If the NCAA did football playoffs the way they should, instead of the farce that is the BCS, it would be a 16-team tournament composed of 11 conference champions (automatic qualifiers) and 5 at-large selections. Hell, I'll throw a bone to the seven BCS supporters out there and say the at-large picks plus the seedings are based on BCS standings.
1st Round
1. Alabama (SEC) vs 16. Troy (Sun Belt)
8. Ohio State (Big Ten) vs 9. Georgia Tech (ACC)
4. TCU (MWC) vs 13. Penn State (at-large)
5. Florida (at-large) vs 12. LSU (at-large)
2. Texas (Big 12) vs 15. Central Michigan (MAC)
7. Oregon (PAC-10) vs 10. Iowa (at-large)
3. Cincinnati (Big East) vs 14. East Carolina (C-USA)
6. Boise State (WAC) vs 11. Virginia Tech (at-large)
Comments: The Cincy-ECU and Boise State-VT matchups are intriguing. Two teams with high-powered offenses versus two teams with stout defenses. I can really see the lower seeds winning these games. If Iowa gets Ricky Stanzi back they can make a tight game of it with the Quack Attack. Tell me the Florida-LSU tilt wouldn't be like another SEC title game.
Okay, we assume the higher seeds all win.
2nd Round
1. Alabama (SEC) vs 8. Ohio State (Big Ten)
4. TCU (MWC) vs 5. Florida (at-large)
2. Texas (Big 12) vs 7. Oregon (PAC-10)
3. Cincinnati (Big East) vs 6. Boise State (WAC)
Comments: I can just see the people at ABC having palpitations over the prospect of a TCU-Cincinnati title game. As it stands though, Bama-Ohio State and Texas-Oregon look like incredible historical matchups. But seeing what the Crimson Tide did to Tebow of Nazareth, I don't see Terrelle Pryor having much luck. TCU gets a chance to show it belongs against the aforementioned Savior.
Final Four
1. Alabama (SEC) vs 4. TCU (MWC)
2. Texas (Big 12) vs 3. Cincinnati (Big East)
Comments: I love matchups of traditional powers against upstarts. You either get blowouts like Georgia-Hawai'i in the Sugar Bowl from a couple of years ago, or all-time upsets like Boise State-Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl. Tony Pike vs. Colt McCoy would be a fascinating war to watch, and the battle in the trenches between Alabama and TCU would be epic.
Championship
1. Alabama (SEC) vs 2. Texas (Big 12)
Comments: Yeah I know, this is the game the BCS is designed to give us, rendering all other bowl games irrelevant and pointless. No one cares but the fans of the schools playing in such glorious games as the Papajohns.com Bowl or Roady's Humanitarian Bowl or my personal favorite, the Gaylord Hotels Music City Bowl.
So there you have it. The college football playoffs as they should have been. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to set the DVR to record the FCS games this weekend. You see, unlike the big boys, the formerly-known-as-1AA schools use a playoff format. So even if there are five undefeated teams in the post-season, they all get a chance to play in the title game.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Monday, November 16, 2009
Superstar or Role Player?
It's an article of faith that the last thing to recover after a recession ends is employment. Companies don't want to commit to long-term relationships with employees until they have long-term commitments from those who provide revenue. The challenge for those in need of employment, whether they are currently working or not, is to make themselves as attractive as possible to the companies they'd most like to work for.
But what is it that defines "attractive"? The answer is sometimes more complicated than you think.
If the company you'd most like to work for is one on the bleeding edge of anything, you generally have to show you are an innovator. You lead. You're aggressive. You get results. You can juggle multiple assignments. You build networks and relationships that help you succeed. You take risks if the payoff is high. You're a superstar and you want everyone around you to know it.
And you could be among the last group of people to get hired.
It sounds counter-intuitive, doesn't it? What company wouldn't want to hire someone like that? The truth is when revenue streams are still recovering, most companies won't jeopardize what they've got by taking risks. They'll spend more time and money optimizing what they already have to ensure future gains in efficiency and productivity.
This is where the role player comes in.
A role player isn't flashy. They don't take risks. The networks and relationships they build are all about acquiring information to get the job done faster and better. They don't have to lead except by example. They don't multi-task well, preferring to focus on one or two things at a time and get them done before moving to the next assignment. Most are just happy to have a job, and if you treat them well they'll stick around a while.
A superstar? Show them the money baby, or they're looking for the door that leads to the next high-profile gig.
The challenge for the role player to beat out the superstar is to do something that is very unlike a role player: You have to sell yourself. Employers won't know you're out there unless you're shouting "Look at me!!" from the rooftops. Trust me on this. The superstars are already doing it and they'll drown you out unless you're up there with them.
But when a company is starting to recover from the ravages of a recession, they don't always want - or need - a superstar. They need someone to come in and stabilize the foundation. They need role players. In this day and age, that's not such a bad place to be.
But what is it that defines "attractive"? The answer is sometimes more complicated than you think.
If the company you'd most like to work for is one on the bleeding edge of anything, you generally have to show you are an innovator. You lead. You're aggressive. You get results. You can juggle multiple assignments. You build networks and relationships that help you succeed. You take risks if the payoff is high. You're a superstar and you want everyone around you to know it.
And you could be among the last group of people to get hired.
It sounds counter-intuitive, doesn't it? What company wouldn't want to hire someone like that? The truth is when revenue streams are still recovering, most companies won't jeopardize what they've got by taking risks. They'll spend more time and money optimizing what they already have to ensure future gains in efficiency and productivity.
This is where the role player comes in.
A role player isn't flashy. They don't take risks. The networks and relationships they build are all about acquiring information to get the job done faster and better. They don't have to lead except by example. They don't multi-task well, preferring to focus on one or two things at a time and get them done before moving to the next assignment. Most are just happy to have a job, and if you treat them well they'll stick around a while.
A superstar? Show them the money baby, or they're looking for the door that leads to the next high-profile gig.
The challenge for the role player to beat out the superstar is to do something that is very unlike a role player: You have to sell yourself. Employers won't know you're out there unless you're shouting "Look at me!!" from the rooftops. Trust me on this. The superstars are already doing it and they'll drown you out unless you're up there with them.
But when a company is starting to recover from the ravages of a recession, they don't always want - or need - a superstar. They need someone to come in and stabilize the foundation. They need role players. In this day and age, that's not such a bad place to be.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
It Didn't Have To Be This Way
Some of my co-workers attended a funeral on Tuesday for a comrade who passed away. I debated for hours whether or not to go but ultimately decided against it. We weren't particularly close, and other than my co-workers I knew no one else who was going.
The more I've heard about the circumstances of his death, the more it bothers me. Not that I didn't go, but what led up to his passing and the days that followed.
A little background first: He worked at my company for 13 years until being laid off at the end of July. About 3 years earlier he suffered a mild stroke at work, and doctors told him it was not his first. He made changes to his diet and lifestyle and lost a lot of weight, but still needed a stent put in about 18 months ago.
Work was his life. He had few family members, and didn't socialize with many people outside of work. The layoff, predictably, was devastating. My co-workers tried to keep in regular contact with him, offering what assistance they could. Other people in the office would see him periodically and chat with him. Despite what had happened, he seemed to be doing okay. The only concern was he seemed to become more and more distant with everybody.
Everything that happened next is what we've heard since this past Monday.
About two weeks ago, someone else in the office saw him and based on how he looked, suggested he go see a doctor.
About four days after that, he died at home. Natural causes, though whether heart attack or stroke we don't know.
Two days later was his mother's birthday. When he didn't call, she became concerned and called him the next day. No answer.
She called his sister, who spent much of the following day calling him. No answer.
His sister called one of his friends and asked if he'd go check. The friend went to his condo and knocked. No answer. He then called the police, who were able to gain entry.
The thing that gets to me is not only did he not reach out to anybody, and that it seems like he just gave up, but that he had so few people in his life that he was dead for 3 days before anyone knew it.
Obviously the viewing before the funeral was closed-casket. Sadly, the lid became the appropriate metaphor for how he lived. And how he died.
I understand the appeal of living a quiet life. But I don't see the value in sheltering yourself so much that the only people who attend your funeral are five relatives, five co-workers, and the two owners of the sports bar you'd go to 3-4 nights a week.
It didn't have to be this way.
The more I've heard about the circumstances of his death, the more it bothers me. Not that I didn't go, but what led up to his passing and the days that followed.
A little background first: He worked at my company for 13 years until being laid off at the end of July. About 3 years earlier he suffered a mild stroke at work, and doctors told him it was not his first. He made changes to his diet and lifestyle and lost a lot of weight, but still needed a stent put in about 18 months ago.
Work was his life. He had few family members, and didn't socialize with many people outside of work. The layoff, predictably, was devastating. My co-workers tried to keep in regular contact with him, offering what assistance they could. Other people in the office would see him periodically and chat with him. Despite what had happened, he seemed to be doing okay. The only concern was he seemed to become more and more distant with everybody.
Everything that happened next is what we've heard since this past Monday.
About two weeks ago, someone else in the office saw him and based on how he looked, suggested he go see a doctor.
About four days after that, he died at home. Natural causes, though whether heart attack or stroke we don't know.
Two days later was his mother's birthday. When he didn't call, she became concerned and called him the next day. No answer.
She called his sister, who spent much of the following day calling him. No answer.
His sister called one of his friends and asked if he'd go check. The friend went to his condo and knocked. No answer. He then called the police, who were able to gain entry.
The thing that gets to me is not only did he not reach out to anybody, and that it seems like he just gave up, but that he had so few people in his life that he was dead for 3 days before anyone knew it.
Obviously the viewing before the funeral was closed-casket. Sadly, the lid became the appropriate metaphor for how he lived. And how he died.
I understand the appeal of living a quiet life. But I don't see the value in sheltering yourself so much that the only people who attend your funeral are five relatives, five co-workers, and the two owners of the sports bar you'd go to 3-4 nights a week.
It didn't have to be this way.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
A Farewell to Omelettes
About 7 years ago I was tested for allergies. I was stuck, probed, prodded, scratched, and probably was implanted with electronic bugs or something. When all was said and done there was a long list of things in the environment I was allergic to: Most grasses, tree pollen, weeds, you get the idea.
I also was positive for soy and corn. Soy was a surprise, but I suspected corn would be on the list simply because of the physical reaction any time I'd have some popcorn.
I also was positive for soy and corn. Soy was a surprise, but I suspected corn would be on the list simply because of the physical reaction any time I'd have some popcorn.
Over the years I've found there are other foods that cause a similar reaction, but only if eaten in sufficient quantity. Lettuce, broccoli, sesame seeds, sunflower seeds, peas, and green beans immediately come to mind.
Now alas, I add eggs to the list.
If I'm baking something that calls for eggs as an ingredient, I don't seem to get a reaction. But eggs as a main part of the meal will eventually make me a very unhappy person.
I may be able to do okay with egg whites, and Egg Beaters are palatable with enough spices thrown in there. The next few weeks will tell. Either way it looks like I'll be looking for new alternatives for breakfast on the weekend.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Thanks. I'm addicted now.
I made the fatal mistake of reading a blog from The Cranky Conservative about his new favorite time-waster, and now it's one of mine. So since I fully believe in the concept of paying it forward, I now provide it to you. It's called Flickchart, and you use the site to rank your favorite movies. What it does is give you two movies to choose from at a time, and you pick the one you like more.
So far I've compared 505 movies and given a total of 1,882 rankings. According to the site here are my top 20 movies:
Happy wasting time!
So far I've compared 505 movies and given a total of 1,882 rankings. According to the site here are my top 20 movies:
- The Godfather
- National Lampoon's Animal House
- The Empire Strikes Back
- High Fidelity
- The Godfather Part II
- The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
- The Manchurian Candidate
- Adaptation
- Cold Mountain
- Ben-Hur
- Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith
- Rocky
- The Usual Suspects
- Monty Python and the Holy Grail
- Taxi Driver
- Star Wars
- Blazing Saddles
- 12 Angry Men
- Being John Malkovich
- Gladiator
Happy wasting time!
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Blogs of Interest - Part 2
Well they're interesting to me. You might find enjoyment in some of these.
Left Of The [Political] Dial. I guess you could call this the counterpart to The Cranky Conservative, though he's a lot more pragmatic than most.
Knights Notepad. I follow the UCF Knights. Unfortunately the Orlando Sentinel is the best of the mainstream sources since Florida Today dumped John Denton.
Israeli Suzy. A fellow transplanted New Englander who made aliyah and now lives in Tel Aviv.
Francase Place. Another fraternity brother and apparently a Texas Hold 'Em addict.
Fistful of Talent. Another HR blog. This one looks at the challenges of finding and keeping talented people.
do I know you from somewhere?. My sister. A tech writer by day, an author/actress by night.
Consumer File. Greg Dawson is probably one of the more effective columnists the Orlando Sentinel has, which means his job is always in peril.
Compensation Force. Since a lot of what I do deals with compensation issues, I'm always interested in seeing what they have to say about the art of pay and reward systems.
Left Of The [Political] Dial. I guess you could call this the counterpart to The Cranky Conservative, though he's a lot more pragmatic than most.
Knights Notepad. I follow the UCF Knights. Unfortunately the Orlando Sentinel is the best of the mainstream sources since Florida Today dumped John Denton.
Israeli Suzy. A fellow transplanted New Englander who made aliyah and now lives in Tel Aviv.
Francase Place. Another fraternity brother and apparently a Texas Hold 'Em addict.
Fistful of Talent. Another HR blog. This one looks at the challenges of finding and keeping talented people.
do I know you from somewhere?. My sister. A tech writer by day, an author/actress by night.
Consumer File. Greg Dawson is probably one of the more effective columnists the Orlando Sentinel has, which means his job is always in peril.
Compensation Force. Since a lot of what I do deals with compensation issues, I'm always interested in seeing what they have to say about the art of pay and reward systems.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Blogs of Interest - Part 1
Well they're interesting to me. You might find enjoyment in some of these.
Typing About Movies. Fraternity brother who does movie reviews in his spare time.
Tony's Blog. Fraternity brother who finds there's a lot more to do than just be a student.
The HR Capitalist. Being an HR geek myself, I like to see what others are thinking about the profession.
The Cranky Conservative. My girlfriend's best friend is among the more rational political bloggers out there. He's a good read, even if you don't always agree with his take on things. If only he'd quit lamenting the inevitable fates of his favorite sports teams.
Marc Musing. A Rabbi in South Carolina shares his perspective on life, both past and present. He rambles sometimes and other times you may not "get" him (you'd have to be Jewish to understand), but he is never uninteresting.
The Business of Management. From Workforce Magazine, HR's take on what's going on in the business of business.
Sharky's Blog. From Computerworld, tales of ID10T errors and other stupid users.
My Improbable Adventures. The goings on of another fraternity brother who can land in any airport in the world with nothing but a few bucks in his pocket and his clothing, but somehow finds a way to do the sorts of things most of us only wish we could do.
I'll share more in a couple of days. Meanwhile, enjoy reading.
Typing About Movies. Fraternity brother who does movie reviews in his spare time.
Tony's Blog. Fraternity brother who finds there's a lot more to do than just be a student.
The HR Capitalist. Being an HR geek myself, I like to see what others are thinking about the profession.
The Cranky Conservative. My girlfriend's best friend is among the more rational political bloggers out there. He's a good read, even if you don't always agree with his take on things. If only he'd quit lamenting the inevitable fates of his favorite sports teams.
Marc Musing. A Rabbi in South Carolina shares his perspective on life, both past and present. He rambles sometimes and other times you may not "get" him (you'd have to be Jewish to understand), but he is never uninteresting.
The Business of Management. From Workforce Magazine, HR's take on what's going on in the business of business.
Sharky's Blog. From Computerworld, tales of ID10T errors and other stupid users.
My Improbable Adventures. The goings on of another fraternity brother who can land in any airport in the world with nothing but a few bucks in his pocket and his clothing, but somehow finds a way to do the sorts of things most of us only wish we could do.
I'll share more in a couple of days. Meanwhile, enjoy reading.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Just when we thought it was safe to show Palmetto Pride again...
...South Carolina Congressman Joe Wilson disgraces himself with this display of disrespect (about 1:28 into the clip).
I'm okay with him disagreeing with the President on many issues, and health care is a complex enough one that I don't expect any type of reform that passes will do so with anything better than a slim majority. But when the President is speaking there is a certain decorum you are expected to follow if you are a Congressman and part of the audience.
Maybe Joe Wilson has a governorship in his future. He certainly hasn't crossed the Sanford line yet...I think. I've never voted for the man who all but called Essie Mae Washington-Williams a liar when she revealed Strom Thurmond was her father. Trust me, I don't plan to start anytime soon.
I'm okay with him disagreeing with the President on many issues, and health care is a complex enough one that I don't expect any type of reform that passes will do so with anything better than a slim majority. But when the President is speaking there is a certain decorum you are expected to follow if you are a Congressman and part of the audience.
- If you support the President's words, applaud.
- If #1 applies and you are in his political party, stand when you applaud.
- If the President's words make you orgasmic with glee, add tasteful cheering.
- If you are not in the President's political party, standing is optional.
- If the President's words do nothing for you, lean over to the person next to you and crack witticisms for as long as the applause lasts.
- If you think the President is being overly partisan, you may consult with any papers you are holding if you have run out of witticisms.
- If you have completely tuned the President out, you may yawn, pick your nose, clean out ear wax, or scratch yourself only if you are completely certain there are no cameras pointed within 25 feet of you.
- Under no circumstances do you boo, heckle, laugh at (laugh with is okay), or otherwise do anything that is indefensibly disrespectful.
Maybe Joe Wilson has a governorship in his future. He certainly hasn't crossed the Sanford line yet...I think. I've never voted for the man who all but called Essie Mae Washington-Williams a liar when she revealed Strom Thurmond was her father. Trust me, I don't plan to start anytime soon.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Yes, You Are Overreacting
Since no one has seen the text of what President Obama's speech to students on September 8 will be, is the reaction from conservative circles to the fact he's doing it just a little over the top?
No.
It's a lot over the top.
Whether or not you agree with his politics I tend to think he and his speechwriters - or any other president and theirs for that matter - would be smart enough to limit a nationwide speech to students about the importance of education.
At least I hope they're that smart.
So in absence of the speech being delivered or the release of any text, what on earth would create reactions like the ones outlined here?
There is a nice summary of the brief history of presidents speaking directly to students at PolitiFact, which includes some of the reactions when Presidents Reagan and Bush (the first) "wasted taxpayer dollars". There is no mention however of school districts having their switchboards jammed, liberal radio talk show hosts crying foul, or an ill-informed citizenry screaming "Fascism!"
I'm starting to think there's a healthy chunk of the populace in desperate need of a prescription for Valium. Maybe that by itself is enough to get universal health care coverage passed.
No.
It's a lot over the top.
Whether or not you agree with his politics I tend to think he and his speechwriters - or any other president and theirs for that matter - would be smart enough to limit a nationwide speech to students about the importance of education.
At least I hope they're that smart.
So in absence of the speech being delivered or the release of any text, what on earth would create reactions like the ones outlined here?
There is a nice summary of the brief history of presidents speaking directly to students at PolitiFact, which includes some of the reactions when Presidents Reagan and Bush (the first) "wasted taxpayer dollars". There is no mention however of school districts having their switchboards jammed, liberal radio talk show hosts crying foul, or an ill-informed citizenry screaming "Fascism!"
I'm starting to think there's a healthy chunk of the populace in desperate need of a prescription for Valium. Maybe that by itself is enough to get universal health care coverage passed.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Check Your Brain At The Door
Two interesting-yet-disturbing things in the media during the past couple of days which are being totally ignored.
First was a spiritual leader of Hamas stating teaching about the Holocaust to students in Gaza is a "war crime".
Most people will generally listen to more than one side of a discussion or debate. It's fundamental to how we learn and grow as a society. This is anathema to Hamas, which prefers the people it claims to support hear no one's perspective but their own.
If you need any examples of why the Gazans don't have a homeland of their own, start with this. Heaven forbid the children of Gaza learn that 6 million Jews were eradicated simply because they were Jews.
Then again, Hamas has never stepped away from their objective of finishing what Hitler started.
The second bit of news is something that has flown under the radar since April, when Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) introduced Senate Bill 773, more commonly known as the Cybersecurity Act of 2009. What has drawn the ire of many conservatives is Section 18 which reads in part:
The concern here is the definition - or lack thereof - of the word "critical". After all, what if President Obama designated FoxNews.com a "critical infrastructure network"?
Somehow I just can't envision President Bush the Younger doing the same with ACLU.org, unless he was giving a speech near their headquarters.
In recent days Rockefeller has submitted a revision to the bill which allegedly would have addressed this issue, but in the opinion of many who read such things he has not only failed, but has further muddied the waters.
Maybe the Tea Baggers should consider forming an offshoot group called e-Baggers to protest this blatant expansion of governmental power.
I will award you five internets each time you forward this post to someone else.
First was a spiritual leader of Hamas stating teaching about the Holocaust to students in Gaza is a "war crime".
Most people will generally listen to more than one side of a discussion or debate. It's fundamental to how we learn and grow as a society. This is anathema to Hamas, which prefers the people it claims to support hear no one's perspective but their own.
If you need any examples of why the Gazans don't have a homeland of their own, start with this. Heaven forbid the children of Gaza learn that 6 million Jews were eradicated simply because they were Jews.
Then again, Hamas has never stepped away from their objective of finishing what Hitler started.
The second bit of news is something that has flown under the radar since April, when Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) introduced Senate Bill 773, more commonly known as the Cybersecurity Act of 2009. What has drawn the ire of many conservatives is Section 18 which reads in part:
The President--
.
.
.
(2) may declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network;
.
.
.
(6) may order the disconnection of any Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information systems or networks in the interest of national security;
The concern here is the definition - or lack thereof - of the word "critical". After all, what if President Obama designated FoxNews.com a "critical infrastructure network"?
Somehow I just can't envision President Bush the Younger doing the same with ACLU.org, unless he was giving a speech near their headquarters.
In recent days Rockefeller has submitted a revision to the bill which allegedly would have addressed this issue, but in the opinion of many who read such things he has not only failed, but has further muddied the waters.
Maybe the Tea Baggers should consider forming an offshoot group called e-Baggers to protest this blatant expansion of governmental power.
I will award you five internets each time you forward this post to someone else.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Different Worlds
I attended a funeral today, and watched part of another on television. One was for a famous man from a famous family. The other was for a young man with one of the most common last names in the country. Yet in their own ways, both left the world a better place than it was when they arrived in it.
Edward M. Kennedy served in the US Senate 47 years.
Donovan X. Jones lived 21 years.
Kennedy graduated from Harvard and the UVa School of Law.
Jones would have graduated this spring from Clemson.
Kennedy leaves behind a lengthy record of work on civil rights, health care reform, education reform, immigration reform, foreign policy, and many other issues important to life in these United States. I'm not going to recount them all here. You can go to just about any web site and find it. He was admired and reviled in multiple circles, but few will debate the impact he had on this nation.
Jones left behind a lengthy record too, which I will recount because rest assured, no one but his close family and friends will be able to find it a month from now.
He was a member of the Kingsbury Road Church of Christ, where he served as co-chair of the youth group, Sunday Bible class, the Bible camp, the Lord's Table, Scripture readings and inter-congregational Bible bowls.
In high school he was named most outstanding student; class salutatorian (earned the class rank of two out of 482 students); scored 1,500 on the SAT college entrance exam; earned the international baccalaureate diploma; and was inducted into the Sumter High School Academic Hall of Fame. He was the number one ranked player on the 2005 SHS Varsity Tennis Team, selected by tennis coaches to the all region team and the USA Team Tennis State Tournament Champion in 2004. He was selected as a Clemson National Scholar (a full six-year academic scholarship), National Merit Scholar, Coca-Cola Scholar, National Honor Society Scholar, Robert C. Byrd Scholar and Palmetto Fellows Scholar.
At Clemson University, he continued his record as an excellent student. He was a member of the Calhoun Honors College; a Dixon Fellow; a member of the student senate and business manager of THE TIGER student newspaper; the Clemson Language Partner Program; was a member of Alpha Phi Omega (my own fraternity), Alpha Lambda Delta, and Delta Sigma Pi; and he participated in the Clemson Study Abroad Program last spring, where he studied in Alicante, Spain. He took advantage of other educational opportunities in Alaska, England, France, Italy, Switzerland and the Netherlands -- all while maintaining a 3.9 GPA.
In the community, he was an organizer of the county-wide Palmetto Tennis Tournament and Youth Day; worked with a team of students to build a Habitat for Humanity home; and tutored Spanish-speaking students in English in the evening at the community library.
I have no doubt Edward Kennedy and Donovan Jones are sharing a table engaged in a great debate on the topics that interest us most.
It's a shame they can't have that conversation where the rest of us can listen. And learn.
Edward M. Kennedy served in the US Senate 47 years.
Donovan X. Jones lived 21 years.
Kennedy graduated from Harvard and the UVa School of Law.
Jones would have graduated this spring from Clemson.
Kennedy leaves behind a lengthy record of work on civil rights, health care reform, education reform, immigration reform, foreign policy, and many other issues important to life in these United States. I'm not going to recount them all here. You can go to just about any web site and find it. He was admired and reviled in multiple circles, but few will debate the impact he had on this nation.
Jones left behind a lengthy record too, which I will recount because rest assured, no one but his close family and friends will be able to find it a month from now.
He was a member of the Kingsbury Road Church of Christ, where he served as co-chair of the youth group, Sunday Bible class, the Bible camp, the Lord's Table, Scripture readings and inter-congregational Bible bowls.
In high school he was named most outstanding student; class salutatorian (earned the class rank of two out of 482 students); scored 1,500 on the SAT college entrance exam; earned the international baccalaureate diploma; and was inducted into the Sumter High School Academic Hall of Fame. He was the number one ranked player on the 2005 SHS Varsity Tennis Team, selected by tennis coaches to the all region team and the USA Team Tennis State Tournament Champion in 2004. He was selected as a Clemson National Scholar (a full six-year academic scholarship), National Merit Scholar, Coca-Cola Scholar, National Honor Society Scholar, Robert C. Byrd Scholar and Palmetto Fellows Scholar.
At Clemson University, he continued his record as an excellent student. He was a member of the Calhoun Honors College; a Dixon Fellow; a member of the student senate and business manager of THE TIGER student newspaper; the Clemson Language Partner Program; was a member of Alpha Phi Omega (my own fraternity), Alpha Lambda Delta, and Delta Sigma Pi; and he participated in the Clemson Study Abroad Program last spring, where he studied in Alicante, Spain. He took advantage of other educational opportunities in Alaska, England, France, Italy, Switzerland and the Netherlands -- all while maintaining a 3.9 GPA.
In the community, he was an organizer of the county-wide Palmetto Tennis Tournament and Youth Day; worked with a team of students to build a Habitat for Humanity home; and tutored Spanish-speaking students in English in the evening at the community library.
I have no doubt Edward Kennedy and Donovan Jones are sharing a table engaged in a great debate on the topics that interest us most.
It's a shame they can't have that conversation where the rest of us can listen. And learn.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Mamas, Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up To Be Killers
I'm a big fan of Chuck Shepard's News of the Weird, which local alt paper Free Times runs every week. The news items he publishes are usually weird, sometimes outrageous, and almost always funny. But there's one recurring feature that can't be described as anything but bizarre:
Murders with the middle name "Wayne".
Probably the most famous, or infamous, murderer who falls in this category is John Wayne Gacy, also known as "The Killer Clown". From 1996 to 2008, Shepard compiled a list of 224 people charged with murder who shared this middle name. Although the list hasn't been updated in quite a while, he continues to compile articles on the subject.
Surprisingly, only 11 of them have the first name John, and that was only good enough for 2nd place on the list. The most common? Michael, with 19 appearances. David (10), Timothy (8), and Robert (7) round out the top five.
Heck, you can use Google to find a handful more in the news, including this one from a couple of weeks ago.
I wonder if Stephen J. Dubner and Steven D. Levitt ever tackled this in their "Freakonomics" studies. Does having this middle name "Wayne" make you more likely to stab, shoot, dismember, beat, pour acid on, set afire, or use a steamroller on other people?
Just to be on the safe side, there's no way in hell I'm giving any child of mine the middle name of Wayne.
Murders with the middle name "Wayne".
Probably the most famous, or infamous, murderer who falls in this category is John Wayne Gacy, also known as "The Killer Clown". From 1996 to 2008, Shepard compiled a list of 224 people charged with murder who shared this middle name. Although the list hasn't been updated in quite a while, he continues to compile articles on the subject.
Surprisingly, only 11 of them have the first name John, and that was only good enough for 2nd place on the list. The most common? Michael, with 19 appearances. David (10), Timothy (8), and Robert (7) round out the top five.
Heck, you can use Google to find a handful more in the news, including this one from a couple of weeks ago.
I wonder if Stephen J. Dubner and Steven D. Levitt ever tackled this in their "Freakonomics" studies. Does having this middle name "Wayne" make you more likely to stab, shoot, dismember, beat, pour acid on, set afire, or use a steamroller on other people?
Just to be on the safe side, there's no way in hell I'm giving any child of mine the middle name of Wayne.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
The War On Talent
One of the blogs I follow is called Fistful of Talent, and one of their writers posted an interesting premise late last week, saying of NFL teams that signing Michael Vick would be the safest hire they'd make all year.
Never mind the negative publicity and the PETA protests which surely would ensue, but such a hire poses an interesting dilemma for a lot of major employers. And most minor ones too.
Let's think about this from the NFL's perspective first. Michael Vick is a game-changer. He is capable of creating and executing plays other quarterbacks can only dream of. He's a spectacular runner and can throw a ball 60+ yards with a flick of the wrist.
He is also a mediocre passer, typically completing 53-55 percent of his throws. His 2-1 career touchdown-interception ratio is very pedestrian. Off the field his reputation for making bad decisions is legendary, including failing drug tests while under indictment for the dog-fighting charges.
So here we have someone who should be in the prime of his career instead fighting for a chance to prove his worth.
Now let's apply this to the "real" world. How many among us would hire an ex-con known to dabble in drugs to perform the same work they did before being imprisoned? Even if they were willing to take minimum wage would you be willing to suffer the slings and arrows of the general public and your employees? If you were, how long would it take before said ex-con demanded his old salary? Would you be willing to pay it?
Many years ago I was interviewing candidates for a maintenance position and brought in one who looked good on paper. There was one key question I had for him, which was to explain a nearly 2-year gap in his employment record. He proceeded to pull out newspaper clippings detailing his arrest and indictment for murdering his wife, along with the court transcript and newspaper clippings detailing the dismissal of those charges by the judge. I'm sure I could have hired him and not gotten any negative press from it, but the air of suspicion in town about him had not fully dissolved. There is no doubt in my mind I would have gotten an earful from the other employees.
And so it goes with any prospective employee with a stain on their resume, especially now. Employers can be choosy about who they hire, and they will take every opportunity to pick through your work history and find a reason to not hire you. You can't avoid the employers who are that picky; they're the only ones hiring! Unless you have a unique set of skills and a consistent history of excellent performance, you might as well make that proctologist appointment now just to get used to the probing.
Now Vick gets to try and revitalize his career in Philadelphia. Isn't this the same city whose fans once booed Santa Claus?
Never mind the negative publicity and the PETA protests which surely would ensue, but such a hire poses an interesting dilemma for a lot of major employers. And most minor ones too.
Let's think about this from the NFL's perspective first. Michael Vick is a game-changer. He is capable of creating and executing plays other quarterbacks can only dream of. He's a spectacular runner and can throw a ball 60+ yards with a flick of the wrist.
He is also a mediocre passer, typically completing 53-55 percent of his throws. His 2-1 career touchdown-interception ratio is very pedestrian. Off the field his reputation for making bad decisions is legendary, including failing drug tests while under indictment for the dog-fighting charges.
So here we have someone who should be in the prime of his career instead fighting for a chance to prove his worth.
Now let's apply this to the "real" world. How many among us would hire an ex-con known to dabble in drugs to perform the same work they did before being imprisoned? Even if they were willing to take minimum wage would you be willing to suffer the slings and arrows of the general public and your employees? If you were, how long would it take before said ex-con demanded his old salary? Would you be willing to pay it?
Many years ago I was interviewing candidates for a maintenance position and brought in one who looked good on paper. There was one key question I had for him, which was to explain a nearly 2-year gap in his employment record. He proceeded to pull out newspaper clippings detailing his arrest and indictment for murdering his wife, along with the court transcript and newspaper clippings detailing the dismissal of those charges by the judge. I'm sure I could have hired him and not gotten any negative press from it, but the air of suspicion in town about him had not fully dissolved. There is no doubt in my mind I would have gotten an earful from the other employees.
And so it goes with any prospective employee with a stain on their resume, especially now. Employers can be choosy about who they hire, and they will take every opportunity to pick through your work history and find a reason to not hire you. You can't avoid the employers who are that picky; they're the only ones hiring! Unless you have a unique set of skills and a consistent history of excellent performance, you might as well make that proctologist appointment now just to get used to the probing.
Now Vick gets to try and revitalize his career in Philadelphia. Isn't this the same city whose fans once booed Santa Claus?
Monday, August 3, 2009
Sometimes Reality Doesn't Bite Hard Enough
I wish I'd thought of this idea in 1994 when I was struggling to find work after finishing graduate school. Then I could have looked like an idiot to the free world.
If you spend $70K in tuition costs for a 4-year degree and you're paying it to a school with no name recognition, one must question your intelligence.
If you attended class every day, achieved a GPA of 2.7, and consider this a positive feat, one must question your intelligence.
If you contacted all the employers listed in the college's career placement office, was contacted by two of them, received no job offers, and you think it's the college's fault, one must question your intelligence.
If you think it should be easy in this economy for a new college graduate with no experience and a mediocre academic record to find a non-retail job, one must question your intelligence.
I'm reminded of people I know who were fortunate enough to work at a company that gave their employees merit increases this year, and complained the amounts were too small. I would love to recommend they leave that company, join together to start a business, and hire the new graduate. It would be the only company in history that would have to declare bankruptcy before it officially existed.
If you spend $70K in tuition costs for a 4-year degree and you're paying it to a school with no name recognition, one must question your intelligence.
If you attended class every day, achieved a GPA of 2.7, and consider this a positive feat, one must question your intelligence.
If you contacted all the employers listed in the college's career placement office, was contacted by two of them, received no job offers, and you think it's the college's fault, one must question your intelligence.
If you think it should be easy in this economy for a new college graduate with no experience and a mediocre academic record to find a non-retail job, one must question your intelligence.
I'm reminded of people I know who were fortunate enough to work at a company that gave their employees merit increases this year, and complained the amounts were too small. I would love to recommend they leave that company, join together to start a business, and hire the new graduate. It would be the only company in history that would have to declare bankruptcy before it officially existed.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Will those in the "Birther" movement please shut up now?
Great article from Steven Thomma on the claims about President Obama not having been born in the United States. It includes the complete interview Bishop Ron McCrae had by phone with Obama's grandmother where he tries to get her to say (through a translator) that he was born in Kenya. He used some editing tricks to make it appear she said he was.
It's an unfortunate shame that politicians would try to use a sham like this for political gain (imagine that!), but Representative Bill Posey of Florida plans to take it one step further with H.R. 1503, which would require candidates for the office of President to prove their citizenship. On it's face that doesn't sound like such a bad idea, but which of the following do you think is more likely to be the correct driving force behind it?
a) No one else in Congress was smart enough to think of a measure like this before.
b) We have to be careful in this day and age when it is more likely for citizens of the United States to have been born abroad.
c) In this era of rampant illegal immigration, it only makes sense for people to have to prove their origins.
d) A certain political party is still upset their white bread war hero/GILF ticket lost the election to a black man.
Leonard Putts chimes in as well with his thoughts being if this is the best the GOP has to offer, the party is in deep doo-doo. Personally I think the country would be better if the moderates split off from the conservatives, then you'd have the right-wing purity so many seem to crave even if they end up representing 12% of the population. The moderates would appeal enough to the Blue Dogs and their supporters to convince them to leave the Democratic party, which would finally allow a strong Centrist movement to build. Imagine how much fun a realistic 3-party system would be.
Sorry, Libertarians and Greens.
It's an unfortunate shame that politicians would try to use a sham like this for political gain (imagine that!), but Representative Bill Posey of Florida plans to take it one step further with H.R. 1503, which would require candidates for the office of President to prove their citizenship. On it's face that doesn't sound like such a bad idea, but which of the following do you think is more likely to be the correct driving force behind it?
a) No one else in Congress was smart enough to think of a measure like this before.
b) We have to be careful in this day and age when it is more likely for citizens of the United States to have been born abroad.
c) In this era of rampant illegal immigration, it only makes sense for people to have to prove their origins.
d) A certain political party is still upset their white bread war hero/GILF ticket lost the election to a black man.
Leonard Putts chimes in as well with his thoughts being if this is the best the GOP has to offer, the party is in deep doo-doo. Personally I think the country would be better if the moderates split off from the conservatives, then you'd have the right-wing purity so many seem to crave even if they end up representing 12% of the population. The moderates would appeal enough to the Blue Dogs and their supporters to convince them to leave the Democratic party, which would finally allow a strong Centrist movement to build. Imagine how much fun a realistic 3-party system would be.
Sorry, Libertarians and Greens.
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Lessons Never Learned
I'd planned to write in part about what seems to be a never-ending topic of discussion in South Carolina: The flying of the "Southern Cross" flag on the grounds of the State House. What was blocking me was how to start until I read this piece.
I don't agree with all of his declaratives, but when you take into account the intent of the legislators who authorized flying the flag on top of the State House in the first place, the attorney general's opinion of its legality flying there, the changing perspective on what flying the flag represents, how flying it there appeared to others in the nation, and how it appears to those who support it flying, the compromise that led to it's current location seems reasonable. The flag is situated at the Confederate Soldiers' Monument, which sits at the corner of Main and Gervais in downtown Columbia on the edge of State House grounds.
The NAACP took a lot of credit for organizing a boycott that continues to this day. The boycott had some successes in the early part of the decade, but only seems to be known today when an organization like the Atlantic Coast Conference commits the horrific faux pas of awarding a baseball tournament to a city 150 miles from where the flag flies. Even though the flag has been removed from the "position of sovereignty", the boycott continues because the monument is on State House grounds.
But my point to all this is really quite simple. Since the mid-1970's there had been a push to remove the flag from the top of the State House. It was done. People on both sides are still complaining about it. It's a lot of energy wasted on an issue that does nothing except sully the image of the state. The flag does not create jobs, generate revenue, improve schools, or generally contribute to the quality of life in South Carolina.
This is a local issue.
Health care is a national issue.
We have spent a half-century debating how to make health care affordable. The issues are known, but no one in that time has been willing to expend the necessary brainpower and political capital to make the changes we need. The question today is whether or not we can make it happen.
The "we" in that statement is not just the politicians. It's us, the public. As a nation we are out of shape and overweight. Our diets are unhealthy. We expect our doctors to treat whatever condition we show up with and fix it, then file complaints and lawsuits because we didn't do what they said to do to prevent a recurrence.
We are all in this together. We need the politicos to create an environment where it makes sense for those in the best of health to pay the least for coverage, but still be able to provide basic coverage for all. We need physicians willing to take the time to treat the cause instead of just the symptom. Most of all, we the people need a Gibbs-slap upside the head to get off our collective butts and get in shape.
McAllen, Texas spends more per capita on health care than any other city but Miami. If you want to know why health care costs so much, read this. When you finish, go for a walk, a swim, or a run. It'll do you good.
I don't agree with all of his declaratives, but when you take into account the intent of the legislators who authorized flying the flag on top of the State House in the first place, the attorney general's opinion of its legality flying there, the changing perspective on what flying the flag represents, how flying it there appeared to others in the nation, and how it appears to those who support it flying, the compromise that led to it's current location seems reasonable. The flag is situated at the Confederate Soldiers' Monument, which sits at the corner of Main and Gervais in downtown Columbia on the edge of State House grounds.
The NAACP took a lot of credit for organizing a boycott that continues to this day. The boycott had some successes in the early part of the decade, but only seems to be known today when an organization like the Atlantic Coast Conference commits the horrific faux pas of awarding a baseball tournament to a city 150 miles from where the flag flies. Even though the flag has been removed from the "position of sovereignty", the boycott continues because the monument is on State House grounds.
But my point to all this is really quite simple. Since the mid-1970's there had been a push to remove the flag from the top of the State House. It was done. People on both sides are still complaining about it. It's a lot of energy wasted on an issue that does nothing except sully the image of the state. The flag does not create jobs, generate revenue, improve schools, or generally contribute to the quality of life in South Carolina.
This is a local issue.
Health care is a national issue.
We have spent a half-century debating how to make health care affordable. The issues are known, but no one in that time has been willing to expend the necessary brainpower and political capital to make the changes we need. The question today is whether or not we can make it happen.
The "we" in that statement is not just the politicians. It's us, the public. As a nation we are out of shape and overweight. Our diets are unhealthy. We expect our doctors to treat whatever condition we show up with and fix it, then file complaints and lawsuits because we didn't do what they said to do to prevent a recurrence.
We are all in this together. We need the politicos to create an environment where it makes sense for those in the best of health to pay the least for coverage, but still be able to provide basic coverage for all. We need physicians willing to take the time to treat the cause instead of just the symptom. Most of all, we the people need a Gibbs-slap upside the head to get off our collective butts and get in shape.
McAllen, Texas spends more per capita on health care than any other city but Miami. If you want to know why health care costs so much, read this. When you finish, go for a walk, a swim, or a run. It'll do you good.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Are handbaskets still made in America?
State of the Union by Carl Moore
Never mind. In Hades, a jihadist is the virgin.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Hands On or Off the Wheel
Governor Sanford issued his latest apology today, which you can read here. This was published one day after an opinion piece about neo-Nazi James Von Brunn by Rabbi Marc Wilson, which you can read here. Although Rabbi Wilson is tackling a difficult and totally unrelated subject, there are words that Governor Sanford should note.
Part of the governor's apology includes this statement:
"It’s in the spirit of making good from bad that I am committing to you and the larger family of South Carolinians to use this experience both to trust God in his larger work of changing me and, from my end, to work to becoming a better and more effective leader."
This is an interesting perspective of self when compared to this part of Rabbi Wilson's piece:
"Reb Moshe Leib Sassover asserted that every human attribute, however base, could be converted into a virtuous deed. Once upon a time, Reb Moshe was taunted by a disciple to explain how atheism could become honorable. “Even that,” Reb Moshe proclaimed. “For if someone comes to you in hurt, you may not say, ‘Take your problems to God.’ No, at that moment, you must become an atheist, act as if there is no God; that there is only one force that can help this man. YOU!”"
My own take on this is more like Reb Moshe. In times of crisis, whether it be personal, professional, or both you must act. God gives us the wisdom, the free will, and the ability to choose the course we will take. At the core we know what the correct action is. It's whether or not we choose to take that action that puts us in or out of line with the teachings of our faith.
Governor Sanford is one of a long list of mostly "conservative" politicians who espouse using the guidance of God in their decision-making when it comes to their politics, but seem to leave Him at the door when it comes to their personal lives (for references, see Craig, Larry; Ensign, Jon; Clinton, William; Gingrich, Newt; Vitter, David; et al). Perhaps the cynicism of the American public about the people we elect to office is what lets them (usually) survive scandal. It doesn't make it right, but it gives them breathing room to think that maybe, just maybe, they can hold on to the power we have given them for a little while longer. If they can do that, then maybe our collective memories will have faded enough to give them our votes once again.
Fortunately for those of us in South Carolina, Governor Sanford is term-limited and has about 18 months left in office. Hopefully during that time he will decide not whether God will be a presence in his life, but whether he will consistently act in the manner that God expects all His children to act, whether we consciously seek His guidance or not.
Is God the pilot or the co-pilot? Do you have to consult with God before making any decision, no matter how small? Or do you instinctively know when to do the right thing? I prefer to think I'm the one behind the wheel of my own life, but I'm using a GPS designed by God to get me where I need to go. Whether I choose to stay on the optimal route or look for a way that will be faster or shorter is up to me. I know of people who prefer to think of God as the pilot and if that works for them, that's great. I only wish more of them actually lived like it.
Part of the governor's apology includes this statement:
"It’s in the spirit of making good from bad that I am committing to you and the larger family of South Carolinians to use this experience both to trust God in his larger work of changing me and, from my end, to work to becoming a better and more effective leader."
This is an interesting perspective of self when compared to this part of Rabbi Wilson's piece:
"Reb Moshe Leib Sassover asserted that every human attribute, however base, could be converted into a virtuous deed. Once upon a time, Reb Moshe was taunted by a disciple to explain how atheism could become honorable. “Even that,” Reb Moshe proclaimed. “For if someone comes to you in hurt, you may not say, ‘Take your problems to God.’ No, at that moment, you must become an atheist, act as if there is no God; that there is only one force that can help this man. YOU!”"
My own take on this is more like Reb Moshe. In times of crisis, whether it be personal, professional, or both you must act. God gives us the wisdom, the free will, and the ability to choose the course we will take. At the core we know what the correct action is. It's whether or not we choose to take that action that puts us in or out of line with the teachings of our faith.
Governor Sanford is one of a long list of mostly "conservative" politicians who espouse using the guidance of God in their decision-making when it comes to their politics, but seem to leave Him at the door when it comes to their personal lives (for references, see Craig, Larry; Ensign, Jon; Clinton, William; Gingrich, Newt; Vitter, David; et al). Perhaps the cynicism of the American public about the people we elect to office is what lets them (usually) survive scandal. It doesn't make it right, but it gives them breathing room to think that maybe, just maybe, they can hold on to the power we have given them for a little while longer. If they can do that, then maybe our collective memories will have faded enough to give them our votes once again.
Fortunately for those of us in South Carolina, Governor Sanford is term-limited and has about 18 months left in office. Hopefully during that time he will decide not whether God will be a presence in his life, but whether he will consistently act in the manner that God expects all His children to act, whether we consciously seek His guidance or not.
Is God the pilot or the co-pilot? Do you have to consult with God before making any decision, no matter how small? Or do you instinctively know when to do the right thing? I prefer to think I'm the one behind the wheel of my own life, but I'm using a GPS designed by God to get me where I need to go. Whether I choose to stay on the optimal route or look for a way that will be faster or shorter is up to me. I know of people who prefer to think of God as the pilot and if that works for them, that's great. I only wish more of them actually lived like it.
Monday, July 13, 2009
The Politics Corollary
"When I get a case about discrimination, I have to think about people in my own family who suffered discrimination because of their ethnic background or because of religion or because of gender. And I do take that into account."
I'll share the name of the person who gave that quote later. For now it's just something to ponder.
When you look at lists of who the greatest people were in any country, normally those who are considered at the top are policitians or statesmen. Ask me who the greatest Americans were and I might come up with names like Theodore Roosevelt, Benjamin Franklin, George Mason, Dwight Eisenhower, or Colin Powell.
Ask kids today who the greatest Americans are and you'd get answers like Kobe Bryant, Terrell Owens, Paris Hilton, or Dane Cook.
Ugh.
Charles Barkley did a commercial for Nike years ago where he famously said "I am not a role model," and was vilified for it. He wasn't wrong, but he wasn't right either. When you work in a profession that puts you on tv, the radio, or the internet you are a role model whether you like it or not. If people are shelling out $50 to watch you perform, you can bet they're going to pay attention when you screw up.
I really hope Plaxico Burris is reading this, and that Donte Stallworth is beating him upside the head.
But there's one faction of the population that puts itself on display at every opportunity for the world to see, and they regrettably do it whether it's necessary or not.
Ladies and gentlemen, meet the "Modern Politician". One hour and forty-eight minutes of saying absolutely nothing.
In most endeavors it is said that cream rises to the top. Yet, we never seem to elect these people to office. Imagine if great minds like Warren Buffett, Carly Fiorina, Bill Gates, or Jack Welch had chosen to tackle elective politics with the same gusto that made them great leaders in business. Sure, the pay would suck by comparison, but how much would the country benefit? Instead we get hacks like Barney Frank and Jim DeMint, cut from different sides of the same tattered cloth.
Maybe its our own fault. Are we as a nation smart enough to elect people who are actually smart?
Did I just answer my own question?
By the way, the quote at the top is from current Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, spoken during his own confirmation hearing. Betcha Jeff Sessions wasn't worried about his use of empathy in making decisions.
I'll share the name of the person who gave that quote later. For now it's just something to ponder.
When you look at lists of who the greatest people were in any country, normally those who are considered at the top are policitians or statesmen. Ask me who the greatest Americans were and I might come up with names like Theodore Roosevelt, Benjamin Franklin, George Mason, Dwight Eisenhower, or Colin Powell.
Ask kids today who the greatest Americans are and you'd get answers like Kobe Bryant, Terrell Owens, Paris Hilton, or Dane Cook.
Ugh.
Charles Barkley did a commercial for Nike years ago where he famously said "I am not a role model," and was vilified for it. He wasn't wrong, but he wasn't right either. When you work in a profession that puts you on tv, the radio, or the internet you are a role model whether you like it or not. If people are shelling out $50 to watch you perform, you can bet they're going to pay attention when you screw up.
I really hope Plaxico Burris is reading this, and that Donte Stallworth is beating him upside the head.
But there's one faction of the population that puts itself on display at every opportunity for the world to see, and they regrettably do it whether it's necessary or not.
Ladies and gentlemen, meet the "Modern Politician". One hour and forty-eight minutes of saying absolutely nothing.
In most endeavors it is said that cream rises to the top. Yet, we never seem to elect these people to office. Imagine if great minds like Warren Buffett, Carly Fiorina, Bill Gates, or Jack Welch had chosen to tackle elective politics with the same gusto that made them great leaders in business. Sure, the pay would suck by comparison, but how much would the country benefit? Instead we get hacks like Barney Frank and Jim DeMint, cut from different sides of the same tattered cloth.
Maybe its our own fault. Are we as a nation smart enough to elect people who are actually smart?
Did I just answer my own question?
By the way, the quote at the top is from current Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, spoken during his own confirmation hearing. Betcha Jeff Sessions wasn't worried about his use of empathy in making decisions.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
When Will They Ever Learn?
I was in Nashville for a long weekend with Alexa, visiting her mother. We arrived very late Wednesday night (or very early Thursday morning) and had a good time. Since I'd inflicted the "Tour D'Elliot" on Alexa back in December when we were in Boston, she did the same to me with the "Tour D'Alexa" on Thursday. Friday we went to Huntsville and visited the US Space and Rocket Center (overrated), and barbecued at her cousin's house. Saturday we left the house early and did a tour at Mammoth Cave National Park (awesome). So far so good, and we were going to be back in plenty of time for that night's fireworks show.
We'd have hoped other than a few jokes at Mark "The Lov Gov" Sanford's expense we'd hear little or nothing about phamous philanderers. So it was a bit of a punch to the gut to hear the radio report on the way home that retired Tennessee Titan QB Steve McNair had been shot, and the queasy feeling of illness started to follow when word got out about who he was with.
Why do they do it? Because they can? Because they don't think they'll get caught? Is it a show of power? Ego? Dissatisfaction?
I'm not going to claim the moral high ground here; I'm in no position to do so. But it boggles my mind at the ratio of people who moralize to the general public to those who get caught doing what they moralize about.
Eliot Spitzer, Mark Sanford, David Vitter, Ted Haggard, John Ensign, Newt Gingrich, Henry Hyde, Jim McGreevey, Larry Craig, Jimmy Swaggert. Enough for you? Never mind the Shawn Kemps of the world, who seem to take the instruction to "go forth and multiply" to extremes.
A line I like to use is "Lead me not into temptation, I can find it myself." If this article is any indication, some people are better at it than others. When you're a public figure, you have to know there is someone out there ready to knock you off the pedestal.
It's really quite simple: Don't engage in behavior that would cause your momma to swat you over the head with a rolling pin if she saw it on the news. In this day and age, there's a camera on every corner and people with dollar signs in their eyes willing to talk about what they saw you do and with who you did it.
Is it really that hard?
We'd have hoped other than a few jokes at Mark "The Lov Gov" Sanford's expense we'd hear little or nothing about phamous philanderers. So it was a bit of a punch to the gut to hear the radio report on the way home that retired Tennessee Titan QB Steve McNair had been shot, and the queasy feeling of illness started to follow when word got out about who he was with.
Why do they do it? Because they can? Because they don't think they'll get caught? Is it a show of power? Ego? Dissatisfaction?
I'm not going to claim the moral high ground here; I'm in no position to do so. But it boggles my mind at the ratio of people who moralize to the general public to those who get caught doing what they moralize about.
Eliot Spitzer, Mark Sanford, David Vitter, Ted Haggard, John Ensign, Newt Gingrich, Henry Hyde, Jim McGreevey, Larry Craig, Jimmy Swaggert. Enough for you? Never mind the Shawn Kemps of the world, who seem to take the instruction to "go forth and multiply" to extremes.
A line I like to use is "Lead me not into temptation, I can find it myself." If this article is any indication, some people are better at it than others. When you're a public figure, you have to know there is someone out there ready to knock you off the pedestal.
It's really quite simple: Don't engage in behavior that would cause your momma to swat you over the head with a rolling pin if she saw it on the news. In this day and age, there's a camera on every corner and people with dollar signs in their eyes willing to talk about what they saw you do and with who you did it.
Is it really that hard?
Monday, June 29, 2009
More things you don't do in baseball
In 2000 I was fortunate enough to get face-value tickets to see the Red Sox and Braves play in Fenway Park. It was my first game at Fenway since my early teenage years and there are really only two things I remember about it. First, the Braves won. Second was the heckling of that great humanitarian John Rocker, for which my own contribution was "How do you spell relief? R-O-KKK-E-R!".
This past weekend Alexa and I were able to procure two tickets at considerably more than face-value to see the Sawx and Braves play in Atlanta. It was my first time at a regular season MLB game in a venue other than Fenway, though with the number of Red Sox fans in attendance it might as well have been a home game. Every cheer from Red Sox Nation was greeting with a disinterested chorus of boos from the home team fans. I say "disinterested" because of one thing: Interested fans don't leave early when the outcome remains in doubt.
Granted it was 95 degrees for the first pitch at Turner Field, and it certainly felt hotter than that until the 5th inning when clouds rolled in. But for the first six innings it was a 0-0 game. I may be in a minority of sport fans who appreciate and enjoy low-scoring, defensive-minded games, but there's something special about knowing one pitch, one hit, one aggressive baserunner, or one accurately thrown ball can make the difference between a win and a loss.
So color me surprised when after the 6th inning ended, Braves fans started to leave.
Then during the 7th inning stretch, after the Red Sox took a 1-0 lead, more Braves fans started to leave.
After each half-inning ended more Braves fans left! I was incredulous. Did you seriously pay $40 or more per ticket to watch 2/3 of a ballgame? I could understand if the Sox were winning 12-2 or by some similarly ridiculous margin, but not a 1-0 game.
I heard from friends who had their own theories: They are trying to beat the traffic. It's too hot. One run is all you need to beat Atlanta this year. The list went on.
All I needed to know about why leaving a game early is a bad thing happened when I was 11 years old. I'd gone to a game with my uncle and cousin. The Red Sox and Tigers. In the 7th inning the Sox were losing 6-3, and my uncle was ready to leave. Since he was my way home, we left. The Sox tied the game in the bottom of the 9th inning, and if memory serves correctly they won it in the 14th.
In the bottom of the 9th the Braves first batter struck out. The second one lofted a fly ball to deep right field that would have cleared the wall if the wall were 3 feet closer to home plate. The third batter doubled. Fortunately for the Red Sox, the fourth and final batter grounded out.
Two opportunities to win the game, and thousands of Braves fans missed them because leaving early is the "in" thing to do.
In A League Of Their Own, Tom Hanks infamously said "There's no crying in baseball." Had his character been at the game this weekend, Jimmy Dugan would have shed a tear or two, then he'd have yelled to the umpire that he looked like a penis with that little hat on.
This past weekend Alexa and I were able to procure two tickets at considerably more than face-value to see the Sawx and Braves play in Atlanta. It was my first time at a regular season MLB game in a venue other than Fenway, though with the number of Red Sox fans in attendance it might as well have been a home game. Every cheer from Red Sox Nation was greeting with a disinterested chorus of boos from the home team fans. I say "disinterested" because of one thing: Interested fans don't leave early when the outcome remains in doubt.
Granted it was 95 degrees for the first pitch at Turner Field, and it certainly felt hotter than that until the 5th inning when clouds rolled in. But for the first six innings it was a 0-0 game. I may be in a minority of sport fans who appreciate and enjoy low-scoring, defensive-minded games, but there's something special about knowing one pitch, one hit, one aggressive baserunner, or one accurately thrown ball can make the difference between a win and a loss.
So color me surprised when after the 6th inning ended, Braves fans started to leave.
Then during the 7th inning stretch, after the Red Sox took a 1-0 lead, more Braves fans started to leave.
After each half-inning ended more Braves fans left! I was incredulous. Did you seriously pay $40 or more per ticket to watch 2/3 of a ballgame? I could understand if the Sox were winning 12-2 or by some similarly ridiculous margin, but not a 1-0 game.
I heard from friends who had their own theories: They are trying to beat the traffic. It's too hot. One run is all you need to beat Atlanta this year. The list went on.
All I needed to know about why leaving a game early is a bad thing happened when I was 11 years old. I'd gone to a game with my uncle and cousin. The Red Sox and Tigers. In the 7th inning the Sox were losing 6-3, and my uncle was ready to leave. Since he was my way home, we left. The Sox tied the game in the bottom of the 9th inning, and if memory serves correctly they won it in the 14th.
In the bottom of the 9th the Braves first batter struck out. The second one lofted a fly ball to deep right field that would have cleared the wall if the wall were 3 feet closer to home plate. The third batter doubled. Fortunately for the Red Sox, the fourth and final batter grounded out.
Two opportunities to win the game, and thousands of Braves fans missed them because leaving early is the "in" thing to do.
In A League Of Their Own, Tom Hanks infamously said "There's no crying in baseball." Had his character been at the game this weekend, Jimmy Dugan would have shed a tear or two, then he'd have yelled to the umpire that he looked like a penis with that little hat on.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Vacationland
There are a few basic rules to follow when you are the BDWIC (Big Dog What's In Charge) of any entity:
Sanford is spoken about with reverence by some in the Libertarian wing of the GOP as a potential 2012 presidential candidate. After all, this is the same governor who with a Republican-dominated Legislature can't seem to get a single bill of his own passed. Of course, they might still be a teensy bit sore about the defecating pigs incident.
Still you have to admire Sanford for sticking to his principles in the face of rising unemployment, shrinking tax revenues, and concerns over same-sex teenage dating violence. He is most definitely his own man.
Someone should probably tell him he is really South Carolina's "man" for another 18 months, even if most of its citizens would prefer next time he takes a break from the world he just stayed away.
- Unless you die, are fired, resign, are rendered unconscious or comatose, or are overthrown, you are always in charge.
- As long as rule #1 is still applicable, it's never a good idea to be unreachable for any reason.
- If you are a public figure, whether a politician, commissioner of a sports league, union head, or Mob boss, word will eventually get out that you can't be found if you violate rule #2.
- If word gets out that you can't be found, your sycophants will rally around the space you used to occupy to protect your reputation, while your opponents will encircle them trying to breach said space and make you look like a fool.
Sanford is spoken about with reverence by some in the Libertarian wing of the GOP as a potential 2012 presidential candidate. After all, this is the same governor who with a Republican-dominated Legislature can't seem to get a single bill of his own passed. Of course, they might still be a teensy bit sore about the defecating pigs incident.
Still you have to admire Sanford for sticking to his principles in the face of rising unemployment, shrinking tax revenues, and concerns over same-sex teenage dating violence. He is most definitely his own man.
Someone should probably tell him he is really South Carolina's "man" for another 18 months, even if most of its citizens would prefer next time he takes a break from the world he just stayed away.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
