Words of Wisdom from Alan Greenspan

So, I’m reading this book, The Age of Turbulence by Alan Greenspan. It’s basically a cross between an autobiography and a sort of “Capitalist Manifesto”. He traces the progress of Capitalism throughout the world, and I found a passage in his chapter about East Asia particularly intriguing:

“US History after World War II chronicles two military defeats in our war to contain Communism. The first was the rapid retreat of US forces in the face of masses of Chinese military crossing the Yalu River into North Korea in the winter of 1950; the second, our humiliation in abandoning South Vietnam in 1975. We may have lost the battles, but not the war. Both Communist China and Communist Vietnam have been struggling to loosen their central-planning straitjackets for the economic freedom of capitalism, while trying not to say out loud what they are doing. In 2006, America’s Merrill Lynch, following Citigroup a year earlier, obtained the right to buy, sell, and market Vietnamese shares on Ho Chi Minh City’s fledgling stock exchange. When Bill Gates, the world’s richest capitalist, visited Hanoi, he was greeted by Vietnam’s top Communist Party leaders and mobbed in admiration. Will miracles never cease? Ideas do matter. Indeed America’s capitalistic ideas appear mightier than our sword.” (page 316)

Anyway, I thought he raised an interesting point, which is rather pertinent to our foreign policy here in America. We have other, better weapons at our disposal besides military force to topple other regimes, if we care to use them. Greespan talks about the fall of the Soviet Union as the end of an world “experiment” that tested the viability of centrally planned Communist government systems. In the end, it wasn’t military conflict that settled the score between the USA and the USSR, it was a lanslide victory on the battlefield of economics. We outproduced them, to the point that their own citizens saw that their governing system was not credible.

In the long run, this seems like the way our future victories should play out. Greatness in the modern world does not hinge solely upon military dominance. If we want other nations to come over to our side, rather than force their hand through military action, we should do our best to make sure our system is among the best and most competitive in the world, sending our ideas, not our bombs, to other countries. If we make our country great, other countries will eventually want to share in what we have, and change of their own accord.

If you look at what other countries love about us (and I speak only for those Western countries to which I have traveled), it is primarily our exported products: films, music, Coke, Starbuck’s, iPods, etc. If you look at what they hate about us, it is generally our ignorance of other countries, and the arrogance of our government, primarily displayed through our military intervention. Both of these aspects of the “Ugly American” have been prominently displayed throughout the course of the war in Iraq.

Terrorism is a product of hatred and desperation. Killing, as a general rule, only begets more killing. It generally only ends when one or both sides are so exhausted or worn down that they decide to resolve their differences. Israel’s attempts to dominate Palestinians with military force has resulted in countless terrorist acts against them. After half a century, the sides finally began to wear down and consent to peace talks (the option that might actually work). There is still a great deal of progress to be made, obviously, but we’ve clearly seen which approach doesn’t work.

The Roman Empire was founded upon military might. They had great social and technological advances that those around them did not (e.g. democracy, plumbing, irrigation, etc. ) However, continued expansion through military force eventually led to an overexpanded empire that could not control its own subjugated citizens, and brought about its own downfall.

At this point, we have killed many times more civilians in Iraq than those Americans that were killed on September 11th. At some point, we have to wonder if the ends justify the means in terms of human lives. If we kill thousands of peaceful Iraqi citizens, are we really preventing terrorism, or are we simply fostering more anti-American sentiment that will almost certainly lead to more terrorism in the future?

If we want to be the greatest power in the world, we need to bring that about with international goodwill, not force —  convincing with our ideas, not our sword.

BTW, I would highly recommend this Greespan book to anyone who is considering reading it. That guy is one smart cookie. Tootles.

Top 5 “Control” Super Powers

Okay, now that I’ve vented sufficiently, let’s move on to this week’s Top 5, shall we?

Parental Advisory Warning: The following top 5 list ventures into some topics that should not be viewed by children. Okay, really just one topic, and I’ve never given this kind of warning before, but I figured no time like the present.

Brief Intro/Explanation: I’ve been wanting to create a top 5 super powers list for quite some time now, but “super powers” is so broad and sweeping that almost anything could be included, and choosing which 5 would actually be the “best” would be incredibly difficult. I would be too tempted to have a million honorable mentions, or otherwise feel like I was leaving perfectly legitimate super power contenders out of the picture. Thus, to qualify for a spot on this list, the super powers in question had to fit certain criteria:

- the powers in question must involve controlling something with your mind (hence the title of the post)

- the powers in question must be somehow amusing/comical to me

- super powers of supreme magnitude (e.g. controlling time, matter) are ineligible, due to the vast, almost unfathomable power involved, and the complications that arise (e.g. the paradoxes of time travel).

- “broken” super powers (to use gamer-speak) such as controlling the weather, the ocean, plants, insects, electricity, etc., are ineligible, because I would never want that much power to be in a single person’s hands.

Now that we have those ground rules out of the way, on with the list:

5. The power to control SQUIRRELS

This super power would be particularly useful on college campuses. How many times have you walked on a college campus, and been just blown away by the number of squirrels scurrying about. I am a huge fan of squirrels, mostly because of how they move. They don’t trot, or march, or waddle, or gallop, or even meander; they undulate. Their body looks like a sinusoidal wave, bobbing up and down vertically as it transverses horizontal space. I also like how they can cling to vertical tree surfaces. If you could control squirrels with your mind, there would be no end of the fun you could have. You could walk around with a squirrel familiar perched on your shoulder for the world to admire; You could have a squirrel deliver a flower to a girl you were trying to impress; You could send a mob of angry squirrels to maul someone you’re not particularly fond of; You could even film enormously popular YouTube videos of squirrels performing inane actions, such as dancing, riding on a skateboard, playing a piano, or flushing a toilet. These are just a few of the countless amusements you could enjoy with the control of squirrels at your command. Sounds pretty tempting, doesn’t it?

4. The power to control SOUND MIXING BOARDS

As a musician, and as a music fan, this is always a power I thought could come in handy.  How many concerts have you attended where the music was blemished by poor sound mixing? There are countless problems that can arise with sound systems: inappropriate master volume, inappropriate levels of distortion, issues with feedback, and the one token guitarist or vocalist who either can’t be heard, or who comes through way louder than the rest of the band. Imagine if you could fix any or all of these problems instantly — with your mind. Your band would always be putting off it’s best sound, as would any band you went to see. Even the Third Eye Blind concert in Mitchell wouldn’t suck so bad…..

Best of all, you would always have a lucrative job to fall back on. Bands can always use a competent sound guy. You could pretend you were adjusting all the levels with your hands, like you were some electrical expert, but really you’d just be controlling it all with your mind! Don’t worry, I won’t tell — we’ll just keep it a secret between us.

3. The power to control BOWEL MOVEMENTS

This super power has been oft proposed and frequently discussed by my twin brother. When ever he begins to bemoan the woes of the BM’s he describes as “peanut-buttery”, he says something along the lines of, “I wish I could cause my enemies to constantly have peanut-buttery [feces]! It would easily triple their wiping time, and they would eventually end up with terrible chapped ass! It would be the worst!”

He eventually extended the reaches of the super power until it ended up as the following: Ultimate control over the frequency and consistency of any person’s bowel movements (self included). Imagine, when you’re in a public restroom with awful toilet paper, you could give yourself one of those hard, dry poops that requires no wiping, and then you wouldn’t have to use the nasty paper. Come to think of it, you could have those poops all the time, and never have to buy toilet paper again! If someone in the street were trying to rob you, you could make him simultaneously poop and piss himself, and then escape while he tries to figure out what the heck just happened to him.  If you saw your dog about to poop on your brand new carpet, you could constipate him until he makes it outside. You could potty train your children almost instantly!

And, of course, you could visit terrible wrath upon your enemies, in the form of constant diarrhea, gas with oily discharge, and “peanut-buttery” poops. But really, I’m not even sure this is in top 5 reasons to have this power. In any case, I have to admit that it would be funny to be able to make people shart whenever to wanted.

2. The power to control HUMAN METABOLISM

This is probably the cash cow super power of the list; although admittedly it would be scamming people. If you could control the metabolism of any person you wanted with your mind, you could make millions of dollars promoting any diet you wanted. You come up with something arbitrary to eat, and possibly some arbitrary behavior for people to follow, and then you stage clinical trials where people who eat according to the diet you structure lose massive amounts of weight, because you raised their metabolisms with your mind. Your diet gets endorsed by labs, doctors, etc., and you sell millions of books, videos, commercials, herbal extracts, or whatever else you want to sell. You could even get industry sponsorship if your diet included a big-money market food, such as beef or dairy. Plus, you could also always be as skinny as you wanted, raise your levels of energy, or even warm yourself up when it gets cold. Aside from the used-car saleseman nature of this super power, I think it would be a pretty sweet one to have.

1. The power to control ORGASMS

Just to clarify, this was the topic I referenced earlier as child-inappropriate. Imagine you could control the frequency and intensity of any person’s orgasms instantly with your mind. In my opinion, this is simply an improvement on the Bowel Movement power. It’s slightly less disgusting, and has an undeniable hotness factor.

In fact, it incorporates advantages of almost every other super power on this list. Let’s think back to the girl you were trying to impress with the squirrel candy gram back at #5. Instead, you could deliver her the flower yourself, and when the flower touches her hand, she is overcome by the most intense orgasm she’s ever had. I think that would leave quite an impression. Let’s think back to the rock band you play for from super power #4. What if, instead of a perfect sound mix, you had the ability to make every woman in the audience simultaneously orgasm when you get to the high point of a song? Your band would either be outrageously popular, or investigated by the federal government. Thinking back to power #3, the man who is trying to rob you will be just as distracted if he spooges in his pants as if he pees and poops in them, and probably just as confused as you run away. This power doesn’t have quite the same cash cow appeal of super power # 2, but you still could probably have a very lucrative career as a sex therapist, or possibly as a pornographer.

The most obvious benefit of this power is the fact that you would be the greatest lover of all time. You would have complete control over your own stamina, as well as your partner’s. You could give your partner countless mind-blowing orgasms via foreplay, intercourse, or even talking dirty. You would even be able to co-ordinate your intercourse so that you always came together if you wanted. Basically, the greatness of your sex life would only be limited by the bounds of your own creativity.

Now, you might be thinking to yourself, “Typical guy, ranks the sex power first. Is that all men ever think about?” First, of all, yes. Second of all, you can’t tell me this wouldn’t be a sweet super power to have. Maybe it’s not as good as some of the powers that were ineligible from this list (say, the ability to fly, or control the weather, etc.), but it’s up there. Male or female, almost anyone could benefit from this power. It certainly wouldn’t save the world; it wouldn’t even solve all of an individual’s problems, but all in all, it would be pretty great.

Alright, after two posts in one day, I’m feeling pretty blogged out. Hopefully this makes up for the fact that I didn’t post last week. Thanks to those of you who are still reading (you stalwart few, you know who you are). I’ll try to write again soon. Tootles.

Thoughts on Barry Bonds

Before I begin today’s Top 5, I have an question about a current situation in professional sports:

How is it that Michael Vick faced a maximum of 5 years in prison for heading up a dogfighting ring, while Barry Bonds may face a maximum of 30 years in prison for lying about his steroid use?

Honestly, the libertarian inside me is screaming. A man who was responsible for the murder of countless dogs (some of which he perpetrated with his bare hands), would hypothetically only be able to be punished one sixth of the amount as someone who injected substances into his body to help give him an unfair physical advantage in baseball. ARE YOU KIDDING ME???!!!???

To be fair, in both cases, the maximum prison sentences in each case actually wouldn’t result from the base crimes themselves, but ancillary crimes committed in the process. In Vick’s case, dogfighting is only a misdemeanor (again, ARE YOU KIDDING ME?), and it was actually gambling issues (I believe some sort of illegal cross-state gambling) that actually opened the possibility of jail time. Bonds is not being charged with criminal steroid use, he is being charged with perjury for lying about his steroid use.

In all probability, if Bonds goes to jail, he will probably serve a sentence similar to what Vick faces (~2 years). However, just the comparison of the maximum sentences that each man could face leaves me wondering where our priorities are. Punishing someone for taking lives, albeit animal lives, six times more lightly than someone who cheats at a sport seems rather absurd to me.

Since Bonds is a professional baseball player, I suppose you could compare him to someone who cheats at his job (e.g. Enron executives), but the results of their actions aren’t even remotely comparable. One put thousands of people out of jobs, retirement funds, and life savings, the other tarnishes a hallowed baseball record. Honestly, is baseball that important? And really, isn’t the record issue easily resolved by placing an asterisk next to Bonds’s name, or removing his record from the books altogether?

Compare this to Vick, who created and managed an organization whose entire purpose is to kill dogs for entertainment. Not only did he fund and direct the operations of the dogfighting ring (and murder individual dogs with his bare hands), as a professional athlete and role model, he presented dogfighting as something “cool” or glamorous that his young fans could aspire to. Is this really six times less reprehensible than lying in court, or tainting a baseball record?

I would argue that in the long run, Vick did much more damage to the community. Yet Bonds faces potentially 15 times as much jail time as Vick will serve, 6 times the maximum jail time Vick could have served. Many Enron executives faced little or no jail time. We call this a justice system? What exactly is just about it?

Red Trades Blue 3 Ore, Wheat, Brick for 2 Wood

First things first:

 HAPPY BIRTHDAY!!!!!!

To me, that is. And anyone who shares my birthday. So far here’s the list: Evan Plowgian, John Hagedorn, Tania Kaimowitz, Hillary Clinton (I’ve heard), and my friend Jon Greene’s mom (I can’t call her Mrs. Greene because she goes by her maiden name, which I can’t remember right now).

 Anyway, on to the post I wanted to make this week. My office recently subscribed to the Wall Street Journal online, and I’ve been reading articles in my downtime. I found this one yesterday that I found particularly interesting:

Red Trades Blue 3 Ore, Wheat, Brick for 2 Wood

By Mehmet Dukar – October 25, 3:37 pm 

Eric Walker, representative of the Red, Inc., agreed in principle for a trade with the Blue team involving the exchange of 3 ore, a wheat and a brick for 2 wood. Wood, which has been in short supply given the recent drought of 8’s and 11’s, has seen its value skyrocket over the past three trimeste..uh, turns. Walker, who desperately needs wood for roads and settlements, was forced to give an arm and a leg (nearly the equivalent of an entire city) to further his company’s plans. Many question his investment, and some have begun to question Walker’s ability to scout the market in times of adversity. Walker remains confident, in spite of this quarter’s losses, that his outlook is not as bleak as it seems. “The wood in question will allow me to gain access to an ore port, hopefully preventing any future trade losses of this magnitude”, a somber Jin stated.  

Meanwhile, Blue Enterprises, an upstart settling company led by one Dusty Harrington, is making its presence felt on the market after spending the greater part of the fiscal year in last place. “We’re ecstatic,” a jubilant Harrington told reporters Friday. “Everyone told me I was foolish to hold on to my wood two rounds ago when I was offered two ore, but now I’m able to build a city and a road simultaneously.” The road, which would connect two previously built road chains by blue, would give him the longest road on the market, which experts predict would raise Blue stock 2 points almost instantly.

Perhaps more disturbing for Red than the massive trade losses they’ve sustained this quarter, or the rapid growth of their competitor (Blue), is the recent sustained drought in the wood market. Wood, which is an essential component of roads and settlements, is seen as a staple intermediate good, and sudden drops in wood production are often an unwelcome precusor to recession. Analysts disagree over the short-term future trending of the value of wood; while some forecast that the current tensions show no signs of alleviating, others are more optimistic. Gary Wentworth, a long-time game expert with a PhD in Catan, expects an increase in the next quarter. “Given its strategic marketing and location [found on 8 and 11 hexes], I can’t believe that a shortage of this magnitude can possibly continue. It would defy all previous market trends and economic indicators.”

However, Florence Pendleton, PhD,  a contemporary researcher, believes that things will get worse before they get better. “Since the production of wood is linked to the production of commodities such as paper, significant players in the market have had their production capacities severely limited. Without some serious, world-shifting trades, I don’t see large stores of wood in anyone’s near future.”

Some speculate that the recent lack of wood is somehow linked to market pressures created by the recent sub-prime mortgage crisis, claiming that massive losses have caused traders and lenders to become less trusting of  market, less willing to continue the transactions that are vital to the Catan marketplace. These rumors have yet to be verified, but could affect investor confidence in the coming quarter.

That’s weird. I never knew that the Wall Street Journal reported on Settlers of Catan. Man, once you subscribe to WSJ online, you can find articles about anything. All in all, I thought the article offered good analysis. I especially liked how they showed both sides. I mean, we need to have hope that the economy can improve, but at the same time, we need to be realistic in order to face our problems.

To those of you who don’t play Settlers, first of all, What the heck is the matter with you?!? Secondly, I promise next post I’ll write about something that’s a little less of an inside joke. Tootles.

Randy Moss, Terrell Owens…Wes Welker???

Sunday’s football game between the Dallas Cowboys and the New England Patriots, dubbed the “Duel in Dallas”, was hyped as not only a clash between two of the league’s elite undefeated teams, but also as a showdown of Randy Moss and Terrell Owens, two of the league’s top receivers.

Funny that they would both be shown up by a man whose relative stature approaches that of a garden gnome.

If the Patriots accomplish any of the goals that people are speculating they will (e.g. Super Bowl victory, undefeated season), a great deal of thanks will be due to Wes Welker, an offseason acquisition that is proving to be among the team’s most valuable.

Welker clearly outshined Moss against Dallas; his 124 yards and two touchdowns, combined with his punt returns, placed him among the most valuable players in the game. His two touchdowns gave New England and early lead, and his exploiting of Dallas’s interior defense forced the Cowboys to respect the short game, setting up later home-run passes to Stallworth and Moss.

Welker possesses great speed, quickness, soft hands, and an almost uncanny ability to make defenders miss. In fact, he has everything an NFL team would want in a wide receiver — except height (or weight, for that matter).

You would think that size would be something an NFL player would need, and that an NFL team would covet. I mean, Welker looks like a white Earl Boykins running around with all those other football players (if you don’t know who Earl Boykins is, you can find him on Wikipedia). He’s officially listed at 5′9″, 185 lbs (two or three inches shorter than I am, with similar build), but placed in the midst of other NFL players, the guy looks downright tiny. I almost feel sorry for him every time he gets tackled by linebackers and safeties who range from one and half to twice his size. Then I remember he plays for the Patriots.

Most of the hype surrounding New England’s offseason moves this year were centered around Randy Moss and linebacker Adalius Thomas. To be fair, up to this point, Moss is looking like the steal of the century, averaging over 100 yards and a touchdown per game. But part of the reason that Tom Brady and the Patriots’ offense are having such a record setting year is the fact that every receiver that Brady throws the ball to is amazing — and Welker is no exception.

Welker and tight end Ben Watson pose short threats that make the Patriots’ passing game nearly unstoppable. They are the New England equivalent of Brandon Stokley and Dallas Clark, only better after the catch. Basically, Tom Brady can throw the ball deep to Randy Moss for touchdowns until the other team stops him (a strategy that has already produced 8 touchdowns this season). When the other team guards deep to take that away, he can dump short passes to Welker and Watson for an almost guaranteed gain of 5 to 10 yars. Sometimes these short passes even turn into 30 yard touchdowns because of Welker and Watson’s ability to break and avoid tackles (as happened twice on Sunday).

This is why New England hardly ever needs to run the ball, and does okay with their 3rd string back. This type of running back production is called the Edgerrin James phenomenon. Average running back plays for a team who’s so good at passing that defenses are on guard against the pass at all times. Running back takes advantage of situation to inflate his statistics, fantasy points and earning potential. This is why espn commentators now all sing the praises of Sammy Morris and Kevin Faulk.

Great teams are always an injury or two away from stumbling. Most people’s dooming injury for New England would likely be Tom Brady. This is probably true, but I think that with the injury to Ben Watson yesterday, an injury to Welker could be almost as devastating.

Okay, by following up my long, girly post about Grey’s Anatomy with a rant about football, I have now evened out the yin and yang of my blog, and the universe is once again in balance. Now if I can just get on a regular writing schedule. Tootles.

Top 5 Ways You Can Tell “Grey’s Anatomy” was Created by/for Women

I came up with the idea for this post this summer while I was watching a bunch of Tivo’d Grey’s Anatomy season 3 episodes on my parents’ DVR (Sometimes you need to fill your unemployed free time with something other than job search). However, after the premier of season  4, I thought perhaps of changing it to, “Top 5 reasons that Grey’s Anatomy is now a terrible, terrible show”. I figure I should probably just stick with my original idea, because otherwise I’d just be pointing out the obvious. And after all, maintaining a quality sitcom year in and year out is a difficult thing to do — Scrubs and Family Guy both saw a substantial drop-off in coherence and originality after their third seasons; Lost quickly nosedived after the end of season 1. I’m not sure when Friends became terrible, but boy was that show terrible in its later seasons. When you have no new quality plot lines or characters to develop, it is difficult to prevent your show from becoming hackneyed, exaggerated, or otherwise generally crappy. That’s why Seinfeld quit at the height of his show’s popularity; he didn’t want the show to die the slow, painful death of almost every other sitcom.

Anyway, there’s another point to be made here: Even when Grey’s Anatomy was good (for those of you who share in my opinion that the show was once good), it was still very heavily catered to/viewed from the perspective of women, which is not surprising, given the fact that the creators of the show are women themselves.

Note: I’m assuming that the show is created largely by women, given the fact that the creator’s name is Shonda Rhimes, and the production company is Shondavision. Obviously some of the actors are men, but the driving creative force behind the show strikes me as clearly female.

Note # 2: There’s nothing wrong with being catered to women. I’m not trying to make any kind of value judgment here — I watch the show, so clearly I don’t think it’s bad (with the exception of season 4). Men (myself included) are allowed to like things that were invented for the sake of women. In less progressive times, this might not have been as socially acceptable. But as we move toward a more gender equal society, I would like to think that we will start to see some of the once clear gender lines blurred a little bit, such as women receiving equal pay, or women asking guys out on dates, or men watching Grey’s Anatomy. At some point we might not even worry about whether our actions are masculine or feminine/effeminate, and just get on with our lives.

This already happens to some extent. Case in Point: Body Spray. All things good-smelling have been traditionally under the jurisdiction of women, but as part of the metro-fication of men,  these once-feminine odor-enhancers have become not only acceptable for men, but even masculine, due to some extensive advertising. The logic of the advertising is this: Our product makes you smell good. Smelling good gets you laid. Getting laid = masculine. QED.

But should we really buy this? I mean, men have traditionally had fragrant MAN-sprays that we called our own, such as Deodorant and Aftershave, but come on, Body Spray? I mean, does that sound to anyone else like it should come with glitter and throw pillows? Not that there’s anything wrong with a man who likes glitter and throw pillows. I’m just saying…

Now that I’ve ranted and gotten entirely off subject, back to the Top 5.

5. The Genre

It’s a tv drama, that has nothing to do with sports or crime investigation. Enough said. Actually, this is a fairly good marketing strategy. The most religious tv show followers that I know of are, in no particular order: Men watching NFL games on Sunday and Monday night, college students watching Daily Show/Colbert Report, and women/girls watching evening dramas (Grey’s Anatomy, Desperate Housewives, and Friends [kind of a comedy, but also kind of a drama]). Since you can’t script an NFL game, and college students aren’t that large of a target audience, an evening drama that appeals to women sounds like a good idea to me.

4. The Lingo

This is mostly in reference to the constant slew of Grey’s Anatomy slang that I hear used almost exclusively by women. Honestly, how many male friends do you have who have ever used an adjective like “McDreamy”? How many male friends do you have who have ever used the phrase “Dark and twisty”? How many male friends do you have who have ever used the word “Va-jay-jay”? Actually, I have been known to use the word Va-jay-jay from time to time, but mostly only when mocking Grey’s Anatomy. Also, according to my brother in med school, Grey’s Anatomy has also sparked among girls/women an intense desire to use terms relating to the medical profession. He says conversations with girls who find out he’s in med school go something like this:

“Wow, you’re in med school? So you’re gonna be like, an intern, right? And then you’ll start your residency? And then you’ll be a resident, right? Like, that’s so awesome!”

I’m truly grateful that we have shows that give people such a profound understanding of the medical system.

3. The Plot Lines

Plot lines in Grey’s Anatomy generally run something like this: Drama. Lots of Drama. Medical drama. Baby momma drama. Baby daddy drama. There are few shows on television that are more emotionally heavy than Grey’s Anatomy. A medical drama, by definition, should have many moments of intense medical drama, such as having to awaken someone with a defibrilator. But what makes the show for women is all of the gossip, lying, and cheating. I swear, there isn’t a married man on that show who hasn’t had an affair at some point. It’s like a cross between ER and Closer (the movie, not The Closer like the tv show). All they’re missing is an episode where Natalie Portman makes a cameo and tells Dr. Sheppard that lying is the most fun a girl can have with her clothes on. I guess this doesn’t necessarily make the show for women, it could also make the show for French people. It is very similar to a lot of classic French literature. You know how those French love their cheating.

2. The Dialogue

Granted, sitcom dialogue isn’t always supposed to be like real-life dialogue; if it was, it probably wouldn’t hold people’s attention as well. It’s understandable that on a tv drama the dialogue will be loaded with over-the-top monologues, etc. However, the men on Grey’s Anatomy don’t talk to each other like men really do. A prime example comes from the season 4 premier (which is not from the show’s glory days, but it’s the freshest example in my mind. In said episode, Mark and Derek had a conversation that ran something like this:

Mark: “Looks like you could use a friend. That Meredith girl really jerked you around.”

Derek: “Don’t ever talk to me about Meredith! Meredith’s mom wrecked her, and her father abandoned her. Now Meredith doesn’t know how to love. She has real love, but she doesn’t know what to do with it. So don’t ever talk to me about Meredith. And I don’t need a friend.”

(one scene later)

Mark: “I’m the one who needs a friend.”

Derek: “What?”

Mark: “I know I said you need a friend, but I’m the one who needs a friend. I didn’t come here for Addison, I didn’t come here for the chief’s job, I came here for you.”

Derek: “Dude, I’m so gay for you right now.”

Mark: “Same here, bro. Totally gay for you.”

Well, maybe I improvised the last two lines, but that’s totally where that conversation was heading. If Mark were a real friend, and a real man, he would have stuck to his guns about the fact that Meredith was crazy. The conversation could have gone like this:

Mark: “That Meredith really jerked you around.”

Derek: “Don’t ever talk about Meredith, not her fault, etc.”

Mark: “I might be true that Meredith had a bad upbringing, but that doesn’t give her free reign to treat people however she wants. At some point she’ll have to assume responsibility for her own actions and relationships. By the way, Derek, maybe you should consider washing the sand out of your va-jay-jay and stop crying like a little McBitch.”

That would be some MAN-dialogue. Don’t get me wrong. Men talk about their feelings from time to time. They just do it in different ways from what you see on this woman-show.

1. The Characters

Have you ever noticed how there isn’t a single stereotypical MAN-character on the show, except for the occasional patient? Maybe it’s just because they’re doctors, and doctors aren’t like other people, but take a look at the main male characters of the show:

Derek: Quintessential nice guy character. Doesn’t really do much other than smile and be supportive. Fortunately, he is also good-looking, and successful, and thus confident, which allows him to still be appealing to women, but for some reason he still loves Meredith, who clearly sucks. This gives women hope that even if they suck, there’s a McDreamy out there waiting for them.

Burke: For those who don’t go for the Nice Guy, here is your alternative. The strong, silent type, filled with intensity and driven by an almost compulsive passion to be the best. Intolerant of failure, stubborn, yet somehow still possessed of a profound emotional understanding and patience when it comes to women. Gets shot, and needs to depend on a woman to get him through it. Women who want to be needed, this is your guy.

Alex: Bad boy character number 1. For the women out there who go for that kind of thing. Early in the show, he was stubborn, egotistical, emotionally unavailable, but confident and attractive enough that Izzy fell for him. Lo and behold, he turned out to have a sensitive side, as TV bad boys generally turn out to. Love for a disfigured pregnant woman caused him to become the kind, generous person we all knew he was deep inside. If you think I find this plausible, kindly read my post about bad boy appeal.

Mark: Bad Boy character number 2. Mostly there as a plot device to create more tension between Derek, Addison, Meredith, and everybody (after all, you can never have too much tension). Actually, pretty convincing bad boy character early on. Good looking man who takes what he wants without apologies. Then he got all sensitive to try and win Addison, then Addison got her own show and now he’s sensitive all over Derek and anyone willing to listen to him.

George: Used to be a realistic Nice Guy character when the show began (at that point he was my favorite character on the show). Genuinely nice guy who was less confident around women; at a disadvantage because he’s short and not as good looking as the other doctors. However, the producers of the show didn’t stick to their guns, and slowly became more and more dramatic and crazy like all of the female characters on the show. At the same time, they somehow turned him into a ladies man, tagging two of his coworkers simultaneously, in spite of the fact that he’s married to one of them.

Chief: Could be a real MAN-character, but maybe I’m just not old enough to relate. Seems to me like the wise old mentor figure who has been through it all (inculding affairs and divorce), who constantly teaches everyone else life lessons about love and surgery. There as an example that you shouldn’t let work overrun your personal life, which is a real problem for some men in society.

Okay, so I guess some of them approach real MAN-traits. But compare them for a second to the female characters, who all seem to possess, and even glorify, typical human compulsions and insecurities. Note the fact that Mark was a “Bad Boy” for sleeping around when his character was introduced, but it’s somehow okay for Meredith to sleep around when she’s trying to get over Derek (a reversal of the usual cultural double standard). Compare the male and female protagonists, Meredith and Derek. Derek is a fairly flat character, without many flaws, but without many traits that make him very complicated or interesting. Meredith is a total headcase, filled to the brim with emotional issues and backstories. Simply in terms of character development, the women seem to have gotten the lion’s share.

Also, you may often hear girls talking about how badly they want a McDreamy in their life, or which character they would date if given the choice. You’ll rarely ever hear that kind of talk from guys. First of all, fewer guys watch the show. Secondly, the female characters just aren’t built to be as appealing to male viewers as their McDreamy counterparts. I wouldn’t want to be in a relationship with any of the women in that show. They’re more flawed, more human. I mean, Izzy is hot, but she only goes after guys that are married or dying. Meredith and Christina are crazy, and Dr. Bailey just doesn’t do it for me for some reason.

It’s probably good to have a show like Grey’s Anatomy that favors women, given Western culture’s centuries of male-dominated cultural phenomena. Like I said, I enjoyed the show up until season 4. On the other hand, I can see why my roommates mock or question me when I change the channel to ABC on Thursday nights. Tootles.

Top 5 Things that should be in all Public Restrooms

This may seem like a somewhat obscure top 5, and really it’s more of a set of suggestions than demands. I realize public bathrooms are a privilege, not a right, and that in a world with limited resources, we can’t always have our cake and eat it too (although, on second thought, we might not want to eat our cake in the bathroom). Anyway, this is basically a list of things that I’ve seen in bathrooms that I’ve particularly enjoyed, and that I think could benefit any public facility. And here they are: 

5. Super Soft Paper Towels

Have you ever been to a country club or really fancy restaurant where the paper towels almost resembled a fine cloth? They are truly amazing — I have no idea how they get the paper so soft. They are also slightly thicker and much more absorbent than regular paper towels; normally I use at least two recycled brown paper towels to get my hands dry, but the soft luxury paper towels normally take care of me with just one use. I almost feel bad throwing them away — I feel like I could dry them out and use them over and over (although I’m not sure that would be sanitary). These could go higher on the list, but I believe there is a better alternative, which I will discuss shortly.

4. Moisturizing Soap and/or Lotion

This one is important to me because I am a semi-religious handwasher. I wash my hands not only every time I go to the bathroom, but also before every meal (and often before lunch I end up washing my hands in a public restroom). If you study at a school or work at an office or store for 8 hours a day, odds are you wash your hands at least twice a day in a public bathroom. That can really dry out your hands if they have cheap antibacterial soap in the dispensers. If they used something like Dove, or Softsoap Milk & Honey, or a soap with Shea or Cocoa Butter, hand softness would increase, morale would soar, and the world would be a better place. As an alternative, they could offer lotion for post-washing moisture renewal. In men’s bathrooms they might want to be careful about the scent of the lotion — no cucumber melon or night-blooming jasmine, obviously. Unscented lotion would probably be a safe bet in both men and women’s bathrooms, actually. Some women already put on so much perfume, body spray, etc. that if they put on more smelly things every time they went to the bathroom, it might cause a nasal overload. But the moisture, the softness, that’s what’s really important. On to more manly topics…

3. Xelerator Hand Dryers

The first place I ever saw this brand of Hand Dryers was at Cedar Point, in the bathroom near the Magnum. It was fitting, because the air that blows out of the dryers is of a comparable intensity to the air-resistance on a high-speed roller coaster. I’ve seen them spring up in assorted grocery stores and restaurants now, and I couldn’t be happier. I realize that air dryers are much more environmentally friendly than paper towels. Like I said, I use at least two paper towels to dry my hands after a minimum of 2 public handwashings a day. That’s a lot of wasted paper. However, many blow dryers fail utterly to dry my hands. I can stand with my hands under some dryers for a full minute before they are sufficiently dry — I feel like I could drip dry them at a comparable speed. Not so with the Xelerator. A few seconds under the dryer, and done. Sure, it’s a little intense, but it’s effective, and a huge time saver. The difference between a normal hand dryer and an Xelerator is like the difference between a wimpy showerhead and a showerhead with adequate to intense water pressure; once you’ve used one you’ll have no patience for the other.

2. Candles

This one isn’t too complicated. Sure, candles can add ambiance and mood lighting to any setting, but this is primarily an odor issue. I’ve been in a lot of public restrooms recently where they place cans of air fresheners in the stalls. That’s a step in the right direction, but do you know what the resulting smell is? Poop covered in air freshener. Candles are superior in this regard, as they burn other bad odors out of the air. Plus, candles only put a limited amount of fragrance into the air at the time, thus eliminating the possibility that overzealous odor-concealers will spray enough chemicals into the air to kill small animals. Sure, candles may present a fire hazard, but that’s a chance I’m willing to take. If someone burns down a room largely composed of tile and porcelain with a candle-sized flame, I would be utterly impressed. Candles are really the way to go.

1. Ambient Music

Now, at first glance, you might think that this is not very important. You may ask yourself, “Why did he put music as number 1? He must really be a music lover.” Well, I am, but that’s not why this is number one. Honestly, how many things can you think of in this world that are more disgusting than when someone sits down in a bathroom stall next to you and you hear every step of the defecation process? Seriously, do you want to hear every plop, every fizz, every “Oh, what a relief it is”? (Ok, it’s probably mostly plops, to be honest, but 10 points to whoever can tell me what I’m referencing). I’ve been in bathrooms so silent that sometimes I’ve heard people grunting, wiping, even holding their breath when they start to bear down (btw, “bear down” is the official medical term for the pushing you do when you pee, poop, have a baby, etc.) I really don’t need to hear what’s going on in the stall next to me in that much detail. Even Toby Keith set to muzak would be better than that. And also, do you really want people to be able to hear you in that much detail? Some of you probably don’t care, but I know that if I see someone’s feet at the urinal or sink while I’m making poop cacauphony in the stall, I think twice before coming out. For the sake of our ears and our inhibitions, I think that music in public restrooms should become a nationwide standard. And, to be fair, I must credit this idea to my twin brother Evan, who mentioned this to me when we were in college.

 Well, that’s all for this week. I’m a little behind, but still on track to write approximately one post per week. I hope at least some of you are still reading and enjoying this blog.   Happy Birthday to my sister in-law Claire — I hope you do something fun to celebrate. Also, congratulations to Andrew Keller and Moon Chong, who are getting married this weekend. I wish you guys the best, and I’ll see you soon. Tootles.

Top 5 Future Presidential Policies

So this week I thought I’d jump on the early presidential election coverage bandwagon and write a post about our future president. I know the primaries haven’t even happened yet, but I have some good policy ideas for the next president elect. I think, given our country’s history and current political landscape that each of these ideas are a sure-fire way to bring about some changes that our country desperately needs. Not too much else to explain about this one, so without further ado….

5. Gay Marriage — Free Trial Period

Now, gay marriage has always been a somewhat controversial issue in our country — one that many candidates wish to distance them from. Republicans pander to their base by promising anti-gay legislation, but then they never carry out this legislation once they get elected (at least, on the national level — 13 states banned gay marriage in 2004). Democrats (aside from Kucinich) generally try to skirt the issue, saying things like, “I’m personally against it, but I wouldn’t vote against it.” In general it seems like an issue our country is somewhat confused about. Some say marriage is a States’ rights issue, and has no place in National jurisdiction. Some people say marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman. Some of those people also say that homosexuals are the reason that 9/11 happened, so who do we listen to? I have a solution that will put all of our questions and doubts to rest. When you want to try a product, but you’re not sure if it’s worth purchasing, the seller will sometimes offer a free-trial period, often 30 or 90 days. This allows you to get a taste of the product without any serious financial commitment. Why wouldn’t this work with gay marriage? We try it as a country for 90 days (possibly calling it something else for those who are nitpicky over the word “marriage”), and we observe the consequences. If we noticed a serious decline in the sanctity of marriage or our quality of life,  or if god begins turning people into pillars of salt, we send gay marriage back for a full refund, no questions asked. If we decide we like it, we put it on the books, make it legal, and enjoy our new purchase. You could think of it as a nationwide social experiment. I would bet money that things would be okay if we let gay people marry each other. If you look back through history, our country has benefited whenever we have extended human rights (e.g. Civil Rights movement), and struggled when we have taken rights or privileges away (e.g. Prohibition). But you don’t have to take my word for it; that’s the beauty of the free trial! Call this toll free number to order now!

4. Stem Cell Imperialism

Another controversial issue facing many politicians today is Stem Cell research. Do we allow it, and if so, to what degree? Do we use Cord Blood? Adult stem cells? Embryonic stem cells? Cells from aborted fetuses? Clones? (Most people aren’t against those first two, by the way) . For the record, I am totally in favor of embryonic stem cell research. I trust scientists who tell me that because we limit the cell lines we are able to study, we are severely hampering the scientific progress that could  be made, and thus the benefits that could be reaped from it. Plus, there are over 400,000 embryos currently left unused in different in vitro fertilization clinics around the country. They have a limited shelf life. If they will eventually become medical waste, why not use them for our scientific benefit? Yes, each of those embryos is a life, but none of them will survive on their own, and no one is stepping up to adopt them. Where do they benefit us more, in a lab, or in the garbage? Here’s what I think needs to happen. When Bush was running for President in 2000, he claimed that America should not engage in Nation Building, and that we weren’t responsible for policing the world. Two elections later, we’ve been nation-building in Iraq for 6 years, and we are the world’s anti-terrorism police. One of next year’s candidates needs to do the same thing with Stem Cell research. During the election, he can claim it’s playing God, and it’s not our place, but once elected, he should massively step up our Stem Cell research efforts, until we become the world leader. Otherwise, someone like China is just gonna beat us to the punch. We need to fight genetic diseases over there (in test tubes) so that we don’t have to fight them over here (in our bodies). Nuff said.

3. Massive Retaliation Gun Control (MGRC)

This is actually an idea I had my junior year of high school when we were studying the Cold War. We learned that during times of nuclear proliferation, the arms race between the USA and the USSR actually prevented nuclear strikes from occuring, because of the theory of “Massive Retaliation”. The general idea is that the US and the Soviets had so many nukes that they could destroy each other several times over; and so neither one could strike the other without both powers being destroyed, and thus fear served as our best form of missile defense. I’ve always thought that this would be an interesting way to approach gun control. Rather than taking guns away, or regulating them, give everyone a gun, or multiple guns, even concealed weapons, assault rifles, and rocket launchers. That way, everyone will be surrounded by so much firepower that they will be too terrified to use their own gun. It’s the perfect plan; I mean, it worked during the Cold War, right? I think we should give it a try. In the words of my friend Anna, NOTHING COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG.

2. Trickle Up Economics

Many of you may be familiar with the idea of “Trickle-Down economics”, the idea that when money is placed in the hands of the wealthy, it eventually makes its way into the hands of the poor. Among proponents, it is known more specifically as “supply-side economics”, stipulating that the money must make its way into the hands of suppliers in the market, who in turn will create jobs, thus passing the money on to the less wealthy. Whether this works is up for debate; some claim that Reagan’s economic actions in this vein led to the eventual economic prosperity we experienced during the Clinton era. Others believe that there is no proof that the rich have any market-driven motivation to actually pass their wealth on to the poor in forms of jobs or charities or anything whatsoever. What, then, is “Trickle Up” economics? Glad you asked. It would take a very special candidate, someone who has street cred with the poor (I’m thinking John Edwards). This candidate would make many appeals to the “Other America” during his campaign, and then use all his political might and sway to then push tax cuts for the poor through a Democratic majority congress (assuming the Republicans don’t take any seats back).  These tax cuts can only go to the poorest 20 percent of the country, or even a smaller percentage if Congress deems it necessary for budget purposes. The candidate will be a beloved champion of the poor, but what the public won’t see is the massive number of shares of WalMart stock that the candidate is buying. Poor people will shop at WalMart with their extra money (as poor people do), WalMart will show unprecedented growth and their stock will skyrocket, and the candidate will make money hand over fist. Thus, the money will pass through the hands of the poor, eventually back up into the hands of the rich. The only way this plan would work better would be if the candidate could purchase stock in local liquor stores, or possibly Goodwill. How will this benefit America, you ask? I’m not sure — I’d just like to see someone pull it off. I’m convinced it would work at least as well as all of those contracts that Cheney shored up for Haliburton.

1. Iraq – Surgeus Interruptus

Fittingly, the number one policy on my countdown represents what will likely be the most important issue in the upcoming election: the war in Iraq. Many questions surround the issue, and will most likely haunt the next president for the first years of his/her presidency, regardless of action taken. It is clear that we as a nation are between the proverbial rock and hard place, losing billions of dollars and dozens of lives per week, but with no clearly feasible exit strategy that leaves Iraq in decent shape. So what is my plan? Well, to understand my plan, you must first accept the analogy that America has been screwing Iraq for the past six years. Sure, when we entered, both sides were kind of nervous and excited, and since then America has certainly impressed with its masculinity and stamina — I mean who would have thought we could have kept it up for six years? However, there must be something wrong with America’s technique, because every time America asks Iraq, “Are we almost finished? Have I gotten you there yet?” Iraq looks back as if to say “Nope, not even close.” Now, in the later thrusts of the war, both sides are getting worn out, chafed, and frankly, a little bored. It’s time for America to accept that Iraq just isn’t going to get there. We’ve already screwed Iraq, we weren’t using adequate protection and we certainly don’t want to bring any more unwanted war children into the world, so the only respectable thing we can do is pull out — quickly and abruptly, without warning. Sure, it might be a little rude, and their might be a little awkwardness afterewards, but if we want to be gentlemen about it, we can pay for Iraq’s cabfare home. (Don’t ask me what the cabfare represents metaphorically. Financial governing support, maybe?)

I hope that all of you who read this are savvy enough to discern the points of levity and sarcasm in this post. It would be a shame if people thought I  was actually a proponent of Massive Retaliation Gun Control. I would probably end up getting quoted on the O’Reilly Factor, being compared to the Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan for my insipid hatemongering (actually, I would be flattered if Bill O’Reilly actually read my blog).

Alright, it’s late, and I need to work in the morning, but thanks to those of you who are still reading, and I’ll try not to leave you hanging for too much more than a week at a time. Tootles.

How I Hurt My Neck

Now, this isn’t a Top 5, nor a Moral Question of the Day, and it’s a little outdated, but I hope that those of you who are still reading enjoy it anyway. This actually happened toward the beginning of the summer (I believe it was in June sometime). To give some background, I had spent the previous weekend driving to Akron to help my older brother move into his new place, and then I had driven 6 hours back to Chicago the night before, followed by an hour of trying to find a parking spot in the city where I was supposed to meet my friends for dinner. needless to say, all of the driving (particularly city driving) had elevated my stress levels significantly. The next morning was father’s day, and my family was going out for a celebratory brunch, which was rendered even more special by the presence of my brother and his wife who had recently flown in from Atlanta.

That morning I got into the shower feeling a little off. I hadn’t slept well, and the muscles in my back were a little tighter and stiffer than usual.  A hot shower helped me to relax a little, then when I reached out for my towel and began to dry my hair. Now, I don’t know how everyone else dries their hair, but according to my twin brother, my methods are a bit unorthodox (I find them simple and effective). I grab the towel with both hands, and rub it back and forth quickly across my scalp until my hair is dry — this usually takes somewhere from 10 to 20 seconds. Normally  a short, sweet, simple way to get my hair dry. Not this time, however. On the morning in question, for some reason, either the already tense and fragile state of my neck muscles and vertebrae, or an overabundance of vigor in my hand motions (possibly a combination of both), something went terribly wrong. I felt something move in a way that it wasn’t supposed to, and suddenly I was in sharp, terrible, dehumanizing pain. I let out several shrieks, shouts and curses as I tried unsuccessfully to move my neck back into place, many of which were heard by my sister in law (who said later that she felt sorry for me when she heard the noises coming from the bathroom, but I’m sure she was probably more weirded out than anything).

When I came out of the bathroom, the nerves in my neck had settled down some, but I could feel that something was still noticeably wrong. My family members pointed out to me that my neck was crooked, a fact that I later verified to myself in the mirror. Instead of coming out of my collar bone at the usual angle — I I — my neck stuck out at a diagonal angle like this: / /. In order to keep my vision angle straight, I had to constantly tilt my head to the left to compensate. I tried as much as I could to relax, hoping that the problem was muscular and with time my bend would right itself, but by the time I got home from brunch the pain was so bad that it was a colossal effort for me to even change position from sitting to standing, and vice versa. I spent the majority of the next two days lying on the floor with a rolled towel under my head, hoping my spine would right itself, and wondering how on earth I could possibly injure myself so badly with nothing more than my hands and a towel.

I called the chiropractor’s office Monday morning , but they couldn’t see me until the next day, so I just waited on the floor, reading a book, occasionally getting up to take eat something or take pain pills. The chiropractor was very nice, he used electro-stimulation to loosen the muscles in my upper back, and then cracked me all over the place. However, even after my first appointment at the chiropractor, I found I couldn’t turn my head to the right without turning my entire body, a fact which brought great amusement to my twin brother and his wife. Two more appointments later, I had all my mobility back, and only minor pain and swelling in my neck. I told the chiropractor that he was a lifesaver, but honestly I hope I never have to see him again.

Now, of course, I’m back to pretty much one hundred percent, but I’m still somewhat circumspect about how I dry my hair. My mother says I should blot it rather than vigorously rubbing it, she says my way causes split ends and other hair woes, not to mention the perils to my upper spine and vertebrae. I still maintain that my way is quick and effective; I just have to be a little more careful from now on.

I hope you have all enjoyed my thoroughly ridiculous story. Now whenever your friends are trading anecdotes about ridiculous ways in which their friends got hurt, you can say, “Well, I have a friend who incapacitated himself for nearly 3 days just by drying his hair!” This ranks right up there with my friend who broke his arm running into a parked car, or my dad, who broke his nose running into a tree. You know, maybe I could have made this into a top 5. Oh well. Tootles.

Top 5 Questions About Michael Vick

Okay, I know it’s been a while; at this point, I’ve given up on making resolutions to post on any schedule, and I’ll just post when I can, and I feel like it. Anyway, I assume all of you have heard about Michael Vick and the allegations facing him, but in case I still have any readership abroad here’s a quick summary. Michael Vick is a Quarterback for the Atlanta Falcons, an American Football team (basically one of the biggest names in one of the biggest sports in the US). He has been charged with being the ringleader of a dogfighting organization in Atlanta, as well as assorted gambling charges which would obviously accompany a sport like dogfighting. The most gruesome charges against him describe what he did to the dogs after they lost fights, including executing them by shooting, drowning, electrocution. This has obviously aroused quite a response from animal rights activists, and Vick’s skin color has added to the controversy, because many Falcons fans in Atlanta feel Vick is being unfairly condemned because he is black. This story has dominated the news here in the States, especially on espn (my tv channel of choice), and many of the facts and opinions I have seen on these news programs sometimes boggle my mind. I have many questions about this case, and I have compiled a list of the most persistent and pressing ones.

Note:  Many of these questions presuppose Michael Vick’s guilt. I am not trying to assert that I am sure he is guilty, although the evidence against him certainly looks pretty condemning. If you like, you may insert a “Assuming the allegations against Michael Vick are true,” in front of any of these questions. I just thought actually typing it might make the questions a bit redundant to read. On to the questions:

5. Why did he do it in the first place?

It can’t be about the money, can it? I’ve heard on the news that the average pot size in a given dog fight is in the thousands, or tens of thousands.  Given the fact that there are only two dogs in fight, and everyone who is betting can only choose one or the other, I would imagine the individual winnings a gambler could make from this would be greatly diminished from the total pot size. Even if Michael Vick were the “bookie” of such an event, and he made more from each fight than any individual better, I can’t imagine his share of a ten-thousand dollar pot would even approach significance when compared to his $100 million football contract and his mutli-million dollar endorsement deals. Even if Vick made money from selling the dogs he bred and raised in his kennel, it would all have to be chump change to him, wouldn’t it? This would be like a GM executive getting busted for selling marijuana to college students. Why would anyone risk such a lucrative legal job for petty criminal activities? Maybe it was motivated by a compulsion to gamble, but then why not play poker or something legal? The only remaining explanation is that he just enjoys watching the dogs suffer, which could be corroborated by the unusually cruel treatment detailed in the charges against him. But if that is really the explanation, then he needs some serious counseling, and I hope he does go to prison.

4. Why leave so much evidence?

It boggles my mind to think how stupid some people can be while breaking the law. When I was in high school, a nearby high school girls’ soccer team videotaped a hazing session in which older girls hit younger girls on the team with baseball bats and dumped pig entrails on them, while parents stood by watching and distributing alcohol to minors. This tape was copied and released to the media, and everyone got in big trouble. You would think if you were headstrong enough to commit to a large lawbreaking activity like that, you would be shrewd enough to cover your tracks, or at least not dumb enough to bend over backwards to give the police something as damning as video evidence.

In the case of Michael Vick, he has been interviewed multiple times on national television talking about his passion for breeding pit bulls (the primary dog breed used in dogfighting). Federal agents found dozens of dog carcasses on his property. So far all three of his co-defendants in the federal case have agreed to testify against him. However, in spite of all of this, Vick claims that he has nothing to do with dogfighting, and that any dogfighting that has happened on his property was organized and carried out by relatives that he trusted to run his property, which he rarely visits.  If everything Vick says is indeed true, then either his relatives really didn’t merit his trust, or someone did a really good job of framing him.  And if no one framed him or betrayed his trust, then Vick ranks right up there with the people who videotaped their hazing, or the soldiers in Iraq who took pictures of all the perverted things they did to the Iraqi POW’s. Why would people do this kind of thing? Your guess is as good as mine.

3. What were they thinking?

This question is not actually about Michael Vick himself, but rather about other NFL players and sportswriters I’ve seen making comments on espn. Thee players and commentators make observations to the effect of the following hypothetical quote: “I don’t understand why everyone thinks that dogfighting is such a big deal. I mean, they’re just dogs”. First of all, having witness the fire and fury of PETA and similar organizations that the Vick controversy has stirred up, do you really want to attract any of this negative attention to yourself? Second of all, even if you don’t value dog life in the same way as human life (which you probably, and perhaps justifiably, don’t), wouldn’t you at least find the way in which Vick allegedly killed the dogs disturbing? For example, I’m not a big fan of insects, but if any of the kids I watched in Day Care had ever killed ants slowly and deliberately by drowning and electrocution, I might have voiced concern to their parents. Can you really dismiss something like that as “not a big deal”? I have no problem with the people who defend Vick using claims such as “innocent until proven guilty”, but at least recognize the heinous nature of the alleged offense.

2. Why are we responding only now?

Now, this question has been posed in many different ways on espn discussion shows, such as First Take, PTI, Outside the Lines, etc. The gist of it comes down to questioning an apparent double standard in the sporting world, which can be phrased in the following way: “If sports stars like Ray Lewis can be implicated in the murders of people, then why is the media suddenly so concerned with someone who may have killed dogs? Do we value canine life more than we value human life?” Other commentators say that other human-related offenses, such as spousal abuse, are more severe than dogfighting and regularly overlooked. Hence, is it really fair to come down so harshly on Michael Vick. The way I see it is this — Yes, the situation may be unfair or hypocritical, but the problem is not how we’re treating Michael Vick, it’s how much we’ve coddled the other people. If Ray Lewis killed somebody, that’s a big deal. If Kobe Bryant raped somebody, that’s a big deal. They should be punished accordingly. However, if others have avoided punishment because they were star athletes, that doesn’t mean Vick should as well. You have to start correcting the problems somewhere, even if there’s no precedent and it seems “unfair” to the person you crack down on. Thus, I worded the question,  “Why are we responding only now?”, to reflect the fact that the problem lies in our past favoritism of athletes, not an unfair strictness toward Michael Vick.

1. Where are our priorities?

Now, the last question already hinted at this. The obvious broad question would be, “Is watching athletes excel at a sport really worth giving athletes legal leeway and preference?” However, the misplaced priorities I wonder about are much more specifically Vick-related. As some of you may know, there is a concurrently running sports scandal right now involving an NBA referee named Tim Donaghy. He recently pleaded guilty in a federal case in which the allegations leveled against him were largely gambling-based. Vick currently faces a possible guilty plea to dog murder and gambling, with jail time estimated at under a year (I’ve heard 10 months). Donaghy, who pleaded guilty to gambling and wire fraud, faces up to a possible 25 years of jail time. Also, Vick faces a possible 2-year suspension from the NFL if he pleads or is found guilty of the charges against him, but not for the dogfighting, which is only a misdemeanor in the state of Georgia. Rather, the act of gambling can cause a player to be banned for life from the NFL, at the discretion of the commissioner, and so the suspension would likely be gambling-related.

Really?

Do we really punish gambling more harshly in our society than we punish animal murder? I mean, I guess since we kill animals for food and sport, punishing people who kill animals for sadistic pleasure could be a slippery slope. But really, punishment 25 times greater for someone who fixed basketball games than for someone who organized and carried out the mass murder of dogs that he bred for the express purpose of killing them? Also, the fact that Vick gambled on the fighting is the only reason that his crimes include felony offenses, and the only reason the feds got involved in the first place. If Vick had run the dogfighting league without actually betting, his crimes would have been limited to misdemeanors and he might not be facing any jail time.

Personally, given the nature of our relationship with dogs over history, we should give them a little more respect. At least in the western world, dogs and horses have a privileged place in our society. We use them as helpers and companions, and in return we don’t eat or hunt them. Yet, if someone wants to murder them, that’s not even a felony? Killing dozens of dogs with your bare hands isn’t as bad as beating your wife? When we put dogs to sleep, it’s merciful, but if a suffering cancer patient asks to be euthanized,  it’s murder? Okay, that last one isn’t exactly Vick related, but it still represents the same double standard (for the record, I think euthanasia can be merciful for both people and animals in the right circumstances).

Don’t get me wrong, gambling is bad, but is it really as bad as strangling, drowning and electrocuting innocent creatures? Or 25 times worse? I realize a referee fixing NBA games could have damaging effects on the whole league, and thus countless jobs, but something about these hypothetical sentences still sits wrong with me. I’d be interested to hear any of your opinions on this (assuming people are still reading this blog).

This is all, of course, assuming that Vick is guilty of the charges set out against him. If he’s been framed, I hope he is exonerated. But if he is indeed guilty, I certainly hope he goes to jail for more than 10 months, with the promise of lucrative NFL seasons when he gets out. Well, that’s all for now, and hopefully sometime soon in the future I’ll write some more. Tootles.