On Friday, Dan Bartlett, counselor to the president, defended Karl Rove. You may recall that Karl Rove claimed that liberals didn't want to fight the terrorists, they wanted to use understanding and therapy. Dan Bartlett pointed out that Karl Rove wasn't referring to Democrats when he used the word, he was referring to a petition that Moveon.org presented asking for restraint "against the war on terror. "His words were pretty clear -- liberals don't want to fight terror.
Well, he got part of it right.
But the rest of it is a lie. (*gasp* A member of the president's staff lying?)
There was not one loyal American who opposed effective and immediate action against al Qaeda. So how do we do that? By going to war against Iraq? Yeah, right. Instead of concentrating resources on finding bin Laden and dismantling al Qaeda, the geniuses behind the war on terror pulled resources from that to go to war in Iraq.
So far what has happened? Al Qaeda has increased in power, and we have lost thousands of American and innocent Iraqi lives in a war that doesn't appear to have a strategy.
No wonder the administration is dancing as fast as they can.
That petition that Dan Bartlett says was what Karl Rove was talking about? I signed it, because I didn't think going to war in Iraq was going to do anything to take care of bin Laden.
The administration continues to make a connection between Iraq and 9/11, even though there isn't. And they are going to continue to lie to suit their purposes. But, hey, it's for the good of the country, isn't it? That pesky Bill of Rights shouldn't have to apply to an administration that is right.
Sunday, June 26, 2005
Friday, February 25, 2005
The tragedy of the University of Washington's athletic department
As the courtroom proceedings in the Neuheisel suit against the UW and the NCAA continues, it becomes more and more clear how likely it is that he will win.
And it's too bad.
It is clear that he acted unethically and perhaps even illegally. But it is also becoming clear that the misactions of UW officials gave him permission to act up, like a kid who knows that his parents may express disappointment but will do no more than frown.
The "wink wink nudge nudge" relationship between Barbara Hedges and Rick Neuheisel is only one indication of an organization out of control. Rick Neuheisel, coming from a program in serious trouble at Colorado, needed restrictions and close supervision.
It appears that the UW is taking steps to clean up its act. The tragedy, however, is that the two people most responsible for the mess, Barbara Hedges and Rick Neuheisel, will never have to face up to their responsibilities.
And it's too bad.
It is clear that he acted unethically and perhaps even illegally. But it is also becoming clear that the misactions of UW officials gave him permission to act up, like a kid who knows that his parents may express disappointment but will do no more than frown.
The "wink wink nudge nudge" relationship between Barbara Hedges and Rick Neuheisel is only one indication of an organization out of control. Rick Neuheisel, coming from a program in serious trouble at Colorado, needed restrictions and close supervision.
It appears that the UW is taking steps to clean up its act. The tragedy, however, is that the two people most responsible for the mess, Barbara Hedges and Rick Neuheisel, will never have to face up to their responsibilities.
Saturday, February 05, 2005
Rick Neuheisel vs. the University of Washington and the NCAA
You know, between the stupidity of Bush's privatization of Social Security proposal, and the Neuheisel suit, I am in a permanent state of annoyed these days.
For now I will spare you my thoughts on privatization.
But this is the thing I continue not to get about Dana Richardson. She's a lawyer who has a job as a compliance officer for an NCAA university. I infer (correctly or incorrectly?) that she would have some interest in sports and specifically collegiate sports and the NCAA rules to even want to apply for or take the job, which is basically lawyer to the athletic department. Theoretically it would follow that, as a lawyer and a compliance officer she would have knowledge of other NCAA matters that have taken place around the country.
Now given all that, I knew that it is wrong for a coach to place any kind of bet on any kind of collegiate sporting event. How could she not know that? Wasn't it her job as a lawyer to interpret lawyer speak? Wasn't it her job to say things like "To be on the safe side don't do it"?
Of course, one also has to wonder, what the heck was Barbara Hedges doing as the AD if she didn't read the memo completely? Wasn't it her job to have final say on those things? Or did she just trust the lawyer? Or did she (even more insidiously) purposely not read it to avoid that responsibility?
I still think she and Neuheisel had a weird connection like Condi Rice and Bush have. This lawsuit is more like a nasty divorce settlement than a job dispute.
And what is so stupid about this are two things:
1. Neuheisel, who improperly gambled, will win a big lawsuit because of the stupid way (no surprise of course) the NCAA handled the investigation and the stupid way the UW handled it.
2. Hedges is living on a fat retirement without accountability when she should have been fired and should be the center of all of this.
Of course, at least a court case gets out all that stuff a lot of people knew was going on but couldn't get to. I hope that THIS time around the UW can face its warts, clean up its act and finally put together an athletic department that is actually ethical.
For now I will spare you my thoughts on privatization.
But this is the thing I continue not to get about Dana Richardson. She's a lawyer who has a job as a compliance officer for an NCAA university. I infer (correctly or incorrectly?) that she would have some interest in sports and specifically collegiate sports and the NCAA rules to even want to apply for or take the job, which is basically lawyer to the athletic department. Theoretically it would follow that, as a lawyer and a compliance officer she would have knowledge of other NCAA matters that have taken place around the country.
Now given all that, I knew that it is wrong for a coach to place any kind of bet on any kind of collegiate sporting event. How could she not know that? Wasn't it her job as a lawyer to interpret lawyer speak? Wasn't it her job to say things like "To be on the safe side don't do it"?
Of course, one also has to wonder, what the heck was Barbara Hedges doing as the AD if she didn't read the memo completely? Wasn't it her job to have final say on those things? Or did she just trust the lawyer? Or did she (even more insidiously) purposely not read it to avoid that responsibility?
I still think she and Neuheisel had a weird connection like Condi Rice and Bush have. This lawsuit is more like a nasty divorce settlement than a job dispute.
And what is so stupid about this are two things:
1. Neuheisel, who improperly gambled, will win a big lawsuit because of the stupid way (no surprise of course) the NCAA handled the investigation and the stupid way the UW handled it.
2. Hedges is living on a fat retirement without accountability when she should have been fired and should be the center of all of this.
Of course, at least a court case gets out all that stuff a lot of people knew was going on but couldn't get to. I hope that THIS time around the UW can face its warts, clean up its act and finally put together an athletic department that is actually ethical.
Friday, December 31, 2004
The Tsunami
The tsunami that hit the coast of India, Pakistan, and numerous small islands is a devastating natural disaster. As are, I suppose, all natural disasters. But so many, many lives have been lost in this one, and the number is growing.
Reading about a mother choosing which son to let go of is almost too unbearable. Although he was found later alive and unharmed is secondary. For a parent to be put in that kind of position is frightening, reminding me that all of us who are parents and, therefore, protectors of innocence, are really no less vulnerable than the rest of the people on the planet.
I feel helpless. Prayer and donations to relief organizations, while the best choice, don't seem to be enough. A failure of my faith? Perhaps. I don't doubt that, given enough resources, people can be helped. But it doesn't not return the feeling of security that had been ripped away with 9/11 and has just tentatively started to rebuild.
I expect that the apocolyptic Christians will point to this as a sign of the end times. Maybe so. But one can argue that we have been in the "end times" since the ressurection and ascension of Jesus. Certainly the writers of the New Testament epistles felt that we shouldn't try to figure out when the end would be here, but instead be prepared daily. In the meantime, we cannot waste our time thinking about when the final battle might be fought, but instead look to take care of humanity now.
Which brings me back to what we can or cannot do for the survivors of the tsunami. I am too chicken to volunteer my time to go help, so the best I can do is pray for support for the brave souls who do go take care of anyone suffering.
If you're reading this, pray. Donate to whichever relief organization you feel comfortable with. I suggest starting with the Salvation Army, the Red Cross, or Lutheran World Relief. But there are so many giving relief, and none of them can do it alone.
And maybe some day I will get over my lazy protectiveness and go do something about it myself.
Reading about a mother choosing which son to let go of is almost too unbearable. Although he was found later alive and unharmed is secondary. For a parent to be put in that kind of position is frightening, reminding me that all of us who are parents and, therefore, protectors of innocence, are really no less vulnerable than the rest of the people on the planet.
I feel helpless. Prayer and donations to relief organizations, while the best choice, don't seem to be enough. A failure of my faith? Perhaps. I don't doubt that, given enough resources, people can be helped. But it doesn't not return the feeling of security that had been ripped away with 9/11 and has just tentatively started to rebuild.
I expect that the apocolyptic Christians will point to this as a sign of the end times. Maybe so. But one can argue that we have been in the "end times" since the ressurection and ascension of Jesus. Certainly the writers of the New Testament epistles felt that we shouldn't try to figure out when the end would be here, but instead be prepared daily. In the meantime, we cannot waste our time thinking about when the final battle might be fought, but instead look to take care of humanity now.
Which brings me back to what we can or cannot do for the survivors of the tsunami. I am too chicken to volunteer my time to go help, so the best I can do is pray for support for the brave souls who do go take care of anyone suffering.
If you're reading this, pray. Donate to whichever relief organization you feel comfortable with. I suggest starting with the Salvation Army, the Red Cross, or Lutheran World Relief. But there are so many giving relief, and none of them can do it alone.
And maybe some day I will get over my lazy protectiveness and go do something about it myself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)