Comic Relief

So funny, yet so sad...

The Palin Identity

This clip, and actor Matt Damon's comments, have caused quite a stir these last couple of days. Since his entrance into the public forum, as an actor, Damon has often been an outspoken political commentator from the left of the political spectrum. Damon has often faced criticism for sharing his views and voicing his opinion - as every American has the right to do.

Damon, and other liberal celebrities who voice their political opinions, are frequently criticized for exercising this right. They are told by those who do not share their opinions that they should stick to what they know - making movies, music, and the like. To some, this may seem a fair argument, after all, what does a Hollywood actor really know about politics? Does Matt Damon have a grasp on intelligence gathering because he has starred as an American foreign operative? Has Martin Sheen gained a special perspective of the presidency by portraying our Commander-in-Chief on television? Of course not, that's like implying Bill Pullman should be elected President should our planet be attacked by aliens.

Now ask yourself this: Who was Mike Huckabee's most influential endorser this primary season? None other than action star Chuck Norris. The late Charlton Heston was politically active, and need I mention Arnold Schwarzengger? Why is it that these actors are considered legitimate political entities, while the liberals I mention above are cast off by the mainstream as loudmouthed radicals? The answer is just as Matt Damon explains it - in America, a bad Disney movie beats an insightful drama every time; and as time goes on, our political theater is turning into just that: theater. Maybe liberals would be wise to embrace their Hollywood peers and create their own Sonny Bono, their own Fred Thompson, their own Ronald Reagan. Or maybe, as Damon implies, politics is not theater.

As Americans, we all have the right to voice our opinions. Further, we all have the right, within the frame work of the Constitution, to seek political office. In this instance, the case is simple. Damon is well within his rights to voice his opinion. Palin is well within her rights to be running for Vice President. However, Damon needs only his citizenship as prerequisite to ably exercise his right. As for Palin, well, ask Matt Damon.

All is Not Lost

It's been a difficult few days to be a New England football fan. One needn't look back that far, though, to find a point of reference, a scenario that casts some perspective on the recent turmoil that has set in upon Patriot Nation.

It was one year ago this week, following Week One of the 2007 NFL season, that New England Patriots fans were smacking from another, much different bombshell. After a Patriots' drubbing of The New York Jets, the controversy that was to become known as Spygate came to light, and a season long storyline was introduced. Now, the Patriots and their fans find themselves in another dramatic predicament. After the loss of their star quarterback, Tom Brady, the season is in serious doubt, and the nay sayers are again circling above. Just as in 2007, however, all is not lost. Don't believe me? Well, consider the following:

Who Are Those Guys?: Here is a list of quarterbacks not named Brady to appear in Super Bowls since the 2000 season (*denotes winner): Trent Dilfer*, Kerry Collins, Kurt Warner, Brad Johnson*, Rich Gannon, Jake Delhomme, Donovan McNabb, Matt Hasselback, Ben Roethlisberger*, Rex Grossman, Peyton Manning*, Eli Manning*.

Sure, there are Mannings, a McNabb and a Roethlisberger, but for every MVP there is a Trent Dilfer, a Rex Grossman and a Brad Johnson. The idea that this a quarterback's league has been a bit overblown and artificially inflated by the advent of pass-friendly rule changes and the fact that you cannot watch t.v. for eleven minutes without seeing a commercial featuring one of the Manning brothers. Granted, new Patriots starting quarterback Matt Cassel will be a lucky man if he ever finds himself on any list of starting Super Bowl quarterbacks, but so would Philip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Tony Romo or Drew Brees. Each of the "second tier" quarterbacks on the list above had one thing in common: an excellent supporting (or leading) cast making up the team around them. Sound familiar?

The Favre Factor: Speaking of The Jets, they've suddenly become a popular pick to dethrone The Patriots as AFC East champions. These are the same Jets who last year won a total of four games, two of them coming at the hands of the lowly Miami Dolphins (who won only one game last season). Why this sudden, perceived turnaround from zeroes to potential heroes? A new quarterback, Brett Favre. Farve is a great quarterback, certainly, but in order to seriously contend for a division crown, a team must realistically aim to win ten games. For the Jets, this would mean a swing of six games. That is a tall order, especially when being placed, for the most part, in the hands of one man. Is it possible for a quarterback to have a six game effect on a team's record? Time will tell. In the case of the Patriots and Matt Cassell, a six game swing from last year's regular season total would put the team at ten wins, and in serious contention for the division crown.

You'd Better Be Sure: Last year, during the Spygate controversy, the Patriots did what they have done so many times over the course of their recent dominance: they banded together as a team. As has become their habit, the team adopted an "us against the world" attitude. Do you think the fifty-two players on this year's roster are having trouble coming up with a rallying point for this season? Better yet, do you think it wise to tell Richard, Rodney, Tedy, Randy, Wes, Laurence or any of the others that they no longer seem a threatening bunch? I'm sure there is some one out there, a la Pittsburgh's Anthony Smith, or former Eagle Freddie Mitchell - both of whom took the risk of publicly questioning the legitimacy of the Patriots and paid for it - who will. Well, you'd better be sure.

The Patriots and their fans have been through these situations before, and not only survived - but thrived. Last year, following week one of the NFL season, I wrote a commentary piece regarding the situation of The Patriots following Spygate. The closing words still ring true today:

"Where then, does this leave us? It leaves us exactly where Coach Belichick has always us wanted to be: rooting for a team that everyone is out to get. But this time, instead of having to conjure up Freddie Mitchell or a beat writer for the Charlotte Observer, he can point to the plain reality that is confronting his team."

Go Patriots.

Quick Hits

A few things that have had me thinking...

Money in the Bank - The world is waking up today to the news that the Federal Government is planning to "partially" assume control of the giant lending institutions Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Sounds like a good idea, seeing as they are both in serious danger of failing, and combined they control between $5 and $9 trillion of the nation's housing market. Of course, this is going to cost a lot of money. On the order of anywhere between $50 to $250 billion over the course of the next nine months to a year. Who will foot this bill? The taxpayers, of course. Don't worry, though; the 94 - ish percent of us in the workforce can pool together and get through this. It's not like our economy is in shambles, or we have two wars to fund, or that fuel prices are at all time highs. Here's my idea: Let's all return those DVD players, flat screen T.V.s and other gadgets and gizmos we purchased with our tax relief stimulus checks. You remember those checks, right? They were sent out to you courtesy of our President, all part of a plan to stimulate our economy. Well George, consider the economy stimulated. These tax cuts have added $3 trillion to our national deficit. That kind of cash might come in handy at times like these, but what do I know? File under: Call it a wash.

Just Win, Baby - John McCain caused quite a stir when he selected Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate on the 2008 Republican Presidential ticket. Another maverick move by an outside the box thinker, right? Well, not so much. In fact, just another example of the Republican tactic of doing whatever it takes to win. Now, don't get me wrong - having a female on major party ticket for only the second time in history is a noteworthy event, but the circumstances of Palin's selection are dubious at best.

In selecting a female, John McCain engaged in an obvious ploy to court female voters disenfranchised or discouraged by Hillary Clinton's exit from the Democratic race. Plenty of people disagree with this view, and many would label my opinion as 'sexist.' I argue that the sexism comes from the selection itself. Selecting a running mate based on a set of criteria that not only includes gender, but places it at the top of the list - that's sexist. The ploy is even more transparent when placed against McCain's stated goal to staff his administration with the most qualified and experienced Americans, regardless of their party affiliation. Palin's experience and qualifications, as far as being second in command, are shaky at best. This selection seems to have been the product of some hybrid Help Wanted/Singles ad:

WM seeks MWF for partnership, possibly more. Experience a plus, but not required. Must love America, Big Oil and family values. Qualified candidates please reply to US RNC as soon as possible. Background information helpful, but a full check will be run upon acceptance of the position. Country First!

Animal Cruelty - There is a lot of animal imagery tied up in our national political culture. From the mascots of our two major parties, to terms like hawk and maverick, to the very icon of our nation - the bald eagle. These animals, for the most part, are meant to embody noble, positive traits that we find in ourselves. We can debate the admirable qualities of some one labeled a "war hawk" and question how the Democrats got stuck with the ass as their party symbol, but where along the line did the pit bull become a noble beast? Forgive me for offending pit bull owners, of which there are many (and please don't tell your dog I've said this), but pit bulls are, at best, extremely dangerous attack dogs around whom you have to be on guard at all times, and at worst they are (by canine standards), fairly unintelligent, overly inbred attack dogs that maim and kill more Americans every year than any other animal.

Pop quiz: What animal does Sarah Palin choose to politically personify herself as? A pit bull! And, if you replace the "unintelligent" (Sarah Palin is very intelligent), with "uninformed", Sarah Palin was a pit bull during her RNC acceptance speech. Now ask yourself: why is that a good thing? Of course, Palin's peers have frequently used a different animal to draw analogy to her: the barracuda. To recap - What's the difference between a pit bull and an Alaskan hockey mom? Lipstick. What's the difference between an Alaskan hockey mom and a barracuda? Lipstick and lungs.

Nit Picking - Not a lot of press has gone to this story, mostly because it's more amusing than important, but it's still worth pointing out. During John McCain's acceptance speech, around the time he was speaking about veteran's affairs and his own personal experience of being medically treated upon his release from a P.O.W. camp in Vietnam, a picture was displayed on the giant monitor behind him of Walter Reed Middle School in California, not The Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington as was clearly intended. The McCain campaigns response? We meant to do that! “The changing image-screen was linked to the American thematics of the speech and the public school was simply part of it,” said spokesman Tucker Bounds. Of course, I suppose they can't really admit the truth, which would go something like "The unpaid intern we had doing the audio visual work must have just typed 'Walter Reed' into a Google image search and picked the first one he saw. Our fact checker didn't catch the error because we do not have a fact checker."

Finding Our Level

In 2000, after weeks of battling the Republicans in Florida, Washington D.C., and the rest of America, the Democratic party - and Al Gore, decided to "get over it" and conceded the presidential election to George W. Bush. Gore's concession speech (video above) marked the end of this disputed contest, one which, evidence shows, was actually won by Gore.

Some heralded Gore's move as a sign of bravery, some saw it as a cowardly gesture of defeat. Few, however, could foresee the dreadful consequences that lie in store for our nation as its result. This concession marked the dawn of the Bush era, a president who's doctrine can best be summed up as "What are you going to do about it?" This concession by Gore set the political tone for the next decade, a tone that, unfortunately, still echoes today.

During the course of events that played out in Florida and across the nation in the fall of 2000, Gore supporters were told to let go, to face the "facts", and give up the fight. They were told to reconcile with the inevitable, stop whining, to get over it. In the interest of the nation,for the good of the whole, as it were, the Democrats conceded, handing Bush an illegitimate victory. And so the stage was set for the era of political capital, executive privilege, and a win at all costs ideology more suited for the gridiron than for the Oval Office. The United States, as a consequence, has suffered its most dreadful decade in a century, enduring untold and unforeseen hardship, all the result of a winner-take-all, loser-silently-step-aside mindset that has corrupted our most basic principles of democracy.

So after eight years of Bush's presidency, and the aforementioned woes that have plagued us, how does the Democratic party respond? By stealing a page from the Bush playbook to hijack the core elements of our democratic system, and exploit the intricacies of our electoral processes to install a candidate who's candidacy and rhetoric ring an eerily similar, albeit dis-tonal chord to that of George W. Bush and his followers.

Now, nearly eight years later, with the Democratic party convening "in unison" - all delegates seated and present - to nominate their candidate for the presidency, many are again being told to "get over it", to stop whining, to get with the program; and while the victor's supporters may be looking forward to possibilities of an America unrealized, there are those who have already seen a crucial element of the American anatomy dissected and discarded: the ideal that contends that there is no truth too difficult to comprehend, no honest vote that shall be left uncounted, no voice left unheard.

In a political system where victory is the ultimate prize, freedom shall be the first casualty. We, as Americans, must ensure that our democratic institutions are honored and protected, and not exploited, no matter the convenience presented by circumstance. Democracy is not the folly of the weak, the sport of the treacherous, nor a spoil for the victor. It is the voice of a people, the protector of decency, and the beacon of our nation.

Final popular vote results for the 2000 presidential election:

Gore - 50,999,897 Bush - 50,456,002

Electoral Votes: Disputed

Final popular vote results for the 2008 Democratic primaries, tallying the votes of all states and territories who's delegates are seated at the convention:

Clinton - 18,046,007 Obama - 17,869,542

Delegates: Disputed

Clinton has now played her part by conceding, and throwing her support behind Obama. Now, as was the case in 2000, the burden of unity falls to the victor. Obama must make every effort to heal the wounds caused by this bitter contest, no matter how superficial they may seem to his core supporters. As was pledged by George W. Bush in 2000, this task must be given the highest priority. Unlike Bush, Obama must carry this duty through to completion and unite the party that nominates him.

Our nation has been bruised, but has survived George W. Bush and his flagrant misuse of power. The Democratic Party is not strong enough to sustain a similar misstep from one of its own.

If We Were French

As the world has been transfixed by the amazing accomplishments of Jamaica's Usain Bolt at this year's summer Olympics, I cannot help but think of an alternate scenario, one which would see our nation cry foul over the unbelievable chain of recent athletic events. To fully understand this alternate reality, one must bear in mind that the United States of America has gone without winning a gold medal in any sprint (100m, 200m, or 400m relay) competition for the first time since 1976. Let us imagine for a moment, that instead of celebrating Bolt's accomplishments, as we have, the nation chose to view Bolt as a phony, an affront to our national pride:

Surely, for this transgression against our national pride to have occurred something must be amiss. How can we just sit back and let this arrogant perpetrator relish in his achievements, basking in what must be an artificially attained glory? How can we let the legacies of Jesse Owens, Carl Lewis, Michael Johnson et al be tarnished by such a blatant act of cheating? Usain Bolt, a promising sprinter prior to these games, but in no means a contender for greatest sprinter ever, has suddenly - and suspiciously hastily - thrust himself into the hall of sprinting greats. Are we to believe this is a product of will power, of determination, a spectacle displaying the extent of humankind's ability? No. Instead, remember Ben Johnson, Linford Christie, and the cacophony of foreign cheats that have repeatedly tried to soil our national parade ground that is the Olympic sprinting medals podium.

Sound pathetic and unbelievable?

In short, it is; and it's disgraceful as well. Of course, that hasn't stopped another nation from taking this exact course of action when one of their beloved sports was dominated by an outsider. I'm referring, of course, to the treatment of Lance Armstrong by the French. A national hero in America, Armstrong is, to this day, considered a villian in France. As with Bolt, there is no reason to believe Armstrong's heroics were the result of anything other than unmatched preparation and unbelievable execution. The French, sadly, have chosen to believe otherwise.

So, let us continue to praise Usain Bolt for his amazing feats, and quietly note our own abilty to gracefully acknowledge when we have been bested by a superior athlete; for sport is still one of the arenas where Americans still display all of the characteristics and qualities that makes us a truly great nation.

P.S. Even though it may go against a lot of the dignity I speak of in this article (and taking into account what a polarizing state Texas has become recently), you've still gotta love this bumper sticker (Lance has publicly worn a tee-shirt emboldened with the same phase):

Quick Hits

A few quick ideas that have had me thinking...

- While reading up on a CNN.com story this morning detailing the Obama campaign's efforts to defend their supporters against implications that they are "mindless fans", I noticed that I could enter the official Barack Obama webpage via a link on the page. I could not help but think that if the Obama campaign is trying to shake the image of a mindless herd of followers, maybe "Join Us" is not the best invitation. Perhaps "Find Out More" or "Enter"?

- This is not meant to be offensive or demeaning to any gymnast or their fans, but how is gymnastics considered to be a competitive sport? I understand the degree of difficulty, the mastery of the form, and the supreme physical condition that these gymnasts are in, but how can this be a sport if winning and losing is based solely on the opinions of judges? I understand that more traditional sports, via officials and umpires, etc. have their own opportunity for human opinion and error, but this is different. If gymnastics, figure skating, and the like are sports, why isn't competitive painting? Even speed painting, were it to exist, would have a time limit.

I understand that there are greater arguments over what makes a sport a sport. Is golf a sport? NASCAR? Darts? Maybe, maybe not. But let's put it this way: Kyle Busch won this past weekend's NASCAR race because he finished the race first, faster than anyone else. Jimmie Johnson had some really nice, artistic maneuvers along the way, and he drives a prettier car, to boot. He finished seventh.

- Gasoline prices, on a national average, have declined for 26 straight days. That's despite this period seeing a hurricane, two tropical storms, increased summer demand and an armed conflict in Georgia (the former Soviet Republic) that this morning shut down a major oil pipeline. What factor could be behind this suprising*, unexpected* drop? Hybrid technology? Stability in the Middle East? The discovery that liquified Alaskan Caribou antlers make a great synthetic oil?

It could be all of the above, but my money, literally, goes with the fact that this is an election year - and we've been down this road before. So the next time you are reminded how precarious the international oil situation is (and it is), warned that foul weather in the Carribbean, civil unrest in Nigeria, and not voting Republican can all have a negative effect** on oil prices, consider how effectively costs can be controlled when there is so much money on the line.

*To some

**For consumers