The University of Tulsa football team continues its resurrection this Saturday. After a season opening heartbreak at East Carolina (51-49) in which a 6'6" receiver out jumped a 6'0" (if that) TU defender for the decisive score, TU suffered the ignominy of losing to Oklahoma State (65-28) in which the entire OSU roster out jumped TU's best for the whole game. The turnaround benchmark was the victory over Notre Dame (28-27) followed by a (64-27) pasta-ing or pasting of Rice University. Tulsa's roster accepted the acclaim for an historic victory, let it go and prepared for a new game one week later, and surgically took apart that opponent.
That OSU team has pummeled nearly everyone on the way to this Saturday. It has a change to pull off the Boone Pickens Christmas gift, beating Texas and OU in the same year. That Notre Dame hasn't beaten anyone of note but itself on the way to a worse season than last year. TU has one loss margin that was likely correct (OSU), and one win that was richly deserved and earned (Notre Dame).
Now TUlsa goes to Houston to face off against the other Houston based school, one of the West division leaders. A win would give Tulsa a tie breaker advantage over Houston (head to head win). Tulsa's other nemesis (SMU) owns an earlier (21-18) win over the Hurricane, so first place is not entirely in the Hurricane's hands. It is on the horizon if they can take it.
But consider the way this weekend's game looks to the players and coaches at Tulsa. No matter what the venue Houston plays in, or the number of fans that attend the game, or the attitude and volume the Houston fans produce, it cannot compare with the same factors Tulsa faced in South Bend, Indiana and overcame. Tulsa will have to take the confidence it gained at Notre Dame and the focus and clarity of purpose it showed against Rice and focus all on Houston. Tulsa has shown the tools to beat Houston.
What's all this got to do with a blog by a still unemployed accounting and finance worker bee? Greatness is not just found in large scale movements or accomplishments. Greatness is found in the small as well as large. The fallacy of the BCS conferences in any sport is that they limit themselves. They look for and find their supremacy only in the large scale stadia, the large TV markets, the large population centers, the large universities with their huge dollar budgets to spend on sports. Volume and size are not the totality of greatness. Greatness is not only grandeur. Success is not just spectacle.
Greatness is also in what you overcome on the way to your accomplishment, not the size of what you end up with. Writing a great book can be done with double A batteries as one of the tools. It doesn't take much talent to find a lunker bass with a fast boat and on-board radar. It just takes money and time. Finding the lunker by just looking the signs of structure and knowing the lake does take talent. It also takes time.
We all can achieve great things. Pursue it for yourself. We're are small compared to Boone Pickens wealth and touchdown Jesus, but not bereft of skills, value, and ability. We are not insignificant. Pursue jobs over time and learn as you go. Follow what the job search experts tell you to do. Always remembering you can overcome anything, even that which is bigger than you.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Tyranny of the minority?
A lawsuit was filed yesterday challenging the constitutionality of state question 751. That's the one that requires all official state communications to be in English or Native American languages. A local attorney filed the suit on behalf of Delilah Gentges, a local resident. A previous action to prevent the state question, as well as SQ 751, from being on the November second ballot at all, failed. Gentges was a plaintiff in that action as well.
Normalcy seems to be under attack in today's society. We speak English in the United States. We do so exclusively because that's what is taught in our homes and our schools. Its not done that way with malicious intent. Its tradition and its practical. One common language is universally understandable. Public discourse is accurately communicated.
When I lived in Houston, Texas, I was taught rudimentary Spanish starting in the fourth grade. That was a voluntary act on the part of the school district. There was a significant Spanish speaking population close to our city, Mexico. Mexico had not yet come to America, but we might want to visit there some day. When my family moved to Ohio, the Spanish stopped. Why? It wasn't needed. Our closest "foreign" neighbor was Canada. There is no official language called "Canadian" so no need to teach it, though I still don't understand what a "hoser" is.
There is a difference between personal initiative in learning a language, organizational initiative in teaching students a skill they "might" need later in life, and a mandate or requirement that mandates multiple languages. Simply put, its the free market. If a language variant is needed and beneficial, the free market will come up with a way to handle that. The free market will also ignore a non English language if it chooses because in the free market majority rules.
The state question stated that English was mandated for all state communications was practical. The suit is not. Legal immagration demands the immigrant learn Endglish, at least conversationally. It also demands the immigrant learn our history. If the immigration process is followed, the individual will learn English.
The simply truth is the SQ 751 simply put in black and white a practical limitation on state publications that would both save money and require a part of the legal immigration process be observed. The idea received a 74% yes vote. How can those facts be ignored by the filing of a law suit on behalf of one person or even one class of people?
Normalcy seems to be under attack in today's society. We speak English in the United States. We do so exclusively because that's what is taught in our homes and our schools. Its not done that way with malicious intent. Its tradition and its practical. One common language is universally understandable. Public discourse is accurately communicated.
When I lived in Houston, Texas, I was taught rudimentary Spanish starting in the fourth grade. That was a voluntary act on the part of the school district. There was a significant Spanish speaking population close to our city, Mexico. Mexico had not yet come to America, but we might want to visit there some day. When my family moved to Ohio, the Spanish stopped. Why? It wasn't needed. Our closest "foreign" neighbor was Canada. There is no official language called "Canadian" so no need to teach it, though I still don't understand what a "hoser" is.
There is a difference between personal initiative in learning a language, organizational initiative in teaching students a skill they "might" need later in life, and a mandate or requirement that mandates multiple languages. Simply put, its the free market. If a language variant is needed and beneficial, the free market will come up with a way to handle that. The free market will also ignore a non English language if it chooses because in the free market majority rules.
The state question stated that English was mandated for all state communications was practical. The suit is not. Legal immagration demands the immigrant learn Endglish, at least conversationally. It also demands the immigrant learn our history. If the immigration process is followed, the individual will learn English.
The simply truth is the SQ 751 simply put in black and white a practical limitation on state publications that would both save money and require a part of the legal immigration process be observed. The idea received a 74% yes vote. How can those facts be ignored by the filing of a law suit on behalf of one person or even one class of people?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)