As Lew Sees It

Just Saying No to Tiger

2009-12-16T14:40:00.003-05:00

There have been a few people who have asked me, "why haven't you written about Tiger Woods in the past month?" so I have to put out my official statement on the matter. There will be no postings on this site about Tiger Woods or any of his "transgressions". I do not believe that a rich, powerful, super famous athlete who sleeps around on his wife is news. That is just life. It will be news if a rich, powerful, super famous athlete lends their name and voice to something more meaningful than their wallet. When athletes like Michael Jordan leave the statement "republicans buy sneakers too" for their agents, and speak up for the folks that work in the Nike factories and shops, THAT will be news.

This is not an indictment against Nike or Tiger or Michael Jordan. This is an indictment on a society that is so easily distracted by a sports star or a sex scandal that we are missing the real "transgressions". There are two wars, that do not seem to be coming to an end any time soon. Poverty so horrific that you don't have to stay up late at night to see on an infomercial, just drive around your town a few times, take a good look at all of the foreclosure signs. There is genocide going on, I don't mean in Africa or some Third World crumbling nation, but right here 45,000 people die due to a lack in health insurance. That is preventable! We do not have to live and die this way. More men and women die due to insufficient health insurance each year than drunk driving and domestic homicide combined.

So that is why we must say no to the tabloids and stop reading about paper tigers. We should not allow ourselves to be so easily distracted to focus so much of our time and energy into the personal dealings with just another man. He is just another guy. Tiger Woods is not, nor has he ever been a god. He is just a regular man with an amazing amount of golfing talent and a very full social calendar.

The American Disease Care System: The Disease of the Dollar

2009-09-20T10:45:00.003-04:00

Since President Obama has taken office, there has been lots of noise made on the Hill about health care reform and the issue of government provided health care to American citizens. All of the talk about reforming healthcare and fixing our healthcare system has been the subject of unfocused anger spewed from both side of the aisle by legislators and political commentators alike. The arguments have been pretty typical, some of the democrats are pushing for a national health-care plan that most likely includes a "public option'. On the other side, stands the GOP along with their allies, the insurance companies and the American Medical Association (the AMA) are crying out "socialized medicine" and the other tired generalizations about government programs for the public good. This entire argument is utterly ridiculous, because the real argument is not about fixing our health-care system. The United States does not have a comprehensive health-care system and this reform that is being proposed will not be comprehensive either. The United States has a disease care system. The worst part is the disease is not curable or even treatable; this disease will always be prevalent in America. The disease is the dollar.

The interests groups like the AMA and the insurance companies stand to get cut out of their continuous pot of gold that will fall their way if Obama and the Democrats are able to pass their toothless healthcare bill. If the Democrats' concessions to the Right, and to the base of corporate America, puts together a reform bill with a 'market mandate' on health insurance like auto insurance the insurance providers are the big winner of this legislation. A mandate would bring 50 million Americans to slaughter by making them buy ineffective health insurance that provides care to the healthy and rejects the sick. This is a growing trend in this administration, big business is the winner of the policies coming out of Washington and the loser is the American people.

The biggest question for our entire situation is this, how can the richest country in the world allow corporations to mortgage its citizens' health on the basis of money? How can our government justify private insurance corporations reaping the financial rewards for denying patient claims and denying payments for treatment of care? This is not socialism, just a rational idea. Too bad rational thought seems to be void on Capitol Hill most of the time (The Senate just voted to apologize for slavery this year, only 144 years late). We are supposed to be living in a modern society. That is what societies do, they protect their citizens. It is just sad that our society is sick and there is no protection in sight. We are riddled with a disease that no health-care reform bill can cure. Americans have been stricken with the disease of the dollar and even President Obama can't change that.

Is it Time to Say Goodbye to the HBCU?

2009-05-15T15:40:00.001-04:00

The economic situation our nation has found itself in over the past two years has revealed many outdated business models. As a country we are looking to get leaner and more efficient for the 21st century. I believe one of those models is the need for the historically black college and university (HBCU). HBCUs exist out of a historical need to provide institutions of higher education for African American students during a time in which they were excluded from the majority serving colleges and universities. Now, times have changed. We live in an increasingly less racist society and an institution that primarily serves African Americans is now as outdated as the model T.

HBCUs have been exposed due to a financial squeeze from financial assistance to the students and state assistance to the institutions. Many of these schools do not possess large endowments and the loss of student enrollment cripples the economic outlook for these centers of higher learning. The education received by students that attend HBCUs is another issue for the next generation of learners. Is the learning experience provided by HBCUs adequately meeting the needs of the next generation of leaders? In a worldwide economy, American needs world class education not world class exclusion! The United States is already behind the rest of the world in education, I don't believe we should be separating our talent pool, by the color of their skin.

The opponents of my viewpoint, say that the HBCU is a bastion of academe that still harvest and cultivates black scholars in an environment that nurtures their talents to a greater extent, than at predominantly white institutions. I would say that they are probably correct. I would also add that a student that hails from a prominently black high school and home environment is more likely not to feel overwhelmed or 'lost' at a HBCU, and studies show from all grounds of higher education that if the student feels comfortable, the student will perform better. At an HBCU, the expectation of black students will be success whether than survival, because the schools have provided avenues of student success for African Americans for over one hundred years. As the scholar Dr. Cornell West says that "expectations are self-fulfilling prophecies," those prophecies are still coming to fruition at HBCUs.

Another argument for HBCUs would be on the behalf of under prepared students coming into the university experience. Unprepared students need a traditional four year environment because they need to get out of the communities in which they grew up to learn effectively. So advocating that they should go to a community college is without merit. What good does going to class during the day serve if you are dealing with drug dealers and crime on your streets at night? Learning can not be effective in those types of environments. If the argument is that higher learning is a cycle of learned successes, there possibility for success is very low in those environments.

This is not some sort of an empty rhetoric piece for assimilation. This is a recognition of the diversity of each one of us makes the whole society stronger for all. This could be an opportunity to have a 'higher education stress test'. The schools that are no longer up to par can be dissolved into the state college and university system. That way we don't lose students in the shuffle, and we begin the transition to a more effective higher education model in the United States. A model not based on the color of one's skin, but the content between their ears. We must prepare ourselves for an ever-increasing 'black and brown' world and educating the students of color in one house and the white students in another just doesn't make sense. To achieve true racial equality, and not just have diversity departments as tokens for recruiting students or companies (or some superficial program marketing campaign), we need to move beyond our old infrastructure and embrace learning and teaching methods for the next generation. I believe that we can provide an equal opportunity for students at all of our institutions of higher learning. If we do not, we will fail as a society. This needs to be a paramount imperative of our educational system, to know that we can provide equal opportunity and access to all students in higher education without having to specialize with the student's skin color.

Are you really Taxed Enough Already?

2009-04-24T11:55:00.006-04:00

As the April 15Th income tax deadline anxiety rose, a different type of anxiety took shape in many U.S. cities, a grassroots movement called a T.E.A. party (which stands for taxed enough already) was taken to the streets. The TEA Party movement is based on the idea that the federal government is over taxing the citizens of this country out of prosperity and taking away money from people who have worked hard for their wages. I have to add that this is group is composed of nearly an all-white following, which may play a role in their dissolution towards the current government? Are these folks really concerned about the possibility of their taxes going up in 2011 or is this movement really about what they perceive their taxes are going to be funding?

I have to raise the point of concern that a pseudo-mob of middle class and upper financial class demographic displaying their displeasure of American tax policy is a little disturbing and a little funny. The last time I checked, the people that were complaining on April 15Th were the people who composed the policies. The conservative television news stations, particularly Fox News, stoked the fire of the protesters that attended the rallies. Isn't it funny to hear Fox News try to be the voice of the populist movement in this country?

Where were these people the past 8 years? NO wait! Where were these disgruntled Teabaggers the last 30 years? This is not some protest on tax policy. This is another example of the racial dog whistle that gets blown by conservative wingnuts to protest this country's new direction as a whole. The change that these people believe in, would be making this the country for 1920 again. A reminder that the 1920s was a time of extreme inequality from rich to poor, and before the social protections of the New Deal like Social Security and Medicare.

Quotes like this were common place from the T.E.A. parties that took place on April 15Th:

“We, the taxpayers who pay the majority of taxes, are sick of supporting those who do not carry their load, we're sick of paying to fund social programs to support those who sit and wait for handouts, we're sick of funding businesses whose fiscal irresponsibility has led to their collapse without a bailout. We are trying to send a message to Congress that We the People have had enough.” --Unnamed Protestor

This angry tax dissenter was not actually complaining about the amount of taxes he has to pay. He was complaining about how the amount of taxes he has to pay will be possibly used to fund government social programs that affect the less fortunate. I feel that it is my responsibility to keep reiterating that poverty disporportionatly effects people of color in this country. The unnamed protestor does not want to support the policies of a president that has vowed to extend a helping hand to those less financially fortunate. The particulary program isn't the point. It could be welfare, Affirmative Action, the worker's right to organize, ACORN, etc., the real point is that the Teabaggers percieve these people are getting a "gift" and the Teabaggers want their gift too.

The Teabaggers were voicing their concerns against immigration and unbridled government spending. After the largest deficit increase in American history, kept them on the sidelines, a new type of president gets these folks up in arms and out on the streets. These rally goers are okay with funding a 10 billion dollar a month war where we invade a country that had zero terroristic connections, but they are not okay with school reconstruction and public health care for the poorest Americans that cannot afford it.

The war in Iraq and Afganistan can easily be seen as another neo-crusade for the hearts and minds of civilization. As Pat Buchanan has said "all politics are not local, all politics are tribal". When our tribe of American soldiers were authorized to go invade Iraq, it was immediately regarded as a Christian imperative to bring democracy and choice to the Iraqis.

This entire movement, no matter how rediculous it may seem to the intelligent people of this country, should be taken seriously, because it highlights several important pillars of a still existing American society. The reverberation from the stains of racism and the original sin of slavery can still be felt in this country. Intolerance towards immigrants is not conservatism, it is just a different form of thinly veiled racism that has taken over the far right.

What should the responsible citizens say to the voiced discontent of the Teabaggers? We should say "to hell with your whining!" For the last 30 years this country has been hijacked by deregulation that have conducted wars under false pretenses and have promoted a mindset that is bent on taking America back to the time of the robberbarons. This country is going through a change. It is a change of evolution not revolution. The evolution of pervailing ideas. If the presidency of Barack Obama does nothing in the next 4 years, he is still not a complete failure. President Obama changed this country, he changed the way we observe this country. When we watched the inauguration in January, those waiving American flags from the sea of observers, were our tickets to a new America. This sect of the country that feels like they have lost something, they did. They lost their tickets to their time machine ride of deregulation back to the 1920s. They lost their stranglehold of concentrated power from the hands of a few all white men. They may be taxed enough already, but I hope the mental taxation of the dawning of a new America dwindles their followers.

Only the Children?

2009-03-25T16:41:00.010-04:00

This week, President Obama was asked again and again about deficits and spending during his second presidential press conference. We all know that the budget is very important, but aren't there more important issues than bickering over why the president wants spend money to improve our schools and the way we fund health care in this country. What I mean is there are very pertinent issues that plague our country and these issues only mildly even relate to money. My issue was highlighted by the reporter from Ebony Magazine who asked President Obama about children living in poverty in this country, children homeless, and the Hoovervillesqe 'tent' cities that are starting to pop up around the country. President Obama responded that he was "heartbroken" that any child would have to live like this in the world's richest country. He totally missed the point!

We are "heartbroken" for any child who has to live like this? How about any American who has to live like this? The problem we so massively suffer from in this country is a distorted perception of what is okay. It's not a politically winnable argument to feel sad for adults, who have made choices and ended up on the street, but we can cry for the children, because that is politically acceptable. You don't see people with any sympathy for the adults that are having a rough time. These tent cities house more than just children, but mothers with no place to go and fathers that cannot find work to put a roof over his family's head. It is not okay for children or anyone else to be living on the streets in the richest country in the world. We need to stand up and cry foul at the notion that poor people are the nation's losers and don't deserve the same respect as rich folks. Eating healthy food and drinking clean water should not be held as a privilege.

This is not an indictment on President Obama. I have the utmost respect for his political skills and talents, as well as Barack Obama the man. I just feel that part of the 'change' that this country sought out in 2008, is the change of moving beyond what is or has always been politically acceptable to what is right! Change cannot be a slogan or a poster for a campaign, but actual actions in the United States to better represent all folks from all circumstances. The poor folks in this country (some of which are sleeping in tents under freeways) tend to get left out of the change that politicians believe in. That needs to stop, and I'm not just speaking about the children.

Lets blame workers! Wait... who should we blame?

2009-03-18T14:08:00.004-04:00

This is a very well written article, but I have to take the other side of this issue up in debate.

AIG's Larceny
Obama ''gets it,'' but Geithner clearly doesn't.
By Dan Gerstein

http://www.forbes.com/2009/03/17/geithner-obama-republicans-bonuses-opinions-columnists-aig.html?partner=email

There have been several articles and columns, very similar to this one, published in the last several weeks. Generally there is a public discourse of anger towards the financial institutions with the ongoing crisis, and those evil people responsible for ruining our economy. How about we look in the mirror to find the evil doers that ruined our economy?

Why are we so angry with the employees? So what that the employees at AIG are receiving a bonus. They had those in their contracts. AIG may be enemy number 1 on the news this week, just like Bernard Madoff was two weeks ago, but no one man, woman, or company derailed our financial system. To simply just throw blame towards the employees at AIG for the collapse of our banking system is just madness. How many people have worked a job, and had to perform a task they did not agree with??? ….. Oh yeah, that is right, EVERYONE! If I worked at AIG, and had to do my job just like all of us out there, and a perk to the daily grind of my job was a bonus of 1k or 5k, at the end of the fiscal year, that makes me a little happier. That just might be a little bit more of an incentive to keep me working. That money will allow my children a few nice things that maybe I couldn't afford throughout the year. Maybe I can afford a vacation with that money, so at least I don’t go crazy from my countless hours at work. Why are we so outraged at regular people that have to work? We all have to work. If everyone was just complaining about the highest level executives, that is an entirely different issue, but they can’t get fired all at once, because if no one knows what they’re doing, AIG will run like the Treasury department.

I find it incredible in this country to see level of executive envy and privilege, and the vile disrespect of ourselves, the everyday professionals. Whether we work at an uptown law firm, a downtown financial institution, a midtown factory worker or anywhere in between, we all have similar goals to provide a good home for ourselves and our loved ones. We just can't sweep this blame towards a few people or factions of our society. This is a failure of tremendous proportions, and we all have had a hand in this some way or another.

The economy was not ruined by people who work at AIG or Bear Stearns or any of the wall street elite. The economy was ruined by a failed ideology, that deregulation and low oversight of the market is good policy. No Wall Street bank or tycoon made the country overwhelming elect Reagan twice, and 2 Bushes for twelve more years at the helm of our country. We are the people that voted for those ideological policies and practices. We have failed us.

Most conservatives will speak of their belief in low government intervention and low taxes will allow individual hard work to triumph, so that individuals will be able to to pull yourself up "by your own bootstraps" with enough hard work and initiative. Now we have broken those bootstraps without a cobbler in sight! Low regulatory oversight and hardly any intervention has left us without a boot to pull up, so we look to blame someone for those broken bootstraps. Who can we blame? Lets blame the workers at footlocker and not government for making sure every shoe sold had to pass certain parameters. Who votes in the government leaders? We do, why are we so angry? We are getting exactly what we deserve. We voted for the people that have promoted those ideologies for the past 30 years. That is the beauty of democracy. Democracy rises and parishes on will of the people. So we can look no further than our ballots for the blame of this mess, not the worker!

Who is going to bring change to Palestine?

2009-01-21T00:08:00.007-05:00

We are on the brink of a new age of American politics. Barack Hussein Obama will shortly take office and take a giant step at fulfilling the dream that so many African American men and women has dreamed about for oh so long. Will he be the great leader that so many Americans voted for? I don't know? In time, we shall see, but my question is bigger than the domestic wants for U.S. citizens. With change coming to America, who is going to bring change to the rest of the world's unfortunate. Who is going to bring change to Palestinians?

In recent history, American foreign policy has been a rubber stamp of approval for Israeli political and military decisions. This comes at a price for the Palestinians and their territories, who have perished by the thousands at the hands of the Israeli military invading Gaza. If you look at it this way, Gaza is a prison for people who have never been convicted of a crime besides being Palestinian. 79 percent of the households live in poverty, food and resources are obviously scarce for children and parents alike. Not to mention this is the region's punching bag, or missile test site for Israel; bridges, schools, power plants, and roads are destroyed on a regular basis.

This is not to say that all of the violence is unprovoked. Recently, the strength of the world's third strongest military has been on display in Gaza with their retaliation effort to the rockets fired by Hamas (democratically elected governing body of the Palestinian territories). Sadly, Hamas has decided that it would rather provide its people with bullets instead of butter. Sometimes, it is easier to start a battle than battle your domestic issues, like poverty.

I believe in one's right and ability to defend itself, but where does it end? The latest records display 13 Israelis dead and a staggering 1350 Palestinians, 80% of which were civilian. Since 13 people have died, does that give Israel the right to kill 1300?

In the states, we have heard a lot about change. Change has come to America. The only problem is that change can not just come to America. Change has to come to all those who live without justice. President Obama needs to stand up for more than just American lives and jobs, but stand up for the light in which The United States of America can still shine on the rest of the world. A continuing support of all that is Israel, is not change for those in Palestine.

Our New Years Resolution: Put the Human Back in Humanitarian

2009-01-01T10:51:00.001-05:00

Every new year, I am inundated with questions about my new year's resolution. Do you want to save this much money? Do you want to buy your first home? Maybe Lew, you should start thinking about getting married? So for this year, I am going to declare a new year's resolution, and I think it is one we can all embrace. For 2009, we should put the human back in humanitarian.

This year, we shall no longer stand for homelessness and hunger in the Unites States. We live in the richest country in the world, and their are 34 million people living in poverty right here. If you listen to or watch the news, you would get the impression that poverty is for people in 1 dollar a month infomercials. It is not, it is right in our front and backyards! In the nation's capital, you don't have to travel five blocks from the White House to see homeless people sleeping on a park bench. This is absolutely disgusting! This is not what we should stand for.

For most people, a humanitarian is a person with a kind heart who will go out of their way to bring kindness to those around them. This kindness falls short on too many counts for too many people though. We live in a society where people will pick up a dog on the side of the road or alone in the park, feed the dog, take the dog in for shots at the vet, and will walk right past homeless people on the street. I wonder how many of those people have ever stopped to help a man or women down on their luck in the park? Would they bother to ask a homeless person where they are from or if they are in need of medical care? Where is the human element in picking up a stray dog or cat, but walking past a man or woman?

So our new year's resolution for 2009 is to put people first, no matter what creed or color. We can combat hunger and homelessness. Last year, there were so many voices carrying the chant "yes we can" and this year we can follow through by putting the human back in humanitarian.

I'm So Proud of You... America

2008-11-05T18:28:00.005-05:00

I'm so proud of you America. It has been a good year for a nation that is pushing 235. This year you went out of your way to renew your promise to all your children, that no matter what background, face or race, you can achieve something great in the United States of America with hard work and a good education. Did I mention you became the first Western nation to elect a man of color to its highest office in the land? What a year you have had. Something great really came out of you in 2008.

America, you have shrugged off some of your darkest days of racial turbulence that was generated during the Civil Rights Era to produce a leader that really represents the diversity of your great land. Just forty years ago, just one generation ago, your land said it was free, but your children were separated in almost every way they navigated your hills and valleys. My parents tell stories of segregated schools, restaurants, water fountains, even music concerts. Now, we share everything, especially the hope for something greater that can come for your renewed promise.

Some theorist have given the name of black plight in the U.S. the 'slave mind'. This is a theory of mental limitations that have been placed on a people, from generations of failure and lost dreams, to eventual acceptance of goals and rules that are less than what can be accepted for the majority culture. This is the idea that obviously stems from slavery, "I am a slave. My children will become slaves." as the cycle continues with no hope to become anything more. This wasn't that long ago. My grandfather's grandfather was born in slavery, and there is no record of my family history past that because of trade. That is why I am so proud of you today America. To rise from the ashes of your own internal flame to let all your children shine down, on the message that there is nothing false about hope.

An MSNBC commercial advertisement stated that "presidents can change lives", perhaps that could not be more true than with Barack Obama. A black man in this country that has risen to the top of American culture without acting in a blockbuster movie, or singing a grammy winning album, or dribbling a basketball... well that last one is in question, but you know what I mean. A man that has achieved prominence with proficiency of his intellect and hard work, not some act of pop culture. I just can't stop smiling that all of this happened here, only could have happened here, in America.

Putting Integrity First

2008-10-15T22:08:00.006-04:00

First off, before I get into any argument on ideology or American policy throughout history, I have to say that John McCain is not George Wallace. Nor is John McCain a racist in any capacity, but his campaign has been treading on the other side of the line for weeks. I will go as far as saying that an observer of the McCain campaign could possibly believe he or she woke up in a time machine and went back to 1968. That is the problem. We deserve more from our politics than cloaking fear and hatred with the idea of a "tough campaign".

John Lewis was not speaking out of turn last week. In America, we cannot afford to ever turn a blind eye to intolerance. There is a responsibility that comes with public office and public service and the ability to put people ahead of a political agenda should be at the top of the list.

"Off with his head," or monkey dolls with Obama stickers should not be tolerated EVER! PERIOD! Could you imagine the backlash if Obama supporters held up a G.I. Joe doll, with a McCain sticker, hanging from a stick.

Talking about pal"ling" around with terrorist. The most prolific terrorist organization in American history is the Ku Klux Klan. If you watched the debates on Wednesday, you heard John McCain say how proud he is of all the people that support him, and come to his rallies. Look at what the republican campaign has been building upon the last two months. Republican campaign surrogates haven't even tried to hide their agenda for the racial attacks on Obama. And just for the record, when they say "we want to turn the page from the economic crisis, and make this campaign about character," what they really mean is that they want to make the campaign about race/religious anxieties/even his name. For the republican campaign, they see McCain's personal "character" easy for them to defend. John McCain is white, a war veteran (hero), and oh did I mention that he is white. He is just like you or your grandpa, whatever works for you.

Maybe I am an idealist just disguised as a realist. Or maybe I am just saddened by the recent campaign efforts of a man that I truly admired. I remember yelling with my parents, who are card-carrying democrats, after seeing the Clinton campaign wallow in the mud during the the Democratic primaries. I told them that I am firmly against race politics, and I am going to vote for John McCain in November if Hillary won the nomination. I want the 2000 John McCain Back! He wouldn't pander to these hate filled crazies that are coming to his campaign rallies, because that John McCain was better than that. Maybe the 2008 John McCain, could put his integrity first.

Who is protected by handguns?

2008-09-14T23:39:00.001-04:00

For the first time in American history, the legitimacy of handgun, or any gun, restriction was brought to a United States Supreme Court this year. The verdict was passed with at 5 to 4 majority overturning a 70 year old decision that the Second Amendment to the Constitution is granting the right to operate militias instead of a personal right to bear arms. The decision hinged on the the ability to own and carry a handgun for the right to protect one's self, and the opportunity to hunt. So I find it necessary to ask, what are we hunting with a handgun --- besides people? This brings up the question, are handguns necessary for modern American society?

In the year 2008, what would Joe Citizen use a handgun to do? Could the primary purpose be self/family defense? I guess, but wouldn't your person and family be safer with a shotgun? Not to mention that a novice shooter would be much more accurate with a shotgun than pistol. Could the reason be the that Joe just doesn't feel that the government's police forces are an adequate crime stopping force and needs to enlist his own version of handheld justice? Who knows? I will suggest that it is none of the above.

The reason people Joe wants to retain the clasp of his handgun is not for safety or protection of his family, it is for the rush and feeling of power. The power of god that only a man with a gun can possess. What more does Joe Citizen in the U.S. love more than power. That is why we shout "drill baby drill" from the gallows at the Republican National Convention, even though drilling won't help domestic gas prices. Americans love power, or at least the appearance thereof, that is why our culture has embraced the Sopranos, Scarface, rap music, and the Iraq War (at first).

Guns do not protect people from anything besides safety. Guns by definition perpetuate violence. Adding guns to any situation makes that situation more lethal. So with that being the case, why does a 21st century United States Supreme Court support 18th century politics? That question I cannot answer, but if we don't embrace our fellow citizens of the world and stop resorting to violence as the only option, the American analogy as the modern-day comparison to Rome could hold more truth than we have ever imagined.

Op-Ed Columnist - The Palin-Whatshisname Ticket - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com

2008-09-14T22:00:00.002-04:00

As my few readers know, I write to display my opinions, and in no means do I attempt to convert anyone, but to inform people of my perspective. I read an article today that was excellent and I wanted to share it. This is the way I want to write, this article is what I want my blog to become... only penned by Lew.

Check out this link:

Op-Ed Columnist - The Palin-Whatshisname Ticket - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com

Racism vs. Sexism... Is that all there is?

2008-04-11T15:58:00.005-04:00

This has been a very interesting political season, especially on the democratic side of the ballot box. 2008 is really turning into a historical year in presidential politics. The Democrats have a heated battle for the nomination with former First Lady, Hillary Clinton (and New York Senator) and Senator Barack Obama being the last two nominees standing. Beyond the typical political excitement of a presidential election, this one will have either an African-American man or a woman at the head of a major party ticket for the first time ever, so the diversity spices up the pot as well. Unfortunately our politics and emotions have turned this election cycle from a celebration of American political progress into a grade school squabble over blacks versus women, and fighting over who is more oppressed.

First off, we all learn in the second or third grade that we cannot compare unlike objects. The historical systematic oppression of black people in this country and the historical systematic oppression and separation of women from several avenues of influence and power in this country are BOTH real, but they are not one in the same. This is not apples to apples. This comparison is not even apples to oranges. At least with apples and oranges, both of the objects are fruits. The comparison of racism versus sexism is apples to bicycles!

There was a time in this country when black people were property in this country, and during that same time white women were married to those powers that be, some possibly slave owners, some were not. It is understood that women have not been treated equally by men or provided them the opportunity to participate in many of the processes of government via voting rights or homeowners rights, or in the workplace, I can keep going on. I don't see how that could be considered similar, especially when this does not account for all women. Are Latino or African-American women exempt from feeling this way, because their experiences are definitely different.

Why are we spinning our wheels on trying to decide who has it harder? Is it African-American people or Caucasian women? The answer is, it does not matter. We all have to work with the cards we are dealt, and play our hand. The citizens of this country should think really hard about how far we have come as a nation in just the last forty years. No, things are not perfect here and they will never be, but that doesn't mean that the way we improve one segment of society is to tear the others down. We are a complex nation of complex people and to limit the discussion and frame the argument to just racism versus sexism is cheating everyone. This argument is not all there is in American politics.

More than fate in 08

2008-02-05T15:53:00.000-05:00

A new year brings a sense of reflection, hope, and the opportunity to measure how far we have come in society through the years. One sign in the Obama camp may have put it best: "GOT HOPE?" 2008 provides a very special chance to do all of these things, as a presidential election year, american society from all walks of life will rally around issues of governance and politics. In this year's election for president history will be made, with the withdrawl of John Edwards from the democratic nomination process, leaves the last two contestants standing.... Hillary Clinton (the first woman presidential candidate nominee) and Barack Obama (the first African American presidential candidate nominee). Whether either of these candidates wins the national election for the presidency that is another thing, but for just this moment, we can can look back and see the progress of our society. As I see it, it has been long overdue to have a woman or an African-American in the White House. This article is not about the president, I want to put some attention on a few other things that have been missing in contemporary American Society for a long time like health care for everyone regardless of financial situation, equal schooling for every child, and a way to initiate immigrants into society so they can fully take advantage of the American dream.

Politicians slide from one side of the isle to the other on healthcare. It is time for people to stand up and say that making national healthcare a priority is IMPERATIVE for the wellbeing of future generations in this country. We can no longer thwart the lives of people just because we think having a national healthcare system is the gateway to communism. As we see with things like presidential elections in this country, change may take a long time in the United States, and this change from old conventional wisdom needs to happen now. Look around everyone, we won, communism is not a threat to the American way of life. How long will it take to get caught up with our allies like England and the rest of the developed world?

The public education system is a joke in this country. How can the education of the next generation of leaders be subjected to the political pandering of rich families from state to state. As I see it, your education status shouldn't depend on whether your mother and father bought a house/condo in a well to do suburb or pocket of a city. What happens to the children that were not given the opportunity to learn from the best teachers or given the resources to succeed developmentally? They get left behind, and cannot compete for scholarships and college entrance. If a student graduates from high school and goes to Harvard, Yale or Stanford its not because he or she is the brightest but had parents that put him or her in the position to succeed. If we were in the Olympics and two runners got to start at the 50 meter mark and the other 6 had to start at the starting line, the two runners with the head start wouldn't be awarded a Gold or Silver metal. In this country we are building and maintaining a permanent underclass and that has to stop!

In newspapers and from politicians we hear about immigration reform, but what we really need is a more comprehensive change to the way we look at people coming in to this country. Throughout American history, immigrants have been detested and opposed by the masses. Why? Are we so afraid that we will lose our jobs to illegal immigrants that we spout off secondary racism? The way I see it, the American public needs to rise above the fear of a stagnant job market or looking at the world through the lenses of a hunter-gatherer. We need to evolve, and I know these changes take time, hopefully they will be made in our lifetime. As spoken in the movie the Great Debaters, "the time for justice, the time for freedom and the time for equality is always right now!" We can make these things happen, and remind our hearts and minds that there is more than fate in 08.

The Pink Elephant in the Center of the Diamond

2007-12-17T11:01:00.001-05:00

Politics and sports go hand in hand. If it wasn't for politics, who would care about the Olympics? There is another side to politics and sport, the side that leaves an ugly reflection upon society, and asks questions about the very fabric of who we are. An issue in sport has divided the nation in this way the past 3 - 5 years, and that issue is steroids, which Barry Bonds being the figurehead for cheating in baseball. Now, through the Mitchell Report, we have come to learn of many others (ex. Roger Clemens) using similar performance enhancing products in the same time frame as Barry Bonds, but without the same anger as we saw with Bonds. Is that fair? Why does society point out one person, without the other, and who is to blame for this behavior?

Fairness is a tough thing to tackle, because life is not fair, and the world of sports is no different. We get lost in the ambiance of sport. Everything within the white lines operates in such an organized manner, that the games have the ability to take us away from our everyday lives and for three hours get lost in the joy of a children's game. The simplicity of the rules provides balance and order that we do not find in the other sectors of our lives.

Now I am not convicting Roger Clemens, or any other player named in the Mitchell Report guilty of anything, besides being mentioned in the Mitchell Report. Just being named in a report does not correlate to guilt in any court, besides the court of public opinion. Barry Bonds has been convicted by the court of public opinion a long time ago. So I ask, what makes Roger Clemens or any other player so different from Barry Bonds. We all know Bonds has been vilified by writers, reporters, fans, and even a book, as the monstrous face of the steroid problem in baseball. Now we see it was a systemic problem with more monsters than Richard Matheson's "I am Legend" novel, with no one in the baseball front office willing to play the Robert Neville character.

Who is to blame for the horrific injustice in the arena of sport? The politics for king-makers are not created by the diamond. The sportscasters, radio shock jocks, and even sports reporters have decided long ago Barry Bonds is public enemy number one. And other the other side of the spectrum Roger Clemens always got a pass, the golden ticket as you will to play the white knight that represents baseball and America at its best. Clemens played the symbol of the product of hard work. While the diamond creates stars and even legends amongst peers and fans, the villains are created somewhere else. In our need to jeer or boo. We feel the need to put some, like Clemens on the pedestal, while we let the monsters feast on players like Bonds. Here is the catch, we are the monsters!

In Political News, Where is THE ISSUE?

2007-11-30T11:16:00.000-05:00

If you have read the newspaper or the headlines for online news feeds in the last few days, most of the major United States domestic news has been aimed at providing coverage of the superficially over-hyped, presidential race for 2008. The way major news headlines have told us everything we have ever wanted to know about the candidates lives, views on issues and more, but my dissatisfaction is not with the amount of candidate coverage. My dissatisfaction lies on the notion that the most important domestic/international topic is no longer getting covered in today's news, and that is the war in the Middle East. Maybe everyone is tired of talking about and reporting on a war that doesn't seem like it is on the road to resolution anytime soon, but that is the exact reason why we need to continue to make this front page news! As long as the United States continues to send 18 and 19 year old men and women to a region of the world to enforce a political agenda, the war in the Middle East should continue to remain a front page headline.

Higher Education Indoctrination

2007-11-07T09:40:00.000-05:00

Last week (November 1st) a discussion topic on Glenn Beck (CNNHN) was debated on the state of higher education, and if modern universities are not educating now just indoctrinating. The topic that was up for debate, and venomously opposed by Mr. Beck's program was the orientation of new students into the university housing (dorm) system and the accepted university definitions of several life terms and experiences. The terms that were taken exception to were the definition for what/who is racist, and understanding sexual identity. Now these are very complex issues that could be discussed as dissertation topics, but they chose to give an editorial commentary on Mr. Beck's television program. Mr. Beck's conclusion stated that the universities have gone away from institutions of higher learning, and now are houses for left-winged, pro-socialist, anti-American professors attempting to indoctrinate young minds. In response to these claims I will discuss these assertions to the best of my ability.

First, Mr. Beck had two guests on the program to discuss the state of modern universities and the educational practices thereof, but neither contributor to the program was a higher education professional nor were they a higher education researcher of any kind. What type of adequate debate can take place when only one side of the argument is represented? There was an independent film maker and the President of FIRE (The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) on dare I say a panel. The university in question was the University of Delaware, and their housing practices, but this isn't really about them. This is about the way they are dissecting a program to single out the parts that they don't like. Glenn Beck made a statement "that as tuition paying parents we've got to change that. (That being the composition of university faculty and staff that as he put it were pro-socialist, anti-Americans going unchecked.)" What about writing a tuition check for your son or daughter makes you entitled to the hiring practices of that institution? If I go to Best Buy to purchase a television, I do not get to comment on their corporate structure. I can complain about poor service. I can start shopping at Circuit City, but I cannot tell Best Buy who they can and cannot hire. Maybe this is for another discussion? The state of American money and the entitlement people feel by spending it, I just want to remind everyone that no one makes you go to a certain school or store. If you don't like what you are getting in one place, you can go to the next.

So some parents feel uncomfortable that their children have to learn about some difficult topics when they get to college, but isn't that what college is for? To make the point that some people are offended by the definition of a racist, should be moot. In the resident training program from the university in question (Delaware), a racist is a person who resides in and profits from a racist society. So by this definition an African American, in America, cannot be a racist, because African Americans do not and have not profited in any form of the American racial hierarchy. This may be an uncomfortable topic of discussion for many, but that doesn't make it untrue. In our modern society, we like to embrace our 'oneness'. We celebrate our diversity, by having unity weeks and diversity pride parades (gay pride, black family reunion, Latino pride, etc.), but we don't discuss how the wealth of our society has been unevenly distributed throughout the history of this country. If you happen to be someone who came from a group of people that could not own land or had to be subject to Jim Crow laws until recently, your outlook on racial disparity has to be different from the people who are trying to live it down.

Also on this topic, we must understand the difference between a racist, and a person who is prejudice. They are discussing being racist. Someone can be ashamed of a system in which a hierarchy had been created, that they themselves had nothing to do with and not embrace it, but that does not make that person exempt from profiting from the history of what was created. To be or display prejudice, would be the thinking or acting on preconceived beliefs about one's race, gender, sexual orientation. That is different from racism, and we all know the power is in the definition. It is a weird thing in American society to discuss race, because for so long it was broken down into two groups. You were either white or black. One was acceptable, and the other was not. Now, as a society we have come a great distance from that time in history, but we must not forget that the era of civil rights was just 40 years ago. You cannot just wash away a history of behavior in one generation, and a society that is still operating on terms that have been in place for hundreds of years. He want to forget the mistreatment of people in our society. We want to relieve ourselves of the guilt that we feel for this American holocaust, by saying things are different now, and they are, but that doesn't change the things that took place. Just because we feel guilty, doesn't exempt someone from it. That is the purpose of a university is to challenge thoughts, that you may not embrace or accept, but that does not make them any less real.

The university experience as a whole, IS AN INDOCTRINATION, but that does not make it negative! It is the indoctrination for young adults into adulthood. Many of the ideas that circulate around in institutions of learning are not parallel to the ideas that the average high school student take for granted, nor are they always the accepted ideas that would be thought at your home. Why do you think that universities are their own entities with university villages or college towns? It is because you are not at home anymore in your suburb that made you so comfortable. University is about expanding your mind, not just expanding your wallet. So many people believe that college is simply about earning a degree to get a job. It is not! It is a place of learning on many levels, and in some cases learning some things that are not so comfortable for you to talk about. Now the university experience is not perfect, but nothing in life is perfect. If we are at a place in society that we are complaining that our children are forced to hear things we are uncomfortable with, we as a society are doing a lot of things wrong, and that does not start and stop with the university system.

Blood Thirsty

2007-10-21T13:10:00.000-04:00

Michael Vick has recently done something he has become very comfortable doing, NO I'm not talking about dogfighting! I'm talking about his ability to create a stir while being altogether unique. Previously when the public would speak on the one-of-a-kind talent of Vick, it was understood that they were speaking of an unquestionably gifted football star. Now they are speaking of an infamous felon, who took the lives of dogs that did not meet his fighting expectations.

What brings us to this point? A debate on the legality of dogfighting? No. The story of a fallen superstar to which society has built up on a pedestal because of his freakishly stunning football talents? No. A discourse from PETA about the treatment of animals in this country? Maybe. The lessons we continue to learn and find out about ourselves, and the gruesome society we live in? YES! Getting down to it, Michael Vick's actions are difficult to stomach, but not as horrible as we make them out to be. Is he the person that many sports fans have come to cheer and respect as a upstanding young man? The answer is not as clear as we would like to think, it is yes and no.

To put a spin on the angry Dennis Green rant "they are who we thought they were", only in this case we feel the hurt and anger in the voices of fans because Michael Vick wasn't the man everyone thought he was. I would argue exactly the opposite. We as football fans never knew him off the field. " He was who we thought he was" on the field, an electrifying talent that brought fans to their feet and opposing defenses to their knees. A young player striving to reach his potential, in a sport very few get a chance to play at the highest level. Off the field is a different story. We as fans, invest so much in the sporting experience, we forget some of the most basic concepts that come along with that investment.

We do not know these athletes as well as we think we do. While we cheer and jeer our sports superstars, sometimes we forget they are just people who live lives away from their game. We appreciate the passion and remarkable talents they display on their craft every game. We understand the type of work ethic and drive that one must possess to reach the higher echelon of professional sports success. Many of us would have to admit that the level of passion they describe is lacking in our everyday lives. Outside of the stage known as professional sports, many of the athletes live rather normal lives. A house with a wife (or husband), several kids, and managing all of the daily tasks that come with those responsibilities. All of us, that means everyone, has done things that we are not happy with. Everyone has had to overcome a few disappointments along the journey we call life, and overcoming those disappointments is what measures to be judged upon, not the mistakes, because we all fall down every once in a while.

Everything to Everyone

2007-08-09T11:26:00.000-04:00

As most of you know, I work at a mid-sized university of 15 thousand students. For some, this is a very rewarding experience, but for me I want to bang my head against the wall due to utterly unnecessary initiatives I am subjected to in Director's meetings. The newest plan of action is to create an Inter-faith council, and give them a large office space on campus in the university center. I am not against formalized religion, even though I do not subscribe to one, but why would you create that type of group for a university campus? Beyond the obvious concerns of what faiths make up their Inter-faith council, and the dangers of discriminating the less popular or accepted, it makes one ask, what is the goal of the modern university? Why are modern American universities trying to become everything to everyone?

The university must ask within itself, "what is our mission?" If the mission of the modern university is to enlighten young minds with learner-centered teaching, public engagement, intellectual freedom, multiculturalism, why would you promote a one-sided way of thinking by introducing religion? Religion is not the enemy of higher education by a long shot. I just feel that introducing "university approved" religions would send the wrong message to the students that did not practice them. How can you go about spouting off comments of multiculturalism and intellectual freedom, and then introduce old-hat philosophy like a government/school/official set of religious practice on campus?

People that go to a restaurant and have appreciate a nice bottle of wine would let you know, that if you fill half the bottle with water, the wine will not be any good. That is how I feel about the modern university structure we are trying to move toward in our society. We are filling the bottle with water, and not concentrating on what makes the university such a special experience. A university is an environment with open doors and open minds that provides a platform for social discourse, which creates a learning unique to any other stage in life. Anything less than that, should not be tolerated, but I guess we can no longer ask for excellence. In a society that puts more emphasis on convenience over substance, I may just have to settle for the watering down of American institutions that continue to fall behind the rest of the world.

What Does a New Jail or Prison Fix?

2007-08-07T10:30:00.000-04:00

I want you to ponder this question, what does a new jail or prison actually fix? I ask you this because we as Americans are so quick to impose a tax to build a new jail or sentence convicted citizens to lengthy terms, that we actually forget about the rehabilitation process. I want to know what you think about what jails and prisons actually fix.

~Lew

Who gets a Pass?

2007-08-03T13:20:00.000-04:00

Maybe it is just me, but I notice on a very regular basis that steroids sparks divisive conversation. And on almost every instance the name Barry Bonds comes up. "What do you think about Barry?" "How do you feel about Barry breaking the record?" I think I depress the question askers with every response. "I am not only happy to see the greatness that is an athlete eclipsing a great milestone like the homerun record, I could not be happier for Barry Bonds!" Amidst all of the controversy and troubles he can still achieve great things. To me this is a display of the best of human spirit, if we believe it we can achieve it. I have read reporters calling Barry a fraud and a cheater, but to me I can only see him as great. A man who has never tested positive of anything gets defined as a cheater and a fraud, but others in his profession and around professional sports get a pass. Why is that?

How can someone, anyone define the greatest player since Willie Mays (if not ever?) as a fraud? A player that has accomplished so many things in his career, in comparison, I would be willing to bet that none of the naysayers (be it fans or journalists) have accomplished anywhere near that much in their own careers! A record as difficult as 755 homeruns certainly does not come over night, and it doesn't come from the tip of a needle. Only hard work, twenty plus years of standout play, and a passion to be the best you can possibly be can result in that many home runs. A player with the most 30+ homerun seasons, tied for the most 40+ homerun seasons, and the single season homerun record seems like a player one could hardly accuse of the lack of a credible resume.

So if Barry is a fraud? What defines a fraud? Last year one of the freshest faces in sports tested positive for performance enhancing drugs and the sporting news community laughed it off like hiccup. How does Shawne Merriman test positive for steroids, then go on to be the cover boy for ESPN the Magazine the next issue? Is he not a fraud? Or is it simply that they like Shawne Merriman, and reporters have an axe to grind with Barry? I don't ever want to hear any praise for a player that tests positive for steroids, but is excused because the press like him, if they can't give the same respect to another player that has never tested positive of anything besides arrogance. We see the power of the press everyday, with the way a good writer can influence the beliefs of so many readers. I want to see the end of irresponsible reporting, not on the behalf of Barry Bonds, but the improvement of public knowledge. There is nothing more powerful than ignorance, and nothing sounds more ignorant than someone trying to tell me that Barry Bonds isn't the greatest player of my time.

Blood on Their Hands

2007-07-31T14:52:00.001-04:00

You don't have to be a sports fan to know that superstar quarterback Michael Vick has recently been indicted on several felony counts for sponsoring dogfighting. You also don't have to be a sports fan to recognize the gruesome details that are described inside the indictment. All of us are pet owners or have family/friends with pets, and the thought of dogfighting and dog executions is absolutely despicable, but this piece isn't about Michael Vick or his alleged guilt, it is about the rest of us. The blood of these dogs fighting is on more hands than this high profile football player, what about the legions of those people? I am speaking of the ability for our society to assign value to certain lives over others and the way we delegate our prison system for punishment instead of rehabilitation.

I am certain that the federal indictment is going to turn into Michael Vick vs. everyone (including angry fans, pet lovers, general public), which should be okay with Vick because that is how every Atlanta Falcons game I have seen turns out. Vick is the best at ducking, dodging and running his way out of trouble in the pocket, now we are going to see if his legal team can scramble to save the way he does on the football field. If they don't scramble enough he could get sacked, and this time it will be for years not yards!

Lets say he gets convicted. Should he serve time in prison for the punishment of this crime? The prison system carries the name of "correctional facility" as a moniker for the mission of incarcerating convicted criminals. Would sending Michael Vick to prison under this definition help his rehabilitation process as a productive member of society? The fact is that, he is already a productive member of society. He gives to charities and spends his time in children's hospitals in Atlanta. Prison by definition is designed to remove the predators from within the mist, those individuals who cannot function within societal norms. These predators would be murders, rapist, thieves, not just any person convicted of a crime. Why the thirst for the sight of rich young people going to prison, I can see no other reason for our thirst than our jealously! Michael Vick should pay a hefty fine, have some term of probation, and go about his business of playing football.

On the other behalf, people will scream and chant about poor Fido, but in the grand scheme of things this is a victimless crime. How did we as such a 'civilized' society provide a hierarchy for what animals carry more importance than others? What is acceptable animal treatment, and what is excess animal cruelty? How in the world did training a dog to fight become worse than bullfighting? We all know how that story ends... the bull dies. Not only does the bull die, but is humiliated in front of an audience while some guy dressed in frills waves a red sheet and after he tires the bull out he stabs him with sword. I personally cannot contain my excitement when the bull wins! Most will argue that due to cruelty laws bullfighting is not done in the states, that is true, but we do have horse racing. I do not remember ever hearing that the horse had a choice whether he (or she for the phillies) wanted to run in the races. If they don't perform well they can't stud, which is a whole other conversation, they go to the "glue factory". So who is going to argue that it is natural or optional for a horse to run in circles with a 145 pound person on their back while hitting them with a stick?

We need to stop being so stupid as a society! We like watching horses run, and that is why it is legal to bread horses to race. We don't like watching Fido get chomped by the bigger, badder dog across the street and that is why dogfighting is illegal. So lets put away the torches and pitchforks, Michael Vick is not going to kill your Fido!

My Broken Heart Over Our Broken Health Care

2007-07-19T11:19:00.000-04:00

The conversation of a national health care plan has been a subject up for debate in this country for a long time. The problem with the debate has been and for the most part still today, viewed by the nation, as socialist reformers. The threat of another "RED SCARE" is enough to keep conservatives and liberals alike voting against a national expansion of government like health care! Socialism is a curse word in this country and the the detractors of a national health care system use it as such to keep us, the voters, afraid of embracing a better way to care for other Americans, with and without preexisting health care coverage. Should profit be at the crux of a health care plan? Is there a better way?

I hate to think that a movie is needed to prompt a discussion on the necessity for a national health care system. Michael Moore's latest film "Sicko" highlights a vital concern over the United States health care system, not just for the uninsured, but for the people who think they are insured as well. While I am sure most certain that Moore's editorial film speaks of his concerns and the way he views the ills of the American health care system. I think a few points he makes, especially about the rise of the HMO (health maintenance organization), are valid for all Americans to take notice. Just because you may be insured, does not mean you are covered.

How could the United States, the world's strongest economic center, be lacking in the field of medical care? The insinuation of anything less than the best or the greatest infuriates the policy makers of this country with the vast amount of resources at our disposal. Unfortunately, that is what we have in the modern age of medicine. American citizens having to sell their house, because they cannot pay their hospital bills. Young couples going broke, before they get a chance to build a financial base, due to the expenses attached to having a baby. Did you know that the number one reason for bankruptcy and foreclosure on homes in this country is due to people's inability to pay their medical bills? I am not saying that I don't believe in getting paid for an honest day of work, but what is honest about putting someone out of their home? If the motto for all those who choose to practice medicine is "do no harm", I guess they are not speaking of harm to your wallet.

The common defenses of our system is the American ability to choose your own doctor, and the luxury to have the top pharmaceutical companies be able to make products in the U.S. That is great! Companies with strong financial outlooks aid the American economy, but since when did it become okay for pharmaceutical companies to hold our nation hostage? Great Britain (which has 2 of the 8 most profitable pharmaceutical companies) has federally subsidized prescription drug prices and a national health care plan that allows doctors to work in subsets of 9, and the British citizens are allowed to choose the group or subset from which they receive medical care. This system still provides the doctors the ability to live with a modest income that keeps themselves in a BMW and their wives in Aston Martins. Why couldn't that system be here?

The rush of animosity from the idea of the socialization of any private service, will bring a nice stir to a debate between liberals and conservatives, liberals and liberals and conservatives and conservatives. If anyone has watched the posturing between the Democrats in their campaigns and speeches, they can see that there is no congruent plan between any two people. Maybe all of the issues begin with our ego? Our big American, everything we do is the best, ego. We cannot admit defeat in combat, and now we cannot concede in policy administration either. Big Brother is going to run our lives, if we let them run healthcare, first by making us live longer and healthier, then by putting more money back in our pocket. How Horrible!

Changing Gears

2007-07-19T09:34:00.000-04:00

There have been a few things that have gone on in my life and the world around me since I have last written in my blog. Due to some of these circumstances and instances, I am going to begin to take my writings in a different direction for a while. I have not fell out of love with sports and the sporting news, but I feel that I need to change gears for a while and talk about some things that may matter on a larger scale than sporting arguments. So I hope you appreciate some of the newer topics that will be discussed by this posting, and I hope that this will encourage further discussion on message boards and homes across America.

Lew

To The Principal's Office Young Man

2007-06-05T11:08:00.000-04:00

Lately, every time I turn to the sports page in the newspaper, or tune into my favorite satellite station (which is ESPN) I have to see a picture of the NFL's version of the perp walk. A young black man being called to go meet with the NFL Commissioner due to behavioral issues unbecoming a professional football player. Could this be true? Professional athletes that exhibit disruptive behavior towards society due to lifestyle choices, money, women and fame. Or is this just another way of the NFL's mob-like control over its employees? These issues are all important, but when did the highest official in the NFL become the hall monitor?

I have grown up in a time of several strong and great commissioners in professional sports. Lasting impressions will be imprinted on society for generations to come with the rapid expansion of the NBA under David Stern and the NFL with Paul Tagliabue which pushed the NFL and the NBA into America's mainstream. I mean that in a sense that goes beyond viewership and participation, but these sports have corporate global dominance that spans different ethnic markets and demographics now like never before. And like all businesses, when the focus is on money and not the people the business serves, there is a divide between interest. The common fan is ignorant to the business of football, and the common player is out of touch with the common fan.

The average ticket holding fan for a professional sporting event in the US would most likely be an upper-middle class Caucasian male, who pay a generous amount of money for their entertainment at these sporting events. While one can't help but notice the demographic of the playing surface be it grass, turf, or the hardcourt is noticeably tilted towards African-Americans and players from over seas. So with the understanding of those readily identifiable differences why would you patronize your product by drawn out public beatings and persecutions?

In the NBA you draft high school kids at the age of 18 and 19 with little marketable education and job skills from neighborhoods that would make Uma Thurman from Kill Bill nervous, and have the nerve to attack the way they dress. David Stern how do you expect them to dress? Many of these kids were poor with no father figure in sight and you expect them to show up in to the gym in a suit and tie. I for one, am not okay with your image problem that was created by greedy NBA executives not the kids. We have probably all heard the phrase that "you will never learn to be a man unless you get to see a man." That statement couldn't ring more true than for some of our young brothers in the NBA.

In American sports now football is king. King does not rest in the offseason either. Most of the press of the king of American sports in the spring and into the summer is simply offseason speculation, trades, and now the new dynamic of which player is getting in trouble. This offseason Michael Vick has been courted by the newly crowned commissioner of the NFL, as well as Pacman Jones (who has the worst nickname in sports), Tank Johnson (whose name is the best--a defensive tackle with the name Tank, come on) and the Bengals WR Chris Henry. All of the aforementioned players have gone to meet with the commish, and all besides Michael Vick have been disciplined by the league, and by league I mean Roger Giddell the commissioner.

Which brings me back to the main question of this article. When did the commissioner's office become the principle's office for professional athletes? The NFL's press release of the job criteria states that "a commissioner’s role is to exercise broad administrative or judicial authority. More specifically, the NFL Commissioner manages the business affairs of the league and is its most visible representative." It even goes as far to state that a conflict between a player and ownership is a conflict of interest. So how did we get here? Now we are in a state of 1984 like dictatorship by the NFL and its management officials. I can tell you how, CONTROL! This is the same league that offers the most violence this side of boxing and the UFC, and doesn't offer its participants guaranteed contracts. If you do what we like, we will pay you, if you don't we can cut you. As we can see that mentality stretches all the way to the top.

I think this mentality sounds like something that comes from the Sopranoes. And we have all seen that Tony is in a bit of trouble on that end of the spectrum. Even Rome fell, with all their advantages and superiority over their competition, overstretching their means caused their collapse as well. For the record, I love football and i don't want it to collapse, but I do believe they should treat their players better! And lastly, I did intentionally leave MLB's Bud Selig out of that conversation above. He got the chance to preside over baseball which has been a part of the American fabric in this society for over a hundred years. I just think he should take up for his players more too. If in the business world, you are your product, shouldn't you support that product?

Being Great Just Isn't That Great: Ask Lebron

2007-05-22T14:10:00.000-04:00

As a little boy, all I dreamt of was being a great professional baseball player. I saw that as the fulfillment of talent and promise and hard work. That was long ago and that dream has long since been dashed, but that does not take away the joy of watching sports, especially at a high level. Last night I watched Lebron James (the brightest light in the NBA) and I could not help but feel sad for the young man because nothing he does is ever nor will ever be good enough.

For four years now, Lebron has been the beacon of hope the NBA has been wishing for. A dashingly handsome young face with excellent marketing potential that exudes superiority and god-given talent. Someone to fill the void left by Michael Jordan. Lebron is all of that and maybe a little bit more. Several weeks removed from his high school prom in northern Ohio, he was giving professional players some different types of moves.

We the fans have very distinct and vivid memories of the 90's Bulls crushing teams in their way of victory records and NBA title after title, but very few remember the tongue waging days of early Jordan when the Bulls didn't have a ice cube's chance in hell of beating the Pistons and Celtics. Even more rare is the memory of MJ being the 3rd or 4th scoring option on a loaded North Carolina team when he first stepped on the college campus.

Our heir apparent hero Lebron didn't even attempt to take his game to the NCAA level, yet he is in constant comparison with his draft class (Dwyane Wade, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh, etc...) all of which at least went to college, some only for one year. Writers and commentators do their comparisons and Lebron compares favorably in every category, besides the category of public opinion.

ESPN's Mike Wilbon has found an excuse at every turn to why he can't anoint Lebron as an elite player. At first it was a lack of a body of work in the Playoffs. Then he was great in the playoffs, but Dwyane Wade won the championship, so Dwyane is better. If that was the criteria of greatness, Karl Malone and Charles Barkley would never be recognized as all-time greats, and Robert Horry would be on an equal plain with Michael Jordan, seeing that they both have six championships.

We live in an age of very high expectations. Not just our athletes, but all celebrities in general (sometimes going as far as calling them role models). And when you are dubbed the greatest thing since sliced bread, you better have a pretty shard knife. In his defense, Lebron's knife couldn't be sharp enough. With every dazzling dribble, dish, and dunk I like probably every other fan is more amazed by the great talent he possesses, but he wasn't blessed with a teammate like Scotty Pippen or Shaq, so no rings yet. He doesn't have the bitterness of witnessing a parent go through the troubles of stardom like Barry Bonds or Kobe Bryant. He just happens to be a kid with a kid's outlook on his beautiful game, and that will never be enough for his detractors. When he finally wins a championship, he won't have six. If he wins six, he won't have nine. Unless Lebron becomes the Tiger Woods of basketball and crushes every record imaginable he will have to face the fact that being great just isn't good enough for the chasm that is created by expectation. The way I see it, Lebron is learning slowly that being great just isn't that great all the time.

Cornerstone of Cheaters

2007-05-18T14:13:00.000-04:00

In the past several years, in all mediums of media, I have seen and heard an assortment of comments about the state of baseball and the way Barry Bonds is ruining the Great American Pastime. Is it a racial issue? Is it a general mob mentality issue? Is it the nostalgic aspect of yesteryear invading our adult memories? I am going to answer those questions for you. Yes.

Yes to all of the concerns. Is Barry a generally good samaritan that is getting a bad rap? No he is not a charity case, and Barry doesn’t want to be, but he is on the other end of the stick when it comes to the courthouse of public opinion. I am not saying a black man cannot be treated fairly in the world of sports in the United States. I am saying that it just doesn’t help.

Everything in sports that we read, listen to and watch is commented on by sports media on a daily basis. Whether it is whatever medium (TV, radio, print, internet) and the media personnel want insight. Everyone wants to break the story. Barry has been the guy to never give the media that glimpse into his life, his story. Now, being that closed off has brought us to this. A public Barry Bonds vendetta killing in full display with the guise of it being all about integrity of the game instead of what it really is… displaced anger towards a guy they (media) think is a jerk.

There have been polls and votes to tabulate who wants to see Barry Bonds break the most significant record in sports, Hank Aaron’s career homerun mark. The findings prove that very few people, if any, want to see this accomplishment get achieved. Need we not forget that there was an even more vigorous display of hatred for Hank Aaron to pass Babe Ruth. The people tend to simply forget that the 60s and 70s wasn’t so long ago and things have changed, but not to the extent we want to celebrate.

The players in the 60s, 70s, or 80s were not saints, they were just ballplayers. So why can’t people move on from the fact that Barry is not alone. Did he use steroids? He probably did. So what? He definitely doesn’t stand alone in that category. Why hasn’t anyone come out to say “put an asterisk on the MVP Ken Caminiti won in 1996”? He admitted to being a steroid and cocaine abuser. This proved to catch up to him when he died suddenly a few years ago. So if Barry has been convicted by the court of public opinion of his doing why can’t the public acknowledge that he is one of many and there is no way to single him out as the cornerstone of cheaters? What about all the pitchers that were juiced that he hit homeruns off of? What about all the base stealers that stole more bases? What about all the hits that were robbed by juiced infielders that got more range up the middle? Where does it end? It ends with the realization that Barry Bonds is the greatest player of his era. His era just might have happened to be juiced.