Happy Friday!

Oregon State 27 - 21 Southern Cal

I'm Not Alone!

Listen to Yourself

On My Soapbox...

Over the past few days, I have found myself cheering for Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats. That’s because our esteemed Treasury Secretary Henry Paulsen has stated that $700 billion is necessary to save the US Financial market. I’m no economist, but $700 billion is not a small chunk of change, even for the US government. But between President Bush and Paulsen, $700 billion will be given away – details are sketchy (this article is the best I could find), but the consensus thought is that the big winners will be Wall Street companies (AIG, Bear Stearns, etc.) and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I was trying to find out details of the proposed plan today, but I couldn’t find very much at all. In fact, $700 billion is a ballpark estimate, and experts say that this figure could rise to as high as $1 trillion!

Personally, I’m outraged by this. I understand that some support is necessary, but who came up with the math that they need so much money? Here’s an idea: take this bailout money, infuse the FDIC with this money and let the companies fail. Companies cease operations, go bankrupt, or get acquired all the time - look at WorldCom, Delta, Delphi, or a host of other companies. The government shouldn’t be obligated to protect businesses, and even if it feels it’s aiding its citizens by stopping the failure of the economy as a whole, shouldn’t there be a little more investigation as to why the businesses and markets are failing before they hand over $700 billion?

The US government currently feels that $700 billion will save our economy and prevent a recession. I say, how do you know it will save our economy? Why is it that these companies are in such a bad way? Sure the credit crunch and the mortgage crisis are major issues, but is that the only answer? Are these companies managed well, are they viable businesses in the 21st century, will they continue to need government sponsorship to operate after the bailout, is there any chance they will pay back their “loan” from the government? I did 3 months of research before I bought a $1,300 TV. Companies I audit spend thousands on studies and research to determine if a $2 million Oracle system is good for them. Even government spends millions before major building projects like highways and bridges, usually around $100 - $200, million are funded. Did anyone do any studies, perform any research, interview any company officials, or look at any market data before coming up with this $700 billion figure?

I feel as if the government thinks it has to make a snap decision. If he keeps this up, George W. Bush will go out with the all-time lowest approval rating - Herbert Hoover and Andrew Johnson are both excited to get a friend on the Mt. Rushmore of loathed presidents! The Republicans want $700 billion now, today. The Democrats, with Nancy Pelosi in the lead, are trying to push Paulsen to send a plan for $150 - $200 billion now, and then if more is needed a second bailout can occur. It sours my stomach, but I have to agree with Nancy Pelosi’s plan, as I think it gives the economy a chance to correct itself without being acquired by the US government. If it needs some more cash later, so be it. But at least more data and information will be available, and better decisions can be made. Take some extra time and make the right decision. Heck, with $700 billion, you could probably pay back most of the money the investors lose if these companies fail!

Damn you Hoover!

In a country where are schools are constantly under-funded, energy costs are sky-rocketing, and retirement funds are being depleted faster than they can be refilled, how are we suddenly able to come up with $700 billion as if from now where? I’d like to see Congress come up with legislation (and money) to improve schools, hire teachers, research and deploy alternate energy sources, and let me live comfortably in retirement. Those are things I’ll pay for. And for the most part, I’ll pay what it takes because I understand the consequences of inaction. There have been studies, investigations, and conclusions made in those areas, mostly because no one will take any action without an abundance of information. There still has been minimal government funding of those issues, and with the current crisis, the chance of those issues being taken up dwindles.

Yet when our economy has a downturn, which happens nearly every 10 years, we suddenly want to artificially prop it up with money we don’t have, for reasons we don’t fully understand, and with consequences we can’t possibly foresee. Maybe the government will wise up and these issues will spur our leaders to take intelligent, thought-out, and informed action. Yeah, and maybe I’m a Chinese jet pilot.

Election Killers

I consider myself a young man. I am 33 years old and have had the opportunity to vote for President only 3 times. Of course I actually do vote every year, and even in some primaries (anyone who does not has no right to make any political commentary). I could go on and on about the issues with our political system, but I will spare you of that. The point of this post is thus: every election has some cooked up pseudo issue that seems to turn the balance of momentum and ends up being a big part of the outcome. Whether it has any relevance to the election or the candidate's ability to lead, it is brought up in a big "GOTCHA" moment for maximum political effect.

1976
I was 1 and have no recollection of Jimmy Carter's ineffectual campaign. All he had to do was say I am a democrat and Nixon was a Republican. Nixon was not popular at the time!

1980
I was still too young, but Reagan had a similar strategy. I am a Republican and Jimmy Carter is a Democrat. Carter also failed miserably as President.

1984: Reagan's Age
The first election I remember. Reagan was the oldest President ever, and the Democrats and Mondale tried to use it against him. Reagan famously neutralized the issue in the second debate saying, "I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent's youth and inexperience." He went on to win in a landslide.

1988: Willie Horton
Bush Sr. took on Michael Dukakis, governor of Massachusetts. The Bush campaign ran an ad about Dukakis' prison furlough program that allowed a convicted murderer to commit a rape on leave. A damning ad that may have turned the tide in a close election.

1992: "Read my Lips..."
Bush lost to Clinton for one reason: the economy tanked while he was in office. The damning ad run by the Dems showed a clip of Bush in 1988 saying, "Read my lips: no new taxes." Of course he had raised taxes, and he lost miserably. Incidentally, the main reason was actually Ross Perot, and not the ad.

1996: Age Strikes Again
Bob Dole tried to take on the very popular Clinton without success. Again, age became an issue, and it was compounded by Dole's war injury that made him appear even older. Although no "Gotcha" moment occurred, Dole did famously refer to the Dodgers as the Brooklyn Dodgers. It really didn't matter. Clinton won easily.

2000: Clinton's Ghost
Again, no major "Gotcha" moments, as younger Bush successfully campaigned on a moral platform in wake of Clinton's multiple scandals in office. Gore was boring and had to try and dissociate himself from his former boss, and he lost in the closest margin ever.

2004: Swift Boat
Now the pattern has emerged and is crystal clear. When Bush beat Kerry, an independent group attacked Kerry mercilessly on his Vietnam service record while serving on a Swift boat. Swift Vets and POWs for Truth stated that he had lied and embellished his record, and Kerry was unable to respond or clarify the issue. Bush wins easily, and the term "Swift Boat" enters the political lexicon. (Obama even recently said he would not let the Republicans "Swift Boat" his comments about putting lipstick on a pig regarding Palin).

2008: The Bridge To Nowhere
It is painfully clear that both parties are maneuvering to make this the "Gotcha" issue of 2008. Pictured at the top of this post, the Bridge to Nowhere was designed to connect the Alaskan coastal city of Ketchikan to its airport on sparsely populated Gravina Island. The funding was approved by Congress, but Palin stated famously that she rejected the funds saying, "Thanks, but no thanks" in her convention speech. Seizing upon a potential Swift Boat issue, Democrats quickly announced that Palin had publicly supported the bridge while running for governer of Alaska. Furthermore, she accepted the funds but used them for other projects. It seemed they had that "Gotcha" moment for 2008.

However, the Democrats should be careful what they ask for. The headline story on CNN.com today shows how the Republicans have COMPLETELY TURNED THIS AROUND ON OBAMA AND BIDEN! Both senators voted to approve the funding for the Bridge to Nowhere as part of a larger transportation bill. You may think that it was just a small part of a larger bill. However, a Republican senator specifically introduced an amendment to the bill that exclusively rejected funding for the Bridge to Nowhere. Biden and Obama rejected that. Even worse, the proposed amendment by Senator Coburn had redirected those funds to Hurricane Katrina ravaged Louisiana to repair damage to roads and bridges. Of course, that money never went to Louisiana!

I think this issue will continue to get air time, and may turn out to be a defining moment in this election. The upcoming debates may solidify that. However, if it doesn't work out, there is still enough time for another "Swift Boat" attack!

NFL Injury Terminology

So you know what the hell the talking heads are talking about...

• sports hernia - a weakening of the abdominal muscles that results in your nuts really hurting.
• stinger/burner - a nerve injury caused by a direct blow to the top of the should that drives it down and causes the neck to bend in the opposite direction, resulting in tingling moving down to the fingertips. This typically only occurs in the situation described above, so when a commentator describes any hard hit to any part of the body that results in the player being shaken up as a "stinger" you know he's a moron.
  
• high ankle sprain - broken leg
• shaken up - concussion
  
• a [INSERT BODY PART HERE] - e.g. a hamstring, short-hand for an injured hamstring. Commentators are too lazy to use adjectives. So don't be confused and think someone cannot perform because of the presence of a vital body part.
• took a tough hit - hit in the balls
• turf toe - jammed toe
• hip pointer - a bruised hip
• landed awkardly - tore every ligament in his knee
  

Lou's Still Got It

So last night I'm watching College Gameday Mid-Evening Intermediate, or whatever it's called these days, and I happen to catch one of Lou's pep talks for some random team I don't care about. Well, it seems that ESPN is giving Lou a little more slack in how much he's allowed to ramble, so he started to give some sort of pep talk aimed at said team. Well you know what, Lou is awesome. He got that crazy look in his eyes and started screaming something about something, I don't quite remember what it was because I think I may have blacked out for a minute, but let me tell you when he finished I was fired up. I head-butted Liz and punched a hole in the wall. Well maybe I didn't do those things but I felt like I could have lifted the old Mazda 626 and flipped it over. I don't know how good of a coach Lou Holtz was, but I now know how he got his teams to win all those games. Excuse me while I go tackle a stranger walking down the street. Go Lou.

Michigan State Pep Rally

Alright guys. It's another big week for the Irish. Just look at that f#$&ing picture above and remember how angry you were when we lost to those punks in 2005. Colin and I were sitting on the field and saw the game-losing TD in OT right in front of us. I personally didn't see the flag planting until people talked about it later.

Now here's your pep rally, here is a postgame photo from the rematch in 2006 after our miraculous comeback win. I also DEMAND that you click this link to listen to perhaps the greatest sports meltdown in the history of radio. This is courtesy of Mike Valenti, a radio talk show host in Michigan on AM 1270. He is a Michigan State homer who hosts a radio show called The Sports Inferno. After our win in 2006, he had an on-air meltdown that can only be best described by another site as the "most heinous, depraved descent into that mirky blackness captured by our modern recording equipment."

CLICK HERE TO LAUGH YOUR BUTT OFF FOR 15 GLORIOUS MINUTES!!!

As far as the game, I don't think many expect us to win, but we are no longer being overlooked as we were last year. My pre-game analysis is pretty simple. On offense, we have to be able to convert 3rd downs. We have been awful at this in our 1st 2 games. This reflects on the O-Line, RBs and on play selection. On defense, we have to be able to slow Javon Ringer. He will get his yards, no doubt. However, we have to stop him in key situations. I'm talking about 3rd and short or inside the red zone. That will put us in the ballgame.

Worth Repeating

After Auburn's thrilling 3-2 victory over Mississippi State last weekend and Georgia's 14-7 shootout with South Carolina my favorite beat-like-a-dead-horse topic is coming up again - the SEC defenses are just too good!

I continue to stand by my alternate conclusion that SEC offenses are plain offensive.

So if you love nothing better than 3-and-out series after series and MVP punters, by all means, tune-in to LSU v. Auburn, Florida v. Tennesse, or Alabama v. Arkansas this weekend. I'm sure you'll see one, maybe two touchdowns in the course of a 4 hour football game. But, man, look at the team speed on defense!

F&$#ing Commenters

With the exception of this lovely, family-owned blog, I really, really, REALLY hate the people who feel obligated to comment in response to articles online. The idea in itself is sound - comments provide a forum to respond to the opinion of others. Ideally, the comments would be sound, logical, thought out counter-arguments or well-reasoned kudos. Instead, the vast majority of commenters are semi-literate morons that, quite frankly, I'm surprised can even read and write.

The examples are too numerous to cite, so I'll just pick two from the sports world the past couple days...

1. Several days back a cell phone-taken video made its way online showing Dallas Mavericks player Josh Howard saying some unsavory things about the National Anthem. I'm 100% sure this is simply a case of a high-profile athlete making a stupid joke to a friend, assuming confidence. God only knows that if even one-tenth of the tasteless jokes I've made in my lifetime made their way to the interwebs people would have a significantly different opinion of me - they'd think I'm awesome and hilarious! The difference between me and Josh Howard is that he's a public figure and I'm not. But the point remains the same - sometimes you say things in confidence, and it's difficult, even for those that live in the limelight, to filter your mouth 24x7x365. The commenters to the linked article above would do well to keep that in mind before accusing Howard of treason, which several actually did.

2. First a disclaimer, I hate Stewart Mandel of Sports Illustrated, but still read him out of some perverse need to get my blood boiling. He always disses Notre Dame, I know every article will include one or two shots, and I know this will piss me off to no end; and yet, I still read him. So it was with reserved enthusiasm that I dove into his weekly college football mailbag yesterday. It's really hard for me to find blame with Steward here because the idiot Notre Dame comment basically served this up on a silver platter. This is a fairly typical reaction for Notre Dame fans in general. Flying way off the handle and proclaiming the team national title contenders after winning a game because of 6 turnovers. True, they caused and converted on all those turnovers, but the offense itself only had 260 yards total, so it's not like they're suddenly Southern Cal. They beat the worst Michigan team in decades at home, in a deluge, while being handed the ball multiple times within Michigan's half of the field. Let's not make this out to be more than it is folks. If they hadn't won that game, they'd be the worst team ever.

My point is this, the media in general are idiots. When you have idiots (commenters) responding to idiots (media) everything ends up getting blown out of proportion. Then the idiot comments become accepted as "public opinion" and we all get generalized. In the two examples above the Howard reaction will be characterized as a public outcry for him getting cut by the Mavs and the myth of the loud-mouthed, blind optimist Notre Dame fans will be perpetuated. All this because a bunch of unemployed losers have nothing better to do all day that trawl the web looking for hot-button subjects to which they can leave inflammatory responses.

So my plea is for commenters to please think everything out before commenting on anything. I'd love to see more major media outlets remove the anonymity from their comment sections. Maybe if people knew they could be held accountable for what they said they'd be a bit more reserved and the comments could fulfill their true purpose of constructive criticism.


P.S. I'd better get a shit-load of retarded comments in response to this post!

Smile!

I dare you to watch this play again and not smile or laugh out loud (as I did). We're gonna get clobbered by State this weekend in East Lansing, but it sure was fun laying the lumber to Michigan...