’t have to break laws to pay the consequences for your actions. If anything these kids learned a valuable lesson. At least they didn’t have to go to prison.


Most people can’t imagine being accused of a crime they didn’t commit. That’s a sentiment often expressed by the members of the pity party that has formed around the Duke Lacrosse boys. Being falsely accused is nothing compared to being wrongfully convicted. These kids didn’t even come close to enduring that. Their case didn’t even go to trial.

We have no idea how many people are wrongfully convicted every year. Nifong is nothing. Prosecuting attorneys often have political aspirations and they hand their hats on conviction rates. Prosecutors are more concerned with wins and losses than they are with justice. We’d like to think that’s not the case but it is. We know for a fact that people get sentenced to death for crimes they didn’t commit. If we can sentence the wrong person to death what’s going on with lesser crimes?

Rudy Giuliani made a name for himself as a hard-nosed prosecutor. Some people loved his stance on crime but there is some concern over his zealous pursuit of criminals, particularly the high profile cases that garnered plenty of media attention. He parlayed his tough persona into a successful bid to become mayor of New York where his administration was credited with cleaning up New York but at a steep price. The deaths of Amadou Diallo and Patrick Dorismond seemed to be a direct result of Giuliani’s hard line style.

Another dangerous aspect of the criminal justice system is the shameless cronyism. In Columbus Ohio two men, Tim Howard and Gary Lamar James were sentenced to death for back in 1977. They were accused killing a security guard during a bank robbery. Both men were arrested when they contacted the police department to clear their names once they heard they were accused but their desire to set the record straight was not taken into account by assistant prosecutor George Ellis who clearly suspended his sense of justice.

The evidence simply didn’t hold up. Reasonable doubt is so painfully evident a modern day prosecutor would have refused to go forward and a reasonable defense attorney would have had the case dismissed. But this was Columbus, Ohio in 1977 and the defendants were two black men. It wasn’t too long ago that being black was all the evidence any jury needed to see. That didn’t stop George Ellis from withholding evidence and quite possibly suborning perjury. Activities he steadfastly denies to this day.

And where is he today? Still at the Franklin County Prosecutor’s office working for Ron O’Brien as chief legal counsel. It’s no surprise that O’Brien, who started his career at the prosecutor’s office as a legal intern in 1972, utilized taxpayer resources to prevent Centurion Ministries from getting a fair shot at justice for Howard and James. O’Brien’s got a vested interest in the continued suspension of justice.

Ultimately Howard and James were freed after spending nearly 30 years behind bars and the men responsible for putting them there were roundly chastised for the miscarriage of justice. Chastised but not punished.

Ron O’Brien wouldn’t stop there. When it came down to compensating Tim Howard and Gary Lamar James for the lifetime that had been stolen from them, O’Brien refused consider any financial reward and insisted on a wrongful incarceration trial. These men might have been found not guilty after spending 30 years in prison but if they wanted to receive any remuneration for their trouble they would have to prove themselves innocent.

Tim Howard went through the wrongful incarceration trial and was awarded $2.5 million but he died of a heart attack less than a year later. Gary Lamar James quickly settled for $1.5 million rather than endure the trial process. Surely he heard the ticking of the clock. Would you spend 30 years in prison for $1.5 million? Would Ron O’Brien?

Let’s not forget that these men were sentenced to die and would have been executed had some touchy feely liberal not managed to suspend the death penalty in Ohio. Howard and James were spared death in 1978 when their sentences were automatically commuted to life. Had they been executed nobody would have known of their innocence.

At least they got out. Of course, Tim Howard didn’t get much of a chance to make up for lost time but maybe Gary Lamar James will. Maybe. Prison has a funny way of taking an exponential number of years. You might serve six but you lose a few more on the back end. People who do time often see their life expectancies shrink much in the same was smokers and diabetics do.

But what about the people who don’t get out? Organizations like Centurion Ministries only have a fraction of the resources prosecuting attorneys around the country do and there are plenty of corrupt offices around the country where political allies take turns running for office. Let’s also bear in mind that nobody’s out there trying to overturn wrongful sentences for armed robbery or grand theft auto. If a sentence is under 10 years it’s probably not worth the effort. Unless you talk to the person doing 10 years. Compare that with prosecutors who see the criminal justice system as a mechanism for publicity. Giuliani loved to march his defendants through a gauntlet of reporters and camera men. Do you think small time politicians are more or less inclined to exploit media attention?

Ron O’Brien has never worked in the private sector. Most of his career has been in the Franklin County Prosecutor’s Office with his brief stint in the City Prosecutor’s office bridging the gap from his run as an appointed lackey to the elected position he currently holds. Voters might be able to send him a message but in the inbred world of the criminal justice system it’s hard to break the cycle. These are lawyers and they have created checks and balances that ensure that lawyers remain in control.

And Ron O’Brien is not exactly a bad guy. He was way off base in this situation but overall it seems as though his office does a decent job. That we know of. Again: how many people are serving time for crimes they didn’t commit?

The only answer is imposing stiff penalties on prosecutors who get caught pursuing these cases. Since the Duke lacrosse boys didn’t even suffer the indignity of a trial, a lengthy prison sentence for Nifong might be a little over the top but he must be held accountable to the people he was supposedly representing. He didn’t commit a crime against the accused young men but he did commit a crime against the people who elected him. In former assistant prosecutor Ellis’ case justice demands he pay a price. He stole almost 30 years from two men and he did it on behalf of the people. We should at least have a trial to determine the extent of his culpability and allow the people to determine his fate.

Elected positions generally possess great power. As citizens we trust our elected officials to be fair, honorable and just. Those elected officials must wield that trust and power responsibly. When the abuse of power, or even a lapse in judgment, results in innocent people being killed, put to death or otherwise harmed, punishment should be swift and severe. We know that we can’t trust elected officials to uphold justice but we can be certain they will look out for their best interests.

Racism where you least expect it

In case you don’t know him, Gary Sheffield is a major league baseball player. He’s one of those guys who has the athletic ability to be among the best players in the history of the game but through the years he has displayed an attitude better suited for a maximum security prison. He exhibits all of the personality traits that demonstrate a great deal of insecurity.

Gary has been talking out of his ass since he came into the league. He’s a liar and a cheat (he has been linked to steroids and human growth hormone). He’s a selfish jerk obsessed with personal success even at the expense of his team. Everywhere Gary has played people have been impressed with his ability to hit a baseball and disgusted with his inability to say anything intelligent. Still, Gary’s recent comments about the dominance of Latin players are far beyond the conventional limits of stupidity.

It’s important to note that Sheffield is black. This wouldn’t be important if Gary didn’t make it such an issue. Gary’s one of those guys who would set a kitten on fire and blame the negative reaction on racial bias. Gary makes race an issue in every discussion. He realizes that people don’t like him and he assumes that it is because he is black. This is because he assumes all black people are jerks just like him. That’s probably because his friends, like Barry Bonds, are jerks too.

Some concern has been expressed over the dramatic decline of black players in major league baseball. The study began innocently enough…with Asian players making such a splash people were curious to see how the demographics of the game have changed. They were stunned to see that the percentage of African American players is almost half of what it was 25 years ago. The percentage of white players is smaller as well but not enough to cause concern. Of course the number of Hispanic players has increased.

Most people believe that the decline is because fewer African American kids are playing baseball. Cities aren’t keeping urban parks up, inner city schools aren’t offering sports, youth leagues are suffering from a lack of funds and volunteers…all of these reason make sense. It’s also possible that more black kids are drawn to sports such as basketball where financial rewards are immediate. LeBron James had a 100 million dollar shoe contract before he graduated high school while top baseball prospects have to prove themselves at the major league level before they can ink a big contract. Then you have the Nintendo effect: more and more African American kids are playing their games from the confines of the living room couch.

Gary Sheffield doesn’t buy any of that. He believes that racism is to blame. Black players are being forced out of baseball by cheaper immigrant labor.

Gary Sheffield explained that Hispanic players do what they’re told and endure more disrespect than a black player would tolerate. To hear Sheffield tell it, there are hundreds of black players with superior playing ability sitting at home because some Mexican player is willing to be humiliated and take less money. Sheffield claims that his race is not going to take such treatment. His race demands to be treated with respect and that is a concession that managers are not willing to make.

This is offensive to everybody. First of all, Hispanic players are not playing for less money. Two of the highest paid players in the league have names ending in “z” and one of them, Manny Ramirez is notorious for not following orders. He’s not necessarily a combative jerk but he’s definitely aloof and his attitude is sometimes problematic for managers. Manny gets a pass because his behavioral issues aren’t malicious. He’s just weird. Moreover, nobody’s trading performance for obedience with him; Manny’s getting paid all that money because he’s the best overall hitter in the game. Ramirez, even with his quirky behavior, is a much better player than Sheffield. Period.

When it comes to sports race is rarely an issue anymore. People want wins often at any cost. Players are paid far more than they’re worth and teams put up with more nonsense from those players than they should. Gary Sheffield’s entire career is a classic example of that. He’s one of the most overpaid players in the game and arguably the biggest jerk in the league. Nobody’s replacing him with some Hispanic player who will smile and do what he’s told. It’s ironic because if there is one black player in the league who should be replaced with a mediocre Mexican it’s Gary Sheffield.

The people who should be most offended by these comments are African Americans. Clearly Gary Sheffield believes that his behavior is typical of his race. He actually thinks that he is a positive black role model. In Gary Sheffield’s world a black man who respects authority as it relates to his job is an Uncle Tom and a black player who puts in extra effort without being paid extra money is a sell out.

Sheffield typifies the type of athlete American fans love to hate. He’s a spoiled brat who, at the age of 39 still believes that throwing tantrums and pouting is how to get his way. Sadly, because he can still hit with occasional power, it works too often. Coaches and players cater to him because he carries a career batting average of .297.

It’s unfortunate that Gary Sheffield is black because it gives him something to hide behind. As long as he looks in the mirror and sees a black face looking back at him he assumes it’s the color of his skin that people judge him by when in reality it is the content of his character.

Gary Sheffield won’t be embarrassed by his comments and if he is grilled on it he will undoubtedly claim that his words were taken out of context and blame that on some convoluted conspiracy by white journalists to impugn his credibility. Sadly, it’s Sheffield who is guilty of racism. He’s also guilty of embodying a negative stereotype unfairly associated with black athletes. Most African American baseball players don’t act like Gary Sheffield but guys like Sheffield seek out the spot light because they need to feed their massive egos. If they can’t get face time by being the best they talk the loudest and if that doesn’t work they say or do something controversial. It’s unfortunate because there are great players, like Ryan Howard, who deserve more attention.

It’s also unfortunate because Sheffield drew attention away from an important subject. We should be concerned about the declining numbers of African American baseball players and take steps to identify why this trend is developing but when a guy like Gary Sheffield claims to represent his race it’s hard to see this as a problem. Baseball doesn’t need more guys like that.

What's the fuss over Dog Fighting?

Clinton Portis can’t figure out why everybody’s up in arms over Michael Vick’s dog fighting ring. The way Portis sees is the dogs belong to Vick, the house belongs to Vick so who cares? When advised that dog fighting is a felony Portis seemed surprised.

The big deal about dog fighting is that it is decidedly cruel. We’re not talking about a tussle between a couple of puppies in the front yard. Dog fighting is a brutal death sport where the losing dog is mortally wounded if not killed. Often the winning dog sustains severe injuries and it is not uncommon for both animals to be left for dead in some abandoned pole barn.

The dogs are bred to be killing machines. When they get loose they attack. A fighting dog running free will savage family pets, children and even full grown adults. These are dogs that have been mistreated to the point of murderous rage. They are raised and trained to be bigger, stronger and faster than normal members of the same breed.

Training methods include treadmills, heavy chains, tires, and regular beatings. Dogs are shocked, burned, and cut in order to deaden nerves and encourage growth of scar tissue. Perhaps the sickest training method is the practice of rendering a passive dog, often a stolen family pet, defenseless and allowing the killer in training to hone its skills. The hell holes where fighting dogs are trained often include the mauled bodies of mild mannered breeds such as retrievers, boxers, German shepherds and huskies, many with their mouths taped shut to ensure the valuable fighting dog wouldn’t fall victim to a lucky desperate chomp.

This is not some misunderstood vocation. These are not happy dogs. Certain breeds enjoy performing the tasks for which they were bred. Border collies love to herd. Anything. Sheep are great because sheep love to be herded but border collies can be seen at any dog park trying in vain to round up the other dogs. They don’t much like to play fetch but they will give chase to establish order. How dare that other dog leave the imaginary corral? It’s not cruel to put a border collie to work at a golf course to run geese off the greens. Border collies must be trained…not to herd but to stop herding on command.

Huskies like to pull. The Iditarod comes under fire from animal rights groups every year because of the risks posed to the dogs. Of the hundreds of dogs who race each year some will get hurt and on occasion one or two might die but great lengths are taken to ensure veterinary care is available along the way. The huskies, however, love every grueling mile. Huskies live to run and pulling a sled makes all of that running worthwhile. Anybody who has owned a husky or a husky mix will tell you that there isn’t much you can do to engage them…they don’t fetch or play catch…but once they have something to pull they don’t want to stop running. Huskies will run themselves to death and die happy. And on the rare occasion a husky doesn’t want to run, nobody will make him. Huskies are stubborn dogs.

Various breeds, including those used in fighting, make excellent guard dogs. These animals require more training because they aren’t inclined to play with strangers. Strangers are a threat to the pack and these dogs are committed to protecting their pack. Even though they can be trained to attack, the idea isn’t to kill but to subdue. Dogs will kill food but when they fight they fight to submission. Generally a guard dog will handle everything with a curled lip and a low growl. Often that’s enough to get the job done.

Retrievers come by their name honestly. They are working dogs too and they love to fetch things. A Retriever will work himself into a frenzied lather on a sweltering day chasing a Frisbee for hours. They’ll swim hundreds of yards to bring that stick back to the person who threw it and literally beg for it to be thrown right back in. Guide dogs, though not generally of a particular breed, enjoy their vocation and while it’s not nearly as fun as chasing a tennis a ball across a soccer field, the pack mindset makes the work enjoyable. They love feeling needed.

And that’s the problem. Dogs aren’t really made for fighting. Dogs are socially oriented. Since dogs are direct descendants from wolves they do indeed possess formidable killing skills and in certain instances they can fight quite well but fighting is reserved for protection. In the wild wolves fight with rival packs for territory and within the pack dynamic they challenge each other for dominance but it is rare for these skirmishes to be deadly. Moreover, domestic dogs have had that instinct suppressed in order to protect man from the politics of the pack. People who raise wolves have experienced the occasional challenge for dominance, an inconvenience traditional dog owners don’t endure thanks to thousands of years of breeding and training. .

Dogs aren’t murderers. It goes against their design. To instill that compulsion in a dog the trainer must utilize exceptionally cruel tactics. In many cases these tactics are counter productive. For every dog that becomes a worthy fighter, three become chronically timid. They’ll bite when approached but they won’t go on the offensive. These dogs are often sold to novice fight breeders and subsequently abandoned because they simply aren’t competitive. So most of the dogs entering this world fail to meet the standards of market value; they are expendable.

People who are drawn to the dog fighting culture are not good people. This is not a vice like high stakes poker or midnight lap dances. These are people who simply have no respect for life. People who can’t respect animals generally can’t respect other people either. Dog fighting is a sick criminal act and the people who promote it, watch it or even defend it are dangerous.

Pope misses the point

The Catholic Church represents religious corruption at its worst although the current incarnation pales in comparison to the totalitarian religion that plagued Europe during what history refers to as the Dark Ages. Crusades, inquisitions and assassinations were the tools employed by the Vatican to destroy rivals and oppress the masses. Back then the Catholic Church rejected remarkable advancements achieved by the cultures that preceded the Holy Roman Empire. Concepts like sewage containment, medicine and personal hygiene were cast aside along with philosophy, art and science. People who sought enlightenment were tortured and killed.

Today the Catholic Church has stopped murdering people…at least in large numbers. Now the Catholic Church is run by impotent, beet-faced old men who scream their stifling rhetoric from ornate thrones. Although the Pope claims to speak the word of God, he and the rest of the Vatican power elite lack the faith to appear in public without armor and a highly trained security detail. Apparently God can’t be trusted to protect the Pope from those who might wish him harm. That’s your first clue that the Church believes more in power than it does in divinity. The Pope is worshipped as a demigod but he still needs to cruise the streets in an armored car. Ironic, eh?

Recently Pope Benedict dropped by to visit Brazil. South and Central America are Catholic strongholds, a holdover from the brutal manner in which Spanish and Portuguese missionaries imposed Catholicism on the indigenous people. Worship or die was the gist of the Church’s message back then. It hasn’t changed much. The church just can’t follow though on exterminating heretics anymore. They are trying to get back to that place, though. That’s why Benedict, a man with ties to the NAZI party, is there. He knows a thing or two about extermination.

Latin America struggles with overpopulation, under-education, disease, poverty and economic exploitation. Rain forests are being consumed at an alarming rate but the people are not seeing any of the financial gain. Typically American corporations like Cargil purchase huge blocks of land, slash and burn it through some local shell company and farm it until the soil is depleted. American get cheap stuff while Brazilians get the shaft.

Latin America needs protection from exploitation; they need birth control and help in educating the people to improve the quality of life. Did the Pope offer any assistance? Nope. He denounced abortion and encouraged people to devote more time to their faith. Never mind the AIDS epidemic spreading through South America; forget about the alarming number of babies born into poverty. Don’t worry about the literacy rate. Go to church and don’t forget to tithe. In order to bolster support for the Catholic Church, the Vatican opted to throw Latin America a bone and offer up a Latin American Saint. Amen. How about a clinic?

Elsewhere, particularly in places where people can read, the Catholic Church is struggling. In the U.S. the religiots flock toward evangelical denominations because they like an aggressive religion. Conservative Catholicism has all the teeth of Presbyterianism in this country. Our Bible thumpers need people to hate. The Catholic Church avoids hating people and focuses on issues. That’s why South and Central America are so important. The Catholic Church has an endless supply of ignorant people who can be molded into reliable Catholics. It’s not India, but if the church can stamp out birth control it might be soon.

However when it comes to those issues the Catholic Church is as blustery and misguided as Pat Robertson. The Vatican’s opposition to abortion is one thing. There are reasonable people who make solid arguments against abortion. It’s a genuinely debatable subject. But the Church also frowns on the use of birth control. Catholic leaders have taken foreign aid organizations to task for distributing condoms and showing people how to use them in African countries devastated by AIDS. The Catholic Church supports an abstinence only message and feels condoms are simply immoral. There’s no logical reason to oppose condoms. Perhaps the Church should think about making sex without a rubber a more severe sin than sex with one. Seven Hail Mary’s instead of five.

The Catholic Church acknowledges that people will make mistakes and sin, which would seem to provide a reason to support the use of condoms. To Catholics, sex outside of marriage is a sin but so is killing yourself. There are places in the world where sex is practically suicide, so why not deliver condoms to people with a stern message about morality? We have Catholic Priests who can’t keep it in their pants…how can we expect some 17 year-old Brazilian boy to resist temptation? Especially in Brazil!!! Have you seen the women there?


The Catholic Church limped toward progress under Pope John Paul II. He tried to fashion himself into a bit of a humanitarian. He recognized the real problems in the world and tried to create enough flexibility in the Church to address them. Mother Theresa was often criticized by Bishops and Cardinals for not promoting Catholicism aggressively enough but John Paul encouraged her to continue helping people. She might not have put butts in the seats on Sunday but she was doing a lot of good. Bishop Deamond Tutu ruffled a lot of feathers for getting caught up in political skirmishes but John Paul, although Tutu was not Catholic, went out of his way to support and praise Tutu for his efforts.

John Paul II still held to conservative views on sexuality and contraception but not to the forceful extent that Benedict does. It seemed that John Paul II wanted the Vatican to focus on the bigger picture and unify the world to promote peace. Perhaps the grandiose platform ignored the smaller issues the regular parishioner could relate to. Benedict is clearly thinking small.

It’s a dangerous time for that. The gap between the rich and the poor is expanding. The world is a hectic place and people need all the help they can get. An organization as powerful as the Catholic Church should be focused on real problems not rhetorical issues. Fire and Brimstone might sell tickets but what good is that if the audience isn’t there to buy them?

Who's Really Supporting the Troops?

As public sentiment against the war grows, war hawks have escalated their assertion that protesting the war is tantamount to disrespecting our troops. They claim that our soldiers are disheartened that so many people believe they have failed. This is a cowardly tactic employed by the shameless people who have engaged this country in an unjust war.

If the soldiers feel that the public has lost faith in them it is only because these same people are telling them as much…Lying to them. Unlike Vietnam, where public resentment was projected on the men and women who served, those who oppose this war have been extraordinarily cautious in their rhetoric. Nobody wants our troops to feel disrespected.

Some of the Democrats in Congress clamored to cut funding for the war but the Bush Administration quickly characterized that as an attack on the troops. The idea of cutting funding was intended to give Bush no other option but to bring our forces home. Even though that intent was clearly explained, war hawks immediately began waving yellow ribbons. Talk about disrespectful.

Those opposed to the war haven’t lied to the American people. They didn’t stage the Jessica Lynch rescue nor did they make a mockery of Pat Tillman’s death. It’s the war hawks who have attacked individuals, like Cindy Sheehan, and made matters personal.

There are soldiers, active and retired, who are convinced that victory is the only option. They insist that withdrawing now means that the terrorists won but withdrawing forces now is not really surrendering. Sometimes withdrawing from a bad course of action to regroup and develop a more efficient plan is how to win a war. There’s a difference between battles and wars.

The notion that we can’t abandon what can only be described as a bad decision is the same imperialistic philosophy that made it possible for Colonial forces to upset the superior British military. British commanders refused to concede failure in their plan and eventually lost the war. They were trained to fight big, so the Colonists made themselves small.

Like Britain, the US has spread itself too thin to manage an unconventional war on an unfamiliar battlefield. During the Revolutionary War, Britain bolstered its forces with mercenaries from Germany known as Hessians. These soldiers were effective in traditional warfare, but as the battle wore on the Hessians lacked the passion to finish the job. They were there for the money.

In Iraq, the Bush Administration has contracted its own Hessians in the form of international security companies that employ mercenaries. Many of the mercenaries are former US soldiers who get paid 10 times the salary our regular troops receive. Furthermore, these mercenaries happily convey the disparity to our soldiers in order to help these security forms recruit more talent. That damages morale far more than people at home demanding an exit strategy.

Iraq is and, aside from the 15 years Saddam held sway, has always been a chaotic mess. The problem is the nomadic nature of the culture. Even though the tiny tribes have consolidated their power into larger units, Iraq is a fractured culture. In addition to the religious conflicts between Sunni and Shiite Muslims you also have disputes between Arabs, Persians, Kurds and Turks. Even if the religious issue is resolved, the ethnic clashes will continue. And yet, we’re still supposed to believe that victory is attainable.

Of course victory has not even been defined. Bush seems intent on fighting until we win but he has never addressed how we will know when we’ve won. Even the most passionate soldier has to be discouraged by the intangibility of Bush’s goal. As difficult as any mission would be in an area as complex as Iraq, victory anywhere is impossible if it is not specifically defined. Technically speaking, we aren’t even fighting a war right now. We aren’t even certain who are enemy is.

The public is aware of this. An Iraqi government has been installed but it clearly has no power. Extremists from all sides are able to undermine any authority the government has which makes it seem likely that this government wasn’t really approved by the people so much as it was favored by US officials. Bush has indicated that the US will stand down when the Iraqi government stands up but we have no idea when that will happen or if it is possible. The government is secular, as any government most be if it will successfully serve people of different creeds, but most of the country wants a theocracy. The problem is that those who want a theocracy can’t agree. War isn’t the answer. The fundamentalists feed on war and chaos. War frightens people and drives them to extremism.

It’s unfortunate that Bush and his cronies didn’t heed the advice of his own father. Removing a tyrant like Saddam without understanding the complicated issues haunting Iraq was a terrible idea. Many of the war hawks are resigned to agree. However, they insist that we can’t turn back the clock and our only option it to stay the course and see this thing through.

That’s ridiculous. You don’t keep paddling full force down a river if you think there might be a waterfall ahead. You don’t keep driving down the highway when you realize you’re heading into oncoming traffic. Successful military leaders throughout history have been known to withdraw from hopeless battles rather than incur too many losses, but giving up a battle doesn’t concede the war. Great leaders aren’t afraid to retreat, revise and redeploy. Unfortunately our military doesn’t promote great leaders. Advancement in our military is based on one’s ability to say yes.

Recruitment figures are down. The military has been forced to extended tours and exploit all sorts of little fine print tricks to force people into servitude. Stop loss measures have been enacted that prevent weary troops from being discharged and the inactive ready reserve has been called into action, surprising many people who had long since been discharged. National Guard forces have been thrown into heavy combat situations with inadequate training, outmoded equipment and a half-baked plan of action.

That’s where the lack of support is. Lies, half truths and sneaky contracts undermine the resolve of our soldiers. The people calling for an end to this war want to bring them home safe and sound. Unfortunately the soldiers are being told that we think they’re failures. That’s not true. The soldiers didn’t let anybody down. They failure begins and ends with the Bush Administration. Everybody else is a victim of a combination of incompetence and treachery.

Learn From Tragedy

The shootings that took place on the Virginia Tech campus in Blacksburg Virginia can only be described as awful. More than 50 people fell victim to what we can only describe as a deranged shooter and 33 people, including that shooter, ended up dead.

Leave it to the news reporters, particularly the talking heads on the networks, to guide the story into the realm of blame. With the shooter dead by his own volition, we don't have an object to project our outrage upon so the press has opted to question the actions of the university, the police and gun control laws.

Over the coming weeks we'll see the police second guessed for failing to lock down the sprawling campus. University administrators will be condemned for not beefing up security measures. Government officials will be questioned on what they are doing to protect our universities from such a terror and of course we'll have to bang on the gun control drum again. In fact much of this has already happened. Deep down inside we know that the only person to blame for this tragedy is the shooter. Life isn't safe. Bad things happen to innocent people every day. We're all going to die and not all of us by natural causes.

If we're going to start doling out blame we need to be fair. Instead of asking the campus police why they didn't lock down the campus after what appeared to be an isolated shooting we should be asking why so many people allowed themselves to become victims. Ultimately our survival depends on our abilities as individuals and as individuals we must be ready to take action to defend ourselves against those who would do us harm.

Granted this was a man who was well-armed, not a terrorist with a box cutter but still at some point you have to realize that this guy is shooting everybody in sight. We all have that fight or flight chip imbedded in our programming as does every other animal on the face of the earth. When confronted by a superior foe every living thing has the innate desire to run but if the option of fleeing has been removed the tiniest animal will bare its teeth and fight to survive.

Humans have that instinct but we program ourselves to resist it. For years the so-called experts have told us to cooperate with bad guys and wait for help to arrive. The problem is that those bad guys don't tend to follow the same rules. Women have been encouraged to resist attackers who intend to rape them because FBI studies reveal that every second of resistance increases the chances of survival by 30%. Law enforcement officials have revised their advice to potential victims. Instead of cooperating and remaining calm, people are being instructed to scream, fight or run like hell because too many cooperating victims have been rewarded with a bullet in the face. Your chances are better if you fight back.

What happened at Virginia Tech was not a rape or a mugging. This was a madman on a suicide mission, but at some point you have to realize that your best chance of surviving is to fight back. Nearly 60 people took a bullet and many more rounds were fired. At some point this shooter had to stop and reload. Why didn't somebody charge him as he changed out clips?

Maybe it's not fair to second guess the victims. Most of us would be paralyzed with fear if we faced a similar situation, but that's exactly the problem. Instead of preparing ourselves for defense we want to rely on security officers and policemen to save us from the bad men. We program ourselves to be victims hoping that we can endure being victimized long enough for a hero to rescue us.

It's time for that mentality to go. Whenever something like this happens we are soon regaled with stories of how woefully unprepared our security forces, be they police officers or unarmed security guards, are to handle such a situation. The fact of the matter is that most police are better equipped to write traffic tickets. Even though they receive training there just aren't enough opportunities to put that training to work on a daily basis. It's not that the police are incompetent; we simply set our expectations too high. Most cops aren't superheroes.

It's not practical to have a sniper hiding in every closet waiting for a rogue gunman to show up. We can't have an armed Air Marshall on every flight because some fundamentalist might try to set his shoe on fire. There's no feasible way to eliminate every dangerous situation so we have to accept risk and prepare ourselves to take ownership of our own survival.

Imus reveals deeper problem

The outrage over Dom Imus is misplaced. It's no surprise the aging "shock jock" said something off color. Imus' entire career is based on his own stupidity. He's a boorish loser who couldn't hold down a job, then stumbled into radio, almost by default, and found an audience who enjoyed listening to him make an ass of himself. He got on the air and proceeded to see if he could get fired. Everything escalated from there.

Don Imus probably isn't very sincere in his apology. There is a hint of indignation in his explanation when he mentions that there are some groups who can't be made fun of. The implication is that the people who are angry simply can't take a joke. Sadly what isn't resonating with Imus is the fact that he is not funny. He really hasn't been all that funny since he decided to hijack Howard Stern's career after Stern essentially bitch slapped him in the ratings.

It's not even outrageous that Imus hasn't been fired yet. Granted, plenty of people have been shown the door for much less offensive comments, but Imus has been encouraged to push those buttons all along. Nobody called him to the carpet when he was reported as using the dreaded "N" word behind the scenes during 60 Minutes interview. Imus and his cohorts have a long history of making inexcusable comments on the air.

The outrage is that he has an audience. The problem is not that Don Imus is a racist piece of redneck garbage or that he has a cadre of cackling Klansmen inserting insightful commentary into the morning drive. Don Imus has a constitutional right to be a jerk. We all do. It's just sad when people get paid for it.

The reason he has a national radio program is because there are people who happily listen to his show. They love the racist remarks. Howard Stern has an audience that enjoys crude humor and juvenile antics; Don Imus has an audience that appreciates anger and hate.

Imus might think that he turns everything he says into a joke by laughing afterwards, but when you laugh after saying something mean you're just being cruel. Imus appeals to a cruel audience. There's a big difference between being crude and being cruel. Don Imus illustrates what happens when a burned out old drunk tries to distinguish between the two. Howard Stern's mastery of this fine line is why he can buy and sell a clod like Imus.

That's what people should be upset over. Ignorance is a part of daily life. Stupid people are everywhere. We shouldn't be shocked when a couple of bigots get together to share their racial views. What should shock us is that enough people agree with those views to keep a hack like Imus on the air. People like Don Imus should be cleaning out port-a-potties all the while complaining that Zionist conspiracies are the reason they smell like feces. He should be sitting at the corner of a broken down bar with blue hands drinking Natty Lite muttering to himself, not hosting a syndicating radio program.

Don Imus is a jerk. That's not a crime. The fact that a moron like Imus is in the position to cause such a fuss isn't the crime…The fact that Imus is a profitable business venture is. Shame on the people who listen to him.

Freedom of Speech comes at a price

Freedom of speech is an inalienable right. In a country engineered to foster and protect personal civil liberty nobody should feel legally obligated to remain silent. The United States of America became a country for a number of reasons and not all of them were good. Clearly some of our revered Founding Fathers had ulterior motives for rebelling against England. Our political system was built upon a network of cronyism and a consolidation of power within the confines of an aristocratic society. To this day that consolidation of power is abundantly evident, particularly when you look at the last two presidential elections. Bush and Kerry not only attended the same expensive university (Yale) they belonged to a secret fraternity that has a long history of enlisting very rich and powerful people. The eerie possibility of a conspiracy aside, this country was still founded on some pretty important concepts that provide common people with a considerable amount of influence. The first amendment protects one of those concepts. The most important concept.

The Constitution essentially spells out the rules. It doesn’t establish the laws of the land but rather outlines the authority of the government. The Constitution doesn’t specifically address crimes but it does limit what can be interpreted as a crime. Murder is a crime because it involves one person infringing upon another’s right to life where as the issue of flag burning is widely debated because it can be argued that burning the flag is a form of expression which is an extension of the first amendment. Abortion is also a confounding subject because we have not been able to establish a legal standard to determine when a human life qualifies for constitutional rights. Everybody has an opinion but nobody has an answer.

Freedom of speech or, to be more accurate, expression is the cornerstone of liberty. If people are permitted to question and criticize their government, their government will have to address those grievances or face the consequences in the next election. This power was clearly demonstrated quite recently when the Republicans finally exhausted the patience of the voters. Without the first amendment the Bush administration could have quashed every story about Iraq, prevented public inquiries into corruption and avoided accountability for questionable actions. The great thing about the first amendment is that it applies to and empowers everybody.

The bad thing about the first amendment is that it applies to everybody regardless of sensibility. So you have gutter dwellers like Andrew Dice Clay making a career out of being a vulgar, less intelligent version of Don Rickles. Hickory, Dickory Dock… As offensive as his alleged comedy routine might be, he has a right to perform it. Fortunately the first amendment also provides puppets like Triumph the Insult Comic Dog the right to offer a much wittier version of this form of expression. It’s sad when you’re beaten at your own game by a rubber hand puppet, but Dice also has a constitutionally protected right to ignore the obvious and beat the dead horse that is his lackluster career. There is no law against being a bloated, washed up hack.

The first amendment allows people to peacefully assemble. That means that thousands of people can come together for a free concert to raise awareness for world hunger. Unfortunately it also means that the KKK can hold a rally on public property anywhere in the country. As morally corrupt as the KKK is to reasonable people, denying them the right to express themselves would be based on subjective reasoning and open the door to denying anybody that same right. There are plenty of examples where the first amendment has been compromised for good and bad intentions.

Tony Dungy recently exercised his first amendment rights when he spoke at a banquet hosted by the Indiana Family Group. IFG is an independent arm of Focus on the Family and Dungy touched a nerve when he stated that he whole-heartedly endorses the group’s position on gay marriage. Being a right wing faction of fundamentalist zealots, they are against it. Dungy later insisted he is not gay bashing, but that he believes in biblical scriptures and strongly supports the idea that a family is best served by a traditional Christian union between a man and a woman. It sparked a lot of criticism.

People countered the criticism Dungy received by citing the first amendment. Dungy has a right to express himself. So does Tim Hardaway who said that he hates gays. Dungy didn’t come out and bash gays the way Hardaway did but both men were simply exercising their right to express themselves. Dungy hit the first amendment trifecta by involving speech, press and religion. As was his right as an American.

However those who choose to criticize Dungy are also exercising their right to express themselves. Just because we are free to speak our minds doesn’t mean we are exempt for the consequences. How many coaches have lost their jobs for letting racially insensitive remarks slip? Dozens. And rightfully so. Sometimes an employee can express themselves in such a manner that the reputation of the company might suffer. This is especially true in high profile jobs. So when Howard Cosell said something about a monkey getting loose ABC had to fire him even though nobody believed Howard Cosell was a bigot.

That’s why the NBA was well within its rights to distance the league from Tim Hardaway. He’s no longer welcome in the NBA family and barred from attending events as a representative of the NBA. He might still have the right to purchase a ticket and watch the game like any other fan but he won’t be sitting in the owner’s box or appearing on television as a sanctioned member of the NBA.

Similarly the Colts would have been justified in firing Tony Dungy is they felt his comments might have a negative impact on the team. The NFL could have taken action as well. Neither organization is leaping to Dungy’s defense but both have distanced themselves from reprimanding Dungy on this matter. Dungy was speaking on behalf of Tony Dungy, not the Colts or the NFL. He made his bed.

Joe Lunchbox might not be held similarly accountable for his actions. People don’t always pay attention when the average person has something to say. So when Joe Lunchbox publishes a racially inflammatory blog he might not loose his job, but he still runs that risk. People are finding themselves in hot water over what they publish on the internet and those companies actions are being upheld in the courts. That’s why Klansmen wear sheets over their heads. They realize they are taking a socially unacceptable position and until they can convince the rest of society to embrace their views, or at least make a living spewing hate like David Duke, they remain anonymous.

Still, this right to free speech is interesting. In addition to affording people the right to express unpopular opinions while affording others the right to criticize or support those opinions, the first amendment also allows people to question the motives behind the comments. That’s more compelling. It’s not important to discuss whether or not the statement is right or wrong, opinions don’t have to be either. However it is important to consider the motivation behind those comments. Perhaps there’s more to the story and a discerning public has every right to explore it.

In Tim Hardaway’s case it’s quite likely that he is gay himself. There’s no proof of that but typically people who are so vocally homophobic are reacting to their own confused sexuality. Hardaway is probably terrified that he will be revealed as not only a homosexual, but a submissive one at that. He’s carefully tried to fashion himself as a man’s man but he knows the façade is thin. In order to overcome the fancy clothes, expensive jewelry and unaccounted for late nights with “friends”, Hardaway has to seem so overly disgusted with homosexuality nobody could believe it. Sadly, he’s too stupid to know that we’ve been on to that

Tony Dungy didn’t seem insecure about homosexuality but it’s interesting that his concern on this subject is rooted in the health and welfare of the family unit. That’s very interesting. Given the tragic loss his family recently experienced, Dungy shouldn’t present himself as an authority on what makes for a healthy family. His son, James Dungy took his own life at the age of 18. Now all public accounts characterize Dungy as a great father and a dedicated husband but anytime a teenager takes his or her own life there’s always something amiss inside the family.

Is that a low blow? No. It’s a reasonable question. Dungy put himself in that position when he questioned the impact homosexual parents might have on children. Most kids stray from the ideal path as they try their wings. Underage drinking, drug experimentation, even minor brushes with the law are common but suicide is rare. Most suicide attempts aren’t even sincere, they’re just dramatic ploys for attention and sympathy. If Tony Dungy was such a great Christian father, why did James take his own life? More importantly, what makes Dungy feel he knows what’s in the best interests of a family? Could homosexual parents do much worse?

It could be argued that Dungy did everything right. Sometimes kids just screw up. That might be true if the child dies in a stupidity induced accident. If James Dungy had gotten drunk and fallen off a cliff it would be hard to point the finger at Dungy, but this wasn’t an accident. James Dungy took his own life and it wasn’t the first time he tried. The kid was clearly in pain and couldn’t face whatever was causing that pain. Maybe he was gay and unable to talk to his devout father. Maybe he was bipolar and Tony was too busy being a coach to get his son the help he needed. We’ll never know the real answer but there’s a good chance that Tony Dungy does.

And that doesn’t matter. Tony Dungy has to face those demons on his own but when he takes that public forum and goes on record with such a strong statement he forces people to question his credibility. Given the circumstances Tony Dungy is no authority on family. If Tony had spent a little more time with his family and a little less at all of those speaking engagements James Dungy might still be alive today. Whatever the case, people probably should consider the source before putting any stock in Dungy’s opinion.

Where did America go?

The United States is showing all the signs of an empire in decay. George Bush is the corrupt byproduct of possible inbreeding who has seized more control over the government than was ever intended.

The United States lulled itself into a false sense of security by aggressively building a military around the concept of détente. In amassing enough nuclear weaponry to destroy the planet 10 times over the U.S. kept its chief rival, the equally powerful Soviet Union, at bay. Meanwhile all of our military tactics were designed to fight a big army in the northern hemisphere.

Similarly the CIA was geared to exploit contacts around the world in order to gain an advantage over the Soviet Union. Our operatives are no strangers to the Islamic world, but the Middle East was always handled as a staging area to wage important battles in the Cold War. After the Reagan era passed, Republicans remained beholden to big defense contractors and money was diverted to unnecessary projects while a much needed transition was neglected.

The Clinton administration endures a lot of finger pointing from Republicans who are struggling to explain our current difficulties in the Middle East. They erroneously claim that Clinton cut defense spending and left our military out of touch with developing trends but the reality is that the Republican controlled Congress undermined Clinton’s efforts to scale back Cold War surpluses and focus on building a more efficient and mobile defense capable of adjusting to variable conditions. Such an evolution would have left Republican cronies in the defense industry, like Dick Cheney, without a steady income.

There is no denying that the events of 9-11-2001 demanded action, but the indignant posturing and self-righteous stance taken by the Bush Administration squandered international good will that the United States had carefully established through years of diplomacy. When the UN expressed concern over our tactics Bush threatened them and later appointed an ambassador who had publicly expressed disgust with the United Nations. John Bolton served this nation as a destructive force in the UN, eroding relationships and undermining the authority of the Security Council. Instead of offering ideas to help the organization, Bolton repeatedly took shots at it. John Bolton was a global slap in the face.

Now, with our military stretched so thin the Department of Defense has resorted to recalling honorably discharged soldiers in a back door draft, Bush has set his sites on Iran. It doesn’t matter that we can’t seem to extract ourselves from two active fronts. Nobody in this administration seems overly concerned that the alleged mastermind of the 9-11 attacks remains at large; China has made a few not-so-subtle moves that require consideration and the American people have clearly demonstrated their frustration with the leadership of this country. However, Bush doesn’t care. He has a sick infatuation with his power as it relates to the Middle East.

Is it religious? Does he buy into the Christian Fundamentalist theory that all Muslims are evil? If so, isn’t he guilty of the same myopic theology Osama bin Laden is associated with?

But Bush is no Christian. Like the evangelists who write sermons with dollar signs in their eyes, Bush uses religion to secure power. He’s a man of the coin, as was his father, grandfather, and great grandfather. His entire family is morally and ethically corrupt. Under his administration companies like Halliburton, Exxon and Shell have seen huge increases in profit and his relatives have reaped the rewards in the form of stock ownership. This so-called war on terror has been carefully orchestrated by Dick Cheney to provide Bush-friendly corporations with every opportunity to maximize profits. Oil prices have risen nearly 200% under Bush’s leadership. That’s no coincidence.

It’s also no coincidence that our enemies seem to be ghosts from the Reagan era. George H.W. Bush spent his single term in office cleaning up Reagan’s messes in South and Central America. George W. Bush seems to be pulling the scabs off of wounds the Reagan administration inflicted in the Middle East. Isn’t it interesting that Osama bin Laden received money, weapons and training from the CIA and US special forces units in the 1980’s? How about the fact that Saddam received help from the US in stabilizing his control over Iraq so he could focus his full attention on a bloody war with Iran?

It’s really pretty frightening. Ronald Reagan was a devious leader who was never held accountable for his actions. He was simply too charismatic. It was obvious his policies weren’t working. The American middle class endured a horrible economic situation throughout his administration while the upper class enjoyed monumental returns on investments. The gap between the rich and the poor expanded, the national debt exploded and the US left its fingerprints on economic and political strife all around the world. But Reagan was never called to the carpet. To this day he is lionized as some sort of American hero.

His cult of personality was strong enough to propel the seemingly feeble George H.W. Bush and his moronic lapdog J. Danforth Quayle into the White House but they were such weak figures that the first Bush administration, though nearly identical to Reagan’s, was blamed for 12 years worth of broken promises.

Under Clinton, the Republican party reformed itself as the great white hope. Angry pundits fueled racial and social animosity while the Republican congress spent millions of dollars, tax dollars, trying to destroy Bill Clinton and any hope the Democrats had in securing an extended period of control over US politics. Then George W. Bush emerged, ensconcing himself in all things Reagan and, like a modern day Nero, the ne’er-do-well offspring of over-privileged aristocrats assumed a position of power with no sense of responsibility. How can a man with such a concise history of utter irresponsibility be elected? Behold the power of Reagan.

Even Reagan’s ghost can’t hide the glaring problems. This administration went too far too fast. Bush seems to know his time is just about up. The right-wing venom ran dry in 2006 and Democrats seized an unthinkable majority in the Congressional election. Sadly, Bush and his advisors see it as some sort of fluke. Instead of seeing the upset as a sign that people want a change, Bush has dug in his heels and refused to discuss any type of exit from a hopeless situation in the Middle East. With Iraq continuing to spiral out of control, Afghanistan reverting back to the totalitarian rule of the Taliban and Osama bin Laden living in Pakistan, Bush has started a game of chicken with the most formidable country in the Middle East. He’s a small-minded man with too much time on his hands. A lot can happen in 18 months…with Bush in office none of it is good.

The Last Laugh

The Dixie Chicks had the last laugh. After being vilified by the NASCAR set for speaking candidly about George W. Bush, the Texas trio circled their wagons and channeled their feelings into a monumentally successful hit single. The dramatic video spent the maximum number of weeks as the number one video in VH-1’s weekly countdown and just last week the girls raked in the most coveted awards at the Grammies.

The Dixie Chicks were country music mainstays who enjoyed marginal mainstream success before they denounced sharing Texas with George W. Bush. The pressure of winning back a fan base blinded by rage, tobacco juice and discount sales at Walmart nearly tore them apart but the Natalie and the girls stood strong, spoke their minds and penned a powerhouse. Millions of record sales later they were honored on their industry’s biggest night.

There are some country music fans that dismiss the success of Not Ready to Make Nice as a desperate sell out to the liberal left, but political sentiment rarely tops the pop charts. You can make some waves but eventually people get tired of being preached to. That’s why Paul McCartney topped the charts while John Lennon pontificated. Lennon was more talented and intelligent, but Paul wasn’t afraid to write marketable crap. The Dixie Chicks weren’t guaranteed any airplay. A lot of stations resisted .The fact of the matter is the song was great and it demanded an audience. The lyrics were deep, the music was well-crafted and the video was excellent.

If you want to talk about sell outs look no further than Toby “Chicken Heart” Keith who exploited indulgent nationalistic anger to sell hayseed records and fill redneck venues with inbred hicks by taking cheap shots at the Dixie Chicks. As if milking patriotism for every penny it was worth wasn’t crass enough, eh? How much money is tough-talking Toby making off those stereotypical Ford commercials? And why is a guy so verbally committed to the working man still schilling for a company currently cutting loose tens of thousands of blue collar workers? Talk about selling out.

Unlike Keith, who is an able bodied man capable of serving his country in deed rather than word, the Dixie Chicks have courage. They knew they were taking a big chance by turning their backs on the ignorant fans that make up the vast majority of the people who buy country records. Maybe there was a time Natalie wished she would have kept her opinion to herself but after standing on top of the world of music, if only for one night, she has to be pleased with the consequences of her actions. She spoke her mind, stood behind her words and eventually, after a lot of abuse, got what she deserved. If Toby stood behind his words he’d be in Iraq right now fighting for his country.

There are three lessons to be learned from all of this. The first is that country music fans are small-minded idiots. The second is that Toby Keith is a bloated, cowardly hillbilly hack and the third is that sometimes living well really is the best revenge. The Dixie Chicks could have pointed that out as they accepted their awards, but they let the moment speak for itself.

Shrubbish...

After digging the Republican Party into a hole Jesus Christ couldn't climb out of, George W. Bush has taken a closer look at the mess in Iraq. He has little choice because only two years after the country gave him a mandate on the strength of a narrow margin of victory in a dubious Presidential election, the voters delivered Bush a furious rebuke by giving Democrats control of both the House and the Senate. Granted the Democrats hold a slim majority but when you consider how beleaguered the "cut-and-run welfare mongers" were through 2005 it was a huge reversal.

Now Bush has to mend fences. He is facing a legislature that will lose patience with him quickly and his own party is afraid to side with him. The expectation is that Bush will spend the next two years fixing the damage he has done here and abroad.

The key project is the war in Iraq. While those who still support the military efforts in the Middle East claim that the causalities have been minimal, this endeavor has dragged on longer than this country's involvement in World WarII. The expense has been monumental and the effort has our military stretched so thin there is reason to believe that our defenses have been weakened to a point that leaves us easy pickings for any country that might see our demise as advantageous to their long term growth. Who would do such a thing? Nobody's sure but China has a lot of people very nervous. Especially Russia who could be driven into thrid world status by a prosperus China.

The idea of Russia attacking the US to gain some sort of economic advantage in an evolving global economy might be a long shot but before World War I this country was a sprawling nation of farmers held at bay by greedy industrialists. By 1950 we had finished two global wars and started what might one day be considered the most significant conflict of all: the Cold War. If you could go back in time and describe the current balance of power to somebody in England back in 1909 they would have laughed at the ridiculous notion that the United States was the most powerful country in the world and that China and India were the most rapidly developing nations. Things change.

What's frightening is that these issues seem to elude Bush. Domestically Bush is interested in setting back our conservation and environmental policies to what we had in place back when the last great Republican president was reelected. Sadly Lincoln was assassinated before he could address anything beyond slavery and a war perpetrated by treacherous southern plantation owners who didn't like the idea of paying for labor but had he been given the time it's reasonable to believe that he might have established a national park or two.

But Bush has invested most of his energy, at least whatever is left after he clears brush on his Crawford estate, on foreign policy. Not surprisingly, for the man who thinks Chumbawumba is a country in Africa, this is his weakest skill. Unless you're the sort of world leader who might be inclined to pound on a desk with a shoe, foreign policy demands a considerable degree of diplomacy. For some reason, no matter how small a country might be, they insist on being treated with respect. Bush treats them like valets at Augusta National. That is when he's not grabbing them from behind like some 1950's CEO making a pass at his secretary.

It doesn't matter why Bush opted to invade Iraq at this point. Those dishes have already hit the floor. The problem is that this clod is still running around blind folded in the china shop. It didn't take a genius to see that ousting Saddam from power in Iraq would create unending chaos in that corner of the world. In fact, the man who first recognized those consequences was our President's father. Granted, kids do tend to defy their parents for spite but its a phase they grow out of by the time they run for elected office, usually.

Now, faced with an angry general public that has grown weary of the open-ended Iraq strategy, Bush has to bring a swift end to the futility. People have heard all the lies and watched the deception unfold with deliberate arrogance. Bush and his administration acted as though they had absolute power and made false promises about the progress being made with a wink and a nudge to the majority of the population they thought they couldn't lose. But they misjudged the stupidity of the public and squandered the benefit of the doubt their shameless manipulation of religion had gained them.

The war in Iraq has decimated global relations for the U.S. During this misguided war on sensibility, Bush has successfully alienated the entire world to the U.S. While few world leaders could condemn Bush for rapidly deploying forces after 9-11, the heavy-handed and ineffective tactics soon evoked concern. That's when Bush, like a crazed gunman, started wagging his finger and making threats. You were either with us or against us. No questions.

Now Iraq is a total mess and it is difficult to see what benefit ousting, capturing and executing Saddam Hussein has delivered. Clearly Saddam's totalitarian regime was borne at least partly out of necessity. His secular government and the mild-mannered Sunni people it favored held sway over a country of fundamentalists from numerous backgrounds including more aggressive Sunni clerics, Shiite extremists, Kurds and a number of general antagonists out to create chaos for the sake of chaos. As brutal as his tactics were, perhaps it was necessary to maintain control.

Like him or not, Saddam had control over a country that seems impossible to control. Britain tried for quite some time to no avail. In fact a significant part of the reason there is so much instability in the Middle East is thanks in large part to imperial meddling. The countries we're are now fighting with were designated by British rule and the borders were inexplicably drawn with total disregard to religious creeds. Mortal enemies were forced to share small countries with limited resources. Such was the case with Iraq. Saddam simply rose to power and succeeded in maintaining it. He couldn't have done it with out the CIA and the Reagan administration but that's another story.

For some reason, in spite of history and his father pleading otherwise, George W. Bush thinks that victory is attainable. He believes he can install a pro-American government in Iraq and that an approved democracy will prevail. Mind you, a democracy that supports Hammas or Al Qaida is unacceptable. Apparently the voice of the people will only be heard if they say what Bush wants to hear.

Instead of taking a cue from the recent election, Bush has opted to increase our presence in Iraq and essentially, to borrow a phrase from the Vietnam era, escalate our effort in order to help the precarious Iraqi government gain control over the uncontrollable. Unless this Iraqi government is willing to employ the brutal tactics Saddam was executed for, the opposing forces of fundamentalism will win. That's the problem in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East: Fundamentalists are not reasonable. For the most part they are ignorant people blinded by rage. Because they are uneducated they don't understand their anger or how to resolve it so they are easily manipulated through religion. The religious leaders are intelligentr and informed but also power-hungry and selfish. It's a cult mentality.

If Bush really wants to bring an end to terrorism and stabilize the Middle East he would be well advised to deploy diplomacy instead of the military. The lesson 9-11 should have taught us is that these are people who are not afraid to die. What good does it do to threaten them with death and destruction when they have proven a willingness to blow themselves up to further their cause. It's like throwing Br'er Rabbit in the brier patch.

Miss USA

So let me get this straight, the woman who won the country's biggest beauty contest is what one might be inclined to call a slut. The woman or, more appropriately, girl who was declared the hottest chick in the US likes to get down and so does the younger winner of the Miss Tenn USA pageant. Is that supposed to disturb us?

Considering we are talking about women who want to earn a living with their hot bodies should anybody be shocked? When you consider the vanity one must have to even participate in this contest it's shocking that these so-called scandals aren't the norm.

About 20 years ago Vanessa Williams had that crown snatched off her head for posing nude in some amateur porn pics. This was before Al Gore invented the internets so we had to wait for Penthouse to publish those pictures but once they hit the market Vanessa Williams was called on the carpet and her title of Miss America was stripped leaving her doomed to a life of anonymous sex with fat business men for spare change. Nobody ever heard of her again.

Actually, losing the crown was the best thing that could have happened to her. She became an instant star landing movie roles and singing chart topping songs. She became one of the biggest names in Hollywood and it was all made possible because she received more publicity for losing her crown than she did for winning it in the first place. It also helped that she was released from any contractual obligations tied to the pageant. Actually it was the woman crowned in Vanessa's place we never heard from again.

Her counterpart Jeri Ryan is also an actress but Jeri Ryan had to slowly claw her way into the business in spite of being a runner up in the 1990 Miss America pageant. Ryan's biggest role and claim to fame came in playing a virtual dominatrix in Star Trek: Voyager. The woman who won in that same year (1990), Debye Turner, has done little of note. In fact most Miss USA winners prove to be too vapid to qualify for any real jobs so they generally end up doing local news and if they manage to read their copy without too many mistakes some get a shot at national news reading.

Sadly, for the Miss USA pageant women who pose for Playboy often prove to have more noteworthy careers. Maybe it's because society respects somebody who doesn't pretend to be something she's not. We act as though these Miss USA contestants are innocent little virgins who are unaware of how beautiful they are. In reality they represent the very worst of female sexuality. They go beyond confidence and they exude that self-centered arrogance that makes everybody hate the prom queen. Miss USA pretends its about intelligence talent and personality as much as it is physical beauty but in the end it's all about looks. That's why Pamela Anderson is more respectable. She's never pretended it wasn't about her body. Maybe she's smarter than we give her credit for. She's certainly more successful than any Miss USA winner, aside from Vanessa Williams who technically didn't win.

Interesting. It would appear that America prefers hot women who put out. I know I do.

Happy Holidays

Thanks to Bill O'Reilly millions of Americans have decided to take back Christmas. Instead of politely wishing people Happy Holidays, they intended to proliferate the social landscape with blood curdling screams of Merry Christmas. Some have even declared that they intend to inflict this holiday jeer on people they know or suspect as being non-Christian. Jesus must be proud. If you say Merry Christmas but mean go to hell does that make it OK?

Ironically the expression of Happy Holidays or Seasons Greetings came about in mainstream parlance thanks to fundamentalist Christians who took umbrage that Christmas was associated with such a display of unabashed commercialism. When retailers would beckon holiday shoppers with attractive signage that wished everyone a Merry Christmas, these devout practitioners of the Christian faith would write letters and stage boycotts because they were offended that their savior was being used to boost year end sales figures. Jesus did not die on the cross for Hasbro.

Now that the flames of insecurity have been aggressively fanned be evangelists hurting for cash and pundits aching for ratings, the push is on to attach Christ to everything. Stores that refuse to specify Christmas are attacked by venomous wags and accused of waging war on Christmas and Christianity. The Nativity must be honored at all costs. Happy Holidays is what the terrorists want us to say.

It's sad because almost everything about Christmas has roots in paganism. The bright colored lights date back to solstice celebrations, the tree is rooted in Norse tradition and Santa Clause is a composite of a number of polytheistic and pagan characters. Jesus never gave anybody presents. He didn't slide down chimneys, or ride in a flying sleigh behind eight magic reindeer.

Theologians concur that Jesus wasn't born any where near the December 25th and peg his birthday in the late spring. In fact, the whole story of the Nativity appears to be a fairy tale concocted to dramatize the undocumented birth of Jesus. As the demand grew for a commemoration of this event, the Catholic Church opted to position the date to coincide with competing holy days. It's no coincidence that December is a busy month for spiritual celebrations. In the northern hemisphere it is the darkest time of the year and symbolizes the beginning of the coldest months. Instead of abolishing ancient tradition, the church decided to trump it. As it would turn out, Christ never really was in Christmas outside of a Papal decree.

Of course none of that matters. Spirituality is a personal matter and how a person chooses to celebrate their beliefs is entirely up to them. It's interesting that so many people of so many faiths choose December as a time to join family and friends to honor their personal beliefs... even if those beliefs are in holiday clearance sales and credit cards. If it brings people together it can't be that bad. Unless it's Old Spice, but then that doesn't bring people together, does it?

That's why people like Bill O'Reilly should just let it be. Why turn the Holidays into some misguided holy war? Whether praise be to Jesus, Santa, Allah, Rudolph, magic Hebrew candles, or low low prices can't we all just get along?

KKKramer's tirade

Who would have guessed that Mel Gibson and Michael Richards (aka Kramer) were the charter members of Hollywood's chapter of the KKK? Mel tried to bury his bigotry with woeful tales of a life long battle with alcohol but a blood alcohol analysis revealed that Mel was not drunk enough to justify hitting on Star Jones, let alone deliver a blistering anti-semitic tantrum. Mel was just buzzed enough to be put off at being hassled by the cops. He was outraged that his popularity had waned and in the midst of his anger he allowed his deep-seated venom to spew. Jews! He wasn't drunk, he threw a pampered celebrity tizzy that escalated into Mein Kampf. Even if you give Mel a pass, the fact that his father offered an impromptu history lesson on the Holocaust reaveals that Mel comes from a long line of bigots.

Michael Richards can't hide behind the booze. The washed up doofus who stumbled into temporary super stardom on the hit sitcom Seinfeld has been desperately trying to find a market for his talent which is rather limited. The talent and the market. The iron was hot about six years ago, now the series is losing its luster in syndication. Game over, Mike.

Unlike the rest of the cast, Richards was a nobody before he got a part in a fledgling sitcom many thought would bomb. It was a side project for Jerry and an easy, no risk gig for Dreyfus and Alexander as both had established themselves as capable actors. Seinfeld might have made them rich beyond their wildest dreams but they had rubbed elbows with big stars and had solid credentials. Richards had a bit part in a Weird Al film. Even though his counterparts have struggled to capitalize on the fame their roles in the greatest sitcom ever provided, Alexander and Dreyfus have been granted numerous opportunities to carry on and seem content to call Seinfeld the pinnacle of their careers. Richards had one shot in a poorly conceived show that shamelessly tried to rehash the slapstick aspect of Kramer and nothing since.

It's ironic. The brilliant physical comedy that Richards used to propel a peripheral character into a primary role has been the bane of the actor's career since the show ended its run. Without that shtick Kramer would have been a semi-recurring character along the lines of Wayne Knight's Neuman, but Richards is forever typecast as a character who lacks the depth to carry a show.

So Richards, desperate to stay viable, opted to roll the dice and give stand up a shot. He generated genuine laughs on the show, so why not clown around on stage? The problem is that on TV the real geniuses (if the show is good) are in a back room writing the jokes and layering the comedy. Richards executed his role with brilliant comedic precision but without writers and directors to hone his performance, capturing that same magic is difficult if not impossible. For an actor who spent the better part of a decade riding a wave of enormous singular popularity, the downward spiral of anonymity is painful. Nobody wants to be a has been.

Michael Richards took the stage full of anger, resentment and desperation. He was up there trying take back his fame, laughter was secondary. When members of the audience called him out for the washed up hack he has become, Richards snapped and let loose a string of racial epithets directed at the African Americans who allegedly heckled him.

Mind you, this wasn't a Don Rickles type of rant where racial epithets are bandied about in jest. Richards seemed to lament the passing of the era where black men were hung from trees and tortured by white oppressors. Funny would have been racially-charged jokes about black people not watching Seinfeld. Funny would have been having enough cultural awareness to drop a few Martin Lawrence references. Really funny would be taking the high road and employing a little self-deprecating humor about being a one trick pony. Jon Stewart mines his less than stellar acting career for big laughs every other night.

Richards and Mel Gibson went beyond the reaches of anger and revealed an ugly side of their personalities. At least Richards has a plausible reason for launching into a racial tirade...the hecklers were black. Had he limited his outburst to a quick epithet and moved on an apology would be sufficient but Richards elaborated and revealed a social philosophy. Michael Richards doesn't like black people. That makes him a racist. There's a big difference between calling somebody a nigger and telling them that 50 years ago they would have been hanging from a tree.

Sadly, this is another example of how deep-seated the racial problem is in this country. If the guy who played Kramer is harboring such unmitigated hatred toward blacks and Mel Gibson is sitting on a powder keg of anti-Semitism we have to assume that its a rampant problem. How many business owners feel the same way?

Even if these people make an effort to suspend their bigotry in public exchanges these feelings will have an impact on their daily decisions. That means a guy like Mel Gibson is going to subconsciously find faults in a Jewish applicant while he overlooks flaws in a Christian candidate. Michael Richards will cut a white employee slack for being 10 minutes late but come down on the black one for violating the attendance policy.

There's not much we can do about it. Mel Gibson is who he is because he was raised in a culture of anti-Semitism and as an adult he has chosen to foster those feelings. Michael Richards is one of those angry white guys who sees the leveling of the playing field as an infringement on his rights. Both of these men resent the object of their rage. When Mel Gibson sees Jon Stewart and Billy Crystal hosting the Oscars he believes that it is an example of the tremendous power Jews have in Hollywood. When Michael Richards sees Dave Chappelle inking a 100 million dollar deal to perform bad sketch comedy he thinks it's because of affirmative action.

Guys like Mike and Mel see the world in US verses THEM terms. They don't want to accept that beyond race, culture and creed we are all just people and there is an extensive amount of common ground that can be exploited for personal gain in the entertainment field. Gibson could have enlisted the assistance of Hebrew theologians to consult with him on Passion. Richards could have combined comedy and his experience in Hollywood to probe the depths of racism in the casting office. While the success both have attained demonstrates that these men aren't exactly idiots, they are just ignorant enough to let their prejudice trip up their careers.

Racism is alive, well and a lot closer to home than anybody cares to admit.