Aliens and the World Cup

It seems that there has been quite a few logical arguments made lately about the existance of extra terrestrials by such notables as Stephen Hawking and The History Channel. Even the Pontiff, himself, has recently acknowledged the possibility of their existance.

So, if they do exist and have a keen interest in human behavior as has been suggested, then they must be observing the World Cup soccer ("futbol") tournament.

In many ways, most Americans are in the same boat, so to speak. We have very little exposure to the "world game" and even less exposure to the cultural intricacies of the other continents as it relates to sport.

As a psuedo alien myself, with very little experience in watching soccer, I can say that the actual extra terrestrials must be less than impressed with our collective human fortitude.

Supposedly, these are the most athletic, most famous, national heroes of their respective countries. The best make salaries that put Alex Rodriguez to shame. While I can admire the tremendous skill and coordination required to excel at the game, it is also a microcosm of American perception of much of the rest of the world.

The best player in the world, Cristiano Ronaldo, (by some accounts) is well known for his "flopping," and that seems to be a common practice among most players. The look of agony on a player's face is quite hilarious when replay shows that the player merely tripped on his own feet or took a "dive."

Then, they roll, suffering, on the ground while clutching their leg, foot, etc.

As a beer drinking southerner, I find myself thinking "get up boy, you ain't hurt."

Even as I write this, I am seeing a player carried off on a stretcher with his hands over his face. Honestly, give me a break... He fell, perhaps while getting kicked in the shin.

(The aliens must know that they have us whenever they want us...)

Then, to top it off, on most of these incidents, the team trainers (who must be really well trained to carry out this job) rush to spray some cold spray on the afflicted body part or apply an old school ice pack which is followed by an offer of a stretcher ride to the sidelines. Most of the time, the stretcher ride is waived off in favor of hopping right back up to play as if nothing was wrong.

If he was really injured that badly to begin with, I've got to get some of that spray. More likely, these fellows don't understand the difference between being injured and being hurt.

By contrast, that type of "injury" happens every play in a game of American football.

What happened to heroes being tough, playing through the pain, and certainly not faking injuries/fouls. (Amazingly, the referees fall for it almost every time)

I guess the closest thing to these "flops" is in the NBA, which has an increasing European influence. I don't know that the NBA carries the same type of passion among fans as soccer or football does either.

Question: I wonder if Phil Jackson limited Kobe Bryant's sexual activites during the finals as many of the latin coaches did in the World Cup to their players?

So, if the Aliens are anything like Americans, (and I suspect that they are...) then they are left feeling quite entertained by the World Cup and fulfilled with a vast aura of superiority.

The Hypocricy of the "World Wide Leader"

As many avid sports fans know, the "World Wide Leader" is ESPN. As a heterosexual male and sports fan, much of my entertainment time is filled with one of the ESPN television networks or ESPN radio.

For years, there have been complaints regarding ESPN's influence on college football rankings, NCAA basketball tournament selections, and even Craig James' undue impact on Mike Leach's career at Texas Tech.

Now, the WWL is branching into politics.

As I watched "The Sports Reporters" on Sunday morning, one of the largest topics of conversation was Arizona's new immigration enforcement laws. Not only did the columnists speak on the potential impact of the law on sports in the state, but they actually gave their interpretation and disapproval of the law.

If I wanted to watch political commentary on Sunday morning, there are a variety of options outside of the ESPN family of networks who, I'm sure, would be more deserving of my viewership.

As if it is not excruciating enough listening to Mike Lupica criticize the performance of another athelete (or anyone with any actual talent), now I have to listen to him berate the state of Arizona for standing up for itself.

One of the reporters (forgive my poor research in getting his name) actually concluded that this was a step back towards the "Jim Crow Laws" and second class citizenship.

Why in the world is this on ESPN?

I think that an effective argument can probably be made on both sides of the issue, and it has been explored in depth on many media outlets. (Which is why I have not discussed it here)

The hypocricy comes into play here: I was listening to "Mike and Mike" this morning on the radio, and they were mocking politicians who made embarrassing or erroneous statements in relation to the world of sports. (Members of Congress investigating the steroids scandal in baseball and mispronouncing players names, the Mayor of Boston saying that Varitek kicked it between the goal posts instead of Vinatierri, etc.)

Mike and Mike correctly concluded that if a politician doesn't know enough about sports to speak intelligently about it, then they should just be more up front about that instead of embarassingly pretending to be a big fan.

The same can be said for "The Sports Reporters" and politics...

I love watching ESPN and will make no empty threats of boycott.

I think that this has just as much to do with our "celebrity worship" society where we look towards our favorite movie star or rapper to figure out how to vote. Everybody feels, not only entitled to an opinion, but to an expert opinion on any subject that needs to be broadcast. (perhaps, me included)

I Disagreed with Neal Boortz?

Yesterday, I disagreed with Neal Boortz, and that was significant enough for me to note.

Florida Governor Charlie Crist vetoed a bill that will hold teachers accountable for their student's performance in the classroom. The bill would make it easier to fire teachers whose students perform below standards on a particular standardized test.

Boortz thought that Crist let the teachers off the hook and was pandering for the vote of the teacher's unions in November. (The pandering part may very well be true...)

While did let the teachers off the hook, so to speak. He also vetoed a piece of bad legislation. Using the war on drugs or most any tax policy as examples, the government must give careful consideration to the consequences of its laws in addition to their general purpose.

Indeed, this bill would make it easier for the state of Florida to circumvent past union negotiations in order to quickly assess and fire bad teachers. (Can you imagine having job tenure at 25-26 years old?) However, it would also prevent good teachers from taking on challenging school districts for fear that their kids would not adequately perform on the tests.

For that reason, Crist was right to veto.

If the bill would have compared teachers within the same school, then I would have been all for it.

Not exactly a big national issue... Just letting Boortz know that I can still think for myself-

I'd Like to Change My Vote

As the new Title IX policy changes come into effect, I would like to change my vote on cheerleading being a sport. It is.

Along with cheerleading, every halftime dancer, majorette, spirit squad, and any other organized flag waving at sporting events should be considered a sport too.

Hope that helps-

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2010/04/officials_reverse_bush_policy_on_equity_compliance.php

Just Wait...

1. How long before people making fun of Rep. Johnson are labeled as racist, hateful, or any of the other words currently being associated with tea partiers?

2. How long before this becomes a story featured in the national media?

3. How long did the Congressman have to prepare for this line of questioning?

4. How long until I stop thinking this is hilarious?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNZczIgVXjg

(Answers: 1. Not long, 2. Never, 3. Not enough, evidently, 4. Never)

The Rich get Richer and the Poor get Wealthier

To paraphrase a number of similar quotes :"The rich have to go to work everyday to stay rich, but the wealthy do not."

(I think it was Chris Rock who even had a bit on how Shaquille O'Neal is 'rich,' but the owner of the team signing his paychecks is 'wealthy.')

The "rich getting richer" drum has been played at nauseum by the media elite, so we will leave that half of the quote alone.

However, based on the second half of the quote, it would seem that the poor are now getting wealthier. Without meaningful contribution to the economy or tax rolls, the millions of subsidized poor in America are actually improving their lifestyle without having to go to work everyday.

All they had to do was vote.

Wealth Allocation

So I'm watching a recent episode of the show "Survivor" featuring all-stars of past seasons...

My attention was caught when two men formed an alliance to make it to the final two. The only logic for their alliance was the fact that both had actually won the show in the past and the $1M prize money. They summized that if either made it to the final vote against another competitor who had not won, then the other castaways would vote for the person who had not won regarless of their performance in the show. The past winners simply didn't 'need' the money.

I'm not sure if it is human nature or liberal dogma to be against "the rich getting richer," but it sure is a microcosm of what is going on in our country.