October Surprise?

To anyone paying close attention to this race the above audio isn't a surprise. Senator Obama believes in the redistribution of wealth. Does this make him a bad person? No. Does this make him unamerican? No. However, I do have a problem with his attempt to conceal this belief from the American voters. It is just as bad as President Bush concealing he was a big government advocate during the 2000 campaign.

This revelation also underlines the worries about his lack of a record. Who is Barack Obama? It was arguably a racist and fear mongering question before, but now it suddenly becomes a very legitimate question. What other economic, social, or judicial philosophies is he trying to keep under wraps until November 4th?

The Obama campaign should be thankful for their large lead at the moment. They should also be thankful this didn't come out earlier this month. I think it will narrow the race. The huge blowout that seemed inevitable is now unlikely. Undecided voters are going to break for Senator McCain in a big way.

Making up 7-8 points in a week is a tough needle to thread. I doubt it can be done, but this race sure got a lot more interesting.

Goodbye Part 2

What a roller coaster the last month and a half has been. It all started in early March. Three time NFL MVP and face of the Packers franchise for 16 years, Brett Favre, retired from the game of football. Then came small grumblings of Favre considering a comeback. Then came an interview with his former QB coach Steve Mariucci in which said he would consider a comeback if Aaron Rodgers were injured. Then came the bombshell. Early July Chris Mortenson of ESPN reported that Brett Favre contacted Packers' head coach Mike McCarthy to let him know he was seriously considering ending the retirement that began only months ago.

I personally first heard the news on the radio while driving in my car . A smile immediately formed on my face. Brett Favre is all I've really known as quarterback for the green and gold. I love watching him play and find it hard to imagine another player ever topping him as my favorite player of all time. I was excited for the possibility of another deep playoff run lead by number four. Then came the drama.

Turns out that the front office of the Green Bay Packers didn't share my enthusiasm. What followed was hard for me to watch. The team I will cheer for till the day I die was at odds with a player that I, for the lack of a better word, love. Release demands, bribes, long conversations, and more rumors then I can count have filled the last month plus. Then came the trade.

Late last night this sideshow was put to an end. Possibly the greatest Packer to ever play the game was traded to the New York Jets. So the question that remains is who's at fault?

This could be potentially debated for years and years to come. I'll take the easy way out and say its both Brett and the organization's fault. One thing that I feel can't be denied is that Favre handled this about as poorly as possible. He retired when he shouldn't have. He revealed his intentions to play in a way that caused a huge distraction for his teammates. He strung this out for weeks and weeks and weeks because he was unable to fully commit. He refused to put bad feelings behind him and rejoin the Packers. He refused to talk to other teams interested in trading for his services until just a couple days ago.

The front office lead by general manager Ted Thompson is certainly not without fault. They probably made Brett feel rushed to make a decision. They communicated poorly with Brett. They handled public relations about as badly as they could have. They were too dogmatic in their stance on Aaron Rodgers as starter. They miscalculated Brett's desire to return.

One thing needs to be kept in mind. Both parties were put into a difficult and unique situation. Swiss clock precision by either side was an unrealistic goal.

The final question which should be answered fairly quickly is was this the right move by the Packers? I think you'd be hard pressed to find a Packer fan (though there are a few) that wouldn't want Brett back this year. The divide in the fan base is between those who want Brett back and don't understand why Ted Thompson forced him out and those that want Brett back but understand why management did what it did. Consider this.

Unlike the previous couple years, Brett didn't work out with a personal trainer in the offseason. Throwing the ball around with the local high school team is all well and good, but at Favre's age he should be doing more focused workouts under the supervision of an expert not less.

In Brett's retirement press conference, he questioned his desire to do the things necessary to be successful come game time--meetings, offseason workouts, game film, practice, training camp etc. He also questioned whether he ever wanted the ball in his hands with the game on the line again.

The potential for a divided locker room could be realized. Even if the Packers did an open competition, it could end up being close and half the locker room could think one QB won and the other half the other QB won. Also the team is full of mostly younger players who haven't played with Favre all that long. They might think it unfair to take the job away from Aaron Rodgers since, unlike Brett, he has been committed to the Packers the entire offseason.

I hate this situation and wish it never happened this way. However, I will support the Packers and Ted Thompson. He has built a young and talented team and we as a fans should be grateful. Despite all the mistakes he has made this offseason, I still think highly of Brett Favre and will always be an apologist and fan of number four. He would have to pull an OJ to undo the 16 years of excitement, entertainment, and joy he has brought me watching him play the position of quarterback like no other.

Don't give into your need to find someone to blame. Sometimes things just happen.

Go Pack, Go Jets.

MTP

Tim Russert's sudden death could not come at a worse time for journalism. In an era of increased partisanship and mud slinging, Tim Russert was a rarity. Sure every network has a Sunday morning show with a somewhat even handed moderator, but Russert was by far the best at it. Widely regarded as the toughest interviewer in Washington, he had a way of being tough without raising his voice or talking over his guest.

He was a newsman not a commentator. Today's media organizations seem to think Americans need talking heads on TV to formulate opinions for them. Meet The Press under Russert sought the facts through probing questions and the audience made their own conclusions.

Watching the coverage on TV today I began to wonder how this was affecting other journalists--the Bill O'Reillys, Keith Olbermanns, Sean Hannitys, Chris Matthews'... If one of these other host and/or commentators were to tragically die tomorrow as Russert did, how would they be remembered?

In the daily and weekly ratings wars and non-stop gauntlet of political wedge issues, it seems to be forgotten that life is short and none of that stuff really matters. The respect of your peers and your audience is more important then winning the 25-50 demo. The honest airing of the facts and civilized discourse is more important then making the red team or the blue team look bad.

I hope this death will not be in vain. I hope other journalists will take a look at the career and legacy of Tim Russert and realize many of them are doing a disservice to the craft of journalism and more importantly this country.

Unity

citizen tube's You Choose ’08: Monday Round-Up

Memorial

"The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

--President Abraham Lincoln

Honesty

In today's politics, its assumed most politicians are liars or at the very least benders of the truth. The many scandals over the past fifty years have seen to that. So why in this latest reemergence of Rev. Wright is Senator Obama still taken at face value by many?

The Senator claims, "...the insensitivity and the outrageousness of his statements and his performance in the question and answer period yesterday. I think shocked me. It surprised me." Really? Shock and Surprise were your emotions? Anyone else surprised?

If you say were surprised you either had no internet, TV, or newspaper access since Rev. Wright became a household name or you're a liar. Senator Obama falls in the later category. Barak Obama not knowing Wright's extremist beliefs is about as likely as Sammy Sosa really forgetting how to speak english or not knowing his bat was corked. Sure there is a small chance, but its so small it should be laughable to suggest so.

So the Senator from Illinois has finally disowned Rev. Jeremiah. When did this occur? After a twenty year relationship with the man? No. After the national media exposed Wright's extreme beliefs? No. Not until Rev. Wright suggested that Senator Obama's speech, statements and actions regarding him were politically motivated did the Senator decide to cut that relationship off.

That is the straw that broke the camels back. For the Senator, "God Damn America" or federal government AIDS spreading theories aren't as objectionable as a politically damaging observation that most unbiased third parties already made.

One thing Rev. Wright can't be accused of is parsing his words or not saying what he believes. He may be out there, but he can't be called a liar. Which is what makes this quote from a April 30 2007 New York Times article so interesting.

“If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me,” Mr. Wright said with a shrug. “I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.”

This is not a new kind of politics. This is not hope. This is the same old thing in an articulate, younger and darker package which seems to fool a lot of people.

Yosted

Baseball fans picture a team for me. This team has two aces, two young solid starting pitchers and a veteran pitcher with a decade plus of experience and postseason success. This team has a veteran bullpen with four different pitchers with closing experience and a shutdown left handed specialist. This team has a lineup with power and speed. Sounds like a championship caliber ball club right? One catch--that team is managed by a mental midget.

That man is Ned Yost. Who still after more then four years of managing at the major league level and before that working under Bobby Cox for twelve years can't figure out how to manage a pitching staff.

The game which just finished is a prime example. Brewers scored 2 runs in the top of the tenth inning to take a 3-1 lead over the Reds. Eric Gagne had pitched the previous three days. Three days is pushing it enough, but Ned thinks it wise to send him out there for the fourth straight day. The Milwaukee Brewers at this very moment are carrying fourteen pitchers. Yes fourteen! Torres has closing experience, Turnbow has closing experience, and David Riske has a little closing experience (closed the first game of the year after Gagne blew the save an inning earlier). Now even to the average baseball fan this adds up to a situation that where you give Gagne a day off and go with another one of your the pitchers from what has been a good bullpen so far this year.

This doesn't dawn on Ned Yost however. Over sixteen years as a coach at the major league level and he can't figure this out. This is just one example of his many mistake over the years during his management of the Brewers.

This is why I can't get to high on the Brewers this season. I know that in many games this year the players will have to overcome the decisions of their manager. I know in many games this year players will be put in positions where they will likely fail. The most frustrating part of this is that teams in markets like Milwaukee don't have large windows to have postseason success and it is nothing but a waste to have Ned Yost managing this team at this time.

The '07-'08 Milwaukee Bucks in a Nutshell

NBA basketball is dead to me.

From brewhoop.com/

Typical

Obama typical white person
by dollarsandsense123

I can't wait for Senator McCain's commentary on a typical black person. I bet that will go over well. Its becoming more and more clear that Senator Obama believes some of Rev. Wright's views on race in this country.

Goodbye

I grew up with you quarterbacking my favorite team. You played the position like no one had before. Thanks for the memories. Hard to think of a football player more deserving of a long and relaxing retirement. Goodbye Brett. You'll always be missed and you'll never be forgotten.

US Americans Such as Asian Countries...

You've probably already seen this but...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww (sorry embeded is acting weird)

wow. That was like that essay question you knew nothing about so you wrote down everything you could think just to get some pity credit. I love that the question was about how the US has a problem and her brain just can't compute that so she starts talking about South Africa and "the" Iraq. Oh and don't forget the asian countries--I hear they are all poor and stupid too.

If you feel even a little bad for her, don't. Within 10 years she'll be married to a fortune 500 CEO or a professional football player and making fun of what you're wearing or how poor you are. Also, props to AC Slater aka Mario Lopez for keeping it together. All those years of acting with Dustin Diamond finally paid off.

I'm off to build up our future.

Al Gore Continues His Struggle to be Important

I don't like to beat up on the guy personally. Al Gore lost the presidency in 2000 when the majority of Americans voted for him to be the president. He has a right to be somewhat bitter, but he said something for the "I invented (edit for my anon reader: "created") the internet" scrap book on the Today show this morning...

"Calling the Iraq war 'the worst strategic mistake in the entire history of
the United States'"

I think that pretty much speaks for itself.

Best Rant Ever

I didn't see it live, but from what I've seen from the youtube clips Steve Colbert was in rare form on election night.

Here's the opening clip that's pretty funny...



And here's the rant at the end of the show (it starts at the 2 minute mark but the rest is pretty funny too)...

Security Now!

My lastest article in the University Standard...

Fans of the television comedy Seinfeld remember the episode “The Serenity Now” from the show’s final season. Dialogue from the first scene of that episode reads, “Frank: Doctor gave me a relaxation cassette. When my blood pressure gets too high, the man on the tape tells me to say, 'Serenity now!' George: Are you supposed to yell it? Frank: The man on the tape wasn't specific.” That humorous exchange is built on throughout the episode as George Costanza’s father Frank continues to yell “Serenity Now” to decrease his stress and blood pressure, but the yelling instead just fuels Frank’s anxiety and makes the situation worse. On October 17, 2006, President Bush signed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 into law. The President characterized the new law as “one of the most important pieces of legislation in the War on Terror”, but in reality the MCA is the equivalent of the US government yelling “Security Now!” The Military Commissions Act allows the federal government to take away an American’s basic constitutional rights while claiming to do so for the safety of the country.

The MCA has drawn a lot of attention from the national media as well as international media. Early on, the media focused on the clarifying of the Geneva Conventions’ definition of torture as it applied to the US government’s coercion of “unlawful enemy combatants.” Talk of water-boarding and stress positions was all over cable news, newspapers and Internet blogs. The MCA states, “As provided by the Constitution and by this section, the President has the authority for the United States to interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions and to promulgate higher standards and administrative regulations for violations of treaty obligations which are not grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions.” In layman’s terms, the President decides what is torture and what is not torture. The current coercion techniques are here to stay until at least 2009. Despite the outcry from the Left, this issue is not as cut and dry as it may seem. These coercion techniques (which some have classified as torture) may bring out information needed to stop terrorist plots and save American lives. On the other side of the coin, how can the United States continue to claim to be morally superior to terrorists and rogue nations when we are using the same type of methods they use? How can we now be outraged and demand justice be done if in the future captured American soldiers are tortured for information?

The new interpretation of the Geneva Conventions Article III by the United States is not nearly as troubling as the potential loss of habeas corpus for American citizens. The MCA clearly eliminates the writ of habeas corpus for aliens of the United States. The laws states, “No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.” This is another gray area. Even though aliens in the past have been given the full protection of the Constitution when being held for a crime, the Constitution makes no mention of the protection of non-citizens.

The suspension of the writ of habeas corpus for non-citizens should not be the main concern however. Sec. 948a. (1) of the MCA states, “UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT – a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense.” The President or the Secretary of Defense can declare anyone they wish to be an enemy combatant and hold them indefinitely—including US citizens.

Also, the first half of the unlawful enemy combatant definition is vague: “A person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al Qaeda, or associated forces).” If a Muslim American citizen gave money to a mosque in Saudi Arabia and the executive branch later decided that mosque helped fund al Qaeda, that American citizen could very well be considered an unlawful enemy combatant and stripped of his constitutional rights.

The Military Commissions Act is unconstitutional. Article 1 Section 9 of the United States Constitution plainly reads, “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” There is no rebellion. There is no invasion. Of the 303 Republican members of Congress, only seven voted against the bill (no GOP Senator voted against the MCA). What happened to the Republican Party philosophy of strict interpretation of the Constitution? The MCA is yet another example of the GOP disregarding their conservative principles to maintain power. One of the main reasons the MCA was voted on in late September and signed in mid-October was the GOP wanted to paint Democrats who voted against the MCA as weak on national security only a month before the midterms. Power and the desire to hold onto power continue to corrupt the Republican leadership in Washington.

The Military Commissions Act of 2006 puts at risk American’s constitutional rights in the name of security. When President Bush addressed Congress just ten days after the 9/11 attacks he said, “Freedom and fear are at war.” Five years later, it seems fear is winning the war. Trading freedom for security is unacceptable. Legal challenges to the MCA are already being prepared and hopefully the courts will act quickly against this unconstitutional law. If this law is upheld through the judicial process it will be a dark day for Americans and I will have to start yelling “Hoochie mama!”

A Breach of Contract

Another article i've written for the University Standard...

With the midterm elections about a month away, I am reminded of the 1994 House and Senate elections. At the time of the ‘94 midterms, the Republican Party had gone 40 years without holding a majority in the House or Senate. The 103rd Congress, which served from 1993 to 1994, had a Democratic Party majority of 258-176 in the House of Representatives and a 57-43 majority in the Senate.

During the fall of 1994, the GOP introduced the “Contract with America”. The contract, which borrowed heavily from the text of President Regan’s 1985 State of the Union address, was written mostly by Texas Representative Dick Armey and publicized and promoted by Georgia Representative Newt Gingrich. Armey and Gingrich’s contract promised floor votes on several pieces of legislation if the GOP were voted into the majority.

The promised legislation in the contract focused on economic issues and congressional reform. In November of 1994, the American electorate voted out of office 34 Democratic incumbents and when the dust had cleared the GOP held a 230-204 majority in the House and a 52-48 majority in the Senate.

This amazing power shift in Washington was fueled by a document that promised Americans responsibility in government and fiscal policy. Despite the success of the Contract with America, the Republican Party over the past 12 years has shifted their focus from responsible spending and a more honest and open legislative branch to religious right pandering and big government.

As stated before, the contract made little mention of moral or values issues. Of the ten different bills promised in the contract, only two have a connection to values—The Personal Responsibility Act and The Family Reinforcement Act.

The PRA was described in the contract as, “Discourage illegitimacy and teen pregnancy by prohibiting welfare to minor mothers and denying increased AFDC for additional children while on welfare, cut spending for welfare programs, and enact a tough two-years-and-out provision with work requirements to promote individual responsibility.” This bill was basically welfare reform with a nod toward the problem of teenage pregnancy.

The contract describes the TFRA as, “Child support enforcement, tax incentives for adoption, strengthening rights of parents in their children's education, stronger child pornography laws, and an elderly dependent care tax credit to reinforce the central role of families in American society.” The TFRA was the only completely values-focused bill in the contract. The GOP made no mention of abortion, gay marriage, media censorship or gun ownership anywhere in the contract.

Yet, morality and family values are now the focus of the Republican Party that controls both the legislative and executive branches of the federal government. The current Congress (109th) has introduced or passed the following bills: Theresa Marie Schiavo's law, Family Entertainment and Copyright Act, Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, We The People Act (states religious freedom, sexual orientation and gay marriage are not in the federal court’s jurisdiction), Constitution Restoration Act (limits the federal judiciary’s jurisdiction in cases involving religious liberty) and Workplace Religious Freedom Act. These issues certainly should be discussed and possibly addressed by making new laws, but are there not more pressing issues in the US?

The Republican controlled Congress has done a complete 180 in terms of fiscal policy and the size of government since the 104th Congress. No two issues were hit more repeatedly in the Contract with America than a responsible fiscal policy and a smaller federal government.

The contract states, “This year's election offers the chance, after four decades of one-party control, to bring to the House a new majority that will transform the way Congress works. That historic change would be the end of government that is too big, too intrusive, and too easy with the public's money.”

Initially, the GOP made good on its promise. Spending was brought under control and the federal budget actually had a surplus after 2000. Then, President George W. Bush was elected president and federal spending increased dramatically.

Several reasons exist for this sudden increase in spending. President Bush, despite being a Republican in name, is in favor of a larger government while his predecessor President Clinton declared that “the era of big government is over” in his 1996 State of the Union address.

Another reason for the increase in federal spending is the GOP-controlled Congress no longer had to worry about an opposition President getting credit for federal programs and policies which they passed. An example of this would be President Clinton’s failed attempts to pass campaign finance reform and health care reform. Both of which were passed (in some capacity) during the Bush Administration.

However, these two reasons are not conclusive. Though spending did not skyrocket until George W. Bush became President, there was a significant rise in spending during President Clinton’s second term in comparison to his first.

September 11th is often cited as a reason for the increased federal spending, but it is often used as a convenient excuse for apologists of the current Republican leadership. The post-9/11 increase in spending has not been only on the national defense or military. Non-defense spending has increased to levels not seen since late 70s and early 80s. The percentage growth of non-defense spending during the Bush Administration has reached levels not seen since the Ford Administration.

Finally, the main reason spending has increased so dramatically since 1995 is the same reason spending was high during the pre-President Regan years: the Republicans have grown comfortable in their seat of power. The only difference is Democrats are supposed to be pro-big government and the GOP is, as the Contact With America continually stated, pro-small government.

Tax cuts are one area in which the Republicans and their current leader President Bush remain close to their conservative roots. The Bush tax cuts have contributed to the current thriving economy, but combined with the increase in spending the tax cuts have also contributed to a ballooning national debt.

Daniel J. Mitchell, PhD of the Heritage Foundation writes, “Regrettably, the benefits of better tax policy have been undermined, especially in the long run, by excessive government spending.” Economics is an inexact science in which many intelligent people disagree, but anyone can understand that the combination of lowering taxes and increasing spending results in debt. A debt which citizens of college age and younger will most likely have the responsibility of paying off through a much higher tax burden than the American workforce has today.

The GOP now focuses on energizing the religious right to win elections rather than responsible spending and honest government. A party that used to proclaim sensibility in fiscal policy has now sacrificed the long-term future of the US economy for the immediate satisfaction of the current robust economy.

Rather then working to reduce federal spending and the national debt, Congress continues to pander to the religious base of the GOP. In this year’s midterms, polls are indicating the Republicans will at the very least lose a significant portion of their majority and possibly become the minority in both the House and Senate.

Moderates and small government conservatives have been alienated at a time when the GOP desperately needs their votes. The time is now for the Republican Party to remember how they became the majority in the first place.

A Disappointing Present With a Promising Future

I recently wrote an article for the new metro-milwaukee/uwm University Standard. Check out their website if you have time. Here's my article on the Milwaukee Brewers...

A Disappointing Present With a Promising Future

Think back to September 30, 2005. The Milwaukee Brewers came into Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania with 80 wins and three games to go in the season. The game that night started poorly for the Brewers. They were down 5-0 after five innings and it seemed the quest for a .500 record would have to wait another day. During the next two innings, the Brewers scored six runs capped off by Wisconsin native Damian Miller’s two-run homer which gave the Brew Crew a 6-5 lead. In the bottom of the ninth before a PNC Park crowd of 20,922, closer Derrick Turnbow struck out two of the three men he faced to record his 39th save of the year. Win 81 was in the books. For the first time since 1992, the Milwaukee Brewers would not lose more games then they won. Right fielder and Brewer elder Geoff Jenkins said that night, “It's an awesome, awesome feeling. It's not the playoffs or anything like that, but for us this is kind of our playoffs. It's a great feeling and something to build on for next year."



Fast forward to September 19, 2006. The Brewers lost their 83rd game of the season. Damian Miller, who has battled nagging injuries all year, did not play. Derrick Turnbow pitched one-third of an inning and gave up 1 hit, 3 walks and 5 runs (2 earned). After being down only one run at 3-2 through five innings, the Brewers did not score another run and gave up nine more for a final score of 12-2. Not exactly what Geoff Jenkins or anyone else in Milwaukee were hoping to build to in 2006.What are the reasons for this unexpected turn for the worse in the 2006 season after the promising building block that was the 2005 season?



3. Geoff Jenkins: Jenkins had a solid 2005 season, but it did not translate to a good 2006 season. His batting average in 2006 is .268 – down from 2005’s average of .292. His slugging percentage is .426 – down from .513. His on base percentage is .347 – down from .375. His homeruns and RBI totals currently stand at 15 and 67. In 2005, he finished the year with 25 homeruns and 86 RBIs. Geoff’s statistical drop off hurt the Brewers’ offensive production significantly and rumors circle around Miller Park that this will be Jenks’ last year in Milwaukee. 2006 may be an unfortunate end to his career as a Brewer.



2. Derrick Turnbow: 2006 has become complete and total meltdown for Derrick. The season started well for the Brewers’ ex-closer, but just before the all-star break in July it all unraveled. The statistical free fall for Turnbow has been well documented, but the key has been his lack of control. He still has the hard fastball, but his sometimes inconsistent control has morphed into just downright dreadful control. Over 67 and 1/3 innings last year, Turnbow gave up 24 walks. In 2006, he has given up 36 walks in 53 and 1/3 innings. Somewhere along the way Derrick lost something whether it be mental, mechanical or both. Hopefully, in 2007 he will regain that 2005 magic.



1. Injuries: The biggest reason for the Milwaukee Brewers not building on last year’s success is the injury bug. JJ Hardy, Rickie Weeks, Corey Koskie, Ben Sheets and Tomo Ohka were all being counted on as key contributors coming into this year and they all have missed two months or more in 2006. Few major league baseball clubs can sustain long term injuries to their starting shortstop, second baseman, third baseman and two starting pitching and still have a winning season.



As the 2006 regular season comes to a close, Milwaukee baseball fans are turning their attention toward next year. Yes, this year was a big disappointment, but reasons for optimism still exist.



3. The Young Guns: Prince Fielder, Corey Hart, Rickie Weeks, JJ Hardy, Billy Hall, and Tony Gywnn Jr. are 26 years old or younger. These are players on the upside of their careers rather than aging veterans (i.e. Geoff Jenkins) who are more likely to see a slide than an increase in their production. They all gained valuable experience this year (some more than others) and Fielder and Hall have already proven that they are legitimate middle of the order run producers.



2. Sheets and Capuano: Ben Sheets seems to be completely recovered from his recent back muscle injury troubles. A full year of both Ben Sheets and Chris Capuano would give the Brewers a legitimate one-two punch in their starting rotation.



1. Doug Melvin: Do not be fooled by 2006’s results. Doug Melvin is one of baseball’s better general managers. Unlike the losing teams of the late 90’s and early 2000’s, the 2006 sub-par performance was due more to bad luck and unexpected production drop off from certain players instead of management putting together a bad team. Rest assured, Doug Melvin will turn the Brewers back in the right direction sooner rather than later. The 2006 season is not an indication of the overall direction of the Milwaukee Brewers. They possess the talent and the management to play competitive and entertaining baseball in 2007.

2,974

The national media has made light of the death toll of American soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq recently surpassing the number of deaths that occurred in New York City, at the Pentagon, and in Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001. My question is why? Why is that a story? Why does that matter? Is the media trying to tell us that somehow this means these military actions are more of a failure or all these young men and women dying more of a tragedy?

Whether they are or not is not the issue. The issue is that this is exactly what it looks like the media is doing. Motives mean little in this area. Whether it is shortsighted and irresponsibly journalism or an elaborate plot does not matter. The media should be going out of its way to avoid even the appearance of spinning military death tolls for political gain. I can understand addressing the milestones (for lack of a better word) of one thousand dead or two thousand dead, but 2,974 is not a story.

Before you accuse me of defending the second gulf war or the Bush Administration, I want to make it clear I'm not a big fan of either. Anyone who knows me would tell you that. 2,973 terrorist attack deaths in one day is a tragedy and 2,974 military conflict deaths over five years is a tragedy, but these numbers miss the greater point. I find it disrespectful to simply reduce the men and women who died on 9/11 and the American soldiers who died giving what Abraham Lincoln said was the "last full measure of devotion" to parts of a simple math problem--2,974>2,973.

Too often we forget the dead soldiers, the victims of 9/11, and their families. However, the greater wrong is that when we are reminded of them and their sacrifice it is often for the wrong reasons.

"Kneel Before Your God Babylon!"

The Comedy Central franchise of Stewart and Colbert made the presentation for the Outstanding Reality-Competition Program emmy last sunday. That presentation was without a doubt the best three minutes of the whole award show.

Here's a little background for those of you who didn't watch the show. The "I lost to Barry Manilow!" line stems from Stephen Colbert losing out to Barry Manilow in the "Outstanding Individual Performance in a Variety or Music Program" category. The Wolverine reference after the Manilow line is citing Hugh Jackman also being nominated in that category for his performance as host of the 59th Tony Awards.



On a side note, the voters were on acid this year--at least when it came to voting for the drama categories. 24 winning best drama series and best lead actor in a drama series (Kiefer Sutherland's acting on that show consists of yelling and talking into a cell phone) is a sad day for small screen drama. I watched the entire season of 24 and the show has some of the worst plots, writing (just keeping track of the 100 different uses of the word protocol and you'll begin to understand what I'm talking about), and acting of any show on television. I watched 24 for the unintentional humor that results from how bad the show is. Hopefully Studio 60 will pick up the slack this fall.

Dumb and Dumber

Very few people do more harm to the public image of conservatives then Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter. I hate being lumped in with these ego maniacs.

A few youtubes for your consumption.

First Ann Coulter on The Big Idea...



What seriously? William Jefferson Clinton is gay? Wow, just wow.

She talks about it further on Hardball...



Notice how the questions from the audience are about 1000x more intelligent then anything then anything that comes out of Ann's mouth.

As far as liberals being "godless", I think its impossible to label a whole group as having no belief in god. Also, if Ann Coulter is a healthy example of what a christian should be, I want to be an atheist.

Apparently the buzz from the "9/11 widows enjoyed their husbands deaths" story had warn off so she decided to go with Bill Clinton is gay to get some attention. What a media whore.

Finally Letterman sums it all up with a little humor...



Now Bill O'Reilly. Countdown has some fun with something he said on his radio show...



Bill O'Reilly has your phone number! This after the liberal countdown host Keith Olbermann schooled him on the "Malmedy Massacre" gaff in late May. Bill is far too moronic to have some many outlets in which to say something stupid on.

Can conservatives who are all over the media stop saying stupid things at least till the midterms are over? Make sure to thank Bill and Ann when Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker of the House.

Gambling

Last week the US House of Representatives passed HR 4411 otherwise known as the Internet Gambling Prohibition and Enforcement Act. This is part of the "Family Values Agenda" being pushed by the GOP to firm up their base for the midterm elections. I have three problems with the bill...

1. I can play poker at my local casino but not on the internet. If the House is going to try to save me from myself, brick and mortar casinos should be closed too. Or how about this? Instead of going after gambling go after big tobacco. I can see how the House in its infinite wisdom looks to save my bank account before my health though.

2. The bill is hypocritical. Horse racing and lotteries are except in this bill. Playing the ponies good? Playing cards bad?

3. Prohibition of gambling doesn't work. Just like prohibition of alcohol didn't work. US government needs to stop playing babysitter and let adults make adult choices.

The following videos feature Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, and finally Jon Stewart for a little humor mixed with truth.