January 15-19, 2007
Jan 15 08:38 Chargers, Schottenheimer Self-Destruct Jan 15 12:39 America Haters Vow to Keep Hating America Jan 15 15:34 Reports: U.S. Economy Moving Past "Soft Landing" Jan 15 22:27 Minnesota's Democrats Face A Choice Jan 16 08:44 Pelosi Threatens President on "Escalation" Jan 16 18:58 Minnesota GOP Stepping Up Jan 19 01:50 Pelosi Opens Global Warming Panel as Snow Blankets Malibu, Texas, Oklahoma
Prior Years: 2006
Chargers, Schottenheimer Self-Destruct
It's just that simple. After watching the game this afternoon, that's the only conclusion I can come to. No, it wasn't Schottenheimer's fault that Troy Brown made a great strip of the ball on Marlin McCree's interception. It is Schottenheimer's fault that he didn't pummel the Patriots' defense with Ladanian Tomlinson play after play in the second half. Instead, the Chargers chose to call pass plays to Vincent Jackson with the Patriots trailing 14-10, then 14-13.
LT is the best running back I've ever watched play. He's better than the late great Walter Payton. He's infinitely better than Barry Sanders, who never played well in the big games. He's better than Emmitt Smith and it ain't even close. With the game hanging in the balance, Marty Schottenheimer chose to call LT's number sparingly while calling pass plays. With no disrespect to the Chargers receiving corps, that's like running plays for Horace Grant while using Michael Jordan as a decoy. That's like asking Nolan Ryan to face the heart of the lineup with primarily curves instead of blowing people away with one 100 mph fastball after another.
If you're gonna lose, lose with your best. Lose while throwing haymakers, not while throwing cute little jabs.I'll also say that Schottenheimer is a decent coach but he isn't a great coach, either. The truth is that great football coaches like Bill Walsh and great baseball managers like former Twins manager Tom Kelly don't give games away. You might beat them but they don't give games away.
A hallmark of the Twins' world championship teams was that they didn't commit errors, they didn't give up many walks and they seemingly took advantage of every leadoff walk they ever got. Yes, they had Kirby Puckett and Kent Hrbek hitting and Jack Morris and Frank Viola pitching but they had lots of no-name players who simply made the routine plays time after time. Bill Walsh's teams had superstars like Jerry Rice, Joe Montana and Roger Craig but their offensive line was a bunch of journeymen for the most part. That said, those journeymen didn't make mistakes.
Schottenheimer's teams have superstars like LT, tight end Antonio Gates and rookie tackle Marcus MacNeill but they've got some journeymen talent, too. Unfortunately, they have a few boneheads who get personal foul penalties at all the wrong times for all the wrong reasons, too.
In the end, that's why Marty Schottenheimer isn't an elite coach. He simply doesn't get his players to concentrate all game long. They simply don't make the simple play consistently enough.
Posted Monday, January 15, 2007 8:40 AM
Comment 1 by Patrick at 15-Jan-07 10:37 AM
Nor was it Marty's fault that Eric Parker couldn't handle a punt. Nor the resulting fumble. Nor does Marty call the offensive or defensive plays. Nor did Marty drop a gimme interception early in the game. The Parker and McCree fumbles led to two short drive TD's alone. My point is, had the players executed, Marty moves on to Round 2. And I'm not pro- or anti-Marty....just a 40+ year Charger fan.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 15-Jan-07 10:51 AM
Marty doesn't call the plays but he's responsible for choosing the coaches that do.
Teams with great coaches tell their QB's not to take chances when nothing is available. Teams with great coaches drill it into their coordinator's head that they use the best RB to put the game out of reach so that the game isn't close.
The Patriots didn't have an answer for LT. An intelligent coordinator would've run LT down the Patriots' throats.
Comment 3 by Lorenzo at 15-Jan-07 02:17 PM
Marty stopped calling plays because he was (rightly) accused of sitting on leads and playing not to lose. The Chargers' offensive coordinator was responsible for much of their win streak - his playcalling was very creative - but he apparently got mental vaporlock this game. The architect of this team, GM A.J. Smith, is cool to Marty, and Marty's contract is up, so expect a new coach next year for a 12-2 team.
America Haters Vow to Keep Hating America
That's essentially the message coming from this article. Here's what thuggish Presidents Ahmadinejad and Chavez said:
"It will permit us to underpin investments...Above all in those countries whose governments are making efforts to liberate themselves from the (US) imperialist yoke," said Chavez.In other words, these thugs will be investing money in countries with the hope of raising up more anti-American terrorists, both in South America and Africa. This is a threat that we can't take lightly because their anti-American beliefs run deep.
"This fund, my brother," Chavez said referring to Ahmadinejad, "Will become a mechanism for liberation." "Death to US imperialism!" he said. Ahmadinejad called it a "very important" decision that would help promote "Joint cooperation in third countries," especially in Latin American and African countries.
I wrote about Joe Kennedy's op-ed last Sunday where he said that we should " warm up to Chavez." I also wrote about how Democrats opposed Reagan's war against Daniel Ortega's Sandinistas, showing how Democrats didn't care then about establishing a pro-American democracy in Nicaragua then just like they don't care about establishing a pro-American democracy in Iraq now.
Let's see Joe Kennedy defend his deal with Chavez now that Chavez has agreed to invest money to destabilize the U.S. For that matter, let's see John Kerry defend Democrats' efforts to defund Reagan's war against radical anti-U.S. lefties like Daniel Ortega now that Ortega has regained power within Nicaragua.
I preached repeatedly during the 2006 campaign that Democrats don't take national security seriously. Now we're getting proof of their unseriousness about that extremely serious matter.
Let's hope Americans wake up before 2008 so that some PC liberal takes over the controls to our national security apparatus.
Posted Monday, January 15, 2007 12:40 PM
No comments.
Reports: U.S. Economy Moving Past "Soft Landing"
That's the word according to this AFP article.
Lehman Brothers chief US economist Ethan Harris on Friday boosted his forecast for fourth quarter 2006 growth to an annualized rate of 3.3 percent, a leap from the firm's prior call for just 2.0 percent growth.The economy noticeably slowed down in November, causing speculation on whether the economy was heading for a slowdown or recession. Based on this information, I'd say we can temporarily set aside worries about a recession.
"After slowing in November, the economy seems to have regained its stride," Harris said. "With the last of the major data in, we are now revising fourth quarter GDP to an above-trend 3.3 percent. A wide range of indicators have been stronger than expected. Most important have been the strong consumption data and the surprising improvement in the trade balance."
The latest data showed US employers added a healthy 167,000 new jobs in December, with unemployment holding at a low 4.5 percent. Average wages were up 4.2 percent annually. A separate report Friday showed US retail sales increased 0.9 percent in December.TRANSLATION: This economy is kicking ass. Expect healthy GDP rates because (a) jobs are being created in healthy numbers, (b) wages are increasing steadily and (c) consumers are spending with confidence.
Keep that in mind the next time you hear Ms. Pelosi or Sen. Reid whine about how awful the economy is.
One last thing: When I bought gas Saturday, the price I paid was $1.979.
Posted Monday, January 15, 2007 3:35 PM
No comments.
Minnesota's Democrats Face A Choice
The Minnesota legislature hasn't even been in session a month yet. In a show of their true intentions, Senate Democrats proposed a series increases during their first week in session. During the second week in session, House Democrats refused the House GOP a vote on a series of tax cuts. They accomplished this by ruling that the tax cuts weren't germane to the legislation that was being debated, which was absurd because taxes were being debated. They pulled this stunt so that their members wouldn't be on the record as opposing tax cuts.
By preventing tax cuts & proposing massive tax increases, Democrats face a choice: Do they love tax increases more than they like being in the majority?
Similarly, Sen. Tarryl Clark, my senator, faces a choice: Does she want to run against Michele Bachmann in 2008 as a tax-increasing liberal or will she be a one-term wonder in the Minnesota Senate? The choice is entirely up to her. It's her right to side with Larry Pogemiller & massive tax increases. That said, she needs to remember that she got elected to that seat only after Dave Kleis left to become St. Cloud's mayor. She barely won re-election this past November at a time when Democrats were winning everything in sight. This is hardly a safe Democratic seat.
The average Minnesotan would think that cutting taxes would be automatic considering the fact that the State government is running a $2 billion surplus. It's worth noting that Democrats have little in common with average Minnesotans on the issue of taxes. This isn't difficult to believe because only a Democrat would propose increasing a wide array of taxes when we're running the second biggest surplus in state history. For that matter, only Democrats would prevent debating tax cuts when we're running that big of a surplus.
The question that must be asked is "Why would Democrats propose massive tax increases?" One possible explanation is that they intend to spend most, if not all, of that surplus. If that's the case, taxpayers should demand to know what they intend to spend that money on and why it's necessary to spend $2 billion in addition to the existing state budget. If that's their intention, that would represent a spending binge that would make Robert Byrd look positively miserly.
According to this information, the budget for 2006-2007 is for $33.64 billion. According to this information, the budget has $653 million set aside in a line item called "Budget Reserve". By the way, the updated 2006-07 budget showed spending at $32.725 billion. Another interesting line item says that Minnesota state government spends $12.76 billion on education, almost 40% of the state's budget.
Another troubling thing for Minnesota taxpayers is that Democrats have been extremely vague in offering specifics about their plans. They haven't offered anything in terms of specific spending proposals. They haven't offered anything in terms of justifications for their tax increases. That lack of specificity is alarming to taxpayers, especially considering Democrats' proclivity for overtaxation and overspending at the state and federal levels.
State Senate & House Democrats have a choice to make about tax policy. If they choose to raise taxes when our coffers are full, they'll be telling Mr. & Mrs. Taxpayer that they'll always be dealing with tax increases for as far as the eye can see.
I'd seriously doubt that that's what Mr. & Mrs. Taxpayer had in mind when they gave Democrats control of both chambers of the Minnesota legislature this past November. If Democrats head in that direction, they'll return to the minority in the House in 2009. It's just that simple.
Something else to consider is how well the economy is doing right now. As I wrote today, the economy is staying strong, which will put even more cash in the State's coffers. With the economy staying strong, that makes it that much more difficult to justify any tax increase in the next budget cycle. In fact, that strong economy makes justifying tax cuts a pretty simple proposition.
That is, unless you're a Democrat.
Posted Monday, January 15, 2007 10:30 PM
No comments.
Pelosi Threatens President on "Escalation"
That's essentially the message she wanted to convey according to this SF Chronicle article. Here's what ms. Pelosi said while in San Francisco:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, returning to her hometown of San Francisco, strongly warned today that President Bush "should not abuse his power" with regard to troop escalation in the Iraq war and said it is the duty of Congress to "exercise oversight over his power...If the president doesn't have a plan, Democrats will hold him accountable," Pelosi said in her first public appearance outside Washington since her election as speaker Jan. 4.President Bush and Vice President Cheney were undeterred by Pelosi's attempted power grab. A Constitutional scholar should remind Ms. Pelosi that Congress has the power to declare war and control the budget but it doesn't have the power to set policy. Neither does it have the authority to execute military policy on a tactical or strategic level. That's a power given exclusively to the executive branch. Vice President Cheney gives the reason why:
Cheney was even sharper, telling Fox News that "you cannot run a war by committee," and pointedly suggesting the Democrats don't have a plan for Iraq.The Founding Fathers gave the President the title and responsibility of Commander-In-Chief. They knew that there couldn't be order or accountability if war-making was put in the hands of Congress.
Furthermore, after Congress has authorized the President to wage war, it's impossible by definition for the President to abuse his powers to wage war. Ms. Pelosi's power cravings notwithstanding, the fact is that her role in this war is limited at best.
The truth is that she's limited to cutting off funds to the troops. If she isn't willing to do that, then all that's left is for her to huff and puff but it won't mean anything.
There's another thing that she'd better consider. If she brings up a Sense of the House Resolution, then she'd best hope that she doesn't lose that vote. Losing that type of vote would diminish her even further as the woman who couldn't get things right. Believe it or not, that's the best case scenario. If that resolution passes, she'd pretty much be throwing all of the freshmen who ran as hawks under the bus. If they have to vote for the resolution, then they'll lose in 2008.
Cheney needled 'Mother' Pelosi by suggesting that Democrats don't have a plan. Here's how 'Mother' responded:
"We have a plan, and he knows it," Pelosi said today as she was mobbed by well-wishers following her keynote address at the 22nd annual holiday breakfast.To be intellectually honest, I must admit that Democrats don't have a plan; they've got several plans. Of course, none consider winning an option, which should be our first priority. Their plans include these options: cut and run, cut and jog, cut and walk. Of course, my favorite is Murtha's 'plan' to redeploy to Okinawa. Gotta love those rapid response redeployments to someplace half a world away.
Posted Tuesday, January 16, 2007 8:45 AM
No comments.
Minnesota GOP Stepping Up
Michael Broadkorb has posted something about Rep. Laura Brod introducing major tax relief for Minnesotans. It's welcome news that our House GOP isn't taking their new minority status laying down.
As I said yesterday, Minnesota's Democrats face a choice: they can try raising taxes & return to the minority in 2008 or (b) they can abandon all these major tax increases immediately and stand a chance of keeping their House majority. Here's what Rep. Brod said:
"There's a simple reason we have this surplus, our economy is in good shape, and our citizens are overpaying in taxes to the State of Minnesota," Brod said. "The time is right to give our citizens a much needed financial break and pass this significant and ongoing income tax relief by ensuring that many Minnesota families can keep more of their own hard earned money."Rep. Brod is right. We have a surplus because we're overtaxed. Let's remember that the DFL's own gubernatorial candidate Mike Hatch said:
"We can increase educational funding without increasing taxes."
We just got word earlier today that the economy is getting stronger again, too. What's the need for increasing taxes? There just isn't a rational justification for it.
There's just a Democratic rationalization for it.
Posted Tuesday, January 16, 2007 7:08 PM
No comments.
Pelosi Opens Global Warming Panel as Snow Blankets Malibu, Texas, Oklahoma
I don't know of a politician who is more tone deaf than Nancy Pelosi. I cite as proof of my claim Ms. Pelosi's seeking to create a special committee dealing with global warming. While Ms. Pelosi was doing this, this headline jumped out at me:
Motorists Stranded Near Grapevine Spend Night In VehiclesHere's what the AP is reporting about this 'special' committee:
Snow Falls In West L.A., Malibu
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sought to create a special committee Thursday in an effort to jump-start long-delayed government efforts to deal with global warming and produce a bill by Independence Day.Here's what NBC is reporting about the snows of Malibu:
---------------
"I promise to do everything in my power to achieve energy independence...and to stop global warming," Pelosi said.
Motorists stranded on the Golden State (5) Freeway overnight near the Grapevine continued their journeys Thursday morning when the California Highway Patrol began escorting drivers on the icy stretch of road.Ms. Pelosi doesn't have a bit of credibility when it comes to energy policy because it's stunningly obvious that she's totally in the hip pocket of the environmental extremists. Before anyone other than the most rabid ideologues believes her on this issue, she'll need to pick a better time to announce her 'global warming initiative'.
---------------
In the Malibu area, part of Kanan Dume Road remained closed Thursday morning as crews worked to clear snow from the roadway. Kanan Road was closed from Mulholland Highway to Triunfo Canyon Road, north of Malibu, says CHP Officer Francisco Villalobos.
If these examples aren't enough proof of her tone deafness, here's more proof:
SAN ANTONIO (AP) - A bone-rattling blast of sleet and snow kept Texas and Oklahoma residents shivering in its icy grip, while a blizzard north of Los Angeles caused big-rigs to jackknife.Finally, I'd add this cautionary note from Michael Crichton's testimony before the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works:
At least 65 storm-related deaths have been reported in nine states since Friday, including 10 in Texas and 23 in Oklahoma. The Alamo was closed Wednesday, as was a 300-mile stretch of Interstate 10 in Texas from Fort Stockton to San Antonio.
In essence, science is nothing more than a method of inquiry. The method says an assertion is valid-and merits universal acceptance-only if it can be independently verified. The impersonal rigor of the method means it is utterly apolitical. A truth in science is verifiable whether you are black or white, male or female, old or young. It's verifiable whether you like the results of a study, or you don't.That's why I'm totally skeptical of Ms. Pelosi's claims about global warming. Understand that I'm not discounting the notion that Earth's climate is changing. I just don't buy into the notion that the polar ice caps melting is inevitable because the people touting that belief have suspect political motivations.
Thus, when adhered to, the scientific method can transcend politics. And the converse may also be true: when politics takes precedent over content, it is often because the primacy of independent verification has been overwhelmed by competing interests.
Posted Friday, January 19, 2007 1:51 AM
Comment 1 by Globalwarming Awareness2007 at 08-Mar-07 11:19 PM
Anyone catch the irony here?
