Month: December 2012

Posted on

ugg(h)s

(In our constant observation of wisdom — or lack of it…)  And then there was this…

 

“After the election of Jimmy Carter, the honorable Coleman Alexander Young, he went to Washington D.C. and came back with some bacon.  That’s what you do.  That’s what you do!  This is, uh — our people in an overwhelming way supported the reelection of this President, and there ought to be a quid pro quo, and you ought to exercise leadership on that.  Of course not just that, but why not?!”

 

Detroit City Councilwoman, JoAnn Watson, at an official council meeting this week claimed Detroit deserves a federal bailout — that would be the “bacon” — because they supported Pres. Obama.  They should thus get something in return.

 

(Note that “bacon” would actually, officially qualify as government “pork.”)

 

Watson’s perspective is not unpopular, friends.  She is merely one of the few who has stated her sense of entitlement out loud.

 

Truthfully, who can blame her?  I mean, we live in an entitlement society.  It’s not just the city, state, and federal levels of government.  It’s not just debt-plagued cities and states like Detroit and California who potentially believe they are owed particular benefits.

 

It’s a little more personal.

 

It’s in our homes and communities.

 

Now one of the great privileges of this blog is the opportunity to interact with several of you on a personal level.  I appreciate your insight and input, and I value dialoguing and learning from you, as you, too, observe the wisdom in the world around you.  Many of you are parents — and as I perceive, solid ones at that.  Several more of you may not be parents, but you are actively engaged in the lives of our youth.  You love these kids generously and sacrificially.  You are hands-on.  You are investing physically, emotionally, and spiritually in these children.  What investment will last longer?

 

But all parents and persons involved in the lives of our youth are challenged with a motive that may actually be initially good and true and right, but yet, the manifestation of the motive often plays itself out impurely.

 

We want our kids to have it better than we did.  We don’t want them to struggle.  In fact, we often want them to learn life’s greatest lessons via the least amount of pain.  We make sure they are well fed, well dressed, have the latest greatest stuff, and that they rarely have to go without.  The inherent challenge in that motive is that sometimes life’s greatest lessons are only taught via the pain… via the actual going without.

 

And thus, while our motive is initially pure, as it becomes distorted, we often find ourselves with kids who feel they deserve…

 

… the latest and greatest…

 

…Uggs, video game, apparel, anything by “One Direction,” iPod/Pad/Ped, etc., etc.  In other words, far more than “bacon.”

 

Perhaps our youth don’t demand it; perhaps they aren’t as loud or elementary as the dear Watsons of the world.  But still, we often buy it.  We want our kids to have what they want.  Yes, the line between “wants” and “needs” becomes very blurry when entitlements continue to increase.

 

Councilwoman Watson simply articulated what she wants; her passion would suggest the bailout is instead a “need.”  In our country’s growing — albeit often unaffordable — sense of entitlement, that should be of little surprise.

 

Sorry… I must run.  My son wants a pizza.

 

I said I’d get it for him.

 

Respectfully,

AR

Posted on

blaming the gun

At halftime of Sunday night’s Eagles vs. Cowboys football game, NBC host, Bob Costas, added a creative sort of commentary.  In reference to the weekend murder-suicide initiated by Kansas City Chiefs linebacker, Jovan Belcher — and quoting significantly from Fox Sports’ Jason Whitlock’s editorial column — Costas shared the following on national television:

 

Our current gun culture simply ensures that more and more domestic disputes will end in the ultimate tragedy, and that more convenience-store confrontations over loud music coming from a car will leave more teenage boys bloodied and dead.

 

In the coming days, Belcher’s actions will be analyzed through the lens of concussions and head injuries.  Who knows?  Maybe brain damage triggered his violent overreaction to a fight with his girlfriend.  What I believe is, if he didn’t possess/own a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.

 

In the coming days, Jovan Belcher’s actions and their possible connection to football will be analyzed.  Who knows?  But here, wrote Jason Whitlock, is what I believe.  If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.

 

As typical of our seemingly oft hypersensitive society, cyberspace and Twitter’s tweets were active with both outrage and support…

 

Is it appropriate for a sports host to offer a politically-charged monologue?

 

Is it appropriate for Costas to speak of something other than sports?

 

And is it appropriate for the host to opine against what is actually a civil right?

 

Would other civil rights opposition be treated similarly on TV?

 

Truth is, while the Intramuralist wonders about Costas’ conviction, I don’t claim to know the answers to all of the above.  Costas consistently shares an opinion in his weekly segment; rarely, however, does the opinion have any political connotation.

 

Is there some truth in what Costas opined?  Possibly.

 

Is there also some truth ignored?  I would agree with that as well.

 

The gun control debate in this country is challenging.  The right to keep and bear arms is firmly implanted in the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights; it is the law of the land and a civil right.

 

As with all “rights,” they are often used and abused.  Sometimes it seems the most grievous abuse — regardless of frequency — garners the greatest attention.  Jovan Belcher sadly, grievously misused his right.

 

The ignored truth, in my opinion, begins first with the impossibility for any to aver definitively — not even a respected long time NBC sports host — that Belcher and his girlfriend would actually be alive today if Belcher had not access to a gun.  Too often our society blames a thing or a circumstance as opposed to recognizing the foolishness of one man’s actions — as opposed to holding the responsible person responsible.  In other words, it was not the gun that triggered the murder-suicide; it was Jovan Belcher.

 

I wonder if the reason we so quickly and easily jump to blame the gun (or the thing or relative circumstance) is because it’s easier to control.  Maybe if we attempt to impose gun control, we won’t have to deal with the foolish ways some utilize guns; maybe if we attempt to limit free speech, we won’t have to wrestle with the foolish things some say.  If we focus on control of things and/or circumstances, perhaps then we never have to focus on the actual foolishness of some people.

 

And my sense is that the foolishness of some people is what’s most challenging to control.

 

Respectfully,

AR

Posted on

life isn’t fair

Some of life’s greatest truths are told via the most clever settings.  (Maybe we listen better that way.)  From the witty 1973 novel that evolved into the movie, The Princess Bride, by William Goldman…

 

It’s one of my biggest memories of my father reading. I had pneumonia, remember, but I was a little better now, and madly caught up in the book, and one thing you know when you’re ten is that, no matter what, there’s gonna be a happy ending. They can sweat all they want to scare you, the authors, but back of it all you know, you just have no doubt, that in the long run justice is going to win out. And Westley and Buttercup – well, they had their troubles, sure, but they were going to get married and live happily ever after, I would have bet the family fortune if I’d found a sucker big enough to take me on.

 

Well, when my father got through with that sentence where the wedding was sandwiched between the ministers’ meeting and the treasury whatever, I said, “You read that wrong.”

 

My father’s this little old barber – remember that too? And kind of illiterate. Well, you just don’t challenge a guy who has trouble reading and say he’s read something incorrectly, because that’s really threatening. “I’m doing the reading,” he said.

 

“I know that, but you got it wrong. She doesn’t marry that rotten Humperdinck. She marries Westley.”

 

“It says right here,” my father began, a little huffy, and he starts going over it again.

 

“You must have skipped a page then. Something. Get it right, huh?”

 

By now he was more than a tiny bit upset. “I skipped nothing. I read the words. The words are there, I read them, good night,” and off he went…

 

All this was never explained to me till I was in my teens and there was this great woman who lived in my home town, Edith Neisser, dead now, and she wrote terrific books about how we screw up our children…  And I remember once we were having iced tea on the Neisser porch and talking and just outside the porch was their badminton court and I was watching some kids play badminton and Ed had just shellacked me, and as I left the court for the porch, he said, “Don’t worry, it’ll all work out, you’ll get me next time” and I nodded, and then Ed said, “And if you don’t, you’ll beat me at something else.”

 

I went to the porch and sipped iced tea and Edith was reading this book and she didn’t put it down when she said, “That’s not necessarily true, you know.”

 

I said, “How do you mean?”

 

And that’s when she put her book down. And looked at me. And said it: “Life isn’t fair, Bill. We tell our children that it is, but it’s a terrible thing to do. It’s not only a lie, it’s a cruel lie. Life is not fair, and it never has been, and it’s never going to be…”

 

“It isn’t!” I said, so loud I really startled her. “You’re right! It’s not fair.” I was so happy if I’d known how to dance, I’d have started dancing. “Isn’t that great, isn’t it terrific?” I think along here Edith must have thought I was well on my way to being bonkers.

 

But it meant so much to me to have it said and out and free and flying – that was the discontent I had endured the night my father stopped reading, I realized right then. That was the reconciliation I was trying to make and couldn’t.

 

And that’s what I think this book’s about. All those Columbia experts can spiel all they want about the delicious satire; they’re crazy. This book says, “life’s not fair” and I’m telling you, one and all, you better believe it… we’re not created equal…

 

Look. (Grownups skip this paragraph.) I’m not about to tell you this book has a tragic ending. I already said in the very first line how it was my favorite in all the world. But there’s a lot of bad stuff coming up, torture you’ve already been prepared for, but there’s worse. There’s death coming up, and you better understand this: Some of the wrong people die. Be ready for it. This isn’t Curious George Uses the Potty. Nobody warned me and it was my own fault (you’ll see what I mean in a little) and that was my mistake, so I’m not letting it happen to you. The wrong people die, some of them, and the reason is this; life is not fair. Forget all the garbage your parents put out… You’ll be a lot happier.

 

And yet we live in a society which continues to embrace fairness as a philosophy, arguably believing that such is good and just and will make people happier.  Fascinating. The challenge is that each of us have different gifts, different strengths, and even different weaknesses because we are not the same; we have not been created all the same.  And yet, there seem fewer adults willing to say it.

 

Respectfully,

AR