The World Around You

If I did not live in Alabama this story would surprise me, but it doesn’t,

Former Auburn cheerleader Christopher Bailey said “War Eagle” one time too many.

Bailey, who became a University of Alabama cheerleader after transfering this year, gave the Auburn cheer on national television Saturday night while wearing the uniform of the Crimson Tide — and promptly got booted off the UA cheerleading squad.

Bailey, 23, was cut after Tide athletic officials received e-mail complaints concerning the interview Bailey did on ESPN during the televised Iron Bowl. A cheerleader for Auburn for three years, Bailey said he still has strong feelings for Auburn and during the interview with ESPN’s Adrian Karsten he complied with her request to say “War Eagle” and “Roll Tide.”

The decision was made at a meeting Monday between UA athletic director Mal Moore, cheerleading coordinator Debbie Greenwell and Bailey.

As a first-year member of the cheerleading unit, Bailey would not have been eligible to travel to Hawaii for Saturday’s Alabama football game against the Rainbow Warriors. But now he will not be allowed to cheer for Tide athletics during the spring semester either.

This may sound like a silly story, but this situation has really cost this guy a great deal. He will lose a partial scholarship and the opportunity to pursue his ambition to compete in national cheerleading competitions.

At the same time, someone who was the head cheerleader at Auburn should know his audience much better than this. The reaction was immediate and vocal and the action that followed was just as immediate.

UPDATE: Steven files this story under Alabama Politics as well.

Kevin at Wizbang is interested in selling two slightly used two year olds.

James posts on the difference between the two parties. He is absolutely correct that governing from the middle is necessary and that most policy is made between the 40 yard lines.

An additional point is that the parties can help shape what the middle is. The parties take on the task of bringing an issue like civil unions for homosexuals into the mainstream. Candidates continue to talk about these ideals and their importance to America, even though they know from a policy standpoint it is not achievable right now, in the hopes that it will be possible in the future.

I saw a particularly good letter to the editor in this morning’s Birmingham News,

There has been much displeasure lately over the removal of religious content from public displays, buildings or text. Those who object to the removal fear the infringement of religious expression. Those who support the removal wish for public property not to become the province of a single religious viewpoint.

The following questions, I think, put the controversy over the removal of religious content from public domains into important context:

1.) Before 2001, the Alabama Supreme Court had no two-ton block with the Ten Commandments engraved on it. Was that wrong?

2.) Before 1954, the Pledge of Allegiance did not have the phrase “under God.” Was there something wrong with the original pledge?

3.) Before 1956, our national motto was not “In God we trust,” but rather “E pluribus unum,” which is Latin for “Out of the many, one.” Was there something wrong with that?

4.) Neither the American flag, nor our national anthem (the first verse of The Star-Spangled Banner), nor the U.S. Constitution mentions God. Is that wrong?

5.) Finally, many other government objects do not mention God, including postage stamps, public mailboxes and federal income tax forms. There is no outcry. So why object when government properties that were originally secular, but later acquired religious content, are asked to be returned to their original secular conditions?

Victor Mark

Crestwood

Thank you Mr. Mark for putting it so well.