Hockey:
What the hell are the Islanders thinking signing a 25 year old goaltender (Rick DiPietro) to a 15 year contract? Now the money is not ridiculous, but who wants a 40 year old goalie on your team, when 95% of all 40 year olds are usually playing in beer leagues or shinny. The Islanders have just hung another albatross around their neck. Can anyone say Alexi Yashin? Hopefully the Rangers will be able to clean the Islanders clock this season.
Football:
I am off to a 1-0 start in my fantasy league, having beaten my brother-in-law’s Personally Foul team. It was a weak win, the lowest point total, considering Shaun Alexander did nothing, and the Tampa Bay Defense did less than nothing. I have already dropped them and picked up the Bengal’s DFENS. Donovan McNabb and Larry Fitzgerald certainly bailed me out this week. Next up is Team Tulsa. Is the Monday Night Football doubleheader a regular thing or just an opening week thing? Please fill me in if you know.
Stamford Youth Soccer – NY Red Bulls
I did not have a chance to watch too much football this weekend, since I spent most of Sunday coaching my son’s youth soccer team. It was pretty fun, and they played really well. It is amazing in 3 months, how much each of the kids on the team has improved. Jacob was the first Red Bull to score a goal this year, and he was very excited. In the spring/summer league he was not able to keep up with the other kids. In the first game, he was able to dribble the ball, and maneuver away from the swarm. What a difference a few months make. And I got to run back and forth for a few hours on a beautiful Sunday afternoon. Come on down to Cummings Beach on Sundays at 2 and see the kids play.
School starts:
Jacob started kindergarten at Toquam Magnet Elementary School in Stamford last week. We are very excited that he got into a magnet school. The district called on the Sunday before school started saying they had an opening and would we want him to take the spot. He loves it, and I am sure we made the right decision. Mollie is supposed to start a 2 day a week pre-school on September 25, very scary I cannot believe she is going to school already.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Jeter's Response to Big Papi
This is classic stuff from ESPN:
I also thought it was interesting in the same article on ESPN quoted above Johnny Damon, who played with Ortiz in Boston and said almost the same stuff I did in my earlier post. Yankees center fielder Johnny Damon said Ortiz's comments didn't sound like the Big Papi he played with for three seasons in Boston.
This is classic Jeter and classic Yankee quotes during the Joe Torre era. We are here to win the World Series and nothing else matters. They will not allow themselves to be dragged into a pissing contest and let the results show on the field. At the end of the year if Jeter wins the MVP and the Yankees don't win the World Series, I am sure he will say in the greater scheme of things the MVP award does not matter since we didn't do what we are paid to do, win the World Series.Don't get me wrong -- he's a great player, having a great season, but he's got a lot of guys in that lineup," Ortiz said of Jeter. "Top to bottom, you've got a guy who can hurt you. Come hit in this lineup, see how good you can be."
To that, Jeter replied "I don't have to do it in his lineup."
"I'm not thinking about the MVP right now," he told reporters Monday. "We're thinking about winning a division. We've still got something to play for."
He then added, "No one here's focused on individual awards."
I also thought it was interesting in the same article on ESPN quoted above Johnny Damon, who played with Ortiz in Boston and said almost the same stuff I did in my earlier post. Yankees center fielder Johnny Damon said Ortiz's comments didn't sound like the Big Papi he played with for three seasons in Boston.
"It doesn't sound like Ortiz," Damon told reporters. "I can't believe he would say something like that."
Damon said he thought Ortiz was a "shoo-in" for MVP last season, but lost out to Alex Rodriguez last year because being a DH hurt him with the voters.
I hope Ortiz comes out and retracts this, since he has always been above this petty stuff.
A real Shocker, NOT!!!
As nobody who reads the piece regularly knows I certainly did not watch the presidents address to the nation last night. As I had stated on Sunday night that I was already sick to death of the media’s coverage of the 5th anniversary of 9/11, and I saw absolutely no reason for the president to address the nation, other than further dividing the country with partisan politics and that is what he seemed to achieve.
As I log onto Yahoo today, I saw the following headline: Democrats accuse Bush of exploiting Sept 11, before I even read the story; I was like “no shit, really.” I was shocked that this president would use this solemn occasion to play party politics. (I hope you notice the deep sarcasm). The same thing can be found at CNN, 9/11 speech sparks partisan squabble.
As a complete sidebar, I was absolutely disgusted that ESPN did a whole halftime tribute to 9/11 during the Redskins and Vikings game. As soon as I heard Chris Berman talk I knew it was time to change the channel. It was a disgusting display of American over indulgence.
As I log onto Yahoo today, I saw the following headline: Democrats accuse Bush of exploiting Sept 11, before I even read the story; I was like “no shit, really.” I was shocked that this president would use this solemn occasion to play party politics. (I hope you notice the deep sarcasm). The same thing can be found at CNN, 9/11 speech sparks partisan squabble.
“Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada and House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California said Bush should have tried to recapture a spirit of national unity in a televised Oval Office address on Monday night.Once again, this just shows the complete stupidity, and how out of touch that the leaders of the Democrat party actually are. They are continually and seemingly easily mislead by the majority party and are constantly made to look they could not lead their way out of a wet paper bag. How I long for an alternative mid-stream party to take control and address the needs of Middle America, not the nut jobs on the right or the equally nutty crackers on the left who seem to dominate both party platforms.
Reid told reporters Democrats had been so confident the Republican Bush would be nonpartisan that they had not sought equal time on television to offer their party's response.
"Sadly, it was a missed opportunity for President Bush, who apparently was more consumed by staying the course in Iraq and playing election year politics," Reid said, accusing Bush of once again trying to "conflate and blur the war in Iraq with the response to 9/11."
As a complete sidebar, I was absolutely disgusted that ESPN did a whole halftime tribute to 9/11 during the Redskins and Vikings game. As soon as I heard Chris Berman talk I knew it was time to change the channel. It was a disgusting display of American over indulgence.
Monday, September 11, 2006
Big Papi is not the AL MVP in 2006
Anyway you slice, David Ortiz is not going to be the AL MVP this year. If you had asked me in July or August, when the Red Sox were in 1st place and every time I turned on my computer Ortiz had another game winning hit or HR it seemed as if he was a shoe in this year and no amount of griping about being a DH would not have mattered. He was a monster and very deserving. Today, he is a mere after thought in my opinion for this award.
Starting in late August and early September the Red Sox began their normal (minus 2004) late season swoon as injuries began to take their toll on Boston. Unfortunately for Ortiz, he was slowed by injury as well, as an irregular heartbeat cost him a week or more of games. If Ortiz was able to stay healthy and single handedly keep the Red Sox in contention he would have won the award hands down, but even when he played the Red Sox were failed by pitching, and in the process probably killed Ortiz chance of becoming the first fulltime DH to win the MVP
What I find most disturbing is a quote from Ortiz on ESPN.com on sunday:
Maybe the Yankees are getting to the big guy, maybe he is just worn down after a long disappointing season, but this fan is disappointed by this egotistical quote, and hope that Ortiz does not damage his reputation or his positive outlook toward the game and its fan.
So who is going to be the AL MVP? With the White Sox fading as well as the Red Sox, it is difficult to vote for Jermaine Dye. Jeter will always garner some support being the heart and sould of the Bronx Bombers, but unfortunately I don't think it is his year either, though this could be the year he comes closest to this award. I would say that Justin Morneau from the Twins is the front runner, since the Twins are now pressuring the Tigers for the AL Central supremacy. They would not have been able to make this late season run without him, and remember the wild card have won (Diamondbacks, Angels, Marlins, Red Sox) or made (Mets, Giants, Astros) the World Series in the recent past.
Starting in late August and early September the Red Sox began their normal (minus 2004) late season swoon as injuries began to take their toll on Boston. Unfortunately for Ortiz, he was slowed by injury as well, as an irregular heartbeat cost him a week or more of games. If Ortiz was able to stay healthy and single handedly keep the Red Sox in contention he would have won the award hands down, but even when he played the Red Sox were failed by pitching, and in the process probably killed Ortiz chance of becoming the first fulltime DH to win the MVP
What I find most disturbing is a quote from Ortiz on ESPN.com on sunday:
"I'll tell you one thing," Ortiz said. "If I get 50 home runs and 10 more RBI [which would give him 137], that's going to be a round number that no one else in the American League will have."From everything I have ever read and seen about Ortiz, even last year when the MVP award was given to Alex Rodriguez, he was always very positive and never sounded self-centered to me. I am hoping that this quote was either taken out of context or just a simple venting of frustration. Where I love to loathe any Red Sox player (and subsequent Yankee killer), I have always had a fair amount of respect for Big Papi because of his enegertic and contagious smile, for the way he plays the game, and always seems take the high road.
"But they'll vote for a position player, use that as an excuse. They're
talking about [Derek] Jeter a lot, right? He's done a great job, he's having a great season, but Jeter is not a 40-homer hitter or an RBI guy. It doesn't matter how much you've done for your ball club, the bottom line is, the guy who hits 40 home runs and knocks in 100, that's the guy you know helped your team win games. "
Maybe the Yankees are getting to the big guy, maybe he is just worn down after a long disappointing season, but this fan is disappointed by this egotistical quote, and hope that Ortiz does not damage his reputation or his positive outlook toward the game and its fan.
So who is going to be the AL MVP? With the White Sox fading as well as the Red Sox, it is difficult to vote for Jermaine Dye. Jeter will always garner some support being the heart and sould of the Bronx Bombers, but unfortunately I don't think it is his year either, though this could be the year he comes closest to this award. I would say that Justin Morneau from the Twins is the front runner, since the Twins are now pressuring the Tigers for the AL Central supremacy. They would not have been able to make this late season run without him, and remember the wild card have won (Diamondbacks, Angels, Marlins, Red Sox) or made (Mets, Giants, Astros) the World Series in the recent past.
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Enough with the 9/11 anniversary
I will be so glad when Tuesday comes. I am already sick to death of the media overplaying the anniversary of 9/11 tomorrow. Yes, I know 9/11 was a (hopefully) once in a limetime truly tragic event, and yes I know the media has the right to cover the 5th anniversay of it any way they feel is necessary for their viewers, and I know the politicians will play the past and the future to each of their constituents and party members, but for G-d's sake, lets not beat this dead horse anymore, let the dead dogs lie.
President Bush has requested from the networks a prime time slot to address the nation tomorrow night. What can he possibly say that is relevant to the American people on this date? Nothing that has not already been said, done, implied or propagandized over 100 times in the past 5 years. What does Anne Coulter accomplish by continually grilling and slandering 9/11 widows? Disgusting publicity and that is all, but the American people seem to buy it, so the media keeps dishing it.
This is the ultimate example of a non-story. I will be glad when Tuesday roles around again.
President Bush has requested from the networks a prime time slot to address the nation tomorrow night. What can he possibly say that is relevant to the American people on this date? Nothing that has not already been said, done, implied or propagandized over 100 times in the past 5 years. What does Anne Coulter accomplish by continually grilling and slandering 9/11 widows? Disgusting publicity and that is all, but the American people seem to buy it, so the media keeps dishing it.
This is the ultimate example of a non-story. I will be glad when Tuesday roles around again.
Friday, September 08, 2006
Bush is at it again…
Well it looks like our esteemed president is now trying to legalize the warrantless eavesdropping program, in order to help win the seemingly never ending war on terror. According to today’s Stamford Advocate via the Washington Post
At least this time, he is attempting to do things in compliance with the legal system, by requesting the legislative branch of the government to actually pass legislation, rather than just exerting executive privilege. I guess that is what we call a uniter, not a divider.
This is an amazing request considering Bush has all of a sudden decided to be more up front and forthcoming having finally admitted to many things that have been alleged or suspected for some time such as saying that certain really bad guys have been held in secret prisons and tortured. This particular act and admission seems to be a very un-American thing to do, but hey I guess this is a do as I say, not as I do situation.
Either way, I hope and plead that if Congress does entertain this request from the commander in chief that they think long and hard about the long term effects of this request and what ramifications this type of legislation will have on future presidents and congresses as well.
Let’s assume for a minute that President Bush and the government are really only interested in eavesdropping on suspected Islamic fascist Al-Qaida types. Then the thinking goes, we can head them off at the pass, just like the British did a few weeks ago, then we will be working to stay one step ahead of the terrorist looking to bring the United States to its knees. This request opens up many Pandora’s Box that could cause the huge loopholes, that could make our tax code look like a Dr. Seuss book in comparison. For are just a few questions to ponder:
Who and what defines who the bad guys are, and under what circumstances would the government be able to snoop on them, without bothering to ask permission from the judicial branch?
How does Congress ensure the scope of the legislation so that it “allows” eavesdropping against the bad guys but also doesn’t violate the 1st and 4th amendments for honest, hard working, liberty loving American citizens?
Does this only apply to non-American citizens?
What if a suspected terrorist or someone under investigation is an American citizen?
What about a citizen of a country that we are “Friendly” with (UK, Germany, Holland, Saudi Arabia, etc.)
What if the suspected international terrorist has a family member, who is an American citizen, and they are only chatting about the weather, and not the downfall of western democracy?
Now, let’s assume it is 10, 20, or 50 years from now. This congress (or the next one) passes some form of legislation that sufficiently answers some of these questions and allows the executive branch to spy without warrants on bad guys. What is going to stop future generations of presidents to further expand who is considered a bad guy?
Picture Richard Nixon at his most paranoid and multiply by 100, since this type of legislation would have allowed Nixon and Hoover to go even further and deeper into their surveillance of Nixon’s enemies list. Think of Watergate never having been uncovered. Think of Woodward and Bernstein being labeled enemies or suspected terrorist, or aiding and abetting the enemy (Al-Qaida, Fascists, Communists, Socialists, Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Librarians and Connecticut for Joe).
Maybe I am paranoid, but having 200+ years of seeing how this country’s government operates, it is not a far stretch of imagination to see a scenario where the President has declared the other political party, or the candidate of the other party a bad guy, and is allowed to do warrantless wiretapping and eavesdropping. Amazing what a person could do with tomorrow’s newspaper today, and being able to account for your enemies actions today, will only weaken our democracy tomorrow.
Think about it and let me know what you think.
“President Bush urged Congress to give him “additional authority” to continue his administrations eavesdropping program.”This is interesting, since this statement assumes he has some existing authority to wiretap and eavesdrop without a warrant, which I believe a judge has already said the government has no such right, but hey that is old news.
At least this time, he is attempting to do things in compliance with the legal system, by requesting the legislative branch of the government to actually pass legislation, rather than just exerting executive privilege. I guess that is what we call a uniter, not a divider.
This is an amazing request considering Bush has all of a sudden decided to be more up front and forthcoming having finally admitted to many things that have been alleged or suspected for some time such as saying that certain really bad guys have been held in secret prisons and tortured. This particular act and admission seems to be a very un-American thing to do, but hey I guess this is a do as I say, not as I do situation.
Either way, I hope and plead that if Congress does entertain this request from the commander in chief that they think long and hard about the long term effects of this request and what ramifications this type of legislation will have on future presidents and congresses as well.
Let’s assume for a minute that President Bush and the government are really only interested in eavesdropping on suspected Islamic fascist Al-Qaida types. Then the thinking goes, we can head them off at the pass, just like the British did a few weeks ago, then we will be working to stay one step ahead of the terrorist looking to bring the United States to its knees. This request opens up many Pandora’s Box that could cause the huge loopholes, that could make our tax code look like a Dr. Seuss book in comparison. For are just a few questions to ponder:
Who and what defines who the bad guys are, and under what circumstances would the government be able to snoop on them, without bothering to ask permission from the judicial branch?
How does Congress ensure the scope of the legislation so that it “allows” eavesdropping against the bad guys but also doesn’t violate the 1st and 4th amendments for honest, hard working, liberty loving American citizens?
Does this only apply to non-American citizens?
What if a suspected terrorist or someone under investigation is an American citizen?
What about a citizen of a country that we are “Friendly” with (UK, Germany, Holland, Saudi Arabia, etc.)
What if the suspected international terrorist has a family member, who is an American citizen, and they are only chatting about the weather, and not the downfall of western democracy?
Now, let’s assume it is 10, 20, or 50 years from now. This congress (or the next one) passes some form of legislation that sufficiently answers some of these questions and allows the executive branch to spy without warrants on bad guys. What is going to stop future generations of presidents to further expand who is considered a bad guy?
Picture Richard Nixon at his most paranoid and multiply by 100, since this type of legislation would have allowed Nixon and Hoover to go even further and deeper into their surveillance of Nixon’s enemies list. Think of Watergate never having been uncovered. Think of Woodward and Bernstein being labeled enemies or suspected terrorist, or aiding and abetting the enemy (Al-Qaida, Fascists, Communists, Socialists, Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Librarians and Connecticut for Joe).
Maybe I am paranoid, but having 200+ years of seeing how this country’s government operates, it is not a far stretch of imagination to see a scenario where the President has declared the other political party, or the candidate of the other party a bad guy, and is allowed to do warrantless wiretapping and eavesdropping. Amazing what a person could do with tomorrow’s newspaper today, and being able to account for your enemies actions today, will only weaken our democracy tomorrow.
Think about it and let me know what you think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
