SamSaid!

JUSTICE II

     A couiple of attentive readers reminded me that I misspelled the first name of France's Mr. Chirac. Sure enough, I omitted the (s) at the end of Jacque. Three explanations:

     .  Aha!  –  gotcha. It was a quick test to see if you were reading the website material. You passed!

JUSTICE

     Jacque Chirac must be close to apoplexy or at least slitting his wrists. The Germans are veering away from him on foreign policy matters, and Americans are still dumping French wine in the gutters. Worse, American wine makers are drawing a bead on the French market in the US, and more and more Americans are finding out that domestic US wine is pretty good. But the worst French news items of all  are the recent sports results.

     The biggest French golf event for women is the Evian Masters which has a $2.1 million purse  –  with $315,000 going to the winner. This past Saturday, an American, Julie Inkster, won by seven strokes and quipped that she was bringing some French Francs back home with her.  That and the trophy.  A day later, the world famous Tour de France  –  the super bowl of bicycle racing  –  was won for the 5th consecutive time by Lance Armstrong, another one of those pesky Americans.

     Poor old Jacque is left sitting out there all alone. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy!

SECOND GUESSING

     Season after season, the arguing continues over America's most favorite outdoor sport  –  baseball vs football. At the moment, King Football is trumping the National Pastime. But I think that baseball fans and football fans are way off base. In this country the most favorite sport by far is second guessing. The potential is limitless, and the results are always good.

     By a little bit of adroit second guessing, Pearl Harbor could have been avoided, the A-Bombs need not  have been dropped, Watergate could have been prevented, The Challenger disaster would not have happened, the Columbia would not have disintegrated, JFK would not have been assasinated, and 9/11 would not have occurred. Now it is the aftermath of the Iraqi War II. How easy it is to reconstruct matters, long past or recent, and re-arrange them in a way to alter history. Any half-baked investigation can come up with this kind of trashy result.

     On the griddle now are our intelligence agencies  —  specifically how they bungled tracking the 9/11 terrorists. In piecing together all of the bits of information from umpteen sources, it is so easy to second guess and blame-fix. And, of course, someone has to be blamed and take the fall. How unfailingly accurate  –  20/20 hindsight.

     Our system of government knowingly distributes responsibility related to national security. We have a variety of agencies and departments which operate independently  –  FBI, CIA, Department of State, Department of Defense, and now Homeland Security. They have their own responsibilities  –  their own turf. And as long as they remain independent, some things will fall in the cracks. We may preach cooperation and information sharing, but as long as the different organizations exist and compete, there will be oversights and errors. In our system of government that is the price we pay and we may as well accept it. When there is only one omni-powerful agency of government in charge of “security” we are keeping company with Saddam and the other tyrants of his ilk.

    Even with the best of intentions and precautions, bad things happen in this world. In traveling around the country we see unprotected bridges, refineries, buildings, airports, roads, manufacturing plants, laboratories, etc. etc. Maybe we should feel good about the extent that we are safe despite the threats of fanatical ragheads. Sure, I favor high quality programs to protect ourselves from the terrorists, but whining, sniping second guessors are not going to aid the cause. Is there a better example than ambitious Congressmen?

     The next 6 months in Iraq are going to be painful even without the back-biters who want to second guess and re-wite history. If the second guessors want to ply their trade, we at least should wait until the whole Iraq matter is over and then take a long view  from a more accurate perspective. But I guess that approach is far too simple and fair for the Congressional attack dogs.   

    In the meantime, College football, the NFL and the World Series are just aroud the corner.

NOSTALGIA

     I was born and raised in southwestern Pennsylvania where the summers were hot and humid. I can recall the weather forecasters reporting the “misery index” which was the sum of the temperature and the humidity level. Anything over 150 was hot, hot, hot, and something around 190 was unimaginable. Even so, as a teenager I played lots of baseball games in full uniform in that kind of weather, and as a pitcher I expended a lot of energy. Heavy sweating was just part of the ambience.  I also can remember trying to go to sleep while laying on top of a sheet  –  still perspiring. I think that gave rise to the expression “stewing in your own juice”.

     Here in the Bay Area, we get a lot of clear sky summer days with very warm sunshine. But the low humidity makes the 85-90 degree temperatures bearable. In 20 years of California living, I have never heard a reference to the “misery index”. But yesterday I had a touch of the old days back east. An atypical weather system developed, bringing a low cloud cover and high humidity with temperatures in the 90s. Standing on the 13th tee, I realized that there were large dark splotches on my shirt  –  sweat. As I approached my tee shot, sweat ran down my forearms into my hands, and a couple of drops fell from the end of my nose as I started the backswing. Virtually unheard of in this part of the country. The other members of the fouresome also commented about the heat and humidity. They also were from other parts of America since there are relatively few native Californians. Some of those who have migrated to California actually got here legally.  

     At any rate, the experience of the last 5 holes nostalgically reminded me of those “misery index” days of my youth. But it all went away once we got inside the clubhouse. The air conditioning made it feel like we had walked into a refrigerator. When I got home, I figured that there was nothing on my project list that couldn't wait until the weather changed for the better. Like they say, a little bit of nostalgia goes a long way.

PAR/BIRDIE

     Golf is truly a wonderful game. Ask any one of the 25-30 million Americans who play. Sure, it can be maddening and frustrating, but it also has its share of mini-triumphs. Consider the environment of play  —   nice green grass, open sky, warm sun, clouds, trees rustling in the breeze, birds chirping, good companionship, and rules that apply to all. Tough to beat. But golf is changing right under our eyes. Hello technology

     The change in golf is fueled by three factors. Not too long ago, the best male athletes opted for baseball, basketball and football. Golf was almost an afterthought. Now, many of the better, bigger, stronger athletes turn first to golf. In addition, due to advanced technology the golf ball is livlier and will travel over longer distances. Add to that superior equipment (technology again)  – the golf clubs used to strike the balls. When these three factors are combined  –    better clubs, livlier balls and stronger players  –  golf becomes a different sport. No longer is the 250 yard drive the standard. Now it is 300+ yards. The result of having more and more long hitters is that many golf courses are obsolete, meaning that they are too short. For most players, a golf course of 6500-6600 yards is a good test of skills, but not for the golf professionals. Now the Pros are designing golf courses of 7000 – 7200 – 7500 yards in length  —-  way beyond the range of 95% of players. It is almost as though there is Golf A and Golf B.

      Add to that the emergence of stronger, better, women golfers. High school girls can now hit the lively ball over 250 yards. They have found the secret of club head speed. They can't quit match the brawn of the men (ask Annika Sorenstam), but they are very good and will get better.

     The only ways to nuetralize the long hitters is to (a) deaden the golf ball, or (b) deaden the clubs. Otherwise, golf course owners  will start to think about lengthening hundreds of courses to emulate the male pro standards which are popularized by TV . Making golf courses longer and tougher will not make the game more popular or rewarding to 15-20 handicappers or the weekend hackers. Certainly I am not suggesting that the game be cheapened by shorter easier courses, but every player likes to think he/she has a chance to par most any hole. On a 7500 yard golf course, not a chance!

     Men and women can play enjoyable golf on 6000 – 6500 yard golf courses well up into their 70s and 80s. The game is really meant for the ordinary players, not the Pros. Sometimes technology has a constructive result. Sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes it is wise to leave well enough alone.

OBESITY

     In yesteryear, people were described as either under weight, about normal, or overweight. Intellectuals often chose “ectomorph” or endomorph” to describe the extremes. When things got nasty, terms like skinny, scrawney, or fat were frequently used. But “obese” was a strongly pejorative word  –  almost like swearing. People were rarely called obese.. Nowadays, I guess it is a clinical term referring to the presence of excessive weight, and medical reports point to the high percentage of Americans who are obese.  And in days of “correctness” and “sensitivity”, obesity is more and more frequently described as a disease, disability or a handicap. Obviously, it is someone else's fault.  

     Without a doubt there is a percentage of overweight people who have a genetice defect. And there are those on the other end of the spectrum who simply enjoy stuffing themselves and could care less about potential health problems. But in between there are the vast majority of heavy folks who simply don't have the self discipline to control their own weight. They eat too much of the wrong stuff and don't burn it off with exercise and physical activity. It is many of these Americans ( and trial lawyers) who quickly point their fingers at the food providers and say “It's their fault”. You can just see the trial lawyers generating a class action suit against McDonalds and other food providers, blaming them for the obesity epidemic. And of course, there are the school administrators only too eager to blame McDonalds for providing menus approved by the schools for their increasingly obese students. .

     One thing is for sure   –  every pound of fat on a person originates with food taken by mouth and swallowed. Lots of food  –  lots of fat. It is not as though McDonalds (I'm not picking on them alone) sends out an army of thugs to capture innocent people, subdue them, pry open their mouths and stuff them full of fries, cheeseburgers etc.  If the McDonalds of the world has committed any kind of crime it is that of producing tasty food that people like. Overeating is not the fault of the food providers. Think about it  –  the role models you see on TV and generally trim and fit. And millions of people have the self discipline needed to keep themselves trim and fit. Unfortunately, many others do not. Ever see a skinny couch potato?

     Lawsuits against food companies is not the answer to obesity.. There are a lot of advantages that come from keeping your mouth shut. Avoiding obesity is one of them.

BURNING ISSUE

     I like to consider myself an environmentalist  —  well, sort of. I was born and raised on the outskirts of a small town where the woods, fields, and streams were only minutes away. My friends and I climbed trees, picked berries, jumped rabbits and pheasants, waded through unnamed streams and generally enjoyed the great outdoors. The local river had few fish because of acidity due to coal spills from barges, and the skies were clouded by smoke from coke ovens. We were not comfortable with that. Forty years later, the fish are back in the river and the skies are clear.

     I didn't really appreciate the environment until I went west and saw the great vistas, rolling prairies, the great plains, the mountains, deserts, lakes, clear running streams and the big forests. For 12 years, my wife and I lived smack in the middle of the Tahoe National Forest on a property featuring tall lodgepole pines, jeffrey pines, red firs and white firs. Big trees.

     Every spring, we carefully removed combustible broken limbs, underbrush, and dead, diseased or dying trees so as to reduce the fire potential. In other parts of the country people worry about floods, hurricanes, tornadoes, etc., but we worried about fire. Then I read about the eco-wacko environmentalists who say, “leave the forest in its natural state  –  don't touch the combustible fuel on the ground”. Our local Forester said that was like putting a big pile of kindling wood in the middle of the living room so that if you have a fire it will be a big one.

     I just don't buy the notion that mother nature knows best and that man cannot tamper with that sacred domain. We breed animals, develop hybrid crops, and convert wasteland to productive purposes. but only after hassling with the eco-wackos out on the fringe. That's why I want to be sure that my environmental concerns are well removed from those knuckleheads. There is more forestland now that there was 300 years ago, and our air and water are better now than when the industrial revolution began.  Sensible environmentalists and industrialists can claim credit. Not so for the environmental ostriches.

     We need to manage the forests, not set them up for uncontrollable forest fires that cause extensive damages and fatalities. These people  either don't understand, or don't care. I can't decide which is worse.

RACISM AND DIVERSITY

     The Supremes have spoken, and thanks to Sandra Day O'Conner, racism has now been institutionalized into the fabric of the law, and “diversity” (vague and undefined) has been elevated to constitutional status. A truly sad state of affairs. For years. I have been convinced that educational institutions should confine themselves to academics and not be convenient vehicles for societal and political change. Now they have achieved a long sought goal  –  to control the thought processes of the country  –  legally. The high brow academicians will no doubt stretch the decision that went their way and simultaneously find ways to get around the one that is a mere hindrance.

     Of particular concern to me is this notion of diversity, which now becomes the standard for academic admissions. Anything that gets in the way of diversity (no matter how defined) will simply be cast aside. If traditional testing, the ACT scores or SAT sccores do not pomote the cause of diversity ( as defined by a particular school) they can be cavalierly set aside or ignored. The big university major domos will essentially be able to say,  “we will admit who we choose to admit to advance the cause of diversity , and if you don't like it, tough!” After all, if it advances the cause of diversity, who can argue?

     I have always felt that diversity is the RESULT of the social, economic and political inter-action of the various elements of our society. Now the reverse has been officially baptized. Now, diversity becomes the official GOAL of academic institutions. Can't you just see the President of Offset University saying to a graduating class, “Maybe a lot of these kids aren't too smart, but we sure are diverse!” The richness of cultural diversity? Baloney. Who set that as a norm? From here on out, we shouldn't think of Universities as citadels of learning; now they are social laboratories in which academic excellence is academic (forgive the pun).

    It all started with the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 when Equal Opportunity was the cry. That quickly became Quotas. Then when Quotas were struck down. it became Affirmative Action. When that was seen (accurately) as Preferential Treatment. that too was struck down. But now, the Supremes say racism is OK and diversity is the big protective umbrella. Before, the cry was “racism”. Now it will be “not diverse enough”.

     Justice O'Conner is famed for straddling the fence and tilting one way or another on tough decisions. She ran true to form in splitting the baby on the Michigan cases. It is said that she is close to retirement. Bye Bye Sandra, I hope the door doesn't hit you in the fanny on the way out.

     This country has a lot of different races, nationalities, cultures, religions etc.,and as long as we treat them differently and preferentially , i.e., “some people are more equal than others” , we drift further and further away from the “United” found in USA. In football terms, Sandra Day O”Conner just penalized all of us 15 yards. It will be hard yardage to regain.

THE SAMMY SOSA SYNDROME

     Sammy Sosa is a professional baseball player employed by the Chicago Cubs. He is paid an immense salary to hit baseballs  –  a long way. He is a premier slugger. A short time ago, Mtr. Sosa was caught cheating and was suspended from playing for a week or so. His crime was “corking” his baseball bat.

     To the uninitiated, corking a bat means drilling a hole in the end of the wooden bat and filling it with cork  –  a much lighter substance. The bat remains strong, but is lighter in weight. The numbers tell the story. The speed of a pitched ball is about 90 miles per hour and travels about 60 feet –  from the pitcher's mound to home plate. If 60 mph is 88 feet per second, 90 mph is 132 feet per second. Obviously, a batter doesn't have very much time to swing at the ball when it travels such a short distance (60 feet) at such a high speed. Hence, a strong lighter bat is an advantage to the batter when only a fraction of a second is involved in swinging the bat. Corking the bat is not new  –  conniving players have tried to get away with it for years. Some get caught, some don't. Mr. Sosa got caught.

     I have a hard time undertsanding why people who have it all  –  fame, wealth, notoreity, power, secure future, adoring fans, etc. –  feel the need to cheat or steal just to get more. There are only so many “toys” to be bought  –  mansions, jewelry, cars, boats, planes  –  and at some point immense wealth becomes almost irrelevant. I can't quarrel with the desire to maximize talents and skills to accumulate more wealth. But why stoop to dishonesty when so much is available by legitimate means?

     I don't mean to pick on Sammy Sosa, because the syndrome applies to so many others, such as Winona Ryder, Union leaders who loot the treasury, corporate executives of companies like Enron, Worldcom, Global Crossing, Tyco, Adelphia, et., al. Call it the The Sammy Sosa Syndrome. As good a name as any.  “Cheating and stealing are OK as long as you don't get caught”. And to make matters worse, sometimes the penalties are no more than a slap on the wrist. Not much of a deterrent. In days of moral relativity, there is no such thing as “right and wrong”. More and more, the guilty shrug off guilt as if saying “What's the big deal”?

     Mr. Sosa's reputation is gone. It wasn't just a “mistake” as he terms it. His act was deliberate, pre-meditated and concealed. No sympathy from me. He now is just one more reason the change channels.

    “Cheating and stealing are OK as long as you don't get caught”.  Not so. Sorry, Sammy!

HILLARY

     At the time of the Super Bowl, World Series, US Open (golf and tennis), and the NBA finals I am always fascinated at the cost of a 30 second TV commercial. I don't mean to pick just these few events  —  there are others which qualify as well. Millions of dollars for brief TV time. In watching Hillary being interviewed by fawning TV hosts (Katie Cutie, Barbara Walters et.al., ) for extended periods of time  –  5-10-15 minutes or longer  –   I couldn't help but wonder at the tremendous value of that much “free” TV exposure. Gotta give Hillary credit  — she looked good  –  and her clothier, hair stylist and make-up artists should be congratulated. Given “softball” questions, she made her well rehearsed pitches. There isn't any question that these TV heroines wanted to make her look good  – and they did.

     If I were a Democratic presidential hopeful I think I would be seething as Hillary makes them look like political midgets in the mould of modern day Lilliputians. She has pushed them off the front page and the network news. And if they have anything to say, it doesn't make the nightly news. They are collectively, “old whatzizname”. The millions she will make off her book can't hold a candle to the value of uninterrupted and extended

TV time handed to her on a suilver platter. Her supporters will be able to cut and splice for hours in making an image overhaul. Tough lady. And she really knows a lot about cattle futures.

     I dont know if you have noticed, but an increasingly high percentage of TV newscasters are good looking female talking heads. Do you think they might give preferential treatment to Hillary? Nah, not a chance! But if you are a betting person, what do you think will happen when Dan Rather, Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw hand up their spikes? Want to take any bets on who grabs the #1 microphones? My guess?  Right after the 2004 Presidential election. Watch and wait!!