Stop the Presses!!!

Ok so maybe I picked a bad time to be out of the loop. We had Republican Presidential candidates snubbing a debate focused on “minority issues”, Bill O’Reilly being slammed by that moron Keith Olbermann and others for being a racists, Rush Limbaugh “supposedly” calling soldiers who oppose the war “phony”, the Jena 6, OJ back in the news…where to begin.

Well first off, I am sorry for being away. I actually was working toward a promotion on my real job and it came through (hooray) and now am back with a critical eye toward all things in politics, culture and items that I consider to be newsworthy.

So, we had a Democratic debate up may way in New Hampshire (actually up my way) and I wasn’t there for it but I did enjoy hearing most of the candidates announce or move away from the fact that they will pull out troops anytime soon. Here are some quotes from the CNN story entitled “Top Democratic candidates won't vow full Iraq pullout by 2013”.

"I think it's hard to project four years from now,” said Sen. Obama.

"It is very difficult to know what we're going to be inheriting," said Sen. Clinton.

"I cannot make that commitment," said former Sen. Edwards.

This honest response allowed the lesser candidates like Richardson and Dodd to of course vow that they would but in reality, there is no way in hell a true thinking person could commit to such a statement (no “read my lips” moment I guess).

What is amazing to me is how dismissive the top candidates are with their base that wants a commitment from them to pullout the troops now and of course has snappy slogans like “support the troops; bring them home”. Is the left in a frenzy right now hearing from their guys (sorry Hillary) that they are basically unable to make such a commitment? Now the Outspoken Roman knows that it is a fool’s errand to make any such statement and was critical of the candidates in the past making such stupid statements which were obviously politically motivated to pander to the base or were the result of incompetence and not examining the issue closely. Either way, it was scary that major candidates for the Presidential office couldn’t be honest until now that like it or not, we are in Iraq for a long haul and everyone better buckle down now and realize that.

One last note you Clintonites. So recall what Hillary said above. Why would she say something like that during the debate when in February 2007 she introduced the Iraq Troop Reduction & Protection Act of 2007 to the Senate? This Act in the words of the junior senator from NY would provide a way out of Iraq for President Bush. Clinton is quoted as saying “This plan is a roadmap out of Iraq. I hope the President takes this road. If he does, he should be able to end the war before he leaves office." So, if this plan is so great, why can’t Clinton adopt her own plan and make that commitment to the country?

Because she can’t. She is a phony who knows damn well that the troops are entrenched in Iraq and it would be foolish for her to say any different on the national stage. Most pundits think Clinton is playing to the center (in a sense assuming that she has the nomination and is actually running like she is in the general election). This is shameful. The troops and Iraq’s future is not a political football but a hard and fast problem whomever comes into office in 2009 has to deal with and cannot be fixed with a simple and ill defined act by the Senate. The troops deserve better.

- Outspoken Roman

Continuing fallout of the Jets/Patriots Game

So for anyone who does not read the sports pages, the Jets got crushed by the Patriots on Sunday 38-14 but there was an interesting side note to report. Apparently the Patriots were accused of videotaping opposing team’s coaches (including the Jets) and were fined a total of $750,000 as punishment for this practice. Story can is here.

This story is interesting in that we saw the NFL move quickly to police its own and to punish unacceptable behavior, regardless if it was due to an incorrect “interpretation of a rule in the Constitution and Bylaws” of the NFL. A lot of credit needs to go to Roger Goodell (NFL Commissioner) who moved out on this issue and quickly punished the Patriots and Coach Belichick who should be ashamed. Great opinion article here in the Sporting News.

But I agree with Nick Canepa writing online for the Union Tribune out of San Diego. He writes:

“Goodell almost got it right. He reportedly has fined Belichick $500,000 and the New England Patriots $250,000 more for taping defensive signals by Jets coaches during last Sunday's game.”

But Canepa continues:

“His answer should have been: no mercy. Put Belichick in the NFL's hoosegow, its gray-bar hotel, its slammer, its brig, its stir. Shawshank this cheat”

In other words, a monetary punishment has no real effect in the NFL that has a lot of cash to throw at penalties such as those imposed by Goodell. A better punishment would have been suspension of Belichick who has been around the NFL in a variety of jobs for sometime and should know better than this. To try and excuse this behavior with a wimpy statement like misreading the NFL bylaws is probably acceptable for a rookie but not a veteran coach like Belichick.

The Patriots should be better than this as they are a real contender for another trip to the Super Bowl this season and I would have preferred a tougher stance from the NFL leadership in this regard. Simplistically, it is all about integrity of the institution and we should expect better from our institutions, whether they be sports leagues or politicians. It has to start somewhere.

6 years ago

So it has been 6 years since the 9-11 attack. 2,974 people killed and how many kids were orphaned that day, with no Mom, Dad, Grandma, Grandpa coming to pick them up from school, or for a playdate, or for a sleep over. It still breaks my heart to think about that day where we as a country lost so much.

So where are we today? A more divided America I cannot recall and I can only conclude that we have forgotten how it felt that day (in the words of Darryl Worley).

This video says what needs to be said on this day. We are still overcome.

This video and a moment of silence to remember.

God Bless America

Keith Olbermann is a disgrace

I used to love Keith Olberman on ESPN Sportscenter. The broadcast was smart, witty and as entertaining as sport news can be. I was sorry to see him leave and actually when I heard he was heading to MSNBC, I thought he would give the news the same makeover (smart, witty, etc.). So I guess I am not made out for the prognosticator business. I imagined The Daily Show or the Colbert Report, and instead we got Countdown. I was not alone when I wondered “what the hell happened to Keith?” Full disclosure, a friend of mine (Kevin – you know who you are) is a dead ringer for Olbermann so maybe I gave his show a lot longer than much of his audience but like apparently the rest of America (except for his small and ever shrinking fan base) I turned him off and gravitated to other news shows.

I don’t mind folks giving their opinion but one cannot take Olbermann honestly with his portrayal of the news with such an apparent bias. Is this considered reporting or editorializing or what? His opinions are far left and his hatred of President Bush and all things right wing are incorporated into every broadcast and most victims of his “Worst Person in the World” segment are those on the right. His vile contempt for Bill O’Reilly is well documented and what’s worse, the left leaning media never seem to hold Olbermann accountable for any of his outrageous slanders.

Well Newsbusters has got this story that is quite choice (as they say). Noel Sheppard reports that in a recent interview in Playboy Olbermann states that “Fox News is worse than Al Qaeda”. Did you get that? A major news network (that kicks MSNBC’s butt consistently in ratings as well as quality of shows) was said to be worse than the Muslim extremists who were responsible for Sept 11, 2001. I read the Newsbusters article thinking that this must be a joke but nope, he meant it. I can’t fathom why this buffon has a national venue at all with thinking such as this. Olbermann actually continued with a more ridiculous slam. Again, from the Newsbusters story Olbermann states “(Fox News is) as dangerous as the Ku Klux Klan ever was.” So not only is the network that more Americans watch worse than Bin Laden’s group, they are worse than a racist hate group.

Why again does this guy have a show? He is on the same network as Imus who was removed from his show for saying such a stupid thing about that basketball team. Doesn’t MSNBC have any stones to stand up to this idiot and realize that he is just a big anchor around their necks (no pun intended)? What kills me is that Olbermann is being considered for another NBC show as if Countdown wasn’t enough. For shame NBC! Dispatch this guy’s show and presence to broadcast history and show at least half the backbone you showed in the Imus situation. I guess Olbermann is lucky he didn’t refer to Fox News as a bunch of nappy headed hos.

Thanks to Noel Sheppard for reporting this.

A Presidential Debate in Spanish?

For all the folks that thought I was picking on gays and lesbians with my post and thoughts on the Democrat debate that focused on gay and lesbian issues, I see that the Democrats held a debate at the University of Miami where the responses were translated into Spanish. I think this is wrong as well and for many of the same reasons but there is actually something a little more insidious with this debate format.

This clearly sends a wrong message to all those potential Hispanic voters out there who either want to hear the response in their supposed native tongue or can’t understand English. As hateful as it sounds, this country runs on English and most of the business that is transacted is in English and instead or prostrating themselves to Hispanic voters, the candidates should be encouraging those same “voters” to learn English and access all that America has to offer.

Do any of the Hispanic voters really think they deserve some sort of special conciliation due to their makeup of the country (15% according to the AFP story). But we see the fight for the newest voting demographic – the Hispanic vote. The debate will translated for the live broadcast on the Univision network and there was an interested quote early on in the AFP story attributed to Maria Elena Salinas, who was a co-moderator of the debate. She states that "The candidates will be speaking to the fastest-growing segment of American society. It's a sign of respect.." Uh no – it is a sign of decay in American Culture and a sign of political pandering and lastly it is a sign of disrespect for a segment of American population who should be getting a different message rather than one of divisiveness and balkanization. What I wouldn’t give for Bill Richardson, one of the Spanish speaking candidates to encourage everyone listening to learn English to improve their lot in life. He is a good example of what they should be hoping to achieve.

Final thought on respect – how many of those potential viewers respect the laws of our country and are here legally vice those that are here illegally? I would love the answer to that question as well.

Outspoken Roman out.

This story creeps me out

So I am struggling watching the Jets and the Patriots play (I am a Jets fan living in Boston and the Pats are in the lead in the 4th quarter 31-14 [ouch]) and reviewing the news and this little tidbit comes across thanks to Fox News.

Opening line is “More than 2,700 recently paroled sex offenders in California have been told they have to move because they are violating a new law that bars them from living near schools and parks.” This is based on the new law (entitled “Jessica’s Law) that requires in part that no sex offenders from living within 2000 ft of a school or park. Why the hell did it take California so long to get off its butt and get the offenders in compliance with the law? The Fox News story reports that the law was passed last November. Moreover, why did this take a special law to put restrictions such as this in place? Isn’t this sensible? Of course here in Massachusetts, we don’t have this law so I guess I am not one to point fingers. If you go to Bill O’Reilly’s website you can see where this law has been passed.

So this seems common sense right? Well there still folks who oppose Jessica’s law. I can’t fathom how someone can read the story of Jessica Lunford and not support a law such as this and moreover not look at current state law and see if there needs to be a “tightening up”. In reading some of the anti Jessica’s Law websites, there is a lot of concern for ex-sexual offender’s civil rights. What? Does this strike anyone else as an odd focus by opponents of this law? Jessica’s Law is not intended to continually punish sex offenders for the rest of their life but it is intended to offer at least a little more security to parents with the knowledge that the schools and parks are not within the living area of sex offenders and quite frankly I don’t care about the apparent low recidivism rate for sex offenders. If we would make the punishment more severe (see my post here on the punishment of Jessica Lunford’s killer) and not give this sort of deviant criminal behavior a slap on the wrist. We also need to recapture our sense of shame in this society and again be comfortable judging behavior as right and wrong. I don’t believe that the push for Jessica’s Law is a “witch hunt” or “politically motivated” as this opponent of the law notes. I believe instead we as a society have gotten used to explaining the why of something rather than exacting punishment for criminal behavior. This equivocation should not stand.

Outspoken Roman turns 1 month today.

I should get myself a cake. So far this has been a real blast and I appreciate the comments/emails that I have got from complete strangers either agreeing with me or disagreeing (I guess they have been mostly email). The great thing about this medium is someone can find a blog like this and stop, read my current rant and either decide to comment, come back or completely ignore it but at least I try and put out thoughts that stimulate the national debate, even if they are between me and myself. I also try and write before I see any other blogs, opinions etc to try and keep my thoughts somewhat original.

Outspoken Roman out

Nifong reports to jail.

Ok I am not obsessed with the Duke fake rape case and I have already blogged about it here. But it does my heart good to see stories like this one from CNN reporting the Nifong has reported for his 1 day in jail. Again, my previous entry on this has described what I think of that (“Conclusion: He is a liar, a fraud and a criminal.”). Why people were there (at the Raleigh, NC Jail) with signs of support for Nifong (they still believe in his “integrity and goodness”) shouldn’t surprise me but it does frost me a bit. What integrity and what goodness? Recall that the court found that Nifong held back evidence helpful to defense and in my opinion (and others) played racial politics for personal advantage. His integrity and goodness is gone.

A note to end this post. I wished in my last Nifong post that he (Nifong) goes on to make millions and has to give it to the lacrosse players he smeared in the eventual lawsuit. The CNN story notes “… the three cleared players are seeking a $30 million settlement and reforms in the legal process, a person close to the case said Friday. They players plan to file a lawsuit next week if their terms are not met, the source added.” This is going to be interesting.

Outspoken Roman out.

Have we learned nothing from 9/11?

I know that the anniversary of Sept 11 2001 is still 5 days away but given the current crop of Presidential debates and questions of National security be answered by folks who instill no sense of competence what so ever I have to comment. For an example of incompetence see this article about Dennis Kucinich visiting Syria but saying “he won't visit Iraq on his trip to the region because he considers the US military deployment there illegal”.

But idiots aside, NationalDefenseMagazine.org has a story with the headline “Reluctance to Share Information Hampers Counterterrorism Efforts”. I can’t believe that this is still a problem (information sharing). This information sharing “wall” (which was built by Jamie S. Gorelick) was cited by Attorney General John Ashcroft as "...the single greatest structural cause for September 11...” and NationalDefenseMagazine.org reports that not too much has changed. The article states:

“But several years into this effort (to establish command centers where federal, state and local officials can share information.), these so-called “data fusion centers” are not functioning as originally planned, mostly because federal agencies have been reluctant to share intelligence with state and local officials.”

So what’s it going to take to remove the territorial boundaries that exist within these agencies? We have our intelligence and law-enforcement agencies trying to establish ownership of data and information when the focus should be on developing the necessary infrastructure to actually make a meaningful impact on this country’s safety and defense against threats to our security. Along with this we have a sandbox mentality that appears to lack any real long term strategy in achieving the necessary end goal or goals, which would be to remove the needless obstacles to making data visible, discoverable and accessible.

As we go to elect a President next year, whoever it is needs to move away from being a static observer and get involved in these issues through engaged staff. I am really disappointed in Michael Chertoff (Secretary of Homeland Security) and the Bush Administration for not being a bigger champion of getting this issue solved especially since this administration was on watch 6 years ago. Have we learned nothing?

Random News

CNN reports that Taxi drivers in NY City are upset over city plans to require GPS tracking systems in cabs as well as offering the ability for customers to pay with a credit card. Is this a bad thing? Lord knows those of us that work in offices have support staff sort of “tracking” where folks are. The CNN story reports that “(s)ome cabbies fear the GPS systems could be used to track their movements…”. Uh yeah – that is the point. This does not mean I support some overall surveillance over each and every one of us, but this seems really silly.

Yahoo has a story that Italian tenor Pavarotti has died. I was never an opera fan but that was the genius of Pavarotti. He made someone like me appreciate his talent and know that his performances were those of a true artist. My father would be saddened if he were alive today that another one of his “idols” has passed and for that, and for the gift that Pavarotti brought to the world, the world is worse off with his passing.

Fred Thompson is running for President. Is this really surprising? The thing about Fred (he was great in The Hunt of Red October) is that he is the current flavor of the month and actually shows the discontent that the republican voters have with the current crop. To be honest though, I think that the Republican field is much more diverse than the Democrats (which I have said before) and with Fred getting in the race, it is that much more diverse and exciting? Now the media can really attack his trophy wife. Why would the NY Times focus on her looks? Would a story like that be written about the Democratic side of the house?

With a title that can only be labeled “oops” Ace Hardware recently discovered a $154 Million shortfall on its books. AP is reporting that Ace Hardware Inc will have to re-report their financial results for the past 5 years.

Finally, and really most importantly, Congress will hear results from a 20 member panel studying Iraq security forces led by Retired Marine Corps Gen James Jones. The US have pored $19.2 billion into developing these forces and their ability to assume/regain/keep control of the country will be a good metric to see really where we are in preparation for Gen. Petraeus’ report. Let’s keep those soldiers in our thoughts and prayers.

The Return of Larry Craig

Ok, I am sure that I was not the only person to notice that Larry Craig did not resign last weekend? I scanned the news and almost everyone noted that Craig resigned (ABC, Fox, CNN) but if you look at the text of Senator Craig’s statement, he says the following: “Therefore it is with sadness and deep regret that I announce that it is my intent to resign from the Senate, effective Sept. 30”.

Now there is talk that Senator Craig is thinking of fighting for his Senate Seat and working to overturn his guilty plea to a misdemeanor. And people wonder why everyone is so cynical about politicians. Was Senator Craig really parsing words during his statement so he can say come Oct 1 that he never stated he was going to resign, only that he had “intended” to resign and that now he “intends” not to. This case has got me scratching my head in wonderment and irritation. If anything it got Chris Matthews to go on air and basically call homosexuality “deviant” (of course he was referring to Senator Craig here but still words do mean things). Video and story here from Newsbusters. I blogged recently about conservative politicians who open themselves up for charges of “hypocrisy” but never really made a judgment about Senator Craig or that he should resign or stay for that matter. What I did say was politicians of the conservative stripe should know the game that they are playing (i.e. politics) and stop acting as if it is a spectator sport. Moreover, it is still frustrating to hear pundits compare the Craig issue to Bill Clinton. Repeat after me, it was not about the sex with Clinton, end of story.

So the ever gracious Ann Coulter with her rapier wit writes about the Craig issue today on her website. Ann notes that there are a preponderance of stories about Senator Craig and what he supposedly did and will he or won’t he resign. It is a great column and readers need only go to Google News and search on Larry Craig. But Ann is not done with her sardonic column. After one is done searching on Larry Craig, run a search on Ahmed Abdellatif Sherif Mohamed and Youssef Samir Megahed (go ahead and use Google News). Do you know who these guys are? They are two Egyptian engineering students arrested on a South Carolina highway earlier this month have been indicted on federal explosives charges as they were found with explosive material going across state lines. ABC News has the story here. So what is the point? Well as everybody is writing about a stupid sex sting (whatever the hell it is), we have Egyptian students looking to blow things up right here in America. Would they have gotten more press if they were potentially targeting bathrooms used for gay sex encounters? The media should be giving us pages of info on stories like this and showing us what threats we still face, especially on the eve of 11 Sept 2007. Thanks to Ann for a great column and for shining the light on stories such as this one that should be the lead story rather than Senator Craig’s wide stance.

A footnote on Ahmed Abdellatif Sherif Mohamed and Youssef Samir Megahed. The ABC News story makes no conclusions as to the religion of these two blokes. Is it wrong for me to guess? Count how many times the terms “conservative” and “Gay Marriage Opponent” appear in stories about Senator Craig. I guess those aren’t as controversial as terms such as Muslim.

Should junk food be banned?

Every time I see some hysteria on smoking and the need to remove any kind of second or third hand smoke from normal environments such as restaurants, parks, cities, etc., I wonder why don’t the do-gooders (read anti-smoking, fascistic zealots) just move to ban cigarettes? We could have our own 21^st century prohibition in a sense. What makes me laugh is that many of these folks (usually found on the left) also support legal drug use. Is that a sensible position?

So I see this op-ed on the online edition of the Baltimore Sun. Basically, the title says it all “Help kids via junk food tax” found here. To summarize really quickly, the writer, David Gray from the New America Foundation, writes that America’s children are facing a new “epidemic” – obesity. He states that instead of taxing cigarettes to support expanded coverage for Maryland’s children, Congress should look at taxing their Twinkies.

“America is not doing right by its children. There are many ways policymakers could go about taxing junk food; policy proposals are out there to raise the costs of everything from hamburgers to sodas. The best place to start might be the root ingredients, such as sweeteners, MSG and trans-fats.” (source here)

So why note this article/op-ed? This idea, (taxing junk food for the children) is an attempt at behavior modification and I have heard a number of times that Government should not/can not dictate behavior or legislate morality. My opinion is that the Government can and should at least have boundaries where good members of a society should live between. But my libertarian leanings on some issues cause me to raise eyebrows when I see articles such as this that proffer Government taxing basically behavior that it considers bad or unhealthy. This does not mean that I am for fat kids and in fact feel that more times than not, it is not the child’s fault that he or she is overweight but rather it is bad choices that we as a society make or what decisions parents make with respect to their children. Although I share Mr. Gray’s concern with respect to our kids, I don’t believe that Government should be in that position. People make good and bad choices and it is especially sad when those choices affect those most innocent such as the children but where does a society draw the line with respect to Government involvement in personal lives? What the op-ed proposes is a dangerous precedent.

People need to change personally and instead of taxing a specific food (or behavior) schools should incorporate better fitness education in a student’s daily life rather then briefing second graders on the joys of homosexual relations or global warming or teaching pre-teens how to put a condom on a banana. Fitness and good eating should be incorporated into a lifestyle and encouraged from the White House down to the local governments, not via raising taxes but on being leaders and example setters. I wouldn’t think that would be so hard.

Finally, the other thing that should be focused on is what is drawing kids away from the ball fields, soccer fields, and pools. It is that outland of cultural rot which passes for entertainment these days, the television. Why not a tax on bad programming or programming that encourages risky (read stupid) behavior like the idiotic MTV offering “Jackass”? Wouldn’t that make more sense than focusing on the food that children eat. I don’t know how long kids spending eating each day but the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry reports that on average an American child watches 3 to 4 hours of television per day. Wouldn’t the children be better served with the Government controlling (call it taxing) the crap that passes for kids programming these days. How about a tax on families that watches more than 2 hours of television? We could just ban television all together or is that too extreme?

Final note. Check out http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/

Final, Final note. Turn off your computer and go outside and move!!!!