When You Can't Afford Any Mistakes

About a week ago I lauded the national news outlets that had done great work in uncovering the actions of the real "fake media" and efforts to undermine the credibility of traditional journalism.  Then last week, many of those same outlets turned around and had very bad weeks--publishing a number of inaccurate stories about the Trump administration providing ample ammunition for the President and his acolytes to turn the people against those trying to report the truth.

First, Brian Ross of ABC News reported incorrectly that Michael Flynn's plea deal with Federal prosecutors contained an admission that he was ordered by Trump to contact the Russians before the election--when in fact that order came after the President won the election.  Then CNN, MSNBC and CBS all aired stories that the Trump campaign was sent links to the Wikileaks information about hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee before they were published.  Somehow, the "sources" for all three of those networks "misread the date" on that email--which was sent the day after Wikileaks posted the emails--and the links were to materials that had already been published for public consumption.  That was followed by Washington Post reporter Dave Weigel tweeting a photo of a nearly empty arena and claiming that was turnout for President Trump's speech in Florida on Saturday night--when in fact the picture had been taken hours before the President arrived.

Obviously, news outlets are going to make mistakes--because they are staffed by human beings.  But the stakes at this point in time are so high that there is absolutely no margin for error--and reporters and editors need to be not just 100-percent sure on their stories--but 1000%--because for a growing number of Americans, one item wrong out of a thousand is looking more like a 100% error rate.

I think too many reporters covering the White House right now are looking for the "grand slam story" that somehow takes down the entire administration--when smaller, completely verified and accurate stories--"opposite field singles" if you will--are more in order.  Let's not forget, it wasn't the Watergate break-in stories from Woodward and Bernstein that exposed corruption in the Nixon administration, they just set the table for the Congressional hearings that revealed the actual Oval Office coverup.

And speaking of Woodward and Bernstein, they made some pretty serious reporting mistakes as well.  In October of 1973, they erroneously identified three men as having received information obtained by wiretapping the Democratic National Committee offices at Watergate.  And just a couple of weeks later, they misattributed information that tied White House Chief of Staff Bob Haldemann to the slush fund that paid the Watergate burglars.  Mind you, their information was correct--Haldemann authorized the payments--but because they wrote that Hugh Sloan told that to the grand jury, rather than he knew about it but was never asked about it in court--they provided the White House with a way to discredit all of their reporting up to that point.

These are dangerous times for reporters in Washington.  The truth is out there--and they will likely find it eventually.  But will anyone be willing to believe it when they do?

Pay Your Bills First

It's too late, but I would still like to nominate University of Mount Union Football Coach Vince Kehres for 2017 Sportsman of the Year.  Kehres likely saved UW-Oshkosh from some major embarrassment by signing off on tomorrow's Division III Football National Semi-Final game being played at Titan Stadium instead of in Ohio. 

When it was announced that UWO was hosting the game, reporters that follow D-III football more closely than me were surprised--as Mount Union had a better record and a higher national ranking than the Titans.  But a Federal Bankruptcy Court hearing this week revealed that UWO getting the home game had more to do with economics than strength of schedule.  You see, there was a very real possibility that UWO wouldn't be able to pay for a road trip. 

The Athletic Department doesn't budget for post-season travel (which when you are one of the top programs in D-III football seems very short-sited)--relying instead on funding from the Foundation to cover that cost.  But when the Foundation went into bankruptcy earlier this year, that required the judge overseeing their case to approve that expense--and there was no guarantee that was going to happen.  UWO likely told the NCAA that having to hit the road before the Amos Alonzo Stagg Bowl may result in a forfeit--which would be incredibly embarrassing.  That's when Mount Union likely agreed to hit the road instead of hosting the semi-final game.

But should have UWO been made to face that embarrassment?  Let's not forget that the Foundation is in bankruptcy due to irresponsible actions of not only its former directors, but former Chancellor Richard Wells in racking up debt that it could not possibly hope to repay.  And when inappropriate transfers from the school itself to the Foundation dried up after Wells split town, the gig was up.  So why should the creditors who are legitimately owed millions of dollars be made to wait longer for payment so a football team can play a game?

I don't fault Bank First National for trying to block this spending in the bankruptcy court.  This is no different than the family that is in foreclosure on their house taking the kids to Disney World for a week.  We always like to say that playing sports in school is about "learning important life lessons"--and "pay your bills first" is certainly an important lesson to know.  Who knows, today's backup offensive lineman may be a future Foundation Director--and he will know first-hand the effects living beyond your means can have.

It may not be "patriotic" but I shall be rooting for Mount Union to win on Saturday and move on to the Stagg Bowl so that the UW-Oshkosh Foundation can do what is actually right and pay that $100-thousand dollars to the people it is owed.

The Sacrificial Lamb

I must admit, I actually feel sorry for Senator Al Franken today.  The Minnesota Democrat is expected to resign in the wake of accusations that he had physical contact with women that they didn't appreciate before he was elected to the Senate.  Yesterday, every Demoratic female Senator turned against Franken--demanding that he quit--even though he is not charged with any crimes, never paid off anyone to remain quiet and isn't even facing any civil lawsuits.

Al Franken is an unfortunate pawn that is being sacrificed by the Democratic Party for future strategic advantage.  By forcing out Franken right now, Dems can claim the "moral high ground" should Roy Moore--with his accusations of pedophilia coming along as baggage--win the Alabama Senate special election next week.  Liberals at every level will be able to point to Franken's resignation and say "See, a Democrat facing the flimsiest of unsubstantiated claims stepped down without any due process and Republicans should demand that Roy Moore do the same!"  And should Moore lose next week, Democrats can hang on to the Franken chip to use when the next GOP Senator or Congressman is inevitably accused of harassment--no matter how old or dubious the claim.

You can bet that the "forced retirement" of Michigan Congressman John Conyers has a lot to do with the pressure being applied to Senator Franken.  Members of the Congressional Black Caucus could not have been happy that one their own was getting pushed out--while a white colleague may have been allowed to skate.  Nevermind that the alleged incidents involving Conyers took place while he was in office (literally in his Congressional office) and that taxpayer money was used to pay off the alleged victims.  Perhaps Senator Franken can take some solace in knowing that his ouster will be seen as a victory for social justice.

One final thing to consider is that Democrats have to feel pretty confident that they can win a special election to fill Franken's seat.  His term runs through 2020, so obviously it won't be allowed to sit empty for two years--although I doubt he will try to hand-pick his successor like Congressman Conyers is by endorsing his son to take his place.  The Democratic Farm Labor party is probably already lining up safe, female candidates to square off for Franken's seat in order to ensure that this doesn't happen again while everyone cares about this issue. 

While they call for his resignation publicly, members of Al Franken's party are likely thanking him in private for "taking one for the team".

Safety Starts With You

The next time someone from the NFL Players Association claims they are "concerned about the health and safety of their members", I hope Mike McCarthy appears out of nowhere to throw the red "CHALLENGE" flag.  We can then go to the replays from just a couple of games this past weekend to show that NFL players have little to no regard for their own safety or that of their fellow competitors.

In Buffalo, New England Patriots tight end Rob Gronkowski--frustrated by being held on a play that resulted in an interception--jumped on and drove his forearm into the back of the neck of a Bills player that was lying face-down on the field long after the play had been blown dead.  Meanwhile, everyone agrees that the Pittsburgh Steelers-Cincinnati Bengals game on Monday night was the "most violent" that anyone can remember. 

Steelers linebacker Ryan Shazier--using poor tackling form--suffered a serious spinal injury when he went in head-down and collided with a receiver while trying to break up a pass.  Shazier laid on the field for several minutes unable to move his legs.  That was followed by not one but two head shots by Bengals defensive backs on Steelers receiver Antonio Brown--one on a play when the pass was clearly uncatchable and the other following a touchdown reception.  Steelers receiver JuJu Schuster-Smith was also called for an illegal "crack-back" block on Bengals linebacker Vontez Burfict--himself a multiple-time offender of the league's policies on illegal hits--that knocked out Burfict and required him to be carried off the field (although, I will contend that was a completely legal play, as Schuster-Smith led with the shoulder and did not strike Burfict in the head).  Schuster-Smith then stood over the motionless Burfict and taunted him.

I know that football is a high-speed, physical game with players having to make split-second reactions and decisions that affect the outcome of every play.  But the incidents listed above--save for the Shazier injury play--were all pre-meditated acts that fell outside the realm of regular play and took place strictly because one player was intentionally trying to inflict damage on another player.  And Shazier hurt himself by using poor tackling technique--which is also avoidable.  While us long-time NFL fans bemoan the league's efforts to "wussify" the game in the name of "player safety" by penalizing plays like those involving JuJu Schuster-Smith that for 80-years were good, hard-nosed blocks--the players themselves have to take it upon themselves to actually treat each other with respect on the field.

When the NFLPA tries to sue the League (provided it is still the cash-cow, tackle football operation that it currently is) on behalf of this generation of players claiming they weren't "properly informed of the risks of playing football to their long-term health" I hope that the NFL's lawyers can secure last week's "highlights" from ESPN (if that still exists 25-years from now as a network that actually shows sports programming) to prove that the players themselves didn't give a rat's behind about their own safety.

Wanna Bet?

Imagine being a state lawmaker and ten of thousands of your constituents called you up demanding to be allowed to pay a new tax.  And amazingly, the people who are opposed to this new tax are the ones that would never end up paying it anyway.  Plus, this new tax would allow the government access to anywhere between 80 and 400-BILLION dollars worth of commerce.

Well that is an opportunity that may be coming to state lawmakers not only here in Wisconsin--but across the US--as the Supreme Court decides if a federal ban on sports betting is constitutional.  New Jersey is leading the legal fight against the ban so it's struggling Atlantic City casinos could cash in on gambling on games--but every other state could allow it as well then, and tap into this new source of revenue.

NBA Commissioner Adam Silver is in favor of granting states the right to have sports betting.  He is the one that estimates the illegal gambling activity to be 400-billion--but since it is currently unregulated, it puts his sport in jeopardy.  Remember, the NBA had to deal with the Tim Donaghy scandal, as a now-former referee admitted to influencing games he worked to help his own betting and that of others.  Silver believes that if casinos and state regulators can monitor gambling activity on games, patterns indicating a fix that were later found in Donaghy's case would be spotted much earlier.

Sports gambling is part of the culture in many other countries.  You can go to a British Premier League soccer game and bet right at the stadium.  While betting parlors are not on site at Wimbledon and British Open golf courses, they are just steps away from the gates--and a great many fans put down a quid or two before heading in.  We likely wouldn't see anything like that here in the US--but on-line betting would almost certainly be huge here.

If presented with the opportunity to legalize sports betting in Wisconsin, you can expect many legislators will pontificate about the "message it sends to kids", how "gambling ruins families" and their unfounded fears that somehow Packers players making millions of dollars are going to throw games on behalf of gamblers that can't offer them a tenth of that.  But while they may fret publicly about allowing yet another vice into our society, they can't help but picture the millions of dollars exchanging hands at the betting window that they would be able to tap into.

It's no different than the states that have allowed recreational use of marijuana--and its legal sale to the public.  Many called it "social justice" (because fewer African-American dealers would get locked up) or "medically necessary" (because people should be allowed to self-medicate based on the amazing claims that pot cures all ills with no side-effects).  But at the root of it all was the desire to bring in more tax dollars.  Especially when the dopes are already begging to pay it.

Those Tricky Millenials

So the state is going to spend seven million dollars in a marketing effort to attract more millenials to Wisconsin bolster the workforce.  With our older population, we just don't have enough "youngins" running around here to take over positions at companies.  Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation officials think flashy multimedia presentations and cleverly placed pop up advertising will "speak" to those twenty- and thirty-somethings and convince them to "Say Yes to Wisconsin!" (a very old state marketing statement some of you may recall on green bumper stickers.

The marketing campaign is going to focus on things WEDC thinks millenials care about: affordable housing, lower taxes and short commute times.  But what they fail to take into consideration is that those are things those of us who have been independent adults for decades care about--but the generations that have followed us have all but abandoned.

Take "affordable housing" for instance.  While those with kids and a job they expect to keep for decades like having their own home and a yard and the freedoms associated with that, younger adults have no interest in "being tied down" with a house.  They prefer densely-packed housing developments where all of the maintenance work is done for you.  Shovel snow?  Rake Leaves?  Cut the grass?  All wastes of time for them.  Plus, that next job could be a couple of mouse clicks away--in a city 2000-miles away--so who wants to get "bogged down" by a mortgage and real estate that you need to sell before you can go anywhere?

"Lower taxes" doesn't hit home with millenials either--because they haven't been paying that much anyway.  When you don't own a home, what do you care about property taxes?  Sales tax is just a line that sometimes gets added to an on-line purchase--depending on the retailer.  Nobody on ebay or Craigslist is charging you sales tax.  And when student loan deductions, health insurance premium subsidies and lower tax brackets mean a fat refund check from Uncle Sam every April, it seems to young workers that they really aren't paying that much income tax anyway.

Short commute times is another lost concept.  Millenials expect their residence and their employer to be on public transit lines.  They don't understand the freedom granted by having your own mode of transportation that you can take anywhere, anytime you want.  They don't have cars in the same percentage of ownership as previous generations--preferring instead to just book an Uber or a Lyft if they need to get somewhere.  They don't need conveniently located shopping either--because they can order anything they want without ever leaving the house on the internet.

Democrats criticizing the Governor's marketing plan may be right in saying that policy is more important that place when it comes to attracting the next generation.  Millenials probably do want de-criminalized marijuana possession, no enforcement of immigration laws, free contraceptives, and much higher government spending--and not so much a house, kids, two-car garages, low crime and cheap beer at a Friday night fish fry.  You just have to ask how much of that do those of us already here want to give up to make it "better" for them?

Important, But Not the Most Important

I've heard a lot of sports hosts calling tomorrow's Big Ten Championship Game the "MOST IMPORTANT GAME IN WISCONSIN BADGERS FOOTBALL HISTORY!!"  I'll grant you that the Badgers would likely clinch a spot in the College Football Playoff with a win over Ohio State and as former Vice President Joe Biden so succinctly said: That's a Big (Expletive) Deal.  And I subscribe to the attitude held by Patriots Head Coach Bill Belichik that the next game is always the "most important game ever".  But when you take a step back--and not treat what is happening right now as the only thing that has ever mattered in the history of mankind--you would see that the "Most Important Game In Wisconsin Badgers Football History" was played on December 4th of 1993--in of all places, Japan.

In that game, the Badgers took on Michigan State.  With a win, they would capture a share of the Big Ten title--and their first berth in the Rose Bowl in 31-years.  To this day, Athletic Director (and then Head Coach) Barry Alvarez says it was his biggest regret agreeing to move that game from what would have been an early November home date at Camp Randall Stadium to a 5000-mile road trip with so much more on the line.  Fortunately, the Badgers played like a team with everything to gain that night--and Michigan State looked like they didn't want to be anywhere near a football field.  Wisconsin won 41-20 and punched their ticket to Pasadena.  And the rest as they say, is history.

But consider what would have happened if Wisconsin had laid an egg in that game.  A loss would have ruined what had been up until that point a Cinderella season--with a dramatic home win again Big Ten powerhouse Michigan and an equally dramatic tie the next week against Ohio State that cleared the way for a potential conference title.  But blow that game against Michigan State--and it would have been the Buckeyes representing the Big Ten in the Rose Bowl--while Bucky would have gone to some second-rate bowl game in late December.

Without that win Barry Alvarez likely becomes the second coming of Don McClain--a solid coach that never really was able to build a consistent winner.  Maybe Wisconsin goes to a few more bowls before Alverez heads off to Miami or Notre Dame.  A loss in Tokyo probably means no pipeline of future NFL offensive linemen coming to Madison.  No Ron Dayne.  No Heisman Trophy season.  No back-to-back Rose Bowl wins.  No Miracle at the Metrodome.  No highly-successful preferred walk-on program that produces All-Americans and future pros.  No smooth transition to Bret Bielema.  No three consecutive Big Ten titles.  No JJ Watt.  No Russell Wilson.  And no record setting days for Melvin Gordon.  Paul Chryst may still have been hired--but he would have inherited a program with little history of success and far less talent.

Yes, there is a lot on the line in tomorrow's Big Ten Championship Game.  And maybe it ushers in an even better era of Wisconsin Football.  But let's keep things in perspective and remember how we got to this point.