Two years of investigating an alleged crime and what does prosecutor Fitzpatrick come up with? The answer is that the original referral for investigation was not a crime however activities involved in the investigation are. Those activities apparently are inconsistencies in answers to questions about a non-criminal event that happened over two years ago.
I didn't get the whole Plamegate issue when it happened and I don't get it now. The facts seem to be that some brain surgeon in the CIA decided that it was appropriate to send Joe Wilson, a known Clinton partisan to Africa to investigate the yellow cake claims. It has now been verified, that despite Joe's denials, his wife recomended him for the job and apparently was at the debriefing when Joe came back with his "findings".
Joe also briefed the whole country about his opinions on the subject by writing an Op Ed piece in the New York Times disputing President Bush's statement that Iraq may have tried to acquire yellow cake in Africa. This is a new policy for CIA contractors from what I understand. You now get a contract for a secret mission from the CIA and when you come home you get to put your findings in a national newspaper and write a book about the fall out. Nice work if you can get it. Joe is now likely to be a favorite on the speaking circuit.
So a known opposition figure makes a statement calling the Republican president a liar and no one should take notice in the opposing camp? If Rove has the reputation the Democrats give him credit for he should have had the FBI investigate Wilson. Instead he and Libby and the Republican political apparatus put out the story that Joe is a little loose with the truth and his wife who works at the CIA put him up to the caper at the behest of some Langley types with their noses out of joint over Bush's effort to clean up the place. That is hardly what I call bare knuckle politics and the retribution Rove and the Bush family is supposed to be famous for. Actually it sounds a lot like the absolute truth.
The Wilson's and apparently the CIA is outraged over the "outing" of "covert" operative Flame and the CIA ends up referring the matter to the Justice Department. This is the same woman who Aaron Brown on CNN last night called under cover and then showed a full page spread of her and Joe in Vanity Fair. Now thats what I call undercover! Plame has been a desk jockey for over six years for the CIA and hardly could be considered covert.
Can you remember the last time the CIA made a referral to the justice department over a leak? If every leak in Washington were investigated there would be no one working on anything else. Is there a place in the world more famous for anonymous comments either for retribution or partisanship than Washington D.C.?
So no crime was committed yet Libby faces charges that have 30 years of prison as a possible result. Fortunately no jury in the land will convict him of this but it will make good copy for the Bush haters for the next two or three years. President Bush ought to put the whole thing to rest right now and pardon Libby. While he is at it he should pardon Sandy Berger who was caught red handed stealing secret documents out of the natonal archive. The partisans in the media would have a hard time complaining about that outcome.
Saturday, October 29, 2005
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Bullies on the right
One of the great rallying cries of the conservative elements of the country is that we are a land of opportunity. If we are independent and hard working and self reliant all will work out in the end to our own and the nation’s benefit. We are often regaled with the bootstraps stories and tales of individual strength and achievement. No need to rely on a welfare state, big government or affirmative action to help anyone along. We should all be self reliant and expect no special treatment.
Apparently that mantra does not always apply or it specifically does not apply to Harriet Miers. Despite that fact that she seemed to meet all the criteria of the doggedly determined self made individual who worked hard and broke down barriers and achieved at the highest levels in her profession. According to what conservative dogma tell us she should have been judged on her merits. Harriet got real special treatment, she was purposefully denied the consideration of a public review. Nominees to the United States Supreme Court are given a hearing before the senate judiciary committee and then voted on by the senate. Instead she was bullied into a withdrawal.
The right often complains of the elitism of the lefties at the Washington Post, New York Times and other liberal media outposts of the Democratic Party but they have clearly shown that this type of snobbery is not exclusively the domain of the Eastern liberal establishment. They took a perfectly fine woman with a track record of accomplishment and dedication and simply trashed her. There is no paucity of self important, self righteous media windbags on the right as well as the left.
The hue and cry raised up from the right wing punditry of the Republican Party over this appointment was vastly over blown in comparison to their importance to the electoral potential for the party in national elections. George Will, William Kristol, Ann Coulter and Charles Krauthammer amongst many of the hard right may have won a battle in this nomination but it is no guarantee that they are going to see the president bow to their demands.
If do they get their wish, it may result in some very negatives effects in the 2006 mid term elections. If the president does nominate someone who has a verifiable track record and will state unequivocally that they are against Roe vs. Wade and passes the fundamentalist litmus test there will be a bruising nomination battle that will likely result in defeat for the nominee. The result will be that the conservative elements of the party will be abandoned by moderate Republicans and Independents and the Democratic crossovers will return to the Democratic fold in the up coming elections. Could an all out fight over one court nomination be a watershed event?
The Republican Party may find over the next election cycle that altogether too much credit has been given to this wing of the party as its core strength and the punishment for that miscalculation could be the wholesale defections of moderates away from the Republicans. If that happens we will get to see how many candidates the right wing of the party can get elected on their own.
Apparently that mantra does not always apply or it specifically does not apply to Harriet Miers. Despite that fact that she seemed to meet all the criteria of the doggedly determined self made individual who worked hard and broke down barriers and achieved at the highest levels in her profession. According to what conservative dogma tell us she should have been judged on her merits. Harriet got real special treatment, she was purposefully denied the consideration of a public review. Nominees to the United States Supreme Court are given a hearing before the senate judiciary committee and then voted on by the senate. Instead she was bullied into a withdrawal.
The right often complains of the elitism of the lefties at the Washington Post, New York Times and other liberal media outposts of the Democratic Party but they have clearly shown that this type of snobbery is not exclusively the domain of the Eastern liberal establishment. They took a perfectly fine woman with a track record of accomplishment and dedication and simply trashed her. There is no paucity of self important, self righteous media windbags on the right as well as the left.
The hue and cry raised up from the right wing punditry of the Republican Party over this appointment was vastly over blown in comparison to their importance to the electoral potential for the party in national elections. George Will, William Kristol, Ann Coulter and Charles Krauthammer amongst many of the hard right may have won a battle in this nomination but it is no guarantee that they are going to see the president bow to their demands.
If do they get their wish, it may result in some very negatives effects in the 2006 mid term elections. If the president does nominate someone who has a verifiable track record and will state unequivocally that they are against Roe vs. Wade and passes the fundamentalist litmus test there will be a bruising nomination battle that will likely result in defeat for the nominee. The result will be that the conservative elements of the party will be abandoned by moderate Republicans and Independents and the Democratic crossovers will return to the Democratic fold in the up coming elections. Could an all out fight over one court nomination be a watershed event?
The Republican Party may find over the next election cycle that altogether too much credit has been given to this wing of the party as its core strength and the punishment for that miscalculation could be the wholesale defections of moderates away from the Republicans. If that happens we will get to see how many candidates the right wing of the party can get elected on their own.
Thursday, October 20, 2005
Wither the Globe?
The Boston Globe circulation figures are out and it is not good news for the paper that is essentially the Massachusetts edition of the New York Times. As a result of declining ad revenue and reduced circulation figures across all of its holdings, the Times has announced job cuts of 500 positions of which over 100 are coming from the Globe.
Having grown up reading the Globe and believing every word written in its pages it is difficult to see the paper fall on hard times. It is particularly difficult to see the human impact of people losing their jobs. The Globe and Times are not the only print media companies feeling the pinch as the internet and other outlets are cutting into revenue sources that were traditionally dominated by the paper business. Car ads, job postings, real estate and even personals have all gravitated to the internet in large numbers primarily because it is cheaper and in many cases a much more effective medium to accomplish your goal.
Unfortunately for the Globe it is more than just competitive ad pressure that is contributing to its decline. The Boston Globe simply is no longer a reliable source of unbiased news or analysis on local or national issues of importance. Its parent is suffering from the same affliction. Any more decay of the Times stock price and it will be the stockholders demanding a change louder than the readers
Now that there is a huge quantity of critical analysis available from a variety of different points of view on every subject it is quite easy to see that the Globe, along with its parent, the New York Times is simply a slanted party organ that chooses its stories and reports the facts in a way that promotes particular view points of the occupants of the news room or the editorial boards.
A number of issues come to mind that I have followed over the years that convince me that the Globe will print what supports its point of view. Nothing could be more obvious than their unabashed love of Chapter 40B affordable housing legislation. The suburban communities have complained for years about the developer led scam that 40B is, yet it has always fallen on deaf ears at the Globe because the powers that be at the Globe have determined that it is good for us. There fore any reasonable objection is labeled as being against the poor or being a snob. There has never been an in depth examination of how the law is exploited to the detriment of the effected communities or how the richest communities avoid it.
The Gay marriage issue is another favorite on Morrissey Boulevard. Although I have no personal position against Gay marriage it was an agenda that the Globe pushed from day one and never allowed any meaningful or thoughtful arguments, disagreement or opposing strategies to be presented in the paper. A razor thin 4-3 margin by the Massachusetts Supreme Court was essentially trumpeted as the will of the people. Any effort by residents to get the question on the ballot is denigrated by the Globe at every opportunity.
Political candidates are another area where the Globe reports what it feels will promote its agenda. An example is the Globe’s candidate of choice for governor. It is clear to any casual reader that the paper has anointed Thomas Reilly as its choice and there fore nothing negative regarding Reilly is likely to appear in the paper. The paper was Hell bent on attacking the church and Cardinal Law over the sex abuse scandal but where was the criticism for Reilly under whose watch a good deal of the wrong doing happened? Also where was the criticism of Reilly for not indicting the Cardinal? The excuse was that the statute of limitations had run out yet it was clear the Archdiocese was conspiring to hide evidence on these cases right up until the very last moment.
Another Reilly strategy that received virtually no criticism from the Globe was the foolish Microsoft suit. Massachusetts was the last state standing in the suit primarily because the software companies in the state were likely to be gratified by Reilly’s stubborn willingness to hold a losing hand till the end.
At every opportunity the Globe sneers at Govenor Romney for tax policy, or political travel or poor appointments or anything else to tarnish him, Reilly of course gets a pass.
I guess the paper should be applauded for supporting a favorite son for President however the free pass that John Kerry has been given by the Globe during his whole career has been nearly scandalous. In contrast, Bush has been President for five years and with the exception of an occasional Jeff Jacoby article it is difficult to find one thing that Bush might have done as the president that the Globe might give him credit for.
Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Kennedy, Rangel, Boxer, Feinstein, the Ku Klux Klan Senator and of course Bill and Hillary can all find a kind word now and then but any mention of Bush is always accompanied with fire and brimstone and damnation!
The Op Ed and editorial pages are another place where the Globe is driving readers away. There is only so much of the same sniveling left wing sycophantic drivel that one can take from the likes of Thomas Oliphant and Derrick Jackson before you come to the realization that .50 cents a day is way to much to spend when you can get more accurate information on the web for nothing.
The Globe is dying a slow painful death and they have no one to blame but themselves.
Having grown up reading the Globe and believing every word written in its pages it is difficult to see the paper fall on hard times. It is particularly difficult to see the human impact of people losing their jobs. The Globe and Times are not the only print media companies feeling the pinch as the internet and other outlets are cutting into revenue sources that were traditionally dominated by the paper business. Car ads, job postings, real estate and even personals have all gravitated to the internet in large numbers primarily because it is cheaper and in many cases a much more effective medium to accomplish your goal.
Unfortunately for the Globe it is more than just competitive ad pressure that is contributing to its decline. The Boston Globe simply is no longer a reliable source of unbiased news or analysis on local or national issues of importance. Its parent is suffering from the same affliction. Any more decay of the Times stock price and it will be the stockholders demanding a change louder than the readers
Now that there is a huge quantity of critical analysis available from a variety of different points of view on every subject it is quite easy to see that the Globe, along with its parent, the New York Times is simply a slanted party organ that chooses its stories and reports the facts in a way that promotes particular view points of the occupants of the news room or the editorial boards.
A number of issues come to mind that I have followed over the years that convince me that the Globe will print what supports its point of view. Nothing could be more obvious than their unabashed love of Chapter 40B affordable housing legislation. The suburban communities have complained for years about the developer led scam that 40B is, yet it has always fallen on deaf ears at the Globe because the powers that be at the Globe have determined that it is good for us. There fore any reasonable objection is labeled as being against the poor or being a snob. There has never been an in depth examination of how the law is exploited to the detriment of the effected communities or how the richest communities avoid it.
The Gay marriage issue is another favorite on Morrissey Boulevard. Although I have no personal position against Gay marriage it was an agenda that the Globe pushed from day one and never allowed any meaningful or thoughtful arguments, disagreement or opposing strategies to be presented in the paper. A razor thin 4-3 margin by the Massachusetts Supreme Court was essentially trumpeted as the will of the people. Any effort by residents to get the question on the ballot is denigrated by the Globe at every opportunity.
Political candidates are another area where the Globe reports what it feels will promote its agenda. An example is the Globe’s candidate of choice for governor. It is clear to any casual reader that the paper has anointed Thomas Reilly as its choice and there fore nothing negative regarding Reilly is likely to appear in the paper. The paper was Hell bent on attacking the church and Cardinal Law over the sex abuse scandal but where was the criticism for Reilly under whose watch a good deal of the wrong doing happened? Also where was the criticism of Reilly for not indicting the Cardinal? The excuse was that the statute of limitations had run out yet it was clear the Archdiocese was conspiring to hide evidence on these cases right up until the very last moment.
Another Reilly strategy that received virtually no criticism from the Globe was the foolish Microsoft suit. Massachusetts was the last state standing in the suit primarily because the software companies in the state were likely to be gratified by Reilly’s stubborn willingness to hold a losing hand till the end.
At every opportunity the Globe sneers at Govenor Romney for tax policy, or political travel or poor appointments or anything else to tarnish him, Reilly of course gets a pass.
I guess the paper should be applauded for supporting a favorite son for President however the free pass that John Kerry has been given by the Globe during his whole career has been nearly scandalous. In contrast, Bush has been President for five years and with the exception of an occasional Jeff Jacoby article it is difficult to find one thing that Bush might have done as the president that the Globe might give him credit for.
Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Kennedy, Rangel, Boxer, Feinstein, the Ku Klux Klan Senator and of course Bill and Hillary can all find a kind word now and then but any mention of Bush is always accompanied with fire and brimstone and damnation!
The Op Ed and editorial pages are another place where the Globe is driving readers away. There is only so much of the same sniveling left wing sycophantic drivel that one can take from the likes of Thomas Oliphant and Derrick Jackson before you come to the realization that .50 cents a day is way to much to spend when you can get more accurate information on the web for nothing.
The Globe is dying a slow painful death and they have no one to blame but themselves.
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
A Democrat's lament
Those of us moderate Democrats who fret over the current state of the party might well take a moment and look back in time to lament what might have been, had the party heavyweights possessed the moral fiber to make a few hard decisions when it mattered most.
Where might the party be now if, after President Clinton’s speech of August 17, 1998 in which he admitted that he had been lying for well over 8 months regarding his inappropriate relationship with Monica Lewinsky, someone actually acted in the party’s best interest?
What if someone with some Democratic Party stature said:
“Hey wait a minute Bill! This admission of yours comes after you addressed the nation on January 22 and denied the relationship, and then on January 23 you assured your cabinet of your innocence. Don’t you think you might have compromised everyone around you Bill? Do you think perhaps the party is at risk now unless you do something chivalrous - like fall on your sword? Now it gets a little stickier because we find that Bill has even less morals than we thought and prefers hubris as a character trait.” When the press finally had the decency to ask Clinton if he would resign, says Bill on February 6, 1998 “I would never walk away from the people of this country and the trust they placed in me.”
What should have happened is that a good Democrat should have convened a smoke-filled room meeting of other good Democrats and said this:
“The guy is damaged goods, who is bringing the party down, and we need to jettison him now before he can do us any more damage.” Of course that wasn’t done and the scandal was allowed to go the full route to the ultimate impeachment and trial of the President of the United States. Mrs. Clinton referred to it as a vast right wing conspiracy, but we all know the number of convictions, fines, pardons or disbarments that came during the administration. In the end it was a matter of law enforcement not conspiring, but doing its job. Clinton served out his term, but the smell of his presidency lingered.
Much is being said now about the coalition of conservatives and evangelical Christians who banded together to support George Bush and defeat both Vice President Al Gore and Senator John Kerry in the last two elections. However, given the razor thin margin or lack of margin that George Bush defeated Al Gore by in the 2000, many groups can claim credit. It is just as true that a disaffected group of moderate Democrats and Independents banded together to give the Democrats a nice hard slap in the face by crossing over to the Republicans.
That slap was not limited to the presidential race, since the Republicans have benefited substantially from gains in the Senate, House, gubernatorial mansions and state legislatures through out the country. That slap came as punishment for Clinton exposing the country to four years of discussions of oral sex, groping in the oval office, sexual harassment suits and perjury.
One can only speculate what might have been, had Clinton been forced to resign by his own party. A nice clean Al Gore would have had two years to solidify his image as a strong leader. Sandy Berger and the rest of the Clinton crowd might have been unemployed much earlier and wreaked less damage on the country. Perhaps instead of everyone in the government being pre-occupied with presidential sex scandals, they might have been focusing on such things as terrorism and African genocide.
Perhaps a President Gore might have avoided an adventurous pre-emptive invasion of Iraq or perhaps not.
One could say that it doesn’t matter because it is all water over the dam. That is not the case, however, if Hillary Clinton becomes the 2008 nominee. The very man who should have been forced from power in disgrace by his own party will likely attempt to return to the scene to do even more damage to the Democratic faithful. Hillary may have solid numbers in the core of the party and it's leadership, but on the fringes and with the independents, it will be a stampede to get away from her as fast as possible.
As time goes by it would be interesting to see some inquisitive historian begin to explore the actions of Democratic power brokers to determine who was in the behind the scenes coalition that saved the Clinton presidency from pragmatic elements of the party. One can only speculate how long it may be before the party recovers from their mistake.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4913
Where might the party be now if, after President Clinton’s speech of August 17, 1998 in which he admitted that he had been lying for well over 8 months regarding his inappropriate relationship with Monica Lewinsky, someone actually acted in the party’s best interest?
What if someone with some Democratic Party stature said:
“Hey wait a minute Bill! This admission of yours comes after you addressed the nation on January 22 and denied the relationship, and then on January 23 you assured your cabinet of your innocence. Don’t you think you might have compromised everyone around you Bill? Do you think perhaps the party is at risk now unless you do something chivalrous - like fall on your sword? Now it gets a little stickier because we find that Bill has even less morals than we thought and prefers hubris as a character trait.” When the press finally had the decency to ask Clinton if he would resign, says Bill on February 6, 1998 “I would never walk away from the people of this country and the trust they placed in me.”
What should have happened is that a good Democrat should have convened a smoke-filled room meeting of other good Democrats and said this:
“The guy is damaged goods, who is bringing the party down, and we need to jettison him now before he can do us any more damage.” Of course that wasn’t done and the scandal was allowed to go the full route to the ultimate impeachment and trial of the President of the United States. Mrs. Clinton referred to it as a vast right wing conspiracy, but we all know the number of convictions, fines, pardons or disbarments that came during the administration. In the end it was a matter of law enforcement not conspiring, but doing its job. Clinton served out his term, but the smell of his presidency lingered.
Much is being said now about the coalition of conservatives and evangelical Christians who banded together to support George Bush and defeat both Vice President Al Gore and Senator John Kerry in the last two elections. However, given the razor thin margin or lack of margin that George Bush defeated Al Gore by in the 2000, many groups can claim credit. It is just as true that a disaffected group of moderate Democrats and Independents banded together to give the Democrats a nice hard slap in the face by crossing over to the Republicans.
That slap was not limited to the presidential race, since the Republicans have benefited substantially from gains in the Senate, House, gubernatorial mansions and state legislatures through out the country. That slap came as punishment for Clinton exposing the country to four years of discussions of oral sex, groping in the oval office, sexual harassment suits and perjury.
One can only speculate what might have been, had Clinton been forced to resign by his own party. A nice clean Al Gore would have had two years to solidify his image as a strong leader. Sandy Berger and the rest of the Clinton crowd might have been unemployed much earlier and wreaked less damage on the country. Perhaps instead of everyone in the government being pre-occupied with presidential sex scandals, they might have been focusing on such things as terrorism and African genocide.
Perhaps a President Gore might have avoided an adventurous pre-emptive invasion of Iraq or perhaps not.
One could say that it doesn’t matter because it is all water over the dam. That is not the case, however, if Hillary Clinton becomes the 2008 nominee. The very man who should have been forced from power in disgrace by his own party will likely attempt to return to the scene to do even more damage to the Democratic faithful. Hillary may have solid numbers in the core of the party and it's leadership, but on the fringes and with the independents, it will be a stampede to get away from her as fast as possible.
As time goes by it would be interesting to see some inquisitive historian begin to explore the actions of Democratic power brokers to determine who was in the behind the scenes coalition that saved the Clinton presidency from pragmatic elements of the party. One can only speculate how long it may be before the party recovers from their mistake.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4913
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Early optimism
The release of President Bush's recent poll number have given hope to the Democratic Party faithful that an imminent reversal of the party fortune is to be realized in the 2006 mid term elections. Bush's 39% approval rating points out the weakness of the Republicans and should present an opportunity to exploit a weak leader, an administration embroiled in quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan and now engaged in bitter internecine warfare over the Miers nomination for the Supreme Court. Coupled with that is the shifting of blame from the state leaders in Louisiana for the Katrina failures to the Bush administration and the growing budget deficit. Interest rates and oil prices are also contributing to dissatisfaction and that will only increase with the winter heating bills soon to be upon us. But wait, hold on a moment, let's not get giddy just yet.
John Hinderaker at http://powerlineblog.com/archives/011936.php makes the point that every president since 1963 has had approval ratings at some time during their presidency at least five points lower that what Bush is at right now. With a full year to go before the mid terms and three full years to go before the end of the Bush 43 era it may be a bit to early for unbridled optimism by the Democrats.
There are a number of reasons for the Democrats to be cautious about predicting any gains in the senate and house in 2006. First and foremost is Iraq and Afghanistan. We are winning in both places and it is becoming more and more apparent that that is the case. The number 2 man in Al Qaida, Ayman Al Zwahiri sent a rather telling letter to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi this summer that indicated things weren't going to well in the insurgency. Zwahiri suggested that cutting off heads and blowing up Iraqis was not likely to be a winning strategy. The letter, which was released this week can be viewed here http://www.dni.gov/letter_in_english.pdf.
The Iraqi constitution elections are scheduled for Saturday and you can tell that they might be a success by the fact that the press is giving hardly a mention to the event. If the constitution is adopted and the elections are a smashing success it could represent a turning point in Iraq as well as a watershed event for the Bush policy.
It might only be a temporary respite but it seems as though some real progress toward a settlement in the Middle East is possible. If a Palestinian state is created and results in some real progress toward economic development and creation of sustainable institutions that can improve the overall prospects of the inhabitants of Palestine then history might treat this as a significant achievement by the participants and by connection, the Bush administration.
Katrina was a political and public relations nightmare for Bush but as time has gone on it has become increasingly more apparent that the news coverage of the event was not the finest moment for the American press. As more sober analysis is done it becomes clearer that the failures of government lie directly at the state and local level. Time will tell if Governor Blanco and Mayor Nagin are punished at the polls for their incompetence.
The left has been having a field day over the possibility of Bush losing his "brain" if Karl Rove is indicted in the Valerie Plame case. I have a hard time having any anxiety over this non issue. Joseph Wilson has been largely discredited for his assertion that he debunked the 16 words in the State of the Union message relative to the Niger uranium. As far as Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame being outed as a CIA operative, it hardly seems like a crime in the context that it has been described. Wilson was recommended for the job by his wife who worked as a desk jockey, not an under cover agent at the CIA. After Wilson's op ed piece in the New York Times with its rather dubious claims why shouldn't the administration have questioned his credibility based on how he got the assignment? While we are on the subject, how many CIA consultants print their findings on the op ed page of any newspaper? We will know soon enough but it appears to be wishful thinking that Rove will be a casualty.
Can the democrats make hay on the findings of any misconduct in the administration? Well I guess they could profit if Rove were indicted but even with that unlikely occurrence a comparison of the Clinton era crimes found here http://prorev.com/legacy.htm would still make the Bush era saintly by comparison.
Speaking of the name Clinton, even if most of the afore mentioned items go against the Republicans, the continued rise of Hillary Clinton as the anointed Democratic nominee may be enough to scare the American public away from the Democrats in 2006. There is simply no more a polarizing figure in American politics today than Hillary Clinton. Moderate Democrats and independents in large numbers will not support Mrs. Clinton and for a variety of good reasons. First and foremost is the fact that she has nothing in her experience to qualify her as the President of the United States. An experienced senator has not been elected president since 1960. How can a freshman senator with no military, foreign policy or government management experience hope to govern the nation?
More so than her lack of credentials has been the negative impact of her husband on the party. Elected in 1992 with 43% of the popular vote it only took a short time for the Democrats under Clinton's leadership to lose majorities in the senate, house and governor's offices nation wide. The damage was extraordinary. The party lost the following during the Clinton legacy; 48 house seats, 8 senate seats, 11 governorships and 9 state legislatures. The Democratic Party is in the position it is today because of Bill Clinton. It is unlikely that the former first lady will reverse that damage and indeed might contribute to the further marginalization of the party.
John Hinderaker at http://powerlineblog.com/archives/011936.php makes the point that every president since 1963 has had approval ratings at some time during their presidency at least five points lower that what Bush is at right now. With a full year to go before the mid terms and three full years to go before the end of the Bush 43 era it may be a bit to early for unbridled optimism by the Democrats.
There are a number of reasons for the Democrats to be cautious about predicting any gains in the senate and house in 2006. First and foremost is Iraq and Afghanistan. We are winning in both places and it is becoming more and more apparent that that is the case. The number 2 man in Al Qaida, Ayman Al Zwahiri sent a rather telling letter to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi this summer that indicated things weren't going to well in the insurgency. Zwahiri suggested that cutting off heads and blowing up Iraqis was not likely to be a winning strategy. The letter, which was released this week can be viewed here http://www.dni.gov/letter_in_english.pdf.
The Iraqi constitution elections are scheduled for Saturday and you can tell that they might be a success by the fact that the press is giving hardly a mention to the event. If the constitution is adopted and the elections are a smashing success it could represent a turning point in Iraq as well as a watershed event for the Bush policy.
It might only be a temporary respite but it seems as though some real progress toward a settlement in the Middle East is possible. If a Palestinian state is created and results in some real progress toward economic development and creation of sustainable institutions that can improve the overall prospects of the inhabitants of Palestine then history might treat this as a significant achievement by the participants and by connection, the Bush administration.
Katrina was a political and public relations nightmare for Bush but as time has gone on it has become increasingly more apparent that the news coverage of the event was not the finest moment for the American press. As more sober analysis is done it becomes clearer that the failures of government lie directly at the state and local level. Time will tell if Governor Blanco and Mayor Nagin are punished at the polls for their incompetence.
The left has been having a field day over the possibility of Bush losing his "brain" if Karl Rove is indicted in the Valerie Plame case. I have a hard time having any anxiety over this non issue. Joseph Wilson has been largely discredited for his assertion that he debunked the 16 words in the State of the Union message relative to the Niger uranium. As far as Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame being outed as a CIA operative, it hardly seems like a crime in the context that it has been described. Wilson was recommended for the job by his wife who worked as a desk jockey, not an under cover agent at the CIA. After Wilson's op ed piece in the New York Times with its rather dubious claims why shouldn't the administration have questioned his credibility based on how he got the assignment? While we are on the subject, how many CIA consultants print their findings on the op ed page of any newspaper? We will know soon enough but it appears to be wishful thinking that Rove will be a casualty.
Can the democrats make hay on the findings of any misconduct in the administration? Well I guess they could profit if Rove were indicted but even with that unlikely occurrence a comparison of the Clinton era crimes found here http://prorev.com/legacy.htm would still make the Bush era saintly by comparison.
Speaking of the name Clinton, even if most of the afore mentioned items go against the Republicans, the continued rise of Hillary Clinton as the anointed Democratic nominee may be enough to scare the American public away from the Democrats in 2006. There is simply no more a polarizing figure in American politics today than Hillary Clinton. Moderate Democrats and independents in large numbers will not support Mrs. Clinton and for a variety of good reasons. First and foremost is the fact that she has nothing in her experience to qualify her as the President of the United States. An experienced senator has not been elected president since 1960. How can a freshman senator with no military, foreign policy or government management experience hope to govern the nation?
More so than her lack of credentials has been the negative impact of her husband on the party. Elected in 1992 with 43% of the popular vote it only took a short time for the Democrats under Clinton's leadership to lose majorities in the senate, house and governor's offices nation wide. The damage was extraordinary. The party lost the following during the Clinton legacy; 48 house seats, 8 senate seats, 11 governorships and 9 state legislatures. The Democratic Party is in the position it is today because of Bill Clinton. It is unlikely that the former first lady will reverse that damage and indeed might contribute to the further marginalization of the party.
Tuesday, October 11, 2005
Go White Sox
The elimination of the Yankees by the Angels last night makes the disappointment of the Red Sox failing to defend their championship a little easier to bear. In retrospect the signs of a weakening ball club were obvious all season yet because the Sox were in first place late into the year there was optimism that a repeat was possible.
The level of competition is so close that one or two cracks in your armor may hold up but when wholesale damage is done to key components of your ball club, then surely some one with better luck is going to exploit you. So it was in the Red Sox vs. White Sox series where you found the Chicago club hitting a nice stride at the end of the season by sweeping an upstart Cleveland club while the Red Sox were hanging on by a thread during an emotional season ending series with the Yanks.
So here’s to the White Sox and despite them having Carl Everett on their team I wish them the best in ending the Chicago curse of not having won a world series since 1917. They seem to be a solid club up and down the order and have some excellent pitching that should get them close to winning it all. The remaining clubs seem to be evenly matched so the White Sox certainly can’t be ruled out.
This loss for the average Red Sox fan seems to be much less traumatic than in the pre Championship era simply because we still had the memory of the 04 come back and excitement. Looking back on the season it was quite a tribute to the club that they performed as well as they did when you consider that two of the projected starting five pitchers (Miller and Schilling) were knocked out by injuries most of the year. Add to that disaster losing the closer (Foulke) and most other clubs might have folded long ago.
The performance of the Ortiz Ramirez duo was certainly one for the ages as we have not seen production at that level in the long history of the club. Ortiz by himself was worth the price of admission when you consider that in terms of clutch hits he had a season that might have eclipsed the great Yaz in 67.
So now it is time for speculation about next year. Who should stay and who should go and what shoring up do we need to do to be competitive once again?
Pitching is always place to examine first and this is a prime weakness for the Sox. Wells is 42 and headed for knee surgery. Wakefield and Schilling are 39, Miller is going in for labrum surgery and Clement might need psyche surgery after that disastrous game one performance. Jon Papelbon projects out as winning a job in the starting rotation next year and there seems to be an abundance of young arms in the minors. Jon Lester, Jeremy Gonzalez, Manny Del Carmen, Lenny Dinardo and Craig Hansen all look like contenders for the remaining spots. A young free agent flame thrower would be a nice addition but it appears as though the free agent ranks are somewhat thin.
The rest of the regulars need a little shaking up as both age and contract status will contribute to the decision making. Johnny Damon is an outstanding lead off hitter and a hard nosed ball player that any club would love to have. However, his agent is the insufferable Boras and he is talking about 5 years and 12 million per year guaranteed. If that’s the case Johnny will be playing some place else next year.
Kevin Millar’s contract is up and despite his clubhouse presence, his lack of productivity means that he will be moving on. The other first baseman, John Olerude is a serviceable starter/ bench player and should be kept if at all possible. Roberto Petagine wasn’t given much of a shot during the course of the year but what we did see of him should earn him at least a look for next year. It would be nice to add a very large right handed hitting first baseman but we hsall see.
Second base should be given to Tony Graffanino. Despite his game two error that changed the course of the series, this is a good hitting hard working guy that is a substantial upgrade at the position.
Edgar Renteria is our shortstop for the next three years at 10 million a year. Edgar was a distinct disappointment this year in almost all categories. He led the majors in errors and his hitting was spotty at best. To be fair there were a number of injuries Edgar battled during the course of the year so perhaps next year a healthy Edgar can provide more of what we expected.
Third base looks like it is finally going to be Kevin Youkilis territory as Bill Mueller’s contract is up and he is likely to be a hot commodity on the free agent market. Mueller was a stalwart player in all aspects of the game and was a joy to watch. In this case he and the Sox are victims of age and economics. He is likely to get more some where else and the Sox have a younger available replacement that needs to get in the line up.
The outfield will certainly need some shoring up. The Sox will surely shop Manny but unless they get tremendous value in return, Manny must stay. Despite any problems of the juvenile sort, Manny is basically a good citizen who is a good team mate and he is the second part of the best one two punch in baseball.
If Damon goes the Sox will have to trade or sign a free agent centerfielder and a serviceable right handed hitting back up for Trot Nixon in right field. Nixon could end up being trade bait of some sort since his production this year was not what it has been in the past.
At catcher the club is set as both Varitek and Mirabelli are signed into the future. Varitek had a noticable drop off in the last month of the season but the bottom line is that any catcher with that kind of a work load has a production drop off late in the season because of exhaustion. Varitek is worth the money solely for his handling of the pitchers and his defense. They shouldn’t be relying on him for big offensive production.
The last item for consideration is Theo’s contract. He has a championship to his credit and he has a farm system that is well on its way to being restocked with some exciting young talent. It is time to give Theo a nice raise and a longer term deal. Let’s give him time to see whether he is a one time wonder or is he the boy genius of the baseball world. The answer is probably some where in between but what we have seen so far is plenty enough reason to want him to stay at the helm.
In any event it should be a very interesting off season. Steinbrenner is in the same place as us except he spent 80 million more dollars than we did. His pitching staff is aging and so to is his outfield.
So, for the time being let’s shift our allegiance to another group of long suffering fans. Go White Sox!
The level of competition is so close that one or two cracks in your armor may hold up but when wholesale damage is done to key components of your ball club, then surely some one with better luck is going to exploit you. So it was in the Red Sox vs. White Sox series where you found the Chicago club hitting a nice stride at the end of the season by sweeping an upstart Cleveland club while the Red Sox were hanging on by a thread during an emotional season ending series with the Yanks.
So here’s to the White Sox and despite them having Carl Everett on their team I wish them the best in ending the Chicago curse of not having won a world series since 1917. They seem to be a solid club up and down the order and have some excellent pitching that should get them close to winning it all. The remaining clubs seem to be evenly matched so the White Sox certainly can’t be ruled out.
This loss for the average Red Sox fan seems to be much less traumatic than in the pre Championship era simply because we still had the memory of the 04 come back and excitement. Looking back on the season it was quite a tribute to the club that they performed as well as they did when you consider that two of the projected starting five pitchers (Miller and Schilling) were knocked out by injuries most of the year. Add to that disaster losing the closer (Foulke) and most other clubs might have folded long ago.
The performance of the Ortiz Ramirez duo was certainly one for the ages as we have not seen production at that level in the long history of the club. Ortiz by himself was worth the price of admission when you consider that in terms of clutch hits he had a season that might have eclipsed the great Yaz in 67.
So now it is time for speculation about next year. Who should stay and who should go and what shoring up do we need to do to be competitive once again?
Pitching is always place to examine first and this is a prime weakness for the Sox. Wells is 42 and headed for knee surgery. Wakefield and Schilling are 39, Miller is going in for labrum surgery and Clement might need psyche surgery after that disastrous game one performance. Jon Papelbon projects out as winning a job in the starting rotation next year and there seems to be an abundance of young arms in the minors. Jon Lester, Jeremy Gonzalez, Manny Del Carmen, Lenny Dinardo and Craig Hansen all look like contenders for the remaining spots. A young free agent flame thrower would be a nice addition but it appears as though the free agent ranks are somewhat thin.
The rest of the regulars need a little shaking up as both age and contract status will contribute to the decision making. Johnny Damon is an outstanding lead off hitter and a hard nosed ball player that any club would love to have. However, his agent is the insufferable Boras and he is talking about 5 years and 12 million per year guaranteed. If that’s the case Johnny will be playing some place else next year.
Kevin Millar’s contract is up and despite his clubhouse presence, his lack of productivity means that he will be moving on. The other first baseman, John Olerude is a serviceable starter/ bench player and should be kept if at all possible. Roberto Petagine wasn’t given much of a shot during the course of the year but what we did see of him should earn him at least a look for next year. It would be nice to add a very large right handed hitting first baseman but we hsall see.
Second base should be given to Tony Graffanino. Despite his game two error that changed the course of the series, this is a good hitting hard working guy that is a substantial upgrade at the position.
Edgar Renteria is our shortstop for the next three years at 10 million a year. Edgar was a distinct disappointment this year in almost all categories. He led the majors in errors and his hitting was spotty at best. To be fair there were a number of injuries Edgar battled during the course of the year so perhaps next year a healthy Edgar can provide more of what we expected.
Third base looks like it is finally going to be Kevin Youkilis territory as Bill Mueller’s contract is up and he is likely to be a hot commodity on the free agent market. Mueller was a stalwart player in all aspects of the game and was a joy to watch. In this case he and the Sox are victims of age and economics. He is likely to get more some where else and the Sox have a younger available replacement that needs to get in the line up.
The outfield will certainly need some shoring up. The Sox will surely shop Manny but unless they get tremendous value in return, Manny must stay. Despite any problems of the juvenile sort, Manny is basically a good citizen who is a good team mate and he is the second part of the best one two punch in baseball.
If Damon goes the Sox will have to trade or sign a free agent centerfielder and a serviceable right handed hitting back up for Trot Nixon in right field. Nixon could end up being trade bait of some sort since his production this year was not what it has been in the past.
At catcher the club is set as both Varitek and Mirabelli are signed into the future. Varitek had a noticable drop off in the last month of the season but the bottom line is that any catcher with that kind of a work load has a production drop off late in the season because of exhaustion. Varitek is worth the money solely for his handling of the pitchers and his defense. They shouldn’t be relying on him for big offensive production.
The last item for consideration is Theo’s contract. He has a championship to his credit and he has a farm system that is well on its way to being restocked with some exciting young talent. It is time to give Theo a nice raise and a longer term deal. Let’s give him time to see whether he is a one time wonder or is he the boy genius of the baseball world. The answer is probably some where in between but what we have seen so far is plenty enough reason to want him to stay at the helm.
In any event it should be a very interesting off season. Steinbrenner is in the same place as us except he spent 80 million more dollars than we did. His pitching staff is aging and so to is his outfield.
So, for the time being let’s shift our allegiance to another group of long suffering fans. Go White Sox!
Friday, October 07, 2005
A debt of gratitude?
The recent nomination by President Bush of Harriet Miers points out quite vividly that elitist resume snobs are not restricted to the left and to the North East. Is it all about the resume or is the outrage from the hard right of the Republican Party more about what they think they are owed?
The objections range from cronyism to lack of constitutional scholarship but really what it boils down to is that the right wing wants an out and out confrontation over a nominee with a verifiable paper trail that lays out an opposition to Roe vs. Wade and any of the other issues that are close to the ultra conservatives heart.
President Bush knows this and it is clear he has no intention of giving the right what it wants and he has very good political reasons for not doing so. First and foremost is that despite all the talk about losing his base, Bush knows that the base has no where to go. It is they that owe a debt of gratitude to Bush not the other way around. Where else on the conservative side of American politics was the Kristol, Frum, Will, Novak Brownback, Coulter wing of the party going to find someone who could defeat a sitting Vice President? Was Pat Buchanan a likely winner or was John McCain even a possible choice for them? Somehow I doubt it.
Bush is pragmatic enough to realize that he has over 3 more solid years to govern from the white house and to make preparation to hold onto to and even expand the Republican majorities in the house and senate. These plans could be derailed by allowing the Democrats to continue with another round of Bush bashing were he to nominate a hard right wing ideologue to the Supreme Court knowing in advance that the nominee would in all likelihood be defeated. The right might like to think they have a majority in the senate but when push comes to shove a very conservative nominee with a track record will be abandoned by the eastern moderates in the senate and will go down in flames.
This nomination proves once again that Bush is a very shrewd thinker. The bulk of the criticism has come from his own party and that which is likely to come from the Democrats was somewhat blunted when Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said he thought Miers was a fine appointment as soon as it was announced. This will blunt some of Senator Charles Schumer’s criticism about President Bush’s lack of consultation with the senate. If Bush consulted Reid and Reid suggested Miers and presto Miers is the nominee then it would seem Chuck has been trumped.
Is Harriet Miers qualified to sit on the Supreme Court? This is an interesting point and largely debatable point for a nominee since the constitution lays out no specific criteria for an appointment.
In a paper entitled “Qualifications as universal factors in the outcomes of supreme court nominations” that can be found at this site, http://ednet.rvc.cc.il.us/~PeterR/Papers/paper2.htm by P.S. Ruckman Jr. it can be said that yes she is qualified primarily because the chief element in all Supreme Court appointments is politics.
Should the cronyism charged be considered in weighing Ms. Miers appointment? Let’s be honest, in Washington and state capitols across the country and in fact most corporations and smallest of organizations, cronyism is a chief qualification for a post. If you have simply adequate credentials for a post but you have the trust of the boss and a proven history doing a good job for him or her don’t you get the new job?
Although she is obviously not a constitutional scholar, Ms. Miers certainly seems to have a resume filled with achievement and dedication and real world experience and unsheltered exposure to regular humans that might bring a refreshing perspective to a group of cloistered old men.
In any event, all of the speculation and opinion including this one are all irrelevant at this point. Bush is the boss and the boss makes this appointment. What the boss has said at this point is that he finds her to be dedicated highly intelligent and hard working and is worthy of holding this most august position. We would all best be served if we wait for the confirmation process and find out just who Harriet Miers is in her own words.
The objections range from cronyism to lack of constitutional scholarship but really what it boils down to is that the right wing wants an out and out confrontation over a nominee with a verifiable paper trail that lays out an opposition to Roe vs. Wade and any of the other issues that are close to the ultra conservatives heart.
President Bush knows this and it is clear he has no intention of giving the right what it wants and he has very good political reasons for not doing so. First and foremost is that despite all the talk about losing his base, Bush knows that the base has no where to go. It is they that owe a debt of gratitude to Bush not the other way around. Where else on the conservative side of American politics was the Kristol, Frum, Will, Novak Brownback, Coulter wing of the party going to find someone who could defeat a sitting Vice President? Was Pat Buchanan a likely winner or was John McCain even a possible choice for them? Somehow I doubt it.
Bush is pragmatic enough to realize that he has over 3 more solid years to govern from the white house and to make preparation to hold onto to and even expand the Republican majorities in the house and senate. These plans could be derailed by allowing the Democrats to continue with another round of Bush bashing were he to nominate a hard right wing ideologue to the Supreme Court knowing in advance that the nominee would in all likelihood be defeated. The right might like to think they have a majority in the senate but when push comes to shove a very conservative nominee with a track record will be abandoned by the eastern moderates in the senate and will go down in flames.
This nomination proves once again that Bush is a very shrewd thinker. The bulk of the criticism has come from his own party and that which is likely to come from the Democrats was somewhat blunted when Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid said he thought Miers was a fine appointment as soon as it was announced. This will blunt some of Senator Charles Schumer’s criticism about President Bush’s lack of consultation with the senate. If Bush consulted Reid and Reid suggested Miers and presto Miers is the nominee then it would seem Chuck has been trumped.
Is Harriet Miers qualified to sit on the Supreme Court? This is an interesting point and largely debatable point for a nominee since the constitution lays out no specific criteria for an appointment.
In a paper entitled “Qualifications as universal factors in the outcomes of supreme court nominations” that can be found at this site, http://ednet.rvc.cc.il.us/~PeterR/Papers/paper2.htm by P.S. Ruckman Jr. it can be said that yes she is qualified primarily because the chief element in all Supreme Court appointments is politics.
Should the cronyism charged be considered in weighing Ms. Miers appointment? Let’s be honest, in Washington and state capitols across the country and in fact most corporations and smallest of organizations, cronyism is a chief qualification for a post. If you have simply adequate credentials for a post but you have the trust of the boss and a proven history doing a good job for him or her don’t you get the new job?
Although she is obviously not a constitutional scholar, Ms. Miers certainly seems to have a resume filled with achievement and dedication and real world experience and unsheltered exposure to regular humans that might bring a refreshing perspective to a group of cloistered old men.
In any event, all of the speculation and opinion including this one are all irrelevant at this point. Bush is the boss and the boss makes this appointment. What the boss has said at this point is that he finds her to be dedicated highly intelligent and hard working and is worthy of holding this most august position. We would all best be served if we wait for the confirmation process and find out just who Harriet Miers is in her own words.
Tuesday, October 04, 2005
Feelin alright
Well we got through a rather confusing weekend where no one really seemed to know what the playoff arrangements were supposed to be. Most of the people I had spoken to had the Sox in a playoff with the Yankees for the division crown should the Sox take two out of three. To everyone's surprise the Yankees clinched the division with a win on Saturday by virtue of their record in head to head competition with the Sox.
That result had Yankee fans wondering exactly what they had won when they considered that they had to fly across the country to engage the Angels who at this point may be playing the best ball in the American league having finished 14 and 2 down the stretch.
As most of us had predicted early on, the final results came down to the last day of the season as the Indians ran out of gas and the Sox got in the post season by a hair.
So off they are to Chicago to engage the White Sox who finished the season as the number one seed having won the most games in the American League. That record is some what suspect when you consider they played the Royals as many games as the Sox had to face the Yankees.
Chicago had gotten off to a huge division lead and were coasting until September when the Indians made a strong push and cut the Chicago lead from a high of 16 games down to 3 games going into the last three games of the season. Cleveland ran out of gas and lost three in a row, which gave Chicago its final margin of victory of six games to win the division.
Chicago comes into the series with a very strong front line rotation of Contreras, Burhle, Garland and Freddie Garcia. If they are to win then this group will have to go deep into games and hold down the strength of the Red Sox line up which from top to bottom out scored Chicago by over two hundred runs during the season. The White Sox pitching has a low ERA but as a group is not a huge mystery to the Red Sox. Contreras in particular has been involved in the Yankee Red Sox wars and has had mixed results with Sox hitters.
The middle of the White Sox line up has some pop of its own with Paul Konerko and Jermaine Dye however thier numbers are only about 70% of what Ortiz and Ramirez have produced for the Red Sox.
The intangibles here are about the experience that the Red Sox have in the post season and the fact that after having won last year the overwhelming cynicism of the fan base has been erased and so to has any of that pressure gone from the club. I felt this first hand in the all important Toronto game. After having snapped the channell five or six times during the course of the evening I came to the ninth inning. Ortiz had tied it at 4 in the eighth inning and came up again in the ninth with two on. The sea change for me was that sitting there I had no doubt that Ortiz would win the game.
The White Sox on the other hand are carrying the type of burden that the Boston crew suffered throgh for years. Chicago fans are thirsting for some sort of baseball achievement and notoriety far different than what Steve Bartman brought to the baseball world.
Call me fat dumb and happy and still reveling in last years win but there is no clear favorite in the playoffs and a loose group like the Red Sox has as good or better chance than anybody. So for posterity's sake my prediction is the Red Sox in five!
In another related note I would have to add my two cents to the MVP discussion. David Ortiz is the single most clutch hitter I have ever seen in the many years I have watched and religiously followed baseball. When he comes to the plate everyone in the ball yard (including the opposing pitcher) expects some sort of a smash somewhere. He was named player of the month for September for good reason as he carried the club down the stretch.
If I had a vote I would cast it for him. All of that being said I fully expect that Alex Rodriguez should win the prize. His numbers with the exception of RBI was equal to Ortiz and he played 150 plus games in the field as a probable gold glove third baseman. For my money ARod is the most complete player in the game today.
That result had Yankee fans wondering exactly what they had won when they considered that they had to fly across the country to engage the Angels who at this point may be playing the best ball in the American league having finished 14 and 2 down the stretch.
As most of us had predicted early on, the final results came down to the last day of the season as the Indians ran out of gas and the Sox got in the post season by a hair.
So off they are to Chicago to engage the White Sox who finished the season as the number one seed having won the most games in the American League. That record is some what suspect when you consider they played the Royals as many games as the Sox had to face the Yankees.
Chicago had gotten off to a huge division lead and were coasting until September when the Indians made a strong push and cut the Chicago lead from a high of 16 games down to 3 games going into the last three games of the season. Cleveland ran out of gas and lost three in a row, which gave Chicago its final margin of victory of six games to win the division.
Chicago comes into the series with a very strong front line rotation of Contreras, Burhle, Garland and Freddie Garcia. If they are to win then this group will have to go deep into games and hold down the strength of the Red Sox line up which from top to bottom out scored Chicago by over two hundred runs during the season. The White Sox pitching has a low ERA but as a group is not a huge mystery to the Red Sox. Contreras in particular has been involved in the Yankee Red Sox wars and has had mixed results with Sox hitters.
The middle of the White Sox line up has some pop of its own with Paul Konerko and Jermaine Dye however thier numbers are only about 70% of what Ortiz and Ramirez have produced for the Red Sox.
The intangibles here are about the experience that the Red Sox have in the post season and the fact that after having won last year the overwhelming cynicism of the fan base has been erased and so to has any of that pressure gone from the club. I felt this first hand in the all important Toronto game. After having snapped the channell five or six times during the course of the evening I came to the ninth inning. Ortiz had tied it at 4 in the eighth inning and came up again in the ninth with two on. The sea change for me was that sitting there I had no doubt that Ortiz would win the game.
The White Sox on the other hand are carrying the type of burden that the Boston crew suffered throgh for years. Chicago fans are thirsting for some sort of baseball achievement and notoriety far different than what Steve Bartman brought to the baseball world.
Call me fat dumb and happy and still reveling in last years win but there is no clear favorite in the playoffs and a loose group like the Red Sox has as good or better chance than anybody. So for posterity's sake my prediction is the Red Sox in five!
In another related note I would have to add my two cents to the MVP discussion. David Ortiz is the single most clutch hitter I have ever seen in the many years I have watched and religiously followed baseball. When he comes to the plate everyone in the ball yard (including the opposing pitcher) expects some sort of a smash somewhere. He was named player of the month for September for good reason as he carried the club down the stretch.
If I had a vote I would cast it for him. All of that being said I fully expect that Alex Rodriguez should win the prize. His numbers with the exception of RBI was equal to Ortiz and he played 150 plus games in the field as a probable gold glove third baseman. For my money ARod is the most complete player in the game today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)