Friday, September 26, 2008
Literally the Most Fun Presidential Debate Drinking Game Ever
Okay so I've been looking all morning for a good drinking game to play tonight with my nerdy friends as we spend our Friday evenings in front of the television watching the presidential debate instead of hitting up the hoppin DC bar scene. I don't think many people were posting their game rules this morning because it was still up in the air whether McCain was going to show or not, but now that Magoo is coming (supposedly, unless the bat signal reappears), several sites have published their drinking game rules. But I just decided to make my own because it's straightforward and, I think, actually playable.
Literally the Most Fun Presidential Debate Drinking Game Ever
-As a warm up, chug your drink if both candidates show up.
-Take one sip of the drink of the person to your right every time McCain starts a sentence with "my friends"
-Take one sip of the drink of the person to your left every time Obama starts a sentence with "look."
-Take one sip every time McCain contradicts a statement he made earlier in the week.
-Take a sip every time McCain says "reform"
-Take a sip every time Obama says "change"
-Take a sip every time either candidate says "same old failed policies"
-Give the tv the finger and take a sip every time either candidate compliments the other.
-Trade your drink with someone else and chug it whenever the figure $700 billion is mentioned.
-Drink the entire length of every pause Obama takes between the subject and predicate of a sentence.
-Drink for 2 seconds every time Wall Street and Main Street are mentioned in the same sentence.
-Drink for 4 seconds every time either candidate blames the media for misrepresenting him.
-Drink for 5 and a half seconds every time McCain mentions being a POW. If you finish your drink, break the can/bottle/glass on your forehead.
-Drink for 7 seconds every time McCain can't remember how many houses he owns.
-Toast your neighbors and drink for 8 seconds every time Obama compares McCain to Bush.
-Get on your knees, look to Russia, make the sign of the cross, and chug your drink whenever Sarah Palin is mentioned.
-Waterfall every time McCain says Rezko, Wright, or Ayers.
-Waterfall every time Obama says Davis, Fiorina, Gramm, or Keating.
Literally the Most Fun Presidential Debate Drinking Game Ever
-As a warm up, chug your drink if both candidates show up.
-Take one sip of the drink of the person to your right every time McCain starts a sentence with "my friends"
-Take one sip of the drink of the person to your left every time Obama starts a sentence with "look."
-Take one sip every time McCain contradicts a statement he made earlier in the week.
-Take a sip every time McCain says "reform"
-Take a sip every time Obama says "change"
-Take a sip every time either candidate says "same old failed policies"
-Give the tv the finger and take a sip every time either candidate compliments the other.
-Trade your drink with someone else and chug it whenever the figure $700 billion is mentioned.
-Drink the entire length of every pause Obama takes between the subject and predicate of a sentence.
-Drink for 2 seconds every time Wall Street and Main Street are mentioned in the same sentence.
-Drink for 4 seconds every time either candidate blames the media for misrepresenting him.
-Drink for 5 and a half seconds every time McCain mentions being a POW. If you finish your drink, break the can/bottle/glass on your forehead.
-Drink for 7 seconds every time McCain can't remember how many houses he owns.
-Toast your neighbors and drink for 8 seconds every time Obama compares McCain to Bush.
-Get on your knees, look to Russia, make the sign of the cross, and chug your drink whenever Sarah Palin is mentioned.
-Waterfall every time McCain says Rezko, Wright, or Ayers.
-Waterfall every time Obama says Davis, Fiorina, Gramm, or Keating.
Hooray! My Friday Night is Saved!
Thank heavens! John McCain will come down to Earth from his very important position as Economy Messiah and grace us plebeians with the gift of his opinions in a live studio event. The debate is on.
And not only that, but McCain already won! Huzzah! At least says the Wall Street Journal in this ad on their website:
[Thank you Christina and Wonkette]
And not only that, but McCain already won! Huzzah! At least says the Wall Street Journal in this ad on their website:
[Thank you Christina and Wonkette]
Let's Put This All Together Now
Okay so this financial crisis is complicated, confusing, depressing, and frustrating. Fun times in America! None of what's happening in the economy is made any easier by the fact that we are in the home stretch of a very important presidential election. Double yay!
In order to try to make some sense of what's happened, I'm going to give you a basic outline of what's been going on, as I understand it. Let me stress as I understand it. If this is totally wrong, please, someone speak up and edumacate us all.
1. Okay so because our government has been run by firm believers of absolute free markets, banks have been generally deregulated over the last decade. The government says, go ahead guys, do your thing, we trust you and we don't want to interfere. So banks and investment firms and the like were like, cool, thanks, we're going to do kind of what we want now.
2. When someone buys a home and uses a mortgage to finance the home, a commercial bank gives the mortgage to the homebuyer at a certain interest rate through which the bank makes money. The bank then turns around and sells those mortgages (the principle amount plus the interest they earn) to a bigger bank, who sells it to someone else, and so on and so forth up the line. In order to sell more of these mortgages, banks were offering mortgages with low interest rates, attracting more people to get mortgages who normally wouldn't really afford them, except that these low interest rates had the possibility of increasing. People took them anyway, even with the risk, because they wanted to buy a home. These are the subprime mortgages. Okay, so we have banks selling mortgages to people who can't afford them and people who can't afford mortgages taking them from the banks. And the government isn't watching what's going on.
4. So then the interest rates on these subprime mortgages go up and suddenly these people who could afford their mortgages at the primary rate can no longer afford them. So they start missing mortgage payments and defaulting on their loans. This is where people start losing their homes. Furthermore, if the people can't pay their mortgage, the originating bank can't make good on the debt they sold to the banks up the line. So there's a shortage of cash flow reaching all the way through the system. Banks suddenly have way more debt than they have capital (which is bad) and everything starts collapsing very quickly as they realize what the deal is.
It's like a series of bouncing checks. I write a check to my landlord for my rent. He deposits it into his account and then pays the contractor working on his kitchen with the same money I just paid him. The contractor pays the lumber yard with the money my landlord paid him, and so on and so forth. But it turns out my check is no good and bounces. So the money my landlord thought he had and used to pay his contractor is no longer there and his check bounces. So then the contractor's does too.
5. Okay so then Hank Paulson steps in as Secretary of the Treasury and is like whoa whoa whoa whoa. This is crazy. So he starts bailing out individual companies, covering their bad debt. He has to get the banks back on their feet by lending them some cash to cover the bad debts so that they have some money to work with. Because the money that banks earn from mortgages and selling mortgages is the money they use to lend us other loans like credit cards and auto loans. If the banks owe more than they make, there's no way they can give us any of the loans we rely on on a daily basis.
6. As Paulson saw the possibility of this happening to many many banks, he decided to step in and just try to fix it all at once instead of as each individual bank was on the brink of disaster. So he proposes this plan to spend $700 billion buying the bad debt from any bank that needs to get their books in the black. He says that if the bill doesn't get passed soon that the whole thing will fall apart. What does that look like? So if the banks can't give you a credit card loan or a car loan, then small business who rely on these loans on a daily basis for their inventory and such cannot operate. They lose and we lose because we can't get the goods and services we need to to survive. And those of us employed by small business may find ourselves out of jobs. If it gets really bad, then even existing credit--your credit cards and loans--will be cut off, leaving people without ways to pay for basics like food and gas. This is what Paulson is trying to avoid.
Oh and the stock market is screwed too. No investor confidence and a shortage of money means your 401k and your stocks and your retirement are quickly diminishing.
7. So Paulson presents this deal to Congress, who needs to pass the bill in order to make it happen. Congress sees a few things wrong with it, besides the fact that it's $700 billion courtesy of the taxpayers. Namely, a) they want there to be provisions providing for more oversight and accountability for the Treasury as to how they are spending the $700 billion b) they want to give the government (and taxpayers) some ownership over these companies who they are bailing out--no freebies here and c) they want to cap executive compensation packages at $400,000 so the filty rich fat cats who head up all of these belly up companies don't get rewarded for their reckless behavior.
8. Okay so Democrats in Congress are like, okay, look. We don't know why we should trust you, Hank. This administration has kind of screwed the pooch in the past and $700 billion is a lot to be responsible for. But we're willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, save for some negotiation on certain details, that we need to do something quickly and this seems to be the only plausible option on the table. So they start working it out with Republicans on the deal because, even though the Dems could pass the measure on their own, they want GOP support so that a) if it doesn't work out, it's not just the Dems fault and b) so that a very national problem can get solved in a bipartisan manner. On Wednesday night reports were coming from negotiations that they were close to agreement. Huzzah!
9. And then John "I Don't Know Shit About the Economy" McCain is like, wait! I will come to Washington and selflessly cancel all of the events I was really looking forward to (Dave Letterman, the debate, the election) so that I can insert myself in a nonpolitical way into a deal I have nothing to do with except that I might have to take over this thing in a few months. So George Bush is like, okay fine, Barack, you come over here too and we'll talk this out with John and other congressional leaders. (Meanwhile, McCain's "suspended" campaign continues to take donations, run attack ads, and send its surrogates to all the talk shows.) John McCain says nothing at this meeting and by powers of the force, single-handedly stalls the whole deal. All of the sudden, even though nothing of this plan had been noted at the meetings that had occured over the last several days, congressional Republicans decided they had a better idea than the plan being worked out. They're not going to tell much of the details except that it has to do with providing guaranteed insurance to banks in trouble instead of just handing them the money. Makes sense, but would have been useful 3 days ago. Meanwhile, Washington Mutual collapses, becoming the largest bank failure in US history. McCain hasn't really said anything, except that he will support whichever plan is going to pass. He came to speed the process, reach a concensus, but will not aid in the negotiations or give an opinion, just support whichever team wins.
And now we wait to see what comes out today, if we're all going to hell in a fireball before or after the NFL games on Sunday, and if the presidential candidates in our Bestest Democracy In the World for the People will actually come and talk to we the people tonight or not.
The end.
In order to try to make some sense of what's happened, I'm going to give you a basic outline of what's been going on, as I understand it. Let me stress as I understand it. If this is totally wrong, please, someone speak up and edumacate us all.
1. Okay so because our government has been run by firm believers of absolute free markets, banks have been generally deregulated over the last decade. The government says, go ahead guys, do your thing, we trust you and we don't want to interfere. So banks and investment firms and the like were like, cool, thanks, we're going to do kind of what we want now.
2. When someone buys a home and uses a mortgage to finance the home, a commercial bank gives the mortgage to the homebuyer at a certain interest rate through which the bank makes money. The bank then turns around and sells those mortgages (the principle amount plus the interest they earn) to a bigger bank, who sells it to someone else, and so on and so forth up the line. In order to sell more of these mortgages, banks were offering mortgages with low interest rates, attracting more people to get mortgages who normally wouldn't really afford them, except that these low interest rates had the possibility of increasing. People took them anyway, even with the risk, because they wanted to buy a home. These are the subprime mortgages. Okay, so we have banks selling mortgages to people who can't afford them and people who can't afford mortgages taking them from the banks. And the government isn't watching what's going on.
4. So then the interest rates on these subprime mortgages go up and suddenly these people who could afford their mortgages at the primary rate can no longer afford them. So they start missing mortgage payments and defaulting on their loans. This is where people start losing their homes. Furthermore, if the people can't pay their mortgage, the originating bank can't make good on the debt they sold to the banks up the line. So there's a shortage of cash flow reaching all the way through the system. Banks suddenly have way more debt than they have capital (which is bad) and everything starts collapsing very quickly as they realize what the deal is.
It's like a series of bouncing checks. I write a check to my landlord for my rent. He deposits it into his account and then pays the contractor working on his kitchen with the same money I just paid him. The contractor pays the lumber yard with the money my landlord paid him, and so on and so forth. But it turns out my check is no good and bounces. So the money my landlord thought he had and used to pay his contractor is no longer there and his check bounces. So then the contractor's does too.
5. Okay so then Hank Paulson steps in as Secretary of the Treasury and is like whoa whoa whoa whoa. This is crazy. So he starts bailing out individual companies, covering their bad debt. He has to get the banks back on their feet by lending them some cash to cover the bad debts so that they have some money to work with. Because the money that banks earn from mortgages and selling mortgages is the money they use to lend us other loans like credit cards and auto loans. If the banks owe more than they make, there's no way they can give us any of the loans we rely on on a daily basis.
6. As Paulson saw the possibility of this happening to many many banks, he decided to step in and just try to fix it all at once instead of as each individual bank was on the brink of disaster. So he proposes this plan to spend $700 billion buying the bad debt from any bank that needs to get their books in the black. He says that if the bill doesn't get passed soon that the whole thing will fall apart. What does that look like? So if the banks can't give you a credit card loan or a car loan, then small business who rely on these loans on a daily basis for their inventory and such cannot operate. They lose and we lose because we can't get the goods and services we need to to survive. And those of us employed by small business may find ourselves out of jobs. If it gets really bad, then even existing credit--your credit cards and loans--will be cut off, leaving people without ways to pay for basics like food and gas. This is what Paulson is trying to avoid.
Oh and the stock market is screwed too. No investor confidence and a shortage of money means your 401k and your stocks and your retirement are quickly diminishing.
7. So Paulson presents this deal to Congress, who needs to pass the bill in order to make it happen. Congress sees a few things wrong with it, besides the fact that it's $700 billion courtesy of the taxpayers. Namely, a) they want there to be provisions providing for more oversight and accountability for the Treasury as to how they are spending the $700 billion b) they want to give the government (and taxpayers) some ownership over these companies who they are bailing out--no freebies here and c) they want to cap executive compensation packages at $400,000 so the filty rich fat cats who head up all of these belly up companies don't get rewarded for their reckless behavior.
8. Okay so Democrats in Congress are like, okay, look. We don't know why we should trust you, Hank. This administration has kind of screwed the pooch in the past and $700 billion is a lot to be responsible for. But we're willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, save for some negotiation on certain details, that we need to do something quickly and this seems to be the only plausible option on the table. So they start working it out with Republicans on the deal because, even though the Dems could pass the measure on their own, they want GOP support so that a) if it doesn't work out, it's not just the Dems fault and b) so that a very national problem can get solved in a bipartisan manner. On Wednesday night reports were coming from negotiations that they were close to agreement. Huzzah!
9. And then John "I Don't Know Shit About the Economy" McCain is like, wait! I will come to Washington and selflessly cancel all of the events I was really looking forward to (Dave Letterman, the debate, the election) so that I can insert myself in a nonpolitical way into a deal I have nothing to do with except that I might have to take over this thing in a few months. So George Bush is like, okay fine, Barack, you come over here too and we'll talk this out with John and other congressional leaders. (Meanwhile, McCain's "suspended" campaign continues to take donations, run attack ads, and send its surrogates to all the talk shows.) John McCain says nothing at this meeting and by powers of the force, single-handedly stalls the whole deal. All of the sudden, even though nothing of this plan had been noted at the meetings that had occured over the last several days, congressional Republicans decided they had a better idea than the plan being worked out. They're not going to tell much of the details except that it has to do with providing guaranteed insurance to banks in trouble instead of just handing them the money. Makes sense, but would have been useful 3 days ago. Meanwhile, Washington Mutual collapses, becoming the largest bank failure in US history. McCain hasn't really said anything, except that he will support whichever plan is going to pass. He came to speed the process, reach a concensus, but will not aid in the negotiations or give an opinion, just support whichever team wins.
And now we wait to see what comes out today, if we're all going to hell in a fireball before or after the NFL games on Sunday, and if the presidential candidates in our Bestest Democracy In the World for the People will actually come and talk to we the people tonight or not.
The end.
So Close, Yet So Far
Hey! The Phillies didn't lose last night!
You may say: "that's because they didn't play last night." I just prefer to remain positive, okay?
There's not a lot to think positively about in terms of the Phils right now. Although the Phillies had a day off, the Mets and Brewers did not and they both won (thanks a lot, Chicago). That means that the Phillies are only 1 game ahead of the Mets. The Mets and the Brewers are tied for the Wild Card. There are 3 teams and 2 spots, so someone is getting screwed here. We may be in the best position, but this weekend is going to be a veritable mess of last-series-of-the-season-oh-my-god-anyone-can-make-the-playoffs-now-because-the-Phillies-didn't-win-last-week. So yeah, the Mets now play the Marlins at home, the Brewers play the Cubs at home, and the Phils get the Nats at home. We definitely on paper have the easiest team to play at this point, but the Nats have really given us trouble this whole season. I think (and hope and pray) that the Marlins are the toughest challenge because they too have been tough this season. Although the Cubs are the best team of the 3, I doubt they will play up to full potential because they have already won their playoff spot and can just phone it in. So on Monday I may be elated or furiously depressed.
In terms of other sports this weekend, Penn State (12) plays Illinois (22) tomorrow in their first real challenge of the season. It's the sexy prime-time game on at 8 on ABC. On Sunday, the Eagles also get the prime-time slot against Chicago.
You may say: "that's because they didn't play last night." I just prefer to remain positive, okay?
There's not a lot to think positively about in terms of the Phils right now. Although the Phillies had a day off, the Mets and Brewers did not and they both won (thanks a lot, Chicago). That means that the Phillies are only 1 game ahead of the Mets. The Mets and the Brewers are tied for the Wild Card. There are 3 teams and 2 spots, so someone is getting screwed here. We may be in the best position, but this weekend is going to be a veritable mess of last-series-of-the-season-oh-my-god-anyone-can-make-the-playoffs-now-because-the-Phillies-didn't-win-last-week. So yeah, the Mets now play the Marlins at home, the Brewers play the Cubs at home, and the Phils get the Nats at home. We definitely on paper have the easiest team to play at this point, but the Nats have really given us trouble this whole season. I think (and hope and pray) that the Marlins are the toughest challenge because they too have been tough this season. Although the Cubs are the best team of the 3, I doubt they will play up to full potential because they have already won their playoff spot and can just phone it in. So on Monday I may be elated or furiously depressed.
In terms of other sports this weekend, Penn State (12) plays Illinois (22) tomorrow in their first real challenge of the season. It's the sexy prime-time game on at 8 on ABC. On Sunday, the Eagles also get the prime-time slot against Chicago.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
There Is Just Too Much To Say Today
Just how did the Treasury come up with $700 billion figure for the bailout? A complex algorithim? Carefully analyzed financial data? An estimate of the overall loss of assets of major financial institutions?
“It’s not based on any particular data point,” a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. “We just wanted to choose a really large number.”
Please wake me up, this cannot be our reality right now.
“It’s not based on any particular data point,” a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. “We just wanted to choose a really large number.”
Please wake me up, this cannot be our reality right now.
Pardon My Incredulousness
Okay, I know a lot of blogs are posting this today, but my god. I didn't think it would be this bad. I mean, I knew she wasn't the sharpest crayon in the box, but I thought she could at least speak coherently.
Watch CBS Videos Online
Wonkette has great coverage of this and of the subsequent Four Questions journalists were allowed to ask her today.
Let me ask you this. Can you identify which statement was made by Governor Sarah Palin, vice-presidential candidate for the Republican Party, and Ms. Lauren Caitlin Upton, former Miss South Carolina?
a) I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in. Where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh, it's got to be about job creation, too. Shoring up our economy, and getting it back on the right track. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade -- we have got to see trade as opportunity, not as, uh, competitive, um, scary thing, but one in five jobs created in the trade sector today. We've got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation.
b) I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uh, some people out there in our nation don’t have maps and uh, I believe that our, uh, education like such as uh, South Africa, and uh, the Iraq, everywhere like such as. And I believe that they should, uh, our education over here! In the U.S. should help the U.S., or, should help South Africa, it should help the Iraq and the Asian countries so we will be able to build up our future, for our children.
And let me ask you this: if you hadn't watched the Miss South Carolina video over and over last year (or whenever it was), would you have known the difference?
Watch CBS Videos Online
Wonkette has great coverage of this and of the subsequent Four Questions journalists were allowed to ask her today.
Let me ask you this. Can you identify which statement was made by Governor Sarah Palin, vice-presidential candidate for the Republican Party, and Ms. Lauren Caitlin Upton, former Miss South Carolina?
a) I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in. Where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy. Um, helping, oh, it's got to be about job creation, too. Shoring up our economy, and getting it back on the right track. So health care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions, and tax relief for Americans, and trade -- we have got to see trade as opportunity, not as, uh, competitive, um, scary thing, but one in five jobs created in the trade sector today. We've got to look at that as more opportunity. All of those things under the umbrella of job creation.
b) I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uh, some people out there in our nation don’t have maps and uh, I believe that our, uh, education like such as uh, South Africa, and uh, the Iraq, everywhere like such as. And I believe that they should, uh, our education over here! In the U.S. should help the U.S., or, should help South Africa, it should help the Iraq and the Asian countries so we will be able to build up our future, for our children.
And let me ask you this: if you hadn't watched the Miss South Carolina video over and over last year (or whenever it was), would you have known the difference?
Onion Article That Made Me LOL
Cash-Strapped NPR Launches 'A Couple Things Considered'
WASHINGTON—Facing major cutbacks, National Public Radio has been forced to retool and relaunch its popular program All Things Considered as a truncated newscast that now only considers a couple, maybe three things per show. "We'd love to consider all things, but the reality is we no longer have the resources necessary to do so," host Michele Norris said following the new show's first broadcast, in which rising gas prices and jazz legend Wynton Marsalis were considered. "We'll still be able to mention six or seven things, gloss over four, and reference five, but we cannot afford to give every single thing our full consideration. Perhaps we were biting off more than we could chew in the first place." A Couple Things Considered is just one of many new shows brought about by budget constraints, along with NPR's recently launched Bicycle Talk and Public Radio International's This Tri-State Area Life. 
I Went to a Hip Hop Show
So I went to a show last night at the 9:30 Club. Not just any show, a hip hop show. Yes, I do believe that nabs me two more points on Stuff White People Like (see #71 and #107). I was surprised to see that not only was I not the only white person there, but I wasn't even the whitest white person there (and neither were my white companions). This may have something to do with the fact that it was a producer battle. It's a known fact that white people can't rap and often look stupid doing so, but it's acceptable for them to at least try to come up with some good beats for other to rap over (see: Mark Ronson). So these producers went head to head with their beats, the first producer playing his beat and then his opponent playing his, and then they go back and forth again. Then the crowd voted and the winner moved on to the next round.
It was fun! The beats were fairly simple enough that I could bob my head in rhythm. There weren't any words, so I couldn't feel stupid not knowing the lyrics or feel uncomfortable not understanding references. It was probably the best white-girl's introduction to live hip hop. And then Wale came on to rhyme a little bit. He was actually who I came to see, but wound up missing. I had to go home early because I have a knee injury and the couple of hours of standing was starting to hurt me. But I heard he was good, albeit brief. And everyone went home happy. The End.
It was fun! The beats were fairly simple enough that I could bob my head in rhythm. There weren't any words, so I couldn't feel stupid not knowing the lyrics or feel uncomfortable not understanding references. It was probably the best white-girl's introduction to live hip hop. And then Wale came on to rhyme a little bit. He was actually who I came to see, but wound up missing. I had to go home early because I have a knee injury and the couple of hours of standing was starting to hurt me. But I heard he was good, albeit brief. And everyone went home happy. The End.
American Exceptionalism
Roger Cohen has an editorial in the NYT today that really resonates with me. It's a topic I've been thinking a lot about recently and always seems to become especially apparent during general election years; Cohen calls it "American exceptionalism." In my head, it sounds more like American superiority complex, but that's why Cohen writes for the NYT and I don't. His piece delves briefly into the topic, drawing comparisons between what American exceptionalism means to Barack Obama and Sarah Palin. I think it's a pretty objective analysis, but I'm biased myself, so who knows. But yeah, worth a read.
Better Have Your Tee-Times Reserved
Long story short, the Phillies lost to the Braves again last night, an abysmal 10-4. Brett Myers has returned to Mr. Hyde from Dr. Jeckyll and is pitching horribly. The hot hitting of the past few weeks from some players has just cooled off terribly, save for Mr. Ryan Howard.Earth to the Phillies: you are not the Mets. So stop blowing this playoff chance and start playing hungry. Yeah, we felt comfortable a few days ago at 2.5 ahead of the Mets for the NL East and the Brewers for the Wild Card. But now that lead has shrunk to 1.5--and that's only because the Cubs saved you last night by beating the Mets in extra innings.
The Mets play today while you have off. If they had won last night, you would be tied. Hear that? TIED. This is somehow reminiscent of last season, except now you are the team with everything to lose. The Mets are the ones who are supposed to fail, not you. You all are saying "One game at a time," "we're not looking to the playoffs," and "let's not get ahead of ourselves." Well, maybe you should start thinking ahead if it will make you play a little better; stop expecting little of yourselves because we, the fans, expect everything.
There are three games left. We can't afford any more losses. On your day off today, see how it feels a little bit. Do you like sitting at home watching other teams play? Because that's what you're going to be doing in about a week when the playoffs start if you don't start playing like the great team we know you can be.
Bullet Thoughts
Okay so the McCain campaign suspension thing happened pretty quickly yesterday and I've been busy (I went to a hiphop show, watched Project Runway, and slept...more on these things later), so I have had a lot of different gut reactions and brief analysis going on in my head about the whole thing. I can't seem to form a coherent essay about it at the moment, so I'll just give you the bullet points:
Now I know this all sounds like ranting, and it is. I'm not pretending to be completely objective here, but this is how I see it: McCain's campaign has turned this crucially important election in the middle of major major problems into a circus of stunts and gimmicks.
Josh Marshall at TPM says it best I think:
"One of the advantages of running a presidential campaign is that roughly half the country is deeply committed to believing or at least saying that virtually anything you do or say makes sense. And so it is here. But, look, if you were living in the real world, if you were some hotshot young executive at a Fortune 500 company trying to rise in the ranks, and you pulled some whacked crap like this, it would probably get you blackballed permanently. People would think you were either deeply unreliable or maybe just had a screw loose. And yet here he is -- is he kidding? He can't debate Barack Obama because he's got to go to Washington and save the economy? It's like the biggest 'dog at my homework' in history."
- Suggested moving the debate to October 2--the date of the VP debate--and then moving the VP debate to an unidentified later date. Isn't that convenient? He's afraid his gimmick VP pick will not perform well, even after her foreign policy crash course photo op this week, that he needs to reschedule the last crucial weeks of the election campaigns.
- The American people deserve to hear from the horses' mouths exactly what the candidates think and say about the issues. That's what the debates are for. This especially goes for McCain, who has seemingly flipped on a lot of issues in a short amount of time, and who prefers not talking with reporters and only giving recorded statements without the opportunity for questions. It's time for him to start being accountable.
- I agree with Letterman--you can't take a "time-out" as President. A good leader surrounds himself with competent team members who could foreseeably take over if necessary. McCain doesn't trust Palin to take over his "campaign" for a few days? What does that say about her? More importantly, what does that say about his leadership skills?
- He never actually stopped campaigning--only canceled Letterman, went on Katie Couric, still has other speeches, hasn't stopped collecting campaign money, hasn't stopped ads.
- McCain admittedly knows little about the economy--how is he going to all the sudden step up and save it?
- Another note on leadership---you have competent people on committees for reasons. Those on the congressional committees are working on the bill because that's what they're good it. As a good leader, you let the people who have the expertise and step in only when there is a standstill. There was no standstill in Congress, they just weren't sure how people would vote.
- Barney Frank came out and said they were pretty much done and were just working out the small details--what would McCain be able to do?
Now I know this all sounds like ranting, and it is. I'm not pretending to be completely objective here, but this is how I see it: McCain's campaign has turned this crucially important election in the middle of major major problems into a circus of stunts and gimmicks.
Josh Marshall at TPM says it best I think:
"One of the advantages of running a presidential campaign is that roughly half the country is deeply committed to believing or at least saying that virtually anything you do or say makes sense. And so it is here. But, look, if you were living in the real world, if you were some hotshot young executive at a Fortune 500 company trying to rise in the ranks, and you pulled some whacked crap like this, it would probably get you blackballed permanently. People would think you were either deeply unreliable or maybe just had a screw loose. And yet here he is -- is he kidding? He can't debate Barack Obama because he's got to go to Washington and save the economy? It's like the biggest 'dog at my homework' in history."
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
I Walk Away From the Computer for TWO HOURS
And look what happens! I can't even talk about it right now, I'm afraid I will burst a blood vessel. Suspend the campaign? Postpone the debate? WTF to the nth. How is dragging your campaign and all of the press hoopla (oh, I forget, he doesn't talk to them) to Washington going to depoliticize the discussion about the bailout package? NEWS FLASH, JOHN MCCAIN: This country is going through real problems here, okay? This is really not the time to play "Call My Bluff, Suckahs." Postponing a debate with only 40 days to go before the election is not going to give us any idea of how you would fix these problems.
Do us all a favor and suspend your campaign indefinitely.
Also, I have yet to see evidence that the entire economy will, in fact, implode at the strike of midnight on Friday if the administration's proposal is not passed. Calling Naomi Klein. Looks like it's so bad that they may need to cancel the election....
Do us all a favor and suspend your campaign indefinitely.
Also, I have yet to see evidence that the entire economy will, in fact, implode at the strike of midnight on Friday if the administration's proposal is not passed. Calling Naomi Klein. Looks like it's so bad that they may need to cancel the election....
Daily Dose
Also, if you haven't already and get the chance to watch the whole episode, I really recommend it. Bill Clinton is the guest and it's a great interview, even though (not surprisingly) Bill does most of the talking. I did notice a few things, though:
1) Was Bill Clinton nervous to talk to Jon Stewart? He was visibly shaking during the interview.
2) Bill Clinton, man with the pinkest face ever, should never wear a pale-pink tie. It's never good to unintentionally match your accessories with your skin color.
3) Barack Obama Barack Obama Barack Obama
1) Was Bill Clinton nervous to talk to Jon Stewart? He was visibly shaking during the interview.
2) Bill Clinton, man with the pinkest face ever, should never wear a pale-pink tie. It's never good to unintentionally match your accessories with your skin color.
3) Barack Obama Barack Obama Barack Obama
Instead of Just Complaining About the Bailout...
...suggest an alternative. I like what Bob Kuttner at The American Prospect has to say.
Take a Breather
This week has been horribly depressing for a lot of reasons (the economy, the election, etc.), so let's just take a break and watch the best music video ever made to the best song ever written, shall we?
This Just In: Maureen Dowd Makes No Fucking Sense
I read Maureen Dowd's NYT column weekly for a good laugh and sometimes to get my heart rate going. She is such an arrogant blow-hard who decries sexism and criticizes Hillary Clinton's hair-do in the same breath. Although I sense that she shares a similar liberal idealism to my own, her columns are more focused on those Zing! moments than making any cogent argument. The only intelligent pieces I've seen come out of her colum were written by other people (see: Colbert, Stephen and Sorkin, Aaron). Today is no exception.
The first paragraph of the post today reads:
"I don’t agree with those muttering darkly that the picture of Gov. Sarah Palin with a perky smile and shapely gams posing with a pleased Henry Kissinger, famous for calling power the ultimate aphrodisiac, is a sign of the apocalypse.
The first paragraph of the post today reads:
"I don’t agree with those muttering darkly that the picture of Gov. Sarah Palin with a perky smile and shapely gams posing with a pleased Henry Kissinger, famous for calling power the ultimate aphrodisiac, is a sign of the apocalypse.
It isn’t even a sign of the apocalipstick."
Oh, whoa-ho! How long have you been saving up that apocalipstick line? She continues on, hypothesizing snarkily about Palin's meeting with Kissinger and then somehow winds up doing what she loves to do most: striking down the Clintons.
Thanks for really providing some insight there, Maureen. Your column really furthers the national conversation. Great piece of edititorial work.
This makes me sad:
"The Arctic sea ice melt is a disaster for the polar bears," according to Kassie Siegel, staff attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity. "They are dependent on the Arctic sea ice for all of their essential behaviors, and as the ice melts and global warming transforms the Arctic, polar bears are starving, drowning, even resorting to cannibalism because they don't have access to their usual food sources."
But they're a healthy, not-endangered species, right Sarah?
"The Arctic sea ice melt is a disaster for the polar bears," according to Kassie Siegel, staff attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity. "They are dependent on the Arctic sea ice for all of their essential behaviors, and as the ice melts and global warming transforms the Arctic, polar bears are starving, drowning, even resorting to cannibalism because they don't have access to their usual food sources."
But they're a healthy, not-endangered species, right Sarah?
We Had Absolutely No Idea
I'm actually surprised he came out, not because I didn't believe he was gay, but because he was so adamant about not talking about it. I can't wait to hear what Kathy Griffin has to say.
But you know what? I'm not going to make anymore cracks about it because good for him. Congratulations on finally being able to be open about who you are and for having a loving family, however nontraditional it may be. And that baby is damn cute. I just hope he doesn't get Daddy's hair.
[People]
I Said Not to Get Too Excited
Phillies lost last night 3-2 against the Braves. The Mets pulled out a win against the Cubs. Somehow, it doesn't seem like all of Philadelphia is freaking out (yet). We still have a lot of winning to do unless the Mets do some losing in order to make it to our second NL East title in a row (a first since '80-'81). And lord knows we can't leave it up to other teams to do it for us.Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Economix
NYT has a new blog called Economix, whose goal is "to make economics accessible and useful to people who otherwise find it frightening, confusing and/or useless." Sounds good to me.
Today they write an explanatory post on what are other potential options for this bailout. What is in between doing nothing and the $700 billion Paulson plan?
Today they write an explanatory post on what are other potential options for this bailout. What is in between doing nothing and the $700 billion Paulson plan?
Playing Palin
Oh this is just too funny. The NY Daily News unleashed a fake Sarah Palin to the streets of New York (you know, since the real Sarah Palin won't talk to anyone), just to see what would happen. Watch the video to see.
The best part, I think, are the Secret Service guys (or "Special Service," if you're that one lady). Nice inconspicuous Versace sunglasses and Madonna headsets.
The best part, I think, are the Secret Service guys (or "Special Service," if you're that one lady). Nice inconspicuous Versace sunglasses and Madonna headsets.
CNN has also joined "the tank"
The McCain campaign set up this whole "See? Sarah Palin has met with foreign leaders!" photo-op, where Palin will continue her foreign policy education (I guess she must have missed some of those classes in the 4 colleges she attended...). Except really, that's all the McCain camp was allowing--a photo-op, as they refused entrance to print journalists. Only photographers and one TV crew were allowed to witness the meetings, because, as you know the American people need to learn to behave and and be respectful, even though they are not giving us the respect of allowing us to ask her questions until after she is elected. I guess if she can't talk to Oprah until then, she can't talk to anyone.
Anyway, so then CNN finally does what all of the media has wanted to do for 4 weeks now. They gave the McCain camp the broadcast-news middle finger and said, forget it, we're leaving. Now the McCain camp has little if any coverage of Palin and her new friends.
Aw, boo fucking hoo.
Update: Ah. So the McCain camp gave in a little and wound up letting ONE reporter in. Let Wonkette tell you about it.
Anyway, so then CNN finally does what all of the media has wanted to do for 4 weeks now. They gave the McCain camp the broadcast-news middle finger and said, forget it, we're leaving. Now the McCain camp has little if any coverage of Palin and her new friends.
Aw, boo fucking hoo.
Update: Ah. So the McCain camp gave in a little and wound up letting ONE reporter in. Let Wonkette tell you about it.
The Magic Number is 4
It's definitely feeling like this time last year, as the Phillies continue to play their best and the Mets continue to collapse, now when it's most important. The difference this year is that the Phillies have held the NL East for most of the season and it's been theirs to lose; the Mets just seem to be blowing the chance they had to take over in the last couple of weeks. I don't want to get cocky because it's the Phillies we're talking about here and there are always chances to blow it. But the Phillies won against the Braves at home last night, 6-2. The Mets blew it against the Cubs. J.A. Happ pitched a great game for the Phillies and, whaddya know, but hunka-chunka Pat "The Bat" Burrell sealed the lead for the Phillies in the 8th with a 3-run homer. Now are 2.5 games ahead of the Mets. We also only have to win 4 more games, assuming the Mets win every game from here on out, to win the NL East. If the Mets lose the next two and we win the next two, it's already over. Please, guys, let me be optimistic and not think I'm jinxing you by being excited.
Bob Herbert: "Time is indeed short, but alternative voices desperately need to be heard because the people who have been running the economy for so long — who have ruined it — cannot be expected to make things right again in 48 or 96 hours."
Monday, September 22, 2008
The Shock Doctrine
I credit a certain professor I had as a sophomore in college, Susan Searls-Giroux, for opening my eyes to progressive ideas. In her class, we read a book that also contributed a lot to my current thinking: No Logo by Naomi Klein. Klein is an excellent writer; she's clear and concise, but very intelligent without seeming arrogant. I've always admired her.
Last year she published another book, The Shock Doctrine, about how certain groups of people, especially the Bush administration, have employed the strategy of turning a blind eye toward (or creating) disasters so that in the public's state of panic and fear, they can push through legislation and policy that profits them and their friends. It's a very interesting theory that is very depressing to think about (I'm not sure I can make myself believe that people could be that evil), but is worth a look into.
The other day, Klein was on Bill Maher's show with Andrew Sullivan and Will.i.am discussing her theory as it applies to the current financial crisis. It's worth a look:
Last year she published another book, The Shock Doctrine, about how certain groups of people, especially the Bush administration, have employed the strategy of turning a blind eye toward (or creating) disasters so that in the public's state of panic and fear, they can push through legislation and policy that profits them and their friends. It's a very interesting theory that is very depressing to think about (I'm not sure I can make myself believe that people could be that evil), but is worth a look into.
The other day, Klein was on Bill Maher's show with Andrew Sullivan and Will.i.am discussing her theory as it applies to the current financial crisis. It's worth a look:
Don't Buy Them Another Car
There is obviously a lot of debate going on right now about the proposed bailout package that President Bush has asked Congress to approve--and approve quickly. Is this enough money? Will it plug a hole in our economy's breaking dam? Will it help the average Joe or just Wall Street? Will this address the causes of the crisis in the first place?
Politico has a great new feature, called The Arena, in which experts offer their opinion and analysis in response to a certain question. Today's question is: What is the biggest flaw in the administration's bailout package? What is the remedy? If you have some time, it's worth a read of the slew of experts that weigh in. And if you don't have that much time, you can peruse the first few sentences of each contribution.
I'm still trying to read more, but I think the bailout package seems kind of like this kid I knew in high school. His parents were wealthy and were lenient in their discipline. This kid liked to drink and drive, he liked to go spinning donuts in muddy fields, and he liked to drive way too fast. Needless to say, this kid totaled several cars--and these were nice cars, like Land Rovers. But every time he would crash his car because of reckless behavior, his parents would give him a slap on the wrist and buy him a new car. Like another Land Rover. I think he went through three or four of them. Now, I understand that it's often an inconvenience for parents to have to drive their kid around when he's 17 years old and it can be easier just to buy another car and not listen to your kid whine. But the kid learned nothing except that his parents were suckers for bailing him out. And in a lot of ways, the Wall Street bailout is way worse (other than the fact that it's, you know, the entire US financial market) because it's not just our dumb government not being good parents and not punishing investment banks for their reckless behavior, it's we taxpayers who are going to pay for the new Land Rover. And, furthermore, with the inclusion of bad debts from foreign banks, it's like buying the kid a new car, and throwing one in for his dumb-ass friend, just because.
Look, I obviously realize the government needs to do something. But you can help alleviate the financial markets without totally screwing over future generations (like mine) and by including provisions that would deter investment banks and the like from engaging in the same risky behavior that got us in this mess in the first place.
I don't really feel like paying for some multi-billionaire's retirement package when years from now federal funds will be so depleted that I won't even get Social Security. Thanks, but no thanks.
Politico has a great new feature, called The Arena, in which experts offer their opinion and analysis in response to a certain question. Today's question is: What is the biggest flaw in the administration's bailout package? What is the remedy? If you have some time, it's worth a read of the slew of experts that weigh in. And if you don't have that much time, you can peruse the first few sentences of each contribution.
I'm still trying to read more, but I think the bailout package seems kind of like this kid I knew in high school. His parents were wealthy and were lenient in their discipline. This kid liked to drink and drive, he liked to go spinning donuts in muddy fields, and he liked to drive way too fast. Needless to say, this kid totaled several cars--and these were nice cars, like Land Rovers. But every time he would crash his car because of reckless behavior, his parents would give him a slap on the wrist and buy him a new car. Like another Land Rover. I think he went through three or four of them. Now, I understand that it's often an inconvenience for parents to have to drive their kid around when he's 17 years old and it can be easier just to buy another car and not listen to your kid whine. But the kid learned nothing except that his parents were suckers for bailing him out. And in a lot of ways, the Wall Street bailout is way worse (other than the fact that it's, you know, the entire US financial market) because it's not just our dumb government not being good parents and not punishing investment banks for their reckless behavior, it's we taxpayers who are going to pay for the new Land Rover. And, furthermore, with the inclusion of bad debts from foreign banks, it's like buying the kid a new car, and throwing one in for his dumb-ass friend, just because.
Look, I obviously realize the government needs to do something. But you can help alleviate the financial markets without totally screwing over future generations (like mine) and by including provisions that would deter investment banks and the like from engaging in the same risky behavior that got us in this mess in the first place.
I don't really feel like paying for some multi-billionaire's retirement package when years from now federal funds will be so depleted that I won't even get Social Security. Thanks, but no thanks.
A More Superficial Post About the Emmys
So I missed the red carpet last night, partially because the Eagles and Phillies were on until after 7 o'clock (yes, it was a veritable sports cluster at our house), and partially because I just forgot. But after glancing through photos on E! and NYT, it doesn't really matter if I watched the red carpet arrivals or not because, all-in-all, my thought was: Ladies, I am not impressed. Seriously, no one really struck me as being extraordinarily fabulous. Of course there are some I liked and there were definitley some I did not like at all (here's looking at you, Eva Longoria Parker). Here are my short lists for Best and Worst. (Look at E! and NYT for photos right now because I'm having trouble linking them).
Worst
Mary-Louise Parker. Yeah, that would be a nice dress if you were attending the Junior Prom at St. Bernadette's in Long Island. You have a great body, but this dress looks cheap.
Eva Longoria Parker. Another three-named-Parker, another fashion criminal. You don't even have to click on the picture to know how bad it was, because I can describe it to you in a few brief words: Short, bow, fringe, sparkle, bronzer, goth-eyes, DYI hair.
Heidi Klum. It's almost hard to say that Heidi looks bad because she never actually looks bad--she's Heidi Klum. But whoever told her to wear this dress and cape (with butterfly earrings to boot) should be auffed. Didn't you eliminate Stella a few weeks ago on PR for making a similar cape? Simple looks better on your, Heidi, stick with it.
Honorable mention: Christina Applegate. I feel for you, girl, with the whole breast-cancer thing, but I'm going to have to disagree with E! and say that I do not like this look at all. Too much of everything all around.
Best
Marcia Cross. I love everything about this look. She just looks so...pretty. She's a little reminiscent of Carrie in the last episode of Sex and the City, in that beautiful tu-tu that is fairy-tale like, but still sophisticated enough to be worn by a grown-up. If Marcia had blonde hair, the color may have washed her out. But as we all know, Marcia is gorgeous ginger and just looks stunning.
Sandra Oh. Finally finally finally Sandra Oh looks good. And I always root for her because she has the personality to be a little daring with her red carpet looks, but she often goes a little too far towards Tilda Swinton on the scale. But this look is beautiful and I love the different textures of the top lace versuse the bottom lace.
Marishka Hargitay. Marishka always looks great because she has a healthy glow, she goes for simple dresses that just pop with color. She just always looks radiant, confident, and comfortable, and honestly, not many ladies can pull off yellow.
Honorable mention: Brooke Shields. I like it, but I don't love it. I think I would like it better if it weren't such an obnoxious color.
Worst
Mary-Louise Parker. Yeah, that would be a nice dress if you were attending the Junior Prom at St. Bernadette's in Long Island. You have a great body, but this dress looks cheap.
Eva Longoria Parker. Another three-named-Parker, another fashion criminal. You don't even have to click on the picture to know how bad it was, because I can describe it to you in a few brief words: Short, bow, fringe, sparkle, bronzer, goth-eyes, DYI hair.
Heidi Klum. It's almost hard to say that Heidi looks bad because she never actually looks bad--she's Heidi Klum. But whoever told her to wear this dress and cape (with butterfly earrings to boot) should be auffed. Didn't you eliminate Stella a few weeks ago on PR for making a similar cape? Simple looks better on your, Heidi, stick with it.
Honorable mention: Christina Applegate. I feel for you, girl, with the whole breast-cancer thing, but I'm going to have to disagree with E! and say that I do not like this look at all. Too much of everything all around.
Best
Marcia Cross. I love everything about this look. She just looks so...pretty. She's a little reminiscent of Carrie in the last episode of Sex and the City, in that beautiful tu-tu that is fairy-tale like, but still sophisticated enough to be worn by a grown-up. If Marcia had blonde hair, the color may have washed her out. But as we all know, Marcia is gorgeous ginger and just looks stunning.
Sandra Oh. Finally finally finally Sandra Oh looks good. And I always root for her because she has the personality to be a little daring with her red carpet looks, but she often goes a little too far towards Tilda Swinton on the scale. But this look is beautiful and I love the different textures of the top lace versuse the bottom lace.
Marishka Hargitay. Marishka always looks great because she has a healthy glow, she goes for simple dresses that just pop with color. She just always looks radiant, confident, and comfortable, and honestly, not many ladies can pull off yellow.
Honorable mention: Brooke Shields. I like it, but I don't love it. I think I would like it better if it weren't such an obnoxious color.
Commenting on Emmy Comments
The Emmy's were last night (huzzah!) and I love award shows. Too bad I was busy making ratatouille for some friends and missed both the red carpet and much of the show. And then once they left, I had had a few too many glasses of wine to stay awake to watch what remained of the ceremony. Not that I didn't love having Sunday dinner at my house.
Apparently, there was a bit of a moratorium on political comments, wherein presenters and winners were discouraged from making any political statements while at the microphone. That didn't stop several, however, from trying. Howie Mandel, Laura Linney, and Kirk Ellis made some jabs at the GOP. Ellis was even cut off abruptly, mid-sentence, with a commercial break. Way to be stewards of free speech, ABC!
Here's a great exchange between Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart, that is more subtle, but no less biting.
Oh, Hollwood. Stop having opinions and just keep looking pretty.
Apparently, there was a bit of a moratorium on political comments, wherein presenters and winners were discouraged from making any political statements while at the microphone. That didn't stop several, however, from trying. Howie Mandel, Laura Linney, and Kirk Ellis made some jabs at the GOP. Ellis was even cut off abruptly, mid-sentence, with a commercial break. Way to be stewards of free speech, ABC!
Here's a great exchange between Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart, that is more subtle, but no less biting.
Oh, Hollwood. Stop having opinions and just keep looking pretty.
Monday Sports Update
I am very pleased to announce that I went 3 for 3 this weekend in sports (I guess, really, 4 for 4 if you want to count both the Phillies wins). Here's a brief recap of the weekend.
Penn State started off Saturday afternoon right with a win over Temple, 45-3. This is not an extraordinary feat, as Temple should, in no way, still be in Division I. Living in VA and this not slated to be an exciting game, I could not watch the game in the comfort of my apartment. I checked the score in the first quarter and saw that we had not yet scored, with only 2 minutes to go. I texted my brother, a senior at PSU who was at the game, and asked why we hadn't yet scored. His response was: They are just trying to keep the fans here past halftime. Fair enough.
Also, although the Nittany Lions are now 4-0, we are not winning any points in the strength of schedule department. We have, however, moved up to #12 in the rankings, two spots ahead of Ohio State (suckahs). Congratulations are also in order for Joe Paterno, who, with this win on Saturday, has now become the winningest coach in college football history. Congrats, JoePa.
The Eagles game is one that I would have loved to be at Penn State for. The Birds beat the Steelers, 15-6 yesterday in a messy win, but a win nonetheless. When I was at PSU, many of the students were obviously from Pennslyvania and the demographics naturally split themselves between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh when it came to the NFL. My junior year was the last time we played the Steelers and we lost. It was a painfully embarrassing experience, if I recall.
The win yesterday does not come without consequence, however, as Brian Westbrook endured an ankle sprain and is scheduled for an MRI this morning. Donovan McNabb also winced with pain at an aggrevated shoulder injury. Please please please let the tests be negative. Philly can't deal with another injury-marred season. Neither can McNabb's career.
The Phillies won twice this weekend, beating the Marlins 3-2 on Saturday and 5-2 on Sunday. The Mets lost both of their games this weekend, not only putting the Phils back on top of the NL East, but with a little extra padding at 1.5 games. The Phils get the Braves again this week, but at Citizens Bank Park this time, and then finish the season with the Nationals. Only six more games to go!
Penn State started off Saturday afternoon right with a win over Temple, 45-3. This is not an extraordinary feat, as Temple should, in no way, still be in Division I. Living in VA and this not slated to be an exciting game, I could not watch the game in the comfort of my apartment. I checked the score in the first quarter and saw that we had not yet scored, with only 2 minutes to go. I texted my brother, a senior at PSU who was at the game, and asked why we hadn't yet scored. His response was: They are just trying to keep the fans here past halftime. Fair enough.Also, although the Nittany Lions are now 4-0, we are not winning any points in the strength of schedule department. We have, however, moved up to #12 in the rankings, two spots ahead of Ohio State (suckahs). Congratulations are also in order for Joe Paterno, who, with this win on Saturday, has now become the winningest coach in college football history. Congrats, JoePa.
The Eagles game is one that I would have loved to be at Penn State for. The Birds beat the Steelers, 15-6 yesterday in a messy win, but a win nonetheless. When I was at PSU, many of the students were obviously from Pennslyvania and the demographics naturally split themselves between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh when it came to the NFL. My junior year was the last time we played the Steelers and we lost. It was a painfully embarrassing experience, if I recall.
The win yesterday does not come without consequence, however, as Brian Westbrook endured an ankle sprain and is scheduled for an MRI this morning. Donovan McNabb also winced with pain at an aggrevated shoulder injury. Please please please let the tests be negative. Philly can't deal with another injury-marred season. Neither can McNabb's career.
The Phillies won twice this weekend, beating the Marlins 3-2 on Saturday and 5-2 on Sunday. The Mets lost both of their games this weekend, not only putting the Phils back on top of the NL East, but with a little extra padding at 1.5 games. The Phils get the Braves again this week, but at Citizens Bank Park this time, and then finish the season with the Nationals. Only six more games to go!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
