Anonymous Communist

The Girl’s soccer lidlifter was this past weekend. Those of you who know me or who regularly read this Web log know I harbor a severe and unyielding prejudice against the sport.

My anti-soccer bias is one of my many shortcomings as a human being. But I am big enough not to pass along my prejudices to my children (except for my loathing of the Chicago National League Ball Club; some things are just too important), so I keep my yap shut around my kids when it comes to soccer.

I also keep my yap shut at the games. I wish I could say they same for the other parents. Some of them were a little enthusiastic with their “encouragement.” As soon as the whistle blew to start the game, some “adults” were screaming instructions from the sidelines, things like:

[redacted], get after the ball!

Get back! Get back! Get back!

Take the shot!

ARRRRRRRRGH!!!!!

I heard one mom say, out loud, how “stressed out” she was watching her kid play, in between embarrassing, asinine bleatings from the sideline. Her child, along with her child’s teammates, is SEVEN YEARS OLD. If a parent is going to get that worked up now, what’s it going to be like in later years when the games actually mean something? “Adults” were actually getting frustrated by what their child was doing or not doing on the pitch.

Here’s a friendly tip for all you overbearing soccer parents: Shut up and let your children play. It’s supposed to be fun for them. You screaming “instructions” or “encouragement” from the sidelines only causes embarrassment, for them and for yourself. Even though they’re only 7 years old, I’m pretty sure that they know they’re supposed to run after the ball and kick it and stuff.

Here’s another tip: Let Coach be Coach. It’s his/her job to do the instructing and encouraging, not yours. If you want to practice one on one with your child on your own time, fine. But once your little Beckham steps between the white lines, it’s Coach’s ballgame.

Gosh, I can’t wait for Game 2 on Saturday.

Bashing Wal-Mart is a beloved pastime for many. There are numerous reasons for doing so:

• Using predatory pricing tactics to undercut other retailers;
• Selling poorly made and dangerous merchandise from China for that low price;
• Forcing employees to work overtime without extra pay;
• Not paying employees a decent wage or providing health care;
• Creepy, revival-style shareholders meetings;
• Charging at least $35 just for the right to walk into Sam’s Club;
• etc.

But sometimes you just can’t escape the Walton Empire’s gravitational field, like when you have to buy individually packaged snacks for a class of 32 kids. Sometimes, Sam’s is the best option for stuff like that.

But I’ve found a way to help relieve the guilt and shame of going there:

Much to my surprise, the last time I was at Sam’s I found Fair Trade Certified coffee beans. So while I’m selling out the American worker by shopping at the Walton Empire, I can at least ease my bleeding little heart by helping small farmers receive a fair price for their goods, which are produced using environmentally sustainable methods.

Plus, those beans make an excellent cup (or 12) of coffee.

Christmas usually is thought of as a joyous time of year, what with the “peace on Earth” and “goodwill toward men” stuff.

But as the calendar brings the winter solstice every year, so does it bring the usual raft of “War on Christmas” bleatings from the O’Reillyphiles. Instead of basking in the season’s warm, glowing warming glow, some individuals insist they are under attack by agents of evil who utter the following chilling words:

“Happy holidays.”

Most of the time, people don’t bother to acknowledge the existence of other people. They just operate in their own self-centered monoverse. So when someone goes out of their way to wish you “Happy Holidays,” it’s not being disrespectful, nor is it an attack on your religious beliefs. They’re just being nice.

Let’s break down the phrase into its component parts:

• Happy: having or showing a feeling of great pleasure, contentment, joy, etc.
• Holidays: a day (or days) set aside by law or custom, usually for the commemoration of some event

By this rigorous analysis, it seems that “Happy Holidays” is merely a non-denominational pleasantry. If you want to read in something sinister, that’s your choice. But calling “Happy Holidays” an attack on Christianity is the same thing as saying a teddy bear named Muhammad is an attack on Islam. The reactions to the perceived slights may be different, but the underlying principle is the same.

And really… what difference does it make? You know how you roll… what does it matter what somebody else says? People will bring you down only if you let them.

America’s addiction to foreign oil long has been a pet issue of mine. The Thomas Friedman column in today’s State Journal-Register revisits this issue.

In it, Friedman advocates what he calls a “patriot tax” on gasoline as a way to increase spending on energy independence as well as to reduce the amount of money our country sends to other nations that “indirectly financ[e] the ideologies of intolerance that [kill] Americans.”

It’s basic economic theory that as the price of an activity rises, the less the participation in that activity, which in this case is the purchase of gasoline. While most people will insist that they can’t (which actually means that they won’t) drive less, there are ways to drive more efficiently, the most obvious being driving more fuel-efficient cars.

Gas-electric hybrids are the best of what’s currently available, from cars to SUVs and trucks. Volkswagen allegedly plans to offer hybrids across its lineup, too.

Honda, however, is taking the lead in introducing a vehicle that uses no gasoline at all. The FCX Clarity uses fuel-cell technology, which uses hydrogen to power the vehicle and emits only water vapor. This is a vehicle I’ve been dreaming of for years, and it’s finally here. Unfortunately, you have to live in Southern California to get one, because that’s where all the hydrogen-refueling infrastructure is.

But as more hydrogen-refueling (or home generation) infrastructure becomes available, fuel-cell vehicles will become a viable source of transportation. It’s a technology that could and should get both sides of the aisle united:

• The pro-environment left: Motor vehicles are said to account for 25 percent of U.S. carbon-dioxide emissions each year. Increased adoption of a zero-emissions vehicle will quickly put a dent in that number.
• The War-On-Terror right: It’s really very easy. The less money this country spends on foreign oil, the less money goes to nations such as Iran, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela, all of which espouse varying levels of anti-American sentiment, directly or otherwise. Starve the petrocracies and the oppressive Islamist regimes can crumble without the need for war.