After a very thought-provoking conversation with a good friend over lunch, I began to express my frustration with humanity, and why it is that humans have so many divisions. So I'm writing this particular blog to further the discussion from a previous blog (The Division of Unity-12/29), respond to a comment that was posted to a another blog (Why???-12/12), and to make sense of the hurt that has become my life in the last two months. So, if you haven't read those blogs, some of this may not make sense to you (hint, hint...go read them, then come back).
I have always considered myself to be an optimist with a realists perspective. However, what I'm about to write is going to sound more pessimistic than anything.
It really bothers me that there are social divisions. Those major divisions stemming from race, language and religion. With them, people who would be perfectly fine friends often never realize what the humanity of friendship has to offer. Without these divisions, our lives seem to lack direction and meaning. So, it is a sad state that we ALL exist in because, in my best estimation, we are all bound to lead lives that we might not if it weren't for these social constructs. Indeed, we are all bound to lead lives that aren't fully satisfying to us, but that we must lead in order to fulfill the requirements of these constructs as they relate to the people/environment around us.
I know that's a very hard thing to explain (trust me, I can explain it easier in person), and if you do understand what I mean, it's probably hard to accept as the reality, but trust me, it's the truth. No single person does what they do because it totally makes them happy; they do what they do (at least in part) because of the influence of these three factors around them.
Let me give a couple of examples to explain my point.
I know these two people that were heavily involved with each other romantically. From an outside perspective, it was clear that they were in love, and I knew enough about them to know that they had discussed marriage and why it would or would not work out. They were from different races and different religions, though they shared a language commonality. To him, religion was most important with family running a tight second, and it was vice-versa for her. In fact, for her, it was more like:
1a. Family
1b. Religion
so if 1a was satisfied, then 1b was also satisfied. To work up from 1b to 1a would be possible, but hard.
Well, I happened to know them very well, and when it came down to it, I know they agreed that they couldn't get married because of their strong allegiances to family/religion. The problem with this reality was, despite their strong convictions, they were still heavily in love. She ended up caving to the pressure of the family, and broke it off while they were still in love in order to fulfill the requirements of her family (which is representative of race, culture, and religion in this instance), despite the happiness that she felt from the loving relationship she was in. She then moved into a relationship with a guy that was more acceptable by her surroundings, and my friend (the guy) was more-or-less forced to move on without her.
Being both of their friend, I wanted to ask them why? But, I already knew why, and it was already clear. Their thinking was indicative of my thinking. There's so much to risk if you truly seek what you want out of life (family, finances, friends, success...), and seemingly so much to maintain by not going against the grain (it's just easier to keep your family, friends, and community happy). So, both party's were eventually going to have to reject the notion of personal/mutual happiness in order to appease, or make the world that they exist in happy. It just so happened that she was more willing to make that transition than he was at that time.
Now certainly there is happiness in keeping your world smooth, and making the people around you happy. But what about your personal needs, wishes and desires? Are they truly being met if you can't indulge in the humanity of romantic love because of the social constructs that exist around you? Are we bound to live a life of "pseudo-happiness?"
The other example that I'd give is in relation to the tragic Tsunami's that hit much of Asia and part of Africa this week. At this point, the death toll is over 120,000. People directly affected are from 2 continents and over 40 countries. Among the dead are Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Christians, Sikhs, and I'm sure many other religions. Their are Blacks, Whites, Indians, Indonesians, Kenyans, Sri Lankans, Sumatrans, Germans, Swedish, and tons of other races and nationalities of people among the dead. And finally, they spoke a myriad of languages (Arabic, Hindi, English, German, French, just to name a few).
And you know what, the only thing that matters now is that the survivors need as much help and aid as they can get, no matter their Religion, Race, Family, Culture or Language!
So if these classifications don't matter now because of the immensity of the tragedy, why do we ever allow them to keep us from relating to one another on levels that would truly make each individual happy? Why did my friends allow these things to keep them from getting married like they really wanted to? Why do we allow these surrounding factors to dictate how we ultimately live and end up?
So maybe what I'm about to say is the farthest thing from realistic as is possible, but it is what's on my mind. And I recognize that my strong religious background might disagree with this (because religion should define who we are and how we live, and you work outward from there, I've been taught), but it would seem to me that God would want our first priority to be the relationship between one human being to another, not how two humans interact based on divisive tools. And if that human to human interaction is compassion for those in need, or intimate love from a man to a woman (and vice-versa) , then that should trump everything else.
Because we aren't all Sikhs, Muslims or Jews; we don't all speak Spanish, Chinese or Yoruba; and we aren't all Black, White, or Brown. The one thing that we all are, though, is human.
Why doesn't that seem to be important?
-Maelstrom
Friday, December 31, 2004
Thursday, December 30, 2004
Happy Christma-Kwanz-Eid-Hanu
The last 60 days of the 365 day year is packed with various holidays and religious observances. There's the Christian holiday Christmas, which celebrates the birth of Jesus; the Jewish holiday Hanukah, which celebrates the Jews independence from the Greeks; and the Islamic holiday Eid, which celebrates the ending of the Holy Month of Ramadan.
And those are just a few religious holidays.
There's also the Indian (and I believe mostly Hindu) light celebration, Diwali; the African-American celebration of unity, Kwanzaa; and my favorite, Thanksgiving (my favorite because it is something that everyone can and should participate in; we all have something to be thankful for). To be sure, this is just a short list of the many holidays, celebrations and observances that occur towards the end of the year.
Since this nation is one made up of immigrants, it only seems right that we respect the multitude of cultural and religious observances. But to be completely honest, until recently, we haven't really tried to. We have only truly observed Christian holidays as a nation; arguably the biggest national holiday of the year is indeed Christmas.
During this so-called "Holiday Season," I found it particularly interesting how Politically Correct this nation has become. I suppose this is a good thing since every race, religion and nationality is represented here in this nation, and I guess (after 200+ years of existence) people are starting to recognize it. I also found it funny how people, mostly the powerful "Christian right" from the Presidential Election, were upset that major stores, like Macy's, now say "Season's Greetings" or "Happy Holidays," in lieu of "Merry Christmas" because it is more inclusive.
Well, look, Macy's is right. You can't claim "melting pot" status as a country if you don't recognize the fact that not everyone here celebrates Christmas.
It has long been my opinion that truly realizing our Constitution is a realistic impossibility. There is no way that you can truly claim to respect everyone's right to the freedom of religion when there are Government holidays based on the Christian religion (like Christmas), or when our money says "In God We Trust" on it when clearly not everyone believes in God. Even if everyone believed in "God," in which God do we trust; and for that matter, why not "In Gods We Trust?" It just can't work.
Consider, there is no official language here, but until recently, everything was done in English (I was shocked to see a section of cards written in Spanish the other day while at a card shop). So why not just make English the official language of the nation, or offer everything in multiple major languages. There is no official religion here, but the only religion that has government holidays ascribed to it is Christianity. So why not make Christianity the official religion of the country, or make national holidays out of other religion's observances.
So to truly avert this problem, and truly fulfill the promises outlined in the Constitution, we need to either become a theocratic government like Saudia Arabia (where it would be perfectly correct to make religious observances, like Christmas, national holidays), or to demand religious transparency like France (where no one can wear any religion defining garment in school).
It's a very complex problem, and as I've stated, unless there are extreme measures taken, there are going to be upset people on both sides of the board. But honestly, if we want to be as inclusive as possible, the Christian right should recognize the reality of this nation, which has no official religion, and respect the fact that there are plenty of other religions represented in the great nation.
So as we approach the end of Kwanzaa, and approach the New Year, I'd just like to say, Happy Holidays to everybody!
-Maelstrom
And those are just a few religious holidays.
There's also the Indian (and I believe mostly Hindu) light celebration, Diwali; the African-American celebration of unity, Kwanzaa; and my favorite, Thanksgiving (my favorite because it is something that everyone can and should participate in; we all have something to be thankful for). To be sure, this is just a short list of the many holidays, celebrations and observances that occur towards the end of the year.
Since this nation is one made up of immigrants, it only seems right that we respect the multitude of cultural and religious observances. But to be completely honest, until recently, we haven't really tried to. We have only truly observed Christian holidays as a nation; arguably the biggest national holiday of the year is indeed Christmas.
During this so-called "Holiday Season," I found it particularly interesting how Politically Correct this nation has become. I suppose this is a good thing since every race, religion and nationality is represented here in this nation, and I guess (after 200+ years of existence) people are starting to recognize it. I also found it funny how people, mostly the powerful "Christian right" from the Presidential Election, were upset that major stores, like Macy's, now say "Season's Greetings" or "Happy Holidays," in lieu of "Merry Christmas" because it is more inclusive.
Well, look, Macy's is right. You can't claim "melting pot" status as a country if you don't recognize the fact that not everyone here celebrates Christmas.
It has long been my opinion that truly realizing our Constitution is a realistic impossibility. There is no way that you can truly claim to respect everyone's right to the freedom of religion when there are Government holidays based on the Christian religion (like Christmas), or when our money says "In God We Trust" on it when clearly not everyone believes in God. Even if everyone believed in "God," in which God do we trust; and for that matter, why not "In Gods We Trust?" It just can't work.
Consider, there is no official language here, but until recently, everything was done in English (I was shocked to see a section of cards written in Spanish the other day while at a card shop). So why not just make English the official language of the nation, or offer everything in multiple major languages. There is no official religion here, but the only religion that has government holidays ascribed to it is Christianity. So why not make Christianity the official religion of the country, or make national holidays out of other religion's observances.
So to truly avert this problem, and truly fulfill the promises outlined in the Constitution, we need to either become a theocratic government like Saudia Arabia (where it would be perfectly correct to make religious observances, like Christmas, national holidays), or to demand religious transparency like France (where no one can wear any religion defining garment in school).
It's a very complex problem, and as I've stated, unless there are extreme measures taken, there are going to be upset people on both sides of the board. But honestly, if we want to be as inclusive as possible, the Christian right should recognize the reality of this nation, which has no official religion, and respect the fact that there are plenty of other religions represented in the great nation.
So as we approach the end of Kwanzaa, and approach the New Year, I'd just like to say, Happy Holidays to everybody!
-Maelstrom
Wednesday, December 29, 2004
The Division of Unity
I've come to accept the fact that there are 3 factors that dictate relationships between people who both know each other, and are perfect strangers. Religion, Language and Race.
Religion can unite people from completely different corners of the world, but can divide people who have been friends all of their lives.
Language, much like religion, often unites people who have never met each other before. For people that speak different languages, it can provide a hurdle that is manageable, but that exists none-the-less.
Race certainly divides people, and does not necessarily connect or unite people.
Now if you paused for about two minutes and sixteen seconds, and considered who your closest friends are, I bet you'd discover that they probably qualify in two of the three categories I've mentioned, if not all three. I guess that makes sense, but, I would just hope that we, as human beings, wouldn't limit ourselves to associating with people who are just like us.
I don't know why it is that people sometimes think that racial commonality should make for some significant social connection. For instance, I've often heard black people say that black people should marry each other because they'll relate easier. I don't think that statement could be any farther from the truth. Some black people are extremely well aware of the struggle that their predecessors went through while others simply are not.
I'd argue that what "hood you grow up in" and the similarities that exists there are better indicators of social connection than race. Depending on the neighborhood, two black people in the same city can have diametrically opposed cultural views which wouldn't be condusive to a good relationship at all. At the same time, a black person and a white person that grew up in the same neighborhood could socially (and culturally) relate in multitudes of ways.
Language is an amazing device. It can be so incredibly uniting. I've seen whole friendships blossom out of scenarios where one person discovers that another person speaks their native language, no matter their races. I've also noted that languages often come with a religion, which might explain why language similarity makes for such a significant relationship (Spanish is often related to Catholocism and Arabic is often associated with Islam, for example).
When traveling to a foreign country, it is like a sign of respect to know the language of that country if you aren't a native speaker. People even appreciate your effort if you sincerely try to speak the language of that country, no matter how bad you are at it. On that note, it is often perceived as arrogant or rude when you don't try to speak the language of the country you find yourself in. Finally, although people who don't speak the same language struggle to verbally communicate, that barrier can be overcome through actions. I actually know of people who are married that don't speak the same language, but express love to each other through their actions.
It would seem to me that religion would be the one thing that wouldn't divide, but unite people. Unfortunately, religion seems to be the most divisive of these three levels of social communication. If I can simplify religion (which I can cuz this is my blog), the goal of it is to separate right from wrong. And though it would seem like the knowledge of the difference between the two is humanly inherent, it isn't. Religion dictates what's right and what is wrong. Since there are hundreds of religions out there, each teaching different rights and wrongs, unless two people agree on the same religion, then a wall as tall as Mount Everest often exists between them. Very few people can scale that mountain successfully. And it has been my observation that if you can overcome the religious hurdle, then the language and especially the racial differences are no big thang to swallow.
Unfortunately, religion is often engrained in us from childhood, and the notion of only one right religion (and all others are wrong) is unbelievably hard to shake. As a result, I have witnessed numerous people in love that were never able to fully explore all that their love for one another had to offer (through marriage or similar arrangements) because of religious incongruence alone. Religious solitude is often reinforced by family, further making it a point of significant contention; because who wants to disagree with their family?
If this world were mine, all of these barriers would crumble like cake mix without egg and oil. For some reason, however, these factors significantly define who we are, both to our friends, and to people who don't know us at all. We prejudge people based on what we can decipher about these factors. And as open minded as I think I am, even I'm guilty of harboring certain opinions pertaining to race, language and religion. I guess it is because they are indeed important. I just wish that this human family could truly come together as one unit, and not allow these social/cultural characteristics to further divide us.
-Maelstrom
Religion can unite people from completely different corners of the world, but can divide people who have been friends all of their lives.
Language, much like religion, often unites people who have never met each other before. For people that speak different languages, it can provide a hurdle that is manageable, but that exists none-the-less.
Race certainly divides people, and does not necessarily connect or unite people.
Now if you paused for about two minutes and sixteen seconds, and considered who your closest friends are, I bet you'd discover that they probably qualify in two of the three categories I've mentioned, if not all three. I guess that makes sense, but, I would just hope that we, as human beings, wouldn't limit ourselves to associating with people who are just like us.
I don't know why it is that people sometimes think that racial commonality should make for some significant social connection. For instance, I've often heard black people say that black people should marry each other because they'll relate easier. I don't think that statement could be any farther from the truth. Some black people are extremely well aware of the struggle that their predecessors went through while others simply are not.
I'd argue that what "hood you grow up in" and the similarities that exists there are better indicators of social connection than race. Depending on the neighborhood, two black people in the same city can have diametrically opposed cultural views which wouldn't be condusive to a good relationship at all. At the same time, a black person and a white person that grew up in the same neighborhood could socially (and culturally) relate in multitudes of ways.
Language is an amazing device. It can be so incredibly uniting. I've seen whole friendships blossom out of scenarios where one person discovers that another person speaks their native language, no matter their races. I've also noted that languages often come with a religion, which might explain why language similarity makes for such a significant relationship (Spanish is often related to Catholocism and Arabic is often associated with Islam, for example).
When traveling to a foreign country, it is like a sign of respect to know the language of that country if you aren't a native speaker. People even appreciate your effort if you sincerely try to speak the language of that country, no matter how bad you are at it. On that note, it is often perceived as arrogant or rude when you don't try to speak the language of the country you find yourself in. Finally, although people who don't speak the same language struggle to verbally communicate, that barrier can be overcome through actions. I actually know of people who are married that don't speak the same language, but express love to each other through their actions.
It would seem to me that religion would be the one thing that wouldn't divide, but unite people. Unfortunately, religion seems to be the most divisive of these three levels of social communication. If I can simplify religion (which I can cuz this is my blog), the goal of it is to separate right from wrong. And though it would seem like the knowledge of the difference between the two is humanly inherent, it isn't. Religion dictates what's right and what is wrong. Since there are hundreds of religions out there, each teaching different rights and wrongs, unless two people agree on the same religion, then a wall as tall as Mount Everest often exists between them. Very few people can scale that mountain successfully. And it has been my observation that if you can overcome the religious hurdle, then the language and especially the racial differences are no big thang to swallow.
Unfortunately, religion is often engrained in us from childhood, and the notion of only one right religion (and all others are wrong) is unbelievably hard to shake. As a result, I have witnessed numerous people in love that were never able to fully explore all that their love for one another had to offer (through marriage or similar arrangements) because of religious incongruence alone. Religious solitude is often reinforced by family, further making it a point of significant contention; because who wants to disagree with their family?
If this world were mine, all of these barriers would crumble like cake mix without egg and oil. For some reason, however, these factors significantly define who we are, both to our friends, and to people who don't know us at all. We prejudge people based on what we can decipher about these factors. And as open minded as I think I am, even I'm guilty of harboring certain opinions pertaining to race, language and religion. I guess it is because they are indeed important. I just wish that this human family could truly come together as one unit, and not allow these social/cultural characteristics to further divide us.
-Maelstrom
Tuesday, December 28, 2004
Make Wise Decisions When You Can
When I woke up Sunday morning, I heard on NPR (yes I listen to NPR, can't help it, I'm a news junkie) that an earthquake, with a magnitude of 8.9 on the Richter scale, had claimed 1,700 lives. Eight hours later the toll was up to 7,000, and now reports say that as many as 44,000 were killed by the Tsunami's that were created by the Earthquake, with the toll steady climbing.
Needless to say, I was incredibly saddened to hear of such a tragedy. I cannot begin to fathom such devastation. Furthermore, I was sickened to hear that most of the lost lives could've been saved had there been some warning device in existence. Although the waves which claimed so many lives were traveling at an astonishing 500 miles per hour, it has been reported that there were at least 2 hours between the time they formed and when they reached land. Even a 5 minute warning could've saved thousands of lives.
So, in times like these, it only amplifies a personal cadence of mine that I truly try to live by. "Make the wisest decisions possible when you can, because there are so many things that can happen to you that you will never be able to foresee." My personal cadence isn't unlike the adage "Failing to plan is planning to fail." And is reminiscent of the childhood fable of the Ant and the Grasshopper.
It is the reality of today's tragedy that brings that cadence to mind because I do not feel that United States of America has acted very wisely in the last 3 years (at least). Today, there are tens of thousands dead, millions homeless, and nations needing billions of dollars in aid. Unfortunately, because we chose to foolishly pre-empt a war with a nation that posed no threat to us, we cannot offer the kind of assistance to those ravaged countries that we should be offering them in this time of need.
We've allocated well over $120 Billion to the War in Iraq, but this morning, I heard that we only donated $4 million dollars to the Red Cross to aid the countries that were affected by the tsunami's. Our total aid package for tsunami victims is up to an underwhelming $35 million.
How sad?
I heard Colin Powell say that the US isn't "stingy," in response to criticism from one of the head aid enumerators who thought the US could do more. He's right, we're not stingy, we're just foolish. We are so far in debt ourselves that it wouldn't make sense for us to offer much more aid. Honestly, you would expect more from the richest nation in the world, but financial mismanagement has been a staple of our current administration, and so we can't feasibly do nearly as much as we should.
I'm not going to spend the time to explain the depths of our financial crisis as a country in this particular blog (you know, the whole plunging "$" value and the very significant trade and budget deficits). But I will just make the point that our $120 Billion spent on Iraq would have been much better spent on people who need it (like those suffering in the Indian Ocean today) as opposed to spending it by killing over 30,000 Iraqi's who posed us no harm.
And the significance is that we chose to waste money in Iraq. Now, we wish and need to be helping out, but we can't because this event was something that we couldn't predict. That is why it is imperative that we, as a nation, make wiser decisions while we can, because there will always be situations that warrant attention that we can't predict.
May God bless and watch over those affected by this tragedy.
-Maelstrom
Needless to say, I was incredibly saddened to hear of such a tragedy. I cannot begin to fathom such devastation. Furthermore, I was sickened to hear that most of the lost lives could've been saved had there been some warning device in existence. Although the waves which claimed so many lives were traveling at an astonishing 500 miles per hour, it has been reported that there were at least 2 hours between the time they formed and when they reached land. Even a 5 minute warning could've saved thousands of lives.
So, in times like these, it only amplifies a personal cadence of mine that I truly try to live by. "Make the wisest decisions possible when you can, because there are so many things that can happen to you that you will never be able to foresee." My personal cadence isn't unlike the adage "Failing to plan is planning to fail." And is reminiscent of the childhood fable of the Ant and the Grasshopper.
It is the reality of today's tragedy that brings that cadence to mind because I do not feel that United States of America has acted very wisely in the last 3 years (at least). Today, there are tens of thousands dead, millions homeless, and nations needing billions of dollars in aid. Unfortunately, because we chose to foolishly pre-empt a war with a nation that posed no threat to us, we cannot offer the kind of assistance to those ravaged countries that we should be offering them in this time of need.
We've allocated well over $120 Billion to the War in Iraq, but this morning, I heard that we only donated $4 million dollars to the Red Cross to aid the countries that were affected by the tsunami's. Our total aid package for tsunami victims is up to an underwhelming $35 million.
How sad?
I heard Colin Powell say that the US isn't "stingy," in response to criticism from one of the head aid enumerators who thought the US could do more. He's right, we're not stingy, we're just foolish. We are so far in debt ourselves that it wouldn't make sense for us to offer much more aid. Honestly, you would expect more from the richest nation in the world, but financial mismanagement has been a staple of our current administration, and so we can't feasibly do nearly as much as we should.
I'm not going to spend the time to explain the depths of our financial crisis as a country in this particular blog (you know, the whole plunging "$" value and the very significant trade and budget deficits). But I will just make the point that our $120 Billion spent on Iraq would have been much better spent on people who need it (like those suffering in the Indian Ocean today) as opposed to spending it by killing over 30,000 Iraqi's who posed us no harm.
And the significance is that we chose to waste money in Iraq. Now, we wish and need to be helping out, but we can't because this event was something that we couldn't predict. That is why it is imperative that we, as a nation, make wiser decisions while we can, because there will always be situations that warrant attention that we can't predict.
May God bless and watch over those affected by this tragedy.
-Maelstrom
Thursday, December 16, 2004
Fall From Grace
Almost 18 months ago, I wrote my first published editorial at my undergraduate University. In that editorial, I discussed the proliferation of young boys and girls turning into professional athletes without getting a college education. During the article, I remember praising a young man for his squeaky clean image and for how he had conducted himself underneath such a heavy public microscope. Boy how things have changed.
The very same week that my editorial was published, Kobe Bryant was being accused of sexual assault in the 1st degree. I remember thinking how ironic it was that I had just got through applauding Kobe, "then this happens."
Though not a Lakers fan at all (I've hated them vehemently since the mid-80's as I am a die-hard Pistons fan), I was always impressed at how Kobe had an apparent desire to do things his way, but to do them the right way.
He went to the NBA fresh out of high school because he felt he could play at that level and handle himself as an adult. Three NBA championships later, he had proven that he could.
When it came to love, he married a young lady despite the disapproval of his family and even refused to sign a pre-nuptial agreement. Why? Because he never intended to get divorced and because he had to live with his feelings, not his parents or family. Both very tough decisions to arrive at, but indeed commendable.
When it came to his personal life, he pretty much stayed out of the public eye. It is significant that he never brandished a criminal record, which is increasingly becoming a commonality among many of today's athletes, both young and old.
Finally, he had a work ethic in the NBA off-season that many of today's players don't have at all, despite their many endorsements. Each year he came back in better physical shape, and with stronger skills on the court than the previous season.
Stand-up guy!... And then we got to know him.
I remember, in the early days after the allegations came out, how most of the news media was reluctant to publicly "convict" Kobe. I was actually quite happy about this because it said to me that reputation does mean something. His clean background actually came up to bat for him. Had it been Allen Iverson, who has had numerous run-ins with the law, I doubt the media would've been so immediately forgiving.
Well, it turned out that Kobe had cheated on the wife, that he loved so much, with a random hotel desk clerk. To police officers, he admitted to cheating on his wife with at least one other woman previously. Despite the fact that he claimed he didn't rape the woman, his image was already tarnished.
The media still handled Kobe delicately, and it became quite the spectacle to see him in court in the morning handling the allegations, and then on the court at night winning games for the Lakers.
The criminal case was thrown out when the young lady decided not to go further with it. And though there is still a civil case pending, most people seem to have forgotten about Kobe's "sex scandal." The buzz turned again to Kobe's relationship with his team, the Los Angeles Lakers.
Annually, Kobe seemed to be at odds with his teammate Shaquille O'Neal. Miraculously, probably due to the coaching of Phil Jackson, the Lakers seemed to overcome this childish squabble and pull together for another championship. So it seemed was their destiny for the 2003-04 season.
Well, on June 15th, 2004, the Detroit Pistons put a halt to the Lakers championship train in a shocking "5-game sweep." Shortly thereafter, the conductor of that train, Phil Jackson, bailed out, eventually taking Shaquille O'Neal with him. Both cited Kobe as the reason for their departure.
Now Kobe apparently has beef with Karl Malone, the man who had defended him throughout the course of his personal struggles. He claims that "the mailman" delivered a very rude gesture to his wife, Vanessa Bryant. Somehow the whole matter got into the public, and now Kobe is a worse looking sports figure than even Barry Bonds, who has come under much fire over steroid use.
Last night I saw Kobe do the most noble thing he could possibly do in the midst of the many mistakes he's made. He made the rounds on a number of sports shows, answered numerous tough questions, and made it publicly known that he wanted to clear the air with his former teammate Shaquille O'Neal.
Despite that, Kobe still has many miles to travel down the road of reconciliation before the public can once again respect him. Hopefully he can follow in the footsteps of football great Jim Brown, boxing legend Muhammad Ali and even Michael Jordan; each of whom have had their significantly negative moments in the public eye (for domestic violence, infidelity and gambling, respectively).
It's still funny for me to think about how respected Kobe was just two short years ago, and to look at him now. I do hope that he can get back on track, and that he can straighten out both his personal life, and the image that he portrays to the public. As of last night, I believe he started out with big steps on the road to redemption, I just hope he continues until he passes through the desert of public forgiveness.
-Maelstrom
The very same week that my editorial was published, Kobe Bryant was being accused of sexual assault in the 1st degree. I remember thinking how ironic it was that I had just got through applauding Kobe, "then this happens."
Though not a Lakers fan at all (I've hated them vehemently since the mid-80's as I am a die-hard Pistons fan), I was always impressed at how Kobe had an apparent desire to do things his way, but to do them the right way.
He went to the NBA fresh out of high school because he felt he could play at that level and handle himself as an adult. Three NBA championships later, he had proven that he could.
When it came to love, he married a young lady despite the disapproval of his family and even refused to sign a pre-nuptial agreement. Why? Because he never intended to get divorced and because he had to live with his feelings, not his parents or family. Both very tough decisions to arrive at, but indeed commendable.
When it came to his personal life, he pretty much stayed out of the public eye. It is significant that he never brandished a criminal record, which is increasingly becoming a commonality among many of today's athletes, both young and old.
Finally, he had a work ethic in the NBA off-season that many of today's players don't have at all, despite their many endorsements. Each year he came back in better physical shape, and with stronger skills on the court than the previous season.
Stand-up guy!... And then we got to know him.
I remember, in the early days after the allegations came out, how most of the news media was reluctant to publicly "convict" Kobe. I was actually quite happy about this because it said to me that reputation does mean something. His clean background actually came up to bat for him. Had it been Allen Iverson, who has had numerous run-ins with the law, I doubt the media would've been so immediately forgiving.
Well, it turned out that Kobe had cheated on the wife, that he loved so much, with a random hotel desk clerk. To police officers, he admitted to cheating on his wife with at least one other woman previously. Despite the fact that he claimed he didn't rape the woman, his image was already tarnished.
The media still handled Kobe delicately, and it became quite the spectacle to see him in court in the morning handling the allegations, and then on the court at night winning games for the Lakers.
The criminal case was thrown out when the young lady decided not to go further with it. And though there is still a civil case pending, most people seem to have forgotten about Kobe's "sex scandal." The buzz turned again to Kobe's relationship with his team, the Los Angeles Lakers.
Annually, Kobe seemed to be at odds with his teammate Shaquille O'Neal. Miraculously, probably due to the coaching of Phil Jackson, the Lakers seemed to overcome this childish squabble and pull together for another championship. So it seemed was their destiny for the 2003-04 season.
Well, on June 15th, 2004, the Detroit Pistons put a halt to the Lakers championship train in a shocking "5-game sweep." Shortly thereafter, the conductor of that train, Phil Jackson, bailed out, eventually taking Shaquille O'Neal with him. Both cited Kobe as the reason for their departure.
Now Kobe apparently has beef with Karl Malone, the man who had defended him throughout the course of his personal struggles. He claims that "the mailman" delivered a very rude gesture to his wife, Vanessa Bryant. Somehow the whole matter got into the public, and now Kobe is a worse looking sports figure than even Barry Bonds, who has come under much fire over steroid use.
Last night I saw Kobe do the most noble thing he could possibly do in the midst of the many mistakes he's made. He made the rounds on a number of sports shows, answered numerous tough questions, and made it publicly known that he wanted to clear the air with his former teammate Shaquille O'Neal.
Despite that, Kobe still has many miles to travel down the road of reconciliation before the public can once again respect him. Hopefully he can follow in the footsteps of football great Jim Brown, boxing legend Muhammad Ali and even Michael Jordan; each of whom have had their significantly negative moments in the public eye (for domestic violence, infidelity and gambling, respectively).
It's still funny for me to think about how respected Kobe was just two short years ago, and to look at him now. I do hope that he can get back on track, and that he can straighten out both his personal life, and the image that he portrays to the public. As of last night, I believe he started out with big steps on the road to redemption, I just hope he continues until he passes through the desert of public forgiveness.
-Maelstrom
Sunday, December 12, 2004
Why???
Seriously, why is it that whenever you try to do the right thing, it seems like everything around you goes wrong?
-a very frustrated and emotionally distressed Maelstrom
-a very frustrated and emotionally distressed Maelstrom
Thursday, December 09, 2004
The Heisman Chase
At 8pm Saturday evening, the winner of the most coveted award in all of College Football will be announced. Winning the Heisman Trophy is not only historical, but it is the key to a guaranteed huge contract and shot in the pros. The five finalists for the award were given out last night, and they are:
-From USC, Quarterback Matt Leinart and all-around back Reggie Bush.
-From Utah Quarterback Alex Smith.
-From Oklahoma, Quarterback Jason White and Freshman Running Back sensation Adrian Peterson.
Now there has been a lot of hoopla made about Mr. Peterson. His remarkable season has been eye-opening if for no other reason than the fact that he is a freshman doing what only upper-classmen tend to do at his position. Despite his incredible run, it has been consistently noted that no freshman has ever won the Heisman. As a result, many sports analysts and critics have been 'O-pining' to get Peterson heavy consideration despite his freshman status.
Well call me biased but I tend to disagree with the chorale of people calling for Peterson to win the trophy. I do so objectively because I know of at least one other freshman running back that should also be considered if Peterson is to win. That running back being true freshman Michael Hart from the Wolverines at the University of Michigan.
So, if you’re reading this and you disagree, you probably think that I’m biased because Michigan is my favorite team (it is) or that I went to U of M (I did), or that I haven’t followed Peterson (I have) or that I’m just plain crazy (trust me, I’m not). So let me run the comparisons.
Rushing:
Michael Hart is a true freshman that barely played in the 1st 2 games of the Wolverines season because U of M hadn’t decided on a starting tailback yet. He was 1 of 4 tailbacks competing for the spot, including senior tailback David Underwood. He averaged 4.6 yards on 8 carries. If you count those games he averaged 5.3 yds/carry and 124.7 yds/game. If you take those games out, he averaged 5.4 yds/carry and 151 yds/game. He also had a stretch of 3 consecutive games where he went for over 200 yards.
Adrian Peterson is a true freshman that started all 12 games of Oklahoma’s season. He racked up 1, 843 yards averaging 5.9 yds/carry. He also came up big in close games and in the big games. He also had three games where he rolled for over 200 yards.
Advantage: Peterson
Receiving:
What makes a good running back that much better is his ability to receive as well as run. Hart, averaged 21.2 yards/game receiving with an average of 9.3 yards/reception
Not much can be said for Peterson here who only caught 3 balls for 6 total receiving yards in 12 games.
Advantage: Hart
Scoring:
Hart had 9 rushing TD’s as well as 1 receiving for a total of 10 in 9 full games played.
Peterson scored 15 rushing TD’s in 12 games.
Advantage: Draw on the basis that had Hart played 3 more full games like Peterson, statistically they would’ve both averaged just over 1 TD a game.
Surrounding Personnel:
The Wolverine’s had quite a group of Wide Receiver’s to keep the defense busy. However, Hart was being handed the ball from a True Freshman Quarterback, Chad Henne, which made both major backfield positions targets for opposing defenses.
Peterson who had a core of WR’s to take the defensive pressure off of him as well, was being handed the ball from last year’s Heisman winner Jason White at QB. This took more pressure off of Peterson and allowed him to focus solely on running the ball.
Advantage: Hart because he did more with less with respect to supporting cast experience.
Conference:
The Big Ten conference is historically known as a “run, run, pass” conference, so the defenses are primarily designed to stop the run and then the pass. That means that Hart had to run against "stop the run" defenses.
The Big 12 conference is more of a spread offense conference which means that they are more likely to throw than to run. This is a huge advantage for running backs in that conference since the defenses are centered around stopping the pass.
Advantage: Hart because he was highly successful at tailback in a "run" conference.
When you add up Hart’s total offense, his numbers look much better when compared to Peterson’s. And don’t forget that Peterson played 12 full games whereas Hart only played 9 full games. When you consider that factor, Hart’s all-purpose yardage of 1,605 could’ve easily been over 2,000 had he been the starting running back beginning in game 1 of the season. That in comparison to Petersons 1,849 yards in a full season.
And no doubt Peterson’s total yards on the ground look impressive, but it’s much easier for him to focus on rushing when he has last year’s Heisman winner throwing to veteran Wide Receiver’s. He never has to consider receiving.
I am not trying to take away anything from Adrian Peterson, he has had a phenomenol season. However, I am trying to squash this notion that he deserves to win the Heisman and that his Freshman status should be overlooked. My point is that he arguably isn’t even the best freshman running back in the nation. And you can’t give the award for best College Player in the Nation to a guy who isn’t even the clear number one player at his position.
Unfortunately, the Heisman trophy has never been about rewarding the best player in College football. It has rather been about rewarding the best offensive player (quarterback, running back or sometimes wide receiver) in College football on a winning team according to Sportswriters and Sports commentators. So the media has done a great job of making a sympathy argument for Peterson by saying that “it’s not fair if the voters don’t vote for Peterson just because he is a freshman.” By repeating this chant every seven minutes for the last month and a half, I’m sure that many of the voters will give in without looking at all of the data.
Maybe they’ll feel some sense of accomplishment for breaking the tradition of not awarding the trophy to a freshman. Maybe they’ve just been duped by the media’s whining. Or maybe they’ll just be wrong. But I’m begging them, vote for Matt Leinart, Reggie Bush, Jason White, Bob Dole, Ross Perot, me; just don’t vote for Adrian Peterson, he doesn’t deserve it!
-Maelstrom
Wednesday, December 08, 2004
United States, Mind Your Own Business
Of all the countries in the world to demand the United Nations' Secretary General, Kofi Annan, to step down, the United States of America should be the last. We have ignored the UN on many fronts, and have heavily criticized it for some of its inactivity in crisis situations when the inactivity has often been largely due to the lack of US participation. If the United Nations is not as strong as we think it should be, there is one country that we should point our finger at as the cause: The United States of America.
The recent criticism from the US toward the UN stems from the UN's "Oil for Food" program. The program, now referred to as a scandal, is purported to have directly benefitted many world tyrants including Saddam Hussein. One notable figure involved in the scandal is the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's son, Kojo Annan. It is on the grounds that Kofi's son is involved in the "mess" that some US Senators are calling for Kofi's resignation. This revelation further frustrated many US politicians who were already calling for Kofi's resignation after he made comments a few weeks ago that suggested that the US violated International Law by invading Iraq.
Although I must admit that Annan seems to be less helpful than he could be in such hectic times, I know that he isn't as incompetent as the US media would like the public to believe. He is a well respected man worldwide, and has an incredibly impressive resume. And, it's worth noting that the United States is the only member of the UN that is calling for his resignation.
Among his many accolades and accomplishments, there are probably two that stick out the most. He is the first United Nations Secretary General to be elected to a 2nd term, unanimously I might add. Typically that position last just one term, and the next representative is from the next Continent in the 6-Continent rotation. Despite protocal, the UN representatives thought enough of Kofi Annan to re-elect him.
In 2001, the Nobel committee honored Kofi Annan with the Nobel Peace Prize. He was given the award, jointly with the UN as an organization, for his efforts towards peace throughout the world. The committee even noted that Annan had added "new life" to the UN.
For some reason, I don't find such realities as grounds for demanding a resignation. And the notion that Kofi Annan should step down because of his son's doings is preposterous. His son is a separate entity and being. It's not like his father told him to commit crimes, and while you're at it give me a 30% cut!
But fine. Let's say that Kofi Annan is corrupt and should step down from his post as UN Secretary General. If that's so, let people who actually care about the well-being of the organization say so; not the country that failed to comply with UN rules on war by pre-empting a war without a UN resolution and who's lack of concern is a major reason that the oil-for-food program turned so corrupt in the first place.
It's not uncommon to hear political critics of the UN (as well as many right-wing citizens) call the UN a weak organization, and say that it doesn't do anything beneficial for the world. That we don't have to wait and listen for what the UN says or thinks, but that we (the US) can do what we want to do, when and how we want to do it.
I also find it interesting that these same critics often explain away US President George W. Bush's many Presidential failures by saying that he was President during really tough times and so couldn't focus his attention on many of the social and economic issues that face us in this country. If that's the case, just imagine what Kofi Annan has to deal with. Everything that was tough for GWB (9/11) was also an issue for Annan, on top of a profusion of other tragic issues throughout the world. So why doesn't Annan get the same pass for some of his oversights, like the Oil-for-food program, that Bush gets?
So my point is this, if the UN is so insignificant and so weak, then why do we care who's in charge of it. Furthermore, if Annan and the organization are so incompetent, why don't we truly participate in the group and build it up from the inside out instead of openly beating it down with harsh words of reprimand from the sidelines.
And finally, since we are the only major country that is so critical of the UN, and the only country calling for Annan's resignation, why don't we just shut up. It's my understanding that unless you're on the team, you can't call the shots. With respect to the UN, we definitely aren't on the team, and therefore don't have the right to call the shots.
So why don't we just take care of us, continue to ignore the UN, pre-empt war somewhere else, and frankly, just mind our own business!
-Maelstrom
The recent criticism from the US toward the UN stems from the UN's "Oil for Food" program. The program, now referred to as a scandal, is purported to have directly benefitted many world tyrants including Saddam Hussein. One notable figure involved in the scandal is the UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's son, Kojo Annan. It is on the grounds that Kofi's son is involved in the "mess" that some US Senators are calling for Kofi's resignation. This revelation further frustrated many US politicians who were already calling for Kofi's resignation after he made comments a few weeks ago that suggested that the US violated International Law by invading Iraq.
Although I must admit that Annan seems to be less helpful than he could be in such hectic times, I know that he isn't as incompetent as the US media would like the public to believe. He is a well respected man worldwide, and has an incredibly impressive resume. And, it's worth noting that the United States is the only member of the UN that is calling for his resignation.
Among his many accolades and accomplishments, there are probably two that stick out the most. He is the first United Nations Secretary General to be elected to a 2nd term, unanimously I might add. Typically that position last just one term, and the next representative is from the next Continent in the 6-Continent rotation. Despite protocal, the UN representatives thought enough of Kofi Annan to re-elect him.
In 2001, the Nobel committee honored Kofi Annan with the Nobel Peace Prize. He was given the award, jointly with the UN as an organization, for his efforts towards peace throughout the world. The committee even noted that Annan had added "new life" to the UN.
For some reason, I don't find such realities as grounds for demanding a resignation. And the notion that Kofi Annan should step down because of his son's doings is preposterous. His son is a separate entity and being. It's not like his father told him to commit crimes, and while you're at it give me a 30% cut!
But fine. Let's say that Kofi Annan is corrupt and should step down from his post as UN Secretary General. If that's so, let people who actually care about the well-being of the organization say so; not the country that failed to comply with UN rules on war by pre-empting a war without a UN resolution and who's lack of concern is a major reason that the oil-for-food program turned so corrupt in the first place.
It's not uncommon to hear political critics of the UN (as well as many right-wing citizens) call the UN a weak organization, and say that it doesn't do anything beneficial for the world. That we don't have to wait and listen for what the UN says or thinks, but that we (the US) can do what we want to do, when and how we want to do it.
I also find it interesting that these same critics often explain away US President George W. Bush's many Presidential failures by saying that he was President during really tough times and so couldn't focus his attention on many of the social and economic issues that face us in this country. If that's the case, just imagine what Kofi Annan has to deal with. Everything that was tough for GWB (9/11) was also an issue for Annan, on top of a profusion of other tragic issues throughout the world. So why doesn't Annan get the same pass for some of his oversights, like the Oil-for-food program, that Bush gets?
So my point is this, if the UN is so insignificant and so weak, then why do we care who's in charge of it. Furthermore, if Annan and the organization are so incompetent, why don't we truly participate in the group and build it up from the inside out instead of openly beating it down with harsh words of reprimand from the sidelines.
And finally, since we are the only major country that is so critical of the UN, and the only country calling for Annan's resignation, why don't we just shut up. It's my understanding that unless you're on the team, you can't call the shots. With respect to the UN, we definitely aren't on the team, and therefore don't have the right to call the shots.
So why don't we just take care of us, continue to ignore the UN, pre-empt war somewhere else, and frankly, just mind our own business!
-Maelstrom
Tuesday, December 07, 2004
Un-Happy Anniversary
Today marks the 63rd anniversary of one of the most infamous attacks on the United States ever. It was on this date that the Japanese bombed the USS Arizona and killed over 2300 while wounding over 1100 at Pearl Harbor. The bombing led to the United States entering World War II, and will forever be remembered by those who were there, and those who weren't, as one of the most criminal acts from one country to another in the 20th century. Though certainly an un-happy anniversary it is, Pearl Harbor is not the topic I'll be discussing in this blog. Maybe next year.
Today also marks the 6 month anniversary of me putting both feet in, and placing all my eggs in one basket. A decision that required much courage of me. A decision that I probably would not have made in years past. A decision that I couldn't pass up on, however, because of the potential prize on the other side and the feelings that I had for that sublime reward. A decision that I was Dying to Find a Way to Get away From or around, but a decision I couldn't deny. A decision that would take me on an often incredible, but ultimately painful voyage. A saga that began like a Hollywood romance, but ended like a tragic Hollywood epic. But that too is a topic for another time.
Today, I'd like to mark the one-week anniversary of the defeat of Jeopardy's supreme icon. A champion like no other, Mr. Ken Jennings. As an avid Jeopardy fan for well over a decade, and a trivia nut, I can honestly say that I never thought such a run of brilliance would ever occur. Each year, thousands of trivia junkies like me try out for Jeopardy. After a series of extremely difficult tests on an ocean of topics that is wider than the Pacific, only a handful of contestants are flown out to California to compete.
Every once in a while there is a contestant that sets themselves apart from the rest, and wins 5 games. That Champion would then leave the show, and could reappear during the auspicious "Tournament of Champions" which showcased the gamet of 5-time champs (and sometimes 4-time champs if there weren't enough 5-timers during the season). Beginning last season, if a Champion won 5 games, they wouldn't be required to leave the show, they could continue winning until they were dethroned by a challenger.
Well, "Mr. Jeopardy" took advantage. Ken Jennings won over $2.5 million dollars in his reign of 74 victories (w/a consolation prize of $2000 in his defeat) which literally left hundreds of extremely intelligent braniacs feeling as though they had more studying to do. In contrast, as I recall, the previous consecutive victories record was 7 on the show (I'm sure you can check me on that one, there's Ken Jennings stuff all over the web).
I remember watching the very first week he was on the show. I knew something was different about him because he was not only winning, but he had virtually won each game by the middle of Double Jeopardy. By that I mean that even if he had answered all of the remaining questions incorrectly (which you lose money for), and a challenger would answer them all correctly, he'd still have more than twice their dollar amount heading into final Jeopardy.
By the 8th episode that he was on, I began telling everyone that they had to see how dominant this Jeopardy guy was. I remember the first time I made my roommate sit down and watch. He marveled in awe because he took note of the fact that Ken didn't answer a single question incorrectly that day, and he rang in on almost every one. I continued to spread Ken's fame to everyone I knew, and only missed when I had to (one particular night in July pertaining to the 2nd paragraph of this blog being one of those times). I was anxious to see if this guy could continue winning, and if so, by how much.
Night after night, Ken didn't disappoint, often annihilating the competition by $20,000 and sometimes $30,000. By the end of the season, he was still dominating and ended undefeated. When the next season began, it was the same ole Ken, winning huge and often uncontested in Final Jeopardy. Then there was this rumor on the internet, sometime in September, that Ken had lost in his 75th appearance after amassing over $2.5 million dollars.
That announcement kinda took the juice out of watching the show, but I still chimed in on a frequent basis just to see if he was still on. Sure enough, he was.
Knowing that his run was reportedly coming to an end last week, I tuned up the VCR, positioned myself in front of the TV, and watched in dismay as Ken began hot, but started to falter in the Double Jeopardy round. He bet big money (as he often did) on both of the Daily Doubles which he usually feasted on. This time though, he missed both of them, something I don't recall him doing in any episode that I saw. So, though he was leading going into Final Jeopardy, he was within reach of the one challenger that remained. She bet just enough to beat him, and he answered incorrectly. The streak was over, but not the fame.
Immediately after the show, he was on virtually every news station. And for the space of about 48 hours, Ken Jennings was a major news story. His chain of victories had already afforded him spots on David Letterman and a significant level of fame. He is now more of a celebrity than most of the losers on those pathetic Reality TV shows, though much less than many overrated athletes and actors.
I have heard some people complain about how big a deal Ken has become, and that they were tired of seeing him on the show. To them I'd like to say that I think it is great that Ken won so many times. Indeed, I think that it is quite refreshing that there is a semi-celebrity out there who achieved that status through intellect as opposed to attaining such status by sleeping with 7 of his roommates in a high-rise in Vegas or by amassing amazing statistical feats with the aid of steroids. Though we esteem education through words in this country, we rarely reward it. On the flipside, though we sometimes criticize the conduct of entertainers, we often praise them, many times for doing very little, through media exposure as well as through monetary gain.
I think that it is a wonderful thing that Ken Jennings, Mr. Jeopardy, has turned the table on the conventional celebrity. And I look forward to Ken's return on Jeopardy during the 2005-06 version of the Tournament of Champions.
Long live trivia!
-Maelstrom
Ken Jennings Info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Jennings
Today also marks the 6 month anniversary of me putting both feet in, and placing all my eggs in one basket. A decision that required much courage of me. A decision that I probably would not have made in years past. A decision that I couldn't pass up on, however, because of the potential prize on the other side and the feelings that I had for that sublime reward. A decision that I was Dying to Find a Way to Get away From or around, but a decision I couldn't deny. A decision that would take me on an often incredible, but ultimately painful voyage. A saga that began like a Hollywood romance, but ended like a tragic Hollywood epic. But that too is a topic for another time.
Today, I'd like to mark the one-week anniversary of the defeat of Jeopardy's supreme icon. A champion like no other, Mr. Ken Jennings. As an avid Jeopardy fan for well over a decade, and a trivia nut, I can honestly say that I never thought such a run of brilliance would ever occur. Each year, thousands of trivia junkies like me try out for Jeopardy. After a series of extremely difficult tests on an ocean of topics that is wider than the Pacific, only a handful of contestants are flown out to California to compete.
Every once in a while there is a contestant that sets themselves apart from the rest, and wins 5 games. That Champion would then leave the show, and could reappear during the auspicious "Tournament of Champions" which showcased the gamet of 5-time champs (and sometimes 4-time champs if there weren't enough 5-timers during the season). Beginning last season, if a Champion won 5 games, they wouldn't be required to leave the show, they could continue winning until they were dethroned by a challenger.
Well, "Mr. Jeopardy" took advantage. Ken Jennings won over $2.5 million dollars in his reign of 74 victories (w/a consolation prize of $2000 in his defeat) which literally left hundreds of extremely intelligent braniacs feeling as though they had more studying to do. In contrast, as I recall, the previous consecutive victories record was 7 on the show (I'm sure you can check me on that one, there's Ken Jennings stuff all over the web).
I remember watching the very first week he was on the show. I knew something was different about him because he was not only winning, but he had virtually won each game by the middle of Double Jeopardy. By that I mean that even if he had answered all of the remaining questions incorrectly (which you lose money for), and a challenger would answer them all correctly, he'd still have more than twice their dollar amount heading into final Jeopardy.
By the 8th episode that he was on, I began telling everyone that they had to see how dominant this Jeopardy guy was. I remember the first time I made my roommate sit down and watch. He marveled in awe because he took note of the fact that Ken didn't answer a single question incorrectly that day, and he rang in on almost every one. I continued to spread Ken's fame to everyone I knew, and only missed when I had to (one particular night in July pertaining to the 2nd paragraph of this blog being one of those times). I was anxious to see if this guy could continue winning, and if so, by how much.
Night after night, Ken didn't disappoint, often annihilating the competition by $20,000 and sometimes $30,000. By the end of the season, he was still dominating and ended undefeated. When the next season began, it was the same ole Ken, winning huge and often uncontested in Final Jeopardy. Then there was this rumor on the internet, sometime in September, that Ken had lost in his 75th appearance after amassing over $2.5 million dollars.
That announcement kinda took the juice out of watching the show, but I still chimed in on a frequent basis just to see if he was still on. Sure enough, he was.
Knowing that his run was reportedly coming to an end last week, I tuned up the VCR, positioned myself in front of the TV, and watched in dismay as Ken began hot, but started to falter in the Double Jeopardy round. He bet big money (as he often did) on both of the Daily Doubles which he usually feasted on. This time though, he missed both of them, something I don't recall him doing in any episode that I saw. So, though he was leading going into Final Jeopardy, he was within reach of the one challenger that remained. She bet just enough to beat him, and he answered incorrectly. The streak was over, but not the fame.
Immediately after the show, he was on virtually every news station. And for the space of about 48 hours, Ken Jennings was a major news story. His chain of victories had already afforded him spots on David Letterman and a significant level of fame. He is now more of a celebrity than most of the losers on those pathetic Reality TV shows, though much less than many overrated athletes and actors.
I have heard some people complain about how big a deal Ken has become, and that they were tired of seeing him on the show. To them I'd like to say that I think it is great that Ken won so many times. Indeed, I think that it is quite refreshing that there is a semi-celebrity out there who achieved that status through intellect as opposed to attaining such status by sleeping with 7 of his roommates in a high-rise in Vegas or by amassing amazing statistical feats with the aid of steroids. Though we esteem education through words in this country, we rarely reward it. On the flipside, though we sometimes criticize the conduct of entertainers, we often praise them, many times for doing very little, through media exposure as well as through monetary gain.
I think that it is a wonderful thing that Ken Jennings, Mr. Jeopardy, has turned the table on the conventional celebrity. And I look forward to Ken's return on Jeopardy during the 2005-06 version of the Tournament of Champions.
Long live trivia!
-Maelstrom
Ken Jennings Info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Jennings
Thursday, December 02, 2004
This 'n' That
Wow...there's just so much to write about, and so many topics to get around to. Unfortunately, I regret that I probably won't be able to fully spend my time on all of them, but hopefully I get around to most of them. Seriously, we've got a messed up Ukraine election, the US telling the UN what it should do with its Secretary General, Ken Jennings amazing Jeopardy run coming to an end (a topic that I must pay homage to), should Weed be legal, and many more. However, since I know that I can't focus my attention on any of those topics today (I have a very huge and difficult homework assignment to finish by 3:30 tomorrow), I've decided just to spew out some random thoughts from my head. Is that ok with you???
Ready or not, here I go!
So Monday, I walked outside to catch the bus like I do every morning. However, it was quite sunny outside, and I looked up and noticed a rather large, half-lit rock just floating there in the air. It appeared to be stationary, and for some reason its presence didn't startle me at all. To be sure, the Moon has been there all of my life, so I guess it shouldn't startle me, but I do find it a little strange that there's a massive rock that just rotates around the Earth, and we just accept its existence.
Over the last couple weeks, I've noted to my friends how strange it is that when someone sneezes, no matter how quaint or how violent, we say "God bless you" (or "gezundheit" or "salud"...), but if someone coughs we say nothing. I mean seriously, I've seen people virtually cough their lungs out and not even a peep of concern out of the viewing audience. What's up with that???
Now, I know this all seems really random to you at this point, but you must understand that I am a person who questions virtually everything around me. And if something exists around me that I haven't questioned yet, don't worry, I'll get around to it. I've learned that tough times (either sad, angry or just bored) often makes us curious as to why they happened, and happy times need no explanation...they just are. But even in those cases I still find myself questioning "why was I so happy?" Despite my inquisitive nature, i Don't Feel Wonderment is Good For every situation. Sometimes we just have to let go and move on, no matter how hard that is to do. That may be why, in fact, we don't question the happy times as much. Because why ruin such a good thing by trying to rationalize its occurrence? However, this next "randomness" has to be questioned.
I was sitting in a staff meeting yesterday, half-paying attention, and watching this girl across the room who was nodding off. I mean, she was really getting a beastie little nap in during the meeting. Well, when she finally "came to," she began doing something that I just consider very inappropriate. I watched her raise her left hand, and focus her left pinky finger on the left nostril of her nose. She proceeded to dig out something from there, and then to add levels of vulgarity to the situation, she pulled it out and put it in her mouth. She then "washed, rinsed, and repeated" the whole process a few more times. Why?
Finally, I'm just now getting settled into my new surroundings and my apartment, despite moving in almost four months ago. So, I'm at the point now where the real last big move-in step will be hanging posters, paintings and mirrors on my walls. Well, wouldn't ya know, all of a sudden, Monday night this maintainance guy comes by and tells me that there's water in my heating vents. I questioned this because I had no indication of it, and when he got there he didn't hear anything suggesting that there was water in my heating vents at all (although in retrospect, I did notice that my apartment was humid whenever I'd come in from outside). So, I dismissed him, and he left. Well, it just so happened that the next night, I heard gurgling in my heating vents, and eventually water came splashing out of at least one of them. I told my landlord, and they told me that they didn't know why this was happening, but if they couldn't fix it, they'd have to move me. So, yesterday the guy came back, drained my vents, and the gurgling subsided. A few hours later, it was back. So, it looks like I'll have to pull my shallow roots out of this apartment and make the treacherous transition to another one. A task that will be monumentally taxing, even if they only move me upstairs.
So to all of this, I have to ask the question that I've often asked myself throughout the course of my life; a question that seems far more relevant given all that's going on in my life right now:
Why???
-Maelstrom
Ready or not, here I go!
So Monday, I walked outside to catch the bus like I do every morning. However, it was quite sunny outside, and I looked up and noticed a rather large, half-lit rock just floating there in the air. It appeared to be stationary, and for some reason its presence didn't startle me at all. To be sure, the Moon has been there all of my life, so I guess it shouldn't startle me, but I do find it a little strange that there's a massive rock that just rotates around the Earth, and we just accept its existence.
Over the last couple weeks, I've noted to my friends how strange it is that when someone sneezes, no matter how quaint or how violent, we say "God bless you" (or "gezundheit" or "salud"...), but if someone coughs we say nothing. I mean seriously, I've seen people virtually cough their lungs out and not even a peep of concern out of the viewing audience. What's up with that???
Now, I know this all seems really random to you at this point, but you must understand that I am a person who questions virtually everything around me. And if something exists around me that I haven't questioned yet, don't worry, I'll get around to it. I've learned that tough times (either sad, angry or just bored) often makes us curious as to why they happened, and happy times need no explanation...they just are. But even in those cases I still find myself questioning "why was I so happy?" Despite my inquisitive nature, i Don't Feel Wonderment is Good For every situation. Sometimes we just have to let go and move on, no matter how hard that is to do. That may be why, in fact, we don't question the happy times as much. Because why ruin such a good thing by trying to rationalize its occurrence? However, this next "randomness" has to be questioned.
I was sitting in a staff meeting yesterday, half-paying attention, and watching this girl across the room who was nodding off. I mean, she was really getting a beastie little nap in during the meeting. Well, when she finally "came to," she began doing something that I just consider very inappropriate. I watched her raise her left hand, and focus her left pinky finger on the left nostril of her nose. She proceeded to dig out something from there, and then to add levels of vulgarity to the situation, she pulled it out and put it in her mouth. She then "washed, rinsed, and repeated" the whole process a few more times. Why?
Finally, I'm just now getting settled into my new surroundings and my apartment, despite moving in almost four months ago. So, I'm at the point now where the real last big move-in step will be hanging posters, paintings and mirrors on my walls. Well, wouldn't ya know, all of a sudden, Monday night this maintainance guy comes by and tells me that there's water in my heating vents. I questioned this because I had no indication of it, and when he got there he didn't hear anything suggesting that there was water in my heating vents at all (although in retrospect, I did notice that my apartment was humid whenever I'd come in from outside). So, I dismissed him, and he left. Well, it just so happened that the next night, I heard gurgling in my heating vents, and eventually water came splashing out of at least one of them. I told my landlord, and they told me that they didn't know why this was happening, but if they couldn't fix it, they'd have to move me. So, yesterday the guy came back, drained my vents, and the gurgling subsided. A few hours later, it was back. So, it looks like I'll have to pull my shallow roots out of this apartment and make the treacherous transition to another one. A task that will be monumentally taxing, even if they only move me upstairs.
So to all of this, I have to ask the question that I've often asked myself throughout the course of my life; a question that seems far more relevant given all that's going on in my life right now:
Why???
-Maelstrom
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)