Messi's Failure Is Great

Lionel Messi is considered by many to be not only the greatest soccer player in the world, but of all time. At the very least, he's one of only two in contention for that honor. He has been fortunate to achieve unbelievable heights of success and bask in the blinding lights of fame, wealth, and praise. Despite such greatness, he once again failed in a final to bring home a trophy to his country. Fourth time in his career he's been so close, only to fall short. The pain and anguish in him was plain as day and hard to watch for anyone with any amount of compassion and empathy. He was an absolute emotional wreck; he looked completely and utterly destroyed. 

And it was great. No, this isn't Schadenfreude. No, I'm not a Messi hater. No, there's no cruelty in this. His failure is genuinely good for the world. It's a reminder that we all fail. We all fall short. We all experience gut-wrenching heartbreak and disappointment. Not even the greatest are infallible or immune. Not even the best are or can be perfect. All of us, every last one of us, no matter how good we become, we all sometimes end up with our head buried in the grass.

Julio Cortez/AP

I find great comfort in this actual real-world fable. It's all too easy to fret and compare our lives to those who seemingly have it better, to those who are seemingly more successful than us. It's all too easy to feel like failures when compared to those such as Messi, who have accomplished astonishing amounts. It's all too easy to lose perspective in the midst of failure, mistaking temporary setback for permanent inadequacy. Messi has reminded us that's all silly hogwash. His heartbreaking failure has reminded us that we are all equal, we are all fallible, we are all mortal, and none of us are special.

I sure do hope his declaration to retire from the national team was just a heat-of-the-moment emotional reaction that doesn't stick. Though he has already done the world a great service with his failure, the fable isn't quite finished. The most important part of the fable is to keep going. He has a great chance show the world, especially the impressionable young, that what matters most is to not quit in the face of failure. Keep pushing on. Failure will happen; you have to learn from it and grow from it, and eventually success will come. There is no success without failure first. Even if you don't achieve all your goals, what matters is that you tried and got back up after getting knocked down.

My heart goes out to him, and I don't blame him for being so distraught, especially with all the incomprehensible pressure he's constantly put under (and with the Argentinian FA in corrupt chaos), but I hope he sees the light and completes this wonderful fable. 

The Worst USMNT Game I've Ever Seen

Last night's Copa American Centenario match vs Argentina was, hands down, the worst US Men's National Team performance I've ever seen. There's usually no shame in losing to the number one ranked team in the world, but there is when you lose like that. It would have been a fairly easy pill to swallow had they given a good fight, performed the best they could, and given the rest of the world a good showing of who they are and what they can do. 

But that's not what happened last night, not even close. After giving up a ridiculously early goal, they were clearly rattled and fearful of Messi(ah) and Argentina. They could hardly ever string together more than two passes, and kept giving the ball away cheaply and poorly. They looked like a rag-tag youth team competing against a professional team of grown-ups. They would have lost to anybody playing like that: San Marino, Faroe Islands, Barbados...much less Argentina. It was utterly embarrassing. 

Worst of all, it was one of the worst possible times for such showing. Reaching the semi-final of Copa America was a big deal, and because it was big deal, the eyes of the world and non-soccer-fan Americans were on it. This was a chance to show the world—and fellow Americans who don't normally watch—that the USMNT can compete respectably with the world's best. Of course, the expectation was that Argentina would win as the world's highest ranked team. But with a good, admirable, gutsy performance, they could have won more respect and fans. Instead, they gave the worst performance possible and have probably done uncountable damage to America's soccer reputation around the world and turned off any prospective new fans for now. 

Anyone unfamiliar with the team that saw that is going to think they're a bunch of amateur idiots who can't hang with the big boys and clearly don't know how to play. It's absolutely not true. Sure, we have a long way to go in our development, but we are much, much, much better than last night's performance. It's slow progress, but we are becoming more competitive on the world stage. The chances we could have upset Argentina were slim, but the capability was there. With expert tactics and a heroic performance, we were good enough to win. It hurt so deep to see it all go so wrong, knowing we are better than that and what it could now cost us in reputation. 

The 3rd place match is another chance to give a good showing versus Columbia or Chile, but nowhere near as good an opportunity—with as many eyes on it—as the semi-final. Still, with a great performance they can do some decent damage control on perceptions. After that, what's done is done, and all the USMNT can do now is learn from it and grow. 

I have no doubt the players will learn something from this, but I do doubt Klinsmann. He has repeatedly shown he doesn't know tactics, what his players best positions are, or what an appropriate and symbiotic line-up should be. His interviews and press conferences show an unbelievable stubbornness and inability to learn from mistakes. He dodges questions, provides asainine ethereal answers, hardly ever takes responsibility, and talks down to fans and media (with a jovial smile and demeanor, which makes it all the more insulting). 

He does have his strengths: pushing the players harder than ever while also inspiring and encourgaing them, bringing great energy and notice to the team here and abroad, pushing development for the future with world-class insight, and giving us all hope that one day we'll be at the top level. Yet for all his strengths, it's hard to see significant progress, especially after a dismal 2015. And although he was a key part in revitalizing Germany, it's clear he had lots of help on and off the field, but especially on the field. Joachim Löw was the tacitcal mastermind with Klinsmann the HR mastermind. Without a Löw, he just doesn't know how to actually coach a team, implement tactics, or select a squad. 

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe we're just still in the painful puberty phase of our development as a soccer nation. Maybe it's all uphill from here on out. Maybe Klinsmann does know what he's doing and is about to break through the wall and lead us to greatness in 2018. But I have my doubts with Klinsmann at the helm. I do hope I'm wrong.

Couple Math

I've recently discovered a new kind of mathematics: couple math. What is that? Imagine this scenario: you're out to dinner with a group of friends celebrating a birthday. It's you, three couples, and the birthday boy (male gender used not because of patriarchy or gender discrimination or any other crap; simply because of alliteration!). Being the super awesome nice friends that you are, you all agree to pay for the birthday boy's meal. One of the couples does the math and calculates what everyone needs to chip in for the birthday boy's meal, after splitting four ways. You, the single person, immediately balk. What? What do you mean four ways? There's seven of us! This is an instance of couple math.

Couples that have been together for awhile, married ones in particular, seem to forget they are two individual financial contributors in a group situation. They've grown accustomed to being a financially united team. Teams count as one unit, so couples view themselves as one unit, and that's precisely what they are when it comes to their own private affairs. However, sometimes they forget that is limited to their private affairs and continue to view themselves as one contributing unit in public, which is understandable to a degree. 

But make no mistake. In public, couples become two contributing individuals. Their status as a private financial unit have no bearing and do not transfer to public or group cost sharing. For example, if the three couples and single person were buying seven Bryan Adams concert tickets (yeah, he's awesome and I like him, deal with it!), the couples would never dream of splitting the seven tickets four ways. They would all know they're responsible for their own ticket, even if paying together as a couple.  That same logic applies to the birthday dinner situation. Seven individuals are responsible for their own share of the gift. Being a couple means you can pay for two shares with one card, and that's it. It does not mean you magically owe one out of four shares when there are seven people. 

It should be noted that there are public situations in which couple math makes sense. If there are only three couples and no single people, then splitting three ways is a good shortcut, but it's still just a shortcut. In actuality, it's still splitting six ways. It's just more convenient to split three ways and let the couples do their own math and splitting however they want. The principle, however, remains the same: each individual in each couple is still responsible for their own share.

As I said, it is understandable for couples to lose that perspective in public or group situations. And to be fair, I'm sure most couples would quickly realize their mistake and apologize as soon as it's pointed out to them. So, it really should not be a big deal. But, when you're the single person in that situation, it kinda feels like a big deal. 

It's actually quite insulting on multiple levels. Obviously, it's upsetting strictly on the math level because you realize you're getting screwed and asked to pay more than your fair share. It's further upsetting that the individuals in each couple would all be paying half of what you're paying. It's hurtful that the couples are momentarily oblivious to your singlehood and aren't stopping to consider what is actually fair to all involved. It's absolutely infuriating that you feel that you're being financially punished for being single, especially when being single among married friends already feels like punishment. If anything, you should be getting a financial discount for being single to offset all the loneliness and misery!

Thus, though on paper it's not a big deal, couple math incites a lot of strong negative emotions in single people. There's already enough sensitivity going on when single, so adding financial punishment into the mix not only makes it worse, it brings out all those other sensitivities and makes the chorus even louder. It's basically opening up Pandora's box.

So, couples, don't open up Pandora's box. Please be alert and aware. Remember that in public or group situations, you're still two individual people who are each responsible for their own fair share. Leave the couple math behind with your private affairs, and bring regular boring old math out with your friends. As a single person, thank you in advance :)  

The Progressive Fight Continues No Matter What Happens

For millions of us progressives, right now is probably a hugely depressing, disappointing, demoralizing time. But it doesn't have to be that way. There is always hope and we'll get to that later. 

Even though the votes aren't done being tallied (tons of provisional and mail-in ballots still to be counted in California alone), the final outcome doesn't look good for Bernie and may not make a difference. It certainly didn't help that once again there was voter suppression/disenfranchisement coupled with blatant lies and misinformation by the sadly-way-too-influential mainstream media. 

No surprises, though; the deck has been stacked against progressive revolution from the get-go. Those in power are never willing to give it up. They will do anything and everything they can to stay in power. And what we want—justice, peace, and equality for all— means the 1% and the political establishment must fall. No duh they're against us. And since they have the power right now, it's easier for them to force the circumstances and conditions that help them stay in power than it is for us to challenge and change the power dynamic. If millions of people weren't left out, Bernie would have won the whole primary by a landslide. That's precisely why both parties do everything they can to ensure low voter turnout. If everyone eligible actually votes, they lose big time. 

Losing out now should not be a surprise by any means. But losing the battle doesn't mean we've yet lost the war. Despite what many in the media are saying, Clinton has not mathematically clinched the nomination because Superdelegates can still change sides (highly unlikely that may be). Bernie is still going to the convention to contest and, at the very least, force as much progressive change to the party platform as possible. Not to mention, Clinton is under investigation and might be indicted. So this particular battle is far from over, slim as his chances are. 

However, even if Bernie does lose to Clinton and the short-term continues to be business as usual with another corrupt politician who doesn't actually care about us, we still haven't lost the war as long as we continue to fight and make our voices heard. If we stop fighting for what we believe in, then and only then do we lose. But if we keep going, we can still win in the long run. It's not just about the next four years, it's about the rest of our lives and far beyond: the distant hundreds/thousands/millions/billions/trillions of years of the future of our country and humanity. The war for progress continues, and there will be many more battles to fight.

What the continuation of the fight means is up to everyone individually. The only common denominator is continuing to vote for candidates that actually represent you and what you believe in. Beyond that, it's all individual choice. We make ourselves heard with our votes and it's all I ask of anyone. As long as you vote, you're in the fight. Anything beyond that is a bonus. Rally, clamor on social media, write to your representatives, volunteer, debate and discuss with people...they're all great and power to you if you aid the fight with any or all of the above. But if all you do is continue to vote for real progress, that's totally fine.

It's not enough to just keep fighting, though. We have to keep fighting in the right way: respectfully with love and dignity. It's understandable to get angry when so much is at stake. I personally have a history of going nuclear on people over politics (and god knows I have some rather colorful things to say about Clinton). As I've gotten older, I have been and will continue to do my best to stay peaceful, positive, and respectful. If that means keeping my mouth shut because I can't play nice, then so be it. Yelling, insulting, and disrespecting people will not change anything; it will only further entrench and polarize. 

If we are to make progress, we have to be civil with and loving of those we disagree with. We have to create and foster real discussion. Progress may be painfully slow, but it does win out bit by bit, piece by piece, person by person. It's a steep uphill battle, for sure, but good things don't come easy and are worth fighting for. No matter what happens in the next month and a half, the fight for progress with continues. We keep going!

To end, I leave you with this from The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers:

Primary Problems

Decision time...

With the California Primary just a week away, I'm frantically slaving away over my sample ballot, trying to make a host of decisions about state and local candidates. Since our votes carry a heck of a lot more weight in state and, even more so, local elections, I give it as much time and thought as I can to put my voting power to good use. After all, it's where we can each do the most good with our vote.

However, as always, this comes with a big ol' sack of frustrations. Ironically, where our votes have the most power is also where we feel the most powerless. The smaller the election, the less information there is with which to make an informed decision. How are we supposed to make good choices if we don't even know what the choices really are?

No website?

How is it that in 2016 a lot of candidates don't even have a campaign website? Almost every jackass and fool has a useless website for something, whether it's for their self-indulgent blog (hey there!), perverted fan fiction, or conspiracy theories. You're telling me these candidates, who seek to have real and important power in shaping our government, can't even be bothered to put forth the same effort as a lazy blogger? Why even run if you're not going to actually campaign?

Hell, even half the candidates that do have websites either don't offer any information whatsoever as to what they're about, or just vague platitudes about "helping the poor and middle class," "fighting crime," "protecting the environment," etc. That doesn't tell me anything useful. Give me concrete plans you want to enact or support. Anyone can talk the talk; you gotta talk the walk. What is the walk that you want to walk? Do you actually have reasonable, logical, compassionate ideas or are you just a smooth talker or nutjob? 

For example, and not to single out this issue as there are a lot that matter, it's just an example: climate change. Conspiracy kooks, extremists, fossil fuel worshiping militants, and smug corporate stooges can all give the same "combat climate change" spiel as a sane, real, valid activist. Only the sane activist is going to actually do something good and practical about it. Without a clear strategy provided, there's no telling who they really are.

Lastly, why are we even voting on judges? There's so much wrong here. Not only are there too many positions to vote on to be able to give an informered decision, there's basically no easily obtainable information on anyone. The only way to get any idea of who these people are is to find a publication you trust (or at least think you trust) and read their endorsements. Even then, even if you truly trust the source, even if you really believe in what they say, you're still being told who to vote for, which really defeats the purpose of voting. 

Why are these decisions even left up to the people? How are we supposed to know if someone is a good judge or not. Why are their appointments not just left up to the experts, guided by government officials we elected, who presumably we voted for based on a lot better information. Judges seem far too important to be decided on, at what is basically random, by an ignorant public. Maybe take that one out of our hands.

So here I sit, as usual, frustrated as I try to make informed decisions without enough information. I want to use my local voting power for good. I really do. But the system makes that very, very, very hard and nigh impossible. Perhaps that's just as the powers-that-be want it. I'll just have to do my best...

It always ends like this.