Watching Cousin Morgan pitch for Robinson Rockets Softball

`

Don't you love photos like this? These girls have worked hard - in the tournament, in the season, and during long softball careers. They KNOW they have earned this tournament championship. They KNOW they deserve it. They fully expressed themselves on the field, and as a result they are genuinely and unabashedly happy about their achievement. I love love love photos like this.


Update: Robinson also won the Fort Worth Southwest Tournament this weekend.


Cousin Morgan, aka "Mo", is 3rd girl from right, in front row, hands on knees, letter jacketed, medallion dangling, cheeks smeared black, hair bowed in pink. She is only a sophomore, yet she is one of two starting pitchers on the team. The team itself is young: only two senior starters. They are a good team: a possible state championship contender.


Cousin Morgan is 5'7"ish; is an outstanding dancer - having taken classes all her life; and is a varsity basketball player. In softball, Morgan uses her long legs and her coordination to whip her hips and launch the ball towards the plate at 57 mph. Morgan throws fastball, drop ball, curve, change-up. Colleges have made inquiries. It would be good if she could increase her fastball velocity to 60 or 61 mph. That seems as if it could happen as her body fills out.


"Mo" is a fan friendly name. The fans yell "C'mon Mo!", and "C'mon Momo!"


Mo has the competitive killer instinct: she's coming right atcha, so you better be ready. I enjoy a quirky thing she does: after receiving the ball from the catcher, she turns 180 degrees and walks through the middle of the pitching circle and straight to the back side (the extreme second base side) of the pitching circle arc. On the way, many times, she launches a vicious baseball style submarine pitch from her right hand and across 6 inches of air and into her glove. Her glove is held with fingers pointing semi horizontal and semi downwards. She really slams the ball into her glove - really puts her shoulders into the throw. Really POPS the ball into her glove. It's AGGRESSIVE. As a long time observer of athletes: I LIKE it.


When Morgan doesn't pitch, she plays 1B. When she does pitch, her mom - Cousin KB - consistently yells at her from the stands: "C'mon honey: throw hard!" I said to KB: "Do you expect that she will go out there one inning and inexplicably forget to throw hard?" KB explained that, as Morgan tires in the late innings, she wants Morgan to put more focus into maintaining her FB velocity.


After every out, all infielders jog to the mound and high five Morgan. 7 innings x 3 outs per inning x 4 high fives per out = 84 high fives per game. I say the high fives are what are tiring Morgan out and causing decrease in velocity! She needs off season physical training geared towards withstanding all those high fives. Or, she needs to high five one infielder per out = 21 high fives per game.


I have a theory about the 84 high fives per game. There is action in softball, yet it is less action than, for instance, in baseball. Morgan strikes out too many batters. The infielders don't have enough to do, so they create a new thing to do: jog to the mound and high five the pitcher after every out. The infielders are just trying to stay busy and to contribute as best they can. Thats my theory.


I've seen Morgan pitch in Waco, and yesterday I saw her pitch in Fort Worth. The tournament bracket said "Waco Robinson". That must be wearisome for the Robinson girls. They are not Waco Robinson. They are not even Robinson Robinson. They are "Robinson". Period. There is exactly one high school in Robinson, TX.


Robinson traveled 90 miles with a good complement of fans. I enjoyed watching 8th grade cousin Madison visiting around the Robinson stands with various of her friends. And I enjoyed watching 3rd grade cousin Shelby playing beside the field with other Robinson children who are her friends - it's a nice, small town dynamic. The children are known to all, and the children feel secure in this environment: are surrounded and cocooned by friendly adults who have eyes on them, and who the children trust will protect them from potential harm. It never occurs to the Robinson children to fear anything. Of course, it never occurs to Shelby to fear anything because her mom Kerry watches her like a hawk. But that's another story, for another day, for when Kerry needs teasing.


Am reminded of watching, in Nov of last year, a Class 3A football playoff game between Graham and Bridgeport. Bridgeport brought maybe 2500 fans to the 8,000 seat Aledo Bearcat Stadium; Graham brought maybe 3000 fans. At halftime, 4 Bridgeport children went onto the field, as they were obviously accustomed to doing in their hometown, and began a game of touch. The game swelled in size as, gradually, other 10ish year old kids sprinted onto the field and into the game. All the kids obviously knew each other. A 10 year old sprinted onto the field and joined an offense. When the offense broke the huddle for the very next play, the new kid was instantly the QB: everyone knew everyone, and everyone knew he was the best QB in that huddle. And it happened twice! 60 seconds later, another kid sprinted into that same offense's huddle, only to instantly emerge as the new QB. As a sports fan, as a former touch football player, I was flabbergasted at the dynamic. But it was small town kids who knew each other, and everyone knew who should and should not be quarterbacking at any particular moment. The game, now about 8 Bridgeport kids against 8 Bridgeport kids, played out in front of maybe 5000+ fans in an 8,000 seat palace of a stadium. Good times.


So, yesterday, I watched parts of two softball games. For the entire tournament day, the Rockets won three games. Go Rockets.






Speaking of Shelby - and of 6 other tiny cousins + a pair of cats + the venerable and now dearly departed Max the dog - from 4 years ago, from the Nancy Cotharn Update: Workin It

The good days are over?

`

Story at Red State. Photo h/t theospark.net

Note: Webutante is the official angler of this blog, except I don't have an angling photo of the official angler. My only Webutante photo is this one, from 1968's Summer of Love ===>

Ranking Texas Rangers injury risks

Baseball seasons are demanding. Virtually every baseball player gets hurt. Or, possibly, every big league baseball player becomes debilitated at various points along the way - Cal Ripken being the exception which proves the rule.

The 2010 Texas Rangers are counting on a sizable group of players who have histories of being injured. The Rangers work closely with sharp medical staff, and hope to gain competitive advantage via shrewder than normal assessment of injury risks.

Ranking Texas Rangers Injury Risks

Level One: Extreme Fragility

Frankie Francisco, Brandon McCarthy

Level Two: Fragile

Rich Harden, C.J. Wilson, Matt Harrison, Vlad Guerrerro, Josh Hamilton, Taylor Teagarden, [Joaquin Arias]

Level Three: Somewhat Fragile

Colby Lewis, Chris Ray, [Eric Hurley], Ian Kinsler

Level Four: Ever So Slightly Fragile (i.e. have sustained past injuries), But Not Worrisome

David Murphy, Chris Davis, Michael Young, Julio Borbon

Level Five: Dear Texas Rangers, Do Not Use Pennant Fever As Excuse To Overload and Risk These Healthy Young Arms

Tommy Hunter, Derek Holland, Neftali Feliz

Level Six: Clean Careers, So Far

Dustin Nippert, Nelson Cruz, Elvis Andrus, Jarrod Saltalamacchia*

Level Seven: Iron Men (Knock on Wood)

Scott Feldman, Darren O'Day, Darren Oliver

* re Saltalamacchia: am ignoring what I consider a freak rib problem which has zero chance of recurrence. Tall catchers do tend to have knee and back problems late in their careers. Saltalamacchia, however, is too young for that.

Map: Generic Names for Soft Drinks Across the U.S.

http://strangemaps.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/popvssodamap.gif

`

What's interesting about Massa

If Massa is gone, it means Pelosi needs to find 2 fewer votes in order to pass the legislation. Massa gone is a big deal for Pelosi.

Since we can't yet know (if ever) the truth or falsity of the harassment allegation against Massa, therefore the interesting thing at this moment is that Pelosi and Emmanuel - via the hardball/bribery/threat tactics they've used on their own members - have made themselves vulnerable to an allegation such as Massa is now making. We know Massa's allegation could be true because we've seen the way Pelosi and Emmanuel operate. Pelosi and Emmanuel have made themselves vulnerable, and we are not quick to dismiss or immediately discount Massa's allegation. It would be ironic if Massa is guilty of blatant sexual harassment and yet still inflicts damage on a vulnerable Pelosi and Emmanuel. And, if Massa is guilty and yet is playing hardball: what is different about Massa's political hardball vs. Pelosi/Emmanuel's political hardball? If we do not condemn Pelosi/Emmanuel for their tactics, is it fair to condemn Massa for his tactics?

Fisking WaPo Dana Milbank review of Karl Rove's "Courage and Consequence"

A couple times a year, it's good to flex the fisking muscle.

The WaPo article. Author Dana Milbank is a sputtering Elmer Fudd. This fisking exposes his bias, his venom, his lack of reason, his lack of evidence to justify his assertions.



#1 Milbank fails to rebut re "trashed" the White House

"[Rove] describes at length how Clinton staffers 'trashed' the White House"

Milbank protests "trashed". If Rove said "trashed" w/o then describing the damage, then Milbank would have an argument (a losing argument, imo, as the degree of trashing has no bearing upon the accuracy of "trashed" as a descriptor). However, Milbank doesn't understand that Rove's description of the damage allows readers to make up their own minds; that Rove's description of the damage means Rove is not misleading any readers.

Milbank, trying to make a case against "trashed", props up a straw man: "though investigators were 'unable to conclude whether the 2001 transition was worse than previous ones'". Milbank's straw man does not rebut Rove's point that Clinton staffers trashed the White House; does not rebut or contradict Rove's descriptions of the damage.



#2 Milbank extends his own mischaracterization of Dick Cheney

"[Rove] says it was a 'dangerous falsehood' that administration officials 'claimed Iraq had been behind 9/11,' so he must have forgotten Dick Cheney calling Iraq 'the geographic base of the terrorists who had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11.'"


Milbank is repeating his own Dowd-like misrepresentation of Cheney's Meet the Press remarks in Sept 2003. In actuality, the "geographic base" of which Cheney was speaking was the entire Middle East. Milbank omitted the first part of Cheney's statement, in which Cheney was explaining the overall strategic goal of the WOT. The overall strategic vision is for a good representative government in Iraq to secure the larger region of the Middle East in such a way that actors in the Middle East do not become future threats to the U.S., do not seek WMD, do not provide safe haven for terrorists. This is a strategic vision which extends 10 years into the future, and 50 years into the future, and more. It is a strategic vision which most of the anti war left has refused to acknowledge. Cheney was speaking of overall strategic vision; was speaking of the Middle East as "the heart of the base, if you will" of violent fundamentalist Islam. Here's Cheney's unDowdified quote on Meet the Press:

"If we're successful in Iraq, if we can stand up a good representative government in Iraq that secures the region so that it never again becomes a threat to its neighbors or to the United States, so it's not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, so that it's not a safe haven for terrorists, then we will have struck a major blow right at the heart of the base, if you will, the geographic base of the terrorists who had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

Another point: Milbank misuses context. Milbank's Dowdified Cheney quote implies Cheney made the assertion as part of a marketing campaign to drum up support for the invasion of Iraq. However, the invasion of Iraq occurred in March, 2003; Cheney's Meet the Press quote was in Sept of 2003. It makes no sense that Cheney, 6 months after the invasion, would suddenly and for the first time assert that Iraq was the geographic base of Al Qaeda. Further, I'm confident Cheney quotes exist which identify Afghanistan as the geographic home of Al Qaeda during that time period.

John at Powerlineblog, on Sept 29, 2003 in The Post Misquotes Cheney Again:

The Post's twisting of Cheney's statement to make it sound as if he said that Iraq was the geographic base of the 9/11 hijackers--which neither Cheney nor any other administration official has ever claimed--can only be a deliberate misrepresentation.

#3 Score! Milbank scores(!) by pointing out that Rove mischaracterized a 2000 Bush apology to McCain

This is assuming Milbank accurately characterizes Rove's book, which - given my low opinion of Milbank's reliability - I do not fully believe unless I read Rove's words for myself. But, for purposes of our discussion, I will address this as if Milbank is correctly characterizing Rove's words.

Here's what Rove allegedly referenced, via Politico quoting the 2007 book "Dead Certain":

Page 81: Meeting McCain privately in May of 2000 before picking up his former rival’s endorsement, Bush finally apologized for not denouncing the statement by Thomas Burch in the South Carolina primary. Burch was the veteran who, with Bush present, accused McCain of forgetting about Vietnam veterans.

A Bush apology, after the South Carolina primary was over, was politically meaningless. If Rove implied differently, then Rove was disingenuous.



#4 Milbank, in full Elmer Fudd mode, sputters about the alleged "RATS" ad in the 2000 Bush Gore campaign

Yes, and a Hillary ad put a child in pajamas which had "NIG" on them. RATS and NIG were never stories; were, instead, examples of media (with Milbank front and center) choosing sides and promoting one candidate over another. Milbank quotes Rove: "Our defense was the truth -- we thought it was an accident", and offers no factual rebuttal to Rove's simple assertion. There never was a story: there was only media speculation and sensationalism.



#5 Milbank sneers about Rove's characterization of Cheney's selection as VP

Milbank offers no factual rebuttal to counter Rove's assertion it is "far-fetched" that Cheney engineered his own selection. Neither Rove nor Milbank are covered in glory.

First, if Rove had no new information on Cheney's selection as VP, then Rove's inclusion of "far-fetched" speculation in the book seems illogical. However, maybe we can give Rove a tiny break, as he is an amateur author/ghosted author.

Second, Milbank supposedly IS a professional writer. If a professional writer has no new information, why include the Cheney-as-VP tidbit in a WaPo article which is already compressed by a word limit? Was Milbank merely searching for another opportunity to sneer? Apparently. Is this the best Milbank can do in however many words he has available in his hit job, and whilst having Rove's entire book as material? Apparently. Weak tea.

#6 Milbank sneers: "Rove didn't find it far-fetched to blame a Gore aide for leaking word of Bush's DUI"

"Blame" is a mischaracterization by Milbank; is either incompetent and/or deceptive. Rove is speculating, clearly says he is speculating, and gives his reasons for suspecting Chris Lehane. Politico has quotes from Rove's book.



#7 Milbank disagrees with Rove's characterization that Bush' education policy was a great policy success.

I'm not on top of this issue, probably agree with Milbank, but also am not interested in delving into the facts of this. Milbank attempts to rebut Rove via noting that the education policy is now being rewritten. Straw man. Rewriting the policy does not equate to the 2001 education policy being a failure. Milbank is maddeningly incompetent: even when he might be correct, he fails to make his case, and he either cluelessly or disingenuously erects straw men which unnecessarily damage his own credibility.



#8 Milbank sneers about Rove's characterization of the "My Pet Goat" moment as Bush "trying to project calm"

What am I missing? Bush was obviously shocked; was obviously trying to project calm. Where was Rove wrong? What other explanation exists? Milbank does not quote Rove saying Bush made the best choice. He only quotes Rove explaining Bush' motivation. What am I missing? Other than spewing maximum venom, what is Milbank trying to accomplish here?



#9 Milbank sneers about Rove's comments re Plame investigation

Milbank has no facts. Rove, though heavily investigated, was neither brought to trial nor convicted. Milbank can only sneer. It's all he's got.



I score this fight: Rove 7, Milbank 2. Even when I score a Milbank victory, as in #7, Milbank nevertheless displays amazing ability to discredit himself. Scoring the entire book would yield a result which would be something like this: Rove 98, Milbank 2.

Mocking midsummer trades for 40-Man Roster crunched Texas Rangers

But, first:

Spring Training Games Begin!

Photos Colorized by uniform fan Larry Bodnovich, courtesy of Uni-Watch.

Rube Marquard and Chief Meyers in Brooklyn plaid.

John McGraw and Chicago's Frank Chance.

Notice the semi seersucker look of McGraw's uniform. The NYG also wore some plaid.

Lot's of teams wore very dark road uniforms, as Chance in this photo.

Post 2010 Season Texas Rangers Rule 5 Eligibles

Method #1 for alleviating Rangers' 40-Man Roster crunch:

trade pitching prospects who do not throw 95 mph. Examples: Moscoso, Kiker, Kirkland, Boscan, for either

A) major league role players, or

B) low level minor league prospects who will not soon be added to any 40 man rosters.

Method #2 for alleviating 40-Man Roster crunch:

trade highest value prospects for highest value major leaguers.

Roy Oswalt, anyone? Roy is my wild speculation. Here's why:

A. Astros need to restock farm system; Rangers can do that for them.

B. Rangers President Nolan Ryan and Pitching Coach Mike Maddux are both familiar with Oswalt from then AA Round Rock: Maddux coached Oswalt during Oswalt's breakthrough season in the minors.

C. Ryan has friendly contacts inside the Astros organization.

Oswalt to Rangers makes sense all around. The only things stopping it are: the emotional bond which Astros fans have with Oswalt; Oswalt will turn 34 this season, adding to the risk for the Rangers. However, I say Astros fans would appreciate seeing Oswalt go to an emerging winning team -- as opposed to seeing Oswalt suffer through a string of 86-loss seasons in Houston.

I am always saying: keep the high value prospects ~ think big ~ be patient ~ let the high value prospects have every chance to develop into something special. However, if the Rangers offense displays improved patience at the plate during April, May, June (which would indicate the offense has potential to be an offense which can produce runs during the playoffs), then the Rangers actually do have the ammunition to go get both a Zack Greinke (the best pitcher in baseball?), and a Roy Oswalt, and still maintain a strong minor league system.


photo by AP

Further, the Rangers could combo grab super speedy defender CF Michael Bourn of the Astros: a 4th year RH hitter who had a .354 OBP and 61 steals in 606 ABs from the lead off spot in 2009. And Bourn has leadership qualities.

Bourn is valued by the Astros. However, the Rangers can offer a lot.

Here's how all that could look:

Greinke for Holland, Smoak, Font, Boscan

Oswalt and Bourn for Hunter, Harrison, Ogando, Kiker, Main, Houston native David Murphy, and Engle Beltre.

With what does that leave the Rangers? A LOT:

Rangers Starters:

Greinke, Oswalt, Harden, Feldman, Colby Lewis

Rangers Bullpen:

Francisco, Wilson, Feliz, Ray, Oliver, O'Day, Nippert

Rangers Minor League Pitching:

McCarthy, Moscoso, Mathis, Strop, Beltre, Hurley, Gutierrez, Beavan, MarPez, Scheppers, Kirkland, Phillips, Wieland, and more.

It pains me to think of high value prospects such as Holland, Ogando, Main, Font, Smoak, and Engle Beltre going out the door. Those are as high quality prospects as exist in all of baseball. However, somebody truly does have to go out the door.

Even in this scenario, the Rangers would maintain high value prospects in the system: MarPez, Scheppers, and more. The Rangers would have acquired the best pitcher in baseball + a grizzled Oswalt to provide leadership in do or die playoff situations + a speedy defender in CF who can lead off as a RH hitter against LH pitchers and who can be a weapon on the basepaths. Rangers CF, with both Borbon and Bourn on the case, would go from a question mark to one of the strengths of the team. The Rangers starting rotation would go from a question mark to one of the strengths of the team. The Rangers bullpen is already a strength. Rangers defense is already a strength. The offense needs to SHOW ME maturity and consistency. However, IF the offense shows itself capable, then Greinke, Oswalt, and Bourn make the Rangers true World Championship contenders.

However, to reiterate, Method #1 remains viable: trade from the second highest tier of prospects; let Holland be the Rangers' Greinke; let Hunter be the Rangers' Oswalt; let Craig Gentry or Endy Chavez* be the Rangers' Michael Bourn. Let Harrison help in the 2010 pennant race. Let Ogando, Main, and Font continue to develop as potential star players. Enjoy the rise of Smoak and Engle Beltre. Absolutely viable.

I'm thinking the Rangers options are win/win ... with this caveat: no more trades for Brandon McCarthy types or Adam Eaton types. Those were panicky stupid trades. No more panicky stupid.

* Endy Chavez was an outstanding CF insurance acquisition by the Rangers. Kudos, Jon Daniels. By midsummer, the Rangers could easily hit Elvis Andrus lead off, hit CF Endy Chavez 9th, and roll on to the playoffs.

Photo by Sports Illustrated:
Endy Chavez reaches over the wall and brings Scott Rolen's bid for a 2 run home run back into play. Sports Illustrated's Jon Heyman called it one of the greatest post-season catches ever.

Ann McElhinney impassioned about idiot James Cameron and Avatar

`
and about indoctrination in America. This is entertainment!

Thanks to Webutante.

`

Friday Hot: Snow Venus

`

"Curvaceous, bodacious and booty-licious"

Photo courtesy Conneran family

A snowlady that Maria Conneran (pictured) and her family sculpted in front of their Rahway home.



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


In Fort Worth, winter is over. We now have warm days (60-70 degrees) and chill nights (35ish to 50ish). We will have more cold weather, yet will term it a "cold snap", and it will go away as quickly as it arrives. All gardeners will begin speculating on when the final night time freeze will occur.

You would think this weather is bliss. And it is. For another day or two, or several. Then: allergy season will begin, and my suffering will begin. In the presence of gorgeous weather: many of us will suffer. In many ways, in this location, I like the winter best. Especially Nov and Dec. There are no allergy problems during those months.

`

The dog is home!

Still sick, lethargic, taking antibiotics and anti nausea medication, but well enough to be home. Awesome!

Democrats, in their own words, on the nuclear option; plus rant roundup

`

YouTube is changing the game. Adapt or die.

Rant Roundup

MSM rally to "government is broken" meme:

Government is only "broken" b/c the MSM have rallied around the meme. Dems are not delivering what the MSM want, and therefore the MSM are thumb sucking the "government is broken" meme.


Government is not broken. What the MSM want is too far left and/or too-much-too-fast for even the Dems to rally around in sufficient numbers. Lots of Repubs are willing to be picked off by skillful Dem political action: the Maine sisters, Grassley - yet Dems have not been skillful enough to rally even Dems in sufficient numbers, much less pick off Repubs.

Cue Jack Nicholson - the left/Dems/Obama can't handle the truth about what America wants:

The left/progressives/Dems/Obama are in psychological denial: are unwilling to face the truth that the nation, by large margins, doesn't want comprehensive health care reform. It matters not that voters favor single issues which comprise parts of a comprehensive plan: voters are frightened at the thought of instituting large numbers of those single issue changes all at once - and properly so: if some or many of the changes are failures, then the nation is worse off. Voters, wisely, prefer to make fewer changes, then see how things go. It's a bitter truth for the left. Yet, it is truth, even for people who do not believe in truth. Polling numbers could not be plainer. It's not that voters don't understand: voters understand exactly, and exactly reject the comprehensive approach.

Cue John Lennon, and imagine, imagine, imagine your opponents are motivated by malevolence:

As for the meme that "wingnuts" are intentionally wrecking the nation in order to regain power: I wish I could read minds as well as the left can. It's not clear, at all, that comprehensive health care reform is the best way to go. If it was clear, then the left would not have to read minds, and could instead expend it's mental energy on destroying the feeble reasoning of those who opposed the shining light which would be comprehensive health care - yet is not, b/c of that nagging problem of it not being at all clear whether comprehensive health care will help the nation or damage the nation. If "wingnuts" are intentionally damaging the nation, then the left has no need to debate the issues. Such circumstance, for the left, would be comforting and self-validating - which is why the left keeps imagining it to be truth.

Given an opportunity to care about corruption, the left choose to fantasize about McCain's motivation:

The left's constant supposition about the right's motivation does not help the left. The attempt to read John McCain's Health Care Summit motive, i.e. "He wants revenge on Pres. Obama!", is an example. No one knows McCain's heart, therefore no one knows McCain's motive beyond what McCain represents his motive to be: duty, honor, country. OTOH, McCain's argument was in the open: the bill is untenable, partially due to corrupt deals which are built into it. McCain's argument is plain. If McCain's plain argument is plainly wrong, the left ought refute it, ought make quick work of it. Does the left ever THINK about their arguments? Here's their argument: when McCain points to inarguable corruption inside the bill - how dare he?! He's only pointing to corruption b/c he hates Obama!

Limbaugh = expert at marketing an intellectual and entertaining product:

The use of Limbaugh -- to justify accusing the right of malicious obstruction -- is either ignorant or deceptive. Limbaugh provoked: "I want him to fail!", yet Limbaugh later made his meaning clear: Limbaugh wants Obama to fail to institute Obama's policies b/c Limbaugh knows Obama's policies cannot succeed. Limbaugh was being provocative, yet was also being intellectually honest: it would be dishonest for Limbaugh to hope for the success of a hopeless cause. When the magazine asked Limbaugh: "Do you hope Pres. Obama succeeds?", what was Limbaugh to do? He chose to be intellectually honest, and he chose - for entertainment and marketing purposes - to be provocative. Limbaugh never chose to wish bad things for America, never chose to obstruct for obstruction's sake. The argument that he did is both a losing argument and another example of fantasy.

Partisanship is good:

It's a feature, not a bug.

Related: Democrat Dan Gerstein, a former staffer to Joe Lieberman, looks at the Dems' health care dilemma with clear eyes.
`

Victoria Jackson: There's a Communist Living in the White House

`


h/t Big Hollywood

Ms. Jackson's lyrics remind of something I wrote regarding a poll question result from Britain's The Economist, i.e.

"85% tea partiers believe Obama is a socialist compared to 60% Republicans and 34% of all Americans."

I wrote:

As much as being a comment on Obama, this poll question result is a comment on definition of socialism. Tea Parties are about small government, decreased spending, tax cuts. A group which is heavily focused on limited government has a more easily accessible line of demarcation for "socialism", than groups which are not heavily focused on limited government.


Some of the poll result IS about Obama himself: his grandparents were Marxists, his mother was Marxist, his father was Marxist, his stepfather was Marxist, his surrogate father - Frank Marshall Davis - was Marxist, Barack Obama was openly Marxist while in college, Rev. Wright (i.e. the replacement surrogate father) is Marxist, Black Liberation Theology is Marxist, William Ayers is Marxist, Alice Palmer is Marxist, early days Obama was one of the few political candidates to be involved with and supported by the Marxist "New Party".


Smoke. Fire. Suspicion of socialist sympathies is not unreasonable -- including in light of Barack's 2001 radio interview* criticizing the Warren Court for interpreting the Constitution as strictly being a document of "negative liberties" which restrict government, as opposed to the Constitution saying (in Obama's preferred formulation) "what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf."


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The left does freak out at mention of either "socialism" or "communism" (though "communism" does make Victoria Jackson's song more fun). Because fair dissenting arguments can be made about proper definitions of socialism and communism, and b/c there is no need to bog a conversation down in such esoterica, therefore it's maybe best to moderate the use of "socialism" and "communism" as characterizations. Mary Katherine Ham has a point (summarizing from memory): I don't call people Socialists, b/c that is too incendiary. I call them scary statists. If someone wants to contest the legitimacy of the characterization "scary statists": that someone is forced to address the issues; is not able to hijack an issue conversation into a vocabulary conversation.



I do argue that "Marxist" is an accurate characterization of Barack Obama and of those who have historically surrounded him. At Occidental College, Barack Obama was proudly and openly Marxist. Marxism is characterized by

1. a belief that history is characterized by the struggle between social classes

2. a critique of capitalism in which the bourgeoisie dominate the proletariat

3. advocacy of proletariat revolution (now represented by advocacy of a political correctness which will weaken and create the collapse of American culture and society).

The above is an accurate description of Barack Obama's worldview re "redistributing income". The proletariat revolution (#3) will occur as the dispossessed demand their "rights"; as the bourgeoisie reject their prior view of the dispossessed as "the other", and embrace a view of the dispossessed as fellow human beings who have been historically oppressed by the guilty bourgeoisie (even if that oppression were unconscious, the bourgeoisie are guilty).

Related:

The History of Political Correctness - Watch more Videos at Vodpod.

Link to video

Walking an old dog, part 2

Update 4: the dog is home! Still sick, is lethargic, is taking anti biotics and anti nausea medication, but is well enough to come home. Awesome.

Update 3: the dog is not out of the woods, yet looks to be doing a bit better. Hooray!

Update 2: When the dog is sick, one doesn't feel like blogging new posts.

Update
And, just like that: Hoss is sick with pancreatitis. Because we caught it early, there's a strong chance he will recover from it. We should know in 2-3 days. I'll update as appropriate.

The sun is low. I'm standing atop a small hill in a park, hitting three 4 iron shots towards our vehicle, after which the dog and I will go home. I normally hit one shot and move on. The walks are more about exercise; less about golf. However, I've swung poorly today, therefore am deploying all golf balls in a last ditch attempt to take a couple of good swings on this day.


There's a little car which is parked only 25 yards behind me. Marijuana smoke wafts from the slightly cracked window. A woman is in the driver's seat, probably another person is in the car - I don't want to stare too hard. I wouldn't have come this close, except I need this flat spot atop this hill as a launching pad for 4 irons.


Suddenly, I hear a bit of yelling. The woman is emerging from the car and is yelling at a terrier which is now on the ground and headed towards Hoss. She fears dog hostility ... which, thankfully, does not happen ... and how could it(?): the terrier is mellowed out on second-hand marijuana smoke! The terrier is exactly like Cheech Marin: Hey, black dog which is 5 times my size! Howya doin, buddy? I'm feelin kinda groovy, heh heh.

Hoss, these days, is a very polite. The dogs hang out for a bit. Buttocks are sniffed. Tails slowly wag.

I walk after my 4 iron shots. I did not hit them particularly well, but maybe did hit them a bit better. Especially the second shot: maybe I shifted weight to the left side more effectively. Hoss dutifully follows along. End of the day.

Cheech Marin demonstrates advanced caddying:

Related:

White Christmas in Fort Worth

Walking an old dog

Eulogy for a smart and loyal dog

Adventures with dogs

Two gay guys comment on figure skating dresses

`
Bitchy fun:

Why do the women's costumes all do weird things around the boobs? Why can't the men's costumes do the same thing with the ass area? That would be an instance where we could get behind illusion netting.

Read it all.


h/t Althouse, whose husband shot relaxing video of groomed cross country ski trails at Blue Mounds State Park.

I've been to that state park, to tour Cave of the Mounds with Youngest Nephew (aka the gun owner, sports uniform designer, baseball champ, and fearsome rock chunker and Iran liberator) and his elementary school class. Aren't Youngest Nephew and I fancy to have been there?

When we visited Blue Mounds State Park, the weather was gorgeous. I'm good luck for Wisconsin weather. The one time I've been there when the weather was bad, the weather was actually good and fun. The other times I've been there - even if the forecast was bad - my arrival coincided with surprising good weather. Wisconsin should adopt me as the official State of Wisconsin Weather Good Luck Charm.




Returning to gay men: if you like Hamlet, then you, especially, will appreciate the value of having a sassy gay friend

Speaking of Hamlet: I love Shakespeare's Hamlet, via Facebook News Feed, by Sarah Schmelling. Try this link. Or this link.

And, skimming through Althouse, was reminded of May 2008, when I caucused for Hillary. A funny night hangin with Dems, and maybe the best vote I've ever cast. If Hillary were President, her foreign policy would not be angering and frightening our allies in such ... dramatic ... fashion. Hillary would have ruthless instinct for protecting and defending the U.S.A. Kudos, Hillary.


`