Health Care and More Interesting Topics

So our so called representative legislature passed a bill that will further us on our march towards less personal liberty. What's new? they're politicians. Enough of that. Let's talk about the NFL's new overtime rule enforced only in the playoffs.
For those of you who don't know, the NFL has made some alterations to the way overtime is conducted. The former way of doing things? Sudden death/first one to score any points, safety field goal or touchdown. When I heard that the NFL was looking into changing the overtime I thought, "Finally!". It was terrible. A team was awarded possession on the basis of a coin flip. For years my friends who are football fans have observed the superiority of College Football's overtime system. In this system, each team gets a possession at their opponents 35 yard line. All normal rules are in place. There is no clock. 10 yards to a first down. Touchdown is six. Extra point is a point. 2 point conversion is two. Whoever scores more on their possession wins. If after both teams have had a possession and the score is tied, then they go into another overtime, and the team who had the ball first in the first overtime, now is on defense first. Of course in this system, its to your advantage to have the ball second. It gives you options knowing how many points you need to score. However the defense is also freed up and clued in to how to play. After three overtimes, you have to go for two so that this doesn't go on forever. It's as fair an overtime system as can be contrived in a game like American Football.
Sudden Death Overtime is an impossibly random and unfair "system". This is self evident. I don't need to go into this year's NFC Championship game or any other game where the losing offense didn't get a chance to score. I don't need to show the statistics that the team that starts with the ball wins 60% of sudden death overtimes. To make my point I would only say that imagine the hoopla if we didn't have a coin flip. If the ref just picked the team he wanted to have the ball first to get it first. Well, everyone would be up in arms. Why? Because it matters who has the ball first. If it's sudden death you have a distinct advantage if you have the ball first. You have to score. You have to do one thing. If you are without the ball. You must stop and score. In college both teams must stop and score. Sure the team that goes second has an advantage. Maybe they should give the choice to go on offense or defense to the team with the most yards on offense. At any rate, the advantage of going second in the college is system is nowhere near the advantage of having possession first in sudden death. And its based on a coin flip! Why shouldn't it be based on ref's choice if it doesn't matter? Many complain about the BCS, but nobody complains about the overtime system.
So the NFL got smart (which it usually does) and changed the overtime system. But the system they came up with, hardly more fair, is also more ridiculous. Here it is. I think.

The Game is over if...
An offensive or defensive touchdown is scored.
A safety is scored.
The team who receives the ball first, (this will still be decided by coin toss) scores a field goal and the stops their opponent from scoring.
If both teams have a possession and they both record a field goal, then normal sudden death rules apply.
If the second team scores a field goal and the first team does not, the game is over. If neither team scores anything. It all just starts over.

This effectively does nothing. As journalist Jon Star says, "The new rule retains the game's sudden death feel because the rule still keeps intact the reality that a team can lose without touching the ball"
I was admittedly under the illusion that the motivation for changing the rule was built upon realizing the absurdity of sudden death in football. Our friend Jon makes another great point, "The new rule persuades the receiving team to score a touchdown. The new rule also removes the notion that a team can receive the kickoff, move the ball 30-40 yards. and end the game.

The new rule was not about removing the sudden death element, it was about simply giving the other team an opportunity to touch the ball following an opening field goal, yet simultaneously adding value to going the length of the field.
Illusion removed. Thanks to Jon I am no longer baffled by this decision. I should have known that the NFL values sudden death. I am not sure that anything has changed, other than the NFL overtime has become more intriguing. But one more catch, it's only effective in the postseason. In the regular season, the old rule applies. Next weeks topic? "Iraq War and More Interesting Topics" That more interesting topic would be Baseball's refusal to have instant replay. Please help me understand why guys who work in sports refuse to make their game more fair. Oh, I have a great idea. How about in the NBA overtime, all free throws are worth 5 points if you are fouled with under 10 seconds left on the shot clock.

The List

So, I hate lists. But I am making one. Actually, its not that I hate lists. Its that I hate how out of control they are. Actually it probably has more to do with me hating pop culture. (Should I write "hate" one more time?) Anyway, for what its worth I decided to make a list for my favorite rock/pop songs. Top 20. Easy.

20. Guitars, Cadilacs, Dwight Yoakum
19. Sugar, We're Goin Down Fall Out Boy
18. If You're Feeling Sinister Belle and Sebastian
17. Screaming Infidelities Dashboard Confessional
16. Ballad of a Comeback Kid The New Pornographers
15. Chem 6A Switchfoot
14. Ever So Sweet The Early November
13. Lithium Nirvana
12. My Rights Versus Yours The New Pornographers
11. My Name is Jonas Weezer
10. Blacking Out The Friction Death Cab for Cutie
9. Here Comes the Sun The Beatles
8. Title and Registration Death Cab for Cutie
7. Friday Night House of Heroes
6. You Know How I Do Taking Back Sunday
5. You Never Even Called Me by My Name David Allen Coe
4. Expo 86 Death Cab for Cutie
3. Jambalaya Hank Williams
2. El Scorcho Weezer
1. I Saw the Light Hank Williams

Clarification

It has been brought to my attention that I come off as being rather cynical and somewhat angry. This made me angry, but then I thought about it, and read some of my blog posts and my profile which says, "I am sometimes happy and sometimes angry like the rest of you" And then I was angry because I think the person who brought this to my attention was right. But its true. I am sometimes happy. I don' think I am upset a disproportionate amount of the time, but when I am angry, boy can I be a jerk. This however is not my intention, and I am truly sorry if I come off as negative. I will work on it.

When It's Warm

When people refer to the good 'ole days it makes me want to cry. Not because the good 'ole days were any better than today, but because the good 'ole days only ever exist in the past. I assume that the longing for the good 'ole days are the sign of bitterness and an inability to cope. One day, when life apparently is worse, you will look nostalgically on today, when you were complaining about how bad life was at the good ole days. I suggest that we end this pessimistic life sucker of an attitude immediately, and start being thankful to be alive today. I think nostalgia is a good thing in general, but I think people that assume a glory day of the past are just irrationally sad.
There are certain things that are not good things that some people in our society have tried to twist somehow, but whenever people try to say they are good things I know they are lying. Here are some things that are always true that people question from time to time.

Being sad stinks.
Snow is horrible. White is a bland color, therefore an entirely white terrain is bland. This is assuming that snow is always white. It is however mostly yellow or off white. Snow allows us to see the dog pee that the grass usually absorbs. Snow means its cold.
Warm is better than cold.
Being a nerd is the definition of NOT BEING COOL. That's the point emo kids.
You were just as bitter during the good ole days. You just think they are good now because you don't have to live them.

I'll be happier tomorrow. When its warm.

Being A Christian

Being a Christian I would think would become less confusing as culture becomes more secular. As it turns out, no matter what if you want to call yourself a Christian, you gotta have faith. You gotta be willing to accept a reality you can't see with your eyes and fully explain with your mouth, as if its as clear to you as these words, and as perfectly rational as any math problem.

Getting Old

"Old" is relative. 16 year old men are young. 16 year old rice pudding is officially a living organism. Ironic. I am 2 and 1/2 years from being 30. (You only believe it because of my stupendous beard) I remember when 30 was old to me. 30 the youngest that anyone has ever been "old" to me at anytime in my life. I realize that to some of you 30 is young. Like I said, old is relative. I will cherish every age that I am because no matter what I am young to somebody. That is not entirely true since there is an official age that is without question old. The age is 100, and then obviously anything coming after that. I heard about a woman who lived to be 123. She outlived her grandchildren. That's ridiculous. Moving on.
But I can't stand when things are all relative and subjective, so I decided to invent an old scale. On this scale, it doesn't matter if you're young to someone, only if you're old to someone. Just pretend that young means under 25. The reason I say that "old" starts at 25 is 25 is the age that you can start saying "when I was your age" to people in High School and they think you're lame. Just the fact that you're saying, "when I was your age" or are even inclined to say such a thing to anybody is a sign of being "old". In my estimation, you're old if you're old to someone. I realize this means that most of the human race is "old" and that if I were serious about making an "old" scale that it would be more sensible to make a young scale since that includes a less amount of the population. According to my line of reasoning thus far, "young" is under 25. But of course it's no fun to be sensible. And so it's on with the old scale.
The point of the old scale is to declare who you're old to. There is a gap between 19-24 that's somewhat of a mathematical enigma, but these people we can just call "the have yet to understand how great it is to have a job group" Like I said if you're 25-35, you're old to 18 and below. If your 36-45 you're old to 21 and below. If you're 46 to 60 you're old to 25 and below. If you're 61 to 77 you're old 40 and below. If you're 78 to 85 you're old to everyone but people over 100. If you're 100. You are 100! You've lived a century and are above the irreverent moniker "old". You are an honorary sage.
A key question is, what are some sure signs that I'm old? Remember "old" simply means "old to someone". So, you know you're old when you can remember when Blockbuster was awesome. You know you're old when you can remember when people laughed at people who wore glasses at the theater. You know you're old when you've seen corduroy come in out and out 5 times. You know you're old when you've seen just finished Tim Burton's Batman (1989) and had this thought. "I thought this was the blockbuster of all Blockbusters. And I thought the Joker wasn't actually supposed to be funny" You're old when you say "Mac Machine". You're old when you have an emotional response to the phrase "Smells Like Teen Spirit". You're old when you know why Pearl Jam doesn't deserve "best new artist" at the Grammy's.
Some of you will read this and think, "I must be really old, since I don't even know what ole' Matt is talking about." And then you will think. "Hey Matt doesn't know what he talking about!" He's young! I bet he doesn't know which member of Simon&Garfunkel wrote their songs. I bet he doesn't know what Neil Young means when he says 'four dead in Ohio", I bet he doesn't know what Roller Skates are, not to mention the Roller Derby. I bet he's never seen a live pterodactyl" You must remember that the objective definition of "old" is when anyone thinks you're old. So although they are certainly degrees of "old", you and I are both old. But you know what. Older is wiser, so I'm all ears.

Continuing Thoughts On the Concept of Virtue and the State's Role in Promoting It

If you reread my "initial thoughts", you will discover that I did not actually talk that much about the concept of virtue or the state's role in promoting it. But I believe that I laid the foundation to continue a discussion. The point I was trying to make was that independence is the central American virtue and not work ethic, although up until recently America has been associated with a hard work ethic because their commitment to independence didn't provide them their basic needs very easily in the hard wasteland of the New World. In other words, if they were going to stay committed to independence, they had to fend for themselves, and that created a strong work ethic. The lack of work ethic in our slacker Generation x/y/whatever, is apparent, I think that it means that work ethic was a mythical virtue all along. The real virtue we held so dear and still do is independence. They apparently are more like apples and oranges than love and marriage. This explains the dissolution of work ethic in our culture. Some conservatives who pine for the old days seem to think that the answer is simpler. They seem to believe that the lack of work ethic in our culture is a direct result of an irreligious, and secular society, as if the Christian worldview itself was the motivating factor for the founders to work hard. Although this is probably true to a degree. A strong protestant ethic is part of the fabric that makes us (America) who we are, it's not the entire makeup of an idyllic golden day of the 17th and 18th century. It's more complicated and mixed up than that. So a general discussion about what makes our culture the way it is in order. I don't presume to be as able to talk about these sort of things in the expert manner of the men with Phd's who've written a myriad of books on exactly this. But it is something I have thought about, and feel obliged and glad to talk about.
In short, along the way we have lost certain virtues as a culture. Most notably , the work ethic that established this country. But ironically we have refused to give up one virtue throughout it all; independence. We can now have independence at a bargain price, and so like all good capitalists, we take it. But it will also cost us our independence eventually, I think, and thus our culture.
I am now going to introduce a topic that is sure to twist the issue in a different direction. Some of you will think that the topic ought not be a twist. But I aim to compel you that it will. Because what this topic will question is whether or not independence is a even an admirable ideal. That topic is Christianity.