 |
|
Monday, January 10, 2005
Criticism vs. Self Righteousness.
Criticism vs. Self Righteousness.
When put in the proper context, there can be a very thin line between the two.
When I first heard about Armstrong Williams and the payments, I criticized the ordeal. Williams know he was wrong, and he has stated it. At the very least, he should have disclosed that he had been paid to speak on behalf of a government policy. By not doing so, he hurt other minorities that were involved within the political spectrum. Tribune had every right to cancel Williams's column with them on the failure to disclose that information, and if TV One cancels his show on their network and America's Black Forum asks Williams to leave, it's simply the consequences of his actions.
But let's not get this twisted; Williams wasn't trying to sully conservatives or trying to kill the conservative movement with this incident. He didn't have an axe to grind by doing this, and since he's human, he does make mistakes. It seems to me as if people are trying to use this incident to go into shark mode at the first drop of blood hitting the water.
It would help a few people, before they go on tirades about Williams's behavior, to recall any mistakes made in their life. I'm sure all can think of a few. The man has apologized, and it's not as if he has a history of such behavior. It's time to break up the posse and move on.
Besides, Williams has a lot more to worry about than a bunch of talking heads throwing down indignation from up high. As Lartigue said, that $240K will come in handy. (I also agreed with Lartigue that his arguments were indeed lightweight, and I felt he was the black conservative whipping boy for the left from way back. The black equivalent of Tucker Carlson, if you will.)
I listened to Limbaugh today, and there were several things that really struck home with me. Here's one of them:
Folks, stick with me here. Principal journalists don't get $250,000 from government agencies to go out and promote what they're talking about, but then again Armstrong Williams doesn't get countless invitations to all the A-list cocktail parties where he can eat for nothing and drink for nothing and hobnob and hang around with all these people. What's the dollar value of becoming close friends with all your sources? What's the dollar value if you're a liberal journalist to being invited to all the right places and get to meet all the rightly people learn all the right spin, given all the right stuff to go out and spread the news in your own way? What's the difference? The difference is, that ostensibly isn't coming from government, the 240 grand for Armstrong Williams came from government.
Now, he's apologized, and that was a proper thing to do. But as I say, go back to the top of the question: What are they really upset about? Are they upset about the ethics of Armstrong Williams or are they upset about the money? Because I will bet you a dollar to a doughnut that Armstrong Williams would not shill for Hillary Clinton for all the money in the world. But how many of his critics would. How many of his critics do? How many of his critics out there shilling for the Clintons, shilling for Hillary no matter what they know; no matter who they know it from, no matter what they know to be the truth. How many of these people out there shilling for Bill Burkett? How many people shilling for all these Bush enemies from his Texas days, trying to get him on this National Guard story? How many people in the media shilling for things? One thing I know about Armstrong Williams: He's not going to shill for something he doesn't believe in. But I can't say that about the other guys. The same could be asked about conservative pundits, too. Are you mad because of the ethics, or the money? How many pundits consort and hobnob with Republican politicans, and other pundits? How many get invited to cruises, or get lucrative speaking engagements?
Does anyone recall the same criticism levied during the election period, when a Boston Globe reporter wrote an article saying a Swiftboat Vet had recanted his accusations against John Kerry, all the time while covering the Kerry campaign for the paper and writing the forward for the initial book for the Kerry campaign. He had been covering John Kerry for years, and this book was one of the perks of doing so. So let's not act as if it's something new or shocking. Plenty of people get perks from the people they cover and network with as a result of being a pundit or a journalist.
But hey, maybe it's just me. I see the amount of indignation shown towards Williams - a bit of it in a self-righteous tone - and then I think, "If I was in the same situation, would they do that to me?" It's the ole "kick em while they're down" approach. The one thing Armstrong Williams will definitely learn from this incident is the people who are truly his friends and colleagues and who aren't.
UPDATE: A very good post by Jeremy Pierce at Parableman. There has indeed been some misconceptions going around about this whole scenario.
Posted at 11:40 pm by Expertise
Link Me
Home
Sunday, January 09, 2005
Vikings/Packers recap.
Let me go ahead and get the Vikes/Packers game out of the way.
Wow.
That was the most entertaining game I've seen in a while. As Culpepper stated after the game, the Vikings came into Lambeau Field with a chip on his shoulder and they took it out on the Vikings. They rolled to a 17-0 lead in the first quarter and never looked back.
And Brett Farve looked like the same Brett Farve a few weeks ago when he was rolled over by Jacksonville at Lambeau Field, giving up four picks and just playing terribly sloppy. The Vikings defense played with a purpose, as they had given up more passing yards than any team to make the playoffs in NFL history.
But it was Randy Moss's day. Randy Moss made two of the biggest plays of the day, and the last one being a flare pass off an audible while Moss was virtually JOGGING with a sprained ankle. After the past week with heavy criticism being thrown at Moss for walking off the field in the game against Washington and comments about Mike Tice, this was definitely vindication for Moss.
However, with the way Fox Sports was calling the game, with their announcing crew of Joe Buck, Troy Aikman and Chris Collingsworth, you'd think they were wearing cheeseheads throughout the game. You can tell that crew, along with James Brown, Terry Bradshaw, Howie Long, and Jimmy Johnson at the sports desk, had a mission today, and that was to trash the Vikings and Randy Moss when they eventually lost to the Packers today. The Vikings obviously didn't show up for the broadcast meeting this morning, and didn't go along with the plan. That didn't stop Fox for staying with the plan, and thus, IMO, looking stupid in the process.
The broadcast crew seemed as if they were in shock, because they couldn't believe that the Vikings would respond this way after everything that went on during the week. When Moss caught his first touchdown, the announcers went on and on about Moss pushing off. Not only did the replay show he didn't, but it was Packers corner Al Harris that grabbed Moss. Buck stated at the end of the game that the Vikings won "despite Randy Moss". When the Viking offense wasn't on the field, they kept panning to Moss, who had his hair blown up into a fro. All through the game it was about how Moss was hurting his teammates, how Moss shows no respect, etc.
To a point, they're right. But anyone that knows anything about sports media knows they try to tell a story in the game whenever possible. Moss and the Vikings' implosion was their story. When Moss did his lil mooning dance after his second TD, Joe Buck had to take time to inform folks about how shocked he was and how he was SOOOO offended by the little dance. After Moss's post-game interview, JB, Terry, Howie, and Jimmy ripped Moss for saying "we whupped their asses".
Here's a message to both Fox and ESPN: Football is a man's sport. It's not for chumps or dignitaries. You take 300llb guys, put them on a field, and bust each other up. Their jobs are to hurt the other team, and get the points on the board. To pretend to be shocked because Randy Moss is being a non-Tom-Brady-Bunch football player so you can turn around and exploit the whole situation for more interest in next week's football game is so phony it's almost funny.
If Moss's post-game comments were so offensive and revolting, then why show it? That interview wasn't live; it was tape-delayed. Moss took the interview immediately after the game, Fox went to commercial after interviewing Culpepper live, then aired the interview with them censoring "ass". Why didn't they just cut that whole response from the footage? It was the same with Moss's TD celebration. They could have easily cut to another camera when Moss started that celebration. But they didn't. Airing Moss's actions and then condemning them makes a more interesting show. Not to mention, they help the NFL levy that fine just a LIL bit higher.
What Fox's broadcasters don't get is that Moss and the Vikings were reacting to the criticism levelled by him and his team. THEY provided the fuel. The Vikings turned it into motivation.
After Moss's interview, where he accused the sports media of blowing the whole situation out of proportion, Howie Long immediately started whining, saying (paraphrase) "I don't know what Moss is talking about, we didn't start this, he did." You're right, you didn't start it, but you were so willing to hype it.
This is one of the few incidents where the athlete was able to get the best of the media that was ready to bury him.
Posted at 10:26 pm by Expertise
Link Me
Home
Saturday, January 08, 2005
More on Armstrong Williams.
More on Armstrong Williams.
I think a few things need to be recognized as this goes further, as this seems to be getting out of hand the more politicians start commenting on this.
I mean, Rep George Miller (D-Ca) had the nerve to call it Pravda for godsakes. Ted Kennedy, Frank Lautenberg, and Harry Reid wrote a joint letter to the president describing the incident as "bribing journalists". What's ironic about it is the fact that the law was made with the cooperation of Kennedy.
It should be noted that this was a Department of Education contract made by a PR firm they hired, not a White House one. Until USA Today filed the Freedom of Information Act in order to see what they had done, the White House probably didn't know what was going on. More than likely Education Secretary Rod Paige was the only one in the cabinet that knew about this, and was more than willing to be a participant in the whole ordeal.
Democrats are screaming bloody murder, and it's working. The White House is trying to distance themselves from both Paige and Williams. More than likely, Bush probably didn't know anything about it. And Williams will be the fall guy, as Tribune Media Services cancelled his syndicated column yesterday. New black network TV ONE has stopped airing his show pending their own investigation. Things don't look good for ole boy.
But Democrats aren't the only ones. Several conservatives are really ticked as well. As noted yesterday, both Michael King and Booker Rising (they call themselves moderates, but whatever)raised cain about it yesterday. LaShawn Barber hasn't chimed in on her blog yet, but she did leave a comment on King's blog stating her outrage. Michelle Malkin called for Rod Paige's head. After hearing Williams's apology, Booker this morning called for Williams to return the contract money he had been given.
While I definitely understand Tribune's take on the situation, in which they don't appreciate being a vessel for Williams to turn their column into a paid informercial, I think some of the other responses are a bit "extra".
There is no doubt that Williams sullied the reputation of minority conservatives, black or otherwise, by participating in this. Minority conservatives are constantly being stereotyped as being on the payroll of conservative backers or organizations, exploiting them in order to further their evil message. Thus, I think King is correct on his outrage. However, Williams is a grown ass man, who makes his own decisions of which most are unbeknownst to other black conservatives. What is done between Williams and Paige is between Williams and Paige, not on behalf of the whole black conservative movement. We need to remember that minority conservatives do not live on some commune, in which all decisions are made with the consent of the group and everyone is affected by a weak link.
I, for one, am not going to allow Williams's actions - nor any other conservative, for that matter - affect the things I do or the principles I believe in. I'm not a conservative because I like Bush, or Cheney, or because I think the Republicans and other conservatives are swell people. I believe in conservative principles - particularly those based on the doctrine of individual liberty as written in the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Federalist Papers - and the profound belief that the best government is a smaller and a fiscally sound government. Those beliefs do not require an alleigance to anyone at any given time. So let Williams do what he wants to do.
I also don't like to see the gang approach, with everyone jumping on Paige and Williams all at once and blowing it up to a situation more serious than it really is. Should Paige be fired? Unless more information comes out in the next few days, no. I can think of a lot worse incidents involving cabinet members and they only got a slap on the arm. Should Williams give back the money? No. He was paid to do a job, and the job was done. Just because people didn't like what he was paid to do doesn't mean the government should renege on the contract. It was the Dept. of Ed's fault that they wasted that money, just like it was the Kerry campaign's fault when they wasted money on Al Sharpton. In my opinion, the only thing Williams did wrong was in not disclosing that he was paid to speak about the issue.
One thing that should be done is to bar the PR firm Ketchum Inc. from working with any future government agencies or departments. This is the second time they have been behind questionable PR work on behalf of the government.
Meanwhile, expect more black conservative bashing like this. The bigots on the left will continue to rear their ugly heads.
UPDATE: Before I have to officiate the warzone that is kids' recreation basketball, let me talk about Payola a bit.
There is a good post up by Instapundit from last night, where he weaved the Williams incident with the controversy over the DaschlevThune blog during the election. With DaschlevThune and several other blogs covering the elections, they didn't disclose they were being compensated by campaigns of their respective candidates. In fact, Reynolds co-authored a book, The Appearance of Impropriety, discussing ethics in government.
Once again, disclosure is the key. I have no problems with Payola as long as you have let it be known that you are being paid for whatever product you are hawking. In fact, we discussed this in detail within a radio class I was taking last year, and I support it even more there due to the immediate backlash from regular mediums. If people don't like what's being heard, they'll turn your station off. It's a little different with political commentators and the like, so disclosure should be mandatory.
Anyway, let me get ready. I may have more on this later this weekend.
Posted at 10:39 am by Expertise
Link Me
Home
Friday, January 07, 2005
Bush Administration paid Armstrong Williams to promote NCLB.
Bush Administration paid Armstrong Williams to promote NCLB.
This is not good.
From USA Today:
Seeking to build support among black families for its education reform law, the Bush administration paid a prominent black pundit $240,000 to promote the law on his nationally syndicated television show and to urge other black journalists to do the same.
The campaign, part of an effort to promote No Child Left Behind (NCLB), required commentator Armstrong Williams "to regularly comment on NCLB during the course of his broadcasts," and to interview Education Secretary Rod Paige for TV and radio spots that aired during the show in 2004.
Williams said Thursday he understands that critics could find the arrangement unethical, but "I wanted to do it because it's something I believe in." Precisely what did you believe in, Armstrong? NCLB or the money?
Actually the dumb ones are the Bush Administration. Williams, as far as I can tell, is a good guy. But paying him $240,000 won't make a difference in popular opinion in regards to that law. Either people like it, or they don't.
According to USA Today, this was handled by the Education Department, headed by Rod Paige, through a public relations firm. Williams was to use his appearances on television to talk about NCLB whenever possible. On "America's Black Forum", of which Williams co-hosts, he was to persuade the producers to talk about NCLB periodically. Williams was also able to get Steve Harvey to get Paige on his show to talk about NCLB twice.
Is this illegal? It's possible. It is normal for administrations to promote new laws and guidelines through bureaucrats making public appearances, using PSA's, and the like. But to pay others outside of the administration to do so, and Williams to not inform anyone on air that you are contracted to talk about this? That shady. And I can already hear the catcalls from the black conservative bashers saying that Williams and others are nothing but puppets getting paid off by the Bush Administration. The only problem this time is....well, they're right.
All I'm asking is.....where's my cut? Show a brother the money.
Posted at 12:25 pm by Expertise
Link Me
Home
Rathergate "investigation" report due today.
Rathergate "investigation" report due today.
Drudge and a number of sources are reporting that CBS's internal investigation into the fake documents scandal should be released tomorrow.
The question is, what are we to expect? Has there really been anything since the scandal erupted in September that would show anyone that CBS has changed it's ways and will be honest about it's deceit?
I don't think so. I envision a report that simply highlights CBSNews's "carelessness". What they will call careless is actually intentional and unethical. They will try to make CBS staffers look like victims, instead of the culprits. And while it's possible that Mapes will be the fall guy- taking all the blame and thus getting fired for it - the truth is that the whole hierarchy is responsible for the mistakes made. In short, Rather nor Heyward are going anywhere.
All you have to do is look at how CBSNews acted in the run-up to Election Day to see nothing has changed. CBSNews was prepared to run a report about a missing cache of weapons in Iraq on the Sunday before the election. If it wasn't for the New York Times fearing the story being leaked before Sunday and reporting the story a week before the election, CBSNews would have gotten away with it. CBSNews's past history points to them intentionally airing this on Sunday in the hopes that the Bush campaign would not be able to adequately respond to it by Election Day, and possibly tilting the election to Kerry.
Will CBSNews admit their collaborations with the Kerry campaign? It's already been well documented that Mapes was in contact with Kerry senior advisor Joe Lockhart and was able to get Bill Burkett in contact with him. Burkett was able to get in contact with Kerry stooge Max Cleland. Has this investigation uncovered the alliance in full detail, and will it be included in the report?
I'm not holding my breath. It's hard to be optimistic about anything concerning CBSNews . If this report is released tomorrow, we'll see what happens.
Posted at 03:17 am by Expertise
Link Me
Home
Thursday, January 06, 2005
New Ga. county sherriff fires white higher-ups
New Ga. county sherriff fires white higher-ups
From CNN:
JONESBORO, Georgia (AP) -- On his first day on the job, the new sheriff called 27 employees into his office, stripped them of their badges, fired them, and had rooftop snipers stand guard as they were escorted out the door.
The move Monday by Clayton County Sheriff Victor Hill provoked an angry reaction and prompted a judge to order him to rehire the employees.
"It appears ... that employees of the Sheriff were terminated without cause" and in violation of the county's civil service rules, Judge Stephen Boswell wrote in granting a 30-day restraining order.
Hill, 39, defended the firings and said the new sheriff has the right to shake up the department in whatever way he feels necessary. He told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that he fired the employees to "maintain the integrity of the department."
"A lot of people are under the impression that the sheriff's office is under civil service laws," he said. "But my research shows the employees work at the pleasure of the sheriff." I used to live in Atlanta about 3 years ago. From what I've known of Clayton County, it's not very popular with the brothers, if ya know what I mean. As with the rest of Metro Atlanta (Clayton is one of the metro counties), Clayton County has grown a bit, and has added an influx blacks and hispanics. Hence, it was only a matter of time before a black sherriff was elected.
Hill used to be a Ga. state representative and an officer in Clayton County. In fact, when he became a state rep he had problems with the former sherriff because he wasn't allowed time off to work in the state legislature. I'm sure the animosity from that played in the decision to run for sherriff, and when he won, fire the hierarchy.
Only problem is, you can't just fire government employees without cause, and that's precisely what he did. Those positions weren't appointments. And considering the continuous shortages for cops all over the nation, where does he think he's going to get the new black cops from? Was he simply planning to hire some buddies of his? This isn't "Walking Tall" and his name isn't Buford Pusser.
As far as I can tell, no charges of corruption or abuse were ever flung at these officers or the former sherriff. And notably, it was the new black county commission chairman - Eldrick Bell - who went to court and filed grievance to get the officers their jobs back. So Hill comes across as a power-hungry bigot.
I'm surprised Michael "da" King hasn't said anything about this yet. He is from around that way.
Posted at 04:36 am by Expertise
Link Me
Home
Wednesday, January 05, 2005
*sighs*
I hate making this post.
Last week was a bad week for the NFL. Very bad. Once again, Bizzaro World struck heavily.
First, Carolina lost...and didn't make the playoffs.
Blah. I guess it wasn't meant to be.
After their first game with the Saints I thought Jim Haslett was as good as fired. This time, their receivers covered Muhammad and Colbert quite well, and didn't allow any big plays to develop. It was the exact opposite for us, as Gamble gave up a couple of bombs and they allowed McAllister to get a 71 yard run. That combined with 3 turnovers was enough to put us away. We were lucky to get a last shot at a 60 yard FG to put the game in OT (but I'd rather had Delhomme go for the bomb at the end of the game, but I'm only Monday quarterbacking).
I'm proud of them. Not too many teams would give themselves a chance after losing a key receiver, three running backs, a safety, and two defensive linemen. They can still hold their heads up high for the job they did this year. If they can resign Muhsin Muhammad, maybe work on that secondary a bit more in free agency, and keep everyone healthy they should be considered Super Bowl contenders next year and regain the NFC South title.
Anyway, let's talk about the playoffs. The NFC has the worst playoff teams I've ever seen:
- Philly, who's without TO and lost their last two (a legit excuse, as they did bench their starters).
- Atlanta, who's got a hurt Vick, was upset by Seattle last week, and has a two-faced defense. You never know which face will show up.
- Green Bay. Can quarterbacks go through a mid-life crisis? Farve seems like he suffers from it every week.
- Seattle, which has a porus secondary that couldn't knock a mosquito out of the air with a mudflap and finds a way to lose games.
- St. Louis, who has the worst head coach in football. Any halfway decent coach would have had that team sitting home this week with a first-round bye.
- Minnesota. See Seattle, but add a better quarterback and receiver corp. But take that "finds a way to lose games" and multiply it by 10. Don't believe me? The Vikes lost seven of their last ten, and five of those games were by less than a touchdown.
Let's put it this way: If Philly - even without TO - can't get the job done this year, they'll never get it done. But all in all, this week's NFC wild card games are a tale of which team finds more ways to lose than the other.
I'm rooting for Green Bay. I want to see Brett Farve go out with a trip to Jacksonville.
The AFC looks much better. This could go either way.
- Pittsburgh has been the polar opposite of Seattle and Minn in that they find ways to win. And Ben Roethlisberger, aka the Baby Jesus, has yet to taste defeat.
- New England..well, they're New England. They have a hellafied coach and the second-best quarterback in the league. Will three times be a charm?
- Indianapolis. The best quarterback in the league having the best season a quarterback has ever had. The major question is can that get him out of the shadow that is Tom Brady and New England? Dwight Freeney needs to have a hell of a playoffs to get them to Jacksonville.
- San Diego is considered the sleeper of the playoffs. They have just enough on both sides of the ball to beat any team in the league.
- The Jets. I respect the whole team. They have a good coach, a good defense, a great RB, among other things. But that chokefest against the Rams bothers me THREE much. Yeah I know Bulger returned, but cmon, that's no excuse for losing a crucial game like that.
- Denver is the only one that I am skeptical of. I think Shanahan has done a bad job with their secondary and made a bad decision in the offseason by going after Jake Plummer. While he was at Arizona he had an excuse, but now he's under a good system at Denver and has a decent offensive line and he has not done anything impressive.
The only bad thing about the AFC? It's being covered by CBS instead of Fox. For some reason I fall asleep on CBS's games. It's as if they intentionally try to silence the crowd in the games.
It won't seem right without my Panthers in the playoffs this year, but I will still watch with interest. It will be fun seeing how bad the NFC wild card games can get and how good the AFC wild cards can be.
Posted at 04:25 am by Expertise
Link Me
Home
Tuesday, January 04, 2005
CBC checks Harry Reid.
Check this out:
The Congressional Black Caucus has told Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., that he crossed the line earlier this month when he called Justice Clarence Thomas "an embarrassment to the Supreme Court."
"We wrote a letter to Sen. Reid cautioning him about his comments," incoming CBC Chairman Mel Watt, D-N.C., told radio host Steve Malzberg, who was filling in Wednesday on Bill Bennett's "Morning in America" show. "I think all of us ought to focus more on substance and less on stereotypes and caricatures," Watt said. Yall, I don't know what's going on, but I'm scared. Watt actually defending Clarence Thomas? Did I step into a portal leading into Bizzaro World and didn't realize it?
Also, James Taranto of Best of the Web did a bit of research in response to a follow-up question Reid was asked on CNN show "Inside Politics" on Dec 26th. Here's how the question went:
Henry: When you were asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" whether or not you could support Justice Thomas to be chief justice you said quote, "I think that he has been an embarrassment to the Supreme Court. I think that his opinions are poorly written." Could you name one of those opinions that you think is poorly written?
Reid: Oh sure, that's easy to do. You take the Hillside Dairy case. In that case you had a dissent written by Scalia and a dissent written by Thomas. There--it's like looking at an eighth-grade dissertation compared to somebody who just graduated from Harvard.
Scalia's is well reasoned. He doesn't want to turn stare decisis precedent on its head. That's what Thomas wants to do. So yes, I think he has written a very poor opinion there and he's written other opinions that are not very good. Ignore the immature insult by Reid for a minute. Taranto checked out Hillside Dairy, and found out that Scalia never wrote a dissent on the case. Therefore, either Reid got the case wrong or he had no clue of what he was talking about.
And judge for yourself whether Thomas's opinion looks like an eighth-grade dissertation (and since when did eighth-graders write dissertations?):
I join Parts I and III of the Court's opinion and respectfully dissent from Part II, which holds that §144 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, 7 U.S.C. §7254, "does not clearly express an intent to insulate California's pricing and pooling laws from a Commerce Clause challenge." Ante, at 6-7. Although I agree that the Court of Appeals erred in its statutory analysis, I nevertheless would affirm its judgment on this claim because "[t]he negative Commerce Clause has no basis in the text of the Constitution, makes little sense, and has proved virtually unworkable in application," Camps Newfound/Owatonna, Inc. v. Town of Harrison, 520 U.S. 564, 610 (1997) (Thomas, J., dissenting), and, consequently, cannot serve as a basis for striking down a state statute. I've known eighth-graders who can't even read. No eighth-grader I've known writes like this.
I'm not going to go as far as Taranto and others who say this is racial bigotry, but I will say Reid would not get away with such comments if it was aimed at a black leftist and not a conservative. Allowing idiots like Greg Palast and Ted Rall to do it without any repercussions has opened the floodgates to others to make the same stereotypical insults that they would have never gotten away with had they been a Democrat.
But hey; kudos to Mel Watt. He's making good on his promise to try to reach across the aisle. He still looks like "Flash" from the Five Heartbeats, tho.
Posted at 12:30 am by Expertise
Link Me
Home
Saturday, December 25, 2004
Christmas Weekend.
I'm not a religious person (actually, my moniker is "heathen conservative"), so I'm not going to talk about the religious aspects of Christmas. You know them. If somehow you don't, then go read the Bible and find out.
All I'm going to say is relax and enjoy yourself during the weekend. Whether you believe in the Christmas story or not, the foundation of this holiday is to spend it with loved ones and showing them how much you appreciate them.
I think that's what most people have forgotten. We have been so busy worrying about who's going to be offended by some decorations or who won't say "Merry Christmas" that we miss out on what makes this time of year so special.
I'm home at my mom's right now. In the morning, I gotta deep fry a turkey, then go to my stepfather's family's house, then take a trip over to my uncle's house and watch a bit of the NBA showdown between Indiana/Detroit, play basketball around 3, go back to my uncle's house after taking a shower and watching some NFL games.
I could care less about presents, or Christmas decorations (although country folk pull out the stops when decorating their yards), or all that other stuff. This is the time to be around family and friends. Make the most of it.
So whatever you want to call this time...Christmas, Hannukah (sp), Kwanzaa, or whatever, how about giving up all that sanctimonius bs for a couple of days and have some fun. Leave the self-righteousness outside with the snowmen. I know I will.
Posted at 02:01 am by Expertise
Link Me
Home
Friday, December 24, 2004
NFL spotlight.
Well this should be an interesting week, with several key matchups coming into play starting this afternoon. We'll see who can cut it and who can't.
Adding to that excitement is the fact that rocketman Michael Vick is now being paid more than Peyton Manning, as he signed a contract extension totaling over $130 million over the next ten years. $37 million of that is guaranteed. Peyton's extension was only $98 mill for seven years, with $34.5 of it guaranteed.
Now, despite the fact that the only record Vick will ever break is the quarterback rushing record, Atlanta has topped Peyton Manning's contract to the Colts, in which he will break another record this week. Indy's also a serious sleeper for an AFC title. Vick, who is nursing an injured shoulder at the moment courtesy of Carolina Panthers' hellcat Will Witherspoon (who was snubbed unfairly for a Pro-Bowl bid, IMO), isn't being taken seriously as an NFC title contender.
But hey; it's a great way to waste money, and considering I used to live there I know the City of Atlanta is quite known - or infamous...take your pick - for. Teams like Indy and Minnesota, who have placed big money in their offensive stars, have trouble in the playoffs because they can't invest in top-notch defensive players.
Atlanta has a couple of defensive players in Keith Brooking and Patrick Ramsey that they're going to have to resign in a couple of years, they claim they want to strengthen their receiver corps - after they "overpaid" Peerless Price (whether he can get open and catch or whether it's the system that he's in is questionable at this point), and they have to do something about their secondary.
Problems problems problems. And note; earlier this season they gave tight end Algee Crumpler - arguably one of the top 5 tight ends in the league - a contract extension as well. Something's gonna give. But hey; Vick puts asses in the seats, so that's all that matters.
Better hope they keep winning next year as well. If anyone knows anything about Atlanta fans, it's that they probably the most fairweather fans in the nation. Getting 40,000 to see a football game by a losing team in the snow? Where do you think this is? Cleveland? Ha.
Yeah Tigue, I saw ya.
Moving onward, today it's Minnesota vs. Green Bay. Let's hope this isn't like Minnesota's earlier efforts this season, in which they find ways to lose football games that are handed to them. They only lost by a field goal in the first encounter. However, the Packers' offense is struggling, and Bret Favre looked more like Vinny Testeverde against Jacksonville last week. Bret has a habit of blasting people after terrible performances, and he generally shows up for exclusive contests like this one, so we'll see. The winner wins the NFC North and at least one game at home. The loser gets a wildcard regardless.
On Christmas, watch basketball. Believe me, Indiana/Detroit and Shaq/Kobe will be more interesting than watching four teams that will more than likely stink it up and aren't going to make the playoffs anyway. Unless you are that much of a football nut, don't waste your time.
My only question is why are they starting so early? They got Indy/Det at 12:30, and Kobe/Shaq at 3? At least Kobe/Shaq is on ABC (lets hope they've improved their announcing crew).
And if I haven't said it lately, fire David Stern.
Back to football. Still a number of big games, with Steelers/Ravens, Pats/Jets, Panthers/Bucs, Colts/Chargers, Falcons/Saints, and Cards/Seachickens (did you know Arizona still has a chance to win the NFC West? It would tickle me if they did.).
Here's my picks:
Minnesota over Green Bay
Kansas City over Oakland
Denver over Tennessee
Bengals over Giants
Detroit over Chicago
Colts over Chargers
Jags over Texans
Saints over Falcons (especially if Vick doesn't play in this game)
Steelers over Ravens
Jets over Pats (upset special)
Panthers over Bucs
Washington over Dallas
Arizona over Seattle ("up, there's another one" © Biggie)
Miami over Cleveland
and Monday Night....Philly over the Rams.
This isn't an easy week to pick, but it definitely will be fun watching my picks lose.
Posted at 04:06 am by Expertise
Link Me
Home
|
|
 |