As I have mentioned on the air many times, I race sailboats. I’ve won some races and lost some, but the favorite wins have been the ones that I least expected would or could happen. I remember the time that we were over early at the start and had to do a penalty turn of 360 degrees, after getting out of the way of the other starting boats. We had a heck of a time starting again, as, by the time we finished our penalty turn, many boats were already in our way.
This incident happened early on in my sailing training, and I became despondent almost immediately, because I realized we now had absolutely no chance of even a third place finish, let alone a first. My coach and tactician sternly yanked me out of my doldrums and told me that we were “down but not out,” and we had to work even harder now to catch up. Frankly, I thought this was philosophically lovely, but hugely impractical, and I could barely see the sterns of the boats in front of us as they had so much distance on us.
Nonetheless, after considering breeze, windshifts, current, direction choices, steering, and crew work, there were enough variables to work with to keep our chins up.
We pulled together as a team, and worked very hard to maximize every option we had, and we ended up winning the race. I learned a lot that day. It’s a lot more gratifying to succeed when it is a righteous challenge than when it seems like more of a slam dunk.
Jason Lezak knew this lesson. Fifty meters from the finish line in the 4x 100 meter freestyle relay at the Beijing Olympics, Mr. Lezak doubted he could overcome the half-body length lead of his French opponent, Alain Bernard, who also happened to hold the world record in the 100-meter freestyle.
Instead of just accepting the probable loss, a determined Mr. Lezak pulled grit from down deep, and swam the fastest he’s ever done, and touched the electronically sensored wall, winning by eight one-hundredths of a second. He shattered a world record and won a gold medal.
And then he heard the fat lady sing…the American national anthem!TrackBack URI
Why have all the talking heads on every network and cable show gone on and on about the Chinese using one girl to lip-sync for another girl who was “singing” their National Anthem? Evidently, the girl with the great voice was not considered by Chinese authorities to be as “cute” as the one they used on the broadcast.
This is American media hypocrisy at best. I figure that if you don’t have great legs, cleavage and long blonde hair, you probably can’t get a job on Fox News at any time of the day or night. All the blondes are anything but dumb – they’re exceptionally smart, as a matter of fact – but they’re all “babes.” Whatsa problem with hiring a few plain women with brains too?
Did people feel sorry for Marni Nixon because she only got to sing while Deborah Kerr (The King and I)), Natalie Wood (West Side Story) and Audrey Hepburn (My Fair Lady) provided the faces for Ms. Nixon’s voice?
I’m told by an insider that many of the stage performances of singing stars are “rigged,” in that the voice you hear has been pre-taped and worked over electronically.
I haven’t seen Greta van Susteren or Nancy Grace spend weeks on the death of anybody who was “plain” looking either.
The little girl with the beautiful voice gave the gift of the performance and was probably well compensated by her government.
The hypocrisy from our media about “looks” not mattering is ridiculous. I wish I had the patent on Botox just for Beverly Hills.TrackBack URI
“Beijing officials have distributed 4.3 million copies of an etiquette book, outlining rules on good manners and foreign customs, including rules about what not to wear,” according to The Wall Street Journal (8/1/08) “Among the no-nos: more than three color shades in an outfit, white socks with black shoes, and pajamas and slippers in public.” It should be interesting for the Chinese citizens who obey these rules to see the foreigners in sweat pants, jeans and flip-flops.
Another issue for the Chinese government is the crackdown on any protesting during the Olympics. China just doesn’t want to look bad to the almost half-million tourists who are there for the festivities. According to the Associated Press, probably several thousand Chinese protestors have already been locked up for the duration so they don’t behave “inappropriately.” Also, protestors had to apply for permission to demonstrate some five days in advance and had to acknowledge that they would not harm national interests. They were supposed to be relegated to one of three parks which are several miles from the main Olympic stadium, but in a report on Saturday, August 8 in the Los Angeles Times, the three parks where demonstrators were to be allowed were totally quiet. There were no signs of protest areas or of protesters, and, according to the Times, there were more security personnel than visitors at the parks. Foreigners who protested over the past week were deported, and the heavy security measures have forced most of the demonstrations to be held in other countries, including Tibet, India, Hong Kong, England, France, and Germany.TrackBack URI
Being able to breathe seems to be a high priority for Olympic athletes – and in Beijing, that’s going to be a bit of a challenge. However, according to Associated Press sources, China is working hard at it….cough…cough.
Last week, Beijing’s air pollution index dropped to 44 from its more typical number which is double that. A reading below 50 is considered “good,” and between 51 and 100 is “moderate,” but “moderate” is still above the World Heath Organization’s guidelines for healthy air.
Their polluted air has prompted the government to begin drastic measures, including the halting of most construction, the closing of machinery, chemical and construction factories, and the imposition of restrictions on half the city’s 3.3 million vehicles.
Many of the 10,500 Olympic athletes are heading to South Korea, Japan and other places to avoid Beijing’s air for as long as possible. This is a kind of “reverse doping,” as the impact of the city’s pollution on the health and performance of these athletes is in question.
Yet another risk is that of Islamic terrorism. Some of you have been led to believe that jihadism is a reaction or reasonable payback to America and her friends for being bad, bad places. So it might seem strange to you to find out that a Muslim group, claiming responsibility for a series of explosions in Chinese cities, is allegedly planning to attack the Beijing Olympic Games. According to the AP, “earlier this year, the Chinese Ministry of Public Security said it had disrupted two plots to attack the Olympics. It claimed one group had been planning to kidnap athletes, foreign journalists, and other visitors, while a second had been manufacturing explosives and was plotting to attack hotels, government offices, and military targets in Shanghai, Beijing, and other cities….” Just yesterday we heard about sixteen Chinese policemen who were killed in an attack on a border post in the Muslim region of Xinjiang.
As if that were not enough, the Chinese government was planning to censor the Internet during the games. Reporters already in Beijing have been unable to access scores of web pages – particularly politically sensitive ones that discuss Tibetan succession and Taiwanese independence, as well as the sites of Amnesty International, Radio Free Asia and several Hong Kong newspapers.
Oh, you should know that the International Olympic Committee quietly agreed to the Internet limitations…that is, the blocking of sites that were not Games-related. There was such an uproarfrom other countries, however, that China has backed off on this deal, and on Friday, the Chinese government announced that it will not censor the Internet during the competition.
In 2001, when China won the right to host the Games, it made the commitment that it would improve its record on human rights and provide athletes with clean air. Without Friday’s announcement (made only because of outside pressure), that would have made the score zero for two.TrackBack URI