[lookout123]

that isn't how i took the article at all. i read it as saying that the system in which we live creates people driven to succeed.

we value individuality
we value competitiveness
we value the do it yourself ethic
we value rewards in line with effort

we instill this into our kids. all he is saying is that this is an extension of our capitalism. those who are dedicated and work the hardest win. the kids who pick a sport and make it to the olympics could very easily not have done it and probably would have had a more traditionally enjoyable life hanging out with their friends, etc... instead of working out and practicing.

they chose to go the more difficult route even though it was harder for them, and expensive for the families involved.

they are competing, in many cases, against people who saw the sport in a passionately competitive way, but as a way out of their situation. better house, food, money, etc. it is more of a job than anything. and beyond that, they don't live in a society that rewards the individualistic competitive types the way we do in the US.

i don't think that one is morally superior to the other - they are just different. and although their is nothing scientific about O'Reilly's opinion piece, i think it makes sense at a certain level.