« April 2010 »
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30
You are not logged in. Log in
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
Navigate Story Archive
Friday, April 30, 2010
Why angry and aggravated Arizonans are angry and aggravated

MY SWEET, SMART MOM ASKED ME why what was going on in Arizona was going on in Arizona.  "Wasn't America made up of immigrants?" she asked.  It is a good question, why are those surly people so surly?

Short answer is they are angry because they have been aggravated too long.  Where most people across the United States see illegal immigration as an abstract problem, for many in Arizona, and the other border states, it is much more real.  They can see the horrific drug-smuggling-fuelled crime wave just across the border.  They know statistics such as 17% of those caught trying to enter Arizona illegally from Mexico have a criminal record. And they may be aware that this is more than a couple of guys. The U.S. Border Patrol apprehended 403,493 entrants without documents in 2006 on the Arizona border.  That's one year and one state -- and, of course, doesn't count those who weren't apprehended.

Wouldn't you be angry and aggravated if you thought the lack of good immigration laws, and the failure to enforce the ones we have now, were putting you out of work, preventing you from obtaining a better job, keeping you from getting a raise at the one you do have, raising your taxes, hiking your town's crime rate and generally lowering your quality of life?  I would.

Amnesty for illegal immigrants has already been tried in 1986 via a bipartisan bill signed by Ronald Reagan. It didn't work -- and without secure borders, real penalties for employers, active prosecution for identity fraud as well as vigorous enforcement of current immigration laws in general, a new amnesty won't either. In fact, it will do just the opposite, as it rewards the original unlawful acts.

Most Americans don't believe, in principle, in rewarding law breakers for their unlawful acts, any unlawful act (and entering this country illegally or overstaying a legal visa is a violation of the law).  Most Americans do believe in limited legal immigration. Most Americans are not racist.  A 2009 survey found that clear majorities of Hispanics (56%), African-Americans (57%) and Asian-Americans (68%), all thought immigration, not just illegal immigration, was too high.  And majorities of all three groups "support enforcement to encourage illegals to go home."

Illegal immigration, like America's many other difficult problems (such as Medicare, Social Security, federal spending deficits and the tax code) has no easy, politically pain-free solution.  So, we mostly do nothing and let the problem get worse.

Besides inaction, why do we have such an overwhelming illegal immigration problem?  One reason is good.  Most of the world sees America as a highly desirable place to live.

The middle-class laborers and working poor don't like illegal immigration, even when they admire the immigrants themselves, because the hardworking illegal immigrants take their jobs and reduce their wages, while the non-working illegal immigrants take social services they pay for.  Taxpayers don't like illegal immigration because they don't think that illegal immigrants pay their fair share of taxes. (Real numbers are hard to come by on this, but even if the illegal immigrants wanted to pay all their taxes -- and tell the truth, who does -- their "undocumented" status would make that difficult.)

Just like water wants to run downhill, the poor run to money, and those without freedom flow to places of where liberty and opportunity abound -- like America.  If this migration were unrestrained, America would be overwhelmed.  That is why we have chosen to put limits on immigration, so that America will remain America.

Ironically, if we don't stanch this continuing influx of immigrants, it may stop itself.  With unabated immigration, America will progressively become more and more like the places that the immigrants were escaping from, so at some point they will stop coming -- when it becomes no better than where they were before.

I think we can come up with a better solution than leaving the status quo.  If we can't, the whole world will be poorer for it.


Gary D. Gaddy recommends that his local readers go to YouTube and search for "immigration gumballs" if they have any notion that unchecked immigration to the U.S. can solve the world's problems. He doesn't need to tell this to his Arizona readers, they already know.

A version of this story was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday April 30, 2010.

Copyright 2010  Gary D. Gaddy

Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:59 AM EDT
Updated: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 9:42 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, April 23, 2010
Destroying diversity in order to save it

YOU WOULD HAVE THOUGHT we would have learned this lesson in Vietnam, where a military officer once famously proclaimed that "we had to destroy the village in order to save it" -- but apparently not.  In modern academia, they are out to save campus diversity by eliminating it from campus.

Before the United States Supreme Court this week is a case, Christian Legal Society vs. Martinez, which asks whether a public university can, in the interest of upholding nondiscrimination, require campus organizations to accept as members any student who wishes to join.  Stated that way, the obvious answer would seem to be, sure, why not?

Consider that such a requirement means that a faith-based organization must accept students who do not hold the beliefs and values of the group if that group wishes to be recognized by the university.  A Christian organization would have to admit, among others, atheists.  A Christian group open to all is not a Christian group, I would contend.  It is just a group.  Consider the campus NAACP being required to admit neo-Nazis, the campus Democrats, card-carrying Republicans,  or the campus chapter of NOW, male chauvinists. This does not seem so reasonable.

Couldn't such "exclusive" groups just go on unrecognized?  Yes, but official recognition, which in the case of the Hastings Law School at the University of California in San Francisco allows an organization to use school classroom space, e-mail communications and other facilities, makes recognition almost essential for a fully functioning campus group.  Without official recognition, a "campus" group would be at best at the margins of campus, meeting off campus while only able to communicate with the student body via unofficial means.  They would be, to use a phrase that seems eerily familiar, "separate and unequal."

Many media reports, such as one in USA Today, characterize the constitutional question here as whether "a state-run law school may refuse to recognize a religious student group that keeps out gay students and non-Christians."  It is not.  The Christian Legal Society does not "keep out gays" anymore than it "keeps out heterosexuals."  It does, however, keep out as members gays, and straights, who don't hold to its religious tenets and moral values.  Those include its statement of "biblical principles of sexual morality," which says that a student who "advocates or unrepentantly engages in sexual conduct outside of marriage between a man and a woman" isn't eligible to vote for or become a group leader.

The CLS does not exclude anyone from attending their meetings, but they do limit leaders and voting members to those who are Christian, as defined by the CLS.  That is, I would venture, why they call themselves the Christian Legal Society and not something else.  This ability to define who may and who may not join their organization, according to their beliefs and behaviors, is a fundamental freedom.  The freedom to associate necessarily presupposes a right not to associate.

One group understands this.  Gays and Lesbians for Individual Liberty, which in their amicus brief supporting the CLS, point out that the freedom for gay Americans to form gay associations -- whose membership rules they defined for themselves -- gave them their collective voice in the face of an often hostile majority.  "[U]nder Hastings' forced membership policy, only majority viewpoints . . . are actually assured a voice in Hastings' forum," argues their brief, which notes that this is "a patently unreasonable way" to "promote a diversity of viewpoints."

Anyone who thinks this case is just about the way-out left coast should be reminded that in December 2002 the University of North Carolina told its InterVarsity Christian Fellowship chapter that it objected to IVCF's constitution saying that officers must "subscribe ... to…Christian doctrine.” The InterVarsity chapter was instructed to “modify the wording" of its charter or have its "university recognition” revoked.  Alan Charles Kors, the founder of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which successfully advocated on behalf of UNC's InterVarsity chapter, characterized UNC’s demand this way: “In short, it is prohibited at this public university for a Christian organization to be Christian.”  Odd way to promote diversity, I would think.


Gary D. Gaddy would not see fit to join any organization that would have him as a member.

A version of this story is set to be published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday April 23, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:03 AM EDT
Updated: Saturday, June 5, 2010 6:37 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, April 16, 2010
Who hates Duke? Not me, certainly not me

HAVING BEEN A CAROLINA BASKETBALL FAN ever since Al Wood's senior season (which just so happened to be my first year in graduate school at UNC's illustrious School of Journalism and Mass Communication), I know about ABC fans.  (In case you don't know what an ABC fan is, they are, usually proudly self-proclaimed, "Anybody But Carolina" fans.  Sometimes they even paste it on the bumper of their car.)  Now, why would a fan pull against someone else's team, in some cases even more than they pull for their own team?

Let us answer this query using the time-tested Socratic dialogue.

A couple of questions:  Which is the most hated team in professional baseball?  Which is the most hated team in professional football (over the long haul, not just this year)?  And, on a slightly different topic, which is the most hated country in the world?

Now that you have answered those questions, answer this one:  In pro baseball, pro football and the Olympic combined event of geopolitics and economics, which teams and country are the most successful, respectively, in baseball, football and generally dominating the world?

[For those keeping score at home, the answers are the New York Yankees, Dallas Cowboys (America’s Team -- to hate) and the other Yankees (Please Go Home!), that is, the United States of America.]

Final question, anyone see a correlation here? 

Good answer, Bob.  Could you elaborate on "yes"? 

That's right, they are synonymous.  The correlation is one to one.

Now let us consider the world of college basketball.  What are currently the four most hated teams in college basketball?

That's correct, Anne.  That would be Kentucky, Kansas, UNC and Duke.

Now, which schools have the most wins in the history of college basketball? 

Right again, Anne.  Kentucky, Kansas, UNC and Duke.  Anyone see a pattern beginning to emerge?

Thanks, Bob, but could you elaborate on "yes"?

That's right, they are synonymous.  The correlation is one to one.

So, class, what conclusion are we to draw?  (Let me give you a hint, it is as easy as ABD.)

That's right, Mike.  When the other kids start to pick on you, it just may be because they are jealous of your success, envious of your trophies and generally tired of losing to you.  They hate you because deep down they want to be you -- except, of course, for the Christian Laettner part.

As for me, a fan of Carolina, one of the few schools which have had more basketball success than Duke, I have no need to hate Duke.  Honestly, I don't hate, despise or even really dislike Duke (except, of course, for the Christian Laettner part) -- but I sure do love beating them.  That's 'cause it is more fun to beat a good team than it is to beat a bad one. (Sorry, State fans, it just is.)

And, another thing, about "people hating Duke," has anyone, by any chance, ever noticed the boorish behavior of many Duke fans, as epitomized by their beloved Cameron Crazies, the unrivaled masters of the obscene chant?  Any possibility that the Crazies have ever crossed any boundaries that brought disdain back onto their team from the fans of the teams they have verbally abused?

I didn't think so either.  So, I guess it is just the high graduation rate that ABD fans despise.

Arrogant, gloating fans in general can also be a problem for any winning team.  But, speaking for Carolinafandom at large, it is hard to be humble, when, for example, your school has won more conference sports titles (39) this millennium (not including this unfinished academic year) than any other ACC school, and has done so in 17 different sports.  So it would not be becoming to even mention the six national titles in four sports in the same period.  I think that those few of you among my readers who are not Tar Heel fans know exactly what I mean.

Gary D. Gaddy remembers one year when he was working at UNC, when, across all sports, Carolina won more ACC championships than the other seven or eight conference schools put together -- and cannot imagine what the other schools' fans found not to love.

A version of this story is set to be published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday April 16, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy


It took him a while, but apparently Coach K finally got around to reading my article. Coach Krzyzewski was quoted in the News & Observer on June 9, 2010 as saying he gets fans rooting against the Devils: "I understand it. I would rather be booed for being good than for being bad."


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 10:36 AM EDT
Updated: Wednesday, June 9, 2010 1:47 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, April 9, 2010
Duke basketball victory celebration muted

DURHAM -- Amid the whoops and hollers, and the traditional bonfire bench burnings, longtime basketball observers could not help but notice a distinct shadow falling across Duke's on-campus national championship victory celebration.  The celebration, they observed, was less exuberant, less unabridgedly blissful than previous such celebrations as Duke fans, the team and its coaches included, admitted still not having fully recovered from the University of North Carolina team's loss in the National Invitational Tournament final on Thursday night.

"It was a testament to our team's heart that my boys were even able to play tonight's game at all after watching UNC go down on Thursday," said Duke Coach Michael Krzyzewski just after the game. "They were just in a funk, but they fought through it," he said.  According to Krzyzewski, "A lot of the tears after the championship game were not for joy, they were out of sadness that the Heels couldn't celebrate with us."

"The first thing I did after I got off the court," said Krzyzewski, "was call Roy (Williams) to make sure he was doing OK.  It's hard to put your heart into a celebration when you know your friend is in pain."

"It's difficult to fully enjoy our success while still smarting from the Tar Heels falling just short of their goal," said Final Four MVP Kyle Singler.  "To tell the truth, this doesn't feel quite as good as the feeling I had last year when the Tar Heels won it all," the Duke forward added.

According to Duke point guard Jon Scheyer, “One thing that carried me through, that motivated me, was knowing that the whole Tar Heel Nation was behind us, and that maybe our victory would boost them just little out of their doldrums.”

"Maybe later," said Duke assistant coach Chris Collins, "after the Tar Heel team has a chance to appreciate how good their incoming players are and that they still have a chance to win in future, they will cheer up, then our team and fans will be able to fully appreciate our win too."

Duke students were sober as well in their assessment of the championship's meaning given the Tar Heels' falling one step short of unprecedented back-to-back NCAA and NIT titles. Said Duke sophomore Jan Goldstein of Paramus, "I felt so bad watching how the Tar Heel team reacted after losing to Dayton, I almost didn't watch the Butler game, but I am glad I did because I did feel better after Duke won, at least a little bit. But, to tell the truth, I did spend a lot of time during the game thinking about Marcus (Ginyard) and Deon (Thompson) and how much it must hurt to lose your final game as a college player."

Duke senior psychology major Lawrence Runkin from Brooklyn said he had been acting as a volunteer bereavement counselor at UNC's Campus Health Services on all day on Friday and Saturday and had not much time to even think about the Duke and Butler contest until he saw some guys in the dorm lounge watching the game when got home late Saturday.  "I guess I am glad we won but the looking at the impact of the Tar Heel loss had on students there had already put sports into some larger perspective for me," Runkin said.

As students and other Duke fans entered the welcoming ceremony for the return of the Duke team in Cameron Indoor Stadium on Tuesday afternoon, they could look across Wallace Wade Stadium at the flag which had been flying at half mast for Carolina since Friday morning, the sight of which had to dampen their spirits.  The welcoming ceremony, which did eventually become more lively, began with a brief moment of "silence and meditation for our friends in Chapel Hill" led by Duke Chaplain the Rev. Bernard T. Stubbs.

Gary D. Gaddy has to admit he pulled for Butler -- along with about everybody else not from west Durham or the Tri-State Area.

A version of this story is set to be published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday April 9, 2010.

Copyright 2010  Gary D. Gaddy


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 6:46 AM EDT
Updated: Friday, April 9, 2010 6:58 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, April 2, 2010
Deconstructing the Defenestrations of Prague

"DEFENESTRATION: Sales dive leads to turnover at the top," the online headline said, which prompted me to quiz my lovely and unsuspecting wife (who was also online at a different computer in the same room).  Reading the headline aloud, I asked: “What does defenestration mean?"  Her response: "It seems like I ought to know."

So, now for her and the rest of my reading public, I present a tutorial on defenestrations and their place in history.  With the help of tens of thousands of Wikipedia contributors, let me enlighten us all.

When I think defenestration, I think the Defenestration of Prague.  There were, however, two Defenestrations of Prague, not one as I had previously supposed, and neither led to World War I, as I had thought.  (The event I had conflated was probably the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo in 1914.)

The Defenestrations of Prague were, in fact, two distinct incidents in the history of Bohemia. (Right off, don't you love any event in the history of Bohemia?)  The first occurred in 1419 and the second in 1618.  The term "Defenestration of Prague" is more commonly used to refer to the latter incident (the one which I remembered vaguely).  Both incidents helped to trigger prolonged conflict within Bohemia and beyond.

But before history, let's do vocabulary.  Defenestration is the act of throwing someone out of a window. Etymologically it does not come directly from German (fenster: window), as I errantly thought, but is from Latin (de: out of, with a downward motion implied; fenestra: window).

The first Defenestration of Prague occurred on July 30, 1419 -- and was not a lot of fun as it involved the killing of seven members of the city council by a crowd of radical Czech Hussites. It marked the turning point between talk and action leading to the prolonged Hussite wars, which lasted until 1436.  (Hussites, you may be interested to know, are lineal predecessors of the Moravians who founded Old Salem and brought us those really tasty thin sugar cookies and gooey sugar cakes.)

The second, more famous, Defenestration of Prague was initiated when some members of the Bohemian aristocracy rebelled following the selection in 1617 of a much earlier Ferdinand, the Catholic Duke of Styria, as King of Bohemia. On May 23, 1618, an assemblage of Protestants led by Count Thurn, whom the Emperor had deprived of his post as Castellan (whatever that is) of Karlstadt, who reacting to an inflammatory letter from the Emperor's principal adviser, Bishop Klesl, exhorted his followers to throw the Regents appointed by the Emperor out the window "as is customary." (Don't you also love Bohemian customs?)

This group proceeded to bribe their way into the Prague Castle where the Regents were meeting.  Many present in the room later claimed that they thought the Regents were only going to be arrested, saying by the time they realized what was happening, it was too late to stop it. The two Regents, along with their secretary, Philip Fabricius, were thrown out the third floor window.  Falling almost 100 feet, the three landed, happily, I guess, on a large pile of manure -- and thus survived.  (I am not making this up.)

Fabricius, when later ennobled by the Emperor, was granted, apparently without tongue in cheek, the title of Baron von Hohenfall (literally meaning "of high fall").  Roman Catholic Imperial officials claimed that the three men survived due to the mercy of angels assisting the righteousness of the Catholic cause.  Protestant pamphleteers asserted that their survival had more to do with the horse excrement in which they landed than the benevolent acts of angels.  In any case, the defenestration was central to the start of the Thirty Years' War.

For those few of you for whom this little history still does not make clear sense, but who are up on their current events, just substitute Democrat for Catholic and Republican for Protestant (or vice versa), it will all become perfectly obvious.


Gary D. Gaddy has walked across the Latin Bridge over the River Miljacka in Sarajevo, Bosnia, near where the later Ferdinand was shot.

A version of this story was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday April 2, 2010.

Copyright 2010  Gary D. Gaddy

Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:01 AM EDT
Updated: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 8:57 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, March 26, 2010
Why my dad married my mom, I think

IT'S A PRETTY GOOD LOVE STORY, my mom and dad.  As I have mentioned before, every Thanksgiving Dad tells the story of how they first met.  This is how it goes. During his freshman year, in the fall of 1940, my dad's roommate at Wingate Junior College, Paul Chapman, invited my dad home to Maiden for Thanksgiving weekend.

Paul asked his younger sister, Inez, then a high school senior, to set him up with a date with a particular girl from town and "to get a date for his roommate Cliff."  So, she did. She picked herself. (Please note that this is about 30 or 40 years before a girl could ask a boy for a date other than on Sadie Hawkins' Day.)

My dad says it was pretty much love at first sight.  If you ever saw my mom during that era (or any other, for that matter), you would understand.  The photo caption from the local newspaper read: "Beauty Queen: Miss Inez Chapman of Maiden recently elected beauty queen in the annual contest held at Wingate Junior College.  She is one the outstanding members of the freshman class, an honor student, and is campaigning for the secretaryship of the student body."  The picture makes the "Beauty Queen" heading quite redundant.

It may be Cliff fell for Inez because she fell for him too. My younger brother Bob recently found a copy of a book of poems which my mom wrote for an English assignment at Wingate. The book is entitled "These Will Remain" and it is dedicated to one Clifford Gaddy. This collection of 31 poems, many about her true love (including two different poems titled "To Clifford."), induced the professor to give her an "A."  My dad probably liked her poetry too.

If my dad had seen the future, he may have fallen for her even harder -- if that would have been possible.  As a dedicated wife, she supported him any way she could through the rest of his college and medical school years.  After he finished his internship and residency, my mom served in her church and her community in extraordinary ways. She was, among other things, at different times, the president of the local YWCA, of the Mental Health Association, and of the Wednesday Club, the local women's club for promoting culture and community service.

And she did this while raising six children (four boys and two girls), all born in a span of 11 years.  Most of them turned out pretty good. The six of us ended up with two doctorates, one medical degree, two master’s and the one who didn't finish college is a mechanical genius -- but all would agree that mom, who never finished college, is smarter than any of us.  For the record, my mom made straight "A" grades in school -- before she met my dad.  (Love will do that to you.)

And my mom is pretty sweet too. For her 80th birthday my sister Betty made a poster titled "80 Things We Love About Nez." She had to edit down the list of nominated suggestions made by her children and grandchildren. Probably should have made it 180.

However, my mother is not perfect (although smart, sweet, caring and pretty is a pretty good combination -- just ask my wife).  When I was playing Little League, my older brothers told me to "Always tell Mom practice gets out an hour earlier than it actually does."  So, being the obedient little brother that I was, I did.  On the day when the first practice finished -- right on time -- I looked up and Mom was driving up. Told you she raised smart kids.

Happy anniversary, Mom and Dad!


Gary D. Gaddy's parents, Inez Chapman Gaddy and Clifford Garland Gaddy, Sr., have been married for sixty-five years this week. He is hoping the marriage works out. (See the January 8th birthday edition, "Ten or so things that I learned from my dad.")

 A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday March 26, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy

Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:25 AM EDT
Updated: Friday, March 26, 2010 9:06 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, March 19, 2010
Welcome to Neologismia and other made-up words

ALL MY COLUMNS ARE WRITTEN IN WORDS.  Mostly the same old words (e.g., the, be, to, of, and, a, in, that, I).  This gets boring for me, so I am sure it gets boring for you, my dedicated readers. (I was thinking here of Sandra and Dan.)  So, this week's edition will move into new linguistic territory.  Welcome to Neologismia!

Let's start with a quiz.  (Please hum any tune from the "Sound of Music" as you answer.).

A neologism is: (C) An amalgam of the Greek words for new and word; (B) The antonym, sort of, of oldlogism; (E) A linguistic indicator of psychosis; (D) Just a made-up word; (A) All of the above.

The answer is: All of the above.

According to Wikipedia, neologism comes from the Greek νέος (neos "new") + λÏŒγος (logos "word" ), and is a newly coined word that has not yet been accepted into mainstream language.  According to the Oxford English Dictionary the word neologism was first used in print in AD 1483, back when neologism was a neologism.

Also, the use of "novel, idiosyncratic words [neologisms] . . . are evidence of psychosis (or possibly, of creativity)," according to Paula T. Trzepacz and Robert W. Baker, authors of "The Psychiatric Mental Status Examination."  [Confer an alternative linguistic indicator of psychosis, echolalia, which is the immediate and involuntary repetition of words or phrases just spoken by others, often characteristic of Miss America contestants.]

Oldlogism is, in fact, a neologism for an old neologism.

So, why should we care about neologisms, besides that they are funny and fun to say? Scholars suggest that neologisms are essential to every human's mental construction of the world.  The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis contends that the varying cultural concepts and categories inherent in different languages constrain the cognitive classification of the experienced world in such a way that speakers of different languages think (and thus behave) differently because of them.  In other words, we cannot think or act outside the confines of our language.

So, whenever we can't explain the world with existing vocabulary, we invent new words.

But, now, let's take another neologism quiz.

Arrange the following neologisms in the order of their first appearance in print from earliest to latest: truthiness, prequel, Internet, retronym, Blogosphere.

This was easy.  They are in order from oldest to newest.

Truthiness was first attested in print in 1824, according to the Oxford English Dictionary  It meant truthful. In its more recent incarnation, truthiness is a "truth" that a person claims to know intuitively "from the gut" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination -- or facts.  Comedian Stephen Colbert presented this newer definition during his political satire program The Colbert Report in 2005.

Prequel first appeared in print in 1958 in an article by Anthony Boucher in The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction, and refers to a "sequel" which comes in time before the original. Other sequel variants include midquel, sidequel and threequel.

Internet was first used, as shorthand for internetworking; in 1974, starting out as an adjective rather than the noun it is most frequently today.

Retronym, coined by Frank Mankiewicz in 1980, is a new or augmented name for an object or concept to differentiate the original from a more recent form or version.  An example of a retronym is "acoustic guitar" (coined after electric guitars appeared).

Blogosphere was so named by Brad L. Graham in 1999, as a joke. The Blogosphere is the collective community of all blogs.  A blog (a contraction of "web log") is a type of website, usually maintained by an individual with regular entries of commentary and descriptions of events, with the entries displayed in reverse-chronological order.  In 2007, the blog search engine Technorati was tracking more than 112 million blogs worldwide.

[Note: The primary sources of infauxmation used in this column are the venerable Oxford English Dictionary and Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Please note that the Wikipedia policy on neologisms, as referenced in the article on neologisms, is to avoid neologisms, which ignores that all words were once neologisms.]


Gary D. Gaddy is a neologist of the superial rankitude. ( is his planet in the Blogosphere.)

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday March 19, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy

Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:01 AM EDT
Updated: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 5:30 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, March 12, 2010
Chapel Hill's problem is Chapel Hill

THE PROBLEM WITH CHAPEL HILL is often it doesn't seem to know that it is the problem with Chapel Hill.

(By Chapel Hill I don't mean the all the town’s citizenry.  By Chapel Hill I mean the town's political establishment and the governing bureaucracy.  Don't get me wrong, many of these people are well-meaning.  But don't get me wrong on this either. Well-meaning is a pejorative.  Well-meaning is synonymous with blithely wrongheaded.)

Chapel Hill doesn't seem to understand that while taxes and regulation are necessary -- if we are to have any government at all -- they are a necessary evil.  They don't seem to understand that the private property in Chapel Hill does not belong to the town; it belongs to the property owners.

Briefly, in the aftermath of Hurricane Fran in 1996, Chapel Hill police restricted access to the town at the town limits.  I thought it was an appropriate move for Chapel Hill, making Chapel Hill the state's only gated municipality.  But, it was unnecessary anyway.  The town has built a barrier much tougher to breach: a massive wall made of land-use taxes, fees, rules and regulations that take a special ladder constructed of dollar bills to get over.

Periodically, local governments study the cost of housing in Chapel Hill.  These taskforces, study groups and advisory boards work hard to figure out why housing costs so much here.  A small mirror would be a lot simpler.

Currently, Chapel Hill assesses a $6,092 impact fee on every new single-family home.  This is a horribly regressive tax (0.6 percent on a million dollar house but 6.0 percent on a $100,000 house -- if such a thing could be built in Chapel Hill).

Eleven years ago, the Chapel Hill Fire Department had 56 members, only one of whom owned a home in Chapel Hill.  Chapel Hill's solution?  “To keep more firefighters, and other workers, in town,” the town "would require developers to build a certain percentage of affordable homes in each subdivision," reported  This rule, as implemented, requires 15 percent of the homes be “affordable” whenever a developer needs a special-use permit.

This, of course, has worked wonders for keeping housing costs down in Chapel Hill.  There is nothing like additional costs and extra regulations to reduce development costs.  While such a zoning ordinance can extort a handful of affordable units from the few developers willing to deal with its strictures, put together with a time-consuming and complicated approval process, it raises, quite obviously, the cost of the other units in the same development.  Further, these additional costs and restrictions keep some developers from even entering the market.  Reduced competition and a reduced supply of housing lead directly to higher prices.

How much higher?  A 2006 study in 50 metro areas of growth-management land-use policies, such as those in Chapel Hill, showed "smart-growth" policies added more than $100,000 per home.  Not so smart, it seems to me.

So, what does Chapel Hill now propose?  An ordinance which would make the affordable housing set-aside rule apply to all housing developments.  Given such an "affordable housing" set-aside, developers will, and have, targeted higher-end homes.  The evidence?  According to, the average price in 2008 for all housing units in Chapel Hill was $411,506.  Is that affordable enough for you?

As the economist Walter Williams has noted, "Politicians love visible beneficiaries and invisible victims."  While a few dozen, easily countable, modest-income homeowners will get their "set-aside houses," we have no way of directly counting the far more numerous modest-income homeowners, who would “rather be in Chapel Hill,” who had to buy houses in Mebane, Butner or Saxapahaw and now make long daily commutes to their Chapel Hill jobs.

Chapel Hill says Chapel Hill is the Southern Part of Heaven.  It says so right on the town's website.  It certainly might be so, because, you know, Chapel Hill does have many neighborhoods where the driveways could be paved in gold.


Gary D. Gaddy served on the Orange County Commissioners Affordable Housing Advisory Board from 2005 to 2010. During his tenure the price of local housing did not go down.

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday March 12, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 11:21 AM EST
Updated: Friday, March 12, 2010 11:36 AM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, March 5, 2010
It's little ol' me versus the killer deer

I AM AT WAR WITH THE DEER.  Over the years I have killed two of them – but, understand, they were trying to kill me first.  Back when it was my car against unarmed deer, my car won.  So, the deer upped the stakes, resorting to biological warfare.  (This is not a joke, they really did.)

Deer are dangerous.  It is not just shrubs and flowers that they harm; they maim and kill humans daily.  Really.  For the public's safety, not just pleasant greenery, the Governor's Club, and Duke Forest, should continue to cull the growing herds which roam their lands -- as should Chapel Hill and about every other community in North Carolina.

Here's why.  Nationally, collisions between deer and vehicles cause more than 150 fatalities each year, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.  In 2009 State Farm insurance estimated that an average of 100,000 collisions between deer and vehicles occur in the U.S. each month   One of these encounters, which cost on average $3000, occurs every 26 seconds, at a cost of over $3.6 billion every year.  Crashes reported to police involving deer in 2008 in North Carolina numbered almost 20,000, nearly 10 percent of all vehicle accidents. And many more such wrecks go unreported to police, including some leading to fatalities.

Further, this problem is worsening.  Over a five-year span, deer-related crashes increased 27 percent, while total crashes decreased by seven percent, according to UNC's Highway Safety Research Center.  In urban areas it’s even worse.  Mecklenburg County has had a 92 percent increase in deer-related crashes since 2002.

Then there is deer-borne disease.  It is no coincidence that the first detailed description of Lyme disease appeared in 1764 after a visit to the Island of Jura (Deer Island) off the west coast of Scotland.

Lyme disease is one of the fastest-growing infectious diseases in the United States.  Cases reported to the Centers for Disease Control in 2008 numbered over 35,000.  Many more are unreported or even undiagnosed.  Delayed or inadequate treatment can lead to serious symptoms, which can be disabling and difficult to treat.  Late treatment occurs commonly since many people do not recognize the common disease indicators (flu-like symptoms such as headache, muscle soreness, fever, malaise and bull’s-eye-patterned rash) as Lyme disease.

The deer-borne Rocky Mountain spotted fever is a serious even life-threatening disease with over 1000 cases reported in the U.S. each year, and North Carolina having one of the highest rates.  Despite the availability of effective treatment, an estimated 30 to 50 Americans die each year from Rocky Mountain spotted fever.

Thankfully deer-tick-borne diseases can be dramatically reduced simply by culling the deer population that the ticks depend upon for reproduction.  Currently there are an estimated 21 deer per square mile for the entire state of North Carolina.  For some local areas, the numbers are much higher. Researchers estimate there are as many as 80 deer per square mile in parts of Duke Forest, making my backyard a dangerous place.

By lowering the deer population to 8 to 10 per square mile, the tick numbers can be brought down to levels too low to spread tick-borne diseases.  In one study, when the deer population was reduced by 74%, ticks decreased by 92%.  Furthermore, as deer density decreased, and ticks decreased, so did the risk of Lyme disease.  When deer were reduced from about 77 to about 10 deer per square mile, after two years of controlled hunting, the risk of humans contracting Lyme disease was reduced by more than 90%.

An estimated 10,000 white-tailed deer inhabited North Carolina in 1900; there are now 1,100,000.  While for the state as a whole the deer population has been slightly decreasing of late, deer populations are rapidly increasing in many urban and suburban areas where hunting as a management tool has been hindered.  Hunting is the most effective way to cull the deer population, according to Jon Shaw, a North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission biologist.

Bowing hunting, properly done, is safe and effective, even in urban neighborhoods.  If bows and arrows don't work, I recommend Uzis and AK-47s.


Gary D. Gaddy has tested positive for Lyme disease and Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, both likely contracted in his backyard.

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday March 5, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:05 AM EST
Updated: Friday, March 5, 2010 9:09 AM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, February 26, 2010
"Are you stupid?" A gaffe of Olympic proportions

VANCOUVER, via satellite -- It would have gone down as one of the great gaffes in sports history, if it had been in a sport that anyone cared about.  It would have been right there with the World Series grounder that went through the legs of Red Sox first-baseman Bill Buckner.  It would have been right next to Dallas Cowboy Leon Lett's premature celebration for his presumed Super Bowl touchdown.  It would have been right along with the non-existent timeout that Michigan's Chris Webber called in the waning seconds of UNC’s NCAA basketball championship victory.

And, actually, it will -- in the Netherlands.  I am speaking, of course, of Dutch speed skater Sven Kramer's Olympic-record, gold-medal winning performance that never happened – officially – in the 10,000-meter final at the 2010 Winter Olympics.

For those of you who didn't see it live (that is, for the non-Dutch in my reading audience), Sven Kramer, 23, is the current Dutch, European and World All-Around Speed Skating Champion, and reigning world champion and world-record holder in the 5,000 meters, 10,000 meters and the 4,000-meter team-pursuit event.  Kramer had already won the gold medal in the 5000-meter event.

This is big in Holland.  The Dutch claim their children learn to walk and skate at the same time.  Speed skating, especially long track, is the Dutch national pastime as well as the national sport.  (Think baseball, basketball and football rolled into one for Americans.)  Kramer's star-crossed 10,000-meter race was seen by 5,168,000 viewers in the Netherlands, which has a population of 16,443,269, meaning 31% of the country was viewing.  (By comparison, the recent Super Bowl was seen by over 106 million people, 35% of the U.S. population, making it the most watched program in American. TV history -- but half of those were watching for the commercials.)

How big is Kramer, the son of a Dutch Olympic speed skater, in Holland?  In 2007 Kramer dated Dutch supermodel Doutzen Kroes, who is currently one of the Victoria's Secret Angels. 

How big does Kramer think that he is?  As noted by the Fourth-Place Medal blog, Olympic reporters planning to interview a gold medalist should make sure they know which gold medalist they're talking to.  A young female TV reporter learned that lesson the hard way last weekend.  She began her interview by asking gold medalist Kramer, "I need you to say your name and your country and what you just won here."  To which Kramer responded, "Are you stupid?"  The reporter continued, "For tape identification purposes."   To which Kramer exclaimed, "Hell no!  I'm not gonna do that!"

About the reporter’s questions.  They were asked to make sure the recording was properly identified, that is, to prevent a stupid mistake from happening; something Kramer may be becoming very familiar with these days.

Here's what happened in the 10,000-meter speed skating final.  Kramer completed the grueling 6.21-mile circuit in what he thought was an Olympic record and gold-medal winning time.  But he was wrong.  He had made a mistake but even the broadcast commentators did not realize it when it happened, saying that what they saw, his skate hitting a lane-dividing cone, was not a disqualifying error.  But what Kramer actually had done -- when his coach told him to -- was change from the outer lane to the inner lane of the rink -- but on the wrong lap.

Here's how Kramer explained it after the race.  "I wanted to go on the outer lane, then just before the cone,  Gerard (his coach Gerard Kemkers) shouted, 'Inner lane!'  I thought he was probably right,” said Kramer.  "I should have gone with my own thoughts but I was brought into doubt. This really sucks. This is a real expensive mistake. This really sucks,'' Kramer concluded.

Before the 10,000 meter race, journalist Jerry Brewer said, "With a legitimate shot at three gold medals, Kramer . . . could be the face of these Games."   Although his reasoning may have been flawed, Brewer now looks like a prophet.


In 1968, Gary D. Gaddy, in an 880-yard track event, was knocked to the ground by a competitor, but got up and finished fourth anyway -- but was disqualified just after the race for, supposedly, cutting off the runner who knocked him down.

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday February 26, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:00 AM EST
Updated: Friday, February 26, 2010 10:28 AM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, February 19, 2010
Inflating Carolina: Achieving a workable solution

GRADE INFLATION IS SUCH A PROBLEM for the University of North Carolina that I can’t even find a list of UNC's recent valedictorians.  Why not?  Probably because printing it out would cause a nationwide paper shortage.  Earnestly, after decades of grades lofting into the stratosphere, is there anything our university (and others) can do to reverse grade inflation, or at least to compensate for the progressively more meaningless and misleading GPA?

In 2007, when grade inflation last came up for discussion at UNC, some professors and students opposed any system that rations grades, including quotas like those implemented at Princeton University and mandatory departmental averages like at Wellesley College.

“My old boss called these the power tools.  It’s amputation for a small injury,” said UNC professor Andrew Perrin, one of those who studied grade inflation for the faculty. “But it does have the advantage that it is very transparent, and it’s easy to explain to the outside community," Perrin added.

Happily, there exists a better, if more complex, system for ranking students.  A proposal made to UNC several years ago is back: add the Achievement Index to students’ grade reports, a measure that filters out variations in grading among different academic departments and among individual professors.  It is a great idea.

As the Daily Tar Heel describes it, the Achievement Index is a “strength of schedule” analysis.  The Achievement Index (AI) measures a student's performance against their classmates’ performance given those classmates' grades in other courses.

The Achievement Index was developed by a biostatistician, Valen Johnson, as a method for combining the information from grades earned across college courses; where the overarching goal is to measure each student’s academic performance while factoring out differences among individual instructors' grading practices.  (Further information on grade inflation is available in the book "Grade Inflation: A Crisis in College Education" by Valen E. Johnson, and a briefer synopsis of the technical aspects of the AI can be found by Googling "Primer on the Achievement Index".)

The basic concept is this: an A in a class where everyone got an A tells us nothing.  An A in a class filled with classmates whose grades in other courses were poor is less of an accomplishment than a B in a course filled with classmates with A's in other tougher courses.  Put differently, an A in a crip course is not as telling as a B in a killer -- as every college sophomore knows.

And research shows the AI works better than the GPA -- even using the exact grades now used to calculate the GPA.  In 2007, UNC’s faculty Educational Policy Committee studied the validity of the AI with two tests comparing pairs of UNC students enrolled in the same class at the same time. GPA and AI were assessed by examining whether GPA ranking or AI ranking better predicts these students’ performance in the very same class.  In 61% of 22,000 cases where students in such pairs earned different grades in the same class, the higher grade was earned by the student who ranked higher on AI but lower on GPA.  

Likewise, based on 14,000 pairs of students in exactly the same class, where one student would have received a degree with distinction using AI (but not GPA), the AI-honor student earned a higher grade than the student with a GPA-honor almost twice as often.  So, clearly, for both assessments, the AI is a better, more valid measure of academic performance.

In the spring of 2007, UNC's Educational Policy Committee recommended that Carolina list their AI on students’ transcripts along with their GPA, that UNC award graduation honors based on AI and also use AI to determine class rank.   After what was described as "a spirited debate," the faculty governing body voted 34-31 against adopting the Achievement Index.   We can hope, in the meantime, at least two faculty members have gained some common sense.

Gary D. Gaddy’s nephew, Benjamin Gaddy, was one of 129 valedictorians at North Carolina State University in 2007.  He had a 4.0 in electrical engineering.  Who do you think should have been THE valedictorian?

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday February 19, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:01 AM EST
Updated: Friday, November 5, 2010 10:01 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, February 12, 2010
Inflating Carolina: The root of the problem

CAROLINA, AND ABOUT EVERY OTHER COLLEGE in America, has a problem with continually inflating grades, having become an institution where all the students are above average -- almost literally.  As the Daily Tar Heel said last fall regarding grade inflation: "The numbers are striking.  So striking that many people don’t believe them."

Between the late 1960s and now, the overall grade point average at the University of North Carolina has risen almost a point.  In 1967, the average GPA was a 2.49.  Last fall, it was a 3.21. This trend has made grades nearly useless, or worse, for distinguishing among students’ abilities. The most common grade given out at UNC is an A, and 82 percent of all grades are either A’s or B’s.  Once upon a time C meant average.

In a UNC report on grading, Donna Gilleskie notes that, in addition to grade inflation, UNC is experiencing grade compression, which means the best students cannot be distinguished from each other.  UNC is also experiencing grade inequality as different departments and different instructors assign different grades for similar performance.

Grade inequality makes grade comparisons between students in departments not just difficult but completely misleading.  For example, the average GPA, using a scale where an F is 0.0 and an A is 4.0, in the UNC math department for the fall of 2008 was a 2.62, while the average in the School of Education was a 3.72.  (I worked on university campuses, including UNC, for a couple of decades, and, just for the record, students taking education courses are not smarter than those taking mathematics.)

This is not a random inequality; this is a perverse, inverted distribution of grades where the highest grades are given in the most vacuous courses, which leads students searching for better GPAs to take easy classes from easy graders.  This does not lead to the optimal educational experience for them, needless to say.

And it is now easy to find easy. Googling "Pick-A-Prof" gets this description of their service: "View official school records to see how many A's professors give before you register."  Students have long found crip courses from pushover profs -- albeit with poorer, hearsay data.  I have often counseled students that they can get a great education simply by taking classes from the professors everyone else is avoiding "because they're too tough."   In my experience, they are generally among the best teachers on campus.  But for many this would be GPA suicide.

While the Vietnam War and the draft once drove grade inflation, the main driver now is the relationship between easy grading and student evaluations -- combined with the omnipresent desire of students to get high GPAs.  Having students evaluate teachers is a good thing, in my view, but there is one major problem: these evaluations are used in tenure and other hiring decisions, and students give higher evaluations to courses (and professors who teach them) in which they think that they are getting higher grades.

And in return, whether consciously or not, faculty give high grades because students' perception of what grade they are going to get in a class is the primary factor in their course evaluations.  In 2000, UNC's Educational Policy Committee found that instructors who awarded an average grade of 2.7 suffered, holding all else constant, a 32-percentile-point disadvantage in student approval compared to those who awarded a 3.6 average grade.  It just happens the second bout of grade inflation began in the late 1980s, at the time that the UNC mandated student course evaluations for all faculty.

As a consequence, for a faculty member, giving higher grades thus means a higher chance of getting tenure or getting promoted.  Since higher grades cost teachers nothing, there is an incessant pressure on faculty to increase grades (and thus their evaluations).

So, is it inevitable that UNC remain LWSU -- Lake Wobegone State University?   You’ll see when you come back next week to find out what UNC can do about spiraling grades.

Gary D. Gaddy graduated from Furman University in 1975 mit fast ein drei punkt fünf auf Deutsch.

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday February 12, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:00 AM EST
Updated: Thursday, February 11, 2010 9:25 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, February 5, 2010
The New York Times v. Citizens United v. FEC

YOU MAY HAVE HEARD ABOUT the recent Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.  Some of the organs of the major mass media, which I won't mention by name, but the New York Times comes to mind, decried the court's decision.

"With a single, disastrous 5-to-4 ruling, the Supreme Court has thrust politics back to the robber-baron era of the 19th century.  Disingenuously waving the flag of the First Amendment, the court’s conservative majority has paved the way for corporations to use their vast treasuries to overwhelm elections and intimidate elected officials into doing their bidding," said the New York Times.

New York Times Company, you should know, is a corporation which publishes two national and 16 regional newspapers; owns eight network-affiliated television stations, two New York radio stations and more than 40 web sites -- and published on October 23, 2008 an endorsement editorial entitled "Barack Obama for President."

The Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, overturned significant parts of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, commonly called McCain-Feingold, that had banned the broadcast, cable or satellite transmission of “electioneering communications” paid for by corporations and unions in the 30 days before a presidential primary and in the 60 days before the general election, but the law notably exempted new technologies, like YouTube, and old ones, like newspapers.

Citizens United, a conservative advocacy group and a nonprofit corporation, produced for broadcast “Hillary: The Movie,” a scathingly hostile look at Hillary Clinton not unlike Michael Moore’s take on George W. Bush in “Fahrenheit 9/11.”

Two basic questions came before the court in this case: Is the film the kind of “electioneering communication” that McCain-Feingold says may not be broadcast in certain time windows before elections?  And if so, is the law itself constitutional given the First Amendment?

On the first, I say, of course.  On the second, personally, I don't know much about precedent, stare decisis, or any other technicalities involving the constitutionality of any particular law -- but I do know how to read, and this is how the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads: "Congress shall make no law  . . . abridging the freedom of speech."  And I do have a notion of what that means.  Here's my take: "Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech." 

Now, one cannot be rigidly absolute in the interpretation of this simple sentence.  The famous counter example to the absolutist free-speech position is that you can't yell "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater.  But this is not that.  It is a documentary.  The theater is not likely to be crowded.

Before this decision came down, the law applied to communications “susceptible to no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote for or against a specific candidate.”  The net effect, according to Citizens United's president, David Bossie, is censorship. “I can put it in as many theaters as I want across the country,” he said of the documentary, but since he can't spend money advertising it, “I just can’t let anyone know about it.”

At the first Supreme Court argument back in March, Fred Wertheimer, a lawyer supporting the FEC's case, seemed reluctant to answer questions about the government’s regulation of books, but when pressed, said, “A campaign document in the form of a book can be banned.”

“Governments are often hostile to speech,” wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy. “But . . . it seems stranger than fiction for our government to make . . . political speech a crime. Yet this is the statute’s purpose and design.”

I agree with the court and with Floyd Abrams, the noted First-Amendment lawyer, who in opposing the law, said, “Criminalizing a movie about Hillary Clinton is a constitutional desecration.”  How the New York Times can't see that is beyond me.

Gary D. Gaddy based the facts of this column almost entirely on New York Times coverage, which is, in his opinion, even without legal exemption, protected by the First Amendment.

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday February 5, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy

Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:00 AM EST
Updated: Thursday, February 11, 2010 9:27 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, January 29, 2010
The Devil and the Reverend Dr. Robertson


Following the earthquake in Haiti, televangelist Rev. Pat Robertson made this statement: "They (the Haitians) were under the heel of the French, you know Napoleon the third and whatever, and they got together and swore a pact to the Devil. . . .They said, 'We will serve you if you will get us free from the French.'  True story.  And so the Devil said, 'OK, it's a deal.'  And they kicked the French out. . . .But ever since they have been cursed by one thing after another."

Since then Robertson has gotten almost nothing but scorn and derision for his comment.  Even Al Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, called the comments "embarrassing" and the result of "theological arrogance matched to ignorance."  Mohler mostly faults Robertson for presuming to know the mind of God -- which, looking carefully, this statement by Robertson does not do.  (I have more of a problem with Robertson quoting the Devil.  What was his source on that?)

Robertson also did not say God has cursed Haiti. He said "ever since they have been cursed by one thing after another."  This statement seems undeniable in the figurative if not the literal sense.  If ever there was a nation cursed, Haiti would be it.

Notably, while this "pact with the Devil" may never have occurred (it has many earmarks of a legend), many Haitians believe it did.  Boukman Dutty, the acknowledged leader of the Haitian revolt, was a Voodoo priest.  According to journalist Edward Fudge, "a report commissioned by the Haitian Ministry of Culture and submitted in 1999 included evidence of such quantity and detail . . . that [the event’s] authenticity is well confirmed."

Still, let us step back from Robertson's statement, so full of inference and implication, to several possibilities and the questions they engender.

Either there is a spiritual world or there is not.  Either there is a God or not.  Either there is a devil or not. Most Americans believe in all three. (Even for the most controversial, according to polls by Harris and Gallup, about two-thirds of Americans believe in the existence of the Devil.)

So, I infer, most of us think there is some sort of spiritual war going on around us.

When we sing and pray "God bless America," those acts imply there is an alternative.  That is, God may not bless America.  Most Americans believe he has and hope he will continue to do so.

Now, if God can bless, presumably he can withhold blessing.  If he can protect, he can withhold protection.  If someone doesn't believe that why would they expend their breath praying?

As to the spiritual state of Haiti, Lynne Warberg, a photographer who has documented Haitian Voodoo for more than a decade, says this: "One common saying is that Haitians are 70 percent Catholic, 30 percent Protestant, and 100 percent Voodoo."  More technically, according to AP reporter Michael Norton, in 2003 an estimated 70 percent of Haiti’s 8.8 million people practice Voodoo to some extent.  And in April 2003 an executive decree by then Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide sanctioned Voodoo as an officially recognized religion.

I don't know what God or the Devil has been doing to Haiti, but if spiritual choices have material consequences, then the whole world, Haiti included, makes more sense than if they don't.

I can't be certain who cursed Haiti; I do know who has been trying to bless it: Operation Blessing International, a charity that operates in 105 countries, according to its website.

Beginning before the earthquake, Operation Blessing partnered with a Haitian charity to help fund a fish-farming program that will provide food and income for nearly 100 families, worked with the Haitian ministry of health to provide every school-aged child in Haiti with anti-parasite medication and basic hygiene, and conducted a pilot project with Lifesaver USA to distribute portable, family-size water filters to villages lacking clean water sources.

Further, Operation Blessing was set to start a hatchery for Gambusia – tiny fish that eat mosquito larvae – as a sustainable method of mosquito control and has two ongoing projects focused on providing clean water to hospitals. (Incredibly, even before the earthquake none of the general hospitals in the country had clean, running water.)

Since the earthquake, Operation Blessing set up a medical clinic and is installing a water purification plant in the national soccer stadium as well as delivering hospital equipment to Dr. Paul Farmer's Partners in Health.

Did I mention that Operation Blessing is a ministry founded by Pat Robertson?  So, that’s what he's been doing to bless Haiti.  What about you?


Gary D. Gaddy went to grad school in Virginia Beach where he spent a lot of time not believing everything Pat Robertson said.

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday January 29, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy

Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:00 AM EST
Updated: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 8:51 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, January 22, 2010
Coaches association expels Duke's Cutcliffe

WACO, Texas -- Meeting in emergency session, the executive committee of the American Football Coaches Association voted unanimously to expel Duke University head football coach David Cutcliffe from its ranks for "conduct unbecoming a collegiate head football coach."

"He is making us all look bad," said Edward Spitzenmaus, the executive director of the AFCA. "Coach Cutcliffe's actions have disrupted the entire football hierarchy, a set system which his willful actions have damaged, hopefully not irreparably," said Spitzenmaus.

"A coach at a place such as Duke simply cannot turn down an offer from a place such as the University of Tennessee, not without grave consequences to college football as a whole," added Spitzenmaus.

According to football analyst Mel Kiper, Jr., “When the NFL's Seattle Seahawks fired their coach Jim Mora, after one season's tenure, Cutcliffe should have known that day that he would be changing jobs.  The coaching carousel is pretty predictable really.

"Here's the way it goes. Mora's gone on Friday. University of Southern California's Pete Carroll is hired by Seattle on Tuesday; the same day Tennessee head coach Lane Kiffen is hired by USC to replace Carroll.  Cutcliffe should have been picking out his suit for the press conference in Knoxville on Wednesday. 

“Instead he was 'mulling over the decision.'  That was OK, playing hard to get is a standard part of the salary negotiation process -- but announcing on Friday that he is staying at Duke, that is nigh unto unforgiveable," said Kiper.  “The man didn’t even ask Duke for a raise,” a clearly befuddled Kiper added.

The ripple effect of Cutcliffe's "inexplicable inaction" is still being felt, said Myles Brand, the president of the NCAA, in support of the AFCA's decision.  "How do you think Lane Kiffin felt when Cutcliffe refused to leave Duke?  Kiffin was willing to sacrifice his family, putting his responsibility to the larger system above personal factors," said Brand.

As analyst Kiper explained Kiffin's sacrifice, "When he took the USC job, Kiffin didn’t have time to tell his brother-in-law, David Reaves, one of his assistant coaches.  Reaves found out Kiffin was gone while sitting in a restaurant watching TV.   Kiffin gets it."

"Cutcliffe obviously doesn't.  He was talking to his wife and his child, and, God help us, 'praying about his decision,' when he should have been negotiating with the Tennessee AD.  The man has no sense of propriety," Kiper added.

Since it was founded in 1922, the improvement of the coaching profession and the sport of football has always been among the top priorities of the American Football Coaches Association. re-activated

CHAPEL HILL -- Following three consecutive losses, and four losses in the past five games by the University of North Carolina men's basketball team, Nathaniel Naibobb has announced that he has re-activated the website.  Naibobb says he expects traffic to be brisk.

The site, which was de-activated in April 2009 following UNC's national championship win, promotes itself as "a place for those disgruntled with Roy Williams to become more disgruntled."

"Oh, sure, the yea-sayers are going to say that Coach Williams has the best winning percentage among all active Division I head basketball coaches -- but who wouldn't with the players he has had?" asks Naibobb.

"Take John Calipari, head coach of the soon-to-be number-one-ranked University of Kentucky Wildcats.  If you give him credit for the two final-four seasons worth of wins that were vacated for NCAA-rules violations, his record may be just about as good, maybe better," Naibobb observed.

"UNC’s national championship was great and all that -- but I can't count the sleepless nights I’ve spent since then thinking about underclassmen going pro, recruits who got away, and games missed because of injury.  We fans deserve better." said Naibobb.

The Tar Heels, who were ranked in the preseason poll in the top 10 for one primary reason (jersey color), now teeter on the brink of extinction at number 24.


Gary D. Gaddy has figured out a way for Roy to tell the Tar Heel twins, Travis and David Wear, apart.  One of them wears "43" and the other doesn't

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday January 22, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 7:04 AM EST
Updated: Thursday, February 11, 2010 9:32 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, January 15, 2010
Some players who have gone pro early

AS THE NEW SEMESTER BEGINS, my thoughts turn to today, January 15, the deadline for eligible college football players to declare for the National Football League draft.  (Happily, for me, Tar Heel football fan, all of  the University of North Carolina football team's underclassmen who were draft-eligible have declared they are staying for another year.  Whether the decisions are smart ones for them, only a year will tell.)

Anyway, this annual day of decision inspired me to write a column on some of the players who have gone pro early that you may not have heard about.

Edwin H. Land (founder of Polaroid Corporation and developer of the Polaroid Land instant camera) left Harvard University after his freshman year. Land was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest award given to a U.S. citizen, for his work in optics.

Michael Dell (founder of Dell, Inc.) dropped out of college at 19.  But don't say that college didn't help him.  He started his computer company in his college dorm room during his brief stay at the University of Texas at Austin.  As of 2009, Forbes estimates Dell's net worth at $12.3 billion.

Steven Spielberg (co-founder of DreamWorks and director of, among other movies, the Star Wars series) was denied acceptance to film school and dropped out of California State University, Long Beach.  Four of Spielberg's films each became the highest-grossing film made at the time of their release.

Bill Gates (co-founder of Microsoft and the richest man in the world), like Land dropped out of Harvard but after his second year. As he later noted, “I realized the error of my ways and decided I could make do with a high school diploma.”  In 2009, Gates was ranked as the world's wealthiest person and is perhaps the world's greatest philanthropist.

But please do understand that not every successful entrepreneur has been a college dropout.   Some never made it to college.

Henry Ford (the founder of Ford Motor Company and the father of mass production) never graduated from high school.  Ford created one of the most powerful companies in the world, and in doing do amassed one of the world's largest fortunes.

John D. Rockefeller Sr. (the founder of Standard Oil, the first multinational corporation) was a high school dropout who became the first American billionaire and, perhaps, the richest man in history.

Thomas Alva Edison (the founder of General Electric, currently one of the largest publicly traded companies in the world, and holder of 1,097 American patents) never got far enough to even drop out of high school, dropping out at age 12 to join the railroad, quitting quit formal schooling after his teacher called him addled.

But just in case you think, based on the preceding list, that dropping out of school guarantees success in life, consider also that Ben Affleck, Christina Aguilera, Jennifer Aniston, Christina Applegate, “Stone Cold” Steve Austin and Dan Aykroyd (to sample only those celebrities whose last names begin with the letter "A") also never finished college.  So, dropping out of college doesn't guarantee any worthwhile contribution to humanity -- other than a fat wallet -- but it does seem to assure the dropout fame, whether justified or not.

For my educated readers who are not so sure that I should be promoting dropping out of school, which I am not, in a town which has as its major industry the University of North Carolina, I have non-rhetorical question: Do you know how to get a Carolina graduate off your porch?  Answer: Pay for the pizza.

Gary D. Gaddy, who graduated from college with a lucrative degree in German, was, at one time, a college dropout, taking an 18-month sabbatical in the middle of his first senior year at Furman University.

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday January 15, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:01 AM EST
Updated: Thursday, January 21, 2010 7:08 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, January 8, 2010
Ten or so things that I learned from my dad

MY DAD'S BIRTHDAY is today.  My birthday present for Dr. Clifford Garland Gaddy, Sr., M.D., is a recounting of some of the best gifts he has given to me: things I have learned from watching him.

Money is not all that matters; it might not even be third or fourth.  Once when I was maybe 10 years old, I was helping my dad send out medical bills because his secretary had been out sick.  One bill was for over $2000.  (A lot of money back then.)  I said, "Oh, boy!"  My dad looked at the bill, said, "He has headaches already and he can't pay this anyway."  He threw the bill in the trash.

Everybody deserves the same respect regardless of their station in life.  Just by listening you couldn't tell if my dad was talking to Harrison, the sharecropper who worked our farm, or to the president of American National Bank.

Big isn't measured in inches.  My dad is big man in every way but height. But I will have to admit that he did enjoy meeting Muggsy Bogues in person, with my dad verifying that he was taller than an NBA basketball player.

Colorblind is good.  My dad is colorblind, literally and figuratively.  He can't tell a red light from a green light except one's on the top and the other's on the bottom.  If my mom didn't pick out his ties for him, he would look really funny some days.  But that's not the kind of colorblind I'm talking about.  Dad says one of his proudest days was the first time that a black player started for our formerly all-white high school's basketball team -- even though his son, my brother Steve, was the player who lost his spot to him.

Give more than you take; leave the place in better shape than you found it.  Once when our family went to Ridgecrest for a family summer camp, a friend loaned us his cabin.  Our last afternoon at the camp our family did yard work around the cabin, leaving the grounds looking great, not because we had to, or even we were asked to, but because it was a good thing to do.  At the time I didn't get it.

Friendships are measured not in days but in decades.  My parents have friends, the Dickersons and the Cresenzos, whose close friendships they kept across seven, soon to be eight, different decades.  My parents always made time to do things with their friends even when it would have been easier not to.  Family vacations with two families with 11 kids are not easy but are a great way to bond.

Loving your children equally well doesn't mean treating them all the same.  I am sure that my dad (and my mom) must have had favorites among their six children.  But, to this day, I don't know who they are -- and that's not because they mechanically treated us the same, because they didn't.

If you are going to do something, do it right.  My dad took up golf as an adult and became quite adept -- and has trophies to prove it -- which you could attribute to his love of the game.  But in his youth he was a Golden Gloves state boxing champion -- though he never really liked the sport -- as you might expect of someone born to be doctor.  As a physician he studied continually -- and was the best prepared practitioner of internal medicine you could imagine.

Keep your promises -- even those made in haste.  My dad promised my brother he would "build a shuffle board court in our backyard" if he won that week's campwide shuffle board tournament.  My dad wasn't too worried about paying off the bet since my brother had just learned to play that week.  Steve beat the man who taught him to play in the finals.  We had a shuffle board court in our backyard.

Love your wife.  Every Thanksgiving Dad tells the story about meeting Inez.  After more than sixty years of marriage, it's a love story every time he tells it.

These are hardly the only things I learned from my dad.  In fact, they are just the first 10 that came into my head.  Happy birthday, Dad!


Gary D. Gaddy would love to be remembered as Dr. Gaddy’s son.

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday January 8, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:00 AM EST
Updated: Friday, January 8, 2010 8:46 AM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Sometimes it is good to lose -- sometimes


IT IS GOOD TO LOSE -- sometimes.  No, this is not an article written to give small consolation to Wolfpack men’s basketball fans disconsolate over their loss to the University of Florida Gators the other night on a 75-foot buzzer-beater.  No one needs to console the fans of a team that won a national championship on an air ball.

Nor is this column written to console the North Carolina Central women's basketball team which recently lost to Duke 117 to 28.  No, somebody at NCCU should have read up on regional holiday customs before booking that gig.  In New Jersey, it is a long-standing tradition to invite over your neighbors around New Year's and beat the snot out of them.  Gracious is not a good description of the Duke women as neighborly hosts.

The NCCU athletic administration might have watched the news feeds from Bangor, Maine, then they could have seen this coming   Current Duke and former Maine coach Joanne P. McCallie was honored before Duke's game at the University of Maine just before Christmas with a standing ovation as a banner with her name was unveiled alongside Maine’s retired player jerseys.  Duke went on to beat Maine 75-34.  Gracious is not a good description of the Duke women as neighborly guests either.

No, in thinking it is good to lose -- sometimes -- I was thinking of the Tar Heel men's football team.  Losing the Car Parts Bowl down in Charlotte the day after Christmas, that was a good thing.

Let me explain by corollary. Winning is not always good.  In 2005 the UNC men's basketball team won the national championship over Illinois with a team dominated by underclassmen.  Think about it, fans.  Sure, it felt good getting treated at the Burn Center after that night's bonfire celebrations, but what about a couple of days later when the painkillers wore off and you realized your entire team was going pro?  The starters -- and a freshman who didn't start a single game -- gone.  The sophomore water boy took a job with Gatorade.  And the consequence? The dreaded re-building season.

(If it had not been for the incoming freshman class, Roy's Boys, headed by Tyler Hansbrough, beating the Duke out of Duke at Duke on "Duke's Senior Night," this could have been a depressing and distressing season for us Tar Heel fans.)

In 2009 the UNC men's basketball team won the national championship in a rout of Michigan State.  So, what happens to our batch of talented underclassmen?  You got it, off to the NBA, leaving us with . . . the dreaded re-building season.

(Note to Coach Williams: Roy, please have your Tar Babies win at Duke on Saturday March 6, 2010 on Jon Scheyer’s "Senior Night."  It will help us hapless fans make it through another dreaded re-building season.)

The Tar Heel football team, in contrast, not only had the sense to lose but to do it as a team.  No player on the team had an outstanding game.  Last year, in the previous Car Parts Bowl, some players did not cooperate in the loss.  I am thinking here of unaccommodating junior Hakeem Nicks, who, playing in his hometown, set three school receiving records and shattered his career-high game in yards receiving, catching eight passes for a bowl-record 217 yards and three touchdowns -- and, of course, immediately went pro.

This season's loss in the Car Parts Bowl was good because parts of our football team which might have gone pro early did not.  So, when the season kicks off against LSU next season, the Heels will be built, not re-building.

And, for those of you who think I am ignoring the elephant in the locker room, no, I am not talking about an overtime loss by the UNC men to a sub-mid-major team.  That game is a great example of the Tar Heels being gracious guests at the College of Charleston’s ironically named Carolina First Arena -- and another good example of life during the dreaded re-building season.


Gary D. Gaddy left college early to work in a pizza-pie crust factory.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy

Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 5:34 PM EST
Updated: Wednesday, January 6, 2010 5:38 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, January 1, 2010
The bottom eight news stories from 2009

THE YEAR-END, AND YEAR-EARLY-DECADE-END, lists are rolling in.  This is one you haven't seen:  the bottom eight news stories from 2009.  Some of them aren't completely  made up.

Ashland passes Carrboro as wackiest town

CARRBORO -- The Carrboro Board of Alderpersons met in emergency session late last night following news reports that Ashland, Oregon, may have surpassed Carrboro as the wackiest town in America. 

Ashland city council member Eric Navickas, to protest proposed limits on public nudity in the town, held a clothing-optional showing in his art gallery of nude portraits and conceptual art involving naked people.  Nudity is currently legal in Ashland, except in the city center and public parks, where people are required to cover their genitals.

Although the Carrboro board did not act, they are mulling future clothing-optional board meetings.

Same-day registration increases voting

RALEIGH -- The institution of same-day voter registration in North Carolina has dramatically increased voting, one election expert has found.  With same-day registration and voting, many more voters are voting earlier and more often, according to N.C. State political scientist Ward Heeler.

"Before same-day registration, voter fraud was too onerous for many would-be voters, discouraging their participation in vote buying, vote rigging and other basic elements of the electoral process.  Before same-day registration took effect, it wasn't that hard to find a homeless vagrant to register but it was often burdensome or even impossible to find them again on election day to actually get the vote tallied," said the University of Chicago graduate.

"Now, with a single six-pack, a person can be registered and vote in one simple step.  With proper transportation, one individual can register and vote in multiple precincts or even municipalities without undue effort.  This greatly enhances voter participation rates which have been flagging over time," added Prof. Heeler.

UNC goes green, replaces coal plant with nuke

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. -- The University of North Carolina, in its biggest push to reduce its "carbon footprint," has begun plans to replace the University's aging coal-fired power plant with a third-generation breeder reactor.  Based on the never-constructed Clinch River Breeder Reactor, UNC's nuclear power plant should provide enough electricity to light up Kenan Stadium several times over

Satan sues Santa for "image infringement"

NEW YORK -- B.L.Z. Satan, the founder, CEO and COO of Satan, Inc., filed suit today in U.S. federal district court in New York, against Santa K. K. Claus and Associates for "intellectual image infringement."

"The case hardly needs to be stated.  For example, the red suit is pretty obvious.  Only a forked tail and pitch fork would be clearer," said Harold Kleinman, the attorney for Satan, Inc.  A spokesman for Claus and Associates had no comment.

Sponsors flee Wie

DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. -- Pro golfer Michelle Wie, who was until recently the highest-earning and most-publicized golfer on the Ladies Professional Golf Association Tour, now finds herself losing multiple endorsements and being abandoned by her sponsors.  Experts say when Wie, 20, won her first professional individual tournament, the Lorena Ochoa Invitational, marketers then realized she would never be her sport's Anna Kournikova.

U.S. voted "Best Destination for Terrorism"

SANA‘A, YEMEN -- The United States has been voted the "Best Destination for Terrorism" in 2009 by the International Organization of Terrorists and Terrorist Associations.  Insiders say the vote wasn't even close.

Sequel to Shakespeare's Hamlet found

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. -- UNC literary historians have found what they believe to be the first newly discovered major work by the English playwright William Shakespeare in nearly 400 years.  The play, which is thought to be a sequel to the tragedy "Hamlet," is a comedy entitled "Omelet" which is set in Ye Olde Waffle House in a "Chapell on the Hill."

U2 to become U3

NEW YORK -- Singer Cher has announced plans to re-unite with Bono, forming a group to be called U3.


Gary D. Gaddy, who has been voted, for the third consecutive year, one of the bottom eight Chapel Hill Herald Local Voices columnists, would like to wish his reader a joyous new year.

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday January 1, 2010.

Copyright  2010  Gary D. Gaddy

Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 8:00 AM EST
Updated: Thursday, January 21, 2010 7:23 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, December 25, 2009
A Christmas column -- or maybe not

I WAS PLANNING TO WRITE a Christmas column, what with it being Christmas and all, but then I started reading the newspaper and now I'm not sure I can.  Apparently it is not correct to speak of Christmas anymore.  (If you can figure out how I can talk about not talking about Christmas without talking about Christmas, please let me know.)

So, how to proceed?  Since in Cary the city puts up a seasonally displayed, ornamentally decorated evergreen tree and calls it a community tree (which coincidentally shows up at about the time a Christmas tree would show up), I considered emulating them.  But I really couldn't call my column a community column because I want to write it all by myself.

My next thought: Maybe I could call it an X-mas column.  Then the "X" could mean one thing to atheists (and their existentialist fellow travelers) but something else to Christians.  In that way it would be one of those secret symbols, like the fish emblem you see on cars that you have wondered so much about.

X-mas, it would seem, would take the Christ out of Christmas -- X him right out, so to speak.  But some atheists would still find X-mas offensive since it would, even in negation, point to Christ.  (Don't think I'm joking.  Many atheists don't like being called atheist because the root of the word is theist which refers to God, who as they would be glad to point out, doesn't exist.  So, some of them have lobbied to have themselves referred to as "brights."  Again, I'm not making this up.)

Here's another problem with an X-mas column.  X-mas is not, some scholars say, a non-Christian, an a-Christian or an anti-Christian term.  Among the religious, objections to Xmas usually fall along the line that this takes Christ out of Christmas, replacing him with an unknown (since the English letter x is a common mathematical symbol for an unknown quantity) -- but this isn't so.  X-mas long predates the 20th-century secularization of the holiday.  The term was a widely used symbol for Christmas in the time of Gutenberg, five centuries earlier, and has no irreverent implication whatsoever.

I contemplated briefly going with the Raleigh solution, as in the dueling seasonal displays in Moore Square, Raleigh's free speech zone. (The U.S. used to be a free speech zone, but something happened, I think.)  In Raleigh, the duel is Son versus Sun.  Call2Action put up a Nativity Scene.  The Triangle Freethought Society put up a poster celebrating the Winter Solstice.

The more sophisticated worship the Sun instead the Son.  Don't laugh, their faith seems more effectual than that of mainstream Christianity.  I don't know exactly how they do it but about this time of year, every year, Sun worshippers start praying for the Sun to return, and in a matter of months it does. Christians have been praying for the return of Christ for two thousand years, and he has yet to come back.

The most powerful Sun-worshipping prayers come from Norway.  I have friend from Tromsø, Norway, which is 200 miles north of the Arctic Circle.  Lene called me all excited one spring with this declaration: "The sun is back!"  In Norway they don't just pray the sun to revive from its diminished state; they have to pray it back into existence.  And they do -- every year.

Anyway, under the Raleigh model I would have to get liability insurance and a government-issued permit, so I just decided to take a pass on the combined Yes Christmas! No Christmas! column as well.

That leaves me with a column which cites a work of literature, where the original wording is retained to maintain the authenticity of the historical text.

    Christmas is a-coming; the goose is getting fat.
    Please put a penny in the old man's hat.
    If you haven't got a penny, a ha'penny will do.
    If you haven't got a ha'penny, then God bless you!


Gary D. Gaddy agrees with Rabbi Marc Gellman that "Christmas without Christ is just 'mas,' which in Spanish means more."

A version of this column was published in the Chapel Hill Herald on Friday December 25, 2009.

Copyright  2009  Gary D. Gaddy


Authored by Gary G. Gaddy at 7:59 AM EST
Updated: Tuesday, December 22, 2009 1:42 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink

Newer | Latest | Older