Baseball in October

“The agony was so real it was beautiful.” *
Their faces painted the picture perfect, textbook definition

Last out made, they walked, slowly, heads down,
pondered a November changed now –

on a cold day, but no colder than normal
for this ambition, started in March chill

ended in a darkened sports cathedral,
where the faithful left more dispirited

than after Sunday services with sins revealed.
“There’s no crying in baseball.” **

But, in private darkness, there was in the cars
on the way home.

* Mark Kizla, Denver Post, 10/13/09

** Jimmy Dugan (Tom Hanks) “A League of Their Own”

© Joseph E. Arechavala 10/13/09

Gajillions of Dittoheads Vow to Never Watch Another NFL Game. Yeah, Right…

“Tonight, we are all Rush Limbaugh” will go down as one of the most hyperbolic and silly assertions ever written. Redstate.com has outdone itself in idiocy.

Where to even begin?

How about this? Rush Limbaugh can afford to buy an NFL team. Can you? Didn’t think so.

Second, the NFL will go to any length, breadth or depth to protect its most valuable asset: its antitrust exemption.

If you want to buy into the game, don’t go into the room labeled ‘controversy’ and hope to be able to pass into the room marked ‘NFL Owner.’ They don’t like it, they stay away from it, and the very last thing the NFL would like to be doing next season is reacting to Rush’s latest controversial statement.

You know, like “The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well” - I guess he doesn't remember Superbowl winner Doug Williams - and “Feminism was established to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream” and “The difference between Los Angeles and yogurt is that yogurt comes with less fruit”.

So Rush, your bid was doomed from the start. And it’s nobody’s fault but yours.

And no, just record, maybe the folks at redstate.com think they're Limbaugh, but I’m not.

Dow Reaches 10000! Unemployed Millions Rejoice!

It’s interesting. We bailed out Wall St. just about a year ago. They're doing fine, aren't they?

Goldman-Sachs, the glad-handed recipient of hundreds of millions in government money, announced their latest earnings yesterday. And a robust $16 billion in payouts for employee bonuses (see marketplace.org). I’m sure the announcement gladdened the hearts of those millions of unemployed, grateful that the big boys are doing so well. Their CEO says they need so much to keep talented people at their firm. These would be the same 'talented people' who put the economy in the mess it's in now.

But, hey, the conservatives tell us ‘capitalism benefits everyone.’




At least, in theory…

Deja Vu With A Twist

In the mini-series “V” (the original back in the ‘80s), earth scientists start to suspect the aliens aren't as benevolent as they're letting on, and start speaking out against them. The aliens’ response is to go about discrediting the scientists with the public, and it works.

Life imitates art.

Republicans, beholden more than Democrats to big, polluting corporations are busily following this script. And corporations, who fear loss of profits far more than loss of jobs or increased costs they will just pass on to the consumer if climate change legislation passes – despite the fact that environmental laws they opposed in the past haven't had this effect – have been busily pulling their strings.

Look back a ways and you'll see a pattern. Just in case you don’t remember, this is a repeat from the 1970s when the Clean Water Act and Clean air Act were being debated. It’s a repeat of the 1990s when acid rain legislation was being debated. But it’s being done with a new twist. Don’t just attack the science, attack the scientists. They have an agenda. They’re really leftists bent on destroying capitalism.

Look on the websites of these ‘concerned citizens’ groups’ (with deliberately misleading names like the American Council on Science and Health) and see who’s really backing them. And understand you’re seeing a dog and pony show.

Captain Planet and the Planeteers Redux

I’ve observed an interesting phenomenon. Unless you have a child in their late teens or twenties, you likely don’t remember the TV show ‘Captain Planet’. Well, my now 19 year-old son watched it when he was young.

And now, my 8 year-old has suddenly discovered it on the Boomerang Channel. Watching the episode – no, I didn’t remember this one – I did suddenly remember how controversial the show was when it came on the air in 1990, how conservatives described it as propaganda for environmentalist tree-huggers.

Yet here we are in the 21st century, and conservatives talk about environmental responsibility as though they never opposed it.

Now, we’re talking about global warming. And the conservatives (mostly) refuse to believe it even exists.

Interesting how times change. Interesting how things stay the same.

Let’s All Support the Pedophile!!

I am stunned and outraged beyond belief at what I’ve read on the Washington Post and Huffington Post regarding the arrest of Roman Polanski on a 30 year old sexual assault case. That anyone would support Polanski – an admitted child molester – is beyond my capacity to understand.

It’s not like these are allegations. He pled guilty to a crime and fled the US, to live a life of luxury in Europe for decades, consciously avoiding the United States and Britain to stay of out of the hands of law enforcement.

What is it with this liberal defense of criminals?

Ira Einhorn and Mumia Abu Jamal immediately spring to mind. To defend people who have committed such heinous crimes is indefensible.

Perhaps it’s liberals need to defend those accused. Perhaps it’s the underdog mentality. Newsflash for you folks – sometimes, in fact most times – they're guilty.

And sometimes, the person just isn't worth defending.

The absolute worst defense I’ve heard is that he should be excused because of some ‘artistic greatness’. Excuse me, but ‘artistic merit’ isn't an excuse for moral depravity.

It doesn’t remotely approach a defensible argument.

I wonder, had been done to one of their daughters, if Joan Shore, Ariana Huffington and their like would be so quick to defend him.

I Remember When Newspapers Used to Cost Money…

I’ve been reading some on newspapers and their troubles lately.

First, new technology makes old technology obsolete: the Pony Express was replaced by the telegraph, typewriters by computers, etc. Newspapers are suffering the same fate – they're being replaced by the net. Unfortunately for them, the newspapers are the old technology.

Going to the Wawa everyday (for those of you not from the Northeast, think of 7-11), I see very few people buying them, and those that do are always over 30, a really bad demographic for the newspaper industry.

And with instantaneous access and the 24-hour news cycle we now enjoy (Or don’t. That’s your call.), a printed sheet of paper is out of date by the time it hits the newsstand.

Third, people have grown to expect their news for free, from the networks, from CNN and Fox News (whatever you think of them), from the radio. So, for newspapers to charge for their content is an uphill proposition at best, especially if CNN.com, FoxNews.com, and others are still offering their content for free.

It’s really hard to see most newspapers surviving this, other than the major national papers – which will still struggle but will have a chance, at least – and those that serve small towns.

Other than that, newspapers are doomed. Progress – if you want to call it that – is inevitable.