How AI Adoption Can Be Benefited with Cognitive Cloud? – Analytics Insight

Posted on by

Today cognitive computing and cognitive services are a big growth area that has been valued at US$ 4.1 billion in 2019 and its market is predicted to grow at a CAGR of around 36 percent, according to a market report. A number of companies are using cognitive services to improve insights and user experience while increasing operational efficiencies through process optimization. Such technologies are set to be a significant competitive differentiator in todays era. Cognitive technologies will enable organizations to stay ahead of the competition when it comes to understanding and improving customer experience.

As it is known, cognitive is highly resource-intensive, requiring powerful servers, deep technical skill-sets, and often leading to a high degree of technical debt, which is why, for a long time, Cognitive was limited to large enterprises such as the Fortune 500s.

However, with the introduction of the cloud, this has been completely overturned. As noted by Medium, the cloud allows developers to build Cognitive models, test solutions, and integrate with existing systems without needing physical infrastructure. While there are still resource costs involved, enterprises can flexibly subscribe to cloud resources for cognitive development and downscale as and when necessary.

In a conventional arena, cognitive would only make sense for large enterprises from a purely ROI standpoint. They would commit sizeable time, effort, and investments in R&D, and could afford delays/uncertainties in value generation. Now, even small-to-mid-sized businesses can utilize the cognitive cloud to apply AI as part of their day-to-day IT ecosystem, rapidly generating value without the infrastructure of vendor dependencies.

Moreover, the cognitive cloud serves great benefits for AI adoption including optimize resource utilization, wider access to skill-sets, and accelerate projects. Enterprises no longer need to spend on cognitive-ready infrastructure. The cognitive cloud can be used as and when required and decommissioned when idle. Also, instead of hiring an in-house data scientist or AI modeling expert, enterprises can partner with cognitive cloud vendors at a flexible monthly rate. This is particularly useful for those facing sluggish digital transformation (traditional BFSI and pharmaceuticals, among others). Further, the overlong planning, investment, and set-up period are replaced by a ready-to-deploy solution. Some cloud vendors even offer customizable default AI models.

According to B2C, the path to building and operationalizing cognitive services is highly dependent on the companys starting point. Cloud-native cognitive services require a degree of digital maturity. For a company well used to leveraging cloud, and comfortable designing, building and deploying in a cloud-native environment, the transition to cognitive will necessarily be quicker. If an organization is still grappling with, say, automation or is fairly new to the DevOps approach, the possibilities inherent in cloud-based resources are still open to it. For example, Infostretch has a long track record of helping organizations accelerate digital, whether its helping them transition from monolithic to microservices architectures, implement Agile DevOps, deploy intelligent automation or create a continuous innovation pipeline.

Priming ones product delivery environment for cloud-based cognitive services is one part of the equation. A robust, efficient test environment is also needed when it comes to deploying predictive analytics in real-time. Also, a highly automated system is important since a team relying on high levels of manual intervention generally will not have the bandwidth to take advantage of what cognitive services have to offer. Infostretchs own intelligent testing suite, for example, relies on bots and other AI technologies to optimize every aspect of an organizations testing lifecycle improving test quality, speeding up the process and prioritizing actions that really need attention.

Share This ArticleDo the sharing thingy

About AuthorMore info about author

Smriti is a Content Analyst at Analytics Insight. She writes Tech/Business articles for Analytics Insight. Her creative work can be confirmed @analyticsinsight.net. She adores crushing over books, crafts, creative works and people, movies and music from eternity!!

Original post:

How AI Adoption Can Be Benefited with Cognitive Cloud? - Analytics Insight

Universities must share their oppressive pasts – University World News

Posted on by

CANADA

Through the first half of the 1900s, the eugenics movement had close ties to post-secondary institutions. For example, leaders at the University of Alberta also engaged in the eugenics movement and at the Alberta Eugenics Board. Two of the three founding colleges of the University of Guelph the Macdonald Institute and the Ontario Agricultural College officially taught eugenics between 1914 and 1948.

Once, eugenics spread the deeply damaging idea that it is possible, and even desirable, to improve the human race through selective breeding. It ultimately spawned policies aimed at eradicating those deemed unfit through institutional confinement, restrictive marriage, immigration laws and sterilisation. Eugenics was considered a science from the early 1900s until the 1930s, when its scientific reputation began to decline and shift.

Exhibiting eugenics

Canadian universities have restricted access to those archives that implicate their institutions in profiting from oppressive ideas and practices. Kathryn Harvey, the schools head archivist, made the University of Guelph archive available to us.

Using the archives, we developed a co-created, multimedia and multi-sensory exhibition at the Guelph Civic Museum called Into the Light: Eugenics and Education in Southern Ontario, which began in September 2019 and runs until March 2020. It is the first of its kind to bring to light the difficult history of Canadian university involvement in teaching eugenics.

Into the Light is co-created by Mona Stonefish (our project Elder), Peter Park, Dolleen Tisawiiashii Manning, Evadne Kelly, Seika Boye and Sky Stonefish, with key supports from Carla Rice (ReVision Centre), Dawn Owen (Guelph Civic Museum) and Sue Hutton (Respecting Rights, a project at ARCH Disability Law Centre). It brings together Indigenous and disabled people who carry personal histories of forced confinement and sterilisation.

The exhibition embraces disability and decolonising curatorial practices that disrupt and unsettle. By presenting artistic, sensory and material expressions of memory through different formats, it speaks the hard truths of colonialism as Ho-Chunk scholar Amy Lonetree writes. By showing more than 30 years of eugenics course documents (1914-48) from the Macdonald Institute and Ontario Agricultural College, it is thus a rare opportunity to consider how eugenics was taught and practised in Ontario.

Teaching eugenics

In Into the Light, the eugenics course documents are accompanied by multiple perspectives. Take, for example, one of the course slides, entitled Eugenical Classification of the Human Stock that was initially displayed at the Second International Eugenics Congress in 1921.

The slide includes a chart which shows the connection between eugenics and British colonialism. In it, Cecil Rhodes is classified as a superior person of genius. In 1921, Rhodes was celebrated for his forceful British colonial and white supremacist agenda. Today, Rhodes is recognised as an early architect of apartheid, a policy that involved the systematic dehumanisation of South Africas Black population from 1948 to 1994.

Also shown on the chart are the eugenic traits of those whom eugenicists deemed to be unfit, including people classified as feeble-minded, poor, criminal and epileptic. In the process of claiming the land and its peoples, Canadian colonial administrators, officers, physicians, educators and scientists framed First Peoples as impaired and mentally unfit in order to justify their actions.

As decolonising scholar Karen Stote writes in An Act of Genocide, this was a precursor to unethical sterilisation and forced institutionalisation.

Food was often used to perpetuate colonialism. In a section of the exhibit at the Guelph Civic Museum, there is a stack of potato sacks, created by the artists, which shows a stereotypical image of an Indian with Eugenics Brand written on the sacks. Bright light streams between the sacks.

The sacks reveal the forced domestic and agricultural labour imposed on those who were placed, sometimes violently, in Ontario residential institutions.

The sacks are accompanied by the smell of rotting potato to evoke the feeling of being denied comfort and nutrition.

The eugenics course suppressed independent thinking and experiential knowledges. But Into The Light centres once-marginalised survivor experiences and encourages viewers to think critically.

The effect of eugenics

The exhibition has had a jarring impact on university students, especially those in psychology, sociology, human development, political science and social work who are aiming for careers in the same professions that once supported eugenics.

One psychology graduate student, for example, spoke about how his relationship towards the University of Guelph transformed after visiting the exhibition. When he learned about the universitys role in teaching eugenics, his pride quickly turned to feelings of discomfort and disorientation. But he became open and eager to change when he realised that the university chose to expose and address its history instead of trying to cover it up.

For survivors and aggrieved groups, the display of archival documents has had an impact also. One survivor of the Mohawk Institute and the Training School for Girls said she felt relieved and validated after decades of being silenced, denied and disbelieved all of which compounded the crimes she experienced due to eugenics.

Dalhousie University and Ryerson University are two schools with close ties to 19th century figures who profited from oppression, enslavement and colonisation Lord Dalhousie and Egerton Ryerson, respectively.

Both schools are coming to terms with these histories. They are establishing scholarly panels and consultation processes with aggrieved groups, that can address colonial, racist and ableist attitudes, policies and practices.

University archivists, librarians, researchers and administrators across the country should work with communities to find meaningful ways of making their archives accessible to those targeted by destructive ideas and practices. Uncovering hidden stories of the past calls into question our ways of doing things in the present; for aggrieved and justice-seeking groups, an open past opens up more just possibilities for the future.

Evadne Kelly is a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Guelph and Carla Rice is professor and Canada Research Chair at the University of Guelph, Canada. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Receive UWN's free weekly e-newsletters

See the article here:

Universities must share their oppressive pasts - University World News

Anti-Semitism preceded Auschwitz and outlived it – The Boston Globe

Posted on by

On Jan. 27, the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau, I will sit with thousands of people, including approximately 200 Holocaust survivors and delegations from 37 countries, astride the infamous train tracks leading into the camp. This concentration camp and killing center was part of Nazi Germanys effort to murder every Jew in Europe, resulting in the deaths of 6 million Jews. It will be a historic day and surely the last time the world will gather in the presence of so many survivors as we pledge to never forget. My thoughts are consumed with the unimaginable horrors those survivors endured deportation, starvation, torture, forced labor and the very troubled world they now inhabit.

Humanity might have assumed that, after 1945, Auschwitz and its unthinkable crimes would have contained anti-Semitism. Yet, with anti-Semitism on the rise in the lands of the Holocaust and even America, my thoughts turned to a radio show I heard last year after one of the anti-Semitic incidents in the United States. A young woman who called into the show knew about the Holocaust and about anti-Semitism, but never connected the two. This is clearly a failure of Holocaust education to teach not only that the Holocaust happened, but also how and why, and what made it possible.

Historians largely agree that three big events at the beginning of the 20th century made the Nazi rise to power possible: World War I, the Russian Revolution, and the Great Depression. But it was also big ideas dangerous ideas such as anti-Semitism and not just big events that made the Holocaust possible.

Hatred against Jews has been around since the dawn of Christianity resulting over the centuries in forced conversions, ghettoization, expulsions, and exclusion from Europes political, economic, and social life. With modern ideas came modern forms of hating Jews, confirming Jews status as a universal and enduring scapegoat. The word anti-Semitism was popularized in 1879 by German Wilhelm Marr, who believed Jews and Germans were different races locked in eternal existential struggle and therefore assimilation a dominant idea since the Enlightenment and French Revolution was not possible.

Ironically, several years later, Theodor Herzl, himself an assimilated Jew, was also articulating from a completely different perspective his view that assimilation in Europe was ultimately not viable: without a Jewish homeland, Jews could never really be safe and free. He recognized that Europes progress over the centuries did not prevent the extensive wave of organized massacres, known as pogroms, in Russia from 1881 to 1884, or the Dreyfus Affair, in which the French military wrongly convicted an innocent Jewish officer of treason, a scandal that gripped France for 12 years beginning in 1894, or the new approach of Marr and many other activists and intellectuals. Their racial anti-Semitism demanded new strategies. Segregation, conversion, assimilation were no longer workable solutions. It was no longer a matter of belief or behavior. It was a matter of biology. Therefore, removal was required.

During this period the mid- to late 19th century a combination of racial science, eugenics, and social Darwinism was used to justify and promote ideas about ethnic nationalism, identity, and colonialism. Now there was something innate about Frenchness, Germanness, and Jewishness. It was in this environment that Julius Langbehn, a German intellectual and anti-Semite said, A Jew can no more become a German than a plum can turn into an apple.

Four decades after Marr coined the term anti-Semitism, Hitler and other Nazi thinkers skillfully fused these existing ideas racial anti-Semitism, ultra-nationalism, and eugenics into a powerful ideology and an effective political movement. And eventually, into the vision and defining policy of a modern state. A genocidal state.

Hatred against Jews has a long and versatile history, easily adapting to new circumstances. Its effectiveness is such that it doesnt even require Jews. It thrives in all kinds of religious, political, and cultural arrangements, and especially at times of rapid change. Its so pervasive that even after the Holocaust, instead of receding, two new forms emerged: Holocaust denial attempts to deny or distort the established facts of the Holocaust and anti-Zionism prejudice against the Jewish movement for self-determination and the right to a homeland in Israel.

Long before social media became a powerful tool that amplifies hatred, Auschwitz-Birkenau has stood as a unique warning about the myth of progress when it comes to human nature. But so too is the long history of anti-Semitism that preceded Auschwitz and outlived it. That is something we must never forget on historic days such as this anniversary and every day.

Sara J. Bloomfield is the director of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.

Read more:

Anti-Semitism preceded Auschwitz and outlived it - The Boston Globe

The Talented Mr. Epstein – The American Conservative

Posted on by

Questions about the late sex offender and his sidekick blackmailing and spying for the U.S. and Israel have gone unanswered. Why?

Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell attend a fundraiser on March 15, 2005 in New York City. (Photo by Joe Schildhorn/Patrick McMullan via Getty Images)

Jeffrey Epstein was the talented Mr. Ripley of shadowy sexual predators.

With a mind-numbing contact list, from Henry Kissinger and Bill Clinton to Prince Andrew and Mohammad bin Salman, the leering billionaire financier and alleged eugenics enthusiast evaded real punishment for almost his entire life. One might say this continued even after he was finally apprehended and facing the music for his sexual abuse and extensive trafficking ring, when he was snuffed out like a cheap cigarette.

What becomes of the case now? Victim Courtney Wilds attempts to unseal records in court that would reveal co-conspirators and hold the government responsible is ongoing, but the case seems largely dead in the water, particularly as Epsteins procurer and occasional sex abuse co-participant Ghislaine Maxwell has disappeared from the scene. Maxwell has reportedly fled to Israel and is now shuttling between there and other unspecified countries where shes being protected by powerful contacts.

The media and Hollywooddespite Ricky Gervais recent remarks at the Golden Globesremain largely uninterested in this massive story. Epsteins Hollywood connections are numerous, including disgraced actor Kevin Spacey, who flew on Epsteins jet to his pedophile island various times, and Harvey Weinstein, whos currently on trial for his alleged sexual abuses. (Its hard to forget the 2006 photo in which Weinstein is standing with Epstein and Maxwell at Prince Andrews party.) What about #MeToo or #TimesUp? Do such movements not apply to a pedophile like Epstein who raped and psychologically tortured preteens for decades?

So many details of Epsteins abuses and sex trafficking operations remain unknown, as do numerous aspects of his close associates, potential connections with various intelligence agencies, and where and exactly how he obtained his copious amounts of money. The disturbing accounts of his victims and his years of being shepherded away from punishment indicate that Epstein was a man of limitless arrogancea man who knew he was protected at the highest levels. In fact, reports from the Virgin Islands allege that Epstein was trafficking 12-year-old girls to his private island of Little St. James as recently as 2018.

Epstein victim Virginia Guiffrewho has faced credible death threats for coming forward about her past abuse, allegedly at the hands of Prince Andrewput it this way as she was walking past Epsteins vacant Manhattan palace with a reporter: Being a kid I didnt even really realize what world I was being brought into. I was abused by people that I cant even mention here. Theres a lot of scars hidden behind those walls. It should be ripped down. It should be burned to the ground.

Maxwell and Epstein would often specifically target children in lower-income neighborhoods for grooming, offering kids a wonderful life serving Epstein with all the money, education, and adventures they could hope for. Epstein sexually molested numerous young girls and reportedly demanded sex three times a day from whoever was on hand. He also paid his victims a commission if they found more girls for him, with a premium placed on those who were a younger age.

Around half of Americans polled believe Epstein was murdered. But apart from that, who was Epstein? Who was he working for and why exactly? Epsteins Israel connections are extensive. He was reportedly tied to former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak who received millions from an Epstein-funded organization created to support Jewish and Israeli professional successes. Baraks services that led to the payoff are unknown and he wont say anything apart from claiming they were research-related (although Barak did threaten to sue media organizations that reported the story). After photos surfaced of Barak entering Epsteins house in 2016 with his face hidden, he scoffed at allegations of wrongdoing, saying he was there for lunch or a chat.

How did Epstein get rich? Money laundering via hedge funds and other methods? Spying for Israel, Saudi Arabia, and possibly certain American interests? Or direct funding from Victorias Secret billionaire Les Wexner?For his part, Trumps former labor secretary Alexander Acostawho says he was ordered by unspecified higher-ups to give Epstein a slap on the wrist while serving as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Floridaclaimed he was told at the time that Epstein belongs to intelligence, leave him alone. Journalist Vicky Ward said Epstein definitely trades in the knowledge he has over the rich and famous, and uses it for leverage. He also introduces rich and famous people, like Bill Clinton, like Donald Trump, to girls.

Epstein routinely bragged about his tight friendship with Jamal Khashoggi-chopping madman Mohammad bin Salman, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, and had a wide circle of associates, many of whom are notable for their fondness or policy flexibility towards Israel and Israeli interests. Maxwells press baron father Robert was himself reportedly a spook. He died in 1991 on his Lady Ghislaine yacht near the Canary Islands, shortly after it was revealed that he was allegedly spying for Israel. Maxwell was given a state funeral befitting a national hero before being buried in Israel, with then-prime minister Yitzhak Shamir stating that Maxwell has done more for Israel than can today be said.

Incidentally, Shamirs spokesman at the time, Ehud Gol, dismissed claims that Maxwell had been with Mossad as leveled by Seymour Hersh as nonsense. Regardless of whether he was conducting espionage or not, Maxwell was one of the most important supporters Israel has ever had and was even key in Israel gaining air superiority among their hostile Arab neighbors by turning post-war Czech factories into production facilities for Israeli fighter jet parts.

Could these allegations, if true, help explain why Ghislaine Maxwell is reportedly being protected by Israel?

Was Epstein a Mossad honeypot to get blackmail kompromat on everyone from Bill Clinton to the Saudis or just a freelancer? Former business associate and scam partner in a massive Ponzi scheme Steven Hoffenberg has written a book claiming that Epstein was in fact a top Mossad spy and was taken out precisely because he was becoming too much of a liability. The claims that Epstein and Maxwell ran a Mossad honeypot are echoed in former Israeli spy Ari Ben Menashes book, which says the two blackmailed politicians for info on behalf of Mossad. He also claims that Epstein was introduced to working with Israel by Robert Maxwell prior to Epsteins meeting and partnership with Ghislaine Maxwell, and that Maxwell wanted to bring Epstein into the weapons dealing on the Iran Contra scheme (with which Ben Menashe was reportedly involved).

The Epstein case should be important to everyone who cares about the truth because it marks the dividing line between cynical resignation and uncovering the facts no matter how disgusting or who they might implicate. The Epstein case and the cast of depraved vampires surrounding it may involve espionage, blackmail, money laundering, and many other sick things that attended the trafficking of teenage girls, but it is also characterized by a brazen dismissal of the law. If those at the top are exempt from the rules, society will eventually collapse and vigilantism will become the norm. Elites engaging in abuse and exploitation is nothing new, from the ancient Mayans to the Romans to the European ruling class of medieval times. But in todays flagrantly self-righteous #MeToo environment, it is particularly important that the establishment and liberal culture faces up to the monsters it has in its midstand has arguably helped create by accepting their money and support.

Paul Brian is a freelance journalist. He has reported for the BBC, Reuters, andForeign Policy, and contributed toThe Week, The Federalist, and others. You can follow him on Twitter@paulrbrianor visit his websitewww.paulrbrian.com.

Original post:

The Talented Mr. Epstein - The American Conservative

Mengele was a monster and a product of his time – Catholic Herald Online

Posted on by

MengeleBy David G MarwellNorton, 420pp, 20/$32

Josef Mengele, the doctor-scientist of Auschwitz, reared in a conservative, Catholic, conventional family, was perhaps, the Italian author Claudio Magris wrote, the most atrocious murderer in all the death camps. With a ready smile he performed horrible experiments on children, pursuing his research on twins with a particular relish for gypsy twins. He would gouge out eyes, inject prisoners with viruses and burn their genitals. Merely to read about his work is disgusting and horrifying. Nobody more than Mengele seems to confirm the truth of George Steiners assertion that the Nazis created the hell on earth which for centuries Europeans had imagined and poets and painters had depicted.

Magris devoted three pages to Mengele in his excellent book Danube. But what he writes about the Angel of Death isnt always accurate. That is made clear in this absorbing new book by David G Marwell, who worked on the Mengele case at the US Justice Departments Office of Special Investigations in the 1980s, proving among other things that Mengele had died in 1979.

Yet Magriss mistakes, chief among them his belief that Mengele was sheltered for three years in a monastery rather than working incognito as a farmhand in a hamlet in the foothills of the Bavarian Alps are not that important. What matters and disturbs is his observation that when he was in hiding he did not gouge out eyes or disembowel people, and I do not imagine that he suffered from withdrawal symptoms. He will have behaved well He did not kill because he couldnt and he resigned himself to this sacrifice without making a fuss. Conversely of course, he had tortured, mutilated and murdered at Auschwitz because he could, because it was expected of him, and because he found pleasure and satisfaction in doing so.

When he eventually made his escape to South America, first to Argentina, then to Paraguay, he re-established himself as a modestly successful businessman. He didnt torture or kill anyone there either. For the most part he kept his head down and led what appeared to be a normal, rather dull life.

I find this disconnection between his past and present, and his ability to live as if everything he had done in Auschwitz had been a matter of duty, fascinating. Thirty years ago I attempted to understand such disconnection in a novel entitled The Sins of the Father. That told the story of a Nazi criminal snatched by Mossad in Argentina and transported to Israel for trial. The novel was concerned with the effect on the next generation, but I also attempted, certainly not altogether to my satisfaction, to try to understand how a man could put his criminal past behind him as something no longer of any importance.

My Nazi was an engineer, Mengele a scientist, and it seems that he continued to believe that his scientific work was valuable, its value justifying whatever he did. Of course the race science he pursued is now thoroughly discredited. Things were different in Mengeles youth. The science (or pseudo-science) of eugenics, with which Mengeles research on twins was concerned, had a respectable following in England and the United States.

Marwell notes that Mengeles mentor, Otmar von Verschuer, gave a lecture to the Royal Society in London in June 1939 in which he paid tribute to Francis Galton (Darwins cousin) as the founder of our science. If the Nazis made the science of eugenics the subject of practical experiment, they were translating into action ideas which had been held by high-minded men and women seeking means of improving the national stock and preventing the unfit from breeding.

Late in life Mengele made contact with his son, Rolf, whom he hadnt seen since the boy was a baby. They exchanged letters in which Mengele explained himself with no hint of apology, and eventually Rolf visited him in Paraguay. Differences between them were apparent. In a last letter, after Rolf had returned to Germany, Mengele wrote: On the basis of my worldview and my specific profession I attach, more than most, of course, special meaning to the terms offspring, inheritance, son. On the other hand, I understand, as well, the power of environment.

It was quite a long letter, but the meaning was clear. If Rolf didnt think as he did, it was because Rolf had been led to view the content of my life incorrectly, if not intentionally negatively.

Mengeles world view, Marwell concludes, was little changed from that summer day in 1944 when he had stalked the ramp at Auschwitz-Birkenau. In 1984, Mengeles divorced wife Irene wrote to researchers working on a book about her first husband: I knew Josef Mengele as an absolutely honourable, decent, conscientious, very charming, elegant and amusing person. Otherwise I probably wouldnt have married him. Magris ended his note on Mengele rather differently: The Gorgon, said Joseph Roth about Nazism, is banal. Mengeles victims are characters in a tragedy, but Mengele himself is a figure in a farrago of gibberish.

Read the original post:

Mengele was a monster and a product of his time - Catholic Herald Online

Margaret Sanger Is a Hero to the Left. Here’s Her History of Ugly Views. – Daily Signal

Posted on by

Margaret Sanger, the womens rights activist and founder ofPlanned Parenthoodthe largest abortion provider in Americais a hero to themodern Left. And little wonder, given her outsized role in the founding andpromotion of the modern abortion industry.

But what few people realize is that Planned Parenthood isactually more extreme than its founder, at least when it comes to abortion. Infact, Sanger, as remarkable as it seems, looks positively tame next to themodern agenda.

Which raises the question: why would Planned Parenthood, whichhas gone so far beyond Sanger in its promotion of abortion, eugenics, andpopulation control, still hold her up as a leader of the movement? Isnt she abit behind the times?

The movement can thank prominent Progressive leaders of thelast decade for raising Sangers profile. Shes featured prominently in liberalspeeches and interviews, like when Hillary Clinton told supporters in 2009 thatshe was in awe of her. In 2014, Barack Obama became the first sittingpresident to address the abortion groups national conference, praisingSangers legacy as its core principle [that] has guided everything all of youdo.

Interestingly, Planned Parenthood, whose highest award still bears Sangers name, has moved so far to the left that its hero probably couldnt even get a job selling T-shirts for the radical abortion giant today. If they were consistent, modern leftists wouldcall Sanger a white supremacist or an extremist for her views on immigration, raceand yes, abortion.

Take, for example, Sangers desire to see Americas borderssealed to all unfit immigrants to protect what she considered a fragile gene pool.That sounds a lot like the caricature of pro-Trump conservatives conjured up inleft-wing fantasies.

Then there was her notorious speech before a branch of theNew Jersey Ku Klux Klan, a well-documented event despite the content beingnearly forgotten. In that speech, Sanger warned that America must keep thedoors of Immigration closed to genetic undesirables.

Then theres Sangers opinion of non-whites, which, if utterednow, would (rightly) cause a conniption among Americans. She consideredAustralias Aborigines compulsiverapists and the lowest known species of the human family, just a stephigher than the chimpanzee in brain development. Because he has no greatbrain development, Sanger wrote, police authority alone prevents [Aborigines]from obtaining sexual satisfaction on the streets.

But if Planned Parenthood was honest about its founder,Sangers most unforgivable sin would be her skepticism of abortion itself.

One of Sangers few criticisms of the Soviet Union when shevisited the communist state in 1934 was its outright insistence on encouragingabortion over contraception. Four hundred thousand abortions a year indicatewomen do not want to have so many children, a perplexed Sanger told a Sovietdoctor.

She thought that access to birth control was a human rightbutwas repulsed by abortion. In my opinion it is a cruel method of dealing withthe problem, Sanger wrote upon returning home, because abortion, no matterhow well done, is a terrific nervous strain and an exhausting physical hardship.

In fact, the founder of Planned Parenthood was deeplyconcerned about the tremendous number of abortions taking place in the SovietUnion, as historian Paul Kengor has documented.Legalization of abortion was one of the communist governments first acts followingthe 1917 Russian Revolutionnearly 60 years before Roe v. Wadeaccomplished the same thing in America. By1920, the Soviet Union was providing abortions free of charge to its citizens.

Sanger wrote that the number of abortions in Moscow was 100,000per year. By the 1970s, there were 78 millionabortions annually in the USSRa rate unmatched in human history, Kengorpoints out. Roe v. Wade only managed 1.5 million in 1973, the year the SupremeCourt legalized abortion.

By these metrics, Planned Parenthoods position on abortion in2020 is far closer to that of post-Revolutionary Soviet Union than their hero, MargaretSanger.

If Progressives held Sanger to their own standards, theydhave to denounce her antiquated viewsso why do they continue to applaud her?Because the Left believes that Sangers contributions to the pro-choicemovement outweigh her racist views. So Planned Parenthood sticks with itsdespicable founder, refusing to disavow her altogether, to its shame.

If leftists were honest, theyd renounce Margaret Sangerandthen reflect on what it means that theyve become even more radical than theeugenicist who started their anti-life movement.

Visit link:

Margaret Sanger Is a Hero to the Left. Here's Her History of Ugly Views. - Daily Signal

Genetic risk scores open a host of concerns and implications – The Daily Cardinal

Posted on by

A world where we can predict what traits and diseases that a baby will be born with is nearly upon us. With the expanding availability of genetic data, researchers in both universities and industry are trying to figure out the complicated relationship between our DNA and human health. For traits and diseases that reflect the interaction between many genetic and oftentimes environmental risk factors, these sorts of predictions are more difficult to make.

Scientists use genome-wide association studies with very large sample sizes to calculate polygenic scores, which correlate genetic factors with complex traits, like height or BMI, and risk for complex diseases, like heart disease or autism.

Almost everything you can think of is highly polygenic meaning [that] many, many, many genes or hundreds of thousands of genetic locations could be affecting [a complex trait], Jason Fletcher, a UW-Madison professor of public affairs studying some of the ethical, legal and social implications of genomic science, said.

Since an individuals genome generally does not change over the course of their lifetime, polygenic scores could offer an avenue for identifying individuals for specialized treatments or early interventions, Fletcher adds.

The positive case might be something like thinking about an instance where there is polygenic score for dyslexia and potentially being able to use a score like that very early in a child's life as a way of collecting individuals who might benefit from specific learning interventions, Fletcher said.

Intellectual disabilities and learning disabilities often go unnoticed for years, which can leave a child to struggle.

Lauren Schmitz, a UW-Madison assistant professor of public affairs, also notes that whereas for heart disease, preventative measures are viewed favorably, for intellectual disability the measures used to intervene would need to be carefully considered to avoid stigmatizing individuals.

Schmitz also stresses that although the science is moving fast, the predictive accuracy of these polygenic risk scores varies depending on the trait or disease in question. However, the for-profit, direct-to-consumer DNA testing industry is blurring the lines on what genomic science can say.

The way I see it, it's the next frontier in personalized things, Schmitz said. I think we're a culture that loves things that are personalized to us me and my experience and so I think the genome is the next marketing frontier.

For example, last November the biotech company Genomic Prediction claimed it could offer polygenic scores for traits including diabetes, heart disease and even IQ as an additional amenity for parents having children through in vitro fertilization. Currently, IVF clinics test fertilized embryos before they are implanted into a uterus to check for inherited genetic disease, like cystic fibrosis or Tays-Sachs disease, or for major chromosome abnormalities that can dramatically decrease the likelihood of a fetus being carried to term.

The announcement has been met with concern from scientists about the accuracy of these new preimplantation tests as well as the long-term effects of selecting on the basis of these traits.

There's all sorts of things where we don't even understand how these different mechanisms are operating and how they're correlated with other aspects of the genome, Schmitz said.

Measurements of intelligence like IQ tests are controversial, and as Angela Saini writes in Superior: The Return of Race Science, much of the work correlating educational attainment with genetics has direct ties to the vestiges of the eugenics movement in the early 20th century. Additionally, for many complex traits and diseases in combination with social and environmental factors at play, these polygenic scores are not necessarily an indication that the trait or disease will manifest.

We should be clear that the scores are not destiny, and there's an upper limit on how predictive it could be, Fletcher said.

Read the original:

Genetic risk scores open a host of concerns and implications - The Daily Cardinal

Editorial: Lt. Gov. Forest — Embrace the truth. Stop spreading divisive falsehoods – WRAL.com

Posted on by

CBC Editorial: Thursday, Jan. 30, 2020; Editorial #8506The following is the opinion of Capitol Broadcasting Company.

Elections should focus on bringing diverse interests together toward common concerns and the greater good. Campaigns must be about the truth.

But North Carolinas Lt. Gov. Dan Forest believes otherwise. In a speech on Martin Luther King Jr. Day a time when unity and understanding are typically the themes Forest sought to deepen divisions. While he gives lip-service to unity in his remarks, his sharpest words aim to isolate.

There is no doubt that when Planned Parenthood was created, it was created to destroy the entire black race,, Forest said in remarks to a breakfast at a Raleigh church. That was the purpose of Planned Parenthood. Thats the truth!

No. It is not the truth which well get to shortly.

Forest has a passion for divisiveness. He was a leader and most vocal advocate of the mean-spirited and ill-conceived discriminatory House Bill 2 bathroom regulations. The legislation became a national model for discrimination to a point where businesses and hosts of major athletic events didnt want to associate themselves with North Carolina.

Forest doesnt stop there. Hes decried diversity and multiculturalism with the notion that everyone needs to assimilate to what he demands our state and nation adhere to.

But, most disturbing about Forests King Day remarks on Planned Parenthood and abortion is that he was wrong. He DID NOT tell the truth. He spread fake news.

Just how wrong was this? Fully and completely.

In 2011, presidential candidate Herman Cain said Planned Parenthoods early objective was to "help kill black babies before they came into the world." PolitiFact, the much-honored fact-checking organization, researched and found Cains claim is a ridiculous, cynical play of the race card. It was rated Pants on Fire.

Factcheck.org, another independent fact-checking organization, investigated the same allegation and came to the same conclusion. Herman Cain has offered an alternate version of history, they concluded. We find no support for that old claim.

In September 2015, presidential candidate Ben Carson said Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger "believed that people like me should be eliminated." Substantial evidence shows, PolitiFact reported, that she was not racist and in fact worked closely with black leaders and health care professionals. Carsons statement bears no relation to historical reality. It was rated False.

When asked by a reporter for clarification of Forest's comments, campaign spokesman Andrew Dunn noted articles about Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger's controversial background and quotes about King's opposition to abortion. Dunn noted Sangers beliefs on eugenics and ties a program called the Negro Project that brought birth control services but not abortion to black communities in the South. All, as noted above, clarified and debunked by the fact checkers.

Spreading falsehoods and fostering divisiveness may help the lieutenant governor win a primary in a few weeks. But no reputable candidate will allow truth and unity to be campaign battlefield casualties.

North Carolina deserves honest candidates who will work to unite the state in pursuit of excellence. The primary voters should insist upon it when they go to the polling place.

Forest must apologize for spreading lies and commit himself to a campaign that elevates truth and the common good.

More:

Editorial: Lt. Gov. Forest -- Embrace the truth. Stop spreading divisive falsehoods - WRAL.com

Kobe Bryant: Reflections on Fatherhood, Passion, and Immortality | The Exchange | A Blog by Ed Stetzer – ChristianityToday.com

Posted on by

Some moments embed themselves in your memory. Most people can remember where they were during 9/11the dreadful day thousands of American lives were lost in several terrorist attacks.

Yesterday was one of those moments for me.

Besides my family, my life tends to orbit around three Bs: the Bible, books, and basketball. I love NBA basketballat times, much to my wifes chagrin. As our ministry team closed our worship services yesterday, one of our members delivered me the news: Kobe Bryant died in a helicopter accident.

My stomach dropped. I had more questions than answers.

As the tragic story unfolded, I learned that Bryants 13-year-old daughter, Gianna, and seven other people also lost their lives in the accident. I felt numb all day. I didnt know what to feel.

When the numbness subsided, one thought plagued my mind. What is it about the tragic, untimely death of iconic men and women that causes a collective lament from people from various religious, ethnic, and social backgrounds?

Three things about Kobes life and legacy ring true. And I think they are informativeespecially for believers.

The Changing Narrative on Black Fatherhood

As a father, my heart hurt that Bryant could no longer continue to nourish and develop his growing relationship with his daughter.

While I did not care for Kobe Bryant as a player, I admired him in his retirement as a father. His active involvement in his daughters lives and his presence after missing special moments because of a rigorous NBA schedule was refreshing.

Our country is rife with mischaracterizations about black fatherhood. Kobe had joined the litany of NBA Black father ambassadors to help shape and change the false narrative of fatherlessness in Black and Brown communities.

We lost the opportunity for Bryants story as a father to play out. But we are also reminded of ordinary, everyday, working Black fathers who put the same effort and love into their childrens lives.

It is no secret that we live in racialized times. Dont get trapped in talking point tales that undermine image-bearing men and women. As believers, let us make sure we continue to believe the best about others and not perpetuate stereotypical views that alienate brothers and sisters in the faith.

The Importance of Passion and Drive

As a Christian, I prayed earnestly that those involved had heard and believed the gospel and that my passion for gospel proclamation would never wane.

Bryant was one of the hardest working players in his sport. And it paid off for him. His passion for the game of basketball led him to study it more than any other player in modern history. He didnt want others to remember him as a disinterested member of the NBA, but as an ambassador.

He also served as an ambassador for the womens gamehelping the basketball community acknowledge and honor the work women put in on and off the court. Down to his last game, that passion never wanedhe scored 60 points in his final game.

What about our gospel passion and drive? Temporal trophies and legacy drove Bryants passion. Gospel work tells another story. Gospel work impacts eternal destinies.

Even for veteran Christians, its easy for the passion and drive to subside. It is easy to plod along in life without having shared our message of hope with those around us. My prayer is that Bryants misguided passion for NBA crowns leads us all to a renewed passion for our eternal crown (1 Cor. 9:25).

The Myth of Immortality

As a 41-year-oldthe same age as BryantI was reminded of the words of the writer of the Psalmist: Teach us to number our days, that we may gain a heart of wisdom (Ps. 90:12).

In many ways, Bryant appeared immortal. He won five NBA championships and multiple NBA MVP awards. Bryant is going to be an inductee in the basketball Hall of Fame this fall. A mere two years into a new entertainment venture, he won an Oscar Award.

The news of his death shocked the conscience because he oozed invincibility. Many of us scrolled and refreshed our social media timelines yesterday because we found it hard to believe the news. But we may have missed an important moment.

As we peered through the windows of social media, many of us neglected to turn our gaze to the mirror of introspection.

We believe in our immortality, too. Or at least we live that way. We dont maximize the moments with our children the way we should. We procrastinate and put things off because theres always tomorrow.

Why? Because thinking of our mortality makes us reshape our priorities. And reshaping our priorities brings us face-to-face with the reality that we are more selfish than wed like to admit.

National tragedies lead to national conversations. But the most important conversation we all need to have in light of yesterdays news is an internal one.

Have you looked in the mirror of your soul lately? If not, step away from the window for a moment, let the truth of your mortality wash over you, and allow Gods grace to numberand shapethe rest of your days.

John C. Richards, Jr. is a thought-leader, gifted teacher, and gifted writer/speaker. He currently serves as the Pastor of Assimilation at Saint Mark Baptist Church in Little Rock, Arkansas. He is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Christian Leadership from Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary and previously served as Managing Director of the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College.

Read the original post:

Kobe Bryant: Reflections on Fatherhood, Passion, and Immortality | The Exchange | A Blog by Ed Stetzer - ChristianityToday.com

How Kobe Bryant Discovered the Path Towards Immortality – Grit Daily

Posted on by

I didnt know Kobe. But I watched him playAnd I loved him.

A schoolteacher once called a radio talk show to complain that Kobe Bryant made 40 times as much as she did, to which the host replied, Yeah, but nobody pays to watch you teach.

Brutal, yes, but also true.

And a lot of people, myself included, paid a lot to see Bryant play.

Little did I know that the one and only time I saw him in person, would be the last. I saw him lifting weights at the Golds Gym mother ship in Venice, California, when he still had that geeky beard and wasnt yet Celebrity Kobe.

Related: The House That Mamba Built: Kobe Bryant, More Than An Athlete

I didnt say a word to him, because in LA, the only way to treat famous people is to pretend you dont see them. Before he became a petulant celebrity, he embodied creativity, spontaneity, and freedom with his play above and below the rim.

Sometimes his coach would chastise him for making a particular play, and Bryant would respond, sincerely, that hed had no idea of what he was going to do before he did it.

And now hes gone.

Poof.

In a foggy Malibu mountain breakdown.

And its one of those things that you struggle to believe is true.

The standard response is that his passing, at 41, shouldnt matter so much to the rest of us.

He didnt teach school, after all.

He was an athlete.

As if being an athlete were something that somehow didnt matter.

He brought excitement and pride to tens of millions, including a whole lot of teachers.

And now hes gone.

So why should it matter so much to those who never met him?

To those over whom he flew in his private helicopter from his Newport Beach home to his workplace in Los Angeles, the Staples Center, to those who never saw him play in person?

Why is that tens of millions of people will never forget the moment they looked at their phones and saw the headline that he was gone?

For the answer, I would turn to one of the most important books I ever read, The Denial Of Death by Ernest Becker, published in 1973 and awarded the Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction the following year.

Becker wanted to understand the fascination people have with celebrities, and he wanted to understand why we tore down celebrities not long after we worshipped them.

He wrote that human beings are half god-like, because of our ability to create, and half-mortal, and that we were reminded of our limited time on earth every time we went to the bathroom.

He called humans gods who s.

Celebrities have more power than the average person, he wrote.

They are richer, prettier, more talented, more famous, morewell, more everything than the rest of us.

So we attach ourselves to them, as fans (a word we forget is short for fanatics), as patrons, moviegoers, voters, followers, or worshippers.

By so doing we believe, we can achieve our greatest goal:immortality.

And then when we discover that these celebrities are human, like us, with feet of clay to go along with their feats of strength, we become angry, and we turn on them.

Kobe Bryant lived long enough into the social media era to be vilified by those who didnt like his egotism, his immaturity (good luck to anyone world-famous at 17), the way he essentially broke up the Lakers by factionalizing the locker room and getting Shaq traded, the dismissal of his sexual assault trial in Eagle, Colorado, the tough guy tattoos he got in his silly quest for street cred, or the goopy, mawkish, public apology to his wife afterward (replete with a $3 million diamond ring apology gift, according to reports).

I actually saw Kobes first Lakers game after the case was dismissed, a preseason affair in Orange County, California.

Thousands of fans, including children, were wearing Bryant jerseys, and whooping and hollering for him, indicating that a whole lot of people werent bothered in the least by anything he had allegedly done in the hotel room back in Colorado.

Bryant upended Beckers theory, because, despite all the negatives, he never lost the admiration of millions who may not have achieved immortality through him but never turned on him for his failing to provide it.

And now Kobe has done the one thing an individual can do to insure immortality for himself and his admirers:dying young, doing an utterly Kobe-like thing, helicoptering his daughter, Gianna Maria-Onore Bryant to her basketball practice.

Related: Like Father, Like Daughter: Gianna Bryant Was a Basketball Star on the Rise

I will tell you my truth.

I loved Kobe Bryant, the early, exuberant, unguarded Kobe, who knew he was going above the rim but had no earthly idea of what grandeur he would create once he got there.

And now he will spend eternity in the same place: above the fray; above the criticism; above the rim.

No, I didnt know Kobe.

But I watched him play.

And to you reader, I loved him.

Go here to read the rest:

How Kobe Bryant Discovered the Path Towards Immortality - Grit Daily

GELFAND: on Tom Brady and Immortality – Zone Coverage

Posted on by

No quarterback in the NFL playoffs this year looked as lifeless and disconsolate as Tom Brady. If you somehow construe Brady as a sympathetic character, you might feel relieved that the loss in the Wild Card round shielded him from future embarrassment. For the record, the 20-13 defeat yielded Brady 20 completions in 37 attempts for 209 yards, zero touchdowns, one interception and 5.6 yards per attempt.

Of course, Brady is hardly a sympathetic character. Indeed, hes more than just one of the most dominant quarterbacks of all time. He is, in fact, every guys fantasy. Especially if the guy is an adolescent. Hes tall, good looking, a winner, has so much money that he could run for President, and, yeah, theres that super-model thing.

So when Brady says he plans to be an NFL hero for years to come actually, he uses the word quarterback, but thats just a code word we shouldnt be surprised. Hell be 43 in August, which makes him the Methuselah of pro quarterbacks. But age, after all, is just a number.

Remember, facts no longer matter, so even though age is just a number is a palpable lie, its OK to believe it. Plus its Brady.

You might also ask: can a man have more than it all? Is Brady kidding us or himself? What exactly are we looking at? Is it arrogance? Hubris? Self-delusion? Greed?

Maybe all of the above. But one thing seems evident: Brady is looking for something far more than a seventh Super Bowl ring. If I had to guess, Id say that his aging body is chasing the tail of immortality.

You can hardly blame him. In fact, Brady and his mentor, Bill Belichick, deserve nothing less than our undying adulation. Look in any record book and there they are. And yeteven if this past season was just an anomaly, there is no denying the fact that they are the past. The future belongs to the likes of Lamar Jackson, who just turned 23; and Jimmy Garoppolo, who is 28 but had to wait until he found life after Brady before he could prove that he, too, is Super Bowl ready. Then there is Patrick Mahomes, who, at 23, doesnt even have to get better in order to become the greatest quarterback of all time.

The celebrated author, contrarian, wit and atheist Christopher Hitchens, as he was dying of cancer, wrote a book called Mortality. In which he wrote: As with the normal life, one finds that every passing day represents more and more relentlessly subtracted from less and less.

Brady probably doesnt see his career that way. But I cant help but wonder if sometimes he feels like he is. Clearly, he cant imagine life without football. Hes already shopping around for his next team. Hell be an unrestricted free agent for the first time in his career, but from where I sit, his view isnt so expansive any more.

Granted, he didnt have much to throw to this year, but that didnt seem to matter nearly as much in the first half of the season. It was the second half that betrayed an anxious, middle-aged man. Damn, hes got a great head of hair, but its whats under it that matters. In the nine games before the bye, the Patriots averaged 30 points; afterward, and including the Tennessee disaster, the Patriots averaged just over 20 points.

Brady has been the Patriots starting quarterback for 19 seasons but finally you can see the fear in his eyes. He spent much of the year flinging the football into the ground at the mere hint of malicious contact. Nobody in their right mind could blame him for a bunker mentality, yet it was a surprise to note that even with another championship looming on the horizon, he was no longer willing to leave the pocket and risk bodily harm in exchange for a first down.

The NFL is no country for old men. In fact, for all the leagues bluster, there were even more concussions in 2019 than there were the year before. Players have figured out that the penalties for using their helmets to concuss an opponent are relatively mild. Theres even one clown T.J. Watt, the Pittsburgh defensive end who goes around punching anyone holding the ball under the guise that hes trying to cause fumbles. Hell break ribs and mangle hands and perhaps even cause permanent brain damage before his career is over, but the league doesnt seem motivated to put a stop to it. That has to be harbinger of a dangerous future for quarterbacks in their mid-40s.

Bradys determination to play forever reminds me of a lot of losing gamblers Ive known. When things go bad, they never back off; they just double down. Pretty soon theyre chasing their money and wishing theyd quit at the top of their game.

Not that Brady is going to go broke. It seems that he has a new hustle these days: The TB12 Method. Which happens to be the name of the book he sort of wrote which celebrates his recipe for eternal muscles, if not eternal life.

Years ago, Brady fell in with a body coach, Alex Guerrero, who helped Brady develop pliable muscles that are damned near impervious to injury. Not everyone swears by this amazing new method, or, for that matter, Guerrero himself.

Muscle pliability, it seems, isnt actually a thing.

The New York Times review of the book noted as much.

Mr. Brady and Mr. Guerrero have not conducted or published clinical trials of muscle pliability, the reviewer stated. Neither has anyone else. On the huge PubMed online database of published science, I found only one experiment that contains the words pliability and muscles, and it concerned the efficacy of different embalming techniques.

I have to admit that when I perused Bradys website, I wasnt entirely convinced. On the other hand, Im an enfeebled old guy who got a stiff neck just from writing this column. In fact, as I paged through the catalog of Bradys amazing products, the trademarked TV12 Vibrating Pliability Sphere start to look like the cure to at least two or three of my many ailments. Its just that it kind of looks like a tire that wobbles, and Ive got one of those on my 20-year-old Camry.

Read the rest here:

GELFAND: on Tom Brady and Immortality - Zone Coverage

Fame, immortality and a paw: The Tiger Trail – The Auburn Plainsman

Posted on by

The Tiger Trail of Auburn is Auburns walk of fame, a stretch of sidewalk that owes its existence to the walk of fame 40 years older in Hollywood, California. The names on plaques along the Tiger Trail are both familiar and lesser known, and refer to men and women from close and far. Like Hollywood has their superstars on the silver screen, Auburn has their own on the field, court, pitch, pool and gym.

The Tiger Trail began over two decades ago as a joint venture between the Auburn Chamber of Commerce, Auburn University Athletics and the City of Auburn. The project was started in 1995 as a way to honor Auburn athletes.

It was primarily made up of a group of men who were retired at the time, said Mayor Ron Anders, who has been involved with the program for several years in different capacities. The primary person was Ken Brown.

Brown was, at that time, retired after a career with Alabama Power and serving on the Auburn City Council, Anders said.

It was really his brainchild to create a kind of Hollywood Walk of Fame in downtown Auburn, Anders said.

Browns brainchild soon became reality as the first granite plaques were placed in the concrete in 1995. The inaugural class was large compared to a typical induction class now; 13 former athletes, coaches and administrators were honored, among them football coach Ralph Shug Jordan, football and baseball star Bo Jackson and football star Pat Sullivan.

Typically, induction classes consist of roughly five to six members, Anders said, depending on the Chamber of Commerces budget for the project for that year costs of the plaque as well as the induction ceremony must be taken into consideration for each inductee.

So keeping in mind the number of inductees that the budget allows for each year, a process of deciding who will be one of the distinguished few for that years induction class begins. That responsibility is left in the hands of a small group of people the Tiger Trail selection committee.

The group is made up of fewer than 10 individuals from both the private and public sector who serve for a term.

Exactly who is on the selection committee, however, is kept secret. The Auburn Chamber of Commerce doesnt give out the names of the committee members, said Auburn Chamber of Commerce Vice President of Communications and Marketing Jennifer Fincher.

The groups privacy is protected to prevent people from lobbying members of the selection committee to induct a certain member of Auburn athletics, Anders said.

Weve never wanted the Tiger Trail to be a political process, Anders said. We wanted it to be everything but a political process.

In the past, Anders has served as a member of the selection committee, but is not sure what his level of involvement will be in the future. However, the mayor of Auburn is always involved in the installation ceremony at the least, Anders said.

Bill Ham, who served as mayor until Anders was elected in 2018, helped with the ceremony, as did Mayor Jan Dempsey, Hams predecessor.

The committee typically only has two or three meetings per year, at which committee members go through a process of nominating who they feel is representative of Auburns history. Committee members then debate and vote according to their own research, due diligence and experiences, Anders said.

The candidates who receive the most are then honored in that years induction class. A ceremony is held and the selected candidates name and accomplishments are immortalized in the sidewalks along College Street and Magnolia Avenue.

While the trail was intended to serve as a unique way to honor Auburn athletes, coaches and administrators, it has also benefited the community in other ways.

This trail is another reason for people to come to downtown Auburn to shop and be a part of our community either as a visitor, alumni or resident, Anders said. It was certainly an economic development, community development mindset behind doing this.

Over the years, its become clear that maintenance is required to keep the plaques in good shape.

We have not had a Tiger Trail since Ive become the mayor, Anders said. What weve done is weve had a number of broken stars downtown because of all the construction, and weve got some of that construction behind us, so what weve tried to do is get some of those plaques replaced, so weve been focused on doing that. Its easier if we dont add six more to the list.

However, the tradition is expected to continue in the future.

Were certainly planning to continue on with the Tiger Trail here in 2020, Anders said.

The rest is here:

Fame, immortality and a paw: The Tiger Trail - The Auburn Plainsman

Kobe Survived his Darkest Hour on His Way to Immortality – MyNewsLA.com

Posted on by

Share this article:

Kobe Bryant will be remembered above all as a stellar athlete and highly devoted family man. Thats because he survived what was clearly his darkest hour an allegation by a 19-year-old hotel clerk in Colorado that he raped her.

The alleged incident occurred June 30, 2003, in a hotel room at the Lodge & Spa at Cordillera in the Rocky Mountains town of Edwards. The woman who made the allegation was working as the front-desk clerk and accompanied Bryant on a tour of the property. She later went to his hotel room, where she said he raped her.

Every time I said `no, he tightened his hold around me, she told police, according to court documents obtained by The Daily Beast.

Afterward, she told police that Bryant warned her that the encounter is just between the two, the two of us, nobody is gonna know about this, youre not going to tell anybody.

The 24-year-old Bryant was charged with one count of felony assault in a case that took 14 months to be resolved. In the end, the accuser decided not to testify and prosecutors dropped the case Sept. 1, 2004. A civil suit brought by the accuser in August 2004 was settled out of court in March 2005.

A day after the alleged rape, Bryant underwent knee surgery in nearby Vail. His accuser reported the incident to the Eagle County Sheriffs Department, and investigators searched his hotel room for evidence.

Bryants attorneys said DNA evidence suggested she had sex with someone else in the hours after the alleged rape and before a medical the exam was conducted, although prosecutors denied it. Bryant was charged with one count of felony sexual assault July 18th. With his wife, Vanessa, at his side, Bryant held a news conference at Staples Center, admitting that he committed adultery but denying he had assaulted the 19-year-old.

I sit here in front of you guys furious at myself, disgusted at myself for making a mistake of adultery, he conceded.

After nearly a year of discovery and pretrial hearings, Bryant entered a plea of not guilty on May 11th, 2004. As the case moved toward a trial, the accusers determination to pursue a criminal trial weakened once she added libel attorney Lin Wood to her team. He believed a criminal trial would not end well for her.

Later, there was another significant concession from Bryant.

Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did, he said in a statement. After months of reviewing discovery, listening to her attorney, and even her testimony in person, I now understand how she feels that she did not consent to this encounter.

For a time, he lost endorsement campaigns, including with Nike, which he resumed serving as pitchman in July 2005.

The rape allegation episode would resurge once again, in 2018, when 17,000 people signed a petition demanding he be stripped of his Academy Award nomination for his animated short, Dear Basketball.

Bryant won the Oscar anyway but was dropped from an Animation jury over the accusations.

Kobe Survived his Darkest Hour on His Way to Immortality was last modified: January 27th, 2020 by Contributing Editor

>> Want to read more stories like this? Get our Free Daily Newsletters Here!

See the rest here:

Kobe Survived his Darkest Hour on His Way to Immortality - MyNewsLA.com

Kobe Bryant lived without fear of death – SB Nation

Posted on by

When Kobe Bryant died, as with any iconic persons death, people said the tragedy should be a reminder of lifes fragility. That it should be a memento mori, a sign we could be gone at any second. A warning to push us to cherish the important things in life our family, friends, passions, and beauty of the world and not to waste energy on inconsequential things. The constant knowledge of how sudden life can end is a tool to energize us into living a better and more clear life.

This reminder is effective because it comes in flashes, often when public icons die. Its only in those flashes we can truly wrangle with death. We periodically look up at the sword of Damocles to remind us that its there, but we cant live while staring and thinking of it falling. Its not that we forget our mortality, but that keeping it present in our minds is an impossible task while living.

In the movie Troy, Brad Pitts Achilles says, The gods envy us. They envy us because were mortal, because any moment may be our last. Everything is more beautiful because were doomed. You will never be lovelier than you are now. We will never be here again.

The idea that the doomed state of life makes the beauty of it more profound is a beautiful statement, but if the gods envy us for our mortality, I think we also envy them for their immortality. If not for ourselves, then at least for the ones we love.

In The Iliad, it wasnt Achilles who knew the burden of his own mortality, but his mother Thetis, a goddess of the sea. She was immortal and he wasnt. She knew from a prophecy that when he chose to go to war, his life would be brief. She spends her time trying to please and soothe her son, making each moment as sweet as possible before his doom, but also trying, as she did when she first dipped him in the river Styx, to save him.

When he begged her to plead with Zeus on his behalf to cause misery to the Trojans after Agamemnon dishonored him, she accepted his request after saying:

My child, why did I rear you, cursed in my child-bearing? Would that it had been your lot to remain by your ships without tears and without grief, since your span of life is brief and endures no long time; but now you are doomed to a speedy death and are laden with sorrow above all men; therefore to an evil fate I bore you in our halls.

Thetis is anguished by Achilles mortality more than Achilles could ever be. Their moments together are sweet because she loves him, but she is also bitter from the knowledge that there wont be many more.

Of course Achilles had to know he would eventually die. He was human and a warrior, he had killed people. He had seen and caused death. But he is most human in that he is only aware of death in the abstract.

Unless it has a set time and place, death is impossible to grasp. It is both near and far. It could come at anytime, and we know that, but the potential suddenness and finality of it is against life, which is full of second chances and change. Random, sudden death is so antithetical to the way humans see their lives, with death as the closing of the book, that the thought I could die in the next minute is repulsive.

The potential of sudden death can be considered only for a brief moment, before being pushed away. Otherwise, the terror of the thought would be paralyzing. Achilles could go out and fight, pout and rejoice, love and live, cherish and waste moments, because he saw himself alive in that immediate moment and the next. He eventually does die, but when Odysseus praises him in the underworld, Achilles doesnt opine on the beauty of his doomed time in the world. He rebukes his friend:

Glorious Odysseus: dont try to reconcile me to my dying. Id rather serve as another mans labourer, as a poor peasant without land, and be alive on Earth, than be lord of all the lifeless dead.

We wake up everyday and make plans for the future, and not just for what is immediate and urgent plans that are often inconsequential, as if our lives are not doomed. We continuously project ourselves into the future, as Achilles must have. Helene Cixious writes in Stigmata that we feign immortality, and we have to:

Outside, I know, but fundamentally I dont believe, everything we think we dont think, thats because were alive, we inhabit the country of the living; that which is beyond, outsidewe dont have the heart to believe. We cant believe in death in advance, it remains inadmissible. Our immortality is: not-believing-in-death.

This disbelief makes itself apparent when someone who we care about does suddenly die. We think there must be a mistake, that its a hoax. Its all a bad dream, and when we wake up, things will return to what they should be. A person we love couldnt possibly be gone, it must be another. We keep hoping that by denying the event, we can make it unreal. It takes a long time for reality to settle in.

When I first read the news of Bryants death, I looked at the headlines reading Kobe Bryant has died in a helicopter crash and thought that it was an absurd statement. The more I read it, the more nonsensical it seemed. It was a thing that was possible, but didnt feel tangible.

When we accept the truth, we go on to celebrate everything our loved one did in their short time. And there is an intensity to their time that get colored in postmortem because of how short it was, but I think thats how we have to reconcile with death, as Odysseus tried to do. Beauty is not a quality that potential disaster adds to life; its what were left with when the physical presence of the person who we miss is gone. If Bryant had lived to be 100 and continued to try to do well, his life would have been even more beautiful. If he had been immortal, even more so. At least for us. The way it would have been for Thetis with her son.

Bryants stature added another layer of disbelief to his death. Bryant is someone who is seen as an icon to millions. Though we can never be immortal, we do create gods all the time. We turn people like Bryant into superheroes, into beings who are transcendent of humanity. Great athletes like him are rarely ever just athletes, they become symbols, ideas, myths. Theyre as immortal as we could possibly be. For these people, a sudden death seems beneath them. Bryant, who was larger than life, dying from a negligible accident. It is incomprehensible. If he, of all people, is vulnerable to that possibility, then the rest of us are even more so.

Yet Bryants death doesnt really bring the concept of sudden death any closer. It is still only possibly, but not entirely, real. Bryant died in a helicopter crash. Not many of us will ever find ourselves in that situation. We may walk outside, get in cars, cross the street during traffic, and toy with our mortality in more familiar ways than getting into a helicopter, but while we know the potential of sudden death, its hardly ever in the forefront of our minds.

Willful ignorance of fatal danger is the only way we can go through each day and imagine ourselves in the next one. And when we do lose people we care about suddenly, the celebration of their lives is followed immediately by the greater grief of their extinguished presence. Celebration is only a small comfort. What we are often left with is a deep helplessness and sadness.

What then? What can save us from this omnipresent and terrifying possibility of death? Im not sure there is an answer, but I like the idea of feigning immortality. Not living with the constant knowledge that any moment could be our last, but that death, until it comes, doesnt matter at all it has nothing to do with life.

I think of how Bryant trained and played, how he wasnt afraid of the big moments or failure. And how that attitude came from a defiance of finality rather than an acceptance of it.

My colleague, Tom Ziller, wrote that Bryant played as if there was no tomorrow, but I think he has it backwards. Bryant behaved as if there were infinite tomorrows. While he played basketball, he did so obsessively, but then he moved on to other pursuits, and imagined himself doing even more in the future. When asked why he wasnt afraid of taking the last shot, he said: Theres an infinite groove. Whether you make the shot or miss it is inconsequential.

Its not the potential of an end that creates beauty or urgency, its the possibility of a future. Life is all about tomorrows, about growth, continuance, and change, about dreams. Death is repulsive because it is not life. It can never get closer than its abstract form, and it shouldnt. It is true we are powerless before it, but until the event of death, it is also powerless before us.

Read more:

Kobe Bryant lived without fear of death - SB Nation

Remembering Rob Rensenbrink: the overlooked Dutch master who came within inches of immortality – These Football Times

Posted on by

Originally featured in the Netherlands magazine, if you like this youll love our work in print. Thick matte card, stunning photos, original art and the best writing around. Support our independent journalism.

.

From the outside looking in, its a strange concept, but just how close the Netherlands came to winning the 1978 World Cup hasnt left too noticeable an imprint on the national psyche, or at least certainly not in the same way as the failure to prevail in 1974 has.

Rob Rensenbrink came to within the width of an Estadio Monumental goalpost from pure footballing immortality. An inch further to the right and the Oranje would have become the sixth different winner of the World Cup, rather than Argentina. Rensenbrink would have joined a special collection of players to have scored a World Cup-winning goal, and he would have finished the tournament as its leading scorer.

By the finest of margins, Rensenbrink was deflected away from immortality, as he instead arguably so drifted into a world of under-appreciation in his home nation. Apart from in the Low Countries of Belgium and the Netherlands, and among football hipsters the world over, Rensenbrink is widely forgotten.

He is a peculiarity. Strikingly gifted with skill to burn, he was blessed with a wonderful left foot and bewitching close-control which saw him drift past defenders as if they werent there, an ability that sprang from a dribbling style which gave him the rare propensity to be able to take a ball right into the face of opposing defenders before changing direction at the last second. Unpredictable, dangerous and, at his peak, impossible to play against, he should be far from forgotten.

Born in Oostzaan, almost nine miles to the north of Amsterdam, Rensenbrink slipped through the prolific Ajax net, instead finding his way into football with city rivals DWS. Essentially on an amateur footing despite gracing the top flight, and enjoying occasional forays into the Inter-Cities Fairs Cup, DWS were never likely to contain Rensenbrinks talents for a prolonged period.

In the summer of 1969, at the age of 22, a year after making his international debut, it was the ideal time for Rensenbrink to move on from DWS. The inexorable rise of Ajax had gained pace, having just contested their first European Cup final, while their bitter rivals Feyenoord, who had won the Eredivisie title, were just a year away from going one better in the 1970 final against Celtic.

Read | Willy Dullens: the Dutch talent many thought couldve been better than Cruyff

While Ajax had been interested observers in Rensenbrinks development at DWS, they were a club blessed with an abundance of left-sided attacking options. Favouring a position on the left-hand side of the forward line, yet equally adept as an out-and-out left winger, Rensenbrink was under no illusions that Ajax had the continually blossoming Johan Cruyff and the legendary Piet Keizer in the two positions he could occupy.

Feyenoord also monitored his progression and there were tentative inquiries. As reigning champions, however, they elected to rest on their laurels to an extent. The brilliant but slowly ageing Coen Moulijn, a player who drew comparisons to Stanley Matthews, was deputised at times by the wonderful Wim van Hanegem. Again, Rensenbrink would have had his work cut out to displace some formidable figures from the Feyenoord line-up. Yet, in retrospect, Rensenbrink would have been the perfect long-term successor to Moulijn.

In the summer of 1969, an entirely different path was taken by Rensenbrink and he would never again kick a ball in competitive anger within club football in his homeland.

Frans de Munck, a former international goalkeeper for the Netherlands, had been appointed as the new coach of Club Brugge that summer, and spotting an opportunity to step in where both Ajax and Feyenoord wouldnt, he swooped for the services of Rensenbrink.

At the Stade Albert-Dyserynck, Rensenbrink took the change of environment in his skilful stride. The Brugge that Rensenbrink joined was essentially sitting upon the eve of greatness. Their solitary league title had been won almost half a century earlier, but from the mid-1960s they had risen to become an increasing thorn in the sides of both Anderlecht and Standard Lige.

Scoring goals on a regular basis during his debut season in Belgium, Rensenbrinks new club finished runners-up to Standard in the league and swept to domestic cup glory. A near miss on the title followed in 1970/71, combining with a run to the quarter-finals of the Cup Winners Cup.

The summer of 1971 proved pivotal for Rensenbrink. Board member Constant Vanden Stock departed the club, only to resurface at Anderlecht. Utilising their friendship, Vanden Stock coaxed Rensenbrink to Brussels, from where he would go head to head with his former club for most of the domestic honours on offer throughout the remainder of the decade, as Standard fell away.

Read | Johnny Rep: the natural Total Footballer who weaved his way into legend

Brought in by Georg Keler the man who had given Rensenbrink his international debut as part of a number of sweeping changes at the club, Anderlecht narrowly edged out Brugge in a tense battle for the title, and defeated Standard in the cup final to clinch the domestic double.Alongside his compatriot Jan Mulder and the Anderlecht legend Paul Van Himst, it was the added attacking potency this triumvirate provided to the team that enabled Rensenbrink to help break the hearts of all those involved with his former club, as his new employers took the title on goal difference.

It was a dream start to life with his new club. However, the following season proved a more difficult one, as Mulder jumped at the opportunity of a summer move to Ajax, while Van Himst struggled for form. It meant that Anderlecht relied on Rensenbrinks talents far more than they had during the previous campaign. This was offset by the gradual emergence of another precocious talent in the shape of Franois Van der Elst.

An inconsistent start to the defence of their title and an early exit from the European Cup meant that Keler departed the club before the year was out. Brugge swept to the title, and while collective form was hard to attain for Anderlecht, Rensenbrink was still scaling individual heights. Despite their problems in the league, the cup was retained as once again Standard were beaten in the final.

Out of sight and out of mind, Rensenbrink was on the outside looking in when it came to the national team, despite his fine performances for Anderlecht. He hadnt represented the Netherlands since departing DWS. In his absence, and despite the elevated club performances in European competition of both Ajax and Feyenoord, the Netherlands had failed to qualify for the latter stages of Euro 72.

Rensenbrink continued to apply himself to the Anderlecht cause. Under his new coach, Urbain Braems, playing alongside the prolific Hungarian striker Attila Ladinszky, and with the added support of the increasingly effective Van der Elst and the slowly ageing yet ever-dangerous Van Himst, Anderlecht reclaimed the title.

It was during the 1973/74 title-winning campaign that Rensenbrink made his return to the national side, initially recalled by Frantiek Fadrhonc, the man who led the Netherlands to World Cup qualification, before being replaced for the finals by Rinus Michels.

Read | Johan Neeskens: more than just the other Johan

Rensenbrink was viewed as the inside man, given that they were sharing a group with Belgium. When the two nations met in November 1973 in the decisive game at the Olympic Stadium in Amsterdam, the Netherlands knew a draw would be enough for them to reach the finals in West Germany. Intriguingly, Rensenbrink was up against four of his Anderlecht teammates on a dramatic night when a combination of fine goalkeeping and profligacy in the penalty area kept the Belgian goal-line unbreached.

Controversy and drama abounded when, in the last-minute, Rensenbrinks Anderlecht teammate, Jan Verheyen, stroked home what appeared to be a perfectly good winning goal. As the Netherlands defence stepped forward while defending a free-kick, Verheyen had been gifted the freedom of the penalty area. Played onside by at least three defenders, his legitimate goal was erroneously disallowed. By the finest of margins, the Total Football of 1974 might never have been given the opportunity to bloom.

In West Germany, Rensenbrink, for so long on the periphery of the national side, now took on a vital role. Michels opted to start him in all but one game, fielding him ahead of Piet Keizer. Rensenbrink, not involved in the Ajax-Feyenoord-PSV power struggle, was blessed with a remit of freedom that not everyone within the squad could match.

Some fine support performances, inclusive of a vital goal against East Germany during the second-round group stage, helped edge Michels and Cruyff towards the World Cup final. When Rensenbrink was on the receiving end of some painful challenges during the de facto semi-final against Brazil, a game marked by the breathtaking football ofOranje, and the brutality of Brazils approach, he was forced to hobble away from Dortmund with huge doubts over his fitness for the final.

Despite passing a fitness test on the morning of the final, in the heat of battle within the Olympiastadion in Munich, Rensenbrink was noticeably off the pace. Had the Netherlands not yielded the early lead they took, then maybe he would have been given further time in the second half. Trailing 2-1, however, Michels could afford no passengers and Rensenbrink was replaced by Ren van de Kerkhof. Had he been fully fit, it might have made the difference between success and failure.

Rensenbrinks importance to the national team intensified over the next few years, helping them to the finals of Euro 76, where they were denied the opportunity to face West Germany in a rematch of the World Cup final by the eventual champions Czechoslovakia.

Read | When Ajax didnt want Johan Cruyff he left for Feyenoord and won the double

By the time Johan Cruyff walked away from the international game in the autumn of 1977, Rensenbrink had inherited the role of chief creator in the side that Ernst Happel took to Argentina. Happel, coach at Feyenoord when they passed up the chance of signing Rensenbrink, deployed him on the left of a three-man forward line, in a loose adaptation of the formation his Feyenoord had won the European Cup with.

With Johnny Rep at the tip, Van de Kerkhof on the right, Rensenbrink to the left, and backed up in midfield by Johan Neeskens and Rensenbrinks Anderlecht teammate Arie Haan, they were a side which lacked the conductor supreme in Cruyff, but instead produced a more balanced and direct variant of play that still embraced sublime vision and skill.

During the span of time between the World Cups of 1974 and 78, Rensenbrink had cultivated a love affair with the Cup Winners Cup at Anderlecht. Molenbeeks shock title win of 1974/75 was followed by a hat-trick of successes for Brugge. While Anderlecht conspired against themselves domestically, in Europe they excelled. The club reached the Cup Winners Cup final in three successive seasons, defeating West Ham in 1976, losing to Hamburg in 1977 and dismantling Austria Vienna a year later. It was during this period that Rensenbrink attracted unfair criticism, that he would raise his game for the big occasions but become unreliable against the lesser teams.

Despite the title eluding them, Rensenbrink, alongside Haan and Van der Elst, made Anderlecht one of the most dangerous and feared sides in Europe. He scored twice in both the 1976 and 1978 finals, performances which enhanced his reputation and in turn raised expectancy levels.

In Argentina, he was in imperious form. A hat-trick against Iran was followed by further goals against Scotland and Austria. Combined with the drive and explosive finishing of Rep and Haan, the Netherlands rolled to the final.Rensenbrink came to within the width of the goalpost at El Monumental from pure footballing immortality.

At the age of 31, it proved to be a watermark moment. Within a year he had played his last game for the Netherlands, while his Anderlecht career ended in 1980 with what was essentially a trailing off, ending his playing days with short spells in the NASL and in France with Toulouse.

Rensenbrink, a man who never went into coaching, remains locked within that vivid moment when he hit the post with only seconds to go in the 1978 World Cup final. He remains a man under-appreciated by many in his homeland, and one often forgotten by football generally. Regardless of that, he will always be a man who hypnotically owned the ball, one who so very nearly inherited the world.

By Steven Scragg @Scraggy_74

Read More:

Link:

Remembering Rob Rensenbrink: the overlooked Dutch master who came within inches of immortality - These Football Times

Is this Alan Fanecas year to be named to the Pro Football Hall of Fame? – Steel City Underground

Posted on by

On the night before the Super Bowl, the 2020 Pro Football Hall of Fame class will be announced. After falling short in previous seasons, will former Pittsburgh Steelers guard Alan Faneca make the cut, and be enshrined to NFL immortality?

Faneca is most certainly deserving of a bust in Canton, as are all of the finalists on the list. In fact, it's those finalists that voters must be convinced of which Faneca ismore deserving.

Headlining this year's list are the following:

As with any list of football greats, its hard to discredit anyone from making this list. However, a minimum of four players must be selected, with a maximum of eight being picked to wear the gold jacket in August.

Embed from Getty Images

Among those 15 names are 2 linemen other than Faneca: Jaguars tackle Tony Boselli and Seahawks/Vikings guard Steve Hutchinson. I felt that last year may have been Faneca's year and that he was more deserving than former Jets guard Kevin Mawae, but if there's any year for Faneca to get the nod, it's 2020. With the Centennial class inducting former Steelers coach Bill Cowher and former Steelers safety Donnie Shell, the modern-era list is headlined by first-time eligible former Steelers safety Troy Polamalu.

That's a lot of Black and Gold, but it makes perfect sense to center the ceremony, as well as the accompanying Hall of Fame Game, around a Pittsburgh fan base within a short drive from the Hall's location in Canton, Ohio,

While all of the above players are well deserving of being Hall of Fame finalists, it's Faneca who stands head and shoulders above his offensive line peers. His 9 Pro-Bowl selections are the most of this group. His 8 All-Pro selections (7 first-team) are 1 less than Mawae (in both categories). He has a Super Bowl ring (the others never won one) and was named not once, but twice, NFL Alumni Offensive Lineman of the Year (2004, 2008).

In addition, Faneca was also named to the NFL 2000s All-Decade Team, and the Steelers 75th Anniversary Team.

During his first 10 years in the league he played with the Steelers, before rounding out his final three years with the Jets (2008, 2009) and Cardinals (2010). While in Pittsburgh, Faneca paved the way for Hall of Fame running back Jerome Bettis, Willie Parker (who has a Super Bowl record-holding longest run) as well as long forgotten names such as AmosZereoue andNajeh Davenport.

Considering his achievements, theonly thing that could hold him out another year is if no lineman is selected at all... which could certainly happen: no linemen were inducted in 2017. Packers great Jerry Kramer was inducted as a senior member in 2018, meaning no modern-era offensive lineman has been inducted in two years.

Furthermore,Redskins great Joe Jacoby failed to make the finalists list again this year (as well as in 2019) after getting close previously. (Jacoby is widely considered the greatest Redskins player who is not currently inducted into the Hall of Fame.)That's a shame, as the honor is long overdue for all of the players on this list.

Mawae was great for the Jets, and finally got his nod, but Fancea, Boselli, and Hutchinson continue to wait.

Boselli was the face of a new franchise with then expansion team Jacksonville. Hutchinson was great not only with one team, but two. And Faneca's best days were obviously with Pittsburgh but he also had Pro Bowl caliber years with the Jets.

Embed from Getty Images

Will a lineman be chosen this year? And if so, will it be Alan Faneca?

I believe the committee has to finally draw the straw of one of these linemen, and for Faneca to continually be a finalist since becoming eligible for induction, his time is coming: and if Polamalu is selected, I have no reason to believe Faneca wouldn't join him in the 2020 class.

I know that offfensive linemen are never "sexy" picks: whether it's entering the league and getting chosen for the Hall of Fame, there are no gaudy stats to point to in order to support their success.That's a shame too, because Faneca had in fact been a dominant player during his career. He paved the way for Ben Roethlisberger's early start, and Jerome Bettis' classic end: a true benchmark of his greatness, aside from the various accolades he acquired throughout the years.

Seeing how long many greats wait out for their names to be added to the immortal halls of Canton, Ohio, we have come to expect Faneca to wait a little while longer. Offensive lineman do "make it" but usually it's a short list with only one getting selected with each class.

However, this season appears to be as good as any. With the Steel City flavor added already, Faneca's selection would be the icing on the cake. His accolades are rivaled by no other lineman in this class and the only reason he would have to wait longer is if, in my opinion, the committee passed on picking an offensive lineman altogether.

That doesn't seem likely, at least under the given circumstances. Therefore, 2020 should be the year we hear that Alan Faneca will be immortalized in the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

Link:

Is this Alan Fanecas year to be named to the Pro Football Hall of Fame? - Steel City Underground

Should I Pretend to Love My Stepchildren? – The New York Times

Posted on by

I married into my husbands family decades ago. We have one child together, whom I adore. The rest of the children are from his previous marriages. I get along superficially with all of them. I make conversation and act interested in what they have to say. I tell them I love them when they say it to me. Generally, they have treated me very well, and I think they actually do love me. But I do not have any real feelings for them. I have never wanted much contact with people. Having interactions with all of them over these years has been painful for me. I fantasize about severing contact with his family once my husband dies. Is my pretending to care about them unethical? Name Withheld

The Roman poet Martial wrote an epigram, absurdly simple and curiously haunting, in which he declared: I do not love you, Sabidius, nor can I say why./This much I can say: I do not love you.

Its not the most obvious candidate for immortality, but it persists because it speaks to the way that not loving someone, like loving someone, is seldom something you can explain. Sometimes affecting affection can, in time, make the affection real; sometimes, as youve discovered, going through the motions leaves the heart unmoved. But is the pretense itself wrong?

Its conventional to say, Very well, thank you, in response to How are you? on the phone, even when you have a cold. Thats not dishonest; its merely polite. Replying to family members who say they love you with I love you, too can be merely conventional in the same way. Isnt pretending to be fond of people you have to spend time with a better and more generous tack than being cold and distant? We know all too well the odious alibi invariably offered for some cruel remark: Im just being honest.

It sounds as if your real problem is that you arent naturally sociable, and so your involvement in family gatherings over the years has been more burden than pleasure. Given that youve pulled it off for decades, you evidently dont have an incapacitating social-anxiety disorder. And youre certainly not the only person who sometimes feels like running away from family gatherings and hiding out. Yet plainly its harder for you than for most: I was struck that you describe your interactions with the stepchildren not as tedious but as painful.

People will understand if you choose to spend more time on your own if you become a widow. But theres no point, at this stage, in telling everyone what your real feelings are in dropping truth bombs, to use the aptly military metaphor. Despite your lack of affection toward your stepchildren, you clearly have some measure of regard for their feelings, and youre right to. Another concern is that cutting yourself off from the world in widowhood (your adored child aside) can lead to depression. Your adjustment to life without your husband will probably go better if you dont lose touch entirely with family and friends. Even introverts, as a rule, benefit from some human connection. So perhaps you can find a way to reduce interactions you find unpleasant without ending them altogether. Create a life that suits you, but in doing so, try to minimize the injury you do to others.

I work in the music department at a large university. Im frequently sent job postings to distribute to the students. Yesterday, I received a posting from the director of a nearby community music school looking for female piano teachers and female voice teachers. I responded to the director indicating that it is illegal to post a job advertisement that includes a reference to gender, as gender is not a bona fide occupational qualification when it comes to teaching music. The director responded that a majority of the job listings are gender-neutral but that, in this case, he is hiring to replace a female teacher whose roster has requested a female instructor as the replacement.

The director offered to reword the posting and asked if I could distribute a description that included no reference to gender. While I would like to provide work opportunities for the students in my program, I feel that I might be ethically implicated in the directors problematic hiring practices, because he communicated his intentions to me, even if the female only distinction doesnt make it into the distributed job listing. What is my best course of action? Rob G.

Whether something counts as a bona fide occupational qualification (B.F.O.Q.) is a complicated question best left to the lawyers. I have no doubt theyd side with you, though. Few gender-based exemptions to Title VII have been granted, and they typically involve concerns about bodily privacy in prisons, hospitals and the like. You and the music-school director ought to comply with the law.

But putting aside the legalities for a moment, it can be challenging ethically to decide whether a preference in hiring is objectionable. Here, the decision was guided by the preferences of an existing roster of students, not by the directors own tastes. Courts have taken a dim view of arguments for gender discrimination based on customer preference, and the same may well apply here. And yet this preference strikes me as less troublesome than a preference for, say, a white woman, which would be difficult to view as having nothing to do with hostility to nonwhite people. In general, partiality for those of certain identities is morally less troublesome than hostility to people of other identities and yes, this is a coherent distinction. It matters, too, if there is a general background of unfair discrimination against people of one identity in finding jobs in a certain field, in which case favoring people of that kind can be a contribution to meeting an injustice. (Perhaps because my primary- and secondary-school piano teachers were both women, Id be surprised to learn that women face particular prejudice in this particular field.)

Being a woman could be morally, if not legally, a B.F.O.Q. if the students came from a religious tradition that prohibited them from spending time with men outside their own families and would simply cease coming if a man showed up. What would be the point in hiring a teacher whose students will simply disappear? Here, there would be a trade-off between accommodating an irrational injustice toward a qualified man and allowing these women the benefit of instruction.

But such circumstances surely dont apply in this case, so youd be justified in saying that youll run the ad only if the director undertakes to consider candidates of any gender. If a woman gets the job, you may feel that the men didnt get a fair shot. But you cant be sure of it. Having made the point, you can hope that the director will recognize that you were right and that what he ought to have done was to make the case to the students that their preference was unreasonable.

And now that youve been sensitized to the issue, you might consider trying to keep track of whether those using your services consistently favor one gender or other in their appointments. As you recognize, whats important in the field of justice in employment is what people do, not just what they say.

Read more from the original source:

Should I Pretend to Love My Stepchildren? - The New York Times

What We Learned from the Altered Carbon Season 2 Trailer – TVOvermind

Posted on by

Apart from the date that the next season is coming out the trailer doesnt show much other than the fact that it is coming. With Anthony Mackie leading the way the second season is set to appear this coming February and will be featuring the popular actor as one of the main characters that will be driving the story. According to Scott Snowden of Space.com the second season was approved back in 2018 and has been in the process of being made and released for some time now. Its safe to assume that with each show and movie coming out these days that producers are wanting to be as exacting and as careful as they can since quite often the fans are the deciding factor as to whether a project will succeed or if it might be time to go back to the drawing board. So far with Altered Carbon the general interest of the public has been great enough to keep it around, and while the details of the second season arent being given out in a flood there is just enough to reason that it could possibly be aiming to outdo the first season or at least keep up the intensity that people came to enjoy.

The overall story of Altered Carbon has to do with the idea of achieving a type of immortality, as Dan Girolamo of Screenrant mentions, by downloading their consciousness into cortical stacks that are then able to be transferred to another body that will allow them to live again with the added benefit of experience and learning gained over a lifetime. Its pretty obvious that there are plenty of moral implications to go with this idea since the whole matter of immortality is something that people have been arguing over for some time since the human condition is one that is seen to be anything but conducive to such a concept and the idea of using a blank body, or a sleeve, is bound to be abhorrent to many. Thankfully due to the sleeves and stacks and how they appear to be interchangeable in such an easy way, its not too hard to figure out why Mackie would be cast in the role that Joel Kinnaman helped to make popular since the manner of switching out one sleeve for another was bound to become an easy out and way to explain to people just how this is possible and how it can be made to happen in a way thats easy for the audience to accept.

So far the plot appears to be taking off the end of the first season with Takeshi Kovacs in a new body but still on more or less the same path that fans from the first season can recall. In a big way Altered Carbon is the kind of show that takes a great number of elements from pop culture and slams them all together in a neat, compact showcase that becomes its own entity thanks to the alterations and reshaping of ideas thats becoming even harder as the years go by since so many ideas have come and gone and many of them are being recycled on a continual basis. David Griffin of IGN has his own opinion to share on the show. There are still plenty of stories out there yet to be told, but the trick at this point is to make them all unique in some way so that they can become a fan favorite in their own right or at least have a decent showing that will possibly be remembered and revisited at a later date. Keep in mind its taken two years for Altered Carbon to make a comeback to Netflix, a time in which the buzz has been evident but not quite as forceful as many other shows that have come along. In fact The Witcher was likely one show that managed to eclipse plenty of others when it came along since it even managed to overtake Disney+s The Mandalorian for a while as the two shows vied for dominance in a market where only the most popular is bound to stay the top spot for long. While Altered Carbon is indeed a popular show it hasnt quite managed to reach this distinction, but its been in a comfortable spot all the same.

The second season is bound to take on at least a few new directions given that Anthony Mackie is now on the scene and as weve noticed in many shows when the main actor is switched up there are many instances in which things can never be the same as the story has to change in order to accommodate. That can be a good thing however since bringing in a new experience and a new face can keep the ball rolling and keep it intriguing enough that people will want to come back and see just where the producers and the director are willing to go with this idea.

See the original post here:

What We Learned from the Altered Carbon Season 2 Trailer - TVOvermind

Chelsea: Liverpool proving the immortality of the Blues truly invincible record – The Pride of London

Posted on by

We may as well face facts. This season is going to difficult for us all. Liverpool are going to win the Premier League and well never hear the end of it. Whilst Chelsea have been busy creating history, Liverpool have been fondly reminiscing (except for the odd Champions League trophy) about theirs. The last time they enjoyed being the top team in England, barely any of the current squad were born.

For the mass media, Jurgen Klopps side winning their first-ever Premier League is the stuff of dreams. The season is barely halfway through and already Liverpools record-breaking team are being lauded on every newspaper back page and click-bait site going.

But with just 23 Premier League games gone Liverpools goals conceded record already equals the 15 goals Chelseas impressive back-line let in during the whole of the 2004/05 season. games in that season and Chelsea had conceded just eight goals.

It was Jose Mourinhos first in charge and that success was built on a solid spine through the team. Chelseas transfer team had been busy during the summer bringing in Petr Cech, Ricardo Carvalho and Didier Drogba. They joined Claude Makelele, Frank Lampard and John Terry already at the club.

Drogbas offensive impact in that first season was much less than it would eventually become. However, he still put in the yards defensively. He was able to attack the ball as effectively in front of his own goal as he was the oppositions. Add those five other players up the middle of the pitch into the mix and the rest were free to create the 72 goals that would see Mourinhos side triumph in Englands top league for the first time in 50 years.

Out of the 38 games Chelsea played in the Premier League in 2004/05 they kept clean-sheets in 26 of them.

By todays standards that was an incredible achievement and one unlikely to be repeated by any team in the uber-competitive Premier League that we now have. Week-in, week-out, Chelseas back-line locked out attack after attack.

To the rest of the leagues jealous fans, it was boring Chelsea. To Blues fans it was manna from heaven.

Eleven games ended in 1-0 wins for Joses team. There was a satisfaction borne out of confidence in knowing that, once ahead, victory would almost certainly follow. With few goals the difference in any game, from the beginning of the season through mid-October, the Blues only defeat occurred when Manchester City won 1-0 at the City of Manchester Stadium. Following that, there was a run of nine games up to Christmas that saw Chelsea score 29 goals and concede just six.

Chelsea may have been boring when they needed to be, but they were far from being the park-the-bus type of team the haters would have us believe they were.

John Terry, Ricardo Carvalho, Claude Makelele and Petr Cech formed that impenetrable diamond that was so pivotal in keeping clean sheets. Also featuring in the full-back positions during the season, and taking a large amount of credit, were Paulo Ferreira, Glen Johnson, Wayne Bridge, Robert Huth and William Gallas.

The season before, Chelsea came second to Arsenal in what is regarded as one of the Premier Leagues finest achievements. Arsene Wengers side went unbeaten in the league through all 38 games. Even the Invincibles as theyve come to be known, conceded 26 goals during the course of the season.

Chelsea were just one goal away from matching Arsenals invincibility. It was a player who later joined Chelsea, Nicolas Anelka, who scored the goal that thwarted them.

Had the game taken place today, the VAR may have kept Chelsea on course for true greatness. Anelkas goal was a penalty, awarded by Howard Webb after Paulo Ferreira clumsily bundled the Frenchman over. The initial foul began outside the penalty area, and once in the box Ferreira could have been dismissed for being the last man.

Liverpool could equal Arsenal and become Invincibles. However, given that theyll have the league won by Easter, it seems unlikely. Competitive levels will drop and they could still be vying for Champions League glory.

In fact, Chelsea could beat them in the penultimate matchday of the season, but with the league won it wont really matter. Theyll have their excuse of not having to win the game to get the title in the bag.

Its not that bold a statement to say no one will ever beat Chelseas record of letting in just 15 goals throughout the course of a season.

To date, the nearest was Jose Mourinhos side the following season, conceding 22 goals. Manchester United equalled that a couple of years later. Chelseas back-line in that season was as good as invincible is ever likely to be in the Premier League.

The likes of John Terry, Ricardo Carvalho and Co. will forever remain the true invincibles, but of course, no one will bother with that once Liverpool are Champions.

Read more:

Chelsea: Liverpool proving the immortality of the Blues truly invincible record - The Pride of London

Even Jeter (and Lincoln) couldnt please everybody (Viewpoint) – MassLive.com

Posted on by

Just for the record, I voted for Derek Jeter, so dont blame me.

The former New York Yankees shortstop is a living legend, but Jeter still fell short of unanimous approval for the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. Proving you cant please all the people all the time, Jeter received 396 votes out of 397 voters, sending the baseball world atwitter on Twitter and elsewhere.

Whos the jerk? at least one online commenter demanded. Because voters are not required to make their ballots public (though most voluntarily do), the identity of Jeters naysayer remained anonymous, which he or she would be wise to maintain, unless egging is on this years home renovation plans.

Four theories exist for why anyone would deny Jeter an honor he so obviously earned. One is Yankee-hating, which didnt keep Mariano Rivera from becoming, in 2019, the first (and only) unanimous selection in the Hall of Fames 80-year history.

Maybe the voter cares only about home runs, of which Jeter hit only a modest 260. Some of those came at the biggest moments of his career. If thats the reason, the voter should be voting.

Jeter is also part of Miami Marlins ownership. Having stripped down the team and payroll to non-competitive levels, he has disillusioned what few Marlins fans are known to exist.

The other and most plausible reason is that some voters have always felt a player should not be elected in his first year of eligibility. There is no logic to that thinking, and its popularity has diminished, as proven by Riveras vote - though Jeters vote suggests there may be at least one holdout left.

Jeter says he totally doesnt care who dissed him. We shouldnt, either, if only because unanimous approval is turning into a modern expectation with no basis in history.

Is Babe Ruth a Hall of Famer? In 1936, the year after Ruth had retired and in the first Hall of Fame vote, 11 of the 226 voters didnt think so. Ty Cobb had the highest vote that year. Even he was left off four ballots.

Willie Mays was pretty good. He received 94.7 percent of the vote. Hank Aaron, whose 755 home runs is still the record if we dismiss Barry Bonds steroid-tainted 762, claimed 97.8 percent.

Hey, Red Sox fans, think Ted Williams earned a plaque? He was elected in 1966, but 20 of the 302 voters werent impressed enough (or didnt like him, or didnt want a first-time nominee to make it.) After Rivera, the closest unanimous votes have almost entirely been for players of recent generations - Ken Griffey Jr., (99.3 percent with three nays in 2016), Tom Seaver, Nolan Ryan, Cal Ripken Jr., and George Brett.

They are the only players ever to receive more than 98 percent. One of the most confounding votes came in 2014, when 16 of 571 voters left 355-game winner Greg Maddux off.

One guy said he refused to vote for any players from the Steroid Era - ignoring there was no question Maddux was clean. Not only did he pile up victory totals more attuned to 19th Century baseball than the 21st, he did it while competing against cheats.

And people wonder why folks dont like media, which supplies the voters through the Baseball Writers Association of America, to which I belong.

But how important, really, is a unanimous vote? How important is it to please everybody, or even almost everybody?

Losing two states in 1936 didnt stop Franklin Roosevelt from political immortality. Losing only one (ours) in 1972 didnt save Richard Nixon from ignominy.

If Jeters lost vote resulted from the not-the-first-time thinking, he wouldnt be the first. Basketball fans were amazed when Dominique Wilkins, who retired as the No. 6 all-time scorer in NBA history and was still ninth after the five-year retirement waiting period, wasnt elected to the Hall of Fame in his first eligible year.

Wilkins was elected in 2006, his second year. "'Nique,' you must have had a great year last year (while retired),'' Charles Barkley cracked.

Who cares who didnt choose Jeter? Id like to know the thinking behind the single votes cast for Brad Penny and J.J. Putz. I covered those guys, unaware I was in the presence of immortality.

The Baseball Hall of Fame remains one of the very few American institutions whose value remains cloaked of mythology. Most of our others have been stripped bare - politics, religion, entertainment and so on.

We see all their warts and human failings. We see those in baseball, too, but the sport still matters to enough people to push back against those failings (steroid use, sign-stealing cheating), rather than blandly accepting that since nothing is perfect, high standards are pointless exercises in pretense and futility.

Jeters selection is special because his career wasnt all about numbers, the likes of which can be spit out of a computer and define a mans lifes work as if it were a math equation. Modern defensive metrics didnt even exist when Jeter joined the Yankees in 1995. Today, they characterize him as an average or even mediocre shortstop.

If that explains the no voter, the voter never saw Jeter play. Those who did were not fooled by man-made statistics.

By missing unanimous acclaim, Jeter joins Ruth, Aaron, Williams, Mays and everybody not named Rivera in Cooperstown. He joins Carl Yastrzemski, whose 1967 season redefined Red Sox history - yet landed him one vote shy of unanimous Most Valuable Player selection, because one petulant Minnesota writer chose the Twins Cesar Tovar - who hit .267 with six homers and 47 RBIs (to Yaz .326-44-121) and whose team lost the pennant to Boston.

If we think greatness is measured by unanimous acclaim, we might remember Abraham Lincoln, who turned out to be a pretty good president. The fledging Republican Party must have known it; they nominated Honest Abe in 1860. Even if it they didnt do it until the third ballot.

Visit link:

Even Jeter (and Lincoln) couldnt please everybody (Viewpoint) - MassLive.com