New York City's Endurance

Though running is my physical workout mode of  primary choice, I have never had occasion or desire to run in a marathon (though several years ago I did do a solo run of 30 miles in what was initially intended as a 4-mile excursion).  It has been a number of years since I have run competitively, mostly in the 5 - 10 km range.  It nevertheless pleases me that there are many organized marathons.

The New York City Marathon is a very worthwhile event.  It is good for the economic and physical health of the population, notwithstanding the significant but temporary transportation irregularities from road closures.  Having stated this, I unequivocally endorse the decision to completely cancel the 2012 running of the New York City Marathon.

NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg had initially asserted that, notwithstanding the devastation wreaked by Hurricane Sandy, the 2012 Marathon would go forward.  Bloomie cited the decision of his predecessor, Rudy Giuliani, to hold the 2001 Marathon notwithstanding the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center.  But the two situations are inapposite for several reasons:

A.  In 2001, the only people who could not return to their homes (temporarily or permanently) were those who lived in the vicinity of the World Trade Center, at the lower tip of Manhattan.  The 2012 hurricane has displaced people -- many more in total than were displaced from Lower Manhattan in 2001 --  in geographically diverse New York City neighborhoods.  I will venture to conservatively estimate that in excess of 80% of the population of New York City and Long Island has at least one friend who has been made homeless by Hurricane Sandy (and though my home incurred but minor damage, my wife and I know at least two homeless co-workers or colleagues).

  Many services -- transportation, electric power, gas and water utilities, gasoline for automobiles -- are simply unavailable to many New Yorkers (and, for that matter, many on Long Island and in other suburbs).

Expending resources for the Marathon -- including electrical generators which could be used to power the darkened homes of many New Yorkers -- is not in the City's best interests.  And running the Marathon on its route through several afflicted neighborhoods only adds insult to the injury incurred by the residents.

B.  Many of the 100,000 + entrants in the New York City Marathon are from out of town, and therefore ensconce themselves in New York City hotels for the event.   Under normal circumstances, this would be good for the economics of the city.  But, unlike the statutes and ordinances enacted by the New York City Council, the New York State Legislature or the United States Congress, the laws of supply and demand, like the laws of gravity, are inviolate.  If large numbers of out-of-towners bed down in New York City's hotels, then the cost of shelter for those displaced by Sandy cannot help but rise. 

C.  [This is the reason which the Main Stream Media will not report (and will take affirmative measures to censor from its content)]:  In 2001, there was a need to show the Muslim world that their attack on New York City did not break the New Yorkers' spirits.  Running the 2001 New York City Marathon was an important element of that.

And to those of you sob sisters who sing the "Not All Muslims Are Terrorists" song, I will reiterate that in 2001, there was a need to show the Muslim world that their attack on New York City did not break the New Yorkers' spirits.  Muslims in America, particularly the Muslim youth, needed to see that New York City was not a vanquished loser, that New York City had a fighting survival spirit, and that there were viable alternatives to Islamic terrorism available for them.  It is because of these alternatives that not all Muslims in America are terrorists.  And the alternatives had to be demonstrated definitively and expeditiously.  Running the 2001 New York City Marathon did just that.

For Hurricane Sandy, the Islamic terrorist factor does not present itself -- at least not in the same manner as it did in 2001.

Mayor Bloomberg  realizes that he called this one wrong, and he accordingly reversed himself.  But then again, Bloomie has been calling many things wrong of late.

Private Matter?

It seems that Rudy Giuliani's daughter got pinched for shoplifting after being caught on camera secreting more than $100 in make-up from a Sephora store in Manhattan.

There are two aspects to the news report that warrant commentary here.


A. "Store managers, after calling police, said they didn't want to press charges against her, [NYPD spokesperson Paul] Browne said. But police arrested her on a petty larceny charge, he said. … … The Manhattan district attorney's office had not decided whether to file formal charges against her, office spokeswoman Erin Duggan said."

Is Caroline Giuliani being accorded a special pass because she is Rudy Giuliani's daughter? It may well make good business sense to not press charges against her. For one thing, it takes up the manager's time to go to court as a witness. Moreover, so long as no charges are filed, everyone can come to an understanding whereby Caroline not only will never do it again, but may even pe persuaded to come back and spend her money at the store. If charges are filed, the store will forever lose a customer.

But is the same standard being applied to Caroline Giuliani as would be applied to anyone else's daughter who gets caught shoplifting cosmetics at Sephora?


B. "Her father, through a spokeswoman, said the case was a personal matter and asked the media to respect her privacy."

This time I beg to differ with Rudy! Criminal charges are, by definition, public causes of action. Unless and until Caroline is acquitted, or charges dropped, the public has an interest in the case.

Query: How much of a "private matter" were the criminal cases brought in the Southern District of New York when Rudolph Giuliani was serving as the United States Attorney there?


Quite frankly, I am of the sentiment that the criminal charges at issue are so petty and picayune and penny-ass that if the victim (the Sephora cosmetics store) is okay with letting them slip, then the government resources should not be burdened by the prosecution of the case. This is particularly so in light of the fact that Caroline Giuliani is apparently not a hardened criminal, and can be swiftly rehabilitated to return to her place as a law-abiding citizen in society (not to mention a spender of money to stimulate the sagging economy).

But the public needs reassurances that Caroline's case is not being spotted any special favors.