"We will never see the likes of Nelson Mandela again." said President Obama at the funeral for the recently passed South African leader.
A great many things have been said about Nelson Mandela since his death. Understand that Mandela was an early advocate of Gandhian non violence in his opposition to apartheid in South Africa. When he saw those tactics led to more restrictions, and harsher actions against the black South Africans, he decided to embark on sabotage (rejecting terrorism, guerrilla warfare, and outright revolution). For this he was convicted of treason against South Africa, and sentenced to life in prison. That's the short story. Here's a little more detail.
Many say he was a communist, and that's the end of that. When he became President of South Africa in 1994, he did not seek to make South Africa a communist nation. He was, along with the African National Congress, linked to communist nations like Cuba, and the Soviet Union. Maybe he was, and changed. Maybe since the western democracies, like the United States, and Great Britain, called him a terrorist and did not support the cause to end apartheid, he sought support for his movement wherever he could find it. Revolutions it seems are not free in a practical sense. Communist? I don't know how dedicated he was to the movement.
Some are critical of things done by the African National Congress like "necklacing" (google it) and by the transitive property they reflect on him. Well, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington owned slaves while leading a movement that has in its founding document "...all men are created equal." Additionally, loyalists were not treated nicely in the War for Independence. Bad things happen in struggles for freedom. That's not an excuse, but it is what it is.
So while dignitaries exalt Mandela for his accomplishments at his funeral, and Obama tells us we'll never see another, I can tell you he's wrong, at least I hope he's wrong. As long as people are repressed, and denied freedom in places around the world, people like Nelson Mandela are needed. The next Mandela may be among the demonstrators in Egypt. They could be fighting in the Syrian civil war. The next one may be in a prison in China.
The next Mandela is likely on a no fly list, or on a watch list, or suspected terrorist list. The worlds' intelligence structure has terabytes of data on the next Mandela. Most of Mandela's life was watched by the spy networks of the world. He was labeled a terrorist by the white South African regime that put him in prison for having the audacity to fight for freedom. He was called a terrorist by the Reagan Administration, and the Thatcher government in England (to name only two). That's what revolutionary leaders are before the movement they lead becomes successful. They're the bad guy.
In the end they're the revered hero. A lifetime of courageous dedication to a single cause - freedom. That's what it takes. Courage to be a bad guy, and the outlaw. Because you see, what may be seem the obvious moral cause is seldom seen that way by those whose advantage is protected by the injustice. So hope for the next Nelson Mandela. The world needs them.
"Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did, and it never will. - Frederick Douglass
Wednesday, December 11, 2013
Friday, November 1, 2013
America's pastime
Really???
If you clicked the link you saw a story about a ND woman who decided it would be responsible on her part to pass out notes on Halloween to kids that are, in her judgement, "moderately obese." These notes called the kids who received them "moderately obese," admonished the parents regarding "consuming sugar and treats," and that she was "disappointed" in the village, and she was taking action since "it takes a village to raise a child."
Really???? Fat kids shouldn't eat too much candy? No shit!? Thanks for the wisdom. Do you really think the parents DON'T know their child has some extra chubb? Expecting parents to read these and say "Holy shit honey! Little Ashley got this note, and wouldn't you know it, she's 'moderately obese.' I had no idea. We're better people now! This is JUST THE THING that will get us to clear the pantry of unhealthy snacks, fatty lunch meats, and high fructose soft drinks. THANK GOD FOR THIS NOTE! IT DOES TAKE A VILLAGE TO RAISE A CHILD. God bless this woman!!!"
I must sheepishly admit that the woman is a liberal apparently. Citation of the "takes a village" tipped me off. And while it does take a village to raise a child, what that means is when you're being a little dickhead as a kid your parents will find out from parents in the neighborhood (village).
Everybody's got an opinion, and that's cool. This is America. And we've been told that's what's so great from the time we're kids is that we're free to express them. But seriously, with the advent of social media sharing your opinion, telling your friends how full of shit they really are, and how fat the kids are in the neighborhood has replaced baseball as the national pastime.
If you clicked the link you saw a story about a ND woman who decided it would be responsible on her part to pass out notes on Halloween to kids that are, in her judgement, "moderately obese." These notes called the kids who received them "moderately obese," admonished the parents regarding "consuming sugar and treats," and that she was "disappointed" in the village, and she was taking action since "it takes a village to raise a child."
Really???? Fat kids shouldn't eat too much candy? No shit!? Thanks for the wisdom. Do you really think the parents DON'T know their child has some extra chubb? Expecting parents to read these and say "Holy shit honey! Little Ashley got this note, and wouldn't you know it, she's 'moderately obese.' I had no idea. We're better people now! This is JUST THE THING that will get us to clear the pantry of unhealthy snacks, fatty lunch meats, and high fructose soft drinks. THANK GOD FOR THIS NOTE! IT DOES TAKE A VILLAGE TO RAISE A CHILD. God bless this woman!!!"
I must sheepishly admit that the woman is a liberal apparently. Citation of the "takes a village" tipped me off. And while it does take a village to raise a child, what that means is when you're being a little dickhead as a kid your parents will find out from parents in the neighborhood (village).
Everybody's got an opinion, and that's cool. This is America. And we've been told that's what's so great from the time we're kids is that we're free to express them. But seriously, with the advent of social media sharing your opinion, telling your friends how full of shit they really are, and how fat the kids are in the neighborhood has replaced baseball as the national pastime.
Sunday, October 13, 2013
Couple things....
OK, couple things that are on my mind, and I really need to get it out.
Redskins; racist slur, and terrible choice for a nickname. It doesn't honor Native Americans. Braves, and Warriors, are commonly understood to be names based on titles given to those that fought for their people. Chiefs is pretty well established to refer to the leaders. Indians is pretty benign, and like Vikings or Spartans is a group of people. They're all OK, but "redskins" is a slur. I know about Coach Deitz. I know the Redskins were the Braves in 1932. I know George Allen, when he was coach commissioned a group of Native Americans, and that group said the nickname was fine. Imagine that, a group created by the then coach liked the nickname. Wow! What a surprise.
It's simple; go into any Native American run casino, and call everyone there "redskin." If you don't get your ass kicked, then "redskin" is probably not a slur. It's not about "context." Context is an excuse, that does not apply to any other slur.
Tea-party bullshit; if you don't think the government is good for anything, then you can't complain about it being shut down.
The whole thing is ridiculous. The "Don't Tread On Me" flag is misused. War for Independence was not about taxes, it was about taxation without representation, which you have. I know because I see the mouth breathers you've elected to Congress. The Confederate Battle Flag is also being bandied about at Tea Party rallied, and is also out of place. It's not about "States rights," (and neither was the Civil War unless you want to stipulate that the only state right they were concerned about was slavery). It's not about government debt either, because you didn't say boo when the deficit exploded under W. And, no, saying W was not a "true conservative" does not re-establish cred to the conservative brand. You dummies loved everything he did for eight years.
Oh yeah, and if government is bad, why do you want to blame the shutdown on Democrats? If government is bad, then logically a shutdown of a bad thing would be good. It would seem to me that you should be taking credit for it.
Lastly Obamacare - Constitutional. Sorry. Passed by the House, and the Senate, signed by the President, upheld by the Supreme Court. That's about as Constitutional as it gets. If conservatives were smart they'd take credit for the whole thing anyway. It's an idea out of the conservative Heritage Foundation. It was implemented by GOP Governor Romney (remember him!?)
Redskins; racist slur, and terrible choice for a nickname. It doesn't honor Native Americans. Braves, and Warriors, are commonly understood to be names based on titles given to those that fought for their people. Chiefs is pretty well established to refer to the leaders. Indians is pretty benign, and like Vikings or Spartans is a group of people. They're all OK, but "redskins" is a slur. I know about Coach Deitz. I know the Redskins were the Braves in 1932. I know George Allen, when he was coach commissioned a group of Native Americans, and that group said the nickname was fine. Imagine that, a group created by the then coach liked the nickname. Wow! What a surprise.
It's simple; go into any Native American run casino, and call everyone there "redskin." If you don't get your ass kicked, then "redskin" is probably not a slur. It's not about "context." Context is an excuse, that does not apply to any other slur.
Tea-party bullshit; if you don't think the government is good for anything, then you can't complain about it being shut down.
The whole thing is ridiculous. The "Don't Tread On Me" flag is misused. War for Independence was not about taxes, it was about taxation without representation, which you have. I know because I see the mouth breathers you've elected to Congress. The Confederate Battle Flag is also being bandied about at Tea Party rallied, and is also out of place. It's not about "States rights," (and neither was the Civil War unless you want to stipulate that the only state right they were concerned about was slavery). It's not about government debt either, because you didn't say boo when the deficit exploded under W. And, no, saying W was not a "true conservative" does not re-establish cred to the conservative brand. You dummies loved everything he did for eight years.
Oh yeah, and if government is bad, why do you want to blame the shutdown on Democrats? If government is bad, then logically a shutdown of a bad thing would be good. It would seem to me that you should be taking credit for it.
Lastly Obamacare - Constitutional. Sorry. Passed by the House, and the Senate, signed by the President, upheld by the Supreme Court. That's about as Constitutional as it gets. If conservatives were smart they'd take credit for the whole thing anyway. It's an idea out of the conservative Heritage Foundation. It was implemented by GOP Governor Romney (remember him!?)
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
No, really. Who's naive and clueless??
"Just another pie-eyed liberal who wants the government to right all the wrongs, and make everything fair for everyone."
"You libs are so naive. You think the answer for every thing is more government. If we could just get the government out of the way of the free market it would be so much better."
"Competition in the market is just more efficient by virtue of competition."
Tea Partiers and other extreme conservatives call liberals "naive" for putting the purpose of helping others on the shoulders of government. To hear them it would be best for all concerned if most everything was left to the magic of the private sectors' market forces.
What does the free market, unfettered by regulation, produce? One only needs to look at the US in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Child labor, there's that. Increased poverty, and stagnant wages. Income disparity, More frequent boom bust cycles with deeper recessions.
Really? History? Anyone? Beuller? Beuller? 19th Century - unfettered capitalism. Ring a bell? How was it for people who worked for a living? We have, in the United States the greatest income disparity since the Great Depression. The financial sector has been deregulated time and again since the 1980s. For the Tea-Billies - deregulation means less government, and more "free market." So the money that greases the skids of the economy has been pretty much going where it wants to in it's chase for profit. You know, profit, the end all be all motivation that, according to the cult of conserva-libertarian-Ayn Rand objectivism will fix everything. Everything I say.
Who's really being naive here? If you think that, despite - you know - history, unfettered capital markets will address what a society need, you're being naive.
So what does history tell us unfettered free market forces yield? Historically business seeks the greatest market share it can get. Theory says a player captures market share by being better: better product, or more less expensive by being a more efficient producer. Market share rules, but unfettered, players in a market find it more effective to capture market share by leveraging it's comparative advantages to buy more. Rockefeller didn't only dominate the early petroleum industry by seeking to be the most efficient producer of kerosene, and later gasoline. He also did it by leveraging early leadership to own and control as much delivery as possible throughout the economy. JP Morgan's General Electric didn't only get in early, but it used frivolous legal maneuvers to choke out early players like Westinghouse whose pockets were not so deep. It's not about being the best in a market. Believing that as business dogma is naive. It's about being the quickest to be the biggest in a market, then dominating the competition with size, not necessarily out performing them. Conservatives say that's business, and it is. What it's not is capitalism, and it's not market forces creating optimal outcomes for the society that they are in. If there's not enough competition, then market forces can't work. Participants get bigger and bigger, and when threats of competition are neutralized - through acquisition, or elimination - players become rent seekers, and extract revenue while controlling costs.
How was it to be in labor in the 19th century, and early 20th century economies? Generally it sucked. Long hours, no overtime, shitty wages. Add to that the greater frequency of panics, recessions, and depressions.
It's been said that business is the worlds most competitive sport. Make no mistake, capitalism remains the most efficient economic system to base a society on, but it needs to be regulated. That is to say it needs regulations, not central planning. It needs the government to be an official and enforce the rules. Every competition needs rules, and referees, otherwise it's not really a competition.
If you really think that unfettered capitalism leads always to optimal results, you need to crack more than a few history books, because you're a doe-eyed child.
"You libs are so naive. You think the answer for every thing is more government. If we could just get the government out of the way of the free market it would be so much better."
"Competition in the market is just more efficient by virtue of competition."
Tea Partiers and other extreme conservatives call liberals "naive" for putting the purpose of helping others on the shoulders of government. To hear them it would be best for all concerned if most everything was left to the magic of the private sectors' market forces.
What does the free market, unfettered by regulation, produce? One only needs to look at the US in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Child labor, there's that. Increased poverty, and stagnant wages. Income disparity, More frequent boom bust cycles with deeper recessions.
Really? History? Anyone? Beuller? Beuller? 19th Century - unfettered capitalism. Ring a bell? How was it for people who worked for a living? We have, in the United States the greatest income disparity since the Great Depression. The financial sector has been deregulated time and again since the 1980s. For the Tea-Billies - deregulation means less government, and more "free market." So the money that greases the skids of the economy has been pretty much going where it wants to in it's chase for profit. You know, profit, the end all be all motivation that, according to the cult of conserva-libertarian-Ayn Rand objectivism will fix everything. Everything I say.
Who's really being naive here? If you think that, despite - you know - history, unfettered capital markets will address what a society need, you're being naive.
So what does history tell us unfettered free market forces yield? Historically business seeks the greatest market share it can get. Theory says a player captures market share by being better: better product, or more less expensive by being a more efficient producer. Market share rules, but unfettered, players in a market find it more effective to capture market share by leveraging it's comparative advantages to buy more. Rockefeller didn't only dominate the early petroleum industry by seeking to be the most efficient producer of kerosene, and later gasoline. He also did it by leveraging early leadership to own and control as much delivery as possible throughout the economy. JP Morgan's General Electric didn't only get in early, but it used frivolous legal maneuvers to choke out early players like Westinghouse whose pockets were not so deep. It's not about being the best in a market. Believing that as business dogma is naive. It's about being the quickest to be the biggest in a market, then dominating the competition with size, not necessarily out performing them. Conservatives say that's business, and it is. What it's not is capitalism, and it's not market forces creating optimal outcomes for the society that they are in. If there's not enough competition, then market forces can't work. Participants get bigger and bigger, and when threats of competition are neutralized - through acquisition, or elimination - players become rent seekers, and extract revenue while controlling costs.
How was it to be in labor in the 19th century, and early 20th century economies? Generally it sucked. Long hours, no overtime, shitty wages. Add to that the greater frequency of panics, recessions, and depressions.
It's been said that business is the worlds most competitive sport. Make no mistake, capitalism remains the most efficient economic system to base a society on, but it needs to be regulated. That is to say it needs regulations, not central planning. It needs the government to be an official and enforce the rules. Every competition needs rules, and referees, otherwise it's not really a competition.
If you really think that unfettered capitalism leads always to optimal results, you need to crack more than a few history books, because you're a doe-eyed child.
Tuesday, September 24, 2013
The shine is off...... Oh Big Jaw....
3 games into the 2013 season, and the 49ers are 1-2. The sole win being week one against the Packers, and that was in doubt until a 4th down conversion late led to a clinching FG. Even then the "soft" Packers were every bit as physical as the big bad Niners. If not for Green Bay's inability to Cover Aquan Boldin, San Francisco might very well be 0-3.
I have to admit. I didn't think ol' Big Jaw Harbaugh would have fallen this soon. 3 weeks and the biggest, baddest bully in the NFC had 3 punks stand up and hit 'em back. Big Jaw had no answers to that, because if he's not the toughest kid on the block he's not much else. Simple scheme with no answers if it doesn't work.
I knew for sure in week 2. A 49er defender planted Seahawk QB Russell Wilson after he handed off on a read option, and I thought "Wow. Ol' Big Jaw can dish it out, but in the lead up to week one when Clay Matthews talked about hitting Kaepernick, Ol' Big Jaw didn't like hearing that." Anyway - Wilson got up without a lineman rescuing him. and Seattle continued it's ass kicking of Big Jaw's Boys. The 49ers had nothing to answer. No changes. not one adjustment - just more "we're tougher." That didn't work either.
Week 3, the Colts did the same thing. The Colts! We already knew the Seahawks were badasses, but the Colts? They punched the Niners in the teeth, and Big Jaw had nothing. Captain Comeback's old team told him to sit down and STFU. Trent Richardson - Pow! Ahmad Bradshaw - Pow! It was like the old Batman TV show. I kept waiting for the graphics to come up, and the camera angle to go to 45 degrees.
He was the coach to be man, Ol' Big Jaw Harbaugh. Now, surely things will be better when Michael Crabtree, and Vernon Davis come back, but then it's the same talent in the same old scheme that only works when he's able to push your team around. Now they now just hit him back. The Niners aren't so tough. Whose gonna do Pepsi commercials and stare at a blank white board now? Maybe ol' Big Jaw should put the Pepsi down, and draw on the board and figure out something to do now that everyone knows his team isn't that tough?
I have to admit. I didn't think ol' Big Jaw Harbaugh would have fallen this soon. 3 weeks and the biggest, baddest bully in the NFC had 3 punks stand up and hit 'em back. Big Jaw had no answers to that, because if he's not the toughest kid on the block he's not much else. Simple scheme with no answers if it doesn't work.
I knew for sure in week 2. A 49er defender planted Seahawk QB Russell Wilson after he handed off on a read option, and I thought "Wow. Ol' Big Jaw can dish it out, but in the lead up to week one when Clay Matthews talked about hitting Kaepernick, Ol' Big Jaw didn't like hearing that." Anyway - Wilson got up without a lineman rescuing him. and Seattle continued it's ass kicking of Big Jaw's Boys. The 49ers had nothing to answer. No changes. not one adjustment - just more "we're tougher." That didn't work either.
Week 3, the Colts did the same thing. The Colts! We already knew the Seahawks were badasses, but the Colts? They punched the Niners in the teeth, and Big Jaw had nothing. Captain Comeback's old team told him to sit down and STFU. Trent Richardson - Pow! Ahmad Bradshaw - Pow! It was like the old Batman TV show. I kept waiting for the graphics to come up, and the camera angle to go to 45 degrees.
He was the coach to be man, Ol' Big Jaw Harbaugh. Now, surely things will be better when Michael Crabtree, and Vernon Davis come back, but then it's the same talent in the same old scheme that only works when he's able to push your team around. Now they now just hit him back. The Niners aren't so tough. Whose gonna do Pepsi commercials and stare at a blank white board now? Maybe ol' Big Jaw should put the Pepsi down, and draw on the board and figure out something to do now that everyone knows his team isn't that tough?
Monday, September 23, 2013
Whose culture of dependency?
Why is it they need to cut food stamps citing "ending the culture of dependency" for poor people, but they never talk about cutting subsidies for big agriculture, or defense contractors, or telecoms, or any of the other big businesses who, for years, use subsidies, and other tax loopholes. Isn't THAT a "culture of dependency" too? There's one important difference. People that use food stamps are, well first off 2/3rd are kids, but the rest are not campaign donors. So the tough talk the tea party simpletons put out there about budgets, and "dependency" is just a collection of platitudes that gets their benefactors to open the checkbook.
It's the same thing in a different vein when it comes to the circle jerk in the House with the 42nd vote to repeal the ACA, or to de-fund it in the looming debt limit. Why are House Republicans passing a bill that will not pass a Senate controlled by the Democrats, or surely get the VETO if it gets to the White House? Principle? A principled politician - that's really sweet of you. It's to show the check writers they're deserving of a little something something for the PAC. Those check writers don't want the ACA.
Here's my question: if the ACA is so bad, and will be so much suckitude in application why don't those who oppose it just let it suck, ride the suckage to election wins - since it'll suck so much right - and the repeal it?
Answer: It won't suck, and there goes the "culture of dependency" that those check writers will have to live without.
It's important to remember that when these things because they're never mentioned in the "red team/blue team" bullshit narrative that mainstream media thinks is "balanced" coverage.
It's the same thing in a different vein when it comes to the circle jerk in the House with the 42nd vote to repeal the ACA, or to de-fund it in the looming debt limit. Why are House Republicans passing a bill that will not pass a Senate controlled by the Democrats, or surely get the VETO if it gets to the White House? Principle? A principled politician - that's really sweet of you. It's to show the check writers they're deserving of a little something something for the PAC. Those check writers don't want the ACA.
Here's my question: if the ACA is so bad, and will be so much suckitude in application why don't those who oppose it just let it suck, ride the suckage to election wins - since it'll suck so much right - and the repeal it?
Answer: It won't suck, and there goes the "culture of dependency" that those check writers will have to live without.
It's important to remember that when these things because they're never mentioned in the "red team/blue team" bullshit narrative that mainstream media thinks is "balanced" coverage.
Wednesday, September 11, 2013
Redskins - c'mon how is that not a slur?!?!?!
Every year it comes up, and every year it stays the same. Washington Redskins. Change the name. It doesn't honor the native Americans. It's a slur.
I've got a better idea than trying to get the Washington Redskins to change their name. Let's use all the slurs we can. Shit, it's a melting pot.
Here are a few names suggestions:
Carolina Cousin Fuckers, Memphis Toothless Hillbillies, Philadelphia Greaseballs, New York Goombas, Houston Hicks, Dallas Redneck Pussies, San Francisco Sodomizers, Montreal Mongoloids, Notre Dame Drunk Irish, Kansas City Crackers,
I've got a better idea than trying to get the Washington Redskins to change their name. Let's use all the slurs we can. Shit, it's a melting pot.
Here are a few names suggestions:
Carolina Cousin Fuckers, Memphis Toothless Hillbillies, Philadelphia Greaseballs, New York Goombas, Houston Hicks, Dallas Redneck Pussies, San Francisco Sodomizers, Montreal Mongoloids, Notre Dame Drunk Irish, Kansas City Crackers,
Saturday, June 8, 2013
Retire the number......once Brett is in Canton
Retire the number. We know it's deserved for what was done on the field. Enough of the drama
For at least 3 years prior to Brett's first retirement there was the "will Brett retire" dance. After the 2007 season this is pretty much what happened:
Pack: Brett, c'mon man. we do this every year. It's getting old. Make up your mind for everyone
Brett: Well, right now, in March, I think I'll retire.
Press conference, I've loved Green Bay. We loved you too Brett. You're the best. No, you're the best
August rolls around
Brett: Man, I know I retired, but it's time for camp. I miss the guys, and playing. I'm not retiring.
Pack: OK, but you have to win the job.
Brett: S'cuse me? I'm Brett f'n Favre. It's my job.
Pack: Negative - you have to win it. Canton bound or not.
Brett: That's BS. Brett Favre don't carry a clipboard. I'm playing.
Pack: Not if you don't win it.
Brett: 3 MVPs, and a Superbowl ring. My job.
Pack: All 10 years old. You have to win it.
Brett: Might as well trade me, cuz' the ol gunslinger is playin'
Pack: OK, but not in the division. You're going to the Jets.
2008 rolls on. Brett's a Jet. Good start, bad finish.
Brett: My arm hurts. I'm retiring - for real this time.
Vikings: Not so fast. Think about it. We're not in a hurry. Jackson.....he's not good.
Brett: Alright I'll think about it.
Vikings: Too bad about the end in Green Bay. We feel terrible for you.
Brett: Thanks man. Chilly, you're alright, and I know Darrell from back in the day. Remember my 3 MVPs?
Vikings: Hellz yeah
Brett: Alright. I'm playing.
Brett tears it up in 2009, but Brett's away the Conference Title against the Saints.
Brett has a forgettable 2010, and A-Rod leads the Pack to SuperBowl LXV.
He want to keep playing, and prove he had it. Nothing more than that. Favre haters need to get over it all.
Brett Favre's number #4 should be retired. The same as Bart Starr's #15. Just like #15 though, #4 should wait until he's enshrined in Canton. Not out of spite, but because that's the Packer way.
Friday, May 24, 2013
Enough with the uniforms already.........
Really. Enough.
Anyone's favorite sports team has too many uniforms. There's the traditional home and away, and most fans don't see a problem with buying a jersey of their favorite player, but really, too much.
Home, away, alternate, throwbacks. It's too much. The Chicago Bears wore orange jerseys. ORANGE!!!! As a Packer fan I'm all for making the Bears look silly, but those orange jerseys (ORANGE!!!!) reminded me of a winter game in Lambeau full of Packer fans wearing their hunting coats. The Chicago Bears should not take the field in orange jerseys. (ORANGE!?!?)
I know the owners need to make a buck, and it's not like stadiums pay for themselves. Taxpayers can do that. I even get it when people say "Hey. Cool orange Bears jersey." (ORANGE???) But really, do the players have to wear them too? My hometown Milwaukee Brewers have home whites, and road grays. That's not enough somehow. There's the navy jerseys. One says "Brewers" One says "Milwaukee" Then there's the wheat colored "gold" option. What is this, bar league softball? That's 6 f'n uniforms!!!!
But wait. There's more. Don't forget the throwbacks. Let's see, there were the Steelers throwbacks that looked like bumble bee stripes, or prisoners. Then the Vikings throwbacks went with the actual purple as opposed to the sparkly Prince purple, with white vents, and gold piping. Cowboys with white helmets, and stars on the shoulder. I guess to harken back to the day when sparkly paint had not been invented. Ahhhh those were the days. The Packers with the navy jerseys, and brown helmets. Then the Browns looked like....well the Browns.
The fans that buy orange Bear jerseys (ORANGE!!!) are going to buy them whether the Bears play in them or not. Some people just like ugly ass clothes. As long as we're picking up the stadium tab, could you guys throttle back the bumblebee stripes, and blaze orange? Really - orange??
Anyone's favorite sports team has too many uniforms. There's the traditional home and away, and most fans don't see a problem with buying a jersey of their favorite player, but really, too much.
Home, away, alternate, throwbacks. It's too much. The Chicago Bears wore orange jerseys. ORANGE!!!! As a Packer fan I'm all for making the Bears look silly, but those orange jerseys (ORANGE!!!!) reminded me of a winter game in Lambeau full of Packer fans wearing their hunting coats. The Chicago Bears should not take the field in orange jerseys. (ORANGE!?!?)
I know the owners need to make a buck, and it's not like stadiums pay for themselves. Taxpayers can do that. I even get it when people say "Hey. Cool orange Bears jersey." (ORANGE???) But really, do the players have to wear them too? My hometown Milwaukee Brewers have home whites, and road grays. That's not enough somehow. There's the navy jerseys. One says "Brewers" One says "Milwaukee" Then there's the wheat colored "gold" option. What is this, bar league softball? That's 6 f'n uniforms!!!!
But wait. There's more. Don't forget the throwbacks. Let's see, there were the Steelers throwbacks that looked like bumble bee stripes, or prisoners.
The fans that buy orange Bear jerseys (ORANGE!!!) are going to buy them whether the Bears play in them or not. Some people just like ugly ass clothes. As long as we're picking up the stadium tab, could you guys throttle back the bumblebee stripes, and blaze orange? Really - orange??
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Jumping out of the speakers
This is a new favorite description of mine. I heard it a few years ago on VH1 behind the music, or a top 100 of the 80s, or some wasted time on television that I should have spent writing, or something that I'll never get back. But I digress. Music, or sounds that "jump out of the speakers" are the things that resonate with all of us. We all have different songs, and there are some we have in common. So I took some time, and made a list of some of mine.
She Sells Sanctuary - The Cult
There's more than one way to jump out of the speakers, but She Sells Sanctuary does it with a one of a kind guitar lick that permeates any room it reaches, and Ian Astbury's vocal clarity dominates, and the song explodes after the opening guitar loop. Billy Duffy's riff lives on in the same strata as the opener to Brown Sugar, and You Really Got Me. This one lives on all by itself. Ian Astbury's powerful voice repeats the same verse, but it doesn't matter. This song jumps out and gets you. This is the birth of what we call "Alternative" today. The Cult were the forerunners to Nirvana, and Pearl Jam in the 90s, and today's Green Days.
Where The Streets Have No Name - U2
There's so much going on here it's almost too much. There's the opening crescendo that bursts into Bono's vocal, and the lyrical tone of a desperate search for.....whatever one's searching for and this song jumps from the get go. This is the first song, for me anyway, where I really heard, and thought about Edge as a first rate guitar player. I don't know how he gets so much sound out. They sound like two or more guitarists, and it's just one guy. It's probably the song that gave us the first idea that U2 would be the biggest band in the world since the Beatles.
Badlands - Bruce Springsteen
Springsteen (personally) could fill a list of "jumping out of the speakers" himself but Badlands is my pick as the best of his. It has the qualities of a hymn, and religious revival, as lyrics of finding redemption wherever one may get into you. "I believe in the love that you gave me/I believe in the faith that can save me/I believe in the hope and I pray that someday it may raise me above these badlands" It's the best live song he does. Lyrical wisdom, and a hopeful keyboard part force this song into the listener. The imagery put into your head by the lyrics and you can't help but feel the emotion of a man yearning for redemption from whatever; shattered love, life's hard times, the wear and tear of just trying. It wears on us all, but redemption is within - find it.
Free Fallin' - Tom Petty
Some songs jump out to get you the way a thunderstorm does. Free Fallin jumps out the way a warm breeze envelops you as you sit outside on a summer day. It just goes through you. The simple acoustic riff, and Tom's distinctive voice just melts into and around you. I remember hearing the echo of "Free Fallin" during the chorus thinking "Nobody can sing like Tom Petty." Not that he's a technically great vocalist, but he's so distinctive. This is another song you have to experience live. The sound of the ENTIRE arena, or amphitheatre (if you're lucky enough to catch as outside show - where Petty belongs) singing the chorus......it's the sensation that the word "unbelievable" was invented to describe.
Holiday - Green Day
"Can I get another amen! AMEN!!!" It's been said all you need to be a rock star is 3 chords and the truth. This is a living example of that platitude. The political/cultural theme of the piece only adds to the power of Armstrong's underlying riff. It's been said that Green Day musically is not complicated endeavor, but that's it's brilliance. Simple pieces are laid down as a base, and the truth (at least as the writer sees it) is generously applied, and the result is an infectious back beat, amazing guitar groove, and lyrics that tell you how full of shit you are. It's what rock and roll is at it's best, and Holiday is a shining example.
Kickin' My Heart Around - The Black Crowes
Love stinks, and while J. Geils tongue in cheek is another candidate for this list, the urgency of Chris Robinson's "Fo' the last tiiimeeee - STOP KICKIN' MY HEART AROUND!!" over a lick, that's on top of a slide lick just explodes. This is blues infused rock and roll in a straight line from Little Richard, to Led Zeppelin to Black Crowes. It's a punch in the face, or a punch in the gut depending on your most recent experience with love, or what you may have though was. Powerful from beginning to end.
Don't Stop Believing - Journey
Easy. Steve Perry. I'm glad I found a decent live clip, because Steve Perry is not a product of the studio. While Escape was the 3rd Journey album featuring him, this was the first time his voice was on full display. "Somewhere in the niiiiiiiiight" That sound is permanently ingrained in anyone from the 80s memory banks, and this song lives on. (and on and on and oooonnnnn - I know, but too easy)
I know there are more, but this is a blog. It's gotta end.
She Sells Sanctuary - The Cult
There's more than one way to jump out of the speakers, but She Sells Sanctuary does it with a one of a kind guitar lick that permeates any room it reaches, and Ian Astbury's vocal clarity dominates, and the song explodes after the opening guitar loop. Billy Duffy's riff lives on in the same strata as the opener to Brown Sugar, and You Really Got Me. This one lives on all by itself. Ian Astbury's powerful voice repeats the same verse, but it doesn't matter. This song jumps out and gets you. This is the birth of what we call "Alternative" today. The Cult were the forerunners to Nirvana, and Pearl Jam in the 90s, and today's Green Days.
Where The Streets Have No Name - U2
There's so much going on here it's almost too much. There's the opening crescendo that bursts into Bono's vocal, and the lyrical tone of a desperate search for.....whatever one's searching for and this song jumps from the get go. This is the first song, for me anyway, where I really heard, and thought about Edge as a first rate guitar player. I don't know how he gets so much sound out. They sound like two or more guitarists, and it's just one guy. It's probably the song that gave us the first idea that U2 would be the biggest band in the world since the Beatles.
Badlands - Bruce Springsteen
Springsteen (personally) could fill a list of "jumping out of the speakers" himself but Badlands is my pick as the best of his. It has the qualities of a hymn, and religious revival, as lyrics of finding redemption wherever one may get into you. "I believe in the love that you gave me/I believe in the faith that can save me/I believe in the hope and I pray that someday it may raise me above these badlands" It's the best live song he does. Lyrical wisdom, and a hopeful keyboard part force this song into the listener. The imagery put into your head by the lyrics and you can't help but feel the emotion of a man yearning for redemption from whatever; shattered love, life's hard times, the wear and tear of just trying. It wears on us all, but redemption is within - find it.
Free Fallin' - Tom Petty
Some songs jump out to get you the way a thunderstorm does. Free Fallin jumps out the way a warm breeze envelops you as you sit outside on a summer day. It just goes through you. The simple acoustic riff, and Tom's distinctive voice just melts into and around you. I remember hearing the echo of "Free Fallin" during the chorus thinking "Nobody can sing like Tom Petty." Not that he's a technically great vocalist, but he's so distinctive. This is another song you have to experience live. The sound of the ENTIRE arena, or amphitheatre (if you're lucky enough to catch as outside show - where Petty belongs) singing the chorus......it's the sensation that the word "unbelievable" was invented to describe.
Holiday - Green Day
"Can I get another amen! AMEN!!!" It's been said all you need to be a rock star is 3 chords and the truth. This is a living example of that platitude. The political/cultural theme of the piece only adds to the power of Armstrong's underlying riff. It's been said that Green Day musically is not complicated endeavor, but that's it's brilliance. Simple pieces are laid down as a base, and the truth (at least as the writer sees it) is generously applied, and the result is an infectious back beat, amazing guitar groove, and lyrics that tell you how full of shit you are. It's what rock and roll is at it's best, and Holiday is a shining example.
Kickin' My Heart Around - The Black Crowes
Love stinks, and while J. Geils tongue in cheek is another candidate for this list, the urgency of Chris Robinson's "Fo' the last tiiimeeee - STOP KICKIN' MY HEART AROUND!!" over a lick, that's on top of a slide lick just explodes. This is blues infused rock and roll in a straight line from Little Richard, to Led Zeppelin to Black Crowes. It's a punch in the face, or a punch in the gut depending on your most recent experience with love, or what you may have though was. Powerful from beginning to end.
Don't Stop Believing - Journey
Easy. Steve Perry. I'm glad I found a decent live clip, because Steve Perry is not a product of the studio. While Escape was the 3rd Journey album featuring him, this was the first time his voice was on full display. "Somewhere in the niiiiiiiiight" That sound is permanently ingrained in anyone from the 80s memory banks, and this song lives on. (and on and on and oooonnnnn - I know, but too easy)
I know there are more, but this is a blog. It's gotta end.
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Same Sex Marraige - What's the big deal?
This has nothing in common with girls wanting to be on the football team, polygamous families, or bestiality fetishes. Those are distracting arguments.
Quite simply homosexual couples are seeking equal recognition under the law of their unions by having them called marriages, and therefore enjoying all the rights that follow; property rights, end of life decisions, tax filing, etcetera. I've heard no fact based argument against same sex marriages. Homosexual marriages don't "redefine" marriages for all. Marriage is a union, and life commitment between two people. The commitment of two homosexuals does not weaken the commitment of two heterosexuals. These marriages are independent of each other. Two lesbians, or two homosexual men who have made this commitment should be able to make end of life decisions, or pass property to each other without the extra-legal work needed under current law. As many smarter than myself have noted the social construct of marriage has evolved from its definition since medieval times from marriages outside of social caste, race, faith, and so on.
As to families and child rearing, there is no clear evidence that children raised by homosexual couples have significantly different outcomes than kids raised by heterosexual couples. Research does show that children do best in households where both biological parents are present in the same household for their complete growth and development. 50% of traditional marriages end in divorce, so even half of the preferred settings don't meet the standard. Comparing heterosexual households with one biological parent, and homosexual households with one biological parent, or adoptive households with zero biological parents (hetero and homosexual) there's really no difference when it comes to child rearing and development.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting
There is no compelling argument that marriage equality for same sex marriage will in any way affect the liberties of opposite sex marriages. Those who oppose same sex marriage equality have done little more than argue the "social order" or "traditional norms." All that really means is they're uncomfortable with it, or that it doesn't fit their definition of normal. Why and who cares? It's not your marriage. It doesn't affect you in any way, shape, or form.
Quite simply homosexual couples are seeking equal recognition under the law of their unions by having them called marriages, and therefore enjoying all the rights that follow; property rights, end of life decisions, tax filing, etcetera. I've heard no fact based argument against same sex marriages. Homosexual marriages don't "redefine" marriages for all. Marriage is a union, and life commitment between two people. The commitment of two homosexuals does not weaken the commitment of two heterosexuals. These marriages are independent of each other. Two lesbians, or two homosexual men who have made this commitment should be able to make end of life decisions, or pass property to each other without the extra-legal work needed under current law. As many smarter than myself have noted the social construct of marriage has evolved from its definition since medieval times from marriages outside of social caste, race, faith, and so on.
As to families and child rearing, there is no clear evidence that children raised by homosexual couples have significantly different outcomes than kids raised by heterosexual couples. Research does show that children do best in households where both biological parents are present in the same household for their complete growth and development. 50% of traditional marriages end in divorce, so even half of the preferred settings don't meet the standard. Comparing heterosexual households with one biological parent, and homosexual households with one biological parent, or adoptive households with zero biological parents (hetero and homosexual) there's really no difference when it comes to child rearing and development.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_parenting
There is no compelling argument that marriage equality for same sex marriage will in any way affect the liberties of opposite sex marriages. Those who oppose same sex marriage equality have done little more than argue the "social order" or "traditional norms." All that really means is they're uncomfortable with it, or that it doesn't fit their definition of normal. Why and who cares? It's not your marriage. It doesn't affect you in any way, shape, or form.
Wednesday, January 30, 2013
"If 'insert name' were alive today....."
This
is the most, bar none, overused bucket of stupid there is.
There's nothing so over the top ridiculous as citing a past figure as so
totally on your side, and they'd say so if not for them being fucking dead. I'm sorry, dead icons are not your personal yes man.
It can be the comical; Sirhan Sirhan stating with
certitude that Bobby Kennedy would be in favor of his parole. Well shit,
If he only he knew Bobby would be on his side in a parole hearing,
maybe he wouldn't have put a bullet in the guys fucking skull. Son of a bitch, I guess they're
right; hindsight IS 20/20!
This one takes the cake though. No shit, National Gun Appreciation Day organizer Larry Ward actually said:
WHAT!??!?! - the obvious bucket overflowing with fucking stupid here is that slaves didn't have any rights under the law, and didn't have the right to do anything, let alone keep and bear arms - that's what SLAVERY means!!
But shit, isn't that a kick in the dick; The Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, an American icon of civil liberties, and equal rights would be, if not for the whole "being fucking dead thing" on your side if not for some cracker ex-con getting a gun and killing him. Sonuvva bitch!!!! If only there was a law that could keep, like, an ex-con with a history of violent crime from easily getting a gun. Like, maybe you could check his background, criminal history, and prevent sellers from selling him a gun? Y'know, whether he went to a gun shop, gun show, catalog, internet (yes gun-tards I know there was no internet in James Earl Rays day) or from one of his cracker buddies, it'd be tougher? That would be a good idea. Maybe really stiff penalties for a gun shop selling this guy a gun? Really stiff penalties for some cracker getting his cracker-buddy, who'd never pass a check, a gun.
I know, I know, criminals don't obey the law that's why they're criminals. Well, drunk drivers don't follow the law either - so fuck it, let's just let people drive drunk right? That's such a bullshit argument. If your restaurant, or bar serves someone negligently, and they cause a death while driving drunk - you're on the hook jack. If someone sells a gun without a background check - put them on the fucking hook if something happens. If someone does a straw purchase (buys for someone else to bypass a background check on the real buyer) and those guns are put to ill use - put them on the fucking hook. We can at least hold gun sellers to the same standard as a goddamn bartender. THAT is not infringing on anybody's 2nd Amendment rights.
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Who gives a shit? Really - why do we even care?
This is getting old.
Manti T'eo had a girlfriend. According to him she was the love of his life. She died. Coincidentally, she died the same day as his grandmother. Now the story breaks that this girlfriend was fictitious. Whether he made her up, or she was made up to begin with, and he fell in love online for the phony person, and - ARRGHH - who gives a shit how the details shake out. Story goes on that maybe the made up dead girlfriend story was all to engender sympathy on the part of Heisman voters. Really? Are Heisman voters really that soft-hearted? I'm actually inclined to believe he was duped, because being dumb explains EVERYTHING. First off, was the Gramma even real? I assume she was, because if they found out about the girlfriend, they had to have looked into the Gramma right? If Gramma was real, how dumb is it to think you need a dead girlfriend in the story because the drama of playing through a beloved dead Gramma is just not sad enough. Is this the NCAA or All My Children?
Also, Lance Armstrong has come clean. Yeah - I don't care about him either. Whoop de fuckin do. Lance cheated. Sorry. I really don't even care if he doped while competing. Seems this was a pretty widespread problem in professional cycling. Not sure why. I mean it's professional cycling for fuck sake. Very few cyclist become enormously wealthy. Not sure why you'd take the needle, and risk raisining your nuts for a cyclists paycheck. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong and elite cyclists rake it in. Lance's problem wasn't cheating, or using PEDs. His problem is being a self-important cock-wad. His problem was using his name and celebrity to crush people who criticized him by telling, what turns out to be, the truth. All I know is that I can never watch Dodgeball the same way again. I'll have to tell Vince Vaughan not to listen to Lance because he's a big headed, self-serving, lying little douche-nozzle. Fuck him and his little bracelet. Being a colossal dick, and ruining others' lives doesn't get wiped away because of charity. Dick - there's your legacy Capt One Nut.
It's really ridiculous that this is even a story. I mean, I get that it is. It's big because it's a freak show, and we all love a freak show, but why are we surprised? There are millions of dollars at the end, or even in the middle of, the sports star rainbow. You get to bang Sheryl Crow. Brent Musberger crows on TV how hot football player girlfriends are - because they are. Hello!!! You get to earn millions playing. Then you get to make more doing Wrangler ads - even after you text your dick to a girl in the PR dept. Who wouldn't lie, and cheat their way to that. We lie and cheat for even less. OF COURSE professional, and elite college athletes, lie. Of course they take PEDs by a large margin. And we love it. We love big, fast collisions. We love athletes dominate the competition. We love touchdowns, and long home runs. That's what we want. So, that's what we get. So quit fucking belly-aching when the curtain is pulled back showing it's all a put on.
You're welcome.
Manti T'eo had a girlfriend. According to him she was the love of his life. She died. Coincidentally, she died the same day as his grandmother. Now the story breaks that this girlfriend was fictitious. Whether he made her up, or she was made up to begin with, and he fell in love online for the phony person, and - ARRGHH - who gives a shit how the details shake out. Story goes on that maybe the made up dead girlfriend story was all to engender sympathy on the part of Heisman voters. Really? Are Heisman voters really that soft-hearted? I'm actually inclined to believe he was duped, because being dumb explains EVERYTHING. First off, was the Gramma even real? I assume she was, because if they found out about the girlfriend, they had to have looked into the Gramma right? If Gramma was real, how dumb is it to think you need a dead girlfriend in the story because the drama of playing through a beloved dead Gramma is just not sad enough. Is this the NCAA or All My Children?
Also, Lance Armstrong has come clean. Yeah - I don't care about him either. Whoop de fuckin do. Lance cheated. Sorry. I really don't even care if he doped while competing. Seems this was a pretty widespread problem in professional cycling. Not sure why. I mean it's professional cycling for fuck sake. Very few cyclist become enormously wealthy. Not sure why you'd take the needle, and risk raisining your nuts for a cyclists paycheck. I don't know, maybe I'm wrong and elite cyclists rake it in. Lance's problem wasn't cheating, or using PEDs. His problem is being a self-important cock-wad. His problem was using his name and celebrity to crush people who criticized him by telling, what turns out to be, the truth. All I know is that I can never watch Dodgeball the same way again. I'll have to tell Vince Vaughan not to listen to Lance because he's a big headed, self-serving, lying little douche-nozzle. Fuck him and his little bracelet. Being a colossal dick, and ruining others' lives doesn't get wiped away because of charity. Dick - there's your legacy Capt One Nut.
It's really ridiculous that this is even a story. I mean, I get that it is. It's big because it's a freak show, and we all love a freak show, but why are we surprised? There are millions of dollars at the end, or even in the middle of, the sports star rainbow. You get to bang Sheryl Crow. Brent Musberger crows on TV how hot football player girlfriends are - because they are. Hello!!! You get to earn millions playing. Then you get to make more doing Wrangler ads - even after you text your dick to a girl in the PR dept. Who wouldn't lie, and cheat their way to that. We lie and cheat for even less. OF COURSE professional, and elite college athletes, lie. Of course they take PEDs by a large margin. And we love it. We love big, fast collisions. We love athletes dominate the competition. We love touchdowns, and long home runs. That's what we want. So, that's what we get. So quit fucking belly-aching when the curtain is pulled back showing it's all a put on.
You're welcome.
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Move the Pro Bowl - for the love of Pete!!
Can we move the Pro Bowl? Please, can we?
NFL Football is the most popular sport in the United States. By far it has more fans, and more eyes on the television screen than NBA Basketball, Major League Baseball, and NHL Hockey. So why is its all star game, the Pro Bowl, the lamest, least watched, least covered, and least talked about of all the major sports all star games? Major League Baseball has a whole weekend of activities. Monday before the game is televised with the Home Run Derby, celebrity games, and other assorted activities. The NBA likewise enjoys a days long extravaganza of the Slam Dunk Competition, and the 3-Pt Shot Competition leading up to the All-Star Game. Hockey has its own skills competitions showcasing the skills that make the game so great.
Additionally these 3 events all take place in the middle of the season. They're a break of sorts where fans take a short break from the races that only then are about to be getting underway to celebrate the best participants the respective sports have to offer.
The NFL Pro-Bowl by comparison sucks. It totally sucks. It's a sucktacular sucktacle of suckage. No skills competitions, non-participation by a significant number of fan selected starters because of sore ankles, elbows, turf toes, hamstrings, and a general "who gives a shit, I'm here because of a contract bonus" air surrounds the entire affair. Well, I'm here to say it does not need to be that way, and it shouldn't.
The most important thing the NFL can do is move the Pro-Bowl. It's in the completely wrong time of the season. It's at the end. All the players are tired of playing. They're beat up, and worn down from the season. It's also played the week between the Conference Championship games, and the Super Bowl. Who gives a shit? How anti-climactic can you be? We've been ramping up to the playoffs all season, and then we're following the playoffs and all the drama entailed there. Then, finally, when we find out who's playing in the Super Bowl, the Worlds Championship of the biggest sport, but wait, let's take a break and watch an exhibition. What?!!?!? Really?!?!?! It's 15 degrees outside, and I'd rather take down my Christmas lights. (I know - slacker)
Move it to the beginning of the season. It can't be a mid-season break like the other sports. Move it to the beginning. Instead of the Hall of Fame Game between to teams, have the Pro-Bowl be the Hall of Fame Game. Really, it's at the beginning of the season. People are ready for football to be back. The athletes are just back from the off-season, and are ready to compete instead of ready to go home and rest.
It's a whole weekend. There's the Hall of Fame Inductions. There's a whole weekend to do skills competitions. There can be a NFL Fastest Man competition. There can be a Strongest Arm competition. There can be a Strongest Man competition. All of it on NFL Network, or ESPN. Then instead of an exhibition between tow teams 2nd and 3rd stringers hoping to make the kickoff coverage team we can watch the Pro-Bowlers we all elected the previous year.
NFL Football is the most popular sport in the United States. By far it has more fans, and more eyes on the television screen than NBA Basketball, Major League Baseball, and NHL Hockey. So why is its all star game, the Pro Bowl, the lamest, least watched, least covered, and least talked about of all the major sports all star games? Major League Baseball has a whole weekend of activities. Monday before the game is televised with the Home Run Derby, celebrity games, and other assorted activities. The NBA likewise enjoys a days long extravaganza of the Slam Dunk Competition, and the 3-Pt Shot Competition leading up to the All-Star Game. Hockey has its own skills competitions showcasing the skills that make the game so great.
Additionally these 3 events all take place in the middle of the season. They're a break of sorts where fans take a short break from the races that only then are about to be getting underway to celebrate the best participants the respective sports have to offer.
The NFL Pro-Bowl by comparison sucks. It totally sucks. It's a sucktacular sucktacle of suckage. No skills competitions, non-participation by a significant number of fan selected starters because of sore ankles, elbows, turf toes, hamstrings, and a general "who gives a shit, I'm here because of a contract bonus" air surrounds the entire affair. Well, I'm here to say it does not need to be that way, and it shouldn't.
The most important thing the NFL can do is move the Pro-Bowl. It's in the completely wrong time of the season. It's at the end. All the players are tired of playing. They're beat up, and worn down from the season. It's also played the week between the Conference Championship games, and the Super Bowl. Who gives a shit? How anti-climactic can you be? We've been ramping up to the playoffs all season, and then we're following the playoffs and all the drama entailed there. Then, finally, when we find out who's playing in the Super Bowl, the Worlds Championship of the biggest sport, but wait, let's take a break and watch an exhibition. What?!!?!? Really?!?!?! It's 15 degrees outside, and I'd rather take down my Christmas lights. (I know - slacker)
Move it to the beginning of the season. It can't be a mid-season break like the other sports. Move it to the beginning. Instead of the Hall of Fame Game between to teams, have the Pro-Bowl be the Hall of Fame Game. Really, it's at the beginning of the season. People are ready for football to be back. The athletes are just back from the off-season, and are ready to compete instead of ready to go home and rest.
It's a whole weekend. There's the Hall of Fame Inductions. There's a whole weekend to do skills competitions. There can be a NFL Fastest Man competition. There can be a Strongest Arm competition. There can be a Strongest Man competition. All of it on NFL Network, or ESPN. Then instead of an exhibition between tow teams 2nd and 3rd stringers hoping to make the kickoff coverage team we can watch the Pro-Bowlers we all elected the previous year.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
BBWAA - Nice going douchenozzles
Baseball Writers Association of America are, collectively, a bunch of sanctimonious, pretentious douche-nozzles. They could not find ONE SINGULAR player who deserved (according to their highfalutin ass-hattery) entrance into Cooperstown. Among the players considered:
Barry Bonds: Career HR leader, and single season HR record holder. Only guy in baseball EVER to hit 500 HR, and steal 500 bases. Only fucking guy.
Roger Clemens: 354 wins, and 7 Cy Young awards. I'll say that again - 7 fucking Cy Young Awards. And before you yell steroids - 3 Cy Young awards before leaving Boston.
Craig Biggio: All he did was get 3,060 hits, play at an all-star level at 2 positions (C and 2B). I guess he's not a 1st ballot HOFer. What a bullshit, totally made up thing. "Oooh - he's so good he's a 1st ballot Hall of Famer." Suck it writers, you're either in or out. Robin Yount has the most comparable career to Biggio, and Yount was a "1st Ballot" guy. He had 3,142 hits. That's only 82 more, and he excelled at 2 positions as well.
Jack Morris: Dominant in his era and totally MONEY in the postseason - plus the best fucking mustache this side of Rollie Fingers.
Curt Shilling: See Jack Morris sans mustache, PLUS pitching in the 04 postseason on one leg.
Lee Smith: 3rd all time in career Saves with 478 - He's not in yet?!?! Are you fucking kidding me!?!?
Tim Raines: 7 consecutive all star appearances, 5th all time steals, The 4 ahead of him are all HOFers, including Ty Cobb, Rickey Henderson, and Lou Brock who have been bestowed the bullshit "1st Ballot" status. (Billy Hamilton's 914 steals in 14 seasons just wasn't good enough according to the writers, so he was named by the veterans committee in 1961.)
Lot's of people call players who used PEDs cheaters. Cheating is breaking the rules the other players are following for an unfair edge. Use of PEDs was widespread before they were banned until the early 2000s. It can't be cheating of most players were using them, and it can't be cheating if it's NOT AGAINST THE RULES. We couldn't hear enough about how great Bonds was, and how McGwire, and Sosa saved baseball with the chase of Maris in 98. You can't have it both ways. If steroids were such an edge, why didn't Canseco get to 500 HR? PEDs don't give you better hand/eye coordination to hit the ball, and they don't give pitchers better control of curve balls, and sliders. Besides, if use was widespread it's a wash. If you dominate your era, you're HOF. You're career speaks or it doesn't. Were players penalized who put up the numbers before the color barrier was broken? No. There is no question their numbers would have been different had the best players from the Negro leagues been playing, replacing the lesser white players who were only there BECAUSE of the color barrier. So take the "What would the numbers have been without PEDs?" argument, and shove it up your pompous ass.
And lastly, 1st ballot, 2nd ballot is a made up, bullshit thing. It means nothing because it's a totally subject to the la-di-dah whims of the BBWAA. No player has ever been unanimously voted into the HOF? What? There isn't ONE player all writers could ever agree should be in the HOF? The highest percentage for a HOF inductee was Tom Seaver who received 425 of 430 votes (98.8%). Who DIDN'T vote for Tom Seaver? Babe fucking Ruth got 215 of 226 votes for 95.1%. 9 people didn't think Ruth should have been in Cooperstown? 9!!! Hank Aaron, 406 of 415. What? Was it the same 9 dumb-ass idiots? Why do we let these fuckheads decide the Hall of Fame. If you don't all agree on something as obvious as the (at that time) all time HR leader is HOF worthy, you're as useless as tits on a bull. And, anyways, who made them, the big sheriffs of baseball integrity? Why are they the guardians of our game. Fuck them. Frankly, the Veterans Committee should be given the selection job by Cooperstown since the BBWAA can't stop fucking it up.
Christ! No wonder the players can't stand the writers. They're fucking dicks.
Barry Bonds: Career HR leader, and single season HR record holder. Only guy in baseball EVER to hit 500 HR, and steal 500 bases. Only fucking guy.
Roger Clemens: 354 wins, and 7 Cy Young awards. I'll say that again - 7 fucking Cy Young Awards. And before you yell steroids - 3 Cy Young awards before leaving Boston.
Craig Biggio: All he did was get 3,060 hits, play at an all-star level at 2 positions (C and 2B). I guess he's not a 1st ballot HOFer. What a bullshit, totally made up thing. "Oooh - he's so good he's a 1st ballot Hall of Famer." Suck it writers, you're either in or out. Robin Yount has the most comparable career to Biggio, and Yount was a "1st Ballot" guy. He had 3,142 hits. That's only 82 more, and he excelled at 2 positions as well.
Jack Morris: Dominant in his era and totally MONEY in the postseason - plus the best fucking mustache this side of Rollie Fingers.
Curt Shilling: See Jack Morris sans mustache, PLUS pitching in the 04 postseason on one leg.
Lee Smith: 3rd all time in career Saves with 478 - He's not in yet?!?! Are you fucking kidding me!?!?
Tim Raines: 7 consecutive all star appearances, 5th all time steals, The 4 ahead of him are all HOFers, including Ty Cobb, Rickey Henderson, and Lou Brock who have been bestowed the bullshit "1st Ballot" status. (Billy Hamilton's 914 steals in 14 seasons just wasn't good enough according to the writers, so he was named by the veterans committee in 1961.)
Lot's of people call players who used PEDs cheaters. Cheating is breaking the rules the other players are following for an unfair edge. Use of PEDs was widespread before they were banned until the early 2000s. It can't be cheating of most players were using them, and it can't be cheating if it's NOT AGAINST THE RULES. We couldn't hear enough about how great Bonds was, and how McGwire, and Sosa saved baseball with the chase of Maris in 98. You can't have it both ways. If steroids were such an edge, why didn't Canseco get to 500 HR? PEDs don't give you better hand/eye coordination to hit the ball, and they don't give pitchers better control of curve balls, and sliders. Besides, if use was widespread it's a wash. If you dominate your era, you're HOF. You're career speaks or it doesn't. Were players penalized who put up the numbers before the color barrier was broken? No. There is no question their numbers would have been different had the best players from the Negro leagues been playing, replacing the lesser white players who were only there BECAUSE of the color barrier. So take the "What would the numbers have been without PEDs?" argument, and shove it up your pompous ass.
And lastly, 1st ballot, 2nd ballot is a made up, bullshit thing. It means nothing because it's a totally subject to the la-di-dah whims of the BBWAA. No player has ever been unanimously voted into the HOF? What? There isn't ONE player all writers could ever agree should be in the HOF? The highest percentage for a HOF inductee was Tom Seaver who received 425 of 430 votes (98.8%). Who DIDN'T vote for Tom Seaver? Babe fucking Ruth got 215 of 226 votes for 95.1%. 9 people didn't think Ruth should have been in Cooperstown? 9!!! Hank Aaron, 406 of 415. What? Was it the same 9 dumb-ass idiots? Why do we let these fuckheads decide the Hall of Fame. If you don't all agree on something as obvious as the (at that time) all time HR leader is HOF worthy, you're as useless as tits on a bull. And, anyways, who made them, the big sheriffs of baseball integrity? Why are they the guardians of our game. Fuck them. Frankly, the Veterans Committee should be given the selection job by Cooperstown since the BBWAA can't stop fucking it up.
Christ! No wonder the players can't stand the writers. They're fucking dicks.
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
Whaaaaaa?????????
Conservatives love 2 things more than anything else. National defense and the 2nd Amendment. That's kinda funny though, because if you believe Alex Jones and his meltdown (hooooooooly shit - did you watch that), the reason we need unregulated gun ownership is BECAUSE of the government and their guns. Of course gun "enthusiasts" never mention how their AR-15s, and AK-47s will be effective against the military's M-16s and M-4s, to say nothing of the rocket propelled grenades, shoulder launch missiles, fighters, bombers, armored vehicles. Right - if the government becomes tyrannical - by making everyone buy health insurance - we will be forced to defend ourselves. Now I know it's not fair to view 2nd Amendment advocates through the prism of Mr. Jones, but let's be real, there's an asshattery charged end of this debate that REALLY thinks giving up guns is what the elites in the New World Order want so they can start the slippery slope of oppression.
Really???????
Look if the cause of gun violence has nothing to do with guns - which sounds counter intuitive - let's have a real discussion about it. If the platitude "Guns don't kill people. People kill people." is true, and I think it is, then let's follow it to its logical conclusion. If you throw that out in a debate, and think it's the endpoint, you're being lazy. What does it mean? It means the problem variable in the gun violence is people. Some people should NOT have fucking guns. That's what it means. What does that mean? It means closing loopholes for background checks so people that shouldn't have guns have a tougher time getting them. No background checks at gun shows? Close it. If that inconveniences enthusiasts - tough shit. We have a right to go to the mall, or the movie, or our kids to school and NOT get shot. That's my liberty, and your right to arms interferes with it. So fuck you and your gun.
Oh, and the 2nd Amendment having intent to arm citizens to overthrow oppressive government - wrong. It's to serve in state militias in defense of a free state. Read the 2nd Amendment, and read the Federalist Papers. Look at Federalist #29 in particular.
After that if you still want to protect us from the government - cut the Pentagon's budget. It's too goddamn big anyway. The Founders were not fans of standing armies, so don't cherry pick their ideas selfishly. Own all that. Besides, now that Republicans are concerned about the deficit and wasteful spending, put that shit on the chopping block too. More than the next 13 countries in the world combined is what we spend on defense, AND countries with defense budgets #4 through #9 are our allies. Do we need to protect ourselves from France?
You're welcome
Really???????
Look if the cause of gun violence has nothing to do with guns - which sounds counter intuitive - let's have a real discussion about it. If the platitude "Guns don't kill people. People kill people." is true, and I think it is, then let's follow it to its logical conclusion. If you throw that out in a debate, and think it's the endpoint, you're being lazy. What does it mean? It means the problem variable in the gun violence is people. Some people should NOT have fucking guns. That's what it means. What does that mean? It means closing loopholes for background checks so people that shouldn't have guns have a tougher time getting them. No background checks at gun shows? Close it. If that inconveniences enthusiasts - tough shit. We have a right to go to the mall, or the movie, or our kids to school and NOT get shot. That's my liberty, and your right to arms interferes with it. So fuck you and your gun.
Oh, and the 2nd Amendment having intent to arm citizens to overthrow oppressive government - wrong. It's to serve in state militias in defense of a free state. Read the 2nd Amendment, and read the Federalist Papers. Look at Federalist #29 in particular.
After that if you still want to protect us from the government - cut the Pentagon's budget. It's too goddamn big anyway. The Founders were not fans of standing armies, so don't cherry pick their ideas selfishly. Own all that. Besides, now that Republicans are concerned about the deficit and wasteful spending, put that shit on the chopping block too. More than the next 13 countries in the world combined is what we spend on defense, AND countries with defense budgets #4 through #9 are our allies. Do we need to protect ourselves from France?
You're welcome
Monday, January 7, 2013
Roll Tide?? - Go Irish?? Who gives a shit
National championship of big time college football is at stake tonight. There are many things wrong with Division 1 NCAA football in general, and with the BCS in particular, but that's for another time.
My problem is the teams in the game. Can't really stand either one of them. Perennial powers for sure, but ...... meh .... who cares?
When any team does well there are always bandwagon jumpers. It is what it is, but when it comes to 'Bama, and the Irish it's a whole new level. This game is like "America's college team" against "America's other college team." It's like the Roger Staubach era Dallas Cowboys are playing the Troy Aikman era Dallas Cowboys. And I know this is "hating." I'll own that.
Every fucking Crimson Tide fan has crawled out of the woodwork with the "Roll Tide" and "Bear Bryant" and Joe Namath bullshit. Crimson Tide is a dumbass team nickname. It's even stupider than the Oregon Ducks. Bear Bryant has been a rotting corpse feeding worms, while Joe Pa passed his record while protecting a pedophile to do so, and Joe Namath was the drunk ass slobbering all over Suzy Kolber. Suck on that Bama fans.
Irish fans are even worse. They're almost as bad as Minnesota Viking fans. The only difference is that at least ND has won something since - forever. Knute Rockne coached forever ago. Joe Montana is doing fucking Skechers commercials - SKECHERS!!!! Lou Holtz talk like he's wearing Rick Mirer's old mouthpiece, and your mascot is a faggoty little dude who runs away from kids so he doesn't have to share his breakfast cereal. Suck it Irish.
Hope this doesn't offend anyone too much, but if you're a fan of either of these teams without any affiliation (family, friend, or you are alums) you're a front running bandwagon jumper. I hope the game is high scoring, and a tie till the end when it's decided by a bad call. That way if you're team won - suck it - it's only because of a bad call they won, and if you're team is on the losing end. Too bad. Shouldn't root for a loser.
My problem is the teams in the game. Can't really stand either one of them. Perennial powers for sure, but ...... meh .... who cares?
When any team does well there are always bandwagon jumpers. It is what it is, but when it comes to 'Bama, and the Irish it's a whole new level. This game is like "America's college team" against "America's other college team." It's like the Roger Staubach era Dallas Cowboys are playing the Troy Aikman era Dallas Cowboys. And I know this is "hating." I'll own that.
Every fucking Crimson Tide fan has crawled out of the woodwork with the "Roll Tide" and "Bear Bryant" and Joe Namath bullshit. Crimson Tide is a dumbass team nickname. It's even stupider than the Oregon Ducks. Bear Bryant has been a rotting corpse feeding worms, while Joe Pa passed his record while protecting a pedophile to do so, and Joe Namath was the drunk ass slobbering all over Suzy Kolber. Suck on that Bama fans.
Irish fans are even worse. They're almost as bad as Minnesota Viking fans. The only difference is that at least ND has won something since - forever. Knute Rockne coached forever ago. Joe Montana is doing fucking Skechers commercials - SKECHERS!!!! Lou Holtz talk like he's wearing Rick Mirer's old mouthpiece, and your mascot is a faggoty little dude who runs away from kids so he doesn't have to share his breakfast cereal. Suck it Irish.
Hope this doesn't offend anyone too much, but if you're a fan of either of these teams without any affiliation (family, friend, or you are alums) you're a front running bandwagon jumper. I hope the game is high scoring, and a tie till the end when it's decided by a bad call. That way if you're team won - suck it - it's only because of a bad call they won, and if you're team is on the losing end. Too bad. Shouldn't root for a loser.
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
Col. Jessup is a douchebag
A Few Good Men was on the other night. I love that movie. It's a compelling story, and the acting is outstanding by everyone in it. My personal favorite is Kevin Bacon as the Marine prosecutor Captain Jack Ross. He's a Marine to the core. No bullshit, by the book. He knows his duty, and is committed to it 100 percent. But....that's not the point here.
Jack Nicholson as Colonel Nathan Jessup is the fan favorite. And deservedly so. His character is the one that carries the movie. Cruise's Lt. Caffey is an interesting character only after he finds out in a drunken state that the reason he was picked to represent the case due to his history of plea bargain to keep the case out of court and avoid embarrassing Col. Jessup. Demi Moore, and Kevin Pollack? I think these 2 are superfluous, and the story could have been told without them. The only exposition involving them is Pollack's serving as a sounding board as Cruise realizes he's being played as a puppet.
No, Nicholson as Jessup is the guy, and the "You can't handle the truth" monologue is the money dialog in the movie. It should be. Nicholson brings it home in this climax of the movie. I mean, he drives it home.
But the guy's a colossal dick. He's the biggest kind of dick there is. Lost in the passionate dialog about walls, and standing posts is the realization that 1) He's a Colonel, and hasn't stood post since forever, and 2) He's letting 2 guys that DID stand post under his command take the fall for internal discipline that he ordered that went bad in the worst way. I didn't serve, but my Dad did serve 23 years in the Navy. At all the command functions we went to over the year, ship's picnics, parties with colleagues, professional friends over there were a lot of conversations I heard, and over-heard. A commanding officer that lets the people in their command take the heat for their screw ups was the worst kind of CO.
So, Nicholson brought down the house in his portrayal of Colonel Jessup, and Bacon was quintessential Marine as Captain Ross, but at the end of the story Jessup got what he deserved, because he let Pfc Downing, and Lance Cpl Dawson take the fall.
Jack Nicholson as Colonel Nathan Jessup is the fan favorite. And deservedly so. His character is the one that carries the movie. Cruise's Lt. Caffey is an interesting character only after he finds out in a drunken state that the reason he was picked to represent the case due to his history of plea bargain to keep the case out of court and avoid embarrassing Col. Jessup. Demi Moore, and Kevin Pollack? I think these 2 are superfluous, and the story could have been told without them. The only exposition involving them is Pollack's serving as a sounding board as Cruise realizes he's being played as a puppet.
No, Nicholson as Jessup is the guy, and the "You can't handle the truth" monologue is the money dialog in the movie. It should be. Nicholson brings it home in this climax of the movie. I mean, he drives it home.
But the guy's a colossal dick. He's the biggest kind of dick there is. Lost in the passionate dialog about walls, and standing posts is the realization that 1) He's a Colonel, and hasn't stood post since forever, and 2) He's letting 2 guys that DID stand post under his command take the fall for internal discipline that he ordered that went bad in the worst way. I didn't serve, but my Dad did serve 23 years in the Navy. At all the command functions we went to over the year, ship's picnics, parties with colleagues, professional friends over there were a lot of conversations I heard, and over-heard. A commanding officer that lets the people in their command take the heat for their screw ups was the worst kind of CO.
So, Nicholson brought down the house in his portrayal of Colonel Jessup, and Bacon was quintessential Marine as Captain Ross, but at the end of the story Jessup got what he deserved, because he let Pfc Downing, and Lance Cpl Dawson take the fall.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)