As Americans we seem to embrace many annual traditions. Some are big and grandiose such as the 4th of July where we boisterously celebrate our independence from tyranny. And some are more muted and solemn, such as Veterans Day where we honor those who fought to make this country what it is today. Others are just excuses to dress like prostitutes, get drunk, and beg for candy (best Flag Day ever).

These days mean more to some of us than others because of our individual experiences and what we hold to be sacred in our own lives. For example I would venture to say that most women in a relationship hold Valentine's Day to be more of a test for how well their significant other pays attention to the hints they have been dropping for months about a specific gift as opposed to the generic card and candy most closely associated with the holiday. Most men on the other hand are confused why the $6 singing card and over sized box of chocolates (that she obviously kept hinting at when she said that she felt like chocolate every time you walked by them) did not achieve the desired effect. Regardless American holidays are rooted in tradition and unfortunately some expectation.

However I take exception to one holiday in particular. In the corporate world this holiday baffles me and angers me beyond even the mild annoyance of National Aviation Day (August 19th...look it up) . That holiday is National Bosses Day. I myself am in management and I think this is an absolute crock! I will admit that this is not exactly a major American holiday but it is listed on the calender in my office which makes it bad enough.

So why does this upset me you ask? I feel that respect is the most important thing in the workplace and I don't think that a card should be what we equate with respect. Especially if it is prompted by an arbitrary date on a calender reminding people to spend money on thanking their boss for doing his job.

No, to me respect means not showing up two hours late for work and drunk (thanks EV). After all the "Boss" probably makes way more than the employees do so why should they give their hard earned money to a greeting card company who in turn gives it to the boss there only to create another fictitious holiday to buy greeting cards for. Now that is a vicious cycle.

Besides what happens to that card once it is read? "Oh, thank you so much for the card. I'll put it up on my huge mahogany mantle surrounded by rare elephant tusks in my huge mansion that sits at the end of a cul-de-sac in my gated community. Enjoy your shanty, peasant." Cards for this kind of occasion should have been replaced by the invention of text messaging. "Hey boss, thnx 4 not firing me yet. :) TTYL".

And what if someone feels like giving the boss a present? They have immediately upped the ante. Its like the kid who give his teacher an apple and automatically gets an A. That brown-nosing mentality would have gotten your ass kicked on the playground. If you give a gift you become that 8 year old little bastard of the class again. And who does that person think they are? The act of openly calling out your fellow employees to match this gift is basically declaring war on the other people in the office.

In the end there are a lot of holidays and traditions that we as Americans can enjoy together and find common ground on. However, should you feel the need to alienate those around you by forcing them to live up to your hallmark standard you should consider putting a mirror in your cubicle to watch your back.

Time and punishment

150 years. A lot can happen in a century and a half. For instance within the last 150 years we have developed planes, cars, computers, pizza bites, ipods, and nuclear power. All of these things have revolutionized our day to day lives. 150 years ago people were just beginning to adjust to the idea that cars didn't crap in the street like horses have a knack for doing. If that isn't an improvement of quality of life I don't know what is.

So why am I so interested in what was going on 150 years ago you ask? Well, today Bernard Madoff was sentenced to 150 years in prison for operating the largest ponzi scheme ever known and I'm just wondering how I feel about that. (Just in case you need to know a ponzi scheme is when you pay investors returns on their investments with other investor's money. Instead of investing the money coming in you just distribute it to other investors and pocket the rest. This method is named for Charles Ponzi who was an immigrant that pulled this stunt about 100 years ago. Don't feel bad if you didn't know because I had to look it up).

I mean the guy did swindle billions from thousands of investors since the early 90's but holy crap that's a long time! Not only was his sentence the maximum allowable penalty by law but also the guy is in his 70's. The judge cited the length of the sentence being "symbolic" and a deterrent for the future. Now don't get me wrong, I think what he did was horrible, despicable, and totally without remorse but it seems like a slight departure from the slap on the wrist that we expect white collar criminals to come away with. Even the former CEO Jeffrey Skilling received a fraction of that for his role in the Enron debacle.

Let me put a 150 year sentence in perspective. Sentencing rules for murder go something like this. With no prior criminal record murder one usually carries a 120-121 month (10 years)sentence all the way to a life sentence with the presumption that there were no other mitigating factors. (Don't worry I didn't know what mitigating factors were either. That's when someone shows extreme behavior either to cause harm or prevent harm. Like using a weapon or if the person acted in self defense. The Internet is awesome!). That doesn't even take into account a possible %20 reduction in time served for good behavior. Does this mean that the judicial system now thinks it is easier to reform a murderer in a few years as opposed to someone who steals money?

Let me take this opportunity to say that I don't mean for this to be a morality debate on if thieves or murderers should get more time in prison. Personally I think every case deserves careful deliberation and I'm all for the punishment fitting the crime. However in Bernard Madoff's case I think there could have been a more fitting punishment than sticking him in a cell that is funded by the tax dollars of those that he stole from. Talk about ironic, this guy just can't stop taking people's money.

I think that forcing him to be one of those dancing Statue of Liberty tax promoters would have been more appropriate. Although I'm already disturbed by thinking about letting those people do my taxes and having Mr. Madoff as your spokesman for anything to do with money might be bad for business. I could get behind him being a chimney sweep under court supervision. Although maybe that would turn out to be an awesome job. I've never met any chimney sweeps. What if the court made him work on one of those crab fishing boats until he made enough money to pay back the money he stole? I suppose that wouldn't work either because then we would have to give him his own reality show on Discovery. Maybe there is no way to punish him adequately for his crime but I just feel like everyone got cheated by simply stuffing this old crook in a cell to rot.

Personally I think I'm hoping that we develop some type of medical treatment to keep Bernie alive for the next 150 years. Just think what he'll walk out of prison to find. Flying cars, holographic computers, pizza bites 2.0, and cold fusion. That is assuming the adjustment to outside life doesn't get to him like Brooks in The Shawshank Redemption. Then he will have to find work in this futuristic world where employment options for a 220 year old ex-con consist of the guy who sprays futuristic bowling shoes with disinfectant and the manager of a flying rental car company. Now that will be the day that justice is served.

A moment of silence...

I am deeply saddened to hear that Billy Mays was found dead in his home this morning. This is especially sad for me because I too am in sales and I always kind of liked his carnival barker approach to selling crap that I never knew I had to have. He was a master of getting millions of people to trust him at first glance while he's hocking his wares at an extreme decibel level on cable TV. Somehow this bearded sales aficionado gave a sense of credibility to everything he touched. I don't know how Oxi Clean works but I can't argue with its stain fighting power and I must have it! Even ESPN got in on the Mays bandwagon to pitch one of their websites which I thought was hilarious and the fact that he could poke fun at himself while doing it was even better. I mean really you have to hand it to the guy for being a true American success story. He even landed his own show recently that really showcased what an icon he had become for selling stuff on behalf of the small time inventor with a decent product and no way to market it. I like him so much I'm even thinking about being Billy Mays for Halloween! Now all we have left is the Shamwow guy who beats up hookers...downgrade. Love him or hate him he got your attention and his death comes in the same week that we lost Ed Mcmahon, Farrah Fawcett, and Michael Jackson. Now we're going to get 24 hour coverage of every autopsy and toxicology report that might lead investigators to believe that any one of these celebs had aspirin in their system that they are linking to them taking for a headache that might have lead to their demise. Let the media circus ensue...shoot me now! Who cares if they were taking drugs. They are constantly pursued by the press, even after death, and I'm sure that just like the rest of us they have problems that a few little pills help them cope with. At least this gives news organizations something else to talk about besides the economy for five minutes. Now we're left with every aspect of Jackson's life and death casting a shadow that is eclipsing everything else going on in the world at the moment. And I understand that it is very shocking and even fairly newsworthy but the part I find the most interesting is how people are fighting over his stuff. Sure its worth a lot of money but why do we put so much value in someone else's crap? I personally can't think of a single room in my place that a silver sequined glove in a glass case would look appropriate. Don't get me wrong I would love to be selling the aforementioned glove which is currently retailing for just shy of $400,000! But what the hell makes it worth that much to someone? Is it the thought that the famous person who owned that item left a little piece of themselves immortalized in spirit behind? And now it can be yours for 3 easy payments of $159,999.99. But wait that's not all, if you call now we'll also throw in the fabulous title of being an eccentric loony toon who shows off random artifacts to no one in particular that 30 years from now no one will even understand the significance of. Not even the great Billy Mays could sell that as a good idea. I also find it a little strange that we as a society put so much value in some one's autograph. Why does someone scribbling illegibly on anything make that item worth more. And then the second that they kick the bucket its value goes through the roof. Is this because never again will they be allowed to hold a pen that touched that fast food napkin you so hastily scrambled to come up with when you saw B-list celeb coming out of the rehab clinic. Now your friends will have to believe you! Am I the only one that thinks that is a weird memento to take away from a chance encounter with a star? Although I am a bit of a hypocrite because I would be happy to build a shrine for a Michael Jordan autographed jersey but that is beside the point. Isn't it funny how we the people build up celebs to be better than us, resent them for being larger than life, strive to grab a piece of their greatness, and then want to tear them down after their gone. Unfortunately that is human nature and I suppose only time will tell how we are going to remember these four individuals. R.I.P.