53. Self-interest drives country

Greek philosopher Protagoras is credited with the phrase, "Man is the measure of all things," meaning that individuals are the ultimate source of value, and that they create standards based on an ideology that most reflects their belief in and of society. Essentially that it is man, or should be man, that decides what is important. We decide what to care about, and, just as importantly, when to care.

Too often individuals only care about the things that have an impact on their lives directly or that adhere to their life agenda. For a variety of reasons, including disinterest, loyalty to a person or party, or ideological differences, individuals often remain uninformed or uncommitted to principles outside of what affects them directly. In the same manner, too often individuals only care when it has an impact on their lives or when they have seen the impact that not caring has on other individuals.

For, few seemed to care when President Bush was rewarding unqualified political supporters with government positions. It was accepted, to the extent that "to the victors go the spoils," and the appointments were largely ignored.

Only when millions witnessed the deplorable effort by FEMA that left thousands stranded did Americans question "cronyism." And only now that President Bush has nominated a judge, whose qualifications seem to include mostly that she is religious and a close personal friend of the President, have both liberals and conservatives expressed outrage at a process that has gone on for five years now.

Few seemed to care about energy conservation when Americans were throwing themselves, one after another, into gas-guzzling sport utility vehicles as a measure of lifestyle. Few demanded that American automobile manufactures invest their resources in energy-saving alternatives, such as hybrids. Few care that Americans use 18 million barrels a day, which is 21 percent of the world's output- despite having only 5 percent of the world's population.

Only when gas prices rise and it affects both individuals and the economy, do Americans suddenly become outraged at our dependence on foreign oil, and insist that measures be taken to maintain American affluence. Only when China, now the number two oil consumer and with over one billion people, starts competing for foreign oil do we care what the rest of the world might be doing in their plight for energy.

Few seemed to care when the invasion of Iraq was portrayed as an act of patriotism, a fight against terrorism, and a search for weapons of mass destruction. Few seemed to care when it seemed like an easy victory, and the vogue thing to do was slap a yellow ribbon supporting the troops on their car- as though that protested the war did not. Few were interested in demanding answers to the tough questions.

Only when America became an international embarrassment and Americans started to suffer numerous causalities, for a fading cause, did we admit, among other things, the immorality dispensed on the thousands of Iraqis civilians. Only then did we ask ourselves the questions we should have asked from the beginning- how reliable was the information, was Iraq really involved in September 11, 2001, do we have an exit strategy?

Few seem to care about global warming when it is made to appear as though it is a scientific uncertainty. Few care that our government, despite the protest of hundreds of scientists, continued to blatantly employ flawed scientific studies to promote their economic programs. Few care whether the administration arrogantly dismisses International environmental agreements or not- as long as business is not affected.

Only when hurricanes and Tsunamis began to hit in record numbers and leave thousands dead did we consider the possible impact of global warming. Only when, as the New York Times recently noted, the once frozen North Pole may soon be acting like an open sea much of the year, do individuals seem willing to acknowledge the phenomenon.

Few seem to care about the overpopulation of our planet when American lifestyles continue to be among the most affluent in the world. Most are oblivious not only to the poverty in this county, let alone the third-world countries. Most do not consider the impact of overpopulation on future generations, or on our natural resources.

Only when other countries, such as China with their population of over one billion, begin to consume natural resources in increasing amounts, proportional to their development, and thus increasing demand, and prices, do we care. Only when American companies take advantage of desperate conditions in other counties, to both employ labor at reduced costs and use the full benefit of lax environmental regulations, and it leads to significant job loss in America, do we seem to care.

Few seem to care about the distribution of wealth as long as their middle-class life is unaffected. Most individuals remain uninterested in the fact that those who have the greatest need for representation in government have nearly no voice, and certainly no lobby. Americans sit motionlessly as wealthy corporations and well-funded special interest groups fight for their significance in government.

Only when Hurricane Katrina unearthed a population that most did not even know existed, and less even cared about, did Americans take notice- even if they were called "immoral and welfare-pampered."

Few seemed to care about the pollution to our water and air when the proper disposal of such pollutants was regarded as an economic cost.

Only when cities became engulfed in smog, a river caught on fire and fish suffered ghastly mutations did we demand that the government place a value on clean air and clean water and hold businesses accountable.

Unfortunately, in the examples above, the pattern is that most people will sit silent and not make personal commitments until the problem or issue inflicts them directly. That it not to say that there are not a number of incredibly dedicated individuals that are willing to sacrifice time, money and lifestyle for principle- there are. There are just not enough of them.

52. Looting, racism both wrong

By definition, the term ‘looting' differs from ‘stealing' only in the undertone that looting is done by force. For example, raiding a village and robbing it of its valuables would be considered looting. Christopher Columbus was especially adept in the looting of the Arawak Indians in his "discovery" of America. Conversely, I would argue, taking things from an abandoned retail store would be considered stealing. There are two differences. While both acts are deplorable, obviously harming someone and stealing from someone is more criminal than just stealing from them. Secondly, the term ‘looting' has been adopted as a discriminatory reference specific to African-American stealing. Apart from the violent undertone, looting is also synonymous with uncivilized and barbaric, and usually attributed to angry or poor African-Americans.

The circumstances in New Orleans for most of us were unimaginable. Also unimaginable were the conditions that many of these people lived in prior to Hurricane Katrina. According to The Progress Report, the area that suffered the worst flooding was 98 percent African-American and one quarter of them earned less than $10,000 per year. Not only did many of the families have nowhere to go, they had no way to get there. They lived in such poverty that Barbara Bush, after touring the people living in the Houston Astrodome arrogantly commented, "So many of the people in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged anyway, so this is working very well for them."

Any community that would undergo a period of lawlessness would experience criminal activity as a natural extension of a small percentage of its population. It is not unreasonable to expect this number to increase under the conditions experienced both prior to and following the hurricane. That is not to say that criminal activity is acceptable, or that it should not be held accountable, but there is something to be said for desperation. Everyone has probably considered one time or another at what point his or her ethical standards would break down in the face of extreme adversity.

Unethical behavior and stealing is a problem across a spectrum of demographics. Surprising to some, the leading demographic class for theft, in terms of the amount stolen, is white, educated, males. Moreover, in a recent survey, only 13 percent of top executives at big companies identified ethical values as the most important leadership trait for CEOs. Ethical values seem to be up to debate, often chosen as a measure of convenience or to justify a certain action. For example, filing anything but a truthful tax return is stealing, regardless of how many other people one might believe are doing it.

Wavering ethical behavior can have exponential consequences in the face of lawlessness. If the IRS no longer audited income taxes, and there was a sense of lawlessness among tax returns, how many would receive returns in excess of what they are owed by filing dishonest tax returns? And what would it be called? Would it be ‘looting' or ‘stealing' from the Federal Government? An even simpler example is our roadways. Most people already break the law daily by exceeding posted speed limits. Imagine again if our roadways were no longer monitored by law enforcement. How uncivilized might our roadways become? Would not a certain percentage of our population engage excessively in criminal behavior by driving dangerously or driving while intoxicated?

My arguments should not, in any way, be misconstrued as support for the criminal activity that has occurred in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Rather my point is to note the portrayal and opinion of such acts compared to other acts that are carried out, or would be carried out, by other demographic classes. There is a measure of both hypocrisy and racism in the attitude of those that form an opinion without considering their own fallibility as well as the situation itself.

51. 'Collapse' sums up Tribe

Maybe the day off before the last homestand gave them too much time to think about it.

Had they really won 92 games, and were they really just a couple of wins away from their first playoff appearance since 2001?

Whatever happened, or whatever they thought about, the Cleveland Indians proceeded to go out and lose 5 out of 6 home games (6 out of 7 overall) and eliminated themselves from the playoffs.

It was as though they looked to the New York Yankees and Boston Red Sox, their competitors for the last playoff spot, and said, “No, please, by all means, here is the invitation to the playoffs, take it.”  Perhaps the Indians felt guilty, after all, the Yankees and Red Sox invest millions more than they in hopes of reaching the playoffs.  If that is not enough, their fans are serious, they want to win championships…period, end of story, no kidding around.  And Major League Baseball loves these teams too, because when they play, a lot of people are interested, and when a lot of people are interested- Major League Baseball makes a lot of money.  In this sense, maybe it was the polite thing for the Indians to do- step aside, and do what is best for the game.

Possibly the Indians were jealous of the other Cleveland teams that have that notorious “one-word” to describe heartbreak.  Not that the Indians have not tried before, there was the 1997 World Series after all.  But the Browns have “The Drive,” and  “The Fumble,” and, of course, the Cavaliers have, “The Shot.”  Apparently, the Indians thought this might get them “The Collapse.”  It was an unoriginal attempt however, because last season they moved within a couple games of the first place and then lost nine in a row.  But that was in August, and not enough people noticed.  Perhaps they thought this would be a bit more dramatic.  Give them credit, this was big, the whole country witnessed their display in futility.  It was on all the sports channels, in the newspapers and on the Internet- seems nobody could explain it.  I mean really, if it means that much to them, they have my vote.

In the world of collapses, it is as though the Indians and Cavaliers were in some type of disturbing competition to see who can disappointment their fans the most.  The Cavaliers, with similar type collapses, have narrowly missed the playoffs the last two seasons.  The competition, however, is over- the Indians have won this thing hands-down.  The title, “The Collapse,” with all assumed rights and privileges, now belongs to them.

Interestingly though, the Indians, not unlike a modern political organization, immediately began damage control.  I may have even caught a glimpse of Karl Rove leaving Indians headquarters Saturday afternoon. The organization, from its announcers to its manager, quickly began trying to spin the negative into a positive.  I may have even heard manager Eric Wedge emulate the popular 2000 presidential debate rhetoric of “it’s hard work.”

The Indians lost two out of three games to Tampa Bay, who has a record of 67-94 (27-54 on the road) and then was swept by a Chicago team that lacked incentive and whose lineup included many second string players- including seven on Friday night.  The Indians pitching staff had a string of 33 innings during the homestand in which they allowed only two runs.  Think about that, 2 runs in 33 innings- and they lost 5 out of 6 games.  During the homestand, the offense was 6 for 50 with runners in scoring position.  The offense, despite the credit given to the opposing pitching, showed its inexperience, and was clearly rattled by the pressure.  They were anxious, swinging at bad pitches and failing to move runners along.  Wedge was also rattled by the pressure and managed the games like ordinary regular season games, rather than ones that controlled the team’s postseason fate.  Despite having the best bullpen in baseball, he left pitchers in too long, and he refused to “make something happen” to help his flustered offense.

The organization dealt with “The Collapse,” by talking about the “signs of progression,” and that they were, “one hit short.”  Wedge said that it was “more about the opposition,” and that they will “do better next time around.”  Broadcasters resorted to clichés such as “one step at a time,” and “that’s baseball.”  The only spin missing was that Tampa Bay and Chicago had weapons of mass destruction and that they were harboring terrorists.

Really, “more about the opposition,” and “do better next time around?”  Are you kidding me?  What opposition?  Tampa Bay, Chicago’s triple A team?  Six home games, in front of a packed Jacobs Field?  And you have the best pitching staff in the American League.  How much better does Wedge and the Indians think it gets?  Maybe three games each against Midview and Amherst would be more to their liking?  And “do better next time around?”  Regardless of the success that may come in the future, I do not get the point in just throwing away opportunities.  This year was a special year and one never knows how many opportunities are out there.  For example, the Indians started the same five pitchers all year.  No one faltered; no one was injured.  That is very rare these days in baseball; it cannot be an expectation going into next season.

I do not know how the Indians would have done in the playoffs.  But, that is the experience they needed, not the experience of handing away a great opportunity.  Two years in a row, the Indians’ organization complained that the fans were not supporting them.  However, times when the fans began to support them, last August and this September/October, they not only failed, they failed miserably.  And as harsh as it might be, the fans that packed the stadium this week left extremely disappointed, if not angry, and it will be that much more difficult to get them back next year.  And I can also assure you that most of them do not want to hear about “signs of progression,’ and that it was “more about the opposition.”  They want to hear the truth and the truth is that this team blew a “golden” opportunity to make the playoffs, this year.  Those excuses and that line of reasoning would not work with the fans in Boston and New York, so why should we accept it?  We are baseball fans just like them, and we want to win… period, end of story, no kidding around.  

50. Texas Holdem' is no sport

I found the creation of ESPN to be a glorious event. What better for sport fans than a cable channel dedicated completely to sports? The network also brought with it SportsCenter, a sports news show that contained highlights from a variety of sports all across the country. For sports loyalists, this meant no more waiting up until after the weather on the local news to get the latest scores and highlights.

For several years, I played competitive racquetball- traveling all over the state and throughout the country. Dedicated to the sport, I was fortunate enough to play at Baldwin-Wallace College, which a couple years ago won the NCAA National Championship. I also had the privilege to play against the best players in the country, amateur and professional, many of which were from right here in Ohio.

Competitive and professional racquetball is much different than the sport most people think of when one mentions it. Though I am a bit partial on the matter, I would argue that their athletes are among the best in the world. The game is tough as nails, both powerful and lightening quick. The ball often travels, within its confined space, between 150-170 miles per hour. However, what is more amazing are the diving efforts put on by the game's top players. I have often commented in comparison to a baseball player that makes a diving catch, which sends the crowd into frenzy, that the top racquetball players make that play sometimes several times per rally- at much higher speeds and while getting out of the way of his or her opponent.

The hope for many involved in the sport is that it would make it onto ESPN, where not only would others be exposed to this great sport; it would also showcase the athletes that played it. To be fair, there is one big problem with racquetball and that is that it is not a great spectator sport- for two reasons. First, the television coverage does not do the sport justice; it is much faster than it appears on television. Secondly, it is a challenge to build and present a glass court that allows cameras to record the relevant action. That being said, it has been televised and ESPN has done a nice job in the past with its production. The problem, however, is that it is rarely on and when it is, it is usually on at two o'clock in the morning.

My complaint with ESPN has been when a lesser sport, again by my bias standards, was shown repeatedly and often in prime time (or at least not 2:00 am). While in recent years I have come to accept racquetball's fate on ESPN, the issue has resurfaced in my mind of late due to recent ESPN programming decisions. Three shows (though if I researched their programming schedule I am sure there would be many more) immediately come to mind- Texas Hold'em Poker, National Eating Competitions and a show on celebrity sneaker collections.

I am mindful of the fact that "sports programming" can be twisted to fit a number of definitions, but I would define "sport" as a competitive individual or team endeavor utilizing mind and body. However, by my definition, if it could not be included in physical education classes, it is not a sport. I could add some other criteria, like one must perspire while participating and the working out must actually benefit performance- but maybe I am being too narrow-minded.

Texas Hold'em Poker is certainly not a physical challenge and, in fact, it is gambling. I have nothing against the game itself or its popularity, or even against gambling, I just do not consider it a sport. It does contain skill and luck, but I do not anticipate the physical education teacher taking time to teach it along with Black Jack and Roulette in gym class.

The eating competition was a learning experience, as the "athletes" were very popular with their followers- signing autographs, trash talking and making dramatic entrances. While it does involve, to a very modest degree, physical and mental talents, it is more like "lunch" than physical education. Perhaps in the future, if the sport catches on, students will be asked to bring a few dozen hot dogs with them to school for gym class!

As for the "sports programming" that includes the display of celebrity sneaker collections, I am at a loss for words. I guess the "tie in" is that individuals that participated in sports once wore these sneakers.

Although the mission statement of ESPN reads, "to serve sports fans," I have no intention of campaigning ESPN to show "real" sports programming like racquetball and the many other sports that have thousands of immensely committed athletes- those athletes that train and compete for the love of the sport, not the love of money. In the same respect, I would probably not get too far anyway; for the "E" in ESPN did originally stand for "entertainment" (the Entertainment and Sports Programming Network). Apparently, there are those out there that find celebrity sneaker collections entertaining.