Wednesday, 25. July 2007, 04:31:14
news, pet peeves, euphemism
almost all american media outlets have followed the department of defense's lead by using the euphemism "troops" to refer to any group of soldiers greater than one...
just a few minutes ago (at least it was when i composed this), i heard on
national public radio (a supposed "bastion" of liberal thought) that
two troops were killed in a roadside bombing today in baghdad
-- doesn't quite have the kick, nor the bitter after-taste, of the truth: two soldiers, aged 20 and 22, were killed by an improvised explosive device today in baghdad... i know that war, by its nature, involves depersonalizing and objectifying one's enemy, but the use of the term "troops" depersonalizes and objectifies america's own soldiers, simply for the sake of a sweeter sound-bite, so innocuous that it floats through one ear and out the other?
Wednesday, 11. July 2007, 04:38:19
mathematics, sports, statistics, pet peeves
not that i care, not that anyone cares, and definitely not that anyone cares whether i care or not, the current major league baseball rule which awards home-field advantage to the winner of the all-star game has never made sense to me (but then again, most of baseball's arcana is a mystery to me, not being a "numbers" person...
all that really means is that i'm a medievalist by training, not a statistician; in fact, in a glowing example of american education in action, i tested better for math at the age of 11 then i did at 16, a fall so precipitous that i wouldn't have gotten into a "decent" university, had not the earlier math test scores counted...
anyway, to return to the nub of my gist, now that the american and national leagues play each other in inter-league play twice a year, why isn't the question as to who possesses home-field advantage settled by overall total of inter-league wins -- if the american league beats more national league teams tham the national league teams beat american league teams, then shouldn't home-field advantage go to the league which had a better record against the other league...
wait a minute -- this is why i hate talking baseball -- it twists one around in knots (gregorian, if not gordian) and obscures simple facts such as shouldn't the team with the most victories in a season be awarded home-field advantage? purists say that the 2 leagues play under different rules, to which i counter that when national league teams play in american league parks, they do so under american league rules, while when an american league team takes the field in a national league park, they play under national league rules, so why not use overall inter-league play as the deciding factor? it would make such riviting games as colorado versus tampa bay actually mean something, other than a chance to see a star play, which before inter-league play, you could only do if your team got into the world series and faced that particular star's team, which even i can figure, is an unlikely event...
why the hell am i writing about baseball? i think it is part of my living will that if i do, the plug is to be pulled, and i am to be garroted with same...
