The Conservative Bulwark

It's so rare when I get to merge two of my favorite worlds...the world of sports and the world of politics. The past three days however, have given me not one, but two opportunities to do just that.

Jim Calhoun is the head basketball coach for the University of Conneticutt. His program is well known as a class act and his teams have been a national power since his arrival. He has been known on occasion to lose his temper. Such an incident happened on Saturday when a "freelance journalist, political activist" starting bombarding Calhoun with questions having nothing to do with the game they had just played and won. The "reporter", Ken Krayeske's line of questioning centered around the theme that in such harsh economic times, Coach Calhoun is making too much money at a public university, and he should entertain the notion of giving some of his salary back. Calhoun responded jokingly at first, but as Krayeske continued to badger him, he blew his top, told him to shut up and pretty much, bugger off.

There are several things wrong with this little confrontation, but here's the second example I referred to earlier...

Greg Norman is a professional golfer. His nickname is "the Shark". He's a pretty cool guy and has been known for being as entertaining as he was talented on several PGA tours. Unfortunately, he had this to say yesterday:

"Prize money's being scaled back in Europe, I wouldn't be surprised if prize money's scaled back in the US just out of respect to every citizen and taxpayer over there who's suffering dramatically. It seems like on the PGA Tour the players are still playing for a million dollars first week, like they're recession-proof."

So what does this all mean?

Well in both cases you have individuals that believe that certain people make too much money...and due to all of the poor, pitiful poor out there, those people should have money removed by force. Apparently, both Greg Norman and Ken Krayeske have zero understanding of economic policies/laws...because both are making their arguments to the wrong people. Let's talk about Jim Calhoun first. If Krayeske genuinely had a problem with his salary, he should be talking to the University, not Calhoun. Calhoun agreed to his contract/salary...he didn't make it. The University did. Furthermore, as Calhoun pointed out in his angry response to Krayeske, his program brings in over $12 million for the University of Conneticutt every year. It's a national powerhouse. Basketball fans in Conneticutt pay well to see their winning product on the basketball court. University of Conneticutt alumni send a lot of money back to the University to help to continue to feed that outstanding program. THAT'S why Calhoun makes over $1 million a year. It's not some evil scheme to pull one over on the poor. If economic times are as bad as Krayeske is trying to paint, then less money will be pouring into the University, less money will be on hand to spend, and large contracts, like Calhoun's, will have to be renegotiated. That's the way it works.

In Greg Norman's case, he again reiterates his lack of understanding of economics. If he was really interested in helping out those that suffering economically he'd be giving some of the tens of millions of dollars he's won over the years to individuals and charities throughout the country. If he had asked players to willingly donate money to whatever cause or group, instead of pushing for tournament heads to automatically reduce the winnings purse, I would have had a different response. Once again though, here's a guy that's barking up the wrong tree. If the economy is as bad as he thinks it is (for other people), then less people will come to PGA tournaments...less sponsors will buy advertising rights at these tournaments...and by cause and effect, the winnings purse will automatically be decreased. No force is necessary to accomplish that. I'm assuming by his statement that no matter how much money is being poured into a certain tournament, the purse should be slashed. If so, then by how much? 25%? 50%? So if a normal purse (as an example) pays out $1.5 million to the winner, does Norman think that the "little people" out there is going to feel better about themselves and the economy if that golfer only brings home $750,000? Really? Be careful what you ask for Mr. Norman...

These two cases play right into a phenomenon that has existed since the beginning of time, but is becoming more and more prevalent with the passing of every day: "That person makes more money than I do/has more 'stuff' than I have...and that's not fair." The people that feel this way then begin a crusade to try and take as much as they can, in any way that they can, from the "evil rich" to try and make them feel better about themselves and their situation. Never once does it enter into their heads that their targets have what they have simply because they worked harder and planned better to get where they are.

Enter the politicians who can smell a potential vote from a million miles away, and suddenly you've got programs stacked upon programs (*cough* the new "stimulus" law *cough*) designed to remove property from one group of people (the rich) and transfer it to those that "deserve" it more (the poor). Throw in a population that, for the most part, can't contemplate the difference between the 10th Amendment and a good speech, and you've got a situation brilliantly designed to destroy any sense of individual responsibility and eagerly awaiting the first opportunity to gut our current economic system.

Remember...our nation just elected a group (including our new President) of people who firmly believe that only more government can solve our problems. Greg Norman and Krayeske seem to be of the same mind.