Eddie checked out

 

They say it was a shame about Eddie. I'm not so sure. In many ways, it is a sad tale, but not for Eddie. Wherever he may have gone.

There are people who were a part of Eddie's life who are sad. Some of them are probably angry. And if they are, well, they have a right to be. They should be angry. At themselves. Unfortunately, that changes nothing.

People who were only casually acquainted with Eddie, when learning of his disappearance, say that it was a surprise. So sudden. But it wasn't, really. People who were close to Eddie, and they are few, know better. They can't bring themselves to admit it, but they know.

It happened quite slowly, over years. Eddie's life was like a man living in a three-story house, who one day decides that he must secure every inch of the place. Starting on the top floor, locking every window and drawing the blinds, locking every door, methodically working down, down... until every point of egress was completely shut to the outside. He no longer cared to see. He no longer cared to listen. He no longer attempted to speak.

He could not be convinced that there was a problem. Some said he needed to be medicated. Some said he needed therapy. He went along with each, to humor them. The only beneficiaries of this were the therapist and the pharmacy. Some now say that he simply lost his mind. Nothing could be further from the truth. Eddie was the sanest man I've ever known.

I don't know where he went. I only know that one day Eddie walked into the forest and never came out. It was a number of days before any type of search was started. The search began with the expectation of finding not the man, but a body. They didn't really put a lot of effort into it; their search yielded neither.

There was nothing wrong with Eddie. He wasn't crazy. One day, like an epiphany bathed in a heavenly light, Eddie realized the peace that comes with accepting being the villain in someone else's story. He may have died out there somewhere. Or, he may have come out the other side and just kept going. Either way, we'll never know for sure. I'm pretty sure that is just how he wanted it.

Today marks ten years since Eddie took his long walk into the Daniel Boone National Forest. He is believed to be dead, and in all likelihood, he is. Whether alive or dead, I'm reasonably certain he is now at peace.

Edward Arthur Eberhard

1960- ?

Did Michigan really win that game?

The short answer to the question posed in our title is not a no. It's a hell no!

But... the truth is, I don't give a fiddler's fuck one way or t'other. I surrendered any remaining interest in NCAA football about fifteen years ago. Leading up to that time, there was a long-running and heated race between our major universities, and the NCAA as governing body for their athletic programs, to see which could earn the most of my contempt. That race is over; they both lost. 

The culminating event was the way that the NCAA "dealt with" the Penn State/Jerry Sandusky scandal. It would have been quite enough for the corrective actions taken by the university, even if those were too far after the fact. It would have been enough for those guilty of any crimes to have been tried and convicted by the Commonwealth under statute. Those reactions could not erase what happened, but it would have been sufficient as an appropriate response from those institutions. The NCAA's further punitive sanctions were purely theater; a supreme demonstration of institutional virtue signaling.

I had long suspected it, but this occasion finally confirmed my belief that the NCAA is run by a pack of greedy buffoons. These are life forms spawned in that toxic petri dish of academia, which they presume to govern. Well, the athletic programs anyway. Ostensibly. What, if anything, did their sanctions in this case have to do with athletics? These were not events that happened on the field. Why should all of those players' accomplishments from 1998-2011 be erased? What advantage did any of them gain from these events occurring within their program?

Well, we have an answer to that. Sort of. At the time, NCAA President Mark Emmert stated that the sanctions were, "not to be just punitive, but to make sure the university establishes an athletic culture and daily mindset in which football will never again be placed ahead of educating, nurturing and protecting young people." Nurturing? I'm sorry, what the fuck does that have to do with football? And further, do you really believe that Mark Emmert, or any other NCAA official, is sincerely interested in educating these young men? Was any of that 60 million dollar fine levied upon the university directed to education? And the Big 10 Conference, chiming in with a "Yeah! What he said!", to the tune of another 13 million? Translating from between the lines, it reads as "You better tell those fucking jocks to get their minds right!" 

I'll tell you what the NCAA has become. It's very far afield from the original charter. Ironically, we find one of the most biting illustrations from the same year that the Penn State scandal broke. Go back to the year 2011, on the program South Park, season fifteen, episode five: The Crack Baby Athletic Association. It is a parody, no doubt; yet it mirrors precisely what the NCAA is in practice. They still mouth allegiance to a creed that their actions betray. The money raked in from NCAA Football, by the association and the big conferences, is somewhere on an order of a billion dollars annually. Mind you that a significant number of those member institutions are state universities. 

The parade of greed and ineptitude on display from the NCAA was enough to turn me sour. Add to that, you have men who are rewarded with multi-million-dollar contracts to coach what are, I will remind you, are amateur athletes. Because according to the NCAA, they must be amateurs, lest they should lose their eligibility. The athletes are physically whoring themselves in exchange for that piece of paper their university will hand them, the very minute that their NCAA eligibility expires. The coaches are worth millions and the players? They get a deluxe crack baby orphanage. 

Ok, I will admit. There are some institutions which may have provided financial or other material rewards to players. I won't say that it has never happened. These amounts are miniscule in the grander scope of monies pouring into the sport. Those monies pouring into the sport, at both collegiate and professional levels, are increasingly coming in the form of advertising dollars from online betting services. Directly or indirectly, those dollars are making their way to the NCAA.

Which is why, my friends, I contend that the U of M did not win that game. I think that what happened last Saturday was something more like this...

Somebody at "Sportsbet.com", or any such, has a hotline to the head of officiating in each major conference. About a fraction of a second after "Final" was flashed on the television screen, the head of officiating for the Big 10 Conference found his phone lit up with a simple, two-word command: FIX IT. That official in turn was in contact with the head of officials on the field. Probably less than thirty seconds later. I won't hazard a guess as to who among them hatched the ridiculous "clock" story, but it didn't take very long at all for that to become the official script. Yep. That's our story and we're sticking to it. We don't care what you saw. This is how it happened.

I had no dog in this hunt. Still don't. I'm not carrying anyone else's water for them. I am, however, as a native Buckeye obliged to offer this to all the U of M fans. 

I still think you're number one

 

I guess we can't avoid this...

 

The entire country seems to be wrapped up in this Lindsay Clancy trial.  I've been working on completing another short story - another one with time travel/interdimensional twists. I was progressing quite nicely with this, and then I made the mistake of reading a couple of opinion pieces about the trial. I sampled a couple out of MANY opinion pieces on this topic. No, really... I mean a shit ton of them. One would almost guess that there was nothing else going on, which is of course actually true on most days. If I had to make lemonade out of this, then I would say that it is at least a welcome respite from campaign ads.

This is a case which rapidly becomes a lightning rod. While the facts of the case seem rather clear; this woman did murder her three children and readily admits that she did, the sideshow evolving outside of the courtroom is ever shifting. The case has fostered a contagion of warriors for a variety of causes. The post-partum awareness and women's mental health cause; both the pro and anti abortion causes; the pro and anti-feminist causes, and yes, even the repeal the 19th amendment cause, have all enjoined their causes to this case. For good or ill.

If this was an act that can be excused for a hormonal imbalance, as a fair number of the feminist camp will contend, then it does not bode well for the state of their "movement". I'm quite certain that none of them are able to see this, but it exposes a glaring contradiction in their thought process. They fail to see that this defense of murder, excused by what is an exclusively feminine trait, helps to validate every argument ever made against women performing certain jobs. There are at least a few women that I have spoken with who seem to realize, that these card-carrying feminist types are fucking it up for ALL women.

There has developed a disturbing fandom, not just around the murderer, but around the case as a whole. We haven't seen anything like this since the OJ trial, which launched what we know as Court TV. Here is a case tailor made for Court TV. The OJ case had a lot of fanfare to herald it's arrival. This one seems to have snuck up on us. Part of that may just be due to the fact that in thirty years, the world has just grown that much colder and callous.

One of the first details that jumped at me about the case, was the fact that it is in the state of Massachusetts. We have witnessed precious little from our courts that should inspire much confidence. If any. If this is true, then it is true a thousand-fold for Massachusetts. Any of you follow the Karen Read trial(s)? Which were, incidentally, also in Massachusetts. A different jurisdiction, to be sure, but if the Read case is any kind of an indicator, then I fully expect the court in the Clancy case to cock it up.

There are those who say that the greatest danger here is that there may be no justice for these children. What justice can any court render for them? What ruling or punishment would bring them back to life? The point being, the justice isn't for them. The justice, inasmuch as any may be wrung from our courts, is for ourselves. A murder trial serves as an article of faith; that if the State can at least get this right, it absolves them of every other injustice that they perpetrate upon their people. It's a poor substitute for the real thing.

Nature does not deal kindly with child killers. If the natural law were at work here, no one would even know her name. There is a lot of ink being wasted on this bitch.

So, there. Since everyone else is talking about it...

More coming to Midnight and other beasts soon

Not a word here rhymes with anything

 

Curse the enigmatic and solitary case

All things seem simple on their face

below the surface

the waters get muddied

Contradicts all that you have studied

Histories written on the wing

not a word here rhymes with anything

A trick of rhetoric, verbal play

always talking yet little to say

Icebergs will grow

the deeper you dive

and differing conclusions will arrive

What new truths do they bring

not a word here rhymes with anything

Not adding up, the numbers aren't right

Try and try with all your might

Once it is twisted

it can not grow straight 

You can still try

but it may be too late

Seductive, like the sirens sing

not a word here rhymes with anything