"Do You Believe in (baseball) Miracles?"

The Cubs are in the World Series!!!

I almost can’t believe I wrote that last sentence but there it is, how sweet! They need to finish the season with a win of course but just getting there is a feat that this team hasn’t seen in 71 years—of just appearing in a World Series! Since 2003 I’ve been an occasional watcher of the north side abysmals, but always a fan. Why that year?(head drops...lets out a long sigh) This was the infamous Bartman year where that poor S.O.B  reached for the foul ball and ‘interfered’ with Moises Alou’s ability to catch it. The entire city knows now that it was a foul ball, out of play, and Bartman was within his rights to reach for it. Alou overreacted (shouting at him) and so did the tipsy outraged fans at Wrigley. He was escorted out like a criminal by some security guards who protected him from beer-throwing, cursing, threatening fans—a sickening display really.

ESPN did a brilliant documentary on it called “Catching Hell” outlining everything from crowd behavior and crowd psychology to rules governing fan interference. They even selected a sermon from a minister on the connection between Steve Bartman and Hebrew scapegoat traditions.

2003 was my junior year of college. I had time to spare and the Cubs were good! That meant skipping the occasional class to catch an afternoon game and rushing home from late classes to catch the last few innings. Not a lot of work (school or other) got done that year and the biggest let down was that playoff season where we lost to the Marlins. They were just better. Bartman or not, our guys couldn’t strike out the Florida club and managed to create additional problems by overthrowing runners, missing ground balls and walking batters. They were abysmal. Our pitching led by Kerry Wood and Mark Pryor had been almost automatic until the 6^th game of the series (the Bartman game). Kerry Wood threw the last game poorly. Marlins advanced. Cubs stayed home. Wrigleyville faithful drowned their sorrow in Old Style and raised their fists toward heaven—Greek tragedy style. It was further proof their ivy walled stadium was cursed. 

Until last Saturday…they never got over it.

   

The most I could muster since that heartbreaking fall of ’03 was watching WGN (when they still played games) on a lazy Sunday afternoon. Cubs had stars in those years and reached the playoffs a few times; in 2008 they got swept and of course just last year the Mets knocked them out with AMAZING pitching. Last year made a believer out of me like it did for so many. This team was built to win. The front office made purposeful decisions to spend money on young talent and develop it. The General Manager Theo Epstein had similar results with the Red Sox in the early 2000s and he made good on his promise to Chicago to invest long term. Fans sense a dynasty is being put together in the best place in the world for baseball, Wrigley field. Nothing is guaranteed of course but the talent this team has trained, traded for and developed is unlike any team before.

I can’t imagine having the time or passion that I did in ’03 ever again. Baseball is just too slow a game for me to sit down for 3 to 4 hours a night and watch. I suspect this is true of most people, even Cubs fans. The pace and regularity of the sport makes it difficult to focus exclusively on the game. We just don’t watch TV like that anymore and even with the DVR recorders, who can catch 50 games a year let alone 162? 

 I’ll be watching every pitch of this historic World Series though. I might even record a few next season and follow the club better in 2017. So I am not the most dedicated fan anymore but like so many others who have hoped, and believed this day would come—GO CUBS!!

"Getting Ahead in the 1st World" or Despicable ME

I’m in new car season. Also known as pumpkin spice latte season. I hate car shopping. Concern over ‘lemon’ buying fills my head. It shouldn’t. The regrettable purchase from the shifty sales guy hasn’t ever happened to me. Always in the back of my mind though.

The shoulder slumping reality that another item needs purchasing (another blasted thing!) forces me to imagine life as a hamster. Not the bad smell or the short life span (although that too) but the endless wheel spinning. Oh the spinning!  Do people ever really get ahead? I don’t mean get rich by discovering an unknown talent like uh…spider whispering. You know, lure them to their doom (I’d pay huge!). I just mean paying debts, growing wealth, saving money and traveling. How common is it for families and individuals to graph their income as a steady increasing line while keeping their expenses line relatively stable?

I understand that making money and ‘getting ahead’ requires attending to small things and overseeing everyday purchases, no scratch off lottery tickets or Monster energy drinks.  Even after all the penny pinching, dollar skimming ways households manage to level the field, it still seems like certain people make deals and some just survive. We either get it or we don’t. Some women can craft and some can’t; some men can dress and some can’t.

Not that my spending isn’t occasionally frivolous and piggish. I can eat like a state fair rat once the noisome folks are gone; it costs a lot of money OK…so sue me!

Anyone can improve through discipline though. If ‘getting ahead’ means more income that outgo, I have to be content with small progress. Loosing ‘hands’ are inevitable in games of Texas ‘hold ‘em’, but anyone leaving the game with more money at the end of the night than at the beginning is successful.

I need to get a little more income if I am going to get a new car though. Poker isn’t an option. Even if I do get enough money for a new car with the extra income I haven’t improved my lot. Sure I have a new car and that’s awesome but it’s kinda worse. My paid off car was getting me from one spot to another under the same speed limit (usually) and costing zilch. Old cars break down and need constant maintenance putting the owner in the poor house to keep the clunker running. So get a new car and make payments, still in the poor house, but driving to it in a nice car. The hamster wheel keeps spinning.

By the way ‘poor house’—super old phrase. It just kind of works though.

I have an Altima from 2000 that runs quite well considering the high mileage and the condition of the front. See I get a little close to that cement barrier in the parking lot and frequently run the bumper over the edge. So it is hanging in there but showing signs of wanting to fall into traffic, death by speed bump.

I am doing a fair amount of whining here with no real argument for anything but contentment. Sometimes we need to just vent. After that though edit the bad language out and post it.

My arc of responsibility for savings over the last 10 years bends toward progress. I’d like to keep it that way but I have my ‘needs’ and preferences. Vacations are a preference and I take a large one every year. I don’t mean riding a limo through Europe large, but a decidedly spendy trip whereby I leave Oklahoma at least. I need something to push me through the busy summers at work, a carrot propelling me forward through the dog days of the busy football season. Vacation is that carrot.

Until I discover a hidden talent or learn to budget, the complaining about VERY 1^st world problems will continue unabated. 

God Bless.

On Fiction and Writing

"If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it."

Elmore Leonard

Being able to describe a thing is a wonderful gift that needs to be curated and perfected, fretted over and dreaded about. What is it that I like good writers to do with characters, scenes, dialog and tension? The short answer...it depends. Non-fiction and historical books draw me in a way that fiction never did. Fiction of the action hero kind is great too and burly enforcers like Jack Reacher are a joy to read. Non-fiction though is the learner type book. Life-long learners seek knowledge and love the presentation a writer delivers through their work.

In recent years I’ve developed a respect for fiction writers who do research on a topic and then write a gripping story bringing the reader along to discover something new. The something new that is discovered is a trick however. The author puts wonderfully human emotions and histories into a fictional world that explains a larger paradigm. Classic novels always do this. They are classic because the characters and worlds they inhibit are almost tangible things. Readers get lost in the plot-lines and threads connecting seemingly separate narratives. Then worlds collide. Stories are suddenly representative of larger events and shifts in culture.

 Boo Radley’s (To Kill A Mockingbird) anti-social behavior becomes a strength when he is revealed as a gentle figure to Scout and Jem. Harper Lee didn’t just understand the South and attitudes about race and society; she knew human nature better than most. During the Jim Crow era, cultural lines were drawn sharply between blacks and whites but human nature remained the same across all barriers. Lee hooks readers by distracting them with mysterious neighbors and myths about unknown people in town. Her trick was to sell the reader on a nasty version of Boo Radley, all the while pointing out how the same fear and wrong assumptions led to the imprisonment of an innocent black man.  

Writers develop by creating a recognizable style or philosophy and exploring it different ways to make for a complete picture. Ayn Rand started doing this by writing plays and essays with a common but basic core theme, self-interest drives decisions. Her book We the Living was her first organized attempt at putting her developing believe in self interest into story form. A clearly fumbling attempt at shining light on a philosophy, it wasn’t Aristotle but it was still good. Her characters were simple one dimensional archetypes, set pieces really, existing to demonstrate an extreme view, positive or negative.

She moved on to richer characters with better histories, and dialogue chocked full of philosophies on everything from sex to existence. By the nineteen fifties she was calling her philosophy 'Objectivism' and her ‘self-interested’ characters exemplified the ‘rational man’ and also the evils of collectivist thought. From We the Living to Atlas Shrugged she wrote essays and gave lectures on her Objective principles while building her own special style, she crafted her ‘voice’. She started with a simple framework and layered it for an easily recognized style.

Mark Twain does dialogue like no one else and his Huckleberry Finn is rich with language and regional accents. Kids in early grade school have trouble with Twain (I certainly did) because the spelling of the words and phrases are incorrect as they are taught. Words like “knowed” “haint” and phrasing like “…I’s wuth eight hund’d dollars” keep kids from ‘sounding’ them out. The mannerisms from the characters feel as genuine as the prejudices defining the small towns along the Mississippi. His short stories have the same language and ‘yarn spinning’ from the mostly Midwest and rural characters.

Not sure why writing development was on my mind, but it helps to be reminded of what I admire in other work, great work.

Those Darn Cats

The neighborhood cats love my yard. It’s a little like Switzerland during World War II. It’s a neutral zone where fighting is prohibited but everyone is welcome--a reprieve for weary warriors. Hard to say how my yard became this ‘no man’s land’ for feline R&R. The neighborhood is full of strays who spend most time defending their home turf from fellow feline ruffians. My yard is a woodsy bliss with no trace of anything cats would find menacing.

 I blame myself for never chasing them off the land. I encouraged their disregard for boundaries and dangerous curiosity. Like a wicked witch cooking a stew though I had ulterior motives, mice. I hate when mice invade my kitchen or garage. Cats are the only real killers that mice respect. Mice are difficult to catch and nearly impossible to kill, once they’ve moved in the only choice is death…uh…for the mice I mean.

But aren’t cats lazy and selfish, concerned with being fed and rubbed before agreeing to work? Ahhh, but here is the beauty of my plan. All cats are welcome for a time but none can’t supplant the others and claim ownership of said property, least the others object. It’s all very legal. Occasionally I do wake up to the sound of screeching cats under my window fighting each other over the yard space. Night time is precarious for those unaccustomed to the schedule; new recruits wander recklessly into the lush grass. Veterans set them straight by roughing them up a bit. Youngsters exercise caution next time.

 I get the benefit of mice hunters without the annoyance of having them jump on my face at 6:30 a.m. ready for breakfast before I’m awake. Hair and subsequent dander stay outdoors just like the litter box waste. My leather (pleather) chair remains in one piece not subject to clawing stretching felines ripping holes in soft fabric. They don’t bother me with incessant meowing (begging) for wet, stinky canned meat or that cardboard dry mix they ignore. All previous cats I have owned have either left the canned food half-finished or just walked away at the sight of whatever I shoveled out for them. This isn’t a problem for dogs. Dogs never have enough. You could order a semi-trailer full of kibble and they would devour it in time to sit by the recliner and whine for popcorn from your bowl.

This isn’t to say the welcome cats haven’t gotten lazy in their day time prowling. I’ve pulled in the driveway multiple times to find the neighbor’s tabby asleep on my sunny stoop, oblivious to danger. Oblivious to my loud car too since it hadn’t so much as twitched when I zoomed into the parking spot. An overweight, lethargic tabby is a cat that isn’t getting a workout chasing mice around my crawl space. But I don’t complain. I know the next one through the yard will be hungry.  I’ve also nearly run them over crossing the street in front the curb; the veterans don’t run so much as stroll away unafraid of my loud engine and lights piercing the quiet and dark yard.

I don’t own a dog so my decent size yard is a playground for felines blowing off steam and chasing birds. Dogs would raise hell at the sight of a cat cutting through the grass and leaping over the fence. Dogs never manage to catch those irritating fur balls walking skillfully from fence to roof, roof to fence. It does limit the chance that cats will spend time using the yard as a hunting ground though.

For now the truce among midtown Tulsa cats abides. Let’s hope not one gets greedy wresting exclusive control of the yard and breaking the agreement. For me not having mice scurrying through the house to their well-healed caverns is worth whatever trouble cats are up to. 

Separation of Powers

Should Christian (traditional) countries bring in Christian refugeesbefore Muslims?

Hungary thinks it should and they have doubled down by insisting Christian groups be given help before Muslims.  I think it is entirely appropriate for governments' to pick who lives in the borders of their country, even at the expense of discriminating. Citizenship is not a right it's a privilege. It shouldn't matter the motives of a particular country or regime in favoring one group over another. Whether safety from Islamic radicals or just a preference for a common religion, countries can allow whomever they wish. 

This is the ‘defend and protect’ position, the law enforcement initiative. 

Christian citizens around the world have a responsibility to help whoever is in need regardless of religion. The church is most effective when unleashing the power of aid and volunteerism through their countless channels. Often they are first responders in disasters and emergency relief. Organizations like World Vision and Samaritan's Purse have warehouses of food and supplies strategically located around the world for better effectiveness. Non-Christian charities work the much the same way. They have locals who specialize in relief and charity. These charities frequently need the diplomatic assistance of countries everywhere for flight clearance, easing visa restrictions, military support and logistical support.

This is the ‘serve and give’ position, the compassionate voice initiative.

As tough as it is to reconcile the opposite opinions on refugees it remains an issue that can't be ignored. When the rich world lets countries like Syria descend into civil war the result is massive inflows of refugees. Also come the migrants from poor countries just escaping the cycle of poverty and lack of real jobs. It isn’t the responsibility of governments to provide housing, food, medicine and work but it is the responsibility of believers of Christ.

Officials can make Christian charity an easier goal to accomplish by removing transportation barriers and letting the military provide support and protection. I am not sure how the two sides can reconcile differences and give genuine aid without flooding borders and subjecting citizens to possible terrorism, but ideas must be brainstormed. The choices shouldn't be all or none. 

"Whoever has earthly possessions and notices a brother in need and yet withholds his compassion from him, how can the love of God be present in him?" (I John 3:17 International Standard)

Laws, Facts...and tables

Alan Dershowitz, famed defense attorney, has a great quote about the practice of defending clients.

“When the law is on your side pound the law. When the facts are on your side, pound the facts. When neither is on your side, pound the table! (paraphrase)” it is a brilliant line because it sums up most of our adult arguments in a classic ‘rule of 3’ joke line. From the time we are kids we argue based on one of those three conditions. Most adult arguments can be boiled down to those three elements. Our debates fit neatly into one of the camps but rarely is our opinion solidly so.

As kids we took turns washing the dishes every night fighting about whose turn it was. From the lazy “It was my turn last night I ain’t doing ‘em again!” to the exaggerated “I wash all the time!” 

The ‘law’ part works like this. The dishes need to be done; it is the law of the house and someone must do them. The ‘fact’ part of the argumentation goes like this, some wash dishes more than others so they shouldn’t be assigned the dishes yet again. It doesn’t matter if the person shouting about doing the chore more frequently is telling the truth. We never had a system for determining who ACTUALLY washed the previous night—memories being short.

Imagine a third family member (cousin) who never did dishes because they didn’t live there getting dragged into the conversation. The task was given to the visitor, it’s the least they could do getting a free meal and such. The cousin is neither required to do the dishes on a regular basis, no law, neither have they cleaned up at any point in the past, no facts. Their only recourse is to shout, threaten or beg mercy and hope the other family members are scared enough or compassionate enough to recant on the chore.

By appealing to a sense of sentiment “I am a guest here!…how many times do I come over and I have to clean up?” Or violence “I am going back up real slow…when I turn around I better see those dishes getting scrubbed.” This is said while holding a steak knife and doing mock jabs into the air. The ungrateful visitor is ‘pounding the table’ since they lack other options.

It goes further toward explaining most issues of the day whether political or cultural. These days the two collide like heated atoms. Take any issue and apply the formula. Donald Trump has rocketed to fame this year, primarily because of his strong stance against illegal immigration. He pounds the law by emphasizing the illegality of being in the country and his recommendations are born of law enforcement—a big southern fence. Hilary Clinton, when she does debate, pounds the facts of illegal immigration and the businesses that depend on migrant workers and low skilled employees. Groups that support amnesty for illegals and congressman like Luis Gutierez of Illinois pound the table by criticizing the law and name calling their opponents.

Immigration is a far more intricate spectacle than the simplified version I laid out. I gave Clinton too much credit; mostly she prefers table pounding and name calling. She has been on both sides of the issue surely. Trump has been nasty as well but has recently softened his position on making Mexico pay for the wall. The tactics politicians use are a mixed bag and almost no one takes a purely rational line on anything. The framework Dershowitz laid out for the courtroom holds true for issues of the day. If nothing else, it should help a person recognize what the opposing view might look like and where it will come from.

Oh and our dish problem was solved by the revolutionary idea of assigning a day to a kid, 6 kids 6 days. Mom took day 7.

 Legal brilliance tied law and fact together and no one was hurt—despite the table pounding.   

'New Media'

What will the future of media consist of and how is that different from the current model?

Consumers of news have seen a transition since the late nineties away from newspapers and toward internet based free websites. Internet pages update regularly forcing ink covered dailies to report old news.  A new term has popped up in recent years new media. It is basically what you imagine, social media like Facebook and twitter, podcasts available through streaming and interactive webinars. Old media like newspapers and radio broadcasts will still probably hang in there as a business model for a while, but won’t get the numbers (audience/readership) it used to. We’ve already seen this be true in live TV broadcasts, Netflix stealing much of TV surfing crowd.

The general thrust of new media is the interactive quality and the feedback mechanisms for regular folks. This to me is the most frustrating aspect of new media and why I don’t have a Twitter account. No, I don’t care what @Frank156 in Omaha thinks about the Huskers D line this year. Please keep your thoughts on ‘campus rape culture’ to yourself @VTechRachel, and your ‘proof’ on 911 conspiracies @NorfolkTruther. Some like the idea of an open all-views-welcome type of format where opinions come from everywhere. This is where Twitter falls short. Trolls reduce the content to a muddy pig pen. Like the public library, Twitter surrounds the reader with endless knowledge but too much time is spent avoiding panhandlers in the lobby. Free stuff online is overrun with freeloaders.

Also, not all opinions are equal. A missionary with experience in India knows more about food shortages in Gujarat than a guy who read a story on the BBC. The guy who just read the story is more likely to share his ‘expertise’. People with experience (I won’t say experts) should be the ones media goes to when seeking comments for information. This is an old media staple and something I don’t think will change even in the diffuse landscape of new content. What will change, already has, is the long form interviews and talks on wonkish subjects for grad students like economic policy or gear heads on motorcycle maintenance. Most of this stuff has been available for years but the communication (the web) has leveled the field and spread the interests out.

The best sources of news and information for the future will be diffuse. I listen to podcasts on various subjects from modern China and technology, to Christian teaching, and interviews with Comedians. This allows the best at their trade to teach to the listener/viewer without a journalistic interpretation. Nothing against journalists, they are generalists where an expert knows the subject intimately. The best part, it is cheap! Anyone with decent recording software can piece together a podcast, or simulcast, on a topic they are into. I listened to a self-described ‘roller coaster fiend’ give details about the speed and tilt of coasters around the country. I enjoyed listening to this tech friendly guy who had put a website together for other ‘fiends’ like him, talk about and share his passion for theme park rides.   

Media companies like News Corp and AOL/Time Warner will continue buying whatever looks promising but expect smaller ratings across their range. The vast number of choices for consumers means only audience heavy events like the Super Bowl are a sure thing. 

I watched an interview with Rupert Murdoch a few years ago where he outlined very simply how he has expanded his media juggernaut so effectively. “Content” was the word he used probably fifty times when asked about success in ratings and vision for the future of media. He was at pains to explain to the reporter that it didn’t matter what the content was, just that if it was quality people would listen, read and watch. The reporter wanted to pin Murdoch down on what type of content was best, or what subjects and analysis were considered best. Murdoch basically said that it didn’t matter, the cream will always rise whether in print or radio, TV or website.

This new media reality is a relief for people with big ideas but small wallets. Make the content good and people will find it.  A market will always exist for quality content, The CEO of News Corp said so!