So I'm on ESPN's website today updating my fantasy football roster in hopes I can pull out a huuuuge winning streak and make the playoffs, and I decide to poke around for NFL articles, news, commentary, etc... After all this is a great year for me and professional football; I'm a Saints fan!! Undefeated to date at 9-0, we average 36.8 points a game (first in the NFL), avgerage 426 yards a game (first in the NFL), more defensive touchdowns than any other team in the League, and we currently sit atop the NFL power rankings. There should be plenty to read...Right?!
Yeah not so much. Not one article, video, highlight or recap about the New Orleans Saints. Plenty of talk about the Pat's boneheaded 4th down disaster, and Peyton Manning, and whether or not the Bears even have a shot at making the playoffs, but Saints? Zero, nada, zilch, zippo!
Is it because we haven't ever won a Superbowl? Is it because we've had such a dismal past? Wouldn't these things make for an even better under-dog story? All I can say is if this is the way it's gotta be, I hope we stay under these chowderheads' radar, and bite them all in the ass come January.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Response Carried Over From Commentary at Another Location
See what started this at: http://ianmcgibboney.blogspot.com/2009/11/blending-sports-and-politicssomething.html
You're an angry fella Tom, but you do have a point about me portraying some of the same divisiveness and adversity in much of my own contributions and commentary. So, I'm not going to mark arguments for such or justify such.
Unemployment is a huge problem. It seems to be your sticking point, much like many others in your quest to paint the current President along with Democratic policy and implementation as the source for all of our woes. You are absolutely right: Obama initially stated that he could hold unemployment to 8% or less. He was absolutely wrong.
This is the source of my point. It's not about supporting the plans of Democrats, but rather supporting truly progressive plans that will have the desired impact, not half-measures watered down by compromise ceded to opposing political organizations. Krugman and a plethera of economists screamed at the top of their lungs about the E.R.A. not being nearly large enough to be fully effective. They even went so far as to state that while the proposed investment would slow down and reverse quite a few key economic indicators, it wouldn't have the desired effect on unemployment rates as they are usually one of the last indicators to turn around. Further, they are still stating unless more investment is made specifically in the areas of job creation several years of inflated unemployment rates are likely.
You see my point is not loyalty to party, but to good ideas. We've run higher defecits as a percentage of GDP in the past, and specifically when that money was used to strengthen the economy and production at home, it was very successful. I don't care about Obama or the particular individuals who tout ideas. I just care about the ideas.
I think Obama has come up short on some of his campaign promises, and delivered on others. I never expected any different when I cast my ballot for him. I simply saw and still see him as the best possibility for Progressive reform.
Tom, anyone who can look at the lack of support shown to health care reform by the Republican party and not say they would rather play politics, is either clinically insane or completely apathetic. Even the extremely ridiculous farce of a bill that they slapped together after much criticism for not bringing a viable alternative to the table, doesn't guarantee an exemption to preexisting condition exclusions.
You are right again on the universal mandate (although no one is going to be thrown in jail). It is a bad idea to provide more of a monopoly to the insurance companies who already are raping the American citizens. That is exactly why a strong and comprehensive public option is necessary. Contrary to what is said so frequently, a public option doesn't automatically equal a single payer government plan in a few years. There are other nations who still have private businesses providing highly regulated health insurance to customers, and they have achieved universal coverage.
Further, don't label me with the nothing but hatred mark. Much of what I write is simply commentary. Have I been inflammatory in my language? Yes, certainly, but there is not a pervasiveness to it as to warrant hatred. Frustration, sure. Anger, maybe, but not hatred.
Also, don't twist my words sir. I was referencing the Evangelical base of the GOP as "wholly equipped with condemnation..." not the party in total.
Finally, in reference to all of your talk about the Obama/racism issue. I have never said that political ideaology doesn't play some role along with other factors, but I have emphatically stated that when you have a President doing many of the same things that other Republican and Democratic Presidents have done; the only difference being the color of his skin, and the dark fellow takes the "Hitler" cat calls, racism is present.
Does that mean that every Republican is racist? Of course not. Does that mean that racism is stronger in the Republican party than the Democratic party? Maybe. However, it certainly does mean it exists, and as such, should be discussed.
Will Obama and the Democrats get trounced in the upcoming elections? I have no idea, and it certainly remains to be seen. To quote Ian, "That is why they play the games". I will say this though. If they are trounced, it will not be because a couple of Governor's races went their way early on. Those two races do not a national referendum make. I believe if Obama stops pandering to more middle of the road Democrats and Conservative Republicans, his success will be much larger, but that isn't likely. It's the nature of politics, and it's the system we have. I think the system we have sucks overall, but I can't think of a better one either.
So, I'm not here to get in a pissing match with you. I'm not here to discuss who's the bigger hypocrite, or what party did what to who'm now or in the past. I'm hear to discuss ideas, and how to bring the good ones to fruition. I haven't always done a good job of doing that, as you have pointed out, but that is my goal.
Now would you care to discuss ideas? Would you care to explain what you think would help our country and why? Would you care to listen to other's viewpoints as well? If you would, I'm in.
You're an angry fella Tom, but you do have a point about me portraying some of the same divisiveness and adversity in much of my own contributions and commentary. So, I'm not going to mark arguments for such or justify such.
Unemployment is a huge problem. It seems to be your sticking point, much like many others in your quest to paint the current President along with Democratic policy and implementation as the source for all of our woes. You are absolutely right: Obama initially stated that he could hold unemployment to 8% or less. He was absolutely wrong.
This is the source of my point. It's not about supporting the plans of Democrats, but rather supporting truly progressive plans that will have the desired impact, not half-measures watered down by compromise ceded to opposing political organizations. Krugman and a plethera of economists screamed at the top of their lungs about the E.R.A. not being nearly large enough to be fully effective. They even went so far as to state that while the proposed investment would slow down and reverse quite a few key economic indicators, it wouldn't have the desired effect on unemployment rates as they are usually one of the last indicators to turn around. Further, they are still stating unless more investment is made specifically in the areas of job creation several years of inflated unemployment rates are likely.
You see my point is not loyalty to party, but to good ideas. We've run higher defecits as a percentage of GDP in the past, and specifically when that money was used to strengthen the economy and production at home, it was very successful. I don't care about Obama or the particular individuals who tout ideas. I just care about the ideas.
I think Obama has come up short on some of his campaign promises, and delivered on others. I never expected any different when I cast my ballot for him. I simply saw and still see him as the best possibility for Progressive reform.
Tom, anyone who can look at the lack of support shown to health care reform by the Republican party and not say they would rather play politics, is either clinically insane or completely apathetic. Even the extremely ridiculous farce of a bill that they slapped together after much criticism for not bringing a viable alternative to the table, doesn't guarantee an exemption to preexisting condition exclusions.
You are right again on the universal mandate (although no one is going to be thrown in jail). It is a bad idea to provide more of a monopoly to the insurance companies who already are raping the American citizens. That is exactly why a strong and comprehensive public option is necessary. Contrary to what is said so frequently, a public option doesn't automatically equal a single payer government plan in a few years. There are other nations who still have private businesses providing highly regulated health insurance to customers, and they have achieved universal coverage.
Further, don't label me with the nothing but hatred mark. Much of what I write is simply commentary. Have I been inflammatory in my language? Yes, certainly, but there is not a pervasiveness to it as to warrant hatred. Frustration, sure. Anger, maybe, but not hatred.
Also, don't twist my words sir. I was referencing the Evangelical base of the GOP as "wholly equipped with condemnation..." not the party in total.
Finally, in reference to all of your talk about the Obama/racism issue. I have never said that political ideaology doesn't play some role along with other factors, but I have emphatically stated that when you have a President doing many of the same things that other Republican and Democratic Presidents have done; the only difference being the color of his skin, and the dark fellow takes the "Hitler" cat calls, racism is present.
Does that mean that every Republican is racist? Of course not. Does that mean that racism is stronger in the Republican party than the Democratic party? Maybe. However, it certainly does mean it exists, and as such, should be discussed.
Will Obama and the Democrats get trounced in the upcoming elections? I have no idea, and it certainly remains to be seen. To quote Ian, "That is why they play the games". I will say this though. If they are trounced, it will not be because a couple of Governor's races went their way early on. Those two races do not a national referendum make. I believe if Obama stops pandering to more middle of the road Democrats and Conservative Republicans, his success will be much larger, but that isn't likely. It's the nature of politics, and it's the system we have. I think the system we have sucks overall, but I can't think of a better one either.
So, I'm not here to get in a pissing match with you. I'm not here to discuss who's the bigger hypocrite, or what party did what to who'm now or in the past. I'm hear to discuss ideas, and how to bring the good ones to fruition. I haven't always done a good job of doing that, as you have pointed out, but that is my goal.
Now would you care to discuss ideas? Would you care to explain what you think would help our country and why? Would you care to listen to other's viewpoints as well? If you would, I'm in.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Maybe I'm Just As Guilty As The Tea Baggers
I've been reading over a current thread I was keeping up with at a well written blog I follow by Ian McGibbony, and in doing so, I followed a profile link of a fellow who thinks little of my politcal and social outlook. I delved into his profile and subsequently his webpage and was a bit disturbed. The tone and tenor of his repsonses on the blog I follow had already provided me with an insight to his overall frame of mind regarding our current President and also the Democratic majority in both houses of Congress, but I was definitely surprised by the pervasiveness of his contempt and acerbic wit.
His every entry consists of hostile and derisive commentary about Barrack Obama, and it has made me wonder am I any different? Almost every commentary I make, almost every response to a posting that I issue, and certainly my own works have been similar in their ire towards George W. Bush and his Republican cohorts. I often get caught up in arguing with people for the sake of winning the argument and casting a poor light on someone that I perceive to be a Republican or conservative individual. I have reached a point of almost knee-jerk negative reaction to anyone who is conservative or touts conservative ideaology. Certainly I could pen sprawling and rather convincing arguments for those reactions and my commentary, but I am beginning to see those reasons are irrelevant.
I believe it is the act of picking a "team" and playing/fighting one another that is causing the lack of progress. Don't misunderstand me, the Democratic party holds vastly larger numbers of candidates who are congruent with my vision of what role government should play in our lives...better put even, what role "we" should play in our own lives. I do truly contain loathing for the wildy hypocritcal and destructive Evangelical base of the Republican party. Perhaps I see more of this strain of the party because of Geography and association, but I think that is important to remember the cause is not about blasting these people. No matter how good it may feel sometimes, it is counterproductive. After all the goal is not to discredit the Republican agenda, but to further the Progressive agenda. What is the Progressive agenda? The betterment of society as a whole. It is the "Socialist" brush that this idea gets painted with that causes so much trouble. This is unfortunate because whatever word you use to describe it, helping each other out is not a bad thing. The whole is reflected in the sum of its parts. The rich gentleman who loses a few dollars in taxes picks up edification and further wealth by a strong and successful societal whole.
The us versus them mentality hurts us all. Much to my dismay we all really do have to share the same country. It's just in our best interest to stop blasting each other (this will be extremely difficult for me) and working on building each other up.
His every entry consists of hostile and derisive commentary about Barrack Obama, and it has made me wonder am I any different? Almost every commentary I make, almost every response to a posting that I issue, and certainly my own works have been similar in their ire towards George W. Bush and his Republican cohorts. I often get caught up in arguing with people for the sake of winning the argument and casting a poor light on someone that I perceive to be a Republican or conservative individual. I have reached a point of almost knee-jerk negative reaction to anyone who is conservative or touts conservative ideaology. Certainly I could pen sprawling and rather convincing arguments for those reactions and my commentary, but I am beginning to see those reasons are irrelevant.
I believe it is the act of picking a "team" and playing/fighting one another that is causing the lack of progress. Don't misunderstand me, the Democratic party holds vastly larger numbers of candidates who are congruent with my vision of what role government should play in our lives...better put even, what role "we" should play in our own lives. I do truly contain loathing for the wildy hypocritcal and destructive Evangelical base of the Republican party. Perhaps I see more of this strain of the party because of Geography and association, but I think that is important to remember the cause is not about blasting these people. No matter how good it may feel sometimes, it is counterproductive. After all the goal is not to discredit the Republican agenda, but to further the Progressive agenda. What is the Progressive agenda? The betterment of society as a whole. It is the "Socialist" brush that this idea gets painted with that causes so much trouble. This is unfortunate because whatever word you use to describe it, helping each other out is not a bad thing. The whole is reflected in the sum of its parts. The rich gentleman who loses a few dollars in taxes picks up edification and further wealth by a strong and successful societal whole.
The us versus them mentality hurts us all. Much to my dismay we all really do have to share the same country. It's just in our best interest to stop blasting each other (this will be extremely difficult for me) and working on building each other up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
