Like many middle aged men, I love sports.
For years I've competed against other like minded individuals in rotisserie baseball leagues. Annually, a group of us will review statistical trends of hundreds of players, read scouting reports on the hot prospects coming up and try to assemble a better team than the other league members can. We'll check how our players are doing whenever possible. Our cell phones come in real handy. A few of us have mastered the art of pulling up the MLB.com website to check the scores/stats without even taking the phone out of our pockets. We take it very seriously and its up there with sex and eating for enjoyment.
Its very normal for a General Manager to decide he needs some of what another team has. Maybe its a starting pitcher. Perhaps a shortstop. Usually, but not always, that GM will look to other teams who have an abundance of starting pitchers or shortstops and try to figure out what they could use. Let's say they need a catcher, (Everybody in fantasy baseball needs a catcher) and I have an extra one who is better than the ones they currently have. Voila! A win-win. Time to send a trade email!
To: John Boehner-GM of the Republican Rattlers
Barry here from the Democratic Dazzlers. I'm looking for help at pitcher and noticed you have some pretty talented guys on your bench. I, on the other hand, have Mr. Muscles, a catcher sitting on mine because I already have Mr. Universe in my lineup. I can send Muscles your way if you could let me have Bazooka arm Bob to help my pitching. Let me know...
John will now weigh the advantages vs. the disadvantages of making this deal. Sometimes, its so reasonable and fair that its a fairly quick yes. Little to no haggling. Other times, its not so easy. Some guys low ball their offers from the start to give them wiggle room to graciously upgrade their offer during further negotiations. Some guys always ask for more no matter how generous the original offer was. (I call them the "...and your Mother" guys.) A better player, a draft pick, cash, etc... Sometimes the offer is just so far out of left field, you just reject it immediately. If its really dumb, you make a mental note to be wary of this certain GM's future offers.
Its not unlike the dance that the Democrats and the GOP are doing currently with the budget talks. The Dems want to increase money coming into the Government and are luke warm to reducing spending. The Republicans want to reduce spending and are very luke warm to the notion of increasing revenues. Both want to reduce the deficit. If this were fantasy baseball the Dems would be flexible on cutting spending while the GOP would show flexibility on increasing revenues. Some acceptable middle ground would be hammered out to their mutual benefit.
The interwebs this morning are running stories about the Obama Administration/Dems showing a willingness to cut two of the biggest entitlement programs, Medicare and Medicaid to the tune of more than 100 Billion dollars over the next ten years. In all, the total amount of reduced spending is projected to be 3-4 trillion dollars if the GOP will meet them part way. That by itself will come with a price tag within the Democratic voting population who often can't accept any cuts to these entitlements. Obama seems prepared to deal with that. Its a rational step. Its a serious offer. In return, the Administration wants some thing equally appealing coming its way. Except that it wouldn't be equal. They're willing to accept roughly just $1 in revenues for every $3 dollars of cuts they provide.
Three for one is a pretty serious offer and a fair one. Spending should be expected to carry a larger portion of the load than new taxes might be. Reign in the spending, get serious about reducing waste and fraud and yes cut out some of the silly tax loopholes that are costing the Government much needed revenues. See how far that gets us and then build your case if you can for increasing taxes.
If this were fantasy baseball, you might think the Dems are overpaying or the GOP is underpaying considering the return. When a trade goes through that's so unbalanced, the rest of the league shakes its collective head. We also file it away for future reference...
The budget talks aren't supposed to be a game. Seems to me that the Dems are being serious about taking meaningful steps to address the problem. Are the Republicans holding out for even more? Reasonable people agree spending needs cut, no question. They also think deals and negotiations...even in Congress...and perhaps especially in Congress...should show good faith and skin in the game from both sides.
To: Barry Obama-GM of the Democratic Dazzlers
Looked over your offer and its unacceptable. We want both Muscles and Universe coming our way. We can use one as our designated hitter. If you accept our demands, we're willing to send you Willie Noarmleff. Sure he's struggled a tad this year but we're confident he'd fit your needs. To keep it fair, we'll also toss in our current catcher, Chubby "Big" Mack to help you out.
Deal?
JB/Rattlers
C'mon guys....yes both of you Dems and GOP-sters...
Play ball!
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Newt Gingrich bets on Alzheimer’s, other niche issues as key to a 2012 comeback - The Washington Post
Newt Gingrich bets on Alzheimer’s, other niche issues as key to a 2012 comeback - The Washington Post
I don't think he's finished and maybe this is a good strategy to get the wheels back on the road. Pocket issues are fairly benign and shouldn't attract too much of the wrong type attention. That said, at some point, as long as his campaign finds enough donations to survive, he will find himself in the cross-hairs of the rest of the GOP field. His negatives are off the charts according to the most recent Gallup Poll survey, so he needs to begin to at least appear normal again before voters can seriously consider him as an alternative to the rest of the Republican field.
Monday, July 4, 2011
Why U.S. is not a Christian nation - CNN.com
Why U.S. is not a Christian nation - CNN.com
Thought provoking essay on the intended role and place of religion in America....
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Republican Candidates Power Rankings 7/3/11
Good weeks for Mitt Romney and Michelle Bachmann...
1) Mitt Romney-So far, so good for Gov. Romney. He enjoys a very healthy lead in the GOP polls and in terms of fundraising, he is crushing all of his opponents. Gave a speech in a closed down factory in Allentown, PA this week that focused on how bad Obama is as opposed to how great he would be if elected President. Gave several non answers to direct comparison questions. Which is the smart way to go right now. The less details, the harder it is for someone else to go after him. This will continue to work...for a while. Bachmann's official entry into the field diverted attention to her campaign, which is just fine with Team Romney. (Last week: #1)
2) Michelle Bachmann- Busy week for Mrs. Bachmann. Last Sunday, FOX's Chris Wallace asked her straight up if she was a flake, to which she responded that "...she's a serious person." Monday, she officially kicked off her campaign in Iowa and spent the week travelling and doing media interviews. Off all the candidates, Bachmann's the one with the most buzz. That said, she should be concerned that she places only 5th in the Real Clear Politics poll released this morning, behind Romney, Palin, Perry and Cain. The take away from this to me is that two of those names in front of her have yet to declare anything yet. (Last week #2)
3) Herman Cain-Moving up this week to 3rd overall is Godfather Pizza's CEO, Herman Cain. Tied with Bachmann for the highest "Positive Intensity" scores from Gallup. Lost a few high ranking staffers in New Hampshire and Iowa this week. Donations to the Cain effort pulled in 2.5 Million dollars mostly from Tea Party supporters, which is a healthy start. On the other hand, Romney reportedly raised between 15-20 million by the June 30th deadline. Unless Cain absolutely explodes with increased fund-raising, I suspect his ride...however pleasant right now, will be a short one. (Last week #4)
4) Rick Perry-Still undecided but nearing a decision, Perry polls very well as witnessed by the recent Fox news poll which placed him second to only the frontrunner Romney. If he enters the race, he would likely find himself positioned to the right of both Romney and Pawlenty, but to the left of only Michelle Bachmann. Reports suggest he'd have some work to do regarding fund raising, which could effect his ability to improve his face recognition around the Country. With a general sense that the established group of GOP candidates is not that sterling, Perry's appeal could toss him into the upper tier if he chooses to run. (Last week #7)
5) Tim Pawlenty-What's the guy supposed to do? At best he's in the middle to low end of most polls (8th out of 10 in the RCP Poll). Points scored for being the first to lay out his Foreign Policy plan, which had a hawkish flavor to it. Points lost for Minnesota having to shut its State Gov't down. Whether or not it all or some of Pawlenty's fault is up to debate, but count on a few of his GOP peers using it against him if/when they feel he's enough of a threat top warrant attacking. Raised a little over 4 Million in fundraising which is roughly 25% of what Gov. Romney has to spend. Tough sledding ahead for T-Paw. (Last week #3)
6) Sarah Palin-Took a break from her bus tour to fullfill her "jury duty" obligation back in Alaska. Saw her movie, "The Undefeated" debut in selected towns across the US to mixed reviews. Polling second in the both the Gallup and the RCP polls, Palin is still positioned to make quite the splash if she decides to run for POTUS. She got great name recognition, loads of cash, a buzz factor that blows away anyone else's. A Palin campaign, to many, would be thrilling. Well positioned for either direction. Stay out of the race and play king maker, or jump in with little to lose. (Last week #5)
7) Rick Santorum-Nothing surprising from the Santorum camp this week. Signing the Pro-Life and the Balanced Budget Amendment Pledge, Santorum played it safe, doing what most expected him to do. Stated for the record on the Glen Beck TV show "...there's no such thing as Global Warming." His campaign released no data on fundraising, which may be a bad thing. (Last week #8)
8) Newt Gingrich-June can't end fast enough for the former Speaker of the House. Mass defections, residual effects of his comments about Paul Ryan's budget plan, low donor activity, and now reports of his staff being worried about his Tiffany accounts. Maybe he's done. Maybe its over, but I still say this is one of the brightest minds in America and if he can simply get all four wheels back on the road, perhaps he can begin to climb in the polls. (Last week #10)
9) John Huntsman- The most left leaning Conservative in the field, Huntsman has refused to sign the Americans for Tax Reform anti tax pledge. With low name recognition, bad polling numbers and a mediocre fund raising start (4M+ reported by the end of June), its hard to put a finger on what Huntsman can do to increase his chances. A Huntsman victory will necessarily be one of winning the war of attrition. (Last week #6)
10) Ron Paul-Beating only Gingrich and Huntsman in Gallup's Positive Intensity score, Paul also has the lowest unfavorable ratings except for Newt Gingrich. Some good news is that he's reported more than 4.5M in end of June fundraising, which is more than Tim Pawlenty or Jon Huntsman have announced. As interesting a candidate as he may be and in spite of how intensely loyal his followers are, Paul has a huge mountain to climb just to be considered something other than a borderline novelty candidate in 2012. (Last week #9)
Overall Rankings: (The lower the score, the better...)
1. Romney - 2
2. Bachmann - 4
3. Cain - 7
4. Pawlenty - 8
5. Palin - 11
6. Perry - 11
7. Huntsman - 15
8. Santorum - 15
9. Gingrich - 18
10. Paul - 19
Sources:
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx
4) Rick Perry-Still undecided but nearing a decision, Perry polls very well as witnessed by the recent Fox news poll which placed him second to only the frontrunner Romney. If he enters the race, he would likely find himself positioned to the right of both Romney and Pawlenty, but to the left of only Michelle Bachmann. Reports suggest he'd have some work to do regarding fund raising, which could effect his ability to improve his face recognition around the Country. With a general sense that the established group of GOP candidates is not that sterling, Perry's appeal could toss him into the upper tier if he chooses to run. (Last week #7)
6) Sarah Palin-Took a break from her bus tour to fullfill her "jury duty" obligation back in Alaska. Saw her movie, "The Undefeated" debut in selected towns across the US to mixed reviews. Polling second in the both the Gallup and the RCP polls, Palin is still positioned to make quite the splash if she decides to run for POTUS. She got great name recognition, loads of cash, a buzz factor that blows away anyone else's. A Palin campaign, to many, would be thrilling. Well positioned for either direction. Stay out of the race and play king maker, or jump in with little to lose. (Last week #5)
7) Rick Santorum-Nothing surprising from the Santorum camp this week. Signing the Pro-Life and the Balanced Budget Amendment Pledge, Santorum played it safe, doing what most expected him to do. Stated for the record on the Glen Beck TV show "...there's no such thing as Global Warming." His campaign released no data on fundraising, which may be a bad thing. (Last week #8)
Overall Rankings: (The lower the score, the better...)
1. Romney - 2
2. Bachmann - 4
3. Cain - 7
4. Pawlenty - 8
5. Palin - 11
6. Perry - 11
7. Huntsman - 15
8. Santorum - 15
9. Gingrich - 18
10. Paul - 19
Sources:
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/election.aspx
Friday, July 1, 2011
Promises, Promises...
 |
| What did he say? |
Mitt Romney said he said it...
Michelle Bachmann said he said it...Tim Pawlenty said he said it...
John Boehner and Eric Cantor said he said it...
Sean Hannity said he said it...
Glen Beck said he said it...
But....
President Barack Obama never said it...
The question is did President Obama actually promise if Congress approved his stimulus package back in 2009, that unemployment wouldn't go above 8%?
Obama never said those words. Look it up...
I'm hearing it quite often these days from the GOP candidates as they take the first steps on their long walks to the Republican nomination. Its a juicy sounding claim to say the President lied about how high unemployment would go. Its just not true.
Fact is, two of his advisors made that statement, along with plenty of caveats and disclaimers. Christina Romer, chairwoman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers, and Jared Bernstein, the vice president's top economic adviser. It was from a joint effort called the "Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan.
From Politifact:
"It should be understood that all of the estimates presented in this memo are subject to significant margins of error," the report states. "There is the more fundamental uncertainty that comes with any estimate of the effects of a program. Our estimates of economic relationships and rules of thumb are derived from historical experience and so will not apply exactly in any given episode. Furthermore, the uncertainty is surely higher than normal now because the current recession is unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity."
There's also a footnote that goes along with the chart that states: "Forecasts of the unemployment rate without the recovery plan vary substantially. Some private forecasters anticipate unemployment rates as high as 11% in the absence of action."
There's also a footnote that goes along with the chart that states: "Forecasts of the unemployment rate without the recovery plan vary substantially. Some private forecasters anticipate unemployment rates as high as 11% in the absence of action."
The Administration has acknowledged its projections were wrong. Just like the non partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projections were wrong as well.
Words matter. Obama had been office a very short time and his team came up with a set of projections they felt were credible. They warned through the report that the estimates were prone to fluctuations, given the volatility of the financial markets. There's no debate they were under estimating how high unemployment would go. It is fair to say they should've had a better projection. (Although the people that do budgets, cost estimates, etc. for a living also blew it...) To suggest however, that Obama is a liar because he "promised" unemployment wouldn't go above 8% is simply untrue.
This election cycle like those before it will have an endless supply of unfair allegations like this one. To the average Hannity or Beck listener/viewer, it sounds plausible. Its certainly something they'd be inclined to agree with and share with their like minded friends. It grows and grows. There will many more by the time November 2012 arrives. On both sides. As interested voters, its our job to fact check everything that we hear. Trust no one. Not Fox, not MSNBC, or whoever you prefer.
Just as important, ask yourself why does a particular person misrepresent the facts? If you consider Hannity or Olbermann to always tell you the truth, why are they actually failing you? Often on a nightly basis. If you belong to a political personality's fan club, you might be prone to accepting some pleasant sounding but factually wrong information.
It bothers me.
It should bother you.
Its very vogue these days to toss around quotes from the founding fathers, so consider this from Thomas Jefferson:
If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed."
Sources:
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/glenn-beck-warns-america-is-on-the-verge-now-of-a-great-great-depression/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)