Triathlons = Good Times

For the past month my wife and have been training sporadically for the Top Cop Triathlon in Temple Terrace. This triathlon consists of a .25 mile swim, 8 mile bike, and 3 mile run. It is referred to as a 'sprint' triathlon (a normal triathlon is 2.5 mile swim/156 mile bike/26 mile run). A co-worker of Claire's has managed to convince us to run in a few 5K races and gave us the nudge to sign up for the triathlon. Training wasn't supposed to be that complicated. Just swim some, do a little bit of biking, and run...right?

SWIMMING (SUCKS ASS)
We started swimming on Saturday afternoons and eventually added more days. The pool at Sulfur Springs is nice and not very crowded at night. Swimming really blew for me. For starters, I couldn't swim very far. Even though I am not a swimmer, I thought I could handle a few laps. I found I could only knock out maybe three or four laps before clinging to the sides for air. How embarrassing! I am a self-professed 'water-baby'. I've been known to swim/drift/float almost the entire length of the Ichetucknee River. The truth was this: I sucked at swimming. My swimming resume didn't really 'hold water' as they say. Of course, my goggles kept filling with water letting in the seemingly high concentrated chlorine into my eyes. That pissed me off. Worse, I tried to use a kickboard to no avail... I always seemed to die halfway down the middle of the lap. And finally I began to lose it when I looked over at my wife (former youth swim team member) cruising through her laps with apparent ease. I guess I just couldn't stand that she could whip me in something physical. Despite my jealousy, she taught me how to do a backstroke. I mostly just got water in my nose and mouth learning how, but I managed to get it down. The curses were flying out of my mouth with no restraint. Somehow I managed to get to my target goal of 18 laps with a combination of freestyle, backstroke, doggy-paddle, and drowning.

BIKING
Well, my bike had a flat till two days before training so I didn't really do much with that. I did bike for about 30 minutes once at USF's gym, but I'm not sure if it counted. Of note, our bikes our the popular mountain bike style, which don't really come in handy for a open road race.

RUNNING
I ran between two and five miles to train for this race. I've found a nice long loop in my neighborhood for the long run. For the short run, the track at Hillsborough High School (a few blocks from my house) is nice. However, you have to dodge field goals from punters on the football team and cheerleading practice.

RACE DAY
Claire and I got up at the crack of dawn. On a Sunday. She really hates that, since she works 8-4 everyday. With my student schedule, it's not a really big deal. I outfitted my SUV with our bikes, while Claire gathered our gear. I really like getting some 'utility' from that thing; I feel like it is earning it's keep. By the way, our 'gear' consisted of a two pairs of goggles, two towels, a Clif bar, a bottle of water, and a extra set of shoes. When we got to the race we had to 'stage' our bikes, shoes, etc. We noticed that most people had nice road bikes and felt embarassed by our lack of nice gear. To make us feel better, our friend's husband mentioned how slow we would be compared to the rest. I was mad until the bike portion, when a 60 year old guy who was about two minutes behind me in the swim went cruising by me like he was Lance Armstrong.

The morning of the race, Tampa was on the tail end of a cold front and it was around 58 degrees. In my tiny swimming/jogging shorts I wasn't feeling it. My collective balls shrank into my stomach when I looked at the pool. Luckily for me, the city planners of Temple Terrace managed give the citizens a heated pool. THANK THE GODS! So the swim was no problem. I was placed in the fifth heat. Claire went ahead of me and did very well: second out of her heat. Then I got in the water. I noticed that no one was doing the backstroke and decided I would have to doggy paddle if it came to that. However, when the gun sounded it lit something new in me: I became a rocket! Somehow I knocked out 9 laps of freestyle before changing to the breaststroke, which I only used for a few laps. I ended up doing .25 mile in 8:40 and tied for first in my heat. How nice is that?

The bike ride was nice and uneventful. As I mentioned, my mountain bike tires seemed to be made of glue and I was passed by several sketchy folks. I probably could have used some additional training but I did pretty decent considering that, had I owned a road bike I would have knocked about 4-5 minutes off my time at a minimum.

The one thing that took me by surprise was the transition from bike to run. I hadn't aticipated the difficulty of that enterprise. My legs felt like lead as I dismounted the bike and ran it back to the rack. The only highlight from my three mile jog was the fact that I passed that old 60 year old bastard who thought he was all hot shit on his bike. Claire met me near the end and urged me to run faster, but I only wanted to puke as I crossed the finish; somehow, I managed not to do that.

Yeah, sweet victory! My time of 1:06:42 netted me lovely trophy you see at top of the post. Even though there were only 4 guys in my age group, it felt good and has definitely made me a fan of these races. I talked to my gung-ho Marine buddy up in Pensacola. I think we should gather a bunch of his buddies and mine and meet for a race. Of course, we would put our own little twist on the whole thing. We would have to all wear Speedos the entire race and swim caps. Our noses would have a absurd amount of pink suntan lotion covering them. To top it off, we will carry a boombox with hits like "Chariots of Fire" and "Eye of the Tiger" playing. Coming soon to a race near you.

Bono Wuz Robbed!!!

The Nobel Peace Prize is an impossible concept. The committee must be feeling that progress toward peace it so unsuccessful that the award must reflect the degree of effort that sucked the least. I don’t even think Mohamed ElBaradei and the IAEA were really even considering that pursuit of ‘peace’ when they went sleuthing around Iraq the last few years. They were using Inspector Gadget when you really needed Penny; because there was nothing out there. I guess the committee was making a finger-to-nose gesture with the rest of the world at the U.S. Saying: "we feel ya' dawg". Of course, Alfred Nobel would be say "tisk, tisk, tisk", at the superpower of the free world recklessly carrying about a foreign policy that promotes peace as toilet tissue, doormats, and false motivation to a ‘free people’. What a joke though, to give it to a bunch of guys who did little, if anything to stop the war. They may as well have given it to Colin Powell.

Someone should clue these clowns in. The fact is, we are running out of peaceful options and NGO's that are relevant against such blatant abuses of power. Not like it matters anyhow, Peace itself is such an elusive little dove anyway, shitting all over the world, while activists try to feed it seed and capture it for weddings. It is so hopeless to even pursue peace. It’s like trying to find TRUTH. Abstract concepts are not going to appear by happenstance. Well, maybe at the top of the mountain, truth can be found after ten years of silent meditation.

In the end they should have given it to Bono. He was robbed. I think the rockin’ globetrotter deserved it just for effort. The oft-glasses-clad Irish-American has been selflessly promoting one sort of Nobel (sic) cause or another since the Pop Tour. However, I guess all was lost when he donned a jean jacket with the American flag stitched to the inside. You see, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has strict standards. You simply cannot wear a flag that was made in a different country than that depicted on the flag. Sorry. Next time pal, until then keep on searching for that which you are looking for.

A question of ethics...

The Coen Brother’s* cinematic classic ‘Miller’s Crossing’ starts off with a frank discussion of ethics. A mob boss is fixing fights, but every time he books a fight with a certain bookie, he gets screwed. “I'm talkin' about friendship. I'm talkin' about character. I'm talkin' about--hell, Leo, I ain't embarassed to use the word--I'm talkin' about ethics… Out of town money comes pourin' in. The odds go straight to hell.” he says. It’s a great scene, made hilarious by the fact that he is basing his justification (whacking a shady bookie) on ethics, something that is normally associated with a moral justification. Should that be the case? Americans have been misled to believe that ethics are associated with morals, that which is Right or Wrong. The concept of ethical relativism is intertwined with the misinterpretation of the term ethics.

The Markkula Center for Applied Ethics finds that ethical relativism is “the theory that holds that morality is relative to the norms of one's culture. That is, whether an action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of the society in which it is practiced. The same action may be morally right in one society but be morally wrong in another. For the ethical relativist, there are no universal moral standards -- standards that can be universally applied to all peoples at all times. The only moral standards against which a society's practices can be judged are its own. If ethical relativism is correct, there can be no common framework for resolving moral disputes or for reaching agreement on ethical matters among members of different societies.”

Scholars often dismiss this theory. They can cite a laundry list of some of the blatant, morally wrong situations where the ethics of one society will overwhelm the ethics of another. It makes sense, if you are looking at the problem from a functional level. No one would want values or morals expunged by those of a different culture. Of course, that is how wars normally start, especially in the modern arena. Arguments have been made as to Bin Laden’s motivation in 2001; whether or not it stemmed from hatred or fear of encroachment remains a topic of discussion.

Looking at ethical relativism solely as a theory lends one to more understanding. If the theory is true, then the mob boss’s reaction becomes clear. In his culture, fixing a fight concedes a certain amount of trust at the ‘fixing level’. He doesn’t want his pick to get out in the public or the “odds go straight to hell”. It is normal for him to expect a fixed fight to go off as planned. His trust is placed in a bookie, which appears to be getting the best of him. He has chosen to kill him… “for starters” as he puts it. That is where his dilemma lies.

*FYI, the Coen Brothers are my favorite directors. Check there stuff out in: Blood Simple, Raising Arizona, Fargo, The Big Lebowski, and Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?.

School House Rock: Propaganda Edition

There has been a push over the past few years to establish a more multicultural curriculum in many colleges across the country. USF is no exception in this trend. A recent article on CNN.com discussed a similar move on the part of state legislatures to encourage more international course material in public schools. Critics suggest that this “politically correct” push could further overload history teachers who already have trouble finding time to teach American history.

Teachers are once again being given a new set of standards and a list of items that must be implanted into the young's collective brains before the Big Brain Dump of summer. Whatever happened to the good old days? When teachers could contrive their own lessons and mold young minds so that by the end of class they were all standing on their desks shouting "O Captain! My captain!!" Those days are long gone and perhaps only existed in the minds of a few screenwriters and ambitious education majors.

Teachers have been the soldiers of governmental propaganda for the past 100 years. For a few years when my siblings and I were young we were home schooled. It was less the fact that my parents were kooky (they were) and more of a fact that Mom just wanted us around. That fact matters not, it's just whenever the subject of home-schooling is brought up some excuse or reason is needed. You just heard mine. Anyhow, my mother decided to teach us from a old history book. Published around the 1890s, it was quite an interesting read. Mom tried to teach us from the book for a time but it soon became a massive collection of epic battles with Indians and the bravery of notable unknowns in obscure Civil War battles. Looking at the book years later it is easy to see what was going on. It was revisionist history before the term was even invented. I was astounded at the misgivings, racism, and blatant opinion presented as fact for the young Laura Ingalls-Wilder era child. It was the Chicken Soup for the Civil War Veteran's Soul.

On a hilarious note, my mother now teaches history to 'gifted' fifth graders in a beach community here in Florida. Recently, she showed me some of her curriculum that was issued to her from the state. There are entire chapters about the Nation of Israel circa 6,000BC - 5AD. Yep, that is prime Bible story time. Even being married to a preacher, she questioned the validity of such blatant welding of church and state. Sure enough, within a week of reaching the Ten Commandments section of 'history' she was getting letters and phone calls.

So what is the point? Well, unless you have a Professor John Keating or Steven Ambrose teaching your elementary class, you are just shit out of luck. History's role as a subject has unquestionable merit. Even so, when schools recieve their funds from the feds or the state there are certain sacrifices that must be made. Teaching what someone else deems as important definitely falls into that category. That isn't to say that a bold teacher can't get away with sneaking a lesson or two into the school year about something relevant like say... slavery's roots. However, the chances that that teacher will return in the next year may be greatly diminished.

We Put the Suck in Success

Here at the University of South Florida, some faculty members in the English department have noticed an upward trend of Freshman Composition student's final course grades. Reported at over 50%, this figure is evidently too high for an academic environment boasts just a 47% graduation rate. It has even been said that in some classes every single student received an 'A' (gasp!). However some schools like Princeton are taking steps to ensure that grade inflation is a thing of the past. Should the school administration hold the classes to a certain percentage of A’s regardless of the instructors’ personal evaluation of students’ work?

That is an interesting question. For instance, take this class where all the students received the highest possible grades. In some fields that would be considered an 'outlier', or an abnormality. Obviously, some teacher from New College transferred to USF and was intimidated by the rigid grade scale. That person then decided to forgo the standards and give those lucky students the same grades. Just imagine the delight of the Timmy the Timeless Guy who never came to class. Waking up past noon one day, just before he lights a bowl his eyes glaze over to his transcripts lying under his stash. He decides to finally brave his fears and take a gander. To his surprise, nestled between an 'Incomplete' and a 'D' is his ENC 1101 grade. Besides his bowl, there is now even more to be happy about. But what has Timmy learned? Putting his joy aside, one could say that nothing has been learned.

In college, no one should be given anything for free. Unless it is beer, food, books, clothes, goldfish... but I digress. At Princeton, they are obviously noticing an upward splurge in achievers. Achieving is not something everyone is supposed to do (according to Princeton only 35% should get the 'A'). Steps to curb that are being made and it looks like professors are going to have to stop the Love Train. I for one am glad.

There is a reason why I feel this way. Confession: I am the one who wrote a passionate yet tactful email to one of my professors at the end of last spring term. She had given the entire class license to cheat on the last exam by giving out the answer key. Having taught a fine class all semester, it was very much out of character. She must have had a lot of low grades or a few teary-eyed-mascara-smeared young ladies bawling their hearts out in her office with the best excuse they had on display. I was angry since it was a class designed with my major in mind. Most of the students in the class were technically competing with me, and for the slackers who didn’t bust it all term to get a final grade equal to mine in grade only… I couldn’t let that go by. I was also mad that I had ruined a perfectly fine weekend holed up in the library studying for a final when I could have been anywhere else.

That is the adult learner (Cough! Dickhead! Cough!) in me I suppose. It really didn't matter. The professor never even considered responding to my email. Why should she? She did a nice thing and I am the just the asshole who didn't want the other people to have a good grade. Besides, she couldn't change anything anyway. Maybe my letter did have some effect. Maybe this term she won't do that again. This grade deflation policy that Princeton is trying isn’t such a bad thing. If they can get some of old ‘softies’ to change their ways, then there wouldn't be guys (DICK!) like me writing long, unread emails at the end of the term.

Soldier's Blogs

This story falls into the same vein as my Pat Tillman post the other day. The author, Zachary Scott-Singley is a soldier stationed in Iraq. He is one of hundreds of soldiers who take the time to post in a blog whenever they have a chance. His posts are sometimes just short anecdotes as to what he did that day; something for his wife to see. However, there are others like the one linked above that are extended insights into the war and the toll that these men and women go through. Blogs like this one give soldiers a much-needed outlet for venting frustrations that come from the real-life images of war.

I didn't find it very surprising that the Pentagon chose to selectively censure soldiers whose blogs gave away a little too much information. Soldiers came under fire over the spring when TIME magazine featured some links to their blogs. The information that they placed on their websites has contradicted some the reports of their superiors. In a war, that spells trouble. Officers charged with management and care of soldiers must take necessary steps to ensure they have complete control of their unit. I can understand both sides of this issue. I would have to side with the officers on this one.

Some soldiers understand that rights shrink upon joining the service. Note that I said 'some' when referring to today's soldiers. That is no mistake. Most never even read their contracts, but they may as well sign in blood when they enroll in this school. I remember reading my contract about ten times before I decided to enlist. I just had to get the courage to subject to a new law: the Uniform Code of Military Justice. This is the type of law that is enclosed in a single book and it is short and sweet. It's like Cliff's Notes for everything lawyers learn in law school, with a special nod to those who regard the Constitution as laughable. That law basically puts a person into the realm of peerless juries, battlefield executions, and a brief Bill of Rights. Most soldiers never cross that line. Those that do are quickly disciplined and pushed back into line. This war has changed that.

Soldiers like Colby Buzzell and Zachary Scott-Singley are walking that fine line. Their posts don't bash the Army or question the administration as much as they challenge the way people think. They question the ethics that underlie the war and show the ugly faces of war. I champion these men (and women) and hope that the Information Age provides the future with some dash of truthfulness that can't be censured.

Logos is MY BOY!

I'll tell you what. Show me an argument, and I will find my way to the bottom of it as fast as I can. Normally, I don't have time for the emotional plea that is the forefront of most argument points. Those are to be regarded as dangerous or deceptive. I will not lie; when I write or verbally argue I WILL employ such means (ethos, pathos, etc). I find playing to emotion will work very well. However, for myself I regard my intellect as superior as to be swayed by emotion in any circumstance.

Emotion is such a volatile component of argument. I use the term 'dangerous' because it is. Emotions can tend to get away from people. This can lead to unforeseen and tragic consequences. Without a doubt, it can also lead to a state of bliss or unbridled passion for a cause, person, etc. For myself, I prefer to look at an argument and sift through the images that rise above what the article is really about. For instance, when talking about national tragedy in a country a reporter will sometimes focus on a single young child, alone and in the dark. An image like that is powerful and can garner powerful support. I try and taper that and focus on the scope of what really happened.

In class the other day my professor was breaking down a simple argument that a husband and wife may have over the purchase of a car. They start with their claims and eventually one can break those down to reasons and the base warrant of the entire argument: the value they placed on... whatever. It made me think of when my spouse and I have similar arguments. We almost always go straight for the base and try to figure out why that is important. This actually helps us learn more about each other.

That is why logos is my boy. I prefer the root of the argument, the meat, the main crux of the issue. I like framing my own arguments with the emotional tone, honing in onmy victims psyche with my carefully positioned reason. But for myself, I prefer what lies beneath the argument and what the author is trying to sell me. But I've written too long this morning, I gotta go mail my payment to support my child in Djibouti so he doesn't get eaten by tsetse flies.

Greg Olson: Super Duper Space Cadet

This past week an American millionaire paid to be part of a Russian crew blasting off in a Soyuz rocket on their way to the international space station. Should citizens be able to pay to take part in space missions? How far should we take this idea of tourism? Should citizens be able to pay to see battles in war or participate in scientific research projects that may perhaps be dangerous for the crew? Why or why not?

Countries around the world waited with bated breath until a few weeks ago, when Russia emerged from relative obscurity with a surprising announcement. Russia has been flying low under the radar since proclaiming their satisfaction with the possibility of Sen. John Kerry winning the U.S. presidency. The world's governments had merely supposed that such a blunder of foreign policy had led them to remain silent for most of the year. However, when Supreme Chancellor of All Territories Vladimir Putin ('Pootie-Poot' as President George W. Bush refers to in private company) announced that Russia would start a 21st century tourism race with the creation of Russo-Disney. Catering mostly to the wealthy and powerful they will be providing "a outlet for all who were disappointed by the Journey To Mars ride as a child".

Some have speculated that the Russians seek to acquire top U.S. talent via this newest venture. Space tourist Gregory Olson is the third such person to pay for this venture into space. Although he prefers the term "private space researcher" he did say that the current title is better than "space luggage". As a scientist, Mr. Olson is no regular $20 million dollar ticket holder by any stretch of the means. His work with infrared imagery is notable, having had one of his sensors used for this summer's Discovery mission, inspecting the shuttle for damage. He is a scientist with the utmost sincerity in his love for the stars. An anonymous source deep in Russian government said recently "We are very pleased dat Gregory hafs agreed to wok wiff oz. His wok wiff infrared imagery could be used to find missing cattle in zour fields. Do you tink he will like dis fur-lined hat?"

Even if the mission is a success ('success' being defined by level of enjoyment of the ride), the program is doomed by failure. There simply is not a demand from the Rich and Famous to see the stars. Why? They see the stars all the time; on Mulholland Drive, Hollywood Boulevard, and Miami Beach. Who wants to pay $20 million for a trip to outer space when, for a couple million and a few hit singles you can get a seasonal pass to the Playboy Mansion? Ask Fred Durst what he prefers and he will quickly point you towards the bunnies.

Meanwhile high above Earth in the International Space Station, little Greg Olson is up in space looking down at all of God's Magnificent Creation praying that his fantastic voyage never ends. One can easily imagine him putting on his headphones and starting his 'Outer Space Road Trip' iPod mix. As the sounds of Pink Floyd fill his auditory canal, he pushes himself up from the bunk and starts a few zero-gravity spins. Spinning aimslessly around the cabin, and uses his arms to accelerate his motion and closes his eyes for a bit savoring the moment. His head slams violently into the ceiling and his entire body bounces in the opposite direction, appendages flinging about. Glancing around, he makes sure no one sees him and mutters, "Stupid! Stupid idiot!"

Pat Tillman's Political Beliefs

It was revealed last week in an article by the San Francisco Chronicle that perhaps Pat Tillman wasn’t really completely supportive of the war in Iraq. Several soldiers from his Ranger unit were quoted stating his opposition to the war. The piece even alluded to a secret meeting arranged with Noam Chomsky scheduled after his tour in Afghanistan. The article makes for an interesting read, describing the horrific details of his tragic death and the subsequent anguish his family has suffered.

Almost a year and half after his death, this story really isn’t headline news. Perhaps the most interesting reaction has been from conservatives like Ann coulter, who on “Hannity and Colmes” dismissed the possibility of his misgivings. The news would be hard for almost anyone to swallow. Having followed the story from day one when he enlisted in the Army, many had formed an image of a stalwart hero. This image was of Tillman, 100% American, charging after the enemy with unwaverable faith in his country and leadership.

Last week, during a conversation with a friend of mine we breached the subject of Iraq and the war. My response (opposing his) made him say “Ben, I’m surprised you say that, you were in the military!” In other words, he believes as many do: that joining the military renders the subject of all independent thought. While it is true that most of those in service lean to the right (and hard) there are plenty that do not see things in the same light. Just like our country, there are those who can ask questions of themselves and what they are a part of.

The military is merely an arm of government. It is strong and powerful arm, but not capable of mind control. When someone signs up they normally have a reason for doing so. For myself, I wanted to get out and see something new, have some adventure, and of course get money for college. The fact is, I was very grateful for my country and felt that I owed it something but that reason for enlistment ranked way behind all others. There are many like Pat Tillman who joined solely to serve their country.

When serving your country, you have to place a certain amount of blind faith that you will not be steered into the wrong place. As I swore to defend this land ‘against all enemies, foreign and domestic’ I remembered thinking: “What if my gun-toting dad joins some militia and decides to wreck havoc? Would I have the balls to defend against him?” The general public would assume that most members, guided by their faith in country would defend it against their own crazy fathers. That may be true, but there would be many still who question the validity of their actions and whether it was right. I’m sure that once Tillman was fully ingrained into the Army he truly realized that he was merely a piece of that powerful arm and they depended on him and those like him. However, he realized that his ability to think freely was not taken from him; that it was possible, to serve and question at the same time.

Country Grammar

At this point in your academic career what are you considering for a major? Why? How do you think this class, and the composition program in general, will help you in the future as you proceed with your classes and later your professional career? Do you think that students should be obligated to take ENC 1101 and 1102? Why or why not? Why in your opinion has the University of South Florida made these classes mandatory for graduation?

I'm just a few credits away from my pre-requisites for the nursing program at the University of South Florida. In fact, this is my last 'undergrad' semester. That excites me for many reasons. I will soon be focused on (and paying for) a subject that truly captivates my interest. I will be one step closer to being out of college and back in a full time job. Nothing thrills me more than the thought of me, nursing degree in hand, using it however I see fit. I really don't see myself as your typical 'wiping the ass' kind of nurse. That aspect of my chosen profession has never held much allure for me. The best thing about nursing is the diversity of the field. You can work in hospital environment, provide in-home care, teach, or work at the FBI. I look forward to finding my niche as a nurse.

One of the most anticipated aspects of finishing this term will be the simple fact that I will be done with many pointless and uninteresting classes. However, one of the few subjects that truly interests me is the composition course I am currently enrolled in. Last spring, I took the first of a two-course composition requirement for all students. Instead of requiring that I learn entirely new subject matter, I was handed the reins to my mind and told to explore a little. These classes enable students to have a creative outlet while honing necessary grammar and writing skills. If you graduate from a university, pay thousands of dollars, and get a degree, then you should be able to write with poise and intelligence.

Not everyone is destined to write well. Most will settle for marginal at best. In fact, most people do not even care to learn how to write creatively at all. However, that said, writing is a crucial piece of hardware. It will come in handy when needed whether one wishes to write scholarly pieces for a journal seeking publication or they merely wish to convince the court of their innocence in a case of speeding down Interstate 4. Frankly, I'm glad USF has such a requirement. I don't see where the opposition would have much grounds for an argument. If the student was enrolled at ITT Technical Institute, then I would understand. The fact that someone is seeking for a higher education would naturally lead to taking a few composition courses and developing a vocabulary.