Winter Olympic Hype In America

I like watching the Winter Olympics. I think it's the Norwegian in me and the sole fact that snow skiing is the ONLY sport I can do decently well at. I love to watch the figure skating, the bobsled races, cross country skiing, the downhill, and my secret love for curling.

I sometimes though wish the media would stay out of the Olympians faces. Sure, the olympians want media coverage, it's how they get their Visa and Wheaties sponsorships to pay the $100,000 a year fees/costs to do their sport each year. It's their income basically.

Look at the Torino games that happened four years ago. All we could hear about was Bode Miller every time you turned on the TV to watch the games. Bode Miller this Bode Miller that. Journalists wanted to cover everything about this guy from his home, to his mother, to his arrogant douchebag attitude that made him the golden boy of sports.

And when Bode Miller didn't give us gold we cast him to the garbage (where all douchebags belong). Pun intended.



You sir are not Spiderman.

And notice this year Bode Miller is not the golden boy. I only saw one clip of him talking about his "changes". Yea buddy, a little too late.

So, this year I was hoping that the media would try to back off immortalizing the greatness of certain individuals. Eh, who are we kidding? It's American broadcasting. Of course they're going to feature certain athletes like Apolo Ono, Shawn White, and Lindsey Jacobellis. The last two athletes I mentioned are snowboarders. A sport created for the Olympics apparently to boost Team USA's medal count. No wonder foreign countries are never really thrilled with us during the games.

So of course the media is going to cradle these athletes giving them air time to show off their ritzy homes and talk about their days of training. I was actually reading an article were it talked about American olympians do not have high school diplomas and some are at the junior high level of education. One athlete only attended 1/6th of classes in his school year. If a normal kid only went 1/6th of the school year they would have to repeat that grade and their parents would be investigated by social services. What gives? Sure, some athletes kids still, and I think that is crap. No 15 year old should be an Olympian competing against someone who's 32 from Italy. That's almost unfair if you ask me.

This just goes to prove my theory that Americans care more about their sports than their education.

Getting back to this hype though. Look at Lindsey Jacobellis, the snowboarder. She's been in commercials on TV, media segments, interviews galore and what happens? She runs off the course and doesn't win a medal.

I think the pressure on theses athletes for winning is absurd. Sure, if I was an olympian I'd want a medal, but these athletes are having to perform for TV ratings, approval of sponsors, the praise from Bob Costas, and the acceptance from the American people that they are "great" athletes.

I applaud the Australian mogulist, Dale Begg Smith, who makes his own money and doesn't have sponsors. He avoids media and just does his sport. That's the way it should be. But the media frowns upon him because he's "not marketable" basically.

I think a lot of Olympians are just sellouts honestly. And it takes away from the athletes that are really good and struggle in their home countries. Just like the Georgian luger who died, he had a hard life but made it to the Olympics to compete. He would never gotten any attention except for his death and it's sad that we don't hear about the voiceless talent.

Cash for Clunkers. Clunker of an Idea?

I'm sure if you've watched TV you've seen the "Cash for Clunkers" commercials for every Ford, Chevy, and Dodge dealership in your area. While the idea may seem pretty good, there's other factors that I don't see as a benefit to the program, or that it will even boost the sale of new cars.

For one example, my grandparents have a 1994 Dodge pick up. My grandparents recently purchased a new Ford Focus when they traded in their large Lincoln Town Car. Papa needed a smaller car due to the fact he's older and honestly shouldn't be driving in my opinion. I suggested a smaller car would be better. So now they have the Focus and the pick up. The Cash for Clunkers would work for my grandparents for their truck, but my grandparents already bought their small fuel efficient car. My grandpa is the only one that drives, so to buy another small car would be pointless.

Example two. My mom has a 1996 Crown Victoria that she has refused to get rid off. She has a brand new Lincoln Town Car that my dad bought for her birthday last year. My sister and I both have small sedan cars. My dad has a truck. If my parents were to trade in the 1996 Vic, why would we need another car? I told my dad that the 2010 Camaro was on the list for purchase, we considered the trade till my mom said no. So, my parents are keeping Old Vicky instead of bringing home a shiny new Camaro to go next to my Camaro. :( Grr.

Then there is example three. The person that drives a clunker bought the clunker at a cheap price. Clunkers or nicely termed, "Late Models" are cheaper. If a person who drives a late model bought a late model for a couple thousand dollars from a newspaper ad or Larry's Auto Mart, then how can they afford a brand NEW car?

People driving 2001 models and up aren't driving around in clunkers, they're decent body styles now. My sister's car is an 01 Grand Am that looks practically new (minus the few scraps I added when I hit a concrete cylinder in a parking lot). People that drive newer cars have a higher sell back rate than $4,500. If my parents wanted to buy a 2010 Camaro, they don't need an incentive to get rid of their old car to buy one, they have the means to do it.

A person who has enough money to buy a $20,000 car will buy a brand NEW car. I person in a lower income level who is strapped for cash wouldn't even begin to look at NEW cars. $4,500 for a car that is worth $2,000 is a nice offer. But that's only $4,500 off a car that is marked up in sticker price higher for $15,000-$20,000 when you originally could only pay $2,000.

It just doesn't work out.

Whether or not the "Cash for Clunkers" program works to "save" the American auto industry, I doubt the outcomes will be high.

Are you or anyone you know going to trade in your old car for a brand NEW car based on this "sweet, once in a lifetime" offer? Or are you sticking to your cheap, paid for, reliable A to B car?