Let Tiger be Tiger

Tiger Woods' apology has spawned more punditry than any apology since the Don Imus debacle. The problem, as I see it, is this: Elin, Sam, Charlie and Kultida Woods are the only people Tiger needs to apologize to. The rest of us need to worry about our own supply of beeswax.

I do not condone Tiger's behavior, but I also do not condone the mistakes of my past. Not only should we not be casting stones, but we should be using said stones to rebuild the crumbling walls of our own moral decay.

There is a feeling that because he is looked up to by so many people, children in particular, that he owes the multiverse an apology. This is coming in an era where families are bombarded with primetime television shows such as "Wife Swap," "Keeping up with the Kardashians," "Temptation Island" and "Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire?"

Tiger's infidelity was wrong insofar as he was married. It is an affront to his marriage, not to the game of golf or to Nike Inc. To hear about sponsors dropping him because his actions are not of the caliber of their organizations is laughable. Let us X-ray the skeletons in the closets of the AT&T Inc. or Accenture fat cats and also let us be surprised when we find misdoings.

Nike, to its credit, has not dropped the world's No. 1 ranked golfer because of his infidelity. They sponsor him because he is the best golfer, not the best husband.

Tiger Woods is not an elected official; he is a golfer — an extraordinary golfer, but still a golfer. Above all he is a human being. I am no Woods apologist but the fact that Tiger was compelled to issue a public apology for transgressions in his private life is appalling.

I would expect to see more elected officials storming Capitol Hill for legislation concerning privacy. But the sad fact is unless it concerns financial transactions, health care or the census you are at the mercy of your neighbor.

That said, I would like to see some legislation to protect children — if no one else — from being thrust in the limelight.

During his 14-minute apology, Tiger Woods seemingly begged the media to keep his family, especially his children, out of the tabloids. I say if the tabloids are going to hide behind the First Amendment while hunting down children of celebrities and various flavors of the day, then maybe said celebrities should hide behind the Second Amendment.

News Web sites and television shows have hired experts to dissect the body language as well as the tone of voice of recent celebrity apologists. They have experts and specialists combing through their every word and nuance as if the media has been appointed to be the district attorney for the entire planet.

They claim the public has a right to know. Where are these rights listed? Perhaps we need Miranda rights for privacy. You have the right to remain private. Anything you say or do can and will be held against you in the court of the water cooler. You have the right to a private life. If you cannot afford a public relations firm, one will be appointed to you. Do you understand these rights as they have been given to you?

Well, one can dream.