( 1:22 PM )
Eve of History
Well, tonight is game 4 of the 2004 World Series. It could quite possibly be the night that the Boston Red Sox capture what has eluded them for 86 years -- a world championship. I'm excited, and I'm sure the city of Boston and every Red Sox fan in the world is excited.
Though, it's a bit strange. In all the years (and decades) that diehard Red Sox fans have imagined this moment -- the moment the Red Sox win the World Series -- I bet no one imagined it in any other place other then Fenway Park. I know I certainly always thought it that way.
Imagine -- the final out (I've always imagined a swinging strikeout thrown by the starting pitcher in a historic complete game) in Fenway Park, with fans pouring onto the field, climbing down the Green monster, just like the old days of big sporting event wins. Fans and players celebrating in absolute joy. I figured the Fenway Park celebration would go on for hours, maybe even days -- no one leaving until the national guard came in to clear them out. The city of Boston would be in complete chaos (and in some places in flames) as the people poured out of Fenway and marched throughout Boston in absolute lunacy. The city would shut down for a week, as people refused to go to work or school, and the date would be declared a State holiday.
I never figured that it might happen in someplace like St. Louis? Is it going to have the same feeling? I guess we'll find out.
I also bet the Red Sox players are even thinking, "Man, I hope where not in Boston when we win this."
And every Red Sox fan in the world right now, even as close as they are to winning -- are praying "Please God, don't let them come back to Boston for Game 6...."
::
0 comments
( 11:41 AM )
NLCS vs. ALCS
As if we haven’t written enough about baseball, but… I was watching the NLCS game 2 last night and realized that the Yankees-Red Sox series is more of a circus and variety show then it is a display of baseball. Watching the Cards and Astros last night reminded me of what good ‘ol fashion baseball is all about. It’s about a sporting event, a game of strategy and skill, and game of sportsmanship, and a game of fun. The ALCS is a joke, on its way to becoming a shameful spectacle of over hyped athletes, and even more over hyped historic background noise.
It was such a relief to watch a baseball game that didn’t included repeated highlights of past bench clearing fights, of highlights of players that don’t even play on these teams anymore (why do they need to keep showing Boone and Clemens when they don’t play for the Yankees anymore?), references to the Bambino and 1918, and close up shots of obnoxious banners and posters in the crowd. I’m also sick of listening to the Yankees stadium crowd chants, which I’m convinced gets started by a bunch of FOX interns sitting in the bleachers.
The media is mostly to blame and FOX is right in the middle of this shameful exploitation. The pre-game show spent more time talking about Schilling and Pedro then it did about the Cardinals and Astros. Part of me hopes this ALCS ends mercifully in four games, so I can’t start rooting for a 4-game sweep by the Cardinals in the World Series.
::
0 comments
( 11:54 AM )
Raymond Chandler’s Take on Democracy
I’m still reading Raymond Chandler’s The Long Goodbye, and came across another great section of dialogue that I’d like to share. Let me briefly set up the scene – Private Dick Philip Marlowe sits down to talk with a powerful business mogul (Mr. Potter) and the topic turns to politics, media, money and corruption. Here’s Mr. Potter’s speech:
--------------------
“We live in what is called a democracy, rule by the majority of the people. A fine ideal if it could be made to work. The people elect, but the party machines nominate, and the party machines to be effective must spend a great deal of money. Somebody has to give it to them, and that somebody, whether it be an individual, a financial group, a trade union or what have you, expects some consideration in return. What I and people of my kind expect is to be allowed to live our lives in decent privacy.
“I own newspapers, but I don’t like them. I regard them as a constant menace to whatever privacy we have left. Their constant yelping about free press means, with a few honorable exceptions, freedom to peddle scandal, crime, sex, sensationalism, hate, innuendo, and the political and financial uses of propaganda. A newspaper is a business out to make money through advertising revenue. That is predicated on its circulation and you know what the circulation depends on.
“There’s a particular thing about money. In large quantities it tends to have a life of its own, even a conscience of its own. The power of money becomes very difficult to control. Man has always been a venal animal. The growth of populations, the huge costs of wars, the incessant pressure of confiscatory taxation – all these things make him more and more venal. The average man is tired and scared, and a tired, scared man can’t afford ideals. He has to buy food for his family. In our time we have seen a shocking decline in both public and private morals. You can’t expect quality from people whose lives are a subjection to a lack of quality. You can’t have quality with mass production. You don’t want it because it lasts too long. So you substitute styling, which is a commercial swindle intended to produce artificial obsolescence. Mass production couldn’t sell its goods next year unless it made what it sold this year look unfashionable a year from now. We have the whitest kitchens and most shining bathrooms in the world. But in the lovely white kitchen the average American housewife can’t produce a meal fit to eat, and the lovely shining bathroom is mostly a receptacle for deodorants, laxatives, sleeping pills, and the products of that confidence racket called the cosmetic industry. We make the finest packages in the world, Mr. Marlowe. The stuff inside is mostly junk.”
--------------
Good stuff. Not much has changed since this was written back in 1953.
::
0 comments
( 10:47 AM )
Battle of Wits
I don’t get it. I don’t get how President Bush is as popular as he is. Am I missing something? Am I missing the part where he presents himself as an effective leader, as someone I’d trust to make an intelligent, well-informed decision when it comes to life-or-death decisions for our military and our general way of life?
After last night’s debate, I figured the world finally got a chance to see the real George W. Bush. The George W. Bush who can’t string two complete sentences together without pausing or mumbling or babbling out one of the 3 catch phrases written down on his cheat sheet in front of him. The George W. Bush that can’t actually answer a question, or even come close to answering a question, and instead falls back on those 3 catch phrases. The George W. Bush who looks like that kid in the back of the class that gets caught day dreaming when the teacher asks him a question – “Uh…what was the question?”
Last night we didn’t see the George W. Bush that usually has the questions ahead of time and his answers written for him. We got to see first hand (and for the first time) the real George W. Bush that is the leader of the free world.
I don’t want to come off sounding like a Dixie Chick, but it was embarrassing. I was embarrassed to see our president fumbling to answer general and basic questions about our foreign policy and his reasoning for going to war. This is our president – a bumbling idiot.
Yet, this morning – all of the major newspapers and news programs barely mention Bush’s inability to look or talk like a leader. They acknowledged that John Kerry was sharp and poised, and that Bush was on the defensive most of the time – but they failed to describe Bush’s slacker-like composure and permanent scowl. They failed to mention how he skirted some of the major questions regarding Osama Bin Ladin and our government’s failure to focus on the real terrorist threat. How he has failed to address some of the other major and more important threats in the world (such as Iran and North Korea). How he has completely dropped the ball in regards to Homeland security.
Kerry came across strong and reassuring. Yes, he skirted some issues as well. Sometimes sounding too rehearsed and making promises that I’m not sure are even possible. But to me, part of the purpose of this debate was to show the type of character and type of personality each man possess. Character and personality are not the sole traits by which we should judge whether a man can lead – but they do show the type of poise and level-headedness a president needs in order to make important decisions. It only took a few questions to get Bush all riled up and visibly angry. Is that the type of man we want making decisions about our involvement in wars? A guy that wants to duke it out at the first sight of disagreement? Over a thousand US soldiers have died because Bush didn’t want to think about other options. He was pissed off and wanted a trophy in the form of Saddam Hussian in prison. The consequences never occurred to him.
I don’t know. To me it seems pretty cut and dry. Kerry comes from the political cookie cutting factory and is also a man of questionable convictions. But when it come to instilling confidence in the ability to lead and govern – George W. Bush is an unarmed man in a battle of wits.
::
0 comments
|
