Maybe the USA Soccer Team Wasn't That Good

Signs that Team USA was maybe not so good:

1. Prior to the game against us Ghana had scored 2 goals all World Cup, both on penalty kicks; they scored two goals against us.
2. How many goals in the first 0-20 minutes are we going to give up? 
3. Other teams seem to have "scorers".  And by that I mean players that just seem to bury the ball in the back of the net when they have a good chance; how many great chances did the USA waste?  With at-em balls (right at the goalie) or just wild misses?
4. We tie England on a fluke shot on goal that hit their golie square on.  England then gets their lunch handed to them 4-1 by the Germans.  Maybe that tie against England wasn't that great after all.
5. In the elimination game against Ghana the coach made an early first half substitution, all but admitting that the USA coach started the wrong guy.  Plus, after a half time formation adjustment the USA played in the Ghana end all second half.  As opposed to the first half, where the Ghana team was playing in the USA defensive end even though Ghana was in a supposed defensive formation.

USA! USA! USA!

First the USA vs. UK highlights Legos-style:

And a great front page:

Fort Worth PD to Attempt to Curb Officer Drinking and Driving

Yep.  The above is correct.  Forth Worth, Texas' Police Department is going to attempt to curb its officer's problem with drinking and driving.  That's how the headline reads from local DFW TV station CBS11's website.  They're just going to try to curb it.  Just lessen it.  Eliminate it?  Heck no. C'mon, let's not set goals that are too high.

Dallas Mayor Opposes Protesting Arizonza "Show Me Your Papers" Law

Mayor Leppert of our fair city, Dallas, Texas, is opposed to the Dallas City Council officially protesting Arizona's new "Show Me Your Papers" law.  What other things might Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert be opposed to?  How about Hispanic votes should he choose to run again? 

Spurs vs. Phoenix (Texas vs. Arizona)

How can a city and state get it so right (San Antonio, Texas) and one city and state get it so, so wrong (Phoenix, Arizona). 

On so many levels.

Number of Presidents, Texas - 2 (I only count native born Texans, which are LBJ and Dwight D. Eisenhower, not the Yankees, H.W. Bush and W. Bush); AZ - 0.

Number of NBA championships, San Antonio, TX - 4; Houston, TX - 2; Phoenix AZ - 0.

Number of laws offensive to Hispanics (keep in mind that each state has at a minimum about a 30% Hispanic population): Texas - 0; AZ - 1.

Way to go AZ (sarcasm intended here).  And way to go Texas (sarcasm not intended here).  Seriously, for all the different ways the GOP have tried to screw up Texas at least the Texan GOP'ers haven't decided to offend one of the largest voting blocks in Texas.  Of course, if Texas State Rep. Donna Riddle has anything to say about it we'll have a similar, intolerant law passed in Texas.  For lots of different reasons I'd like to see Gov. Rick Perry address this. 

Needless to say the immigration issue is a serious one.  But, to sports-minded people like me, the Spurs/Suns series is a big deal, albeit a much, much more minor deal than the immigration issue.  But, what a great coincidence - TX vs AZ.  Politics meets sports yet again.  I wonder if Manu Ginobli or Tony Parker will make sure to carry their visas everywhere they go in AZ in case they're asked for proof of citizenship (yes, I know the law's not effect now).  Tim Duncan was born in the Virgin Islands.  What does that make him?  And how will Eva Longoria "prove" that she's actually an American citizen?  All the Spurs, and their entourage, should, maybe, out of protest, wear their birth certificates, ID's, passports and visas around their necks to show and prove and protest their right to be in these, the United States of America.  

Oh, by the way, which was one of the last states to aknowledge that Martin Luther King, Jr. deservered a holiday for his contribution to us?  Oh, that's right, it was the state that keeps on discriminating in the post civil rights movement era, a state called AZ.  Way to go AZ.  Way to keep the trend going.

But, as usual I digress, AZ will play TX.  The Suns will play the Spurs.  Phoenix vs. San Antonio.  Who do you think has got it right?

So I Guess I'm Not Going to Arizona Anytime Soon

The AZ governor says that their new illegal immigration law won't lead to racial profiling.

Who are they going to stop and ask for their papers?  Blonde and blue eyed people?  People that look like illegal Canadian immigrants?  I can hear it now, "What's this all aboot?!?"  "I'm not your buddy, guy!"  "I'm not your guy, friend!"  "I'm not your friend, buddy!"  If there's two things I hate it's intolerance and Canadians.

Of course I'm kidding.

But, all kidding aside, because this is serious, AZ's new law may can lead down a serious, perilous, slippery slope of intolerances.  For example...

They're just going to ask Hispanics for their papers.  Maybe the armed police will just go door to door to all the residences that have Hispanic surnames listed as renters/owners.  Then, after they've asked for their papers, to make it easier next time, they'll have all Hispanics wear the picture of a taco or Our Lady of Guadalupe on their clothes to identify them as legal.

And then, AZ can just have all the "legal" Hispanics live in the same neighborhood, like a suburb, or apartment complexes or maybe ghettos.

Or better yet AZ can just have all Hispanics wear a bracelet with a number on it.  Odd number = legal.  Even number = illegal.  Just for the ease of the law enforcement officers.

Or even better yet, since they (the Hispanics) could maybe somehow rid themselves of the bracelets, maybe AZ will just pass a law that Hispanics have to get a tattoo on their wrist with the above referenced odd or even numbered designations indicating who is in fact here in the USA legally and who is not.

And keep in mind some Hispanic families have lived in the region since before it was a state.

And those with the even numbers (the "illegals"), when found, can just be put on buses or even better, trains, and shipped off to who knows where.

Way to go AZ.

I'm not going to lie, when I heard that this law was passed it was a punch to my gut.  But, it's also a gut-check.

The AZ law is, in my humble opinion, violative of not only the 14th Amendment but also the 4th Amendment of our Constitution for a number of reasons (reasons I will not go into right now but, trust me, it's unconstitutional).  Hopefully, it will be struck down as such in short order.

Fundamentally though, it smacks of intolerance and ease.  Not all Hispanics are illegal but, AZ would, simply and in an intolerant gesture, subject all Hispanics to the potential indignity of being asked, "for their papers," regardless of whether a person was born here in the USA or not.  We are, last I checked, a nation made up of immigrants (unless you're a Native American).  Of course, at times, this great nation has treated immigrants with reckless intolerance.  This is just another example.  Ask Italian or German or Japanese or Irish immigrants or their progeny about the indignities they faced in the last century or so.  There are African "immigrants" but, I don't include them in the previous list because their experience, with few exceptions and in large measure, and for obvious reasons, is unique.

But, as usual, I digress.

Again, I'll not be visiting AZ anytime soon if I can help it.

And of course, SNL, in the second "story" below incapsulates how asinine AZ's law is:


And as usual I welcome your comment.

Remember I Said November 2010 Is a Ways Away?

After health insurance reform passed the GOP'ers declared that they would use its passage as a rallying point to flip one if not both chambers of Congress during the midterm elections this year in November.  And I recall pointing out that there was a heck of a lot of time left until the midterms and finance reform was next on the list.

And now the GOP is "digging in" to oppose finance reform.  Really?  Do they think opposing finance reform is a good idea, especially in light of all the terrible press coming out as a result of the Goldman Sachs investigation?  Or do they just understand who butters their toast?  And don't get me wrong, the table was at least partially set for the whole financial mess when Bill Clinton signed the law repealing Glass-Steagall.  Reinstating Glass-Steagall should be number one on the list of reforms considered.

But, as usual I digress.

Either way, (whether the GOP really thinks the financial status quo is OK or they owe their benefactors on Wall Street) you have to admire the GOP for sticking to their guns as the party of no.  Even if it means alienating voters before the midterm elections.

Check This Out

Great, interesting post on another blog posits, "Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black" and the president was white.  The piece is by Tim Wise.

One of the Most Expensive Scratching Posts Ever?

Was Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) In the Movie "Hannibal"

Judge for yourself:

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) - above

Was that really Gary Oldman playing the above character in "Hannibal" or was it McConnell?

Poor (In Every Sense of the Word) Iceland

First, Iceland's economy collapses sending shock waves around the world, now this volcano there blows it's top.  To say that things have not been going well for Iceland recently would be like saying Sandra Bullock's marriage has been just a little shaky recently.

Weird Children's Show Stuff From Years Past, #5

Looney Tunes, of course, has to be included.  Here's Bugs Bunny introducing kids to a great piece of music, while at the same time you have the extreme violence (remember again, Elmer Fudd is trying to KILL Bugs Bunny) and cross dressing:

Weird Children's Show Stuff From Years Past, #4

Tom and Jerry.  Itchy and Scratchy have nothing on them except Itchy and Scratchy cartoons show what the actual outcome of the violence would be.  Violence galore.  Some drunnkeness.  Oh, and throw in some racist stereotyping just for good measure:

Weird Children's Show Stuff From Years Past, #3

Oscar the Grouch is a weird character to begin with.  See Dave Chappelle's stand up from Killing Them Softly.  But why is he telling kids how great trash is?  And did he sing, "rusty trombone?"

Weird Children's Show Stuff From Years Past, #2

More from the Muppet Show, here's a drum battle between Animal and Buddy Rich (like any kid would know who the heck Buddy Rich was).  And the lesson?  If you lose your drum battle, resort to violence:

Weird Children's Show Stuff From Years Past, #1

Remember the Muppet Show?  I know I sure do.  And I used to enjoy the musical numbers, I really liked the ones with just the Muppets.  Here's one that I always remembered.  Probably because it was so freakin' dark, especially for a young kiddo.  What they heck were they showing us?!?!  Were they trying to scare the crap out of us?:


(it's a cover of Buffalo Springfield's song For What It's Worth)

A Small Sign That Maybe Civilization as We Know It Is Not About to End

The MTV show "The Hills" was cancelled.  I teared up a little bit when I read this news.  Not because I was sad but, because it brought a glimmer of hope for our future.  A little hope for our future is better than none at all.

Stay Classy Tea Partiers

Check out this class act, the Tea Partier in the tie, that mocks a man (by making it rain?!?!?!) suffering from Parkinson's disease, also notice the Tea Partier on the left of the shot with the baby in the baby carrier appearing noticably uncomfortable:

And I know some will say that the above is just one bad apple.  There are a multitude of examples of Tea Party gatherings being supposedly marred by a few "bad apples" that don't reflect the true views of their movement.  I wonder why the Tea Party movement attracts so many "bad apples"?  The answer to that question probably says a lot about the Tea Party movement. 

Here's my answer to why the Tea Party movement attracts so many "bad apples": the Tea Party movement, at least in part, preaches a politics of fear of change, fear of the different, and just plain fear.  If, in part, the Tea Party continues to preach fear, other fear-preaching groups and individuals will continue to be attacted to the Tea Party.  Exactly how many bad apples have to be caught on video or photographed before it's decided that maybe the whole barrel is tainted?

"I'm Not Saying, I'm Just Saying"

More on the politics of the day (especially since lousy Kansas destroyed my bracket).  I know the GOP and Tea Partiers and rubbing their hands together getting ready for a huge gain in one or both chambers of our fair Congress.  But, 8 months is a long time.  Look at recent history, for example.  Don't forget, McCain was polling great against both potential Democratic presidential nominees, Obama and Clinton, in late March and early April of 2008 in key batteground states.  Let me be clear, I think the Dems will lose seats in the House for sure and maybe even the Senate.  However, it may not be as bad for Dems and good for GOP'ers.   

Things can and will change.  Voters attention will shift away from health insurance reform by Nov. 2010, trust me.  Surely Glenn Beck will come up with another political crisis at which he can point his fanatical Tea Party followers by Nov. 2010.  And don't forget that Tea Party candidates may run and split the GOP votes in some midterm elections.  Look at what happened in the upstate New York special election in 2008, a Dem won a seat that been held by the GOP since Reconstruction.  Financial regulation reform is the next political fight to be had and it should be a doozy.  Who knows what will be at the top of voters' lists as THE important issue when Nov. 2010 rolls around.  Memories fade.  It's only March 2010 not November 2010.  8 months till the midterm elections is a long, long, long time, especially in politics.  To quote a good friend of mine, "I'm not saying, I'm just saying."

Who Said Change Was Going To Be Easy

Health insurance reform passed.  At least some form of it.  Here's a decent synopsis of what's in the bill.  It's not what ultra-liberals wanted, a single-payer, run by the government, health insurance option available to all people regardless of income level.  It's definitely not what conservatives wanted, which was to maintain the status quo in which 30+ million Americans were without healthcare. 

Remember, conservatives have been against every major piece of progressive, "liberal" legislation in the last one hundred years including, but, not limited to, labor laws (including mandatory maximum work weeks, establishment of a minimum wage and every increase since then for example), social security, disability, medicare, medicaid.  I'm sure there's more but, that's all that I can think of off the top of my head.  Tea partiers must be besides themselves.  And will Limbaugh really leave the country now?

Obama ran on change and this legislation is certainly that.  Health insurance legislation was one the cornerstones of Obama's change platform.  The Dems won the presidency and both chambers of Congress on the coattails of Obama's pledge of change.  And when a party wins both the presidency and the Congress you get change.  And then you get a political backlash against that change.  It almost happens like clockwork, especially in a president's first term.  In fact only 3 presidents since Reconstruction have netted seats in midterm elections (FDR-first midterm gain, Clinton-second midterm gain and W.-first midterm gain; I attritbute W.'s midterm success in 2002 to the goodwill directed towards him and the GOP in the aftermath of 9/11, but, that's just my take).  Let's see what happens next.  Maybe the Dems lose the House or Senate in the midterm elections.  I certainly doubt they lose both.  Dodd's financial reform bill just flew through the Senate committee and is headed to the Senate floor for debate.  More change on the way?  Who could possibly be against financial rules changes in the wake of "too big to fail?"

But, as usual, I digress.  So there will be changes in health insurance but not as much as some wanted and way more than others desired.  That compromises were made should surprise no one.  Don't forget some of the definitions of compromise: 1. To arrive at a settlement by making concessions; 2. To reduce the quality, value, or degree of something.