Tuesday, June 28, 2011

Michelle Bachman even with Romney in Iowa poll - so what?

So she is even with Romney in some Iowa poll - so what?  The primary is way off, lots could happen, its a caucus primary too, and success in Iowa means little for national fund raising, and running for national office is all about fund raising and money.  Here are some crazy things Michelle Bachman has said.  She obviously has a thing about gays and gay marriage.  I wonder what her views are on other topics?  She has a bunch of children, foster children, kinda like Angelina Jolie only more so.  Is this a family or a residential center for in need of treatment children?  sorry, that was cruel.  Bachman is great with the one liners, great with saying things to excite the conservative fringe.  She is even with Romney in Iowa...so what?  its a long nomination and Romney has the money, the fund raising ability.  The big fear is that these nut candidates will turn off voters when the republicans finally select a candidate, like Romney.  And that the nut supporters will not turn out and vote for the romney-esque nominee.  I am assuming it will be Romney.  The country is split into Urban and Rural voters:  Bachman attracts the rural voters.  the republicans need a candidate who can do that, but also reach out to some suburban and urban voters - that and some funny ballot counts in Florida.  Romney is the closest thing to George HW Bush (#41) that the republicans have, but i think they prefer #43 to #41.  

Tuesday, June 07, 2011

Plantation loses another slave

ok, i know, i went overboard.  Terrelle Pryor is not a slave. but, everyone knows that NCAA football (esp div 1, 1a, 2) are to the NFL what the minor leagues are to baseball.  Only the football players dont get paid, and the minor leaguers get paid.  of course, football players get an education....sure.  If they can handle academics, if they dont get injured.

Look at the rosters of the NFL - they list the colleges of the players, not that they graduated, but they "attended." of course some graduate, but i can tell you what the average chance of graduating is for NCAA football players (less than 50%) and the chance they will play in the NFL (less than 5%).

Majority of college football players dont graduate, dont play for the NFL, and deal with injuries the rest of their lives.

So Terrelle is out, after getting free tattoos in exchange for signed jerseys, and cashed in bowl rings.  and he wont graduate.  If the NFL ever settles the strike he will play, eventually, and make millions.  of course, those millions will have to stay with him for life - what else can he do?

There should be a category of football teams in the NCAA that have paid players, say, maybe 75 programs.  the top programs.  i dont know how to select them.  maybe ask for applications?  have separate rules for paid NCAA players and their colleges?

who makes money off college football players?  the colleges, the networks, stock owners, advertisers.  the colleges also get additional applications, more contributions from alumni.  the only people not making money are the players, and half of them dont even get a degree.

I mean come on, a black football player, with injuries, doesnt get drafted by NFL, maybe does graduate with a degree in fitness, or sports, or health or something - what kind of job does he get?  Black man with a vague college degree, has some injuries, "football player" type, good luck.

My eldest son once had a biology professor tell him to change his major from biology, because biology is a hard major - he knew my son played football, soooooo, dumb football player, change your major, to something simple that you dumb football players can learn......thats how they are treated.

At Slippery Rock University we just had couple of players drafted by NFL, we also have a coach with a PhD, he is a tenured professor, and a graduation rate higher than average, over 65% (which is good).  SRU is division II football, which means the players are really student athletes.  and we have had some really talented players.  and they are really good students too.

but with Ohio State and D-I football, the competition is fierce, Jim Tressel has to recruit nationwide, has to keep his players, has to get to bowl games, generate lots of income for the univ, it is very big business, and he has run a clean program except for some free tattoos,  i mean come on,  - why doesnt jim apologize, take a cut in pay or something, and get on with the next season.  BTW, i think Terrell needs another year before going in draft - couldnt he apologize, get the tattoo burned off, maybe miss a couple games, and get on with his life.  maybe he could even stay at OSU long enough to graduate.

I KNOW i could get some grad students, have them brainstorm, and come up with a better arrangement than exists now for these semi pro players.  As it is, its a sham, phoney.  Lets fix this!

and Jim Tressel is welcome to coach at SRU as soon as our coach retires.  and Terrell could play out his final eligbility at SRU, we'd love to have him - he has political science major written all over him.

Monday, June 06, 2011

iraq withdrawal: here we go again, JUST LEAVE!

Even as the American military winds down its eight-year war in Iraq, commanders are bracing for what they fear could be the most dangerous remaining mission: getting the last troops out safely.
The resurgent threat posed by militants was underscored Monday when rockets slammed into a military base in eastern Baghdad, killing six service members in the most deadly day for American forces here since 2009. 
OK Here it is:  leave everything there, bring the troops home. the strykers in this picture are beat to crap, driven more miles than designed, the cost of repair too great, costs too much to fly them home. just leave the tanks, the vehicles, everything, in Iraq - disable them somehow, cheaply, quickly.  bring the troops home.  Do what we have done so far in pacifying areas: engage in bribery, payoffs, pay insurgents not to shoot at the troops.  Honestly, i could assemble a group of graduate students to come up with a withdrawal policy, that would protect our troops, be cost effective,  and quick.  this picture above is nuts:  we dont want the vehicles, the equipment - just leave it there, disable the weapons systems, blow up the remaining bombs and  ordinance - everyone knows (yes, everyone in the Pentagon) that our Army and Marine corps is broke, troops exhausted, too many tours of duty, the equipment is crapped out, obsolete, lasted much longer than designed, - our attention should be on manufacturing new equipment that we need for our new wars (small, elite units, temporary conflicts, quick response), helping exhausted troops to recover, recruiting new troops, and caring for our injured, caring for the families who have lost members.  Who are these reporters who  come up with such lame news stories?  besides, we will always have some troops in Iraq, that was the idea all along.  why withdraw all troops when we have such a great strategic location?  Look on a map - we are edged in between Syria and Iran, with our troops, thats like Syria or Iran having troops in canada and mexico, why would they ever withdraw them?  So yeah, we are never going to withdraw all the troops, and further withdrawals should be people only, leave the beat up equipment there its not worth bringing it home.

Sunday, June 05, 2011

way to go Israel! Undermine anti Syrian protests, support the Syrian gov!

Israel opened fire on pro Palestinian demonstrators, who were attempting to cross the "border" of Syrian and Golan.  Obviously, there are demonstrations against the Syrian government by Syrians, and the gov has brutally suppressed these demonstrations, killing hundreds of their own citizens.  nothing could undermine the anti gov efforts in Syria more than Israel killing Syrians - rally round the flag, rally round the government, rally round Pres. Assad in standing up to the Israelis.

the anti Assad demonstrations in Syria are good for Israel, just think if the syrian gov was overthrown, Assad is out, and a new gov is in that would recognize Israel, negotiate for some peace treaty including the disputed Golan area, it would be to Israels advantage.

but killing Syrians only increases support for Assads regime.  Israel is self defeating itself.  Poor leadership.  israel is its own worst enemy - some Israelis understand this, but the leaders dont.

sarah palin and American history

She's done it again: Sarah Palin insisted Sunday that history was on her side when she claimed that Paul Revere's famous Massachusetts ride was intended to warn both British soldiers and his fellow colonists.
"You realize that you messed up about Paul Revere, don't you?" "Fox News Sunday" anchor Chris Wallace asked the potential 2012 presidential candidate.
"I didn't mess up about Paul Revere," replied Palin, a paid contributor to the network.
"Part of his ride was to warn the British that were already there. That, hey, you're not going to succeed. You're not going to take American arms. You are not going to beat our own well-armed persons, individual, private militia that we have," she added. "He did warn the British."
The British were marching to Lexington and then Concord, they had two ways to getting there from there HQ in Boston, the long way around the bay, or across the bay on boats.  depending on their route, they would arrive in Lexington earlier if they went by boat across the bay, rather than march around it.  Paul Revere's job, along with other riders (yes there were others) was to alert other "sons of liberty" members (a domestic terrorist group) which route the british were taking.  He rode a race horse named Brown Beauty, a borrowed horse, because he didnt own his own horse.  Horses were expensive, only rich people had horses to ride, esp horses like brown beauty .  Farmers had horses to help with farm work, they didnt "ride" them.  Revere wasnt a farmer, he had no horses, he was a relatively unsuccessful tin-iron monger, living in a small house with a shit load of children.  He was stopped by a british patrol, because he was out late (after curfew) and he was obviously riding a race horse (the soldiers recognized brown beauty, because they would bet on her in races).  They took Brown Beauty, and revere went on ahead on foot.  he ended up at Lexington mass, just before the british arrived.  there were two other members of the Sons of Liberty at lexington (they didnt live there).  the Lexington Militia was drilling on the town square when the british arrived, they were ordered to disperse.  they did.  their guns were not loaded, since they were muzzle loaders, and the powder would get wet if it stayed in the rod too long, esp in the morning with morning dew.  A shot rang out - still a mystery.  the british troops started firing, oddly enough, they either marched with loaded muskets (which would have been strange) or they stopped prior to entering Lexington and loaded.  It was not policy for the british to march with loaded weapons, or to have loaded weapons among colonists (they were british citizens, not an enemy, they were not at war).  the lexington militia members who were shot were mostly shot in the back, they were walking away when the british opened fire.  who fired the first shot?  There were "outside agitators" from Boston, revere and some other sons of liberty, among them Sam Adams (a real prick) - could THEY have fired the shot?  did they fire a shot to start an incident?  Could revere have been a catalyst behind the lexington massacre, or sam adams, who wanted to start a war, so the extent that they would fire a shot and cause the british to open fire?  Sarah Palin has no idea whatsoever about Paul Revere, jesus, i mean, few people do, most  history books are inaccurate, but academicians have research revere and sam adams and the whole lexington and concord events, and the conclusion is that the British march was stupid, unnecessary, nothing was accomplished by the british, the Lexington militia was not poised for trouble, the initial shots were an accident, no british officer gave the order to shoot, but there was a mysterious "shot" that started the firing, and it DID NOT come from either the lexington militia, or the british.  that is for sure.  My opinion? Sam Adams shot a round off while hiding off the village green, or maybe it was Revere, with the intention of forcing the british to open fire.  

Thursday, June 02, 2011

Sarah Palin fires shot at Mitt Romney at Bunker Hill

"In my opinion, any mandate coming from government is not a good thing, so obviously ... there will be more the explanation coming from former governor, Romney, on his support for government mandates," Palin told reporters today.  She was referring to Romney's health care plan for massachusetts, when he was governor.  actually, its a good plan, better than anything else that could have been done.  it provides for universal coverage, everyone is required to be covered, there is a "tax" for those who are not covered, and it relies primarily (if not exclusively) on private sector docs and health care providers.  Mandates?  Does sarah mean mandates like: seat belt laws in cars?  education for children? clean drinking water?  Did she ever hear of the Tragedy of the Commons, where individual action results in harm for the public interest, which is why we HAVE mandates in the first place.  and BTW, the big battle of Boston was not Bunker Hill, it was Breeds Hill, the Americans kick british ass on Breeds Hill, then retreated to Bunker Hill. it was only when reinforcements arrived that they left Bunker Hill and retreated.  to this day, seriously, the british regiment that fought at Breeds Hill is still honored for their courage (or stupidity) charging up a steep hill against intrenched pissed off Americans who shot them down like fowl in the barnyard (sorry for comparison- James Longstreet at Fredericksburg when Gen Lee asked him if the union charge up hill would succeed, longstreet said, "even a chicken couldnt survive our crossfire" or something like that).

Romney is the only hope of the Republicans to have a rational, credible candidate that could somehow put the Republican party back together again.  I dont think even Romney could win, the economy should improve by 2012, we will be out of combat roles in both iraq and afghanistan, Katrina hasnt happened so far, Obama seems to be a mentally health well adjusted husband, so he should get re elected. the only question is, will the Republicans nominate someone who is rational, or will they nominate a nut case?