Post election day thoughts

1) The smarter campaign won. This is obvious, but it does make me wonder what happens if John McCain does more talking about issues rather than trying to tear down Obama's image. For me, it was the constant disparaging of Obama, especially during the debates, that didn't allow the Maverick image to shine. Of course, imitating Obama's campaign didn't make him seem better either.

2) Now, I have as much hope as anyone that Obama can make good things happen in government. But I'll know the Daley Machine has extended its reign to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. if Patrick Fitzgerald is disposed of as the U.S. District Attorney in Chicago while Obama is in office. Of course, this could also lead to the 2016 Summer Olympics in Chicago, which many are now predicting in Chicago.

3) Affirmative action goes down in Nebraska. Gay unions go down in California. Yet Colorado can't figure out when a person's life begins. Here's a hint: 80% were wrong.

4) Lots of promises means they will either be fulfilled or 1994 will repeat itself in 2010. Mr. President-elect, you've been warned.

And lastly, the word of the day is:

Obamanation

For you Democrats out there, this is a synonym of domination. For the Republicans in the crowd, just think of what other word it sounds like if you say it really fast. It'll help you survive for at least the next 2 years.

Cole Hamels = John Cleese?

You decide.

(H/T to the wonderful wife)

Back in business

Man, this whole not posting thing does not work well, now does it? Ok, reset button time (for the fifth time)...

The Olympic Gymnastics Rant

Gymnastics is one of those Olympic sports that I literally only pay attention to during this quadrennial celebration of sport, and I probably wouldn't mind if NBC didn't broadcast so much of it in future games. That being said, the brouhaha over He Kaxin and her fellow Chinese gymnasts' ages lead me to ask the IOC and FIG this:

WHY ARE YOU ASKING THE CHINESE!?!?

Let's backtrack a bit. First, before the Olympics, FIG (the international gymnastics governing body) examined the Chinese-issued competition passports of the Chinese gymnastics team, which stated all of their team's athletes were 16, and thus eligible, even amid the swirl of suspicion that those ages may not be true; a Danny Almonte case in reverse.
A few days ago, new media investigative reports brought these age issues back into question. Now, put yourself in the FIG Investigator's shoes. In the case that new evidence arises that puts these same issues in doubt again, should you go check the same source for different documents and stop there, or should you examine other legitimate records?
Obviously, if a fraud is being perpetrated, the perpetrators, if they're worth anything, should backtrack to forge what is necessary in case of investigation; in this case, birth certificates. So why stop there? I'm almost certain that gymnastics has a World Junior Championships event for athletes not age-eligible for this highest level of competition. Wouldn't you have records from that stating the ages of the competitors there? Wouldn't a gymnast in line for an eventual spot on a national team have competed there? Again, I have to pose these as questions because, as I said, I don't follow gymnastics outside of the Olympics, nor do I care to.
It seems to me the logic used in this case is to take the accusation, ask the accused to provide their own evidence in refute, and if they produce valid proof clear their name without any cross-examination. It is that lack of an extra validity check that has me questioning these findings, and odds are if news does break that China cheated in this case, you can surely bet that it won't come with the spotlight on.

Lessons from a life

The top news headline today reads as some variant of this: Tim Russert dead at 58.

A few weeks ago, an obituary ran in a newspaper in IL. A long-time resident of that community had passed, after 100 years of life.

The first was a famous name of a television reporter who I occasionally watched on Sundays. The second is my father's godmother. It would seem comparing the testimonials of Russert's colleagues to the reflections of my own great-aunt would have nothing in common, and yet they remarkably do.

It appears Mr. Russert was a man of great faith who invested himself in people, regardless of their status. Listening to Bob Woodward and David Gregory said just as much, and personally I couldn't help but think he was a good guy after his insightful yet generous appearances on Jim Cramer's Mad Money. And reports have it that his family had just been in audience with Il Papa, which makes this Catholic smile.

My aunt lived her life without the public spotlight, but yet still gave herself in service to all. Her work as a trust officer secured a number of families with a stable financial foundation, many of whom returned her generosity upon their own deaths. She always enjoyed visitors to her house, and treasured that time with them. Her faith (also Catholic) was her foundation, the wellspring from which her generosity flowed.

I write this because as a society, we treat death almost exclusively as the sadness of losing something good and with the idea that the deceased has moved on to a better place. But to someone whose persona demands that things have a purpose, it seems that another question needs to be raised with equal reverence: What did he or she teach us? What good from his or her life should be incorporated into my life that hasn't been already? I'm not sure there's a universal answer to these questions, because these are the types of questions with answers that speak to a personal level.

For this purpose-obsessed mind, the lesson from both of these is clear: Too often do I associate purpose with tangible pursuits, rather than in developing relationships with people. Maybe it's that rugged individualism that is ingrained in American lore, but I find myself looking to help my pursuits almost as much as I should be trying to help others'. Yet my head knows that it is in genuinely helping others that we most help ourselves. As Jesus was quoted: "The first is this: 'Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is Lord alone! You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.' The second is this: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these." (Mk 12: 29-31; author's emphasis)

That's how Tim Russert lived. That's how my great aunt lived. That how we all need to live.

Seamheads post

Today's post on Seamheads is an orientation to statistics. Yes, I use baseball examples, but the lessons within are something to understand across all numeric data that you're presented, like polls.

A new feature

Some smart person related to me by blood made the brilliant suggestion that I post links here to my work at Seamheads. Well, here's my post for this week.

If I remember, expect this every Wednesday. And I'll stop promising to be more regular with posts here when it's obvious that writing in this space is not a high priority.