Great post on CBSNews.com today as part of their "United States of Influence" series:
"As a congressional candidate, "every waking minute of every day is devoted to that campaign," said Doug Heye, a former spokesman for the Republican National Committee. "It requires an extraordinary amount of time, and it becomes difficult for a lot of people if you have a full-time job... When you've got a mortgage to pay and college tuition and braces to pay for, those kinds of day-to-day, real-life expenses come before putting six months into a campaign.""
At what point will people start feeling like they're being treated like serfs?
Thursday, June 30, 2011
FEC Approves Stephen Colbert’s Super PAC for 2012 Election - The Note
I can only imagine where this will lead...
Cirque du Soleil First Pitch
This has to be the CRAZIEST first pitch ever! What's even more amazing is the pitch was a STRIKE!
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Jose Reyes continues to sizzle...
From ESPN.com: "Jose Reyes played his 1,000th major league game [on Tuesday] and went 4-for-4 with a walk before being replaced with Ruben Tejada as a pinch-runner. Only Ty Cobb had more steals and triples in his first 1,000 games in major league history."
More: "The Tigers estimated Reyes had swung at 153 pitches in the past two weeks and missed only three."
I'm starting to run out of words to describe Jose Reyes's season. The statement "Only Ty Cobb had more steals and triples in his first 1,000 games in major league history." speaks for itself.
More: "The Tigers estimated Reyes had swung at 153 pitches in the past two weeks and missed only three."
I'm starting to run out of words to describe Jose Reyes's season. The statement "Only Ty Cobb had more steals and triples in his first 1,000 games in major league history." speaks for itself.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Blue Jersey:: All You Have To Do To Be A Taxpayer Is Buy A Snickers
This is brilliant and extremely well put...
Monday, June 27, 2011
"Managerialist America"
This is an interesting take on things:
"...this suggests a structural antagonism not between the rich and the not-rich, but between the corporate managerial class, the diffuse crowd of individuals who actually own the companies the managerial class so jealously control, and the rest of us, who are harmed by the knock-on effects of the sorts of managerial malfeasance enabled by the regulatory reinforcment of the separation of ownership and management, and the amplification of agency problems that reinforcement entails."
"...this suggests a structural antagonism not between the rich and the not-rich, but between the corporate managerial class, the diffuse crowd of individuals who actually own the companies the managerial class so jealously control, and the rest of us, who are harmed by the knock-on effects of the sorts of managerial malfeasance enabled by the regulatory reinforcment of the separation of ownership and management, and the amplification of agency problems that reinforcement entails."
Friday, June 24, 2011
"Don’t make Reyes pay because of Jason Bay."
A life-long Yankee fan offering great advice on why the Mets should keep Jose Reyes and an honest assessment of Yankee fans:
"Maybe as much as a third of the Yankees’ fan base are front-running, J.Crew, wine-and-cheese chumps who only go to games because it’s trendy and daddy can afford the ticket. None of them can name a game or a player prior to 1996. Ask who Ron Hassey is and they will likely say a senator from Indiana."
This is very true. In fact, I had to remind a Yankee fan friend of mine who Mel Hall was. In his defense though, he was only 13 years old when Hall hit that home run in Minnesota when he took half a minute to round the bases.
"Maybe as much as a third of the Yankees’ fan base are front-running, J.Crew, wine-and-cheese chumps who only go to games because it’s trendy and daddy can afford the ticket. None of them can name a game or a player prior to 1996. Ask who Ron Hassey is and they will likely say a senator from Indiana."
This is very true. In fact, I had to remind a Yankee fan friend of mine who Mel Hall was. In his defense though, he was only 13 years old when Hall hit that home run in Minnesota when he took half a minute to round the bases.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Friday, June 17, 2011
Who are Raja Krishnamoorthi and Senator Bhatia?
Yet another person of South Asian descent making a name in politics as Raja Krishnamoorthi is running for the 8th Congressional District of Illinois. Then, a few days later, President Barack Obama went to Puerto Rico gave a shout out to Senator Bhatia in his speech. Who is Senator Bhatia, you might ask? Read for yourself; he has a very interesting story.
"Liar, liar, pants on fire" (At least 70% of the time.)
PolitiFact.com did a tally of Michele Bachmann's statements that they have rated since 2009. Of the 23 statements, 16 were rated either "False" or "Pants on Fire". So basically when she says something newsworthy, she's lying 70% of the time. A 30% success rate might be great for a major league hitter but not for someone who is trying to be taken seriously as the leader of 300,000,000 people. Additionally, FactCheck.org weighed in with some of her more dubious statements.
Of course, her supporters will probably do what Sarah Palin's supporters did and try to change what the truth really is. At what point does it stop being politics and start being a religion?
Of course, her supporters will probably do what Sarah Palin's supporters did and try to change what the truth really is. At what point does it stop being politics and start being a religion?
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Sunday, June 5, 2011
"Bakkshlled Singh in particular being a marvel of physical beauty. He stands 6 feet 2 inches and is built in proportion."
All the talk of Manny Malhotra playing for the Vancouver Canucks in this year's Stanley Cup Finals and Brandon Chillar of the Green Bay Packers winning a Super Bowl ring (albeit while being hurt) got me thinking not just about this history of South Asian athletes but South Asians in North America in general. It got me thinking about Robin Bawa, who in 1987 became the first person of South Asian descent to play in one of the pro sports leagues (the NHL.) It also got me thinking about the first documented record of people from the Indian subcontinent arriving in the United States on April 6, 1899:
"There are four Sikhs who arrived on the Nippon Maru the other day were permitted yesterday to land by the immigration officials. The quartet formed the most picturesque group that has been seen on the Pacific Mall dock for many a day. One of them, Bakkshlled [sic] Singh, speaks English with fluency, the others just a little. They are all fine-looking men, Bakkshlled Singh in particular being a marvel of physical beauty. He stands 6 feet 2 inches and is built in proportion. His companions-Bood [sic] Singh, Variam [sic] Singh and Sohava Singh-are not quite so big. All of them have been soldiers and policemen in China. They were in the Royal Artillery, and the tall one with the unpronounceable name was a police sergeant in Hong Kong prior to coming to this country. They hope to make their fortunes here and return to their homes in the Lahore district, which they left some twenty years ago.-San Francisco Chronicle April 6, 1899, p.10"
It got me thinking about Bhagat Singh Thind, who was a US Army veteran in World War I but was denied US Citizenship in a case that went to the United States Supreme Court.
It got me thinking about Dalip Singh Saund, who in 1956 became the first person of South Asian descent to be elected to the United States Congress.
Then it got me thinking that too many people of South Asian descent don't know the history of South Asian peoples in North America so I had better post this on my blog so someone can read it sometime somewhere soon.
"There are four Sikhs who arrived on the Nippon Maru the other day were permitted yesterday to land by the immigration officials. The quartet formed the most picturesque group that has been seen on the Pacific Mall dock for many a day. One of them, Bakkshlled [sic] Singh, speaks English with fluency, the others just a little. They are all fine-looking men, Bakkshlled Singh in particular being a marvel of physical beauty. He stands 6 feet 2 inches and is built in proportion. His companions-Bood [sic] Singh, Variam [sic] Singh and Sohava Singh-are not quite so big. All of them have been soldiers and policemen in China. They were in the Royal Artillery, and the tall one with the unpronounceable name was a police sergeant in Hong Kong prior to coming to this country. They hope to make their fortunes here and return to their homes in the Lahore district, which they left some twenty years ago.-San Francisco Chronicle April 6, 1899, p.10"
It got me thinking about Bhagat Singh Thind, who was a US Army veteran in World War I but was denied US Citizenship in a case that went to the United States Supreme Court.
It got me thinking about Dalip Singh Saund, who in 1956 became the first person of South Asian descent to be elected to the United States Congress.
Then it got me thinking that too many people of South Asian descent don't know the history of South Asian peoples in North America so I had better post this on my blog so someone can read it sometime somewhere soon.
Friday, June 3, 2011
MLB Players Poll: Most Overrated Player - Photos - SI.com
SI.com polled 185 MLB players to name the most overrated player in baseball. SI's photo gallery lists the top 16, which includes Yankee players in the top three spots and five Yankees (and one former Yankee) overall.
"God Is Not a Christian: And Other Provocations" by Desmond Tutu
The winner of the 1984 Nobel Peace Prize, Archbishop Desmond Tutu has written a new book titled, "God Is Not a Christian: And Other Provocations". An excerpt from the book was posted on Huffington Post yesterday.
I was blown away by the incredible humanity in this great man. In fact, I read through the post to find blurbs to post on this blog and was so impressed that I posted the entire piece below. Please read it below, or go to the original site to read it there, and reflect on what this incredible human being is telling us. Thank you!
The following is excerpted from the Archbishop Desmond Tutu's new book, 'God Is Not A Christian: And Other Provocations.'
This talk also comes from a forum in Britain, where Tutu addressed leaders of different faiths during a mission to the city of Birmingham in 1989.
They tell the story of a drunk who crossed the street and accosted a pedestrian, asking him, "I shay, which ish the other shide of the shtreet?" The pedestrian, somewhat nonplussed, replied, "That side, of course!" The drunk said, "Shtrange. When I wash on that shide, they shaid it wash thish shide." Where the other side of the street is depends on where we are. Our perspective differs with our context, the things that have helped to form us; and religion is one of the most potent of these formative influences, helping to determine how and what we apprehend of reality and how we operate in our own specific context.
My first point seems overwhelmingly simple: that the accidents of birth and geography determine to a very large extent to what faith we belong. The chances are very great that if you were born in Pakistan you are a Muslim, or a Hindu if you happened to be born in India, or a Shintoist if it is Japan, and a Christian if you were born in Italy. I don't know what significant fact can be drawn from this -- perhaps that we should not succumb too easily to the temptation to exclusiveness and dogmatic claims to a monopoly of the truth of our particular faith. You could so easily have been an adherent of the faith that you are now denigrating, but for the fact that you were born here rather than there.
My second point is this: not to insult the adherents of other faiths by suggesting, as sometimes has happened, that for instance when you are a Christian the adherents of other faiths are really Christians without knowing it. We must acknowledge them for who they are in all their integrity, with their conscientiously held beliefs; we must welcome them and respect them as who they are and walk reverently on what is their holy ground, taking off our shoes, metaphorically and literally. We must hold to our particular and peculiar beliefs tenaciously, not pretending that all religions are the same, for they are patently not the same. We must be ready to learn from one another, not claiming that we alone possess all truth and that somehow we have a corner on God.
We should in humility and joyfulness acknowledge that the supernatural and divine reality we all worship in some form or other transcends all our particular categories of thought and imagining, and that because the divine -- however named, however apprehended or conceived -- is infinite and we are forever finite, we shall never comprehend the divine completely. So we should seek to share all insights we can and be ready to learn, for instance, from the techniques of the spiritual life that are available in religions other than our own. It is interesting that most religions have a transcendent reference point, a mysterium tremendum, that comes to be known by deigning to reveal itself, himself, herself, to humanity; that the transcendent reality is compassionate and concerned; that human beings are creatures of this supreme, supra mundane reality in some way, with a high destiny that hopes for an everlasting life lived in close association with the divine, either as absorbed without distinction between creature and creator, between the divine and human, or in a wonderful intimacy which still retains the distinctions between these two orders of reality.
When we read the classics of the various religions in matters of prayer, meditation, and mysticism, we find substantial convergence, and that is something to rejoice at. We have enough that conspires to separate us; let us celebrate that which unites us, that which we share in common.
Surely it is good to know that God (in the Christian tradition) created us all (not just Christians) in his image, thus investing us all with infinite worth, and that it was with all humankind that God entered into a covenant relationship, depicted in the covenant with Noah when God promised he would not destroy his creation again with water. Surely we can rejoice that the eternal word, the Logos of God, enlightens everyone -- not just Christians, but everyone who comes into the world; that what we call the Spirit of God is not a Christian preserve, for the Spirit of God existed long before there were Christians, inspiring and nurturing women and men in the ways of holiness, bringing them to fruition, bringing to fruition what was best in all. We do scant justice and honor to our God if we want, for instance, to deny that Mahatma Gandhi was a truly great soul, a holy man who walked closely with God. Our God would be too small if he was not also the God of Gandhi: if God is one, as we believe, then he is the only God of all his people, whether they acknowledge him as such or not. God does not need us to protect him. Many of us perhaps need to have our notion of God deepened and expanded. It is often said, half in jest, that God created man in his own image and man has returned the compliment, saddling God with his own narrow prejudices and exclusivity, foibles and temperamental quirks. God remains God, whether God has worshippers or not.
This mission in Birmingham to which I have been invited is a Christian celebration, and we will make our claims for Christ as unique and as the Savior of the world, hoping that we will live out our beliefs in such a way that they help to commend our faith effectively. Our conduct far too often contradicts our profession, however. We are supposed to proclaim the God of love, but we have been guilty as Christians of sowing hatred and suspicion; we commend the one whom we call the Prince of Peace, and yet as Christians we have fought more wars than we care to remember. We have claimed to be a fellowship of compassion and caring and sharing, but as Christians we often sanctify sociopolitical systems that belie this, where the rich grow ever richer and the poor grow ever poorer, where we seem to sanctify a furious competitiveness, ruthless as can only be appropriate to the jungle.
I was blown away by the incredible humanity in this great man. In fact, I read through the post to find blurbs to post on this blog and was so impressed that I posted the entire piece below. Please read it below, or go to the original site to read it there, and reflect on what this incredible human being is telling us. Thank you!
The following is excerpted from the Archbishop Desmond Tutu's new book, 'God Is Not A Christian: And Other Provocations.'
This talk also comes from a forum in Britain, where Tutu addressed leaders of different faiths during a mission to the city of Birmingham in 1989.
They tell the story of a drunk who crossed the street and accosted a pedestrian, asking him, "I shay, which ish the other shide of the shtreet?" The pedestrian, somewhat nonplussed, replied, "That side, of course!" The drunk said, "Shtrange. When I wash on that shide, they shaid it wash thish shide." Where the other side of the street is depends on where we are. Our perspective differs with our context, the things that have helped to form us; and religion is one of the most potent of these formative influences, helping to determine how and what we apprehend of reality and how we operate in our own specific context.
My first point seems overwhelmingly simple: that the accidents of birth and geography determine to a very large extent to what faith we belong. The chances are very great that if you were born in Pakistan you are a Muslim, or a Hindu if you happened to be born in India, or a Shintoist if it is Japan, and a Christian if you were born in Italy. I don't know what significant fact can be drawn from this -- perhaps that we should not succumb too easily to the temptation to exclusiveness and dogmatic claims to a monopoly of the truth of our particular faith. You could so easily have been an adherent of the faith that you are now denigrating, but for the fact that you were born here rather than there.
My second point is this: not to insult the adherents of other faiths by suggesting, as sometimes has happened, that for instance when you are a Christian the adherents of other faiths are really Christians without knowing it. We must acknowledge them for who they are in all their integrity, with their conscientiously held beliefs; we must welcome them and respect them as who they are and walk reverently on what is their holy ground, taking off our shoes, metaphorically and literally. We must hold to our particular and peculiar beliefs tenaciously, not pretending that all religions are the same, for they are patently not the same. We must be ready to learn from one another, not claiming that we alone possess all truth and that somehow we have a corner on God.
We should in humility and joyfulness acknowledge that the supernatural and divine reality we all worship in some form or other transcends all our particular categories of thought and imagining, and that because the divine -- however named, however apprehended or conceived -- is infinite and we are forever finite, we shall never comprehend the divine completely. So we should seek to share all insights we can and be ready to learn, for instance, from the techniques of the spiritual life that are available in religions other than our own. It is interesting that most religions have a transcendent reference point, a mysterium tremendum, that comes to be known by deigning to reveal itself, himself, herself, to humanity; that the transcendent reality is compassionate and concerned; that human beings are creatures of this supreme, supra mundane reality in some way, with a high destiny that hopes for an everlasting life lived in close association with the divine, either as absorbed without distinction between creature and creator, between the divine and human, or in a wonderful intimacy which still retains the distinctions between these two orders of reality.
When we read the classics of the various religions in matters of prayer, meditation, and mysticism, we find substantial convergence, and that is something to rejoice at. We have enough that conspires to separate us; let us celebrate that which unites us, that which we share in common.
Surely it is good to know that God (in the Christian tradition) created us all (not just Christians) in his image, thus investing us all with infinite worth, and that it was with all humankind that God entered into a covenant relationship, depicted in the covenant with Noah when God promised he would not destroy his creation again with water. Surely we can rejoice that the eternal word, the Logos of God, enlightens everyone -- not just Christians, but everyone who comes into the world; that what we call the Spirit of God is not a Christian preserve, for the Spirit of God existed long before there were Christians, inspiring and nurturing women and men in the ways of holiness, bringing them to fruition, bringing to fruition what was best in all. We do scant justice and honor to our God if we want, for instance, to deny that Mahatma Gandhi was a truly great soul, a holy man who walked closely with God. Our God would be too small if he was not also the God of Gandhi: if God is one, as we believe, then he is the only God of all his people, whether they acknowledge him as such or not. God does not need us to protect him. Many of us perhaps need to have our notion of God deepened and expanded. It is often said, half in jest, that God created man in his own image and man has returned the compliment, saddling God with his own narrow prejudices and exclusivity, foibles and temperamental quirks. God remains God, whether God has worshippers or not.
This mission in Birmingham to which I have been invited is a Christian celebration, and we will make our claims for Christ as unique and as the Savior of the world, hoping that we will live out our beliefs in such a way that they help to commend our faith effectively. Our conduct far too often contradicts our profession, however. We are supposed to proclaim the God of love, but we have been guilty as Christians of sowing hatred and suspicion; we commend the one whom we call the Prince of Peace, and yet as Christians we have fought more wars than we care to remember. We have claimed to be a fellowship of compassion and caring and sharing, but as Christians we often sanctify sociopolitical systems that belie this, where the rich grow ever richer and the poor grow ever poorer, where we seem to sanctify a furious competitiveness, ruthless as can only be appropriate to the jungle.
More David and Jose thoughts...
A few more nuggets about Jose Reyes and David Wright. Joel Sherman of the New York Post wrote yesterday that the Mets unlikely to get a lot back for veteran stars. Additionally, Jeff Bradley of The Newark Star-Ledger wrote that Sandy Alderson is familiar with the Jose Reyes situation:
"The date was June 21, 1989, and Alderson, then the 41-year-old GM of the Oakland A’s, fleeced the Yankees for Rickey Henderson, sending pitchers Greg Cadaret and Eric Plunk, and outfielder Luis Polonia east for the greatest leadoff hitter in major-league history. Four months later, the Henderson-led A’s were World Series champions.
At the time of that deal, Alderson believed Henderson — in his walk year — was most likely going to be a short-term rental for the A’s. But taking Henderson was a risk he took on behalf of Oakland that translated into that team’s one and only World Series title during an era the A’s appeared ready to dominate."
I remember the Henderson trade, remember the buzz created by Caderet, Plunk, and Polonia. The buzz was especially loudest about Polonia growing up blocks away from Yankee Stadium and that the Yankees got back the fireballer Plunk, who they sent to Oakland when they traded to get Rickey Henderson a few years earlier. The only other buzz thereafter was when Luis Polonia was arrested after an incident involving a 15-year old girl in a Milwaukee hotel room.
[On a side note, any Met fan over the Reyes era can tell you that Jose's mindset as a leadoff hitter or focus as a basestealer didn't really solidfy until the Mets hired Rickey Henderson as a baserunning coach. I don't think it's a coincidence that is when Reyes' game really picked up.]
Which is why Ken Rosenthal's column at FoxSports.com today is so appealing. I mentioned in my blog post yesterday that replacing Reyes would be much more difficult than replacing Wright and I even made some comparison to Nomar Garciaparra. However, Rosenthal makes some great points that I hadn't considered that replacing Wright isn't so simple either:
"Let’s see if I can build a market for this ne’er-do-well third baseman, whose OPS-plus from 2008 to ’10 — as pointed out by Andy McCullough of the Newark Star-Ledger — was comparable to Mark Teixeira’s from ’06 to ’08 at a similar age.
Wright would fit for both Los Angeles teams, both Chicago teams, the Rockies, Orioles, Twins, Tigers and Mariners. He could replace Scott Rolen in Cincinnati, Chipper Jones in Atlanta and Aramis Ramirez with the Cubs.
That enough?
No, the Mets probably wouldn’t trade Wright to the Braves or Phillies. But I’d bet that the Phillies’ uber-aggressive GM, Ruben Amaro Jr., would move heaven, earth and a killer prospect package to get Wright’s right-handed bat at Citizens Bank Park.
I’ll say it again: The entire discussion is ridiculous. If so many teams could use Wright, then maybe, just maybe, the Mets could use him, too."
"The date was June 21, 1989, and Alderson, then the 41-year-old GM of the Oakland A’s, fleeced the Yankees for Rickey Henderson, sending pitchers Greg Cadaret and Eric Plunk, and outfielder Luis Polonia east for the greatest leadoff hitter in major-league history. Four months later, the Henderson-led A’s were World Series champions.
At the time of that deal, Alderson believed Henderson — in his walk year — was most likely going to be a short-term rental for the A’s. But taking Henderson was a risk he took on behalf of Oakland that translated into that team’s one and only World Series title during an era the A’s appeared ready to dominate."
I remember the Henderson trade, remember the buzz created by Caderet, Plunk, and Polonia. The buzz was especially loudest about Polonia growing up blocks away from Yankee Stadium and that the Yankees got back the fireballer Plunk, who they sent to Oakland when they traded to get Rickey Henderson a few years earlier. The only other buzz thereafter was when Luis Polonia was arrested after an incident involving a 15-year old girl in a Milwaukee hotel room.
[On a side note, any Met fan over the Reyes era can tell you that Jose's mindset as a leadoff hitter or focus as a basestealer didn't really solidfy until the Mets hired Rickey Henderson as a baserunning coach. I don't think it's a coincidence that is when Reyes' game really picked up.]
Which is why Ken Rosenthal's column at FoxSports.com today is so appealing. I mentioned in my blog post yesterday that replacing Reyes would be much more difficult than replacing Wright and I even made some comparison to Nomar Garciaparra. However, Rosenthal makes some great points that I hadn't considered that replacing Wright isn't so simple either:
"Let’s see if I can build a market for this ne’er-do-well third baseman, whose OPS-plus from 2008 to ’10 — as pointed out by Andy McCullough of the Newark Star-Ledger — was comparable to Mark Teixeira’s from ’06 to ’08 at a similar age.
Wright would fit for both Los Angeles teams, both Chicago teams, the Rockies, Orioles, Twins, Tigers and Mariners. He could replace Scott Rolen in Cincinnati, Chipper Jones in Atlanta and Aramis Ramirez with the Cubs.
That enough?
No, the Mets probably wouldn’t trade Wright to the Braves or Phillies. But I’d bet that the Phillies’ uber-aggressive GM, Ruben Amaro Jr., would move heaven, earth and a killer prospect package to get Wright’s right-handed bat at Citizens Bank Park.
I’ll say it again: The entire discussion is ridiculous. If so many teams could use Wright, then maybe, just maybe, the Mets could use him, too."
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
No way Jose! David instead of Jose?
Adam Rubin of ESPN reported yesterday and WFAN reports today that the Mets are considering moving David Wright should they decide to re-sign Jose Reyes. The WFAN article even quotes a scout saying:
"“Look at their club and look at the other shortstops around the league, and trading Wright makes more sense,” said the scout. “You can play (Daniel) Murphy at third and he’ll give you enough offense there. But you can’t replace Reyes’ offense with (Ruben) Tejada.”"
I hate to admit it but it's hard to disagree with the scout. It's harder find a shortstop with the offensive upside of a Jose Reyes than it is to find a third baseman with the offensive upside of a David Wright. It's not something I like about the game but that's just how players are developed. And let's not forget the Boston Red Sox traded Nomar Garciaparra at the height of his popularity in Boston only to go on three months later to win their first World Series title in 86 years. That proved to be a brilliant move because Nomar was never again the caliber of player he was in Boston. A part of me wonders if Nomar's fate is David Wright's fate as well but a part of me desperately wants to believe what WFAN's Rich Coutinho wrote today.
Meanwhile, Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight writes about how the team's image is impacting its attendance. I wonder if there was a way for him to factor in all the trade talk into his analysis.
"“Look at their club and look at the other shortstops around the league, and trading Wright makes more sense,” said the scout. “You can play (Daniel) Murphy at third and he’ll give you enough offense there. But you can’t replace Reyes’ offense with (Ruben) Tejada.”"
I hate to admit it but it's hard to disagree with the scout. It's harder find a shortstop with the offensive upside of a Jose Reyes than it is to find a third baseman with the offensive upside of a David Wright. It's not something I like about the game but that's just how players are developed. And let's not forget the Boston Red Sox traded Nomar Garciaparra at the height of his popularity in Boston only to go on three months later to win their first World Series title in 86 years. That proved to be a brilliant move because Nomar was never again the caliber of player he was in Boston. A part of me wonders if Nomar's fate is David Wright's fate as well but a part of me desperately wants to believe what WFAN's Rich Coutinho wrote today.
Meanwhile, Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight writes about how the team's image is impacting its attendance. I wonder if there was a way for him to factor in all the trade talk into his analysis.
Friedman: The Bin Laden Decade - NYTimes.com
Thomas L. Friedman, right on point today in The New York Times:
"Washington basically gave the Arab dictators a free pass to tighten their vise grip on their people — as long as these Arab leaders arrested, interrogated and held the Islamic militants in their societies and eliminated them as a threat to us.
It wasn’t meant as a free pass, and we really did have a security problem with jihadists, and we really didn’t mean to give up on our freedom agenda — but Arab leaders, like Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, sensed where our priorities were. That is why Mubarak actually arrested the one Egyptian who dared to run against him for president in his last election, and he and the other Arab autocrats moved to install their sons as successors."
Furthermore...
"President George W. Bush used the post-9/11 economic dip to push through a second tax cut we could not afford. He followed that with a Medicare prescription drug entitlement we cannot afford and started two wars in the wake of 9/11 without raising taxes to pay for them — all at a time when we should have been saving money in anticipation of the baby boomers’ imminent retirement. As such, our nation’s fiscal hole is deeper than ever and Republicans and Democrats — rather than coming together and generating the political authority needed for us to take our castor oil to compensate for our binge — are just demonizing one another."
"Washington basically gave the Arab dictators a free pass to tighten their vise grip on their people — as long as these Arab leaders arrested, interrogated and held the Islamic militants in their societies and eliminated them as a threat to us.
It wasn’t meant as a free pass, and we really did have a security problem with jihadists, and we really didn’t mean to give up on our freedom agenda — but Arab leaders, like Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, sensed where our priorities were. That is why Mubarak actually arrested the one Egyptian who dared to run against him for president in his last election, and he and the other Arab autocrats moved to install their sons as successors."
Furthermore...
"President George W. Bush used the post-9/11 economic dip to push through a second tax cut we could not afford. He followed that with a Medicare prescription drug entitlement we cannot afford and started two wars in the wake of 9/11 without raising taxes to pay for them — all at a time when we should have been saving money in anticipation of the baby boomers’ imminent retirement. As such, our nation’s fiscal hole is deeper than ever and Republicans and Democrats — rather than coming together and generating the political authority needed for us to take our castor oil to compensate for our binge — are just demonizing one another."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)