Muhammad Ali and the Phantom Punch

          In 1965, Muhammad Ali faced Sonny Liston for the much awaited rematch. Before their first fight, Ali was a 7-1 underdog who scarcely anyone gave a fighting shot to. But with the controversial, yet defining, victory over Liston, after he refused to continue fighting at the begining of the 7th round, Ali was now, to the suprise of millions, the Heavyweight Champion of the World.

          When they finally met again, the tables and roles were switched; Ali was the reigning champion and Liston was the challenger. What a turn of events! People were claiming Ali had a fluke in his first fight and that Liston would get him this time around. However, to the astonishment of many, Ali not only defeated him again, but in a more humiliating manner: first minute of the first round. Because the fighters had barely gotten warmed up and the punch with which Ali had connected seemed to have not been so hard, many claimed that Liston had purposely taken the fall. Some say the Mafia forced Liston to purposely lose the fight because of pending dues he had with them. Others say that Liston himself was reported as stating that he threw the fight for fear of the black muslim sect that was campaigning Muhammad Ali’s boxing career. Due to being hard to see on regular speed, the punch that knocked out Liston was coined “the phantom punch.”

           Though some may discredit the phantom punch as the consequence of a corruption or exhortation, for those who do believe the punch do have connected flush it is an inspiration. No matter how many may count you out, if you believe in yourself nothing is outside your reach. Muhammad Ali, formerly known as Cassius Clay, demonstrated to the world that “Impossible is nothing.”

Muhammad Ali vs Sonny Liston (1965)

ALI Phantom Punch

Hilary “Misspeaks”

                                          

          Candidates running for presidential office strive, even if only a farce, to build credibility for themselves. Every move they make, and every word they utter can and will be used against them. If a nominee deems it necessary to lie, he or she must first ask the question: how will a deliberate act of deceiving taint my integrity in the public’s eyes. Hilary Clinton seems have forgotten to ask herself this one simple question before she blatantly lied to the very people she is hoping to woo.

          Mrs. Clinton found her way onto the front pages of all newspapers when she “misspoke” of her trip to a military base in Bosnia in 1996, as first lady of the United States of America. Opposition in the media and political spectrum has justly used this as yet another weapon with which they can wage war against by far the most influential woman of our country’s era. How can it be, they argue, that the former first lady can make such a blunder? Shaking hands with people and greeting an eight year old pale in comparison to running and taking cover from snipers. How does one make such a ludicrous mix-up, without having done so deliberately? It is hard to believe that someone could confuse a placid walk among friendly bystanders, with a life changing homicide attempt. Hilary has some explaining to do…

           It is now her duty and responsibility to prove that she was not intentionally trying to mislead Americans to believe that she had fended for her life. In her attempt to do so, Mrs. Clinton has stated: “I say millions of words every week, and there’s a lot more room for error when you’re talking as much as I’m talking.” She has played the slip up card, along with the fact that the secret service and military had instilled in her the notion that she was going to arrive at a war zone (the military base in Bosnia). Even so, Hilary cannot escape the accusations of making up a farfetched story to embellish her reputation in the eyes of the undecided voters. The truth is self evident; she has to fess up and move on, otherwise everything coming out of her mouth from now on will seem like nothing more than futile attempts of gaining the admiration of voters.

          Hilary Clinton, like Obama who has been under close eye of the public, cannot take such ill-advised courses of action. She must not forget what is at stake and never lose sight of what is crucially needed to win: charisma, efficient plans, and most importantly credibility. It is do or die for Hilary; will she fall or will she stand tall?

Barack Obama:The Epitome of our next Commander-in-chief??

                          

          Barack Obama, presently set as the front runner in the democratic primaries, has managed, yet again, to bring controversy to his doorstep. By associating himself with an over-the-top pastor, who has no wish to keep his disdainful tirades of ire and dissent for “White America” clandestine, Obama has subjected himself to rightfully deserved scrutiny. Is this man who advocates “change” and reaching out to all Americans, no matter how small, just another inexperienced politician with no spine to repudiate the abominable assessments catering to a hateful ideology?

          The lambasting of Mr. Obama is not a result of his seemingly steadfast support of a long time friendship with Reverend Wright, or his religious and spiritual roots embedded in the Trinity Church for two decades. Rather, the disconcerting issue is the inconsistency that he demonstrates to the American public whenever put under the magnifying class. One of the first clear indicators of Mr. Obama’s reluctance to act from conviction came up at one of the three democratic debates with Senator Clinton. In it, he stonewalled the “rejection” of Louis Farukan, a pastor who had consistently made disparaging, anti-Semitic remarks. When asked by the moderator whether he would accept or reject the endorsement of a pastor who was openly anti-Semitic, Mr. Obama sheepishly responded, “I denounce it.”  Senator Clinton cleverly put pressure on him during one of his most halting moments, thereby compelling him to state: “I have denounced mister Farukan, but if Mrs. Clinton feels that the word reject is a stronger word than denounce, then I both reject and denounce him.” Another blaring blast from the past comes to mind: Mr. Obama criticized Don Imus for his seemingly racist remarks and called for his immediate removal from the air. So with these prior precedents, why on earth would he fail to both denounce and reject a pastor, who has maliciously revved up the lingering resentment of the African American race? What makes this case any different?

          It is understandable to a certain degree that Mr. Obama not want to condemn or ostracize Reverend Wright after decades of friendship. However, it is detestable that he intends to continue running for President of The United States of America, while still remaining member of this congregation. To the bewilderment of many, Trinity Church has been inculcated by racist, parsimonious preachers to embrace doctrines of hate and resentment, as opposed to love and forgiveness. Defenders of Reverend Wright have stated on repeated occasions that the rest of “White America” is only now becoming aware of what goes on in their parishes. They maintain that after years of oppression and deplorable treatment of the colored race, we have no right to rebuke their “customs” for we are in more ways than one guilty of all that has happened. But is this truly the ridiculous, stifling mentality that the rest of America should condone? Isn’t this the first time in the history of our “racist, white nation” that a man of color has, not the right, but the privilege of attaining the highest position in the land: President of The United States of America. Who is it really that has failed to move on from the blunders of old and embrace a new era?

          Aside from showing major inconsistencies, Mr. Obama has also turned to deceit. In his most recent statements, he has attempted to instill the folly that he had never once heard or been aware of Reverend Wright’s audacious statements. So let’s get this straight, he expects us to believe that in 20 years of attending this church he never once heard an Anti-American cry? Does he truly believe that we are so irrational to be swayed by his feeble attempt to purge himself of all guilt? Everyone knows that Wright’s successor has defended the retired pastor’s message and shown no indication of stopping similar rhetoric from being spewed from the pulpit at “Church.” Reasoning, as a result, clearly shows us that Obama has boldly chosen to remain a member of this hate spreading institution, which breeds and feeds the logo “God Dam America.” We might be unreasonable, but certainly not stupid

          If Barack Obama is to win back the credibility and respect, which he deliberately relinquished when he refused to rescind from The Trinity Church, he must demonstrate to the American Public that his job as president would truly be to unite all race, color and creed under one tolerant administration. The longer he takes to acknowledge the detrimental nature of brainwashing generations of people to hate one another, the longer it will take for the country to realize the dream of an extraordinary man: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

“The Journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.”

Will you take that first step Mister Obama?

Marijuana: The Achilles Heel Of Society II

          It would seem like a robust few are still having issues with discovering the substantial difference between Fact and  Myth, with regards to the blatant effects of using marijuana. Arguments have been presented to prove that legalizing marijuana would in fact benefit society, or at least appeal to a hedonistic, self-centered genre of people, who completely disregard the inherent worth of a human being. The veil of secrecy and deception will now fall off, leaving the inconvenient truth to the viewing pleasure of all that truly want to see reality at its finest.

          It is has been cited, by stalwart supporters of the substance, that marijuana is the third most commonly used drug. Tobacco and Alcohol are the top two used in the world, and each claims the lives of thousands of people each year, while “not one person has died from the use of Marijuana alone.” It is crucial to note the key word used in the previous sentence: alone.  Of course, it can be advocated that marijuana by itself has not killed anyone, but this statement deliberately fails to address the harmful effects that marijuana has to offer to the human body; dying is not necessarily the worst thing that can happen to a person, as you will soon find out by reading more. According to the US Drug Enforcement Agency Administration or (DEA):

     “Marijuana use can lead to dependence and abuse.  Marijuana was the second most common illicit drug responsible for drug treatment admissions in 2002-outdistancing crack cocaine, the next most prevalent cause. Shocking to many is that more teens are in treatment each year for marijuana dependence than for alcohol and all other illegal drugs combined. This is a trend that has been increasing for more than a decade: in 2002, 64 percent of adolescent treatment admissions reported marijuana as their primary substance of abuse, compared to 23 percent in 1992.”

      “Smoking marijuana can cause significant health problems. Marijuana contains more than 400 chemicals, of which 60 are cannabinoids. Smoking a marijuana cigarette deposits about three to five times more tar into the lungs than one filtered tobacco cigarette. Consequently, regular marijuana smokers suffer from many of the same health problems as tobacco smokers, such as chronic coughing and wheezing, chest colds, and chronic bronchitis. In fact, studies show that smoking three to four joints per day causes at least as much harm to the respiratory system as smoking a full pack of cigarettes every day.  Marijuana smoke also contains 50 to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke and produces high levels of an enzyme that converts certain hydrocarbons into malignant cells.”

     “The extent of the problem of marijuana-impaired driving is startling. One in six (or 600,000) high school students drive under the influence of marijuana, almost as many as drive under the influence of alcohol, according to estimates released in September 2003 by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). A study of motorists pulled over for reckless driving showed that, among those who were not impaired by alcohol, 45 percent tested positive for marijuana.”

          Also, the relationship between this drug and the usage of other deadlier ones has not been rightfully made. Scientific findings prove that it is rare to find abusers of other deadlier drugs, who did not first begin with marijuana. But let’s use logic here, if we legalize it now, where does the desire for decriminalizing widely-used drugs end? Are we to say that given the known side effects of this disdainful drug, we are going to allow people, who have never tried it before or established a habitual use due to fear of the law, to go on to harm their bodies and lives?

 

          Yes, those who reject the legalizing marijuana are quite aware that not everyone who uses it will have a chaotic life. But that is like saying the abuse of alcohol isn’t a grave blunder simply because some know how to use it in moderation. This is a tenuous argument that fails to withstand counter claims of how destructive it can be to so many. If people want to say that many use it and few suffer because of it, so be it. But it should be the objective of any legitimate society to eradicate that which plaques an ”unlucky few.”

 

          There is no option or choice in the matter during these perilous times. Mainstream society must develop awareness now to effectively eradicate the looming threat of all deadly substances. It is imperative that they wake up and smell the putrid scent of burning grass seducing an ignorant generation of people, confined by shackles of deceit to a four wall room with no escape in sight. The epidemic must end now or face the dire consequences we shall.

 

 

Edelman’s Account of the Boiling Frog Syndrome

“If you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water, he’ll jump out. But if you place a frog into a pot of lukewarm water and slowly turn up the heat, it will boil to death.”

    

Matt Serra=Fluke or GSP=Disgrace

     

          

      Serra comes back to fight George St. Pierre at UFC 83. Serra has not fought since UFC 69 due to testing positive for steroid use and some injuries; as a result, his match with George St. Pierre that was scheduled earlier this year was postponed. The rematch that is scheduled for next month has been much awaited since Serra’s upset victory over GSP in which he took the welterweight championship.

      In their first encounter everyone thought GSP would completely maul Serra. It was the safest bet to take, seeing how easily he had dismantled the great Mat Hughes. Serra, born and raised in Long Island, was not intimidated by the implausibly large mountain he had to climb. Round one started out with both fighters being very cautious and tactical. GSP tried to get his kicks going, but Serra kept interrupting his rhythm. Slowly but surely we saw Serra get closer and closer with his heavy hands. When out of nowhere one of his punches grazed the back of GSP’s head. He started to stumble backwards, but Serra with the rage of a champion in the making kept on him with devastating lefts and rights. As GSP completely collapsed to the ground, Serra hovered over him and perpetuated the barrage of blows to his face. The referee had no choice but to step in and be a witness to one of the biggest upsets of UFC history. Serra was now the welterweight champion of the world. 

      Since this fight occurred, Serra has not defended his title once or been in a fight for that matter. GSP on the other hand has had incredible performances against the likes of Josh Kosheck and Mat Hughes, proving his superstar status once more. With this rematch coming up, it is safe to assume that GSP will once again be the favorite and Serra the underdog. Most analysts and critics believe that the last fight was the case of the great champion taking his opponent lightly and paying the price for it. This time around most, if not everyone, believe that GSP will perform as is expected of him.  

      Will the former champion reclaim his title and prove the fluke of his previous lost or will the underdog once again be an inspiration for all those who are pegged to the old cliché of David vs. Goliath?            

 

Love Poem

WASTEFUL SIGHS
Another wasted night of sleep has left me weary and dreary.
Another night of the same of wondering if I’m there,  
present in your thoughts, your mind, or maybe your heart.
Another night of wasting in sighs.
Another night of wondering who I am.
Another night in which I feel defeated.
I get up thinking of the night before, and remember all to  well that my heart is battered and broken.

What gives me hope?
What makes me smile?
I anxiously wait for that giggle and laughter that makes my  
day, for that beauty that makes me stutter and choke on  
every word I dare not speak.
I’ve kept myself together and avoided the break,
but I’m a fragile glass house being hit by stones.
I begin to hear the glass shudder around me,
O no! the house is breaking.
I want to save it,
but now it seems to late; I’ve been broken.
I try to pick up the pieces but to no avail.
This house simply will not stand.

Where are you?
Where am I?
Come for me and set me free.
Take me from the abyss in which I sorrow
help me stand up,
and give me hope in tomorrow.
Don’t look away,
don’t turn your face,
just look at me and give me glee.

Help me ponder,
help me wonder,
why my heart is prone to burst.
Help me feel,
help me see,
I pray to know if you’re real.
I’ll hold you tight,
I’ll keep you close,
and always love you will all my might.
Remember me, 
talk to me,
for this feeling will FOREVER BE.

ENDLESS PACING

Pulses are racing,

Fists are clenched,

And pressure two minds into endless pacing,

A waterless well now fully drenched,

Kindles a dream now in the making.

Hearts are beating

Mouths are dry,

All common sense is now depleting,

Reality quickly rushes by,

Preventing day and light from ever meeting.

A picture is frozen,

A moment is captured,

What lies in the future can never be chosen.

Eyes are shut,

Reason thrown out,

Nothing remains but feelings of the gut.

Two flavors become one,

One taste becomes two,

Has pleasure for the mouth now officially begun?

 

Whether is was sweet,

Whether it was bitter,

All that is known is logic was finally beat.

Words are lost in all of the clutter,

Not one sound is made, not even a peep.

Soothing Poetry-for those who liked the stuff I wrote.

The Iraq War: A Necessary Evil

                   

       After the five year anniversary of our invasion of Iraq, questions and protests still linger in what has proven to be a long, drawn out war with no end in sight. Some feel lied to, others believed they have been trotted over. The times are trying, the tribulations are great, but does this mean we should be ready to throw in the towel? Could we possibly be heading to a crucially needed over- time?           

       To quote Thomas Pain: “These are the times that try men’s soul. The summer solider and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.”  The same is true in the present war; many claim to be stalwart patriots, but would never fight a second for the country that has made them who and what they are today. It is very easy to be the “sunshine patriot” who claims he would do anything for hus country when all is going well; however, the same pledge of allegiance should be worth something when the nation is in peril. One thing is to chant “The land of the free and the brave” and another thing entirely is to truly be a member.         

       Whether you agree with people laying down their life for his or her country is irrelevant. The current situation in Iraq is that many Americans feel they are fighting an unjust, tiresome war which has shed the blood of over four thousand brave soldiers. They believe that because they were lied to by the Bush administration and because victory has not yet been achieved; they have the right to demand the withdrawal of troops. These really do not seem like the best reasons to retreat from battle. After all, we were the ones who invaded Iraq and overthrew its brutal regime; we do take credit for that, but not for the “spoils of war.” Our obligation to finish what we started in Iraq can be simply put: “You break it, you fix it.” We cannot get out of this turmoil infested nation until we undo the “bad” we have done. If we were to get out, the entire nation would plunge into chaos, not mentioning the message we would be giving to terrorists around the world.           

       Surrendering now would only embolden the Muslim extremists, who want “death to American.” The worldwide view that Americans have no stomach for a long war would be branded on our nation forever. It is imperative to realize that this sign of weakness would be all the terrorists would need to throttle us completely. They would realize that we do not want to get involved in another war; as a result, the superpower of the world would be on its knees for the people who pray for its destruction each and every day.           

        Giving up at this present moment is not an option that a reasoning president or candidate has on his or her agenda; neither is keeping the war going for an eternity. But the disastrous consequences of pulling out of Iraq should be taken into account when considering a withdrawal. Some lives may be saved on the short run, but how about on the long run? Will those who laid their lives down for a cause: hunt and kill each and every terrorist, be recorded in the history books as nothing more than mere puppets? Can it be possibly be that our final tribute to the soldiers, who made the ultimate sacrifice of laying down their lives, will be to openly declare that it was all in vain? ((For Hilary unfortunately it is)    

            ”Come back to me with your shield or on it.”

Marijuana: The Achilles Heel Of Society

          For countless years there have been people vigorously pushing for the legalization of marijuana. They have offered compelling arguments as to why this drug should be made accessible to the general public. But is this just an attempt to quench the thirst of a hedonistic society? Should government pander to the masses? 

      Marijuana For All shows a well prepared case for reversing the present illicit nature of the substance. NORML is used to cite its wide usage among millions of people. But does this really make it acceptable? Opium was prevalent during the Asian Golden age and was one of the main reasons of the downfall of China, the superpower of the world at the time. Their widespread practice of using opium breed a generation of addicts that succumbed to the imperialistic British. The once superior, impregnable center of the world turned to pitiful ruins. Must the current superpower of the world plummet to a shameful fate as well? 

      There are those who claim that people have a right to make their own choices so long as those choices do not hurt others. Using Marijuana, they argue, is one of those choices. But without a doubt there are millions of people around the world, who have had a loved one taken from them as a result of the usage of marijuana and other drugs. Those who have stood next to the coffin of their loved ones with bittersweet tears rolling down their cheeks. They without a doubt would have countless things to say in response. Many have died in drug wars in Colombia, Mexico, and even here on American soil so to even utter that it is a choice that affects only the individual is completely absurd.  Yes, these deaths are a result of attempting to quell the selling of this drug. But this does mean that if subduing an unlawful action is unbearable then we must make it legal? With this folly like train of thought we would have to say that because it is very hard to stop thieves and murders, we should then make their respective crimes legal. No, this scenario is not a different case. Marijuana has been accepted by most as the gateway drug leading to other deadlier ones such as ecstasy, cocaine, etc. By itself it creates a mental addiction that at times can be more devastating that any physical dependency. So why on earth would we have the sheep invite the hungry wolf to dinner, knowing full well others will follow? 

      If society was foolish enough to legalize marijuana, it is safe to say that there would be more users than ever before. Those who never did drugs either for fear of breaking the law or because they never had any contacts with dealers, will find it quite easy to purchase the substance for themselves. But is this the genre of problems the United States of American wants to develop for its citizens: addiction, pain, and death? If so, good luck with your pragmatic view on the human worth. 

       “Marijuana is the third most popular recreational drug in America (behind only alcohol and tobacco), and has been used by nearly 80 million Americans. According to government surveys, some 20 million Americans have smoked marijuana in the past year, and more than 11 million do so regularly despite harsh laws against its use. Our public policies should reflect this reality, not deny it.”-NORML  

      Which reality: the one that shows everyone is doing it, thus making it right or the blatant one proving too many people are falling victim to this disgraceful trend? Time to make up your mind…      

“What is popular is not always right, and what is right is not always popular.”

Seven more ways to not go to heaven.

          The Vatican has taken the world by surprise once more with a burdensome batch of “social sins.” Is this really the time to be dealing with seven more ways to disappoint the deity that created us? Are these new sins realistic and consistent with today’s society?          

          The blog click here describes the new list of wrongdoings as a positive indicator that the Catholic Church is changing with the times. That while these sins will not lead a person to hell, avoiding them would help “foster community.” Mention is made of the infamous seven deadly sins: pride, envy, gluttony, lust, anger, greed, and sloth. According to Catholic doctrine if someone dies without having confessed for one or more of these transgressions, the sinner will go to hell. So what is the objective of being aware of these offenses, if doing them won’t lead to eternal damnation?

          The previously referenced blog lists the seven social sins are:

1. Bioethical violations such as birth control

2. Morally dubious’ experiments such as stem cell research

3. Drug abuse       

4. Polluting the environment

5. Contributing to widening divide between rich and poor

6. Excessive wealth

7. Creating poverty         

          Not everyone however, has expressed their undying support for what seems like the Catholic Church’s attempt to regain its notorious power over the lives of its community of believers. Across the years people have responded negatively to the incarcerating shackles imposed by the leading Christian infrastructure of the world. And with this new redefinition of what is right and wrong, countless people are questioning whether the attempt to acclimate to the changing times is just a ludicrous charade. But even if they do believe this sham whole-heartily, aren’t most of these new sins hypocritical, inconsistent, and unattainable?         

          The first sin on the list is the only one that proves itself legitimate, consistent, and feasible. The other six should be subject to a case by case basis rather than being labeled objectively by a narrow-minded standard. Stem cell research has been determined to be wrong. There are two kinds; Embryonic and Adult. Opposing embryonic research makes sense; what about the adult one? There is no logic in condemning that which will offer a saving grace to individuals, who are suffering in this world due to incurable conditions and sicknesses.

          Drug abuse is now a sin? So let’s be consistent and label anything we abuse as wrong. It is not enough to simply say using drugs is amoral. By implementing that logic we would have to say that alcohol and cigarettes, even when used in moderation, are sinful in nature. And we know that is not possible given the trivial consumption of these substances.         

          Polluting the environment is also a sin! This statement leads the cynic to pose a humorous question: unless the Pope drives around in his Pope Mobile with something other than gas as his fuel source, isn’t he sinning?         

          The remaining “social sins” are in more than one way interrelated. If we are lavishly rich, we are doing something wrong; good job Bill Gates and Carlos Slim, you are bad people. When poverty is created, as is the case in every form of government, we have officially failed God; the economy is to blame. If and when a bigger gap is made between the rich and poor, the one responsible for this has broken the Vatican’s rule; thanks a lot wretched Capitalism.         

          These rules are perhaps evidence of a Church attempting to renovate the outdated morality of a 2,000 year old religion. Perhaps the right intentions are present, but logic certainly is not. Nothing in life, not even a monotheistic God, is within black and white terms. There is always a grey area and this is what the Church has failed to see after thousands of years of existence. Some see these new set of sins as a harmless whim of the Vatican that can be easily disregarded. Others however, see it as strict fundamentalist view on how to please God. A view that is meant to dictate the life of the believer.     

      The days of old have long since past, so please don’t try to bring them back.

Elliot Spitzer: Judge the sin, not the sinner

                                            

          Elliot Spitzer has been the center of attention for a week due to the recent discovery of his connection with a prostitution ring. The media has had a field day with the moral catastrophe of the self proclaimed “righteous” governor. He was after all the one that as District Attorney relentlessly combated evils like drugs and prostitution with an iron fist. The people are furious at his blatant hypocrisy and as a result they conveniently find it acceptable to rip him apart. But are they justified in judging who he is rather than his actions?

          Every time a scandal exemplifying a politician with human weaknesses washes ashore the general public seems to acquire a new sense of morality. They turn into pristine individuals, who are by their own judgment free of sin and can thus disparage the lives of others. The Spitzer scandal was not to be the transfixing exception. People have criticized the governor more for not having practiced what he preached rather than the list of legal infractions he committed. He has several charges heaped against him, not just for soliciting a prostitute. But this seems to be superfluous when you can simply stone a man’s character and integrity with nothing more than an over-inflated ego. What gives anyone the right to think they are any better than he is?

          Amid all that has happened there still are those who argue that Elliot Spitzer was a great governor and that the hypocrisy of his nature does not change the validity of his crusade against the evils corrupting a complacent society. He has done a far better job as governor than most of his arrogant, outspoken critics could ever dream of doing. While his actions have deprived him of any future credibility, his prior message is consistent with the widely accepted perception of “morality.” It is safe to say that until Mr. Spitzer was unmasked, he wore an impregnable suit of invulnerability. Once the first crack was found, it was not long till the rest was shattered.  

                           Blog: http://twentyfirstcenturylife.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/elliot-spitzer-a-legend-of-hipocrisy/ is a vivid example of someone attempting to judge by moral standards, but only succeeding in treating their fellow man with disdain. Yes, Governor Spitzer was acting hypocritically when he established a code of conduct that he himself did not follow. Yes, he broke the integrity of the office by soliciting the services of a high priced prostitute, who has emerged as an icon from the whole disgraceful situation. Yes, he broke several laws that could cost him his law license, let alone his political career. But no, no one has the right to smear his person with contemptuous remarks that serve no purpose in determining morality. Many of those who ostracize the politicians, who fail to live up to the public’s case by case misconception of morality, are hypocrites themselves. It’s easy to talk, even easier to judge, but it is truly a feat to walk the walk.

          The only way to have a legitimate form of moral evaluation is to judge the action and not the actor. In this context Mr. Spitzer was the actor, who according to some played the role of hypocritical idealist. But it is not our calling nor our place to sputter critical remarks, but rather to see what went wrong and how can we learn from another’s mistake. As for those who so desperately awaited the resignation of the governor, are you happy now? Curious enough he was unfaltering on one of his promises when inducted to office about a year ago: he promised to relieve the administration of all corruption. By resigning last Thursday he may very well have turned his greatest undertaking into a reality. 

          “Who are you to judge the life I live,    

            I’m not perfect, and I don’t live to be, 

           But next time you point your fingers,  

           Make sure your hands are clean.”