"You'll walk the floor the way I doYour cheatin' heart will tell on you."
Hank Williams, Your Cheatin' Heart, 1952
In my 30-year career as a Financial Advisor I saw the damage cheating did. People lost faith in markets. Clients lost money. Companies like Enron cheated in their accounting. Brokerages gave "strong buy" ratings to stocks they thought were garbage. Banks and mortgage companies bundled "liar loans" into bonds. Ratings agencies called those loans AAA. People cheated to get an edge, to make more money faster.
Yesterday's post focused on cheating to gain political power. Something does not need to be true for people to assert it. Indeed the assertion can be well-established as false. It only needs to be arguably true, which then permits someone to assert that position. An ongoing point of frustration for me, evidenced in this blog, is that people who like the outcome of a pretext legal fiction are so willing to assert it. It turns out that democracy depends on more than the rule of law. A cheater can pretend something is legal and find fellow cheaters to go along with the pretext. Democracy requires people to be good sports and recognize the validity of the unspoken rules of the game they are playing. To bear true witness. It requires good character. For laws to be enforceable, it requires that the public demand good character of others.
Mullen, 1965 |
Guest Post by Jack Mullen
Somewhere deep in the American psyche lies a tolerance for cheating--if cheating results in the common good.
John D. Rockefeller, Cornelius Vanderbilt, Andrew Carnegie, and J.P. Morgan somehow withstood Teddy Roosevelt’s trust busting and managed to gain wide public acceptance, if not admiration, both for the work they did in their careers and for their philanthropy. San Francisco's Nob Hill has institutions that bear the names of railroad barons. Huntington, Stanford, Mark Hopkins and Crocker are considered the great empire builders of an America that stretched from coast to coast. The descendants of the people who did the hard manual labor live in tiny apartments in Chinatown, three blocks away. For all their faults, and there were many, the four robber barons made a contribution in the 19th Century. We have railroads to show for their work.
The morality of our 21st Century titans of industry is becoming more and more suspect. Their reputations took an unusually big hit in 2022. Sam Bankman-Fried played too cute with his clients’ crypto accounts and now finds himself in a New York jail. Elizabeth Holmes' company, Theranos Inc., scammed the likes of Henry Kissinger and George Shultz by promoting her supposed pharmaceutical miracle. She is now in jail. Elon Musk may get through this rough patch with Twitter with reputation intact. He had banked some reputation good will; we have electric cars and renewed space travel to show for his efforts as a business innovator and disrupter. But take a look at Bankman-Fried and Holmes. Did they have the common good in mind as they amassed their wealth, based on what now appears to be deceit? The early admiration for these so-called geniuses melted away quicker than a Frosty Cone on a mid-August afternoon in Medford.
In 1954 Jacques Barzun said, “Whoever wants to know the heart and mind of America had better learn baseball, the rules and reality of the game.” There is nothing like baseball to uncover how much cheating America can tolerate.
Two miles south of Nob Hill sits Oracle Ballpark. Barry Bonds, a talented athlete, routinely crushed home runs in to the San Francisco Bay. He smashed the home run records of Hank Aaron, Mark McGwire, and because of his shortened seasons, the great Babe himself.
All, save the most loyal San Francisco Giants fans and Baseball Commissioner Bud Selig, knew and acknowledged Bonds was doing something to get an unfair advantage. It was steroids. It is eye-opening to compare before-and-after photos of Bonds and McGwire. Still, sellout crowds came to see Bonds play, to cheer him in San Francisco, and to boo him at visiting ballparks.
So how did the baseball establishment handle cheating? Baseball commissioned the Mitchell Report, which listed all the players who cheated by using steroids. In addition to big boppers like Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire the report also included pitcher Roger Clemens and Designated Hitter David Ortiz.
The records of all the above-mentioned players are still in the books. However, baseball’s Hall of Fame refuses to enshrine most of the players who cheated the game, players such Bonds, McGwire, Sammy Sosa, and Roger Clemens. It is significant to acknowledge that Bonds, McGuire and Roger Clemens were considered by most, especially the press, to be boorish, A-1 jerks. But good guy and well-liked Mike Piazza, also a steroid user listed in the Mitchell Report, was voted into the Hall of Fame this past year. Personality and likability matter.
Good works matter, too. David Ortiz, a steroid user, was a beloved figure by Red Sox fans. He rallied the City of Boston with his stirring speech after the 2013 massacre at the Boston Marathon. He, too, is in the Hall of Fame.
[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your email go to Https://petersage.substack.comSubscribe. The blog is free and always will be.]
11 comments:
Let’s not forget the Houston Astro’s cheating in the World Series being booed in every ball park the next year. The Patriots we’re always viewed as possible cheaters during their glory years. Peyton Manning was careful what was said in the visiting locker room when in New England. After being caught taping opponents practicing, New England was viewed with great skepticism, resulting in thinking they deflated their football’s to gain another advantage. Trump is a notorious cheater on the golf course, kicking opponent’s golf balls into sand traps among other things like lies over counting his strokes.
If you won by cheating did you really win?
{Not intended for publication: it's Mark McGwire, not "McGuire"]
There was a book that came out in 1986 called “All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten.” One of the first things mentioned is, “Play fair.” How soon we forget.
It also gives an ever-relevant warning: “Ignorance and power and pride are a deadly mixture, you know.”
"Something does not need to be true in order to assert it....[i]t only needs to be arguably true, which then permits someone to assert it".
Instructively enough, that describes a good deal of the legacy media coverage of the entire Trump presidency, from the Steele dossier to the Alfa Bank suborning to Russia, and so many other would-be "bombshells" besides. If someone was willing to run that someone, often unnamed, had said It, then the others reported that some source had said It. It was enough to be plausible.
Yesterday's debate for me concerned the longstanding double news media standard in this connection, with Democrats usually trusting that same news media.
With cheating, like the question-begging word "pretext" as used here, it's about the culpable mental state. Does the person at issue know up front they are wrong? Or SHOULD they knoew, which is different? Recall "Bush Lied, People Died" on WMDs? Do Democrats now believe Dubya rubbed villain's hands together and thought, "There are none in Iraq, I know, but I'll go with it"?
Our society has veered way too far towards empathy, and away from enforcement and punishment.
When the main penalty is disapproval, sociopaths are free to do whatever they want, and the occasional bad impulses, we all have become more likely to be acted out.
Fear of consequences is an important component of social order. Kate Brown just told us all that even when it comes to the worst criminals, we don’t really mean it.
For the record, regarding some popular disinformation:
"Mr. Trump and his allies have insinuated that the F.B.I. based the Russia investigation on the [Steele] dossier. But when counterintelligence agents launched the effort on July 30, 2016, they did not yet know about the dossier." https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/01/us/trump-russia-investigation-dossier.html
As the investigation showed: “The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systemic fashion” (see the Mueller Report).
Regarding Bush’s villainy:
His various rationales for invading Iraq were credibly refuted before we even invaded, which is why he kept coming out with new ones. The most notorious example, of course, was the yellowcake uranium hoax, leading to the Valerie Plame affair in which the Bush administration outed an undercover spy.
It's also really bad when the cheaters are your elected officials who write new rules and rewrite the old rules in order to elicit an outcome favorable to maintaining power ...at the expense of democracy, and causes people to question the reliability of our elections.
The only thing more seductive than sex is power
There are none who are immune to this malady, all parties are guilty.
As a big baseball fan some time ago, let me correct the record that Mike Piazza was not named in the Mitchell Report. The whole report is online, and easily accessible to find any information. http://files.mlb.com/mitchrpt.pdf
Quite a while back. I had the opportunity to watch the Enron TILTED "E" being removed from the stadium in Houston. The first thought that popped into my head was...." investors should never have trusted a corporation whose symbol was crooked to begin with"
He might have been thinking of Rafael Palmeiro, for the, sorry, for “a” record. Sometimes truth is need, and vice versa. Certainly in political advocacy.
Oops, forgot—yet another lesson for the primacy-and-recency credulous. The Plame uranium/spy hoax was itself a hoax. Her blowhard husband had spilled the proverbial beans vis former Bush Sr. politico Richard Armitage them late journalist Bob Novak, not the Bush Jr. administration. Moreover, Plame had been a Langley pencil-pusher for years too long to remotely qualify as a undercover operative under the applicable law anyway. No one was ever charged for Plamegate. Initial convenient “info” often sticks, resistant to subsequent correction.
Post a Comment