JayStream

It is three months to the day after Thanksgiving – but I think we need to re-visit that holiday. It seems to me it came and went without a lot of appreciation.

On Thanksgiving Day 2008, we had just elected a new president who campaigned on, “the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.” Remember how abysmal it was when we went to the polls? Unemployment was at 4.7%, the Dow at 9,625.

Back in those days, workplace grumblers and complainers were grumbling and complaining. They bemoaned their jobs, their salaries, their lives. Thanksgiving was observed in the usual manner – the network newscasts treated us to an onslaught of expectations for the Christmas shopping season.

Fast forward one-quarter of a year. People are losing their jobs, businesses are losing their customers, Dow is losing its points. But people aren’t grumbling and complaining about work as much. I think it is because our definition of thankfulness has changed.

Last night on television, a story aired about a man and his wife. They both have jobs, but recently found out that their salaries would be involuntarily reduced due to the economic slowdown. They must lower their household budget to cope with the shortfall. And the reaction of the man who was asked about having his salary cut?

“To be honest my first reaction was, I’m just thankful and blessed I have a job.”

I expect more people will have similar sentiments nine months from now, when we observe our next Thanksgiving Day.

Jay News, Television industry economy, layoffs, recession, Thanksgiving

In speeches, world leaders usually employ what’s called the “royal we” (latin: pluralis majestatis) to emphasize that he or she is speaking for a government or their people. The use of the first person plural is also common in newspapers, where editorialists express their opinions after the word we to indicate that they speak for a group, such as an editorial board.

American presidents have traditionally used it as well. Not only is it an acknowledgement of a team effort in government, but also implies a certain humility; or like we say in the Midwest, it indicates that a speaker hasn’t gotten too big for his britches.

Contrast that with our new president. Barack Obama never uses the royal we; he only uses the word “I”. President Obama told the nation’s mayors that, “I will not tolerate any compromise or shortcuts” in the way he intends stimulus money to be used. Since the president rarely speaks without a teleprompter, we can assume it was a deliberate use of the word “I”. Behind closed doors, he reportedly shot down Republicans seeking input on the stimulus with the admonition, “I won.” It ended any notion of compromise and drove home the point that there’s a new sheriff in town.

When President Obama appointed his inaugural cabinet, news pundits asked how he would be able to control a room full of large egos. We now have the answer: By having the biggest ego of them all.

Jay News rhetoric, stimulus

The word warning used to mean something: caution, alert, alarm. Like the robot in the old TV series Lost in Space that droned, “Danger, Will Robinson.” If you recall, the robot’s warnings always verified.

The other day, as I drove past the Walgreens store at 57th and Cliff, I couldn’t help but notice large, red words on their electronic sign that screamed, “FLOOD WARNING.” I immediately felt cautioned, alerted, alarmed – and confused, since there was no rain in the forecast on this February day. Then I thought about the sign and figured out what was going on. The store is located on the southeast corner of 57th and Cliff, meaning that it is 50 feet inside the Lincoln County border. Had the store been on the northeast corner of the same intersection, there would have been no warning at all, because no warnings were in effect for Minnehaha County.

The warning itself was posted because of the potential for lowland flooding of farmland along the Big Sioux River on the opposite end of Lincoln County, many miles from where that sign was warning passing motorists. I’m not criticizing Walgreens, because the sign was displaying a valid warning for the county in which it was located; nor am I criticizing the National Weather Service, which issued a perfectly valid, by-the-book, weather alert.

Here is the problem: every motorist who saw that sign probably imagined it was bogus, or at least another exaggeration of a perceived threat to their person or property. In weather, just as in every daily newspaper and newscast, we have so needlessly over-used the word warning that it is largely ignored. Just within the past few hours, there have been warnings published about the financial markets, oil supplies, North Korea, Twitter, and tenant cannabis farms. Who can stand the stress and anxiety of all these warnings? I mean, we can be alarmed about only so many things before warning fatigue sets in.

As we head into the warm season, we will soon be warned about everything from penny-size hail to violent tornadoes. Regardless of the severity of the threat, the weather and broadcast industries will be working hard to make sure that every weather warning receives thorough coverage on every electronic medium.

Yet people have become so de-sensitized to the incessant warnings they receive each day that the question asked after most of these storms will be not whether it came without warning, but rather whether anybody paid attention.

Jay Weather flooding, weather warning

They were two stories on opposite ends of the Argus Leader newspaper. One was below the fold, the other in a side banner. Connect the two, and you have an outrage.

The first story was about cutbacks at the University of Sioux Falls. The article said eleven to 16 staff members would be dismissed immediately; four to eight faculty members will leave at the end of the term. Those who keep their jobs will see an immediate nine percent pay cut.

The other story was picked up off the AP wire, headlined “Ferentz gets seven-year extension to coach Iowa.” Curious about why any college coach in today’s economy would be given a seven year contract for anything, I read on. The story said Kirk Ferentz would receive the same salary and bonus structures as his previous contract, which this year rewarded him with a salary of $2.84 million.

I am a big sports fan, but I also believe in a quality education. Students at the University of Sioux Falls, a good school with a solid reputation, will lose professors to save $2.2 million. At the University of Iowa, slightly more than that will be spent to keep a football coach.

Why does this happen? The University of Sioux Falls is a private college, with a president who needs to make cuts to meet a budget. The athletic director at Iowa, Gary Barta, gets to play with other peoples’ money. Specifically, the taxpayers of Iowa ultimately guarantee costs of the football program at the public university. The Hawkeyes must figure Iowans have money to burn – if it means a decent football team.

I realize that Iowa’s unemployment rate is only 3.6%. But I doubt that the 60,900 jobless people in Iowa will be sending Ferentz congratulations on his new deal. Barta said Ferentz has “proven himself to be a winner.” At Iowa, a winner is defined as 70-53 in ten seasons.

Jay Sports football, Iowa, job cuts, university

In his signature masterpiece Faust, German novelist Johann Wolfgang von Goethe wrote about a man who sold his soul to the devil. All is well – until the devil demands repayment. The CEO’s of several American financial institutions can identify with Faust.

Their devilish transaction took place a few months ago. Banks were in trouble; bad mortgage loans set the ball rolling toward shrinking credit availability. Faced with the potential of widespread collapse, bankers accepted bailout money from the federal government. Minimal strings were attached – they thought.

Thursday those same bankers sat before an indignant US Senate committee. Arrogant senators vented righteous outrage, demanding to know why – why the bankers hadn’t sold their corporate jets, why they hadn’t lowered the interest rates on credit cards, and why they hadn’t given part of their personal paychecks back to the companies they worked for. It was typical political theater, with senators alternating in the role of Goethe’s Mephisto. The bankers came to realize they sold their souls for federal money, and it is time to give the devil his due.

After the hearing, one of the bankers who refused the offer he couldn’t refuse breathed a sigh of relief. In an interview, Steve Buster said 60 million dollars in federal TARP funds had been dangled in front of his Mechanics Bank. In exchange, the bank would have been told how and to whom to lend, would have had to accept oversight in the board room, and would have been prohibited from giving employee bonuses for five years. In Buster’s words, “A lifeline turned into a noose,” and Mechanics Bank turned down the federal money.

While it is outrageous to think that any Senator has the ability or right to tell a banker how to do business, the fact of the matter is that the banks took money from the federal Mephisto. The banking CEO’s violated one of the first rules of business: know who you are doing business with.

Jay News bailout, bank, Senate

I was unable to watch President Obama’s highly anticipated, first prime time press conference. I did see clips on the 10 pm news, and expected that the president probably handled a number of questions about very serious issues.

Then as I was driving home, listening to baseball news on ESPN radio, I heard that “even President Obama was asked about Alex Rodriguez” and his admission of steriod use. The president was asked about A-Rod? The night before a vote on a 900 page spending plan nobody has completely read, and crucial international situations in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Mexico – a professional journalist actually wasted national TV time asking about A-Rod? According to the transcript, Michael Fletcher of the Washington Post did.

During the hour-long press conference, the President gave long answers to each inquiry, so only 14 questions were able to be asked and answered. Time ran out before another journalist could ask if Kobe Bryant passed the ball enough.

I don’t remember any White House reporter ever tossing President Bush a softball question about baseball. Which is ironic, since Bush used to own a major league team and could have handled such a question with some authority; unlike President Obama, who has never owned anything.

Jay News news conference, Washington Post, white house

I had no intention of watching the Super Bowl® game, because I had some projects to do around the house and, frankly, I had no dog in the fight. I don’t much care about the Cardinals or Steelers. But I did watch part of the pregame show, and here are three people that made an impression on me:

1) Tony Dungy. I lived in Minnesota when Tony was the quarterback at Minnesota, and was surprised when he began his professional career on defense. Although most people know him for his champtionship ring, Dungy has had some difficult moments in his life, most notably the suicide of his son. But his new passion for helping young people is nothing short of impressive. He just released a new book (Uncommon: Finding Your Path to Significance), and it atop of my list of future-reads. His comments about Larry Fitzgerald show what a star performer and star person Dungy is – a great role model.

2) Bob Costas. The Chicago Cubs’ icon Harry Caray always called Costas the “best young broadcaster in the business.” It couldn’t have been that long ago, was it? Costas is now clearly one of the best in the business – period. One thing that stood out for me during the pregame show was not only how smooth Costas is, but how he dealt with a set crowded with five people holding microphones. Maybe you have to be a broadcaster to appreciate this, but Costas was able to involve them all and make them all look good. Not many sportscasters/studio hosts can do that.

3) President Obama. Say what you want about his politics, but he was incredibly charming and engaging during his interview. Unlike previous presidents, who got all wishy-washy when asked to predict the big game, Obama unflinchingly said he was pulling for the Steelers. Of course, Steelers owner Dan Rooney had endorsed Obama, while Cardinals owner Bill Bidwell is a staunch Republican. But beyond that, Obama seemed very sincere when answering Matt Lauer’s wide range of questions. It almost felt like Obama was sitting there watching the pregame show with you. The interview was a definite winner for the new president.

By the way: If you need to pick up some home improvement materials, go to the hardware store during the Super Bowl. You will have the place to yourself.

Jay Sports NFL football, Super Bowl, television, Tony Dungy