30,000 Year Plan, Part IV

So while I was away, the 30,000 year plan proceeded uninterrupted. Three bits of news about it:

1. My Patriots blog became more famous in two ways. First, it was listed among the top 100 for the keywords "nfl standings." Might not seem like much, but it squeaked past Pro Football Weekly's web page into 76th place, and I love that magazine.

2. And second, someone named marosia posted a SPAM/Advertisement in the comments section of a post. It's a little strange that someone used my blog to advertise a place to buy Patriots tickets, but somehow I think that makes me slightly more famous than I was before.

3. Additionally I had a letter published in the Boston Globe last week. Granted it wasn't about anything earth-shattering; but long after I'm gone it will remain as a reminder that I existed. And getting a letter in the paper certainly can't *hurt* the 30,000 year plan. If anyone remembers what a newspaper is :)

So as the plan proceeds, take note Angelina Jolie -- 29,991 more years and I'll be as famous as you!

That's all for now. Check back this weekend for posts about Avatar and James Cameron in the run up to the Oscars telecast on Sunday.

- Scott

Book #22 The Host by Stephanie Meyer

The twenty-second book I read since May 2008 is:

The Host by Stephanie Meyer

****Note: spoiler alert****

I love a good story that explores what it means to be a person. The movie Blade Runner is one of the classic tales that ponders whether or not being born makes you human, or if it is something more. And this book held that possibility, with a reverse-telling of Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

However, The Host didn't end up doing a very good job of fleshing out the issues it held in its hands. It's a very intriguing concept; but most characters are either well-worn stereotypes (Kyle, Jeb, even Melanie), meaningless props (all of the rest of the Souls), or window-dressing/furniture (most of the rest of the crew living in the caves).

Only Jared, Doc, Wanda/Wanderer have the kind of complexity to explore the issues at hand, and unfortunately that wasn't enough to make it an interesting discussion. The rest of it seems more like a lurid look at love triangles where there were only two bodies but three "people."

Also unfortunately, the book is over 600 pages, and you can predict how it will end about 200 pages in. By that time, I was invested enough to want to finish. Problem is that I didn't find Meyer's writing style gripping enough to hold my attention.

Meyer is an okay writer, but she has a bit of a tin ear for dialogue and has several characters who do the same thing over and over (Jamie, and even the main character spring to mind). So on the whole, the idea was great, the story was well constructed, but the characters and writing weren't enough to sustain 600 pages.

Okay, but not worth the effort unless you've read and enjoy the style of the writer.

- Scott

Book #21: Leading Geeks

The twenty-first book I read since May 2008 is:

Leading Geeks by Paul Glen

I actually saw Glen speak a few years ago, and was promised a copy of his book at the time. I never got that copy, and turns out I didn't miss much. The book is decent, but I didn't learn anything in it that he didn't cover in his presentation.

My advice; get it at the library and read about the first one-third. The rest is rehash of the initial thesis, which is that geeks are different from the rest of us and need totally new thinking by their managers. Not a ground-breaking thought, but Glen starts out doing a good job explaining why the old models don't work and then peters out as he reproves the same thing over and over.

- Scott

Book #22: The Giver

The twenty-second book I read since May 2008 is:

The Giver by Lois Lowry

Labeled juvenile fiction, The Giver is a lot deeper than most books aimed at that age group. It takes place in a world without meaningful differences, where people's obedience is their greatest strength, and where all feelings are discussed and dismissed before they get out of hand. It's a world of control that evolved out of a fear of chaos.

In some ways it's like the world in The Handmaid's Tale (by Margaret Atwood), given that the society is closed and insular but you don't really know how far it reaches and what is just beyond it. And that uncertainty helps hold it all together.

But back to The Giver; the main character is a teen named Jonas and he is chosen for the ultimate job -- to serve as the repository of all emotions of the greater society. It's important because some decisions can't be made through sheer logic, so when the elders are faced with tough choices they will call on Jonas to make the right decision.

But the new job comes with difficulties: the newly provided freedom to lie to those close to him, knowledge of his family's (and the larger society's), and understanding of the horrors of starvation and war. He is up to the task, but it is exhausting to both him and "The Giver" (the man giving him the emotions).

However, once Jonas begins experiencing the joys and sorrows of emotion, he just can't bring himself to deny them to the rest of his community. And even though he is called "The Receiver" through most of the book, at the end he sacrifices himself to become the real "Giver" -- gifting emotions to all those in his orbit in exchange for his own life.

The Christ symbolism is thick here, but the tale is one that shows the scary underbelly of conformity and ultimately shuns it for the unpredictable world of natural beauty and feeling. A quick read and a layered story that held my nephew's attention (no small feat). I'd recommend it; and given how quick a read it was, I'll probably re-read it again soon.

- Scott

Book #20: Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them

Twentieth book I read since May 2008:

Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them by Al Franken

I enjoyed the book, though it didn't tell me a lot I didn't already know or suspect. Yes, the right-wing spin machine lies, bolstered by the middle-right mainstream media outlets and the conservatives who own and operate them. And yes, the lies can weaken freedoms and squelch debate here at home and support catastrophic foreign policy mistakes.

It was funny at times and informative all the time. I didn't care much for Franken's imagined comic book (Operation Chickenhawk -- starring the stars of the right wing who somehow got out of military duty); he was more pointed and funnier when he stuck to debunking the lies.

But what was missing was a solution to the problem of liars. The louder you denounce them, the more their lies are repeated by a media hungry to report on the fight. And the more you ignore them, the bolder they seem to become. All the while rationality dies a slow death at the hands of talk radio and screaming heads on television.

The solution might be to let both sides scream themselves silly and continually elect centrist politicians. And maybe someday, when the screamers realize the error of their ways, they'll join us in civil society again.

- Scott

Book #19: Welcome to the Monkey House

Nineteenth book I read since May 2008:

Welcome to the Monkey House by Kurt Vonnegut

A friend lent this one to me, stating that she thought Vonnegut's short fiction was more accessible than his novels. She also thought it would be easier to read short stories on the train.

She was right on both counts.

My only worry going in was that the shorter fiction might lose some of the poignancy and Vonnegut-ness woven into the longer fiction. Well, I'm happy to say that his short stories are just as interesting and semi-zany as any of his novels I've read.

He has a wonderful way of twisting the future just slightly and figuring out how human cultural and biological wants/needs/flaws would express themselves in such a world. Would the world's only telekinetic decide to rule the world or alter it for the common good? What are the family dynamics when nearly ever-lasting life is guaranteed? How would our society react if people no longer needed their bodies? And the overarching question of whether or not a longer life is worthwhile.

But wait -- there's more! He also explores romantic relations between political enemies, race relations, how dogs might actually be ruling the world, and what we might need to sacrifice to motivate apathetic youth.

As you would expect with Vonnegut, it's all done with characteristic flair and small twists. His prose is spare, though at some points frankly confounding. But a very easy read, with interesting windows into everything from the human soul to the post-Camelot Martha's Vineyard.

Highly recommended.

- Scott

Book #18: Ender's Game

Eighteenth book I read since May 2008:

Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card

I would hesitate to call this a joyous romp through space. After all, the fate of humanity hangs in the balance. But it is played out by children, so there is a certain playfulness about it. Though the children are often more deadly serious than the adults and play for keeps in all ways, which can be as dangerous as anything adult can be.

Ender is the nickname of the teeny kid who is apparently the savior of the human race. Chosen because he's empathetic enough to understand an enemy and brutal enough to destroy it, six year-old Ender turns accepted military strategies on their head and is thinking ten steps ahead of students twice his age. He rifles through military school faster than other tikes open their birthday presents and snaps out of a mid-life crisis in time to meet his destiny on the battlefield.

The books touches on some important topics: how young is too young for indoctrination; are leaders born, made, or both; should there be any rules of war; is it a war crime if you win; do wars/enemies unite us more than they divide us. But this book doesn't really explore them, just touches on them.

From what I understand, the rest of the Ender Saga contains deeper exploration of those questions, so I might read through some of the other books to find out. And I'm open to suggestions as to which book I should read next. There are about a dozen books and they don't follow a single through-line, so you don't have to read them chronologically.

But on its own, Ender's Game was a solid effort, with interesting characters and a lot of intrigue about motive, both seen and unseen. And it set the stage for a lot of future machinations, lots of interesting possibilities, and deeper philosophical debate. Oh, and it was also an enjoyable read, though the dialogue was a bit forced at times.

- Scott

Book #17: Outliers by Malcom Gladwell

Seventeenth book I read since May 2008:

Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcom Gladwell. It's the first non-fiction entry on the blog, and it is a fascinating book. A true must read for anyone who buys the idea that our society is anything close to a meritocracy.

Gladwell clearly and sometimes painfully illuminates the role of luck, societal bias, class, culture, and well... luck, in the lives of hyper-successful people. In our world, the year you were born, the month of your birthday, the genes you got, the random opportunities that present themselves, and the family/culture/region in which you were brought up -- those factors have much more to do with your success or failure than your own hard work, determination, and your ability to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps.

The author is not a nay-sayer to the American Dream; he contends that hard work is essential to any success story. And in fact, he argues that to improve the lives of people and the overall functions of society we should we provided better, more equally distributed opportunities to all. Then talent and hard work would be rewarded more often and those successful people would make our world a better place by having their talents and hard work rewarded and recognized.

Gladwell does prove that the "self-made man" is a cultural illusion -- a fairy tale we tell ourselves -- that has virtually no examples in real life. Success in our world depends on being born into the right situations, having time to discover and nurture your talents, and getting the opportunities to apply those talents.

I would recommend this book highly to anyone who questions our society or culture and anyone who goes through life without questioning them. It's an intriguing study of how cultures self-select who will become successful, why some cultures have more success in some areas and tend to fail in others, and is far from the downer that this blog entry might make it sound like.

It's a celebration of success, and a hopeful dream that we can make small changes that can result in big success for even more people. And by the way, it's a quick read. I finished all 300 pages in less than a week on the train :)

- Scott

Book #16: Certain Things Last by Sherwood Anderson

Sixteenth book I read since May 2008:

Certain Things Last: The Selected Short Stories of Sherwood Anderson (edited by Charles E. Modlin)

I enjoyed every single minute of this book. Anderson's spare style and simple phraseology make him easy to read and get into, and he pulls a lot of life knowledge from simple things.

His landscape is mostly rural Ohio, and yet his stories plumb the depths of human experience. Frustration, sexual desire and promiscuity, family obligations and limitations, status, artistry, the innocence and lack of innocence of youth, race relations, class distinctions, and even gender bending.

He also portrays his world with simple grace, bringing back visions of old town and slick cities as they moved from the industrial revolution and the great depression. But not the down sides of this transformation but the simple realities those events created for the people who had to survive them. And the yearnings and discarded dreams of those people.

The stories are short but chock full of great writing and vast knowledge. My favorites were Death in the Woods, Virginia Justice, and Fred. Anderson is a thoroughly modern and accessible writer, and I'd recommend these or any of his works to anyone.

- Scott

2 x 6 = enjoyment!

Some of you are no doubt aware that I had a six-word memoir published a year ago. Well, the folks at Smith Magazine are at it again, and they've just released another tome of shorter-than-short non-fiction -- this time with a theme: "Love & Heartbreak." And believe it or not, *I* am at it again, too. I had a second memoir published, one of the few people to be featured in both books.

The first memoir was pretty serious stuff. "Changing mind postponed demise by decades" refers to a few simple decisions that, when repeated every day for years, pulled me out of a suicidal depression. The memoir and accompanying image are here (ninth one in the series), and the back-story was published by Smith Magazine here.

Interestingly my mother and one of my sisters commented on the back-story, both saying they had no idea what I was going through. I know that wasn't true for my mom, but I believe my sister. And it surprised me that she didn't know -- but she was probably dealing with her own demons from the crazed family environment. I didn't really know what was going on with her, either. Maybe someday she'll write a six-word memoir that *I* can comment on :)

Anyhow, the second memoir is on the topic of Love & Heartbreak. Rachel Fershleiser and Larry Smith from Smith Magazine were in town last Tuesday on the book launch tour. I checked in with them at the event, at the Brookline Booksmith, and got more than I bargained for.

First, the bookstore's projector was missing a cable. Calling on my years of IT experience, I figured out that we could scavenge one from an old monitor and that's how IT Man saved the day (and got his first round of applause!). They got to show a nice presentation with some choice memoirs from the new book, and it was a great way to warm up the crowd.

Once things got rolling, they called me up to talk about the first and second memoirs, the back stories to each, and how I felt about the process. After telling a shorter version of the back-story from the first one, I moved on to the second memoir.

"They all came before they left."

That got a hearty laugh from the audience, and after some banter between me and Rachel, the story I told was basically this. The memoir refers to a string of women who broke things off with me right after I got them to... er, the "promised land," if you know what I mean. I realize that each relationship ended for different reasons, but it was an odd coincidence that they never seemed to fall apart *before* I got to show my mastery.

My friends sometimes joke about my video game fast-twitch fingers, but it did come in handy during that time. Just wish the good times had kept rolling longer. And I sort of felt like Elaine (from Seinfeld), when she helped her boyfriend become a doctor, and he dumped her after reaching that goal. Sure, the goal I helped with was easier, but... well, I felt *used* -- NOT!

The icing on the cake for the evening was that a reporter from the BU daily newspaper interviewed me and included a paragraph about me in her story (link). From the story:

Scott O'Neil, an information technology manager from Waltham, said he submitted his six-word memoir for both books because he enjoyed the project. His six-word memoir, published in the book about love, was "they all came before they left," he said.

"It opened up my emotional life a little bit more," O'Neil said. "It forced me to go back and live through those [memories] and experience them again."

In any event, I just thought I'd write about this a bit, because it was one of the most satisfying projects I've ever been associated with. I've remade connections with past friends and relatives and found new connections with my friends of today. I thank Rachel and Larry for coming up with the idea and Rachel especially for her endless encouragement.

More about this soon.

- Scott

H.P. Lovecraft

I remember the first time I read Emerson. It was in an American Lit. class and I'd read about ten words of his first essay of his when I realized he was the best writer I was going to read that semester.

Well, I just had a similar experience with H. P. Lovecraft. I'd never read anything by him before picking up a book of short fiction (edited by Joyce Carol Oates) at the library. "The Call of Cthulhu" begins thusly:

The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents. We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go mad from the revelation or flee from the deadly light into the peace and safety of a new dark age.

In a paragraph he crystalized the dichotomy of our desire to discover new truths and our unwillingness to discard ideas destroyed by those truths. Lovecraft intuits that scientific exploration will always be anchored in and by the myths and fears and past science that built our culture and our society. Amazing to think that in 1926 he presaged the current state of affairs, where 9/11 somehow makes people want *more* religion and the intelligent design crowd desperately tries to beat science into a shape that keeps their gods in the center of the universe.

I'm only a few stories in, but already I think Lovecraft might be the best author I read this year.

- Scott

One? How About Six!

I got this idea from my friend's blog, where I posted my one-word replies to these questions. However, since I'm more of a six-word guy, I'm changing the rules. All answers here must have exactly *six* words instead.

Here are mine:

Where is your mobile phone? Inside jacket pocket, awaiting your call.

Where is your significant other? In the kitchen, Turkey Day prep.

Your hair colour? Full and brown, flecks of gray.

Your mother? Usually Maine, always in a fog.

Your father? In the ground for thirteen years.

Your favorite thing? Endorphins make the world more bearable.

Your dream last night? No dream to tell. So sorry.

Your dream goal? Disappear now, reappear whenever I want.

The room you're in? Small, Patriots mementos, iMac, scratching posts.

Your hobby? Pondering how culture shapes our existence.

Your fear? At this point, only one: torture.

Where do you want to be in 6 years? Six years further, six years older.

Where were you last night? Stayed at home, shared Thanksgiving ideas.

What you're not? Destroyed, despite the world's best efforts.

One of your wish-list items? Home playoff run with exciting finish!

Where you grew up? Cedarwood, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA, Earth, Milky...

The last thing you did? Solved hard killer Sudoku, congratulated self.

What are you wearing? Loose fit jeans, new shirt, smile.

Your TV? Unfairly large, distracting, worth every penny.

Your pets? Adorable, snuggly, curious, scared, quiet, comfortable.

Your computer? Absolutely necessary to exist these days.

Your mood? More upbeat than this blog indicates.

Missing someone? Always missing someone, but who isn't?

Your car? Boxy, AWD, reliable, red, in driveway.

Something you're not wearing? Boxers, briefs, panties, boy shorts, thong.

Favourite shop? Joie de Vivre, Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge.

Your summer? Absolute busiest ever, but worth it.

Love someone? Can't answer in only six words.

Your favourite colour? Today: blue. Yesterday: red. Black? Never.

When is the last time you laughed? Cat hanging upside down, earlier today.

When is the last time you cried? May of 1983, sad television show.

- Scott

30,000 Year Plan, Part III

And the 30,000 Year Plan continues unabated.

Proof #9 that in 29,992 years I could be as famous as Angelina Jolie: Smith Magazine decided to include another of my memoirs in their up-coming book of six-worders about Love & Heartbreak.

No image this time (and when you read my memoir, you will be glad of that), but the possibility of more publicity work and of course, another chance to hob-nob with the upper crust at the book launch.

For those of you unfamiliar with the 30,000 Year Plan, kindly check it out here.

And thank you for your support in my quest for soul-destroying fame!

- Scott

True Hypocricy

Ever been impressed when athletes thank our troops for their service? Thought well of them when they praised the selfless actions of fire fighters or police officers? Admired them when they went into war zones to boost morale?

Well, if you want to continue feeling good about those actions, you might want to stop reading right now. Because the hyporicy of some of these "patriots" has been exposed in this story at Yahoo.com. Apparently, agents for some baseball players are trying to find ways to avoid paying extra taxes that might be due under the new president. From the story: "For a big-money free agent earning $10 million in 2009, Obama’s plan could increase his federal tax by more than $400,000."

And just so you don't think baseball is the only sport where this is going on, read this. Seems that that football players might be doing the exact same thing. (Though it is more understandable with them; their careers are shorter and their contracts are not guaranteed.)

So to summarize, athletes making *200 times* the average U.S. wage want to avoid paying an extra 4% in taxes. Taxes that could provide body armor for soldiers or equipment/raises for police and fire fighters, or perhaps pay down the national debt. And, by the way, taxes they would have had to pay before the current president took office in the year 2000.

These guys might call themselves patriotic. I call them hypocrites. "Sure, I'll host a fund raiser for the local fire department, but don't ask me to pay my fair share to equip them." Pathetic.

Maybe this is just agents blowing smoke or working to game the system. But the agents act on behalf of the athletes. And any multi-millionaire athlete who schemes to avoid taxes while the country slips further and further into debt cannot be considered a true patriot.

Any player (or other filthy rich person) who truly wants to support U.S. troops or the fire/police we *all* depend on should not complain about when asked to pay an additional 4% in taxes. In past wartimes, all citizens were asked to make sacrificies for the cause. Just because George W. Bush didn't mind doubling the national debt to pay for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan doesn't mean that that those wars were free. Someone will have to pay that bill eventually, and I think overpaid millionaires are just the people to do it.

But the way these guys treat their country, maybe they should rename it "The Land of Opportunists."

- Scott

30,000 Year Plan, Part II

From time to time there are creeping signs that I am gaining some teeny-tiny modicum of notoriety. It used to worry me. But rather than fight it, I've incorporated it into something I call "The 30,000 Year Plan." The idea is that if I continue doing what I'm doing and work hard at it, in 30,000 years, I will be as famous as Angelina Jolie is right now.

I'm eight years into the plan, and Proof #8 that I'm on track is a letter of mine quoted and published by an ESPN columnist (under "Reader Comments" here).

He did take some liberties with the content of my letter, so here it is in its entirety:

Gregg,

Your stance that rich universities should spend more of their endowments could easily apply to the world's major religions.

How many hungry could be fed if the Pope sold off all the riches of Vatican City and put them to Christian uses? How many homeless could be sheltered if Sun Myung Moon spent money on that instead of enriching his family? How many dying could be cured if the Salvationists bought life-saving drugs instead of sending money back to London headquarters?

Religions are not required to report the size of their "endowments," so direct comparisons are difficult. But given some of the excesses seen in many of the larger religions -- as well as their much longer time in existence -- we can safely assume the big guys have lots of money. In fact, I'd suggest that their "endowments" dwarf Harvard the same way that Harvard's dwarfs smaller universities.

So given your stance on colleges/universities, can we assume that you will soon call on the leaders of major religions to begin using their accumulated capital for the betterment of human beings?

- Scott

PS. I'd like to believe the best of you, Gregg. Please don't take a pass on this question just because you are religious.

Just further proof that I existed here in the early 21st century (documented for ever and ever by Google.com, I'm sure). 29,992 years to go, Angelina -- I'm hot on your trail!

- Scott

PS. Here is the past proof that The 30,000 Year Plan is for real.

Proof #7. A picture of me dressed as the Riddler appeared at Boston.com to celebrate the release of the latest Batman movie, The Dark Knight. (Note: they keep changing the list order, so you'll just have to scroll through them to find me.) My costume was one of the few home made ones, and I still own most of it, so I'm all set for Halloween every year! Until I get the mid-life beer gut.

Here are some past indications of my burgeoning fame:

Proof #6a. In February 2008, I was featured in Smith Magazine's online publicity blitz for a book of six-word memoirs. In fact, they pretty much just published an email I sent, so in a way, I was the *author* of that article -- no offense, Rachel :)

Proof #6b. And of course, the reason for the feature on me was that I had my six-word memoir and accompanying drawing published on its own page in an actual book, Not Quite What I Was Planning. I've had multiple requests for autographs and had one person tell me that if I could do 20 more drawings like the one in the book, she could get me a gallery showing. I was flattered, of course, but it took me a month to do the one they published, and as I stated in the other article, it was very tough to do.

(Side note: my father had some poetry published in a book, but he had to buy a bunch of copies to ensure his inclusion. And it became clear after the fact that the "publishers" simply collected money from a lot of people who wanted their poetry published and then distributed the book back to them. So I guess I'm one step ahead of my dad -- but just a very, very small step.)

Proof #6c. Also associated with the release of the book, there were multiple sitings of my memoir and image on the web. NPR featured it (along with others in a picture gallery) on their Talk of the Nation blog, Boing Boing had it on their page of cool new things, it was all over the blogosphere (Ward Six, Moving from Me to We, something called Wishbone Clover, even the Washington Post baseball notebook), and lastly, it was featured in a journal where I worked.

Proof #5. I had an article published on the well-respected web site, Coldhardfootballfacts.com. It detailed how bad the NFC was versus the AFC, and was the first piece that they received from one of their readers that the decided merited being published by them.

Proof #4. I've had several letters published on the Boston Globe, most notably about malpractice insurance, the current war in Iraq, and the Patriots rules about ticket resale.

Proof #3. I have been elected a delegate to the state convention of a major political party four years running. No big deal to do it once; but to be re-elected three more times and to wield some actual local clout is the big deal here.

Proof #2. At Super Bowl XXXIX, my brother and I were interviewed for an article in the local Jacksonville paper. And despite my brother's worries, I did indeed make it back alive in plenty of time to see the Patriots beat the Eagles!

Proof #1. In November of 2003, I had an article published in the Boston Globe detailing why Bill Belichick was a better head coach than Bill Parcells. Believe it or not, there was still a debate at the time. Now, of course, everyone knows that I was right -- but I'll let my words do the talking and leave the bragging to others.

I will keep you updated on how things are going with the plan. If you continue to read this blog, perhaps in fifteen-hundred years or so you will begin to see the wisdom of my slow-and-steady approach.

- Scott

Why Bother?

I heard two stories in the last week that ended the same way. The stories themselves were very different, but both held the same sense of outrage, and so they both ended like this: "What kind of lesson are we teaching these people?"

One was a third-hand account of a student caught selling drugs out of his dorm. The school administration was rightly upset, and expelled him. But as sometimes happens, the student's father was very rich, and he gave a boatload of money to the school in exchange for having his son reinstated and the crime expunged from his record.

The person who told me that story said that it was wrong on a lot of fronts. And especially in that the student in question is likely to think he can buy his way out of trouble with money. Of course, he just *had* gotten out of trouble with money, but my friend still thought it was wrong.

Fast-forward to this past Sunday, when someone on ESPN's The Sports Reporters expressed outrage that Marion Jones requested a pardon from President Bush. The commentator protested against the idea of such a request, asking rhetorically, "Did Marion Jones forget that she promised to accept the consequences of her actions?" Another panelist chimed in: "What kind of lesson would we be sending if President Bush talked tough about steroids in baseball and then let Marion Jones off the hook?"

At first I agreed that neither the student nor Marion Jones should be "taught the wrong lesson" by being let off the hook. After all, if we live in a meritocracy, why should some people get different treatment? But when I thought things through more thoroughly, I realized I had it all backwards. If we want to teach the rich and powerful how the real world works, maybe we should let them get away with their crimes.

In the real world, pampered athletes and children of the rich *rarely* have to suffer any real consequences for bad actions. We hear stories all the time of championship athletes skipping classes in college, robbing people for fun, beating/raping/murdering people, and they usually don't have to pay the piper for their actions. For every Michael Vick, there are probably 50 guys like Leonard Little.

And why bother trying to teach a spoiled little rich kid that the law applies equally to everyone? We all know that isn't true, and no matter what, this kid will always have a built-in advantage over the destitute. Maybe the lesson he *should* be learning is that within reason he can do whatever he wants and daddy's money will get him out of it.

Why bother "teaching a lesson" to people who will never learn it? And why try to teach them about the world we wished we lived in rather than the one we actually live in? Sounds like a useless exercise to me.

In the end, perhaps the university in question made the right choice. And maybe President Bush should go ahead and pardon Marion Jones. No need to make either one of them learn a lesson. As a society, we've shielded both of them from consequences their entire lives. Why change course now?

- Scott

It's Time for "Score Hundreds"

I heard it again this morning, some commentator thought he'd be clever and call the current decade the "zeros." I've also heard "twenty hundreds," "oughts," "two-thousands," and "no-names" (very strange variation). I'd like to end the confusion and propose what I think is definitively *the* best name for this decade: the "score hundreds."

The whole thing might sound a little silly, but we need a solution before we move on to the "two-thousand teens." The problem really is that "nineteen hundreds" rolls of the tongue, but "twenty hundreds" stops you cold. Just doesn't work as a natural extension of our language or of the standards from previous centuries.

IMO, all the other contenders for the job have big problems that "score hundreds" solves.

"Twenty hundreds" is just plain wrong. It's sort of a childish attempt at consistency with the previous centuries, but it has no other place in our language so it sounds foreign to the ear. This one isn't even a contender; I rarely hear it used.

"Zeros" could refer to the first 10 years of any century, including the year 1 through 9 AD. Its lack of specificity is maddening and makes it sound just as stupid as "twenty hundreds." Besides, it won't stand the test of time. There is no way that 200 years from now you will be able to refer to this decade as the "zeros." No one will understand what the hell you're talking about.

"Oughts" is just as idiotic as "zeros," and has the additional silliness of sounding like something incomplete. When someone says, "oughts" I find myself waiting for another word or two... words that never come. And it is non-specific to boot -- so no dice, sonny.

I won't insult your intelligence by dealing with "no names" -- which is just someone's attempt to get attention.

That leaves "two thousands," which is the best one I've heard up until now. Unlike the rest of the terms, this one has the advantage of working with the rest of the century -- e.g. "two-thousand teens," or "two-thousand forties." However, that is exactly where "score hundreds" shows its greatest advantage.

I submit that "score forties" is a quicker, more natural sounding phrase than "two-thousand forties." Both are accurate, but my suggestion is faster and has a verbal kick to it. Besides, think of the pun possibilities of the word "score." "Good evening ladies and germs, and welcome to the 'score teens' -- or as Warren Jeffs calls it: '*my* kind of decade!'" ::rim shot please::

So that is my suggestion to deal with an oddity of a decade. Go with "score hundreds" and follow that up with "score teens," "score twenties," etc. Anything, as lonog as it isn't "oughts" or "zeros." Blech!

- Scott