Draymond Green Isn't Suspended

Golden State Warriors player Draymond Green avoided suspension after kicking fellow NBA player and New Zealand native Steven Adams in his kiwis. This was the second time that Green did this to Adams. I'm neither a Golden State Warriors fan nor a Draymond Green fan. Although I have a mild dislike for Green because he's a big mouth who attended a rival university to my own I don't even follow the NBA that closely these days. My favored team is still struggling to become mediocre so I don't care who wins the NBA Championship. But the NBA should have suspended Green for this action. This is not a situation when there's a battle for the ball or for position and someone gets accidentally hit. This is a deliberate attempt to prevent a man from siring children in the future. Compared to other professional sports leagues the NBA has done a great job in trying to crack down on physical play and fighting. Rightly or wrongly the NBA had to battle and I think overcome a "thug" image. But in eliminating fighting the NBA may have thrown out the baby with the bathwater. Baseball and Hockey each tolerate fighting after particularly egregious instances of rule breaking. Football does as well although there almost anything that goes on before the whistle is already legal. But a dirty NBA player (and Green could possibly be described as such) is only going to be stopped by serious league penalties or by the knowledge that he will quickly reap what he sows on the court. NBA teams used to have enforcers for just that purpose. If the NBA refuses to punish obvious dirty play with penalties severe enough to deter it then eventually players will take matters into their own hands. Or maybe they won't. Maybe today's NBA players are too well paid and too soft to do anything like that. Maybe this was Green's way of letting Adams know that he disapproved of Adams' recent malapropisms about monkeys. Dunno. But if I were the Oklahoma City coach, in the next game I would start the last man on my bench, the non-playing scrub who normally spends the game watching cheerleaders and congratulating starters during timeouts. His sole job would be to walk up to Green and kick him in his Draymonds. Message sent. Message received. Now let's play basketball. 

The other problem with this non-suspension is that the NBA recently suspended Cleveland Cavaliers scrub Dahntay Jones for doing the same thing to a Toronto Raptors player. The difference? No one cares if Jones plays. He rarely does. But Green is a starting member of an exciting championship team. Double standard. The NBA doesn't want to mess with the money train. Watch the video below. Does that seem like an accident to you?

D'Angelo Russell and Breaking the Code

For many reasons people often share private, personal and intimate information with those they consider within their circle of trust. I have done so. You have as well. Everybody has. It's part of being human. For most of us the group of people that we trust includes closely related family, past, current or would be intimate partners, clergy and really good friends. For some of us the group of people whom we trust without reservation even includes co-workers. I have never seen co-workers in that fashion but there are some jobs where it's critical to know your co-workers in ways that would be uncomfortably intimate for most of us.These types of jobs usually involve the requirement of spending much more than a 9-5 shift with your co-workers. And sometimes, no matter what kind of job you have or what sort of trust level you have with the people around you, you just need to vent or share information that probably shouldn't be shared. Whatever the case may be when you are giving personal information to someone you usually don't expect that news to go beyond the two of you, let alone be broadcast to the world. Basketball player D'Angelo Russell, LA Lakers guard, apparently didn't understand this. Russell had a conversation with teammate Nick Young. Young talked about his sexual exploits with women, some of which may have occurred while he was engaged to his fiancee, Australian rapper Iggy Azalea. The problem was that Russell recorded this conversation, evidently without Young's knowledge. The worse problem is that Russell or someone close to him provided this conversation to the entire planet. This action obviously embarrassed and humiliated Young and Azalea. It also revealed Russell as an immature and decidedly untrustworthy individual. Russell's Lakers teammates have responded to his breach of decorum by freezing him out of their social networks. At the time that this post was written they're still refusing to talk to Russell, acknowledge or sit next to him during travel or lunch. And some football players responding to Russell's actions have broadly hinted that in the aggressive and dangerous world of the decidedly macho NFL, Russell might have worse and more pressing problems than someone not wanting to be his friend.    

Now I suppose a person of a more moralistic bent might point out that if Young didn't cheat or boast about things best left unspoken then he wouldn't have to worry about public exposure and any hypothetical resulting damage to his relationship with Azalea. And that's true as far as it goes. The greater sin is Russell's violation of trust with his teammate. I think that the parameters and boundaries of Young's and Azalea's relationship are things they need to discuss with each other, not with Russell or the world. If I were to become aware of a co-worker's infidelity or negative feelings towards his or her spouse I would not think I was required to give that knowledge to the spouse or make it public news. After all the spouse by definition knows the co-worker much better than I do. He or she may already know all about whatever ugly dirt I'm dragging into the spotlight. The spouse may not appreciate my actions. And in a case where two young attractive millionaires who work in the sports and entertainment business travel the world it would almost be more newsworthy if neither one of them was ever unfaithful. So I think I'd just keep quiet. The only way I could ever see pulling someone's coat about their spouse's unfaithfulness is if I am directly related to the party that's being cheated on or otherwise had some strong pre-existing relationship with him or her. And even then I'd have to think twice about it. And then I'd have to think some more. I have enough of my own issues to solve. Getting into someone else's personal business is dangerous stuff. And sharing it with the world is damn near unforgivable. This is like going to confession and learning the next day that the priest posted details of all of your sins on the Vatican website. It's just not what you expected when you spoke to him. Few people stay angry forever. It's not healthy. There are only a small number of people on the planet with the sort of talent possessed by D'Angelo Russell. So I think that eventually the NBA fraternity of players and coaches will if not quite forgive Russell, come to some sort of understanding with him. But Russell will always have that "snitch" label attached to him. For now he might consider a stint in the Witness Protection Program until the heat dies down.

Would you ever reveal someone's bad behavior told to you in confidence?

De'Andre Johnson dismissed from FSU football team

Some people like to say that there is no excuse for violence against women. I don't really like that framing at all because it turns what could be a valid reason into an "excuse" and ignores the fact that whether we like it or not there are some very violent, dangerous and even deadly women on this planet. What IS true however is that almost regardless of what a particular woman might have done to initiate or continue a physical confrontation, a man who hits a woman rightfully has a very high bar of skepticism and contempt to climb over in a court of law or especially the court of public opinion. Because this is the case it is a good idea to avoid putting hands on women. It's a bad idea and is often morally repugnant. However, men, like women, do have the right and duty to defend themselves. There ought to be a better way for us to distinguish the case of a man who is legitimately defending himself from the case of a lowlife punk who just gets his kicks beating and terrorizing those who are weaker than he. I've seen both situations. This problem is further muddled by the assumption that women are and should be in all ways "equal" to men. Some people say that if we wouldn't worry about a bad outcome happening to a man because of his or someone else's dumb decision than we shouldn't worry about a woman in the same position. So by this logic if a woman wants to be in combat and is qualified, let her do it. There should be no cries of "Save the women and children!" if a ship starts to sink. We're all equal. Well.
De'Andre Johnson, former quarterback for the Florida State Seminoles football team, found out the hard way that "defending yourself" from a woman in the same way that you might defend yourself from a man is not, at least for him, an acceptable course of action. He got into a physical confrontation with a woman at a Tallahassee bar. She raised her hands which were balled up in fists. They both appeared to push and grapple with each other. She took a swing at Johnson. Johnson punched back. The woman lost. It is the difference in gender and strength that makes this a shock. Johnson was suspended and later dismissed from the team.


Florida State Seminoles coach Jimbo Fisher dismissed freshman quarterback De'Andre Johnson from the team Monday night, hours after the state's attorney's office released video showing Johnson punching a woman in the face last month at a Tallahassee bar.

Fisher made the announcement in a brief statement released by FSU on Monday night.
Johnson, who was named Florida's "Mr. Football" as a senior at First Coast High School in Jacksonville, Florida, was indefinitely suspended from the team in June. He was charged with misdemeanor battery for striking the 21-year-old woman during an argument June 24. He surrendered to Tallahassee police on June 30 and was released on $500 bond.
The video, which was captured by security cameras in a bar near the FSU campus, shows Johnson trying to push past the woman, who was waiting to order at the bar. The woman turned toward Johnson, who grabbed her right arm after she raised it in a fist. The woman raised her knee and swung at Johnson with her left arm, and then he punched her in the face.
LINK

When I watched this I asked myself what was Johnson, who is under the legal drinking age, doing in a bar in the first place? But I was informed that some bars allow underage people to enter; they just won't serve them alcohol. Both Johnson and the woman made bad decisions. If I were the prosecutor I would charge both of them or charge neither of them. But I'm no lawyer. Perhaps someone with actual legal training and experience will chime in to discuss the charges. Bottom line though is that I think it's critically important that we teach all people regardless of their race or gender not to put hands on other people. If this were a smaller man who had started something with say, a heavyweight MMA or boxing champ before losing in a spectacular fashion, many more of us would likely find it humorous. We would tend to judge same gender interactions differently than we would opposite gender ones. Is that wrong? Perhaps. I think it's good and proper to teach men not to hit women. I also think it's good and proper to teach women not to hit men. No hands. Why is this so difficult? Did the woman think that Johnson was just to going to accept a punch in the face? Did Johnson think he was going to walk away with no repercussions? 

Marshawn Lynch speaks to the media

As most of you know the Super Bowl is this Sunday. I am betting (not literally of course since I don't make enough money to lose any) that the Seattle Seahawks will defeat the New England Patriots. If Seattle does win there's no doubt that their starting running back Marshawn Lynch will be key to their victory. If Seattle loses or gets blown out (assuming New England didn't cheat) there's a pretty good chance that Marshawn Lynch either didn't have a good game, was hurt, or otherwise removed from the game plan. He's that dominant. Known as Beast Mode, Lynch has a very aggressive commanding running style. There's a few times I've seen him dragging defenders down the field, simply refusing to be tackled. He's a very exciting player in a time where the passing game has tended to outshine the running game. But Mr. Lynch has become just as well known for his dislike for talking in public, or rather, his dislike for talking in public to reporters. His teammates have consistently said that he's a great guy. One of the most extroverted and verbally demonstrative Seahawks, cornerback Richard Sherman, has said (paraphrasing) that asking Lynch to go out and answer interview questions and/or verbally banter with reporters is akin to asking a reporter to play linebacker and tackle Adrian Peterson. Nonetheless, the NFL is adamant about ensuring that the media has access to star players. The NFL has fined players, including Marshawn Lynch, for avoiding interviews or cutting them short. Although I suppose a $10,000 fine won't hurt someone who's making millions those fines can add up. 

So Lynch stopped skipping interviews. Though he attended interviews he limited himself STRICTLY to what the NFL required. He answered reporters' questions but used the exact same phrase over and over ("Thank you for asking") no matter what. The NFL said he had to answer questions for at least five minutes so he set an alarm on his phone and "answered" questions for exactly five minutes and not one second longer. You would think people would get the hint but this just continued a game of "Let's ask Lynch a question today just because" and showed the limits of the NFL's or the media's power to compel someone to engage verbally. On sports radio shows arguments have raged about whether the NFL is right to attempt to make star players speak (it's good for business and was apparently negotiated in the collective bargaining agreement) or if this is just a pushy, entitled and uncaring NFL/media complex trying to force an individual to do something he's not good at and has no interest in doing. As someone who is introverted and generally only opens up verbally to people I know very well or like a great deal I tend to support Lynch. On the other hand he's paid a lot of money so what is so bad about answering some, admittedly mostly silly, questions. Well yesterday Lynch did have a little more to say besides "Have a blessed day" or "That's a great question". Check it out below and share your thoughts.

Michigan: Michigan State Game

Today in East Lansing my cherished alma mater, the University of Michigan, will play Michigan State University in a football game. Unfortunately this game is highly unlikely to result in a U-M victory. At the time of this writing U-M is a 17 point underdog. Since 2008, MSU is 5-1 against U-M. In their last two matchups U-M could not even score a single touchdown against MSU. In 2013, MSU dominated U-M so thoroughly that some people who saw the game left questioning the manhood of the U-M players. There was a time when U-M was the team that went around punching other teams in the mouth and daring them to do something about it. Those days are long gone. Now, sadly even a diehard Wolverine fan such as myself must admit that there is a certain softness, a certain weakness about U-M. MSU on the other hand has an attention to detail, toughness and even arrogance that used to be U-M's domain. The programs are headed in different directions. Although the Big 10 and Midwest college football in general is not competitive with the juggernaut that is the SEC, MSU has risen to prominence over the past eight years, displacing U-M as the power in the north. This has come about under the leadership of MSU's smirking head coach Mark Dantonio. Meanwhile U-M has floundered and failed, never more so than under the "leadership" of current head coach Brady Hoke, a hapless and oft incoherent man who will likely hopefully be fired at the end of the season. Still, this is a rivalry game. Both teams should be excited. MSU's defense is not quite as good as last year's. MSU's QB makes more mistakes than he should. So anything can happen. And if there is one thing that could save Hoke's job it would be going to East Lansing and laying an old school Schembechler style smackdown on the Spartans. That almost certainly won't take place but dreams and memories are increasingly all U-M fans have left. Anyway, below the jump there are two videos summarizing the two schools and the types of people who attend them. Obviously the stereotypes aren't true but as with any stereotype you can always find an example to buttress it.

            

              

Stephen Smith, Michelle Beadle and the Ray Rice Situation: Was Stephen Smith Defending Domestic Violence?

Man got his woman to take his seed /He got the power oh she got the need/ She spends her life through pleasing up her man/She feeds him dinner or anything she can/
She cries alone at night too often/ He smokes and drinks and don't come home at all/
Only women bleed only women bleed only women bleed/
Black eyes all of the time don't spend a dime clean up this grime/And you there down on your knees begging me please come watch me bleed Only Women Bleed - Alice Cooper 
As you may have heard Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice and his then fiancee and now wife Janay Palmer got into some sort of physical altercation in an Atlantic City hotel. Unlike the one way slap and kickfest between Solange Knowles and Jay-Z the public lacks video evidence of what exactly took place but apparently whatever fight took place the new Mrs. Rice lost decisively because we do see the video of Mr. Rice dragging the unconscious Mrs. Rice by her hair and lifting her up after he apparently knocked her out. The police arrested both Rice and Palmer. Each had assault charges filed against them. Janay Palmer's charges were later dropped while Mr. Rice's charges were increased. However as a first time offender, Mr. Rice was eligible to enter into a diversion program, which will allow him to avoid jail or prison. FWIW his wife indicated that she didn't want to pursue charges. In fact at the press conference in which Rice apologized to everyone except her, she said that she regretted the role she played in the incident. Ok. I can't imagine ever becoming violent with a woman. The very idea disgusts me. It's a virtual impossibility. Work it out or walk away. I was raised in a very traditional household. However I am also disgusted by the idea of a woman spitting on me or hitting me as Mrs. Rice is reported to have done to Mr. Rice. I think that everyone should abide by a no-hands rule in interpersonal conflict. When you start a violent confrontation you don't know what the other person might consider an appropriate response to your physical aggression. I have never understood people who hit or beat a spouse or intimate and then go to sleep in the same house as the person they just assaulted. I think that's dumb. You might get some hot grits thrown on you. You might not wake up with everything still attached. You might not wake up at all. So again, no violence against either party should ever be tolerated. This is for both moral reasons and those of pure self-interest. 

So with no jail time upcoming, the only question was what would NFL commissioner Roger Goodell do. Goodell has a media image, one aided by his own pronouncements, as a tough take no prisoners type of guy, who was going to lay down the law to bad guys. Beating your wife certainly is something a bad guy would do. So many people both in and outside of the NFL were a bit taken aback when Goodell announced that Ray Rice would be suspended for two games and have pay withheld for a third game. Some people wanted a tougher sanction. Oft irritating ESPN personality Stephen Smith is paid to be opinionated and loud. So he gave his opinion about the Rice situation. However he walked into a buzzsaw of controversy when he seemingly suggested that women can be taught or advised not to inflame situations. Likely the word that caused the media storm of controversy and set off a wordy twitter battle with fellow ESPN employee Michelle Beadle was "provoke". As expected Smith had to apologize for his statements which he duly did here. It was a pretty good apology as apologies go I guess. I would guess that his bosses at ESPN made it clear that it was not helpful to the network or his continued employment at the network for anyone to think that Smith or the network condoned beating up women. If I go tell the police that I was assaulted I would be taken aback if rather than ask who did it, their first question was "Well what were you doing to cause that? We need to investigate that first sir before we go bother other decent people on your say so." So I understand that discussion of "provoking" violence likely won't be well received by anyone who was the target of said violence.

Nevertheless I feel that Smith and his detractors are talking past one another, purposely or not. If I walked up to a man larger, stronger and entirely more dangerous than myself and said insulting things about his mother, punched him or spit in his face there's a good chance that after I got out of the hospital people might ask me why I thought my actions were appropriate. And those would be fair questions. There are many people who see the NFL as the last remaining he-man woman hater's club. But I don't think that's the case. There are plenty of other situations where businesses or organizations have looked the other way when a man who brings in money behaves poorly or even arguably criminally with women. Former American Apparel CEO Dov Charney, who among other things, pleasured himself in front of a female journalist, and fashion photographer Terry Richardson, who has been accused of everything from generalized sleaziness to sexual harassment and assault, are just two examples of men not working with, in or for the NFL who somehow have managed to until recently avoid mainstream media attention, even after having done or allegedly done acts that are just as bad as what Ray Rice did. The ugly truth of the matter is that just like every other business, the NFL is looking to make money. That's the primary concern. If Charney were still making money for his company American Apparel he would still be in the big seat. And Richardson is skilled enough at what he does to still have legions of admirers and fans. And if Ray Rice rushes for 1300 yards this year, most Ravens fans won't care too much about whatever happened in that elevator. That may be sad and even immoral but it's just the way it is. So I don't think we should pretend that the NFL alone has a problem. 

Domestic violence is all over the place. It's a societal problem, not just a NFL or sports problem. Everyone should be aware of it and seek to stop it, regardless of the victim's gender. I think that is what Smith was trying to say. I think that as soon as Smith used the word "provoke" people thought about the classic stereotype of a woman cutting a man verbally and a man lashing out at her physically or for no reason at all because he's a cowardly POS. Those events still take place. I've seen a few, unfortunately. But times change. There are some quite dangerous women walking around out there. If you were the man unlucky enough to be intimate with Sadie Bell, you had better be ready to defend yourself at all times, up to and including fisticuffs or more. That's reality. 
Update********

ESPN on Tuesday announced a one-week suspension for one of its most controversial commentators, Stephen A. Smith, in the wake of his widely-criticized remarks about domestic abuse that referred to possible "provocation" by victims.

What do you think?
Is a two game suspension enough for Ray Rice?
Was Stephen Smith defending domestic violence?
Should Stephen Smith have been suspended?

Who's a thug: Santelli vs. Sherman

You may remember that Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman was quite excited after his team just won the NFC Championship game. Sherman was instrumental in helping his team to achieve that victory. He spoke emphatically and aggressively. He also spoke dismissively of rival football player, wide receiver Michael Crabtree of the San Francisco Forty Niners. Sherman was fined. He was also excoriated in social media and by more than a few pundits as a thug. A great many people made racist ugly comments about Sherman's intelligence, his family, his class, his race and black people in general. The people making these sorts of attacks on Sherman did not care that he was a Stanford graduate, was obtaining a Masters Degree, or most importantly had no record of criminal arrests or convictions. AFAIK no one has accused him of domestic abuse, drug sales, bar fights, child abuse, drug usage or anything else that might indicate violent or criminal tendencies. All that is public record about Sherman is that occasionally he likes to run his mouth on the football field. These public attacks on Sherman weren't just your normal attacks by conservative/racist whites. They also included people like liberal/moderate law professor Jonathan Turley. Unconscious stereotyping and unexamined bigotry cross all political lines.

You may not recall that CNBC commentator and derivatives trader Rick Santelli is also a very excitable man. He happens to lean conservative. His initial rant about the possibility of bailing out underwater homeowners is credited with helping to start Tea Party movements across the United State. Recently, as Princeton Economist and NYT opinion columnist Paul Krugman has been predicting, more financial commentators and economists are starting to notice that the very specific predictions about the economy made by conservative pundits like Santelli have simply not come true.  In fact, sometimes the exact opposite has happened. When Santelli was called out on television about his consistently incorrect financial predictions he became very agitated, aggressive and extremely loud, probably about as loud as Sherman was. But from what I can see twitter and other social media has not exploded with racist vitriol towards Santelli. There don't seem to be many people questioning his intelligence or whether he got special assistance in admission to or graduation from his alma mater. I don't seem to find too many people calling Santelli a thug or making offensive links between his ethnic background and his behavior. Santelli is not of course someone with the same national profile as Sherman but still. Talking smack may well be more of a black athlete thing than a white one but there have been more than a few white athletes who can talk smack with the best of them and aren't called thugs. Although there have been successful introverts in the career paths of both Santelli and Sherman, their chosen jobs tend to be filled with people who are confident, loud, aggressive and don't mind letting you know about how good they are.

Now anyone who knows me in real life would tell you that I am generally pretty introverted and quiet. If I get angry with someone initially it usually comes across as ice and coldness instead of heat and fire. It takes a lot before I raise my voice or start sputtering insults. That's what I've been told anyway. That's neither good not bad. It's just the way I am. Sometimes I think it would be useful to be more fiery like some people I know. But that's not me. The chances of me sounding like either Santelli or Sherman are extremely low. Outside of a few relatives or other special people I'm not overly fond of excitable, boisterous, loud people. That said, I also know that everyone is different and just because someone's personality or mode of expression is different than mine doesn't tell me anything about that person. I think that I can usually get my point across without yelling or raising my voice. Other people have much lower thresholds for increases in volume or irritation. So it goes. The problem I have with the different reactions to the Santelli/Sherman rants is that these reactions have very real impact on all black people, regardless of gender, age, or personality type. These double standards count. The white law professor and the white police officer may have very different ways of seeing the world. They may vote for diametrically opposed candidates. But if they both immediately think "thug" when they see or hear a loud black man, that could lead to things like this. An unarmed black man allegedly resists arrest and is immediately swarmed, taken down and killed. An armed white man tells the Federal government what they had better not do and is still walking free.

These double standards and perception differences around the same behavior in different people are one of the definitions of racism. They need to be identified, called out and resisted as often as possible. Not getting hired or promoted or treated equally in the workplace is more common and much less painful than getting harassed, beaten or killed by the police. But the same ugly mentality is behind both responses. It's a mentality that still sees a black person as the dangerous other, who is not to be trusted or treated the same as whites. To be called a "thug" by apparently no small number of people all a black man has to do is speak loudly. For society to even think about granting a white man that title he would actually have to go out and beat or kill someone, you know, actually meet the definition of the word. But even then that might not be enough. Sherman is not a thug.
This is a thug. See the difference?

Kohl's Lawsuit: Deadbeat Client or Harassment; Brad Ausmus: Unfunny Joke

A long time ago before I was the sober responsible grownup that I am today I used to use credit irresponsibly and run up bills that were more than I could pay in one month. Doing this a few times and getting dinged with late fees, interest, and other penalties and having the highly irritating experience of having a few paychecks effectively spent on debt service before I even received them was more than enough for me to revert back to my parents' training of not buying something if you couldn't pay cash for it. After all we all must be able to distinguish between a want and a need. Grown ups do that. Children don't. Generally speaking, if you can't or won't pay cash for something, chances are you don't need it. I believe that if you owe money you should pay what you owe. That's what's fair. However just because someone owes money doesn't give the creditor the right to take extra-legal steps that include tactics of harassment or worse in order to get their money back. As a creditor there are a number of laws you must abide by when seeking to get your money back, whether you are doing it yourself or have outsourced it to a legbreaker collection services agency. In Michigan, a woman who owed Kohl's department store felt that the store was being far too aggressive in seeking to recover a particularly small debt. It's unclear as to whether the debt was more than 30 days late. Fed up with the tactics she filed a federal lawsuit. Yes that's correct. A federal lawsuit.

Enough with the calls.That’s what one consumer is telling Kohl’s in a federal lawsuit that claims the department store is stalking her and harassing her by phone over an overdue credit card bill, calling her at all hours of the night over what she calls a measly $20.“They started harassing me over $20 and I was like, ‘Screw it, oh well,’ ” said Lisa Ratliff, the 29-year-old plaintiff from Ypsilanti who got so fed up with the phone calls she sued over them. “It’s really annoying if you’re trying to get things done or you’re trying to sleep or you’re working or spending time with your family …I just want them to stop harassing me.” 

Ratliff said she was going to pay the bill but got so irritated by the repeated calls that she decided against it. Instead, she’s suing over Kohl’s collection practices — tactics that she claims are prohibited under federal law. In a lawsuit filed Monday in U.S. District Court, Ratliff’s lawyers claim that Kohl’s violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, a 1991 law that makes it illegal to call a cell phone using an auto dialer or prerecorded voice without the recipient’s consent. The lawsuit, filed by the Krohn & Moss Consumer Law Center in Chicago, is seeking damages under the act, which allows victims to sue for $500 per violating call — or up to $1,500 per call if they can prove the party knowingly violated the law. Kohl’s officials did not return calls or e-mails seeking comment. No attorney of record is yet listed in court documents for Kohl’s. According to Ratliff’s lawsuit, the Kohl’s phone calls — which included both automated and live operator calls — started in November 2013. Until then, she said, she paid her bill in full every month and that her total credit line was $400. When the calls started, she owed $20. Now it’s up to $100 because of late fees and interest, she said.

The woman may well have a case, at least according to the local attorney giving some analysis in the clip from FOX 2 News.
Fox 2 News Headlines
Link

Also in local news the Detroit Tigers, who had a great start with people talking about the pennant and the World Series have sunk into the toilet since and now have people wondering if rookie manager Brad Ausmus really knows what he's doing. Faced with questions of how he deals with the stress and unpleasantness of losing, Ausmus responded with a wisecrack that wasn't funny. The current political-sociological environment made it even less so. Detroit Tigers rookie manager Brad Ausmus is known to be quick with a quip. But he strayed over the line Wednesday and he knew it. It started when he was asked after the 2-1 loss to the Kansas City Royals how he has been able to keep his cool during his team’s horrendous streak.“Yeah, it’s not fun,” he said. “Like I said, once I get to the field, I’m always in a good mood, especially if I’m driving and it’s sunny out. Once I’m here, I’m ready to go. I feel like I’m the exact same person that you would have seen on day one of spring training.”And when he goes home? “I beat my wife,” Ausmus said. “I’m just kidding. No, luckily, my wife and kids are fantastic. I do get a little mopey at home, but my wife and kids are good. They’ve seen me be in a bad mood after a loss, so they’ve been great.” His joke drew some hearty laughs and some nervous laughs from the media and, after answering another question, he came back to it. “I didn’t want to make light of battered women,” Ausmus said. “I apologize for that if it offended anyone.”  I think it's pretty obvious that Ausmus did not mean to endorse beating one's wife nor was he making fun of abused women. He apologized almost immediately because he knew the joke wasn't funny or appropriate. I think it should end there. Sometimes we all say things that aren't funny or just don't fit in the environment we happen to be in at the time. Ausmus is a guy who hasn't had this level of scrutiny previously. He still needs to learn that not everything that pops into his mind needs to be shared with the rest of the world. I don't think that MLB or the Tigers need to say or do anything else to Ausmus. Leave it there.

What do you think?

1) Does Ms. Ratliff have a federal case?

2) Does Mr. Ausmus need to attend sensitivity training or pay fines?

3) Did you ever get so irritated with a creditor that you told them off?

Corporate Welfare or Good Business Sense???

I'll take any mother*****'s money if he giving it away!!!!
-Clay Davis
Regardless of race, gender, political affiliation or geography, when you say "welfare", many people probably still think of a person who looks and sounds like this. Such a wretched individual makes an easy target for people who are tired of other people putting hands in their pocket while having the nerve, the audacity to claim that they are somehow entitled to do so.

However it has never ceased to amaze me that the more you need money the less likely people are to give it to you while the less you need it, the more people break their neck trying to give it to you. I was reminded of that by two separate recent events, one national and one local. If we take our focus off "welfare" as money given to "underclass" mothers and/or other loud obese moochers and expand the term to include well off people, we might be surprised by how much government assistance the rich get, even for doing things they would already do. There have been books written on this. This is a tremendously inefficient use of government resources. And it's unfair. I don't mind paying taxes if those taxes can prevent someone from starving to death or being homeless. I do mind paying taxes when those taxes are given to individuals or companies that are not so troubled.

Michigan billionaires, Mike and Marian Illitch (net worth around $3 billion), owners of Little Caesars, The Detroit Tigers, The Detroit Red Wings, various land development companies and Motor City Casino (under Marian's name for business reasons) have decided that they want a new arena for the Red Wings. The current one, Joe Louis Arena is not quite decrepit but is definitely outdated.

Well in a so-called free market when you want to take a risk and build/buy something new you pony up the dollars and either get the rewards or take the losses. But that's not how things work for billionaires, especially in sports. Despite the fact that tons of evidence exists that public financing of sports arenas rarely brings the ROI that supporters claim it does, the City of Detroit and the State of Michigan have come together to ensure that the Illitches get public land for essentially nothing in order to build their new stadium/entertainment complex. That's how things work, not just in Detroit, but in many cities. The subsidy is bad enough but what made this deal stand out to me was that the Illitches, or rather their company, will keep ALL revenues from the stadium. There will be no sharing with either the state or the city. Additionally Olympia Entertainment will pay no property taxes on the new stadium. Even the building of the stadium itself will be 60% publicly funded. Now does that sound like a win-win deal for the city? 

In one of the largest land transfers in the city’s history, the Detroit City Council agreed Tuesday to hand over 39 parcels of land along the Cass Corridor to transform what was once a blighted, crime-ridden strip near downtown Detroit into a $650-million entertainment venue that will include a new arena for the Detroit Red Wings. The vote authorizes the city to sell the public land for $1 to the Detroit Downtown Development Authority, which will own the arena and lease it for up to 95 years to Olympia Development of Michigan. The company is owned by the Ilitch family, which owns the Red Wings. The essentially free transfer of public land — with an assessed value of about $2.9 million — is the city’s chief contribution to the development.

As proposed, construction of the arena itself would be 58% publicly funded and 42% privately funded. No Detroit general fund dollars would be spent; the state is contributing the bulk of the public investment. Olympia has agreed to pay $11.5 million annually for about 30 years to help pay off the construction bonds. Olympia will own the arena’s naming rights and will keep all revenues from arena operations, including parking fees and concessions sales. The city will not collect property taxes on the arena.

The second instance of corporate welfare which caught my ire was the agreement over the latest farm bill, which President Obama is going to sign into law today, likely at Michigan State University, that center of agricultural higher learning better known as Moo U. I hear that the President will also be treated to a demonstration of the correct techniques of cow artificial insemination and 101 uses of cowpies. But I digress. The bill, soon to become law, has all sorts of goodies included into it, most of which are going to insurers and agribusiness, not "farmers". Think less Tom Joad and more Monsanto.

The bill stinks. And given that it also cuts food stamps can Democratic partisans stop talking about how the evil Republicans are behind this. If the food stamp cuts really bothered the President he would veto the bill. He's not doing that. Take from that what you will. I learn from people's actions, not their words.

WASHINGTON — No one was happier than Danny Murphy, a Mississippi soybean farmer with 1,500 acres, when the Senate on Tuesday passed a farm bill that expanded crop insurance and other benefits for agribusiness. “It’s a relief,” Mr. Murphy said. Few were as unhappy as Sheena Wright, the president of the United Way in New York, who expects to see a surge of hungry people seeking help because the bill cuts $8 billion in food stamps over a decade. “You are going to have to make a decision on what you are going to do, buy food or pay rent,” Ms. Wright said.

The nearly 1,000-page bill, which President Obama is to sign at Michigan State University on Friday, among other things expanded crop insurance for farmers by $7 billion over a decade and created new subsidies for rice and peanut growers that would kick in when prices drop. But anti-hunger advocates said the bill would harm 850,000 American households, about 1.7 million people spread across 15 states, which would lose an average of $90 per month in benefits because of the cuts in the food stamp program.

Unlike the food stamp program, the federally subsidized crop insurance program was not cut. The program, which is administered by 18 companies that are paid $1.4 billion annually by the government to sell policies to farmers, pays 62 percent of farmers’ premiums.

LINK

So the rich will get richer and piggish private interests will continue to feed from the government trough, only pausing long enough to wipe the crumbs from their snout and mumble "free market" or "individual responsibility" to the rest of us, before continuing their gluttony. Such is life I guess. I would like to know though where is the conservative outrage over such transfers of public monies to private hands? Why are some conservatives silent about this when businesses are the recipients? And flipping the script would liberals be quiet if it were a President Bush cutting food stamps in the economic environment we have now? Somehow I doubt it. But look over there! Chris Christie!!! Benghazi!! Birth Control Pills!!!!!!

Joakim Noah Meltdown

Chicago Bulls center Joakim Noah provides unimpeachable evidence that I am not the only person in the world who occasionally gets irritated with his co-workers and supervisors. I can't and don't do what Noah did when I lose patience with annoying people. It's not my personality nor am I that important to my firm. At worst Noah will lose a small piece of his salary and/or be asked to stay away from work a day or two. Generally speaking I find such hyper emotional displays somewhat childish. I've worked with people who have had regular meltdowns during work conflicts. If the powers that be like them it's written off as passion for their work. If the powers that be don't like them it's considered insubordination and they're written up or terminated. But when you have the exceedingly rare skill set that Joakim Noah possesses you can do things like this on occasion. Noah may well have had a point. I don't know. I just thought it was funny how Noah wanted to make sure each referee knew exactly what he thought of them at that point in time. I guess if you're gonna get ejected you might as well get your money's worth.

Jayru Campbell Arrested

There was a lot of talk recently about whether or not Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman is a thug. I don't think he is. Generally speaking most thugs, in the most basic understanding of the word, don't attend Stanford or score 1400 on their SAT's. My snobby class bias aside though more importantly I think that your actions, not your words, hair style or skin color make you a thug. Speaking loudly and animatedly without cursing, about your success over a rival player after a big win does not a thug make. See a thug could be someone who body slams a school security guard. That would be Cass Tech QB and Michigan State University (MSU) verbal recruit Jayru Campbell, who was arrested for his actions in the video below. The security guard is of course somewhat fortunate to be alive as getting body slammed on a hard floor without any protection can lead to all sorts of bad outcomes, especially if your head impacts the floor as it did here. I didn't attend public schools until high school and certainly did not attend Cass Tech High School or MSU. Cass Tech has traditionally been considered one of the better public schools in Detroit but I've heard that in recent times (over the past 10-15 years or so) that's akin to boasting that you're the skinniest fat person at fat camp. My brother first brought this to my attention. He didn't attend Cass either. Smirk. Of course these things are not common but stereotypically this explains why people, black and white, racist or not, have been fleeing Detroit Public Schools. 

We hear a lot about about how certain people are improperly disciplined in schools and thus set up for a school to prison pipeline. That's true. A child who is boisterous, loud mouthed or questioning of authority isn't necessarily "disturbing the peace" or "special needs" or a "threat". The flip side of that though is that there are some children who are indeed threats and need to be removed from the school ASAP for the safety of others. Evidently Campbell was given second chances and missed them. So it is what it is. Of course in our society even where there is a video like this the accused is still presumed innocent until proven guilty. Just ask the cops who beat Rodney King. However, unless there is evidence that the security guard was assaulting Mr. Campbell or attempting to molest him or something like that I am not seeing how this ends well for Mr. Campbell. I think he gets expelled from school and convicted of any criminal charges. And I'm okay with that. I am both descended from and related to people who worked or still work in schools. I would hate to see something like this happen to them. Watch video below.

The quarterback of the Detroit Cass Tech High School football team has been arrested in connection with an attack on a security guard.

Jayru Campbell was arrested Wednesday by the Detroit Public Schools Police Department because of an incident that occurred inside Cass Tech at dismissal time. But in a departure from earlier DPS statements, district spokeswoman Michelle Zdrodowski said this afternoon that Campbell has not been charged, describing the earlier statements as a misunderstanding on the district’s part.

In an e-mail this afternoon, Maria Miller, a spokeswoman for the Wayne County Prosecutor’s Office, said her office has now received paperwork on the case, but she cautioned against making any assumptions. “It would be premature to indicate what if any charges (we) will issue until we have reviewed the paperwork and a formal decision has been made,” Miller wrote in the e-mail.

Campbell, a junior, verbally committed to play college football at Michigan State, but commitments are nonbinding until national letters of intent are signed in February 2015. Per NCAA rules, college coaches are not allowed to comment publicly on unsigned recruits. Campbell committed to MSU in August, turning down scholarship offers from Alabama, Notre Dame and Wisconsin, among others. He is rated as a four-star recruit by rivals.com. The alleged assault marks the second incident in recent months involving Campbell, who was suspended from school and for the first game of the 2014 season for throwing a punch after Cass Tech’s state semifinal loss to Novi Detroit Catholic Central in November.

LINK

Do you think that Cass Tech should expel Campbell?

Are you curious as to what Campbell's side of the story is? 

Should MSU reject Campbell because of this incident?

Would you be willing to hire/work with someone if you saw them do this?

Dance-Off at Pistons Game

Apropos of nothing it's good to be alive and sometimes the best way to express that joy is to have a dance-off. 11 year old Pistons fan Antwain Alexander and Palace usher Shannon Sailes certainly haven't forgotten that little piece of wisdom.

Antwain Alexander, an 11-year-old Pistons fan, had one goal when he attended last week's Detroit game against the New York Knicks.
"He had been trying to get that dance cam to be on him throughout the whole entire game," his father, Pastor Alexander, told ABC News.
The cameraman finally gave Antwain his moment and then, unaware that he was making history, cut from Antwain to Shannon Sailes, 46, an arena usher famous for dancing in the aisles during games. "He was, like, doing his moves and everything, and then they went back to me and I stood up and I said, 'Come on!'" Antwain told ABC News.

"It was time for me to step up," Sailes told ABC News. And step up, he did. The pair's dance-off has gone viral, and while no one has officially declared a winner, both competitors remained magnanimous towards their rival.  Fox 2 News Headlines

Dwight Howard and Criticism

Dwight Howard decided to leave the LA Lakers to take less money with the Houston Rockets. While there were quite legitimate basketball related reasons behind this move statements from both Laker partisans and Howard himself suggest that Howard was not ready for the LA spotlight or for the occasionally pointed and direct criticism from fellow Laker and famously intense competitor, Kobe Bryant.

I don't like criticism that much. I don't know many people who actually do like criticism. It can hurt your ego when someone explores your shortcomings. The critic's tone and who they are can outweigh their valid content. It's one thing when someone who is more successful or experienced than you in your chosen field and/or has the authority to oversee your work gives you some pointers. It's a different matter entirely when a person who has been homeless for a decade starts lecturing you on your career or finances. A firm and fair critique or a blunt discussion behind closed doors resonates with me more than a person who, when pointing out something wrong or dumb I'm doing feels the need to a) inform the entire world and b) throw in gratuitous insults about my intelligence, competence or immutable attributes. Ideally, both the person giving the criticism and the target of the critique should separate the criticism from the person.

However, usually without someone to push you, you simply can't grow. You'll constantly make the same mistakes. That's true in both personal and business relationships. You need honest feedback that lets you know where, to use corporate speak, you have "room for growth". So even though I dislike criticism, I've occasionally sought it out. If I know what my weaknesses are hopefully I can make changes to develop in a positive direction. This means checking my ego and investigating if the criticism is valid and useful. That's more important (usually) than the tone or motivation.

Growing takes work and sacrifice. Often people who are the best in their field aren't super patient with those who haven't done the work. There's a reason for the saying "Nice guys finish last". Isiah Thomas was a ferocious competitor who didn't mind starting fights or finishing them. Magic Johnson might have had a famous smile but he would also give you a forearm to the throat if you came down the lane. Larry Bird would talk trash all day long while dropping a triple double on you. Was there any NBA player who hated losing or lack of preparation more than Michael Jordan? He could make grown men cry with his verbal attacks. He bullied and sometimes punched teammates. LeBron James may not appear as relentless as Jordan but that doesn't stop him from giving Mario Chambers extended harsh public corrections. These men and others like them required the best each day from their teammates. And they demanded better tomorrow. They wanted to win. People in different disciplines had that same drive. Whether it was James Brown fining musicians for fumbled notes, late arrivals and unshined shoes or Jimi Hendrix yelling at Dave Mason "Why can't you get it right?" when recording "All Along the Watchtower", the best of the best (with some notable exceptions) are often perfectionists.Even if they're soft-spoken or non-confrontational, top performers will call you out for mistakes.

How much criticism can you take? That's different for everyone. I have had occasion to give but more often receive criticism. If one can put a wall around their ego and try not to take (or give) things personally criticism can be quite useful. Sometimes there is no time to sugarcoat things. Your program works or it doesn't. Your project is on time, in scope and within budget or it's not. The higher the stakes are, the less inclined people will be to care about hurting your widdle feelings. I think, given the statements by Shaq, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, and Magic, that Dwight Howard might have made a mistake in letting his ego and pride interfere with becoming a better basketball player. That's easy for me to say because I don't have Kobe Bryant in my face screaming that I ran the play wrong or running me down on the team flight. Still, no one said becoming a champion would be easy. If I'm Dwight Howard, I must consider how badly I want success. What will I do to win that championship. Maybe hearing crap from a past his prime Kobe is not worth it. Maybe Kobe is done. Nevertheless when people of the calibre of Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Shaq, and Kobe all question your work ethic, skills and approach, maybe you should listen.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar speaks on Dwight.

Did you work with Dwight Howard? “No. I had a real good meeting with him when he first came to L.A. He was like, ‘Yeah,’ but that was the last time I spoke with him. . .He’s charming, he’s charismatic, very nice young man. Maturity wise, he doesn’t get it.

”Imagine if you could teach Howard the sky hook. “At least he’d have an offensive move. He gets the ball on offense, oh, my god, he doesn’t know what to do. It’s usually a turnover, people come and take the ball from him or tie his arms up. Offensively, he doesn’t get it. Hasn’t made any progress. We (the Lakers when Kareem was an assistant coach) played them in ‘09, and when I saw him this past season, he was the same player.”

Dwight Responds to critics

What did you think of Kobe Bryant’s comments that he could teach you how to be a winner? DH: “He didn’t say anything of that sort. People twisted a lot of stuff that he said. But in my personal opinion, I’m a winner. I’m a winner because I’ve been playing for nine years when the average career for an NBA player is three years. I’m a winner because I made it to the NBA from a small school in Atlanta, GA, with 16 people in a class. I’m a winner because I’m succeeding in life. I’ve had problems and I’m not better than the next man, but I’m going to push myself to be a winner when it comes to winning a championship. But he didn’t say anything like that and a lot of people twisted what he did say.”

QUESTIONS

1) How well do you take criticism?

2) Can you recall criticism in your job or other arenas that actually helped you?

3) If someone who dislikes you gives you criticism, do you automatically dismiss it?

4) Does Dwight Howard lack maturity? Will he ever get a championship?

University of Michigan: ONE GAME LEFT....

Michigan Wolverines Defeat Syracuse Orangemen 61-56

Louisville...you're in the way bub..

Details