We Did It Again: Damn Liberals!

As I was viewing time’s blog, specifically a blog by Joe Klein exclaiming the characteristics of “left wing extremists.” These are not just characteristics of say, Fidel Castro or Tito, but characteristics that seem to resound in our current political system. These are the type of comments that infuriate me, as it is ludicrous to believe that anyone would buy into such blasphemy. Allow me to address a few of Mr. Klein’s claims.

In the realm of foreign policy, we have these comments:
--believes the United States is a fundamentally negative force in the world.
--believes that American imperialism is the primary cause of Islamic radicalism.
--believes that the decision to go to war in Iraq was not an individual case of monumental stupidity, but a consequence of America’s fundamental imperialistic nature.

A lot of these comments are going to be blown out of proportion and “misread,” but it is the opinion of many that the US is an increasingly negative actor in world politics. I would not say that America is again an imperial power, such as England was throughout much of the 18th, 19th, and some of the 20th centuries. But needless to say, it is a terrifying prospect and could soon become reality, especially if our war monger president decides to pick another fight. America is not the cause of Islamic radicalism, but in essence our current activities in the Middle East are pissing off a lot of Islamic fundamentalists, which could lead to perpetual terror in our nation.

In the realm of domestic policy, we have these comments:
--believes that eternal problems like crime and poverty are the primarily the fault of society.
--believes that America isn’t really a democracy.
--believes that corporations are fundamentally evil.
--believes in a corporate conspiracy that controls the world.
--is intolerant of good ideas when they come from conservative sources.
--dismissively mocks people of faith, especially those who are opposed to abortion and gay marriage.
--regularly uses harsh, vulgar, intolerant language to attack moderates or conservatives.

I disagree that our society has caused poverty, but it is the fault of the individual. Remember, we all have a little thing called free will, which we can think how we want, hence we can motivate ourselves to work anytime that we want. I have news Mr. Klein, America is not a democracy. America is a federal republic with democratic tendencies. It does not take a scholar to figure that one out. The founders did not want to create a democracy, but a republic. Democracy in its own right is one of the worse forms of government on the planet; nothing would ever get done, just ask the Greeks.

Corporations are really not a bad thing, they help to drive the economy and make the U.S. a world power. Corporations just add to income inequality and such minor pains in the side. I am not going to even address the comment about corporate conspiracies, which is simply not even true. I cannot speak for my fellow liberals, but I personally look at new ideas without filtering them through my party ID. I give the ideas careful though and if it is a decent idea, I am game to listen more. If not, chances are it was a dumb idea. I do not dismiss those who are opposed to abortion and gay marriage, I simply disagree with them. I am sure that they have their reasons for their beliefs, as well as I do. Did I use intolerant and vulgar language to express myself? Nope!

And The Debate Rages On

It has been a bedrock principle of Christianity for the past 2000 years that Jesus Christ died a single man and rose from the dead in order to save man from his sins. But a recent documentary produced by James Cameron entitled ‘The Tomb of Christ’ presents a challenge to the paradigm that has guided man for two millennia. The documentary, which is to air on the Discovery Channel on March 4, is based around ten ancient stone boxes (coffins) discovered in Jerusalem in 1980, which carbon date back to the time that Jesus lived. Within those ten boxes were believed to be the remains of Jesus, Mary Magdalene (his supposed wife), and remainder of his family.

One box even has an inscription stating, “Judah, son of Jesus,” which could signal that Jesus had a child, which would refute the basis of Christianity. But of course there are those that refute the evidence, especially scholars and those in religious community. It is believed that Jesus and his supposed family would have no business being entombed in an area that was of middle class status in Old Jerusalem, as Jesus is referred to as a poor man in scripture. Plus, it is widely believed that he spent three days lying in “state” at a temple across town, far away from the middle class area.

Others all calling the documentary propaganda aimed at misleading people and making money. Other say such names like Jesus and Mary were rather prominent during the time period the boxes were entombed. It is not even known if the boxes actually state the name Jesus, as the language of the time period (Ancient Semitic) is rather hard to decipher. Never the less this is another potential dent in the armor of Christianity. Other evidence has come to prominence that possibly disproves the legend of Jesus, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls found from 1947-1956.

The scrolls include what is referred to by religious scholars as the Gnostic Gospels. These particular gospels were not included in the New Testament (completed around 300AD) and include the gospels written by Judas (the apostle who betrayed Jesus) and Mary Magdalene herself. In a historic sense, we do know that Jesus did exist (unlike Abraham or Moses, which is in doubt) from 4-33AD. But the trouble is that he is only written about in an external source once, a book of Antiquities composed in 90AD. It is obvious that Jesus existed, but it is not so obvious of what context he existed in.

The Loophole America Has Been Waiting For?

A Senate resolution to revoke the president’s ability to wage war in Iraq is currently in the works. Senators Carl Levin (D-Michigan) and Joseph Biden (D-Delaware) are working towards drafting a revised version of the 2002 resolution that gave President Bush the authorization to wage war in Iraq. The draft resolution will call for the removal of all US troops from Iraq by March 2008, with a select few being left behind to assist Iraqi forces in counterterrorism measures. Whether or not the resolution will have the number of votes to pass the Senate and House remains to be seen. But this is by far the most aggressive piece of legislation that has been discussed in Congress to date.

Last week the House failed in passing a non-binding resolution that condemned the surge of 21,500 more troops to Iraq, which is a strong signal that Democrats do not have the necessary votes to pass the new potential restrictions on the president. The revised resolution will be presented to the Democratic caucus and some Republicans on Tuesday and then the “politicking” for votes will begin. Even if enough votes are garnered to enact the resolution, there still remains the question of whether the resolution will interfere with the president’s constitutional commander-in-chief powers. Like many presidents before him, Bush has always been protective of his war making power.

Constitutional scholars will be debating the issue for weeks to come, but I believe that the issue is cut and dry. The president will contend that Congress never declared war on Iraq in March 2003, which they did not. Instead the original resolution granted the president the authority to dispatch troops to Iraq in order to halt Saddam Hussein’s production of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and other assorted issues that deal with terror. The original pretext of the resolution was debunked when no WMDs were located, which in theory deflates our whole reason for being there. Yes, the president can command the troops, but if his basis for commanding the troops is revoked, he should in theory not be able to continue to run his personal war.

Does the News Still Exist?

It has become apparent over the past few weeks that the media has overstepped the bounds of what one would consider news. The news has been a firm part of the American psyche since the advent of radio and more recently, television. The modern news media is a questionable institution based on the fact that news conglomerates do not give us the whole story of the events that pervade our lives. Never the less, at least they were giving us the scoop on matters that we concerned ourselves with, that is before CNN became the E! Channel.

There are three things that sell news: sex, scandal, and controversy. Besides Bill Clinton, the media market has a severe lack of attention gathering stories, besides the lives of celebrities. The most recent binge that the media has been on has been in concern to the death of Anna Nicole Smith and the less than reputable behavior of Britney Spears. Even reliable news networks like CNN and MSNBC ( I enjoy their point of view) cannot get enough of these people. Personally, I would love to hear about real news, no matter how disturbing or "honest" it may be.

But instead, the news directors of these conglomerates subject us to live feeds of the trial for custody of Anna Nicole Smith’s body; her body. Who wants to hear a blubbering judge decide who gets the decomposing remains of a blonde bimbo who fancied herself a modern day Marilyn Monroe (she was far from it). Sadly, that is not all that the news can get enough of. Who can forget Britney Spears? I enjoy turning on CNN at 9AM to hear that she has no business being around kids, much less her own, shaved her head, and checked herself into rehab, again and left, again. Honestly, who in the hell cares?

I am firmly aware that the American infatuation with the lives of celebrities is a multi-billion dollar (my net worth) a year industry, but how much can we really take? I would like to assume that celebrities are human and enjoy the right to privacy like the rest of the civilized world. Yet we have to place these people on a pedestal to boost our own egos with the fantasy that famous people are human just like us. If I want to stalk these people, I will buy the National Enquirer or turn on the E! Channel. If I want to enlighten myself about the events of the world, I will turn on a reputable news network; get the "scoop" straight.

It’s Over: Take A Seat, Scottie

In keeping with the annual tradition of a great player past their prime wanting to relieve the “stresses” of retirement, Scottie Pippen has declared that he would like to return to the NBA. The 41 year old Pippen believes that he still has the ability to assist a play-off caliber team, as he has been training throughout the winter in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. He is hoping to strike some sort of deal this weekend at the annual NBA All-Star game, which is being held in Las Vegas this year. Taking any player past their prime and especially those past the twilight of their career is risky business, especially if the team has to depend on them. Pippen last played in the NBA in 2003-2004, averaging 5 points and 3 rebounds a game.

Pippen is one of the NBA’s 50 greatest players of all-time and being a Chicago Bulls fan, I would have to concur he was once a phenomenal player. I would hope that he learned his lesson from former teammate Michael Jordan that making a comeback in you’re forties is not exactly a logical decision. Not to downplay the role that Pippen played while apart of those great Bull teams, but Pippen is not exactly a basketball god when Jordan is not by his side. Many of his stats declined monumentally after Jordan retired after the 97-98’ season. His most prolific and most known role will always be that of Michael Jordan’s side-kick whether he likes it or not.

Pippen may not have been a scoring god like Jordan, but his tough defense was renowned across the league. But is there a chance that a 41 year old man can keep up with a mid twenties man like Dwayne Wade? There comes a time and point in all of our lives when we are unable to compete in a sport at a level that we once played at; it is called aging. An individual can still be in monumental shape in their 40’s, but a 20 year old in monumental shape has the upper hand. Plus, there is the humiliation factor that Scottie needs to worry about. I am not saying if he were to comeback he would drag ass all over the floor. But it would be in the interest of his legacy not to comeback; he has nothing more to prove.

“Cheat Me in the Price, But Not the Goods”

Who would believe that NASCAR would be “rocked” by a scandalous tale of cheating on the eve of the sport’s biggest race? Isn’t NASCAR a “good old boys” sport? Evidently our perceptions were wrong in this case, as it was discovered on Sunday that Michael Waltrip’s Toyota “stock car” was in violation of various NASCAR rules. Amongst the violations was an intake manifold (brings air into the engine block) laced with a jet fuel performance additive, which obviously would give the team an unfair advantage over the field. NASCAR reacted by indefinitely suspending and fining Waltrip’s crew chief and team director who were escorted from Daytona International Speedway on Wednesday.

Waltrip maintains that it was the act of individuals, not his team. Like scandals in other sports, this incident will undoubtedly cost Waltrip his reputation and possibly his career. During an interview on Monday, Waltrip appeared rattled to the point of not even plugging his sponsors (something he is known for). He did the admirable thing by trying to pull out of the Daytona 500, but was talked out of it by NASCAR officials and his wife. Is this act of unfair play attributable to Waltrip? Some would concur that he was behind it, as the second year owner-drivers comes into this season after an atrocious 2006 season that included no top 10 finishes.

This coupled with the fact that his lot of cars are three of the cars sponsored by the newcomer Toyata, Waltrip is indeed under a massive amount of pressure. Besides the personal effects on Waltrip, many wonder what the reaching influence will be on the sport as a whole. Will this tarnish the reputation of NASCAR, a sport that has become immensely popular over the past decade? Other instances of cheating have perpetually hampered the images of other sports, such as the Black Sox Scandal of 1917, where the Chicago White Sox (mainly 7 players) threw the World Series against the Cincinnati Reds. This forever changed our view of baseball and pushed many fans away from the sport.

Michael Waltrip and his team have paid the price from an administrative point of view. But the actions of his team have ceaselessly tarnished the very “goods” that NASCAR gives its fans. NASCAR will surely scrutinize the cars they inspect even more so than they do now, which could in theory lead to more instances of botched cheating. NASCAR is a cut throat sport where all of the cars are essentially in the same plane and finding the slight LEGAL edge over the competition is on the minds of all the teams. NASCAR’s rules concerning many aspects of performance enhancing are considered to be dense to the point of being unclear. It appears as if NASCAR has some work to do and the season has yet to begin.

Dear Mr. Hendry: Give ‘Big Z’ What He Wants

Mid-February: dreary, cold, boring (if you live in Illinois), and nothing on TV in the weigh of sports. Have no fear though my fellow sports junkies, baseball is soon to make an appearance on a TV near you. With those words I can hear a resounding shout of joy, but that is after the fact that we have to sit through two months of basketball and a debunked NHL, sounds like fun, right? Never the less there is news affront in Chicago, specifically with the Cubs. It is no secret that the Cubs were atrocious last season (last century as well), finishing with an NL worse 66-96 record. General Manager Jim Hendry has attempted to make amends with fans by spending over $300 million in the offseason to procure the best and brightest (Ramirez, Soriano, DeRosa, Kotts, Marquis, Floyd, and Lilly). Plus, one cannot forget the luring of Lou Pinella to his grave for $10 million (coaching the Cubs may kill the man).

Hendry’s acquisitions will hopefully end the longest drought in sport’s history between championships, 99 years. Either way, if the Cubs blow it this season they move into triple digits, if not they will produce big numbers to help pay for some of those big contracts. But Hendry needs to shell out just another $15 million. What is $15 million between friends? Hopefully nothing because it is vital that Carlos Zambrano is signed before the season starts. During the annual Cubs convention last weekend, Zambrano stated that he needs to be signed by the Cubs before the season starts, or he is “gone” after the 2007 season. The Cubs offered Zambrano $11 million a year, but that was not enough. I will admit that $15 million is a bit extreme, but Carlos does bring up a good point when he pointed out that Barry Zito was signed for $126 million over 7 years, hence taking the biggest free agent off of the market. If Zambrano is not signed it is obvious that he is going to be the most courted starting pitcher on the market in 2008.
Plus, it is not an intelligent strategy to let the ace of your pitching staff go without any compensation.

Mark Prior and Kerry Wood have proven that they deserve of the title ‘ace.’ But the chances of either one of them staying injury free throughout the season is comparable to me obtaining a date with a super model. With those prospects, it is vital that Zambrano stick around to lead the charge. In my mind he has proven his worth season in and season out. Last season he led a rickety starting staff with a 3.41 ERA, 210 strikeouts, and 214 innings. No one is invincible, but Zambrano is comparable to a thoroughbred horse running a marathon; the man hardly misses any starts. The rest of his numbers are in the top five in the NL. What we have here is a pitcher in his prime and one that Chicago cannot let get away. If history serves as a reference, one cannot forget the Greg Maddux ordeal in the early 1990’s. Look what happened to him? He served out the prime of his career in Atlanta, not Chicago.

The Bolt of Lightening Democrats Hoped For?

Invoking the moniker and legend of a man named Lincoln; Barack Obama announced his candidacy for president on Saturday in Springfield, Illinois in front of the “Old State Capitol” where the ghost of Lincoln still saunters to this day. Obama served 7 years in the General Assembly before his “prolific” rise to the U.S. Senate and fame, so why not attempt to illustrate the point even more so than by rousing up images of one of the nation’s greatest presidents? The irony between his speech and Lincoln is somewhat amusing, as Obama plans to run his campaign based on two themes, progressiveness and unity. History has shown us that these two ideologies do not mix well in politics, especially during the time of Lincoln (the whole Civil War thing). At some point and time one of these ideas will have to be sacrificed, as the status quo will remain in Washington D.C (even though he wants to change all of that).

Obama is on the verge of toppling over his own two feet at this current juncture in the campaign and it is only the beginning. There is no doubt that as the campaign revs its engines up, Obama will become rather well known throughout the nation and the world. But from what I have discerned from what Obama stands for, I am unsure of what he really stands for. Yes, he rouses up recollections of John F. Kennedy, as he is young (as far as presidential races are concerned), he has a young family, and is progressive, which is why the Democratic Party is absolutely crazy over him. Obama is in essence a well packaged candidate from a political science point of view. But in a race that will have to focus on policy, does Obama have the right ideas? The trouble with the presidential election gearing up so soon is that candidates are not able to show all of their cards at once; they have to wait.

Chicago progressives are worried that Obama has jettisoned his “prophetic” candor in favor for a normal politician; he has gone Hollywood. Opponents will be fast to point out that he won his Senate seat by default because the GOP could not find an admirable contender (Alan Keyes was the best that they could do). Other would say that he deserved the seat. Obama even stated that he would finish out his term in the Senate, but obviously that has gone down the tubes. An article in The Nation described Obama as “so fucking coy,” which reins true at this current moment. Besides garnering the primary votes of Democrats, he has to deal with Hillary Clinton and others. Democrats are renowned for trying to “out-left” each other during primary season, which in this case may not be a pretty staff meeting in the “going negative department.”

The primary debates are to occur in mid-April and I believe that by then both Democrats and Republicans will have a firmer idea of whom they want to support. Up until that time it is going to be a guessing game with most of the candidates. Lincoln once gave the infamous “house divided” speech on the very steps of where Obama stood on Saturday (it kicked off his presidential campaign in 1858) and it is fair to say that our government is divided at the current time. But the real question(s) for Obama is simple, how divided is the Democratic Party and low will the candidates go in order to secure the nomination? Obama wants to fix Washington, we know that, but that is going to be easier said than done; just ask Lincoln.

Show Me The Money!

The U.S. Mint plans to release a new $1 coin this Thursday to commemorate past presidents. Just like the 50 state quarter program, the $1 coins will be released in one set per year with the first four presidents depicted on the coins (Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison) in 2007. According to the U.S. Mint, the coins will feature the same metallic makeup as the Sacagawea gold dollars, but there are some unique characteristics that include: the name of the president, the year(s) in which they served, and the order of their service engraved onto one side of the coin. The reverse side of the coin will feature a depiction of the statue of liberty with the words “United States of America” next to lady liberty.

But the most unique part of the new coins will be featured on the edge. It appears as if the coins are thick enough to allow the engraving of the words “E Pluribus Unum” (from many, one), the year, and the bank at which the coins were minted on the serrated edge. The new coins will be available from banks that placed specific orders and of course, from the U.S. Mint. The new coins have lead many to wonder if the U.S. Mint plans to phase out the use of dollar bills, which in theory would save the government millions of dollars each year. But more than 3/4th of people surveyed do not want paper money phased out, nor does the government plan to stop making paper money. But no one can doubt that the U.S. Mint has been on a coin craze over the past decade.

The goal has to been to amplify the number of coin collectors the world around. Investing in coins is technically one of the most feasible ways to generate a future profit, but the original capital needed can be hefty. Per se one wants to invest in a set of American Eagle coins (gold, silver, and platinum). The starting cost for a set of four is a petty $1500. Granted, the coins in theory should double their worth over a period of time, but the cost is a bit hefty for the average collector. If the U.S. Mint really wants to stir up sleeping coin collectors, they should use more ideas like the presidential coins. They are affordable and easy to obtain unlike many of their products. The State Quarter Program was a success, but it remains to be seen of the added 75 cents will hamper average collectors.

A Different Examination of Valentines Day

It is well known by now that I despise “Hallmark holidays,” especially Valentines Day. This sentimental holiday traces its roots from religious figures, more specifically Saint Valentine (there are 3 of them) within the Catholic Church. The St. Valentine that historians concentrate on, at least in this regard, lived during the 3rd century in Rome. Legend has it that Emperor Claudius II decided that single men were prime military material, so he decreed that young men were not to be married. St. Valentine fought the decree and was incarcerated for his attempts to thwart the emperor by still performing marriages for young couples. It was during his prison term that he fell in love with a young woman (his jailor’s daughter) and sent her the first ‘valentine’ in the form of letter, as he signed it, “from your valentine.”

The actual commemoration of the day takes place on February 14th because St. Valentine was eventually executed for his deeds on February 14, 270. Americans literally took the holiday to heart 1500 years later, as home made Valentines were exchanged around 1700. Valentine’s Day became an official commercial holiday in the 1840’s with the mass production of greeting cards. Is it not ironic that we celebrate our “love” for a significant other based on a day that saw a man’s slaughter? Needless to say, Hallmark and other corporate entities have firmly embraced the art of selling chocolate to selling “cute” teddy bears (which have their roots with President Teddy Roosevelt) to help satisfy American’s urge to satisfy “that special someone.”

I took the liberty of reviewing some demographic numbers in concern to Valentines Day from the US Census Bureau and I must say I am now fully aware of why people spend the way they do. For instance, those who fall in the age group of 20-29 are more apt to purchase a gift for someone simply because these are the prime years in which we seek a mate. There are 118 single men for every 100 single women, which spells for mass squandering of capital in order to secure mate. Never mind the principle behind it (which I disagree with), it is all about seeing how low we will go to find someone (which probably leads to our colossal divorce rates). On the Brightside, if you are male and have not found love by the time you are 65, there are 33 single men for every 100 single women (Viagra sales).

So what kind of sales do retailers typically do on the days leading up to Valentines Day? Over 60% of American consumers participate in the holiday and on average spend over $100 each. Last year, over $13.7 billion was spent, with these figures bound to exceed that number this year. Oddly enough, you can say that Valentines Day is a “chick holiday” with the average male planning to spend around $135 and the average female planning to spend just $68. Where do the majority of these funds go to? The greeting card industry of course! 68% of consumers usually purchase a greeting card, with candy in second, and an evening out in a close third. What does all of this mean? For one it means go into the greeting card business. Secondly, it shows how materialistic our society is. Praise the lord I am single, as my valentine to myself this year are tires; practical and inexpensive.

A Tainted Idol

For the first time in NASA’s history, an active astronaut has run into legal troubles. Lisa Marie Nowak was caught by Orlando Police in an attempt to “confront” a romantic rival (an air force captain) with a four inch blade, a rubber hose, and a BB gun. Nowak, who is a Captain in the US Navy (thats one rank away from admiral), was arrested after failing to assault her rival in an airport parking lot. She followed her rival’s plane from Houston to Orlando by car, not even stopping for bathroom breaks, as she wore a diaper the entire way. I guess she became accustomed to those diapers in space. Why not give them a try in gravity?

Evidently, Nowak and the other woman are “active participants” in a love triangle with a fellow astronaut. The ramifications are already being felt by Nowak, as NASA has grounded her from flight status and put her on thirty day leave. She was allowed to post bail of around $25K this afternoon under the condition that she wear a GPS tracking device around her ankle. It maybe a bit rash, but one of the charges included attempted murder. There is no word yet on the other participants. NASA has yet to officially comment on the story, but chances are their reputation has taken a big hit.

One would wonder how a “crazed” individual like this even gained entrance into the astronaut program in the first place. Potential astronauts are put through rigorous psychological monitoring and testing in order to get into the program, much less the other rigors it takes to enter space. Nowak has been an astronaut since 1996 and has countless degrees from the US Naval Academy, i.e. she is not stupid. She even took part in STS-121 last summer when the space shuttle Discovery spent a few weeks at the International Space Station. Astronauts are human like the rest of us, but their aura in our society is comparable to a god; they are idolized the world around.

It has been widely known that the very first astronauts were not exactly model citizens. Yet their acts of disorderly conduct were set aside under the guise of “boys will be boys.” Nowak though is at a disadvantage, as the standards for astronauts both on and off the job have increased since the late 1960’s. What does this mess mean for NASA? It is too early to surmise what the resounding effects will be. But it is fair to assume that the agency has been tainted. At the very least I would expect incredibly tougher standards, even tougher than the present time to become an astronaut.

Damn, there goes that career choice...

Super Loss

I have finally been had; my prediction for the Super Bowl was immensely off. The Bears suffered their final demise of the season with a 29-17 loss at the hands of the Colts. Let’s face it, Peyton Manning ruled the day again with solid play that thwarted the Bears defense on every level. The Bears did start out strong in an obvious sense, as Devin Hester ran the opening kickoff back 92 yards for a touchdown. That touchdown was then complimented by a Colt’s turnover which turned into a Rex Grossman touchdown pass to Muhsin Muhammad. After that it was downhill. The Bear’s offense turned into an impotent pile of sludge and Peyton Manning ruled the day.

With the offense unable to stay on the field for an elongated period of time which meant that Peyton Manning was on the field. The Colts controlled the ball for a little over 38 minutes compared to the Bears’ 21 minutes. Grossman could have performed a lot better, but he never had the opportunity to find a rhythm. Plus, accruing five turnovers did not help matters, especially two interceptions on the part of Grossman who just did not have the touch on this day. The defense played admirably by forcing three turnovers, but when you are on the field for more than half of the game, it is a futile fight. The Colts garnered 430 total yards, compared to the Bears’ 265, which equaled defeat for the Bears.

Most of the blame for the loss will more than likely have to be shouldered by Grossman, which is an unfair assessment. Like Lovie Smith stated countless times over the course of the season when Grossman was struggling, the team made it to the Super Bowl with him as quarterback. But there will be resounding “what if” statements flying around Chicago until next season. What if Brian Griese was at the helm all season? Would he have been more consistent? Defense and Special teams performed marvelously all season, which leaves the offense as the weak link in the chain. Will Grossman return next year as the starting quarterback?

Either way, the Bears had a great season. They made it to the Super Bowl against all odds, which is commendable on any level of professional sports. They probably should not have made it this far, but defense can only do so much in any sport. A good defense has to be complimented by a solid offense. I am not talking Michael Jordan like numbers here, but something respectable. Hopefully team management can keep the core of the team together in the offseason and even bring in further pieces that will allow the team to finish the puzzle and win the Super Bowl. Wishful thinking? You never know, as the Bears showed us all this year.

Angry Earth

A group of top climatologists meeting in Paris, France have released a compelling report that officially puts the blame on humans for global warming. The scientists are 90% certain that we are to blame for increasing global temperatures and rising ocean levels. The most haunting aspect of the report states that global warming is a runaway process; there is nothing we can do to halt it. It is essentially like a large train with no brakes speeding down the tracks at 100mph and no one can stop it. What is worse, the climatologists believe that Earth’s median temperature will increase 3.5-7 degrees by 2100. When global temperature increases, ocean levels rise, which by 2100 may rise by 23 inches. This truly alarming report is an eye opener to what mankind is capable of doing; ruining our home.

Of course with any new report on global warming, many conservatives are going to allege that the idea of humans screwing the Earth up is not conceivable. I am not one to take such reports at face value, but I am alarmed by this latest premonition. Some would argue that this is just a natural Earth cycle and that this is just a warming cycle. But the evidence tells the tale for us in this particular case. How can anyone counter the fact that CO2 levels have rose exponentially since 1700; the eve of the Industrial Revolution? With more CO2 in the atmosphere, that means the sun’s rays are forever trapped in our atmosphere, hence warming the planet. One cannot forget the stunning pictures of ancient icebergs breaking off of glaciers due to the increased temperatures at both the extreme northern and southern latitudes.

The damage is already done; there isn’t anything we can do in the short term to repair what we have taken for granted. Obviously there are actions that can be taken to help lessen the severity of the onset of extreme global warming conditions. The U.S. and other industrialized countries are heading in the right direction in concern to lessening CO2 emissions. Following the Kyoto accords is vital in maintaining what we have now. Either way, the effects of global warming are more far reaching than we think. Coastal areas are especially vulnerable, as we have witnessed the last few years with the occurrence of countless intense hurricanes and typhoons. Cities like New Orleans that are already below sea level may have legendary status like the fabled lost island of Atlantis when our children grow older.

Super Sunday Mania

It is indeed that time of the year, the most prestigious sporting event ever crafted is upon us; the Super Bowl. Who knew that a simple game envisioned and named by Lamar Hunt in 1967, would pit the champion of the American Football Conference (then the AFL) and the National Football Conference (then the NFL) would turn out to be what it is today? The Super Bowl is the most watched TV program of the year, usually garnering 80-90 million viewers with over 140 million people world wide tuning in at some point in the game. Obviously, Americans are enamored with the Super Bowl and the events surrounding it for many reasons, mainly the simple fact that it is the middle of winter. What else do we have to do besides sit on our duffs stuffing our faces with Tostitos?

There is also the added bonus of viewing the countless new and highly “original” commercials. It is the only time of year when Americans are able to experience an onslaught of new material all at once and usually underscored by a comedic twist. Personally, I enjoy the Anheiser-Busch commercials. Who knew that beer would seem more tempting after watching a pilot jump out of an airplane without a parachute to retrieve a cold one? This year 30 second advertisements will cost companies roughly $3 million. Every year the cost goes up, as do tire sales. We even get to witness over 670 pounds of confetti fall from the sky after the winner of the game is decided. If you are lucky and have $5-10K to blow on a ticket, you get to witness it all in person. Hot damn!

Finally onto the most overlooked part of the Super Bowl, the game. The Colts are a 7 point favorite, which was bound to happen. But with the success of the AFC in the past 7 of 9 games, there is no doubt that those in Vegas are going to play it safe. But I believe that it should be a classic game of a high powered offense versus a powerful defense. We all know defense wins championships, so it is rather obvious where my allegiance lies. With all of the hype surrounding Peyton Manning, Rex Grossman has been severely overlooked. Grossman has had 7 games with a quarterback rating over 100. Guess who also had the same statistic? That’s right, Peyton Manning himself! As with any Bears game it is a matter of whether the good Rex Grossman shows up and if the defense plays like they are on a planet with less gravity, especially Brian Urlacher’s.

Flem’s Super Bowl Prediction: Colts 10, Bears 21

Is Vista the End All of Operating Systems?

Microsoft officially released Windows Vista yesterday, along with its new Office system. Most of the “tech crowd” is apprehensive about the new operating system and for good reason. Even though the OS is stable and has an assortment of new gadgets such as Aero Interface, which essentially streamlines the desktop allowing for a glass like appearance. But on the downside, the more technologically sound aspects of Vista are only included in the higher end versions, which comes with the added bonus of paying even more money ($649 for “ultimate”). The other added bonus included the one license that come with any version of Vista. This means that a user can install the product only once on one machine. For those of us who own more than one machine, looks like we are SOL.

Vista took roughly five years to be developed, which led many of us to expect more from Microsoft. The added features are new, but are comparable to what many have called “Windows XP service pack 3.” In sum, the new features are not exactly worth the added cost. Speaking of cost, Vista comes with the joy of having to upgrade your current machine. For example, let’s take a look at my machine. It is a solid machine as far as Windows XP is concerned: 3.2GHz P4 with HT, 1GB of single channel RAM, 160GB hard drive, 128MB ATI Radeon graphics card, and various other aspects. After running a variety of programs that tell a user whether they should upgrade, the results suggested that the “home basic” version was adequate for me, which does not have the new components advertized by Microsoft.

For users with baseline machines like mine, the cost of upgrading the hardware is monumental. To operate the “ultimate” edition, I’ll tell you exactly what you need: either a Pentium D or Duo Core processor, 2GB of memory, at least 40GB of hard drive space, and 256MB of graphics memory. This is a case of false advertisement if you ask me, but welcome to the world of IT. The basic consumer really does not have any of this, unless they have happened to spend a pretty penny on a new computer in the past few months. Dell is already marketing Vista basic and home editions with their new computers, which will open the market up for the new OS. But for those of us who do not need to upgrade, Windows XP will suffice or MAC OS 10.4, which is about the same thing as Vista.

Hitch-Up The Horses: Tehran Here We Come!

Over the past few days the world has not ceased to surprise anyone, much less myself. In the foreign arena, Iran has been a bit “busy.” The Pentagon is investigating the likely hood of an Iran connection to the January 20th attacks in Karbala, Iraq on a military compound. Five U.S. soldiers died in the attacks which were originally thought to have been the work of Iraqi insurgents. Yet, further review of the attacks suggests that Tehran may have been involved in the attacks. U.S. officials believe that the attacks were far too sophisticated for any Iraqi insurgent group to have carried out, which suggests that the Iranians were involved on some level. Iran is by far the most powerful nation in the Middle East with the most refined military capabilities, especially the Iranian Revolutionary Guard who are a highly trained military force similar to U.S. Special Forces.

If Iran is behind the U.S. deaths, there will be a good possibility the U.S. may aim to punish Tehran. A habitual ground war is not likely due the massive strain the U.S. military is under, but other options are available, including strikes on their nuclear facilities. Even though many of Iran’s nuclear facilities have been relocated underground since the international community has spoke out in defiance, the U.S. does have the capabilities to take out such subversive structures. But the downside is an attack on Iranian soil would disrupt the world’s oil supply, as they have the capabilities for an offensive within the Persian Gulf. If that were to occur, the price of oil could easily make it over $100 a barrel. Oil prices that high could quite literally leave the U.S. “high and dry.” The U.S. has moved more fire power to the Persian Gulf in the form of more warships in a show of force, signaling a possible strike.

Obviously, a military strike against Iran would not be a keen move right now. If we are drawn into a ground battle with the Iranians, we are going to be overwhelmed even more so than we are now. Congress and EU countries have suggested that the Bush Administration engage in diplomatic talks with Iran to work out an understanding. But the Bush Administration refuses to engage in talks with Tehran, which is rather typical of the president. His love of the status quo is even detrimental to his own war with Iraq. It is imperative that we deal with one rouge nation at a time; not the whole damn world at once. Never the less, it would be tidy to deal with the Iranians in specific concern to Iraq. Washington has been accusing Iran of training and arming Shiite insurgent groups, which is why diplomatic talks may facilitate better relations.

Is Restraint Plausible?

Democrats are considering a revision of the bill that allowed President Bush to go to war in 2002. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (the second ranking Democrat in the House) suggested the revision of the bill to allow more Congressional oversight and influence over presidential policy. Hoyer believes that a revision of the bill is quite plausible because the original language of the bill suggests that U.S. forces were to enter Iraq on a “nation building” mission; not conflict resolution. The solution in these terms would in theory arise out of military spending bills (the power of the purse) for military and diplomatic action in the war torn country.

If this bill is passed by Congress, there is no doubt that the president’s power will be curtailed in a policy making role. Even the president is in need of money these days. But restricting the president’s power as commander-in-chief is not a feasible option. Evidently, the Constitution does not allow for such actions. Congressional hearings about the U.S.’s actions in are to begin in haste. For the first time since 2003, the American public and Congress will finally receive some answers. If more detrimental information comes out of these hearings, there is a good chance that Congress will have more concrete evidence in which to restrain the president’s personal war in his sandcastle known as Iraq.

Stepping up diplomatic pressure on the Iraqi government is another vital part of this proposed bill. It is obvious to both the president and Congress that the Iraqis need to take over their own security operations. Their prime minister has promised more troops to the cause, but one has to question the commitment of the Iraqi people. Just like other human beings, people tend to become irritated when a bad situation does not change in due time. The status quo is not acceptable to those living through this atrocity, much less those with a comfortable view from 3000 miles away. I have stated the answer to this quandary countless time, but like most Americans whose opinions do not count to this administration, I have to ask this question instead: what’s the use?

Reaction: State of the Union Address

As it is tradition and law, President Bush gave the American public the state of the union before a joint session of Congress. This was Bush’s sixth state of the union address, but his first before a Congress dominated by Democrats. Also for the first time in our nation’s history, the president began his speech with the words, “madam speaker.” Bush spelled out four major points throughout the speech, none of which seem feasible, especially in concern to the operations occurring in Iraq. But he did spell out both a foreign and domestic policy for the next year; a vital year for the president. If Bush is unable to shore up the operations going on in Iraq and follow through on his domestic agenda, he will be spending the last year of his term as a “lame duck.”

The president spelled out a long term plan to reduce our dependence on oil by 20% over the next ten years. He also called for the production of 35 billion gallons of renewable energy sources (ethanol) by 2017 to help cut down on global warming and our dependence on oil from abroad. In theory, this new plan would take roughly 26 million cars off of the road and reduce our dependence on Middle Eastern oil imports by three-quarters. This new initiative sounds admirable from the president’s mouth, but in theory it will never work. Cranking up the fuel mileage required per company is not going to happen in the foreseeable future, as the American consumer is tentative and the major manufacturers are not going to spend their marginal profits (at best) to develop new vehicles to use alternative fuel sources.

Finally, the president met with silence when he discussed his latest strategy for dealing with Iraq. The past few years he has been met with great applause from the GOP side of the aisle. But this latest escalation has created many doubters in both GOP and Democratic ranks. He essentially begged Congress and the American people to give his latest plan a chance to succeed or the whole Middle East will go to hell in a hand basket. The brightest idea of the night was the potential creation of a Civilian Reserve Corp., or what would best be described as an American mercenary force not under the direct control of the military. He ended his Iraq tirade by giving the Iraqi government an ultimatum of shoring up security, as this U.S. assistance is not an open ended commitment.

In the domestic arena the president proposed more far fetched ideas that will take a complete miracle to work the way in which he envisions. The health care system needs reform; there is no doubt about that. 47 million Americans live without health insurance, which is indeed a big problem. His plan is to turn taxable income into health benefits, but there is no chance that this policy would extend coverage to the countless Americans that need health insurance. Their income is low enough, hence the reason why they cannot afford health insurance. A tax break will not generate enough money to provide adequate insurance premiums and even raise taxes for many more Americans. He even touted his no child left behind agenda…what a success! His approval numbers are the lowest of any president in the past fifty years; this speech is a snapshot of why.

Will the Real Nominees Step Forward

For the first time in over a half century the American public will not be voting for an incumbent president or vice presidential candidate. The presidential field is wide open for 2008, which signals the changing of the guard in Washington, which many would agree is a much needed change. The list of candidates for the GOP and the Democrats is expanding by the week, which will make for a fierce and highly contested primary season. We are too early into the process, but the front runners for each party will have to distinguish themselves and run away from the pack by late in the year. Undoubtedly, the campaign for the general election will be intense, but the fight for party nomination has already taken on a life of its own, which calls for concern when the primary campaigns kick into full swing.

The first punch was thrown recently by Senator Hillary Clinton (D- NY) towards her chief challenger in the Democratic Party, Barack Obama (D- IL). Clinton’s people dug up some dirt on Obama, which alleged that he had attended a fundamentalist (radical) Muslim school while living in Indonesia from 1967-1971. Originally reported by Insight Magazine, the article caused a stir in the corridors of Washington. But the article was debunked by CNN, which looked into the report and clarified that Obama had never attended such a school during his time in Indonesia. Insight’s editors stated that they had received the information from someone on Sen. Clinton’s staff. Clinton called the reports “a right-wing hit job.” This claim may or may not be true, but it signifies how intense this election is to become.

Clinton is the front runner in the race thus far, with 50% of potential Democratic voters stating that they view her in a favorable light. Obama is second with just around a 24% favorable rating. Clinton officially declared her candidacy last week, which signifies how important it is to declare candidacy early and the effect that such a statement of intent has on potential voters. Obama has yet to officially declare his candidacy, but it is extremely likely that Obama will officially enter the race at anytime. On the GOP side of the coin, former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani leads Arizona Senator John McCain by a 28% to 20% margin of potential GOP voters. The onslaught has already begun on the GOP side as well, with negative ads connecting McCain to President Bush’s plan to escalate troop numbers.

Riding the president’s “coattails” this election season will not be a favorable action by any potential GOP candidate. Bush’s approval ratings are dismal, as only 38% of Americans believe that Bush is doing a decent job in the White House (out of 1500 voters). With an essential lame duck president who has minimal political capital as your party’s leader, the GOP is in serious contention to cede power to the Democrats on the executive level. The reactionary response by voters during the 2006 midterms signals that if the status quo does not improve under the guise of Bush, the GOP may very well be at a disadvantage from the get go. GOP leaders in the Senate are attempting to resurrect their party’s stature by proposing a resolution disagreeing with Bush’s policy of sending more troops to Iraq. I am sure that will get the point across to the president; just like the opinion of American public.

Super Sunday Here We Come!

It is official; the Bears are not as inept as the “experts” would have us believe. The Bears defeated the Saints 39-14, in what can only be described as a one sided game on Sunday. Rex Grossman played a solid game, even though his accuracy was not exactly dead on (he admitted to it after the game). Thomas Jones carried to offense with two scores and 123 yards rushing (the man runs angry). Oddly enough, it was not the offense that won the game though. The “Monsters of the Midway” returned to early season form by pressuring Drew Breeze throughout the game and the secondary managed to rangle in the speedy New Orleans recievers. A game that was suppose to be one sided ended up being one sided indeed, but in favor of the Bears. Shocking, isn’t it ESPN?

The Bears will face off against the Indianapolis Colts in Super Bowl XLI (41) in two weeks. The Colts defeated the daunting New England Patriots in what can only be described as a game for the ages. After falling down by as much as 21-3 in the first half, the Colts led by Peyton Manning tore back into the game, with power running, staunch defense, and of course, Peyton Manning’s arm. Tom Brady just about rose to the occasion again. But an interception with 30 seconds left in the game sealed the Patriot’s fate (finally). Even though I was off by 10 points in my prediction, the Colts won the game 38-34. Surprisingly enough, my prediction for the Bears game was spot on, but slightly off of course. If I was a betting man, I would be rich. But sadly I am not a betting man.

The Colts are already a 7 point favorite in the Super Bowl, which does not surprise me. Even though the Bears did win one more game in the regualar season. I guess this “under dog status” can be attributed to the AFC’s dominance in the big game, as AFC teams have won seven of the last nine Super Bowls. Needless to say I believe the Bears will be a formitable challenge for the Colts and their sky high offense. If the Bears defense makes another showing like they did on Sunday, I believe that Lovie Smith will become the first African American coach to win a Super Bowl. Either way an African American coach will finally win a Super Bowl, as Tony Dungy is also African American. It is indeed a monumental step in the NFL and society that two coaches from a race that have never won a Super Bowl will simeltaneously be competing for the honor. I guess it is a win-win situation for once.

Ass-Backward Nation

I recently read an article in Time Magazine about how Americans tend to “live dangerously,” which in retrospect makes you really think about how blind we are to the world around us. Americans and people in general (especially those in the industrialized world), tend to weight short term risks in higher standing than long term risks, especially risks that have a direct bearing on our health. The article does indeed raise some incredibly valid questions about our life styles and why we as people, tend to self destruct. Now I am not saying that every American is guilty of this habit. But I would bet a fair amount of money (which I don’t have) on the fact that some of us are guilty of these habits.

According to this article, the cause of our lapses in judgment occurs because of how our brains are wired. The brain is wired in what the article calls a “prehistoric” manner, which was a vital asset to our ancestors. These individuals weighed risk in terms of survival, hence being able to pass their genes along to the next generation. That does not mean that prehistoric humans did not take risks; most had to. How would you feel about killing a mammoth with a spear instead of your trusty elephant gun? Chances are that no competent individual in the modern world would attempt such a feat without the assistance of alcohol (mammoths are extinct by the way). The question is then, how does out prehistoric brain wiring effect us in the modern world?

Gamblers are masters of calculating probabilities. They know their exact chances of success and failure based on what cards they received in the deal, for example. Your average Joe, on the other hand is not exactly a Vegas casino attendee. Take smoking for instance. Over 30 million Americans smoke or use some form of tobacco, which results in over 1200 deaths a day and over 650,000 in a year. In the short term, yes, smoking will probably not kill you, hence why people start in the first place. Fast forward 20 years later, that very person is still smoking (if they made it that long). There is a good chance that their health is suffering immensely from smoking in some form. That first cigarette did not kill the person, but the 6,000th very well may put that person in the lung cancer category.

A better example in this case is AIDS and diabetes (or some other nasty disease). I am not saying that AIDS is something that everyone should go out and get, because it will kill you eventually. But if treated in its early stages (HIV), there is a good chance that the individual will go on to lead a normal life span. Diabetes on the other hand is a bit different from AIDS. I understand that some people inherit it or are simply unlucky. But what about those that cram thousands of calories of pure “crap” down their gullets each day? Are they not thinking about the risk that unhealthy foods will pose to them down the road? It is a fact that better nutrition reduces the likely hood that someone will develop a degenerative disease down the road.

The article pointed out that after 9/11; more people were driving to their destinations instead of flying (which was understandable). But what many people did not know is that even though countless people perished in the attacks, especially aboard the planes (in this case), that the likelihood of perishing in a plane crash were still considerably less than being killed in a car accident. You still have a better chance of being struck by lightening that dying in a plane crash. The simple fact of the matter is that we are more concerned with short term risk and not the things in everyday life that will affect us down the road. Steroids may help an athlete right now, but liver tumors are not exaclty a pleasant thing to deal with down the road.

Let the Predictions Spur Forth

Championship Weekend looms; the Bears will play the New Orleans Saints this Sunday in Chicago at Soldier Field. The Saints have never made it this far before, as the organization has been one of the tragic stories of the NFL since they first joined. The Bears on the other hand, after fighting through a largely disappointing decade of the 1990’s, return to the NFC Championship for the first time since 1989. On the AFC side of the coin, it will be a rematch of an ever evolving rivalry; Peyton Manning vs. Tom Brady. Surprisingly, these two teams defeated the top two seeds in the AFC (Chargers and Ravens) with convicting victories in two games that were rather close. Being that everyone and their mother is making a prediction about Championship Weekend, I figure that I might as well join the club.

New Orleans Saints (11-6) vs. Chicago Bears (14-3)
The Bears are the favorite in this game, at least as far as the Vegas’ bookies are concerned. But many of the “professional analysts” and the Saints themselves argue that they should be the favorites. I would beg to differ on that point. Somehow the Saints lost 6 games during the regular season; I wonder why? The Saints are not the “hulks” of the football world, as many “analysts” would argue. The team is on a collective roll, which was confirmed over the course of the last few weeks of the season. Drew Brees, Deuce McCallister, and Reggie Bush are all at the top of their respective games right now. Drew Brees is the real deal in my opinion; the man knows how to pass with great efficiency and explosiveness. McCallister is running over everyone in his path and Bush is running all over the field like he did at USC.

Plus, the Saints have the collective moral support of the nation, as they hail from the devastated New Orleans. I completely agree on this aspect of supporting the Saints. It would be an awesome sight to see the Saints go to the Super Bowl after enduring a year away from the Super Dome and giving more hope to the begrudged citizens of New Orleans. I believe that the “analysts” are on board the “moral support train” as well, which has a tendency to cloud judgment. I agree that the Bears are not the team we witnessed during the first half of the season, as injuries have decimated the Monster’s of the Midway. But the Bears did win 13 games during the regular season, which to me shows that they did something right. Even with the train wreck of Rex Grossman at the helm, the Bears managed to put a high-quality season together.

With any game that the Bears have played over the second half of the season, the first issue to come to mind is whether the superior or ghastly Grossman will show up on Sunday. Grossman proved himself last weekend with solid play and poise. He did not make any mistakes that took his team out of the game. Basically, he shone through when the game was on the line. I believe the Grossman of weeks one through seven’s past will show and rise to the occasion. The defense is due for a superior game, as they have been giving a lot of points up over the past five games. I smell a Brian Urlacher-Lance Briggs domineering effort on Sunday. I also smell a Devin Hester run back at some point. He did it last weekend, but was called back after a poor call from the officials. Contrary to belief, I believe the Bears will win the NFC Championship.
Flem’s Prediction: New Orleans 17, Chicago 34

New England Patriots (13-5) vs. Indianapolis Colts (13-5)
The AFC Championship game relights the most recent and entertaining NFL rivalry between two of the league’s top quarter backs. It has been recognized that Peyton Manning has been unable to win “the big game” to solidify his place as one of the game’s all time greats.’ On the other side of the coin, he faces the current reincarnation of greatness itself, Tom Brady. The Colts destroyed the Patriots earlier in the year, but like the Bears, the Colts were a different team then. The Patriots have been the same old’ Patriots throughout the playoffs, as they have shown the resilience of a coach and a quarterback that have won three out of the last four Super Bowls. Manning has been haunted by “big game” losses to the Patriots throughout his career, but I have a feeling that he is due. He is too damn good not to ever make it to a Super Bowl.
Flem’s Prediction: New England 24, Indianapolis 28

The War Is Over

Oddly enough I am not referring to the current war in Iraq. Instead, I am referring to the American Civil War. Yes, the Civil War that ended in 1865, almost 142 years ago. Indeed, the Civil War where more than 620,000 American lives were lost at the hands of their own countrymen. I bring this up today on the eve after Martin Luther King Jr. (MLK) day in the United States. The entire country celebrated the legacy and accomplishments of the greatest civil rights activist in the history of this great country. Undoubtedly, King's work and life has affected the lives of countless African Americans in life and in death.

On this most auspicious day, Senator Joseph Biden (a presidential hopeful) of South Carolina, stated that he wants the Confederate flag completely removed from the grounds of the Columbia state house. He deemed the flag’s presence as a persevering reminder of racism in this country. Six years ago the NAACP successfully lobbied for the subsequent removal of the Confederate flag from the dome of the statehouse in Columbia. Even though the flag was removed from the statehouse itself, it still remains on the grounds in the form of a tribute to the confederacy.

This “tribute” is indeed a mockery of those who lost their lives in the Civil War, much less the millions of African Americans that are descended from the very slaves that were emancipated through blood, sweat, and tears. A group of 35 individuals protesting the movement to remove the Confederate flag from the state house grounds gathered today in what can only be described as a “consorted” charade to “maintain their heritage.” These people want to maintain the heritage of their ancestors, the ones who illegally succeeded from the nation in 1861?

These “neo-Confederates” as I have termed them, are in severe denial. I live in the state of Illinois, the very state that Abraham Lincoln resided in upon his election to the presidency in 1860. This was also the man who lost his life at the hands of a rouge confederate by the name of John Wilkes Booth who disagreed with Lincoln’s emancipation of the slaves (I am firmly aware of the fact that Lincoln was rather indifferent on the issue of slavery). It sickens me to still see bumper stickers and various other ornaments decorating countless vehicles (mostly pick up trucks from 1970 that somehow still run) of those who “maintain their heritage.”

It is an insult that we should be having this debate 142 years after the end of the Civil War. The war was won by the North, not the South, plain and simple; these individuals need to deal with it. Slavery has long been outlawed in this nation. But there are those that still maintain the appalling beliefs of the secessionists. That flag represents a time in American history that many would assume forget. The Confederate flag should be removed from any governmental building in the South, much less from the psyche of the American people.

"We The People..." Right?

Today President Bush told 60 Minutes that he has the authority to act in any matter that he feels necessary in concern to sending more troops to Iraq; much less his handling of the entire war. Facing stern opposition from both parties in Congress, the president sent his chief crony, Dick Cheney on national television to reiterate the point. Cheney believes that it is the president’s responsibility to run the war, not Congress. Furthermore, Cheney said that opposition from critics in Congress would not influence decisions made by the president.

This defensive stance by the White House is nothing new, but it does come just days before both the House and Senate plan to vote on a non-binding resolution combating the president’s plan to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq. The non-binding resolution would in no way affect the way in which Bush will continue to handle the war. But it is by far the biggest stance from Congress over the Iraq issue. Bush maybe the commander in chief of the armed forces, yet as every new day passes, his administration seems to be imitating a dictatorship.

The last time I read the Constitution, I was under the impression that we lived in a federal republic, not a dictatorship. The backlash against the president against his own war by the people of this country should signal to Bush that enough is enough; just drop it. We elect the president to follow through with the will of the people, not his own will. When a president’s own party takes a stance against its own leader, one must assume that there is something seriously wrong. What is this war really worth to the American people?

This war is worth nothing and like the Vietnam conflict, this pointless variance is further destroying the reputation of a great nation. The resistance in Iraq may not be able to break the will of the George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, but when there was no will or legitimate reason to be there in the first place, well I do not see the harm in pulling out. I feel sorry for the Iraqis, as when we do pull out we will be leaving those who want a stable country high and dry. Instead of defeating the terrorists, the president is further infuriating and giving life to those who choose to participate in this global “jihad.”

There are many critics to the war, but Cheney does have a point when he says that the Democrats do not have a better alternative for dealing with the war. I have an alternative; impeach the president. The notion has been thrown around before and even introduced to the House, but obviously, to no avail. If the Democrats are to gain a full grasp on the war and reign in presidential power, they need to show the White House that they are not afraid to stand up to this dictator of sorts. They may not act tomorrow, but when they figure out that talking to the president is comparable to talking to a wall; they will act.

A Bit of Evenhandedness

Today the Senate attached an amendment to the ethics reform bill that would strip “ethics challenged” members of Congress of their federal pensions. If passed by the House and signed into law by the president, the bill would only apply to future violators of Senate and House ethics rules. The new ethics rules are a complete overhaul in comparison to the GOP rules, which remained relatively unchanged since 1994. Like the Constitution, the law is a bit vague on what it would consider an offense worthy of pension suspension. But the basic premise of the amendment would consider offenses such as bribery and conspiracy worthy of losing the tax payer funded “retirement plan.”

The measure, introduced by John Kerry passed the Senate 87-0 today. The bill is a response by the Democrats due to the past 12 years of Republican corruption that has permeated on all levels of the federal government. But one peculiarity of the bill is that it only applies to future violators. If the Democrats wanted to make a colossal impact on the system itself, they would have been inclined to have the bill take effect retroactively. For example, ex-Congressman “Duke” Cunningham collects $64,000 annually from his federal pension, even though he confessed to bribery charges by pleading guilty. At least future violators will be deterred, as it typically is not in a Congressman’s best interest to throw away his “pocket change.”

In other news, the vault on the Gerald Ford interviews has been completely unlocked, especially in regard to his opinions on past presidents. For over 25 years, Ford gave interviews to a local Michigan paper in which he gave rather pointed opinions of those who preceded him in the Oval Office. Like his taped interviews with Bob Woodrow of the Washington Post, the interviews were only to be released after his demise. The most unsympathetic outlook was directed towards Jimmy Carter (whom he compared to Warren G. Harding), who in 1981, Ford called a “poor president.” He adjusted his view of Carter in 1998, when he stated that Carter was a better president than some were led to believe.

Ford also believed that Reagan was overrated, at least in concern to opinions believing he ended the Cold War via an arms build up. He believed that NATO and the Marshall Plan (aid to Europe after WWII ended) were key contributors to ending the Cold War. Many would beg to differ, including myself that it was Mikhail Gorbachev who was responsible for ending the Cold War. But that point is for another time and place. Surprisingly he was rather fickle on the presidency of Bill Clinton, who he called average. Who escaped the ex-president’s criticisms? Dwight D. Eisenhower, a moderate Republican, much like himself, was his favorite president, at least in a policy making role. Even though this was a man who committed the nation to MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) during the Cold War. Basically, if the Soviets or the U.S. fired upon one another, both countries would simply take the destruction and move on. But again, that is another discussion all in itself.

Extreme Overkill

Today one of the richest sporting contracts in history was signed by soccer “legend” David Beckham. The contract is worth a reported $250 million over the next 5 years. To put it into perspective, Beckham will earn roughly a million dollars per week for the next five years. He will be playing for the Los Angeles Galaxy who are apart of Major League Soccer (MLS), which was founded in 1996. The league is comprised of a various teams all over the US, especially in major cities. Beckham, who hails from England, has most recently played in Spain for the New Madrid team. But one wonders, is this man really worth $250 million in a country that is not exactly known for its enthusiasm for soccer?

Soccer main allegiance of fans pervade from other parts of the world, more specifically throughout Latin America and Europe. By nature, soccer is a “poor man’s sport,” which is why it has never taken hold in the United States. But obviously, as shown with Beckham’s exodus to the United States, soccer is gradually taking hold as one of the premier sports in the country. Now, I do not doubt Beckham’s ability, as it takes an extraordinary athlete to play the game for as long as he has, much less play the game at all on a competitive level. But isn’t this massive contract just a bit much for a sport that isn’t exactly on in prime time?

A recent survey conducted on ESPN.com suggests that Americans are not interested in Beckham joining the Galaxy. Out of 45,000 individuals, almost 36% do not even watch soccer. But 68% report that they are a bit more interested in watching a soccer game as long as Beckham is on the field. Even though the number is staggering, I really do not see what all of the fuss is about? His contract even trumps Michael Jordan’s $30 million or so a year when he was playing for the Chicago Bulls. But he was worth it, as he was able to draw both an audience in wherever he played as well as on TV. He was a revenue maker on an extraordinary level, as well as the most talented person to ever play the game of basketball.

Beckham may be renowned on a world wide scale, but the United States has a tendency not to acknowledge international superstardom. People in the United States are more concerned with events and people that are occurring in their backyard; we are very selfish in essence. I have a feeling that Beckham’s presence will not substantially affect viewership of MLS in the United States. Last year, Nielson reports that on average 687,000 people viewed MLS games. Compare that to the NFL, the richest sport in the U.S. Just last week, FOX drew a total of over 17 million people watching playoff football. CSI draws more viewes than MLS soccer! Americans a re stubborn by nature, which signals to me that all of the hype over Beckham will pass soon and Beckham will be added to the list of international superstars that have been swallowed up by American popular culture.

A Lack of Faith

Tonight, President Bush announced his latest strategy in concern to the war in Iraq. This “refreshed” strategy of sorts sounds a bit familiar to most, which is the reason why many doubt the sincerity of his message. Starting Monday, Bush plans to send roughly 21,500 more troops to the war zone. The additional troops, along with the troops already there will now be charged with training Iraqi forces in a more “hands on manner.” Now Iraqi troops will be embedded with American trainers as well as missions consisting of both American and Iraqi forces working together.

So what does this mean for the over all scheme of Iraq? Bush said that he would pull American support out of Iraq if the Iraqis do not start to maintain order within their own borders. He even said that he is taking responsibility for all of the wrongs that have occurred with Iraq. The president has two years left in his term and his latest strategy is more than likely his last great chance to affect the outcome of his personal war. Personally, I believe that this strategy is a case of more bark than bite. Military experts agree that sending more troops over will not fix the situation, but instead, make it even worse.

Even Lt. Colonel Oliver North, a staunch GOP member, disagrees with the new strategy. He belies that the addition of troops will not encourage the Iraqi forces to fight, but instead to rely on American forces even more. Even those of the president’s own party are starting to falter in their support of Bush and his foreign policy. How did the new Democratic Congress respond to all of this? They refused to “zip up” the pocket book on this new endeavor. The only power that Congress has over the executive in this case is the power of the purse. I am shocked by the lack of action from Congress. Something needs to be done in order to curtail this president’s dangerous assault on the Constitution.

But there lay in the danger of opposing a Bush policy, especially in concern to Iraq. If the Democrats were to challenge this latest plan, Bush could easily turn the tables. He would do this via a smear campaign of calling democratic congressmen and women “un-American” and slinging a variety of other propaganda. Either way, we are in a no win situation and it appears as if Congress will not take the impeachment route, at least not yet anyway.

Cooperstown: The Enduring Joke Continues

The baseball writers inducted two new members into the baseball Hall of Fame; Tony Gwynn and Cal Ripken Jr. Gwynn received 97.6% of the vote, while Ripken garnered 98.5%, the third highest percentage of all time. These two men were the cream of the crop throughout the mid 1980’s to the late 1990’s. Gwynn ended up with a lifetime batting average of .338, which is incredible in any era. Ripken broke Lou Gehrig’s record game streak of 2,130, which he would extend to over 2600 games, an incredible feat in any sport. These two men deserved the sport's highest honor, but evidently, some were not for reasons that are yet unclear to me.

The annual induction into the hall did not come without controversy. Mark McGwire did not make it in his first time on the ballot. McGwire, who is 7th all time in homeruns with 583, and a 12 time perennial all-star, only appeared on 23.7% of the submitted ballots. What is odd about McGwire’s situation is that every person who has ever been at least a 12 time all-star is a member of the hall. He also holds the all time record for home runs per every 100 at bats with a staggering 10.6 and is 9th all time in slugging percentage. His career numbers are more than sufficient to get him into the hall. So why in the hell didn’t McGwire make it into the hall?

Personally, I am a fan of McGwire, as him and Sammy Sosa single handedly resurrected the game of baseball in the summer of 1998 with their prolific chase of the single season home run record. Yet, the writers will not allow McGwire entrance due to his alleged use of steroids. He admitted to using a legal supplement called androstene in 1999 after it was discovered in his locker. Granted, the supplement is now banned by MLB, but at the time it was legal. The metaphorical nail in the coffin for McGwire occurred in 2005 at a congressional hearing concerning steroids in baseball. At the hearing he stated that he did not want to talk about the past, which led many to believe he was guilty of ingesting steroids at some point in his career.

The writers vote is based off of heresy, plain and simple. McGwire never failed a drug test while active in MLB. He has never admitted to using steroids, even though it may seems to many that he is guilty of it. The baseball writer’s community needs to show the man some respect, as their constant badgering and belittlement of his great career has forced him to live a life of perpetual exile. No one deserves that, not after the career he had. I am unsure as to why it is up to the writers to vote on who should get into the hall. Who made these people judge, jury, and executioner? They may write about the sport, but their logic is based off of opinion. Every person in America knows as much about baseball as some of these idiots.

Look at some examples from the past. Joe DiMaggio did not make it into the hall until his third time on the ballot. This is Joe DiMaggio, not your common every day no name. Evidently the writers did not vote him in because he retired at age 37, which signaled to them that he may have made a come back. Even the all time leader in wins, Denton True Young, otherwise known as “Cy” Young did not make it in until his second time on the ballot in 1937. Lee Smith, second all time in saves with 478, did not make it in this year as well. I really do not get it? What are the criteria that these hacks use to decide who makes it in? Obviously, opinions are biased in this case and something needs to change. Maybe we should have computers do it like we have them do everything else! A more subtle solution would be to establish a firm set of criteria that all of the writers or those whom are selected to vote should follow.

Football Fest: It’s That Time of Year

As I sit in front of the TV with my laptop watching the Florida vs. Ohio State melee, otherwise known as the National Championship contest. I wonder why in the hell another Florida team will win a prestigious sports championship again? Last year it was the very same University of Florida that won the NCAA college basketball title (I am bitter, as the gators are in the same conference as my beloved Kentucky Wildcats). Ohio State had a great year, but the 51 days in between games tends to kill a team. They need to have the bowl games sooner than later. Needless to say the controversy will begin to swirl around the BCS system after the game is completed tonight. Believe it or not, I actually believe the system worked this year.

The computers got it right in a year that was competitive as ever. The sheer amount of one loss teams vying for the coveted spot in the BCS National Championship Game was staggering. Florida was the correct team for the big game, as Ohio State did indeed defeat Michigan handily in November. That was Michigan’s chance and they blew it. The only pick I have with the system is the favoritism that is still shown to Notre Dame. Obviously, Notre Dame is a big name school which in theory tends to draw a lot of viewers. They only lost two games coming into their BCS bowl, but were utterly humiliated by LSU 41-14. The “experts” are now labeling Notre Dame as “BCS pretenders,” which sounds right to me.

Besides college football, the NFL is out in full force, as it is playoff season. The divisional round did not disappoint, as all of the games were rather competitive and chalked full of emotion that any football fan would love. The Dallas vs. Seattle game was one for the highlight reels for years to come. Tony Romo’s drop of a perfect snap on a field goal attempt will go down in league lore for the remainder of time. I feel for the man, as I am sure it is a humiliating thing to blow a game on national television on a simple hold. The Giants almost beat the damn Eagles, but to no avail. The Eagles will play New Orleans next week in what should be a very interesting game. Who in the hell cares about the AFC, well at least until Super Bowl time?

The Bears will play the Seahawks again next Sunday at noon. The first game was a blow out in the Bears’ favor, as the times were merrier with both offense and defense playing on all eight cylinders. Now both entities are playing like a Geo with a burnt out manifold. In the season finale against the Packers, Rex Grossman again impressed us all with a steady diet of interceptions and fumbles, which again allows concerns of his consistency to creep back into talks. He best pull his head out of his ass on Sunday. The defense is in shambles as well. I do not believe that they have the ability to stop a sloth attempting to make it to the goal line. Ron Rivera better fix it before he leaves for Arizona to commit career suicide. Needless to say, I do not want a replay of last year’s loss to Carolina at home.