you pick the headline for this blog

Some of you have seen this by now. It is video footage of a woman being attacked by an otter. We actually see very little of the otter as the woman starts flailing and screaming trying to flee from the aggressive little fur-ball.

Here is my moment of geek: Otters belong to the same family as weasels, badgers and polecats, so it should not really be a big surprise. But it is unusual for the nice member of the family to be so nasty. Still, keep an eye on your small dogs, children, and family members with video camera.

So, that's my blog. But the fun part? The TITLE!

Here are the options I came up with.

Don't Put One Foot In Front of the Otter

Otters Fed Up With TSA Scans and Remote Cameras

Victim From An Otter Mother

Otterly Ridiculous Animal Attacks

Auburn Paid Otter to Attack Florida Gator Fan

Wikileak: Otter Attacks Part of Obama Leftist Conspiracy

Violence Increases Near Harry P Otter School

This Is My Commandment That You Love One An Otter

The Tyranny of Otter Babies, Otter Rabies

Tea Party Chooses Wrong Angry Momma. Otter Mommas Kick Grizzly Ass!

What are your suggestions?

Three Cheers for Government Bailouts!!!

I have a question for those who believe the government should NOT have bailed out the banks and the automobile industry: Why not?

As this is a blog and not a conversation, I will describe what I understand to be the philosophy behind such a position: The market punishes bad businesses by letting them fail and rewards good businesses by helping them grow. (I agree with this premise, actually, to a point.) The market is based on demand and supply. If the banks and car companies go under, new ones will replace them without any outside help. (I actually agree with this too. Don't act so surprised!) But the flaw in allowing the market to solve all problems is that it operates on its own schedule without regard to human suffering.

Recent studies estimate that the bailout of the car companies saved 1.14 million jobs. It is probably true that given time the market would have rewarded a new or different car company with those jobs as demand for cars slowly went back up after the economy eventually recovered from a devastatingly high unemployment rate and a serious depression that would have resulted from the complete collapse of the American auto industry. Not to mention the devastation from a gutted banking industry. But why should we suffer for that long just for some silly principal that sounds really great in a college classroom, but actually can be quite painful when practiced without exception?

To pretend that the government is not a major market player is just setting up your tent on the banks of denial. The US government is the largest consumer in the world, spending more than $500 million a year purchased goods and services. And yet, has this involvement stifled our economy? No. The US has the largest economy in the world, if you rank by country, and it is either first or second if you combine the European Union into one economy. (Yeah, no government involvement in the EU economy at all. (That's sarcasm for those of you who don't know me very well.))

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence[sic],promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. This is the preamble to the Constitution. Can I summarize? It means, government exists to make our lives worth living. We give up some of our power as individuals and states to that government, that we choose, so that we can live with less fear, with more comfort, and with a system of laws and justice that promote fairness and peace. Ideally. At least that's the goal. And we balance the exercise of government power with our liberties. Or we try to.

What we have learned in the past century is that having a government with regulatory and purchasing power can take the sting out of the market while still allowing market forces to grow the economy. And you can label it whatever you want - socialism, big government, whatever - but it works. It has a cost, sure, but one I'm willing to pay. And if you have ever received unemployment, disability, social security, medicaid, medicare, CHIP or you work for a government contractor, you have benefited from it.

Though it was railed against as wasteful government spending, we bailed out the banks and the auto industry. And the result?

Banks and the auto companies are back on their feet. And even more importantly, the auto bail outs have been paid back and TARP actually made a profit for taxpayers. TARP yielded better than a Treasury Bond (at 8.2% profit).

So can we stop rending our garments over the government interfering in commerce? One hand of commerce may be invisible, but the other is wearing stars and stripes. Allowing the visible hand to steady the market and protect us from disasters is a good thing. And as a practical matter, I prefer that protection to free market fanaticism.

Gender Equality Still Controversial in Some Countries

It is a very sad and disappointing day in one struggling democracy. The legislature of that country voted today on a bill that, if passed, would have required women to receive equal pay for work equal to that of their male counterparts. Sadly, the law failed to pass. Even in 2010, gender equality is offensive to some.

Aside from the obvious fairness of receiving equal pay for equal work, the requirement of equal pay for equal work would have helped reduce poverty among single parent households (since most of them are single moms) and among retired widows. But to some, the idea of women being treated as men's equals was just too much.

In this same country, struggles for racial equality have resulted in the passage of sweeping laws, but women have been unable to get their shoes on and get out of the kitchen. Some have tried, with various levels of success, but have been unable to actually end gender inequality because of religious dogma, social convention, and what can only be described as being undermined by other women.

For example, a few very powerful women in this country's legislature, who are paid the same as their male counterparts, voted against the measure, refusing to extend the sort of income equality they enjoy to all women in their country.

Yes, it is a very sad day indeed for this backwards country that cannot find a way to value their female citizens the same as their male citizens. It's especially sad for me since it is my country.

Sports Failures

Photo is of Reggie Bush, former Trojan running back, with his Heisman Trophy. He recently gave the award back after the NCAA found he had received benefits (i.e. a house for his family to live in) from a USC booster while he played football there.

I enjoy college football. I'm a huge fan, and in the first weeks of the season, I'll watch any good game on TV. But once in a while, things happen that really just turn my stomach. Here are a few things that really ruin sports for me.

(1) Coaches berating college players. I don't mind as much when professional players mess up and the coach goes ballistic. They are paid millions and they are doing a job. When they screw up, it's about more than just a game. But this past weekend, Nick Saban launched into back-up quarterback McCarron relentlessly, and he even hit him - on the butt, but still. Yes, AJ McCarron, adult and college football quarterback, got spanked by his coach on TV. He walked next to him for more than 30 seconds screaming in his face. What exactly is this type of humiliation supposed to accomplish?

Nick apologized to everyone when he used the word "shit" in his press conference a few weeks ago. But honestly, he can swear all he wants, IMO. I am much more offended by the disrespectful way he treated this young man. And Coach Saban is not alone. Many coaches have engaged in this method of coaching. I agree that sometimes a raised voice and some negative reinforcement can help train and teach, but what was the point of humiliating that young man on national TV?

(2) The sight of Cam Newton (or any player) praying at the goal post prior to the game. The individual hypocrisy of Mr. Newton's behavior aside, I am so over the whole "giving God the glory for my football performance" and "thanking Jesus for helping me score a touchdown." Is there anything more crass than invoking religion in a sporting competition? (OK, yes, thanking Jesus for winning an Adult Film Award might be worse.) Want to pray that everyone stays safe and healthy? Fine. But PLEASE SPARE US YOUR SANCTIMONY WHEN YOU SCORE A TOUCHDOWN! Also, people might actually get hurt less IF YOU STOPPED TRYING TO HURT THEM! Which transitions nicely to my next point -

(3) Football players trying to hurt opposing players. There is nothing wrong with a good, legal hit, and sometimes people do get hurt. Football is a rough game. But this weekend, I saw a quarterback essentially punch a defender in the head (no flag), a defensive player spear a quarterback in the back after the ball was gone (flag thrown), and numerous other defensive players in numerous games trying to knock players unconscious by blindsiding them. Is that what this game has become? Is it so much about winning that we no longer care about following the rules? Just win at any cost, no matter how many rules you break, no matter how viciously you hurt someone? If this is true, it is no longer football. It has become Ultimate Fighting.

(4) Finally, I want to address the Cam Newton situation. As an Alabama fan, I have no love for Cam Newton, Auburn's quarterback. But as a sports fan, I was happy to see him find a place and do well. His story was a really good one. I enjoyed watching him run all over people and jump up smiling into the arms of his teammates, even though I was not excited about what he will likely do to my team. (Maybe I can be more objective than some Bama fans since I live in Utah.) I had the same mixed feelings about Tim Tebow. I really got sick of hearing about him, but he seemed like a genuinely nice guy, a great competitor, and a very talented athlete. All of these things seemed to apply to Cam Newton. I even went so far as to question the objectivity of the Florida coaching staff, wondering why Tebow was elevated to star prior to arriving on campus while Newton, who seems to be even better that Tebow, was essentially anonymous. I wondered if it was the result of racism since I had never heard of him prior to his appearance at Auburn this year.

I have to apologize to Florida coaches and fans for my accusing thoughts and give Urban Meyer credit for putting character over winning. Florida fans probably find that small consolation as they watch South Carolina pack their bags for the trip to Atlanta and the SEC Championship, but Coach Meyer at Florida got an eye-full of the real Cam Newton, and he did little if anything to stop him from leaving.

Some of my Facebook friends who are Auburn fans have made a lot of jokes about this situation. The one about the cruelty to animals was particularly funny - Cam accused of beating tigers, bulldogs, hogs, etc. Very amusing. But is it funny that he was about 30 seconds from being expelled from Florida for "academic fraud?" (Most of us call that cheating.) Or that he purchased a stolen notebook computer (or may have even stolen it himself)? And is it really funny that his father demanded a six-figure sum from Mississippi State for Cam to play there instead of Auburn?

I am aware of no evidence that any Auburn supporter paid Cam to attend Auburn and I assume that it didn't happen. But the facts that are supported by evidence are enough to make both him and his father (who is a pastor, BTW) look really, really dishonest. In summary, they appear to be cheaters.

I guess if I was an Auburn fan, I would hope that at least Auburn's program did nothing wrong. Also, I'd prefer to lose with him on the bench or off the team rather than be known as the school that played him and won, despite knowing about his "character issues." Bama has had violations in the past that involved players receiving benefits from boosters, etc., and has taken their lumps for them. But even aside from sanctions, I enjoy the sport more when the rules are being followed.

I predict Cam will be booed a lot in Tuscaloosa. Bama fans do boo opponents (though I wish they wouldn't), especially Auburn, but usually do not single out particular players. I suspect this will be an exception. No one likes a cheater, except the fans wearing his colors.

Cam Newton may be too good of an athlete for Alabama to stop. But as a fan and a human being, I think those so-called important lessons learned from participating in team sports really have more meaning when the players actually play by the rules. Because ultimately, whether your team wins or loses - a game, a championship, or a trophy - character is all you have that really matters. I feel sorry for players, coaches and fans of all teams who don't get that. Not because of a sense of moral superiority, but because the beauty of sports is the integrity of following the rules and competing within the bounds. People who accept cheating as part of the game simply don't get to experience that kind of beauty.

Addendum: Just read online that Tony Dorsett called the investigation of Cam Newton a "modern day lynching."

I am really sick of this phrase. I think it really cheapens the suffering of real people who were actually lynched out of hateful racism. Moreover, Cecil Newton has admitted to soliciting money from MSU in a pay-to-play scheme, so there actually is something here to investigate.

There is racism in this country, and people are sometimes oppressed, attacked, and harmed because of their race, but to suggest that racial hatred is behind this investigation is both irresponsible and incredible. I have heard no evidence or accusation of such a motive by any party involved. But hey, Tony Dorsett got a headline, so I guess it was worth something to him to say it, evidence by damned.

In A Rut

This may be the strangest safety warning I've ever read.

These are fraught weeks for drivers, deer and the nation’s car insurers: costly auto-deer collisions make a special jump during the mating season, usually October through December, and peak each November. “The bucks throw caution to the wind as they chase does during the breeding season,” said Billy Higginbotham, a wildlife specialist at Texas A & M University.

"The bucks throw caution to the wind as they chase does...."

What can be done about these reckless, horny deer? May I suggest some dating advice?

Dear Overeager, Undersexed, Reckless Bucks:

Here are some tips to help you achieve your goals of procreation while avoiding those fatal collisions with speeding cars and trucks.

First, the does are likely going to be more responsive, and therefore less likely to run into traffic to get away, if you would just slow down a bit. I mean really! What self-respecting doe would want to have sex with a buck so wound up he's got the technique of Hammy from Over the Hedge? Running towards your beloved at full speed like a blitzing linebacker may just be a bad strategy to start with.

Second, maybe a little dinner before getting on to making Donner. You should try hanging out around the tender leaves and overripe berries and lingering near the does that catch your eye. The buzz from the fermented berries can help relax both you and your chosen one, slowing you down from Tigger to Bambi (who was a buck, don't forget) and maybe making the doe a little less likely to bolt.

Finally, remember to apply the important lessons of John Forbes Nash, Jr. Don't obsess over the biggest or fattest doe. After all, the biological imperative you are fulfilling is simply to spread your seed and procreate, as often and as successfully as possible. So, just go with the slutty (or slower) does.

So, my horny friends, follow these simple tips and I promise, this will be the best, safest, and most fruitful rut of your life.

Sincerely,

Heather
A Driver in Deer Country

PS to blog readers: This is the pic featured with the article. Is that guy's name Buck? 'Cause it looks like he's chasing that doe in a street. Just sayin'.

Are You a Sheep? Does It Make You Feel Baaaaaaaad?

If someone told you God spoke to him and told him to plant his tomatoes on a certain day, what would you think of him? Be honest. Would you think, "Wow, what a truly righteous man?" Or would you think, "Wow, what a kook?"

Obviously, it does not matter why he he chose to plant his tomatoes on one day or another. Whether he heard the voice of God or simply had a dream about planting his garden inspired by eating pizza really late at night, who really cares?

But what if he claims God told him to offer his unwed daughter to a group of men looking for an orgy? Or if he claims that God told him to kill his son? Would you simply assume that God would never tell anyone to do such heinous things to his children? If you assume that, you'd be making an assumption directly in contravention of the Old Testament, BTW.

Or would you assume he was mentally ill? If so, why? Why is it believable that God told Lot to offer up his daughter for an orgy and told Abraham to kill his son, but not believable that God told Brian David Mitchell to take Elizabeth Smart as his wife?

Apprently, there is some concern that people might believe Mitchell is a prophet because Elizabeth Smart has been questioned in such a way to establish that Mitchell was "not religious" and would receive revelations rather "conveniently" to permit him to take actions he wanted to take. (Huh. Not sure what that testimony proves.)

[Before I go further, let me make it clear that I think Mitchell's abduction, rape, and brainwashing of Elizabeth Smart was a cruel and sadistic crime. I have no sympathy for him, mentally ill or not. He needs to be separated from normal society forever as he is, IMO, a threat to young girls. Whether he belongs in a mental institution or a prison, I leave to the jurors and judge.]

My point is this: because of centuries old teachings and religious beliefs, we continue to believe that God spoke to his people and told them to do cruel things: kill entire villages (genocides), sacrifice their children, commit genital mutilation, stone and beat people for minor offenses like weaving the wrong materials together, etc. Take a good read of the Old Testament if you have forgotten. Do you believe that God commanded these things or not? If so, why is it so easy to just discard the word of seemingly devout believers today who claim to hear directly from God just because they don't lead a large international church?

Why do we accept that the leaders of mainstream churches - Catholic, LDS, Baptist, various Pentecostal denominations, etc. - "hear" God's voice and are speaking with His authority while calling people like David Koresh and Brian Mitchell "crazy?"

If I advocate something completely false and harmful, while claiming I am speaking on behalf of God, I would be labelled crazy or mentally ill or delusional or some such thing (even if I am a licensed minister). But when the Catholic church perpetuates the lie in Africa that condom use actually causes the spread of AIDS, no one does anything to interfere because it is "religion."

Religion can bring comfort and peace to a worried mind, it can bring solidarity to a group in need of community and support, and it can be the blue pill we swallow that perpetuates the most absurd and harmful delusions.

The Bible refers to people frequently as "sheep." Are you a sheep? Do you bleat when the wolf gets too close and makes you uncomfortable? Do you look to the bellwether to follow his lead? Or are you a thinking, rational human being who recognizes that YOU SHOULD NOT JUST STEP IN LINE BECAUSE SOMEONE CLAIMS HE (OR SHE) HEARD GOD'S VOICE? Work it out for yourself. Don't be a sheep. At best, sheep get sheared. At worst, sheep get butchered.