Posted by
Keith Arnold on Thursday, March 26, 2009 5:48:26 PM
Nineteen short centuries ago, Juvenal lamented the fallenness of Roman society, decrying this way: "the people that once bestowed commands, consulships, legions, and all else, now meddles no more and longs eagerly for just two things — bread and circuses." The Romans had once valued participation in their Republic as citizens; by Juvenal's time, they had traded away that participation in return for just two things: the grain dole and lurid entertainment. As long as their overlords provided those two things for the masses, the masses in turn would let their overlords rule in any way they chose.
Panem et circenses. Bread and circuses.
The politicians have learned again that the masses will happily fall in line if they are kept fed and entertained. By these laconic words, Juvenal skewered both the rulers for their pandering and the citizenry for their willingness to be bought. Not since Esau sold his birthright for a bowl of red stew had a people sold their citizenship so cheaply.
Fast forward to the present. Today, American citizens are ceding whole sectors of our lives to our own overlords in return for these two things. As long as proles have a welfare check in the mail and American Idol on their cable TVs, they will continue to vote to keep in power those giving them those things. In return, they will gladly let their eyes glaze over and surrender everything else to government: free speech, self-defense, property rights, choice of doctors for treatment, retirement plans, and our own livelihood.
We saw the "bread" half of this equation back with FDR. Welfare and dozens of other redistribution programs moved the responsibility of feeding people from individuals and their own efforts to the governmental nannystate, in return for nothing except for an ever-increasing share of the earnings of producers by way of taxation. Suddenly millions of people became clients of the State, and those millions were not going to vote against the overlords who were feeding them.
But what about the "circuses" part - other than the unending gladiatorial spectacle that Washington itself is, I mean? I thought that the Congressional meddling in the steroid controversy in major league baseball was it, or perhaps the Federal concern over the conversion to full-digital television would be the key. Until today. Today I learned that these things were just small players in the unfolding drama of the nannystate taking responsibility for keeping us mind-numbingly entertained and distracted. Here is how our overlords are going to take over our entertainment sector:
Senate Judiciary Subcommittee To Take Control Of BCS - here, here, and here.
Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) has stated that "the BCS system has proven itself to be inadequate, not only for those of us who are fans of college football, but for anyone who believes that competition and fair-play should have a role in collegiate sports."
Fine, Orrin, you get no argument from me about the diagnosis: I hate the BCS too. As far as I'm concerned, the BCS doesn't prove which college team is America's champion. It can't, because football isn't Major League Baseball. The MLB has a limited number of teams, and can have best-of-five and best-of-seven playoff systems to avoid eliminating a good team that happens to have one bad day. College football? Apples and oranges, Orrin. If you're concerned about every college team, the large and the small, having equal access, in a sport that is so demanding that you can't play more than one game a week, then your annual championship system will take six years to go through. Do the math.
I also understand that it's a personal thing for you and your constituents. Your Utes (no, readers, that's not a reference to My Cousin Vinny) had a good season - no, a GREAT season, rolling to an undefeated 13-0, starting with a win over the Michigan Wolverines and ending with a trouncing of the Alabama Crimson Tide in the Sugar Bowl. That's a season you can hang your hat on. I feel for you, Orrin, and I'm not trying to be condescending. The University of Utah has every right to claim the title of Best in the Country for this season. The Utes were awesome, and they weren't just playing a lot of bottom-rung teams to get there.
Finally, Orrin, I also realize it's not just bragging rights we're talking about: there's serious money involved. A big stack of Benjamins that the Utes didn't get because of how the BCS works. Here's an idea: instead of messing with the system, why not just earmark a piece of some bailout to the school to make up for the inequity? I mean, you guys have plenty of practice at that, what with 9,000 or so of them. What's one more between friends?
So, now that we both know I do understand the situation and your feelings, let me just ask two simple questions to counterbalance:
(1) On the basis of what Constitutional authority does the Senate feel it has any business stepping into the whole controversy of how college football decides whose team is better than whose? Hint #1: any answer that includes any reference to "the Commerce Clause" is grounds for immediate disqualification, because it's a wrong answer. Hint #2: this would be a really good question to ask about ANYTHING the three branches of the Federal government get the urge to stick their grubby little fingers into.
(2) With so many larger and most important things taking place in the world to which the Senate is probably giving some of its attention - oh, for example, an economy that you all are taking a wrecking ball to; a nuclear Iranian headcase; a North Korean despot compensating for his self-esteem problem with ballistic missiles*; the loss of fair and free elections in this country; I'm sure a few more concerns could be added - what possible compelling interest exists for the Senate to have to get involved in this? IF you had some legitimate Constitutional authority to go there (which you don't - see #1, above), and IF you've cured cancer, protected our borders, defeated crime, ended the scourge of drugs for our children, given all the hippies a bath, and everything else more important, then I'd have no beef with you saying "you know, we ought to take a look at fine-tuning the way college football decides on a champion." But until you do, shut the heck up and get back to work.
Oh, by the way: "the BCS system Federal government has proven itself to be inadequate, not only for those of us who are fans of college football freedom, liberty, and prosperity, but for anyone who believes that competition and fair-play should have a role in collegiate sports life here in America."
There. Fixed that for you, Orrin. You're welcome.
* Watch the comments section for my off-center thoughts on this.
### UPDATE ### Special News: Orrin Hatch scores in the news twice in one week. Today, Michelle Malkin highlights another Hatch tour de force, along with legislation which plays fast and loose with the Thirteenth Amendment. Who'll be the first to denounce this for bringing slavery back to America: Jesse Jackson? Al Sharpton? Michael Steele? The Prezznit?