Greed is Good

When does one draw the line when it comes to being happy with your level of self improvement?

I have noticed a trend in my life; I'm never happy with the level of developent in my life. The question becomes is this a bad thing? I know that there are a lot of people out there who are of the philosophy that you have to be happy with you. I understand this line of thinking but I can't help thinking that with this as your guiding principle it is easy to become complacent about where you are in life. Is it good to be unhappy or uncontent about yourself if it pushes you to be a better person; you know the best you can be? I understand that one has to temper this with patience and a lot of wisdom. But I can help thinking about what Lance Armstrong said, patience didn't get me over that mountain (I paraphrase). Is it good to be a person who is never satisfied with where they are in life if it drives them to be better? Can one be unhappy with oneself yet still enjoy the simple pleasures in life? I think it can as I have done so. I have this feeling that the answers to these questions are more of degree than kind.

Miranda I think we should see other people.

What seems like ages ago I attended law school. While I was there I had the luck of having then Prof, now judge Paul Cassell as my criminal law instructor. I believe Judge Cassell to be the UofU school of law's best professor (not necessarily my favorite). He was the most academically versed and yet still approachable. To say the least I enjoyed his class even while squandering my time at the law school. Judge Cassell has held some very controversial views which those who don't read his arguments would say "this man is insane". However when you read his arguments you get this strange sense that that well he could be right. At the least you walk away thinking well he's wrong but he has a really good point. In fact one of my good friends, let's call him Beef Jerky, after reading Cassell's arguments for capital punishment almost changed sides (for a brief second).

One of Judge Cassell's stances that I use to completely disagree with was that regarding Miranda. In the Article "The Statute That Time Forgot: 18 U.S.C Section 3501 and the Overhauling of Miranda" some basic points were laid out for the legal reasoning behind opposing Miranda. Since this article was written pre SC Dickerson it doesn't mean a whole lot in the way of legal argument (as now the matter is settled). However at the end of the article the argument was made that Miranda as caused a good amount of social harm. I remember in another article written by Cassell (I forget which, and do not have the resources to look it up, or am to lazy; you decide) he mentioned the hindering effect Miranda had on police officers from getting confessions that would absolve other people under police suspicion. Another issue under examination was how much Miranda violations directly lead to false convictions. So this got me thinking, maybe Miranda isn't what it is cracked up to be. A lot of my reservation on the issue is due to the fact that the numbers are under heavy dispute and it seems no consensus is coming (once again lazy or lack of resources you decide).

I however do have a lot of reservations about even thinking about reviewing my Miranda stance. Some questions arise that weren't answered by either side. One of the most compelling was when suspects were properly Mirandized how many were false convicted? Also how many had civil rights abuse when Mirandized? In my magical world of futurama, every suspect has a lawyer right next to them during every aspect of the adverse process. Then again would that hinder investigations as well? I suppose a lot more work needs to be done on the impacts of Miranda before we can even talk about Miranda's social impact and what we are willing to pay to keep it or have it go. Then again there is probably a better scheme that nobody has bothered to come up with yet.

Sports Fatigue

Have you ever watched so much ESPN that you thought "I can't possibly watch another episode of the same Sports Center agian." ?

Then have you ever just powered through for three hours just to see if Sports Center has changed? As you are watching it you realize that it is the same episode of Sports Center that you watched just three hours ago. Then you watch the same episode regardless?

I had a random thought. This was a cool movie schene; Crocodile Dundee the last schene where Mick is about to go on a walk about and the female love interest has to use a relay yell across a crowded NYC subway. Yeah that schene was great.

The difference of being different

I have been writing a friend of mine, lets call him little roster served with beef jerky gravy and a side of leaves. During the course of our conversation she (hey fishes change sex so can my friend pronouns) mentioned that one of his past friends had gone down a slippery slope into a life less desired. At the root of our non in depth discussion was why and how often people make such choices. The overall sense was that of fustration.

The first thing I'd like to touch on is greatness. A good friend of mine, lets call him island, gave me some good advice. Greatness doesn't come from doing that one great thing, it comes by preparing to do that one great thing every day with the little things. I derived a corollary from that; the things that effect your life greatly aren't the few big choices, but the small ones you make on a daily basis. As I have aged some, choices like: which school am I going to, what is my major going to be, what am I going to do for grad school, what is my career going to be, and so on have had very little impact on who I view myself to be. Further these big choices have even less impact on who I want to be. Don't get me wrong there are some big choices that will effect who you are greatly, like hey lets have a baby. So what does this have to do with people not living the most desirable life or how does this apply? My contention is this, people sell those little things for what they think are great things.

I don't like to use examples but I'm not feeling paticularly abstract at this time so here you get one. As some of you know, I have what most people would consider some odd religious tenets. I have at one time or another violated nearly every tenet of my faith. That's just a fact I can't hide it. But enough of that lets talk about me being obedient for a change. I've come across a new set of people due to my work. Due to the nature of my work you have to hang out with those you work with; it just wouldn't be good if you didn't. One of my tenets is thou shall not not drink spirited beverages. The vast majority of my new friends drink alcoholic beverages. Some of these new friends are of the exact same faith as me (go figure small world). When we go out there is a lot of drinking. People at the very start asked if I would like a drink, and often became rather pushy on the subject. Being the DD gave me a quick out. However after the first few times I just started letting my position known, I don't drink spirited beverages. I just like saying/writing spirited beverages. Anyways, people still asked all the time. However, as time wore on they realized I wasn't going to bend on this so they stopped. Another interesting trend, as they realized I wasn't going to bend on the issue I got asked to hang out even more where no DD was necessary. What happened instead of my new friends viewing me as a up tight stick in the mud, a foundation of respect had developed for the choice I had made. I understand for someone battling substance abuse this would be a huge choice, but for me not drinking is such a small thing. This respect translated into me being well liked by my friends. Well that and I'm really realy good looking and that's what counts in life.

So lets juxtapose this with one of my new friends of the same faith. I'll call her number one. Number one wanted all of us to like and include her in all the activities we hand planed. He was in a new environment and wanted some people he could bond with. If you hung around people who drink before there are a lot of "drunken stories". So when number one was presented with, "hey just have one drink, join us in the fun!" number one decided to partake of the sacrament of porcelain. Needless to say one drink led to another, on time drinking led to another. Another interesting thing happened, number one started to get alienated from the group. She was viewed as crazy and unstable (even though his behavior was exactly the same as everyone who drank). When I mentioned we should include number one on events people raied a brow every time. They didn't want to do it. Even though number one was a part of so many, I'm talking a lot here, of those drinking stories no bonding happened.

In this example I saw that somebody had traded a little principle of daily living for something they perceived to be great, the bonding and fellowship of friends. The situation worsened and number one's life slowly but surely slipped. Don't get me wrong I'm an idiot and have my fair share of slips. But when I don't slip on the daily little things is when I see my life taking shape. The things in my life for the most part are not defined by the big choices I have made but the small rules I have obeyed or disobeyed. I have so much more to say about this topic but my fingers are tired and many better than I have said much to cover the topic.

What I think about in the shower.

Where I am at right now I am constantly surrounded by people. Generally that is not a bad thing as I like people. However I do like to have moments of solitude. Solitude gives me time to reflect on the things that move my life, inspire me, and in general develops the big picture perspectives that will probably dominate the little things in my life. One place nobody will talk to you and where you can get some alone time is the shower. It just seems odd to talk to someone as they are getting ready to and taking a shower. So what has been on my mind as of late?

The thing that constantly keeps coming up in my mind is the Sudan. I've been tracking this issue/area for some years now. I'm nowhere near an expert on the region. But it is a compelling issue. I remember at one time Will and I had a four hour plus conversation about the Sudan being on the UN human rights council. Granted it was a mix of topics but, the catalyst for the talk was what was going on in the Sudan. I have also been impressed by Time's early (relatively speaking) response to what has been going on in Dafur. The issue itself has been leading me to draw some conclusions about humanity, the region, and the people of the United States. So what's been going on in Sudan?

To say the situation is complicated would be an understatement. Sudan is divided into three regions: North, South, and West (Dafur). The gist of it is this, the North has had most of the infastructure and money. Using it's money it has gone and developed military power. In that process due to drought a land war ensued between the North and South. The problem was further exastrabated when oil became an issue in the South. The South developed militia and warlords to counter the aggression of the North. Until recently the South was a war zone. The North was unable to maintain military operations in the South. The zone was left in shambles. Now there is a ounce of stability in the South. The South has a vote coming up on whether or not they will be a part of the Sudan or their own country. The South has the largest oil reserves in the region. The only way the South gets to hold this vote is if it can maintain subility until the vote. Current proxy fights are on the rise in the South. Oil development has mainly been backed by the Chinese and has been an economic boom to the North (however everyone and there dog has their hand in the cookie jar). The picture is much worse in Dafur. The conflict eventually made its way to Dafur. The North used its troops and a proxy called the janjaweed to do the business of genocide. Some estimates have totaled the death count at 300,000. I believe the number is lower than that but not by much. According to some figures over a million people have been displaced from their homes and are now unwelcome refugees. These refugees have an increased mortality rate and more or less live in misery. The important thing is that genocide is happening/happened. If you are reading this I'm pretty sure that you know about the Sudan and that I've glossed over how bad it really is. So what does this mean to me?

The Sudan has been more of a back drop for my thinking than anything else. There have been many excuses used to explain why we (the United States) haven't done anything: the AU is already on it (yes but they are failing and have admitted so), we simply don't have the resources to commit to the area, the situation is to complicated and a wait an see approach might be the best option (unfortunately I think this might have some truth to it), and the list goes on and on. Regardless of the force of these excuses I have been drawing some conclusions that I hope are not true. A while a go the situation in Rwanda set off an outrage in the US. Congressmen said that this must never happen again. In fact if you ask, most people would say that genocide should be stopped. So what's the deal?

Even if all the excuses for action where taken away I am beginning to believe that the US would still do nothing. I'd hoped that such was not the character of my nation, but I am starting to lose faith. Harry Reid stated that US troops should only be used to ensure American interest. I've always had mixed views about Mr. Reid. But his statement I think is emblematic of the way this country feels. Hey if it going to cost us something then forget it. This lead me to believe that genocide to this country is like a piece of really expensive furniture that is horrible. Nobody likes to look at it in the house, but nobody wants to go through the effort and cost of getting rid of it. Simply put all that talk about Rwanda was just lip service. We say those things because we know in our hearts that is what is right. At the end of the day however, we choose not to listen to our inner light and choose to wallow in the filth that has become our comfortable lives. Ed Murrow feared that TV would be used to insulate us from horrible things. He felt that the networks were wrong to think that people didn't want to see or hear about horrible things. He feared that the networks would only shield us from seeking our light. I fear that Mr. Murrow as wrong about the people. How much shame does it take for action? I know this, we can do something but we choose not to because the cost is to high. But what is that cost? I believe it to be comfort. We have sold our integrity and honor for a cushion and laughs. I hope I'm wrong.

On the plus side the US government has pledged $40 million in political and humanitarian aid for the area. I think however that money is not going to solve the problem, and I hope that it is not a way for use to silence our guilt with dollars.