The Best and Worst of the American Political System

Democracy is Alive and Well - for Now

A few days ago I was watching CNN and the ongoing dialogue about Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. It was the day before senators were going to vote and they were outlining how they would be voting and why.

I happened to catch 2 senators' speeches and I was extremely impressed with both. The first was Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy, and immediately following Republican Senator Lindsey Graham. Two days later I observed the elevator incident with Republican Senator Jeff Flake and later his tapping the shoulder of Senator Chris Coons - his friend and Democratic rival - for a private conference.

I make four points :

1. When I saw and heard Leahy I must confess I was expecting another lengthy yada yada drawl by some old guy (OK - I am also a senior.) Was I wrong! This guy articulated his points with precision and great timing and convinced me that the Judge should NOT be confirmed. I can see why he became a senator.

2. Next Lindsey Graham whom I have seen several times was also very well spoken and had me thinking he was also going to vote "No." Then he did a complete about face and lambasted the Democrats. He accused one of them of leaking the name of a female complainant to the press and brought out another fact which was new to me. The Doctor had apparently been offered the chance to avoid publicity by testifying in private at her time and place but she never received this offer. He convincingly stated that he believed her when she said she was not aware of this option. He then powerfully questioned who had intercepted the offer - her legal team or more Democrats? Whoever it was they certainly did not have the Doctor's best interests at heart.

3. Hopefully many people witnessed the elevator incident with Senator Jeff Flake when a couple of women accosted him in the elevator preventing the door from closing and dragged him through the coals over his apparent attitude towards female abuse. You could see the emotion on his face and theirs.

4. Finally we saw him return to the committee room to ask his friend Chris Coons to meet with him privately. Apparently he changed his mind on the need for an FBI inquiry.

Wow! As a Canadian I too enjoy a democratic form of government and I am frequently critical of it. Often Canadians are smug about our system vs. the American one with its open and brash institutions and decisions - the O. J. Simpson trial comes to mind.

However look what happened to me. By having a system in which four people (in my example) were able to speak freely without repercussions, I changed my mind at least twice. These people are still alive as far as I know and not confined to slave labour for their outspokenness. In other countries they would not be so lucky.

But the main point is that finally two senators from opposing parties were able to compromise for the good of their country. THAT is what Democracy is supposed to be about. Where was this when the Republicans stonewalled Obama? Where has it been with the Democrats to date with this issue?

THAT must never change. It is the heart of Democracy.

Now if only the person elected to their highest office shared this belief!


The Brewster

Serena: Did she break a racquet or a racket?

Who was Guilty of Bad Behaviour Here?

I did not see this match, but I heard and then read ALL about it. I have to admit that when I heard about racquet smashing and back talking to an official, my first reaction was - there she goes again. She got what she deserved! Serena has definitely lost it before.

Now my thoughts are mixed, especially hearing from other legendary players both male and female.

Initially I was thinking "Give me a break (no pun intended)." Spoiled tennis brat behaviour has gone on too long. Some people argue that top athletes just get heated and will act like this occasionally and we - including officials - should accept it. Did Bjorn Borg carry on like this? Martina Lavratinova? Does Roger Federer? 

It is true that in every sport there are those who express their anger and frustration openly, verbally, and physically and those who don't. I happen to prefer the latter because I think it is more difficult to keep your cool and  play your best simultaneously. It is all about being a good sport and good sportsmanship. Some people love the Jimmy Conners and John McEnroes - I don't, preferring the Federer / Gretsky / Palmer styles of classy behaviour. 

Then I read on. I was not aware of the "no coaching" rule. What's with that? Imagine baseball, football (both types), hockey, car racing, or boxing without a coach yelling or signaling from the side? Is it just one of those traditional, stately old tennis idiosyncrasies like the once "white uniforms only" rule? Is there another sport with such a rule?

If the rule stays then it should be respected. Serena is right however, to protest if the rule is overlooked when male players are guilty. She was NOT right o break her racquet or call the official a thief and neither are any men who do the same thing. I agree that if men are warned first, then she should be also. That is the "racket" part of this - apparently a racket to the advantage of men. I don't buy in to the proposal that this particular official got upset just because it was a woman who spoke to him in such a manner.

A lot of people do not like Celine Dion or Tiger Woods when they are off the stage or the course. I try to separate the personalities from the talent. That I will always admire and wish them success in their profession. The same goes for Serena -  she is a fantastic tennis player.

Is there a conclusion here or am I just lobbing balls over the net? OK - I have to agree that some overdue good will come out of this. Eliminate silly rules or clarify them and apply rules equally to ALL players. The sad part about all of this is that the moment should have belonged to Naomi Osaka who most observers say would have prevailed regardless. Her moment of glory was tarnished. THAT I blame on Serena.

The Brewster