Children Today Are Overly Anxious and Depressed

 Email This Post

There’s a new study out from San Diego State University saying that children and young adults today are the most anxious and depressed of the last seventy years.

I’m not surprised at all.  Having too many choices is chaos.  Morals and values have been sacrificed in favor of infamy and fortune.  When sports heroes are infamous and rich because they took drugs to increase their performance, that is demoralizing to kids who work hard to aspire to athletic greatness simply by practicing a lot.  When other young people get famous for flaunting drugs and anti-social behavior, it makes it difficult for the kids who simply work hard.

When you have a major Hollywood producer/director putting together a movie to excuse and explain Hitler (in context, he says), you have a generation that has no clear understanding of evil.

When you have military dying in the fields of foreign countries because we are at war with a religious ideology that wants to terminate western civilization, and one of their combatants is caught and tried only as a common criminal, you have a generation that is confused.

When you have a culture that does not support the basic building block of education - the family - we have children turning to equally confused peers and pop culture.

When the people in positions of power, authority and fame turn out to be of little character, you have a generation that doesn’t know what to respect or whom to emulate.

It all matters.

Our kids pay the price.

Moral Nearsightedness

 Email This Post

Earlier this month, I took a call that I thought was a perfect example of how “moral nearsightedness” is overcoming American society.

This twenty-something young woman was pregnant out-of-wedlock, “shacking up” with her alleged fiance (they are living with his father), and the fiance doesn’t have enough income to support a wife and child.

But that’s not why she called!!

In fact, when I pointed out the irresponsibility and immaturity of conceiving out of wedlock with a guy incapable of supporting a family, I got back:  “Well, that’s not my question!” (And, by the way, she didn’t want to have a wedding until after the baby was born and she got her figure back in order to wear a white gown).

Her question actually related to her mother.  Apparently, her mommy came to visit and “got it on” with the fiance’s dad….all night.  There were other children (of other family members) in the home when this was happening.

That’s as far as she got when I said: “It’s genetic.”
She responded with:  “What?”
I repeated and expanded: “It’s genetic…having no moral foundation for decisions.  Like mother, like daughter.”

Now that may sound harsh to you, but truth often is, and there was nothing I could do to change anything about this situation.  She was already “shacking up” and pregnant; her mother already had humped the maybe future father-in-law.  Her question was going to be about confronting her mom about this outrageous behavior.  I couldn’t bear to hear her even go there, considering she was the pot and the kettle all by herself.

It’s a shame both of our eyes point only outwards.  It would be a far, far better thing if one of them turned inwards.

Tiger Woods: Athlete of the Year?

 Email This Post

Big news late last week:  Tiger Woods was named Athlete of the Year by the Associated Press.  Not only did his “sexcapades” not limit his votes, but more than half of the 56 votes came in after the scandal made news.  I guess the AP-types got confused - maybe they thought they were voting for the “Sexual Athlete of the Year.”

It’s too late now, but it is interesting that the question is being asked after the fact, as to whether or not he should receive this honor.  First of all, “Athlete of the Year,” is not based on anybody’s character - just athletic achievement (unfortunately).  So, the next question is:  is golf an actual athletic sport?  Truly, there is no physical hardship.  Players might get a little winded from walking the course or get sweaty on hot days, but that’s about it.

Someone responded to the question of whether golf is actually athletic or not by pointing out that Tiger was in good shape, and another retorted with “You also have to be in shape to bowl and even to shoot billiards, but to compare those and golf to baseball, soccer, basketball, football, rugby, track & field, cycling, boxing, tennis and wrestling is silly.  Golf requires skill - not athleticism.  Having played it myself…”

Additionally, yet another comment pointed out the veracity of many accolades these days:  “Al Gore got an Oscar, Obama got a Nobel, Bill Clinton got a Grammy.  Nothing is real any more.”

Well, let’s look at the runners-up for “Athlete of the Year:”

1. Lance Armstrong - cancer survivor; won Tour de France six times in one decade.  He came in second with 33 of the possible 142 votes.
2. Roger Federer - more grand-slam singles than any other man in history.  He came in third with 25 votes.
3. Michael Phelps - record-setting Olympic swimming champion.  He came in fourth with 13 votes.
4. Tom Brady:  New England quarterback.  He had 6 votes.

We all know why they gave it to Tiger Woods:  He’s made them more money than any other person in something considered a sport.  Because Tiger is good-looking (as all his bimbos also know) and a terrific golfer, the media turned him into a sensation, and more people showed up to golf tournaments (ka-ching), more photographs and stories were printed about golf (ka-ching), more shoes and stuff with his name attached were sold (ka-ching), and so on.  Just follow the money.  He is a huge money-maker for everyone, and that’s why he got the award.

I agree with the critics who say golf is not athletic.  Lance Armstrong and Roger Federer are better qualified for this honor, but it’s not an honor anymore.  It is recognition of “Ka ching” Power.

The Foundation for A Better Life

 Email This Post

There is very little broadcast television that matters, but there is a lot of broadcast television that tears down morale and morality.

There is one ray of persistent sunshine - the one minute spots produced by The Foundation for A Better Life.  These are the most touching, moving, elevating, lovely video essays you can imagine. 

The one I saw in the middle of watching the 5:30AM morning news showed a ferocious scene of a very physical professional hockey game.  The scene then shifts to the locker room where all these sweaty, huge and muscular macho guys are getting ready for the next game.  One of them is on the telephone, trying to hide his face and voice from the rest of his buddies.  He’s clearly uncomfortable, but doing what the person on the other end of the phone is asking him to do:  sing the “itsy bitsy spider.”  The scene cuts to his little daughter giggling with delight as Daddy sings to her while Mommy holds her on her lap.  Daddy finishes the song, and tells his daughter he loves her.  He hangs up to find his buddies surrounding him and doing the hand motions of the itsy bitsy spider going up the water spout.  He says “Hey, it’s my girl - my daughter,” and all the guys smile like crazy.

It’s just so lovely.  The Foundation for A Better Life has a website - check it out at www.values.com.  Look at their archives.  Be touched and moved like me, and be elevated in your mood as you try to survive the moral decay of our society.  There is a light!

Alienation of Affection Law Could Help Tiger Woods’ Wife

 Email This Post

I understand that the list is now at 14 distinct dalliances by Tiger Woods, and the count is likely to grow.  One of the reasons the legal types are interested in this situation is the precedent for “alienation of affection” suits, which can be filed when an “outsider” interferes in a marriage.  These suits are allowed in seven states:  Hawaii, Illinois, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Dakota and Utah.  Why these suits are disallowed in all the other states is a curiosity.  Perhaps lawmakers in those states were being pre-emptively self-protective.  Who knows?

However, it doesn’t matter that Woods lives in Florida, a state where alienation of affections suits aren’t allowed.  If any of Woods’ professed affairs took place in an alienation of affection state, Mrs. Tiger Woods could sue.  According to my research, the suits rarely make it to trial - usually the threat of such an embarrassing lawsuit is enough to have it end up in an out-of-court financial settlement.

On my radio program, when I discuss with the “wronged” spouse their pain and desire to get revenge with the “other woman or man,” I remind them that it is their spouse who breached vows.  The other individual was just the means to that sad end.  When people don’t wish to leave their marriages, they often focus their rage on that other person to protect their spouse from their rage.  However, I believe it ought to be common understanding that the vows include a warning to others:  “let no man turn asunder” means that no one should interfere with the married couple’s intimacy.  All society has really taken that vow.  Therefore, I believe it is fair that there be some consequence, and perhaps compensation, for the hurt caused.

I think all states should allow such lawsuits, as they respect the sanctity of marriage.

Tiger Woods

 Email This Post

My comments today are short and to the point.

With respect to Tiger Woods:

He is the best golfer ever.

He is a philandering spouse of major proportions.

Should that matter?

It was posited to me that what a celebrity does outside of his or her “famous” activity should not matter to anyone.

I thought about that for about an hour, and then decided this:

That statement is correct, unless that celebrity makes hay (or money) on the issue of TRUST, which Tiger Woods does by using his name and image as a “nice guy” to sell products.  He is untrustworthy…plain and simple, and therefore, should not be representing anything or anyone, because his word means nothing.

He is a great golfer.

So what.

He is not a great man/father/husband.

End of commentary.

Using the Web to Get Revenge

 Email This Post

In a recent radio interview, I discussed the issue of “webtribution,” a term coined by Elizabeth Bernstein in The Wall Street Journal to describe people who use the Internet to get revenge - i.e., publicly to hurt another human being with whom they are not happy.

The Internet is anonymous, immediate, and gratifying in the moment.  In human history, vengeance is not unfamiliar - people haven’t changed that much.  Their means of delivering pain has evolved from poison, duels, clever rumors, and Machiavellian manipulation to the world wide web.  In some ways, damaging someone’s reputation is akin to murdering them, as their reputation is devastated world-wide and forever, making it difficult for them to function in private relationships as well as in the community and at work.

To quote The Wall Street Journal:  “Most of us have heard of someone posting naked photos of an ‘ex’ online.  Or writing nasty reviews for a restaurant or book, not because they dislike the product, but because they dislike the person who created it.  Or signing up an acquaintance for [unwanted] e-mail advertising lists.” 

My opinion is that it should be illegal, as it is immoral, to post information or opinion about people without identifying yourself.  Obviously, it is also cowardly.  Google and all other such carriers should not permit anonymity.  That would immediately change the complexion of what is posted, and I don’t think they’d lose business, except from those who use the Internet for evil (terrorists of the international and interpersonal kind). 

Wife Turns in Pedophile Husband

 Email This Post

I remember when the Unabomber was caught.  There was an uproar of indignation concerning the fact that it was his brother who “ratted” him out.  When his brother saw the published ramblings of the serial murderer known as the “Unabomber,” he recognized the sentiments, mentality, and writing style of his brother, and informed the police.  If memory serves me right, The Los Angeles Times had either an editorial or an op-ed piece castigating the brother for essentially “turning on blood.”

That was a morally repugnant point of view.  Protecting the innocent against evil is the responsibility of every human being, regardless of the “job description” of the evildoer - in this case, a sibling.

Fortunately, in England, a wife of twenty years understood her responsibility to others (in this case, children), and set aside emotional pain and potential embarrassment.  She set out to trap her husband, whom she suspected of being a pedophile.  Apparently, her husband chatted with teenagers as he groomed them for sex.

The wife pretended to be a 14 year old girl, and caught him in the act.  She was in the neighboring living room while he was in his study sweating over a hot computer, setting “her” up for a meeting to have sex.  He also used a webcam to carry out sex acts and send the videos over the Internet.  Our plucky wife watched this in absolute disgust and horror.

She then contacted police who seized his computer.  She didn’t march into his study to confront him, cry, or threaten.  Like a good citizen, she just turned it all over to the authorities.  GOOD FOR HER!

He only received three years of community service and was banned indefinitely from having access in person or online to children under the age of 18.  He also had to register as a sex offender, and, oh yes, she divorced him.

“I did the right thing, and I don’t regret it.  Now I just need some time to think and put this all behind me,” she said to a reporter.

She should have gotten a medal.