Keller @ Large Blog

No, Don't Go For It

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 03:46:59 GMT

I was every bit as stunned as every other Pats fan Sunday night when the team blew a big lead and lost in the final seconds to the Colts. Our beloved Pats remain a work in progress, to say the least. But I was equally stunned by some of the ridiculous over-reactions we heard all day yesterday. "Bill Belichick is not the genius everyone thinks he is," wrote one typical online commenter. Concluded another, in all capital letters: "FIRE BELICHICK."

Excuse me? Fire the best coach in football and the most successful coach in modern-day New England sports? Ridiculous. But I really shouldn't be surprised. Our popular culture loves nothing better than to see an icon brought down to size. Isn't that right, President Obama? Consider what he must be thinking, the toast of the nation one year ago, now struggling to crack 50% approval in the polls and deflecting criticism that by pushing a costly health-care fix right now, he's going for it on fourth-and-two from his own 29 yard line.

Say what you will about Belichick's call Sunday night, but I wonder -- since when did "going for it" - taking a risk at a moment of crisis - become cause for derision? Aren't we always hearing a chorus of complaint - about our political leaders, our football coaches, even Hollywood script-writers - that they're playing it too safe, not showing leadership and creativity? "Going for it" can lead to spectacular success or unpleasant failure - that's why they call it "risk." I thought that risk-taking spirit was part of the fabric of America. I still think it is. But so, apparently is second-guessing, whining, and impatience.

Palin's Me-Tour

Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:11:51 GMT

In the days after John McCain picked Sarah Palin to run with him, we had fun here lampooning the hysterical over-reaction of some on the left, especially cultural snobs who simply gagged on her un-PC atmospherics. Especially ludicrous were the "feminists" whose knee-jerk response was no, we didn't mean to see that kind of woman promoted. (A notable recusal from the bash-Palin brigades -- Hillary Clinton, then and now.)

But the bottom-line on equality is, you've still got to deliver the goods. And while Palin continues to demonstrate a knack for connecting with some on certain issues (she sure got a lot of mileage out of "death panels") that is to be ignored by other pols at their own risk, the latest episode in what appears to be a run for president in 2012 reeks of the kind of narcissism that conservatives love to skewer President Obama for.

If there are deep thoughts about public policy or a detailed vision for our future contained in Palin's new book, it isn't apparent from the ongoing publicity blitz, which features the former governor rattling on endlessly about herself and her personal style and her personal feelings and other ephemera. Urged on, of course, by her interviewers, but I haven't yet heard of her throwing down the mike and stalking off the set in disgust. Meanwhile, her literary contribution has an ambivalent relationship with the facts. And by choosing to walk away from the job she sought where she could actually prove her bona fides in favor of fueling the starmaking machine, it appears she has turned off plenty of folks.

When the only one keeping you from being the least-popular national figure is John Edwards, you're doing something wrong.

"A Mixed Bag"

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 04:21:51 GMT

Here is a link to an interesting web site exploring some of the issues raised in our piece tonight about the 40th anniversary of Sesame Street.

Quiz answer: "Rubber Duckie."

Girls Gone Wild

Tue, 10 Nov 2009 03:56:49 GMT

More details about the Rhode Island girls' soccer brawl referenced in my report Monday night are here.

My guest expert, Dan Lebowitz of the Sport in Society Center at Northeastern University, argues that coaches, parents and the society at large need to be much more explicit about the behavior expected of young atheletes and much more emphatic about the consequences of misbehavior. Watch the piece (posted here shortly) and tell me -- do you agree or disagree?

The Most Stylish Bostonians?

Fri, 06 Nov 2009 01:57:13 GMT

The Boston Globe has unveiled its latest list of "the most stylish Bostonians," and while they all look sharp, I have a different take. Watch it at 11, then add your own nominees below.

Is Kate a Bad Mother?

Mon, 02 Nov 2009 21:48:00 GMT

Kate Gosselin was on cable TV tonight in an effort to keep her reality show going, even as she acknowledges the kids are starting to show "signs of stress and behavioral changes."

Q: Is she the poster woman for bad, exploitative stage-mothering?

My take: basically, yes. I watched her big interview and saw a woman absolutely entranced by the celebrity she's created, still eager to be on TV, willing to put the kids back on if her estranged husband would only allow it, seemingly oblivious to the connection between the money and fame and the damage done to her family.

Your view?

(Read more about my guest expert tonight, Dr. Lisa Machoian, here.)

Paging Casey Sherman

Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:28:18 GMT

Here's your next book.

"Unhappy" Women?

Wed, 28 Oct 2009 03:01:38 GMT

Here is the Time Magazine cover story referenced in my report Tuesday night.

Here is the controversial academic study Time found so credible.

Whoops. Makes you wonder - or should - about any news story or analysis you see based on a "study."

"Bad Dads" Gone Wild?

Wed, 21 Oct 2009 21:09:23 GMT

A Virginia father takes his 11-year-old son to Hooters for lunch to get some insight into how he's reacting to women these days, and gets hammered on the internet as a bad dad.

Fair? How does he stack up with the likes of Jon Gosselin of reality TV fame, "balloon boy" sire Richard Heene, Michael Lohan (Lindsay's daddy), or any of a string of over-zealous dads who pick fights or cause trouble at youth sports events?

Comment below; take our poll to the right.

The Hoax Parade

Mon, 19 Oct 2009 14:07:53 GMT

Fool us once, shame on you; fool us twice, shame on us.

Let's be real -- the Heene family's (alleged) hoax, especially exploitative and vile as it may be, is hardly the first time we've been victimized by a hoax. Around here, no one can hear about a murder without thinking of con man Charles Stuart and the vicious, racist hoax he tried to pull off to cover up his wife's slaying. Hardly a year goes by without some sad specimen feigning cancer to elicit donations, which they usually blow on toys.In politics, lefties think Iraqi WMDs were a Bush hoax, despite clear evidence that he used them against the Kurds; right-wingers see global warming as a hoax, notwithstanding significant evidence of climate change.

Watch my report on why we fall for hoaxes and how to break the habit here.