Playing the “Gotcha” game…

Let’s face it… We all have people or things in life we hate… and sometimes we want to take someone or something down a notch for whatever grievance we have against a particular person or things.  Political correctness is the manifestation of this “gotcha” game.

Both Liberal and Conservative People alike love to play this game.  Liberals play the game as a means to balance the world and promote fairness, justice, and equality for any reason.  In doing so, they also hope to elevate themselves in the subconscious of the masses.  At the same time it is a means to destroy people or things whose lifestyles or choices they despise.  It could be Paula Deen, Hank Williams Jr., or Phil Robertson.  All they have to do is find that weak link in the persona (whether it’s about race, creed, sexual orientation, etc.), twist it just a little bit, and BAM!   A career is damaged, a particular diversity group is elevated, and Liberals can feel good about themselves.

But Conservatives also play the “Gotcha” Game and play it just as well.  For Conservatives, their motivation is more of the “Expose the Liberal Hypocrites” who promote fairness, equality, and that everyone should love each other—except conservatives, and then they can call them every expletive and vile word in the book.  Martin Bashir, Alec Baldwin, and Bill Maher are just some examples of people who Conservatives believe show this double-standard.  Taking people down who willing to pass judgment without looking in a mirror themselves provides a certain level of justice in their eyes.

This game will continue because both sides feel that the scales need to be balanced in their favor.  Neither side will ever call the gotcha game and the back and forth will continue forever—which is sad because no one really wins in the long run in the gotcha game.  Whether it divine providence or just plain “Karma”, those who point the finger will eventually get paid back—in spades.  It may not happen immediately, next week, next month, next year, or next decade.  But the forces of the Universe always find a way to square the accounts of each and every being—one way or another, whether in this world or the next.

Just remember… while you are verbally chastising a star of “Duck Dynasty”, an msnbc host, or a Government Agency now, one day you will take your turn being the human pinata.  And then maybe you’ll understand that old phrase:  “When you point a finger at someone, three fingers are always pointing back at you.”

Just something to think about in this season of Hope and Wonder…

Tale of the Tape - Ohio State/Michigan vs. Alabama/Auburn

(stolen from and with apologies to Nick Bakay)
Everybody knows that the greatest College Football Rivalry of all time is Army/Navy and it will be as long as there is a United States.  But what is the greatest current rivalry in College Football?  Is it Ohio State/Michigan or Alabama/Auburn?  To find out, I put together a list of 21 different factors to determine which rivalry is better.  Each category will be rated either Ohio State/Michigan is better, Alabama/Auburn is better, or push with an explanation as optional.  Here we go...

1.  ALTERNATE NAME FOR RIVALRY GAME - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: "The Game"; ALABAMA/AUBURN: "The Iron Bowl".  ADVANTAGE: Alabama/Auburn. Most Americans know "The Game" is the title of the Harvard/Yale Rivalry Game, not Ohio State/Michigan.
2.  CONFERENCE - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: Big Ten; ALABAMA/AUBURN: SEC.  ADVANTAGE: Alabama/Auburn.
3.  VENUES - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: The Horseshoe & Ann Arbor; ALABAMA/AUBURN: Tuscaloosa & The Plains. ADVANTAGE: Ohio State/Michigan. Michigan Stadium seats over 113,000. Nuff said.
4.  NATIONAL TITLES - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: Combined for 30, but just 8 in Poll Era. ALABAMA/AUBURN: Combined for 24, but 12 in Poll Era.  ADVANTAGE: Push.
5.  HEISMAN TROPHY WINNERS - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: 10 (Archie Griffin counts twice); ALABAMA/AUBURN: 4.  ADVANTAGE:  Ohio State/Michigan.
6.  ICONIC COACHES - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: "Woody" & "Bo"; ALABAMA/AUBURN: "Bear" & "Shug".  ADVANTAGE: Alabama/Auburn.  Bo was the only coach of the four who didn't win a National Title.
7.  ICONIC PLAYERS - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: Archie Griffin and Tom Brady; ALABAMA/AUBURN: Joe Namath & "Bo" Jackson.  ADVANTAGE: Push.  Brady may have more Super Bowl Rings and Archie is the only player to win back-to-back Heismans, but Joe Namath won the biggest game in Super Bowl history under the bright lights of New York City and Bo in his prime will never be replicated on the football field or the baseball diamond.
8.  MODERN ICONIC MOMENT IN RIVALRY - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: "Hellooooooo Heisman!" (Desmond Howard in 1991); ALABAMA/AUBURN: "Bo Over the Top" (Bo Jackson in 1982).  ADVANTAGE: Ohio State/Michigan. The Heisman pose was brilliant in its execution.
9.  BANDS & ITS SONGS - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: "Script Ohio" & "Hail to the Victors"; ALABAMA/AUBURN: "Rammer Jammer" & "War Eagle" ADVANTAGE:  Ohio State/Michigan.  2 bonus points because Ohio State is the best band in the land and because of Script Ohio.
10. CHANTS - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: "O-H! I-O!" & "Go Big Blue!"; ALABAMA/AUBURN: "Roll Tide!" & "War Eagle!". ADVANTAGE: Alabama/Auburn. Any time you can add cuss words into the middle of the chant and it works is a bonus.
11. DOCUMENTARY - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: "The Rivalry" on HBO, narrated by Liev Schreiber; ALABAMA/AUBURN: "Roll Tide/War Eagle" as part of ESPN's 30 for 30 documentary series, narrated by Wright Thompson.  ADVANTAGE: Slight edge to Alabama/Auburn. If you have never heard Wright Thompson narrate a documentary, you are missing out. Wright Thompson is just as good of a narrator as Liev Schreiber is.  And Ohio State/Michigan's documentary was a little too Sunday School to be on HBO.  Jim McKay's Documentary is the only documentary on HBO that is allowed to be TV-PG.  Got it, Buckeyes & Wolverines?
12. TRADITIONAL BOWLS PLAYED FOR - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: The Rose Bowl; ALABAMA/AUBURN: The Sugar Bowl. ADVANTAGE: Ohio State/Michigan.  Pasadena is generally awesome in January.
13. GOLDEN AGE OF RIVALRY - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: "The 10-Year War"; ALABAMA/AUBURN: 2009 & 2010. ADVANTAGE: Alabama/Auburn. Little-known fact: During "The 10-Year War", Alabama won at least a share of more National Titles (2) than Ohio State & Michigan combined (1).
14. HAPLESS RIVALRY COACH - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: John Cooper; ALABAMA/AUBURN: Bill Curry. ADVANTAGE: Ohio State/Michigan.  How many potential National Titles did Michigan cost Cooper? At least 3...
15. SKULLDUGGERY - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: The whole Jim Tressel era; ALABAMA/AUBURN: Poisoning Toomer's Corner Oak Trees. ADVANTAGE: Auburn/Alabama. Tressel doesn't even rise up to the level of the Gene Jelks espionage scandal. And Michigan fans aren't insane enough to poison Buckeye trees.
16. BEAUTIFUL SCENERY - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: Um... um...; ALABAMA/AUBURN: "The Bear Bryant Twins" & Katherine Webb.  ADVANTAGE:  Alabama/Auburn (you have to ask?)
17. FASHION STATEMENT - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: Sweater vest; ALABAMA/AUBURN: Houndstooth Fedora. ADVANTAGE: Alabama/Auburn.
18. MASCOTS - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: Buckeyes & Wolverines; ALABAMA/AUBURN: Elephants & Tigers. ADVANTAGE: Alabama/Auburn. Seriously, who is intimidated by a tree nut?
19. RIVALRY GENESIS - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: Border war in the 1830s; ALABAMA/AUBURN: The Civil War and a 40 Year Stoppage due to arguing who should referee the game that ended when the Alabama State legislature forced the two teams to meet.  ADVANTAGE: Alabama/Auburn.  Ohio & Michigan fought over Toledo. Seriously, they fought a war over Toledo?!?  I hope Ohio lost the war and was forced to take Toledo!
20. RAISING FAN TEMPERATURES - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: Telling corny jokes about the opposition; ALABAMA/AUBURN: Screaming at each other on the Paul Finebaum Radio Network all year.  ADVANTAGE: Alabama/Auburn.
21. TRADITIONAL GAME TIME - OHIO STATE/MICHIGAN: Noon. ALABAMA/AUBURN: 3:30 pm. ADVANTAGE: Push. For most Buckeye & Wolverine fans, a noon start means they can leave at 3:30 pm in time to get to the Early Bird Special at Denny's. And a later start allow mostly Tide & Tigers fans to get liquored up good.

So there you have it.  In the end, the Overall Edge goes to Alabama/Auburn. And unfortunately for Big Ten fans, it doesn't appear that Ohio State and Michigan can match the intensity of Alabama and Auburn anytime soon.

A decision the Atlanta Braves will regret…

One of the great things about my childhood was my father taking me on the Marta Subway train on warm summer nights from the Avondale train station.  We would get off at the Georgia State/Capitol station, and walk past the Capitol working our way South, crossing over the Downtown Connector and I-20 to ultimately reach Atlanta Fulton-County Stadium to watch the Atlanta Braves play baseball games.  Sure, the Braves weren’t exactly good in those days and the stadium was a hellhole, but it was fun to watch those games and it was cheap entertainment in those days.

The Atlanta Falcons also played football in that stadium for many years as well.  I love to tell the story of how my dad and I watched a pre-season NFL game there against the Eagles in 1991 when a Rookie 3rd-string QB was trying his best to stay on the team by throwing darts all over the field.  That QB’s name?  Brett Favre.  I hear he went on to have a pretty decent NFL career…

Anyways, the Falcons left Fulton-County Stadium after the 1991 season for the Georgia Dome which was built closer near the GA World Congress Center and the Omni (later replaced by Phillips Arena).  And after five more seasons, the Braves would leave the place where Henry Aaron hit his record-breaking 715th home run to move across the street to the Olympic Stadium (reconfigured to a baseball stadium design and renamed Turner Field).  Fulton-County is long gone, and I never watched a game inside Turner Field, but knowing the Braves had not moved far was a comfort.

Or at least it was until this morning.  The Atlanta Braves announced that after the 2016 season, they will not renew their lease to Turner Field and will instead move to a new yet-to-be-built facility in Cobb County, near the intersection of I-75 and I-285.  It was pointed out to me that most Braves executive live in the County famous for taking very conservative stances on social issues in the 1990s, which made at least one of my GA friends suggest that neighborhood politics may have been involved in the decision.  But the decision are gives the middle finger to any fans who live south and east of the city of Atlanta, as well as those who live in the city and use Marta to commute to the games.   It’s a mistake.

Yes, I know the Falcons are about to leave the Georgia Dome to move to a new stadium, but at least they are staying in the vicinity of the old stadium, so new real new infrastructure has to be built.  But the Braves?  How are fans going to get to the games?  You are putting the facility near one of the busiest interchanges in the Southeast, you don’t have Marta access to the area of the Stadium, and you expect things to be OK?  Good luck!

In the 1980s we all saw the famous bumper stickers around Atlanta that said “Go Braves and take the Falcons with you.”  This was back when both teams sucked and were considering moves (the Braves to Tampa-St. Pete & the Falcons to Jacksonville).  Now that the Braves have been a good team for a long time, they have decided to leave Atlanta for good.  The impact will be felt and it will further strain the richer northern suburbs from the poorer southern suburbs.  It also is a blow for a city trying to revitalize a downtown area that is just now beginning to show recovery after decades of decay.

I wish the Braves would reconsider.  Turner Stadium by all accounts is a great stadium.  There is no need to build a new stadium or renovate Turner field for at least a decade.  Fulton-County survived for 31 years.  Why build a new stadium elsewhere?

The loss of little boys and girls walking down city streets to attend a baseball game cannot be easily replaced.  Those fans will never come back.  And you will lose fans for this, Braves.  Mark my words!  This is a decision that will come back to haunt the Braves.

Mourning a Video Rental Goliath…

By now, most people have heard that Blockbuster Video will shutter the last of its 300 company-owned brick-and-mortar stores AND it’s DVD-by-mail operations within the next 2 months.  The few remaining franchise stores will also likely shutter their operations around that time or shortly after, meaning Blockbuster won’t even make it to it’s 30th birthday, which would have occurred in 2015.

It’s a dramatic fall for a company that once dominated Video Rentals, Game Rentals, and even dabbed a little bit into Music Stores.  Blockbuster ran smaller Video Rental operations into the ground.  Turtles, Tower Records & Video, and other companies ultimately caved to a chain that less than a decade ago had 9000 stores.  Blockbuster was so popular once upon a time that people fought for parking spaces at the stores on Friday nights.  My wife even worked at Blockbuster for a time.

Ultimately, Blockbuster fell victim to similar circumstances that knocked Kodak out of the camera business and has left BlackBerry smartphones in tatters.  Blockbuster failed to adapt to changing circumstances, like those other two companies.  Kodak failed to adjust to the rise of digital photography, even though they were the first to create it.  Kodak has apparently survived, but it will never be the same company again.  And although BlackBerry created the first smartphone, their failure to adjust to changing demands left Apple and Google a path to run BlackBerry towards the cliffs of extinction.  In Blockbuster’s case, streaming Video over the Internet and cheaper alternatives like Netflix and Redbox destroyed Blockbuster.  There were other reasons for Blockbuster’s collapse, and I’m sure other people can explain why Blockbuster went from American titan to fading memory.

With Blockbuster now joining the pile of companies from my past that have come and gone, like Circuit City, KB Toys, Steak & Ale Restaurants, and others, I wonder if anyone will really care about Blockbuster’s demise.  What do you remember about Blockbuster Video Stores?

A Geek Looks at 40…

By now, you have seen my new FB Cover and Profile Pics.  With the Big 4-0 now just hours away, I thought it would be an appropriate time to pay homage to my past, look at the present, and wonder about the future in pictures…

The Cover Photo honors my past.  A picture was taken from approximately each year of my life, starting from my first year (Age 0) to my 40th (Age 39).  The first 18 years were easy, thanks to my sister, Sheri, putting together a scrapbook as part of my High School Graduation gift.  Because I got my first Digital Camera in 2003, the last 10 years have been easy to catalogue.  And thankfully, my sisters and I were able to fill in any gaps in-between with other pics.

The Profile Pic is my official 40th Birthday Pic.  It’s inspiration was taken from The Fab 4 and the cover of their 1963 album “With the Beatles”.  I knew to pull this off, I needed professional help.  Luckily, there is a Professional Photographer in the family whom I called upon to take the picture (thank you to Angela Zaloudek Photography). 

One interpretation is that it’s my way of saying that I exist in two worlds:  the world I choose to show, and the world I choose not to show.  Rarely do those worlds collide.  But another interpretation that I prefer is that it is my past and future colliding in the present.  Given that life expectancy for men is about or less than 80 at present, it’s probable at least half of my life’s journey is complete.  The part that is showing is my past, while the part that is hidden is my future.  And (hopefully) the future part will slowly reveal itself as time permits. 

Like my Blog Profile suggests:  “You think you know me? You don't know my full story, but maybe by following this blog, the complete picture will come into focus.”  Even I don’t completely know myself today.  The future can change me in ways that are unpredictable.  I hope I can retire, and travel the world someday.  But the future does not guarantee that.  This journey will be exciting and scary, but for now I am content that I will not be alone in my journey.  My wife, my son, my soon-to-be born daughter, my extended family, and my friends will be there as long as they can.  And I believe a Divine Power is also with me.

So while it is time to celebrate the past in the present, it is also time to begin revealing the future.  Time to let the rest of the picture come into focus…

Time to expose the Dallas Cowboys…

Once again, the NFL season is in its early stages and once again the fans of America’s Team and ESPN Sports Broadcasters are crowing about how great the Dallas Cowboys are.  They are talking about Tony Romo as an elite HOF QB, the Defense is ferocious, and this is the year Dallas makes that long-awaited Super Bowl return…

Shut up.

Let’s look at the facts… Yes, Dallas has won 3 Super Bowls since Jerry Jones took over ownership of the Cowboys in 1989 and started the team over from scratch.  Yes, Dallas has won 5 Super Bowls with three different coaches (Landry, Johnson, and Switzer) and is tied with Pittsburgh for the most Super Bowl appearances at 8.  Yes, Dallas has a great legacy, great players, a great stadium, and beautiful cheerleaders.

But…

Dallas has not come close to a Super Bowl since their last appearance in 1996.  And their playoff record since that Super Bowl XXX victory is poor… when they have somehow survived the final game of the regular season to make the playoffs.

Let’s look at some more facts…

FACT:  Pittsburgh has more Super Bowl rings (6) than Dallas (5).  And if you want to factor in NFL Champions as part of the comparison, Green Bay and Chicago have won far more NFL Titles than Dallas has.

FACT:  Since Dallas last won a Super Bowl, they have won just twice in the playoffs (once in the 1996 playoffs, and once in 2009).  To put that in perspective, 24 of the other 31 teams in the NFL have won MORE playoff games than Dallas has.  That 3/4 of the league right there.  Two other teams (Houston and Washington) have won as many playoff games as Dallas—and Houston has only been in the league since 2002.  The only team to win fewer playoff games than Dallas?  KC (0), CIN (0), CLE (0), BUF (0), and DET (0).

FACT:  All NFC South and NFC West Division Teams have appeared in the Super Bowl since Dallas last went there.  Yes, that includes the Arizona Cardinals, the Atlanta Falcons, and the Carolina Panthers.  Tampa Bay and New Orleans have not only appeared in the Super Bowl, they actually won a Super Bowl.

FACT:  Jacksonville may be a laughingstock now, but they have been in more Conference Championships games (2) than Dallas has (0) since Dallas last appeared in the Super Bowl.

FACT:  The Baltimore Ravens did not exist as a franchise when Dallas last won a Super Bowl.  The Ravens have now won 2.

FACT:  Dallas last won a playoff game on the road in the 1992 NFC Championship Game.  To put that in perspective, the Baltimore Ravens have won 9 road playoff games since Dallas won one. 

FACT:  New England, Denver, Pittsburgh, Green Bay, Baltimore, and the New York Giants have all won multiple Super Bowls since Dallas last won theirs.  St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Indianapolis, and New Orleans have each won one ring during that time as well.

FACT:  Tony Romo struggles late in the season and in the postseason.  People try to make the argument that he is a better QB than Roger Staubach or Troy Aikman.  Maybe statwise, but those two hold all the Cowboy Super Bowl Rings.  Romo has yet to even approach Danny White’s postseason success—or even Don Meredith.  And Romo is now in his 7th full season as the starting QB.  I have seen no indication that he has evolved into the elite QB that he needs to be.  In fact, his legacy right now is making bug mistakes at the worst possible times.  See Seattle in 2006, NY Giants in 2007, Philly in 2008, and Washington last season.

Face it, Cowboy fans and ESPN apologists like Colin Cowherd… Until Dallas gets to an NFC Championship Game, much less a Super Bowl, Tony Romo, Jerry Jones, and the Dallas Cowboys will continue to be questioned and mocked.  No one is mocking Joe Flacco.  Even though he doesn’t have the great regular season stats, Joe wins in the post-season.  And now he has a Super Bowl Ring.

So Cowboy apologists had better hope Dallas wins this season.  Otherwise, the mockings will continue.

Just the way Miley planned it…

By now, everyone has seen or heard about Miley Cyrus’ performance at the MTV Video Music Awards.  Those who haven’t don’t care and don’t want to know.  Regardless, many people were shocked to see the performance either live or in replay.  Whatever innocence the one-time star of Disney’s Hannah Montana had was not just erased by her twerking and violating people in teddy bear and Beetlejuice costumes, it was nuked.  Miley will never be able to escape the images that have now been emblazoned in many people’s minds.

But it appears that it was exactly what the woman born Destiny Hope Cyrus wanted.

Make no mistake, anyone who had followed the career of Miley knew she was heading down this path the moment Hannah Montana made its debut.  The daughter of Billy Ray Cyrus was more than willing to go down this path, and her parents did everything possible to enable the chain of events that led to this moment.  In late 2007, I knew Miley’s career would transition to porn fodder and said so to my wife when we visited Disney World.  Miley had just turned 15 at the time, and was still trying to convince her fans she was the innocent country girl persona that she displayed on TV.  But the Childhood Fame Monster that had claimed Miley’s predecessors, Brittney, Christina, Lindsey, and other Mouseketeers was closing in on her at the time.  Within 2 years, Miley was posing topless with her dad in photo spreads, even though she was not legal in age.

And once she turned 18 and broke free of the Disney restrictions, Miley openly show her unrestricted side.  The change was almost instantaneous.  Miley began to show her body in ways that left little to the imagination.  Still her fans clung to the hope that she was just going through a phase.  Her engagement to Australian actor, Liam Hemsworth was seen as a step toward normalcy and it seemed that she might settle down, pursue a decent music career, and maybe go into acting.

But once the New Years’ Ball dropped on 2013, Miley kicked into overdrive in the outrageous things she was doing.  The cutting of the hair and the bleaching of it shocked a lot of people.  My wife openly wondered if Miley was a lesbian.  Then the sticking of the tongue out at events.  It was also clear that Miley and Liam were not as tight-knit as an engaged couple.  Though it appeared the main male protagonist of “The Hunger Games” broke off the engagement or at least postponed the wedding day, Miley showed off her engagement ring as if to say, “I’m still engaged, b****es!”  Liam and Miley have been rarely seen in public, and when they have, it has not been as a truly lovey dovey couple.  Then came the VMA awards, and the rest is history.

If you think Miley has gone off the deep end, think again.  Miley wants everyone to talk about her.  She saw what Charlie Sheen did when he went off the deep end, and saw similar spikes when Amanda Bynes went crazy.  Miley also took a page out of the Madonna playbook.  The Material Cougar has been at this for so long and done so many outrageous things, but has always appeared to remain in control.  Miley figured if Madonna could do it, she could too.

And she got what she wanted:  attention.  But Miley made a huge miscalculation in her attempts to shock people into looking at her.  African-Americans looked at her performance and saw racism.  Feminists screamed that Miley’s twerking was an insult to women’s rights.  A wide range of political opposites united to either mock Miley or outright condemn her.  People turned their outrage which had just been on Ben Affleck for becoming the new Batman onto her.  The only people that seemed to come to her defense were musicians and her mom, who gave her a Standing O after the raunchy number.  After all, VMAs has done some pretty outrageous things in the past, why stop now?  Heck, Lady Gaga went Lady Gaga during that same event and hardly anyone was giving Gaga heat. 

After the VMAs, Miley just Can’t Stop.  Everything she is doing makes headlines.  Now comes word that she joined Justin Bieber twerking in a new video.  Oh goody.  Justin and Miley, the perfect pairing of a new generation.  Also, she teamed up with Kanye West on a project.  Heck, why not bring in the Kardashians while you’re at it.

A wise teacher about 2000 years ago, once said:  “What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet loses his soul?”  Miley and others like her have traded their souls for fame, wealth, and an honor that is fleeting.  Short term, she is “winning”.  Long term?  Don’t we all know how this will end?  Only Miley can Stop Miley now—and the longer she waits to change course, the harder it will be to come back to even a reasonable amount of respectability among the masses.

The 2014 Winter Olympics: Citius, Altius, Fortius, … Homophobius?!?

As some of you are aware, Next February, the Nations of the World will gather in Sochi, Russia, to commence the Games of the 22nd Winter Olympiad.  The fact that Sochi is hosting the Winter Olympics was a potential International incident waiting to happen, being that the Chechnya, and other Caucus flashpoints are in the neighborhood.  Then, add in the situation with Edward Snowden, chilling U.S.-Russian relations at a time that the Russians could use US security support.

But all that pales in comparison to a controversy that could light a real powder keg of Olympic protests, making Berlin in 1936 and Mexico City in 1968 look like a Sunday picnic…

In June, Russia enacted a series of anti-gay laws.  Basically, the laws state, that while you can be gay in Russia, any attempt to be show your gayness in public or support gay rights in public is illegal.  The laws have enabled anti-gay groups (such as Neo-Nazi-like group) to publicly attack anyone who supports gay rights.  And some of the attacks have been brutal.  Just today, I saw a CNN article on a Russian journalist who was fired after he came out of the closest.

The response to this legislation has varied and is largely disorganized.  Some gay rights advocates have called for a boycott of Russian vodka.  Others have asked for the U.S. to boycott a second Russian Olympics.  Still others, like George Takei, are asking for the IOC to move the Winter Olympics to Vancouver.

So how is Russia handling the arrival of the world’s greatest athletes, some of who will be openly gay?  The Russian Government has said gay athletes are welcome, but you get differing views on how the laws may be enforced during the games.  Some Russian leaders have asked all athletes to respect Russian laws, while others have said there will be no issues in Sochi with respect to the laws.  The IOC has clouded the situation further stating that all athletes need to respect the laws of the host country.  At the same time, the IOC has asked Russia to clarify their position on the upcoming Winter Olympics and gay athletes.

So will any pro-gay signs of demonstration be allowed from the athletes?  The World Track & Field Championships, currently taking place in Moscow, may offer a clue.  Will any track & field athlete be brave enough to openly show gay pride during this week in Moscow?  Oh, and memo to Johnny Weir:  I know you want to go to Sochi just to shove it down Putin’s throat, but your best days were 8 years ago in Turin.  You’re going to have to earn it in January—and you haven’t skated competitively in almost a year.  You’re going to have a tough road just to get there, much less win.

There are no easy options.  I do think the Russian law should be overturned, but it is not worth boycotting the Olympics or Russian vodka over.  You have to win the hearts of the Russian people and get them to change and evolve.  It will be a long and hard road to do that, and you have to overcome hurdles as big as the Caucuses.  But it will be worth it in the end. 

But my real anger is at those who were so willing to display the pink equals sign in the red background on their Facebook profile—in fact some of them still do.  Where are you at?  Why aren’t you willing to take a position on this matter?  Is it because it is Russia?  It is easy to criticize anti-gay laws in Uganda repetitively, and criticize the Pope’s views on Gay marriage, but you don’t want to take on Putin for his anti-gay views?

It’s embarrassing that I have to be the catalyst here.  But, if I have to be the one to get the debate going… so be it.  Consider the fight engaged.

Why we can’t have a National Dialogue on Race…

Recently, a news story came about stating that Tawana Brawley had finally begun to pay her portion of a lawsuit over two decades ago, when she accused a group of white men of committing a heinous sexual assault and scrawling racial slurs across her body.  A grand jury ultimately concluded that Brawley had falsified the accusations, and one of the accused, who happened to be an assistant DA, filed suit against Brawley, Brawley’s lawyers, and the civil rights leader who had stirred up the New York community against the accused rapists—Al Sharpton, who was making his national debut into the public consciousness.  Now Brawley is 41, a nurse, and still refuses to recant her initial story, even though her story was debunked in court.  Al Sharpton long settled his monetary debts in the lawsuit.

On November 12, another woman, Crystal Magnum is scheduled to to go on trial for murder of an ex-boyfriend.  Magnum is the stripper at the center of the Duke Lacrosse Rape case and her accusations were also ultimately proven to be false.  Again, Al Sharpton stirred up the community and pushed for punishment of the Duke Lacrosse players, even though they did not commit a crime.  Al Sharpton to this day has still not apologized for his role in the case.

2 cases of alleged racism ultimately proven false.  So why are we having to deal with Al Sharpton again and again on issues of race?  Now, we are dealing with him again in the aftermath of the George Zimmerman case—not just because he is pushing for civil rights charges to be filed against George Zimmerman, but because he used his position at NBC to doctor an audio tape before the trial began to make George Zimmerman sound racist and turn public opinion further against him.  (Please don’t kid yourselves—Al Sharpton’s fingerprints were all over that doctoring, even if he wasn’t directly involved.)

And that, in a microcosm, is why we can’t have a National Dialogue to address the real problems that the African American community has.  Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and other African-American “Leaders” are too busy trying to scream racism at every turn, but they go silent when thousands of young African-American are robbed of their future by violence, and when thousands more are raised in single mom households.  Or worse, they criticize anyone who tries to offer serious solutions to the problems in the African-American community—whether white or black, conservative or non-conservative.  Why?  Al and Jesse and others are too busy profiting off of their communities’ suffering.

There’s just something wrong with these “leaders” attacking people like CNN’s Don Lemon for trying to speak out in trying to change a culture that is deteriorating.  Lemon just wants the next generation to be better than the last one.  What is wrong with that?  It’s because these “leaders” don’t want to see the ugliness of what they have left in their wake.  Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream lies in ruins for all African-Americans.  Sure, some have risen to incredible heights, but Dr. King’s vision was for ALL African-Americans to rise above his upbringing.  He knew Jesse Jackson was not prepared to be a good leader, but Dr. King never got the chance to try and help Jesse see the error of his ways.  Initially, Jesse had his heart in the right place, but once he entered the political realm, he abandoned helping out the African-American community as a while in favor of helping himself.  Obviously, Jesse’s son learned from his dad, and look at where it has taken Jesse Jr.

It is high time for the President to commence with a National Dialogue on Race.  It is time for the President to tell Jesse, Al, and other African-American leaders to either get serious on race issues or stand aside and let others try to solve the issues that affect the African-American community.  Otherwise, there may not be an African-American community to save in the near future.

A good place to start would be the 50th Anniversary of the March on Washington and Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech.  It is time for Jesse, Al, and other Civil Rights Leaders to recommit to Dr. King’s dream.  It’s time to stop the “Self-Destruction”, because that’s where Dr. King’s Dream is heading on its present course with it’s current leaders in charge.

Postmortem thoughts on the Zimmerman trial…

Well, since we have had a chance to digest the results of the Zimmerman trial, I wanted to share my thoughts.  Some of my more liberal and conservative friends might want to pay attention.  You could learn something, especially from someone who just served as a juror a month ago…

Some of you may have looked at my comments in my last blog about serving on a jury and think that there was overwhelming evidence that the defendant caused the accident.  In truth, because the trial was a CIVIL case, there only had to have been enough evidence that it was more likely that the defendant caused the accident than the plaintiff did.  In that instance, the threshold was clearly met in my eyes and in the eyes of my fellow jurors.  We made that decision within 20 minutes of deliberations and spent the remaining 3+ hours trying to calculate damages.  Personal note:  And the final 4 judgments weren’t easy.  On the final damage award payout (future monetary damages for the female plaintiff), I was the holdout.  My fellow jurors wanted to award her more money than I was willing to.  I realized that certainly, the female plaintiff needed more money than her husband because she was in worse health post-accident.  But I was not willing to go all the way my fellow jurors were going.  After a back-and-forth of 15 minutes, we finally agreed that the damages should be 3/4 ths of what the prosecutor was asking.

By contrast, the George Zimmerman trial was a CRIMINAL case.  The burden of proof for the prosecution to win the case was even higher than a civil trial.  The prosecution had to prove BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that Zimmerman was guilty of 2nd degree murder.  Which leads to my first point…

(1) THE PROSECUTION’S CASE WAS BASED MORE ON THEORY THAN FACTS… AND WAS FLAWED FROM THE GET GO:  It was a fuster cluck of a case that the prosecution put together.  In most cases, the prosecution lays out what they believed happened, has a set of facts they put forward, and have witnesses to affirm the facts and theory.  In this case, however, a theory was all they had to go on.  The defense appeared to have more facts than the prosecution, and that is never a good thing if a conviction is what you are trying for.  The witnesses never really backed up the theory of what happened because they were not there at the scene.  Some of the witnesses were not credible.  Some of the witnesses were more helpful to the defense than the prosecution.  One witness was so disastrous that the prosecution took an unusual step of asking the judge to strike at least some of the testimony.  But something the prosecution failed to do in their case really should have chaffed everyone…

(2) THE PROSECUTION FAILED TO PROVIDE ALL THE EVIDENCE TO THE DEFENSE IN A TIMELY FASHION BEFORE THE TRIAL:  This issue was perhaps the most damaging blow to the prosecution.  The prosecution failed to give the defense all the evidence they had.  The defense only knew of this when someone from the DA’s office alerted them to this fact (that person, BTW, was fired as the jury began their deliberations on an allegedly unrelated issue).  In the aftermath, the Prosecuting attorneys could still face sanctions for their actions.

Personal note:  In the trial I was a juror in, the defense had a witness who failed to provide the prosecution with all the evidence they had.  The judge laid into the witness when we were not in the room—we found out after the trial what happened.  So, it goes both ways.

By the end of the trial, the prosecution realized that they had failed to prove 2nd-degree murder.  They also had bungled the evidence so badly, they were facing charges themselves.  Barring jury nullification, they knew they were going to lose the case.  That is why an unusual step was taken...

(3) IT’S NOT A GOOD SIGN WHEN THE PROSECUTION REQUESTED ADDITIONAL LESSER CHARGES SHOULD BE FILED AFTER BOTH SIDES PRESENTED THEIR CASES:  When a Manslaughter charge was added after both sides rested their cases, I was surprised.  Normally, after both sides present their cases, charges can be dropped against a defendant.  In the civil case I served as a juror in, the case against one of the defendants was dismissed.  So, while it is legally possible for addition charges to be filed, the fact that a manslaughter charge was added should have told everyone the case for 2nd-degree murder was lost, and the prosecution was hoping for ANY sort of conviction.

The Defense’s case wasn’t exactly a thing of beauty, either.  But all the defense had to do was prove reasonable doubt that 2nd-degree murder did not take place—and it was a job that was proven easier when a certain person failed to take the witness stand…

(4) THE FACT THAT GEORGE ZIMMERMAN DIDN’T TAKE THE STAND WAS A KEY POINT THAT INDICATED THE DEFENSE HAD DONE ENOUGH TO WIN THE CASE:  Normally in a murder case, the defendant will only take the stand if the case is in such a desperate state that the defendant has nothing to lose.  Despite my friend, John Brown, saying Zimmerman was a coward for not taking the stand, George took the smart advice his council provided and declined to take the stand.  At that point, the defense knew they had established reasonable doubt.  Having Zimmerman take the stand to publicly state his side of the story might have helped his, but it also would have given the prosecution a last-ditch chance to discredit Zimmerman completely and potentially prove their side of the case.  So, while cowardly, it was the correct move.

(5) THE JUDGE’S INSTRUCTIONS COMPLICATED THE DELIBERATIONS… AND MAY HAVE LED TO THE NOT GUILTY VERDICT:  The Judges’ instructions were very complicated to say the least.  The jury had to considered so much, and the confusion eventually led to the jury asking for clarification about the manslaughter charge.  That should have been the clue that 2nd-degree murder was no longer being considered by the jury.  In the end, the combination of factors was too much to hope for a conviction.  Plus, the laws (as bad as they may be) pretty much assured that the jury return a not guilty verdict.

Let me be clear:  a NOT GUILTY verdict DOES NOT ALWAYS mean the jury thinks that the defendant is INNOCENT.  It just means that the state failed to prove it’s case.  In this case, Zimmerman was not innocent.  Anybody with a reasonable thought process knows Zimmerman made mistakes as well that night.  But reasonable people should also know there was not enough to convict.  See the OJ case as an example.  BTW, OJ lost the wrongful death suit filed against him by the Goldman and Brown family 2 years after his murder trial, which leads me to another point…

(6) A WRONGFUL DEATH LAWSUIT AGAINST ZIMMERMAN IS STILL COMING:  Treyvon’s parents will almost certainly file a wrongful death suit against George Zimmerman and the HOA Zimmerman worked with.  With this suit being a civil case, the threshold for the plaintiff’s to prove their case is lower.  Will the Martin family win the case?  I think there’s a good chance.  I could also see an out-of-court settlement if all parties agree to it.

You will notice race has yet to be mentioned until now.  A Hispanic man shoots an 17-year old African-American male, and several leaders in the Civil Rights movement used the case as a lightning rod for screaming racism.  But…

(7) FILING CIVIL RIGHTS CHARGES AGAINST GEORGE ZIMMERMAN WILL BE A HIGH THRESHOLD:  AG Eric Holder knows that, unless he has videotape evidence of the incident, he is going to have a nearly impossible task of proving George Zimmerman committed a hate crime.  If anything, one could make an argument that Treyvon was violating George’s civil rights in allegedly beating him up before the fatal moment.  If Holder files Civil Rights charges, the impression by most reasonable-minded US voters will be he did so only under pressure from Sharpton, Jackson, Jealous, Bond, and other black leaders.  Which is why I ultimately believe Holder is letting the Civil Rights team at the Justice Department take a look, just to prove he is pursuing the idea.  But, the Justice Department cannot file charges without risking a political backlash from political opponents who are screaming that the Justice Department is doing nothing about Fast & Furious, Benghazi, the IRS, and Gov’t leaks to the media.

In the end, we are going to have to deal with the after-effects of this trial for a long time.  Only when we move past this case can we begin a healing process desperately needed in this country…

Serving on a jury…

I know many jurors have written books about some of their experiences in the most famous trials in recent memory.  Sadly, my recent experience with jury duty is only good enough to be worthy of a blog.

I was called for jury duty for the fourth time in 10 years earlier this month.  Three times, I have been called to serve as a petit juror in Anne Arundel District Court.  A fourth time I was called for Jury Duty at the U.S. Federal District Court in Baltimore—on my birthday.  It amazes me how Court continues to find me to serve when there are millions of people who have never even been called in their lives.

And this time, I was asked to serve as a juror in a trial.  Oh, joy!

As it turned out, it wasn’t too bad.  It was a four-day civil trial with a 6-person jury and 2 alternates focused on monetary damages from an auto accident that occurred on New Years’ Eve 2011.  And somehow yours truly passed the mustard to serve as a juror.

Did I mention that my father worked in Auto claims adjustment for most of his work life, and I frequently heard about work when he came home from dinner?  Maybe the prosecution or defense would have found grounds to excuse me had they known that.  But they never asked that question during the selection process.  Luckily for them, it didn’t matter.  But I did make it a point to mention that fact to the judge after the trial.

The bottom line is that it was a classic situation.  An all-white jury judging a case in which the Plaintiffs and Prosecution were old and white, and the defendant and his attorney were younger and African-American.  And yes, the Defense Attorney did make an issue of that to the judge to no avail.

In the end, the case was a comedy of errors by both sides.  The Prosecutor almost put us to sleep, while one of the Defense Witnesses almost got thrown in jail by the Judge.  The highlight was when the Prosecution brought in an Incomplete Google Map of the Accident Scene, and the Defense wisely tried to use the map to confuse the Plaintiff.  But 4 of the 6 jurors (including myself) saw the error in the map (FYI:  we polled the jurors during deliberations, so that’s how I know 4 of the 6 jurors thought the map was incomplete), and the Judge called both attorneys to the bench and chewed them out over it.

We ended up deliberating for 4 hours.  There was no question in our minds that the defendant had caused the accident (it was a rear-ending BTW), and the biggest issue was the awarding of damages.  We decided NOT to give the prosecution the full amount they asked for (partly because the prosecution’s case was flawed), but the medical bills were paid for and some compensation for future medical bills was given.

I hope this is the last time I am called to serve as a juror for a LONG time.  And I hope I am never called to serve on a grand jury.  I can only imagine what the jury in the George Zimmerman trial is going through right now.  At least I got to go home at night.

The Duke Lacrosse Case aftermath… a new postscript

A few of you may remember the Duke Lacrosse Rape case from 2006.  Here’s a quick recap in case you don’t recall.  On April 5, 2006, at an off-campus house outside of Duke University, a party was held for the Duke Lacrosse Team.  A stripper was brought to the party, and at some point, the stripper accused three players of raping her.  In addition, when she left, several players were accused of yelling racial epithets at the stripper, who just happened to be a student enrolled at a nearby historically black university, North Carolina Central University.  The accusation triggered a major investigation by then Durham County District Attorney, Mike Nifong, who decided to charge 3 players with rape.

The resulting firestorm caused Duke University’s President to effectively fire the Lacrosse Head Coach, Mike Pressler and cancel the remainder of the 2006 season—no trivial matter for a team who had finished National Runner-Up the year before and was a favorite in 2006 to win the NCAA National Title.  The Lacrosse Team was shunned by students and faculty alike.  A group of Professors calling themselves the “Group of 88” published a controversial ad claiming the stripper’s side of the story to be fact, and at least one of the Professors failed 2 Lacrosse players for being on the team.  Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton showed up in Durham to support the stripper and ask for justice against the accused rapists.

But, from the get-go, inconsistencies showed up in the stripper’s story which indicated that she had not been truthful.  Physical evidence did not exist on the alleged victim.  Plus the alleged victim continued to change her story.  Quietly in December 2006, some of the charges were dropped against the Lacrosse players.  Then in early 2007, the North Carolina Attorney General, Roy Cooper took over the case, and on April 11, he made the stunning admission that not only were all charges dropped against the 3 accused Duke Lacrosse players, they were completely innocent.  The accuser, one Crystal Magnum, had made up the story.

The aftermath of this bombshell was seismic.  The NCAA reinstated the eligibility of all Duke Lacrosse players from the 2006 season.  The Lacrosse Team, led by the 3 accused and cleared players, sued the University, Mike Nifong, and the city of Durham for damages related to the scandal.  Nifong was disbarred and went to jail for his role in the scandal.  The Group of 88 has never backed away from their claims, writing a Clarifying letter in January, 2007, but has since gone silent.

And now the postscripts…

The Duke Lacrosse players who were freshman on that 2006 team, finally achieved glory for Duke as Seniors, leading the 2010 team to Duke’s First Lacrosse National title.  The freshman on that 2010 Championship Team just recently led the 2013 Duke Lacrosse team to a second Championship.

And Crystal Magnum?  She has been arrested twice since the rape allegations, once in 2010 on attempted murder and child abuse charges among other things, and a second time in 2011 for Murdering an ex-boyfriend.  Four months ago, she finally posted bond from her second run-in with the law, and she is expected to stand trial for the 2011 murder beginning on July 8th.

The Duke Lacrosse case was a full-blown scandal in many eyes when it came to light, inflaming racial passions, but has petered out as a story once the truth became known.  To this day, MSNBC has not covered the story of what happened on April 11, 2007 and since regarding the Duke Lacrosse Case.  It’s clear that MSNBC would like to sweep their involvement in trying to convict the Lacrosse players under the rug.  ESPN did some coverage, but only in passing.  Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton suddenly went silent about the Duke Lacrosse Case and ran away from Durham as fast as they could.  The last time Jesse spoke about the case, he was humiliated by Anderson Cooper.

So… what have we learned from this case?  Nothing.

As Crystal Magnum is going to trial, another high-profile racial case has taken it’s place.  The Treyvon Martin trial has inflamed racial passions again.  I’m not saying the truth is similar to what happened in Durham, but the same passions are seen now in Florida.  Ironically the George Zimmerman trial will occur around the same time the Crystal Magnum case will be tried.  I wonder if anyone else sees the irony of those two trials.

From now on, I refuse to let racial passions cloud my judgment.  We were fooled once.  If we are fooled again, we have only ourselves to blame.

Who is your watcher?

One of my favorite quotes comes from the ancient Roman poet, Juvenal, around the turn of the second century.  One of his Satires had the famous line, “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?”.  Translated from Latin, the question means “Who will guard the guards themselves?”  This line is appropriate in today’s world where corruption at the highest levels of governments have been rampant since the dawn of time.  Today, the United States’ government has two major scandals plaguing it (The IRS investigating certain groups of citizens and the DOJ snooping on news reporters), and who knows how many more scandals loom under the surface.  It appears no one is able to act as the leaders of this nation’s conscious to prevent politicians (both Republican and Democratic) from making major miscalculations.  The people in charge over the last 40 years have thought they can do no wrong.  They are mistaken.

Now, you might think you can avoid the trap of corruption and that you would never put yourself into a situation where your can be corrupted because of your views.  But ask yourself a question:  “Who is your watcher?”  I’m not necessarily talking about your spouse or a parent; I’m talking about someone whom you trust and who is not afraid to be a political critic about everything that goes on.  They may be right on certain things, wrong on a few things, and occasionally off-base on others.  But you can always count on them to keep you honest.

My watcher goes back many years, and though I don’t often agree with his views, I respect the fact that he is not afraid to speak his mind.  He is an intellectual equal who took a different path than I did.  He sees the world in an idealistic perspective, and that is a good thing.  This South Gwinnett alum will criticize liberal and conservative alike when they are violating the rights of the people.  To challenge him in a debate is difficult under the best of circumstances, and impossible if you have no knowledge of the debate subject.  He is the reason I have developed a counterexample strategy in debates.  If I don’t see reasonable counterexamples in a potential debate, then I don’t challenge someone to their views. 

I may not always agree with my watcher, but I always hear his views.  And as someone who believes in freedom, I believe all views should be heard, even if it is not the popular view.  (Some of my Valparaiso friends would be well-advised to take that piece of advice to heart.)  It is what makes this country great.  It does mean, however, that when you believe your views are absolute, you better be ready for a challenge if I sense your views are off-base.  I have learned from the best. 

Because of what I do, I realize I walk a fine line, and I need people on both the left and right to keep me from going off the reservation.  My watcher and other South Gwinnett friends have kept me honest through the years, and I am grateful for them, even when I don’t always agree with them.

So… Who watches you?

Why the Democrats are going after the IRS…

With the recent IRS scandal targeting Tea Party and Conservatives group for extra scrutiny in setting up 501 (c) (4) tax exempt entities, it’s interesting to note that Democrats are almost as angry about the scandal as Republicans are.  After all, the Tea Party is antagonistic to Democrats and vice versa.  In fact, many Democrats asked the IRS to investigate Tea Party Groups over the last few years.  So why would Democrats in Congress now chastise the IRS over things which the same Democrats asked them to do?

Could it be that Democrats realize how bad this looks for them and that this scandal could damage them long-term?  Possibly, but even though the scandal itself would usually be a concern, there are far more damaging concerns to be worried about.

Could it be that Democrats understand that if a Republican regains control of the White House, turnabout would be fair play?  Maybe, but that scenario has already happened in the Bush administration when the IRS looked at the NAACP’s tax exempt status.  (And please, anyone who thinks the NAACP is non-partisan is stupid.  They stopped being non-partisan when former Democratic legislatures began to lead their organization.  Let me know when J.C. Watts or Alan West leads the organization to balance out the Julian Bonds or Kweisi Mfumes that have led in recent years.)

So why would the Democrats go after the IRS?  The answer is simple.  They need a boogeyman to go after.  After what?  Would you believe Obamacare?  Really?  It’s possible.  Consider Democratic leaders in the Senate have publicly stated that Obamacare’s implementation will cause problems.  Finance chairman (and retiring Montana Senator), Max Baucus, has stated as much, as has Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid.  Even allies, such as labor unions, are now beginning to see that the health care reform may not be in their best interest.

And they are right for a simple reason:  No matter how much change may be for the better, NOTHING ever works completely right the first time you try something new.  There is ALWAYS some trial and error, even when you are following instructions.  Look at when I try to put furniture together as an example.  And that assumes everyone agrees change is for the better.  Many conservatives believe Obamacare is going to cause major problems and will be expensive to implement.  Obamacare’s implementation has no chance to work perfectly from the get go. 

And that’s why the Democrats need a health care boogeyman.  If Obamacare has initial failures (and they will), everyone except the most partisan of American people will look towards the Democrats as the ones to blame messing up healthcare.  Only 1 Congressional Republican even supported the measure and he was defeated in the next election by a Democrat.  And Chief Justice Roberts can’t be blamed, either, because all he did was tell Congress and the President that it’s on you to decide how to resolve this.  And the Democrats were too busy trying to pass the legislation without first looking at it, as Nancy Pelosi famously said.  So the Democrats would be on the hook—UNLESS they can find someone else to blame.  And that someone could be the IRS.  Why?  Because the IRS will be in charge of determining who gets subsidized for health care.  That’s why the IRS is hiring new agents.  And wouldn’t you know that the person in charge of the Cincinnati field office at the time of the Tea Party controversy now is in charge of implementing the health care reform for the IRS.  How… convenient.

If health care reform fails, watch the Democrats and their allies say “We had a good idea, but the corrupt IRS failed to execute it properly.  And it’s so messed up, we are the only ones who can fix it.  Besides, the Republicans won’t help with reform.  They are too obstructionist to do what is right.  Elect us to finish the job the right way.”  And some people will buy it, maybe enough to give the Democrats control of everything again.

Of course, the Republicans aren’t going to try and help the Democrats out of this mess.  They want the health care reform to be implemented as is.  Oh sure, they vote to repeal health care in the House, but they don’t defund the health care.  Why?  They have their own ideas of health care and if the Democrat’s proposal goes bad, they might find it easier to implement their “reforms’, especially if Obamacare ultimately drives the Democrats out of Congress and the White House.

So right now, don’t believe anyone is Congress is doing the right thing for the American people.  Everyone in Washington has their own agendas at work and will stop at nothing to obtain ultimate power.

The Caucasus… A quick Primer

Anyone who has followed the aftermath of the Bombings at the finish line of the Boston Marathon has heard that even though the suspects had lived in the US for several years, the family originally came from the Caucasus region in the southernmost part of Russia.  That may explain why Russian President Vladimir Putin has expressed a great desire to help the US in the investigation.  The brothers are ethnic Chechens, though the elder brother was born in Kyrgyzstan in South Central Asia, while the younger brother was born in Dagestan province, near the Chechnya state.  The region has been a dangerous place ever since the end of the former Soviet Union, as a large group of Muslim ethnicities that live in this area have tried to break away from Russia with sometimes violent means, while the Russian response has been equally as destructive.  A map below shows the region.

Just looking at the neighborhood, one can see some huge issues.  Armenia is the only Christian nation in the region south of the Caucasus Mountains, but it is landlocked and surrounded by 3 Muslim countries (Turkey-who committed genocide on Armenians in WWI, Iran-who is probably the 2nd most antagonistic state in the world right now after North Korea, and Azerbaijan-who isn’t exactly a stable state).  Georgia also has a large Muslim group in their province, and they just lost a war to Russia over the South Ossentia and Abkhazia territories.  As for the Russian provinces, Chechnya and Dagestan have caused a particularly huge amount of problems for Russia, with attacks over the last 20 years extending from Groznyy all the way up to Moscow itself.  Bombings, hostage standoffs, and other attacks have killed hundreds of people.  The Russian response has killed thousands and have left a ruthless strongman in charge of the Chechen state.

For further details, here is the breakdown of ethnic groups in the Caucasus:

As you can see, the neighborhood is eerily similar to the diversity found in the Balkans region just across the Black Sea from this area.  It is a toxic brew that has flashed into violence on more than one occasion.  Many Muslims from this region have fought in other conflicts in the neighboring Middle East areas, including Iraq and Afghanistan, so the temptation is to link the Muslims from this area with the Al-Qaida network.  Though no official link has been made, that hasn’t stopped President Putin from asserting such a link exists.  Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t.  But, if a link is found, it may force the United States to confront another troubled region in the Middle East.

Ironically, this area is another region rich with oil with a large transnational oil contingent invested in the nearby Caspian Sea area, so Natural Resources will play a role in the decisions the US makes in this region.  Until we can wean ourselves off of foreign oil, we will be pressured into sending forces into oil-rich regions to stabilize these areas.  That increases the risks of terrorists targeting the US and their policies.

And there is another potential flashpoint.  Next February, the eyes of the Sports World will focus on the Winter Olympics, which will take place in this region, in the Russian town of Sochi (you see it on the left side of the first map).  A terrorist attack during the Olympics is highly possible, even with Russian troop presence.  Considering the instability, you have to wonder why the IOC thought giving into Putin’s wishes was a good idea.

There are no easy answers.  Evidence is not conclusive that the brothers had support from the region.  But it cannot be ruled out.  It may take another terrorist attack to determine whether the Boston Bombings were lone wolf operations or the start of a larger campaign against the US.  The next move is up to the terrorists in the Caucasus.  Will they not target the US for another attack?  Or will they strike the US/International Community with even more deadly force?  We shall see.

Ending the use of Native American mascots…

Since it appears that the argument over gay marriage is about to be resolved, allow me to give you PC-minded folks a new argument to go after.  Pay attention, you might learn something. (Jim Ingram, you can sit this one out, because you and I see eye-to-eye on this issue).

Native Americans have been up in arms over the use of their images as mascots from everything from elementary schools up to the professional sports level.  Two of the most offensive Indian nicknames to Native Americans are the Washington Redskins, and, regrettably as a former Atlanta resident, the Atlanta Braves.  In the early 90s as the Braves made their 1st Championship run and the Washington NFL team made their last Super Bowl Run, Native American groups made a huge push to pressure all professional sports teams to eliminate their Native America mascots and nicknames.  Though several college and high school teams did get rid of their mascots, the push seemed to fail and the argument died, possibly forever.

But underneath the surface, the elimination of Native American mascots has made significant ground.  There are only a handful of colleges that still have Indian mascots (Florida State being the most recognizable).  Stanford, Syracuse, Oklahoma, St. Johns, and Illinois are just a few of the major colleges which have eliminated Indian mascots over the years.  On the public high, middle, and elementary school levels, several states are outlawing Indian nicknames.  At one time, 3000 schools had Indian nicknames.  Now, that number has shrunk to 900 and is still declining.

Now, the push to eliminate the Professional Sports Indian nicknames may have gotten new life.  At a recent forum in DC, many media and elites pushed anew to get rid of the Washington nickname, considered by many Native American groups to be the most offensive, and on par with calling a team the N-word.  At least two Washington area papers, have decided to stop referring to Washington’s NFL team by their nickname, and lead Washington Post Sports columnist, Mike Wise, seems to be leading the media charge to end the use of the R-word in Washington sports.  Late last year, the Atlanta Braves tried to bring back Chief Nocahoma’s image on their logos, but the public outrage that followed terminated that proposal.

It’s interesting to note that the Braves and Washington’s NFL team are the two nicknames that generate the most push for termination of their Indian nicknames.  After all, they originally shared the sports stadium and Braves nickname in what many still consider the most segregated city in America—Boston.  The Football Team changed their name after moving to Fenway Park in 1933, home of the Boston Red Sox.  Here is where another parallel occurs that most people in this country are not aware of.  Washington’s NFL Team was the last NFL franchise to integrate (much like the Red Sox was the last MLB team to integrate), but only after the Federal Government threatened Washington team and pressure was applied from the Washington Post (George Preston Marshall, the owner at that team, was believed to be a racist).  Any attempts to try and re-write the history of the nickname as honoring Native Americans rings hollow, just based on those historical facts.

Congress is trying to pass a new law that may end the use of Native American mascots and nicknames all together.  History now appears to be on the Native Americans.  Yeah, I know, this push sounds like a broken record.  But something feels different now.  I don’t know how I know.  It’s just a feeling, like now is the time where if enough pressure is applied, Washington will change its nickname and the remaining dominos will fall rapidly.

So common, all you champions of PC causes.  Get on board the Ban Native American nickname train while there’s still time.  Because, if you miss this locomotive that is gathering steam, you’re going to be no better than those you regularly mock as being old-fashioned and out-of-touch with today’s world.

The long slow decline of the Greeks

When I was midway through my days at Valpo, I may the decision to join a fraternity.  Granted, many don’t consider a music fraternity (is it a professional Greek society or social society or both?) to be an official fraternity, but Phi Mu Alpha Sinfonia at Valpo has their own house so I consider it a fraternity all the same.  Sometimes, I even refer to the Kappa Sigma chapter of the fraternity as the 810 Brown Street Mafia, in honor of the house address.  So, I do see things from the Greek perspective, and what I saw regarding the future of Greek in the mid 1990s is sadly starting to play out today.

In the mid 1990s, I made the prediction that the Greek system at Valpo would begin a decline and that within 10 years the number of fraternities and sororities would stand at 5 with all the sororities having gone national and at least 1 fraternity and sorority at Valpo being a minority Greek system.  My prediction was based on declining pledges and the University’s apparent hostility towards the Greek system.  Several fraternities were on probation due to various minor and major violations, the Theta Kappa Epsilon had been gone for a decade, Lambda Chi Alpha was trying to resurrect its Valpo chapter as a dry Greek, and the Pi Kappa Alpha fraternity was about to be kicked off of Valpo for good, dropping the number of fraternities from 13 at its peak to 11.  The sororities were still local and numbered 8, with Delta Phi Kappa being the smallest in size.  Turns out I was wrong, but only in how long the decline of the Greeks has taken.

Since I left Valpo, a lot has happened.  The sororities made the decision to go national immediately after I graduated, but it was not enough to save one of the sororities.  Delta Sigma Theta closed its doors around 2000.  Phi Delta Theta was kicked off campus in 2003.  And perhaps the most surprising departure to me was the elimination of Theta Chi, 2 years ago, dropping the fraternity total to 8 (Lambda Chi Alpha, Sigma Phi Epsilon, Phi Kappa Psi, Phi Sigma Kappa, Phi Mu Alpha, Sigma Tau Gamma, Sigma Chi, and, yes, Sigma Pi) and sorority total to 7.

Now comes word that Sigma Tau Gamma has been kicked off campus for 4-5 years by National and Valpo starting next year due to hazing and drug violations.  Pressure is mounting for the chapter to sell its house, basically marking the potential end of the fraternity at Valpo.  If the chapter is eliminated, that will even the number of fraternities and sororities at 7.

It’s no Greek secret that fraternities are under constant duress from a legal perspective.  Gone are the party days made famous by movies like “Animal House” and “Revenge of the Nerds”, and events like Spring Break.  The drinking is now severely regulated by Universities fearful of being sued should parties go wrong and people die from alcohol-related problems.  National fraternities also face similar pressure, so many of the nationals have gone dry in an attempt to change their image.  Hazing is prohibited under penalty of chapter termination.  In other words, what happened in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s with keggers, hazing, and drunken orgies is no longer tolerated in a PC world.

Athletic organizations also discourage joining fraternities due to the ever increasing pressure of athletes to put their sports ahead of everything except education (allegedly).  Also the perception of fraternities being troublemakers doesn’t help.  It is said Homer Drew discouraged his basketball players from going Greek at Valpo, which wouldn’t surprise me if true.

Sororities were never really painted with a broad negative brush that fraternities were, so their image is more positive in certain views.  (Although in Indiana, the rule is if more than 5 woman who are not related live in a house, it is technically considered a brothel, which is illegal-don’t laugh, that law was around when I was a college student.)  But sororities cannot survive independent of fraternities, no matter what some people would like to believe.  Ultimately, what happens to one happens eventually to the other, so sororities must work together with fraternities to try and change the negative connotations.

In order to survive, the college Greek systems must adapt or die.  Students no longer need to go Greek to enjoy college life as there are a number of alternative things to do.  The Greek system must find new ways to encourage people to take a look at becoming Greek.  The alternative is eliminating the Greek experiences at colleges nationwide, which would not necessarily be a good thing.

It’s going to take a lot of work for the Greek system to overcome the “boys will be boys” image that was once allowed.  But in the end, I believe fraternities will be better for it if they can.  Otherwise, the Greek system will become a thing of the past.

The cell phone at 40…

April 3rd marked the 40th anniversary of one of the most important inventions of the last half of the 20th century.  On April 3rd, 1973, Martin Cooper of Motorola made the first cell phone call to his rival at Bell Labs using a DynaTAC phone.  In that moment, the world of communications was changed forever.  Although it would be 6 years before the first cell phone network would come on line in the world, the ability to communicate had forever changed.

The basis for the cell phone were mobile radios the US military had used in World War II.  But it would be nearly 3 decades following the war before Motorola would perfect the technology in a device that was a foot long, 2 pounds in weight, and looked like a brick with a battery life of a mere 20 minutes.  As the first US networks came on line in the 1980s, these devices were largely used by traveling salespeople, doctors, Wall Street executives, and mostly governmental leaders.  These first cell phones had dedicated frequencies and used the entire bandwidth provided to transmit an analog signal.  The capacity of the networks were therefore limited, making wireless phone call a premium service.

The first wireless phone call was just the first of three monumental game-changing moments that the cell phone would create.  The second monumental event came in the early 1990s around the time the first digital cell phone standard, known as GSM was created.  As the voice became digitized, the developers realized that more services could be provided.  Using pagers as a guide, GSM developers created a service called short messaging service (or SMS) to provide another means of communicating.  Of course, we know SMS by another name… texting, which today has replaced voice calls as one of the most popular uses of cell phones.  Other services would be added, such as internet, E-Mail, and digital payments.

Making the phone digital also provided increased capacity, helping to lower the cost of making phone calls and maintaining the network.  But something else happened during the construction which really brought the cell phone to the masses.  As the cellular networks were developed, workers from all over the world came to build the GSM and CDMA networks.  As they did so, they learned how to build these networks, they also learned that they could take that knowledge back to their home countries and build cheap wireless networks of their own in places that never even had a wireline network.  As a result, the ratio of people to cell phones in the world today is closing in on a 1:1 ratio, and within the next two years, there will be more mobile devices than people worldwide.  Every country in the world has a digital cell phone network, and very few even have a 1sst generation analog network still in operation (Thailand is one of the few countries that still have an analog network).

The third great moment was the introduction of the iPhone in 2007.  Sure, the iPhone was not the first smartphone (that was the Blackberry).  However, the iPhone made the concept of the smartphone simple for the younger generation to comprehend, and its ease of use revolutionized the smart phone in ways Blackberry could not.  The iPhone and its Android rivals changed the way we used cell phones again, taking full advantage of social media and using the mobile phone in ways Martin Cooper could not even imagine.  Gaming, GPS, and other services have made the cell phone indispensible in our lives.

The phone used to be a home luxury where an entire family was connected with only one phone line.  Now, each family member can have a dedicated phone lines at a cost cheaper than a home phone line with many of the same services and then some.  In the coming years, the dedicated voice channels of cell phones will be replaced by a more IP-centric concept, turning voice into digital data, again reducing the cost of making a phone call.  How else will the cell phone change?  No one knows for sure, not even Martin Cooper himself.

One thing is clear:  the cell phone is unquestionably a game-changing technology.  What will the cell phone look like at 50?  Who knows.

Into the deep end of the pool…

So the issue of gay marriage has come before the Supreme Court and it seems that everyone is trying to assert their opinions on why they support or oppose gay marriage.  It has gotten personal in many cases and social media has seen an uptick in people changing profile pics in support or opposition of gay marriage.
I have been watching this fight for over 14 years in various forms of Valparaiso University distribution lists and other pages.  Name-calling on both sides has been embarrassing to say the least.  It hasn’t changed my mind about the issue.  And frankly, I am numb from the back and forth.

So, how have I decided to approach the issue?  First, I have decided to eliminate some noisy people from the argument that are more interested in the “My way and you’re wrong and I will embarrass you into coming over to my side” holier-than-thou stance.  Unfortunately, with so many people acting that way, it does reduce how many people I pay attention to.  Since I am a Christian, the Bible has been a source as well.  But there is a lot of deciphering between the Law of the Old Testament and Gospel of the New Testament that it can get confusing.  Examples in my life are playing a role as well.

First off, let me state my belief that marriage is a GOVERNMENT institution in this country.  Marriage certificates are provided by the state and not by religious groups.  Religions and priests have the ability to marry people in this country, but you can also get married at a courthouse, or by anyone who is licensed to wed people.  Heck, in Portland OR, you can get married at a donut shop.  So what purpose does Marriage serve in this country?  The answer is simple:  tax collection.  By the way, this argument was presented to me by an LC-MS pastor—not exactly a liberal type, mind you.  So, if the government decides to legalize gay marriage for tax purposes, who am I to disagree.  And with so many ways to get married, same-sex marriages do NOT have to occur in churches or synagogues that oppose those types of marriages on religious doctrine.  So, same-sex couples can avoid going to get married at religious institutions who disagree with their views—unless they want to force a confrontation.

Let me be clear:  Governments do not care whether you marry for love, marrying up for status, getting married at the point of a shotgun barrel (OK, they might care about “Shotgun” weddings these days, but that’s another point), or whether you marry someone of the same sex.  True, they do care about you marrying blood relatives, but that’s more from a health and genetic standpoint, and nothing else.  All they care about (aside from the blood relative issue) is getting their fair share.

Why are gay people interested in marrying?  Well, a sound reason is for the benefits and the ability to take care of a person they love.  That right is important.  Civil unions are not always recognized by states in certain manners of benefits and taking care of people.  Only marriage is a complete guarantee of certain benefits and rights.

So, is it that simple?  Not completely.  How do you square what is written in the Bible concerning the topic?  It’s not easy, and people who do not ascribe to the Christian view often mock what the Bible says on a number of topics WITHOUT confronting what the Bible says about Homosexuals and Marriage (they choose to attack other parts of the Bible instead of confronting the point directly).  To be fair, Jesus is never asked point blank about his views regarding homosexuality and marriage in the Bible and only St. Paul addresses the topic of homosexuality in the New Testament.  Regarding marriage, Jesus was asked by the teachers of the Law whether is was lawful for a man to divorce his wife, and Jesus gave the same response found in Genesis 2 that a man will leave his father and mother, cling to his wife, the two shall become one flesh, and what God has joined together, let not man separate.  God only allowed divorce because man’s heart was hard.  Privately, Jesus explained to his disciples that anyone who would divorce except for spousal unfaithfulness and remarry was committing adultery.  But then, Jesus revealed something to the disciples that SHOULD SHAKE everyone’s views on marriage (gay, straight, poly, etc.) and it is found in Matthew 19:  Because of the difficulties of maintaining monogamous relationships, it is better for men and women to NOT MARRY in many situations and focus instead on the kingdom of heaven.  However, if one cannot withstand their sexual cravings, they should marry and they should be faithful to their spouse.  Break the marriage covenant, and you commit adultery.  St. Paul affirms this belief in one of his letters to the Corinthian church.  Yes, there are references to Jesus being the groom and the church being the bride, but it is reference to imagery about the kingdom of heaven.

As for my interactions with same-sex couples, well, I’d call it “Fifty Shades of Gay”.  I have never met any two gay people who have had the same perspective on same-sex relationships.  The perspectives have been fascinating.  Some have chosen to live in the closet, only coming out to a few people.  More have chosen to be open about their life.  Some have thrown their lifestyle in the face of others.  And some have chosen to live a relatively quiet life.  And some live in variations of all four types.  Their reasons for being gay are infinite.  In short, no different than how heterosexual people live their lives.  I will say the lives of my same-sex relationship friends from Georgia have been the more positive portrayals.  It is their examples and the voices of my childhood friends who have supported gay marriage that have more than offset the counterproductive attitudes that have largely come from the Valparaiso contingent, which to a significant extent has largely held the “I’m right, your wrong, and I’m going to mock you even if you change your opinion one day” attitude.  There are some from VU who have tried to engage in a rational discussion on the matter, but it is few and far between. 

So what now?  Now we find out if this will be resolved legislatively or judicially.  Either way, we need more productive discussions on the matter and less in-your-face confrontations (I’m looking specifically at you, Mr. Arnold).  It’s time for the “adults” to sort this out.  And we’ll be better for it the sooner we do it.

South America’s Yugoslavia…

Less than a year ago, I predicted that Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez had less than a year to live, sorely based on his own words.  And despite assurances from his advisors trying to maintain all is well, Chavez’s own words and, at the end of his life, his lack of words told the truth.  Even though there were claims of a heart attack and that the US was involved, cancer ultimately claimed the life of the South American leader at the age of 58. 

So now what?  Well, let’s look at what I said about a year ago for a possible clue:

“He (Chavez) effectively owns every major company in the country, and whatever he doesn’t own, he uses his power to try and take it.  Several once prosperous companies are now being run into the ground by Chavez allies, all in the name of allegedly helping the poor and spreading the revolution, but in reality, it is keeping those allies from turning on him.  In short, he is Venezuela.

But what happens when you remove a leader like Chavez from the equation?  To answer that, you don’t have to look very far into the past at a country once known as Yugoslavia.  Josef Broz (better known as Tito) was the undisputed leader of Yugoslavia from 1948 until his death in 1980.  He ruled with a iron fist, but his charisma managed to keep conflicting factions from wiping each other out by integration and intimidation.  But upon his death, no one was able to match his leadership abilities, and within 10 years, the country began to split apart, factions began committing genocide, and once beautiful countries were reduced to ruin that have taken years to rebuild…

When a leader who consolidates all the power and resources to himself or herself over a period of time, their departure means their subordinates or others will fight over control of that power.  Rarely does a successor have the iron will or charisma to keep the power to themselves, though the obvious counterexample is the former Soviet Union, where Josef Stalin was an even more larger than life figure than Lenin.  It is unlikely, based on what we know about the situation in Venezuela, that there is a successor who can even match, much less be bigger than Hugo Chavez.  That means trouble for Venezuela once Chavez has left the scene.  And it’s not just Venezuela.  What happens in Cuba, once old age finally claims the Castro brothers and their brothers in arms from the 1950s revolution?

Regardless of what you think of Chavez, the country is Venezuela is now tied to him.  His imprint will long affect that country, even after he is gone.  His untimely departure is not a scenario I look forward to, regardless of my opinion of Hugo.”

Chavez’s allies are trying to portray Hugo as an eternal entity.  But Venezuela has real problems that not even Hugo could easily face.  The currency is falling, basic food staples are in short supply, and crime is rampant across the country.  The oil industry in Venezuela can only survive so long without the major capital investment improvements that companies like Exxon, Chevron, Shell, BP, and others could provide.  And if the TransCanada pipeline is approved, oil companies will likely favor a more friendly Canada for development as opposed to a hostile Venezuela.  The oil productivity in Venezuela will continue to decline in years to come unless the nation gives oil companies a reason to invest.  And without constantly flowing oil money, the situation in Venezuela will only get worse. 

New President Maduro can only hold the people in check so long without descending into an unpopular dictatorship.  And can all of Hugo’s former allies work together without Hugo’s charisma at work?  History shows not likely.

I hate to say this, but Venezuela will have issues for years to come.  And their allies in Cuba won’t live forever.  It’s about to get really interesting for the bombastic anti-US leaders in Latin America… and not in a good way.

A new Lutheran (un)Civil War…

Normally, I am the kind of person who lets news stories and opinions slide.  Initially, I might have a reaction, but after a few minutes, I normally calm down realizing that all opinions should be respected, even if I disagree with the opinion.  I might comment, but I try to be respectful.  I learned from great debaters, like my friends Josh Gunn and John Brown, that if I let my emotions get the better of me and let it cloud my logic, I will become vulnerable to getting schooled.  But there are some situations where my emotions and logic line up together, and those are the moments where even a Chris Bonneau type would need to look the hell out for my wrath.  It’s happening here and now, and unfortunately my wrath is pointed in the direction of the leaders of my religious denomination, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. 

It takes a rare act of stupidity these days to unite the Walkers (my parents, my sisters, and I) in anger and opposition, but apparently LC-MS President Matthew Harrison has done just that.  For those of you who have not heard, Harrison ordered Rev. Rob Morris, pastor of an LC-MS church in Newtown, CT, to apologize to the denomination for participating in a public interfaith vigil attended by President Barack Obama two days after the shooting at the elementary school which killed 26 students and faculty members.  The reason?  Harrison said Morris’ participation in the service “violated the limits set by Scripture regarding joint worship.” 

This garbage again?  Didn’t we in the LC-MS learn our lessons in the aftermath of the 9/11 tragedies in interfaith events at Yankee Stadium and at Valparaiso University?  A national tragedy occurs and the morons leading from St. Louis want to maintain purity at all costs?!?

But wait, it gets worse.  Apparently, there is a sect of the LC-MS denomination, known as The Brothers of John the Steadfast.  This group identifies themselves as confessional Lutherans — church members who stress strict adherence to the Book of Concord, the 16th-century work that defined the central doctrines of Lutheranism.  They were vocal critics of the post-9/11 services and they have shown up again in this situation.  And they were not so kind in their criticisms of Rev. Morris.  From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch: 

“One commenter said Morris’s participation in the service “does more harm to the souls of the survivors than any gunman could ever do.”

“Does anyone else agree that Pastor Morris’ action is more abominable than those committed by the gunman?” the commenter asked.

“Yes I do,” (Rev. Timothy) Rossow (a pastor from Naperville, Ill., and Steadfast’s leader) answered in a post that followed. “The gunman killed the body which lasts for 70 or 80 years. ... False teaching and practice kills the soul which lives for eternity in heaven or hell.” ”

Did I mention it is rumored that one of the of the dead in the tragedy likely was a member at Rev. Morris’ church?  For not just fellow LC-MS Lutherans to compare Rev. Morris’ acts to the acts of the gunman, but pastors… well, there’s no easy way to put this… it sounds very much like Westboro Baptist Church speak.  And I guess The Brothers of John the Steadfast don’t think too highly of women, either.

Harrison is up for re-election later this year at the National LC-MS convention.  The Last Convention produced some very controversial results, such as termination of a closer relationship with African-American congregations and the election of Harrison.  The Newtown Controversy just adds fuel to the fire that the fundamental LC-MS Lutherans (largely Midwestern congregations) will be on the defensive in the next convention from the more moderate to liberal LC-MS Lutherans (largely based along both coasts and in the South).  Could this cause a schism among LC-MS Lutherans?  Possibly.

Regardless of the outcome, I fear my sister Sheri is right.  The closer you live to St. Louis, the crazier the LC-MS leadership becomes.  I just worry about the future of the LC-MS’s younger members, many of whom will gather in San Antonio in July.  Will they be content to remain in a denomination that shuns moments of mercy to maintain doctrine purity?

As for me, I threatened last year to leave the Lutheran faith if another Seminex-like controversy flared up.  Now this situation has come up.  What will I and my house do?

Free Wi-Fi Nationwide soon? Better think twice…

Recently, the FCC, led by chairman Julius Genachowski, began to float the idea of a Nationwide Wi-Fi network.  According to the Washington Post: “The federal government wants to create super WiFi networks across the nation, so powerful and broad in reach that consumers could use them to make calls or surf the Internet without paying a cellphone bill every month.”  Naturally, the wireless industry, led by AT&T Mobile, Verizon Wireless, T-Mobile, Sprint, and others are vehemently opposed to the idea, while tech giants, such as Microsoft, Google, and others are pushing the idea.  I won’t quote the entire article, but if you would like to see the article, please click on the following link:  http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-02-03/business/36728627_1_wifi-networks-wireless-industry-wireless-networks .

It may sound like a good idea on paper, but is it feasible anytime in the near future?  Whose going to build it?  Is it really going to be free?  Can it be secure?  And what about other issues that could effect the network?

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there are a myriad of factors that could make the idea of a Super Wi-Fi network nearly impossible, at least immediately.  Consider the following complications:

(1) THERE IS NO CURRENT WI-FI STANDARD FOR THE PROPOSED FCC SUPER WI-FI BAND.  IEEE 802.11 is the standard keepers for the World’s Wi-Fi standards.  There are approved standards at 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz—not 600 MHz as the FCC is proposing.  Now, it may get approved in short order, but we are at least looking at 2 years before the proposed Super Wi-Fi Band is approved (at least).  Plus, Wi-Fi chip manufacturers will have to build to the new specs, and that could take time, up to a year (initially in dongle format, then another year to imbed inside wireless devices).  So you are looking at 3-4 years just to develop the HW to accommodate the standard.

(2) TESTING SUPER WI-FI AT THE NEW 600 MHZ BAND WILL TAKE TIME—AND MAY PROVE THE STANDARD IS NOT FEASIBLE AT SUCH A BANDWIDTH.  Exhibit A:  LightSquared.  This Wireless company proposed using the L-Band (~1.6 GHz) to develop 4G LTE services via satellite to cover the nation.  But testing exposed the potential to disrupt GPS signals used by John Deere and the Military.  Despite arguments from LightSquared that these group were the problem, not LightSquared, Congress and the FCC ultimately suspended LightSquared’s licenses to use the band indefinitely.  LightSquared has since gone bankrupt.  At 600 MHz, the Super Wi-Fi signals could interfere with Digital TV signals on the low side, and smaller Wireless carriers on the high side.  Testing will be very important for Super Wi-Fi, and they will need to get it right.  If they can’t, the network will never be approved.

(3) THE DATA RATES FOR THE NEW SUPER WI-FI WILL STRUGGLE TO MATCH 802.11n/ac SPEEDS.  IEEE 802.11n and 802.11ac are the fastest Wi-Fi standards.  It is highly unlikely that these new Super Wi-Fi data rates will get higher than 50 Mbps initially.  That’s if you’re only using 1 Wi-Fi device with Super Wi-Fi access point.  And with the potential for millions of users to use Super Wi-Fi, you’re probably looking at dozens of mobile devices accessing the same Access Point.  Congestion will be a major problem on a normal day or even a quiet Sunday.

(4) SECURITY, SECURITY, SECURITY.  Wi-Fi networks are extremely vulnerable to cyber attacks in open Wi-Fi hotspots like Starbucks and McDonalds.  Securing a Nationwide Wireless network will be critical, and also prove a challenge.  How do you keep hackers away from knocking someone’s medical device offline or cause a wireless pace maker to go haywire?  Don’t even ask about financial security.  The people responsible for securing such a network may never have a good night’s sleep for the rest of their lives.

(5) BUILDING THE NETWORK MAY TAKE DECADES—AND THE GOVERNMENT ALREADY HAS A WIRELESS NETWORK PROJECT TO DO.  How many people have heard of the first responders network?  Anyone?  First Responders Network is one of the main reasons the FCC forced TV Carriers to go Digital 4 years ago.  Police and Fire Crews need a National Public Network to coordinate in times of crisis.  With everything going to the internet, these first needed BW to support accessing Voice, Video, and Data services.  The network is now being trialed in Las Vegas and Miami by police units, but getting a national networks is at least 5 years away—and they have been talking about this idea for close to a decade.  Can the Government take on two major wireless projects without the 30+ years of experiences companies such as AT&T and Verizon has?

(6) WHO’S GOING TO BUILD THE NETWORK, …  Even if all the equipment were available today, who would put together the network.  Google?  Cisco?  Alcatel-Lucent?  Huwaei?  (Oh, please God, not Huwaei!!)  Awarding the contract to build the network will take some time.  If you split up the building nationwide, then you also have to worry about equipment interoperability.

(7) … WHO’S GOING TO MAINTAIN THE NETWORK, …  As I said, under normal conditions, normal operations will be difficult at best.  But equipment has to be replaced and upgraded regularly.  Will the ones who built the network have the ability to maintain the Super Wi-Fi equipment when the time comes under normal circumstances.

(8) … AND WHO’S GOING TO PAY FOR IT?  The $64 billion question.  Who pays for all of this?  Companies?  Maybe part of it.  Taxpayers?  You’re getting warmer.  New taxes?  Ding, ding, ding!!

(9) FINALLY, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN “UNPLANNED CHAOS EVENTS” OCCUR?  9-11, the East Coast Earthquake, and Superstorm Sandy exposed several weaknesses in the wireless companies’ networks.  9-11 and the Earthquake showed that AT&T, Verizon, and others struggled to keep with the demand of consumers frantically checking on friends and family.  Superstorm Sandy used wind and water to damage or even destroy cell towers and wireline telephone networks, leaving many in desperate need of help without any means of communication.  If such an event were to occur against a Super Wi-Fi, what kinds of challenges would the network have to overcome?

I’m sure others would come up with another set of reason why this may not work in the short term.  A nationwide Super Wi-Fi network may occur, but it won’t be for many years.  So, until then, enjoy your free Wi-Fi at Starbucks and McDonalds.  It’s the closest you’ll get to free Wi-Fi for some time to come.