Needless to say, for anyone who has only the basic American high school level understanding of the Second World War in Europe, they are probably unaware many aspects about the war.
But I have to caveat this by stating that the Second World War was not a subject I exclusively studied, I am pretty confident that I am not clueless about this subject.
American high school version of WWII:
1933 Hitler becomes dictator of Germany and immediately rebuilds the German military. The wimpy British and French acquiesce to the German's demands in Austria and later in Czechoslovakia. The Germans then blitz the Poles and subsequently defeat their inferior army; in fact the Poles were so backwards that they sent cavalrymen on horses against German Panzers. Then the Germans invade and beat the French because they are fans of surrendering. Then they invade Russia, get caught in a bad winter; which doesn't help because they declared war on the United States. The US beats up the Germans pretty bad in North Africa, then stages the worlds largest amphibious operation at Normandy and start to liberate France. Then the US liberates Paris. Then the Battle of the Bulge. Then its a race to the heart of Germany for the US and the USSR who have too many people for the Germans to fight. The Russians take Berlin in 1945, Hitler commits suicide and end of the war.
That was actually a bit difficult for me to write seeing that I had to eliminate most of what I've read about the European theatre of the war in order to give the truncated version of what covered about 20 - 30 pages in a US textbook. Needless to say, I forgot to mention that it was the US that bailed everyone out. I think I managed to get the contempt for the French in there...the same pointless contempt that Americans today have towards the French.
As for the US taking the brunt of the war, in reality, it was probably the people of the Ukraine and Russia that took the biggest losses in the war compared to other European nation. Soviet records tended to lump all USSR casualties together, following old Russian doctrine of including the states of Byelorussia and the Ukraine into the overall Russian state. Norman Davies covers this near the end of his work: No Simple Victory.
I do highly recommend that book for those who have only the rudimentary background about this epoch in history.
Still, I am a bit saddened by the tilted version of the war, as seen through the kaleidoscope of the American experience: the roles of the British (who bore the brunt of the German Luftwaffe from 1940-1941), the French (it was not cowardice on the part of the French fighting man that brought about their surrender--in fact the French decided to make Paris an Open City to keep it from being wiped out by the Germans. As for the French not predicting the Germans coming through the thickly wooded Ardennes...it was a huge gamble on the part of the Wehrmacht to commit to that move and the French had covered the most likely path of the Wehrmacht, coming down from Belgium) and even more sadly, the marginalization of the Red Army.
Reading the excellently composed A Writer At War covering the personal writings of Vasily Grossman, a Soviet war correspondent for the Pravda, along with other writings by Antony Beevor, Norman Davies, Guy Sajer etc does bring to light the colossal struggle between the Wehrmacht and the Red Army, and how all other campaigns conducted by the American Army pale in comparison.
Patton's great tank battles were mere child's play, or just the games of divisional commanders when compared to Kursk.
The clearing of the hedgerows in Normandy or even the Battle of the Bulge paled in comparison to the bitter struggles of Stalingrad or the siege of Moscow and Leningrad.
The great and swift movements of the US Armies in France were a normal day for the Red Army sweeping across the European steppe towards Berlin in 1944.
Needless to say, it is a humbling and eye opening experience when actually delving into the German-Russian War. It puts into perspective the actual sacrifices of the Western Allies and the fighting ability of the Russian and German solider. While it is pretty easy to go along with the generally accepted statement that the German Wehrmacht was one of the world's greatest armies in World War II, the soldiers of the Red Army were nothing to scoff at. Tough, resilient and brave fighters--they were the ones who broke the back of the Wehrmacht in 1944. They were the ones who actually crushed the fighting ability of the Wehrmacht.
Of course, we all know Stalin wasn't exactly the world's greatest humanitarian, but it was the officers and enlisted of the Red Army, irregardless of Party affiliation: news flash, not all members of the Red Army were Communists...in fact those in the Party were not so sure whether or not to allow members of the Red Army into the Party. It was a very exclusive club.
We just happened to corner the market on improving on pulverizing cities from the sky.
So maybe Russians do have some right to scoff at the Western Allies when talking about defeating Germany, because until the Red Army overran the German industrial complex, the Albert Speer run war industry of Germany was still able to produce to supply the Army. Maybe they do have a right to scoff since it was they who destroyed one of the most powerful armies in the world at Stalingrad, or that they inflicted the crippling blow to the vaunted German panzer might at Kursk.
But, this post wasn't originally intended to go into how people should at least read one or two books about the Eastern Front (I do suggest Antony Beevor's Stalingrad: The Fateful Siege 1942-1943 and The Fall of Berlin 1945 as they are not only very informative but very accessible to the casual reader. He is the perfect historian--one who is able to convey his vast knowledge into something that anyone can easily understand and retain. I also suggest Antony Beevor and Luba Vinogradova's joint effort in A Writer At War: A Soviet Journalist with the Red Army, 1941-1945 that chronicles the Eastern Front through the private journals and Pravda pieces by Vasily Grossman), but about my take on the first hundred or so pages of Richard J. Evans' latest opus about Nazi Germany titled The Third Reich at War.
I have not read his first two books, The Coming of the Third Reich and The Third Reich in Power, but he even states in the introduction that each volume is capable of standing alone on its own. His intent in The Third Reich at War is not to give a history of World War II in Europe, but to "focus...is on Germany and the Germans" and at the very center of it is the mass genocide committed by the Germans and the German state. Basically, he intends to show how the Germans developed the mechanism that later lead to the killing machine of the "Final Solution."
Right from the start, Evans floors me with evidence that just as the German Wehrmacht was rolling across Poland that the murder, dispossession and deportation of Jews and Poles followed in the dusty tracks of the panzer divisions. Needless to say, despite some commentary about how this isn't a new trail blazing history of Nazi Germany, I personally thought that the German savaging other races did not go into full swing until the start of Operation Barbarossa. There's always something that someone did not know.
Still, just after the first 100 pages or so, I find it very readable with great information and without the usual dry prose that would make most people pass out after the first three paragraphs or so...but maybe other people would find this boring. I find TV in general quite boring, so who knows. The book already stands well on its own and maybe when I finally trudge through the 680 pages that remain, I may look into his two previous volumes.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Thursday, May 7, 2009
When you put on your uniform, you are not a solider of god.
While the baseball purists will bemoan about the signal that Manny Ramirez has sent to young people with his current suspension in violation of MLB's drug policy, that is a non-issue in light of a little tidbit of information a buddy of mine was kind enough to post on Facebook.
I could care less about professional athletics sometimes--the teams, athletes, GMs, media, boorish fans and etc have created this situation with high salaries and matching expectations that allows for people looking to find an extra advantage in the game.
In other words, you have reaped what you have sown. I combat this by not subsidizing any professional team or athlete. The reality is that these teams and paid professionals do not care about you and don't want to drink a beer with you. They want to be left alone in their own free time, so therefore, give them space.
But this is a much more serious issue: US military chaplains proselytising in Afghanistan. Here's the article on Military.com.
For me, I am disgusted by these commissioned officers blatantly tossing out regulation just because they feel that it is their mission from god to force their bronze age god onto other people. This is not a mission for US military chaplains; they are there for personnel in the military who seek counseling etc.
In other words, these guys should no longer be drawing a paycheck from the US government. But that's my own opinion...and opinions are like assholes...everyone has one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
I could care less about professional athletics sometimes--the teams, athletes, GMs, media, boorish fans and etc have created this situation with high salaries and matching expectations that allows for people looking to find an extra advantage in the game.
In other words, you have reaped what you have sown. I combat this by not subsidizing any professional team or athlete. The reality is that these teams and paid professionals do not care about you and don't want to drink a beer with you. They want to be left alone in their own free time, so therefore, give them space.
But this is a much more serious issue: US military chaplains proselytising in Afghanistan. Here's the article on Military.com.
For me, I am disgusted by these commissioned officers blatantly tossing out regulation just because they feel that it is their mission from god to force their bronze age god onto other people. This is not a mission for US military chaplains; they are there for personnel in the military who seek counseling etc.
In other words, these guys should no longer be drawing a paycheck from the US government. But that's my own opinion...and opinions are like assholes...everyone has one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Do you really need a Kalashnikov?
A thought popped into my head when I read an article on CNN.com about people hoarding ammunition in the United States. The thought was: do you really need that Kalashnikov?
Yes, there is nothing in the article about AK-47 ammunition, but the same proponents for the Second Amendment would be the first to say you have the right to own a AK-47. Indeed, the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights states:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." (Courtesy of the US Archives Online)
So, yes, it does say that the right to keep and bear arms are not to be infringed by the government. But the first part of this sentence is also very key and requires an understanding of the historical context.
*Insert time machine travel type noise from Dr. Who* In the 18th century, there was no permanent, large standing Army (except for the British Army) that exists in our contemporary epoch. In fact, the Founding Fathers were not very wild about the idea of creating and maintaining a large permanent professional army, based on their experiences during the imposition of British power on the North American continent in the late 18th century. Therefore, as they were not interested in maintaining a large professional Army (and Navy), it was felt that the idea of state militias, which were a well established part of each state would provide the basic defense for the United States.
Until the growth of a larger professional Army in the United States after the American Civil War, the state militia system was the pool of manpower that the government would call up in order for the defense of the nation. The American Civil War is written by the exploits of several state militias battling on the killing fields, from Fredricksburg to Shiloh to Chancellorsville to Gettysburg to Cold Harbor (albiet, these militias were called up for Federal service in the Militia Act of 1862 to fill the ranks of the Federal Army, but they were not part of a large standing professional Army).
The idea was that the pool of manpower that would fill the ranks of these militias would have to supply their own weapons when called up, as listed in the Militia Act of 1792. Therefore it was important for individuals to have the right to bear arms. The follow on Militia Acts of 1903 and National Defense Act of 1916 Federalized the state militias and placed them under the auspices of what would later become the Department of Defense...and removing the requirement for one to appear to drill with their own M-1 Garand, M-14, and now M-16 and 9MM and 100 rounds of ammunition.
So, why is it that people need to have military grade weapons? I'll be the first to admit that it's fun to pop off rounds from a machine gun (done during my time on active duty), why is it that private civilians need automatic weapons, .50 cal sniper rifles, machine guns and other military style ordinance in their own personal inventory? I'm not quite understanding that the right to bear arms based on 18th century realities actual equates to the right for one to own the before mentioned weapons.
This is not to say people should not be allowed to own handguns, hunting style rifles and shotguns. But my issue is with people needing an AK-47. There is no need to have such weapons since there are no requirements for civilians in the National Guard or even the State Guards to personally own those weapons as they are supplied those weapons by those organizations.
Of course, online, the quotes of Adolf Hitler espousing the importance of banning or having oversight for personal weapons is used to hammer the fear factor into people, raising the spooky spectre of the Nazi demon that murdered, imprisoned and plundered Europe from 1935-1945. Somehow I think that if the US government passed laws similar to the Enabling Act of 1933 or the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, then people should be worried...somehow limiting the production and dissemination of military grade weaponry does not fall under the government taking away your rights.
Case in point, why would it be possible for someone to get those machine guns robbers used in LA several years back that held a whole city in fear for a few hours.
Atop of that, in light of some of the public shootings, as one of my esteemed friends suggested that there be a thorough screening of people to ensure they are mentally stable, do not have suicidal tendencies or have a record of violence or criminal activity. What is to stop a guy who beats the shit out of his girlfriend or wife from using a gun the next time she "pisses" him off? What is to stop someone who is not mentally stable from going into a community college, murdering a classmate and then taking their own life? These are legitimate ideas and should be used in the process of someone looking to purchase a firearm. Why should we allow people who could be a danger to themselves and others to be allowed to simply stroll in, pay for a gun, wait three days and then pick up said weapon?
Even better, why should our modern civilization allow the before mentioned people have the ability to buy military grade automatic rifles, high powered sniper rifles, large caliber weapons and machine guns?
And lastly...
Do you really need that Kalashnikov?
Yes, there is nothing in the article about AK-47 ammunition, but the same proponents for the Second Amendment would be the first to say you have the right to own a AK-47. Indeed, the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights states:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." (Courtesy of the US Archives Online)
So, yes, it does say that the right to keep and bear arms are not to be infringed by the government. But the first part of this sentence is also very key and requires an understanding of the historical context.
*Insert time machine travel type noise from Dr. Who* In the 18th century, there was no permanent, large standing Army (except for the British Army) that exists in our contemporary epoch. In fact, the Founding Fathers were not very wild about the idea of creating and maintaining a large permanent professional army, based on their experiences during the imposition of British power on the North American continent in the late 18th century. Therefore, as they were not interested in maintaining a large professional Army (and Navy), it was felt that the idea of state militias, which were a well established part of each state would provide the basic defense for the United States.
Until the growth of a larger professional Army in the United States after the American Civil War, the state militia system was the pool of manpower that the government would call up in order for the defense of the nation. The American Civil War is written by the exploits of several state militias battling on the killing fields, from Fredricksburg to Shiloh to Chancellorsville to Gettysburg to Cold Harbor (albiet, these militias were called up for Federal service in the Militia Act of 1862 to fill the ranks of the Federal Army, but they were not part of a large standing professional Army).
The idea was that the pool of manpower that would fill the ranks of these militias would have to supply their own weapons when called up, as listed in the Militia Act of 1792. Therefore it was important for individuals to have the right to bear arms. The follow on Militia Acts of 1903 and National Defense Act of 1916 Federalized the state militias and placed them under the auspices of what would later become the Department of Defense...and removing the requirement for one to appear to drill with their own M-1 Garand, M-14, and now M-16 and 9MM and 100 rounds of ammunition.
So, why is it that people need to have military grade weapons? I'll be the first to admit that it's fun to pop off rounds from a machine gun (done during my time on active duty), why is it that private civilians need automatic weapons, .50 cal sniper rifles, machine guns and other military style ordinance in their own personal inventory? I'm not quite understanding that the right to bear arms based on 18th century realities actual equates to the right for one to own the before mentioned weapons.
This is not to say people should not be allowed to own handguns, hunting style rifles and shotguns. But my issue is with people needing an AK-47. There is no need to have such weapons since there are no requirements for civilians in the National Guard or even the State Guards to personally own those weapons as they are supplied those weapons by those organizations.
Of course, online, the quotes of Adolf Hitler espousing the importance of banning or having oversight for personal weapons is used to hammer the fear factor into people, raising the spooky spectre of the Nazi demon that murdered, imprisoned and plundered Europe from 1935-1945. Somehow I think that if the US government passed laws similar to the Enabling Act of 1933 or the Nuremberg Laws of 1935, then people should be worried...somehow limiting the production and dissemination of military grade weaponry does not fall under the government taking away your rights.
Case in point, why would it be possible for someone to get those machine guns robbers used in LA several years back that held a whole city in fear for a few hours.
Atop of that, in light of some of the public shootings, as one of my esteemed friends suggested that there be a thorough screening of people to ensure they are mentally stable, do not have suicidal tendencies or have a record of violence or criminal activity. What is to stop a guy who beats the shit out of his girlfriend or wife from using a gun the next time she "pisses" him off? What is to stop someone who is not mentally stable from going into a community college, murdering a classmate and then taking their own life? These are legitimate ideas and should be used in the process of someone looking to purchase a firearm. Why should we allow people who could be a danger to themselves and others to be allowed to simply stroll in, pay for a gun, wait three days and then pick up said weapon?
Even better, why should our modern civilization allow the before mentioned people have the ability to buy military grade automatic rifles, high powered sniper rifles, large caliber weapons and machine guns?
And lastly...
Do you really need that Kalashnikov?
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Holy Crap Batman! A post that no one will read!
Wow.
It was just another uneventful day in the office. Nothing special: I had just finished our semi-annual physical test, managing to overdo it in my shoes (I really, really, really need custom made inserts for my feets), the other guys were trying to fight of the unstoppable force of malaise and the A/C was actually a lie since the heater was blasting in a chilly 26 degrees (C).
Then I received a large envelope from Valparaiso University School of Law. It was larger than most rejection letters and I wondered what new correspondence the school was sending me now that I was on the purgatory of the Wait List. Was it possible that they would send me information that I was not selected for the newest opening at the school.
A bit harsh don't you think?
So I opened the envelope, saw a pieces of paper and a glossy view book inside and figured it was a reminder about being on the Wait List and the view book was to sell a school I had already submitted an application and an acceptance to join the elite of the "Not Quite Good Enough This Time Around" of the Wait List. In other words, I was slightly confused at this not-so-green use of paper.
So instead of maintaining my healthy dose of pessimism to lead to tossing it in the front drawer of my desk filled with rejection letters from other law schools, I pulled out the paper and read the following:
Dear Anthony,
We are writing to inform you that we are offering you a position in the Fall 2009 incoming class...
I paused. Was this a joke or was this real? I was already accustomed to failing miserably with my attempt to gain admissions into a Law School that I had already accepted the fact that I was probably not going to gain admission to any school and that I would need to find a job to allow me to survive in the post-Navy life. Part of me had embraced this new plan of working after the Navy, I already plotted a course to work my way into the field of Paleontology or Marine Biology. It was more of a blastosphere than a complete organism, but at least it was a start to Plan B, C, D all the way through ZZX (ZZY was trying to become a USNR Canvassing Recruiter and plan ZZZ was to request to pull my RAD and sign up to sell at least 3 years of my life back to the Navy and flail for three years as an afloat DH.) dealt with some form or another of that basic idea.
Now the one item arrived that all but confirmed the conclusion of my illustrious Naval career.
I'm pretty excited about all of this: for a moment I figured that my two years of sophomoric stupidity would come to roost without mercy. Well, that and my so-so showing on the LSAT. I really should have answered that last question with: "We are given two options for these individuals to include their own basic desires in retirement, yet, both arguments for these options are based on scanty evidence that does not allow for a strong argument. I will go into why neither will appeal to these individuals unless further evidence is provided to give greater detail in order to build a strong argument for or against either option."
Well, that could have also backfired.
That's about it. Hopefully all zero people who read this blog were able to...yeah. Leave a comment if you managed to stumble upon this fine piece of mediocre-ish prose.
Cheers!
T
Oh just in case the current tally is 1-19-1. Looks like the Cubs record in the 1990s! Ha!
It was just another uneventful day in the office. Nothing special: I had just finished our semi-annual physical test, managing to overdo it in my shoes (I really, really, really need custom made inserts for my feets), the other guys were trying to fight of the unstoppable force of malaise and the A/C was actually a lie since the heater was blasting in a chilly 26 degrees (C).
Then I received a large envelope from Valparaiso University School of Law. It was larger than most rejection letters and I wondered what new correspondence the school was sending me now that I was on the purgatory of the Wait List. Was it possible that they would send me information that I was not selected for the newest opening at the school.
A bit harsh don't you think?
So I opened the envelope, saw a pieces of paper and a glossy view book inside and figured it was a reminder about being on the Wait List and the view book was to sell a school I had already submitted an application and an acceptance to join the elite of the "Not Quite Good Enough This Time Around" of the Wait List. In other words, I was slightly confused at this not-so-green use of paper.
So instead of maintaining my healthy dose of pessimism to lead to tossing it in the front drawer of my desk filled with rejection letters from other law schools, I pulled out the paper and read the following:
Dear Anthony,
We are writing to inform you that we are offering you a position in the Fall 2009 incoming class...
I paused. Was this a joke or was this real? I was already accustomed to failing miserably with my attempt to gain admissions into a Law School that I had already accepted the fact that I was probably not going to gain admission to any school and that I would need to find a job to allow me to survive in the post-Navy life. Part of me had embraced this new plan of working after the Navy, I already plotted a course to work my way into the field of Paleontology or Marine Biology. It was more of a blastosphere than a complete organism, but at least it was a start to Plan B, C, D all the way through ZZX (ZZY was trying to become a USNR Canvassing Recruiter and plan ZZZ was to request to pull my RAD and sign up to sell at least 3 years of my life back to the Navy and flail for three years as an afloat DH.) dealt with some form or another of that basic idea.
Now the one item arrived that all but confirmed the conclusion of my illustrious Naval career.
I'm pretty excited about all of this: for a moment I figured that my two years of sophomoric stupidity would come to roost without mercy. Well, that and my so-so showing on the LSAT. I really should have answered that last question with: "We are given two options for these individuals to include their own basic desires in retirement, yet, both arguments for these options are based on scanty evidence that does not allow for a strong argument. I will go into why neither will appeal to these individuals unless further evidence is provided to give greater detail in order to build a strong argument for or against either option."
Well, that could have also backfired.
That's about it. Hopefully all zero people who read this blog were able to...yeah. Leave a comment if you managed to stumble upon this fine piece of mediocre-ish prose.
Cheers!
T
Oh just in case the current tally is 1-19-1. Looks like the Cubs record in the 1990s! Ha!
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Miscellaneous photos....
Miscellaneous photos...
葉山くるまや～デーラクスメンとギョウザ
崇福寺 （長崎市）
平和公園 （長崎市）
眼鏡（めがね）橋 （長崎市）
葉山くるまや～デーラクスメンとギョウザ
崇福寺 （長崎市） 
平和公園 （長崎市）
眼鏡（めがね）橋 （長崎市）Took Hah-vahd long enough to send my rejection...e-mail?
I opened my google email to see what new interesting spam or phising attempts awaited in my inbox or spam box to discover that Hah-vahd (Harvard) Law sent me my rejection e-mail.
I thought...e-mail? What? No letter? I guess enough people pinned rejection letters on their walls to fuel their desire to gain revenge against Hah-vahd that Hah-vahd decided to stop sending letters...or it's a more green way to disappoint people. I like to think it is because it is a greener method. I really do.
Needles to say, I really had no delusions that I would somehow sneak into the incoming class for the fall semester of 2009. My spectacular showing as an undergraduate and average showing during the LSAT all but confirmed my rejection. What really surprised me was that it took them this long to send it to me. My other hopeful half court shot, Yale sent me one within a month of receiving my package. Actually, maybe they [law school applications] all were half court heaves...
But Hah-vahd took almost four months to decide that I was not the caliber of person they wanted at their university.
But can you blame them? My GPA and LSAT score would have dragged down their spectacular averages. Zeus or Odin forbid that I taint the pristine 3.6 GPA and 160 LSAT minimums for these schools! Well, again, they do need to grease the alumni to get donations, so again, I don't cut it...based on my performance...where does the blame lie? Me.
I don't think that my life will be effected too much, seeing that I'm shooting a huge oh-fer-everything in this attempt to go to law school. The only positives are letters informing that I am now part of the elite of the not-quite-so-good-enough-to-get-in, on the wait list for Indiana University and Valpo. I'm not going to hold my breath; seeing that this would entail enough people to choose not to go to either of those schools to open up a position for X number of people to be thrown into competition for X spots...and the X number of people always outnumber the X amount of spots.
It's not that I'm not used to screwing up. Failing 3 OOD boards, 2 SWO boards and screwing up in general as I have in the past 10 years since I left high school should at least teach me that. Wait, failing is the word. I might have been way off using 10% as my estimated success rate. Maybe 1% or even more daringly, 5% would be more appropriate.
But...all of those failures and screw ups etc led to some pretty interesting adventures and experiences. If I didn't screw up in college, I would have never gone to my first ship (that I went to) and met Mr. Hotdog, Wee-Man, Mr. Pear, MoNgO, and the other characters from the G.E. Electric Oven (all names property of Mr. Brent Gregory Meyers)...and I would have never ended up in Japan and meandered into the adventures and experiences here etc etc. So I'm proud of my 2.86 GPA!
Actually, it is pretty humorous and I try to make a game out of it. "Who is going to reject me this time?" "Man, I haven't received a single rejection letter yet this week, what gives?" I really have nothing mean to say to any of the schools, knowing that I am at best (just looking at GPA and LSAT) a marginal candidate, except for Wisconsin, but the bones that I pick with that university are based on a litany of other reasons.
And no, its not that Brett Beliema loses games, that's life (does anyone really expect Wisconsin to win a national championship?), but its that the University pays him 1.6M USD a year to coach football...sorta knocks the wind out of sails in the argument for Wisconsin being a legitimate academic institution...that and the less than 60% graduation rate for the football team. How the hell can I have pride in that? For 1.6M it should be at least 90%.
I won't even start on the bronze immortalization of Barry Alvarez. Before that was raised, I think the only statue on campus was that of Abe Lincoln...you know, the guy who ended slavery, started the first moves towards civil rights, reunited the United States...you know, things not as important as winning three Rose Bowls and having a son microwave a parrot.
I thought...e-mail? What? No letter? I guess enough people pinned rejection letters on their walls to fuel their desire to gain revenge against Hah-vahd that Hah-vahd decided to stop sending letters...or it's a more green way to disappoint people. I like to think it is because it is a greener method. I really do.
Needles to say, I really had no delusions that I would somehow sneak into the incoming class for the fall semester of 2009. My spectacular showing as an undergraduate and average showing during the LSAT all but confirmed my rejection. What really surprised me was that it took them this long to send it to me. My other hopeful half court shot, Yale sent me one within a month of receiving my package. Actually, maybe they [law school applications] all were half court heaves...
But Hah-vahd took almost four months to decide that I was not the caliber of person they wanted at their university.
But can you blame them? My GPA and LSAT score would have dragged down their spectacular averages. Zeus or Odin forbid that I taint the pristine 3.6 GPA and 160 LSAT minimums for these schools! Well, again, they do need to grease the alumni to get donations, so again, I don't cut it...based on my performance...where does the blame lie? Me.
I don't think that my life will be effected too much, seeing that I'm shooting a huge oh-fer-everything in this attempt to go to law school. The only positives are letters informing that I am now part of the elite of the not-quite-so-good-enough-to-get-in, on the wait list for Indiana University and Valpo. I'm not going to hold my breath; seeing that this would entail enough people to choose not to go to either of those schools to open up a position for X number of people to be thrown into competition for X spots...and the X number of people always outnumber the X amount of spots.
It's not that I'm not used to screwing up. Failing 3 OOD boards, 2 SWO boards and screwing up in general as I have in the past 10 years since I left high school should at least teach me that. Wait, failing is the word. I might have been way off using 10% as my estimated success rate. Maybe 1% or even more daringly, 5% would be more appropriate.
But...all of those failures and screw ups etc led to some pretty interesting adventures and experiences. If I didn't screw up in college, I would have never gone to my first ship (that I went to) and met Mr. Hotdog, Wee-Man, Mr. Pear, MoNgO, and the other characters from the G.E. Electric Oven (all names property of Mr. Brent Gregory Meyers)...and I would have never ended up in Japan and meandered into the adventures and experiences here etc etc. So I'm proud of my 2.86 GPA!
Actually, it is pretty humorous and I try to make a game out of it. "Who is going to reject me this time?" "Man, I haven't received a single rejection letter yet this week, what gives?" I really have nothing mean to say to any of the schools, knowing that I am at best (just looking at GPA and LSAT) a marginal candidate, except for Wisconsin, but the bones that I pick with that university are based on a litany of other reasons.
And no, its not that Brett Beliema loses games, that's life (does anyone really expect Wisconsin to win a national championship?), but its that the University pays him 1.6M USD a year to coach football...sorta knocks the wind out of sails in the argument for Wisconsin being a legitimate academic institution...that and the less than 60% graduation rate for the football team. How the hell can I have pride in that? For 1.6M it should be at least 90%.
I won't even start on the bronze immortalization of Barry Alvarez. Before that was raised, I think the only statue on campus was that of Abe Lincoln...you know, the guy who ended slavery, started the first moves towards civil rights, reunited the United States...you know, things not as important as winning three Rose Bowls and having a son microwave a parrot.
Holy Crap! Jay Cutler!
I woke up this morning (morning here in Japan, and around 6 AM JST~ish) to find out the Bears traded for Jay Cutler. Now, living overseas, I don't follow the NFL all too much since there are tons of other interesting things to do (get drunk at an izakaiya, get drunk during 花見, get drunk at a 横浜ベイスターズの野球 game, get drunk at the Beer Museum at 恵比寿 and etc etc...I kid, I kid) in Japan. Actually, the only reason I know anything about the NFL since 2005 is that the bulk of the games are played on TV (AFN mind you) between 3 and 11 AM JST.
I guess it works out this way.
Do you really want to screw with this guy? Seriously? Looks like he could put the lights out on Shawn Merriman...and he's clean! He has to be clean, since PED's are illegal in professional bodybuilding, or he would have never made it this far in his sport. Shawn Merriman though, after having to stop using steroids has completely fallen off the earth. I guess we know his source of aggression...
Jay Cutler reminding the NFC North that he isn't going to
But if the Bears really want to improve their chances of winning a Super Bowl before Jay Cutler retires (he's 35, so that might not be too far down the road), they should hire Pavel Tsatsouline as their strength coach, because he can probably de-wimpify Brian Urlacher from the guy who wont and can't shed a blocker to a machine that will break the blocker into to pieces and then juggle a couple of 2-pood kettlebells afterwards to ham it up for the crowd.
Oh wait, being able to surf huge waves off Cortez Banks is much more impressive than anything any football player can do on the gridiron.
Mind you, I don't love the NFL (or my hometown Bears) that much to wake up at 3 AM to watch a football game. If I were to wake up at 3 AM, it would be to throw my surf rack on my roof, strap on my longboard, pack up my mini shower, wet suit, booties, rash guard, surf wax, sun block and flip flops and to drive somewhere in Shonan to find decent waves...not to watch American football. To be honest, Futball, soccer, whatever you call it is much more interesting to me..and is the only organized sport that I can and actually enjoy playing (on defense...I don't have the speed or stamina to be a striker or a back) and watching.
Back on track, to the Bears' acquisition of Jay Cutler. The name sounded familiar and everyone seemed pretty excited (my friends from my old region who reside via Facebook) about this news. I figured to join in on the excitement out of the inner homer in me, wanting to support my local team before the moment passed and I began questioning the validity of paying athletes millions of dollars to play a silly game while people who actually contribute to society (not your typical cluebird musicians, not your typical cluebird actors/actresses, not your typical cluebird celebrities. Cluebird=one who has no real experience or knowledge of what they are speaking about. For example, I would be a cluebird if I were to write about how to defend against the Cover-2 defense or to talk about the stresses of making films, as I have no experience and no knowledge of such subjects) make what they throw at strippers and/or hookers on a nightly basis.
Okay, not all pro athletes throw money at strippers or hookers, but you get the point.
But for that matter, I seriously doubt god, if it truly exists or cares, would really waste its omnipotent or just simple power to help some human score a touchdown, when said powers could be used to clear up some serious issues such as famine, poverty, nuclear armament, fundamentalist extremism (of all faiths) et al.
Seriously, if god does exist as many have tried to lead me to believe, creating universes, creating quarks and spin particles and gas giants and galaxies and matter and time and space; to modify the thoughts of the great Carl Sagan: why the hell would it give a damn about some insignificant human on an insignificant blue rock orbiting a nondescript star on the outer edge of a relatively new galaxy?
I guess it works out this way.
But back to Jay Cutler.
So, I opened my web browser, typed in Jay Cutler in Google and I discovered this tidbit about Jay Cutler: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Cutler_(bodybuilder)
He's a 2-time Mr. Olympia! That has to mean something, because the Governator was a 7 time Mr. Olympia...so that means he's pretty ripped. That should stand for something since that might be an intimidation factor for the Bears offense.
Do you really want to screw with this guy? Seriously? Looks like he could put the lights out on Shawn Merriman...and he's clean! He has to be clean, since PED's are illegal in professional bodybuilding, or he would have never made it this far in his sport. Shawn Merriman though, after having to stop using steroids has completely fallen off the earth. I guess we know his source of aggression...
I'm not so sure that he'll head out in the field wearing a helmet and the speedo get-up, but somehow I'm sure the Bears will manage to modify his uniform and pads to emphasize his physique to scare the hell out of the opposition.
And if anyone has any questions, just imagine the Packers defense crapping their pants when Jay gets tired of their shit and flexes to show them that they really, really want no part of this.
Jay Cutler reminding the NFC North that he isn't going to
take their shit anymore by flexing his massive lats.
I'm still trying to figure out how Jay Cutler, who was a professional bodybuilder was originally acquired by the Denver Broncos and subsequently traded to the Chicago Bears for Kyle Orton and a couple of draft picks. But it looks like a win-win situation--the Broncos get a guy with a great neck beard that should fit in with the locals in Denver and they can manage to do something with the draft picks. I don't know what, but hey, we got a two-time Mr. Olympia!
But if the Bears really want to improve their chances of winning a Super Bowl before Jay Cutler retires (he's 35, so that might not be too far down the road), they should hire Pavel Tsatsouline as their strength coach, because he can probably de-wimpify Brian Urlacher from the guy who wont and can't shed a blocker to a machine that will break the blocker into to pieces and then juggle a couple of 2-pood kettlebells afterwards to ham it up for the crowd.But then the NFL would ban Pavel and Russian Kettlebells from the NFL as they give an unfair performance edge over other teams. Or they could just get rid of the pointless 225 lb bench press test, 40 yard dash test, high jump test (mind you, in shorts, running shoes and all of that nifty sweat wicking technology from Under WE MUST PRO-TECT THIS HOUSSSSSSEEEEEE Armor) and use only kettlebell activities to prove manliness.
But hey, catching a football, running away from people who want to hurt you or going out of your way to hurt someone else as hard as you can is still very impressive to me. Almost as impressive as catching a huge wave at Cortez Banks.
Oh wait, being able to surf huge waves off Cortez Banks is much more impressive than anything any football player can do on the gridiron.
What's that? Oh, there's another Jay Cutler? And he's from Northern Kentucky? (definition: anywhere south of Lake County, but just before you get to Lowell in the state of Indiana.) Haven't the Bears learned their lessons about quarterbacks from Northern Kentucky? (See Grossman, Rex for further clarification)
I was really hoping to have a 2-time Mr. Olympia kicking some ass for the Chicago Bears, but I can always hold out for the Pavel hire...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
