State Of The Republican Race

It's been almost a year already since I took my first shot at summing up the race for the Republican nomination http://somethingclever13.blogspot.com/2010/11/start-game.html.  I nailed some things (hello Rick Perry) and whiffed on others (oh, Haley Barbour, why have you forsaken me?).  The aftermath of the first sort of important debate is a good time to reset the field and see where we are.  I'll break the remaining candidates into four groups. 

Still Pretending:  People who can't possibly win the nomination, but are still plugging away like champs.
Still Contending:  People who I think still have a shot
Wild Cards:  People I still can't totally figure out
Front Runner:  The guy on top, for now.

But first...
Hasta La Vista Timmy
First off, a fond farewell to Tim Pawlenty.  He showed up at the Iowa debate, hammered away at Michele Bachmann for a little while, finished a distant third in the straw poll and then he bailed.  Well done, buddy.  Tim was the little engine that couldn't, because nobody wanted him to.  After the debate Thursday, I was thinking Pawlenty had a great performance and, in going after the two front runners, did exactly what he needed to do.  I just didn't know if it was enough.  Now I know.  It wasn't.

Still Pretending

Newt Gingrich

Newt easily had the worst performance in Thursday's debate.  Look, I understand conservative politicians can score points by blaming the media every time they say something stupid.  But Newt, who WORKED AT FOX, went to the FOX DEBATE Thursday and complained that the FOX ANCHORS were nailing him with gotcha questions.  Gotcha questions like, "Why did your whole staff quit?" and "Can you explain words that you said?". 

Newt then proceeded to finish 8th in a 10 man race, behind a guy who announced he wasn't participating in the straw poll two months ago and a guy who wasn't officially in the race yet when the poll started.  I'll enjoy the comedy of Newt's campaign until whenever he drops out. 

By the way, I wish Republicans would stop trying to tell me that Newt is some kind of super genius.  He's a small time political hack who can't cut it on the national stage.  End of story.

Herman Cain

Speaking of hacks.  I don't really know what to make of Herman's Cain's debate performance.  Policy wise, he's in pretty far over his head at this point.  His calling card is that old story about how if you ran a business then you know how to run a government.  Of course, that's nonsense, but politicians have been saying it for as long as I can remember and people are still falling for it.  I can see Cain doing surprisingly well in one of the early primaries, but one third place finish in Iowa doesn't get you the nomination.

Rick Santorum

The knuckle-dragging bible-thumping on social issues.  The know-nothing, war-mongering nonsense on foreign policy.  The blind loyalty to the cult of tax cuts.  Rick Santorum is everything that's wrong with the Republican party all rolled up into one ignorant package.  I do not like him.  Luckily, he isn't winning. 

By the way, for anyone who read my recap of Thursday's debate, I want to quickly re-visit one point.  When I said Rick Santorum promised to come to each state and be homophobic in person, I wasn't being hyperbolic or making that up.  Rick, if he wins the Presidency, will apparently spend the majority of his term flying around the country and fighting the evil gays face to face.  That landed him almost 10% of the straw poll votes.  Iowa must be feeling very proud today.

Ron Paul

I love Ron Paul.  If Ron Paul was an atheist, I'd quit my job to go volunteer for his campaign.  Ron did his thing in Thursday's debate.  He talked about monetary policy, which I think he only does to prove that he's smarter than the other candidates, Bachmann can't even spell monetary.  He talked about his different (and better) vision for what Republican foreign policy can be.  He talked about the Constitution, which he was doing back when the rest of the Republican party was cheering George W. Bush on as he urinated all over the Constitution.  He almost won the straw poll, finishing a very close second.  And, as usual, nobody cares.

I think my favorite thing about Congressman Paul is his clear disdain for almost everyone else in his party.  You could tell during the debate, it seems like he hates those people he was sharing the stage with almost as much as they hate Barack Obama.  When asked about Rick Perry, Paul immediately dismissed him as another establishment political hack.   Like I said, I love Ron Paul.

Still Contending

Jon Hunstman

I know, Huntsman probably isn't a real contender and may drop out before I finish typing this sentence.  I think this is me just trying to stay hopeful that maybe, just maybe, the Republicans can turn this thing around and nominate someone with a working brain.  Sadly, my hope is most likely misguided. 

What makes me say that?  Well, Huntsman just sort of blended in at the debate and then finished 10th in the straw poll, including getting less votes (69) then the "other" category (162).  Why I am still a little hopeful?  Hunstman was never going to win Iowa and everyone knew it.  He needs to focus on New Hampshire, work on his delivery (he has a really odd speaking style) and hope for the best.  He still has a good amount of money behind him.

Michele Bachmann

Bachmann's debate performance was awful.  She clung to her talking points the way her husband clings to his (insert latent homosexuality joke here).  However, this one awful performance in this one very early debate is a good sign going forward.  Congresswoman Bachmann is working hard on her ability to stay on message, stick to her talking points and limit her trips to Imagination Land.  It makes her look stiff and over-rehearsed now, but it'll pay off later.  Frankly, I'm a little worried she's taking this more seriously than I thought she could.  I'm impressed with her growth over the last few months, and terrified to say that she might actually be able to win this nomination if she keeps it up.

The Wild Cards

Sarah Palin

Still lurking around the perimeter of the campaign like a shark circling a school of trout, the former half-term Governor continues to cast a shadow over the nomination process.  The fun thing about Palin is you really don't know what she'll do next.  She could run, she could endorse somebody, she could try host her own primary somewhere, she could challenge the other candidates to a bus race.  Palin's unique combination of insanity, irrational self-confidence and delusions of grandeur make almost anything possible.  It's probably already a little late for her to get into the race and win, but you can bet she'll do something in the next six months to seriously influence the race.

Rick Perry

Perry just got in, but I've been convinced he was running since last November.  I don't know what people see in him.  They say he created jobs in Texas.  First of all, I thought government doesn't create jobs, so I'm a little confused.  Secondly, he created jobs in Texas by undercutting surrounding states on taxes, wages and regulation.  That trick doesn't work when you're in charge of the whole country. 

For fans of the West Wing, you may remember the guy President Bartlet ran against for re-election, a know-nothing conservative Governor from Florida named Rob Ritchie, played by James Brolin.  At the time, Ritchie seemed like an approximation of George W. Bush, but now he looks like a mirror image of Perry.  As you may recall, Bartlet wiped the floor with Ritchie in the one debate they had, and I'm pretty sure President Obama would do the same with Perry.

The Front Runner

Mitt Romney

Still at the head of the field, for now.  Here's the thing about Mitt Romney.  His message in the debate was an anti-Obama message.  He's trying to prove he can be the guy Republicans want, the guy to go after the President hard and relentlessly.  That's fine for now, but if he wants to beat the President, he needs more.  No matter how low the President's job approval sinks, he's personal popularity remains high.  People like Barack Obama, and Romney can't beat him by bashing him.  If Mitt wins the nomination, he needs to run a positive general election campaign, centered around his own ideas for what he would do as President. 

Romney's religion could still be a problem in the primary, but only if the other candidates work together.  Michele Bachmann can't just come out and talk about Romney being a mormon, it would drag her down too.  What she needs is a third person, say Herman Cain, to start reminding Republican primary voters that Romney isn't really a christian like they are.  Cain would doom his own campaign by overtly making religion an issue, but he isn't going to win anyway.  Evangelical voters would start to get more nervous about Romney then they already are, and Bachmann would reap the windfall while being able to give the ol' "this campaign isn't about Mitt Romney's faith, it's about the American people" soundbite. 

But before that strategy can work, Bachmann and Perry have to figure out who gets the crazy idiot vote.  If they split that half of the party while Romney manages to avoid splitting the slightly more reasonable and somewhat rational half of the party with someone else, Hunstman maybe, then Romney walks to the nomination while the tea people and the evangelicals are arguing over Bachmann and Perry. 

The bottom line for me is this.  Whichever half of the Republican party can decide who they're behind quicker wins.  Right now, Romney has the lead because nobody can cut into his support with the establishment side of the party while the other side of the party is still getting their act together.  When the primaries start, Bachmann will win Iowa, Romney will win New Hampshire and Perry should win South Carolina assuming he runs a halfway decent campaign.  That puts everyone on even footing coming out of the early states and Romney's money and name recognition should be able to carry him from there. 

This only changes if the tea people and evangelicals can get together and pick one person to win Iowa and South Carolina. Then that person starts the rest of the primary process with an advantage and some momentum.  Do I think this will happen?  Probably not.  Can it happen?  Sure.  Does the idea of President Bachmann or President Perry terrify me?  You bet. 

Meeting of the Cult of Tax Cuts

So, I decided to watch tonight's Republican debate in Iowa and, ya know, blog about it. This is probably a terrible idea. Debates are boring, and being 15 months from the actual Presidential election, this particular debate couldn't be less important. But, honestly, these people are morons and I can't help myself. As usual, I make no promises about this being coherent, well written or spelled correctly.

If you haven't been paying attention yet, first of all, good for you, and secondly, here's a quick rundown of the participants in no particular order:
1) Minnesota Congresswoman and noted insane person...Michele "Crazy Eyez" Bachmann.
2) Former Godfather's Pizza CEO and the Republican party's new black friend...Herman "The Pizza Man" Cain
3) Former Pennsylvania Senator and enduring internet sensation (google it!)...Rick "Frothy" Santorum
4) Known mormon and possible robot...Mitt "Magic Underpants" Romney
5) Former Minnesota Governor and current person...Tim "Tim" Pawlenty
6) Speaker of the House during, I believe, the Taft administration...Newt "I Can't Believe He's Still Alive" Gingrich
7) Internet darling, Texas Congressman and consistent 5th place finisher...Ron "Dr. Steel Hammer" Paul
8) Former Ambassador to China and less mormony mormon...Jon "Who The Fuck Is That Guy" Huntsman

Without further adieu, live from Crazytown, it's the first of way too many Republican debates. Wait, one pre-debate note. I watched like 45 seconds of Bill O'Reilly while waiting for the debate to begin and he made me curse at the TV twice. Not a good start.

Quick side note, you might be asking yourself why I'm watching Republicans instead of pre-season football. Well, because pre-season football sucks, that's why.

Right off the bat, I have to say I'm surprised and a little disappointed to see that Tim Pawlenty decided not to show up. Wait a minute. You know what? Pawlenty is there. That's my bad, I had mistaken him for a podium.

Fox "News " anchor Bret Baier is the moderator. He's got a panel of some other people asking questions. Baier starts off by asking the candidates to "put aside the talking points". Good luck with all that.

9:04 - First question to Bachmann, hooray! She thinks we shouldn't have raised the debt ceiling, and followed it up with a barrage of talking points. Baier cried a little. Then Romney said President Obama has ruined everything and then gave us a 7 point plan for fixing the economy. Yikes, he's like a Republican John Kerry.

9:07 - When questioned about why he's been in hiding all summer, Romney answered by completely ignoring the question and rambling until Herman's Cain's pizza delivery came to the door (oops, that was the was bell telling us Romney's time was up).

9:08 - Ron Paul did a minute on our failed monetary system. I think he may have been right about most of it, but nobody in the arena, including the seven other candidates, had any idea what he was talking about. Then he mentioned defense cuts and got a big cheer from the crowd. Four years changes a lot of things.

9:11 - Next question: What would President Cain do to re-start the economic engine? Answer: Permanent tax cuts for rich people and corporations. He must be the first Republican to have thought of that awesome plan.

9:12 - Gingrich gets the $100 prize for being the first one to mention Ronald Reagan. I can't believe it took 12 minutes.

9:13 - Pawlenty directs us to his website instead of just answering a question, then asks where Barack Obama's plans are. Maybe they're on his website. Then Pawlenty took a weird shot at Romney, something about one acre. Odd moment.

9:16 - Low blow on Pawlenty from Fox's Chris Wallace. Pawlenty responded by calling Bachmann's record in Congress "non-existent". Bachmann responded by basically saying that having no experience is still better than being Tim Pawlenty. I'll have to agree with her on that one.

9:20 - Did you know Bachmann introduced something called the "Light bulb Freedom of Choice Act"? I'm serious. By the way, we're in the middle of an all out fist fight between Bachmann and Pawlenty at this point. Apparently, Pawlenty is rubber and Bachmann is glue.

9:21 - Baier mentions how Romney made his money by laying people off. Romney's answer basically boiled down to "life's tough, get a helmet".

9:26 - We just met the chairman of the Iowa GOP. He looks EXACTLY how you would picture him. Seriously, try to picture the chairman of the Iowa GOP in your head, and then google him. I guarantee you were close.

9:27 - Gingrich reminds Wallace that any tough question is, by rule, a gotcha question. Wallace got quite a lecture from Newt there. Wallace defended himself and got booed. Meanwhile, Newt still won't address the fact that his whole staff quit.

9:31 - Huntsman might actually not be a moron. As you might expect, the crowd doesn't really know how to react to his answers.

9:32 - Cain gets the prize for being the first one to bring up the imaginary threat of sharia law. That was in response to a question about whether or not he knows enough to be President. I wonder if he knows anything about irony.

9:33 - I may have spoken to soon about Huntsman. He seems to be a fan of the magic Mexico border fence.

9:34 - If you come to America and get a PHD in Physics, Mitt Romney will staple a green card to your diploma. Good to know.

9:35 - Cain says "America has got to learn how to take a joke". I'm with him on that one. It's nice to know Cain has been joking this whole time. For a minute I thought he was trying to run a serious campaign.

9:37 - Gingrich immediately demonstrates his inability to take a joke and then proposes a number of unconstitutional things we can do to immigrants (English as the national language and somehow distinguishing between people who have been here for a long time and people who just got here recently were the highlights). Newt's playing the role of a crazy homeless guy who wandered onto the stage.

9:41 - The liberal-ish guy on the panel is asking the former Governors about the times they raised taxes. The basic response was "lalala, we can't hear you, tax cuts!". Pawlenty and Bachmann are hammering away at each other again. Pawlenty keeps trying to make logical arguments, he doesn't know Bachmann is impervious to logic. So much for Minnesota nice.

9:47 - One minute from Santorum on the importance of negotiation and compromise, except when it comes to taxes.

9:51 - Now Pawlenty's going after Romney. It's open season on front-runners, and Pawlenty's got the shotgun. Also, Romney agrees with everything in President Obama's health care plan, except the fact that President Obama was involved.

9:54 - Bachmann says the government can't force people to buy anything. I wonder if she has car insurance.

9:56 - Ron Paul says government involvement drives a wedge between the doctor and the patient. That's right! Government isn't supposed to get in there, that's where the insurance companies go.

9:57 - Santorum just compared same-sex marriage to polygamy and sterilization. Took him long enough. No follow-up from Baier. Glad he's here. Also, it appears the candidates get to take a walk whenever we have commercials. Sort of like recess.

10:00 - Bachmann came back late from recess. I can't even write a joke for that one.

10:02 - Huntsman has to work on his delivery. I always think he's being sarcastic (come to think of it, maybe he is).

10:04 - Quick side note. If Rick Perry somehow becomes the President, I'm moving to Canada where him and his god can't get me.

10:08 - Every question Gingrich gets is a gotcha question. Also, Gingrich did a pretty good job of laying out his policy on Libya, he believes we should do the opposite of whatever the President is doing, and he feels very strongly about it.

10:14 - Ron Paul doesn't mind Iran developing nuclear weapons, he made the point that we let Russia and China have nuclear weapons. He thinks we should talk to Cuba too. Santorum practically leaped over his podium to disagree with him on Iran. Paul responded with a history lesson about Iran. Silly Ron Paul, Rick Santorum doesn't care about facts.

10:18 - Bachmann was talking about terrorists being given due process and said something that I never understand when Republicans say it. If they believe that the rights granted in our Constitution are given to us by their god, why is it that those rights only apply to Americans? I know why I believe rights in the Constitution only apply to Americans, because I know their god isn't real. But I find their position incongruent. (sorry religious friends, I try not to be mean, but these Republicans get me all riled up).

10:22 - Paul responds to more nonsense from Santorum on Iran by saying "you've just heard the war propaganda that will get us into the next war". I know he's crazy sometimes, but I don't care, Ron Paul's the best.

10:26 - Gingrich explains that his proposed loyalty test for muslims who work in the government would actually apply to everyone. Oh, that makes it OK then.

10:28 - Cain pulls the old "I don't mind Mitt Romney being a mormon, but other people really don't like it" trick. Ya know, I think Herman Cain is great, but I've heard other people think he's a total moron.

10:31 - Romney believes marriage should be decided at the federal level. He looks a lot like that guy who was going on and on about states rights and healthcare like 30 minutes ago. Apparently marriage is different because people move from state to state. Of course, Romney knows that when you move from one state to another, whatever poor health you previously had stays behind.

10:33 - Santorum does not like the gays, and Ron Paul does not like Santorum. Personally, I'm on Ron Paul's side. Santorum also promised to come to every state and be homophobic in person if he has to.

10:37 - Now they're talking about abortion. What the hell? Is there some kind of debate inside the Republican party about this? Are we not sure if the eventual Republican nominee will be anti-choice? Why do they have this weird competition about who hates abortion more every four years? We get it.

10:40 - Romney's in favor of privatizing unemployment benefits. Interesting argument coming from a guy who laid people off for a living. Maybe Mitt should just sit this topic out.

10:43 - Bachmann demonstrates that she still doesn't understand how the debt ceiling works. At least she's consistent with her stupidity.

10:47 - I think Gingrich is going for the overall championship for most mentions of Reagan. He certainly has the lead.

10:50 - Santorum criticizes Bachmann and Paul for not being able to magically use the one vote they each have in the House of Respresentatives to immediately balance the federal budget.

10:54 - Huntsman believes parents and local politicians should be in charge of education. OK, that's it, I'm done with him. You know how I feel about parents and local politicians.

Each candidates gets a closing statement, I'll try to sum them up for you:
Santorum - Iowa's a nice state.
Cain - Something about poetry.
Paul - Ron talked about god. Oh Ron, why do you hurt me so.
Romney - President Obama hasn't lived in the real economy (Huh?)
Bachmann - Washington DC is bad. (where does she work again?)
Pawlenty - More god stuff.
Huntsman - We're all gonna die, unless you vote for me.
Gingrich - Screw the Presidential election, we need to do something now. That was weird, and a perfect ending.

10 Ways to Reduce Our Debt

Our giant national debt is a huge issue. Huge! It has to be, because it's all our Congress talked about all summer. Even the magic of tax cuts hasn't solved our debt issue. We cut taxes all the way back in 2001, and ten years later, for some strange reason, our debt just keeps getting larger. This is a HUGE issue. If there's a problem that can't be solved by tax cuts, Republicans are pretty much out of ideas (no, Rick Perry, praying doesn't count as an idea, I'm only interested in reality based solutions).

Sidenote: Debt wasn't quite such a huge problem when we had white Presidents. It's a good thing the tea party came along when it did. They know that if we don't control the black President's spending, he'll just blow all of our money on grape soda and Tyler Perry DVD's.

Anyway, huge debt or not, I'm not convinced we should be slashing the federal budget. And even if I was convinced, America's intelligence profile indicates that we're too "stupid" to stick to a budget. So, like Homer Simpson, we need more money, and I have ideas.

Bake Sale: Everyone in America bakes a pie. If you can't bake a pie (let's say you don't have access to pie ingredients, or you don't have an oven, or let's say you're an infant), someone else will bake your pie for you. We sell all the pies to Europe, Japan and Australia at a huge mark-up, like $15 a pie. I figure that's at least $10 of profit per pie, times 300 million people (give or take), and that's 3 trillion dollars. Did I mention that any country that refuses to buy our $15 pies gets invaded?

Sloth: We all take month long vacations. That's what Congress is doing, so it has to work. One member of Congress recently explained it on TV by basically saying that's what they always do in August. Oh, OK. Where did we find these people? Is being in Congress so awful that only the craziest, most irrational, least useful people in the country want to do it. I know I've said we get the government we deserve, but holy crap. Who else could cap off two months of gross incompetence with one month of "well deserved" vacation.

Roulette: We take whatever we currently have in the treasury to Vegas and bet it on black. Or red. Whatever. Either way, that's just short of a 50/50 chance of doubling our money right there. After watching Congress take two months to raise our imaginary debt ceiling, wouldn't you take 50/50 odds over whatever our current odds are of solving this problem?

Anarchy: This is what the tea people want, right? If there's no government, there's no debt. Just freedom, horrible freedom. And zombies. I don't know how, but anarchy seems to lead to zombies most of the time. Or maybe zombies lead to anarchy. I guess we'll find out.

Real Estate: How much do you think Canada would give us for Alaska? What if we were willing to throw in Montana, the Upper Peninsula of Michigan and the top part of Maine? OK, all of Maine. You drive a hard bargain Canada. If they won't buy our land, we go to plan B, holding Justin Bieber for ransom.

New Currency: We could convince the world to switch to a new global currency based on something we already have in abundance. Can you base a currency on fat people? How about abandoned factories? We have tons of those. I explored the downside of cheese based money in an earlier post, but if we encased the cheese in some kind of impenetrable, inedible substance, that could still work.

Robot Hilter: I recently saw Virginia Congressman Jim Moran giving a quick summary of how we got out of the Great Depression. First, there was the New Deal. Then, in 1937, Republicans tried to ruin the New Deal for some reason (it seems stupidity was part of the Republican platform long before the tea people came along, who knew?). Then, along came Hitler and we fought our way out of our economic troubles by killing nazis.

Well, Hitler's already dead, nothing we can do about that. But, Robot Hitler can be alive and kicking just as soon as someone invents him. Of course, there's roughly a 75% chance Robot Hitler takes over the world, becomes Skynet and kills us all. But, if we win, it's mostly smooth economic sailing for like 30 years until Robot Reagan comes along and ruins it all again.

Sidenote #2: Extra benefit of the Robot Hitler plan. We finally have someone who pundits and politicians can fairly compare to actual Hitler.

Ocean's 11: Step 1: We put together an elite team of thieves to go rob all the countries that still have money. Step 2: We use the stolen money to pay those same countries back what we owe them. They'll be especially happy to take it, seeing as all their money just mysteriously went missing. "Gee Japan, I'm sorry all your money disappeared, we'll be sure to keep an eye out for it. On an unrelated note, we just found all these yen at the bottom of the grand canyon. Here you go."

Heel Turn: I loved wrestling when I was a kid. If you didn't, here's how the heel turn works. We invite China out to the ring to "talk" about that little sum of money we owe them. We're the good guys, so China doesn't suspect anything. China's music hits and they stroll on down with a big smile. As China is preening for the crowd...BANG! Chair shot to the back of the head...heel turn!

As Always: Guns n Roses reunion concert. We hold it in America and charge the world to see it. We'd easily make 14 trillion dollars with plenty to spare to pay the boys.

Saint Derek of The Bronx

When Ken Griffey Jr. retired, I attempted to put his career into some kind of historical context. With Derek Jeter recently reaching 3,000 hits, I thought it would be a good time to do the same with him. Where does Jeter stand all-time? As a Yankee? As a shortstop?

I should probably mention a couple of things before we start. First, I always really liked Griffey Jr. while, in comparison, I've always been pretty ambivalent about Jeter. On the plus side, he's been around for five championships for my favorite team, and he was a key player (if maybe not the best player, but we'll get to that) for each winning team. On the down side, I rarely buy into intangibles and leadership (which we'll also get to) and "that guy is just a winner". In that way, Jeter is tailor-made for me to hate, if he played for any other team, he'd probably be my least favorite athlete ever.

Also, just to get it out of the way right now, when I talk about comparing Jeter to other shortstops, I'm not including A-Rod. First of all, Alex only played shortstop for half of his career, and secondly, steroids. Say what you want about Derek, but he'd probably make anyone's top ten list of "guys who seem clean". Could he have us all fooled? Sure, but he's never tested positive or publicly admitted using PED's and, at this point, that's the only fair standard we can use.

So, where do you put Derek all-time as a Yankee? I heard some radio moron yesterday saying he was definitely in the discussion as a top-five Yankee(actually, now that I think about it, that moron might have been Joe Girardi). Stop right there. The top four all time Yankees are set in stone; Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle and Dimaggio. Some people put Dimaggio ahead of Mantle, I continue to call those people Communists.

That only leaves one more spot in the top five, and we're already done. Even if you like Jeter more than the other guys from the past (Whitey Ford, Yogi, Munson, Mattingly, etc...for me, Whitey gets the 5th spot), you can't put Derek ahead of Mariano, who is the best relief pitcher of all time and was THE MOST important guy on each of Jeter's five championship teams, period.

So, top ten maybe? Now we're talking. I'd put Ford and Rivera 5th and 6th. Jeter beats Munson and, I think, Mattingly. Mattingly's four year run from 1984 to 1987 tops any four consecutive years Jeter had (1998-2001 or 2005-2008 being the two best four year runs for Jeter), but there's something to be said for longevity and, especially with the Yankees, championships.

The tough one for me is comparing Jeter to Yogi Berra. Yogi was a three-time MVP, and finished second in the voting two other times. Jeter's highest MVP finish was second, which he did once. Yogi was also part of 10 championship teams, compared to Jeter's five (to be fair, Jeter did it with a lot more teams in the league). On the other hand, Derek will most likely finish his career with something like 1,000 more hits than Yogi, including seven 200 hit seasons compared to Yogi's zero.

Tough call, but I like Jeter just a little more. A .300+ career average and well over 3,000 career hits are two statistical career milestones that Yogi can't touch, and I think it's enough. Plus, as I learned on the YES Network this weekend, Derek Jeter's sweat can be distilled and used as a cure for over 20 diseases...and counting. So there's that.

What about all-time shortstops? Shortstops are really hard to compare, because defense factors into the equation in a way that it doesn't necessarily do at other positions. For example, here are the career offensive numbers for a guy who is, as far as most people are concerned, easily a top five all-time shortstop:

.262 BA, 2460 hits, 28 HRs, 793RBI, 580SB

The low power numbers and high number of stolen bases point to a lead-off hitter, but this guy's .337 career OBP tells you he wasn't a great lead-off guy. These numbers belong to Ozzie Smith. As much as I trust offensive numbers, I don't really like the numbers they've made up to measure defense in baseball. For example, Ozzie's career range factor per nine innings was 5.22, Derek's is 4.11. Ozzie's is higher, but is that a lot higher or just a little higher? So, does Ozzie Smith go ahead of Derek Jeter on the all-time shortstop list. I say yes. Can I prove it? Not really.

As compared to other great shortstops, MVP's are Jeter's big Achilles heal (0 for Derek compared to 2 for Cal Ripken, 2 for Ernie Banks and 1 for Barry Larkin), but that evens out with championships, Derek's five are more than Ripken, Larkin, Banks, Alan Trammell and Ozzie Smith combined.

I like Arky Vaughn is a historical comparison for Jeter. Batting average (.318) and homeruns (96) pretty close when adjusted for era. If Vaughn had played a full career, he probably would have reached 3,000 hits. Ernie Banks makes a decent comparison too. They're different players, but Derek's high average, 3,000 hits and 5 championships puts him pretty close to Banks' MVPs and power. I'd probably place Derek fourth all-time, behind Honus Wagner, Banks and Smith, just in front of Vaughn and safely ahead of Larkin, Trammel and the stupendously overrated Ripken.

Guys like A-Rod and Robin Yount are hard to categorize by position, having spent plenty of time elsewhere on the field. Yount was great, but probably not quite where Jeter is. Omar Vizquel is tough for the same reason as Ozzie, but probably just a bit behind Derek. Also, unlike the rest of the these guys, Jeter is able to use his psychic powers, which continue to grow as long as Derek lives under the light of a yellow sun, to magically make his teammates better.

So what about those amazing leadership abilities? Let's get a few things straight. First of all, almost nothing in sports is less meaningful than being the captain of a baseball team. Calling Jeter "the Captain" is roughly the same as when a co-worker walks into your office and you say "hey chief". It doesn't make him an actual chief, he's still just some guy you work with.

Secondly, Derek's awesome leadership didn't build 1996-2000 Yankees, unless Gene Michael was actually Jeter in an old man costume, which I guess he could have been. Also, where was the Dear Leader when A-Rod showed up in town and everyone hated him for no real reason. Seems like that would have been an awesome time for the greatest leader in the history of the human race to step up and help out a new teammate.

So, here's the point. Derek Jeter is one of only 28 guys with 3,000 hits. I have him as a top five shortstop and a top ten Yankee, and I think it's fair to put him in the top 75 of all-time players, but that's the end of the story. He's a great baseball player, but he's just a guy, ya know? I always really wanted to like Derek, but I think my natural aversion to religion hurt me here. With so many other people making Derek out to be a god, it takes all my energy just to be willing to believe he exists.

The Curious Case of the Mets

In general, I don't believe in anything, or I at least try not to believe in anything. I try to know things, knowledge being belief in something that is true. We can't always know what is true, but we can try to find out.

So, I don't believe in god, or gods, or superstition. I don't believe in fate or destiny. I don't believe in ghosts or spirits. I know sometimes people can get lucky, but I don't believe a person, or a group, or a team can be consistently lucky or unlucky. I certainly don't believe in curses. And yet, there's the curious case of the New York Mets.

As a native New Yorker, the Mets were always somewhere on my TV. I would watch them whenever the Yankees were off, or rained out, or playing at a different time, or playing Baltimore for the 15th time and I just couldn't stand it anymore. I'm happy to root for the Mets as long as they aren't playing the Yankees (which, incidentally, should happen never unless they meet in the World Series; I hate interleague play SO MUCH).

I worry about the Mets. In the 24+ seasons since the 1986 World Series victory, here are some numbers on the B team in the nation's biggest market (which, of course, rightfully means they should be the best team in the National League):

11 losing seasons (including 103 losses in 1993, which put them 5 games behind the expansion Marlins)
11 different managers
4 playoff appearances
1 World Series appearance

And the playoff appearances...oh, the playoff appearances, almost tailor-made to slowly drive fans into insanity.

1988: The Mets go up 2-1 in the NLCS before losing two home games, only to win game six in Los Angeles and then ultimately get shut down by Orel Hershiser in a game 7 that was over after two innings.

1999: After falling behind Atlanta 3-0, the Mets fight back to make it a series with two one-run victories, including a 15-inning game 5 win in which they were down one going into the bottom of the 15th. Then, they lost game 6 by the score of 10-9 in extra innings after overcoming a 5-run first inning deficit.

2000: The Mets finally get all the way back to the World Series, only to have their pants pulled down on national television by a cross-town rival that simply had them outgunned. The Yankees never had a doubt, the Mets never had a chance.

2006: Game 7 against the spectacularly mediocre Cardinals. Down two, bases loaded, two outs. Carlos Beltran, easily the Mets' best player that season, watches somberly as strike three sails right on by, almost like he was thinking "OK, I've got him right where I want him, when he tries to throw strike four by me, I'm gonna hit it out of the park!".

What's wrong with the Mets? Why aren't they the best team in the National League, the one that New York deserves? Some people go right to ownership. As far as I'm concerned, the owner's only job is to provide money, and the Mets have been top 10 in payroll every year since 1986, including 2003 when they were second and still managed to lose 95 games. Say what you want about the Mets' ownership, they put up the cash.

Poor management then? Maybe, Omar Minaya made a lot of mistakes. Letting Willie Randolph, the best manager the team had since Davey Johnson (you heard me!), go in 2008 when the team was just one game under .500 was a huge blunder. But then, so was letting Davey Johnson, the most successful manager in Met history, go in 1990 when the team was 2 games under .500 just 42 games in. Omar was scouting for the Texas Rangers when that happened.

Omar signed a ton of bad contracts too. Luis Castillo and Oliver Perez were disasters. He overpaid for Carlos Beltran by at least 20 million dollars, and don't even get me started on Jason Bay. But Omar wasn't there for Bobby Bonilla, or Vince Coleman. He wasn't even the one who signed Kaz Matsui.

The Mets failed miserably, over and over again, to properly develop young talent under Omar Minaya. Lastings Milledge never panned out, and Fernando Martinez already looks pretty much ruined. Mike Pelfrey could have been an ace, but now it looks like he's rounding into a guy who can be the number 3 starter on a championship team.

But failure to properly handle prospects goes back 20 years for this franchise. Remember Gregg Jefferies? A constant disappointment with the Mets who left, spent a year toiling in Kansas City and then hit .342 and .325 in back to back years in St. Louis. I could fill this space just with names of talented guys who never panned out or good young players the Mets traded away (like Heath Bell, Scott Kazmir, Alex Escobar, Alex Ochoa, Bill Pulsipher, Milledge again just for fun, etc, etc, etc).

I've recently started to think the Mets' training staff may be to blame. How do you constantly have this many injuries to key guys? I understand Pedro Martinez was an injury risk when they signed him, everyone knew they wouldn't really get four full years from Pedro. Carlos Beltran seems to be falling apart, but maybe he's just getting older. Jason Bay played in at least 145 games every year since 2005, until last year. But maybe he's just getting older too. Maybe Jose Reyes is just injury prone. Maybe Johan Santana was always heading toward shoulder surgery. Maybe David Wright's recent back problem was just a freak thing. Maybe...maybe...maybe, but why are all these things happening to the same team?

I look at the Mets this year and I can't decide if they should go for the wild card or trade some key guys and start rebuilding. Currently, the Mets are two games over .500 and 7.5 games back of Atlanta in the wild card standings, and that's with, arguably, three of their best five players (Wright, Davis and Santana) on the DL, and a fourth one (Reyes) probably heading in that direction. If the Mets got all of those guys back by August 1st, and maybe added another pitcher (I'd love to see them add a #2 starter if they could find one), they could be a serious wild card contender.

On the other hand, this is probably their last chance to get something for Beltran, and they may have already missed the boat on getting something for Reyes while he was healthy. If they dealt Beltran, Reyes (if the injury isn't serious) and K-Rod, they could really stock a farm system that's currently running on empty. Additionally, the Mets (or Braves, or Diamondbacks, or Pirates or anyone else in the NL) have almost no shot at getting past the pitching in Philadelphia and San Francisco, so is it worth it for the Mets or anyone else to push knowing a playoff berth will ultimately end badly?

I think so. A healthy Met team, even with automatic outs at catcher and second base, can out-hit Philadelphia and San Francisco. If they were to add a legitimate #2 starter, that guy could join a healthy and fresh Santana, a solid #3 in Pelfrey and the emerging Dillon Gee or Jonathon Niese in a pretty formidable playoff rotation. You can't really count on the Mets' bullpen, but you can't really count on anyone's bullpen.

I said at the beginning of the season the Mets had "nobody believed in us" written all over them. That's even more true now with all the injuries. It's amazing what a competent manager can do with some talented players. I think the Mets should go for it, keep all the key guys and make one or two additions (namely, a starting pitcher. I've decided Chad Billingsley should be available. I'd suggest adding a second baseman, but I honestly can't think of one that might be available and worth anything).

If they can just get to the post-season, anything can happen, unless they're cursed. But even if they are cursed, they should still go for it. A cursed team can't win the World Series, but rebuilding won't help either, so they might as well have some fun before dumping another season into the black hole of losing. And I'll be rooting for them, because if they get to the World Series, I can't imagine they'll find the Yankees there. Just the thought of needing wins from Bartolo Colon and Freddy Garcia in October makes me a little queasy.

Inception

I recently had a very odd dream in which I was eating lunch in my college cafeteria (the school I went to, not the one at which I currently work) with various childhood friends who I haven't seen (except on Facebook, if that counts as "seeing") in anywhere between 13 and 18 years. I awoke from this dream at work, at approximately 3PM on a Friday. It took me a couple of minutes to realize that:
A) I don't sleep at work
B) the friend with whom I was excitedly sharing the details of the dream is no longer a co-worker and
C) my office isn't located in my grandparents' house.

These simultaneous realizations jarred me into the real world, where I found myself slowly waking up on a Sunday morning, comfortably tucked into my bed in my nicely air conditioned apartment. I had experienced the rare dream within a dream. I immediately decided that I would have to stop watching Inception whenever it appeared on HBO, as it was clearly starting to infect parts of my brain.

The rest of my day consisted of breakfast, or lunch, whatever you'd call it when you're eating right after you woke up, but it's happening at 1PM because you've been afflicted with the sleeping patterns of a small, nocturnal mammal. Then I read a book (seriously, I finished reading a book! The first book I actually sat down and read since I read Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time sometime in 2004 or 2005). Then, some TV sports consisting of a Yankees game (thank you MLB extra innings) and NASCAR (sports pickins are slim in the summertime).

Then, Fox News Sunday. The first segment of the show was an interview with Republican presidential candidate and noted crazy person Michele Bachmann. The second segment was a brief interview, mostly about the budget negotiations, with Arizona Senator Jon Kyl, who proves his fiscal conservative bona fides by not spending money on superfluous letters for his name. As expected, we spent most of their collective half hour in Fantasyland (specifics in a minute).

How did it come to this? I imagine, at some point in our history, politicians and other public leaders spent their time saying things that were true, or that they at least believed to be true. Then, as politics became a career rather than a temporary state of public service, there was the natural migration toward pandering to voters, but that stopped working after a while. People are stupid and they don't even know what they believe half the time, and sometimes they start to believe that they don't like being pandered to. It's all such a hassle.

But then, somebody had an idea. I'm picturing Dick Morris and Karl Rove in a dimly lit laboratory somewhere in Washington D.C. The idea? Inception. If you haven't seen the movie, inception is a pretty simple concept. You plant an idea in a person's mind in a way that makes them think they had the idea on their own, thereby causing them to act on the idea as they would if it really were their own.

Here's how it works:
Step 1: Introduce a relatively simple, but emotionally charged talking point into the public debate and/or news cycle. You can do this yourself, but it's even better if you can use your favorite shill "commentator" in the media ("remember, if we want this to work, we have to use words Sean Hannity would use, nothing over one and a half syllables").

Step 2: Wait to see if the idea takes hold. It's important to use an idea that people would want to believe, or an idea that would give them a "logical" excuse to feel a way they already feel for irrational reasons. Example: Gay marriage destroys families.

Sidenote: If the idea doesn't properly take hold, just stop saying it. And when you run for President, tell everyone you never said it, even as news people show you video of you saying it.

Step 3: Once the idea takes hold, do some polling. If you've done your job correctly, the "American people" will parrot your idea back to you in the form of poll answers. The media will then do your bidding and report these poll answers as "news". For example, this just in from CNN..."like, zOMG you guys! A majority of the American people don't want to raise the debt ceiling, and this is important, even though most of them have no idea what that means." OK, maybe that isn't "just in" from CNN, but it sounds like a headline they'd use.

So then, let's say you're Michele Bachmann, and you go on some Sunday show and the sad looking man in the suit asks you about same sex marriage. You can proudly say you don't agree with it. But not because you're a bigot. You aren't a bigot, you're a good person, just look at all your foster children. No, you have to be against gay marriage, because you're just standing up for the American people, who are overwhelmingly in favor of protecting the family, which we all know is constantly under threat of gay destruction (sidenote #2: I have a number of homosexual or bisexual friends, I keep forgetting to ask them why they hate families so much, I should write that down so I remember).

Or, let's say you're Jon Kyl. You have to defend the tax cuts demanded by your corporate overlords and the other various super-rich people who own you (and your entire party, and the other party too, and really the whole country...sigh). Well, that sounds pretty indefensible. But, luckily, your party has been seeding the public debate for 30 years with ideas like "tax cuts create jobs" and "tax cuts actually increase revenue through the magic power of tax cuts" and "tax cuts equal freedom". That last one is especially insidious because it equates something tangible and easily given (tax cuts) with something intangible and impossible to give, something that must occur naturally or be earned (freedom).

So then, Jon Kyl can go on Fox News Sunday and suggest the President wants to put an anchor around the neck of the economy with his evil plan to slightly raise the top marginal tax rate. It's not fair to punish success by making people pay taxes. Seriously you guys!!! It's, like, so unfair!

I know I'm picking on Republicans again, but that's because they're so much better at this. It's like picking on Barry Bonds for (allegedly) using steroids. I'm sure plenty of other guys you never heard of (allegedly) used steroids, but you've still never heard of them, so who cares?

Anyway, I think I have some possible solutions to this problem:
1) We could all try being a little smarter and better informed (just kidding).
2) We could hook elected officials and people running for office up to lie detectors whenever they're speaking publicly (I actually really like this one, it would quickly turn any debate, speech or TV appearance into a game show we all watch to see if the lie detector goes off).
3) We could stop letting corporations and rich people buy politicians legally through campaign contributions (once again, just kidding, the Supreme Court is always right and legalizing bribery was an awesome idea).
4) We could start electing bears to run the country for a while. What they would lack in logic, reason and writing skills, they would make up for in mauling our enemies and stealing honey from other countries. What's that? You say a bear can't be President? Well sir, I say that makes you a bear racist.

I seem to have lost my train of thought. Where was I going with this? Oh yeah, I was going back to where I always go. I wish politicians would stop telling me what the American people want. First of all, I'm an American person, and I almost never want whatever it is they're telling me I want. Secondly, I don't care what the other American people want, because, for many reasons, including the one I just theorized about, what they want is usually stupid.

I'm tired of asking for a show of hands whenever we have a problem. Michele Bachmann was making the point yesterday that the government has a responsibility to protect the American people from same sex marriage, because a majority of them don't want it. No moron! The government has a responsibility to protect LGBT people from the dumbass majority trying to withhold rights from them for no good reason. Which is why, as always, New York is the best state ever.

The Darkness

One of my favorite exchanges from the best TV show ever:

President Bartlet: "The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral. Returning violence with violence only multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars."
Leo: "Dr. King"
President Bartlet: "I'm part of that darkness now Leo. When did that happen?"
Leo: "Dr. King wasn't wrong, he just didn't have your job."

So, I don't know if you heard, but apparently, Navy Seals shot Osama Bin Laden in the face last Sunday (awesome work, by the way. If I ever open a restaurant, military people eat free, all the time, forever and ever). In a related story, Donald Trump had a very negative reaction when the world stopped paying attention to him for five minutes, causing him to shoot Meatloaf in the face (I kid Mr. Loaf. I only half kid Mr. Trump, who is nothing more than an inherited billionaire attention whore. He's like an old man version of Paris Hilton).

I admit to having a wide range of reactions to the Bin Laden news. I think I started at "yeah America!". Not just because our military finally got him, but because after eight years of Presidential, let's say, unremarkability, we all got together and said "you know what we should try, electing someone smart". Two and half years later, BANG! Right in the face! Good electing by us.

I've heard multiple Bush administration people and lots of Republicans trying to give the former President some credit for this. I saw Michelle Malkin on Fox literally making the case that the Obama administration finally getting Bin Laden vindicates and justifies everything the Bush administration ever did in the areas of foreign policy and national security.

Come on guys. This happened two and half years into the Obama presidency, this is 100% his thing. I don't understand what's wrong with people sometimes. These are the same people who have been telling me it's Obama's economy now since the summer of 2009. I, by the way, would like to suggest that this is still Ronald Reagan's economy. He's the patron saint of deregulation and never ending tax cuts.

Anyway, then I went to "singing in the streets doesn't really seem like the appropriate reaction to this". I started thinking we're supposed to be the good guys in this fight, and the good guys don't usually do the killing, and they certainly don't usually do the singing about it. Batman doesn't kill the bad guys, he just leaves them tied up for Commissioner Gordon to deal with. This lasted about ten minutes, then I realized this isn't a superhero movie and sometimes you have to kill the bad guys because it's the only way to deal with them.

And yes, while I almost always reject President Bush's black and white, with us or against us view of the world, there are a few people who are just bad guys, and there isn't another side of the story (I feel like all of my Rashard Mendenhall fueled fantasy football victories are tainted). One of those bad guys is now at the bottom of the ocean with a big hole in his face.

Then I thought "the final season of Rescue Me is going to be AWESOME!" Right? It's not necessarily that I think this recent news will make Rescue Me better, although it certainly could, but being reminded of 9/11 immediately reminded me of Rescue Me and how much I can't wait for the last season to start. I may try to freeze myself for the next two months.

After that thought came, "I hope everybody enjoys President Obama's second term, I know I will". Sure it was crass to think about politics at that point, but whatever, I like politics. Just look at the reality of President Obama's clear competence vs. the carnival of morons that currently make up the Republican field. My pick for the GOP nomination, Haley Barbour, who I contend is not a moron and could be a serious candidate, dropped out of the race before he even got in. Thanks for playing. I don't know who to root for in the Republican primaries now. Mitch Daniels? He's like 8 inches tall.

And then, as I went to sleep Sunday night, I think I was back at "yeah America!". But the "yeah America!" of today isn't the same as it was back in, say, 1998. The darkness makes things more complicated, murkier. We know a lot more now, including plenty of things we never wanted to know. I now know that you can't just capture the world's most wanted terrorist, put him on trial and throw him in prison forever. All you can do is find him, shoot him in the face and throw him in the ocean. I really didn't want to know that.