Do laws and principles matter anymore?
June 17, 2010
Before I write anything here, let me make one thing clear. I have no illusions about the fact that there are some things that, even if they are right, cannot or should not be said for political reasons. We live in the real world and public figures cannot always say what they honestly think because the political reality is what it is. Numerous figures have learned this lesson the hard way, most recently Rand Paul who, after making what he viewed as valid comments on the Civil Rights Act, was blasted from all corners. Paul got a very quick tutorial on what you can and cannot say, and that what you feel is not always appropriate for public viewing.
In this light, when we come today to Rep. Barton’s comments defending BP, I am fully aware that his comments are very likely stupid and damaging, from a political sense. The media and the left are already using them as a platform to deride Republicans as friends to Big Oil, and other GOP members are making distance from Barton. What I want to cover is, then, whether Barton’s comments, existing outside of a political spectrum, have any worth to them. I think looking at this is a good lesson on our current realities and what it means for those who might believe things that are not popular or well-accepted.
To begin, I do think Barton, however inelegantly, may have a point. The behavior of the Obama team regarding BP has been aggressive and often bullying. By no means should BP be immune from being treated harshly – their mistakes are going to cause massive damage and cost to the Gulf region. But doesn’t there come a point where things are pushed too far? I know it may make political sense and be popular, but does the Obama administration have the right to force them to pay into a fund without any kind of legal backing to do so? In short, can they essentially do whatever they feel like, given that the public accedes to it?
I realize this point is mainly theoretical, as reality is what it is, and as I said above, Rep. Barton’s comments may certainly be seen as stupid and foolish. But given how the Obama administration has behaved, I think there is something to be said for standing up for BP a little, however hard it may be and however ignominious BP may be at this point. We would be wise to understand that at some point, principles have to be worth something. I don’t know if this is the best example, as BP is considered such a bad guy at this point, but I feel like the point has to be made that we should not let politics make us afraid to say what is true. In this instance, if the Obama administration is indeed acting illegally, I think we should say so. We can’t just let them do what they want out of fear of being attacked.
I say all of this because I feel we have a group in power now whose first instinct is to pounce and savage opponents. They have shown no regard for law or process. We need to at some point realize this and understand that their goal is in fact to terrify us into not stating the truth. Regardless of the specific instance at hand, we must realize that these guys are essentially bullies, and mentally prepare for what will surely be many battles ahead. By standing on principle we can show them to be what they are.
Soccer and American opinion
June 12, 2010
As I write this, the World Cup is just beginning, and soccer fans both here and abroad are in heaven. And as even American sports media obsesses over this event, it is impossible to avoid, bringing out a dislike for soccer that is almost as passionate. For in America, where soccer has been promoted for decades, the sport remains quite unpopular. It helps a little bit to try and understand American positions on soccer.
First of all, it does well to reiterate the level of effort that has gone into trying to make soccer popular in the US. Many people have devoted great time and money into this goal. For as long as I can remember, sports and news media have attempted to drill into American brains how popular the sport is worldwide, how it is the “authentic” version of “football,” how all the cool countries in Europe dig it. We have been taught how uncultured we all are for not appreciating the strategy and beauty of the game. In short, there has been a lot of work put into convincing Americans to like soccer, up to and including the establishment of a professional league in the States.
And yet despite this, the game’s popularity is very limited here. In fact, perhaps the effort itself may have caused part of this. Americans can be a stubborn people and we don’t like being told what to like. Especially when we are told that international and Europeans like it. Call it silly, but Americans have a certain pride about them and a resistance to follow world opinion. Many Americans have a gut distrust of the UN, for example, and mocked John Kerry when he spoke in 2004 about following their lead.
Beyond this, though, the reasons for soccer’s unpopularity extend beyond this. The fact is, soccer is just a really boring sport. It is played on a gigantic field, meaning it takes a long time for plays to develop. It is very low scoring, with 90+ minute games often ending with just a couple goals scored. Fair or not, the players are viewed as very prone to diving and being dramatic, which I think rubs Americans the wrong way. It doesn’t help that our teams are largely made fun of even by natives (with the notable exception of the women’s teams). In the end, most Americans have very little reason to follow soccer.
All of these factors combine to form the nearly intransigent distaste for association football. I really can’t see the game ever becoming popular in the States. We resent being told we have to like it, and when we do watch it, we are bored. So what possible chance does the game have? Especially when American football is so popular, baseball (a true American game) remains big, and other sports take the rest of our time up. I, for one, have no interest in it, and I think many sports fans are the same. So could we stop trying to force it on us?
Cut off the cancer
June 5, 2010
I would like to share a small experience I had yesterday, and what I feel it means for the Tea Party movement as a whole.
Yesterday, a list that I have been on sent out one of the most ridiculous birther pieces I have yet seen. It included full-blown pictures of Obama’s supposed Kenyan birth certificate, along with the farcical assertion that his Hawaiian certificate was “forged”. I immediately emailed the list owner, asking him why he would send out this nonsense. His reaction? In what barely amounted to English, he ended up challenging me to meet him face to face, if I was “man enough”. Really – this was a reaction expected of a child, not a fully grown man.
I had to reach the conclusion, then, that at least this one group has been completely taken over by birthers, and I think that many groups around the country have suffered the same fate. They are indeed like a disease that slowly infiltrates a group, turning otherwise intelligent people into raving loons. And every group they take over quickly turns into a conspiracy-theory cesspool that has no hope of being a legitimate player in politics. It is like a cancer, and once it takes the brain, the creature is rendered useless and dead.
It is my firm position, then, that this sickness must be cut off immediately whenever it is discovered. Unfortunately, this can be tough, as it can hit even otherwise stalwart folks, who might otherwise be allies and sources of information. But once birtherism earns its place as a legitimate idea in someone’s mind, they are compromised and must be cut off for the good of the movement as a whole. If we do not remove this ugliness from our midst, it will continue to infect and eventually destroy the long-term viability of the Tea Party movement.
My policy, then, is what I would also urge others to do – when you hear someone talking about birtherism, do a little probing, and if you find that this person genuinely believes Obama is not a citizen, cut off ties. If you follow them on Twitter, unfollow them, even block them if you have to. You can argue with them if you so desire, but most likely to no avail. Their minds have been captured by what can be referred to as Obama Derangement Syndrome – that is, a tendency to believe literally insane things about Obama due to an intense personal hatred of him.
The quicker we do this, the sooner we can minimize the damage done overall. I would, then, strongly advocate a no-tolerance policy. It is the only way we can avoid becoming a laughingstock and maintain the integrity needed to be a long-term political player.
On perfection in baseball
June 2, 2010
There are a few things that animate people on Twitter like no other. In my sphere a major political event does the trick. Other potential culprits include a popular TV show, awards show, or movie. But often all of these pale compared to a major event in sports. One team winning, another losing, an amazing accomplishment, or an athlete’s stupid behavior can all get Twitter going quite well.
Tonight’s event was the near perfect game by Armando Gallaraga of the Detroit Tigers. In the next 24 hours many people will see the video, so I won’t bother posting something that will be on many sites and on TV. The short story is this – an umpire, Jim Joyce, blew a call on the final out, ruling a runner safe when he was clearly out. This blown call resulted in a single hit that destroyed the perfect game. Fans of all allegiances were justifiably outraged. Within seconds, all manner of nasty things were being said about the ump. Only after he graciously apologized for his error did the attacks die down.
Now, clearly an inevitable result of this event will be the resurrection of the debate regarding instant replay in baseball. Replay is something well known to fans of football, hockey, tennis, and other sports. Each of these sports utilizes cameras and technology to help correct erroneous calls. Fans have become completely accustomed to the football challenge especially, and the red flag that signifies such a challenge. I don’t see any significant movement in play to go back to the days before the challenge. The idea essentially amounts to this – fans want the right call to be made. With the game often on the line, being accurate is important.
With baseball, though, some fans tend to react quite differently. This is largely because baseball, unlike football or hockey, has a great deal of romance to it. It is deeply linked with American history and is viewed as a quintessentially American thing. Baseball fans, then, view any change to the game with skepticism, especially one that removes what is viewed as part of baseball’s “magic.” These fans, then, argue that instant replay expansion would destroy the crucial human element of the game. To them, the failure of the umpires to make perfect calls is one of the important parts of the game.
In my view, these fans are misguided. I can understand the need to preserve the “essence” of baseball – it is my favorite sport, after all. But fans that refuse the introduction of modern technology into baseball are ignoring the fact that such technology could potentially eliminate many of the questionable or flat-out wrong calls that plague every team. When something as meaningful as a perfect game is on the line, it is simply too big to be robbed by an obvious human error. The fans who oppose replay seem to be fetishizing this sort of preventable error, as if the baseball gods will be pleased that we kept their sport unblemished. (Though, in terms of blemishment, I’d say baseball is pretty damn damaged already by widespread steroid abuse.)
An analogy I could make here is to those who are purists in the political arena. There is a certain subset of any political group that insists on total purity, and in candidates meeting every requirement and proper opinion. They are willing to accept defeat and minority status in order to maintain such standards. In a similar way, baseball fans who oppose replay seem willing to accept that their beloved sport will be filled with easily-correctable mistakes, including earth-shattering ones like tonight’s, in order to maintain the sanctity of the sport. They are willing to see history prevented, games lost and won wrongly, records affected, and seasons changed by generally honest mistakes that could be erased. And all to preserve this sense of baseball as something more than a sport, in almost a religious fashion.
I come at it from the complete opposite direction. I’ve long thought, for instance, that computer assistance could be used in many parts of the game. While I am sure such changes won’t be adopted, I’ve thought computer-assisted strike zones and safe/out base calls could be implemented using current technology. Both of these changes would be accepted in time and eliminate a huge amount of uncertainty and frustration for players, managers, and fans. And in time, such events as occurred to tonight could be avoided entirely. The game would change, for sure, but it would be into one where winning and losing is not affected by an umpire being distracted or a constantly changing strike zone. And I, for one, think that it would be a better game for it.
