Re: Another opinion on the big issues of the day

[bird <birdwl@earthlink.net>]

<Attachment missing>>
>   If you doubt the conection of hostility to authority figures and drug
> taking, you might want to get out on the streets. It was that way in the
> sixties(remember the phrase; "off the pigs?"), it's the same now.

Ah, right, the Sixties.  I don't doubt the connection, Jim, tenuous though
it may be
(I would imagine social class and money would have more to do with it)
even though I may not be "out on the streets" (I'm having trouble fighting
the urge to add "Starsky" or "Hutch" to that line, but I guess that was
the Seventies, right, Huggy Bear?  Plus, I guess I like people who are
somewhat hostile to authority; I enjoy independence and thumbing one's
nose at the powers that be.

>    I'm sure the "DeadHeads" were pretty "mellow" at that concert, and
> while "stoned," most people are very passive, hence the lack of aggresion
> in Moiso's(or often Robt. Parish's) game, there are also the opposite
> effects, that often linger, between highs.

There's very little scientific evidence to support your last statement,
actually -- at least if we're taking about the same drug we were before.
In fact, I would think alcohol and tobacco (legal drugs) would have a far
more deleterious effects between, shall we say, doses.  Can you imagine an
NBA player playing with a hangover?  (I guess you might just look at Shawn
Kemp.)  You know, just because you have this idea of what people are like
when on certain drugs doesn't make it so.  You seem to equate using
cannabis to being passive, and that's not necessarily the case.  Didn't
Bill Walton smoke while at UCLA (and possibly beyond, AFAIK)?  I wouldn't
call him unaggressive, but then, I wouldn't call Robert Parish's game
passive, either -- I mean if you look beyond the impassive expression.   I
don't think he "passively" helped the C's to those championships at all.

>    Anyway, I'm not wanting to get on any crusade here, nor do I really
> care who smokes pot, if he gives me my money's worth as a fan, but
> Charles Oakley's words have to be considered and any high school
> counsellor will tell you to look for drug use, if your child is
> underperforming, surly and lethargic.

Right, the high school counsellors.  Well, I never listened to mine, and I
never heard of anyone who did, so there you go, but if you want to talk
about being "out on the streets" I think the aforementioned counsellors
are about as opposite of that as you can get.  I mean, I think the leading
cause of being surly and lethargic as a teenager is _being_  an adolescent.
   (Kind of quid pro quo, really.)  At least, it is if you're doing it
right.

I could be wrong, but you really do seem very concerned about who may or
may not indulge in the NBA.  You keep mentioning Charles Oakley, for
example: why are his words so important?  He may have exaggerated or may
not know who does or doesn't, and, at any rate, is still just one player.

Anyway, we should probably take this to email if you feel the need; it
doesn't have all that much to do with Celtics, after all.

(The Celtic "Tird",
  Celticus "tirdius")