Outrageous NCAA

Brave. Strong. Courageous. Relentless. Warriors. Proud. Fearsome.

All of these describe characteristics you want in your sports teams. The team mascot is generally chosen to embody these characteristics, so many sports teams have taken on American Indian inspired names, such as Warriors, Indians, Braves, Redskins, Seminoles, Illini, Utes.

Now the NCAA has decided that these names are "hostile" and "abusive", and colleges which use American Indian models for their sports teams will be banned from using those names and mascots in all NCAA-sanctioned tournaments.

Small wonder, given the President of the NCAA is Myles Brand, who brings with him a legacy of being the past president of Indiana University, recognized as the best party school in the nation, one of the most liberal campuses in the nation, and home of the Kinsey Institute for Sexual Deviance.

The very terms used to explain this decision, "hostile and abusive", are all we need to understand the intellectual vacuum in which these people exist. Has anyone ever in recent memory been "hostile" or "abusive" to any tribal member anywhere, because the way their race is represented by some sports mascot? Has any tribal member alive experienced hostility or abuse of any kind because of their tribal or ethnic status? Never, as far as I can tell.

If we're going to decide that for some reason using American Indian icons for sports teams is disrespectful, then I suppose Myles' former university should also be sanctioned. After all, isn't "Hoosier" based on a derogatory term for hicks from Indiana? What about Irish People, who might be offended at Notre Dame's leprechaun and the stereotypical term "Fighting Irish"? How about the brothers in Catholic monastic life, should they be offended by the Providence "Friars"? How about PETA, surely they find the use of animals like Lions, Tigers, and Bears (Oh My!) objectionable.

Watch out Wisconsin and Iowa, schools who announced that they will refuse to schedule any teams with American Indian nicknames. How hypocritical, when they are hostile and abusive to Badgers and Hawks!

Even in the story, the Seminole Tribe in Florida is proud to be represented by Florida State. I believe it is because they have embraced the characteristics I listed at the top of this story and abandoned the silliness of those few always on the lookout for something that offends. Even our nation's capital has an NFL team called the "Redskins"!

I'm disgusted and outraged. Colleges have always been the primary refuge for the wierd and disaffected, but now things have gone way over the edge. Not only have the eccentricities of academia spilled over to take control of the institutions themselves, but they have succeeded in implementing a liberal fascism that is revealing the tip of the iceberg in this crazy and stupid NCAA ruling.

Bioethics

A topic I never completely formed an opinion on, and hesitate even now to take a hard and fast position with, is embryonic stem cells. This lies in that continuum of difficult moral and ethical questions most refer to as bioethics.

First we should discard the extreme positions of those who have chosen to politicize this particular question:

The left side pillories the president, which is their favorite sport these days, for stopping important stem cell research that, if not for his ignorant obstruction of science, would have cured all manner of diseases by now. If your source of information is television news programs, not to mention certain Democratic politicians, then you probably believe that Christopher Reeve would be alive and walking around by now, Ronald Reagan wouldn't have died from Alzheimers, and Michael J. Fox would still be appearing in lots of movies without a trace of his Parkinsons' symptoms, if not for the ignorant policies of the president.

The right side envisions a doomsday scenario where the abortion mills selling aborted fetuses to a new embryonic stem cell industry that gained enough clout to convince a majority of Americans that abortion is not only a positive choice, but helps save lives. The scenario is reminiscent of the old Capra film, Soylent Green.

What we have to do is separate the facts from the rhetoric. And in this particular case, I can't say for certain that I completely understand all the facts. Because it's very hard to tell the truth from spin when proponents of either side of the issue seem to be saying opposite things.

All that considered, here is a list of what seem to be the facts:

• Stem cells are showing terrific promise in treatment of a wide range of maladies.
  
• Adult stem cells are already being used successfully to treat some illnesses.
  
• Placental stem cells have shown the greatest promise yet, and some researchers say they appear to be better than embryonic stem cells.
• Embryonic stem cells, although appearing to hold great promise, have yet to be successfully applied to any positive effect, even in a laboratory environment.
• The president did not ban or restrict stem cell research. There are no laws preventing private companies from experimenting with embryonic or any other stem cells as much as they please. His only crime was in restricting federal funding only on embryonic research to the use of existing lines. Public and private research never stopped, and is continuing today.
• The latest flap is over Bill Frist, who has come out in favor of expanding embryonic stem cell funding to include embryos from fertility clinics that were going to be discarded anyway.

So what conclusions do I draw from what (admittedly little) I understand about the issue?

1. That some research scientists are using the debate to try to get more funding, whether or not there is any potential of a miracle cure in this research.
2. That Frist's new position means nothing, other than he's trying to broaden his support base for a possible run for president.
3. That abortion rights activists see this as a way to get wider acceptance of their philosophy.
4. That the discussion hasn't even gone to the true ethical question yet, but just to how much should taxpayers be forced to contribute to this particular research project, even if they object on moral and ethical grounds.
   
5. That the president's position on this has to come from his core principles and not political calculation. Why? If he had done nothing, nobody would have noticed, and he would have received little or no criticism on the issue.
6. That the bottom line question is, are we willing to sacrifice human life to save other human life? Even when even the possibility of that process working is still in doubt?

I am sort of leaning toward the president's point of view on this one.

The Secret of Misleading Polls

I got polled today. Most of the poll was pretty straightforward, asking what I thought in general about the president and a few basic issues. Along the way, though, there was a single question that made me angry and frustrated.

The question was whether or not I supported teaching of religious values in public school. What a horrible question to ask, because if I were to respond to the clear intent of the question's wording, the answer would have to be "no". Because that implies a specific religious content from a specific religious sect, presumably required, which of course would not be appropriate in our pluralistic society.

But that is so far from an accurate picture of my opinion on the real topic. If, as I interpreted the question, the proposition is to set up a class that is required of all students teaching, say the United Methodist brand of Christianity, then absolutely not. But that's nowhere near the same as asking whether religion of any kind should be allowed past the doors of the local school.

But what the poll would not allow me to communicate was that I totally support academic classes on religion. And elective classes on specific religions - in other words, if a local Rabbi wants to come to the school and provide an elective class on Judaism, fine! Likewise a Mormon class, a Catholic class, an Islam class, a Comparative Religion class; just not anything evil like Paganism or Wicca or Satanism. Students should be free to choose to attend elective classes on religion, as long as it does not interfere with the primary mission of public education. They also should be free to organize, on their own, specific religious clubs or bible study groups or music groups, whatever they wish, meeting at lunchtime or study period or outside school hours.

The problem with the poll is that when they report the results, they will say something like, "over 70 percent of respondents said they did not support the presence of religion in public schools". And that's not just a distortion, it's a lie! Religion should be embraced by the schools as a positive influence on the development of children's values and morality, but no single religion should be given preference over another.

The lesson we all need to learn is to never fully believe the results of a poll you might hear reported. Because the results are driven by the way the pollster phrased the question, which obviously has the goal of achieving a particular outcome.

The Big Secret

Sorry fellow members of my gender, I'm going to let the cat out of the bag. The following is the result of a 48-year study by the Institute for Theoretical Social Behavioral Studies (ITSBS), and is based on empirical observation of hundreds of adult relationships.

Have you ever seen couples that are disgustingly happy? You know, always together, exhibiting public displays of affection, never seeming to argue, and so on.

Here's the secret: The female of the couple knows and applies the simple principles of conditioned response, aka behavior modification.

Face it, men are uncomplicated creatures. And despite all the "modern feminist" protestations otherwise, women want a caveman. In a contest for woman's affections between the caveman and the "sensitive, thoughtful, empathetic" girly man, the caveman ALWAYS wins.

It's probably something about the fact that the caveman is uncomplicated, strong, and dominant. Women want that alpha male who is going to protect her against the dangers of the outside world. It is simple instinct. And why the "nice guys" finish last.

Paradoxically, once the female of the species has trapped her choice caveman, she is not satisfied. Because being a new feminist thinker, she believes she can domesticate him. Unfortunately, most women are clueless as to what approach works best in that effort, and they either remain unhappy in their "bad relationship" or dump the bum (assuming he doesn't dump her first).

What do the successful women do that lets them have their caveman and domesticate him too? They understand and employ those basic principles proven long ago with Pavlov's dog and used by animal trainers everywhere. Conditioned Response.

When you get to the root needs of the average male animal, there are only 3:

• Food
• Sex
• Toys/Games (aka Cars & Sports)
  

Not necessarily in that order.

Women who understand Conditioned Response and employ it with maximum effectiveness are the women who can rule the world (or at least their house). And the best accomplish all this without the man ever realizing through expert application of the above 3 rewards.

It's very simple, really. Using some variation of rewards which meet the 3 driving needs, the female may entice her caveman to, say, mow the lawn, with an immediate reward that includes an effective combination of some or all the three. The better the perceived reward, the more likely the behavior is to be repeated. For another example, if the female catches her caveman picking up his socks and rewards him with a memorable experience from among the big three, it won't be long before he's picking up his socks without even being asked.

Nagging and cajoling and other forms of verbal and nonverbal punishment, the most common methods employed by modern women, have proven to have the opposite effect. Such responses to a man's behavior are known as Extinguishers, and the more they are attempted, the less likely the man is to respond. But unfortunately, most women never seem to learn this simple but important lesson, and thereby doom themselves to a life of anger, hostility, and disappointment. Because no self-respecting caveman will ever consciously allow a women to dominate him, but will instead withdraw into his cave or avoid contact with the female to eliminate the source of irritation.

Thus proves the thesis of this study, that the happiest and most successful women are able to get whatever they want from their mate through a simple understanding of Conditioned Response. So the next time you see one of those deleriously happy couples out there, observe the micro-level conditioned response at work, and you will find the practitioner is nearly always the female.

Omens and Portents

On my way to the office, I passed a white dove sitting on a fence and just staring at me. My presence didn't seem to frighten the dove at all, and it's rare to see white doves around here anyway.

So it popped into my head, "is this an omen?"

But then, an omen of what? What possible meaning could I divine from a white dove? Maybe lots of other people passed by the same dove on their way to work as well. Was it an omen for them?

I've decided it isn't an omen or warning or anything else - just a white dove sitting on a fence.

I have never been superstitious. Like teammates on the football and basketball teams back in high school, I didn't have a pair of "lucky socks" or a pregame ritual or any other quirky little superstitious aid. But those who did would probably tell me that's why I didn't become a great player and got injured.

Naw.

My grandmother (my mother's mother) was very superstitious. I think she brought them over from Scotland. She got very upset once when I broke a mirror, not for breaking the mirror, but for the bad luck it was sure to bring me. Come to think of it, she might have been right - I sure have had more than my share of bad luck. She had other quirky little superstitions that I never was quite sure whether they were serious or all in fun.

Like picking your feet up when crossing a bridge, or holding your breath past the cemetary, or ...

I'm just pretty dense. I won't recognize any "signs" unless they involve God Himself slapping me up-side the head and yelling at me to do or not do something.

Safe Blogging Zone

My blog topics mostly avoid my most personal thoughts and experiences, because such things cannot be shared with readers who know me. I've taken a risk now and then with posts that scratch the surface, but have been careful to avoid the deepest personal topics.

The paradox of blogging is in the conflict between publishing your thoughts, experiences, and opinions for anyone to read and the risk of offending or destroying your image with those who know you and may read the blog.

Sometimes it is tempting to set up an anonymous blog which you tell nobody about, where you can post your deepest and most personal stuff without fear of discovery. I often wonder how many others do just that, but also whether anyone even reads such blogs. Given the fact that I'm not terribly consistent with this blog, I'm not sure I could take the time to post in a second one. And unless the other blog draws an audience of strangers, it would just be sitting out there with no readership besides myself. But then, if it attracted a large audience, that would increase the risk that someone I know would find it and easily figure out the author's identity.

That leads to the question, "Why do I blog"?

For me, it's a personal journal outlet that fills some need nothing else can satisfy. It reminds me of "John Boy" in the old Walton's television show, who used a tablet to chronicle his daily experiences. It's not terribly important to me whether anyone reads the blog, because ultimately it is not written for others, but just for my own personal blog therapy.

On the other hand, if I'm expressing a strongly-held opinion or belief, I do hope others see it and at least think about what I have to say. One of my hopes for my blog is that someday I get a comment from someone who disagrees with what I've written, but makes a well-reasoned case for why they disagree. Engaging each other constructively, like my recent back-and-forth with the newspaper reporter, is the best way for people to begin to understand each other.

Anyway, I'll probably just continue to post as I have been; whatever is bugging me or rolling around my brain looking for an outlet will find itself in this little cyberspace journal.

When Stupid People Rule

There was a short story I read many years ago, and can't remember the author. But the basic story was about a future society that was run by the stupid and uneducated, who had enslaved the small group of people left who had enough intelligence to keep the ignorant population fed and comfortable.

In some ways, I wonder if we aren't on a fast track to something similar to the world imagined by that short story writer. For evidence of cultural stupidity, all one needs is to look around and listen.

When I'm out in the community, I observe and listen to an overwhelming majority of people advertising their ignorance like a billboard. It can be seen in the way they dress, the bumper stickers on their cars, the way they treat their children, and their inability to produce an intelligible sentence.

When I turn on the television, it seems that 90 percent of the programs are targeted toward idiots. Aside from the slide in sitcoms into the gutter because of the loss of talented writers, there are the news shows so obviously managing stories to manage viewer attitudes. There are talk shows that exploit stupid people with faux psychology, and those are the ones that haven't reached the gratuitous Jerry Springer genre.

Even in the newspaper it is easy on any given day to find errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation. It's funny sometimes to see a word provided by the writer's spell-checker that is a real word but has nothing to do with the context of the sentence.

We live in a world of blissful ignorance. Most people I meet have no clue of what's going on in the world, but have strong opinions all the same. If not for the internet, I fear the real truth of current events would no longer be accessible even to those of us who want to know. We've almost reached the point where the country will be effectively stolen by those politicians who have recognized and exploited the stupidity of its citizens.

And that's why I now believe the freedom and democracy that made America unique in history will be destroyed in my lifetime.

Still Learning

If nothing else, the past year and a half of being my own boss have been quite the learning experience. And the learning never stops.

The key question is, would I recommend self-employment to others? And what are the most important things to understand about starting a business?

First, the recommendation part. If you want to start your own business for the following reasons, forget it right now!

• Not being "tied down" to a 9-5 job. Sorry, but if you start a business you'll be tied down for 12-15 hours a day. Forget about it if you think your life will be easier just because you are self-employed.
• My chance to do what I "love" full-time. Strike two. Yes, you might get to do what you love for part of each day, but you also have to be an accountant, salesperson, marketing manager, janitor, office manager, etc., whether you like it or not.
• Getting rich quick. Did you know most businesses fail? And that by fail, it means financially bankrupt? Going into business may have a long-range potential for wealth, but almost nobody gets there quickly, but it takes years of hard work, dedication, and resilience.

If you aren't afraid of working hard for long hours, failing over and over again, competing, learning, and living on practically nothing for a couple of years, maybe, if you are lucky, you can succeed in your own business.

Even if you think you meet all of those qualities listed above, there's still the critical decision of what business you want to open. There are lots of businesses that seem successful on the outside, but are barely scraping by because competition kills their profit margins. There are other businesses that seemed like a good idea, but when they built it, nobody came.

But mostly, there are many failed businesses that just didn't have enough up-front capital to allow them to survive until enough customers find them and make them profitable.

I was reading about franchising awhile back, and read a story about Subway restaurants. That's about the most affordable of all the fast-food franchises, so there have been lots of budding entrepreneurs opening a Subway. The majority of Subway stores do generate some level of profit - sounds good, doesn't it?

But the story I was reading revealed the problem. One Subway store with an owner-manager quite often barely clears enough profit to provide a minimal living to that owner-manager. Where the Subway franchisees begin to make a decent profit is through owning several stores, with volume the key to success. But the trap is that a single owner who sank his life savings into that single Subway store gets stuck working long hours in the store for low rewards, and can't afford to do the expansion needed for true success. So he ends up selling the store, usually for less than he has invested, to one of the multi-store franchisees.

Before going into business, you have to have a plan. A written plan that outlines what kind of business you are opening, what makes it unique and therefore attractive to your target market, how it will be financed, how it will be advertised and marketed, and how you will survive during that first year or two when the business is struggling to get itself established.

The holy grail of business is finding that fresh, new, unique concept that nobody else has tried, and opening to find it is wildly popular among the target customer base. Most people can't find it, so the next best thing is to find a need in your community that either is poorly met or not met at all by local businesses, find enough capital to make it successful, and pour everything you have into making it work.

There's so much more I could write, but I've already written so much I risk reader boredom. Besides, I've got work to do.

Hypocrisy

This topic germinated with a book I read this week by Bernard Goldberg, 100 People Who are Screwing Up America. It was meant as a sort of light-hearted book to point out 100 people who he thinks are the major contributors to the coarseness of our society. Many are left-wingers, some are right-wingers, and the rest are just clueless, but all serve to help make his point. In fact, he really never attacked any specific principles held by anybody, but the lowbrow tactics they use to try to gain power or attention.

He has been viciously attacked by a bunch of left-leaning folks who happen to idolize most of the people in his book, none of whom actually bothered to read it. It's kind of amusing to see how foolish they make themselves look by confirming pretty much the entire premise of the book they're trashing so vociferously.

So anyway, it got me thinking about hypocrisy. Who gets called "hypocrite" more than anyone else these days? Yeah, Christians. And if you define hypocrisy as a failure to practice what one preaches, then all Christians are indeed hypocrites. But really that's the point of the Christian faith, in that all fall short and fail. But we recognize and admit our failings and pledge to ourselves to do better.

But where are the most obvious examples of hypocrisy in our culture?

Number one on my list are abortion-rights advocates. They're generally the same people that want to abolish the death penalty and save the animals. The typical PETA member marches one day against farmers raising animals for slaughter, then the next day to protest the Supreme Court nominee who is rumored to think that killing babies isn't a good idea. So let me see if I get this straight - save the whales and mass murderers but kill the babies? Seems the essence of hypocrisy to me.

To extend that discussion, has anybody in that crowd ever considered who's getting abortions? From reports I've seen, the vast majority of abortions are by poor black women. For those who call conservatives "nazis", who are the ones trying their hardest to thin out the population of undesirables through abortion? Isn't the primary justification for abortion to eliminate "unwanted" pregnancies? Wow, just a cursory look at the facts would seem to indicate the real fascists are NOW and NARAL and Planned Parenthood.

Another one I really like are the Hollywood activists. It cracks me up when an environmental activist actor or actress shows off their new hybrid automobile as proof of their sensitivity to the environment, then parks it in their garage between the Rolls and the Maserati. Then they take off to their next movie location in their private jet, which in a single trip burns more oil than all the cars in their garage use all year. Finally, they march against those who want to drill for more oil or build a new power plant, then go home to their mansion that uses 10 times the energy of the average home. Cracks me up.

The campaign last year had a terrific example. John Kerry had just made a speech pandering to the environmentalist left, where he seemed to oppose the evil SUV. A brave reporter later asked him, "Don't you own an SUV yourself?". He said it was his "family's", not his. Hilarious.

The public education advocates are another easy target. They protest loudly against using a voucher system to give people choice to find the best schools for their children, while almost universally send their own children to private schools. The implicit message there is that public schools may be fine for all of you little people out there, but we important people send our kids to private schools.

Then there are the pacifists. Now there are Christian pacifists such as the Amish and Mennonites that see it as a tenet of their faith. They will support no war under any circumstances, and definitely don't care whether it's a Republican or Democrat who leads the country into a war. Their faith says that God will take care of them and there are no justifiable reasons for fighting and killing. Nobody can reasonably accuse them of hypocrisy, at least on this point.

On the other hand, a whole new religion of pacifists has sprung up over the war on terror. These are the ones who didn't have anything to say when Clinton sent troops to Bosnia or blew up the aspirin factory in Sudan (Wow, can you only imagine what would have happened if Bush had made that mistake?). But now with the war on terror, all of a sudden there are all these newly converted pacifists! They say that Bosnia was necessary to stop the brutal genocide of the Serbs, but don't really care that Saddam was killing and torturing as many Iraqi citizens. There are those who say we deserved 9/11, somehow just because we elected Bush our President. Some of them even believe that if we're just nice to them and try to understand their plight, the terrorists will leave us alone.

So I got this mental image of terrorists attacking, say, the Chinese Theatre in Hollywood. A group of actors led by Michael Moore come out of the theatre waving white flags saying, "Don't shoot! We are your friends!". A half-hour later while wiping down his automatic rifle from that day's killing, the leader of the Al Qaida commando unit laughs and shakes his head, saying "Crazy American Infidels".

OK, just one more. All those putting pressure (successfully) on the government to send money to help Africa complain about how America does so little to help the diseased and impoverished there. Have they ever heard of NGO's? That the aid organizations that make the greatest difference for the average impoverished child around the world are Christian missionary organizations? That the majority of funding for those missions comes from people in American churches? That when the government kicks in money, it almost always goes into the pockets and Swiss bank accounts of the dictators who run those countries?

Maybe that last one isn't so much hypocrisy as it is ignorance.

Anyway, some who read this might be offended. OK, fine, be offended if you must, but don't shoot the messenger of truth.

Better All Around

Yesterday I rescheduled my appointment and went home after experiencing waves of nausea and deciding it would be nearly impossible to function. After getting home and taking something to ease the discomfort, I went to bed and fell into a deep sleep that lasted most of the day. Today I feel much better, with only a dull headache and a little fatigue hanging on.

The publication of my letter resulted in some feedback, all positive, from random individuals. There was even a phone call from a local woman who said she wanted to thank me for the letter. That was very nice.

I reluctantly agreed to let Tim go to a concert tomorrow night with some friends. My reservations are mostly based on what I saw at rock concerts back in Ft. Wayne, where I moonlighted as a doorman at the coliseum. Many of the rock concerts there were a bizarre environment full of kids indulging in all manner of drugs and alcohol. The air would be so thick with pot smoke you could barely breathe. One of my unpleasant duties was carrying out those kids who had passed out from either alcohol poisoning or drug overdoses, both of which were frighteningly common.

One memorable example was at either an Ozzie Osbourne or Van Halen concert (they were the two worst events I worked for). I was called into the arena to find a young boy, who couldn't have been any older than 15, lying comatose on the floor covered in his own vomit. I carried him out by myself, as I doubt he weighed much over 100 lbs. Placing him on the gurney and wheeling him to the first aid station, I saw that his breathing was very shallow and his eyes were open but saw nothing. I wondered if he was dying. But when I arrived at the first aid station, the first nurse to examine him assured me he would be alright. They placed him into the next available ambulance for transport to the hospital.

That night there were many kids who went to the hospital. In fact, what I estimated at a half-dozen ambulances were on a continuous rotation between the coliseum and the hospital throughout the concert, transporting unconscious or semi-conscious children for treatment of drug overdoses and alcohol poisoning. I was in my early 20's at the time, but I made a commitment then to never allow my teenage children to attend such concerts.

To this day, I have no desire to attend rock concerts, and can think of very little worse experiences than being crowded into a mass of teens under a choking cloud of marijuana smoke trying to avoid disgusting behaviors and a vomit-covered floor. I sincerely hope the concert Tim is attending does not attract this sort of crowd.

Published

Even though I intended my letter just for the guy who wrote the op/ed in our newspaper, they went ahead and published it anyway (if you want to see the letter, it's a couple of posts back).

I wasn't really going for publication, and am a little apprehensive about everyone in the area seeing the letter. But if you write a letter, I guess it's subject to public domain whether you like it or not.

Yesterday I was feeling very stressed and hopeless, so of course today I feel sick. Funny how that happens. I would have stayed home in bed if I didn't have a meeting later today. If I still feel rotten after that meeting, maybe I'll go home and crash then.

Saw the supreme court nomination announcement last night. The best part is he grew up in Indiana. The fight seems to have already started, and I'm not really going to blog about that because I don't have much to add that everyone else is already saying. Except this one thing - it's all about abortion; if the Dems even suspect he doesn't like Roe v. Wade, they'll stop at nothing to derail his appointment. Very simple, really.

Anger and Frustration

I lost control yesterday.

Even though I consider myself to be one of the most self-controlled people anywhere, a sequence of events yesterday pushed me to the breaking point. I lost it and yelled, or screamed. And I said hurtful things.

Was my anger justified? Yes.

Was my reaction appropriate? No.

Today I remain angry and frustrated about the same things that led to my temporary insanity. But I'm also frustrated with myself for losing control. Screaming at someone is no way to change what they are doing; in fact, it probably is more damaging to any chance of getting your real message across.

There have been times on occasion where I've wanted to escape. To leave. To start over. To abandon this life with all of its problems and pressures and hardships, change my identity, and search for happiness somewhere else. But I know that's just an illusion. My life is what it is, I chose a path a very long time ago and must see it through to the end. The path was the easy one all those years ago, but has led to a place that is dark, disappointing, and nearly hopeless.

When I reach these stages, all I can do is make the best of things by getting up every morning and going to work and fighting my way through. Am I getting bogged down in the negatives and failing to recognize my blessings? Is God punishing me? Are there better days ahead, or am I even capable of making the days ahead better? I fear it's all my fault, that I've created this mess and have to take responsibility for cleaning it up myself.

That's enough of this dreariness. I'll post again when I feel better.

Experiment

We had a nice weekend up north, which was an enjoyable visit with family. We cleaned up part of Dad's basement, found out the wedding date is Oct 30, and finally Tim & Chris spent enough time with some of their cousins to at least get to know them a little. Too bad Nick was impossible to convince to show up; I believe he would have had a good time.

So I had a chance to run a little experiment on the news media. The topic was the flap about Carl Rove. If you don't know who the heck Rove is or what the flap's about, that's OK, because the exercise was much less about the specific issue than about how the news media reports on things.

I was able to catch reports on the topic by each of the major networks (NBC/CBS/ABC), then the report from Fox News. It was amazing. The three major networks basically did the story the same way - offering pretty much no facts, but repeating the allegations and what Democrats were saying about it. And what Democrats were suggesting was that Rove committed treason and should immediately either resign or be fired from his job at the White House.

Then there was Fox News, where they actually dug into the facts of the case. They presented information about what has been publicly released about what has been alleged, what seems to have actually happened, what the parties involved said about it, and where the investigation stands. And the conclusion of anyone seeing the story is nearly opposite of the conclusion one might reach after seeing the version of the story done by the big 3 networks.

So, which manner of reporting is better and shows less bias? That of Fox News, which presented all available facts, or that of ABC/NBC/CBS, which presented a high-level overview of the "charges" followed by what Democrats are saying about it?

If people want to say that Fox News is a right-wing propaganda machine, this particular story would seem to demonstrate the opposite is true. We're getting satellite TV hooked up today, finally, and it will be interesting to perform my experiment on future news stories.

My Letter

Today there was a debate on the editorial page with a local reporter named Jon Clark taking the position that displays of the Ten Commandments should be removed from all public property. He was very anti-Christian in his opinion, with a diatribe against "holier-than-thou" Christians dictating to the rest of the citizens how they should behave.

So, anyway, I was inspired to write the following response, which I emailed to him directly at the newspaper.

Hello Mr. Clark:

Reading your editorial today, I couldn't help but wonder, why so angry? If somewhere in your past you were abused in some way by people you perceived as Christians, please accept my apology on their behalf.

Because there must be something that has so incensed you against religion that your editorial does not mask that antagonism. I sincerely hope that you will come to understand that the Christian faith is not one of lectures and "holier-than-thou put-down"'s, but of love, understanding, and forgiveness.

In the meantime, I respectfully submit the following for your consideration.

1. The Ten Commandments is actually not uniquely Christian, but is core for all of the Judeo-Christian world and even respected by Islam.

I disagree with your point that they have nothing to do with our system of laws, as all of the Commandments have been codified into law by Western Civilization at one time or another. Modern laws represent the logical conclusion that only the admonitions against murder, theft, and lying can or should be objectively enforced.

I also disagree with your apparent contention that we are a secular society, but that our founders had the wisdom to found a country based on Judeo-Christian values that was at the same time tolerant of other faiths and determined not to force anyone to join or support a specific sect.

2. If citizens who subscribe to Eastern religions that do not subscribe to the Ten Commandments feel marginalized by the 230-year practice in America of posting them on public grounds, why not change the debate to whether we should permit them to erect a monument that represents their particular rules for living? Wouldn't an argument based on inclusion be more consistent with religious freedom than your argument of exclusion?

But then, all of the objections I have ever heard regarding public acknowledgement of religion have come from Atheists, and not from members of eastern or other religions.

3. In effect, this ongoing crusade against religion in the courts, particularly Christianity, ignores the true intent of the constitution by attempting to change the concept of "Freedom of Religion" to "Freedom from Religion".

Based on the religious ferver in which the Atheist community rails against all religious expression, I would have to conclude that the objective is to establish Atheism as the official State Religion.

4. There can be no denial of the fact of a direct correlation over the past 30 years between the incremental removal of religious expression from our society and dramatic increases in crime, drugs, violence, STD's, and divorce, as our culture becomes coarser and disdains anyone with the temerity to suggest a return to objective morality.

I for one believe in the concept of freedom of religious expression, and much prefer a society that honors its people's attempts to rise above our baser instincts than today's anything-goes narcissism.

Again, Mr. Clark, I sincerely apologize for whatever offense some in the Christian community may have given you. But please consider whether the greatest good in our society is served by removing God from public discourse.

Sincerely,

etc.

Fair Birthday

Nothing like a birthday to remind me how old I've become. It was OK as birthdays go - for some reason I seem to remember some real stinker birthdays instead of those that were probably pretty good. Must be a character flaw.

Anyway, Chris, being the good sport he always is, agreed to accompany me to the Barth. Co. Fair last night. I've always enjoyed the county fair, based on mostly happy memories of the Elkhart County Fair every year as a child.

Even getting stuck on the Ferris Wheel with my sister once when we were very young doesn't stick in my mind as a particularly bad memory. I just remember being a little scared but trying to comfort her when they tried to restart the ride and it went way too fast. And I remember being very cold as we stayed stuck at the top late into the night.

But for me, just knowing my parents were on the ground waiting for us was comfort enough, and somehow they did finally get the ride functioning well enough to bring us down at least close enough to earth so that someone tall could reach up and pull us down to earth that late summer night.

Fair food, the animals, the exhibits, the midway, the people. All combine to make the county fair fascinating and fun for me. I bought Chris a ticket for the bumper cars and waited while he worked his way through the long line to crash his little car into a bunch of strangers for 3 minutes. I didn't succeed at convincing him to join me on the Tilt-a-Whirl, that awesome ride that's been my favorite since I was about 5 years old. But that's OK.

There was a tractor pull in the grandstand, but Chris and I decided it wasn't worth the admission fee to just go in and watch the competition for a half hour. We probably would have bought tickets if it was Demolition Derby night, though.

I seem to remember that there were more musical performers in the grandstand back in Elkhart County. I know a Fair Board member here and asked him about that once, and he told me that there wasn't any money in bringing in musical acts. Their fees are so high that the fair loses money or barely breaks even on a performance, and the tractor pull and demolition derby are by far the most profitable. Too bad, I'd pay to see a singer or band I like.

A little county fair secret I suppose it's OK to divulge now that it's somthing like 35 years later: One summer at the fair, I think maybe between 7th and 8th grade or maybe between 8th and 9th, I was making my way around the midway with my sisters when I caught sight of an angel. Or at least a female someone approximately my age that just knocked me off my feet.

I did my best to keep her in sight, and even chose amusement rides based on those she boarded with someone I assumed was her sister. If my own sister noticed what I was up to, I can't recall whether she made any comments, but then I was probably so focused on that beautiful creature that I wouldn't have heard.

Of course, consistent with my socially inept character, I was unable to gin up the courage to try to meet this beautiful creature, and went home that night thinking about almost nothing else. I seem to recall finding a way to get to the fair every day that year, where I continued to seek out just one more glimpse of my secret crush, but alas, she was never seen again.

I hadn't thought about that girl in probably close to those 35 years, but whoever she is, she made my summer way back then. And it makes me laugh at myself now to think about that shy kid so many years ago who could find such perfect adoration in an unapproachable little girl.

You know, I always identified with Charlie Brown.

Survey

Today I'm playing with a survey that I'd like one of the big pollsters to use. The answers to these questions would give us a really good idea both of where most people in the country stand, but also just how informed or uninformed on today's issues.

So, here's the survey:

Choose the answer that best describes your opinion on the topic:

1. The Iraq War

1. Was dreamed up by Bush and Cheney simply to make Halliburton rich, and we should get the soldiers out of there immediately and but out of the middle east entirely.
2. Was a mistake based on bad intelligence, and we should withdraw as soon as possible.
3. Was an appropriate response to 9/11, but is being mis-managed. We need to replace Rumsfeld with somebody who can do a better job.
4. Was the right decision and has taken the war to the terrorists. We need to see it through, then go after Syria and Iraq if necessary.

2. The next Supreme Court Nominee

1. Should be bold in helping make rulings that the people want, like protecting and expanding abortion rights and affirmative action and protecting citizens from the fascist policies of the religious right.
2. Should fit the mold of Sandra Day O'Connor, whose moderate rulings came from neither political agenda but from the heart.
3. Should be fairly conservative in protecting constitutional rights and honoring precedent, but should not actively try to overturn the law of the land in Roe v. Wade.
4. Should be a strict constitutionalist who believes in interpreting law only through identifying the intent of the founding fathers. We need enough justices on the court to overturn bad decisions of the past like Roe v. Wade and Scopes and others like them.
   

3. Healthcare

1. Every American should be covered under a National Health Plan now. It's unfair that Insurance Companies, Drug Companies, and HMO's make obscene profits on the backs of sick people.
2. Every Employer should be forced to provide medical benefits to their employees, and the unemployed should be covered by the Government. Price controls should be placed on all medical services and prescription drugs.
3. Keep the system the same, but make it easier for the uninsured to get insurance for a price they can afford.
4. There's nothing wrong with the current system. Just stop giving free healthcare to all the illegal aliens and get people to stop smoking and lose weight, and everything will be fine.

4. Homeland Security

1. Repeal the Patriot Act now! We deserved what we got on 9/11, and if we want to stop the attacks we should get out of the middle east entirely and stop supporting Israel.
2. Keep the Patriot Act but make lots of revisions to protect citizens from unwarranted wiretaps and government meddling. Get out of Iraq and stop agitating Muslims against us. Let the UN take over the peace process in the Middle East.
3. Keep the Patriot Act as-is, but get serious about re-establishing friendships with our allies around the world. Negotiate with anyone willing to help us stop the cycle of violence.
4. Get more aggressive by sealing our borders and enforcing our immigration laws. Round up everyone in the country from terrorist nations who is not a citizen and send them home until the war on terror is over.

5. Gay Marriage

1. Gays should have the same rights as everyone else to marry and receive all the benefits available to married couples. Bigoted churches that refuse to perform marriage ceremonies for gay couples should lose their tax-exempt status and be subject to fines or jail time.
2. Gays should be able to establish domestic partnerships that give them all of the same benefits of marriage without specifically calling it marriage.
3. If gays want to act as if they are married, it's OK with me. Just don't give them the same ability to adopt children, get government survivor benefits, or force the state to sanction it as marriage.
4. There is no reason gays should be married or even get domestic partner benefits. What they do behind closed doors is none of my business, so I resent having their decadent lifestyle forced down my throat everywhere I turn.

6. Church and State

1. Religion has a long history of being the root cause of all evil in the world, from the Inquisition up to today's radical Islamic terrorism. If religion were outlawed, our country and the world would be a better place.
2. Separation of Church and State means that the state should leave religion alone as long as religion leaves the state alone. Let religion stay in the churches, synagogues, and mosques for whoever finds it useful. But keep it out of the public square.
3. We should respect religion as long as it doesn't cross the line into unlawful activity. Let the religious express themselves in public, but do not let public schools or government bodies hold up any one religion over another.
4. America was established as a Christian nation, with tolerance for other religions encoded in the constitution. There is no constitutional restriction on religious expression anywhere, including government, as long as it does not establish a specific state religion or trample an individual's right to another faith.

7. The Environment

1. We must immediately adopt the Kyoto treaty, shut down all of our coal-burning power plants, raise the required mileage standards for vehicles, and replace the internal combustion engine with bicycles and solar/electric power. We also must end logging and confiscate all unpopulated lands as wildlife refuges.
2. We should aggressively move toward alternative fuels like electric and hydrogen for our vehicles, build more mass transit systems, and protect as much of our wilderness as possible.
3. We should continue to incent companies to find alternative clean energy sources and encourage conservation without forcing such a dramatic timetable that it damages our economy.
4. There's nothing wrong with what we're already doing for the environment. Many endangered species are endangered no longer, our lakes and rivers are cleaner than they've been in 100 years, and alternative energy is under development and is already appearing. Let the market take its course.

8. Welfare

1. We must increase benefits and reduce work requirements for single mothers. The government isn't doing enough to make sure poor families have a decent home and enough food.
2. We should target welfare improvements toward the most needy, but combine benefits with programs that help them receive education and training that will help lift them out of poverty.
3. Drugs and crime are the bigger issues that are keeping people poor, plus a minimum wage that hasn't been increased in many years. Raise the minimum wage to something people can actually live on and work hard to help people overcome their drug addictions while taking the criminals off the street.
4. There are more than enough programs in place now. There's something wrong with a system that has people on the public dole better off than hard-working people making close to minimum wage. Continue the "workfare" approach, which has proven hugely successful in getting people off welfare and into the workforce.

9. Social Security

1. Keep the system intact for everyone. If necessary to keep it funded, raise the amount the rich have to pay in and reduce their benefits at retirement.
2. Make some minor "tweaks" but don't do wholesale changes. Raise the annual limit for social security taxes and raise the retirement age, and the system should stay solvent much longer.
3. Stop the government from stealing the surplus from the social security trust fund. Instead, invest that surplus in government-issued interest-bearing securities so it can grow to help offset shortages projected in the future.
4. Gradually change social security into what it was originally sold to America. An individual account for retirement with disability insurance and a death benefit. Gradually transition the program so that every dollar that goes into social security is invested on behalf of every American paying into it, and they can retire on the annuity from the proceeds of their account as well as leave whatever might be left to their survivors at death.

10. Taxes

1. I don't pay enough taxes. Everyone should pay more, especially the rich. We should go back to the days when the marginal rate for earnings over $100K are at 70 or 80 percent.
2. I pay enough taxes. So does everyone who makes in the same range as I do or less. But those in the higher tax brackets should pay more. I'm not sure how much more, but they can afford to contribute a little extra.
3. I pay enough taxes, but there are too many loopholes and the tax code is outrageous. We should simplify the tax code so everyone has to pay their fare share, with no exceptions.
4. I pay too much in taxes. My taxes and everyone else's should be lowered, because that will result in more investment in the economy, which in turn results in more taxable earnings from everyone. Everybody wins when taxes are low.

So, to score yourself, add up the total from your answers, using the number preceding each answer.

If your total score is between 10 and 15, you are an ultra-liberal. You and Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin would get along famously.

If your total score is between 15 and 25, you are what is now called a moderate liberal. You lean toward a liberal point of view, but not to the extremes of the ultras.

If your total score is between 25 and 35, you are a moderate conservative. You have mostly conservative leanings, but aren't totally sold on 100% free market capitalism and hands-off government.

If your total is above 35, you are a great example of what they call a right-wing conservative. You believe in free markets and capitalism, freedom of religion, personal responsibility, and small government. On the other hand, people in the ultra-liberal category would probably call you a nazi.

What I really wonder is whether after taking the survey, anyone's mind could be changed with some education. Not from an idealogue slanting facts to support their predetermined conclusion, but just education about the facts behind each issue, for example, the historical facts about the minimum wage or the observable effect of government-controlled healthcare or what happened to the education system when the courts said there could be no mention of religion in the public schools.

It could be a fun experiment to run, if only I had the time and resources.

A Day Off

Yesterday I took the day off. Chris and I went to the Indy Zoo, where we had a nice day. If you haven't seen the new Dolphin Dome, it's very impressive. A unique glass underwater dome is in the middle of the main dolphin tank, which gives you a unique vantage point to watch the dolphins almost as if you're underwater with them.

The exhibit is so new, it was pretty obvious that the trainers have a long way to go to match their couterparts at other dolphin exhibitions around the country. Going into the show accustomed to seeing an impressive array of dolphin tricks, it was just a little disappointing for Chris and I to see the trainers work very hard to get a few very basic behaviors from their young sea mammals.

We capped off the day with an IMAX film, the NASCAR 3D. It was an interesting film, but I left wondering why they did it in 3D. The film made real use of the 3D effect a total of 1 time, flinging a tire at the audience after an on-screen crash. I did learn that the racing teams are far from the backwoods 'shiners racing each other on the weekends.

Now that the nice little mini-vacation is over, it's time to get back to the grind. Gotta pay taxes now, which is not the least bit fun.

If you live in Indiana

Just something I thought was funny ...

You Know You're From Indiana When...

You drive for three hours and the scenery outside doesn't change. Not true! There's three feet of snow on the ground and school is still in session. Yeah, this year. Global warming my !@#$ You only go to the mall once a year 'cause it takes too long to get there. What mall? Who goes to malls anymore? While driving all you see is corn. No way, there are soybeans too! People still have Christmas decorations up at Easter. Not this people. You start saying to yourself "More than corn in Indiana my butt." guilty. Anyone with a cell phone looks out of place. That's changing fast. Walking through Wal-Mart with two carts full of kids is normal. Why shure it is Anyone with a tan is rich. fer shure The hip hang-out place is McDonald's. Yeah, ask Nick There really is more than corn in Indiana. There’s soybeans, too. Hey, that's what I said! When you plan an orgy and a Euchre game breaks out. that's just disgusting. A restaurant has an invisible wall in the non-smoking section and you believe it works. Yeah, the smokers do believe it works. Speeding consists of 2 miles over the speed limit. Maybe 3 You think you don't have to use a turn signal on your car because you don't use it on your tractor. Yup You build your dream house on a cornfield, and you considered it posh. Ouch, that's hitting close to home You warsh your clothes and you think George Warshington was the first president. So what's your point? You're proud to be called a Hoosier, even if you don't know what one is. Darn right You have no problem spelling or pronouncing "Terre Haute" Who would? Detassling was your first job. Bailing hay, your second. Woulda' been, but I've got bad hay fever. You can stack hay, swim in the pond to clean off, and then have the strength to play a couple of games of hoops all in the same day. Doesn't everybody? You say things like "catty-wumpus" and "kitty-corner". Let's not go overboard You own a dirtbike or a ATV. No, but I want one You live in a city ... and there's a cornfield in your backyard. So what's your point? High school basketball game draws a bigger crowd on the weekend nights than movie theaters. Used to, not anymore. So sad. See previous post. You can see at least 2 basketball hoops from your yard. Unless your neighbor's too far away to see You can name every one of Bob Knight's "exploits" over the last few years. Can't everybody? You shop at Marsh. That was before Wal-Mart Supercenters Damon Bailey was your childhood hero. Nope, he wasn't born yet when I was a child The biggest question of your youth was "IU or Purdue?" What other question is there? Indianapolis is the "big city". Yeah, or maybe Cinci Louavul if you want to leave the state "Getting caught by a train" is a legitimate excuse for being late to school. It shoulda been People at your high school chewed tobacco. Yeah, so? Everyone knows who the town cop is, where he lives, and whether he is at home or on duty. Reminds me I should check that out for E-Town, beyond my neighbor You actually know what the CART vs IRL debate is about and have taken a side. Sure, and it's IRL To you, a raccoon is simply a "coon". Yep. Ever been Coon Huntin? The vehicle of choice in your area is not a car, but a pickup. Nothin like a good Chevy Pickup (But I had a Dodge) Someone you know is BIG John Mellencamp fan. Well Duhh You've been to the Covered Bridge Festival. Almost went once. Great festival from what I understand. To you, a tenderloin is not an expensive cut of beef, but a big, salty, breaded piece of pork served on a bun with pickles. And about a half-dozen eateries around here claim to have the best in the state. They are good! You call a green bell pepper a "mango". Huh? Sometimes, you call the toilet the "commode" or the "stool". Both perfectly acceptable. In the fall, one of your favorite pranks was corning cars. I can't say I ever did it, but had some friends who did You know what FFA and 4H stand for. Doesn't everybody? You know what chip-and-seal is, and your high school was located on just such a road. Of course, and no, my HS was in town You go the county fair every night of it's week-long duration. I would if I could get anybody to go with me. It's next week, what do you say? You can say "French Lick" without laughing out loud. What's so funny? Did you know they're getting a casino there? There's actually a college near you named "Ball State." Yeah, and I graduated from there. Wanna make something of it? The last "g" is silent in any word ending in "ing." Unless we're trying to impress somebody from out of town You think the state Bird is Larry. No, actually I know this one - it's the Cardinal! You actually get these jokes and pass them on to other friends from Indiana. Yup

Get Your Own "You Know You're From" Meme Here



More cool things for your blog at
Blogthings

What's Wrong with my Favorite Sport

Growing up a Hoosier, how could I help but make basketball my favorite sport? From the time I was about 2, trying over and over again to hoist the little orange toy plastic basketball up to the full-size rim at the playground, I have loved the feeling of getting that ball through the hoop and hearing the little rip sound as it brushed the net.

But how my beloved sport has fallen. And I think you need not look any further than the NBA to see the fruit of a series of stupid changes in the development of the sport.

In the NBA this year, there were a number of rosters that carried not a single white or even hispanic player. But who were the stars of the NBA this year? Foreign players. The league MVP was an awesome white point guard named Steve Nash. He's from Canada. The champion Spurs had as their star players Tim Duncan (Virgin Islands), Tony Parker (France), and Manu Genobili (Argentina). They beat a Pistons team that didn't have foreign starters, and also had zero non-blacks on their roster.

When's the last time the USA Men's Basketball team won the Gold Medal in the Olympic Games? I'd have to look it up, because it's been awhile. The NBA players came to believe that if they just showed up, they would win. What they discovered was that a well organized group of fundamentally sound players playing as a team will beat a disfunctional group of superstars with their super egos every time.

Why isn't the NBA more racially and ethnically diverse? Why are the NBA teams increasingly going outside the country for their players? Where have all the Larry Birds, Bob Cousys, Pistol Petes, George Mikans, Rick Barrys, Jerry Wests, John Stocktons gone? What happened to solid fundamental basketball?

The entire development system for basketball in the United States is broken, and nobody but me seems to recognize the fact. I believe it starts at the elementary school level and gets worse through high school and college.

In about the fourth grade, kids start playing basketball in recreation leagues. That's probably the best part of the program, but only gets worse from there. By the 5th or 6th grade, the best players in the age group are selected for their school teams. And those "best" players happen to be the ones who are most coordinated and advanced at things like ball handling and shooting, not those who are tall and awkward, or are developing physically at a different pace.

By the time kids reach the 7th grade, most of them have already given up basketball. Sure, a few keep the dream alive by playing in recreation or intramural leagues, but most kids choose another sport. Once again, the 7th grade coaches choose the boys that can help their team win right now, and those are almost always the shorter and more coordinated. Then in 8th grade, a kid would have to show skills well beyond those of the legacy team members to get a chance to break into competitive basketball. Sadly, before they are freshmen in High School, most kids are already washed up when it comes to basketball.

Then there's High School. Years ago I taught in a school that had a mixed black and white population. The basketball team was made up entirely of blacks. A major source of anger for the white students, one I heard from many of them directly, was that the unwritten rule at that school said, "If you're white, don't bother to try out for basketball".

As an outside observer here, I see the local high school unable to compete in their league with the players that made the team back in the seventh grade. Nobody over 6'4", and the mostly short (sub-6') white players who were the best athletes when they were 12 are now too slow and untalented to compete with the big city schools. In the meantime, wandering the halls of that high school are dozens of talented athletes and boys above 6'4" who are capable of embarassing their varsity classmates on the basketball court. They're the same guys the 7th grade coach wouldn't even consider, who have blossomed into talented athletes in other sports.

The big city schools dominate these days, because they're full of black athletes who dream of playing for the NBA. The coaches at those schools find success much easier, given their pick of hundreds of boys who believe that basketball is their only hope for escaping poverty.

And then, what really killed basketball in Indiana was the move to class basketball. A bunch of misguided administrators decided it wasn't fair to put little schools like 1954 state champs Milan on the court with mega schools from Indy, so they broke up the single-class tournament in favor of a class system. And the famous "Hoosier Hysteria", the long-standing tournament that inspired people from all over the country, ceased to exist.

So where is the next Larry Bird? Not in Indiana. Not anywhere in the United States. He probably got cut from his 7th grade team 3 years ago and plays football instead. Besides, he and his buddies decided back in the 7th grade that basketball was a black man's sport, and there's no future in trying to play the sport. Where the playground courts when I was growing up were always full of kids playing basketball, sadly today they're all sitting empty, with the nets removed presumably so nobody will steal them.

None of this is racist, it's just pointing out the true facts of how the sport has been wrecked over the past 20 years by well-meaning but ignorant people that created this system. Nobody can blame young black boys for giving everything they have to the sport, although I wish someone could get through to them that the NBA is NOT the only way out of poverty and convince them to put some of that basketball energy into science and math.

I miss the days when I could enter a packed arena to see the Sectional Championship game, which might pit little Podunk HS against Mega HS. And everybody on the court is playing their hearts out, especially the seniors who know this is probably their last chance for basketball glory. All that is gone, with the tournament games playing to gyms less than half full with parents and some interested students.

Too bad nobody else seems to see what I see.

Sports Withdrawal

This time of year I begin to experience withdrawal from my primary addiction - sports.

What about baseball? You may ask, but I completely quit paying attention to MLB after the last strike, and never returned. And I no longer miss the sport. It started as a general disgust over the fact that both sides were merely fighting over control of the gazillion dollars generated by the sport. The owners and players both decided to have a showdown to try to gain the power to control the larger slice of the pie. The bald and obvious battle for power and wealth turned my stomach, and I decided I would never again be able to watch a major league game again without being reminded of how everyone involved in the sport took me and all of the fans who generated that wealth for granted.

Sure, the sports I still follow, NFL and NBA, are probably not that much different. But those sports, aside from the half-season lockout in the NFL several years ago, haven't lost an entire season in such power plays.

Did anybody notice that the NHL missed their entire season this year? I barely noticed, and suspect the same was true for many others. The NHL should take a lesson from baseball, but of course that's not happening. There aren't any NHL teams nearby, and the sport doesn't translate well on TV. You have to be there in person to get the full effect of a hockey game, which can be lots of fun. But for me, it's more fun to see the minor league hockey games, which are relatively close, cost a fraction of the cost of an NHL game, and are more fun to attend anyway.

So recently there was the controversial decision by the NBA to set the age limit for rookies at 19. That effectively means that prospects have to sit out a year after high school or go to college for at least a year before they can join the NBA. There have been some very vocal opponents of the policy who call it racist and an unfair restriction.

It is true that the NBA didn't make many friends among the NCAA basketball coaches and fans when they began to allow teams to draft players straight out of high school. Baseball's been doing that forever, so why not basketball?

What I'm wondering is, which is more racist - the idea that players should at least be given one year of post-high school education before trying to make the jump to the NBA, or that (black) players who aren't college material shouldn't be forced into a college anyway for a year. Maybe it's just me, but I think the second is the racist attitude.

How many of the 18-year-olds drafted by the NBA last week will never make an NBA roster? How many might get to sit on the bench for a couple of years before they're unceremoniously dumped on the street? Most of them. The players in the class of LeBron James, Kevin Garnett, Jermaine O'Neal, etc. are the exceptions. The vast majority of those players coming out of high school will be back on the street, with no education, no skills, and most likely a ton of personal baggage. Were they well served by those who gave them their "shot" at fame and fortune before they were physically and emotionally prepared?

Then there's the whole "system" of development in the basketball world, which I think is the worst of any sport. But I'll hold off on that part for today.