Musings on Sports, Politics and Life in general

Latest

Nutcases & Hypocrites


I get plenty of people asking me why, if I’m as non-partisan as I claim, do I spend so much time bashing Democrats.

That’s probably the easiest question to answer I can imagine. This is why:

26991952_10156081152319764_751150742036256179_n

So is this: pelosicrazy

And of course, who can forget this:

maxresdefault

Folks, Republicans are hypocrites. They’re liars. They have no moral compass, except the one that polls best in October of an election year. They would sell their own mother to the highest campaign donor, if that’s what it took.

But let’s face it: Democrats are flat-out CRAZY. I mean not, “Maybe Johnny needs a Diazapam” crazy. We’re talking full-blown, straight jacket ready, padded room required INSANE. Think Jack Nicholson in “The Shining,” or Anthony Hopkins in “Silence of the Lambs,” and you’ve got an idea how positively nuts Democrats have become.

So, yes, of course I’m going to drop as many bombs on them as I can. I have a faint hope Republicans can be reformed. Their sins are those of character, not utter foolishness. But Democrats? As long as their party is obsessed with trying to justify 37 genders and insisting everyone not named “Kamala Harris” is a racist rapist, they’re beyond hope.

Advertisements

Shitholes, Fucktards & Distractions


Well, THERE’S a headline I never thought I would see, much less write.

Unless you’ve been living on Mars for the past week, you might be confused by this topic. It certainly seems a great number of people who should know better – our politicians, our press and our pundits – are confounded, similarly to how a dog might wonder what his master is up to by having a bone yanked away just as he’s about to take a bite.

outhouse-2-wesleying

So a quick refresher course might be in order, both for those recently arrived from outer space and us more earthbound types.

On January 9, during what became an impromptu, hour-long televised bipartisan meeting on immigration matters in the Cabinet Room, the basic framework for granting amnesty to the roughly 800,000 “Dreamers” seemed agreed to. In exchange for amnesty, Democrats would agree to a $1.8 billion down payment on border security measures, which presumably would go towards further development of the border wall. Hammering out the long overdue overhaul to America’s immigration system would be fast-tracked after the budget was passed.

But in typical Washington fashion, nobody could long stand the positive vibes. Liberals immediately decried the border wall, Trumpkins decried the amnesty. And so…

On January 11, a new “Gang of Six’ (apparently, the old “Gang of Eight” atrophied in the bright sunlight the last time Congress attempted to tackle immigration) struck a deal that they simply had to know was going to be a non-starter with anyone politically left of California. In exchange for amnesty not only for “Dreamers,” but their extended families, granting permanent residency to everyone here under Temporary Protected Status and a couple thousand fewer lottery visas, the government would get $1.8 billion in border security measures.

The White House almost immediately announced their displeasure with essentially granting fully legal status to over 4 million illegal aliens. Which brings us to…

Can you say “verpiss dich?” No? How about “shithole” (or “shithouse,” depending on who’s interpretation of events you choose to believe)?

That evening, during a meeting with the Gang of Six and a few others, the President made his position clear: no more unfettered immigration from shithole (or shithouse) countries, which he loosely defined as being Haiti, El Salvador, and pretty much all of Africa. But not Norway.

And so, for four days now, any discussion of doing the actual work required of this Congress and the Executive branch – little things, like passing spending plans for the federal government and actually passing a realistic immigration plan and doing something about border security and doing something about entitlements and…

You get the picture? Instead of focusing on the real business of governance, we’re distracted by discussions of the President’s racial animus. (For the zillionth time, he isn’t a racist – but he is, as we all are, a prejudiced shithole. Deal with it.) And here’s the part that drives people like me nuts: any substantive discussion regarding immigration is immediately tinged with calls of “racism” by those opposed to anything other than fully open borders. All because the President uttered a rather crass epithet in describing a rather larger segment of the world.

Here’s what should be beyond dispute: there are large swaths of the globe in Africa, Asia, Central and South America that are, in the common vernacular, either outhouses or the holes located at the bottom of an outhouse. There isn’t one sane person who would describe Haiti,  Gabon, Rwanda or Chad as a prime tourist destination. Nobody except a Jack Nicholson character would characterize Thailand, Libya, El Salvador or Venezuela as the kind of place where you would want to raise your kids (it’s a great neighborhood, Mr. Nicholson – on a good day, you can get three hours of electricity, the corner market will have toilet paper and the drug gangs will only take half your belongings!).

Here’s what should also be beyond dispute: not everyone from a basket case nation is themselves a basket case. Yes, the predominant population in those places isn’t

****TRIGGER WARNING****

(the following statement will be too true for some of you)

what we want as new Americans. After all, if they were their countries wouldn’t be basket case outhouses. But some of those people are the sorts of folks we do want to come here, and those should be the ones we allow in.

****TRIGGER WARNING CANCELLED****

Merit has nothing to do with nation of origin or skin color. Conversely,

****TRIGG… oh, screw it

barring someone from, say, Haiti likewise has nothing to do with skin color, either. But the President’s remarks, which were in response to the asinine idea that the “temporary” in TPS now means the same thing as permanent in non-Washington speak, have been twisted, misconstrued, massaged and rebranded by both sides of the identity politics war into competing clarion calls.

That’s what all the teeth gnashing , thumb sucking and 140 character diatribes of the past four days have left us with. If you happen to agree with the President’s position that maybe, just maybe, a system that right now says if your homeland, which wasn’t in particularly great shape to begin with, get whacked with a hurricane, you get to stay here indefinitely, is off-kilter, you’re branded a racist. If you sort of wandered over the border, or maybe overstayed a tourist visa, a couple of decades ago, no biggie – you get to stay, too (why should our laws apply to you? You meant well)! If you think that a system that says we’re going to have immigration based on a lottery, where winning not only means you get to set up house here, but you can bring your mother, your brother, your great uncle and your second cousin thrice removed while we deny a software engineer residency is just a wee bit out of whack, you’re a racist. If you happen to think the systems in Canada, India, Japan, South Korea, etc, and so forth (all, by the way, “enlightened liberal” democratic societies) might be something we could learn from, you’re obviously a racist. Because those damned Canucks are totally racist, eh?

So, how do we get out of this miasma of non-productivity? I’d suggest the first thing to do would be for both sides to ditch to identity politics and identity politicians, pundits, journalists and all the rest of that diaspora. Al Sharpton, you gotta go. Same for you, Sean Hannity. Because so help me, if I hear one more idiot yell “I’m a proud black man!’ or type in all caps “I’M PROUD TO BE WHITE”, I just might lose it.

Speaking of identity politicians, if I see one more disingenuous congresscritter emerge from a private meeting fuming about language, I might just have to point them to their own past statements (bunch of hypocrites, the lot of ’em). Besides, ever listen to the tapes from the Kennedy, Johnson or Nixon Oval Offices? You would hear language that would make a Parris Island Drill Instructor blush. And Trumplicans don’t get a pass on this, either. Saying the President didn’t utter one epithet because he used a different cuss word is equally disingenuous. It was pure huckstering on both sides, and it had the desired effect. The status quo will remain for at least two more years. Congratulations! Washington has once again succeeded at doing the one thing it’s proven incredibly efficient at: creating new problems while ignoring the existing ones. It’s back to the ramparts, you plebes – fight the good fight and if the country burns in the meantime…well, at least I won reelection.

 

Do the Yankees Need Another Infielder?


As a result of the Brian Cashman’s moves in December (trading Starlin Castro for Giancarlo Stanton; trading Chase Headley for Jabari Blash), the Yankees find themselves without a credible veteran presence at second and third base. The current starters would likely come from a trio of rookies: Gleyber Torres, Miguel Andujar and Tyler Wade, along with the possibility of utility player Ronald Torreyes of earning a starting shot in Spring Training. The question is, can a team hoping to reach the World Series in October live to get there while playing multiple rookies?

Last season, the team won 91 games with Castro and Headley playing regularly. In addition to breakout seasons from the two Aarons (Judge and Hicks), it has to be noted that the Yankees received above normal production from both of the since departed infielders. Headley posted a 100 OPS+, an advance over the 94 he had posted over the previous three seasons. Castro provided a 106 OPS+, even more substantially above the 97 aggregate for his previous three years than Headley’s sudden offensive output. Yet, despite those improvements in offense over previous years, both players were essentially league average. Defensive metrics weren’t kind to both players, either: Headley posted a -11 DRS at third, while Castro limped to -8 DRS at second. Really, replacing these two former Yankees with simply league average production, both offensively and defensively, would actually mark an improvement from 2017.

Another factor to consider is the Yankees well and often stated desire to drop below the $197 million salary tax threshold and how any available veterans would fit into that framework. Let’s take a look at some of the names who’ve been rumored to possibly heading to the Yankees.

  1. Josh Harrison, Pirates: Harrison provides adequate defense at both second and third, along with the ability to play both outfield corners. He also brings better than average contact skills, striking out in only 15% of his plate appearances over the past three seasons. He’s also in the last year of his contract, owed a little under $12 million (including team buyouts of options), which might be doable. But he’s only managed a 95 OPS+ over the last three years, and Pittsburgh will want a decent prospect return for one of their more valuable players.
  2. Todd Frazier, Free Agent: The Yankees have familiarity with Frazier, having swung a deadline trade for him last year. I think many Yankee fans would love to see Frazier return, as he proved to not only be an excellent defender, but gave the team a much needed lift in both the clubhouse and the lineup. He also brings some defensive versatility, although metrics aren’t kind to his glovework at first base. But Frazier is looking for a multi-year contract, will be entering his age 32 season and while he has averaged a 110 OPS+ and 34 homers over the last three seasons, his production is already declining. It’s hard to see him agreeing to take a pay cut from the $15 million he earned last year on a short term contract, and I doubt the Yankees are looking to make a long term commitment to a player who’s shown declining production.
  3. Mike Moustakas, Free Agent: By all accounts, Moustakas would bring many of the same team leadership traits as Frazier. He’s also three years younger and profiles as better offensive threat than Frazier, having averaged a 117 OPS+ over the past three years with his production on an upswing. No doubt his lefty power would play well in Yankee Stadium and provide a valuable counterweight to the Yankees predominately right handed line-up. While his defense isn’t quite the caliber of Frazier or Harrison, nor does he provide any defensive versatility, he also isn’t a liability with the glove at third. In short, he would be a massive upgrade over Headley. But he is represented by Scott Boras, the one agent who’s known for extracting maximum contracts for his players. A 6 year, $120 million contract for Moustakas seems reasonable, but such a contract would blow apart the Yankees budget.
  4. Manny Machado, Orioles: This one strikes me as far-fetched. It’s arguable that he is the best third baseman in the game today. Even if the Yankees could somehow convince the Orioles to trade their best player within the division, there are a couple of additional roadblocks. First, Machado wants to return to shortstop, his original position – but the Yankees already have an all-star caliber shortstop, who also happens to be a team leader, in Didi Gregorius. Second, Machado is in the last year of his contract and is widely expected to receive a contract next year that would dwarf Giancaralo Stanton’s. While I suspect the Yankees could make Machado a very happy third baseman by giving him a 10 year, $400 million contract extension (not unreasonable, no matter how crazy that sounds), that would absolutely blow away any hopes of getting back under the salary cap this year.
  5. Jed Lowrie, A’s: To me, giving up prospects for Lowrie would be a waste of resources. The veteran is entering his age 34 season, has had trouble staying on the field and only sports a league average bat (102 OPS+). While he is capable of playing third, second or short, the only position he’s played decently over recent seasons is second. The only positive he brings to the conversation is that he’s only owed $8 million on an expiring contract.
  6. Yangveris Solarte: Solarte broke into the majors with the Yankees in 2014 and became an immediate feel-good story. The he was traded (ironically, for Chase Headley) midseason and since then has been, well, Chase Headley. While Solarte can play third, second or first, his glovework hovers between statuesque and terrible while only wielding a 105 OPS+. The only positive he brings to the equation is he won’t reach free agency until 2020, but that seems like something that would be more useful to a team like the Marlins than the Yankees.

So, back to the Yankees in-house options. Torres is the big name here. He is currently the second-ranked prospect in all of professional baseball and, despite only being 21 years old, seemed ticketed to making his major league debut last year. Nobody has much doubt about his talent level. The questions regard seasoning; he only has 96 AAA at bats and 139 in AA. Not even 300 professional at bats in the two highest major league levels would mean a lot of learning in the major leagues. Not that a player with Torres’ talent level is incapable of making that jump; after all, the Red Sox Rafael Devers played extremely well with similar minor league experience before coming up. A bigger question might be his defense, and again strictly from an experience standpoint. To date, Torres only has 83 professional innings at second base, which would be his presumed position in the Bronx. Again, it’s not a question of talent. But a second baseman who has only turned two double plays in his life poses a lot of questions about how well he can handle the position.

Andujar may be the most intriguing player in the bunch. Originally signed in 2012, he finally started to put it all together in 2016. Last year was something of a breakout year for him. Most scouts aren’t worried about his ability to hit major league pitching (in a one game call-up, he went 3-4 with 4 RBI). Rather, the questions surround the third baseman’s ability to field his position. However, it isn’t a question of physical tools. Andujar has above average arm strength and range. Rather, he has a troubling tendency to make mental errors and rush plays, which have contributed to a subpar .917 career fielding percentage. It should be noted that his defense has been steadily improving over each of the past three seasons.

Wade rode the Scranton Shuttle more than any other Yankees prospect last season, managing to get into 30 games with the big club. He is the most versatile player on this list, able to play 7 positions. While he undeniably flopped in the majors last year, it should also be noted he entered the season as the Yankees #17 prospect and was scheduled to play his first full season in AAA. He brings an interesting mix of offensive skills to the table, with consistent doubles power (that might translate into a few more homers with experience) and blinding speed.

Finally, there’s Torreyes. He’s spent the last two seasons as the Yankees utility player, playing second, third, short and taking a few turns in the outfield. While he’s one of those guys you love to root for (and the shortest man to play baseball not named Altuve), there’s a reason he’s been a utility player and not a starter. While he plays numerous positions passably, he isn’t terrific at any of them. As for his offensive skills, that career 81 OPS+ says about all you need to know.

My guess is that while a veteran infielder certainly makes some sense, it isn’t an area of absolute need for these Yankees. If something falls into their laps, terrific. But I don’t see them jumping into a bidding war for any of the available free agents, and I don’t see them going crazy to make a deal for any of the trade candidates. I suspect the season will open with Andujar at third, Torres at second and Torreyes retaining his utility role, with Wade in Scranton to work on his game. By midseason, should either of the youngsters find themselves floundering, the same resources the Yankees have available now will be available then. And odds are, the same cast of available options will be there, as well.

Thoughts on Jacoby Ellsbury’s Future


egbafom

It was safe to say that at the end of the 2017 season, Jacoby Ellsbury had become the major league’s all-time highest paid 4th outfielder. The emergence of Aaron Hicks, who finally began to fulfill the promise that made him a first-round draft choice of the Twins, the MVP caliber season of Aaron Judge and the continued steady play of Brett Gardner had relegated Ellsbury to the bench. During the magical playoff run, Ellsbury became little more than an afterthought.

060317_jacoby_ellsbury_1280_a7plt4ji_9fwoozpb

Still, Ellsbury did make some important contributions with his legs down the stretch, so you could sort of understand his refusal to waive his no-trade clause. Better to be on a potential World Series winner, even in a bench role, than starting for a team going nowhere.

Then, the Yankees did the most Yankee thing of all: they traded for the fo74jzwe
NL MVP. Just like that, Ellsbury went from the 4th outfielder to a player without any clear role. A very well paid player without any role, who still insists on not waiving his no-trade clause. And…I do mean no role. I suppose he would be useful as a pinch runner in the late innings. But really, how often are the Yankees going to find themselves with Greg Bird or Gary Sanchez standing on second in a tie game in the 8th or 9th inning?

Let’s face it, as fans we all feared Ellsbury’s decline at the end of that massive contract he signed prior to the 2014 season. We just had no idea how quickly that decline would come, or how dramatic it would be. Over the past three seasons, he has struggled to an 89 OPS+, while injuries have held him out of 114 games. Even what was once his best asset, an ability to swipe bases seemingly at will has slipped. He’s totaled only 63 steals and watched his steal percentage drop from 85% to 74%. Defensively, he’s lost some range but can still be a serviceable center fielder. He would probably be better suited to left, because of his throwing issues. We don’t know because he’s refused to even try playing there.

At the same time, his presence on the roster is making it impossible for the Yankees to get an extended look at several of their top outfield prospects, kids like Clint Frazier and Billy McKinney. In other words, Ellsbury has become a luxury item that you might have found a spot for on a National League team in the 1970’s. But not an American League team in the 2010’s.

I think it’s fair to say that Ellsbury has reached Mark Teixeira/Alex Rodriguez territory: an overpriced, aging player that the Yankees will pay to make go away. Already there are reports that Yankees are willing to eat a substantial amount of the money owed him, as much as $40 million of the $68.5 million on his contract. If I were Ellsbury, I would be on the phone with my agent daily, finding me a place to play. Because while Ellsbury can probably force his way onto the 2018 roster by means of his contract, I doubt he’ll be in the Bronx past that. In fact, he would be the best paid unemployed man in America next offseason. And he shouldn’t be under any illusions about this. After all, the Yankees paid A-Rod $42 million to go home – and Ellsbury isn’t half the player he was.

The Yankees Next Big Move…


060317_jacoby_ellsbury_1280_a7plt4ji_9fwoozpb

…should be to dump Jacoby Ellsbury and as much of the $68.5 million he’s owed, for whatever they can get. A big of peanuts would be acceptable. And then after that? Nothing.

This might sound like something of a letdown to my fellow Yankee fans. After all, the stated goal is to win the World Series. But that’s the stated goal every year, and by doing nothing else this offseason, the team would be primed for a five or six year run. The type of run reminiscent of the 1996-2001 team.

Let’s review: this past season, the Yankees rode a home-run happy offense, a strong starting rotation and dominant bullpen to within one game of the fall classic. Youngsters Aaron Judge, Gary Sanchez, Greg Bird, Aaron Hicks, Didi Gregorius and Clint Frazier powered the offense. Jordan Montgomery, Sonny Gray, Luis Severino, Masahiro Tanaka and Chad Green anchored the pitching staff. Those 11 players, all under 28 years old, provide a strong core to build around for both the present and the future. Now, this offseason, the Yankees stunned the world by acquiring the NL MVP, Giancarlo Stanton (age 28) and his 59 home runs in exchange for Starlin Castro.

Before that move, the favorites in the American League were the Yankees and the Houston Astros and that remains the case now. Yes, the Red Sox and Indians remain strong contenders, but both of those teams have enough questions that they do not appear ready to challenge the top two teams. Given that dynamic, I can understand the Yankees fan desire to maybe grab a third baseman and another starting pitcher. If one falls into their laps, okay – but here’s why I wouldn’t go crazy looking right now.

With an eye to the present and the future, the Yankees have a trio of rookies they can try at second and third in Gleyber Torres, Miguel Andujar and Tyler Wade. While it would be atypical of the “Yankee Way,” I would play Torres and Andujar on opening day and let Wade fill a super utility role. Based on their minor league careers and pedigrees, it’s a little hard to imagine all three turning into major league pumpkins. Since they would likely hit at the bottom of the order, any offensive struggles wouldn’t impair the juggernaut the Yankees have assembled throughout the rest of the lineup. If they can excel, then the Yankees have found some diamonds and next offseason can be spent on luxury items (Bryce Harper? Clayton Kershaw?). If they look as lost as lambs, then the Yankees can use their payroll flexibility to go after necessities (say, Manny Machado and DJ LeMahieu). If they’re simply better than average players, they can be spun for value in trades for other pieces, while going after superstar talent to replace them.

Therein lies the biggest reason for dumping Ellsbury. Whether the Yankees go into next offseason looking for extra goodies or to address vital needs, they’ll probably look to add somewhere north of $50 million in AAV. When you add in the salaries for their existing core, there really is no room to pay a 5th outfielder $23 million, while retaining enough flexibility to make further moves as the years go by. Again, this isn’t just about winning in 2018. It’s about winning in 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 – and so on.

As far as 2018 goes, the Yankees lineup (even with two rookies starting daily) is every bit as potent as Houston’s, and decidedly better than Boston or Cleveland’s. The starting staff, including the minor league depth, lines up favorably with Boston and Cleveland and is a step above Houston’s. The key is to maintain that position this year and see how far we can go, while setting up to get a talent base that eclipses everyone else by 2019.

What You’ve All Been Waiting For


170103164328-01-healthy-food-or-not-restricted-super-169

I haven’t commented on the Alabama Senate race for a simple reason. I don’t live in Alabama. And of the thousands of people who follow this blog, very few of you do, either.

The nationalization of local and state elections is one of the trends that’s evolved over the last decade that’s left all of us worse off than we were before. Even without the media attention focused on this particular election, which features two candidates few people outside of Alabama had even heard of until a few months ago, the national party apparatuses had already been staging forces, sending money and trying to coordinate with the state parties.

To what end? The reason we supposedly enacted the 17th Amendment was to prevent the rampant corruption that comes about from Senators being beholden to political machines. Yet here we are, 104 years later and we’re no better off than we were then. If anything, we’re worse off. At least in the latter 19th century, politicians were only corrupted by their local and state machines. Today’s politicians may start out being corrupted by local interests, but they quickly learn that in order to maintain their status on Capital Hill they need to play the tune according to what their national taskmasters demand.

As originally envisioned by the Founders, Senators were supposed to be representatives of their states. Today, they are nothing more than pawns in the all-consuming sport of the national party getting to 51 votes. Even if a bill would absolutely destroy or enhance their respective state’s industry, economy or sovereignty, every Senator knows where their duty truly lies. Yes, they know they must vote the way their party leadership tells them to vote.

So excuse me if I do not get as worked up about today’s election in Alabama as the various bloviators on the web or television. After all, they’re part of the machine, too. They rely on keeping you exercised, rooting for your team (Go Blue! Go Red!) in matters that don’t concern you whatsoever. But do you know what it is good for? It’s good for my popcorn consumption.

You see, I just sit over here munching on my popcorn watching y’all line up opposing football teams, ready to bash and clash over sheer nonsense while the country burns around you – and you not realizing how complicit you are in it’s demise.

Kabuki Absurdity (and Potted Plants?)


al-franken-roy-moore-1024-1-850x369

There are days when I feel like I fell asleep and woke up in an alternate dimension. You know, kind of like Rod Serling kidnapped me and threw me into an episode of “The Twilight Zone” without asking first. There’s been more of them over the past 26 months than in the previous 50 years of life, but I’m beginning to think all of that was just a warm-up for the past month.

You see, that’s when people suddenly became aware that men will, given the opportunity, think of women as sexual objects (and vice versa).

I know, that’s a shocking concept. Prior to a month ago, every woman in every nightclub around the world was dressed in a potato sack. Those jokes you heard about men thinking about sex every ten seconds (personally, I think those overestimate the time between thinking about sex by around 8 seconds) were invented somewhere around October 15. Marilyn Monroe was the most talented actress of all time, which is why she’s so well remembered.

Of course, all of that is bunco, but judging from the hew and cry over the past month you would never know it. This isn’t to excuse the behavior of a Harvey Weinstein or Matt Lauer. I’m going to be honest, before either of those guys hit the news I hadn’t even heard of the mating ritual that involved jerking off to a potted plant while your intended watched. But the sudden shock that anything of this sort  was going on is, well, disingenuous, to say the least. Look, I’m not one who reads Page Six or watches TMZ. But even I recall hearing stories about the infamous Hollywood “casting couch” as a kid. You know, how wannabe starlets would trade sexual favors in exchange for roles in movies and television. To pretend that any of this is new, or that every woman who participated, was somehow abused is laughable on its face.

Now, we’ve moved on to the next target: politicians. Somehow, in all this recent fervor, we’ve discovered that not every politician is a great guy (or gal). Their effectiveness as a legislator, jurist or executive is of no matter when judging their fitness for office. Nope, the only thing that counts now is if they ever grabbed somebody’s ass in a hotel room (or, in Al Franken’s case, a dressing room). This is about as ridiculous an idea as has ever been thrown into public discourse.

The simple fact is history is replete with examples of horrible, terrible people who excelled in public service. Think where the civil rights movement would be today if Martin Luther King or Lyndon Johnson (or John Conyers, for that matter) were held to these absurd standards. The world might well be a cinder if JFK had been subjected to them. We might all be speaking German if FDR’s peccadilloes had forced him from office. The US might not even exist if Thomas Jefferson (or if John Hancock or Samuel Adams) were held to this sudden contempt we have for men who act like boors. And just imagine where the #MeToo movement would be if the sexual predations of Eleanor Roosevelt had been splashed across the front pages of her day.

And please, let’s not even get started on the sexual career of William Jefferson Clinton. He may not have been a great President, but he did introduce all of us to other unique mating rituals. *ahem*

So, grow up people. Get past the junior high titillation and get back to the real issues at hand. Lord knows we have things facing our country, things that really matter, than to allow ourselves to be distracted by all this folderol.

Oh, and guys? If you feel the need to make love to a potted plant, seek professional help.

 

 

Aaron *bleeping* Boone?


Last night, word broke that the Yankees have chosen Aaron Boone as their next manager. My first reaction, like so many others (based on what I saw on Twitter) was that Brian, Hal and the gang had their holidays mixed up and thought yesterday was April 1. My reactions after seesawed between amazement and anger. If the most critical factor was that Brian Cashman can trust him because he came clean about tearing up his knee in a pickup basketball game 14 years ago, the team’s standards have dropped precipitously since George died.

Aaron Boone could turn out to be the next Casey Stengel. I truly hope he is. Like Boone, the Ol’ Perfessor was amiable, handled the press well and built a managing career from a bonehead move as a player.

Or, he could turn out to be the next Bucky Dent. Casey, of course, is in the Hall of Fame. Bucky, like Boone, was a middling player who is most remembered for one improbable home run. The Yankees gave him a chance to manage in 1989. It was a disaster, a debacle, an absolute horror show. And Dent had one thing Boone lacks: actual experience managing a professional baseball team.

Boone might also turn out to be the next Bill Dickey. Like Stengel, Dickey is in the hall of fame and has his number retired in Monument Park. Unlike Stengel, it was for his career as a player that he is enshrined. Dickey was the last player-manager the Yankees hired, and also the last manager the Yankees hired without any prior coaching experience. He took over a talented, young Yankee team (with future Hall of Fame players Joe DiMaggio, Phil Rizzuto, Joe Gordon and Yogi Berra) when Joe McCarthy decided he’d had enough of the front office’s meddling and quit 5 weeks into the 1946 campaign. Dickey only managed a third place finish, despite the talent he had on the team, and when owner Larry McPhail made it obvious Dickey wouldn’t be asked back in 1947, he quit with two weeks left in the season.

Hal Steinbrenner is trusting his general manager implicitly with this choice, and both he and Cashman are betting against all logic and history with Aaron Boone. The last rookie manager to win a World Series title was Bob Brenly in 2001, with Arizona. The Diamondbacks weren’t a young team, though. In all of baseball history, only 4 men have won a title in their first year managing: Brenly, Ralph Houk in 1961, Eddie Dyer in 1946 and Bucky Harris in 1924. By the way, Harris is the only man to ever win a World Series despite having never managed or coached a game in his life.

Make no mistake here: Cashman, who never met a statistic he couldn’t recite, knows everything I wrote above and probably a whole lot more about those failures, about how rookie managers tend to struggle even with experienced teams and coaching staffs. He isn’t betting so much that Aaron Boone is somehow magically imbued with enough baseball intelligence to overcome that history and lead this team to a championship.

No, Brian Cashman is betting that his own baseball intelligence and his faith in sabermetrics will win the Yankees their 28th World Championship. What Cashman needed was a mouthpiece, a stooge and (if everything falls apart) a potential fall guy. Boone checks off all those boxes beautifully. Anyone who has actually listened to Boone’s inanity during a broadcast will realize he’s a gleeful idiot. The writers know it; the fans know it. If the Yankees win, it will vindicate Cashman’s belief that systems win, not people. If systems are no better than the people running them… Well, Boone was hired to be a patsy.

Compounding the problem is that the Yankees are, by and large, a very young team. Their projected starting nine will average less than 3.5 years of major league playing experience. Communication with the media is undoubtedly an important skill in New York, and that’s the one area where Joe Girardi was severely deficient. But it isn’t the most crucial aspect of managing. The Yankees are gambling the development of their talented, young core on a guy who has never developed anything except the ability to eat hot dogs at the Little League World Series.  But again, Boone isn’t being hired to manage this team. He’s being hired as little more than a pre- and post-game announcer. You can bet everything from line-up decisions to pitching changes will be phoned in from the front office on a daily basis.

Yes, Yankee fans. George Steinbrenner certainly engaged in some serious power tripping when he was alive. But not even George never went on a power trip like the one Brian Cashman is embarking on now.

The Meaning of Citizenship


I finished re-reading Robert Heinlein’s Starship Troopers the other day, and it got me thinking. Now, those of you who are only acquainted with the story via the rather dreadful Hollywood version probably think it’s just another space opera. While the backdrop to the story is an intergalactic war between humans and aliens who look spiders and act like ants, in reality Heinlein used the story to convey a message about societies and how they govern themselves. The world Heinlein has created, some 200 years into our future, is one in which humans have abolished our two competing philosophies of governance (democracy and socialism) after a great, cataclysmic war. Instead, there is a global republic – but the only way to obtain citizenship in this republic is by completing a term of service to the government. Not everyone who wants to be a citizen is accepted for service, though.

starship_troopers_by_deathmetaldan-d3iaigx

Throughout the novel, Heinlein lays out who is accepted for service and why, and how this society came to be ordered. Despite being originally published in 1959, much of what he wrote as regards the symptoms of a dissolving democracy seems as though it were ripped from the headlines of today. He describes rampant crime in the cities, gangs of youth preying upon the weaker members of the community, rising substance abuse, joblessness, aimless citizens and ineffective (and often corrupt) politicians. But for Heinlein, the greatest cause of societal collapse was that while virtually everyone was granted the privileges of citizenship, few exercised the duties. He wrote,

…their citizens (nearly all of them counted as such) glorified their mythology of ‘rights’ and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can endure.”

The principle reason that only those who have completed a term of government service are granted citizenship (and the stringent standards for acceptance into said service) is to ensure that the citizens of the Terran Federation will exercise not only the privileges, but duties of citizenship.

It was this point that got me thinking. As I mentioned, much of what Heinlein wrote about as the symptoms of societal decay are prevalent in today’s society. But something I’ve thought for quite some time is that we have cheapened the value of citizenship to the point that for many of our number, citizenship is even less important than residency. Indeed, we no longer consider granting citizenship as a privilege to a select company of our number. Rather, most of us think of it as a right guaranteed by… something. Stop to think about that for a moment.

We have people here who were never granted residency demanding the same rights as citizens, and others (including those in elective office) defending their “right” to do so. We have people claiming the rights of citizens who have never so much as stepped foot in this nation. Further, the number of citizens who actually exercise the duties of the citizenship given as a birthright is depressingly small. YouTube and Facebook are filled with videos of educated citizens who cannot name the Articles of the Constitution, the rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, or define any of the inalienable rights expressed in the Declaration of Independence. Spend more than a few moments on Twitter and you will be verbally accosted by droves of people who cannot tell the difference between a parliamentary democracy and constitutional republic. Visit the local courthouse, and you’ll see most people called for jury duty doing their level best to avoid said duty. And sadly, barely half of us bother to cast a vote when the time comes (and even fewer when the election isn’t tied to a national referendum). Given the sorry regard my fellow citizens have for their duties, I am sorely pressed to say the majority of those casting a vote even know who or what they are voting for – too often, they’re simply checking the box under “R” or “D”.

In the nearly 60 years since Heinlein published Starship Troopers, the condition of our society has deteriorated to the point he foresaw, even if it’s taken perhaps a bit longer (he placed the dissolution of the United States in 1987). The question that’s been nagging me for days is this: Heinlein saw no way out of this mess except to restrict the right of governance to a select few, based on a criteria that placed an innate drive for public service above all other factors. In short, he was of the opinion that our current attempts at including more and more people into the governance of society was exactly the wrong tack. His society works because a caste of elites run things, but not elites as we’re given to thinking in our age. Indeed, the protagonist in his novel quite literally throws away a fortune in order to begin public service (later, his father does the same).

Heinlein is not alone in his thinking. Since the very founding of our republic, we have constantly watered down the requirements for citizenship, as well as the duties thereof. Consider that the men who created the nation saw citizenship as being open only to land owners who had established themselves. Over the intervening years, we have so cheapened citizenship that we now grant adolescents those same rights – and more.

It is something to think about. Why is it we require those not born on our soil to pass an exam and take a loyalty oath before granting citizenship, but not those who are native born? Ask yourself: could you pass the citizenship exam? Would you be willing to take the Oath of Citizenship? Bear in mind, once subscribed to this oath, you will be freely granting the government the power to require unpaid service of you, in both military and civilian positions. Did that last sentence cause you to go “whoa” for a moment?

That sentence is the crux of Heinlein’s argument: the vast majority of our citizens are not willing to truly sacrifice for the privilege of citizenship and prove it daily. He thought human nature being what it is, that such fallibility meant the end of democracy. I hope he was wrong. But I’m not as sure today as when I first read that book some 40 years ago.

Why We Hunt Deer in the Wild


deer-attack-300x169

(Reprinted from someone who wants to remain anonymous, who farms, writes well and actually tried this)

I had this idea that I could rope a deer, put it in a stall, feed it up on corn for a couple of weeks, then kill it and eat it. The first step in this adventure was getting a deer. I figured that, since they congregate at my cattle feeder and do not seem to have much fear of me when we are there (a bold one will sometimes come right up and sniff at the bags of feed while I am in the back of the truck not 4 feet away), it should not be difficult to rope one, get up to it and toss a bag over its head (to calm it down) then hog tie it and transport it home.

I filled the cattle feeder then hid down at the end with my rope. The cattle, having seen the roping thing before, stayed well back. They were not having any of it. After about 20 minutes, my deer showed up– 3 of them. I picked out a likely looking one, stepped out from the end of the feeder, and threw my rope. The deer just stood there and stared at me. I wrapped the rope around my waist and twisted the end so I would have a good hold.

The deer still just stood and stared at me, but you could tell it was mildly concerned about the whole rope situation. I took a step towards it, it took a step away. I put a little tension on the rope, and then received an education. The first thing that I learned is that, while a deer may just stand there looking at you funny while you rope it, they are spurred to action when you start pulling on that rope.

That deer EXPLODED. The second thing I learned is that pound for pound, a deer is a LOT stronger than a cow or a colt. A cow or a colt in that weight range I could fight down with a rope and with some dignity. A deer– no Chance. That thing ran and bucked and twisted and pulled. There was no controlling it and certainly no getting close to it. As it jerked me off my feet and started dragging me across the ground, it occurred to me that having a deer on a rope was not nearly as good an idea as I had originally imagined. The only upside is that they do not have as much stamina as many other animals.

A brief 10 minutes later, it was tired and not nearly as quick to jerk me off my feet and drag me when I managed to get up. It took me a few minutes to realize this, since I was mostly blinded by the blood flowing out of the big gash in my head. At that point, I had lost my taste for corn-fed venison. I just wanted to get that devil creature off the end of that rope.

I figured if I just let it go with the rope hanging around its neck, it would likely die slow and painfully somewhere. At the time, there was no love at all between me and that deer. At that moment, I hated the thing, and I would venture a guess that the feeling was mutual. Despite the gash in my head and the several large knots where I had cleverly arrested the deer’s momentum by bracing my head against various large rocks as it dragged me across the ground, I could still think clearly enough to recognize that there was a small chance that I shared some tiny amount of responsibility for the situation we were in. I didn’t want the deer to have to suffer a slow death, so I managed to get it lined back up in between my truck and the feeder – a little trap I had set before hand…kind of like a squeeze chute. I got it to back in there and I started moving up so I could get my rope back.

Did you know that deer bite? They do! I never in a million years would have thought that a deer would bite somebody, so I was very surprised when ….. I reached up there to grab that rope and the deer grabbed hold of my wrist. Now, when a deer bites you, it is not like being bit by a horse where they just bite you and slide off to then let go. A deer bites you and shakes its head–almost like a pit bull. They bite HARD and it hurts.
The proper thing to do when a deer bites you is probably to freeze and draw back slowly. I tried screaming and shaking instead. My method was ineffective.

It seems like the deer was biting and shaking for several minutes, but it was likely only several seconds. I, being smarter than a deer (though you may be questioning that claim by now), tricked it. While I kept it busy tearing the tendons out of my right arm, I reached up with my left hand and pulled that rope loose.
That was when I got my final lesson in deer behavior for the day.

Deer will strike at you with their front feet. They rear right up on their back feet and strike right about head and shoulder level, and their hooves are surprisingly sharp… I learned a long time ago that, when an animal -like a horse –strikes at you with their hooves and you can’t get away easily, the best thing to do is try to make a loud noise and make an aggressive move towards the animal. This will usually cause them to back down a bit so you can escape.

This was not a horse. This was a deer, so obviously, such trickery would not work. In the course of a millisecond, I devised a different strategy. I screamed like a woman and tried to turn and run. The reason I had always been told NOT to try to turn and run from a horse that paws at you is that there is a good chance that it will hit you in the back of the head. Deer may not be so different from horses after all, besides being twice as strong and 3 times as evil, because the second I turned to run, it hit me right in the back of the head and knocked me down.
Now, when a deer paws at you and knocks you down, it does not immediately leave. I suspect it does not recognize that the danger has passed. What they do instead is paw your back and jump up and down on you while you are laying there crying like a little girl and covering your head.

I finally managed to crawl under the truck and the deer went away.

Now for the local legend. I was pretty beat up. My scalp was split open, I had several large goose eggs, my wrist was bleeding pretty good and felt broken (it turned out to be just badly bruised) and my back was bleeding in a few places, though my insulated canvas jacket had protected me from most of the worst of it. I drove to the nearest place, which was the Co-Op. I got out of the truck, covered in blood and dust and looking like hell. The guy who ran the place saw me through the window and came running out yelling, “What happened?”

I have never seen any law in the state of Kansas that would prohibit an individual from roping a deer. I suspect that this is an area that they have overlooked entirely. Knowing, as I do, the lengths to which law enforcement personnel will go to exercise their power, I was concerned that they may find a way to twist the existing laws to paint my actions as criminal. I swear… not wanting to admit that I had done something monumentally stupid played no part in my response. I told him “I was attacked by a deer”. I did not mention that at the time I had a rope on it. The evidence was all over my body. Deer prints on the back of my jacket where it had stomped all over me and a large deer print on my face where it had struck me there. I asked him to call somebody to come get me. I didn’t think I could make it home on my own. He did. Later that afternoon, a game warden showed up at my house and wanted to know about the deer attack. Surprisingly, deer attacks are a rare thing and wildlife and parks was interested in the event. I tried to describe the attack as completely and accurately as I could. I was filling the grain hopper and this deer came out of nowhere and just started kicking the hell out of me and BIT me. It was obviously rabid or insane or something.

EVERYBODY for miles around knows about the deer attack (the guy at the Co-Op has a big mouth). For several weeks people dragged their kids in the house when they saw deer around and the local ranchers carried rifles when they filled their feeders. I have told several people the story, but NEVER anybody around here. I have to see these people every day and as an outsider — a “city folk”. I have enough trouble fitting in without them snickering behind my back and whispering, “There is the dumbass that tried to rope the deer!”

All these events are true so help me God…An Educated Farmer