More reporters cover the University of Connecticut men's and women's basketball teams than cover the Connecticut General Assembly.

 

Dozens of reporters and camerapeople document the niggling details of the 35 or so college basketball players who generate $20 million annually, and nary a handful of journalists cover the 181 or so representatives and senators who appropriate $17 billion annually.

 

And yet, the two biggest stories about UConn basketball this year came from journalists who do not cover the Huskies regularly.

 

As the Huskies verge on a third national title, and Coach Jim Calhoun lays the legal groundwork to protect his title, don't expect the groupthinkers in the media horde to question the way the UConn athletic department dealt with the onset of these alleged violations of NCAA recruiting regulations.

 

The timeline, compiled from various sources, looks like this:

Early October 2008 - Yahoo! Sports reporters Adrian Wojnarowski and Dan Wetzel submit Freedom of Information Act requests to UConn, looking for state-owned cell phone records of various men’s basketball coaches.

December 2008 - The UConn athletic department retained the law firm of Bond, Schoeneck & King, a Kansas outfit known for work on NCAA issues.

January 2009 - 80 percent of the Yahoo! Sports story was done (according to reporting by Courant columnist Jeff Jacobs), but UConn stalled and delayed turning over the phone records central to the Freedom of Information Act requests.

March 2009 – Yahoo! Sports breaks the story about Calhoun and company allegedly committing NCAA recruiting violations. Shortly after this story breaks, UConn reports the violations to the NCAA.

Exactly when UConn president Michael Hogan learned of this remains a mystery.

But the men who run the UConn athletic department know. They earn hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to know. Sneaky they may be, but stupid, they ain't. They looked at the FOI requests, understood the implications of the phone records being sought, and battened down the hatches.

 

From these facts, we can infer that sometime in December, somewhere inside an office in Gampel Pavilion, Calhoun, UConn athletic director Jeff Hathaway and the associate athletic director Tim Tolokan listened to advice of their counsel.

 

Then they made a few decisions. First, winning basketball remained the number one priority. If they could win games, then this strengthened their position when the news hit the streets. No one backs a loser.

 

This cold, Machiavellian power calculus factored in Calhoun's raw political muscle, the years of winning and goodwill that he has built up, and they figured they could withstand whatever full court press happened, as it were, whenever the story broke.

 

Finish Reading this thoughtful, misanthropic diatribe...

Editor's Note: On occasion, law school homework meshes with current events. This reaction paper provides a rare example where what we read in class would not put non-law students to sleep. More often than not, theoretical readings and ancient precedent lack the thrill of a Grisham novel. While this isn't "The Firm," I found the topic worth sharing. For those curious about what a law school assignment reads like, enjoy. I should also note that this was a graded assignment, and before publishing this, I received permission from my professor to do so. The casebook referred to is Mass Media Law Cases and Materials, 7th Edition by Franklin, Anderson and Lidsky.

 

Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v Virginia, 448 U.S. 555 (1980) claims that "the open processes of justice serve an important prophylactic purpose, providing an outlet for community concern, hostility and emotion." As a prong of the holding guaranteeing newsgatherers the right to attend trials, the Supreme Court opined that distribution of information about criminal and civil trials helps prevent vigilante justice. "Without awareness that society's responses to criminal conduct are underway, natural human reactions of outrage and protest are frustrated and may manifest themselves in some form of vengeful 'self-help'." Id. (casebook, 674)

 

This theory sounds remarkably similar to the safety-valve theory of free speech. Justice Brandeis elucidated how free expression creates political stability in his concurrence in Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357, 375 (1927). "Those who won our independence [knew] that fear breeds repression, that repression breeds hate, that hate menaces stable governments; that the path of safety lies in the opportunity to discuss freely supposed grievances and proposed remedies."

 

Free speech philosopher Thomas I. Emerson in The System of Freedom of Expression (1970) further argued that free expression "provides a framework in which the conflict necessary to the progress of a society can take place without destroying the society." The safety valve, in essence, allows politically marginalized people to channel their fervor to speech, not violence.

 

While the readings on "Access to Judicial Proceedings" offer no evidence of any cross-pollination between the prophylactic purpose of open trials to stem vigilante justice and the safety valve value of free speech as a means for preventing political violence, the cases referenced throughout the reading invite comparison, and indeed, it seems that the two ideas go hand in hand.

 

For example, Press Enterprise Co. v. Superior Court (II), 478 U.S. 1 (1986), explores the "'community therapeutic value' of openness" (CB 687) in criminal trials. Press Enterprise II explains that heinous violent crimes can "provoke public concern, outrage and hostility." The public awareness of justice being done resulting from news coverage of trials increases confidence in the judicial system, and "an outlet is provided for these understandable reactions and emotions." Thus, a free press reporting on the wheels of justice can avert the angry mob certain to arise in the absence of a prosecution. Press Enterprise II then quotes Press Enterprise I for the proposition that openness creates an appearance of fairness.

 

When openness reveals unfairness in the machinations of justice, the cathartic value of observing the judicial process drops, and an obvious injustice can create enough pressure to blow through the safety valve of free speech. The riots following the verdict for the police officers who beat Rodney King attest to this potential exception.

 

Where there is limited openness in judicial proceedings, as seen in the post 9/11-terrorism cases, has the prophylactic function of the court been served? While this may be too broad a question to ask, it's worth sketching an argument that more sunlight in trials for terrorism suspects could reduce violent hate crimes against Muslims and Arabs living in the United States.

 

Click here to finish reading the assignment...

Former Waterbury Republican sports reporter Adrian Wojnarowski, who pressed Coach Calhoun's buttons while covering UConn in the 1990s, has done it again, but this time on a grand scale.

 

Now working at Yahoo! Sports, Woj, working with writer Dan Wetzel, has uncovered a series of recruiting violations of NCAA rules regarding highly-rated, but highly troubled prospect Nate Miles.

The University of Connecticut violated NCAA rules in the recruitment of former guard Nate Miles, a six-month investigation by Yahoo! Sports has found.

Miles was provided with lodging, transportation, restaurant meals and representation by Josh Nochimson – a professional sports agent and former UConn student manager – between 2006 and 2008, according to multiple sources. As a representative of UConn’s athletic interests, NCAA rules barred Nochimson from having contact with Miles or from providing him with anything of value.

A UConn assistant coach said he made Nochimson aware of the Huskies’ recruitment of Miles. Later, the assistant coach said he knew that Nochimson and Miles had talked.

The rest of the story is here.

 

An argument can be made that Coach Calhoun was working to save the boy from himself. Miles was expelled from UConn in October for committing a felony - violating a restraining order. According to Woj and Wetzel, UConn continues to recruit Miles.

 

This is all too believable, and all too human. The NCAA is partly to blame for this, because their rules pretend that the business of recruiting star players is all about academics. But Coach Calhoun should know the rules, and play by them, as he promised in his contract.

 

Section 4.1 of Calhoun's contract states he will "maintain the moral and ethical standards commonly expected of the coach as a leading representative of the Division of Athletics at the University." Section 4.3 is the real kicker, though.

"To recognize and comply with the laws, policies, rules and regulations of and governing the University and its employees, and the rules and interpretations of the National Collegiate Atheltic Assocation ("NCAA") and the Big East Conference ("the Conference"), as now constituted or, as they may be amended during the term hereof."

Understanding that Calhoun and his crew are entitled to due process and a fair hearing, the evidence - the phone records, text messages and numerous witnesses contradicting Josh Nochimson, the sports agent's story, make it difficult to worm away from this one.

 

What price victory, Connecticut? There can be no pride in winning by cheating.

 

Calhoun likely cheated...

Okay, so I was wrong. My prediction that number one seed UConn would lose to number four seed Washington in the third round of the NCAA tourney fell flat when Purdue beat Washington.

 

Oh well. I'll suffer that indignity, considering that I may have been right to bring up the question of Coach Calhoun's salary, in loght of the number of stories that have recently arisen discussing paying players and coaches' salaries. Not only that, Courtney Paris, a star player from Oklahoma, has vowed to repay her scholarship should she not win a national title.

 

This is madness. It was only two weeks ago that the 40-Year Plan suggested that football running back Donald Brown of UConn should give some of his professional signing bonus to UConn, as it lost money in the International Bowl earlier this year. The press is catching on.

 

"The Real March Madness" from the Wall Stret Journal, March 20, by Richard Vedder and Matthew Denhart (with a h/t to Joel for pointing it out to me):

The economy may be tanking and our pocketbooks are slimmer, but we can rejoice in one thing: March Madness is here and we can watch our favorite teams participate in the annual NCAA college men's basketball tournament. Behind all the hoopla, however, is the reality that the players who entertain us receive compensation that amounts to only a very small percentage of what they would have earned if they sold their services in a competitive market.

Take Kevin Durant, for instance. After a stunning freshman season with the Texas Longhorns in 2008, Mr. Durant elected to forgo his final three years of college and entered the NBA draft. Selected by the Seattle Supersonics (now the Oklahoma City Thunder), he agreed to a contract paying $3.5 million in the first year. By contrast, his yearly compensation (in the form of room, board, books and tuition fees at Texas) amounted to about $33,120, less than 1% of what was offered by the Supersonics.

Vedder and Denhart suggest what organizers for youth rights have known for a long time, that it is nearly impossible to organize oppressed young people because they eventually grow out of their oppression.

 

"March Money Madness", from the New York Times Room for Debate Blog, March 18, 2009, by the Editors:

For millions of Americans, nothing makes for better television than the N.C.A.A. college basketball tournament, which starts this week. The perennial powers, the cinderella teams and those irresistible brackets make for a sweet combination. The network advertisers know it, too. CBS paid the N.C.A.A. $6 billion for an 11-year contract to carry the men’s tournament through 2013.

Of course, this entire commercial bonanza is made possible by the student athletes, who are barred from receiving salaries by N.C.A.A. rules. Should they be paid — just as college students on work-study or otherwise hold campus jobs are paid? If not, are there ways to ensure that more of the revenues benefit the students?

The Times asked six people to write about the concept of paying players. Of course, none were black, or players. Among the opinions were professor Allen Sack and sports economist Andrew Zimbalist. Ellen Staurowsky, a professor of Sports Management from Ithaca College in Central New York pegged it: "Despite N.C.A.A. rhetoric, the Division I men's basketball tournament is no place for amateurs — and business executives know it."

 

But Prof. William C. Dowling from Rutgers provided the best critique:

The various proposals for “reforming” college sports — by paying a stipend to the athletes who provide television profits, say, or diverting some of the money to academic purposes — show just how oblivious we’ve become to the damage commercialized Division IA athletics has done to American universities.

Over at Slate, Josh Levin calls Jim Calhoun on his messianic complex in a piece called "Teams We Hate" (and another h/t to Joel for this one, too).

After securing his 800th career victory last month, Connecticut's Jim Calhoun explained his philosophy of coaching. "Any day that I sat down on a kid and didn't really push them, and then loved them as much as I possibly could and backed them, then I'm not really doing my job," he said. "That's the only way they're going to give you the type of performance they gave me tonight." A decent man credits others on the occasion of personal success. Jim Calhoun discusses his players like a jockey talks about his mounts.

Levin's kicker to end the piece: Calhoun "feels compelled to turn his life story into a fantasy in which Connecticut, if not America, is saved by a coaching messiah."

 

We don't need a messiah, we need people with guts, like Oklahoma Lady Sooner Courtney Paris, an All-America center and journalism major who promised that she would repay her scholarship should she not win a national title. The Times' Jere Longman has more from March 23, "Putting a Price on Title Run Stirs Debate."

The vow has raised questions about personal responsibility in sports, the emphasis placed on winning and an athlete’s obligations in fulfilling a scholarship contract...

 

While Paris has completed her course work toward a degree in journalism and entered the N.C.A.A. tournament attempting to become the first player, male or female, to collect 2,500 career points and 2,000 rebounds, she said her ambitions would be fulfilled only by winning a championship.

 

David L. Boren, the president of Oklahoma, said Paris was apparently so serious about her vow that she checked beforehand with university officials to make sure that repaying her scholarship would not be a violation of N.C.A.A. rules. Since then, Paris has repeated her promise to follow through, presumably using money she will make playing professionally in the United States and perhaps overseas, and from endorsements.

 

“This program and university have given me so much support,” said Paris, who is from Piedmont, Calif. “I feel like I want to give them something back that’s really special. If I can’t do that with a national championship, I want to give back my scholarship because I don’t feel like I’ve earned it.”

 

The university has said it would not hold her to her promise. News reports have placed the cost of an Oklahoma scholarship at $64,000, but according to the university’s Web site, out-of-state tuition would put the value at more than $100,000.

It's amazing to see how the discussion has taken off. And every time I think I have a new favorite part, like the fact that the Times editorial board is pursuing these questions, I find a young leader, like Courtney Paris and learn that she is a journalism major. Courtney, if you're out there, I love you.

Permanent Link Pay the Players?

Among the four number one seeds in the NCAA collegiate basketball championship, Country Club Jim Calhoun has the worst graduation rate at 33 percent. Number one seed North Carolina, under coach Roy Williams, boasts of an 86 percent graduation rate, according to the 2009 annual study by the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport.

 

Williams, who like Calhoun makes $1.6 million a year, seems to focus his million-dollar time a little more on athletics. Consider, too, how much more genteel Williams is than Country Club Calhoun. When asked about his $1.6 million salary, Williams at least indicated his family is suffering under the economic buckle, as his son recently lost a job.

 

Country Club Calhoun, though, earned himself a new nickname, as he was out there rubbing it in our faces again. Mr. "I-make-more-than-that" gave this to a presser, scribed by Brendan Punty of the Newark Star-Ledger:

Calhoun was asked a question about playing first-round opponent Chattanooga and eventually rambled into watching good friend and College of Charleston (which is a Southern League member with Chattanooga) coach Bobby Cremins.

"I watched (Chattanooga) against (Charleston) because of my friendship with Bobby Cremins," Calhoun said. "Same country club down in Hilton Head that I'm a member of."

"Actually, I shouldn't say that, 'I'm a member of a country club,'" Calhoun said grinning. "Probably not a good idea to advertise, I'm sorry. The public course that I go to and play with him -- $35 greens fees down in Hilton Head -- sure."

Unbelievable, Connecticut. He's yours. You can have him, and his 22 percent graduation rate when it comes to African-American players only.

 

Me, I just picked the Huskies to lose in the third round to Washington. It's happened before. And without Jerome Dyson, they lack the depth.

 

It showed in that sixth overtime last week. And full disclosure - I was rooting for my alma mater last Thursday night. How could I not cheer for my Orangemen?

 

Although Syracuse Coach Jim Boeheim's graduation rate needs helping, as he only graduates 50 percent of his players, according to the Institute for Ethics and Diversity in Sport down at the University of Central Florida.

 

Amazingly, a college basketball team can make the post-season and have a 100 percent graduation rate, witness Florida State. As for the other number one seeds, Louisville has a paltry 42 percent graduation rate, and Pitt, another Big East team, boasts a 69 percent rate.

 

Link to Country Club Calhoun...

Marijuana is going to be legal in our lifetimes. If the Quinnipiac Poll is good enough to predict collective forgiveness of Jim Calhoun, then surely, the Q-Poll saying that 58 percent of Connecticut voters want to decriminalize marijuana can't be wrong.

 

And from this poll, we have an answer to one of the more trying questions of public policy right now: how to create wealth. While I think decrim is okay, we need to take it a step further and legalize it outright.

Legalizing the underground drug economy would bring hundreds of millions of dollars above the table, taxable, where now, millions of dollars pass through our state without regulation or taxation. I had an old friend tell me 15 years ago that marijuana would be legal the day that the government could make more money and advantage on it from taxation and regulation than from criminalization.

 

So, it appears that day has arrived, or is certainly around the corner. Consider that yesterday - March 18, 2009 - U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder suggested he won't be prosecuting medical marijuana dispensaries in California.

 

The hour is upon us. This pot of gold awaits the first American city and state that make this policy change. For the first city that creates a three or four block red light district like Amsterdam, the value of being a pioneer is tantamount, and worth the equivalent of billions.

 

In our capitalistic culture, the sloppy second city that makes the change won't have the prize. Hartford is in a position to be first. And the red light district doesn't have to be the whole city. It need only be one small three block area.

 

People already think Hartford is a sink hole. But if the city, and the state do something radical and thought provoking, if we stands on the cutting edge of drug policy reform, we will be seen as a beacon. The value lies in breaking the ground, in being the first.

The Q-Poll is a stunning development from the inhabitants of the land of steady habits. We Nutmeggers should capitalize on this courage, and blaze the trail in the green economy. Connecticut can set the agenda for the policy, and invent the American model. The dollars and prestige from research and innovation that will come this way are unimaginable.

 

Not one state has legalized weed outright yet. California is close, because it sees the hemp dollars pumping into its economy, one of the world's largest. Marijuana increases real estate prices in farm country, it creates jobs, not just at urban dispensaries, but at rural farms, too. Connecticut must leapfrog ahead of California and be the first among the 50 to create a policy for weed like alcohol.

Link to the Green Economy, Q-Poll Style

Just rereading the account of Rachel Corrie's death makes me angry, sad, upset and frustrated. This may be overwrought, but I cry when I think too much about it.

 

Six years ago today, non-violent protestor Rachel Corrie was murdered, run over by a heavily-armored American-made, Isreali-piloted Caterpillar bulldozer. She was trying to protect a house from demolition.

 

Whatever has been said about her, I prefer to let Rachel Corrie speak for herself. Rachel's Words has the emails she wrote to her folks in Olympia, Washington. I'll republish an email from February 20, 2003 that she wrote to her mom:

 

Love you. Really miss you. I have bad nightmares about tanks and bulldozers outside our house and you and me inside. Sometimes the adrenaline acts as an anesthetic for weeks and then in the evening or at night it just hits me again - a little bit of the reality of the situation. I am really scared for the people here. Yesterday, I watched a father lead his two tiny children, holding his hands, out into the sight of tanks and a sniper tower and bulldozers and Jeeps because he thought his house was going to be exploded. Jenny and I stayed in the house with several women and two small babies. It was our mistake in translation that caused him to think it was his house that was being exploded. In fact, the Israeli army was in the process of detonating an explosive in the ground nearby - one that appears to have been planted by Palestinian resistance.

This is in the area where Sunday about 150 men were rounded up and contained outside the settlement with gunfire over their heads and around them, while tanks and bulldozers destroyed 25 greenhouses - the livelihoods for 300 people. The explosive was right in front of the greenhouses - right in the point of entry for tanks that might come back again. I was terrified to think that this man felt it was less of a risk to walk out in view of the tanks with his kids than to stay in his house. I was really scared that they were all going to be shot and I tried to stand between them and the tank. This happens every day, but just this father walking out with his two little kids just looking very sad, just happened to get my attention more at this particular moment, probably because I felt it was our translation problems that made him leave.

I thought a lot about what you said on the phone about Palestinian violence not helping the situation. Sixty thousand workers from Rafah worked in Israel two years ago. Now only 600 can go to Israel for jobs. Of these 600, many have moved, because the three checkpoints between here and Ashkelon (the closest city in Israel) make what used to be a 40-minute drive, now a 12-hour or impassible journey. In addition, what Rafah identified in 1999 as sources of economic growth are all completely destroyed - the Gaza international airport (runways demolished, totally closed); the border for trade with Egypt (now with a giant Israeli sniper tower in the middle of the crossing); access to the ocean (completely cut off in the last two years by a checkpoint and the Gush Katif settlement). The count of homes destroyed in Rafah since the beginning of this intifada is up around 600, by and large people with no connection to the resistance but who happen to live along the border. I think it is maybe official now that Rafah is the poorest place in the world. There used to be a middle class here - recently. We also get reports that in the past, Gazan flower shipments to Europe were delayed for two weeks at the Erez crossing for security inspections. You can imagine the value of two-week-old cut flowers in the European market, so that market dried up. And then the bulldozers come and take out people’s vegetable farms and gardens. What is left for people? Tell me if you can think of anything. I can’t.

If any of us had our lives and welfare completely strangled, lived with children in a shrinking place where we knew, because of previous experience, that soldiers and tanks and bulldozers could come for us at any moment and destroy all the greenhouses that we had been cultivating for however long, and did this while some of us were beaten and held captive with 149 other people for several hours - do you think we might try to use somewhat violent means to protect whatever fragments remained? I think about this especially when I see orchards and greenhouses and fruit trees destroyed - just years of care and cultivation. I think about you and how long it takes to make things grow and what a labour of love it is. I really think, in a similar situation, most people would defend themselves as best they could. I think Uncle Craig would. I think probably Grandma would. I think I would.

You asked me about non-violent resistance.

When that explosive detonated yesterday it broke all the windows in the family’s house. I was in the process of being served tea and playing with the two small babies. I’m having a hard time right now. Just feel sick to my stomach a lot from being doted on all the time, very sweetly, by people who are facing doom. I know that from the United States, it all sounds like hyperbole. Honestly, a lot of the time the sheer kindness of the people here, coupled with the overwhelming evidence of the wilful destruction of their lives, makes it seem unreal to me. I really can’t believe that something like this can happen in the world without a bigger outcry about it. It really hurts me, again, like it has hurt me in the past, to witness how awful we can allow the world to be. I felt after talking to you that maybe you didn’t completely believe me. I think it’s actually good if you don’t, because I do believe pretty much above all else in the importance of independent critical thinking. And I also realise that with you I’m much less careful than usual about trying to source every assertion that I make. A lot of the reason for that is I know that you actually do go and do your own research. But it makes me worry about the job I’m doing. All of the situation that I tried to enumerate above - and a lot of other things - constitutes a somewhat gradual - often hidden, but nevertheless massive - removal and destruction of the ability of a particular group of people to survive. This is what I am seeing here. The assassinations, rocket attacks and shooting of children are atrocities - but in focusing on them I’m terrified of missing their context. The vast majority of people here - even if they had the economic means to escape, even if they actually wanted to give up resisting on their land and just leave (which appears to be maybe the less nefarious of Sharon’s possible goals), can’t leave. Because they can’t even get into Israel to apply for visas, and because their destination countries won’t let them in (both our country and Arab countries). So I think when all means of survival is cut off in a pen (Gaza) which people can’t get out of, I think that qualifies as genocide. Even if they could get out, I think it would still qualify as genocide. Maybe you could look up the definition of genocide according to international law. I don’t remember it right now. I’m going to get better at illustrating this, hopefully. I don’t like to use those charged words. I think you know this about me. I really value words. I really try to illustrate and let people draw their own conclusions.

Anyway, I’m rambling. Just want to write to my Mom and tell her that I’m witnessing this chronic, insidious genocide and I’m really scared, and questioning my fundamental belief in the goodness of human nature. This has to stop. I think it is a good idea for us all to drop everything and devote our lives to making this stop. I don’t think it’s an extremist thing to do anymore. I still really want to dance around to Pat Benatar and have boyfriends and make comics for my coworkers. But I also want this to stop. Disbelief and horror is what I feel. Disappointment. I am disappointed that this is the base reality of our world and that we, in fact, participate in it. This is not at all what I asked for when I came into this world. This is not at all what the people here asked for when they came into this world. This is not the world you and Dad wanted me to come into when you decided to have me. This is not what I meant when I looked at Capital Lake and said: “This is the wide world and I’m coming to it.” I did not mean that I was coming into a world where I could live a comfortable life and possibly, with no effort at all, exist in complete unawareness of my participation in genocide. More big explosions somewhere in the distance outside.

When I come back from Palestine, I probably will have nightmares and constantly feel guilty for not being here, but I can channel that into more work. Coming here is one of the better things I’ve ever done. So when I sound crazy, or if the Israeli military should break with their racist tendency not to injure white people, please pin the reason squarely on the fact that I am in the midst of a genocide which I am also indirectly supporting, and for which my government is largely responsible.

I love you and Dad. Sorry for the diatribe. OK, some strange men next to me just gave me some peas, so I need to eat and thank them.

Rachel

 

Read more from Rachel Corrie

Should the United States ever vote for a general as president again, it will be for an affable, humorous four-star servant of empire like David H. Petraeus.

 

As General David Petraeus cracked jokes about Brezhnev, told war stories about Iraq and spun lies about murderous policies, he received multiple standing ovations from the packed house at Goodwin College's new riverfront building in East Hartford Friday night, March 13.

 

Among the clapping crowd was a who's who of Connecticut cognoscenti – Congressman Joe Courtney, Ned Lamont, Brad Davis and even former governor and ex-con John G. Rowland. And the business leaders and military personnel who populated the auditorium lapped up Petraeus’ public speaking skills.

 

Petraeus, a four star general, actually saw combat in the invasion of Iraq, and participated in the liberation of Najaf, he said.

 

"You could feel it, it fell," he said. When that happened, he told a fellow officer, "The good news is, we own Najaf. The bad news is, we own Najaf."

 

Congressman Courtney didn't see this as a statement of empire.

 

"I think you're drawing way too much of a conclusion," Courtney said afterwards. "It's a quip, not a policy statement."

 

Was it? Combined with the rest of Petraeus' remarks, and the context of his visit, I am not so certain. The World Affairs Council of Connecticut, along with weapons manufacturers Northrupp Grumann, United Technologies and Colt Manufacturing sponsored his visit.

 

Like a good guest, Petraeus made sure to thank the local munitions suppliers for their work in supplying America's troops with the best military hardware in the world. It is clear, then, that Connecticut's economy relies on war.

 

Like good hosts, the World Affairs Council made sure it was a largely painless visit fro Petraeus. Just as with Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Hartford back in September of 2008, the Council cautiously screened any audience queries that Vietnam War hero and WAC board member Paul "Buddy" Bucha would ask Petraeus in the question and answer session.

 

Bucha praised Petraeus effusively. "He is a man who walks in grace, a man of impeccable integrity," Bucha said, comparing him to Alexander the Great, particularly because Petraeus oversees an area larger than the breadth Alexander's domain.

 

Introducing Petraeus, Retired Lt. Gen. William Keys, now the head of Colt Manufacturing, called Petraeus a "soldier's soldier."

 

"He leads from the front," Keys said. "He has superb intellectual prowess." Keys only compared him to McArthur and Eisenhower, and listed the accolades mass media has heaped on Petraeus.

 

In his own right, Petraeus not only graduated at the top of his class at West Point, but he holds a doctorate from Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. He started the speech with a joke, and dove into policy, which sounded neoliberal.

 

CentCom is a military operation which stretches across 18 languages, 20 countries, 22 ethnic groups, and 530 million people, Petraeus said. Combined with rich oil reserves, a lack of water and severe poverty, this makes "a potent brew of challenges."

 

CentCom's four main activities are defeating extremism, preventing aggression, protecting trade routes and stopping nuclear proliferation. Petraeus added to that list stopping counterinsurgency, quashing narcotics trades and securing the single problem set that is Afghanistan and Pakistan.

 

He talked of networks nested within networks nested within networks to deal with intelligence sharing, engagements, operations and training. He sounded like a corporate leader with his talk of multilateral cooperation between governments and U.S. agencies.

The ultimate goal in Afghanistan, Petraeus said, was to assure that transnational terrorists are not able to enjoy the base in Afghanistan they had before. That base was the result of blowback, and one wonders what kinds of blowback we are going to face in 30 years for the actions our military takes now.

 

"Countries realize the importance of strengthening their bilateral relationships with the United States," Petraeus said. He quoted President Obama, Vice President Biden, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and even international wanted man Henry Kissinger.

 

And he seemed to belong in this company of accomplished powerbrokers of global domination who trade in death for profit.

 

The man Moveon.org called "Gen. Betrayus"...

The argument, for the past three weeks, has been that the salaries of Div. I college coaches are justified because they bring in huge profits for the university athletic departments.

 

These cash-cow sports teams, we are told, have no negative impact on the academic side of the university. In fact, they have a positive impact, the advocates gloat.

 

Well, what happens when they lose money? And the loss is announced the day after the University hikes tuition by 6 percent and promises to cut 160 jobs?

 

Let's find out, because according to sports reporter Ed Daigneault in today's Waterbury Republican, UConn football lost $63,406 on its trip to Toronto. The Huskies wanted to break even, but they had to purchase more than $340,000 in unsold tickets because fans didn't give a rat's ass about a second rate bowl game, according to Daigneault.

 

But for a change in accounting methods in how UConn write-down coaching bonuses, the loss would have been $255,103 Daigneault wrote. Unreal.

 

So will UConn football coach Randy Edsall, sitting pretty at $1.5 million annually, kick in some of his salary because Calhoun's argument has been, we'll, I bring in big bucks, so I am untouchable? What happens when the football program loses in one day the equivalent of the in-state tuition of three students?

 

The Republican ran a photo of UConn athletic director Jeff Hathaway with the story. Hathaway, at $550,000 a year or so, is one of the six highest paid state employees.

 

Will Hathaway be kicking in that $63,046 from his salary to make up the loss? Or do we students and taxpayers have to absorb the costs of this misguided adventure?

 

Or will former UConn running back Donald Brown, a projected first round draft pick out of UConn, who lied about his draft status before the bowl game, contribute some of his signing bonus to make up the loss? Brown's stock in the draft jumped significantly after he tore up the University at Buffalo defense for something like 265 yards.

 

What risk do these individuals who benefit from taxpayer subsidies bear when the sport loses money?

Funny, too, that Jesse Jackson, the featured speaker at the International Bowl, appeared on Democracy Now! today to decry the usurial rates of student loans, and to decry the rising costs of college.

 

So listen up, Hathaway, Edsall, Calhoun, Auriemma, the salad days are over. Start forking up the cash, and start turning it over to students now.

 

Here's Rev. Jackson:

Well, really we have made a fundamental shift from grants to loans. And these are very oppressive loans. The more you go to school, the worse off you are. Talking about students who are in $150,000 in debt, they marry a classmate, $300,000 in debt, and so you have the combined burden of the loan, and then you have compounded interest. If you don’t start paying back after six months, then you’re facing default and garnishment. If 20 percent of your school cannot pay back, it can face the loss of accreditation. It only gets worse.

And so, we feel that students should get the same deal banks are getting. If they can get, on the top, zero to one percent loans, students should get zero to one percent loans, and it is a transparent flow of the moneys. When you, in that sense, restructure the student loan process—more grants and less loans—it helps the student, it helps their parents, it helps the school, it helps community. I mean, the help just never stops coming.

And so, we have launched a website, reducetherate.org. Students should begin rebelling and marching across the country. Students have accepted this as like normal. It’s normal, but it is not right. And it is a point of rebellion. So we’re urging students across America who want to reduce the rate and have more grants and less loans, let’s begin to have marches, use last year’s energy in the presidential campaign, demand a new deal.

The Republican probably won't keep its link for the Daigneault story up, but they have a great take on the numbers, so I'll share:

While officials stated before the game that their goal was to break even financially, the final numbers showed a deficit as the school was forced to spend more than $340,000 to buy unused tickets. That meant a loss of $63,406 after factoring in the expense of taking the team, staff and the band to Toronto for several days.

For the full story from the Republican...

If millions of people tell you that something is right, even though you know that something is wrong, does it matter what those people think?

 

No. Of course, people have a right to their opinion. But consider the dangers of an uninformed opinion forcefully argued, like the sports fan who loves his hero.

 

The sports fan opines based blindly on emotion, and this distorts his view of reality.

 

Sports fans should not be trusted, then, to run important enterprises like government. So why are we letting our love for sports lead us right now?

 

We confront, then, a lack of leadership in this state, and this country. Bumper sticker wisdom says “When the people lead, the leaders will follow.”

 

While believing a $2 proverb on beat-up junker is comfortable, Jon Green, the head of the Connecticut Working Families Party, knows better.

 

“People take cues from leaders,” Green said. “When we have leaders in elected or non-elected office saying the right things in a forceful and direct way, people respond to their better instincts.”

 

However, Green warns, “When only one perspective has a megaphone, it is not surprising that a smaller percentage of the population will spontaneously on their own push the leaders,” he said. “It takes the leaders to pull the rest of the people with them.”

 

Right now, Connecticut has multiple leaders telling us many different things, but only a few of them have strong megaphones.

 

The men’s basketball coach has the biggest megaphone of all. He tells us that the winning de facto professional sports franchise he runs under the protection of an academic institution is good for us because it generates profit and winning makes us feel good about ourselves.

 

He tells us to shut up when we ask about his salary and we like it.

 

The women’s basketball coach has a megaphone, too, and he tells us the it is impolite to ask about salary, which essentially means that the discussion should not be had at all. He tells us the questioner should be in jail.

 

The university president tells us that in-state tuition should rise by 8.67 percent because the tax credits from the stimulus package from the president of the country will more than offset the rise in tuition.

 

The university president, by inaction, tells us that the coaches’ salaries are sacred.

 

The university board of trustees tells us we only need a six percent tuition hike, which means that 160 jobs will still be cut, and the student teacher ratio will its five-year slide from 14-to-1 to 17-to-1 will no doubt worsen.

 

More on Calhoun's Spinning Plates...

Mayor Eddie Perez rewrote history Monday night in his state of the city address at Hartford City Hall. He eliminated from existence his arrest and criminal prosecution on bribery charges, and he erased any talk of a crisis of confidence in city government.

 

But the bigger revisionist coup was Perez reworking the chronology of the Nineteenth century. The Mayor told the assembled standing room only crowd in council chambers that Abraham Lincoln was president in 1809.

 

"Two hundred years ago, President Lincoln said, "I like to see a man proud of the place in which he lives. I like to see a man live so that his place will be proud of him,'" Perez said in closing his annual address.

 

In the next sentence, Perez quoted the "We are the ones we've been waiting for" mantra of President Obama, who has done much to cultivate a resurgence of interest in the Lincoln administration.

 

After the speech, which highlighted financial aid to art projects, mayoral press aide Sarah Barr said that she wasn't sure off the top of her head when Lincoln was president, but she said, he was born 200 years ago. He was, in 1809.

 

Eight out of eight city council members correctly identified Lincoln's term of office as stretching from 1861 to 1865. Had I interviewed Councilman Ken Kennedy, an attorney, I am certain nine out of nine councilmen would have correctly named the years Lincoln served as President.

 

It's not like Lincoln Financial hasn't spent a decent amount of time and money reminding the city of Lincoln's existence, what with all the great scuplture work on Riverfront Recapture. And it's not like the Wadsworth Atheneum doesn't have a great Lincoln art exhibit going on right now, either.

 

But precision with facts and figures have never been a strong point of the Perez administration. And that truism played itself out in his state of the city address.

Finish Reading Perez Rewrites History...

Needed an ax to shatter the frozen lake within my soul the other night, and by chance, pulled The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956, off my bookshelf.

 

I've had Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn's paperback, a yellowing 1974 first edition (priced at $1.95), in my library for at least a decade. I don't even know where I got it, a tag sale or a second hand store or an aunt's attic. The story about Soviet concentration camps, first printed in 1973, always seemed important, but I never mustered the courage to open the two-inch thick opus.

 

For some reason, Monday night, I sought change, new experience to wake me up before I drifted to sleep. Solzhenitsyn cracked my ice mind. He called the first chapter: "Arrest."

Arrest! Need it be said that it is a breaking point in your life, a bolt of lightning which has scored a direct hit on you? That it is an unassimilable spiritual earthquake not every person can cope with, as a result of which people often slip into insanity?

 

The Universe has as many different centers as there are living beings in it. Each of us is a center of the Universe, and that Universe is shattered when they hiss at you: "You are under arrest."

 

If you are arrested, can anything else remain unshattered by this cataclysm?

 

But the darkened mind is incapable of embracing these displacements in our Universe, and both the most sophisticated and the veriest simpleton among us, drawing on all life's experience, can gasp out only: "Me? What for?"

More from The Gulag Archipelago...