10. Gran Torino
9. Hotel Rwanda
8. Lars and the Real Girl
7. Across the Universe
6. Babel
5. Radio
4. The Dark Knight
3. Remember the Titans
2. The Pursuit of Happyness
1. Crash
Monday, December 28, 2009
Top Music and Movies of the Decade
With the 2000s coming to an end, I decided to do my top ten bands and top ten movies of the decade. I don't have a scientific formula for the lists, only that the music is what I enjoyed the most, and the movies are the ones that I enjoyed the most and was the most affected by. So here are the top ten bands:
9. Five for Fighting
10. Foo Fighters
9. Five for Fighting
8. Dave Matthews Band
7. Matchbox Twenty
6. Kings of Leon
5. The Killers
4. Death Cab for Cutie
3. Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band
2. The Wallflowers
1. Coldplay
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Braves Trying to Stay in the Race
Leading 4-2 in the bottom of the ninth last Thursday, the Braves called on Rafael Soriano to close the game out. But with the top of the Dodgers order up, I knew instantly in my gut things wouldn't turn out right. Three batters later, Andre Ethier sent a Soriano offering over the right field fence giving the Dodgers a 5-4 win, seemingly putting a fork in the Braves playoff chances. But baseball is a funny game of ups and downs, and three days later, with the help of clutch hitting and excellent pitching and defense, the Braves had swept the final three games of the series against the National League's best team. Now entering tonight, the Braves find themselves just 4 1/2 games behind the division leading Phillies and four games out in the wild card race. And knowing the Braves will be getting better with the return of Omar Infante and of Tim Hudson in a couple of weeks, it's realistic to think they may have a shot at the playoffs with 50 games left. But that can all evaporate quickly. There's a big series this weekend when the Phillies come to Turner Field, but first the Braves must take care of the Washington Nationals. The Nationals have played better against the Braves than just about anybody else, taking 16 of 27 dating back to 2008. And earlier this year, when the Braves jump-started their stretch of better baseball by sweeping the Phillies at home, they turned around and lost two of three in Washington. And now they face an improved Nationals team that has currently won eight in a row and is under the leadership of a new manager in Jim Riggleman. Given the Braves up and down tendencies and their incompetence when it comes to the Nats, I'm still not holding my breath on the Braves making a serious run. They could just as well be out of the race at the end of the week. Eighteen of their next 22 games are against the National League East, and now they may have a better shot at the division than the wild card. But either way, they need to continue hitting consistently, and they need to win the games they're supposed to. Otherwise, they'll be another disappointment. It starts tonight.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Obamacare = Epic Fail (SOME BAD LANGUAGE)
"Do I really look like a man with a plan?"
- Heath Ledger as the Joker in The Dark Knight
There are so many things to address with this, so it may take a little while. A quick disclaimer: there is some language, not much, but some. Don't judge me.
There's been quite a ruckus at town hall meetings across the country, as opposition to the President's socialist health care plan has risen substantially. And as would be expected, the supporters of the policy and the president, these democrats in Congress, and to a large extent, the media, have cast these protesters as extremists. And they call these town hall meetings theatre. Paul Krugman, columnist for the New York Times even shocks everybody that has bothered to breathe by citing racial fears of a black president as the reason for the opposition to universal health care. I'll have to check with Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, JC Watts, Walter Williams, Condi Rice, and well you get the drift, to see if their opposition or at least criticisms of such a plan are motivated by the fear of a black president. So Mr. Krugman, do us all a favor and stick to teaching economics at Princeton, so college juniors such as myself don't embarrass you on a regular basis.
Anyway, it is quite remarkable how these democrats have suddenly turned cold against the idea of town hall meetings, letting citizens speak their voice, and dare I say, some damn CHANGE. This past week, a controversy was stirred up over a poster with Obama on it, sporting the Heath Ledger joker-style makeup. The accompanying word was socialism. "Politically mean spirited" was how I heard it described. More politically mean spirited than the tired old "Bush Lied, People Died" shirts, posters, bumper stickers, hats? Once again, get over yourselves. The health care plan is socialistic in its design. And it's a joke. What's there to discuss? One of the things that was always so frustrating about George W. Bush was how his biggest supporters blindly defended him. And now we are seeing that surpassed under President Obama.
But let's get to the actual plan and its flaws and contradictions, and the hypocrisy of these people.
1. The President's position is that the "status quo" can no longer remain. This current system bankrupts families, business and government. However, as he puts it, "if you are happy with your plan and doctor, stick with it." So let me get this straight. It's an irreversible disaster, but we can stick with it if we choose to and not be harmed. Hell, give me one of those joker posters.
2. Another main supporting argument behind this plan is that it will save money and be a cost-cutting measure, despite the fact that the Congressional Budget Office (about as non-partisan as you can get in today's political world) says that these proposals will increase health care spending, putting us even further behind budget.
3. Barack the Magician says we can cut down health care costs while theoretically providing health insurance to approximately 50 million more people. If any of you believe this, here's what you do. You take some aluminum foil, put it on your head, go sit in a closet, and turn out the lights. Then just sit there and think a while.
4. Now let's get to the uninsured, who won't have the option to get covered by the government plan. No, they will be MANDATED to get it. So people in my age group, who are healthy and rarely sick and choose not to be covered right now get stuck with paying increased premiums that will be more than any medical expenses in the long run because they didn't get the mandated coverage. Mr. President, if you can sense my middle finger pointing in your direction, I'd say you're a good guesser.
5. It's understood that the health care issue is critically important, and getting it right is critical, regardless of whether you support the universal system or not. But rather than making sure it's done right, these buffoons want to ram this legislation through Congress, not allowing time for it to be READ (wow, there's a radical freaking idea) and debated thoroughly. "We don't have time for that! It's morally imperative!" goes the generic democratic response. "And it will work just like the stimulus did when we rushed it through." (Even though the stimulus has done the complete opposite.) Well, it must not be too pressing, seeing as we can keep our plan and doctor if we want..supposedly. How about you put the entire thing on the Internet for us citizens to see? Isn't that what you promised, Mr. President? More transparent government? Bull.
6. One of the main determinations of the health care reformers has been not to screw it up like they did in 1994 with President Clinton. They say they have strayed away from all the tactical and procedural measures that doomed it the first time. But the plan itself hasn't changed much. Mandates, more regulations of insurance companies, government-managed markets. And a bonus "public option" open to all people and run by our government, which does such a wonderful job running things. The bottom line (That's what Joe Biden says all the time, usually when he is lying, but I'm not lying.) is that it is intellectually dishonest and condescending for these people to tell me that this plan will cut costs of health care by expanding coverage to 50 million more people and that even though this current system is unsustainable, I can still keep my plan and doctor and not be harmed.
7. Really one of the big goals is to bankrupt the insurance companies. It's people like John Edwards who constantly gripe about the way these companies pick and choose what to cover and what not to cover. Under this proposed system, these companies will be forced to cover everything. Let's use a little damn common sense. That will only bankrupt the insurance companies. And if the companies don't go bankrupt, by covering all this extra stuff, they will have to raise the cost of insurance. So assuming the CBO's estimates are accurate, and assuming this proposed system goes into effect, that means the government will be forced to look at cost-cutting measures. It most likely will be a combination of significantly high tax increases (making it harder on the people they claim to want to help) and DECIDING WHAT PROCEDURES AND MEDICINES TO COVER AND NOT TO COVER. It's amazing how stand up comedians even make a living in this country. If people just turned on the news and opened their ears, they'd get all the comedy they need.
8. Essentially, you're going to have a government-run bureaucratic system with all these assholes in suits overruling experienced and trained doctors on what to do all for the reason of bringing down the costs of health care. And by the way, where do you get all the new doctors to cover all these extra people?
9. Sometimes it's best to look at countries with these systems in place. Take Canada for instance. There are thousands of Canadians crossing over to get medicines and treatments here that it takes way too long to get over in Canada. And the reason they do that, plain and simple, is because despite what our politicians and President say, we have the best quality of medical care in the world.
10. This whole idea of the government controlling what procedures you can get covered for, what medicines you can get, what doctors can do is nothing new. It's just the same old tired business of the government getting a little more control of our life. A direct slap in the fact to the country's founding documents.
11. This is really for a different blog, but no matter how politically correct or rhetorically appealing it may sound, health insurance is not a right.
These politicians need to understand this opposition is not just from what they try to make people perceive as extremists. It's real opposition that may very well cost the democrats the House of Representatives in 2010 and worse in later elections. It's important for us citizens to educate ourselves about this issue and be able to call this bullshit when we see it. We just need to ask ourselves these basic questions.
1. If this system will be cost-effective and productive, then why are there so many problems with systems that are government-run, such as medicare, medicaid and veterans hospitals?
2. How can you cut health care costs by providing insurance to 50 million more people?
3. If it is imperative to fix the system, why do they insist we can keep our plan and doctor if we like? Does that imply if we choose the government option, which why wouldn't we if it's supposedly more cost effective, that we will be an overload on the system, thus throwing the plan on its face?
4. And finally, why are so many people coming over from countries like Canada to PAY for care here?
Many people in this country are acting like dogs running for a stick, but I'm not these people's dog.
- Heath Ledger as the Joker in The Dark Knight
There are so many things to address with this, so it may take a little while. A quick disclaimer: there is some language, not much, but some. Don't judge me.
There's been quite a ruckus at town hall meetings across the country, as opposition to the President's socialist health care plan has risen substantially. And as would be expected, the supporters of the policy and the president, these democrats in Congress, and to a large extent, the media, have cast these protesters as extremists. And they call these town hall meetings theatre. Paul Krugman, columnist for the New York Times even shocks everybody that has bothered to breathe by citing racial fears of a black president as the reason for the opposition to universal health care. I'll have to check with Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, JC Watts, Walter Williams, Condi Rice, and well you get the drift, to see if their opposition or at least criticisms of such a plan are motivated by the fear of a black president. So Mr. Krugman, do us all a favor and stick to teaching economics at Princeton, so college juniors such as myself don't embarrass you on a regular basis.
Anyway, it is quite remarkable how these democrats have suddenly turned cold against the idea of town hall meetings, letting citizens speak their voice, and dare I say, some damn CHANGE. This past week, a controversy was stirred up over a poster with Obama on it, sporting the Heath Ledger joker-style makeup. The accompanying word was socialism. "Politically mean spirited" was how I heard it described. More politically mean spirited than the tired old "Bush Lied, People Died" shirts, posters, bumper stickers, hats? Once again, get over yourselves. The health care plan is socialistic in its design. And it's a joke. What's there to discuss? One of the things that was always so frustrating about George W. Bush was how his biggest supporters blindly defended him. And now we are seeing that surpassed under President Obama.
But let's get to the actual plan and its flaws and contradictions, and the hypocrisy of these people.
1. The President's position is that the "status quo" can no longer remain. This current system bankrupts families, business and government. However, as he puts it, "if you are happy with your plan and doctor, stick with it." So let me get this straight. It's an irreversible disaster, but we can stick with it if we choose to and not be harmed. Hell, give me one of those joker posters.
2. Another main supporting argument behind this plan is that it will save money and be a cost-cutting measure, despite the fact that the Congressional Budget Office (about as non-partisan as you can get in today's political world) says that these proposals will increase health care spending, putting us even further behind budget.
3. Barack the Magician says we can cut down health care costs while theoretically providing health insurance to approximately 50 million more people. If any of you believe this, here's what you do. You take some aluminum foil, put it on your head, go sit in a closet, and turn out the lights. Then just sit there and think a while.
4. Now let's get to the uninsured, who won't have the option to get covered by the government plan. No, they will be MANDATED to get it. So people in my age group, who are healthy and rarely sick and choose not to be covered right now get stuck with paying increased premiums that will be more than any medical expenses in the long run because they didn't get the mandated coverage. Mr. President, if you can sense my middle finger pointing in your direction, I'd say you're a good guesser.
5. It's understood that the health care issue is critically important, and getting it right is critical, regardless of whether you support the universal system or not. But rather than making sure it's done right, these buffoons want to ram this legislation through Congress, not allowing time for it to be READ (wow, there's a radical freaking idea) and debated thoroughly. "We don't have time for that! It's morally imperative!" goes the generic democratic response. "And it will work just like the stimulus did when we rushed it through." (Even though the stimulus has done the complete opposite.) Well, it must not be too pressing, seeing as we can keep our plan and doctor if we want..supposedly. How about you put the entire thing on the Internet for us citizens to see? Isn't that what you promised, Mr. President? More transparent government? Bull.
6. One of the main determinations of the health care reformers has been not to screw it up like they did in 1994 with President Clinton. They say they have strayed away from all the tactical and procedural measures that doomed it the first time. But the plan itself hasn't changed much. Mandates, more regulations of insurance companies, government-managed markets. And a bonus "public option" open to all people and run by our government, which does such a wonderful job running things. The bottom line (That's what Joe Biden says all the time, usually when he is lying, but I'm not lying.) is that it is intellectually dishonest and condescending for these people to tell me that this plan will cut costs of health care by expanding coverage to 50 million more people and that even though this current system is unsustainable, I can still keep my plan and doctor and not be harmed.
7. Really one of the big goals is to bankrupt the insurance companies. It's people like John Edwards who constantly gripe about the way these companies pick and choose what to cover and what not to cover. Under this proposed system, these companies will be forced to cover everything. Let's use a little damn common sense. That will only bankrupt the insurance companies. And if the companies don't go bankrupt, by covering all this extra stuff, they will have to raise the cost of insurance. So assuming the CBO's estimates are accurate, and assuming this proposed system goes into effect, that means the government will be forced to look at cost-cutting measures. It most likely will be a combination of significantly high tax increases (making it harder on the people they claim to want to help) and DECIDING WHAT PROCEDURES AND MEDICINES TO COVER AND NOT TO COVER. It's amazing how stand up comedians even make a living in this country. If people just turned on the news and opened their ears, they'd get all the comedy they need.
8. Essentially, you're going to have a government-run bureaucratic system with all these assholes in suits overruling experienced and trained doctors on what to do all for the reason of bringing down the costs of health care. And by the way, where do you get all the new doctors to cover all these extra people?
9. Sometimes it's best to look at countries with these systems in place. Take Canada for instance. There are thousands of Canadians crossing over to get medicines and treatments here that it takes way too long to get over in Canada. And the reason they do that, plain and simple, is because despite what our politicians and President say, we have the best quality of medical care in the world.
10. This whole idea of the government controlling what procedures you can get covered for, what medicines you can get, what doctors can do is nothing new. It's just the same old tired business of the government getting a little more control of our life. A direct slap in the fact to the country's founding documents.
11. This is really for a different blog, but no matter how politically correct or rhetorically appealing it may sound, health insurance is not a right.
These politicians need to understand this opposition is not just from what they try to make people perceive as extremists. It's real opposition that may very well cost the democrats the House of Representatives in 2010 and worse in later elections. It's important for us citizens to educate ourselves about this issue and be able to call this bullshit when we see it. We just need to ask ourselves these basic questions.
1. If this system will be cost-effective and productive, then why are there so many problems with systems that are government-run, such as medicare, medicaid and veterans hospitals?
2. How can you cut health care costs by providing insurance to 50 million more people?
3. If it is imperative to fix the system, why do they insist we can keep our plan and doctor if we like? Does that imply if we choose the government option, which why wouldn't we if it's supposedly more cost effective, that we will be an overload on the system, thus throwing the plan on its face?
4. And finally, why are so many people coming over from countries like Canada to PAY for care here?
Many people in this country are acting like dogs running for a stick, but I'm not these people's dog.
Thursday, August 6, 2009
More Braves Stuff
Okay so once again, it's been a month since I have posted on this blog. I've been struggling with time and haven't been as inspired to write. And clearly I don't have a lot of people reading this blog, so I'm trying to link people to it from my Facebook. But with a new football season getting ready to start, I'll be providing a lot more on the sports front, and there's plenty to talk about the political world and many other subjects. Within the next week or so, I'll be giving some pre-season picks on football and be analyzing the baseball pennant races a little more closely.
The Braves were 38-40 when I wrote my last blog on here. Since then; 17-13. At 55-53, they are now officially two thirds through the regular season. Coming into play today, they are 6.5 games back in the National League East race and 5 games back in the Wild Card. With 54 games left, they theoretically still have a chance. But the fact hasn't changed that the Braves are still a .500 baseball team that I'm not convinced is capable of going on the tear they need to make the playoffs.
Let's look at the Wild Card leader San Francisco, who at 60-48 would finish 90-72 if they were to continue their current pace. To get the 91 wins needed, the Braves would have to go 36-18 the rest of the way. That's a .667 winning percentage. Two wins for every three games. It's not impossible but very hard to do. Clearly the many games the Braves blew earlier this year, as well as the three games they blew on the road right before the All-Star break are coming back to haunt them. They got a brutal wakeup call last weekend when the MLB-best Dodgers came into Turner Field and dominated, outscoring the Braves 17-5 and taking two out of three games. In reality, the Braves were very fortunate to win the one game they did.
And now tonight they start a four game series in Los Angeles. They'll need at least a split, and probably three out of four to actually convince me they're still contenders. My biggest point in that I am not convinced the Braves have a realistic shot is that they are behind four teams in the Wild Card race, five once you factor in that the Cubs and Cardinals are tied atop the Central Division standings. So they have to catch up with at least four of those teams to get in the playoffs. They'll have plenty of opportunities to surpass the Marlins with another 10 games remaining against them. But they have three games left with the Cardinals, and they are done with the Cubs, Giants and Rockies, which makes it harder to directly impact these circumstances. The division provides almost as good as a chance. The Braves also have nine games left against the Phillies, a team which they have gone 7-2 against. However, this is a drastically different Philadelphia team than the one struggling the last time these two faced each other. The addition of 2008 AL Cy Young winner Cliff Lee has made their starting rotation much better, and on offense, they're killing the ball.
If the Braves are going to make a serious push, the next nine games should settle whether or not they are serious or not. These four games in LA will be followed by a two-game set with the Nationals in Atlanta. And then next weekend, the Phillies will be at Turner Field again. If the Braves are any worse than three games or so out in the division and Wild Card by the end of next weekend, it may be time to look toward next year.
Now if the Braves are going to get serious about making this push, they'll need three things. One is what they've had all year: great starting pitching, a category in which they are second to none. Another is a consistent offense, which obviously has been a big problem. Adam Laroche has provided a spark to the lineup, going 9-18 with some big hits since his return. A glaring hole remains in right field though. As much as I love Matt Diaz, he does not hit right-handed pitching well enough to be out there every day. Ryan Church is a decent player but has not been healthy even though he did get back in the lineup yesterday. The potential solution is in AA, with right-fielder Jason Heyward. At 19 and turning 20 on Sunday, Heyward is hitting well over .400 with an on-base percentage over .500 to go along with 17 extra base hits in 28 games since his promotion to AA Mississippi. He is without a doubt the most highly touted prospect to come through the organization since Andruw Jones, and it's believed he could have an immediate impact if he gets the call-up, similar to how Jones impacted the team in his call-up in 1996. At 6-5 and 230 pounds, Heyward has drawn comparisons to Darryl Strawberry, and he has remarkable discipline at the plate. Heyward may be the shot in the arm the offense needs. And finally the Braves could use more bullpen help. The Braves will also be getting Tim Hudson back, which means that most likely Kenshin Kawakami would go to the bullpen. And when Omar Infante returns, the Braves will have their key bench bat back.
So the chance, albeit a small one, still remains for the Braves to make the playoffs. Should they fall out of it in the next two weeks, there will still be reasons to watch the team. Heyward most likely will be a September call-up if not in August. It's unlikely the Braves would be able to keep both Hudson and Javier Vazquez next season, so it will be important to see how Hudson does coming off his injury. But please Braves fans, when it comes to this playoff race, don't hold your breath. You most likely will wind up disappointed.
The Braves were 38-40 when I wrote my last blog on here. Since then; 17-13. At 55-53, they are now officially two thirds through the regular season. Coming into play today, they are 6.5 games back in the National League East race and 5 games back in the Wild Card. With 54 games left, they theoretically still have a chance. But the fact hasn't changed that the Braves are still a .500 baseball team that I'm not convinced is capable of going on the tear they need to make the playoffs.
Let's look at the Wild Card leader San Francisco, who at 60-48 would finish 90-72 if they were to continue their current pace. To get the 91 wins needed, the Braves would have to go 36-18 the rest of the way. That's a .667 winning percentage. Two wins for every three games. It's not impossible but very hard to do. Clearly the many games the Braves blew earlier this year, as well as the three games they blew on the road right before the All-Star break are coming back to haunt them. They got a brutal wakeup call last weekend when the MLB-best Dodgers came into Turner Field and dominated, outscoring the Braves 17-5 and taking two out of three games. In reality, the Braves were very fortunate to win the one game they did.
And now tonight they start a four game series in Los Angeles. They'll need at least a split, and probably three out of four to actually convince me they're still contenders. My biggest point in that I am not convinced the Braves have a realistic shot is that they are behind four teams in the Wild Card race, five once you factor in that the Cubs and Cardinals are tied atop the Central Division standings. So they have to catch up with at least four of those teams to get in the playoffs. They'll have plenty of opportunities to surpass the Marlins with another 10 games remaining against them. But they have three games left with the Cardinals, and they are done with the Cubs, Giants and Rockies, which makes it harder to directly impact these circumstances. The division provides almost as good as a chance. The Braves also have nine games left against the Phillies, a team which they have gone 7-2 against. However, this is a drastically different Philadelphia team than the one struggling the last time these two faced each other. The addition of 2008 AL Cy Young winner Cliff Lee has made their starting rotation much better, and on offense, they're killing the ball.
If the Braves are going to make a serious push, the next nine games should settle whether or not they are serious or not. These four games in LA will be followed by a two-game set with the Nationals in Atlanta. And then next weekend, the Phillies will be at Turner Field again. If the Braves are any worse than three games or so out in the division and Wild Card by the end of next weekend, it may be time to look toward next year.
Now if the Braves are going to get serious about making this push, they'll need three things. One is what they've had all year: great starting pitching, a category in which they are second to none. Another is a consistent offense, which obviously has been a big problem. Adam Laroche has provided a spark to the lineup, going 9-18 with some big hits since his return. A glaring hole remains in right field though. As much as I love Matt Diaz, he does not hit right-handed pitching well enough to be out there every day. Ryan Church is a decent player but has not been healthy even though he did get back in the lineup yesterday. The potential solution is in AA, with right-fielder Jason Heyward. At 19 and turning 20 on Sunday, Heyward is hitting well over .400 with an on-base percentage over .500 to go along with 17 extra base hits in 28 games since his promotion to AA Mississippi. He is without a doubt the most highly touted prospect to come through the organization since Andruw Jones, and it's believed he could have an immediate impact if he gets the call-up, similar to how Jones impacted the team in his call-up in 1996. At 6-5 and 230 pounds, Heyward has drawn comparisons to Darryl Strawberry, and he has remarkable discipline at the plate. Heyward may be the shot in the arm the offense needs. And finally the Braves could use more bullpen help. The Braves will also be getting Tim Hudson back, which means that most likely Kenshin Kawakami would go to the bullpen. And when Omar Infante returns, the Braves will have their key bench bat back.
So the chance, albeit a small one, still remains for the Braves to make the playoffs. Should they fall out of it in the next two weeks, there will still be reasons to watch the team. Heyward most likely will be a September call-up if not in August. It's unlikely the Braves would be able to keep both Hudson and Javier Vazquez next season, so it will be important to see how Hudson does coming off his injury. But please Braves fans, when it comes to this playoff race, don't hold your breath. You most likely will wind up disappointed.
Friday, July 3, 2009
Braves Update and All-Star Picks
The Braves finally look like they are playing as a team after their sweep of the Phillies, but has my opinion changed of the overall direction of their season? Not much. I'll admit, it's hard to write them off, now that they stand just two games out of first place. However, they remain fourth in the division standings, and they will face the MLB-worst Nationals, who have been a thorn in their side, this weekend in Washington. If the Braves take care of business and sweep Washington, maybe I'll begin to warm up, but my diagnosis remains largely unchanged. The Phillies series was impressive. The Braves began to hit with runners in scoring position, Bobby Cox managed more aggressively, the pitching continued to be outstanding, and maybe most important of all, the Braves played with hunger and swagger. If they continue to play that way, then certainly they've got a shot to win the division. However, keep in mind that the Phillies have been playing terrible as of late, and the division is still a weak one. Martin Prado has finally replaced Kelly Johnson as the starting second baseman, but it's unrealistic probably to expect him to continue his hot streak. The platoon of Garret Anderson and Matt Diaz has been playing well lately, but I don't think they are be the long-term solution for this season. The Braves still need an impact power bat to play one of the corner outfield spots, preferably right field, if they expect to seriously compete. All I'm saying is, don't get your hopes up too much. And to get one that would seriously help, they'd have to give up one of their stud prospects or maybe someone on the team that they wouldn't want to lose.
And now my 2009 All-Star Game picks. These are the guys I think deserve it, keeping in mind every team must be represented.
Starters in Bold
National League:
C – Brian McCann – ATL, Yadier Molina – STL
1B – Albert Pujols – STL, Prince Fielder – MIL, Adrian Gonzalez – SD, Lance Berkman – HOU
2B – Chase Utley – PHI, Orlando Hudson – LAD
3B – Pablo Sandoval – SF, David Wright – NYM, Ryan Zimmerman - WAS
SS – Hanley Ramirez – FLA, Miguel Tejada – HOU
OF – Raul Ibanez – PHI, Ryan Braun – MIL, Justin Upton – ARI, Brad Hawpe – COL, Carlos Beltran – NYM, Carlos Lee – HOU, Adam Dunn - WAS
SP – Tim Lincecum – SF, Dan Haren – ARI, Matt Cain – SF, Johnny Cueto – CIN, Jair Jurrjens – ATL, Javier Vazquez – ATL, Zach Duke – PIT, Randy Wells – CHC, Jason Marquis - COL
RP – Johnathan Broxton – LAD, Ryan Franklin – STL, Rafael Soriano – ATL, Heath Bell – SD
American League:
C – Joe Mauer – MIN, AJ Piercynzski - CWS
1B – Justin Morneau – MIN, Kevin Youkillis – BOS, Mark Teixeira – NYY, Russel Branyan – SEA
2B – Aaron Hill – TOR, Ian Kinsler – TEX
3B – Evan Longoria – TB, Brandon Inge – DET
SS – Derek Jeter – NYY, Jason Bartlett – TB, Marco Scutaro – TOR
OF – Jason Bay – BOS, Torii Hunter – LAA, Ichiro – SEA, Johnny Damon – NYY, Ben Zobrist – TB, Adam Jones – BAL, Shin-soo Choo – CLE
SP – Zack Greinke – KC, Roy Halladay – TOR, Edwin Jackson – DET, Felix Hernandez – SEA, Jered Weaver – LAA, Kevin Millwood – TEX, Justin Verlander – DET, Mark Buerhle – CWS, Josh Beckett - BOS
RP – Joe Nathan – MIN, Mariano Rivera – NYY, David Aarsma – SEA, Andrew Bailey - OAK
And now my 2009 All-Star Game picks. These are the guys I think deserve it, keeping in mind every team must be represented.
Starters in Bold
National League:
C – Brian McCann – ATL, Yadier Molina – STL
1B – Albert Pujols – STL, Prince Fielder – MIL, Adrian Gonzalez – SD, Lance Berkman – HOU
2B – Chase Utley – PHI, Orlando Hudson – LAD
3B – Pablo Sandoval – SF, David Wright – NYM, Ryan Zimmerman - WAS
SS – Hanley Ramirez – FLA, Miguel Tejada – HOU
OF – Raul Ibanez – PHI, Ryan Braun – MIL, Justin Upton – ARI, Brad Hawpe – COL, Carlos Beltran – NYM, Carlos Lee – HOU, Adam Dunn - WAS
SP – Tim Lincecum – SF, Dan Haren – ARI, Matt Cain – SF, Johnny Cueto – CIN, Jair Jurrjens – ATL, Javier Vazquez – ATL, Zach Duke – PIT, Randy Wells – CHC, Jason Marquis - COL
RP – Johnathan Broxton – LAD, Ryan Franklin – STL, Rafael Soriano – ATL, Heath Bell – SD
American League:
C – Joe Mauer – MIN, AJ Piercynzski - CWS
1B – Justin Morneau – MIN, Kevin Youkillis – BOS, Mark Teixeira – NYY, Russel Branyan – SEA
2B – Aaron Hill – TOR, Ian Kinsler – TEX
3B – Evan Longoria – TB, Brandon Inge – DET
SS – Derek Jeter – NYY, Jason Bartlett – TB, Marco Scutaro – TOR
OF – Jason Bay – BOS, Torii Hunter – LAA, Ichiro – SEA, Johnny Damon – NYY, Ben Zobrist – TB, Adam Jones – BAL, Shin-soo Choo – CLE
SP – Zack Greinke – KC, Roy Halladay – TOR, Edwin Jackson – DET, Felix Hernandez – SEA, Jered Weaver – LAA, Kevin Millwood – TEX, Justin Verlander – DET, Mark Buerhle – CWS, Josh Beckett - BOS
RP – Joe Nathan – MIN, Mariano Rivera – NYY, David Aarsma – SEA, Andrew Bailey - OAK
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
The Braves Are What They Are
You'll hear plenty of people say the Atlanta Braves' upcoming series, which starts tonight against Philadelphia at Turner Field, is the series which will determine the season for the team or determine what they have. At 35-40 and practically halfway through, I think it should be obvious all that has already been determined. When comedian George Carlin explained why he didn't rail on politicians as much in his act, his reasoning was that he realized that they all came from American families and American universities, and what we have is the best we have to offer. Whether or not you agree with that, the parallel is blatant. This is as good as the Braves are going to get, and they likely will get worse before the season is over.
It's tempting for people to point out that with the Braves playing about as bad as possible, that they are only five games out of first place, and with a sweep they could get to within two games of the first place Phillies. But that's honestly more of a reflection on how mediocre the division really is. Also, factor in the Phillies and Mets have played well below their potential, and that's the only reason the Braves are anywhere near them. Even if the Braves were to pull off a sweep and get within two games of Philadelphia, they still have to catch both the Mets and Marlins as well. And let's do a little quick math. The Braves are currently 35-40, a winning percentage of .467. Let's say that it will take 90 wins to win the division. To do that, the Braves would have to go 55-32 the rest of the season, a winning percentage of .632. And even though the wild card will likely come from the NL Central, let's say the Braves were going to make a run at that. So let's say it will take 87 wins to get the wild card. Even then, the Braves will have to 52-35, a winning percentage of .598. So we're looking at the Braves having to play at least .600 baseball the rest of the way to even have a hope at the postseason. Can you REALISTICALLY expect that from one of the worst offenses in the league?
There are some factors you could point to that could give the Braves some hope in winning and maybe even sweeping the series. The Phillies pitching has been terrible lately, almost as bad as the Braves offense, and something has to give. The Braves will be throwing Derek Lowe, Jair Jurrjens and Javier Vazquez this series, and they face Joe Blanton tonight, who they have owned. That leads me to the first reality check of this blog...we're talking about the Atlanta Braves. This is the perfect time for them to take a 4-1 loss to Blanton tonight and to be swept at home by the Phillies and subsequently buried in the race. After all, the Phillies have won their last nine games at Turner Field.
Many fans are still operating under the thought that the Braves are one big bat away from being division champions and going deep in the playoffs. Here's reality check number two....the only three bats that would make that kind of impact are Albert Pujols, Alex Rodriguez and Manny Ramirez. And none of those will be in Bobby Cox's lineup card anytime soon. Think about it; if Mark Teixiera wasn't the difference maker, Jermaine Dye certainly can't be. It's understood that if the Braves had anywhere near a good offense, they'd be in first place and in pennant contention. Their pitching staff is as good as any. Ignore Lowe's (7-6, 4.53 ERA) last three starts, all of which have been horrible, and he's been what was expected of him. Ignore the win-loss records of Jair Jurrjens (5-6, 2.93) and Javier Vazquez (5-7, 3.04), and you could make an argument for either one of them to be the National League starter in the All-Star game. But their lack of run support is going to cost them both a spot on the roster and Cy Young consideration. That's not to mention Tommy Hanson (4-0, 2.48), who, if he keeps it up, will probably be Rookie of the Year.
But the Braves just do not have an offense. Jeff Francoeur has gone all the way from the real-life version of Roy Hobbs (as penned by Sports Illustrated three years ago) to one of the five worst outfielders in the game. Kelly Johnson has been absolutely terrible, and is regressing rather than progressing like he should be at 27. Yunel Escobar is still talented and having a respectable year, but he's now seen as a hassle in the clubhouse, and he seems to have given up on hustling. Finally Casey Kotchman, who is good defensively, has provided a whopping two home runs at the first base position. Granted he's never been more than a 15-20 home run guy, two won't cut it. Which brings me to reality check number three...it's time for the Braves to realize they won't be serious contenders this year and enter the sellers market and rebuilding mode. You could make an argument that in some ways the rebuilding mode, even if not self-consciously, has begun. Atlanta didn't make the play for a power-hitting corner outfielder that they needed to in the offseason, but rather brought in an aging Garret Anderson to serve as a stopgap. Anderson and Kotchman are both likely stopgaps for the two 19-year-olds (leftfielder Jason Heyward and first baseman Freddie Freeman) in the farm system who are supposed to be the next big thing. But take that with a gargantuan grain of iodized salt; Francoeur was the next big thing not too long ago.
You could say that Frank Wren's job is likely on the line (There seems to be some tension between John Scheurholz and him about how the Smoltz and Glavine situations were handled.), and that he may try and go balls out for the division. But if the Braves continue down that path without a realistic shot at winning a world series, they will forever be stuck in this hole of mediocrity. Now besides the top prospects such as Heyward and Freeman in the system, McCann, Hanson, Nate Mclouth and Jurjjens should be seen as untouchables (unless there's a total mind-blowing deal for Jurjjens). Everybody else should be seen as expendable. It'd be hard to part with Vazquez and Lowe, but they could net you a good return. Tim Hudson will be back later this year, which will give the Braves six good starting pitchers. Another couple that could be dealt are relievers Rafael Soriano and Mike Gonzalez.
It's realistically going to be hard to trade Francoeur or Johnson for much more than a bat boy, some Gatorade coolers, a sample of dirt from the bullpen and free tickets to a Coldplay concert because those two are so terrible. Escobar still has value and should be dealt. And finally we have Chipper Jones. It may very well be time for him to go. I know, you can say it'll never happen, and you're probably right. As of now, he's in the worst slump of his career, but as good of a hitter as he is, he'll snap out of it. And if he happens to get red-hot before the trade deadline, that's a perfect opportunity to send him to a team and get a nice little rip-off. But in looking toward the future, I'd say Chipper's time is running thin. The only problem with letting him go however, is that it would be a public relations disaster and lower an already pathetic attendance that much lower.
Finally Bobby Cox's ship needs to sail. You can keep him the rest of this year, since the team isn't really going anywhere. But in the offseason, he should be given the option of retirement or being fired. Cox has grown too old and is not the aggressive manager he once was and needs to be. The Braves are not a power-hitting team, and yet they don't steal bases. They don't hit and run; they don't bunt runners over. They don't do things that can generate more runs rather than sitting back and waiting on the three-run homer that hardly ever comes.
It's time for the Braves to wake up and smell the roses, and maybe a sweep at the hands of the Phillies could do that. This is what they are going to be the rest of the season. Why not trade away what they can, and get some great talent in return and look towards contending the next few years? In the end, that's what the fans really deserve, isn't it?
It's tempting for people to point out that with the Braves playing about as bad as possible, that they are only five games out of first place, and with a sweep they could get to within two games of the first place Phillies. But that's honestly more of a reflection on how mediocre the division really is. Also, factor in the Phillies and Mets have played well below their potential, and that's the only reason the Braves are anywhere near them. Even if the Braves were to pull off a sweep and get within two games of Philadelphia, they still have to catch both the Mets and Marlins as well. And let's do a little quick math. The Braves are currently 35-40, a winning percentage of .467. Let's say that it will take 90 wins to win the division. To do that, the Braves would have to go 55-32 the rest of the season, a winning percentage of .632. And even though the wild card will likely come from the NL Central, let's say the Braves were going to make a run at that. So let's say it will take 87 wins to get the wild card. Even then, the Braves will have to 52-35, a winning percentage of .598. So we're looking at the Braves having to play at least .600 baseball the rest of the way to even have a hope at the postseason. Can you REALISTICALLY expect that from one of the worst offenses in the league?
There are some factors you could point to that could give the Braves some hope in winning and maybe even sweeping the series. The Phillies pitching has been terrible lately, almost as bad as the Braves offense, and something has to give. The Braves will be throwing Derek Lowe, Jair Jurrjens and Javier Vazquez this series, and they face Joe Blanton tonight, who they have owned. That leads me to the first reality check of this blog...we're talking about the Atlanta Braves. This is the perfect time for them to take a 4-1 loss to Blanton tonight and to be swept at home by the Phillies and subsequently buried in the race. After all, the Phillies have won their last nine games at Turner Field.
Many fans are still operating under the thought that the Braves are one big bat away from being division champions and going deep in the playoffs. Here's reality check number two....the only three bats that would make that kind of impact are Albert Pujols, Alex Rodriguez and Manny Ramirez. And none of those will be in Bobby Cox's lineup card anytime soon. Think about it; if Mark Teixiera wasn't the difference maker, Jermaine Dye certainly can't be. It's understood that if the Braves had anywhere near a good offense, they'd be in first place and in pennant contention. Their pitching staff is as good as any. Ignore Lowe's (7-6, 4.53 ERA) last three starts, all of which have been horrible, and he's been what was expected of him. Ignore the win-loss records of Jair Jurrjens (5-6, 2.93) and Javier Vazquez (5-7, 3.04), and you could make an argument for either one of them to be the National League starter in the All-Star game. But their lack of run support is going to cost them both a spot on the roster and Cy Young consideration. That's not to mention Tommy Hanson (4-0, 2.48), who, if he keeps it up, will probably be Rookie of the Year.
But the Braves just do not have an offense. Jeff Francoeur has gone all the way from the real-life version of Roy Hobbs (as penned by Sports Illustrated three years ago) to one of the five worst outfielders in the game. Kelly Johnson has been absolutely terrible, and is regressing rather than progressing like he should be at 27. Yunel Escobar is still talented and having a respectable year, but he's now seen as a hassle in the clubhouse, and he seems to have given up on hustling. Finally Casey Kotchman, who is good defensively, has provided a whopping two home runs at the first base position. Granted he's never been more than a 15-20 home run guy, two won't cut it. Which brings me to reality check number three...it's time for the Braves to realize they won't be serious contenders this year and enter the sellers market and rebuilding mode. You could make an argument that in some ways the rebuilding mode, even if not self-consciously, has begun. Atlanta didn't make the play for a power-hitting corner outfielder that they needed to in the offseason, but rather brought in an aging Garret Anderson to serve as a stopgap. Anderson and Kotchman are both likely stopgaps for the two 19-year-olds (leftfielder Jason Heyward and first baseman Freddie Freeman) in the farm system who are supposed to be the next big thing. But take that with a gargantuan grain of iodized salt; Francoeur was the next big thing not too long ago.
You could say that Frank Wren's job is likely on the line (There seems to be some tension between John Scheurholz and him about how the Smoltz and Glavine situations were handled.), and that he may try and go balls out for the division. But if the Braves continue down that path without a realistic shot at winning a world series, they will forever be stuck in this hole of mediocrity. Now besides the top prospects such as Heyward and Freeman in the system, McCann, Hanson, Nate Mclouth and Jurjjens should be seen as untouchables (unless there's a total mind-blowing deal for Jurjjens). Everybody else should be seen as expendable. It'd be hard to part with Vazquez and Lowe, but they could net you a good return. Tim Hudson will be back later this year, which will give the Braves six good starting pitchers. Another couple that could be dealt are relievers Rafael Soriano and Mike Gonzalez.
It's realistically going to be hard to trade Francoeur or Johnson for much more than a bat boy, some Gatorade coolers, a sample of dirt from the bullpen and free tickets to a Coldplay concert because those two are so terrible. Escobar still has value and should be dealt. And finally we have Chipper Jones. It may very well be time for him to go. I know, you can say it'll never happen, and you're probably right. As of now, he's in the worst slump of his career, but as good of a hitter as he is, he'll snap out of it. And if he happens to get red-hot before the trade deadline, that's a perfect opportunity to send him to a team and get a nice little rip-off. But in looking toward the future, I'd say Chipper's time is running thin. The only problem with letting him go however, is that it would be a public relations disaster and lower an already pathetic attendance that much lower.
Finally Bobby Cox's ship needs to sail. You can keep him the rest of this year, since the team isn't really going anywhere. But in the offseason, he should be given the option of retirement or being fired. Cox has grown too old and is not the aggressive manager he once was and needs to be. The Braves are not a power-hitting team, and yet they don't steal bases. They don't hit and run; they don't bunt runners over. They don't do things that can generate more runs rather than sitting back and waiting on the three-run homer that hardly ever comes.
It's time for the Braves to wake up and smell the roses, and maybe a sweep at the hands of the Phillies could do that. This is what they are going to be the rest of the season. Why not trade away what they can, and get some great talent in return and look towards contending the next few years? In the end, that's what the fans really deserve, isn't it?
Friday, June 19, 2009
Big Scott
"You're Scott's son, aren't you?"That's the question I most often get in Dublin, Georgia, the place I call home. Once you see us both, listen to us talk, watch us adjust our glasses and use the same facial expressions, there's not much doubt I'm Scott Thompson's son. If you know us really well, you'll know we can both be completely sarcastic and quite dorky as well. Those of you who know him know he works tirelessly. He's been a real estate attorney for I believe 27 years. He's a historian, has authored books on the history of Dublin and Laurens County and publishes a weekly column in the Courier Herald. He's a member of the Dublin City school board, having been elected in 2005. He was a little league coach, and he's been involved with the Dublin High School band and baseball team. And that's just some of what he does.He also happens to be one of the more generous people you can run into, having given much money to kids and schools in the county, along with other charities and causes. And he lent a helping hand in making sure that every team member on Dublin's state championship athletic teams got their championship rings. He often quotes Winston Churchill, saying "We make a living by what we get. We make a life by what we give."We both share a love for writing. The highlight of my short career as a journalist so far has been covering a football game in Athens with him last September. As I sat in the press box, he was down on the field taking pictures between the hedges. And it was he who introduced me to baseball, which we both are very fond of. He was my coach for the majority of my little league career. I used to follow him to work a good bit when I was little, sporting a suit and all. Those days are gone now, but our bond isn't.Back in January, he had a heart attack. Luckily his heart problems were realized soon enough to avoid anything worse. Even when I got the call, I wasn't really panicked. Because the man endures. And even though I felt uncertain in those couple of months, I knew in the end, he'd be fine. It's certainly made me appreciate spending time with him a great deal more.Along with my mom, my dad has been my rock. He's been to countless band concerts, practices, marching band performances, baseball games, banquets, you name it. And even when other people have let me down, he's been by my side throughout it all, supporting me in all that I've done.Having a father that is so widely respected around the community as well as a grandfather who was the same way, I often find myself wondering if I will live up to that, and I put a good bit of pressure on myself. The best advice my dad has given me is to be myself and follow my dreams.People can be amazed at how he rattles information off the top of his head like an encyclopedia, and I used to pretend not to know him when he did the twist in front of the entire band. But it's all him being him. I believe he's still very much a kid at heart.Big Scott is not perfect. He'll be the first to tell you there are things he could have done better. Like all the rest of us, he's only human. But in his number one job as a dad in a world that is in desperate need of more good ones, he gets an A+ from me.Happy (early) Father's Day.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
A Few Quick Hits
After a long absence I'm back. Things have been pretty busy lately, but here's a few short thoughts.
* Watching this Sarah Palin-David Letterman thing unfold, I have to say that there's little doubt in my mind that the joke was directed at the 14-year old daughter. But here's a few things/questions:
1. The joke was in poor taste and not funny at all.
2. The joke was a obvious sexist one, but the outcry is not quite as much as it would have been if Palin were an liberal woman, and Letterman a conservative.
3. If the 14-year old daughter of Palin is now fair game, does that mean that the Obama daughters are also in play for such wisecracks? It would be interesting to get Mrs. Obama's opinion on this whole ordeal.
4. Should Letterman be fired? That should be up to CBS, not any kind of government legislation.
5. How come nobody has talked about how this might piss Alex Rodriguez off? I personally wouldn't take a joke about me committing statutory rape very lightly.
* When Christians as a whole become more Christ-like in their actions and not so judgemental and hypocritical, other people's opinion of them will certainly rise.
* Supporters of democratic gubernatorial candidate Roy Barnes should ask themselves this question: Why do they support a candidate who has already proven he can polarize a state and lose an election as an incumbent with a huge money advantage?
* The video on the news of the cop pulling over the ambulance and putting the EMT in a chokehold because he didn't yield at a yield sign (despite having a patient in the back) shows that unfortunately, there are some law enforcement officers who feel they are above the law. I see this a great deal in Milledgeville.
* While I would say I generally watch Fox News more frequently than other news networks, I will say the new Fox Nation commercial they've got is WAY over the top.
* The radical who shot the abortion doctor in Kansas has succeeded in giving the media the opportunity to paint the entire pro-life movement as a fringe one. I watched a PBS documentary the other night, with two colleagues of Dr. Tiller basically saying the "anti-abortion" people are domestic terrorists. This deranged man obviously was - the peaceful protesters are not. It's sad that a disagreement could lead to a murder. Maybe one day people will accept that abortion is not a black and white, clear-cut issue. There are way more gray areas involved, and regardless of whether you agree with it or not, sometimes there are extraordinary circumstances. But people need to be able to make their own choices, which is why I am pro-choice. But let me remind you that not all people opposed to abortion or abortion rights are going to go kill abortion doctors. Honest disagreements and civil discourse is part of America.
* Watching this Sarah Palin-David Letterman thing unfold, I have to say that there's little doubt in my mind that the joke was directed at the 14-year old daughter. But here's a few things/questions:
1. The joke was in poor taste and not funny at all.
2. The joke was a obvious sexist one, but the outcry is not quite as much as it would have been if Palin were an liberal woman, and Letterman a conservative.
3. If the 14-year old daughter of Palin is now fair game, does that mean that the Obama daughters are also in play for such wisecracks? It would be interesting to get Mrs. Obama's opinion on this whole ordeal.
4. Should Letterman be fired? That should be up to CBS, not any kind of government legislation.
5. How come nobody has talked about how this might piss Alex Rodriguez off? I personally wouldn't take a joke about me committing statutory rape very lightly.
* When Christians as a whole become more Christ-like in their actions and not so judgemental and hypocritical, other people's opinion of them will certainly rise.
* Supporters of democratic gubernatorial candidate Roy Barnes should ask themselves this question: Why do they support a candidate who has already proven he can polarize a state and lose an election as an incumbent with a huge money advantage?
* The video on the news of the cop pulling over the ambulance and putting the EMT in a chokehold because he didn't yield at a yield sign (despite having a patient in the back) shows that unfortunately, there are some law enforcement officers who feel they are above the law. I see this a great deal in Milledgeville.
* While I would say I generally watch Fox News more frequently than other news networks, I will say the new Fox Nation commercial they've got is WAY over the top.
* The radical who shot the abortion doctor in Kansas has succeeded in giving the media the opportunity to paint the entire pro-life movement as a fringe one. I watched a PBS documentary the other night, with two colleagues of Dr. Tiller basically saying the "anti-abortion" people are domestic terrorists. This deranged man obviously was - the peaceful protesters are not. It's sad that a disagreement could lead to a murder. Maybe one day people will accept that abortion is not a black and white, clear-cut issue. There are way more gray areas involved, and regardless of whether you agree with it or not, sometimes there are extraordinary circumstances. But people need to be able to make their own choices, which is why I am pro-choice. But let me remind you that not all people opposed to abortion or abortion rights are going to go kill abortion doctors. Honest disagreements and civil discourse is part of America.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Can someone please tell me....
why in the hell the first question about President Obama's pick to replace Justice Souter on the Supreme Court is whether they will be a woman or Hispanic or black or whatever? Once again, we miss the entire point about the Supreme Court and more broadly the judicial branch. Look no further than your basic government class in school, and you'll see the Judicial Branch is an independent branch of government and was designed to be politically independent by making federal judgeships lifetime appointments under the Constitution. Obama's criteria in his choice of who will be the next person to sit on the Supreme Court should not include any kind of empathy toward a particular group. Can I get a 14th Amendment shout out? Every time this situation comes up, a controversy begins, usually of political prowess. And the main political issue that trumps all is that of abortion. Is the judge pro-life or pro-choice? Right now, every pro-life and pro-choice group you can think of is preparing responses to all the potential choices, and if that choice happens to lean personally one way or another, the other side will lose its bananas. Again, we miss the point that the judicial branch is supposed to INTERPRET and APPLY the laws according to the Constitution, not make up its own legislation. That would be the LEGISLATIVE Branch's job. But nowadays, and this went on with Bush too, it's all about gaining a political edge and putting in judges who will mirror your views. Simply applying the law is merely an afterthought.
It's not always black and white:
I just completed the spring semester at college. In my intro to the law class, I was asked to write a three page response to an article regarding the issue of American "torture" of prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay and how President Obama has handled the issue. The author took a shot at Obama for side-swapping the issue and not pressing for prosecutions, even though he campaigned strongly on shutting the facility down, which he has indeed signed an executive order for. But maybe President Obama realized that campaigning is easier than executing, and that situations are often complicated ones. I never really warmed up to President Bush, but I always resented him being called a war criminal by people who praise other presidents who made similarly morally gray choices. Whether the acts such as water-boarding and walling should be considered torture or not is beside the point. Let's allow the proposition that it is torture: was it justifiable? The radical anti-bushies would say no. Some of those same ones will praise other presidents who made even tougher decisions. Let's take a look at some comparisons. I'm not saying these decisions are necessarily wrong, they're just rhetorical questions.
- If water-boarding and sleep deprivation are war crimes, what is dropping an atomic bomb on thousands of innocent civilians?
- Bush holding terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay has been called a war crime by some. Go to your google box and type in Japanese Americans, "war relocation camps".
- Bush was berated for denying habeas corpus rights to the detainees by some of the same people who praise Abraham Lincoln, who suspended habeas corpus to American citizens during the Civil War. Democrats love to praise Woodrow Wilson, who signed the Espionage Act, which made it illegal for Americans to use critical language about the government.
- Finally we can't forget all those who clamored for a third Bill Clinton term, the same Bill Clinton who backed the NATO bombing of Serbia, which killed hundreds of innocent civilians. His defense was that the bombing helped prevent a bloodier offensive, the same type of argument used over and over again by presidents.
It's not enough to say each situation is unique, and one is situation is more morally demanding than the other. There are just some complex questions that go along with these issues? Did dropping the atomic bomb save thousands of other lives down the road? Did water-boarding these suspects help prevent violent acts against Americans akin to 9/11? We may never know the true answer, but maybe President Obama understands it's not always a black and white thing. Sometimes you have to be morally gray.
Two years down
I just completed by second year of college, which flew by even more quickly than the first. I'm more than grateful for the three new people that came into my life over the course of the year. I still like the college very much, despite some housekeeping flaws and asinine policies. The people, students and most of the professors are great. I would like to see more people from this part of the state go to the school.
It's not always black and white:
I just completed the spring semester at college. In my intro to the law class, I was asked to write a three page response to an article regarding the issue of American "torture" of prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay and how President Obama has handled the issue. The author took a shot at Obama for side-swapping the issue and not pressing for prosecutions, even though he campaigned strongly on shutting the facility down, which he has indeed signed an executive order for. But maybe President Obama realized that campaigning is easier than executing, and that situations are often complicated ones. I never really warmed up to President Bush, but I always resented him being called a war criminal by people who praise other presidents who made similarly morally gray choices. Whether the acts such as water-boarding and walling should be considered torture or not is beside the point. Let's allow the proposition that it is torture: was it justifiable? The radical anti-bushies would say no. Some of those same ones will praise other presidents who made even tougher decisions. Let's take a look at some comparisons. I'm not saying these decisions are necessarily wrong, they're just rhetorical questions.
- If water-boarding and sleep deprivation are war crimes, what is dropping an atomic bomb on thousands of innocent civilians?
- Bush holding terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay has been called a war crime by some. Go to your google box and type in Japanese Americans, "war relocation camps".
- Bush was berated for denying habeas corpus rights to the detainees by some of the same people who praise Abraham Lincoln, who suspended habeas corpus to American citizens during the Civil War. Democrats love to praise Woodrow Wilson, who signed the Espionage Act, which made it illegal for Americans to use critical language about the government.
- Finally we can't forget all those who clamored for a third Bill Clinton term, the same Bill Clinton who backed the NATO bombing of Serbia, which killed hundreds of innocent civilians. His defense was that the bombing helped prevent a bloodier offensive, the same type of argument used over and over again by presidents.
It's not enough to say each situation is unique, and one is situation is more morally demanding than the other. There are just some complex questions that go along with these issues? Did dropping the atomic bomb save thousands of other lives down the road? Did water-boarding these suspects help prevent violent acts against Americans akin to 9/11? We may never know the true answer, but maybe President Obama understands it's not always a black and white thing. Sometimes you have to be morally gray.
Two years down
I just completed by second year of college, which flew by even more quickly than the first. I'm more than grateful for the three new people that came into my life over the course of the year. I still like the college very much, despite some housekeeping flaws and asinine policies. The people, students and most of the professors are great. I would like to see more people from this part of the state go to the school.
Monday, April 20, 2009
The world lost a great man yesterday
I was heartbroken today to learn that former Johnson County football coach Bill Bonds succombed to his 10-year battle with cancer last night at the age of 49. It's often cliche to say this, but I honestly don't think you would find a finer gentleman than Coach Bonds. He never gave up and continued parting his lessons on the athletes he coached until his last breath. And for all those thousands of athletes, those lessons will stay with them. I never really had the chance to speak much with Coach Bonds. My contact with him was limited to taking messages on the phone from him while working at the Courier Herald in the sports department. But actions speak louder than words, and Coach Bonds lived life to the fullest with an unshakable faith in Jesus Christ. You didn't have to know him well to be impacted by him. Anyone that was ever around him has a story they were touched by. My heart hurts for his wife and children as well as the Johnson County and ECI communities. It's people like Coach Bonds that remind us that even when life throws you obstacles, you have to keep living it. Because you only get one shot. And it's ultimately up to you to how you will be remembered. Coach Bonds will be remembered as a man who cared and loved. And he was certainly loved by many as well.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
The first score
As I prepare to celebrate 20 years of existence, I have some thoughts to share. As I've gotten older, I've wondered more and more what my purpose in life is and what I'm meant to do. Still, with plenty of growing up to do, I don't have a definite answer, but I think I'm heading in the right direction. One of my big passions is sports, whether playing them or watching. Sports to me, are capable of bringing people from all different backgrounds together in a way that I don't think anything else can. My other big passion is writing, so it's probably not a big surprise that the career I am seeking is a sports writer, perhaps even earning national recognition one day. The numerous compliments from teachers and people about my writing have only inspired me to continue to improve on my skills.
I am blessed to have a solid support system behind me from my family, a few teachers and adults that are close to me, my close circle of friends from Dublin and my three close friends from college, two of whom I have met this year. These people know who they are.
I am blessed to have a solid support system behind me from my family, a few teachers and adults that are close to me, my close circle of friends from Dublin and my three close friends from college, two of whom I have met this year. These people know who they are.
Red Skelton once said "we were put here to build and not destroy." So my goal in life is to help people and try my best to do my part in making the world a better place. I've seen some good and some bad, but mostly good. I'm not naive enough to think we can ever bring a complete end to injustice and violence, but as President Kennedy once said, it doesn't hurt to work towards that goal, stopping it wherever we can. To paraphrase the character Hiro Nakamura from one of my favorite television shows, Heroes, certain things are in God's hands. But for everything else, God has given us the gift of choice. Every hand we extend should be in kindness, and every blow we strike should be for justice.
So as I continue to go through changes and live life, here's to the next 20 years.
So as I continue to go through changes and live life, here's to the next 20 years.
Peace,
Scotty
Scotty
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
More Thoughts and Musings
* I can't understand for the life of me why Alex Rodriguez, a professional athlete, would inject himself with a substance some 36 times over the course of three years and not once think about what the product might do to him or if it was even legal.
* Many Atlanta fans were frustrated that the Braves were not able to land Ken Griffey Jr.. Quite a few felt like Griffey slighted the Braves. But there are many forces at work here. For starters, he is not the same Griffey he was three and four years ago when he returned from his first string of injuries. Looking back, it's a real shame injuries kept him from being the home run king. At best, Bobby Cox was looking at platooning Griffey with Matt Diaz in left field. And likely it would not have had a good ending. After being traded to the White Sox last year, Griffey went down with an injury. And though he may have liked the idea of playing in Atlanta for Bobby Cox and being only an hour through plane away from his kids, a return to Seattle probably is better for him - especially with the DH. For those who think the Braves were slighted by Griffey, maybe the blame should lay partly on Frank Wren. There seems to be many excuses for the Jake Peavy, AJ Burnett and Rafael Furcal situations, not to mention John Smoltz. Maybe it's Wren that isn't up to closing deals. However, let's give him credit for Derek Lowe. Instead the Braves landed Garret Anderson, who was one of the best hitters in the game a couple years ago. He'll be an upgrade, but I'm not sure if it'll be enough. The Braves needed a power-hitting left fielder to bat clean up. Anderson isn't going to give you all those, but if he stays healthy, he'll make plenty of contributions.
* Count me in for the people who want to see Slumdog Millionaire, which won eight oscars, including best picture.
* Speaking of the Oscars, what would we do without our buddy Sean Penn? For those of you that need a refresher, Penn is a great actor (seriously) that has beaten his ex-wife and hung out with dictators like Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein. In addition he makes it a point to lecture Americans on human rights. What a guy! Penn won the best actor role for his portrayal of Harvey Milk, the openly gay San Francisco city advisor back in the 70's who was assassinated. Let's take a look at Jesus - uh - Penn's acceptance speech with a little intersecting dialogue from yours truly.
Sean Penn: You commie, homo-loving sons-of-guns.
Scotty Thompson: You wife-beating fascist.
Sean Penn: I did not expect this, and I want to make it clear that I do know how hard I make it to appeciate me often.
Scotty Thompson: Aw shucks.
Sean Penn: But I am touched by the appreciation. I did scribble in the names in case you were commie, homo-loving sons-of-guns.
Scotty Thompson: You know me, Sean. Che, Che, what do you say?
Sean Penn: I think it's a good time for those who voted against the ban for gay marriage to sit and reflect and anticipate their great shame and the shame in their grandchildren's eyes if they continue that wave of support. We've got to have equal rights for everyone.
Scotty Thompson: I'm not opposed to gay marriage, but come on Sean. Some people of good conscience have a moral opposition to it. Doesn't make them any worse of a person than you.
Sean Penn: I'm very very proud to live in a country that is willing to elect an elegant man president.
Scotty Thompson: So if I didn't vote for Obama, I must be anti-gay? And being elegant makes him a good president?
* GCSU's homecoming concert featured Shop Boyz and Cartel. Shop Boyz, a rap group was high from the beginning of the show, and contributed nothing substantial. Cartel, a rock band, had good guitarists, a good drummer and a lead singer with a girly, whiny voice. Not much different from the average pop-punk/rock band out there today. But he was a very funny guy. Two of the memorable quotes from him: "Hurray for Pneumonia!" and "How many of you are here with another girl?" The girls my roommate and I were with did meet them downtown later that night, and they seemed like nice people. I think the college could make plenty of money if it had more concerts like that throughout the year. As a side note, the only casualty of the night was my glasses, which were bent by a girl crowd surfer, who landed on top of my head.
* Many Atlanta fans were frustrated that the Braves were not able to land Ken Griffey Jr.. Quite a few felt like Griffey slighted the Braves. But there are many forces at work here. For starters, he is not the same Griffey he was three and four years ago when he returned from his first string of injuries. Looking back, it's a real shame injuries kept him from being the home run king. At best, Bobby Cox was looking at platooning Griffey with Matt Diaz in left field. And likely it would not have had a good ending. After being traded to the White Sox last year, Griffey went down with an injury. And though he may have liked the idea of playing in Atlanta for Bobby Cox and being only an hour through plane away from his kids, a return to Seattle probably is better for him - especially with the DH. For those who think the Braves were slighted by Griffey, maybe the blame should lay partly on Frank Wren. There seems to be many excuses for the Jake Peavy, AJ Burnett and Rafael Furcal situations, not to mention John Smoltz. Maybe it's Wren that isn't up to closing deals. However, let's give him credit for Derek Lowe. Instead the Braves landed Garret Anderson, who was one of the best hitters in the game a couple years ago. He'll be an upgrade, but I'm not sure if it'll be enough. The Braves needed a power-hitting left fielder to bat clean up. Anderson isn't going to give you all those, but if he stays healthy, he'll make plenty of contributions.
* Count me in for the people who want to see Slumdog Millionaire, which won eight oscars, including best picture.
* Speaking of the Oscars, what would we do without our buddy Sean Penn? For those of you that need a refresher, Penn is a great actor (seriously) that has beaten his ex-wife and hung out with dictators like Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein. In addition he makes it a point to lecture Americans on human rights. What a guy! Penn won the best actor role for his portrayal of Harvey Milk, the openly gay San Francisco city advisor back in the 70's who was assassinated. Let's take a look at Jesus - uh - Penn's acceptance speech with a little intersecting dialogue from yours truly.
Sean Penn: You commie, homo-loving sons-of-guns.
Scotty Thompson: You wife-beating fascist.
Sean Penn: I did not expect this, and I want to make it clear that I do know how hard I make it to appeciate me often.
Scotty Thompson: Aw shucks.
Sean Penn: But I am touched by the appreciation. I did scribble in the names in case you were commie, homo-loving sons-of-guns.
Scotty Thompson: You know me, Sean. Che, Che, what do you say?
Sean Penn: I think it's a good time for those who voted against the ban for gay marriage to sit and reflect and anticipate their great shame and the shame in their grandchildren's eyes if they continue that wave of support. We've got to have equal rights for everyone.
Scotty Thompson: I'm not opposed to gay marriage, but come on Sean. Some people of good conscience have a moral opposition to it. Doesn't make them any worse of a person than you.
Sean Penn: I'm very very proud to live in a country that is willing to elect an elegant man president.
Scotty Thompson: So if I didn't vote for Obama, I must be anti-gay? And being elegant makes him a good president?
* GCSU's homecoming concert featured Shop Boyz and Cartel. Shop Boyz, a rap group was high from the beginning of the show, and contributed nothing substantial. Cartel, a rock band, had good guitarists, a good drummer and a lead singer with a girly, whiny voice. Not much different from the average pop-punk/rock band out there today. But he was a very funny guy. Two of the memorable quotes from him: "Hurray for Pneumonia!" and "How many of you are here with another girl?" The girls my roommate and I were with did meet them downtown later that night, and they seemed like nice people. I think the college could make plenty of money if it had more concerts like that throughout the year. As a side note, the only casualty of the night was my glasses, which were bent by a girl crowd surfer, who landed on top of my head.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Random Thoughts
* Surely I'm not the only Georgia College student or faculty member that has some concerns over the fact that our university's president was offered extra bonuses to stay when we are already in a tough financial situation. Classroom sizes are increasing, there are still some technology upgrades needed, and there are hiring freezes in some departments. This just proves my point that Georgia College is really preparing us for all the stupid BS out there in the world.
* The fact that Coldplay's "Viva La Vida or Death and All His Friends" didn't win Best Album at the Grammys is a travesty. Especially when you consider that the award went to "Raising Sand", a mediocre country/almost bluegrass album by Led Zeppelin frontman Robert Plant and Alison Krauss. But that's typically how it goes. The choice was the politically correct one. Refer to last year when Herbie Hancock won for his jazz album. There are however two sides to the sword. If we simply relied on the voters to pay attention to the public, the Jonas Brothers - who coincidentally and quite sadly would be improved by the addition of Britney Spears - and other suspect groups would be racking up.
* The Alex Rodriguez news is very disturbing and puts yet another taint on the game. A-Rod may have been the last shot to wipe Barry Bonds off the top of the home run list.
* Most rational people are opposed to the current stimulus bill because it is way too much wasteful spending and doesn't even come close to focusing on enough job creation. What's incredible is that Nancy Pelosi and some of her far-left pals aren't satisfied with the bill either. They want more spending.
* President Obama continues to preach about making Washington a post-partisan place. So why on God's green earth did he let the most partisan democrats write this bill?
*President Obama stated that not doing anything is not an option. Maybe not, but he still wonders who thought it'd be a bad idea for the government to play the main role in attempting to "stimulate" an economy. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin for starters.
* Quote of the day: "I think there ought to be a government booklet entitled 'Where to Stick It'. Now that I think of it, there is a government booklet like that. They send it to you on April 15th." - George Carlin
* Michael Phelps is catching quite a lot of flack for his bong and drinking incident, even though he is merely 23. Everybody talks about the role model he is supposed to be. Which is absolutely true. But so is the President, and our current one was hitting up weed and cocaine when he was Phelps' age, and that's ok? Also, the two presidents before him got into some illegal drugs as well.
* People who call Fox News a right-wing network in a country with a left-leaning president should ask themselves if that's the case, why is Fox continuing to dominate the ratings?
* Remember Jerimiah Wright's "chickens coming home to roost"? An earlier use of that expression came from Malcom X. He was referring to the Kennedy Assassination.
* The fact that Coldplay's "Viva La Vida or Death and All His Friends" didn't win Best Album at the Grammys is a travesty. Especially when you consider that the award went to "Raising Sand", a mediocre country/almost bluegrass album by Led Zeppelin frontman Robert Plant and Alison Krauss. But that's typically how it goes. The choice was the politically correct one. Refer to last year when Herbie Hancock won for his jazz album. There are however two sides to the sword. If we simply relied on the voters to pay attention to the public, the Jonas Brothers - who coincidentally and quite sadly would be improved by the addition of Britney Spears - and other suspect groups would be racking up.
* The Alex Rodriguez news is very disturbing and puts yet another taint on the game. A-Rod may have been the last shot to wipe Barry Bonds off the top of the home run list.
* Most rational people are opposed to the current stimulus bill because it is way too much wasteful spending and doesn't even come close to focusing on enough job creation. What's incredible is that Nancy Pelosi and some of her far-left pals aren't satisfied with the bill either. They want more spending.
* President Obama continues to preach about making Washington a post-partisan place. So why on God's green earth did he let the most partisan democrats write this bill?
*President Obama stated that not doing anything is not an option. Maybe not, but he still wonders who thought it'd be a bad idea for the government to play the main role in attempting to "stimulate" an economy. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin for starters.
* Quote of the day: "I think there ought to be a government booklet entitled 'Where to Stick It'. Now that I think of it, there is a government booklet like that. They send it to you on April 15th." - George Carlin
* Michael Phelps is catching quite a lot of flack for his bong and drinking incident, even though he is merely 23. Everybody talks about the role model he is supposed to be. Which is absolutely true. But so is the President, and our current one was hitting up weed and cocaine when he was Phelps' age, and that's ok? Also, the two presidents before him got into some illegal drugs as well.
* People who call Fox News a right-wing network in a country with a left-leaning president should ask themselves if that's the case, why is Fox continuing to dominate the ratings?
* Remember Jerimiah Wright's "chickens coming home to roost"? An earlier use of that expression came from Malcom X. He was referring to the Kennedy Assassination.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
The Great BS
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results"
- Albert Einstein
That's the only way I can characterize President Obama and Congress's plan to stimulate the economy by spending yet another 800-plus billion dollars when we're already in such a deep hole. So let's look at a few things in this latest 647-page insult to the American people.
1. $1 billion for Amtrack because yea, that works, right? Right?
2. $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts? I'm all for preserving art, but really? I guess the Smithsonian's huge money goes in with this too.
3. $40 million for global warming research. Damn, I thought that was settled.
4. $2.4 billion for carbon capture demonstration projects, whatever the hell that is.
5. $650 million for digital TV conversion coupons? ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FREAKING MINDS!?!
6. $4.9 billion to everyone's favorite voter fraud organization ACORN.
Which leads me to paraphrase political comedian Lewis Black, "We'd be better off if they just came to our door and pissed on our foot."
At what point do we say hell no? President Obama, God bless his soul, picked a guy who didn't pay his taxes at one time to head up the treasury. Oliver Stone couldn't come up with that. But what's worse is that Geithner used to lobby, and what's President Obama's big rule? No lobbyists in the administration. And twice now, he's broken his own rule.
But let's get back to this stimlus crap. President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Sen. Reid, etc. have talked about the urgency to pass this bill quickly, not leaving much time to read it all and dissect it. Let's go to the quote vault again.
"Anytime you pass something that rapidly, you're bound to have mistakes."
- Barack Obama
Obama was talking about the PATRIOT Act being passed too rapidly, and he had a point. But suddenly, that concept doesn't apply anymore.
And finally, let's look at the petition to silence Rush Limbaugh. Silencing the opposition. Sound familiar to some other places?
Again, I didn't want to be so hard on Obama so soon, but he's hit the ground running, and he's making himself look like an idiot, well to me at least.
- Albert Einstein
That's the only way I can characterize President Obama and Congress's plan to stimulate the economy by spending yet another 800-plus billion dollars when we're already in such a deep hole. So let's look at a few things in this latest 647-page insult to the American people.
1. $1 billion for Amtrack because yea, that works, right? Right?
2. $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts? I'm all for preserving art, but really? I guess the Smithsonian's huge money goes in with this too.
3. $40 million for global warming research. Damn, I thought that was settled.
4. $2.4 billion for carbon capture demonstration projects, whatever the hell that is.
5. $650 million for digital TV conversion coupons? ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR FREAKING MINDS!?!
6. $4.9 billion to everyone's favorite voter fraud organization ACORN.
Which leads me to paraphrase political comedian Lewis Black, "We'd be better off if they just came to our door and pissed on our foot."
At what point do we say hell no? President Obama, God bless his soul, picked a guy who didn't pay his taxes at one time to head up the treasury. Oliver Stone couldn't come up with that. But what's worse is that Geithner used to lobby, and what's President Obama's big rule? No lobbyists in the administration. And twice now, he's broken his own rule.
But let's get back to this stimlus crap. President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Sen. Reid, etc. have talked about the urgency to pass this bill quickly, not leaving much time to read it all and dissect it. Let's go to the quote vault again.
"Anytime you pass something that rapidly, you're bound to have mistakes."
- Barack Obama
Obama was talking about the PATRIOT Act being passed too rapidly, and he had a point. But suddenly, that concept doesn't apply anymore.
And finally, let's look at the petition to silence Rush Limbaugh. Silencing the opposition. Sound familiar to some other places?
Again, I didn't want to be so hard on Obama so soon, but he's hit the ground running, and he's making himself look like an idiot, well to me at least.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
A Uniter or Divider?
No, I'm not talking about George Bush. I'm talking about Barack Obama. We are about a week into the 44th president's administration, and I am far from impressed (surprised, surprised). I don't want to ramble on too much, but let's go down a quick list here. At times, I will directly address our chief executive.
1. He issued an executive order to close Guantanamo Bay. Okay, that's fine as long as there are certain conditions. And the main one is THAT YOU HAVE A PLACE TO TRANSFER THEM TO, IDIOT! You campaigned for almost two years and campaigned on the idea of closing the place down. So why in the HELL did you not have a backup place????
2. Obama, who is supposed to be the one to usher in a new era of bipartisanship in Washington said that Republicans "shouldn't be listening to Rush Limbaugh and expect to get anything done." He also told republican lawmakers "I won. I'm the President." Good ole bipartisanship there for you.
3. He wants to cure the economic crisis and the huge debt by SPENDING MORE MONEY!
4. He's supposed to have a transparent government with no lobbyists in his administration. And yet, he has a deputy defense secretary who has lobbied big time in the past. He didn't allow cameras to see him sign the executive order to give federal funding to international charities that provide abortion services. And he has grown irritated with reporters that ask him tough questions.
Hypocrite anyone? Arrogant ass? I know it's early, but it is certainly not hopeful, and there sure isn't much change, at least good change.
1. He issued an executive order to close Guantanamo Bay. Okay, that's fine as long as there are certain conditions. And the main one is THAT YOU HAVE A PLACE TO TRANSFER THEM TO, IDIOT! You campaigned for almost two years and campaigned on the idea of closing the place down. So why in the HELL did you not have a backup place????
2. Obama, who is supposed to be the one to usher in a new era of bipartisanship in Washington said that Republicans "shouldn't be listening to Rush Limbaugh and expect to get anything done." He also told republican lawmakers "I won. I'm the President." Good ole bipartisanship there for you.
3. He wants to cure the economic crisis and the huge debt by SPENDING MORE MONEY!
4. He's supposed to have a transparent government with no lobbyists in his administration. And yet, he has a deputy defense secretary who has lobbied big time in the past. He didn't allow cameras to see him sign the executive order to give federal funding to international charities that provide abortion services. And he has grown irritated with reporters that ask him tough questions.
Hypocrite anyone? Arrogant ass? I know it's early, but it is certainly not hopeful, and there sure isn't much change, at least good change.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Exit Bush, Enter Obama
I was amused at how many people watched President Bush's farewell address Thursday night and then turned around and said something to the effect of "there's the Bush I voted for" or "there's the Bush that was missing." In reality, he wasn't that much different from what he's been in the past. If at any time he was different, it was in his final press conference, where he aggressively defended his decisions, specifically in regards to his terrorism policies and Iraq policies. Perhaps the best, or at least most important thing Bush said the other night was in regards to the years following the September 11 terrorist attacks:
"As the years passed, most Americans were able to return to life much as it had been before 9/11. But I never did. Every morning, I received a briefing on the threats to our nation. I vowed to do everything in my power to keep us safe."
I believe him, and for that, I think we can all be thankful, for that may have been the best accomplishment of his presidency. It's no question that the Bush presidency has left several less-than-desirable things: massive deficits, energy problems, education problems, unresolved immigration problems (a practical endorsement of amnesty for illegals), support for McCain-Feingold (throwing the first amendment out the window), etc. But Iraq will likely be the issue Bush is remembered by. And anyone who thinks they completely know whether or not that war was the right decision is delusional to put it lightly. (For the record, count me in with the less than thrilled crowd, but not the narcissistic "blood for oil" people).
History will judge George W. Bush. Abraham Lincoln was a rather unpopular president, and Harry S. Truman was widely unpopular as he left office. And yet as we now look back on history, those two men show up in virtually every "top 10 presidents of all time" lists. I'll leave Bush with this summation. He was a decent man, lacking in some critical leadership areas to be a truly effective president. He didn't always surround himself with the best people. I believe he had a set of principles and at least tried to follow them. He received very harsh treatment from the media and the opposing party, some of which he deserved, some of which he didn't.
On Tuesday, Barack Obama takes over. The general idea from CNN I got this morning was that we should all be excited. As a friend commented to me, if anything else, it's history. I'm usually pretty careful to be "excited" by politicians. As a matter of fact, none have ever excited me. And I can't forget that I strongly disagree with several of the ideas which President Obama campaigned on. On the other hand, I've watched him tack closer to the political center in the last two months in the decisions and statements he has made. That could make me feel even more comfortable with him, but I'm not one to get complacent either. I know two things will certainly happen. Apologies will be made for any shortcomings in at least his first year or two (aka: Bush will be anointed the scapegoat), and there will be a double standard in how he isn't criticized for putting on such a ridiculously expensive inauguration in bad economic times (well more expensive than Bush's even though Bush was thoroughly grilled).
But putting policies aside for the moment, Obama has great potential. I agree that this can indeed convey a positive message for Black Americans, and particularly black youth. But let's not kid ourselves. Too many people voted for Barack Obama solely because he was black, and too many people voted against him because he was black. "How much is too many," you might ask. The answer is at least one. Because voting for someone with a disregard for principles and ideas and solely on skin color is not just a waste of a vote, but a thorough rejection of what Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights movement stood for. With that in mind, we can't ignore the progress that has been made. I'm not merely talking about electing a black president for the first time. I'm talking about the millions of people who made a conscience decision of whether or not to vote for him, regardless of what he looked like. In that sense, Dr. King would be, and we can all be, proud.
I do indeed hope that Obama becomes one of our great presidents. But for now, we can only hope and support him.
"As the years passed, most Americans were able to return to life much as it had been before 9/11. But I never did. Every morning, I received a briefing on the threats to our nation. I vowed to do everything in my power to keep us safe."
I believe him, and for that, I think we can all be thankful, for that may have been the best accomplishment of his presidency. It's no question that the Bush presidency has left several less-than-desirable things: massive deficits, energy problems, education problems, unresolved immigration problems (a practical endorsement of amnesty for illegals), support for McCain-Feingold (throwing the first amendment out the window), etc. But Iraq will likely be the issue Bush is remembered by. And anyone who thinks they completely know whether or not that war was the right decision is delusional to put it lightly. (For the record, count me in with the less than thrilled crowd, but not the narcissistic "blood for oil" people).
History will judge George W. Bush. Abraham Lincoln was a rather unpopular president, and Harry S. Truman was widely unpopular as he left office. And yet as we now look back on history, those two men show up in virtually every "top 10 presidents of all time" lists. I'll leave Bush with this summation. He was a decent man, lacking in some critical leadership areas to be a truly effective president. He didn't always surround himself with the best people. I believe he had a set of principles and at least tried to follow them. He received very harsh treatment from the media and the opposing party, some of which he deserved, some of which he didn't.
On Tuesday, Barack Obama takes over. The general idea from CNN I got this morning was that we should all be excited. As a friend commented to me, if anything else, it's history. I'm usually pretty careful to be "excited" by politicians. As a matter of fact, none have ever excited me. And I can't forget that I strongly disagree with several of the ideas which President Obama campaigned on. On the other hand, I've watched him tack closer to the political center in the last two months in the decisions and statements he has made. That could make me feel even more comfortable with him, but I'm not one to get complacent either. I know two things will certainly happen. Apologies will be made for any shortcomings in at least his first year or two (aka: Bush will be anointed the scapegoat), and there will be a double standard in how he isn't criticized for putting on such a ridiculously expensive inauguration in bad economic times (well more expensive than Bush's even though Bush was thoroughly grilled).
But putting policies aside for the moment, Obama has great potential. I agree that this can indeed convey a positive message for Black Americans, and particularly black youth. But let's not kid ourselves. Too many people voted for Barack Obama solely because he was black, and too many people voted against him because he was black. "How much is too many," you might ask. The answer is at least one. Because voting for someone with a disregard for principles and ideas and solely on skin color is not just a waste of a vote, but a thorough rejection of what Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights movement stood for. With that in mind, we can't ignore the progress that has been made. I'm not merely talking about electing a black president for the first time. I'm talking about the millions of people who made a conscience decision of whether or not to vote for him, regardless of what he looked like. In that sense, Dr. King would be, and we can all be, proud.
I do indeed hope that Obama becomes one of our great presidents. But for now, we can only hope and support him.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Smoltz to Boston
I was merely disappointed that Stafford and Moreno left, but this is devastating. I hated it when Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine left, but this is the first time probably since the 1996 world series that I've been heartbroken. Smoltz has always been my favorite Brave, and I have to admit that the Front Office takes the blame for this. If it was just any 42 year old pitcher coming off a third or fourth surgery, and he wouldn't be ready until the end of May, I could understand letting him walk. But this is John Smoltz! He's an Atlanta sports icon, and he, along with Chipper Jones has been the face of the franchise. Smoltz is the only one that has been with the Braves from the start of the run in 1991, and if Tom Glavine doesn't return, all of the 1991 Braves will be gone. Apparently Smoltz was guaranteed two million with a few more in incentives. Boston offered a guaranteed five million, and he took it. How could Frank Wren let anyone top our offer?
The only way this would have made sense is if Atlanta had spent up all its money in making the team a World Series contender and simply couldn't shell out the money to Smoltz. But they have at least 30 million sitting on the shelf, so it's inexcusable. You can't use the rebuilding ploy because you came out and said you were going to spend money and make the team competitive. If you were going to rebuild, why try and trade young guys for Jake Peavy? Why offer AJ Burnett and Rafael Furcal contracts? Why offer Mike Hampton more than Smoltz? Smoltz isn't the difference between 70 wins and a division championship, but he wouldn't impede the rebuilding progress. As a matter of fact, he could still mentor the pitchers like Jurjjens, Morton, Hanson, etc.
I think not making the moves to make the Braves better probably made the decision easier for Smoltz, who undoubtedly wants another shot at a championship that he wasn't going to get here with the roster as is. But to lowball a guy who has sacrificed for and poured his heart and soul into an organization for 21 years is pathetic. Wren probably is too stupid to realize that this will make a significant, negative impact on PR and attendance. Fans still pack the Ted, just to watch Smoltzie pitch.
Add Frank Wren to the **** list.
The only way this would have made sense is if Atlanta had spent up all its money in making the team a World Series contender and simply couldn't shell out the money to Smoltz. But they have at least 30 million sitting on the shelf, so it's inexcusable. You can't use the rebuilding ploy because you came out and said you were going to spend money and make the team competitive. If you were going to rebuild, why try and trade young guys for Jake Peavy? Why offer AJ Burnett and Rafael Furcal contracts? Why offer Mike Hampton more than Smoltz? Smoltz isn't the difference between 70 wins and a division championship, but he wouldn't impede the rebuilding progress. As a matter of fact, he could still mentor the pitchers like Jurjjens, Morton, Hanson, etc.
I think not making the moves to make the Braves better probably made the decision easier for Smoltz, who undoubtedly wants another shot at a championship that he wasn't going to get here with the roster as is. But to lowball a guy who has sacrificed for and poured his heart and soul into an organization for 21 years is pathetic. Wren probably is too stupid to realize that this will make a significant, negative impact on PR and attendance. Fans still pack the Ted, just to watch Smoltzie pitch.
Add Frank Wren to the **** list.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
The Future of Georgia Football
I won't spend too much time dissecting the Stafford and Moreno decisions. But I'll break it down like this. I certainly would have liked for them both to have stayed. If I had been advising them, I would have told Moreno to go ahead, but for Stafford to stay put another year. I won't speculate what I would have done if I was them, since I'm not, but I must admit if I had the chance to go in the NFL and make millions, I'd probably take it. I could always come back and finish college 10-15 years down the road. I will say this about Stafford. Listening to him in the press conference, I didn't get the vibe that he is mentally ready for the NFL. (Not Moreno either for that matter) But at least Moreno stands to go to a pretty good team. The highest I saw him possibly going was 12th overall to Denver, and that's a playoff potential team. Some other potential suitors (Chicago, New York Jets, New Orleans, New England) are close to being playoff teams. Stafford will probably wind up in one of four places: Detroit, St. Louis, Kansas City, San Francisco. But let's assume these experts are right, and the Lions do take him first overall. He will step into the league's worst franchise in a city with the bleakest of bleak economic outlooks. And he will be expected by many Lions fans to be the savior. Is he ready to take that on? God help him. But that being said, what's done is done. I wish them nothing but the best in their NFL careers.
Now in regards to the future of Georgia, I certainly don't believe it is one of despair. Regardless of the officious prick Jim Rome's opinion, Georgia has more than a chance to have a very successful 2009 campaign and success even further down the road. Joe Cox, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you...uh, the Bulldog nation anyway. I'm comfortable with Mark Richt and Mike Bobo's full endorsement of Cox as a perfectly capable QB, and I think in many ways, he could be more successful than Stafford. Many are likening the situation to DJ Shockley in 2005, when in his one and only chance to lead the Bulldogs, he helped bring in an SEC championship. Cox certainly doesn't have Stafford's arm strength, and he's not going to be the sexy first round draft pick. But I'm thinking he'll probably be much more than merely serviceable. Cox does throw a more accurate deep ball, and he will probably make much better decisions than Stafford did.
Also to keep in mind is that the Bulldogs will have a veteran and seasoned offensive line coming back, all of it to be exact, that will protect Cox. This includes their best lineman Trinton Sturdivant, who missed all of 2008 with a knee injury. And I would say that an offensive line like the prospective one for 2009 certainly would have helped Stafford out much more. Cox will have a multitude of good receivers to throw to, the biggest target being AJ Green. But remember that Mike Moore looked really impressive this year, and Kris Durham, Tavarres King and Israel Troupe should all contribute as well. That's not to mention a couple of recruits coming in that could see time. Cox should be fine. He knows the system, and he should manage it well. He's led the Bulldogs to victory before. (Colorado 2006) I could even see Georgia mixing Logan Gray in similar to the way that Florida mixed Tim Tebow in in 2006, and LSU Ryan Perriloux in 2007. And keep in mind incoming freshman Aaron Murray, who I think we'll see in 2010, and who I think we'll be a stud.
Perhaps the biggest area of concern is the running back position. Who will step up in Moreno's place? There's talk about moving Richard Samuel to linebacker, but who knows? I would expect Caleb King will have a chip on his shoulder during the off season, but he definitely has the ability. Dontavious Jackson and Carlton Thomas, both of whom were red shirted, have the talent, and Washaun Ealey could make an impact. It may be a running back by committee thing, until one of them steps up as the guy.
Georgia's defense stands to improve for next season. With all of the defensive tackles, except Corey Irvin returning, the Bulldogs will have plenty of depth. Geno Atkins is back, along with Jeff Owens, who will be returning from a season ending injury. Rennie Curran, Daryl Gamble and Akeem Dent will all be back at linebacker, even though the Dogs are losing Dannell Ellerbe. Let's just hope that players like Darius Dewberry, Akeem Hebron and Marcus Dowtin can step up and be reliable backups. The secondary should be improved, providing Reshad Jones can become more disciplined at safety. Look for incoming freshman Branden Smith to make an immediate impact. The biggest concern on defense will probably be at defensive end. Who will step up at that position? Demarcus Dobbs? Justin Houston? Maybe incoming Toby Jackson?
As for special teams, I would hope that Blair Walsh can get his kickoffs under control, and I think Georgia will be fine.
The team could benefit from a little more favorable schedule. Starting at Stillwater will be tough, but the Dogs also get Arizona State at home and LSU at home, even though the Tigers could creep back up to prominence next season. Biggest of all is that Georgia gets a bye week before Florida. Can't complain there. There are of course the tough ones, like the trip to Knoxville, but I'm still more comfortable with the 2009 schedule than the 2008 one. And finally with Stafford and Moreno now gone, the media's expectations for Georgia will drop. So almost certainly no pre-season number one ranking, maybe not even top 10. And the Bulldogs have done much better when they were lying under the radar. Don't set your sites too high that Georgia may win a championship next year, but absolutely don't write it off as a rebuilding project.
Just remember the striking similarities between 2005 and 2009. After a disappointing 2004 in which the Bulldogs failed to meet their high expectations, they lost David Greene, David Pollack, Fred Gibson, Reggie Brown, Odell Thurman and Thomas Davis among others. The jury was still out on DJ Shockley, and yet the Bulldogs won the SEC.
Now in regards to the future of Georgia, I certainly don't believe it is one of despair. Regardless of the officious prick Jim Rome's opinion, Georgia has more than a chance to have a very successful 2009 campaign and success even further down the road. Joe Cox, a nation turns its lonely eyes to you...uh, the Bulldog nation anyway. I'm comfortable with Mark Richt and Mike Bobo's full endorsement of Cox as a perfectly capable QB, and I think in many ways, he could be more successful than Stafford. Many are likening the situation to DJ Shockley in 2005, when in his one and only chance to lead the Bulldogs, he helped bring in an SEC championship. Cox certainly doesn't have Stafford's arm strength, and he's not going to be the sexy first round draft pick. But I'm thinking he'll probably be much more than merely serviceable. Cox does throw a more accurate deep ball, and he will probably make much better decisions than Stafford did.
Also to keep in mind is that the Bulldogs will have a veteran and seasoned offensive line coming back, all of it to be exact, that will protect Cox. This includes their best lineman Trinton Sturdivant, who missed all of 2008 with a knee injury. And I would say that an offensive line like the prospective one for 2009 certainly would have helped Stafford out much more. Cox will have a multitude of good receivers to throw to, the biggest target being AJ Green. But remember that Mike Moore looked really impressive this year, and Kris Durham, Tavarres King and Israel Troupe should all contribute as well. That's not to mention a couple of recruits coming in that could see time. Cox should be fine. He knows the system, and he should manage it well. He's led the Bulldogs to victory before. (Colorado 2006) I could even see Georgia mixing Logan Gray in similar to the way that Florida mixed Tim Tebow in in 2006, and LSU Ryan Perriloux in 2007. And keep in mind incoming freshman Aaron Murray, who I think we'll see in 2010, and who I think we'll be a stud.
Perhaps the biggest area of concern is the running back position. Who will step up in Moreno's place? There's talk about moving Richard Samuel to linebacker, but who knows? I would expect Caleb King will have a chip on his shoulder during the off season, but he definitely has the ability. Dontavious Jackson and Carlton Thomas, both of whom were red shirted, have the talent, and Washaun Ealey could make an impact. It may be a running back by committee thing, until one of them steps up as the guy.
Georgia's defense stands to improve for next season. With all of the defensive tackles, except Corey Irvin returning, the Bulldogs will have plenty of depth. Geno Atkins is back, along with Jeff Owens, who will be returning from a season ending injury. Rennie Curran, Daryl Gamble and Akeem Dent will all be back at linebacker, even though the Dogs are losing Dannell Ellerbe. Let's just hope that players like Darius Dewberry, Akeem Hebron and Marcus Dowtin can step up and be reliable backups. The secondary should be improved, providing Reshad Jones can become more disciplined at safety. Look for incoming freshman Branden Smith to make an immediate impact. The biggest concern on defense will probably be at defensive end. Who will step up at that position? Demarcus Dobbs? Justin Houston? Maybe incoming Toby Jackson?
As for special teams, I would hope that Blair Walsh can get his kickoffs under control, and I think Georgia will be fine.
The team could benefit from a little more favorable schedule. Starting at Stillwater will be tough, but the Dogs also get Arizona State at home and LSU at home, even though the Tigers could creep back up to prominence next season. Biggest of all is that Georgia gets a bye week before Florida. Can't complain there. There are of course the tough ones, like the trip to Knoxville, but I'm still more comfortable with the 2009 schedule than the 2008 one. And finally with Stafford and Moreno now gone, the media's expectations for Georgia will drop. So almost certainly no pre-season number one ranking, maybe not even top 10. And the Bulldogs have done much better when they were lying under the radar. Don't set your sites too high that Georgia may win a championship next year, but absolutely don't write it off as a rebuilding project.
Just remember the striking similarities between 2005 and 2009. After a disappointing 2004 in which the Bulldogs failed to meet their high expectations, they lost David Greene, David Pollack, Fred Gibson, Reggie Brown, Odell Thurman and Thomas Davis among others. The jury was still out on DJ Shockley, and yet the Bulldogs won the SEC.
Monday, January 5, 2009
Some Notes on the Passing Sports Scene
* The Falcons turnaround season ended this past Saturday thanks to a fairly poor performance. But hey, give Arizona credit. One clear thing we should have learned, that some of us had already learned, is that Keith Brooking's best days are behind him. I don't know how in the hell a 10-year veteran could be that out of position on a 3rd and 16, but oh well. I took issue with Jeff Schultz of the AJC and his seemingly doom and gloom column after Saturday's game. Nope, the Falcons didn't play well at all, but did you really expect them to win the Super Bowl. I thought at best, they'd beat Arizona and then lose to the Panthers or Giants this week. Of course as typical with the Atlanta media, one person said the team might be Super Bowl bound, and they ran with it. Of course, this season could always turn out to be a fluke, and the Falcons could suffer through a couple more bad seasons following this one. Afterall, the franchise has yet to post back to back winning seasons. But with the personnel in place, I can't see them flopping. Matt Ryan should only get better, and his supporting cast of Turner, Norwood, White and Jenkins will add to the success. If the Falcons can address their biggest weakness (pass defense) in the offseason, expect them to field a competitive team in 2009.
* Matthew Stafford and Knowshon Moreno should be nearing their decisions in the next week, and then we should be able to guage the future of the Georgia Bulldogs. Obviously I would like them to stay, but I'd have to say both are probably gone. Assuming they do go, I still feel pretty well about the 2009 season. Georgia has yanked in another strong recruiting class, and their defense should be much better next year with injured players returning. Also, they'll have the entire offensive line back. The running back situation should be solid with Samuel, King, Jackson, Thomas and possibly Ealey looking to make the big impact. And I would welcome a healthy QB competition between Cox, Gray, Murray and Mettenburger, even though I think Cox will get the nod. Georgia could surprise some people in 2009 because their schedule is a little more favorable.
* Can all of us please now say that a playoff system is needed in college football? With Utah's victory over Alabama, the Utes are now staking their claim to the national title. Same goes with USC, who handled Penn State. And if Texas beats Ohio State like they should, they will make their claim as well, especially if Oklahoma beats Florida. I still don't think Utah belongs in the discussion, but out of Florida, Oklahoma, Texas and USC, it's impossible to pick a definitive best team out of those.
* I assume the Atlanta Braves haven't dropped off the face of the Earth and are still trying to improve their club for 2009. GM Frank Wren has made it clear that pitching is the first priority. I doubt the Jake Peavy talks start going again, so that leaves Ben Sheets and Derek Lowe as ace options. The left field position still needs to be addressed, and Adam Dunn might be worth the gamble. Or maybe even Jermaine Dye. And don't forget John Smoltz. Anyway with 40 million still left in the bank, Atlanta needs to get on the ball if they expect to contend this year. They could get their ace pitcher and power bat for left field without having to give up their prized prospects (Hanson, Heyward, Freeman, Rohrbrough). It's really a question of if they are up to it.
I'll have a bigger post on the Braves soon.
* Matthew Stafford and Knowshon Moreno should be nearing their decisions in the next week, and then we should be able to guage the future of the Georgia Bulldogs. Obviously I would like them to stay, but I'd have to say both are probably gone. Assuming they do go, I still feel pretty well about the 2009 season. Georgia has yanked in another strong recruiting class, and their defense should be much better next year with injured players returning. Also, they'll have the entire offensive line back. The running back situation should be solid with Samuel, King, Jackson, Thomas and possibly Ealey looking to make the big impact. And I would welcome a healthy QB competition between Cox, Gray, Murray and Mettenburger, even though I think Cox will get the nod. Georgia could surprise some people in 2009 because their schedule is a little more favorable.
* Can all of us please now say that a playoff system is needed in college football? With Utah's victory over Alabama, the Utes are now staking their claim to the national title. Same goes with USC, who handled Penn State. And if Texas beats Ohio State like they should, they will make their claim as well, especially if Oklahoma beats Florida. I still don't think Utah belongs in the discussion, but out of Florida, Oklahoma, Texas and USC, it's impossible to pick a definitive best team out of those.
* I assume the Atlanta Braves haven't dropped off the face of the Earth and are still trying to improve their club for 2009. GM Frank Wren has made it clear that pitching is the first priority. I doubt the Jake Peavy talks start going again, so that leaves Ben Sheets and Derek Lowe as ace options. The left field position still needs to be addressed, and Adam Dunn might be worth the gamble. Or maybe even Jermaine Dye. And don't forget John Smoltz. Anyway with 40 million still left in the bank, Atlanta needs to get on the ball if they expect to contend this year. They could get their ace pitcher and power bat for left field without having to give up their prized prospects (Hanson, Heyward, Freeman, Rohrbrough). It's really a question of if they are up to it.
I'll have a bigger post on the Braves soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
