Let's face it: Dubya is abominable, and he's coming to give us a snow job in his State of the Union address this-coming Tuesday. I apologize to the ghost of Eugene O'Neill for any hint of any reference to his play The Iceman Cometh.
Please tell me I'm not the only one who has noticed that Dubya still behaves like a college frat boy. He says and does whatever the heck he wants, and he gets away with it all--so long as no grown ups are watching. Even when grown ups are watching, he still tries to bluff or bully his way through to getting what he wants as opposed to doing the right thing. [Not that Congress consists of grown ups. It's just that now the Democrats have the majority, Dubya cannot proceed with total impunity.--Ed.]
I saw Sen. George McGovern on one of the late-night news shows earlier this week (I want to say it was Nightline, but I don't think that's correct). His plan for what to do about Iraq strikes me as being eminently sensible. First, don't put even more of our youth in harm's way. Too many have died or been maimed already. Second, implement a timeline for a phased withdrawal. Third, carry it out. The only way the Iraqis are going to take charge of and responsibility for what's happening in their country is if they no longer have us around to be the "one-size-fits-all" scapegoat.
But Dubya still thinks the Iraqis owe us a debt of gratitude. Of course, he also thinks he's going down in history as being a much better president than contemporary opinion polls would suggest. I'll bet he's actually glad he's never been a student of history, for his lack of knowledge allows him to wallow in his delusions. I don't care what he thinks: Dubya is NO Harry Truman.
Which leads me to suggest why Harry Truman's grave in Independence, Missouri is not covered with snow and ice right now, despite the winter weather. Harry is so ticked off at Dubya's misappropriation of Harry's image that he's steaming mad!
I don't blame him.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Thursday, January 11, 2007
It's The Bee Gees vs. George Gershwin
Either it's a tragedy or it s'wonderful. Take your choice. Better yet, s'tragedy--in honor of all those who mispronounce "strategy"--and in dubious honor of all those who misuse it. Like our president.
I'll give Dubya this: I never thought the words "mistakes" and "mine" and "responsibility" would pass his lips in the same sentence . . . and yet they did last night during his speech revealing the new US strategy in Iraq. Not that his owning up to his errors made (or makes) a difference. I would be thrilled if Dubya's plan to put 20,000 more US troops in harm's way would help end the Iraq debacle--especially if it ended it favorably for the US. But I am not sanguine about its chances for success.
More troops with greater presence equates (to me and to many others more expert in military affairs than I) to more anger on the part of the insurgents . . . and more targets for them to hit . . . and more strife and needless bloodshed, not less.
In Iraq, we are in position not unlike the US's position vis-a-vis slavery in the early 18th century as analyzed by Thomas Jefferson. When you are riding a tiger, you don't want to hang on, but you cannot bring yourself to let go. There is deadly danger in any option you choose once you've foolishly put yourself in the position in which you find yourself.
A wholesale withdrawal would only embolden the terrorists who want to harm us. Staying only irritates those terrorists further. (Besides, they've not been able to solve their problems and settle their feuds for thousands of years . . . what the heck made us think we could do it for them?) An escalation that is more of a slow motion wave than a genuine surge will only prolong the agony. Too bad we can't call a mulligan and start over by not going into Iraq in the first place. [Gershwin wins again: You say to-may-to, I say to-mah-to . . . let's call the whole thing off!--Ed.]
I grieve for our troops, who are struggling valiantly to do the impossible. If they succeed, all they do is breed resentment against the US. If they fail, they die. And I confess to not having any ideas at all about what to do. Well, that's not exactly true. If we aren't going to withdraw immediately, retrench, get new people into office in 2008, and go about rebuilding America's reputation in the world, we need to go in with overwhelming force and stomp out every last one of the terrorists in Iraq now. Not that we'll succeed. Terrorists are like cockroaches in that for every one you see, there are 10 you don't. But if we can overwhelm the visible terrorism long enough to get out (relatively) cleanly and let the Iraqis deal with their own problems, we've made the best of a very bad situation.
God help me, I am beginning to think we need Douglas MacArthur and Curtis LeMay to come back from the dead and throw a few nukes around. And that scares me most of all.
I'll give Dubya this: I never thought the words "mistakes" and "mine" and "responsibility" would pass his lips in the same sentence . . . and yet they did last night during his speech revealing the new US strategy in Iraq. Not that his owning up to his errors made (or makes) a difference. I would be thrilled if Dubya's plan to put 20,000 more US troops in harm's way would help end the Iraq debacle--especially if it ended it favorably for the US. But I am not sanguine about its chances for success.
More troops with greater presence equates (to me and to many others more expert in military affairs than I) to more anger on the part of the insurgents . . . and more targets for them to hit . . . and more strife and needless bloodshed, not less.
In Iraq, we are in position not unlike the US's position vis-a-vis slavery in the early 18th century as analyzed by Thomas Jefferson. When you are riding a tiger, you don't want to hang on, but you cannot bring yourself to let go. There is deadly danger in any option you choose once you've foolishly put yourself in the position in which you find yourself.
A wholesale withdrawal would only embolden the terrorists who want to harm us. Staying only irritates those terrorists further. (Besides, they've not been able to solve their problems and settle their feuds for thousands of years . . . what the heck made us think we could do it for them?) An escalation that is more of a slow motion wave than a genuine surge will only prolong the agony. Too bad we can't call a mulligan and start over by not going into Iraq in the first place. [Gershwin wins again: You say to-may-to, I say to-mah-to . . . let's call the whole thing off!--Ed.]
I grieve for our troops, who are struggling valiantly to do the impossible. If they succeed, all they do is breed resentment against the US. If they fail, they die. And I confess to not having any ideas at all about what to do. Well, that's not exactly true. If we aren't going to withdraw immediately, retrench, get new people into office in 2008, and go about rebuilding America's reputation in the world, we need to go in with overwhelming force and stomp out every last one of the terrorists in Iraq now. Not that we'll succeed. Terrorists are like cockroaches in that for every one you see, there are 10 you don't. But if we can overwhelm the visible terrorism long enough to get out (relatively) cleanly and let the Iraqis deal with their own problems, we've made the best of a very bad situation.
God help me, I am beginning to think we need Douglas MacArthur and Curtis LeMay to come back from the dead and throw a few nukes around. And that scares me most of all.
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
Well Butter My Butt And Call Me A Biscuit
Nebraska really stunk up the Cotton Bowl yesterday. The Huskers played exactly the way they've played in all their other losses this season: they came out strong in the first half, but didn't score as many points as their statistics suggested they should have; they then proceeded to stand around and give the game away in the second half, due to an unfortunate combination of turnovers, bad play calling, and worse play non-execution.
So Auburn won the game 17-14. Will this finally get the people around here to wake up and see that Bill Callahan is a fraud as a coach? Probably not. That's too bad for NU. Let's face it: Callahan got the job only because of Athleltic Director Steve Pederson's ego. Pederson didn't want retiring coach Tom Osborne's pick to head the program. He wanted to put his own stamp on the program by ensuring his own choice would coach NU. Frank Solich thus got canned for going 9-3. Callahan thereupon proceeded to drive the program so far into the ground that 9-3 now looks good . . . and now Husker players and fans are saying things like "we nearly have the quality of players we need to play in the highest echelons of the game."
Blech! [I never thought I'd say this, but where the heck is Bob Devaney when we need him?--Ed.]
On the other hand, Boise State is for real. This year's Fiesta Bowl has to be one of the most exciting, improbable, and compelling college bowl games I've ever seen. I am now officially a fan of blue AstroTurf. Or more correctly, of the team that plays its home games on it. There's no quit in those Broncos. After dominating Big XII Champion Oklahoma and building an 18-point lead in the third quarter, Boise State seemed to be collapsing in slow motion late in the game--to the degree that OU took the lead on an interception for a touchdown with about 1 minute to go. Yet the Broncos came back to tie the game with the chestnut Hook and Lateral play, force overtime, and then win with a variation on the Statue of Liberty play for a two-point conversion. [It's so much fun to see old plays being dusted off and put to good use again!--Ed.]
If ESPN Classic isn't replaying this game as an "Instant Classic," it ought to be. I don't get ESPN Classic anymore--my cable company removed it from my tier of service but raised my rates anyway. [How shocking is that? Not!--Ed.] I encourage you to watch the game if you have ESPN Classic and it is playing on that channel. It has to be one of the most exciting college football games I've ever seen.
Considering how many college football games I've seen, that says a lot. Yesterday, I actually was starting to burn out on college football. The Cotton Bowl was embarrassing, the Rose Bowl was a yawn, and there had been entirely too many yapping [not talking, yapping.--Ed.] heads and not enough exciting play . . . until the Fiesta Bowl. If Ohio State loses to Florida next Monday, Boise State ought to get voted National Champion. After all, in that case, Boise State would be the only undefeated Division I A team. That's not the way the Bowl Championship Series works, but that doesn't make it right. At the very least, if Ohio State loses, someone ought to offer to fund a game between Florida and Boise State to determine the national championship for 2006-07 with finality. If Ohio State wins next Monday, Boise State ought to be voted co-champion.
That won't happen, either, and for the same reasons there will never be a true playoff system in Division I A college football. There's not enough money in it for all the schools that would be shut out of a bowl game if a true playoff system were implemented. The current philosophy seems to be the more schools get any piece of the pie, the better. So why couldn't revenue sharing be implemented? I know, I know. It's a question of who decides which schools would get how much of the revenues available. Almost everyone with decision-making power in NCAA Division I A college football seems to prefer the current scattershot system to something that would actually make sense. This most probably because they all fear they'd lose funds if changes were made.
Better the devil you know, I suppose. Nor is it that a playoff system would extend the bowl season to an untenable degree. As far as I'm concerned, that's already happened. Since when do we have to wait until January 8th to find out who gets the coveted "National Championship"? Since now. I have a sneaky suspicion that unless the Orange Bowl and the Sugar Bowl turn into barnburners exceeding the Fiesta Bowl (an exceedingly unlikely scenario), most of us won't care by January 8th whether Ohio State or Florida gets the win and thus the title.
Over time, the loss of interest due to the fans' collective short attention span will cost Division I A more than would any shifting of revenues resulting from a genuine playoff system going into effect.
So it's up to you, Ohio State football Buckeyes. Lose the BCS Championship Game next Monday so that we can kick this debate up "notches unknown to mankind!"
So Auburn won the game 17-14. Will this finally get the people around here to wake up and see that Bill Callahan is a fraud as a coach? Probably not. That's too bad for NU. Let's face it: Callahan got the job only because of Athleltic Director Steve Pederson's ego. Pederson didn't want retiring coach Tom Osborne's pick to head the program. He wanted to put his own stamp on the program by ensuring his own choice would coach NU. Frank Solich thus got canned for going 9-3. Callahan thereupon proceeded to drive the program so far into the ground that 9-3 now looks good . . . and now Husker players and fans are saying things like "we nearly have the quality of players we need to play in the highest echelons of the game."
Blech! [I never thought I'd say this, but where the heck is Bob Devaney when we need him?--Ed.]
On the other hand, Boise State is for real. This year's Fiesta Bowl has to be one of the most exciting, improbable, and compelling college bowl games I've ever seen. I am now officially a fan of blue AstroTurf. Or more correctly, of the team that plays its home games on it. There's no quit in those Broncos. After dominating Big XII Champion Oklahoma and building an 18-point lead in the third quarter, Boise State seemed to be collapsing in slow motion late in the game--to the degree that OU took the lead on an interception for a touchdown with about 1 minute to go. Yet the Broncos came back to tie the game with the chestnut Hook and Lateral play, force overtime, and then win with a variation on the Statue of Liberty play for a two-point conversion. [It's so much fun to see old plays being dusted off and put to good use again!--Ed.]
If ESPN Classic isn't replaying this game as an "Instant Classic," it ought to be. I don't get ESPN Classic anymore--my cable company removed it from my tier of service but raised my rates anyway. [How shocking is that? Not!--Ed.] I encourage you to watch the game if you have ESPN Classic and it is playing on that channel. It has to be one of the most exciting college football games I've ever seen.
Considering how many college football games I've seen, that says a lot. Yesterday, I actually was starting to burn out on college football. The Cotton Bowl was embarrassing, the Rose Bowl was a yawn, and there had been entirely too many yapping [not talking, yapping.--Ed.] heads and not enough exciting play . . . until the Fiesta Bowl. If Ohio State loses to Florida next Monday, Boise State ought to get voted National Champion. After all, in that case, Boise State would be the only undefeated Division I A team. That's not the way the Bowl Championship Series works, but that doesn't make it right. At the very least, if Ohio State loses, someone ought to offer to fund a game between Florida and Boise State to determine the national championship for 2006-07 with finality. If Ohio State wins next Monday, Boise State ought to be voted co-champion.
That won't happen, either, and for the same reasons there will never be a true playoff system in Division I A college football. There's not enough money in it for all the schools that would be shut out of a bowl game if a true playoff system were implemented. The current philosophy seems to be the more schools get any piece of the pie, the better. So why couldn't revenue sharing be implemented? I know, I know. It's a question of who decides which schools would get how much of the revenues available. Almost everyone with decision-making power in NCAA Division I A college football seems to prefer the current scattershot system to something that would actually make sense. This most probably because they all fear they'd lose funds if changes were made.
Better the devil you know, I suppose. Nor is it that a playoff system would extend the bowl season to an untenable degree. As far as I'm concerned, that's already happened. Since when do we have to wait until January 8th to find out who gets the coveted "National Championship"? Since now. I have a sneaky suspicion that unless the Orange Bowl and the Sugar Bowl turn into barnburners exceeding the Fiesta Bowl (an exceedingly unlikely scenario), most of us won't care by January 8th whether Ohio State or Florida gets the win and thus the title.
Over time, the loss of interest due to the fans' collective short attention span will cost Division I A more than would any shifting of revenues resulting from a genuine playoff system going into effect.
So it's up to you, Ohio State football Buckeyes. Lose the BCS Championship Game next Monday so that we can kick this debate up "notches unknown to mankind!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)