Never Underestimate The Predictability of Stupidity: Part III

The recent news media torrent of coverage concerning recent cases of police brutality have not slipped past me unnoticed. One of the more troubling tales to occur last week was when a 23 year old black man was essentially shot in the back by a police officer in his parent’s driveway while officers were investigating whether or not his car was stolen or not. Obviously, cases of police brutality and citizen complaints concerning these acts have been common place for decades, so this is nothing new. However, in a county where our government is based upon the consent of the people (police are a part of the government, mind you), one must figure that something has to be done about the way that police officers operate.

To begin, I fully respect the role that police officers play in our society: to protect and serve. A vast majority of these officers are indeed good cops and work hard at what they do. At the same time though, police officers are part of our civil service and for all intents and purposes, police officers are at the bottom of the heap in terms of education. Sure, they undergo extensive training, but this is training that is the brainchild of other officers with minimal education. Some departments do require that their officers obtain a bachelor’s degree before becoming employed, but this is not enough.

By trade and education, I am a social scientist. That is, I study society as a whole, whether from my concentration of politics, to history and other various views of how our modern society interacts with each other. I am not about to claim that I understand what a police officer working in South Central LA experiences and knows about the area; that is beyond me. However, being that we give a lot of power to our most undereducated civil servants, universities and other police training grounds should really consider more education and training in the realm of social science. Police officers need to understand how society works; from issues of race to the role that they play in our government, for example.

I have never really had any major run ins with police officers and when I have, I have been more than compliant. For others, they have been far from complaint, which leads to a milieu of issues. I understand the use of force, whether from a gun to a tazer, when an officer’s life is in danger. However, part of me believes that an officer finds legitimacy in the eyes of society not through the badge, but through the gun that they carry. When the person that you are talking to has the ability to take your life and you do not have the ability counter it because you are not carrying a gun, you are going to comply. The fear of god is not stricken into us by the badge, but the gun.

Many of us have viewed “The Andy Griffith Show” at some time or another in our lives. The one thing that I remember about the show is that Andy, the “sheriff” never carried a gun- instead, it was always in his desk drawer. Yet, he was able to garner the respect of the citizens of “Mayberry” without a gun. Granted, this was a TV show in the middle of “white America” in the 1950’s where no real danger existed. But the point is, what if police officers were never given guns in the first place? Would a vast majority of criminals today even use guns? What if they had to actually resolve conflict without the risk of force coming to mind (much like the UK)?

I am not suggesting that we take guns away from cops, nor am I suggesting that our right to own guns be curtailed, as it is a constitutional right of almost everyone in this country (minus felons). I am simply suggesting that police departments put more of an emphasis on training their officers in a more intelligent manner. For example, require more and more successful completion of social science and community or interpersonal relations in college education and training. With a more thorough understanding of how society works, I believe that crime would decrease and at the same time, officers would find more respect for themselves in the community. Would it hurt to try this? To force more training on some of our most undereducated, yet most powerful civil servants?

A Few Words at the End of the 2008 NFL Regular Season

As with the end of any NFL season, there is always much to be discussed and analyzed. I am not into the analysis part of the equation, as I’ll leave that to the various “experts” on TV. However there are a few things that need to discussed, mainly the current playoff system, the Detroit Lions, and the TV coverage of the league. Like any fan, we all have areas of the game that we are unhappy with (besides our own teams that we root for), but these three matters in general seem to stick out to me the most. Of course, I could rant on about the rather disappointing and pathetic season that the Chicago Bears had, but I’ll go ahead and leave that for another day.

First, let’s have a word about the current playoff system that the league uses. My gripe in this respect is that the New England Patriots finished up at 11-5 and still did not make the playoffs. A few years back the league reorganized the respective conferences into four divisions from three. Before the reorganization, a few divisions were lacking in comparison to the others. However, the Seahawks were moved to the NFC and now all eight divisions have four teams each. This in itself was not a bad idea (something that MLB should look into) and should be kept in mind if the league were to change its playoff system. Ideally, teams should continue to play teams within their respective divisions twice, but instead of 6 teams making it into the playoffs, 8 should. With 8 teams, the two top seed would lose their bye in the first week, which would irritate some at first, but they would get over it. In essence, 2 more wild card trams would be added.

Next, the 7 year demise of the Detroit Lions came to fruition today, as the Lions became the first team not to win a single game since the inception of the 16 game schedule in 1978. In 2001, the Lions hired Matt Millen as their president and over that time his reign was met with hostility and disappointment in Detroit. Granted, Millen was fired in September, but this season was the fruit of his incompetent labors. Unlike other professional sports, football is the one sport where every team seemingly has a chance at the beginning of each season. In the case of the Lions over the past 7 years though, the Lions never had a chance. Frankly, an 0-16 season is inexcusable in this day and age in the NFL. In a town that is having enough problems as it is, the Lions 2008 season was the figurative cherry on top.

Finally, let’s explore the general TV coverage surrounding the NFL. The first gripe that I have with the NFL is its move to make it into a pay-per-view sport, such as boxing, with its NFL Network. The beauty of most professional sports that anyone seems to care about is the mainstream coverage by the major networks that are accessible by almost anyone with a TV antenna. However, the NFL has betrayed many of its fans by forcing them to purchase a package of channels just to get their network, much less for one measly game that they want to see. It would be a lot easier if we could turn on CBS, NBC, or FOX to view a Thursday or Saturday night game instead of having to pony up even more money to your carrier. Hopefully, the NFL Network goes belly up in the coming years so fans do not have to deal with this frustration.

Just a Few More Weeks

In just a few weeks, Barack Obama will take the presidential oath of office, which will effectively end one of the curious presidential administrations in this nation’s history. From the height of his popularity just after 9/11 to now, George W. Bush has ridden the figurative public approval rollercoaster up and down to both soaring heights and the lows of lows. However, we should be cautious when coming to conclusions over a man who fears that his legacy will be that of LBJ, as time has long been the ultimate judge of American presidents. If we could ask Harry Truman, I’m sure that he would say the same thing.

On January 20, 2001, Bush’s inauguration day, he was met with angry crowds on the streets of Washington D.C. After winning a close election over Al Gore, many in the crowds on the parade route found it necessary to pelt his limo with mounds of debris while he traveled to the Capital building. Who would have guessed that this event would foreshadow what would become one of America’s most intriguing presidential administrations. To this day, many believe that Bush was handed the election by a right leaning Supreme Court (thanks to Ronald Reagan) and had essentially stolen the election by not winning the popular vote. When less than 51 percent of “the people” did not vote for him, he was bound for a hard 4 years and later, another 4 years.

The psyche of the countless nations and their people that have existed on this planet over the course of history is to cling to their leader(s) during times of great distress and needless to say, after the events of 9/11, the people of the United States embraced Bush for both comfort and security. Just as his father’s approval ratings had soared during and right after the first Persian Gulf War, so did his son’s after 9/11. For months his approval ratings were commonly hovering within the 90 percent range. However, when your enemy is not an organized nation and an all out victory is unobtainable, the steps that Bush took to seek vengeance upon the Taliban in Afghanistan and Sadam Hussein in Iraq soon backfired.

The early periods of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were for all intents and purposes quite successful. The Taliban were eradicated and Sadam was toppled from power. Many in the United States would have been content to leave things at that; two victories and stronger security on the home front. As we know now, he did not leave it at that and chose to intensify military efforts in Iraq. While the situation in Iraq has turned into a disastrous quagmire, the Taliban and other terrorist organizations have again taken hold in Afghanistan due to Bush’s preoccupation with Iraq. If Bush had decided to end U.S. military operations after the above mentioned victories, his legacy may have been cemented as mediocre, if not successful.

Unlike Bush, time has begun to speak on the legacy of Lyndon B. Johnson’s presidency. America still wears the scars of the Vietnam conflict, as a generation of men who survived a draft and hell on Earth in the jungles of Vietnam still bare the mental and physical scars of pointless fighting. Johnson’s presidency though had marked success in the domestic policy arena. His “Great Society” initiatives have indeed brought this nation closer than it has ever been. Bush’s domestic policy success has not even been marginal, much less inexistent. The one domestic initiative that many will remember is Bush’s “No Child Left Behind.” It will not be remembered because it was a success, but because it was a dismal failure. America’s schools have been tainted by a brainless policy from the mind of a “C student.” At least Johnson’s presidency was marked with domestic policy success, which to many, still goes unnoticed to this day.

To finish, through this week, Bush has an approval rating of 29 percent, slightly up from the all time low of 22 percent a few months back. The 22 percent approval rating a few months back was the lowest approval rating of any president in the history of presidential approval ratings. Even though we do not have approval ratings that span the years after a president has left office, I have a feeling that if we did, Bush may very well find himself at the bottom of the pile. Then again, only time will tell.

A Scenario to Fix the Ghastly BCS System 

It has been evident since the implementation of the Bowl Championship Series (BCS)in division one college football is that it does not truly decide the national champion at the end of the year, much less the two best teams in the nation who should play in the deciding game. Opponents of the BCS system are far more numerous than proponents, with yours truly fitting in with the opponents. Even President-elect Barack Obama has spoken out against the BCS and like many opponents, has proposed a play-off system. Personally, I am in favor of a playoff system or even going back to the old system where the human voters decide who is to play for the national championship. 

As is obvious, the human component is more art than science, while the current BCS system is based upon science. A playoff system on the other hand is a mix of art and science and in all likely hood may very well be the best solution for all involved. If you think about it, who would you rather have deciding who plays in the national championship game, a human or a computer? 

Below I present a this hybrid system, which I believe would satisfy opponents and proponents alike. We can still use the BCS set up, the computers, and human voters to decide a national champion. However, the plan is to use these components in a playoff setup. 

The Setup 
To begin, I will use the current BCS standings in this example. The top 14 teams in the BCS standings will be ushered into the playoff set up.  

The teams included would be: 
1. Alabama 11-0
2. Texas 10-1 
3. Oklahoma 10-1
4. Florida 10-1 
5. USC 9-1 
6. Utah 12-0 
7. Texas Tech 10-1 
8. Penn State 11-1 
9. Boise State 11-0 
10. Ohio State 10-2 
11. Georgia 9-2 
12. Oklahoma State 9-2 
13. Missouri 9-2
14. TCU 10-2

The bracket for the round would look as follows (with the hypothetic winner in parentheses, i.e. the top seed for simplicity’s sake): 
1. Alabama vs. 14. TCU (Alabama) 
2. Texas vs. 13. Missouri (Texas) 
3. Oklahoma vs. 12. Oklahoma State (Oklahoma) 
4. Florida vs. 11. Georgia (Florida)  
5. USC vs. 10. Ohio State (USC)
6. Utah vs. 9. Boise State (Utah) 
7. Texas Tech vs. 8. Penn State (Texas Tech)  

The second round (top remaining seed gets a bye): 
2. Texas vs. 7. Texas Tech (Texas)  
3. Oklahoma vs. 6. Utah (Oklahoma) 
4. Florida vs. 5. USC (Florida) 

The third round: 
1. Alabama vs. 4. Florida (Alabama)
2. Texas vs. 3. Oklahoma (Texas) 

The national championship game:
1. Alabama vs. 2. Texas (Alabama) 

Personally, I believe that it is simple as that. Granted, modifications could be made, i.e. a bye in the first round or even an NCAA basketball like set up. In this case everyone wins, as there are more game and more money to be had by all involved. This may extend the season a bit into mid January, but it appears to be a fair system 
 

Cursed of Simply Unlucky?

I am not one who believes in such superstitions as curses, especially in the realm of sports. However, one has to wonder what exactly has befallen the Cubs franchise throughout their history. To date, the Cubs are in their 133rd season, as they played their very first game on April 25, 1876. Throughout those 133 years, they have managed to win two World Series championships. Furthermore, the franchise made their last appearance in a World Series and last in the twentieth century in 1945, eventually losing to the Detroit Tigers. In total, the Cubs won the NL pennant four times in the twentieth century, which leads into my analysis of whether their losing ways is a curse or a simply a case of bad luck.

Undoubtedly, the most success that the Cubs franchise has ever had occurred from 1906 to 1908. The 1906 team won a major league record of 116 games, but would eventually lose to their cross-town rivals in the World Series. 1907 would bring the team 110 wins and their first ever World Series title by sweeping the Detroit Tigers. 1908 brought the team less wins in the regular season, only 99, but it was enough to propel them into the World Series against the Tigers once again. They would eventually win the series 4-1. But as we know, this was the last time the Cubs franchise would win a World Series title. Many forget about 1945, as the Cubs won 98 games and would go onto lose the World Series 4-3 against the Detroit Tigers (again).

Since 1945, the Cubs have never made it back to the World Series. In 1969, the team was the preferred choice to win it all, but a monumental collapse left the Cubs 8 games out. Obviously, we are all familiar with the NLCS collapse of 2003 against the eventual World Series champion Florida Marlins. Lou Pinella would lead the team to an NL central division crown in 2007. However, the team was easily dispatched in the first round (NLDS) by the Arizona Diamondbacks.

That of course brings us to this year, a 97 win season and another central division championship. Many thought that this would be year for a variety of reasons, mainly because it was the first time since the fabled 1907 and 1908 seasons that the Cubs had made the playoffs in back to back years. Dominant hitting and pitching have been key throughout the year, but just like last year, both the offense and defense have hit a figurative brick wall in the first round. At the time of this writing, the Cubs are down 0-2 to the LA Dodgers in the NLDS. Not to stick a fork in them too early, but things are not looking up and defeat is likely unless they can pull off a miracle.

As one can see from above, the latest teams to have made the playoffs had to play a 162 game regular season, while the other teams to make the playoffs and win the World Series only had to play a 154 game season. It is a long season and winning that many games is an incredible feat. Yet one has to wonder, especially this year, with such a dominant team, how are they are down 0-2 to a team who struggled to win their division? Is everyone tired? Has the figurative magic run its course? No one really knows or will ever know for that matter. Personally, I lean towards the theory that the team is tired from the long season and are simply out of the magic and luck that a great team needs to win it all.

Party Conventions: Worth the Hype?

With the Democratic National Convention (DNC) happening this week, I figured that it would be worthwhile to have a word about the current status for the highest office in the land. To this point, the presumed nominees, Barack Obama and John McCain are tied in the polls with just over 3 months remaining until Election Day. Predictably, those numbers may jump in favor of Obama during and after the DNC, but not as much as in the past. The “bump” that candidates receive after their party’s respective conventions is usually noticeable. However, the Republican National Convention is set to be staged next week, just four days after the DNC concludes. Mind you, this is not a coincidence, holding the RNC a so close to the DNC was planned.

With that said, I do not expect the numbers to go up considerably in favor of either candidate over the coming weeks. Obama has named his VP nominee, Delaware Senator Joe Biden and McCain has yet to announce his. Unless McCain taps Bill Gates, it will not make much difference in the polls, at least in terms of favorables. Where do the conventions leave us then? I venture to posit that each party’s respective convention will leave the status of the election where we stood on August 1st: Up in arms.

With no substantial bumps expected, the coming three months are going to be vital for each candidate, especially in battle ground states. I expect there to be heavy campaigning from both candidates in the following states: WI, VA, PA, OH, NM, NH, NV, MO, MI, IA, IN, FL, and CO. Of those states, expect to see a lot of Obama in Florida if the numbers remain close in the state. The high numbers of African American and Latino voters in Florida may in fact make a difference if it is close in November. Missouri may also be worthwhile for both candidates, as the nation’s “bellwether” has voted on the side of each presidential winner since 1904 (excluding 1956).

Let the games begin, again.

Never Underestimate the Predictability of Stupidity: Part II

I recently came across a video on CNN that displayed a young man sticking his fingers into a jaguar’s (panthera onca) cage at the Oklahoma City Zoo. Evidently, he decided that it would be a great idea to release the video on liveleak for all to see. Thankfully, the news media caught on and proceeded to make a complete dimwit of the person. As is obvious, stunts like this tend to irritate me. Would you find it in your best interest to tease a wild jaguar? I think not. A stunt like this is not exactly like sticking your fingers into “fluffy’s” cage on the way to the vet. Unfortunately, this gentlemen still has all of his fingers.

Zoos have a myriad of fences set up for a reason: to keep visitors and staff safe. Countless “exotic” animals in zoos have the ability to kill a human without thinking about it. However, scaling a fence or two to taunt an apex predator (top of the food chain) can lead to a major league headache for all involved. Look at it this way, the jaguar is widely believed to have the second most powerful bite of all mammals, which even allow it to puncture the shells of turtles (i.e. biting through solid bone) or kill a giant anaconda. Taking off a human finger is comparable to running a hot knife through butter.

I find it rather pathetic that a great predator like the jaguar has been reduced to being teased in a zoo cage. Ancient South American cultures idolized this great cat. For example, the name jaguar is derived from the ancient Guarani language word “jaguarete,” which translates to “kills in a single bound.” The Guarani revered this powerful animal, as they believed that the cat’s spots were comparable to the stars above (jaguars are usually nocturnal hunters). Sadly, those days have long since passed to days where the jaguar is now an endangered species.

What lesson can be taken away this above-mentioned incident? There are two: One, don’t stick your fingers in a cage at the zoo. Two, show a little respect for a creature that could easily have you for breakfast.

Video link: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/07/15/dnt.ok.finger.in.cage.koco?iref=videosearch