Thoughts during a rainy February Sunday’s NBA doubleheader …
The NA Confidential household doesn’t spend much time watching television, but we always try to make room for NBA games a couple times a week.
College? That’s where people go for an education. Meanwhile, the world's finest basktball players play in the NBA.
In the NBA, it’s all about the money – and not a single person involved with the league denies it.
In college basketball, it’s also all about the money – and every single person involved with the sport denies it.
In both the NBA and college, it’s a paying proposition. In both cases, the fans pay to watch athletes play basketball.
In the NBA, a large proportion of the money generated by the players goes to the players in the form or salaries and endorsements.
In college, a strikingly small percentage of the money generated by the players goes to the players in the form of scholarships and grants.
The NBA is far from perfect, but at least it’s free of hypocrisy.
~~~
Speaking of basketball ...
In today’s Tribune editorial, “That boat would look good on our riverfront,” Chris Morris reminds us that New Albany “blew it” a decade ago, when “voters in this city had a chance – two chances – to vote yes on a referendum which would have allowed a riverboat casino to dock on our riverfront.”
Adds the Tribune’s Managing Editor:
"If the residents of this county had boated for the boat, Scribner Place would have been completed, the sewers would be paid for, and Mayor James Garner wouldn’t have to worry about coming up short or owing $2 million in a sewer loan.”
It’s certainly true that if a riverboat casino were docked in Floyd County, the money would be rolling into our coffers.
It's less certain where it would go after that.
In truth, the sheer number of variables involved makes it difficult to calibrate hindsight and to reckon the outcome had we voted for “the boat” ten years ago.
Had Clark County voted favorably at the time, it’s possible that only one license would have been issued, and Jeffersonville would have snagged it. Conversely, had Floyd County gotten a license, Caesar’s might be exactly where it is today, only a few hundred yards east of the county line – and downtown might well have seen no direct investment as a result.
Perhaps Doug England would have been re-elected Mayor instead of being toppled by Regina Overton.
And so on.
In the end, there’s just no way to know, but we agree with Chris that “we’re living with the consequences,” for better or worse.
~~~
Thanks to our friend Edward, here’s the link to a site that includes the original text of scholar Ward Churchill’s infamous essay.
The current controversy surrounding Churchill’s assessment of 9-11 has been described by at least one NA Confidential reader as “one of the juiciest to come down the pike in many moons,” and this probably is true, but the real question for us is this:
How many of the people discussing Churchill have actually read what the man said?
Here's your chance.
~~~
For lighter reading on the general topic of good beer, the Potable Curmudgeon's Blog is up and running:
The Potable Curmudgeon
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
All credit to Churchill for inadvertently getting these ideas on the national news.
As most of the country fretted about in their usual nationalistic, "drank the Kool-Aid" stupor wondering how a 9/11 attack could've possibly happened here, my only question was why it took so long.
The world is indeed a scary place when the occasional Bin Laden tape begins to sound like the voice of reason.
Good thing we've got basketball, I guess.
Kevin,
First, Churchill has created spirited public debate on a national level concerning what may very well be the most important topic facing our country. If that's not the definition of a good teacher, what is?
Second, are you suggesting that we, as citizens, are not culpable for the actions of our government?
Kevin, I do believe the question asked by Bluegill is the pertinent one:
"Are you suggesting that we, as citizens, are not culpable for the actions of our government?"
What if we all re-read Churchill's essay and omit the part where he refers to the WTC occupants as little Eichmanns?
Excise Churchill's inflammatory rhetoric, and he notes only the obvious: Americans are unwilling or unable to think about the rest of the world, ever eager to remain disconnected to the government that acts in their name, and too obsessed with the bread and circuses of consumermania to care much about the consequences.
Personally, I find Churchill's rhetorical flourishes tasteless and unnecessary, because his central thesis involves so much more in the way of persuasion.
However, his overall argument cannot be reduced to a sound bite as easily, and there's just too much potential cognitive dissonance, hence the controversy over one paragraph to the exclusion of all else.
And the result, sadly, is the same: We're spared the burden of thinking, and can shop at Wal-Mart without worry.
Tactically speaking, consider my comments to Kevin as a spoonful of sugar helping the medicine go down.
Post a Comment