Expertise's Politics and Sports Blog


Tuesday, June 22, 2004
The Rampage Powerbomb and Randleman suplex

I LOVE PRIDE FIGHTING CHAMPIONSHIPS!

I'm serious.  I've been watching Mixed Martial Arts for quite awhile now; ever since the beginnings of The Ultimate Fighting Championships.  But UFC simply does not hold a candle to Pride in terms of giving the fans what they wanna see, and the tremendous skills of these athletes.

I got two clips for you guys:

The first clip is of Quinton "Rampage" Jackson who was facing an opponent who was trying to place him in a triangle hold, which consists of wrapping your legs around his neck and shoulder in an attempt to get your opponent to tap.  Well, you simply do not do that to a power wrestler, guys.  Rampage simply picked him up and lit him up in the greatest power bomb in history.  The clip contains a slow motion replay, but it's too wicked for words.  The power bomb practically knocked him clean out.


The second clip is of Kevin Randleman, who is gaining a reputation of being one of the toughest MMA fighters in history.  In April, he scored a vicious upset knockout on Mirko "CroCop" Filiopic (sp), who was considered to be one of the best knockout fighters in history himself.  This time, he faced Fedor Emalienko, the Pride World Heavyweight Champion.  In this clip you see one of the most wicked suplexes I've ever seen in my life.  I forgot the technical name for this suplex, but I know it was made famous by one of the greatest wrestlers in world history, Alexandr Karelin.

For Fedor to actually shake off this suplex, and moments later armbar Randleman and make him submit, is simply amazing.  It tells you the fortitude these athletes have.  Well, Fedor isn't the Pride Heavyweight Champion for nothing.

Anyways, if you've never seen a Pride fight or a Pride PPV, you're really missing something.  They have the toughest fighters in the world.  There aren't any sissies in that league.

Posted at 12:35 am by Expertise
Leave a message  

Home




Monday, June 21, 2004
John Kerry: "Show me da monaaaayyy!"

Great job Kerry.

Following the new Democratic prescedent paved by Bill and Hillary Clinton along with Al Gore, John Kerry gets into his own little problem.

It seems as if the Kerry campaign took money from the son of a former disgraced South Korean president who was arrested for evading a death (inheritance) tax.  How ironic, yet fitting.

And it must be noted, that Kerry wasn't going to give this money back until he was questioned by the Associated Press.  In fact, they didn't know anything about him.  The truth is that they didn't care who it was, as long as he showed him the money.

How did Kerry get the money?  Well it seems as if Kerry's own fundraising vice chairmen, Rick Yi, got him to give up the money.  According to the AP, Yi has been bringing in big bucks for the Kerry campaign, up to half a million dollars.  That's pretty damn decent.

But the problem is that this is a South Korean nationalist.  He isn't American, although Yi says that he showed him a Social Security card.  Of course, it's illegal to take donations from foreign sources in presidential elections.  I think Yi is full of crap and knew precisely what he was doing and what kind of people he was dealing with.

Now does this mean Kerry is guilty of anything or is up to something scandalous?  No.  Well, lemme take that back...time will tell.  But small things like these are usually signs of things to come.  It will be real interesting what else we will find under Yi's rock, or on Kerry's donation lists in the next few months.  I'm sure Michelle Malkin and others are on the case.

Posted at 01:23 pm by Expertise
Leave a message  

Home

John Lehman sets things straight

On Meet The Press yesterday, when asked by Tim Russert about the press reports on the staff statement report released last week, 9/11 Commission member John Lehman said:

"Well, I really totally disagree with what I thought was outrageously irresponsible journalism, to portray what the staff statement--and again, this is a staff statement; the commissioners have not addressed this issue yet--to portray it as contradicting what the administration said.  There's really very little difference between what our staff found, what the administration is saying today and what the Clinton administration said."


Exactly.

Later on, fellow Commission member Richard Ben-Veniste tried to pull a fast one:

"Well, our staff statement has again refuted the notion that there was any Czech meeting.  Indeed, the individual is now in custody, Mr. Ani, who Mohammed Atta supposedly met with in Czechoslovakia while we have pretty unshakeable evidence that Atta was in Florida.  So with the principle that someone can't be in two places at the same time as well as looking at this very carefully over time, talking to the CIA, the FBI, all those with primary information, we have come to the conclusion that the so-called Czech meeting never happened."
But Lehman did not let him get away with that:

"Well, first of all, as Richard said, we have concluded on the Prague meeting.  We haven't concluded anything on the Prague meeting, and our staff has concluded, I've looked at the same evidence, and I don't reach any conclusion.  But I think it's irrelevant."

Well just damn.

Kudos goes to John Lehman for setting the record straight.  I wonder how many media entities outside of the internet will report this?



Posted at 05:03 am by Expertise
Leave a message  

Home

Terrorist faggots kidnap South Korean

 I apologize beforehand for any vulgarities....

But I'm sick and tired of this shit.  That piece of camel shit Abu Al-Zarqawi and his band of cowards have grabbed another hostage, this time a South Korean.  They grabbed him last week in Fallujah while he was making some sort of delivery, and now South Korea has until midnight to pull their soldiers out of Iraq or they will behead him, like Nick Berg and Paul Johnson.

Boy, these pussies sure are brave, huh?  They go out and jump on an unarmed civilian and take him to a hiding place to cut his head off.  How honorable. 

Fortunately, South Korea didn't bow down like Spain did, and are not going to pull out their troops in the face of terrorist aggression.  But now it seems that Al-Zarqawi and his boys are making this a regular thing.  And these incidents have to place the U.S. on the offense.

Surprisingly, the Saudis set the example last week.  Abdullah wasn't playing games once he found out Johnson was kidnapped, and he set off a manhunt in Riyadh.  Well soon after some Islamic website posted pictures of a beheaded Paul Johnson, the Saudis killed this bitch.  Instead of playing defense and turning our troops into well-trained security guards, the U.S. government should follow the example and hunt down this Al-Zarqawi bitch.

After seeing the brutal murder of Nick Berg and Paul Johnson, and now this South Korean man that's been taken hostage and more than likely will be dealt the same fate, I can't understand how the political left will still call for the Coalition to disband and pull out of Iraq.  Do they think these animals will just turn around and lead productive lives once the Coalition leaves?  Leftists believe that terrorists are nothing but concerned men that are just misquided into doing bad things.  Not only is that idea stupid, but it's dangerous.

After we left Vietnam, millions of Southeastern Asians died within 4 years after Americans left due to the Communists, which had spread to Cambodia under Pol Pot before Vietnam annexed it.  If we leave Iraq in the state it is in, thousands, if not millions, will die due to Islamic fundamentalism as well.  But leftists live their lives in a impenetrable bubble; where their own assertions, whether true or false, are enclosed and are not placed into the perspective of relative facts or logic.  Let's hope Americans do not fall for the ridiculous claims of the leftist political machine which includes the mainstream media and leftist special interest groups and defeats this vision in November.

Posted at 03:13 am by Expertise
Leave a message  

Home




Saturday, June 19, 2004
And When It All....

It All Comes Downnnn....(c) Kanye West.

Well it definitely fell down this week.

The Lake Show is over, folks.

After being humiliated in 5 games by a Detroit Pistons team that wasn't supposed to win more than two, the expected (well, at least I expected it) shakeup happened.

- Kobe, as expected, decided to opt his free agent clause.

- Phil Jackson, as I expected, bid adeu to the Lakers franchise

- Shaq, asked for a trade.  Aiight, this WASN'T expected.

- Malone is testing free agency.  I'm surprised he hasn't announced his retirement yet.

- Gary's gone too, as expected.

The biggest surprise is the Lakers trying to keep Kobe instead of Shaq.  Well, at least it was to me.  I would have thought that if you're going to have one person to build a team around, it would be Shaq.  But Shaq is getting up there in years, (as he is on his what...12 season this year?) so I can understand this move.  I'm sure Kobe has been dying for this day anyway.  Finally he can get a team that he and only he leads.

This also puts the notion that there wasn't any animosity between Kobe and Shaq to rest, as both of them have been saying over the years.  We know winning makes anyone stay at least cooperative.  But the fact is that the Lake Show isn't winning world titles anymore.  And I think an era is gone where we see the one or two dominant forces on one team grabbing world championships in the NBA.

Think about it for a second; last year's team, the San Antonio Spurs, won the NBA Title with some of the best team efforts of all time.  Sure, Tim Duncan is no doubt a Hall-Of-Famer, but it's the little things he does that makes the difference.  He wasn't some scorer that had to put up 40 points every night.  In fact, he could carry the Spurs to a win with a simple 15-20 at times.  That's because folks like him make his whole team better.

Now take this year's NBA Champions, the Detroit Pistons.  This was so much of a team effort that ABC's commentators said Stern should give the MVP award to the whole team.  And they're right.  Billups was the MVP because he was consistent, not necessarily because he had a great performance.  And it would have been hard for Detroit to repeat this feat if even one guy was out of the rotation, and that includes the bench.

Have you noticed that the Pistons are the first NBA Championship team in about 25 years or so that hasn't had a dominant Hall-of-Famer lead their team to a title?

Check this out:

- Lake Show:  Kobe, Shaq

- Spurs:  Duncan, Robinson

- Bulls:  Jordan, Pippen, Rodman

- Rockets:  Olajuwon, Drexler

- Lakers:  Magic, Kareem, Worthy

- Celtics:  Larry Legend, McHale

You see, you KNEW who the leaders of their teams were back in the day, and you knew they were great.  However, the NBA doesn't produce this kind of talent anymore.  The jury is out on Carmello and LeBron but it's doubtful that they will start their own dynasties.

The next few months, and years, in the NBA will be interesting.  I can only hope that more parity will help give other teams a chance.  Maybe it will be a plus much like it is for the NFL.

But anyways, basketball season is over, so now I can just concentrate on wrestling and MMA until football season starts.  If anyone wants to give me some NC State home tickets (not because I like them, but because they got some really good televised games this year) or some Carolina Panthers tickets, let me know.

Posted at 09:44 pm by Expertise
Leave a message  

Home

Welcome Back.....

I know you like that (c) Mase

Well, if anyone actually read this blog in the past 6 months or so, lemme say I'm sorry.  I totally slacked off on my writing after Thanksgiving.  However, after reading Michelle Malkin's and LaShawn Barber's blogs it got me a lil envious.  I've been slacking off way too much.

Resurfacing my blog will help me, since I started working with a talk radio station in April and I get practice on my writing skills.  Hey, not everyone can write like Malkin or Ann Coulter.  As we speak, I'm at work at 6 in the morning on a Saturday, and I'm going to be at full speed until about 5 or 6 this evening.

But let's get down to business:

- First, lemme clown the mainstream media real quick.  The Associated Press, Reuters, New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, ESPECIALLY USA Today, and everyone else that recorded that tripe about the 9/11 Commission stating that there was no Iraq/Al Qaeda link.

As shown by James Taranto's Best of the Web column on OpinionJournal.com, USA Today deliberately misled it's readers into thinking that President Bush attempted to make a link between Saddam and the 9/11 hijackers.  This is trash journalism by the lowest standards, and Dick Cheney was right in criticizing the media for it's coverage, depicting it as "lazy journalism".  I can think of better descriptions than that.

Anyone that read the 9/11 Report knows that this was more of a sidenote than anything.  Out of 12 pages, only ONE paragraph was written detailing the Iraq issue.  Second, it's a 9-11 COMMISSION, not an IRAQ WAR Commission.  Therefore, what would be the reason for the 9/11 Commission to go into a full Iraq/Al-Qaeda connection?

Here's the paragraph:
"Bin Ladin also explored possible cooperation with Iraq during his time in Sudan, despite his opposition to Hussein's secular regime.  Bin Ladin had in fact at one time sponsored anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan.  The Sudanese, to protect their own ties with Iraq, reportedly persuaded bin Ladin to cease his support and arranged for contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda.  A senior Iraqi intelligence officer reportedly made three visits to Sudan, finally meeting bin Ladin in 1994.  Bin Ladin is said to have requested space to establish training camps, as well as assistance in procuring weapons, but Iraq apparently never responded.  There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda also occurred after Bin Ladin had returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship.  Two senior Bin Ladin associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq.  We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."

 
Now, look at that final statement again:  "WE HAVE NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE....that Iraq and Al-Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."

No evidence does not mean it never happened.  They just don't have anyone to come forward to their commission with evidence that proves there was a relationship.  And since they were investigating 9/11 only, that means there wasn't a full investigation done on the links both before and after 9/11.

Some of the most damning evidence came from a Wall Street Journal Editorial  just last week discussing Ahmed Hikmat Shakir, who was one of the people at the 9/11 planning meeting.  A similar name showed up on a Fedayeen list, and it's known that Shakir did get a job as an airport greeter while in Kuala Lumpur from an Iraqi diplomat. 


Add that with the consolidated information that Deroy Murdoch of National Review provides in several of his columns, such as Saddam's Terror Ties, The 9/11 Connection, and Saddam's Philantropy of Terror

At the VERY least, you cannot deny that there are a hell of a lot of coincidences between Saddam and Al Qaeda, and you can't simply blow it off by saying "There's no connection" without bringing more specific evidence to the table.

But lack of evidence to prove a point has never stopped the mainstream media before.  The sad truth is that lazy journalism is more of the norm rather than the exception nowadays.

Posted at 09:08 pm by Expertise
Leave a message  

Home




Monday, November 24, 2003
Healthcare in America

At this very moment a huge medicare bill is being debated in Congress, in accordance to government subsidization of prescription medicine. 

Several conservatives, including Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA),  have opened the eyes of the American people to the realities of health care not only in America, but other countries.

The reason why countries like Canada, Germany, the U.K. and others have socialist health care is due to the fact that they have price caps which artificially lower the prices of medicine there.  The medical companies think it's better for them to do business at these low prices and have enough to cover the basic costs of production than to not do business with them at all.  That's reasonable. 

But guess who gets stuck with even higher prices?  We do.  Remember, businesses are in business to gain a profit.  When you're not getting a profit, you're out of business.  Therefore if they can't get it one way, they have to get it another.  So, Americans are the ones that help pay for the medicine of these countries.

Some legislators are considering making it easier for Americans to go across the border and buy medicine in Canada.  But that only puts a bigger strain on consumers that can't buy medicine there.  It possibly could force legislators in Canada among other countries to at least raise the price cap there, but you'd be risking jobs and the welfare of businesses that are already strained to the max. 

The one good thing about it is the personal accounts, in which individuals can contribute to tax-free.  But is this prescription drug bill REALLY worth all of the government spending in order to obtain it?  After reading and hearing the opinions of several people and looking at some information on it, I'd have to say no.  Fiscal conservatives were right for voting against this plan, although it ended up passing the House anyway (under dubious means, I might add.).

Because of this bill, the 76% of seniors who already had some kind of prescription drug plan could end up losing it because companies will feel no need to cover them for something the government is giving away for free.  The problem with health care will continue to escalate as long as legislators continue to hold fast to the idea that more government and regulation will solve the problem.

Posted at 01:22 pm by Expertise
Leave a message  

Home




Wednesday, November 19, 2003
Keyshawn's out.

Keyshawn Johnson was deactivated by the Tampa Bay Buccaneers for the remainder of the season and now has to wait to be traded to another team before he can play again.

It's about time someone did something in lieu of the primadonna attitudes that high profile superstars like Johnson have had for a long time.  Although I haven't forgiven the Glacier family after how they treated Tony Dungy more than a year ago, they and John Gruden deserve kudos for this move.

Keyshawn Johnson has been one of the most vocal football players in the league.  If he's not happy, he's going to let someone know it, and in time that takes a toll on the whole franchise.  He has not only mouthed off about his former coach, Tony Dungy, but also about current coach Gruden, GM Rich McKay, and about his teammates.

One incident in particular happened two seasons ago, in which he complained about Dungy's coaching and then trashed some of his teammates due to some of them making comments about other teams.

Hello Pot.  Meet Kettle.

What makes the situation even worse is the fact that Keyshawn's stats only make him an above average quarterback at best.  He brings in less than 14 yards per catch and only has 3 touchdowns.  That's great numbers for a tight end, but not for a wideout.  The problem is, Keyshawn wants everyone to think that he is the greatest wide receiver in the league, when he really isn't.

And lets not forget that it was Keyshawn himself that asked for this.  He went to Gruden and told him outright that he would not play for this team after this season, and went so far as to tell Gruden that he'd RETIRE before he would play next year for them.  And now that Joe Jurevicus is back in the lineup, they figured it was a good time as any to get rid of him.

A great column appeared on ESPN.com by Adrian Wojnarowski highlighting some of Johnson's many antics, including insecure criticisms of Marvin Harrison during a Monday Night Football game -- a game in which the Colts made a huge comeback to beat the Bucs -- and comments during last years Super Bowl weekend against the New York Jets for trading him to the Bucs 3 years ago.

This has become a growing trend among wide receivers, who either spout off about how they aren't getting the ball as much as they "should" be or they're talking smack about other teams.  Whether it's Keyshawn, Terrell Owens, Randy Moss, or others, this problem needs to be addressed by coaches and front office staff.  They'll be quiet as long as they are getting the ball and winning.  But once they start losing, they are the first ones to run to a mic and tell everyone what's screwed up about their team.  And they never point fingers at themselves.

Let's hope this is just the beginning.  There's no doubt that the NFL has some great wide receivers and they deserve respect.  But they aren't the only ones on that team, nor are most the ones leading their teams to victory.  Some should be reminded that there are 10 others on that field that work with them.

Posted at 01:25 pm by Expertise
Leave a message  

Home




Tuesday, November 18, 2003
Hannity was wrong.

I try to be a fair observer, no matter what side of the political spectrum they are on or what political party they come from.  If they are wrong, they are wrong, and I give credit where credit is due.

Therefore, in complete fairness, I'm about to criticize Sean Hannity.

There was an article published on NewsDay.com by syndicated columnist and professor Paul Ginnetty.  In it he criticizes Rush Limbaugh, other talk radio hosts, including Hannity, and their listeners.  He figures the reason why talk radio does so well is because the analyses and opinions given on the show are so basic that anyone could understand them and thus, get behind them.

Ginnetty took a shot at "Marty", a older daily caller on Hannity's show that participates in the "Trash the Lines" closing segment, calling him "pathetic".  He identified Marty as a typical talk radio show listener, implying that they listen and call to get a "sense of derivative celebrity and charisma" from interacting with a "a mega-rich and politically powerful figure".  Meanwhile they are getting suckered into supporting policies that really work against their self interests.

Of course, it's the typical way leftists try to bash talk radio; portray listeners as stupid, simple, and uninformed.  However, Hannity did no favors for the talk radio industry - it's hosts or listeners - last night with the stunt he pulled.

Hannity allowed Ginnetty to call into the show yesterday, which I'm sure Ginnetty took it as a chance to elaborate on and debate his opinions against Hannity.  However, Hannity put Marty on another line and spent the entire segment trying to get Ginnetty to apologize for calling Marty pathetic.  After Ginnetty did so (actually he did several times, but the previous ones did not satisfy Hannity so he continued to bulldog him into giving an appropriate apology), Hannity stated he didn't care about his opinions and didn't want to talk about the column, and ended the segment.

Listening to the reactions of Marty himself, it seemed that he was uncomfortable for being put in the middle of this and didn't appreciate the special attention.  Marty's a grown man.  I'm sure it didn't bother him that much.  Ginnetty was undoubtedly wrong in characterizing Marty as pathetic.  But as Ginnetty pointed out, that was only 5 words in an 800 word column.  After Ginnetty apologized, what about discussing the rest of the column?

That's what the talk radio audience should be truly bothered about.  It's an easy way to discredit what they discuss and the views they espouse.  However, surveys have shown that talk radio listeners are only second to classical music listeners in intelligence and more likely to use the internet for information purposes. 

Hannity should have used this evidence and proved wrong every single statement Ginnetty made.  It might not stop leftists from making the same characterizations, but it would discredit Ginnetty's personally, and discredit him.  Talk radio is about interactive debate.  You form an opinion, they form one, and the listeners decide who made the better one.

Instead, Hannity dominated the entire conversation and placed emphasis on a superficial issue while ignoring the whole purpose of the outrage.  The article was about talk radio's popularity and the people who made it popular, not simply about Marty.  Hannity, while legitimately outraged, helped to make Ginnetty's point instead of properly deconstructing it.

Posted at 01:38 pm by Expertise
Comments (2)  

Home




Monday, November 17, 2003
Rush is back

Rush Limbaugh returned to the airwaves today after 5 weeks of rehab to combat an addiction to painkillers.

Rush is no doubt the biggest radio star out there today, and one of the biggest political figures as well.  He has a worldwide audience of 20 million people a week, and his base continues to grow.  He is expected to have a huge rating for his return.

Being a highly partisan figure, Rush constantly criticizes Democrats and leftist Republicans and occasionally jumps on the media.  His opinions do not respect party lines, as he has criticized President Bush on more than one occasion.  However, his critics, who obviously do not listen to his show often, tries to make the claim that he does.  They definitely consider him a threat, which explains why there was a media firestorm after the National Enquirer broke the story that he was subject to a criminal investigation due to his illegal prescription drug use.

For the past two years there have been complaints coming from leftists about talk radio, particularly conservative talk radio, and in response they have tried to impede it through legislation.  The so-called "Fairness Doctrine", which forces talk radio stations to have equal access and time allotments for different sids of an issue, is one of those methods.  Recently, they were able to make progress by passing the Shays-Meehan Campaign Finance Act, in which one of the provisions bans political ads of any kind from being broadcast within 60 days of an election.  Some say that it's the first step to forcing talk radio to stop their broadcasts as well.

Some limousine leftists are going at it another way; they want to compete and try to finance talk radio stations and networks with leftist talk radio hosts.  However, people tend to frown upon mouthpieces of a political party or group, which is what they'd obviously become.  Rush is unabashedly Republican, but he works for Premiere Radio Networks, which handles his Excellence In Broadcasting network.  The ones that are trying to fund and start this are Democratic political figures.

Rush is often credited with saving the AM radio band; before his syndicated talk radio show became a hit, several AM stations were failing miserably.  He is credited by Talkers Magazine as being the best radio show host of all time and is in their hall of fame.  Anyone that knows anything about marketing knows it's very hard to knock off someone that is as established as Rush is.

After Clinton left office, people were saying that Rush and other talk radio shows would lose their appeal, because their success was supposedly attributed to criticizing Clinton.  However, 9/11 showed they were wrong, and that talk radio didn't miss a step. 

There have been several instances where talk radio helped to make some kind of change.  CBS's cancelling of "The Reagans", which was supposed to be a first-hand look at the Reagan White House but was exposed to be a hatchet-piece created by Democratic financeers, proved to be one of those times.  Public pressure stemming from both talk radio and internet reports led by the Drudge Report forced CBS to review the movie, and gave it the ax.  Talk radio also helped spur tax protests against legislatures in Ohio and Tennessee.  Considering that tax politicization is one of the foundations of the Democratic Party, you can see how this hurts them.

Democrats will continue going after talk radio, and unless some kind of intrusive legislation/judicial activism pops up, they will continue to fail.  Guys like Rush, Sean Hannity, Neal Boortz, G. Gordon Liddy, and others will leave, and others will take their place.  And it is these guys that are changing the face of the political landscape in America.

Posted at 03:02 pm by Expertise
Leave a message  

Home




Next Page



   









Contact Me

If you want to be updated on this weblog Enter your email here:




rss feed

BLOGDRIVE
TEMPLATES

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com

Blogdrive