Posts

Posted on

PANETTA, GATES & CLINTON

[Note: as the Intramuralist was leading a conference this weekend, allow the following to serve as today’s column — one of the more insightful editorials I read this week. It was written by Ed Rogers and appeared in Wednesday’s Washington Post.]

Much is being written about the revelations in former secretary of defense and CIA chief Leon Panetta’s new book, “Worthy Fights,” regarding President Obama’s inadequacies and mistakes as commander in chief. The Panetta revelations have provoked a fresh appraisal of similar disclosures from former secretary of defense Bob Gates in his book and the more gentle — but still direct — criticisms of the president found in former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s book.

None of these individuals are amateurs. They were not manipulated into writing what they did by greedy publishers hoping to sell books. They are not a bunch of Scott McClellans, the now-forgotten White House press secretary under President George W. Bush, who shamed himself by using his so-called memoir to turn on Bush 43. Panetta, Gates and Clinton are not lightweights who are in over their heads, nor do they think they need to reveal secrets to get attention. They are all distinguished leaders who don’t shoot from the hip or have anything to prove. So when they agree on something, whatever they are telling us should be treated seriously. The world should take notice.

The explosive conclusions they all independently report about President Obama should not be seen as acts of disloyalty or selfishness, as The Post’s Dana Milbank suggests in his latest piece, “Leon Panetta, other former Obama subordinates show stunning disloyalty.”  What else could have motivated their so-called disloyalty? Maybe we should look at their revelations not as selfish, disloyal acts, but as sincere warnings from patriots. Are they trying to tell others still serving in this administration that President Obama has the wrong instincts and a misguided worldview? Do they think the president needs to be aggressively hounded into doing the right thing to protect America’s interests and not be left to his own devices? Perhaps Panetta, Gates and Clinton are telling those who still serve in government that President Obama’s biases and instincts need to be challenged. The few adults left in the administration should not roll over, and the Republican opposition needs to be constantly vigilant in order to try to shape a more protective American national security posture. Maybe Panetta, Gates and Clinton are putting loyalty to a country at risk ahead of deference to the president who appointed them.

All three knew their disclosures would be flashpoints in the media and that many would find fault in their decision to go public. Gates and Panetta have both held their last government jobs, they don’t need the money and they don’t have an agenda beyond contributing to the historical record.  Clinton may have a more tangled mix of motives behind her latest book, but the points she makes are still valid when reinforced by Gates and Panetta.

The bottom line is that all three have made it clear: There are problems within the Obama administration, and they saw those problems up close. As Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal told Milbank, “Secretary Panetta and others are echoing what is obvious from the outside, but it’s more powerful when it’s coming from people on the inside.”

So rather than have a knee-jerk reaction, rush to protect President Obama and see character flaws in three people who have served their country in a variety of capacities, maybe we should listen more closely to what they are telling us. The Obama apologists who are howling that Panetta, Gates and Clinton are just trying to sell books know better.  

Respectfully written by Ed Rogers

[Follow Ed on Twitter: @EdRogersDC]

Posted on

“you can’t handle the truth!”

e98df83447ef9af51137f6f21921f0Quit telling us what you think we want to hear. Tell us the truth. Don’t manipulate the truth in order to serve what you’ve determined is a greater purpose…

When Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) was asked by MSNBC this week if he “thinks the Obama administration has done an appropriate job in handling the Ebola crisis,” the November candidate fumbled the question — lots of “uh’s” and pregnant pauses before finally saying “it’s hard to know.” Pryor is running for re-election in a state where Pres. Obama’s approval rating is only, approximately 31%.

When Alison Lundergan Grimes (D-KY) was asked three times by local reporters last week if she voted for Obama in 2012, the November candidate repeatedly ignored the question and refused to answer. Obama’s approval rating is also only, approximately 31% in Kentucky.

Quit telling us what you think we want to hear. Quit dodging the questions. It’s ok to agree or disagree with Obama. It’s ok to have voted for him or not. Good people voted both “for” and “against” Obama in the last election — contrary to popular, partisan belief.

Pres. Obama, the Intramuralist would also like you to be transparent with the truth…

Just three weeks ago, the President, said the chances of Ebola making its way from Africa to America are “extremely low.” He said, “We’ve been taking the necessary precautions, including working with countries in West Africa to increase screening at airports so that someone with the virus doesn’t get on a plane for the United States. In the unlikely event that someone with Ebola does reach our shores, we’ve taken new measures so that we’re prepared here at home.” That was September 16th.

Two weeks later a Dallas man got on a plane after visiting Liberia, returned to the United States, and was diagnosed with Ebola. Before an accurate diagnosis, he went to a hospital, was sent home, and the measures taken were not effective nor substantial. He was diagnosed in the United States. “We” weren’t prepared. He sadly died this past Wednesday. More are probably infected.

Did Pres. Obama lie? Of course not.

I realize I aver such with emphatic certainty; truthfully, no one can opine with certainty the deceit within the heart of another. But there is nothing within the President’s statement that suggests any sense of falsehood.

My point is that while I do not believe for any reason that Pres. Obama lied to us regarding the potential spread of the Ebola virus, I do believe he again fell prey to what’s unfortunately been a consistent pattern throughout his tenure: Pres. Obama seems to tell us what he thinks we want to hear.

Pick the issue. Pick his public response. (Note: feel free to start with the IRS and being told there is no possible “smidgen” of corruption.)

He had no idea if the virus would reach our American shore. But that’s the point:  he had no idea. While none of us would desire the spread of this potentially fatal infection, none of us — none of us — not even the President — could or can predict the expanse of the epidemic. And yet, the President did predict the expanse. He told us what we wanted to hear. Perhaps I’m wrong, but my strong sense is that a “politician-first” tells us what we want to hear (note the above campaign examples even of viable candidates). A “leader-first,” however, tells us the truth — acknowledging what we can do, what we can’t, what we know, what we don’t, and all the while he or she boldly but humbly shares a commitment to trudge forward together.

More important than what we want to hear is transparently telling the truth. Sometimes the truth is “I don’t know.”

Respectfully…

AR

Posted on

busy signals

phone_dangling4-219x300He picks up his cell phone, calls into a witty Sirius radio show on Sunday, and after only a few short seconds, he hands me the phone, and says, “What’s this?!”  A look of genuine confusion had usurped his entire countenance.

I put the phone up to my ear and responded with an immediate chuckle, deciphering the supposedly foreign sound. I realized that my clearly, budding-in-maturity teens, living in this digital age of abundant texts, Tweets, selfies and Snapchats, are quite possibly still ignorant of the infamous, decades-old, non-melodic “busy signal.”

“A busy signal? What’s that?”

Yes, even in 21st Century America, where cell phones often come as an extra bodily appendage, we are not used to someone or something being unavailable… too busy to talk to us… unable to be contacted, found, or Googled on an immediate whim. We aren’t used to “busy signals.”

We also aren’t used to something else — perhaps something even more significant. We aren’t used to being ignorant; better yet, we aren’t used to admitting our ignorance.

Friends, to say that one is ignorant is not an insult. To be ignorant means there is something we don’t know. Let me be clear: there are lots of things we don’t know! I’ll speak for myself… I don’t know how to fly a plane… I can’t ice skate (woe is me)… and I have no idea how to teach either rocket science or complex music theory.

Granted, there are lots of things I do know — lots of things, too, I have learned because I am responsible for their activity or for what happens in that area — but I had to be intentional, take the time, and humble myself enough to learn what I needed to know. We should also note, no less, that when the topic or task is something we are responsible for, then our ignorance may actually be a weakness. But when the topic or task is outside the realm of our responsibility, our ignorance is evident of neither shortcoming nor failure.

My sense, however, is that far too many are unable to admit that of which they are unaware. These persons may be highly intelligent. They may be our leaders. But neither intelligence nor leadership automatically equates to wisdom — especially if there exists an inability to admit ignorance.

Much of this seems happening in the world today. I see it in America’s current, shaky, foreign policy approach. I see the world crumbling. Just this weekend, I ran into a young woman who said, “Is it just me, or does it seem like the world is falling apart? America doesn’t seem to know what she’s doing.”

Not knowing what we’re doing… not knowing.

Friends, I don’t claim to know all the right approaches. I am ignorant in many of these areas. Now while I do attempt to humbly educate myself on what I do not know, let me also add that the areas are not my responsibility; hence, my ignorance equates not to weakness.

Thank God I’m only dealing with busy signals. And thank God my son had no issue admitting what he did not know.

Wishing more would humbly do the same…

Respectfully…

AR

Posted on

mom a

pinwheelYears ago, as a young mom with three little kids in tow, I remember visiting my mother-in-law’s home for the weekend — a too infrequent delight for our entire family. After we sat down for breakfast and the always abundant spread of eggs, bacon, toast, muffins, and more, Mom A excused herself from the table, went to the pantry, and promptly placed a fresh box of Nabisco Pinwheels smack-dab in the middle of our meal. Yes, Pinwheels. Yes, breakfast. You know the ones: those old fashioned, marshmallow cream, mini-Bundt cake looking cookies, totally doused in sugar, covered in oh-so-unhealthy chocolate.

As a young mom committed to raising my kids in the way they should go, I couldn’t believe it. Pinwheels… really?! How could my mother-in-law, who’s supposedly older and wiser and attempting to help us in this prudent, persevering, raising-of-kids process, even think of putting such a sugar fest right in front of my boys? But having one of those indignant, self-righteous moments that every unknowingly immature, growing parent must confront now and then, I remained silent, said nothing, while quietly steaming inside that my kids were about to be ruined for life.

Funny. I’d like that moment back right now.

I stand amazed — and humbled — at how much we sometimes don’t know… and don’t know we don’t know…

My righteous indignation was undoubtedly well-founded, as of course, each of us wants to contribute positively to the lives of others; of course, we want to be healthy; and of course, as young parents we’re often feel we’re doing the very best we can. But what I couldn’t grasp at the time was how the offering of an unexpected, sincere treat did not impede any progress. In fact, eating those sweet Pinwheels may have been healthier in an emotional sense — noting how we were pausing to enjoy something we typically don’t… how we were intentionally enjoying something good.

My mother-in-law modeled many things well for our family. Among them…

… how to eat a blueberry bagel…

… how to semi-subtly tap in a puzzle piece, so that everyone would know you found exactly the right piece…

… how going to church every Sunday is less important than an authentic relationship with Jesus…

… how to be intentional with boys…

… how to discern really good barbecue…

… how to be consistent in honoring your spouse…

… how to be generous…

… how to be faithful…

… how to love a child other than your own…

… and how and when to intentionally enjoy a treat — how to savor something good.

After only a short stay in the hospital, Mom A passed away somewhat suddenly this past week. She had lived a good life, and valiantly modeling her faith for us once more, she was ready to go — embracing both what’s beautiful and next. I will miss her dearly. I will also be serving Pinwheels soon for breakfast.

Respectfully… lovingly… with both a wink and a tear…

AR

Posted on

khorosan

middle-east-mapAs we found ourselves recently shocked by reality — that grown men would intentionally decapitate innocent others in the name of their so-called religion — most of us have begun paying increased attention to terror in the Middle East. Not since the unspeakable wake of 9/11 have we consistently been so alarmed. With this renewed attention, we’ve learned some new terms: ISIS, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria — and ISIL, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant. (The Levant is a larger Middle Eastern area that includes Lebanon and Jordan in addition to Syria.) Just last week, a new term arose: “the Khorosan group.” [or “Khorasan”]

Now let me immediately acknowledge that the Intramuralist is by no means aware of all geopolitical terminology. Many things fly over, under, and/or right through my desired, observant radar. But I found it odd that all of a sudden the United States was conducting airstrikes against “the Khorosan group” — and far more than this semi-humble observer had never heard the phrase before.

I began asking questions. I found it odd that still early this week, the definition of “Khorosan” in Wikipedia was nothing short of ambiguous, offering only six, brief potential meanings, from a historic region to a wheat variety.

I searched ample sites… liberal, conservative, factual, subjective. I repeatedly read the narrative of Khorosan being “a little-known terror network” (very little, apparently). I found a few who suggest an active, existent sect. I found still more repeaters of indeterminate talking points. I found one more perspective that scared me. Note: I don’t know if this is true…

Andrew C. McCarthy is a former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York — the same position once held respectively by Louis Freeh and Rudy Giuliani. McCarthy is most known for the conviction of Islamic terrorist Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and the 11 other defendants of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing (according to Wikipedia, which had far more information on him, I might add). While McCarthy embraces conservative politics, he is respected across partisan lines because of his noteworthy background in terrorism prosecution; he is knowledgeable. He believes the Khorosan group is fictitious.

McCarthy’s opinion is certainly not widespread nor unanimous. He acknowledges the historic region definition, but adds that the name is one “the administration came up with, calculating that Khorosan — the Iranian-Afghan border region — had sufficient connection to jihadist lore that no one would call the president on it.”

McCarthy argues that Pres. Obama has repeatedly boasted that al-Qaeda has been decimated under his watch, often substantiating the claim by the killing of bin Laden. McCarthy continues by saying Obama has routinely dismissed any serious rise of al-Qaeda, blaming the current threat on all things other than mistakes in his discernment or decision-making. Obama diminishes any perspective contrary to his desired rhetoric of strong leadership. And in perhaps his most poignant criticism, McCarthy adds: “Obama is not the manner of man who can say, ‘I was wrong: It turns out that al-Qaeda is actually on the rise, its Islamic State faction is overwhelming the region, and American interests — perhaps even American territory — are profoundly threatened.’ So instead . . . you got ‘the Khorosan Group.’ ”

Let me be very clear: I hope Andrew McCarthy is wrong. Many believe he is. Many believe he’s wrong in that the group is not fictitious, but that Khorosan is not an accurate representation of the entire picture, as it’s merely a small terrorist cell; in other words, the group may not be fictitious, but it may be overhyped.

The part that concerns this observer most is this administration’s tendency to embrace hyperbole in attempts to seemingly manipulate the public narrative… “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor…” “not even a smidgen of corruption” in the IRS. These are untrue. While manipulative rhetoric is certainly not indigenous to this administration, it greatly concerns this observer that the truth is so ambiguous.

Respectfully…

AR

Posted on

what it is


whats_in_a_name.2Let’s call it what it is — and not what it’s not…

The unfathomable beheading at a food processing plant in Oklahoma City is not simply “workplace violence.” It was the evil act of a disgruntled, fired employee who was a Muslim convert, who may or may not have been imitating recent, publicized acts by Muslim militants overseas — who have publicly called on Muslims across the globe to join in the terror.

The military involvement overseas attempting to destroy ISIS is not simply a coalition addressing a “conflict.” It is a war. War is “a state or period of fighting between countries or groups” or “an organized effort by a government or other large organization to stop or defeat something that is viewed as dangerous or bad.” The United States is fighting organized terrorist groups — currently ISIS, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

(Note: that also means that there is no “war” against women, teachers, or Christmas, much to the rhetorical chagrin of many.)

We also are not fighting simply against a “radical extremist group.” We are fighting against an Islamic extremist group. While many seem most comfortable omitting the religious affiliation, the reality is that Christians, Jews, Buddhists, etal. do not kill former members or those who don’t embrace their religion. As said ironically, perhaps best by the too-oft, in my opinion, disrespectful Bill Maher: “Vast numbers of Christians do not believe that if you leave the Christian religion you should be killed for it. Vast numbers of Christians do not treat women as second class citizens. Vast numbers of Christians do not believe if you draw a picture of Jesus Christ you should get killed for it.”

And perhaps Maher’s best line, when CBS/PBS’s Charlie Rose attempted to compare the ISIS terrorists to so-called “radical” Christians: “Well you’re wrong about that. The Qur’an absolutely has on every page stuff that’s horrible about how the infidels should be treated.”

(Another note: many do not know what the Qur’an actually says.)

My point again: let’s call things what they are — and not what they’re not…

As for the “what they’re not” perspective, observe the current hot seat of Democratic Party Chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Regardless of one’s political leanings, she’s fascinating to watch. Let me say now, I don’t know her heart; I don’t know what drives her; I have no ability to accurately assess her moral integrity. But with multiple polls suggesting a current souring of Democratic candidates as we near the November elections, she’s restlessly working to drum up support for the politically likeminded. For a second time in recent months, she’s actually said that an opposing gubernatorial candidate has given women “the back of his hand.” What Wasserman Schultz must intend to imply (accuracy seems secondary) is that her opponent’s policies have not been friendly to the female gender. However, she instead calls the candidates something they are not.

Yes, we should call things what they are — not what they are not — always with respect, recognizing, too, we may possess a limited view of the facts.

Respectfully…

AR

Posted on

the dangers of social media

images-1I learned a lesson last week. I learned the “code” of social media. Not to be confused with the proverbial dress code, dating code, or universal bro code — each which are unfortunately, ostentatiously, sometimes broken — social media has its own understood, accepted protocol. For example…

Indirect tweeting is an art form.

The teens are all on Twitter because the parents invaded Facebook.

Parents can “like” or “favorite” their kid’s status, but comments will negatively impact any coolness factor.

Insulting tweets are totally acceptable if they are retaliatory.

And…

Success is measured by the number of “favorites” and “retweets.”

Let me be the first to acknowledge the good that can come from social media. Among the many benefits, I am thankful that social media is a time saver. It allows us to connect with friends across the years and countries and that we otherwise may have lesser time for; it keeps us in touch.

It also gives us insight into how other generations are thinking. I love having extended, effective avenues to communicate with my kids — especially when they’re stuck in those adolescent stages of not wanting to share too much.

I additionally see social media applying pressure to some areas that otherwise might quietly fade away. I think of the spotlight social media has placed on trending topics — from the areas of semi-subtle government overreach to the recent abuses of not so subtle professional football players. Social media has prolonged the conversation and thus the attention on important topics.

Let me say, too, though, that social media can be dangerous. For example…

… One liners now count as communication; a response qualifies as dialogue. Insults are accepted — even thought to be good and true, especially if exceptionally witty. Respect for other people is secondary to the right to express oneself. Self-focus reigns. Hurting people is justified. Listening is not encouraged..  And… If I feel it, I can say it, post it, take a pic and broadcast it, because what I want matters most.  In other words, social media can sometimes act as an arrogant, selfish, foolishly accepted platform. What are we teaching our younger generations?

This week I had the unfortunate experience of witnessing an emotional drama publicly play out in the Twitter universe. One person says something… another person says something else… the first justifies the next… the next justifies more. There was arrogance, insults, justification for foolish behavior, yada yada yada.

But let me tell you what it was not. It was not healthy conversation. It was not respectful dialogue. It was people who think they’re grown up all hurting one another, and justifying it along the way. The challenge for this semi-humble observer is that I love the many persons engaged in the interaction. I wanted to shout out and say, “What are you doing?! Do you not know how to speak to each other? Do you not know how to have conversation? Do you not know that social media can be dangerous?” Sadly, obviously not. They couldn’t hear me.

The biggest danger of social media is that people think they’re listening when they’re not. They think they’re communicating when they’re not. And they think what they’re doing is wise… when by all means it’s not.

Respectfully…

AR

Posted on

what’s most important

149A headline snapshot from around the world this week…

“U.S. Military Leaders: Strikes in Syria Are Just the Start of a Prolonged Campaign”

“Ebola Epidemic Could Top a Million Victims If Not Contained, CDC Warns”

“Lois Lerner Breaks Silence: I’m ‘Not Sorry for Anything I Did’”

“A Majority of Americans Say Obama’s Presidency Is a ‘Failure’”

“Ravens Owner Steve Bisciotti Defends Team, Denies Withholding Information about Ray Rice Incident”

Each of the above gives me reason to pause…

War. Disease. Corruption. Leadership troubles. Domestic violence.

Each makes me stop in my tracks, soberly pondering the reality of what actually happened to substantiate such a headline. Most days, the Intramuralist does just that… ponders the headlines… reads deeper… makes inferences… asks questions. Except for days like today…

… when…

I went to a friend’s funeral…

I witnessed a son’s heartache…

I watched the advancement of an illness in another…

Each puts life into perspective.

Truly the little things matter very little… Being upset about an irritant or annoyance means little in the long run. Worried about a missed assignment or missed opportunity is disappointing but little more. And crying over spilled milk or spilled anything only adds liquid to the plate.

Are we paying attention to what’s truly most important?

Sometimes. Sometimes not.

It hurt my heart to see a young mom die. So soon. So early. But I have confident hope in a life that’s amazingly better. She knew that hope. She will suffer no more.

It hurt my heart to see my son in so much pain. He was wronged. Part of his response was wise — part of it not. I look forward to how regardless, he will grow.

And in regard to my friend who is sick now… that hurts my heart, too. But wow… her attitude of gratitude is amazing… it spurs me on… my turn to grow.

All keep me away from dwelling too much on dreary headlines… (Thank God).

Respectfully…

AR

Posted on

something good

stillthumbThese past few months we’ve witnessed even the non-sports fan pay increased attention to the athletic arena. From the previous outrage directed at then NBA owner Donald Sterling and his racist rants to the current outrage directed at the quartet of NFL players marked more by their off-field abuse than on-field athleticism, we’re seeing the bad; we’re witnessing the ugly. “Bad” and “ugly,” however, do not account for all that occurs in the wide world of sports. Noting the infamous Eastwood epic, let’s not forget to focus on the good. Let’s not get sidetracked by all the awful in the world. Let’s celebrate the story of Devon Still.

Devon Still is a defensive tackle for the Cincinnati Bengals. After being named a consensus All-American at Penn State, Still is now in his third year as a professional football player. Be aware that the average career of an NFL player is only 3.3 years (see Statista 2014). Entering his third year, in the last round of training camp cuts, Still was actually released. By his own admission, he wasn’t able to give 100% anymore.

In June of this year, Still’s 4 year old daughter, Leah, was diagnosed with Stage 4 neuroblastoma, a rare pediatric cancer; she is said to have a slightly better than 50% chance of survival. Upon learning of the diagnosis, understandably, Still’s motivation to play professional football faded quickly. Said Still, “When I found out, I told my family I was done. Done. I didn’t feel comfortable leaving my daughter while she’s going through this. She’s fighting for her life. Sports is not more important than me being there while my daughter is fighting for her life.”

He said more… “My head is messed up, to be honest with you. It’s messed up. Sometimes I feel bi-polar. Sometimes I wake up and I’m optimistic. Sometimes I wake up and it’s just heavy on me.”

One day after being cut, Still was re-signed to the Bengals practice squad. The front office knew Still was no longer giving his best. But something bigger was happening in Cincinnati. By placing Devon Still on the 10 member practice squad, Still was able to maintain his excellent insurance by the NFL, paying for his daughter’s care.

“They could have just washed their hands completely of it,” Still said. “Say we don’t care what’s going on in his personal life, we just want people who can care 100% on football, that’s what they pay us to do. But they thought about my personal issues and allowed me to come back on the practice squad so I still have insurance. They said if I keep working on my physical with my injury and mentally prepared myself to focus on football, then they can move me back up to the roster, so I am not all the way out of the loop.”

Two weeks ago Still was moved back to the active roster. He has made significant contributions to the team’s success in each succeeding week. Something about the faith the Bengals showed in him and the prioritization of what’s truly most important made a difference in Still’s motivation — a motivation that continues to be spurred on by a heart wrapped around a vivacious young girl.

Said head coach Marvin Lewis, who is well respected for his character both on and off the field: “He’s been a great father. He’s done everything he can to be a part of the football team… We’ll continue to allow him to do what he needs to do as far as attending to her care because it’s important.”

The Bengals also made the decision to donate proceeds from Still’s jersey sales to Cincinnati’s Children’s Hospital and pediatric cancer care and research. His #75 jersey has quickly become the team’s top seller. Sean Payton, head coach of the New Orleans Saints, responded by personally purchasing 100 jerseys at $100 a piece.

Devon and Leah Still are making a positive difference far beyond any wide world of sports. The Bengals are doing something good.

Respectfully…

AR

Posted on

who am I?

blg 31 vikings giants“I am not a perfect son. I am not a perfect husband. I am not a perfect parent, but I am, without a doubt, not a child abuser.” — currently deactivated NFL star, running back Adrian Peterson

Former Pres. Richard M. Nixon told the world he wasn’t a “crook.” Lauren Bacall pronounced she wasn’t a “has been.” And Albert Einstein actually declared he wasn’t a “genius” (… “just curious” was Einstein’s self-assessment).

So allow me to ask: who are we? … what defines us? Or perhaps the better question: are we defined by what we do?

Look at the NFL, currently throbbing under the increased, exponential scrutiny of social media. Look at the current questionable conduct (at best) exhibited by Peterson and the much publicized trio of Jonathan Dwyer, Greg Hardy, and Ray Rice — each previously known more by their athletic prowess than by their current assault accusations. Is that who they are? Contrary to what he desperately desires us to believe, for example, is Adrian Peterson a child abuser?

Let me ask still more: does only one thing define us?

Jameis Winston, the reigning Heisman Trophy winner… is he Florida State’s star quarterback or a shouter of malicious memes? … is he, too, an assailant of a 19 year old woman?

Bill Clinton… a former President or a philanderer?

Tiger Woods… a professional golfer or an adulterer?

Woody Allen… a talented playwright or a twisted step-father?

My point is simply that we like to define persons as easily as possible, when sometimes, it’s simply not that easy. We are more than that. And yet, we continue to attempt to identify people in a bit of a figurative, nonporous box — some nice, neat fitting explanation that isn’t always so nice and easy to define. We are complex people. We may be good people. Good people make mistakes. We make mistakes. The wise man also then learns from his mistakes. So the question is whether our mistakes define us. Does any singular act define us? … or is it a succession of acts? The definition is often not so singular and simple.

As I penned this post, a political ad arose on the television. promoting a candidate for a neighboring state. Here was Alison Grimes (D-KY), an articulate woman hoping to unseat Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in the U.S. Senate. Their race seems competitive and spirited indeed.

But I was struck by the first thing Grimes had to say. Instead of telling us who she is or what she believes, her statement was emphatically clear: “I’m not Barack Obama.”

You and me… Nixon, Bacall, Einstein… the sad, growing plethora of NFL’ers… even candidate Grimes…

Defining a person isn’t quite that easy.

Respectfully…

AR