The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is reporting that the Packers may end up trading Brett Favre to either the Vikings or Bears if they can't find a suitable deal with any other team. This makes sense for the Packers.
Current season be damned, if the Packers can't get a 3rd rounder for him from anyone else but can from either of those two teams, they should take it. It would be better for the long-term health of the franchise. If they cared about this year or next year so much, they would probably welcome back Favre and name him the starter anyway. It's time they apply the (correct, I think) longer view to a trade just as they are doing with their QB situation.
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Griffey to the Sox? UPDATED
Ken Rosenthal is reporting that the Sox and Reds have agreed to a trade that would send Ken Griffey, Jr. to the Sox. No other details are available. Griffey has to waive his no-trade clause.
I should wait until it's finalized (if that even happens), but I don't see the fit. Griffey can't play center field any more, so he's limited to the outfield corners and DH. Including first base, the Sox are currently set at those spots. I don't see Griffey as an upgrade over any of Carlos Quentin, Jermaine Dye, Nick Swisher (who has the odd combination of skills to play either CF or 1B), Jim Thome, or Paul Konerko. Not that they are all having great years, but then one of them has to sit every day. Maybe that's the point, to get them all more rest and give them a thumper off the bench every game. But then why can't Josh Fields to a reasonable impression of that when Joe Crede gets healthy?
This trade is too confusing to think about without hearing the details, so no more from me on it now.
UPDATE: It's Griffey for Nick Masset and Danny Richar. That's not much to give up, but I still don't understand what Griffey brings to the team that they don't already have.
I should wait until it's finalized (if that even happens), but I don't see the fit. Griffey can't play center field any more, so he's limited to the outfield corners and DH. Including first base, the Sox are currently set at those spots. I don't see Griffey as an upgrade over any of Carlos Quentin, Jermaine Dye, Nick Swisher (who has the odd combination of skills to play either CF or 1B), Jim Thome, or Paul Konerko. Not that they are all having great years, but then one of them has to sit every day. Maybe that's the point, to get them all more rest and give them a thumper off the bench every game. But then why can't Josh Fields to a reasonable impression of that when Joe Crede gets healthy?
This trade is too confusing to think about without hearing the details, so no more from me on it now.
UPDATE: It's Griffey for Nick Masset and Danny Richar. That's not much to give up, but I still don't understand what Griffey brings to the team that they don't already have.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Dudes wearing eyeliner
The latest sign of the collapse of Europe is that in England, a company is selling mascara for guys. I can just picture it: "You know what? half the potential market isn't being addressed!"
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Babytalk to old people
Rachel Lucas (clearly one of the few bigger misanthropes than me) writes about a study showing that old people hate being talked to like they are 2 years old. She does so very colorfully, so I recommend it to all.
When my grandmother was in her later years, I remember people talking to her like that. I hated it about as much as Rachel did. I always talked to her about normal things in a normal voice and I think she appreciated it.
When my grandmother was in her later years, I remember people talking to her like that. I hated it about as much as Rachel did. I always talked to her about normal things in a normal voice and I think she appreciated it.
More romantic: men or women
John Hawkins and Dr. Melissa Clouthier have a little debate over IM or something about whether men or women are more romantic. I found it interesting. I can't believe it, but I actually agree more with the doctor.
Sick people on the CTA
This morning I'm on the Blue Line headed to work on a jam-packed car. We get to the Chicago stop and all of a sudden, at the other end of my car some of the passengers are forcing the doors open and getting off. I wonder what's happening (luckily I tend to have a good vantage point), and it becomes apparent that someone is "sick" on the train.
From what I could tell it was a little Hispanic lady who wasn't terribly old or fat. Yeah, the train was kind of warm, but when it's full of people that's going to happen. So the conductor and someone else (I guess the guy who was working at the station) come down and are just kind of talking to her for a few minutes. After this goes on for about 10 minutes we finally take off with this lady still on the train!
Now...
Unless someone is having a seizure or heart attack or stroke or something, why in the hell can't they just get up? Why can't we carry them off? This lady looked OK to me (not that she wasn't sick, but she could have gotten her ass up and off the train). We had to hold up morning rush hour for her to catch her breath or whatever? Meanwhile, the rest of the train was getting hotter and we were all getting warmed up while she had tons of room to calm herself down or something.
I'm quite aware that this may be my most misanthropic post yet, but I just don't get it. She wasn't going anywhere, so why not just get the train two more stops to Clark and Lake where everyone else can get off and she can be attended to? The whole thing is just done with no consideration of the hundreds of other passengers on the train sweating our asses off, not to mention the other trains behind us now getting clogged up.
From what I could tell it was a little Hispanic lady who wasn't terribly old or fat. Yeah, the train was kind of warm, but when it's full of people that's going to happen. So the conductor and someone else (I guess the guy who was working at the station) come down and are just kind of talking to her for a few minutes. After this goes on for about 10 minutes we finally take off with this lady still on the train!
Now...
Unless someone is having a seizure or heart attack or stroke or something, why in the hell can't they just get up? Why can't we carry them off? This lady looked OK to me (not that she wasn't sick, but she could have gotten her ass up and off the train). We had to hold up morning rush hour for her to catch her breath or whatever? Meanwhile, the rest of the train was getting hotter and we were all getting warmed up while she had tons of room to calm herself down or something.
I'm quite aware that this may be my most misanthropic post yet, but I just don't get it. She wasn't going anywhere, so why not just get the train two more stops to Clark and Lake where everyone else can get off and she can be attended to? The whole thing is just done with no consideration of the hundreds of other passengers on the train sweating our asses off, not to mention the other trains behind us now getting clogged up.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Video of the day
This is going to be the best video you see all day. Trust me. I can't describe it any better than has been done by Ufford at With Leather, so I'll quote him in full:
This elaborate unveiling of soccer uniforms (fine, fine: kits) comes to us from Bayern Munich, aka Bayern München, aka The Adventures of Bayern Munchausen. And I don't want to spoil anything, but if you hate soccer and Germans -- and most Americans do -- this isn't going to improve your view of either.
I just don't know how team officials arrived at this monstrosity. "We need to show off the new kits." "How about a fashion show?" "That's a terrible idea." "How about a fashion show... with choreography!?" "NOW you're talking!"
Even the presence of beautiful models in the video can't save it.
This elaborate unveiling of soccer uniforms (fine, fine: kits) comes to us from Bayern Munich, aka Bayern München, aka The Adventures of Bayern Munchausen. And I don't want to spoil anything, but if you hate soccer and Germans -- and most Americans do -- this isn't going to improve your view of either.
I just don't know how team officials arrived at this monstrosity. "We need to show off the new kits." "How about a fashion show?" "That's a terrible idea." "How about a fashion show... with choreography!?" "NOW you're talking!"
Even the presence of beautiful models in the video can't save it.
Friday, July 25, 2008
The Green fad may be ending
Has anyone noticed that everything everywhere is green (or should I write, Green)? I was just thinking about it last night. There I am, watching Special Report with Brit Hume, and I get pummelled with another goofy gas commericial by BP or somebody. In it, I am told that they do all kinds of things to "protect the environment".
What does that even mean? What do they mean by "environment"? Anything specific? Also, how are they "protecting" it, and from who or what? See what I mean when I write that this stuff is just plain goofy? I also think it's meant to appeal to idiots who don't think about things like this, but that's another issue.
Anyway, I was thinking about how everything has to be Green. It's so annoying. Can't anybody just sell me some gas or burgers or beer and leave it at that?
I am glad the fad is dying. And yes, environmentalists, it was always fad. I knew people were smarter than that, and they are proving me correct:
As global warming was first becoming a cause célèbre a few years ago, many serious environmentalists worried that green was in danger of becoming a fad -- something that would inevitably recede from consciousness after overtaxing our limited pop-cultural attention span.
Sad to say, that prediction shows signs of coming true. Last week, The New York Times noted that the advertising industry is pulling back from green-themed marketing, having "grasped the public's growing skepticism over ads with environmental messages.
What does that even mean? What do they mean by "environment"? Anything specific? Also, how are they "protecting" it, and from who or what? See what I mean when I write that this stuff is just plain goofy? I also think it's meant to appeal to idiots who don't think about things like this, but that's another issue.
Anyway, I was thinking about how everything has to be Green. It's so annoying. Can't anybody just sell me some gas or burgers or beer and leave it at that?
I am glad the fad is dying. And yes, environmentalists, it was always fad. I knew people were smarter than that, and they are proving me correct:
As global warming was first becoming a cause célèbre a few years ago, many serious environmentalists worried that green was in danger of becoming a fad -- something that would inevitably recede from consciousness after overtaxing our limited pop-cultural attention span.
Sad to say, that prediction shows signs of coming true. Last week, The New York Times noted that the advertising industry is pulling back from green-themed marketing, having "grasped the public's growing skepticism over ads with environmental messages.
Fatass whiners
What a bunch of babies. Big, fat babies:
In late April, Troutman learned an unfortunate side effect of his healthy weight gain: After entering the Michigan Avenue Gap store, he was told that they no longer carried his size, XXL.
"I'm not sure what I felt at that moment, but part of it was embarrassment," Troutman wrote on his blog, My View from the Jeep. "Regardless of the words the associate used, all I heard was, 'We're not serving your kind anymore.' "
The horror. It's like Jim Crow all over again.
The Gap was Troutman's favorite retail spot, and shopping there provided him with relief from the stresses of working as human resource manager at a Chicago not-for-profit. Now, he says, the local store on his block is a reminder of where he is not welcome anymore. "At my size, I don't have many options for shopping, and this was just one more limitation," he said. "The Gap is making it harder for a group of people who already have difficulty shopping to purchase their product."
Paul McAleer is a Chicago Web designer and developer who created and writes for My Big Fat Blog, which aims to report on "fat awareness and fat rights." He said the Gap's decision to pull the XXL from stores is part of a retail trend to make the bricks-and-mortar store less plus-size friendly. "To me it says that fat people, both men and women, do not fit within the Gap's brand image," McAleer said. Last year Old Navy, a youth-oriented brand of clothing owned by Gap Inc., pulled women's XXL from its stores, making it available only online.
What I'm about to write is not because I hate fat people and make fun of them (though they can be funny sometimes). It's because I'm 6'9" and can't find clothes everywhere I want to shop either:
All right, fatty, here's the deal. Stop being such a whiner. First, you are fat because you eat too much and don't exercise enough. If it's really just due to muscle gain, no one has to subsidize your roided up body. To complain about not finding clothes because of your lifestyle is ridiculous. That's like if you chopped off your arm on purpose and started complaining because stores don't carry one-armed shirts.
Second, why is Gap a bad guy? They are trying to be more efficient in their inventory. You can still buy your clothes online. Besides, since you are a guy you should appreciate not having to go to a store. It sucks poop, and only gays and metrosexuals enjoy shopping for clothes. Online shopping is SO much easier and better. Trust me, I do it all the time.
Third, this isn't Russia (to turn a phrase; I know they have a market economy now). We have a free market. If there are so many fashionable fatties out there who want to shop, open a store for them where you design the clothes. You should be fabulously rich benefitting from all of the fat discrimination out there.
Wait, what's that you say? You wouldn't get rich from it? Well no kidding. I guess there's not that much demand for it. Now do you see why Gap is not carrying that stuff any more?
Why should a store be required to carry everything they have in your size? Where does it end? Can I get some size 15 shoes, or 38 inch inseam pants, or XLXT shirts too? How about Shawn Bradley? How about Yokozuna? Hey, they've got rights and shouldn't be inconvenienced either, correct?
Yeah, dude, everybody today is a victim. Everybody has to bitch about something. Why don't you stop complaining and either fix the problem (by opening your own stores) or deal with it? You do that by finding out where you can find clothes that fit. It was quite a disappointment when I was a 6' 6" junior in high school and I figured out I had to buy all of my pants and shoes (and most of my shirts) from a catalog for the rest of my life, but I GOT OVER IT. Life goes on. With the internet, it's easy to find all kinds of big and tall stores.
In late April, Troutman learned an unfortunate side effect of his healthy weight gain: After entering the Michigan Avenue Gap store, he was told that they no longer carried his size, XXL.
"I'm not sure what I felt at that moment, but part of it was embarrassment," Troutman wrote on his blog, My View from the Jeep. "Regardless of the words the associate used, all I heard was, 'We're not serving your kind anymore.' "
The horror. It's like Jim Crow all over again.
The Gap was Troutman's favorite retail spot, and shopping there provided him with relief from the stresses of working as human resource manager at a Chicago not-for-profit. Now, he says, the local store on his block is a reminder of where he is not welcome anymore. "At my size, I don't have many options for shopping, and this was just one more limitation," he said. "The Gap is making it harder for a group of people who already have difficulty shopping to purchase their product."
Paul McAleer is a Chicago Web designer and developer who created and writes for My Big Fat Blog, which aims to report on "fat awareness and fat rights." He said the Gap's decision to pull the XXL from stores is part of a retail trend to make the bricks-and-mortar store less plus-size friendly. "To me it says that fat people, both men and women, do not fit within the Gap's brand image," McAleer said. Last year Old Navy, a youth-oriented brand of clothing owned by Gap Inc., pulled women's XXL from its stores, making it available only online.
What I'm about to write is not because I hate fat people and make fun of them (though they can be funny sometimes). It's because I'm 6'9" and can't find clothes everywhere I want to shop either:
All right, fatty, here's the deal. Stop being such a whiner. First, you are fat because you eat too much and don't exercise enough. If it's really just due to muscle gain, no one has to subsidize your roided up body. To complain about not finding clothes because of your lifestyle is ridiculous. That's like if you chopped off your arm on purpose and started complaining because stores don't carry one-armed shirts.
Second, why is Gap a bad guy? They are trying to be more efficient in their inventory. You can still buy your clothes online. Besides, since you are a guy you should appreciate not having to go to a store. It sucks poop, and only gays and metrosexuals enjoy shopping for clothes. Online shopping is SO much easier and better. Trust me, I do it all the time.
Third, this isn't Russia (to turn a phrase; I know they have a market economy now). We have a free market. If there are so many fashionable fatties out there who want to shop, open a store for them where you design the clothes. You should be fabulously rich benefitting from all of the fat discrimination out there.
Wait, what's that you say? You wouldn't get rich from it? Well no kidding. I guess there's not that much demand for it. Now do you see why Gap is not carrying that stuff any more?
Why should a store be required to carry everything they have in your size? Where does it end? Can I get some size 15 shoes, or 38 inch inseam pants, or XLXT shirts too? How about Shawn Bradley? How about Yokozuna? Hey, they've got rights and shouldn't be inconvenienced either, correct?
Yeah, dude, everybody today is a victim. Everybody has to bitch about something. Why don't you stop complaining and either fix the problem (by opening your own stores) or deal with it? You do that by finding out where you can find clothes that fit. It was quite a disappointment when I was a 6' 6" junior in high school and I figured out I had to buy all of my pants and shoes (and most of my shirts) from a catalog for the rest of my life, but I GOT OVER IT. Life goes on. With the internet, it's easy to find all kinds of big and tall stores.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Link make goodness funny
The headline above is my weak attempt at humor by pretending that it could be an example of the way some Japanese phrases translate to English so horribly. (Sort of like the Three Happiness restaurant in Chintown visible from the Red Line.)
This website collects other such examples from people. It's pretty funny.
This website collects other such examples from people. It's pretty funny.
Reason ranks the 35 biggest cities by freedom
Guess which city comes in last in personal freedom? If you don't know, you are new to this blog. How about this apalling part:
Shortly after taking office in 1989, Mayor Richard Daley blew the dust off an ancient ordinance allowing individual city precincts to vote themselves dry. Today, nearly one quarter of Chicago’s precincts are alcohol-free; the number of Chicago taverns has dropped from some 7,000 in the late 1940s to just over 1,300 today.
Shortly after taking office in 1989, Mayor Richard Daley blew the dust off an ancient ordinance allowing individual city precincts to vote themselves dry. Today, nearly one quarter of Chicago’s precincts are alcohol-free; the number of Chicago taverns has dropped from some 7,000 in the late 1940s to just over 1,300 today.
Don't want to deport illegals?
Don't drive around San Franciso, or you'll probably be gunned down by one of them.
The best is this a-hole's lawyer, who just couldn't stop lying to the press about his client:
Shortly after that, police arrested Ramos, a native of El Salvador and reputed member of the Mara Salvatrucha gang, known as MS-13. Investigators believe he was the gunman, though two other men were seen in the car with him...
Ramos' attorney, Robert Amparan, said his client was not the shooter. "They have the wrong person," he said.
Amparan declined to discuss details of the case, but he denied his client was involved in gang activity and said Ramos entered the country legally. Federal authorities contend Ramos is undocumented.
Sure. How did he avoid deportation? Through the same type of law that we have here in Chicago:
The victims' family learned that Ramos had been arrested at least three times before the shooting and evaded deportation, largely because of San Francisco's sanctuary status.
The policy, adopted in 1989 by the city's elected Board of Supervisors, bars local officials from cooperating with federal authorities in their efforts to deport illegal immigrants.
Despite his history, the city turned him loose only four months ago when he was in the middle of being deported:
Ramos was arrested in late March with another man after police discovered a gun used in a double homicide in the car Ramos was driving.
The district attorney's office decided not to file charges against Ramos, and he was released April 2 even though he was in the process of being deported after his application for legal residence was denied, according to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Not that deportation would matter when this animal could just scurry back across the border. Here's the big finale. Mayor Newsom should be impeached or recalled or whatever they do over there:
"We need to remember always that a death-dealing policy like 'sanctuary' hides behind the false mantle of compassion," Hull said.
Nathan Ballard, a spokesman for San Francisco's mayor, said city officials were wrong to shield undocumented, juvenile felons from federal immigration authorities.
"The sanctuary program was never intended to shield felons," Ballard said. "The policy was inappropriate."
However, Newsom "still supports the worthwhile aims of denying the federal government" assistance in deporting otherwise law-abiding undocumented residents, he said.
"Otherwise law-abiding undocumented residents"? WHAT?!?!?!? That's like saying I'm a swell guy other than all of my liquor store robberies.
The best is this a-hole's lawyer, who just couldn't stop lying to the press about his client:
Shortly after that, police arrested Ramos, a native of El Salvador and reputed member of the Mara Salvatrucha gang, known as MS-13. Investigators believe he was the gunman, though two other men were seen in the car with him...
Ramos' attorney, Robert Amparan, said his client was not the shooter. "They have the wrong person," he said.
Amparan declined to discuss details of the case, but he denied his client was involved in gang activity and said Ramos entered the country legally. Federal authorities contend Ramos is undocumented.
Sure. How did he avoid deportation? Through the same type of law that we have here in Chicago:
The victims' family learned that Ramos had been arrested at least three times before the shooting and evaded deportation, largely because of San Francisco's sanctuary status.
The policy, adopted in 1989 by the city's elected Board of Supervisors, bars local officials from cooperating with federal authorities in their efforts to deport illegal immigrants.
Despite his history, the city turned him loose only four months ago when he was in the middle of being deported:
Ramos was arrested in late March with another man after police discovered a gun used in a double homicide in the car Ramos was driving.
The district attorney's office decided not to file charges against Ramos, and he was released April 2 even though he was in the process of being deported after his application for legal residence was denied, according to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Not that deportation would matter when this animal could just scurry back across the border. Here's the big finale. Mayor Newsom should be impeached or recalled or whatever they do over there:
"We need to remember always that a death-dealing policy like 'sanctuary' hides behind the false mantle of compassion," Hull said.
Nathan Ballard, a spokesman for San Francisco's mayor, said city officials were wrong to shield undocumented, juvenile felons from federal immigration authorities.
"The sanctuary program was never intended to shield felons," Ballard said. "The policy was inappropriate."
However, Newsom "still supports the worthwhile aims of denying the federal government" assistance in deporting otherwise law-abiding undocumented residents, he said.
"Otherwise law-abiding undocumented residents"? WHAT?!?!?!? That's like saying I'm a swell guy other than all of my liquor store robberies.
Where's the John Edwards news?
The National Enquirer said last fall that John Edwards fathered a love child with a woman who isn't his wife. They reported this week that they caught him exiting the woman's hotel room in the wee hours of the morning. Haven't heard about all this?
Jack Shafer wonders why, especially compared to what Larry Craig and his wide stance went through. (He even throws out Jesse Jackson and his bastard child.) He thinks this:
Or are they observing a double standard that says homo-hypocrisy is indefensible but that hetero-hypocrisy deserves an automatic bye?
Or could it be that Craig is a Republican and Edwards and Jackson are Democrats? Methinks that's the much more obvious explanation.
As an aside, it's easy to laugh at this and say that the Enquirer is just a bunch of fake news. If so, why doesn't Edwards sue the crap out of them rather than just try to ignore it and change the subject when asked about it? He IS a trial lawyer, and a very successful one at that.
Jack Shafer wonders why, especially compared to what Larry Craig and his wide stance went through. (He even throws out Jesse Jackson and his bastard child.) He thinks this:
Or are they observing a double standard that says homo-hypocrisy is indefensible but that hetero-hypocrisy deserves an automatic bye?
Or could it be that Craig is a Republican and Edwards and Jackson are Democrats? Methinks that's the much more obvious explanation.
As an aside, it's easy to laugh at this and say that the Enquirer is just a bunch of fake news. If so, why doesn't Edwards sue the crap out of them rather than just try to ignore it and change the subject when asked about it? He IS a trial lawyer, and a very successful one at that.
Zell plays by his own rules
Since Bud Selig took over as commissioner (really just president of the owners), usually when a baseball team gets sold it's because he approves of it. MLB has an anti-trust exemption, the only major sport that does, so they can stop team moves and sales. Selig likes to reward his friends and those who will play by his rules.
Sam Zell, the new Cubs owner, just wants to maximize the amount of money he gets and doesn't give a fig about Bud Selig and the rest of the owners. Selig's favorite group? They underbid, probably thinking they could slide through thanks to Selig's support. But now they are out:
Canning declined to comment. He represented a group that included Aon Corp. Chairman Patrick Ryan, business leader Andrew McKenna and restaurateurs Richard Melman and Larry Levy, among others.
“His bid was not at a high enough level. He’s out,” a source said. “He could rebid. He could say, ‘I’m sorry, I forgot a decimal point.’ But as of now, he’s out.”
Who is in the final five? They only tell us of one, and it's going to give Selig heartburn:
Making the cut as the Cubs winnowed the list of bids from an original 10 respondents was Mark Cuban, owner of basketball’s Dallas Mavericks, said a source familiar with the process. The identity of the other finalists couldn’t be learned.
This just tells me that the more I hear about Zell, the more I like the way he works:
The bold move points to escalating tension between Tribune Chairman Sam Zell, trying to maximize the price for the Cubs, and the lords of baseball. Rules specify that 75 percent of the owners must approve any sale, and they could look at factors other than price in settling on a suitable Cubs buyer.
Thake that, Bud! Your buddies are going to cough up more money. Zell is in a unique position of having to maximize the Tribune Company's assets to pay off debt. He doesn't give a rat's patootie about who it goes to.
Sam Zell, the new Cubs owner, just wants to maximize the amount of money he gets and doesn't give a fig about Bud Selig and the rest of the owners. Selig's favorite group? They underbid, probably thinking they could slide through thanks to Selig's support. But now they are out:
Canning declined to comment. He represented a group that included Aon Corp. Chairman Patrick Ryan, business leader Andrew McKenna and restaurateurs Richard Melman and Larry Levy, among others.
“His bid was not at a high enough level. He’s out,” a source said. “He could rebid. He could say, ‘I’m sorry, I forgot a decimal point.’ But as of now, he’s out.”
Who is in the final five? They only tell us of one, and it's going to give Selig heartburn:
Making the cut as the Cubs winnowed the list of bids from an original 10 respondents was Mark Cuban, owner of basketball’s Dallas Mavericks, said a source familiar with the process. The identity of the other finalists couldn’t be learned.
This just tells me that the more I hear about Zell, the more I like the way he works:
The bold move points to escalating tension between Tribune Chairman Sam Zell, trying to maximize the price for the Cubs, and the lords of baseball. Rules specify that 75 percent of the owners must approve any sale, and they could look at factors other than price in settling on a suitable Cubs buyer.
Thake that, Bud! Your buddies are going to cough up more money. Zell is in a unique position of having to maximize the Tribune Company's assets to pay off debt. He doesn't give a rat's patootie about who it goes to.
Sox fans need to keep some things in mind
Paul Konerko is not having a good year. Some hometown fans have started to boo him:
Walker and Konerko heard the boos directed at the Sox first baseman Tuesday night, as Konerko left five men on base in the victory against the Texas Rangers.
Hitting coach Greg Walker is not happy:
''The one thing, the people that were booing -- they have a right to boo -- but when they walk into this ballpark and take a look at that statue [the Championship Moments Monument] out there, they better realize he's a big reason that statue is even standing and we're walking around here with rings on our hands.
''I would tell them that, if they asked me what I thought, 'You better be grateful this guy played here, and one day you will be.'''
...''The thing is that his legacy is still in front of him here,'' Walker said. ''If he comes on strong the rest of the way when it really counts ... I mean, I know his teammates have picked him up this year, but he could do the same thing for them down the stretch and make something special happen.
''I do hate to see some negative people that are totally down on him. But ultimately, the only person that can get Paul Konerko going is Paul Konerko, and he understands that, too. I always tell people that the game doesn't feel sorry for you. If you start feeling sorry for yourself, then it will just pile on.''
Walker said he talks to Konerko almost every day and continues to remind him that this season is salvageable.
''We all have to remember that Paul has produced on the biggest stage,'' Walker said. ''When people with those thundersticks in Anaheim were beating them so loudly that I couldn't hear myself think [in the 2005 ALCS], this guy goes out and hits home runs in the first inning two days in a row to absolutely take all the pressure off of his team. So he's handled it.
''This will not be the season that he looks on the back of that baseball card and says, 'Man, I was good that year.' But it might be the season that he can look back on and say, 'Hey, I didn't give into it, I fought, and we did something special that year.' That's what I'm hoping.''
I agree completely. The guy has been hurt this year, and he's out there trying. And, as Walker says, he was the best hitter on the 2005 championship team. He only deserves to be booed if he's not out there trying his best.
So what hometown players deserve to be booed? I think these are the categories:
1. Guys who are tanking it. That's easy.
2. Guys who don't belong on the team. This includes criminals and those guys who are just terrible who never belonged on a team to begin with. The second part included numerous Sox of the past, such as Royce Clayton and World Series hero Scott Podsednik (who I now will admit had his virtues as player).
3. Guys who hold out for a new contract, but this one is a little iffy.
Guys who are just overpaid don't necessarily bother me. It's only when you combine that with some of the issues above that they do, such as former Sox and Cub Jaime Navarro.
Walker and Konerko heard the boos directed at the Sox first baseman Tuesday night, as Konerko left five men on base in the victory against the Texas Rangers.
Hitting coach Greg Walker is not happy:
''The one thing, the people that were booing -- they have a right to boo -- but when they walk into this ballpark and take a look at that statue [the Championship Moments Monument] out there, they better realize he's a big reason that statue is even standing and we're walking around here with rings on our hands.
''I would tell them that, if they asked me what I thought, 'You better be grateful this guy played here, and one day you will be.'''
...''The thing is that his legacy is still in front of him here,'' Walker said. ''If he comes on strong the rest of the way when it really counts ... I mean, I know his teammates have picked him up this year, but he could do the same thing for them down the stretch and make something special happen.
''I do hate to see some negative people that are totally down on him. But ultimately, the only person that can get Paul Konerko going is Paul Konerko, and he understands that, too. I always tell people that the game doesn't feel sorry for you. If you start feeling sorry for yourself, then it will just pile on.''
Walker said he talks to Konerko almost every day and continues to remind him that this season is salvageable.
''We all have to remember that Paul has produced on the biggest stage,'' Walker said. ''When people with those thundersticks in Anaheim were beating them so loudly that I couldn't hear myself think [in the 2005 ALCS], this guy goes out and hits home runs in the first inning two days in a row to absolutely take all the pressure off of his team. So he's handled it.
''This will not be the season that he looks on the back of that baseball card and says, 'Man, I was good that year.' But it might be the season that he can look back on and say, 'Hey, I didn't give into it, I fought, and we did something special that year.' That's what I'm hoping.''
I agree completely. The guy has been hurt this year, and he's out there trying. And, as Walker says, he was the best hitter on the 2005 championship team. He only deserves to be booed if he's not out there trying his best.
So what hometown players deserve to be booed? I think these are the categories:
1. Guys who are tanking it. That's easy.
2. Guys who don't belong on the team. This includes criminals and those guys who are just terrible who never belonged on a team to begin with. The second part included numerous Sox of the past, such as Royce Clayton and World Series hero Scott Podsednik (who I now will admit had his virtues as player).
3. Guys who hold out for a new contract, but this one is a little iffy.
Guys who are just overpaid don't necessarily bother me. It's only when you combine that with some of the issues above that they do, such as former Sox and Cub Jaime Navarro.
Go ahead, take the train to O'Hare
The CTA finished early on the slow-zone work between Rosemont and O'Hare. There are still some slow spots between other stops, but that part always seemed really bad to me. Maybe it was because it was so long that seemed slower than other parts.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Like high energy prices?
Keep voting Democratic, says Jeffrey Lord.
Lord lays out the case against Democrats on this issue, and why they can't even say what they really believe. There is so much good stuff, I hate to only excerpt a small part. Here's his conclusion, but anyone who votes should read the whole thing and keep it in mind:
Do you think Senator Obama wishes to acknowledge that the liberal philosophy he and his liberal (and frequently very rich) friends champion has gotten us to this exact point in American energy history? Of course not. If the American people figure out the connection between the price of gas and liberalism, they won't put a liberal in the White House. Which is why Obama, as with Dukakis, has to hide his liberalism. Connecting the dots between what we see in our everyday lives and illustrating the folly of whatever liberal idea got us here is what the rest of us have to do.
More here on the same theme:
Assaulting the standard of living of the middle class is what Barack Obama is all about. For you can search through all of his position papers, speeches and talking points and not find a word about reducing the price of gas or oil. He clearly has no intention of trying to reduce the price of gas at all. He has said, in fact, that the high price of gas and oil is good for the environment, and the only problem is that the prices increased too suddenly. This is the Marie Antoinette school of energy policy.
Remember Obama's famous quote:
"We can't just keep driving our SUVs, eating whatever we want, keeping our homes at 72 degrees at all times regardless of whether we live in the tundra or the desert, and keep consuming 25 percent of the world's resources with just 4 percent of the world's population, and expect the rest of the world to say you just go ahead. We'll be fine. That's not leadership. That's not going to happen. "
What he means by this is that the current standard of living of the American people is unfair. It represents massive inequality in comparison to the rest of the world. So here we have a leading Presidential candidate who thinks truth and justice requires a reduction in our opulent middle class living standards. Good luck, and good night.
Lord lays out the case against Democrats on this issue, and why they can't even say what they really believe. There is so much good stuff, I hate to only excerpt a small part. Here's his conclusion, but anyone who votes should read the whole thing and keep it in mind:
Do you think Senator Obama wishes to acknowledge that the liberal philosophy he and his liberal (and frequently very rich) friends champion has gotten us to this exact point in American energy history? Of course not. If the American people figure out the connection between the price of gas and liberalism, they won't put a liberal in the White House. Which is why Obama, as with Dukakis, has to hide his liberalism. Connecting the dots between what we see in our everyday lives and illustrating the folly of whatever liberal idea got us here is what the rest of us have to do.
More here on the same theme:
Assaulting the standard of living of the middle class is what Barack Obama is all about. For you can search through all of his position papers, speeches and talking points and not find a word about reducing the price of gas or oil. He clearly has no intention of trying to reduce the price of gas at all. He has said, in fact, that the high price of gas and oil is good for the environment, and the only problem is that the prices increased too suddenly. This is the Marie Antoinette school of energy policy.
Remember Obama's famous quote:
"We can't just keep driving our SUVs, eating whatever we want, keeping our homes at 72 degrees at all times regardless of whether we live in the tundra or the desert, and keep consuming 25 percent of the world's resources with just 4 percent of the world's population, and expect the rest of the world to say you just go ahead. We'll be fine. That's not leadership. That's not going to happen. "
What he means by this is that the current standard of living of the American people is unfair. It represents massive inequality in comparison to the rest of the world. So here we have a leading Presidential candidate who thinks truth and justice requires a reduction in our opulent middle class living standards. Good luck, and good night.
Post of the Day
Michelle Malkin has a great one on the blinding insanity held by the left, and rapper Nas in particular, in regards to Fox News Channel. To wit, they want a boycott of FNC due to its supposed racist coverage toward Barack Obama.
Malkin's demolition of their grievances is a beautiful thing.
Malkin's demolition of their grievances is a beautiful thing.
Loyola kills animals!
That's the healine the animal rights folks want you to read. Here's the reality:
Sloppy work at Loyola University Chicago's Stritch School of Medicine research lab in Maywood led to the deaths of five dogs and seven rabbits, according to an animal-rights group that reviewed 2006-07 federal inspection reports.
Wow. Five dogs and seven rabbits. Is it any wonder no one takes these nutjobs seriously?
Sloppy work at Loyola University Chicago's Stritch School of Medicine research lab in Maywood led to the deaths of five dogs and seven rabbits, according to an animal-rights group that reviewed 2006-07 federal inspection reports.
Wow. Five dogs and seven rabbits. Is it any wonder no one takes these nutjobs seriously?
Cook County Board still loves those new taxes
An effort to repeal the punitive new sales tax in Cook County failed yesterday. I like how those who want to let people keep more of their money are irresponsible:
Peraica took most of the heat. Commissioner Earlean Collins said Peraica's move was "all talk." Other board members criticized Peraica for being "irresponsible" by trying to repeal the tax in the middle of the year.
"To vote in favor of the repeal of the sales tax today would be to send our government to bankruptcy court possibly or to stop essential services," Commissioner Roberto Maldonado said.
Right, and what services are so essential? Certainly not the black hole that is the county hospital system. The county has no business throwing money at poor people and illegals who want free medical care.
Board President Todd Stroger was predictably modest about his efforts in the position so far:
When the rather long-winded arguments were over, Board President Todd Stroger said he is irritated by the constant criticism of his administration.
"I'm doing what's best for the people. That's how I'm running the government. And until this place falls apart, then I'll step up and say, you know what, I screwed up," Stroger said. "But until then, I'll tell you I'm doing a damn good job."
Sure you have, Todd, what with the hiring of your cousin as the budget director (I'm sure she is perfectly qualified, but she just happens to be related to you) and the ridiculous tax increases, one of which gives us this:
On July 1, the county's portion of the sales tax increased 1 percentage point -- a penny on the dollar -- to 1.75 percent, giving Chicago the highest sales tax in the country at 10.25 percent.
Let's not forget he wanted 2%!
We'll see if people remember this next election. I'm sure they won't, since Republicans are too mean for some people to ever vote for them. Add that to blacks monolithically voting for Stroger, and you have a mini dynasty. Great.
Peraica took most of the heat. Commissioner Earlean Collins said Peraica's move was "all talk." Other board members criticized Peraica for being "irresponsible" by trying to repeal the tax in the middle of the year.
"To vote in favor of the repeal of the sales tax today would be to send our government to bankruptcy court possibly or to stop essential services," Commissioner Roberto Maldonado said.
Right, and what services are so essential? Certainly not the black hole that is the county hospital system. The county has no business throwing money at poor people and illegals who want free medical care.
Board President Todd Stroger was predictably modest about his efforts in the position so far:
When the rather long-winded arguments were over, Board President Todd Stroger said he is irritated by the constant criticism of his administration.
"I'm doing what's best for the people. That's how I'm running the government. And until this place falls apart, then I'll step up and say, you know what, I screwed up," Stroger said. "But until then, I'll tell you I'm doing a damn good job."
Sure you have, Todd, what with the hiring of your cousin as the budget director (I'm sure she is perfectly qualified, but she just happens to be related to you) and the ridiculous tax increases, one of which gives us this:
On July 1, the county's portion of the sales tax increased 1 percentage point -- a penny on the dollar -- to 1.75 percent, giving Chicago the highest sales tax in the country at 10.25 percent.
Let's not forget he wanted 2%!
We'll see if people remember this next election. I'm sure they won't, since Republicans are too mean for some people to ever vote for them. Add that to blacks monolithically voting for Stroger, and you have a mini dynasty. Great.
Obama cannot be this stupid
The Barack Obama nerds think he walks on water and such, but I don't even think he's the brightest guy around. I mean, he's probably smarter than me, but that's not saying much.
Still, he couldn't possibly be dumb enough to name (or even consider) John Edwards as his running mate. Let's go through the reasons:
1. He's run for president twice and lost each time.
2. He ran as the VP nominee only four years ago, and lost. In campaign manager Bob Shrum's book, John Kerry did not have flattering things to say about him.
3. He served a single term in the Senate, and he was one of the most non-descript members of that body. In fact, despite his silly two Americas presidential campaign speech, he was fairly moderate in the Senate and ran as such.
4. He's served in no other elective position.
5. Obama's problem (or one of them, which may or may not even end up being a problem) is that he's inexperienced. Edwards is the only possible nominee who is even less experienced. His selection would do nothing to help satisfy voters who are concerned about that.
6. Edwards is a southerner, but he's moved too far to the left for him to do any good there any more. Kerry won no southern states in 2004. (I know that Obama isn't Kerry, and also that McCain isn't Bush, but it's worth remembering by anyone who thinks Edwards would help there.)
I don't know who he should choose, as he has a lot of very different options that could help accomplish different things. I just don't see how Edwards helps any of that. Can anyone think of reasons why he would be chosen?
Still, he couldn't possibly be dumb enough to name (or even consider) John Edwards as his running mate. Let's go through the reasons:
1. He's run for president twice and lost each time.
2. He ran as the VP nominee only four years ago, and lost. In campaign manager Bob Shrum's book, John Kerry did not have flattering things to say about him.
3. He served a single term in the Senate, and he was one of the most non-descript members of that body. In fact, despite his silly two Americas presidential campaign speech, he was fairly moderate in the Senate and ran as such.
4. He's served in no other elective position.
5. Obama's problem (or one of them, which may or may not even end up being a problem) is that he's inexperienced. Edwards is the only possible nominee who is even less experienced. His selection would do nothing to help satisfy voters who are concerned about that.
6. Edwards is a southerner, but he's moved too far to the left for him to do any good there any more. Kerry won no southern states in 2004. (I know that Obama isn't Kerry, and also that McCain isn't Bush, but it's worth remembering by anyone who thinks Edwards would help there.)
I don't know who he should choose, as he has a lot of very different options that could help accomplish different things. I just don't see how Edwards helps any of that. Can anyone think of reasons why he would be chosen?
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Lucky she didn't get my picture
Whew, that was close!
I recently found myself on a nearly-empty Brown Line car during the early evening, when I realized that a man sitting next to me was masturbating. I kicked him and yelled at him to stop, which he did, and he left the train at the next stop.
More seriously, that's pretty gross. I can't believe anyone who isn't mentally ill would think that's a good idea. "Hey baby, I love you THIS much!"
I recently found myself on a nearly-empty Brown Line car during the early evening, when I realized that a man sitting next to me was masturbating. I kicked him and yelled at him to stop, which he did, and he left the train at the next stop.
More seriously, that's pretty gross. I can't believe anyone who isn't mentally ill would think that's a good idea. "Hey baby, I love you THIS much!"
Monday, July 21, 2008
Fun times for the Hawkeyes
This is all alleged right now, but Iowa football coach Kirk Ferentz, along with the AD and 3 other school officials, is accused of trying to cover up a gang rape (two is a gang in my book) involving a couple of football players. Here's the best part:
The alleged victim was harassed, followed, taunted and called names such as "whore" by several athletes from university athletic programs, including Satterfield, Everson and other football players, her mother said in a phone interview.
Very nice.
The alleged victim was harassed, followed, taunted and called names such as "whore" by several athletes from university athletic programs, including Satterfield, Everson and other football players, her mother said in a phone interview.
Very nice.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Greg Norman is still doing it
Norman is leading the British Open near the end of round 3. He's 53 years old, and the previous oldest man to win a major was 48 (some dude in the 1960's). The final round should be fun to watch tomorrow morning.
He's inspired me to bring out this chesnut from Dumb and Dumber:
Hey, I guess they're right. Senior citizens, although slow and dangerous behind the wheel, can still serve a purpose. I'll be right back. Don't you go dying on me!
He's inspired me to bring out this chesnut from Dumb and Dumber:
Hey, I guess they're right. Senior citizens, although slow and dangerous behind the wheel, can still serve a purpose. I'll be right back. Don't you go dying on me!
Friday, July 18, 2008
Atkins is healthy
Professional dieticians don't like it, but a new study shows that the Atkins diet does a good job of lowering cholesteral levels (despite intuition). I've always been a fan.
Meanest post ever
When a blog post is so evil that even I think it's bad, you know it's gone a little too far. Be sure to check out the last paragraph of this one from What Would Tyler Durden Do?
Sure, I laughed, but I would never write or say something like that.
Sure, I laughed, but I would never write or say something like that.
ECW was the best
This is an old clip of the end of a match from ECW (a now-defunct professional wrestling organization whose wrestlers and fans were slightly, uh, off). It appears to be Terry Funk and Cactus Jack vs. Public Enemy, though a more knowledgeable person can correct me if I'm wrong.
It must be a slow sports-related news day, since With Leather posted it. It's still great, though.
It must be a slow sports-related news day, since With Leather posted it. It's still great, though.
The ultimate Obama profile
The Onion is in on the joke:
NEW YORK—Hailed by media critics as the fluffiest, most toothless, and softest-hitting coverage of the presidential candidate to date, a story in this week's Time magazine is being called the definitive Barack Obama puff piece.
"No news publication has dared to barely scratch the surface like this before," columnist and campaign reporter Michael King wrote in The Washington Post Tuesday. "This profile sets a benchmark for mindless filler by which all other features about Sen. Obama will now be judged. Just impressive puff-journalism all around."
The 24-page profile, entitled "Boogyin' With Barack," hit newsstands Monday and contains photos of the candidate as a baby, graduating from Columbia University, standing and laughing, holding hands with his wife and best friend, Michelle, greeting a crowd of blue-collar autoworkers, eating breakfast with diner patrons, and staring pensively out of an airplane window while a pen and legal pad rest comfortably on his lowered tray table.
NEW YORK—Hailed by media critics as the fluffiest, most toothless, and softest-hitting coverage of the presidential candidate to date, a story in this week's Time magazine is being called the definitive Barack Obama puff piece.
"No news publication has dared to barely scratch the surface like this before," columnist and campaign reporter Michael King wrote in The Washington Post Tuesday. "This profile sets a benchmark for mindless filler by which all other features about Sen. Obama will now be judged. Just impressive puff-journalism all around."
The 24-page profile, entitled "Boogyin' With Barack," hit newsstands Monday and contains photos of the candidate as a baby, graduating from Columbia University, standing and laughing, holding hands with his wife and best friend, Michelle, greeting a crowd of blue-collar autoworkers, eating breakfast with diner patrons, and staring pensively out of an airplane window while a pen and legal pad rest comfortably on his lowered tray table.
Starving people in the heartland
Yeah, as Jonah Goldberg points out, these guys look like they are really struggling with hunger (see the picture):
The rising cost of food means their money gets them about a third fewer bags of groceries — $100 used to buy about 12 bags of groceries, but now it's more like seven or eight. So they cut back on expensive items like meat, and they don't buy extras like ice cream anymore. Instead, they eat a lot of starches like potatoes and noodles.
The rising cost of food means their money gets them about a third fewer bags of groceries — $100 used to buy about 12 bags of groceries, but now it's more like seven or eight. So they cut back on expensive items like meat, and they don't buy extras like ice cream anymore. Instead, they eat a lot of starches like potatoes and noodles.
Al Gore needs some perspective
Or so it seems, via Fark:
"I don't remember a time in our country when so many things seemed to be going so wrong simultaneously," Gore said, having never heard of the Great Depression, the Revolutionary War, the Civil War or the World Wars.
Also, Jim Geraghty has some commentary about other parts of Gore's big goofy environmental speech yesterday. This part is good:
Today's Washington Post notes, "As people filed out of the hall, three black cars waited for Gore and his entourage. A young woman walked up to the first one, a Lincoln Town Car, and stuck a handwritten note on the windshield: 'I wish I were a Prius.'"
A 2008 Lincoln Town Car gets 15 miles per gallon in the city, 22 on the highway.
"I don't remember a time in our country when so many things seemed to be going so wrong simultaneously," Gore said, having never heard of the Great Depression, the Revolutionary War, the Civil War or the World Wars.
Also, Jim Geraghty has some commentary about other parts of Gore's big goofy environmental speech yesterday. This part is good:
Today's Washington Post notes, "As people filed out of the hall, three black cars waited for Gore and his entourage. A young woman walked up to the first one, a Lincoln Town Car, and stuck a handwritten note on the windshield: 'I wish I were a Prius.'"
A 2008 Lincoln Town Car gets 15 miles per gallon in the city, 22 on the highway.
Funny blog
Here's something I just found: R.O.C.K. on the CTA.
I'll let the proprietor describe it herself:
A somewhat snarky, sometimes cranky, borderline stalker-y view of the world from my seat on the bus. No offense meant to anyone.. all of these stories are just made up. I really know nothing about you. And I care even less. I love watching the urbanites as they do their daily dance along the train tracks and bus routes...They make me happy. And sleepy.
She takes pictures of random people on the CTA and makes up stories about them.
UPDATE: An intrepid commenter pointed out that the author is a dude. Reading his comments I wouldn't have guessed that. Oh well.
I'll let the proprietor describe it herself:
A somewhat snarky, sometimes cranky, borderline stalker-y view of the world from my seat on the bus. No offense meant to anyone.. all of these stories are just made up. I really know nothing about you. And I care even less. I love watching the urbanites as they do their daily dance along the train tracks and bus routes...They make me happy. And sleepy.
She takes pictures of random people on the CTA and makes up stories about them.
UPDATE: An intrepid commenter pointed out that the author is a dude. Reading his comments I wouldn't have guessed that. Oh well.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Eddie Murphy's career as a leading man may be over
I guess the Eddie Murphy movie that opened last weekend called Meet Dave didn't do so hot at the box office. Here's a list of 50 movies that did better. I kind of like #18 and #19.
Just to be clear, I'm not trying to pee on the grave of Murphy's career. I always loved his stand-up routines and his movies up to a point. I just thought the list was funny.
Just to be clear, I'm not trying to pee on the grave of Murphy's career. I always loved his stand-up routines and his movies up to a point. I just thought the list was funny.
Sporadic Megan Fox update
Here you go. Only because we could all use a little more of her in our lives.
What your fantasy says about you
Oops, I meant to type "What your fantasy football drafting strategy says about you". My mistake. Anyway, since we are getting close to both real and fantasy football, here's an article by Mike Tanier over at the very best NFL site on the interwebs, Football Outsiders.
This one's the best, because it's so true (and I just love the name of it):
Strategy: RB-RB-TE (The Gates Guy)
Style: You are always the first guy to grab a tight end. You also pick a kicker around Round 8 and a defense in Round 9 or so, two healthy steps ahead of the curve. This year, it’s Antonio Gates, Stephen Gostkowski, and the Bears. Ten years ago, it was Shannon Sharpe, Jason Elam, and the Panthers. Your quarterbacks often stink and your top wide receiver for five years was O.J. McDuffie, but you are always strong where you think it counts: the peripherals.
Personality: You’re the guy who outsmarts the system, and you consider yourself a master of market inefficiencies. You dabbled as a day trader in the 1990s and a real estate speculator five years ago. You now own 20,000 shares of Boo.com and a $300,000 duplex in the Heroinville neighborhood of Addictowne, but that doesn’t dissuade you of your genius.
Other Traits: You like to collect curios and oddities. You prefer vinyl to iPods, and you’ll argue to the death that it’s better to have slightly improved equalization and stereo separation than the ability to walk down the street listening to music. You enjoy fads that involve over-complicating things that should be easy, like soap making. You still brew your own beer, even though it went out of style a decade ago, and your friends politely swill the latest batch of J.W. Wittenlover Select even though it tastes like a blend of Guinness, WD-40, and rotting grass.
As an aside, I am about 1/3 done with their annual book, and it's by far their best yet. Every team chapter's article is about team-building, which is a change from prior years (and much more similar to what the guys do with Baseball Prospectus.) I highly recommend it.
This one's the best, because it's so true (and I just love the name of it):
Strategy: RB-RB-TE (The Gates Guy)
Style: You are always the first guy to grab a tight end. You also pick a kicker around Round 8 and a defense in Round 9 or so, two healthy steps ahead of the curve. This year, it’s Antonio Gates, Stephen Gostkowski, and the Bears. Ten years ago, it was Shannon Sharpe, Jason Elam, and the Panthers. Your quarterbacks often stink and your top wide receiver for five years was O.J. McDuffie, but you are always strong where you think it counts: the peripherals.
Personality: You’re the guy who outsmarts the system, and you consider yourself a master of market inefficiencies. You dabbled as a day trader in the 1990s and a real estate speculator five years ago. You now own 20,000 shares of Boo.com and a $300,000 duplex in the Heroinville neighborhood of Addictowne, but that doesn’t dissuade you of your genius.
Other Traits: You like to collect curios and oddities. You prefer vinyl to iPods, and you’ll argue to the death that it’s better to have slightly improved equalization and stereo separation than the ability to walk down the street listening to music. You enjoy fads that involve over-complicating things that should be easy, like soap making. You still brew your own beer, even though it went out of style a decade ago, and your friends politely swill the latest batch of J.W. Wittenlover Select even though it tastes like a blend of Guinness, WD-40, and rotting grass.
As an aside, I am about 1/3 done with their annual book, and it's by far their best yet. Every team chapter's article is about team-building, which is a change from prior years (and much more similar to what the guys do with Baseball Prospectus.) I highly recommend it.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Texas tells the World Court to go to hell
Good for them.
What I find most disturbing is this part:
Earlier, President Bush issued a directive to the state courts to abide by the decision and also asked Texas specifically to review Medellin's case ahead of his planned Aug. 5 execution.
Those steps were "highly unusual," Bellinger said. "It almost never happens that the federal government enters an appearance in state court proceedings."
However, Texas refused, and in March the U.S. Supreme Court ruled by a 6-3 vote that Bush lacked the authority to compel state courts to comply with the judgment from The Hague.
Are there actually 3 Supreme Court justices who think the President has any power over a state supreme court (let along for purposes of following the World Court)? The President has no such power, and those three justices (I can guess 4 possibilities) should be impeached and removed from the bench for simply making things up.
What I find most disturbing is this part:
Earlier, President Bush issued a directive to the state courts to abide by the decision and also asked Texas specifically to review Medellin's case ahead of his planned Aug. 5 execution.
Those steps were "highly unusual," Bellinger said. "It almost never happens that the federal government enters an appearance in state court proceedings."
However, Texas refused, and in March the U.S. Supreme Court ruled by a 6-3 vote that Bush lacked the authority to compel state courts to comply with the judgment from The Hague.
Are there actually 3 Supreme Court justices who think the President has any power over a state supreme court (let along for purposes of following the World Court)? The President has no such power, and those three justices (I can guess 4 possibilities) should be impeached and removed from the bench for simply making things up.
Global warming update
This post is far too long and interesting for me to just post some excerpts, so I recommend reading the whole thing. The best part is the quoting of a physicist who demolishes the establishment opinion on global warming.
Rachel Lucas watches some HGTV
And she hates everyone on it.
Her bigger message is that she finds the women on these shows so stupid, irrational, spoiled, and emasculating that she wonders how any man who watched that channel would want to ever marry.
I've never seen the channel, but I will agree that there is a larger than desired proportion of women who are just as she describes.
Not being married and having no prospects doesn't sound so bad after all...
UPDATE: Dr. Melissa Clouthier has more. Her conclusion?
What will reverse this frustrating tide? I don’t know. Men may revolt and give up women and encourage legalized prostitution like some of the commenters recommended. Men may just consign themselves to lead single and happy (well, happier than being with a shrewish woman) lives. Or, as Rachel suggests, men might go gay. But I have to say, that last choice might be jumping out of the frying pan and into the fryer.
Her bigger message is that she finds the women on these shows so stupid, irrational, spoiled, and emasculating that she wonders how any man who watched that channel would want to ever marry.
I've never seen the channel, but I will agree that there is a larger than desired proportion of women who are just as she describes.
Not being married and having no prospects doesn't sound so bad after all...
UPDATE: Dr. Melissa Clouthier has more. Her conclusion?
What will reverse this frustrating tide? I don’t know. Men may revolt and give up women and encourage legalized prostitution like some of the commenters recommended. Men may just consign themselves to lead single and happy (well, happier than being with a shrewish woman) lives. Or, as Rachel suggests, men might go gay. But I have to say, that last choice might be jumping out of the frying pan and into the fryer.
Ichiro the Motivator
This story continues to make me laugh:
He pointed to Ichiro Suzuki, the Seattle Mariners’ wisp of an outfielder, a man who still uses a translator to do interviews with English-speaking reporters – and happens to be baseball’s amalgam of Anthony Robbins and George Carlin. Every year, after the AL manager addresses his team, Ichiro bursts from his locker, a bundle of kinetic energy, and proceeds, in English, to disparage the National League with an H-bomb of F-bombs, stunning first-timers who had no idea Ichiro speaks the queen’s language fluently and making returnees happy that they had played well enough to see the pep talk again.
The tradition began in 2001, Ichiro’s first All-Star appearance, and the AL hasn’t lost a game since. Coincidence?
Oh, what I would give to hear it one year.
The exact words are not available. Players are too busy laughing to remember them. Ichiro wouldn’t dare repeat them in public. So here’s the best facsimile possible.
“Bleep … bleep bleep bleep … National League … bleep … bleep … bleeeeeeeeep … National – bleep bleep bleepbleepbleep!”
“If you’ve never seen it, it’s definitely something pretty funny,” Morneau said. “It’s hard to explain, the effect it has on everyone. It’s such a tense environment. Everyone’s a little nervous for the game, and then he comes out. He doesn’t say a whole lot the whole time he’s in there, and all of a sudden, the manager gets done with his speech, and he pops off.”
Miguel Tejada, who moved to the Astros and the NL this year, had high hopes for one of his All-Star teammates:
“I hope Fukudome does it this year,” Tejada said.
Kosuke Fukudome, the Cubs outfielder, will start in center field for the NL team. He is not fashion conscious, does not have a sycophantic following and does not start trends. He is, aside from sharing a left-handed swing and exemplary bat control, the anti-Ichiro.
“I have no plans for that,” Fukudome said.
He pointed to Ichiro Suzuki, the Seattle Mariners’ wisp of an outfielder, a man who still uses a translator to do interviews with English-speaking reporters – and happens to be baseball’s amalgam of Anthony Robbins and George Carlin. Every year, after the AL manager addresses his team, Ichiro bursts from his locker, a bundle of kinetic energy, and proceeds, in English, to disparage the National League with an H-bomb of F-bombs, stunning first-timers who had no idea Ichiro speaks the queen’s language fluently and making returnees happy that they had played well enough to see the pep talk again.
The tradition began in 2001, Ichiro’s first All-Star appearance, and the AL hasn’t lost a game since. Coincidence?
Oh, what I would give to hear it one year.
The exact words are not available. Players are too busy laughing to remember them. Ichiro wouldn’t dare repeat them in public. So here’s the best facsimile possible.
“Bleep … bleep bleep bleep … National League … bleep … bleep … bleeeeeeeeep … National – bleep bleep bleepbleepbleep!”
“If you’ve never seen it, it’s definitely something pretty funny,” Morneau said. “It’s hard to explain, the effect it has on everyone. It’s such a tense environment. Everyone’s a little nervous for the game, and then he comes out. He doesn’t say a whole lot the whole time he’s in there, and all of a sudden, the manager gets done with his speech, and he pops off.”
Miguel Tejada, who moved to the Astros and the NL this year, had high hopes for one of his All-Star teammates:
“I hope Fukudome does it this year,” Tejada said.
Kosuke Fukudome, the Cubs outfielder, will start in center field for the NL team. He is not fashion conscious, does not have a sycophantic following and does not start trends. He is, aside from sharing a left-handed swing and exemplary bat control, the anti-Ichiro.
“I have no plans for that,” Fukudome said.
Today in terrorists
Michelle Malkin has the round-up. I recommend reading it. One part funny, another part pathetic.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Title IX is coming to college science departments
Read this to learn more. If you like what this application of Title IX did to athletic departments, you'll love this.
On the other hand, if you majored in one of the hard sciences or are concerned about watering them down, be very scared.
On the other hand, if you majored in one of the hard sciences or are concerned about watering them down, be very scared.
Peyton Manning had surgery
He's out 4-6 weeks. It will have no effect on the team, I say. They open against the beloved Bears on September 7 in their new stadium.
Prediction: Bears 57 Colts 13
OK, not really.
Prediction: Bears 57 Colts 13
OK, not really.
Comics: Hands off Obama!
The late-night talk-show hosts have apparently decided that Barack Obama cannot be made fun of in their monologues. The reasons are numerous (or so they say), including that the audience members don't like it and that a bunch of white (guilty liberal) people are uncomfortable making fun of him since he's black. I guess the Obamessiah is beyond criticism.
Then there is this:
Why? The reason cited by most of those involved in the shows is that a fundamental factor is so far missing in Obama: There is no comedic "take" on him, nothing easy to turn to for an easy laugh, like allegations of Bill Clinton's womanizing, or President George W. Bush's goofy bumbling or Al Gore's robotic persona.
"The thing is, he's not buffoonish in any way," said Mike Barry, who started writing political jokes for Johnny Carson's monologues in the waning days of the Johnson administration and has lambasted every presidential candidate since, most recently for Letterman. "He's not a comical figure," Barry said...
Jimmy Kimmel, the host of the ABC late-night talk show "Jimmy Kimmel Live," said of Obama, "There's a weird reverse racism going on. You can't joke about him because he's half-white. It's silly. I think it's more a problem because he's so polished, he doesn't seem to have any flaws."
What?
Oh dear, people have lost their minds about this guy. Here's some easy stuff that's non-political: he's inexperienced, and there is also the way his followers swoon over his every utterance. That's not too controversial, I would think, even to Obama supporters. I could come up with lots more that many people wouldn't agree with, but then I've never agreed with the cartoonish depiction of our current president, not that it ever stopped these guys from continuing that.
The worst part is this:
But Barry said, "I think some of us were maybe too quick to caricature Al Gore and John Kerry and there's maybe some reluctance to do the same thing to him."
Wow. I mean, wow. I can't believe he actually came out and said it. He gets honesty points, at least, for admitting that he doesn't want to doom his favored candidate. After all, he didn't mention how much these writers screwed over Bob Dole in 1996, did he?
Then there is this:
Why? The reason cited by most of those involved in the shows is that a fundamental factor is so far missing in Obama: There is no comedic "take" on him, nothing easy to turn to for an easy laugh, like allegations of Bill Clinton's womanizing, or President George W. Bush's goofy bumbling or Al Gore's robotic persona.
"The thing is, he's not buffoonish in any way," said Mike Barry, who started writing political jokes for Johnny Carson's monologues in the waning days of the Johnson administration and has lambasted every presidential candidate since, most recently for Letterman. "He's not a comical figure," Barry said...
Jimmy Kimmel, the host of the ABC late-night talk show "Jimmy Kimmel Live," said of Obama, "There's a weird reverse racism going on. You can't joke about him because he's half-white. It's silly. I think it's more a problem because he's so polished, he doesn't seem to have any flaws."
What?
Oh dear, people have lost their minds about this guy. Here's some easy stuff that's non-political: he's inexperienced, and there is also the way his followers swoon over his every utterance. That's not too controversial, I would think, even to Obama supporters. I could come up with lots more that many people wouldn't agree with, but then I've never agreed with the cartoonish depiction of our current president, not that it ever stopped these guys from continuing that.
The worst part is this:
But Barry said, "I think some of us were maybe too quick to caricature Al Gore and John Kerry and there's maybe some reluctance to do the same thing to him."
Wow. I mean, wow. I can't believe he actually came out and said it. He gets honesty points, at least, for admitting that he doesn't want to doom his favored candidate. After all, he didn't mention how much these writers screwed over Bob Dole in 1996, did he?
Monday, July 14, 2008
Wisconsin is in a tizzy
We've all heard about how that selfish jerk Brett Favre (who would soon become local hero Brett Favre if he comes to the Bears) wants to come back and play after announcing his retirement. Packer fans are pretty worked up one way or the other about the whole thing.
Yesterday a bunch of them held a rally outside Lambeau Field in support of Favre. Yes, they are dorks who couldn't even stay home and watch CC Sabathia pitch for the Brewers. Instead, they tailgated at their protest:
The crowd of more than 100 chanted "We want Brett," and carried signs reading, "Favre for President" or "Favre Forever." Many in the parking lot wore No. 4 jerseys, tossed footballs and grilled.
I think they really just want to get away from their wives with an excuse to spend their summer Sundays drinking beer and eating sausage:
The rally in Green Bay, Wis., was the brainchild of brothers Adam and Erick Rolfson, who on Friday tried to think of a way to keep Favre in Green Bay. Another rally is planned for Monday night in suburban Milwaukee and every Sunday thereafter at Lambeau Field until Favre is back.
Yesterday a bunch of them held a rally outside Lambeau Field in support of Favre. Yes, they are dorks who couldn't even stay home and watch CC Sabathia pitch for the Brewers. Instead, they tailgated at their protest:
The crowd of more than 100 chanted "We want Brett," and carried signs reading, "Favre for President" or "Favre Forever." Many in the parking lot wore No. 4 jerseys, tossed footballs and grilled.
I think they really just want to get away from their wives with an excuse to spend their summer Sundays drinking beer and eating sausage:
The rally in Green Bay, Wis., was the brainchild of brothers Adam and Erick Rolfson, who on Friday tried to think of a way to keep Favre in Green Bay. Another rally is planned for Monday night in suburban Milwaukee and every Sunday thereafter at Lambeau Field until Favre is back.
The enthusiasm gap
Stephen F. Hayes has written a Weekly Standard piece on the difference in support for the two presidential candidates. Here are some polling results:
There are risks to this strategy and the enthusiasm gap is chief among them. A Washington Post/ABC News poll last month found that nearly half of the liberals surveyed are enthusiastic about supporting Barack Obama, while only 13 percent of conservatives are enthusiastic about McCain. More generally, 91 percent of self-identified Obama supporters are "enthusiastic" about their candidate; 54 percent say they are "very enthusiastic." Seventy-three percent of such McCain supporters say they are "enthusiastic" about his candidacy, but only 17 percent say they are "very enthusiastic."
A USA Today/Gallup poll reported similar findings last week. That survey shows that while 67 percent of Barack Obama's supporters are "more excited than usual about voting" for their candidate, only 31 percent of John McCain's supporters can say the same thing. More troubling for the McCain campaign is that more than half of those who identified themselves as McCain backers--54 percent--say they are "less excited than usual" about their candidate.
Hayes then goes on to list some of the issues that McCain disagrees with conservatives. He doesn't really dig and get to the biggest one, though.
You know what's coming: immigration. It's not mentioned once. I presume that's because The Weekly Standard is basically for open borders. Hayes must have had to sift through a bunch of people to interview before be found a "typical voter" who didn't bring up the issue.
Yes, McCain believes in the global warming nonsense. He's also squishy on all kinds of other issues. That's annoying, but the reason I will not support him is his open-borders/amnesty stance. The thing is, Obama's no better on it, but for Obama it's just another issue. For McCain amnesty is more of a personal quest, and when he becomes president he will fight hard for it starting on day one. Obama will be more concerned with having the government take over our health care industy.
There are risks to this strategy and the enthusiasm gap is chief among them. A Washington Post/ABC News poll last month found that nearly half of the liberals surveyed are enthusiastic about supporting Barack Obama, while only 13 percent of conservatives are enthusiastic about McCain. More generally, 91 percent of self-identified Obama supporters are "enthusiastic" about their candidate; 54 percent say they are "very enthusiastic." Seventy-three percent of such McCain supporters say they are "enthusiastic" about his candidacy, but only 17 percent say they are "very enthusiastic."
A USA Today/Gallup poll reported similar findings last week. That survey shows that while 67 percent of Barack Obama's supporters are "more excited than usual about voting" for their candidate, only 31 percent of John McCain's supporters can say the same thing. More troubling for the McCain campaign is that more than half of those who identified themselves as McCain backers--54 percent--say they are "less excited than usual" about their candidate.
Hayes then goes on to list some of the issues that McCain disagrees with conservatives. He doesn't really dig and get to the biggest one, though.
You know what's coming: immigration. It's not mentioned once. I presume that's because The Weekly Standard is basically for open borders. Hayes must have had to sift through a bunch of people to interview before be found a "typical voter" who didn't bring up the issue.
Yes, McCain believes in the global warming nonsense. He's also squishy on all kinds of other issues. That's annoying, but the reason I will not support him is his open-borders/amnesty stance. The thing is, Obama's no better on it, but for Obama it's just another issue. For McCain amnesty is more of a personal quest, and when he becomes president he will fight hard for it starting on day one. Obama will be more concerned with having the government take over our health care industy.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Top 10
"10 Best Things About Booze", that is, from Modern Drunkard Magazine:
Booze burnishes to a high gleam every quality you’re lucky enough to possess, and some you weren’t even aware you had claim to. It certainly makes you more generous—there isn’t a barista on earth that makes as much as a bartender. It elevates your sense of humor, surely—no one laughs at a bad joke like a drunk. It reveals you to be an expert dancer, deft conversationalist, brilliant philosopher, gifted singer and the most sensual of lovers. And good looking? You’re so damned handsome you’d have to beat the girls off with a stick if they weren’t so intimidated by your sheer, well, handsomeness. And tough—you’re so hard you could deck half the guys in the room with a single punch if they’d just stay still for a goddamn minute.
Alcohol lets you love yourself. And I say that’s a fine thing. Everyone should feel that way every now and then. Why must you go through life acting like an accountant or salesman or carpenter, just because that’s what you do for a living?
Why should only kings get to feel like kings?
Also, a defense of the hangover!
Also, what your drink says about you. Here's my new favorite drink:
Lime Rickey
You have no real love for the drink itself, but for reasons known only to yourself, you enjoy the suffering of limes.
Finally, I wish Iived in Denver to go to this.
Booze burnishes to a high gleam every quality you’re lucky enough to possess, and some you weren’t even aware you had claim to. It certainly makes you more generous—there isn’t a barista on earth that makes as much as a bartender. It elevates your sense of humor, surely—no one laughs at a bad joke like a drunk. It reveals you to be an expert dancer, deft conversationalist, brilliant philosopher, gifted singer and the most sensual of lovers. And good looking? You’re so damned handsome you’d have to beat the girls off with a stick if they weren’t so intimidated by your sheer, well, handsomeness. And tough—you’re so hard you could deck half the guys in the room with a single punch if they’d just stay still for a goddamn minute.
Alcohol lets you love yourself. And I say that’s a fine thing. Everyone should feel that way every now and then. Why must you go through life acting like an accountant or salesman or carpenter, just because that’s what you do for a living?
Why should only kings get to feel like kings?
Also, a defense of the hangover!
Also, what your drink says about you. Here's my new favorite drink:
Lime Rickey
You have no real love for the drink itself, but for reasons known only to yourself, you enjoy the suffering of limes.
Finally, I wish Iived in Denver to go to this.
Robert Redford is a dumbass
Sorry for the profanity, but it's true:
Asked by Michael Dwyer, film correspondent of The Irish Times , if he was looking forward to "regime change" in the US, Redford said: "Yes. Where my country is at the moment, I'm not confident of anything. I'm hopeful.
"I think Obama is not tall on experience . . . but I believe he's a really good person. He's smart. And he does represent what the country needs most now, which is change.
"I hope he'll win. I think he will. If he doesn't, you can kiss the Democratic Party goodbye. I think we need new voices, new blood. We need to get a whole group out, get a new group in."
Wait, what?
Parties do disappear, even in our system of winner-take-all elections (as opposed to the European parliamentary system). See the Whigs. They don't happen because of a single election loss of one person. They occur because of internal dissention over issues, or even a single issue. The Whig link above mentions how they collapsed, for example.
To pound the point home further, even if McCain beats Obama, the Democrats are still almost assured of majorities in both houses of Congress. Are they just going to become independents?
Asked by Michael Dwyer, film correspondent of The Irish Times , if he was looking forward to "regime change" in the US, Redford said: "Yes. Where my country is at the moment, I'm not confident of anything. I'm hopeful.
"I think Obama is not tall on experience . . . but I believe he's a really good person. He's smart. And he does represent what the country needs most now, which is change.
"I hope he'll win. I think he will. If he doesn't, you can kiss the Democratic Party goodbye. I think we need new voices, new blood. We need to get a whole group out, get a new group in."
Wait, what?
Parties do disappear, even in our system of winner-take-all elections (as opposed to the European parliamentary system). See the Whigs. They don't happen because of a single election loss of one person. They occur because of internal dissention over issues, or even a single issue. The Whig link above mentions how they collapsed, for example.
To pound the point home further, even if McCain beats Obama, the Democrats are still almost assured of majorities in both houses of Congress. Are they just going to become independents?
2008 NFL Salary Cap Numbers
Here is a complete list of the 2008 cap numbers for every NFL player. Enjoy!
The top few players make sense, but then you get to guys like the thoroughly decent Dewayne Robertson at number 9. And who would have guessed that the highest Bear would be Charles Tillman?
The top few players make sense, but then you get to guys like the thoroughly decent Dewayne Robertson at number 9. And who would have guessed that the highest Bear would be Charles Tillman?
Hard power vs. soft power
Charles Krauthammer hits it on the head. The last sentence is the most important one:
Solemn condemnations have been issued from every forum of soft-power fecklessness -- the EU, the U.N., the G-8 foreign ministers -- demanding that Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe stop butchering his opponents and step down. Before that, the cause du jour was Burma, where a vicious dictatorship allowed thousands of cyclone victims to die by denying them independently delivered foreign aid lest it weaken the junta's grip on power.
And then there is Darfur, a perennial for which myriad diplomats and foreign policy experts have devoted uncountable hours at the finest five-star hotels to deplore the genocide and urgently urge relief.
What is done to free these people? Nothing. Everyone knows it will take the hardest of hard power to remove the oppressors in Zimbabwe, Burma, Sudan and other godforsaken places where the bad guys have the guns and use them. Indeed, as the Zimbabwean opposition leader suggested (before quickly retracting) from his hideout in the Dutch embassy -- Europe specializes in providing haven for those fleeing the evil that Europe does nothing about -- the only solution is foreign intervention.
And who's going to intervene? The only country that could is the country that in the last two decades led coalitions that liberated Kuwait, Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan. Having sacrificed much blood and treasure in its latest endeavor -- the liberation of 25 million Iraqis from the most barbarous tyranny of all, and its replacement with what is beginning to emerge as the Arab world's first democracy -- and having earned near-universal condemnation for its pains, America has absolutely no appetite for such missions.
This is one area where, to his credit, John McCain far surpasses Barack Obama, who I fear would bring back a Carter-esque foreign policy of appeasement and dithering.
Solemn condemnations have been issued from every forum of soft-power fecklessness -- the EU, the U.N., the G-8 foreign ministers -- demanding that Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe stop butchering his opponents and step down. Before that, the cause du jour was Burma, where a vicious dictatorship allowed thousands of cyclone victims to die by denying them independently delivered foreign aid lest it weaken the junta's grip on power.
And then there is Darfur, a perennial for which myriad diplomats and foreign policy experts have devoted uncountable hours at the finest five-star hotels to deplore the genocide and urgently urge relief.
What is done to free these people? Nothing. Everyone knows it will take the hardest of hard power to remove the oppressors in Zimbabwe, Burma, Sudan and other godforsaken places where the bad guys have the guns and use them. Indeed, as the Zimbabwean opposition leader suggested (before quickly retracting) from his hideout in the Dutch embassy -- Europe specializes in providing haven for those fleeing the evil that Europe does nothing about -- the only solution is foreign intervention.
And who's going to intervene? The only country that could is the country that in the last two decades led coalitions that liberated Kuwait, Bosnia, Kosovo and Afghanistan. Having sacrificed much blood and treasure in its latest endeavor -- the liberation of 25 million Iraqis from the most barbarous tyranny of all, and its replacement with what is beginning to emerge as the Arab world's first democracy -- and having earned near-universal condemnation for its pains, America has absolutely no appetite for such missions.
This is one area where, to his credit, John McCain far surpasses Barack Obama, who I fear would bring back a Carter-esque foreign policy of appeasement and dithering.
Britain is falling apart
This is what happens when leftism and political correctness runs amok in a country, as Jaime Sneider writes. Britain released a terrorist from prison and not only lets him walk the streets (he's technically under house arrest, but he's pictured walking around his neighborhood), but pays him $100,000 a year in welfare for his supposed bad back:
Al Qaeda foot-soldiers behead our soldiers while we pay their leaders disability. Qatada is living in a home worth $1.6 million. He's receiving government benefits totaling $100,000. This goes well beyond not deporting him. There really are no words.
Al Qaeda foot-soldiers behead our soldiers while we pay their leaders disability. Qatada is living in a home worth $1.6 million. He's receiving government benefits totaling $100,000. This goes well beyond not deporting him. There really are no words.
Strange crime of the day
This will make no sense, but here goes: Be on the lookout for an attractive woman named Patches who travels with three large black men and sprays perfume that makes men pass out.
She sort of sounds like a supervillain that Batman would fight.
She sort of sounds like a supervillain that Batman would fight.
Want some free Chick-fil-A?
No problem. Except it's today only, so you have to find one. Not easy in Chicago.
Also, you have to dress like a cow.
Also, you have to dress like a cow.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Everyone should have the DirecTV sports pack
After ESPN SportsCenter's "Who's Now?" fiasco last summer, I swore off the show. It had become bloated with commentary and slim of actual highlights, along with spending too much time on crap that no one cares about (Olympics, NASCAR, WNBA, NHL, etc.). Then there are all of the human interest stories, interviews, and various Salisbury-laced analysis segments. All I want are highlights of the prior night and straight news of trades, you fools! Do you think I give two poops about John Kruk thinks about a free-agent signing? I know more about baseball transaction analysis than he does.
All of that isn't even getting into how self-congratulatory the show had become. The anchors were all about themselves and the network. And the show is 1 hour long, 1.5 hours on Sunday night/Monday morning. That's just not necessary, and it leads to much of the bloat.
Anyway, I quickly found ESPN News as a nice alternative last summer. It is kind of SportsCenter light since they only have a half-hour to work with. As a result, they just don't have time to unload most of the useless stuff on us. It still has its flaws (such as spending too much time on sports no one cares about and analysis), but it is good enough. Plus, I can wrap it up in half an hour without missing anything.
The flaw in the channel is that they still have too much of the junk in the show, so there are whole baseball games (keep in mind there is NOTHING ELSE GOING ON right now) they completely ignore. Since the White Sox aren't exactly a media darling, they often are in those games. I can only imagine being a Royals fan...
I guess ESPN management has gotten pissed about people bailing on SportsCenter (the network's flagship show, mind you) in the morning to watch ESPN News, because they have started showing a live video broadcast of their ESPN Radio show Mike and Mike.
Setting aside the merits of the show, which I have never heard, why would they possibly do a video broadcast of it? Everyone in the country gets it on the radio, and people are free to listen to it at home. Anyone can do so with an old AM radio stolen from one's grandparents' house. My only guess (as I wrote above) is that the ratings differential between SportsCenter and ESPN News in the morning has become embarrassing. (I have not seen any ratings, so it's just conjecture.)
What was I to do? Watching 2 minutes of SportsCenter reminded me why I hated it. We do have Comcast Sports Channel here, but since they have no national affiliation the sports highlight show is all Chicago stuff. Jeez, I don't need 15 minutes of highlights, interviews, and analysis of a Sox game I watched half of the night before. So that was out. A solution appeared before me...
Last spring I purchased the sports pack on DirecTV, which gives access to all of the regional sports channels (blacking out games on the MLB, NBA, and NHL packages, of course). I always thought most of the channels were useless other than having ESPNU for college basketball and Fox Soccer Channel for EPL games.
Given my dilemma a few weeks ago, I hoped that the array of local Fox Sports Channels had a national highlight show. And it did! It's called The Final Score. Here are my favorite things about it:
It's only a half hour long.
They show highlights to every game.
There is NO analysis by so-called "experts".
Interviews clips are brief.
There is a crawler on screen showing what the next few topics are.
There are TWO score crawlers at the bottom. One is just scores (and it moves fast) and the other has some news mixed in, like Bobby Jenks going on the DL yesterday.
There is only one anchor, at a time, so there is no stupid banter between them.
They only show things that a regular sports fan cares about. NASCAR, golf, tennis, Olympics, and whatnot are all brief. They know the reason for their existence is to show highlights of games we care about.
Here are the downsides:
I am nitpicking here, but I could do without the highlight of the day at the end of the show, or whatever it's called. But that only takes about 10 seconds, so it's no big deal.
That's it. No other negatives!
Best of all, they actually showed a WNBA highlight today, and the anchor was making fun of it! First, it was the last highlight of the show (which is good because NO ONE CARES). Second, he starts off with saying, "How about a WNBA highlight?" is a fake serious voice. Third, he said something about the game and followed it with, "in front of dozens!" with the camera showing a sea of empty seats behind the court.
(Now, as a digression, this is fantastic. The mainstream sports media is as liberal as any other aspect of the media. [A cursory viewing of SportsCenter would make this clear to anyone.] They are deathly afraid of making fun of the WNBA, even though it is clearly deserving of ridicule. No one attends the games, the ratings are horrible, and the action sucks. Example #1: Check out how newspaper articles/columns will rip MLS or NHL TV ratings, without ever mentioning that the WNBA does even worse. Example #2: Remember the XFL? The MSM hates Vince McMahon, so they loved hammering him and the league for any failing of it, be it ratings, level of play, etc. Some of that was brought on by Vince himself, but how come the WNBA never faces that kind of scrutiny? Why does the media never make fun of David Stern for standing behind it so ferociously?)
Clearly, this show is for regular sports fans. They aren't out to win any reporting awards for their lame-ass stories about blind cyclists or whatever, and they certainly aren't full of political-correctness.
I highly recommend this show to every sports fan tired of the ESPN culture. If you can, order the sports pack. If you don't have DirecTV, I am sorry. No joke.
(Here's an article mentioning everything above! It's too bad we are stuck here in Chicago without FSN, though it may be on cable.)
UPDATE: I see that Comcast Chicago does show it, but only the live version at 12:30 AM. Since I need it in the morning, I always use MSG+, which is channel 624 on DirecTV.
All of that isn't even getting into how self-congratulatory the show had become. The anchors were all about themselves and the network. And the show is 1 hour long, 1.5 hours on Sunday night/Monday morning. That's just not necessary, and it leads to much of the bloat.
Anyway, I quickly found ESPN News as a nice alternative last summer. It is kind of SportsCenter light since they only have a half-hour to work with. As a result, they just don't have time to unload most of the useless stuff on us. It still has its flaws (such as spending too much time on sports no one cares about and analysis), but it is good enough. Plus, I can wrap it up in half an hour without missing anything.
The flaw in the channel is that they still have too much of the junk in the show, so there are whole baseball games (keep in mind there is NOTHING ELSE GOING ON right now) they completely ignore. Since the White Sox aren't exactly a media darling, they often are in those games. I can only imagine being a Royals fan...
I guess ESPN management has gotten pissed about people bailing on SportsCenter (the network's flagship show, mind you) in the morning to watch ESPN News, because they have started showing a live video broadcast of their ESPN Radio show Mike and Mike.
Setting aside the merits of the show, which I have never heard, why would they possibly do a video broadcast of it? Everyone in the country gets it on the radio, and people are free to listen to it at home. Anyone can do so with an old AM radio stolen from one's grandparents' house. My only guess (as I wrote above) is that the ratings differential between SportsCenter and ESPN News in the morning has become embarrassing. (I have not seen any ratings, so it's just conjecture.)
What was I to do? Watching 2 minutes of SportsCenter reminded me why I hated it. We do have Comcast Sports Channel here, but since they have no national affiliation the sports highlight show is all Chicago stuff. Jeez, I don't need 15 minutes of highlights, interviews, and analysis of a Sox game I watched half of the night before. So that was out. A solution appeared before me...
Last spring I purchased the sports pack on DirecTV, which gives access to all of the regional sports channels (blacking out games on the MLB, NBA, and NHL packages, of course). I always thought most of the channels were useless other than having ESPNU for college basketball and Fox Soccer Channel for EPL games.
Given my dilemma a few weeks ago, I hoped that the array of local Fox Sports Channels had a national highlight show. And it did! It's called The Final Score. Here are my favorite things about it:
It's only a half hour long.
They show highlights to every game.
There is NO analysis by so-called "experts".
Interviews clips are brief.
There is a crawler on screen showing what the next few topics are.
There are TWO score crawlers at the bottom. One is just scores (and it moves fast) and the other has some news mixed in, like Bobby Jenks going on the DL yesterday.
There is only one anchor, at a time, so there is no stupid banter between them.
They only show things that a regular sports fan cares about. NASCAR, golf, tennis, Olympics, and whatnot are all brief. They know the reason for their existence is to show highlights of games we care about.
Here are the downsides:
I am nitpicking here, but I could do without the highlight of the day at the end of the show, or whatever it's called. But that only takes about 10 seconds, so it's no big deal.
That's it. No other negatives!
Best of all, they actually showed a WNBA highlight today, and the anchor was making fun of it! First, it was the last highlight of the show (which is good because NO ONE CARES). Second, he starts off with saying, "How about a WNBA highlight?" is a fake serious voice. Third, he said something about the game and followed it with, "in front of dozens!" with the camera showing a sea of empty seats behind the court.
(Now, as a digression, this is fantastic. The mainstream sports media is as liberal as any other aspect of the media. [A cursory viewing of SportsCenter would make this clear to anyone.] They are deathly afraid of making fun of the WNBA, even though it is clearly deserving of ridicule. No one attends the games, the ratings are horrible, and the action sucks. Example #1: Check out how newspaper articles/columns will rip MLS or NHL TV ratings, without ever mentioning that the WNBA does even worse. Example #2: Remember the XFL? The MSM hates Vince McMahon, so they loved hammering him and the league for any failing of it, be it ratings, level of play, etc. Some of that was brought on by Vince himself, but how come the WNBA never faces that kind of scrutiny? Why does the media never make fun of David Stern for standing behind it so ferociously?)
Clearly, this show is for regular sports fans. They aren't out to win any reporting awards for their lame-ass stories about blind cyclists or whatever, and they certainly aren't full of political-correctness.
I highly recommend this show to every sports fan tired of the ESPN culture. If you can, order the sports pack. If you don't have DirecTV, I am sorry. No joke.
(Here's an article mentioning everything above! It's too bad we are stuck here in Chicago without FSN, though it may be on cable.)
UPDATE: I see that Comcast Chicago does show it, but only the live version at 12:30 AM. Since I need it in the morning, I always use MSG+, which is channel 624 on DirecTV.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Black politicians in Dallas don't know anything about astromony
What other conclusion can we draw from this? Oh yeah, they are also ridiculously sensitive. Maybe the NAACP can just shut down if this is the kind of "racism" that exists nowadays:
A special meeting about Dallas County traffic tickets turned tense and bizarre this afternoon.
County commissioners were discussing problems with the central collections office that is used to process traffic ticket payments and handle other paperwork normally done by the JP Courts.
Commissioner Kenneth Mayfield, who is white, said it seemed that central collections "has become a black hole" because paperwork reportedly has become lost in the office.
Commissioner John Wiley Price, who is black, interrupted him with a loud "Excuse me!" He then corrected his colleague, saying the office has become a "white hole."
That prompted Judge Thomas Jones, who is black, to demand an apology from Mayfield for his racially insensitive analogy.
Mayfield shot back that it was a figure of speech and a science term.
I love how the writer threw this in at the end just to completely humiliate these two clowns and point out to science-dopes what the phrase means:
A black hole, according to Webster's, is perhaps "the invisible remains of a collapsed star, with an intense gravitational field from which neither light nor matter can escape."
A special meeting about Dallas County traffic tickets turned tense and bizarre this afternoon.
County commissioners were discussing problems with the central collections office that is used to process traffic ticket payments and handle other paperwork normally done by the JP Courts.
Commissioner Kenneth Mayfield, who is white, said it seemed that central collections "has become a black hole" because paperwork reportedly has become lost in the office.
Commissioner John Wiley Price, who is black, interrupted him with a loud "Excuse me!" He then corrected his colleague, saying the office has become a "white hole."
That prompted Judge Thomas Jones, who is black, to demand an apology from Mayfield for his racially insensitive analogy.
Mayfield shot back that it was a figure of speech and a science term.
I love how the writer threw this in at the end just to completely humiliate these two clowns and point out to science-dopes what the phrase means:
A black hole, according to Webster's, is perhaps "the invisible remains of a collapsed star, with an intense gravitational field from which neither light nor matter can escape."
Obama wants everyone to speak Spanish
Anybody who thinks he's not left-wing (as opposed to merely liberal) needs to follow Barack Obama more closely:
Obama starts off this clip by opposing English as an official language, seems to emphasize that teaching kids Spanish is more important than teaching them English, and then says Americans are an embarrassment because they only know one language when they go to Europe. It may be the one of the most grotesquely arrogant, out of touch displays that I have seen from someone running for President in the last decade.
The video shows it all.
UPDATE: Transcript:
You know, I don't understand when people are going around worrying about, "We need to have English- only." They want to pass a law, "We want English-only."
Now, I agree that immigrants should learn English. I agree with that. But understand this.
Instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English — they'll learn English — you need to make sure your child can speak Spanish. You should be thinking about, how can your child become bilingual? We should have every child speaking more than one language.
You know, it's embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to Europe, and all we can say [is], "Merci beaucoup." Right?
You know, no, I'm serious about this. We should understand that our young people, if you have a foreign language, that is a powerful tool to get a job. You are so much more employable.
So, not only does he want everyone here to know English (and for what purpose? So we can tell illegals how to mow our lawns? Spanish isn't exactly useful in international commerce.), but who gives a crap what Europeans think of us? If it wasn't for us they would have been overrun by the Soviets. If they don't like us maybe they could build the biggest and baddest economy and military in the world like we did.
Obama starts off this clip by opposing English as an official language, seems to emphasize that teaching kids Spanish is more important than teaching them English, and then says Americans are an embarrassment because they only know one language when they go to Europe. It may be the one of the most grotesquely arrogant, out of touch displays that I have seen from someone running for President in the last decade.
The video shows it all.
UPDATE: Transcript:
You know, I don't understand when people are going around worrying about, "We need to have English- only." They want to pass a law, "We want English-only."
Now, I agree that immigrants should learn English. I agree with that. But understand this.
Instead of worrying about whether immigrants can learn English — they'll learn English — you need to make sure your child can speak Spanish. You should be thinking about, how can your child become bilingual? We should have every child speaking more than one language.
You know, it's embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to Europe, and all we can say [is], "Merci beaucoup." Right?
You know, no, I'm serious about this. We should understand that our young people, if you have a foreign language, that is a powerful tool to get a job. You are so much more employable.
So, not only does he want everyone here to know English (and for what purpose? So we can tell illegals how to mow our lawns? Spanish isn't exactly useful in international commerce.), but who gives a crap what Europeans think of us? If it wasn't for us they would have been overrun by the Soviets. If they don't like us maybe they could build the biggest and baddest economy and military in the world like we did.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
More, more, more!
Because I find this topic so rife for posting, here is more on Helms, Republicans, Democrats, etc. from Jonah Goldberg (who was not a huge Helms fan):
But here's the thing. The reader who ticked me off yesterday cited no evidence that Helms was a "stain on conservatism," he merely took it as a given. Others cite Helms' opposition to the Martin Luther King holiday and his 1990 ad with the white hands. I don't consider either of these things racist in and of themselves. Indeed, like the Willie Horton ad, I consider them examples that liberals cite over and over again as racist as if doing so will simply make it true. Now, as for other Helm's positions and comments, I think it is very hard indeed to defend the man. In other words, I'm not sure the "stain" spreads nearly so far as the left insists. If having men with racist pasts on your team is, in and of itself, a stain, where are the liberal washerwomen going after Bill Clinton's mentor William Fulbright, Robert Byrd or for that matter Jeremiah Wright? In short, these things are more complicated than the simplistic morality tale in which conservatives are evil and liberals are good (hey, I think someone wrote a book about this).
Indeed, I grow weary at the constant liberal browbeating administered to conservatives to not only apologize for the racist skeletons in our closet but the insistence that those skeletons define modern conservatism, particularly when liberals insist that liberalism has no skeletons whatsoever (which is, simply, a Big Lie). That's what I took to be going on in that e-mail. But, again, I was wrong. Or rather, that's not all that was going on.
Still, after thinking about it. I think the conservative celebration of Helms has been too hagiographic, just as I think the left’s demonization has been too two-dimensional. Helms was the product of his times and upbringing, just as Fulbright and Byrd were. The difference is that liberals think it’s childish to point such things out about Democrats, but it’s all you need to know about Helms – and the GOP.
But here's the thing. The reader who ticked me off yesterday cited no evidence that Helms was a "stain on conservatism," he merely took it as a given. Others cite Helms' opposition to the Martin Luther King holiday and his 1990 ad with the white hands. I don't consider either of these things racist in and of themselves. Indeed, like the Willie Horton ad, I consider them examples that liberals cite over and over again as racist as if doing so will simply make it true. Now, as for other Helm's positions and comments, I think it is very hard indeed to defend the man. In other words, I'm not sure the "stain" spreads nearly so far as the left insists. If having men with racist pasts on your team is, in and of itself, a stain, where are the liberal washerwomen going after Bill Clinton's mentor William Fulbright, Robert Byrd or for that matter Jeremiah Wright? In short, these things are more complicated than the simplistic morality tale in which conservatives are evil and liberals are good (hey, I think someone wrote a book about this).
Indeed, I grow weary at the constant liberal browbeating administered to conservatives to not only apologize for the racist skeletons in our closet but the insistence that those skeletons define modern conservatism, particularly when liberals insist that liberalism has no skeletons whatsoever (which is, simply, a Big Lie). That's what I took to be going on in that e-mail. But, again, I was wrong. Or rather, that's not all that was going on.
Still, after thinking about it. I think the conservative celebration of Helms has been too hagiographic, just as I think the left’s demonization has been too two-dimensional. Helms was the product of his times and upbringing, just as Fulbright and Byrd were. The difference is that liberals think it’s childish to point such things out about Democrats, but it’s all you need to know about Helms – and the GOP.
Monday, July 7, 2008
McCain's running mate
Here's an e-mail to KJL at The Corner on why McCain should pick Bill Bennett as the Republican VP nominee.
Lots of good reasons are given, and I think he'd make one the top few choices possible. (I think disaffected social conservatives would flock to McCain if Bennett was with him.) I'd like to see Mitt Romney picked, but then I have a bit of an irrational politi-crush on him. Voters just don't really like him very much, which is a hindrance. I do wonder if he would be a better VP candidate than presidential candidate, though, as he would be able to focus on his core strengths that McCain would want him for, such as economic experience.
On the other hand, Amnesty John isn't getting my vote anyway, and I'd hate to see Romney's political career destroyed by having to back McCain's immigration plans.
On a final note, I think Obama's VP pick is going to be a much more interesting decision, as he's kind of blank slate to many people beyond the "hope/change" stuff.
Lots of good reasons are given, and I think he'd make one the top few choices possible. (I think disaffected social conservatives would flock to McCain if Bennett was with him.) I'd like to see Mitt Romney picked, but then I have a bit of an irrational politi-crush on him. Voters just don't really like him very much, which is a hindrance. I do wonder if he would be a better VP candidate than presidential candidate, though, as he would be able to focus on his core strengths that McCain would want him for, such as economic experience.
On the other hand, Amnesty John isn't getting my vote anyway, and I'd hate to see Romney's political career destroyed by having to back McCain's immigration plans.
On a final note, I think Obama's VP pick is going to be a much more interesting decision, as he's kind of blank slate to many people beyond the "hope/change" stuff.
More good immigration news
The headline from USA Today says it all:
Illegal immigrants face threat of no college
It's amazing that they could go in the first place. Some of the story:
Josh Bernstein of the National Immigration Law Center, an illegal-immigrants advocate, says sweeping anti-immigration bills are "a very serious threat" to the overall illegal population.
Good! What use is it making them "illegal" if they can just walk around and do whatever they want, including getting in-state tuition for schools when they aren't even authorized to be in the country? Why not get in-state tuition everywhere?
Illegal immigrants face threat of no college
It's amazing that they could go in the first place. Some of the story:
Josh Bernstein of the National Immigration Law Center, an illegal-immigrants advocate, says sweeping anti-immigration bills are "a very serious threat" to the overall illegal population.
Good! What use is it making them "illegal" if they can just walk around and do whatever they want, including getting in-state tuition for schools when they aren't even authorized to be in the country? Why not get in-state tuition everywhere?
More on Helms, Republicans, and civil rights
From an excellent post by Kevin D. Williamson on Nation Review Online:
Helms and Thurmond were contemporaries in that their careers overlapped, but Thurmond had been in the Senate for decades before Helms ever held office, and Thurmond had — again, let's point it out, since the AP surely won't, as a Democrat — staged the longest filibuster in Senate history to block the 1957 Civil Rights Act, which was proposed by a Republican president, Eisenhower, and passed on Republican support in Congress. How a reporter can write about Helms and Thurmond and the civil rights era without at least noting the institutional hostility of the Democratic party toward these bills is mysterious. (Someday, somebody will figure out that Republicans have been responsible for the most important civil rights actions, starting with the Emancipation Proclamation, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the Klan Act, the 1957 and 1960 acts, and the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments. But this isn't the place for that discussion.) And why isn't Helm's precessor as alleged "standard-bearer for civil rights opponents" Sen. Robert K. Byrd, a Democrat who is still in the Senate and who was launched into his political career by serving as Exhalted Cyclops of the Ku Klux Klan?
The whole post is worth reading to fight through the contemporary spin that Republicans have been traditionally against civil rights. Also note this a little earlier:
On the subject of Helm's life before the Senate, you'd be hard pressed to take away from Margasak's piece anything about Helms's career as a Democratic operative or the role of the Democratic party in trying to block the civil rights acts that were passed, after all, on Republican support. Instead, we get this:
No to civil rights. No to abortion. No to communism. No to the United Nations. No to gay rights. No to arts funding with nakedness. No to school busing. No to the U.S. giving up the Panama Canal. No to a nuclear arms reduction treaty called Salt II.
One of these things is not like the others, no? Helms wasn't even in the Senate until 1973, after the major civil rights legislation had been passed. It is true that Helms worked against those bills — as a supporter of Democrats such as Beverly Lake. On the issues where Helms actually had a Senate vote — the NEA, the abortion, school busing, &c. — Helms's record is pretty good. But Helms was a conservative and a Southerner, so it is essential that he be tarred as an unreconstructed racist.
UPDATE: Here is an interesting counterargument (of sorts) made by a liberal e-mailer to Jonah Goldberg. Here's his conclusion:
Many of us liberals have discussions with conservatives all the time, respect them, and don't assume conservatives are racists, but this circle the wagons defense of Helms is just odd. I realize that times are tough for Republicans at the moment, but I think it is counterproductive to take this line on Helms, as well as intellectually specious, craven even. It wouldn't be throwing him under the bus to make a differentiated argument about the good and bad (from a conservative point of view) that he has done. I'm sorry you don't see that.
Helms and Thurmond were contemporaries in that their careers overlapped, but Thurmond had been in the Senate for decades before Helms ever held office, and Thurmond had — again, let's point it out, since the AP surely won't, as a Democrat — staged the longest filibuster in Senate history to block the 1957 Civil Rights Act, which was proposed by a Republican president, Eisenhower, and passed on Republican support in Congress. How a reporter can write about Helms and Thurmond and the civil rights era without at least noting the institutional hostility of the Democratic party toward these bills is mysterious. (Someday, somebody will figure out that Republicans have been responsible for the most important civil rights actions, starting with the Emancipation Proclamation, the Civil Rights Act of 1866, the Klan Act, the 1957 and 1960 acts, and the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments. But this isn't the place for that discussion.) And why isn't Helm's precessor as alleged "standard-bearer for civil rights opponents" Sen. Robert K. Byrd, a Democrat who is still in the Senate and who was launched into his political career by serving as Exhalted Cyclops of the Ku Klux Klan?
The whole post is worth reading to fight through the contemporary spin that Republicans have been traditionally against civil rights. Also note this a little earlier:
On the subject of Helm's life before the Senate, you'd be hard pressed to take away from Margasak's piece anything about Helms's career as a Democratic operative or the role of the Democratic party in trying to block the civil rights acts that were passed, after all, on Republican support. Instead, we get this:
No to civil rights. No to abortion. No to communism. No to the United Nations. No to gay rights. No to arts funding with nakedness. No to school busing. No to the U.S. giving up the Panama Canal. No to a nuclear arms reduction treaty called Salt II.
One of these things is not like the others, no? Helms wasn't even in the Senate until 1973, after the major civil rights legislation had been passed. It is true that Helms worked against those bills — as a supporter of Democrats such as Beverly Lake. On the issues where Helms actually had a Senate vote — the NEA, the abortion, school busing, &c. — Helms's record is pretty good. But Helms was a conservative and a Southerner, so it is essential that he be tarred as an unreconstructed racist.
UPDATE: Here is an interesting counterargument (of sorts) made by a liberal e-mailer to Jonah Goldberg. Here's his conclusion:
Many of us liberals have discussions with conservatives all the time, respect them, and don't assume conservatives are racists, but this circle the wagons defense of Helms is just odd. I realize that times are tough for Republicans at the moment, but I think it is counterproductive to take this line on Helms, as well as intellectually specious, craven even. It wouldn't be throwing him under the bus to make a differentiated argument about the good and bad (from a conservative point of view) that he has done. I'm sorry you don't see that.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
What if Obama was a Republican?
Good question!
Could you imagine the horror if it was the Republican party swooning over an oratory candidate in massive rallies with messianic overtones? The comparison to Hitler would be immediate and relentless. MSNBC would have a constant split screen showing how it was the 1930s all over again.
Could you imagine the horror if it was the Republican party swooning over an oratory candidate in massive rallies with messianic overtones? The comparison to Hitler would be immediate and relentless. MSNBC would have a constant split screen showing how it was the 1930s all over again.
Shhh! Don't tell the health Nazis!
Second-hand smoke is no danger. What a surprise! (Not to me, I mean.) I could see that old people, people with respiratory problems, and small children shouldn't be exposed to all kinds of it. For normal adults, though, the nanny-staters who want to ban indoor smoking just had their main rationale (the health of workers in bars and restaurants) destroyed.
Oh well, it was never really about the health of workers. If it was, why is smoking banned in beer gardens of bars in Chicago? Once again, facts become inconvenient to those who want to take away freedom.
Oh well, it was never really about the health of workers. If it was, why is smoking banned in beer gardens of bars in Chicago? Once again, facts become inconvenient to those who want to take away freedom.
Friday, July 4, 2008
Good thing he's retiring
Virginia Senator (a Republican!) John Warner is asking the Energy Secretary to look into reinstating a national speed limit.
For those who are too young to remember, there used to be a speed limit of 55 mph everywhere. Yeah, it sucked all right. If I recall correctly, it came into existence during the 1970's because the nanny-staters wanted everyone to slow down to supposedly save lives (where do you think the old expression "Speed kills" comes from?). In fact, it did just the opposite for a few reasons, but mainly because there was a larger differential in speeds of vehicles on the same road.
When Republicans took control of Congress following the 1994 elections, they repealed the national speed limit. I think pretty much everyone (again, except for the nanny-staters) loves it, as it allows states to set their own speed limits. Now along comes Warner wanting to bring it back, ostensibly to force people to save gas. I'm glad the old fart is retiring this year.
For those who are too young to remember, there used to be a speed limit of 55 mph everywhere. Yeah, it sucked all right. If I recall correctly, it came into existence during the 1970's because the nanny-staters wanted everyone to slow down to supposedly save lives (where do you think the old expression "Speed kills" comes from?). In fact, it did just the opposite for a few reasons, but mainly because there was a larger differential in speeds of vehicles on the same road.
When Republicans took control of Congress following the 1994 elections, they repealed the national speed limit. I think pretty much everyone (again, except for the nanny-staters) loves it, as it allows states to set their own speed limits. Now along comes Warner wanting to bring it back, ostensibly to force people to save gas. I'm glad the old fart is retiring this year.
Jesse Helms, RIP
I just saw the news that former NC Senator Jesse Helms died. I know he wasn't everyone's cup of tea, but I consider him an American icon. He wasn't perfect, but on a lot of big issues I thought he was great (like the military, for example). He was 86.
UPDATE: More on helms from John Fund:
The issue of race will always cast a shadow on Helms's legacy. He could never understand why he was viewed by many as a bigot, having run one of the most integrated TV stations in the South and often hiring blacks on his staff. His criticisms of affirmative action and forced busing were on the mark. But as conservative scholar John Hood notes, "he failed to marry every criticism of government overreaching with calls for the South's social and moral transformation and clear denunciations of racist business owners."
Indeed, the mainstream media rarely put Helms's career in context the way they did, for example, with Sam Ervin, a Democrat who served with Helms in the Senate from North Carolina before retiring in 1975. Ervin was the leading legal strategist against Civil Rights legislation, and he largely crafted the Southern Manifesto against Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court case that ruled school segregation unconstitutional. But Ervin was the man who chaired the Watergate hearings that helped bring down Richard Nixon, and his views on civil rights were almost never mentioned. Both Helms and Ervin were courtly, principled conservatives. Only one became a cartoon media villain.
UPDATE: More on helms from John Fund:
The issue of race will always cast a shadow on Helms's legacy. He could never understand why he was viewed by many as a bigot, having run one of the most integrated TV stations in the South and often hiring blacks on his staff. His criticisms of affirmative action and forced busing were on the mark. But as conservative scholar John Hood notes, "he failed to marry every criticism of government overreaching with calls for the South's social and moral transformation and clear denunciations of racist business owners."
Indeed, the mainstream media rarely put Helms's career in context the way they did, for example, with Sam Ervin, a Democrat who served with Helms in the Senate from North Carolina before retiring in 1975. Ervin was the leading legal strategist against Civil Rights legislation, and he largely crafted the Southern Manifesto against Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court case that ruled school segregation unconstitutional. But Ervin was the man who chaired the Watergate hearings that helped bring down Richard Nixon, and his views on civil rights were almost never mentioned. Both Helms and Ervin were courtly, principled conservatives. Only one became a cartoon media villain.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Fear Itself review
I gots a little A-How in me, but I finished the first four episodes of the new NBC show Fear Itself last night. Since this post is going up an hour before the next episode, I know it does no good for this week. Anyway, here goes.
Good show! It's pretty much what I hoped for. It's got a lot of Tales from the Crypt in it, which is a good thing. Three of the four episodes were very good, while one was meh. Hey, that's a pretty good average.
Anyway, I recommend it if you are a fan of mostly horror/little bit of sci-fi stuff. They also throw in a little classic Twilight Zone at you with the twists, including a breathtaking one in the fourth episode. (Sure, I can usually be sucker for them since I don't like to think when I watch TV, but it was still hard to predict.)
Good show! It's pretty much what I hoped for. It's got a lot of Tales from the Crypt in it, which is a good thing. Three of the four episodes were very good, while one was meh. Hey, that's a pretty good average.
Anyway, I recommend it if you are a fan of mostly horror/little bit of sci-fi stuff. They also throw in a little classic Twilight Zone at you with the twists, including a breathtaking one in the fourth episode. (Sure, I can usually be sucker for them since I don't like to think when I watch TV, but it was still hard to predict.)
Happy Independence Day
Let's not forget about what our day off of drinking beer and blowing off our fingers is really about.
The Declaration of Independence is a great document to read. It starts off like everyone remembers, then goes off on all of the things the king of Great Britain was doing to the colonists. Here are some of my favorites. Note the hyperbole and awesome 18th century language:
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
and
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
After all that, we get the huge finale. It still kicks ass 232 years later:
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
After that, they all signed it. Think about what that meant at the time. These were the bright lights of the colonies, many of whom went on to write the Constitution and become founding fathers, putting their names down as traitors against the biggest and baddest empire the world had ever seen. If Britain had put down the rebellion, they all would have been executed. Now THAT'S courage.
Finally, let's not forget what followed: a war that annoyed the British enough to finally leave us alone. Yes! USA! USA!
The Declaration of Independence is a great document to read. It starts off like everyone remembers, then goes off on all of the things the king of Great Britain was doing to the colonists. Here are some of my favorites. Note the hyperbole and awesome 18th century language:
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
and
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
After all that, we get the huge finale. It still kicks ass 232 years later:
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
After that, they all signed it. Think about what that meant at the time. These were the bright lights of the colonies, many of whom went on to write the Constitution and become founding fathers, putting their names down as traitors against the biggest and baddest empire the world had ever seen. If Britain had put down the rebellion, they all would have been executed. Now THAT'S courage.
Finally, let's not forget what followed: a war that annoyed the British enough to finally leave us alone. Yes! USA! USA!
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
D-Bag of the holiday weekend
I knew I wouldn't have to search too hard for a post today. These things just fall to me. Here is the winner of my D-Bag of the Week award:
Put the fireworks in storage.
Cancel the parade.
Tuck the soaring speeches in a drawer for another time.
This year, America doesn't deserve to celebrate its birthday. This Fourth of July should be a day of quiet and atonement.
He deserves a punch in the baby-maker. And by that, I mean his ovaries.
Speaking of D-Bags, here is a fun website I found researching this post.
Put the fireworks in storage.
Cancel the parade.
Tuck the soaring speeches in a drawer for another time.
This year, America doesn't deserve to celebrate its birthday. This Fourth of July should be a day of quiet and atonement.
He deserves a punch in the baby-maker. And by that, I mean his ovaries.
Speaking of D-Bags, here is a fun website I found researching this post.
Go Rays! Boo M's!
Searching for a post today, I came up blank. Here's something:
The best team in baseball, the Tampa Bay Rays, need to go at least 26-53 the rest of the way for me to win some money on their over/under on wins for the season. I took the over, obviously.
The worst team in baseball, the Seattle Mariners, need to finish the rest of the way no better than 52-27 for me to win some money on their under.
Both look pretty safe right now. Thanks to BP (for their computer projections) and my co-conspirator on these wagers.
The best team in baseball, the Tampa Bay Rays, need to go at least 26-53 the rest of the way for me to win some money on their over/under on wins for the season. I took the over, obviously.
The worst team in baseball, the Seattle Mariners, need to finish the rest of the way no better than 52-27 for me to win some money on their under.
Both look pretty safe right now. Thanks to BP (for their computer projections) and my co-conspirator on these wagers.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Think twice before buying something
Today the new giant sales tax in Chicago (and the rest of Cook County) begins, thanks to political lightweight Tood Stroger:
The tax is estimated to bring in more than $440 million in new revenue.
I doubt it. Enough people like me are pissed off about it that they will make as many purchases as possible outside the county.
I've written it before and I'll write it again: when you elect liberal Democrats, you can't complain when they raise taxes. It's what they do.
The tax is estimated to bring in more than $440 million in new revenue.
I doubt it. Enough people like me are pissed off about it that they will make as many purchases as possible outside the county.
I've written it before and I'll write it again: when you elect liberal Democrats, you can't complain when they raise taxes. It's what they do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)