Where's the love man?!?!

LeBron James has a championship ring.

I don't know why so many people dislike LeBron James so intensely. What did he ever do to engender so much hostility? "The Decision?" As over the top, and ridiculous as that was, how many people REALLY think that was his idea? Was it abandoning small market Cleveland for the excitement of Miami? I don't know that either of those two things should be enough to make people proclaim hate for him. (sports hate, not hate hate) I mean really, how many players in any sport have left smaller markets for bigger contracts? Too many to count. As for "The Decision" I put that at the feet of ESPN and it's need to televise everything sport. Not in any imagination can I see a player pitch that idea. "OK - how about you follow me around while I make my decision on signing, and televise it? Whadaya think?"

Everyone loved Michael Jordan. When the Bulls finally beat the Lakers for the 1st of the 6 titles they would win in the Jordan era there could not have been more love sent his way. Why the difference? Well, Jordan never switched teams. He was faithful to the Bull fans, and the city of Chicago many people will say. True, but also kinda easy. Chicago is way bigger than Cleveland. There was no way any team could have lured him away with a more lucrative deal. Could the Knicks or Lakers have found more to pay him than the Bulls? No way. Jordan was always gonna get paid in Chicago, and there was zero chance he'd ever leave. of course I am discounting his 2nd un-retirement from the Wizard front office to the Wizard backcourt. Hardly counts as leaving a team via free-agency.

They are each the definitively most talented, dominant players in the league of their eras. He's been playing the best basketball on the planet for at least the past 3 seasons. LeBron has not had any scandalous behavior surface. No illegal narcotics, no illegitimate children, no beaten girlfriends. Nothing. Even Jordan had his golf gambling to overcome - such as it was.

So why? LeBron - you're awesome. Well done. Congratulations. You earned it.

Was that so hard?

Retire Brett Favre's Number

I've been stirring on this for a few weeks. The seed was planted when, during the Packers Tailgate Tour, the question of when Brett Favre's number would be retired was posed to Mark Murphy. His answer was that it would be in a year or two, when it's meaningful to Brett.

I'm not sure what that means. Does that mean Brett is still pissed at Ted Thompson, and Mike McCarthy for not letting him come back as the started when he changed his mind about retiring? Does it mean Brett has hurt feelings about how he was booed by Packer fans at Packer-Viking games. I don't know. What I will say is the next number the Green Bay Packers should be retiring is #4. There should not be another number retired until Brett's #4 is retired. There, I said it. I did not like it when Brett went to play for the Minnesota Vikings. I never loved Brett as a player any less. I never turned on Brett in playoff failures, or after horrible games, or bonehead throws that ended up in the arms of a defender. But Brett put on the wrong shirt, and worse Brett maneuvered himself into that purple shirt as a "up yours" to Ted Thompson for not letting him come back when he changed his mind about retiring. And I cheered against the Vikings. Not because of Brett's presence, but because they're the Vikings. This guy is a Packer fan, and does not cheer for Vikings except in rare circumstances when their victory will be good for the Packers.

Having said that, retire the number. And when they do nobody should be booing. NO-BODY. If Brett doesn't play in 92 with a separated left shoulder he doesn't impress Reggie White, and Reggie does not come to Green Bay the next season. Reggie White said one of the reasons he signed with the Packers, aside from God's guidance, was he believed in Brett Favre's leadership as being key to the Packers being a place where he would be on a winning team. No Brett, no Reggie. No Reggie, very few of the other key additions through free agency that Ron Wolf brought in. Brett was the first domino of the players that led to the resurgence of the Green Bay Packers in the 1990s. So remember that when it comes time for #4 to be retired. When the day comes when Brett stands on the "G" at the 50 yard line of Lambeau Field at halftime of some primetime game remember that Brett Favre is the most significant reason that the Green Bay Packers became a perrenial winner. That day should be a cascade of cheers. The stadium should be resplendent with signage professing fan love and appreciation.

I think "meaningful to Brett" is a poor choice of words. Haw can it not be meaningful to Brett? Elite athletes have big egos. They always have, and always will. A stadium of cheers, even with the boos mixed in feed that ego. The truth is that it should be done when it's meaningful to the vast majority of fan. When those who will boo now, will not. That's when it should be done. I want to see Brett at midfield as the stadium roars. I want Brett to call Lambeau "my house!" and the stadium to roar. I want to hear a lone voice shoud "Love ya Brett!!" at a pause, and another roar. Retiring that number means as much to us as fans as it does to him as a player.

I hope it's meaningful to those yahoos soon.

June 5th 2012 - Recall Day in Wisconsin

     It's 8:30 on election day for the Gubernatorial recall. I've not watched news coverage, and don't know who's polling ahead, and if anyone has projected a winner I don't know.
     It's been quite a time here in Cheeselandistan since the Budget Repair Bill saga of last winter. Political, and partisan passions have been pretty intense since then. Just looking at that, and it looks like an understatement. Anyone who's posted a comment on a news service message board, blog, Facebook can attest to that intensity.
     As I watch the Brewers play the Cubs here I about how the game of baseball is called the "National Pastime." Seems the State pastime these past 15 months has been soapboxing our political opinions in any way available. There has been much said by friends, acquaintances, and strangers today about looking forward to the end of the campaign, and the ads, and the phone calls. Really? I hope so, but I'm a little less optimistic. Realistically we're looking at a neck and neck election, so whoever wins the tonight it's not "over." Dollars to doughnuts there's a recount - automatic or otherwise. You can also bet that if there's a recount the postings, and partisan noise will continue through that. That's been the Wisconsin pastime since Act 10. At the end of the day it's a good thing to have an opinion, and it's a good thing to express it, but that reminds me of something my father the sailor said. "Opinions are like assholes; everyone has one, and nobody thinks their own stinks." 
     There are things we know because we observe them, and there are things that are a result of deeply held beliefs. Some of them we will see something that changes our mind, and others we will never recant. Knowing that this is not over means that more of us will share our perspectives passionately. Mark Twain once said “The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also.” That's a really nice way to state another thing my Dad said: "You're as full of shit as anyone else." Remember that the next time you read something one of your friends says, or some stranger has posted on a message board, or news comment board. Before you satisfy that personal need to "put them in their place," remember you're as full of shit as they are. You just aren't aware of it. Maybe with that realization a basic amount of respect for another persons' attachment to their own convictions will lead to a respectful exchange of ideas, mutual respect, and maybe an appreciation that we're all in this together. Maybe then the partisan divide that seems so vast might reveal itself to be closer than it looks.
     It's 9:15 now, and the Cubs are killing the Brewers. At least we can all get behind how sucky that is. (except for those jackass Cub fans)

Deficits and the War on Terror

I generally like John Aziz's blog. I don't always agree, but he never fails to provoke thought. 

http://azizonomics.com/2012/03/30/the-economics-of-the-war-on-terror/

I thought this post was pretty good in terms of that. We spend a lot of time in the United States talking about debt, and deficits in terms of whose fault it is - politically speaking. That's one problem with out political culture; it's D said R said tunnel vision passing for political coverage when in fact the decisions that are made have to be judged in longer terms than the next election or poll.

When it comes to the War on Terror, a lot was spent. The Dept of Homeland security is a huge bureaucracy. The Iraq Invasion, and subsequent occupation was exclusively funded through supplemental bills meaning all deficits. No taxes were part of those bills. The Afghanistan operations were funded likewise. This is not to say the deficit is therefore the fault of President Bush. The question as to whether this additional deficit was worth it is the main thrust in the linked post. I do quite agree that given the state of affairs in Afghanistan, with a resurgent Taliban in Pakistan, and in Afghanistan we have had questionable success in establishing a friendly government in Afghanistan. President Karzai is quite unpopular due mainly to corruption in his government, and the view that he's a puppet of the United States. "Winning the peace" as General Patreus put it has proven difficult in that region of the world. Over in Iraq, while Hussein is long gone we can hardly say that the current leadership there is friendly toward us, and our interests.

This gun thing......

This Traymon thing, it's got me. I mean, really got me.

Look, I support gun rights. The 2nd Amendment is there for a reason. The Founders had recently fought the War for Independence. They firmly believed that citizens needed the right to arm themselves. Both in the defense from invaders, and in the event government became tyrannical. So all the gun rights purists who DON'T read me......well they don't so it's all good.

Guns don't kill people. People kill people. We've heard it thousands of times - maybe hundreds. I just did a little mental math. It's probably hundreds. It's up there in the hundreds though. Pretty high in the hundreds I'd say, but that's a small point. Fact is the adage is pretty on the button. The problem is the message of the adage is missed. If the wild card in the equation is people, then the only conclusion any logical person can make is that: SOME PEOPLE SHOULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO GUNS!!!!

The self-appointed captain of the the neighborhood watch takes it upon himself to patrol the neighborhood. That's fine I guess. It's what neighborhood watches do. This guy though, this guy was something else. He calls 911 - an emergency line - to report the presence of a "suspicious person." I'm sorry, is that what the emergency line is for? He follows the kid, tells the operator he's gonna follow him, even after the operator tells him not to. This fucking cowboy is the reason for the confrontation, not a teen with some skittles. Don't we all know someone like George Zimmerman: takes himself a little too seriously, wants to be a cop, but the cops you know think he's a fucking nut, and would probably snap and beat a suspect because "he knows."

Then there's the guy in Slinger. Drinking party next door. He calls the police with a noise complaint. Police come, and they don't get permission to enter the house. The don't have a warrant, or probably cause (complaint isn't probable cause), so they tell the guy they're gonna wait across the street till the owner (parents) get home. In the meantime, idiot teens, and early 20s being drunk, and dumb decide some are gonna make a break, One hides in this guys porch which is unlocked. Let's see, he's got a gun in his house, and he calls the cops, but he doesn't lock his porch. Not saying he's baiting someone, he's probably just dumb too. I mean, he hears a noise, but doesn't call the cops who are ACROSS THE STREET? So he looks in his porch, sees the guy between the fridge, and cabinet (or dresser). Guy moves. Homeowner shoots. Police finally are called buy homeowners wife. Shot guy, STILL BETWEEN THE FURNITURE AND FRIDGE.

That's the problem with "Stand Your Ground," the Florida law that allows you to use a gun outside of your home if you feel threatened, and the "Castle Doctrine" in Wisconsin that presumes self defense if a person uses deadly force in their home. It's all if you "feel" threatened. Clearly some people have no tolerance for threat, and just enough crazy to feel threatened by a teenager in a hoodie.

Some people should not have guns, and that's not a gun thing, that's a people thing, People kill people

Rush Limbaugh is an asshole......

Rush said some, depending on your location on the ideological spectrum, despicable/insensitive/stupid/honest things about a Georgetown student, and contraception. This is the political theater's outrage of the moment. Look, Rush Limbaugh is an asshole. I don't mean that in the insult/pejorative sense. I mean Rush says things and people react. He shares opinion on a great many things, and you can like it or hate it. At the end of the day he really doesn't care if you like him or not. He's an asshole in the same way my buddy Roy is an asshole, or in the same way my Dad can be an asshole. Don't like what I say - go fuck yourself. At the end of the day Roy is my buddy and I love my Dad and at their core they're good people. Rush's job is to be an asshole on the radio. People listen, like, and keep listening. Others listen, dislike, and don't listen, or make a stink. It's political theater like I said.

Here's the issue. We don't need anymore political theater. We've had the same bullshit theater for the last 20 yrs. Since the 92 election it's been theater way over the top. I'm tired of it.

Why is it people say we should have a leader with business experience? Really, why is it that a person with business experience is so valuable for the economy? Because they are the experts in business. We're told that because they live in the business world, they can speak to the real world applications of how the economy manifests itself. Well why, when the consensus of the scientific community - the experts - say that climate change is real, the same people say we should not listen to those people.

In 2008 when the financial sector of the world economy nearly melted down because the leverage in the system from opaque derivative instruments is so great, and interconnected that there is not enough liquidity when swaps are called in. Why is the solution from the same experts who didn't see this in the system, more of the same "let the market" figure it out. The market nearly melted down without rules. Now you tell us the solution is to keep playing the game with no rules?

Regardless of your stripe of politic - ask the question, and demand a debate on the issues that matter. When the media dipshits give you the assholism of the day from (insert dickhead media person) turn it off. OK, Rush Limbaugh is an asshole. We've known for a long time. Rush Limbaugh being as asshole again is not news.

Thoughts on Ryan Braun

Ryan Braun won his appeal of a 50 game suspension for testing positive for an extremely elevated level of testosterone.

Ryan Braun proclaims innocence.

Major League Baseball cries foul.

Regardless of your position on whether or not Ryan Braun should or should not be branded a cheater, and be suspended there are a couple things to think about:

Major League Baseball is a multi-billion enterprise. Billion is 9 zeros after a 1. Owners make a shit ton of money. Players make a shit ton of money, TV makes a shit ton of money. Fans pay a shit ton of money for tickets, parking ($10 for cheapie parking at Miller Park), brats, beer, tee shirts, jerseys.

Players are tested, not only when they are under contract, but their entire playing career beginning as kids. I mean tested in the sense of can they hit, field, throw? Are their joints solid? Is there an injury risk, and on and on. They have to sign contracts promising never to bet on baseball, or they are banned. They have assorted clauses that they have to comply with - all to assure the investment that owners are making is protected.

You would think something as important as the testing for performance enhancing drugs in a mulit-billion dollare enterprise would follow a pretty strict protocol. And according to the current collective bargaining agreement in place, there are protocols in place that each side has agreed to.

Did Braunie get off on a technicality? I don't know, but Major League Baseball - follow your own protocol.

Technically, maybe MLB would do a little more than hire some part time techs looking for some side cash to collect samples. You would think - technically.

Maybe technically samples should be sent the lab according to protocol.

Technically, maybe, technically, said sample shouldn't sit in the collectors fridge for two days until it can be sent to, you know, get tested - technically.

Technically, before you technically take away about a third of a players pay you should be sure.

Technically some guys fridge is not a "cold and secure" location. I mean, I trust my buddies, but I don't want my shit in their fridge. MLB should at least be as stringent as me.


I guess, technically, before owners give up fans' spending money in their stadiums because the MVP won't be there, they should be sure.

Maybe, just maybe, before you forever cast a cloud over the integrity of a player, technically, who has never tested positive for anything, thus harming his earning potential outside of baseball you should be sure.

I don't know maybe you should technically collect samples on a weekday when you have more time to get to the Fed Ex Store.