When the CEOs of the Big Three automakers were asked yesterday how they reconciled asking for $25 Billion when they EACH traveled to Washington D.C. on their corporate jets, the answers were astounding. Forget, for a moment, the environmental waste here. God forbid these guys pool resources for fear of divulging corporate secrets via mental osmosis or “Vulcan mind meld.” What’s equally astonishing to me is that the corporate flights are listed by the press as ONLY costing $20k. Huh? I suspect someone at the AP has not checked all their facts. The fuel, air strip access costs, and proportional salaries for the pilots and ground crews surely add to more than that. By comparison, seats on Northwest Airlines flight 2364 from Detroit to Washington were going online for $288 coach and $837 first class. But we can’t expect corporate executives to fly public transportation, can we?
“It’s corporate policy that officers travel on private aircraft,” says Ford CEO Alan Mulally. Reality Check: In the past year, I’ve see the likes of NBA’s Eddie House (Eddie was on a flight with my wife & I not even a week after his team, the Boston Celtics, won an NBA title), HBO’s Doug Gray, and ESPN’s Chris Berman all flying public transportation. Heck, I even caught Coolio on a Southwest Airlines flight! If these guys, who are infinitely more recognizable than Mulally, can fly public aircraft then so should he.
“We don’t fly on public transportation because we’re concerned about security,” said one of the Big Three staffers. Excuse me? When did the security of a corporate CEO become tantamount to protecting a Mafia Don? Perhaps these guys are trying to bump one another off literally?—and not just in the marketplace? Raise your hand if you would even recognize Ford CEO Mulally or GM CEO Rick Wagoner if you saw one of them with a T-shirt with “Corporate CEO” on the front. I thought not. Talk about a superiority complex!
Tell you what guys, the American people should consider loaning your companies money when you’ve proven capable of managing a budget. How about some humility? How about recognizing that your business model of 20,000+ dealerships is bloated—GM has almost 7,500 franchised dealerships alone. By comparison, Toyota has about 1200. Even Starbucks, which had some 8,000 stores back in 2004 and plans for 25,000 shops worldwide had to curtail its plans and close over 500 shops over the past year. Not everyone can regularly afford a five dollar cup of coffee, same as not everyone can afford the $100k ZR1 Corvette. Now I recognize there are certainly more jobs at stake at GM than at Starbucks, but GM’s overhead from agreements with the UAW and its own compensation model each need a major overhaul. Speaking of GM, their quality has certainly improved over the years, but the diversity of their products has not. We’re still waiting for the Chevy Volt—the car that promises 40 miles on electricity alone—but it won’t be on the road until 2010. Dear GM: You might need to consider adjusting your time table if you want to keep the doors open! Meanwhile, with gas prices falling to “reasonable” (albeit temporary) levels, don’t expect the Big Three to take much focus off the gas-guzzling behemoths that are their principle profit centers.
Yes, something does need to be done for the American automotive industry. President-Elect Obama has already indicated that he will work to provide assistance. All I have to say is there better be a whole LOT of strings attached. This just in: Congress agrees with me and has set a deadline of December 2nd for the Big Three to submit proposals on how they would spend the money. I suppose that’s a start. I think Congress need to be hard-nosed on this one. The deal should be worked out the way dealerships sell cars. Picture the CEOs sitting in an office in the White House sweating over how much their companies get, while Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel runs to the back room and emerges with several hundred pages of legal papers indicating all of the stipulations of the deal. Most likely it will include the government getting a preferred stake and control in decisions. Like GM’s own Saturn model, there should be NO negotiation. The deal is what it is. Now that would be poetic justice!
Peace,
+THINKER
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
When Did Capitalism Become Synonymous with Entitlement?
Capitalism run amuck has me concerned. To be clear, I’m not advocating socialism, but when one considers the economic landscape one really must question how a country this great has allowed ethics to go awry for this long. Wall St. purports to “create” wealth. You wouldn’t know it by the signs of the times. At the time of this writing, Wall St. has plunged to more than a 5-year low, the entire system has come close to the brink of collapse, and the American people have anteed up $700,000,000,000 with NO apparent oversight as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). Even after receiving over $100B of taxpayer dollars, executives and employees at AIG continue to act as if they’re entitled to maintain their standard of living even as thousands in their own ranks are sent packing. At exactly what point in time did capitalism become synonymous with entitlement? We probably can’t pinpoint a precise event, but there are several examples of excess that continue to ripple across our socio-economic landscape...
I still believe in capitalism, and I have no issue with a person’s ability to earn a buck. But the days of sustaining current executive compensation levels are over. To further complicate matters, there is not near enough dollars “trickling down” into the economy from those with the cash--think of the guy with high chip stack at the Texas Hold'em table who continues to play the minimum bet. If s/he doesn't "stimulate" the table with some chips, the wealth doesn't have an opportunity to get transferred.
Greed has taken a strangle hold in our economy and it’s not going to let go willingly. It’s evidenced by the lack of sacrifice by executives, and their willingness to purge those at the bottom of the economic food chain. Sadly, our economy can ill afford the time it will take for the market to drive the ethics correction of where we need to be. And that leaves government regulation to solve the problem—and we all know how good the government is at solving problems!
It’s that $700B bailout that agitates me the most. Why? Mainly because of the lack of control over how the money is being doled out, but we've also set precedent. Expect plenty more requests for federal bailouts from other industries preaching "doom and gloom" over the next few months. The American people must be asleep because there’s not near enough outrage coming through the airwaves, through the newspapers, or over the Internet. If you’re among the millions of Americans who work hard and pay your bills, you should be furious! Where is the justice for the people who are doing the right thing? Personally, I neither want a bailout nor need a handout; I just want the solution(s) to be fair to those who are fiscally responsible. If you’re among the responsible people sensing that you’re getting the short end of the stick, I encourage you to write your Congressman to remind them of your views. The (National) debt you save could be your own…
Peace,
+THINKER
- In the world of sports, Americans have grown accustomed to stars pulling down huge salaries because these performers bring the masses to the box office. “If we don’t pay them (huge sums of) money then someone else will,” is the refrain. Is that so? The Texas Rangers signed Alex Rodriguez in 2001 for $252,000,000 in a bidding was with itself! Let me repeat that: two hundred fifty-two “MeeEEEeel-yun” dollars! The fact that then owner Tom Hicks grossly overpaid A-Rod continues to affect sports contracts today. Alex and his offspring shall be rich for years to come, but should A-Rod be considered rich or wealthy? To paraphrase Chris Rock, “People like A-Rod are rich. The man that signs A-Rod’s paycheck is wealthy!”
- The (American) Automotive Industry CEOs flew to Capitol Hill today with tin cups in hand begging for a bailout loan. Here’s the funny the part: GM is spouting that they’re going to be “strapped for cash” before the next administration takes office, but saw fit to send CEO Rick Wagoner to Washington D.C. via private jet at a cost of ~$20k. In fairness, the CEOs of Ford and Chrysler did exactly the same thing. Rewind: Three CEOs flew three different private jets from the same city to the same destination. Have these guys not heard of carpooling? Call me crazy, but when my funds are tight, I stop eating steak and start eating Top Ramen! Such excess exhibits how Wagoner, and the other Big Three CEOs, are completely out of touch. The Big Three CEOs expect to maintain their existing benefits while instilling fear over the thousands they’ll have to lay off in order to keep the Lear jet engines running.
For the record, Wagoner’s salary and other compensation rose 64 percent in 2007 to $15.7 million (up from a paltry $9.57M). This is the salary GM paid him while the company lost money. Tell me again why this is a business model worth sustaining? Would you give “a loan”—[insert Sarah Palin wink here]—to a panhandler in an Armani suit knowing that he’s just going to use the Benjamin’s to purchase a pair of Bruno Maglis? Of course not. Why? Because the panhandlers—the Big Three CEOs—neither understand nor appreciate the complex nature of their business problem and, to this point, have not provided a viable alternative business plan.
Most interesting of all: none of the foreign automakers—many of whom assemble automobiles in the Unites States—are asking for a loan or handout. - Wall St.’s John Mack, chief executive of Morgan Stanley Inc., the second-largest U.S. investment house, received $40 million in stock and options for his 2006 bonus. This reflected the largest bonus awarded to a Wall Street CEO at the time it was given. Mack’s record for the biggest bonus ever paid to a Wall Street chief executive didn’t even last a week. It was smashed by the $53.4 million that Goldman Sachs gave its chief executive, Lloyd Blankfein. The windfall for Blankfein included a cash bonus of $27.3 million, with the balance paid in stock and options. But it gets better for Mr. Blankfein. Last year, Blankfein received a bonus of $67.9 million. At least Goldman Sachs reported record Wall Street profits of $4 billion—that’s more than Rick Wagoner can say! Goldman Sachs, which is part of the $700 billion US bail-out package, will not add to the $600,000 salary of chief executive Lloyd Blankfein and six other officials for this year. That’s mighty “right” of them considering Blankfein made more money in the last two years than Tiger Woods, Alex Rodriguez, and Roger Federer combined.
I still believe in capitalism, and I have no issue with a person’s ability to earn a buck. But the days of sustaining current executive compensation levels are over. To further complicate matters, there is not near enough dollars “trickling down” into the economy from those with the cash--think of the guy with high chip stack at the Texas Hold'em table who continues to play the minimum bet. If s/he doesn't "stimulate" the table with some chips, the wealth doesn't have an opportunity to get transferred.
Greed has taken a strangle hold in our economy and it’s not going to let go willingly. It’s evidenced by the lack of sacrifice by executives, and their willingness to purge those at the bottom of the economic food chain. Sadly, our economy can ill afford the time it will take for the market to drive the ethics correction of where we need to be. And that leaves government regulation to solve the problem—and we all know how good the government is at solving problems!
It’s that $700B bailout that agitates me the most. Why? Mainly because of the lack of control over how the money is being doled out, but we've also set precedent. Expect plenty more requests for federal bailouts from other industries preaching "doom and gloom" over the next few months. The American people must be asleep because there’s not near enough outrage coming through the airwaves, through the newspapers, or over the Internet. If you’re among the millions of Americans who work hard and pay your bills, you should be furious! Where is the justice for the people who are doing the right thing? Personally, I neither want a bailout nor need a handout; I just want the solution(s) to be fair to those who are fiscally responsible. If you’re among the responsible people sensing that you’re getting the short end of the stick, I encourage you to write your Congressman to remind them of your views. The (National) debt you save could be your own…
Peace,
+THINKER
Random Thoughts on tax cuts…and who needs them the most
The theory behind providing tax cuts to businesses is that in doing so the government provides incentive for them to do more to create jobs. Unfortunately, in practice, job creation is more hope than mandate and the theory has failed woefully. This should come as no great surprise to people who have a clear understanding of capitalism. As defined by Merriam-Webster, capitalism is an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.
Businesses are not altruistic entities that create jobs for the betterment of the state, country, or mankind. The principle purpose of a business is to make money. Period. Business are vehicles that exist for the purposes of generating profit for the people who “matter”—preferred stock holders and investors, the board of directors, executive team, common stockholders, and employees—in that order. That’s not to say that there aren’t businesses out there that have a "corporate conscience," but they are few and far in between. Provide a thriving business a tax cut and they’re more prone to horde the money, pad the balance sheet, or pencil in some bonuses than to invest the windfall…unless it’s to their benefit, and that rarely translates into new job creation. In short, tax breaks alone without oversight or control provide no more incentive to create jobs—or keep them stateside—than does President Bush saying, “Pretty please with sugar on it: create some jobs, Damn it!”
President-elect Obama campaigned that he would advocate tax incentives for jobs created in the United States. What a concept! Call me selfish, but I’m much more concerned about the availability of jobs here than I am in improving the standard of living of various countries overseas or otherwise.
President-elect Obama’s tax cuts, if implemented, are also supposed to benefit those making less than $250k/year. Admittedly, he waffled a bit on the actual threshold amount, but it’s his philosophy that’s pertinent here. Given the current state of tax affairs, tax relief is needed for the American people and not American corporations. Consider how individuals are taxed today…
Taxes are as American as…well…America. The old adage, "the only 'for sure' things in life are Death and Taxes,” is truer than most recognize. In America we get taxed on income, gains, after death, and just about everywhere one spends money in between. Win the lottery--or "too much" dough in a casino--and Uncle Sam will take a piece of that, too! Suffice it to say, I’m definitely “on board” with the forthcoming administration giving the American people a break and taking a hard look at the spending our government is already doing. Just as most responsible consumers do today, our government must recognize that when it's spending more than it's taking in it must adjust accordingly. We can't deficit spend forever, can we?
The realities of compromise on capitol hill don’t always line up with rhetoric and propaganda. Still, I’m hopeful President-elect Obama is able to implement something remotely close to what was promised during his historic campaign. The more and more I think about it, the more I’m certain the American people could really use their own “bailout” in the form of tax relief! Stay tuned…
Peace,
+THINKER
Businesses are not altruistic entities that create jobs for the betterment of the state, country, or mankind. The principle purpose of a business is to make money. Period. Business are vehicles that exist for the purposes of generating profit for the people who “matter”—preferred stock holders and investors, the board of directors, executive team, common stockholders, and employees—in that order. That’s not to say that there aren’t businesses out there that have a "corporate conscience," but they are few and far in between. Provide a thriving business a tax cut and they’re more prone to horde the money, pad the balance sheet, or pencil in some bonuses than to invest the windfall…unless it’s to their benefit, and that rarely translates into new job creation. In short, tax breaks alone without oversight or control provide no more incentive to create jobs—or keep them stateside—than does President Bush saying, “Pretty please with sugar on it: create some jobs, Damn it!”
President-elect Obama campaigned that he would advocate tax incentives for jobs created in the United States. What a concept! Call me selfish, but I’m much more concerned about the availability of jobs here than I am in improving the standard of living of various countries overseas or otherwise.
President-elect Obama’s tax cuts, if implemented, are also supposed to benefit those making less than $250k/year. Admittedly, he waffled a bit on the actual threshold amount, but it’s his philosophy that’s pertinent here. Given the current state of tax affairs, tax relief is needed for the American people and not American corporations. Consider how individuals are taxed today…
- Your income is taxed at the Federal, State, County, and City levels
- Your purchases of tangible goods and services you buy:
- Auto Fuel
- Food
- Clothing
- Electronics
- Telecommunications (Cable, Satellite, Mobile Phone, etc.)
- Utilities (Electric, Water, Sewage, Gas, Garbage, etc.)
- Healthcare (Services, prescriptions, etc.) - Property you buy is taxed at time of sale
- Your property you own is taxed annually
- Your gains on property you sell is taxed
- Your investment gains are taxed
- Your travel via Air, Land (Bus), Rail (AmTrak), and Sea (Pick one) is taxed
- Your estate is taxed
Taxes are as American as…well…America. The old adage, "the only 'for sure' things in life are Death and Taxes,” is truer than most recognize. In America we get taxed on income, gains, after death, and just about everywhere one spends money in between. Win the lottery--or "too much" dough in a casino--and Uncle Sam will take a piece of that, too! Suffice it to say, I’m definitely “on board” with the forthcoming administration giving the American people a break and taking a hard look at the spending our government is already doing. Just as most responsible consumers do today, our government must recognize that when it's spending more than it's taking in it must adjust accordingly. We can't deficit spend forever, can we?
The realities of compromise on capitol hill don’t always line up with rhetoric and propaganda. Still, I’m hopeful President-elect Obama is able to implement something remotely close to what was promised during his historic campaign. The more and more I think about it, the more I’m certain the American people could really use their own “bailout” in the form of tax relief! Stay tuned…
Peace,
+THINKER
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Got five kids? Do you know where your (Alaska) Governor is?
As the Democratic National Convention came to a close and was about to hit a crescendo, the Republican Party shot a cannonball across the bow by announcing John McCain’s Vice Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, to steal some thunder from the DNC. I believe the cannonball has ricocheted in the face of the GOP in the worst way. Allow me to elaborate…
Let me say up front that I am all in favor of equal pay for equal work (for women), believe women are quite capable of doing most (if not all) things men can do—physical extremes notwithstanding—and are, in many cases, the more intelligent of the species. That said, what the Hell was Sarah Palin thinking when she said “Yes” to the offer of becoming the Vice Presidential candidate of the United States? Perhaps more importantly, what was John McCain thinking??? Let’s examine the judgment of both of these individuals, shall we? Starting with Senator McCain…
Thank you, John McCain, for truly answering the question regarding your judgment. If your VP pick of Sarah Palin is evidence, your better judgment must have left you years ago. John McCain recently stated (regarding his selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate), “My vetting process was completely thorough and I’m grateful for the results.” Thorough? Grateful? I suppose if one subscribes to the Little Richard philosophy, “It’s when they stop talking about you is when you have to worry(!),” then Senator McCain’s statement makes nominal sense. Clearly, picking Sarah Palin was a cheap attempt to rope in supporters of Hillary Clinton who were either disgruntled or on the fence about supporting Barrack Obama. The question is on what grounds would a Hillary supporter vote for a McCain-Palin ticket? Sure, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton both have fallopian tubes, but I’d say that’s where the similarities end—make a beeline to the non-partisan site, On the issues, if you have not checked the other hyperlinks already. What can one say about Sarah Palin? Sarah Palin is attractive for her age and she’s younger than John McCain. That’s about the only practical comments one can make about the GOP’s selection for Vice President of the United States. Does McCain really think voters are so naïve that they would accept Palin based upon gender alone? Apparently so, because these women are as far apart on issues—abortion, bearing arms, fiscal views, social views—as one can get. I still don’t understand (or accept) the vitriol that Hillary’s detractors espouse. What did Hillary ever do to a conservative that was so horrible? Stand by her man, family, and country? At least in Hillary’s case, she allowed one chapter of her life to close before the aggressive seeking of higher political pursuits. That’s more than I can say for Gov. Palin. Just what makes people think they can have it all?
Sarah Palin is the antithesis of who should be representing a “successful” working woman. Gov. Palin may not wish to acknowledge it, but her life is in disarray, and the only one who can’t see it is her. You mean to tell me that she has five children (one of whom has Down Syndrome), a teenage daughter who’s pregnant out of wedlock, a husband who has had a DWI conviction, and she still believes she can manage to be Vice President of the United States of America, too??? In the words of Chris Rock, “Just because someone says you can do it doesn’t make the sh-t right!” Perhaps if Sarah spent more time at home, her pregnant daughter might have a better sense of her parents’ values. You know…the same values that make you want to get back at your ex-brother-in-law by subtly suggesting that he be fired. The self-proclaimed, “Anti-corruption crusader,” is being investigated herself— excerpt From The Washington Post:
For the past several years, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential candidate, has been embroiled in a bitter family feud that has drawn in the state police, the attorney general, the governor's office and the state legislature.
A bipartisan state legislative panel has appointed a special prosecutor to investigate whether Palin improperly brought the family fight into the governor's office. The investigation is focusing on whether she and her aides pressured and ultimately fired the public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan, for not removing Palin's ex-brother-in-law from the state police force.
Suspected abuse where there is a truckload of “circumstantial” evidence is no reason to exclude someone’s selection as a Vice Presidential candidate, is it? Or maybe Gov. Palin could have driven her inebriated husband home. Or perhaps she could just help the kids a little more with their homework? Mow the grass? Do the laundry? Clean up around the house? Pay the family bills? Don’t get me wrong. I’d never ask a Governor to do anything I don’t do myself. I suppose as Governor, she has “people” to assist with such trivial things as raising a family, and we’re all starting to see just how well that worked out. Aren’t we? Managing a federal budget can’t be any more difficult that managing the PTO budget, right? You mean to tell me there were no other women in the GOP that were worthy (or willing) to run with John McCain? Is this the best the GOP had to offer? John McCain sure thinks so! And that’s pretty scary.
Of course, there is already “noise” from the likes of Carly Fiorina about how the Democrats are launching “sexist attacks” against Palin—Frankly Carly, if the GOP really wanted the female vote, either you, Ann Coulter, or Condoleezza Rice would have been infinitely better picks in my opinion. Make no mistake, the “sexist” characterization is a political smoke screen to detract from the fact that John McCain has made a screw up of mammoth proportions in picking Sarah Palin in the first place. And frankly, she had no business accepting the VP candidate nod other than to massage her own ego. Someone in the Grand Ol’ Party needed to pull Sarah to the side and tell her, “Lady, you have enough on your plate.” In the coming weeks, we’ll hear plenty about how we’re supposed to “fall in love” with her story. Whatever, Man…Hopefully, the voters in America will be listening intently and come to the same conclusion: Sarah, there’s not a story you can tell that suggests you should be a proverbial heartbeat from the Presidency when you can’t even effectively manage your own household. ‘Nough Said…
Peace,
+THINKER
Let me say up front that I am all in favor of equal pay for equal work (for women), believe women are quite capable of doing most (if not all) things men can do—physical extremes notwithstanding—and are, in many cases, the more intelligent of the species. That said, what the Hell was Sarah Palin thinking when she said “Yes” to the offer of becoming the Vice Presidential candidate of the United States? Perhaps more importantly, what was John McCain thinking??? Let’s examine the judgment of both of these individuals, shall we? Starting with Senator McCain…
Thank you, John McCain, for truly answering the question regarding your judgment. If your VP pick of Sarah Palin is evidence, your better judgment must have left you years ago. John McCain recently stated (regarding his selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate), “My vetting process was completely thorough and I’m grateful for the results.” Thorough? Grateful? I suppose if one subscribes to the Little Richard philosophy, “It’s when they stop talking about you is when you have to worry(!),” then Senator McCain’s statement makes nominal sense. Clearly, picking Sarah Palin was a cheap attempt to rope in supporters of Hillary Clinton who were either disgruntled or on the fence about supporting Barrack Obama. The question is on what grounds would a Hillary supporter vote for a McCain-Palin ticket? Sure, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton both have fallopian tubes, but I’d say that’s where the similarities end—make a beeline to the non-partisan site, On the issues, if you have not checked the other hyperlinks already. What can one say about Sarah Palin? Sarah Palin is attractive for her age and she’s younger than John McCain. That’s about the only practical comments one can make about the GOP’s selection for Vice President of the United States. Does McCain really think voters are so naïve that they would accept Palin based upon gender alone? Apparently so, because these women are as far apart on issues—abortion, bearing arms, fiscal views, social views—as one can get. I still don’t understand (or accept) the vitriol that Hillary’s detractors espouse. What did Hillary ever do to a conservative that was so horrible? Stand by her man, family, and country? At least in Hillary’s case, she allowed one chapter of her life to close before the aggressive seeking of higher political pursuits. That’s more than I can say for Gov. Palin. Just what makes people think they can have it all?
Sarah Palin is the antithesis of who should be representing a “successful” working woman. Gov. Palin may not wish to acknowledge it, but her life is in disarray, and the only one who can’t see it is her. You mean to tell me that she has five children (one of whom has Down Syndrome), a teenage daughter who’s pregnant out of wedlock, a husband who has had a DWI conviction, and she still believes she can manage to be Vice President of the United States of America, too??? In the words of Chris Rock, “Just because someone says you can do it doesn’t make the sh-t right!” Perhaps if Sarah spent more time at home, her pregnant daughter might have a better sense of her parents’ values. You know…the same values that make you want to get back at your ex-brother-in-law by subtly suggesting that he be fired. The self-proclaimed, “Anti-corruption crusader,” is being investigated herself— excerpt From The Washington Post:
For the past several years, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice presidential candidate, has been embroiled in a bitter family feud that has drawn in the state police, the attorney general, the governor's office and the state legislature.
A bipartisan state legislative panel has appointed a special prosecutor to investigate whether Palin improperly brought the family fight into the governor's office. The investigation is focusing on whether she and her aides pressured and ultimately fired the public safety commissioner, Walter Monegan, for not removing Palin's ex-brother-in-law from the state police force.
Suspected abuse where there is a truckload of “circumstantial” evidence is no reason to exclude someone’s selection as a Vice Presidential candidate, is it? Or maybe Gov. Palin could have driven her inebriated husband home. Or perhaps she could just help the kids a little more with their homework? Mow the grass? Do the laundry? Clean up around the house? Pay the family bills? Don’t get me wrong. I’d never ask a Governor to do anything I don’t do myself. I suppose as Governor, she has “people” to assist with such trivial things as raising a family, and we’re all starting to see just how well that worked out. Aren’t we? Managing a federal budget can’t be any more difficult that managing the PTO budget, right? You mean to tell me there were no other women in the GOP that were worthy (or willing) to run with John McCain? Is this the best the GOP had to offer? John McCain sure thinks so! And that’s pretty scary.
Of course, there is already “noise” from the likes of Carly Fiorina about how the Democrats are launching “sexist attacks” against Palin—Frankly Carly, if the GOP really wanted the female vote, either you, Ann Coulter, or Condoleezza Rice would have been infinitely better picks in my opinion. Make no mistake, the “sexist” characterization is a political smoke screen to detract from the fact that John McCain has made a screw up of mammoth proportions in picking Sarah Palin in the first place. And frankly, she had no business accepting the VP candidate nod other than to massage her own ego. Someone in the Grand Ol’ Party needed to pull Sarah to the side and tell her, “Lady, you have enough on your plate.” In the coming weeks, we’ll hear plenty about how we’re supposed to “fall in love” with her story. Whatever, Man…Hopefully, the voters in America will be listening intently and come to the same conclusion: Sarah, there’s not a story you can tell that suggests you should be a proverbial heartbeat from the Presidency when you can’t even effectively manage your own household. ‘Nough Said…
Peace,
+THINKER
Monday, February 04, 2008
Superbowl XLII: Epilog
As an avid Giants fan, I am thrilled with the results of Superbowl XLII (a.k.a. Extra Large Deuce). Generally speaking, I only hope for a competitive game to satisfy my sports appetite for the final pigskin showdown on the biggest stage. But with a proverbial horse in the race, this game took on a whole new meaning. This game was hype infinitum, and among the few times in sports when I can recall the hype being warranted. For a number or reasons, Superbowl Extra Large Deuce will be remembered as one of the greatest games ever played. Here are some topics that stick out in my mind…
“I only play when I wanna play.” This infamous line comes to you courtesy of Randy Moss during his tenure as an Oakland Raider. Randy Moss is the undisputed king of the NFL sound bite—beating out the likes of Terrell Owens and Chad Johnson. Sports writers love listening to this guy for his candor. On the other hand, Raider fans detest him because his performance as a Raider belied his obvious talent, and it has been crystal clear that Randy quit on the Raiders long before the Raiders traded him based on his lack of performance and insolence. I believe Randy has a good heart underneath those shoulder pads somewhere, but he frequently fails to use that soft membrane inside his helmet before he speaks which winds up with him having cleats in his mouth. Case in point: When Randy stated, “I only play when I wanna play,” he didn’t qualify it as result of his disgust with the organization. Consequently, to outsiders he appeared to be a malcontent that quit on the Raiders organization. The problem is Randy either didn’t understand (or didn’t care) that by quitting on the organization in Oakland, he quit on his teammates and fans as well. Playing football is a privilege, not a right. Pros that understand this edict and love the game play with honor. What Randy did is among the most unforgivable things a player can do. To exacerbate the issue, the Raiders effectively rewarded him by trading him to a title contending team. And Randy wasted no time showing he still has top flight skills. In fact, up until the last game, Randy had as good a season as a wideout has ever had in the NFL. He had even shown signs of having drunk the Belichick Kool-Aid and pronounced he was a “team first” guy. Say what? Was this the new Randy Moss? Not so fast. Randy had been limited to just two catches in the post season until he caught a touchdown pass in the fourth quarter to put the Patriots up 14-10. In an act of backsliding, Randy saw fit to gawk at the fans in the stands thinking the game was in the proverbial bag. He performed a motion with his arms that looked like he was force-opening imaginary elevator doors—It was either that or some form of Ghetto peak-a-boo. Suffice it to say, the game was NOT over and the results are now notable history. But sometimes you just have say “thank you” to those lovely ladies—Karma and Fate—for kicking certain people who need it squarely in the ass.
“We’re only going to score 17 points??? …okay” was the phrase of disbelief from Tom Brady during Superbowl Extra Large Deuce media day. Tom was referencing an earlier sound bite from Giants Wide Receiver, Plaxico Burress, who had indicated that the Giants would win with the score 24-17. “Is Plax playing defense?” asked Brady in the interview session. “At least give us some credit for scoring more points!” Admittedly, Burress’ prediction was bold—not quite as audacious as Joe Namath’s guarantee, but close. Fortunately, the Giants defense backed up the bold prediction with some pretty bold statements on the field. Tom Brady does not like getting hit, and the frequency of the pounding he took clearly rattled him in the latter part of the game. The Giants defense sacked Tom Brady five times and put him on the ground and additional eighteen times. Result? Patriots managed to score only 14 points. Three less than Plaxico’s prediction. It’s often said that “Defense wins championships,” and defending has long been a hallmark of the New York Giants. Chalk one up for the “G-men.”
Giant Vindication. The Giants started the season 0-2, were congratulated for their 35-33 loss to the Patriots at the close of the regular season, and were 14 point underdogs heading into the Superbowl. Can you say, “DIS+r-e-p-e-c-t?” Interestingly, the Giants—like the Patriots—never faltered on the road. They won every game away from Giants Stadium. That seems to be a footnote now, but was not a point that weighed very heavily with the ESPN and NFL network pundits. The Giants consistently believed in themselves, even though the media only reluctantly conceded they had “a shot” at winning the big game. The Patriots, on the other hand, were the team of destiny and chasing history. Well history has been made, and the Giants (and Eli and Tom Caughlin) have been vindicated in a very big weigh. The pursuit of perfection was stopped cold in its tracks.
18-1. No one ever remembers who loses the Superbowl; however, everyone will remember who lost Superbowl XLII because of the Patriots’ chase for perfection. One could argue they had already passed their mid-term exam, the regular season, with flying colors. Most touchdowns in a single season and most touchdowns by a wide receiver records were set and they had an 18-0 record going in. They were the clear favorites in the game and should have been. And frankly, some small part of me would just like to tell Mercury Morris from the ’72 Dolphins to pipe down already. To quote Hank Aaron, “Records are made to be broken.” But the Dolphins’ “Season of perfection” would not be broken for Superbowl XLII thanks to some outstanding plays by Eli Manning and the boys.
In the end, the drama that played out the way it always does: The ultimate thrill of victory and the agony of defeat. With the exception of their coach, the Patriots handled themselves with class before and after the Superbowl game. The Patriots players even gave credit to the Giants for “making plays.” That’s as close as most professional athletes ever get to saying, “They were better than us today.” The Giants were intent on not being a footnote. On this day, they would not be the team that the Patriots defeated to get to 19-0. The Giants refused to be satisfied with “just being in the Superbowl.” Yes, the Patriots were supposed to complete the perfect season. Unfortunately for them, the Giants didn’t read that version of the script.
“The Catch.” The Catch just got a sequel. When you think of The Catch, football purists envision Dwight Clark's winning touchdown reception off a Joe Montana pass in the January 10, 1982, NFC Championship football game. In retrospect, it really was a pretty good catch—no pun intended—but that play was not in a Superbowl. Let the record show that the grab by David Tyree is arguably the single best catch in Superbowl history. Better than The Catch. Better than the Immaculate Reception. It had all the elements of greatness. The play began with Eli Manning escaping the clutches of Jarvis Green and roughly a dozen other Patriots. Unexpectedly, he fought, scrambled, and pulled a “Brett Favre.” Eli proceed to sling the ball 32 yards downfield—an on target beeline, albeit a little high—to receiver, David Tryee. Tyree had broken off his blocking route, leaped in the air, beat all-pro cornerback, Asante Samuel, to the ball, pinned the ball against his helmet, and brought the ball down under control for a first down. The Giants would go on to score the winning touchdown with just 32 seconds left to play in the ball game. This is the same David Tyree whom Amani Toomer had been quoted as saying, “was dropping everything in practice on Friday.” Tyree would finish with 3catches for a total of 43 yards, but he won’t catch a more important ball in his career.
Going for it on 4th and 13??? The Patriots coach, Bill Belichick, is as brilliant and arrogant as they come. For a moment, forget everything you know or have heard about Spygate. Forget about the vindictive running up of the score during the first quarter of the 2008 season at Bill’s direction. Forget about Belichick’s lack of communication during press conferences. Forget about his lack of sportsmanship when it’s time to shake other coaches’ hands at the end of a game. Forget about his unwillingness to dress in something befitting a head coach in the NFL besides a ripped up sweatshirt. Bill Belichick is an aloof, crotchety, cantankerous, surly SOB. But if you really want to know how self-absorbed a man is, watch the decisions that he makes. Not that the Giants actually needed any bulletin board material, but Belichick showed his true arrogance when he ordered the Patriots to go for it on 4th and 13. 4th and 13? What was he thinking??? He thought what he always thinks: That his play calling and his team’s execution could overcome the statistically obvious. Belichick expected that his offensive unit would not be denied, and that arrogance cost him 3 points on that possession. Superbowl XLII came down to being a good old fashioned, field position controlling, limited possession having, “smash mouth” football game. Had it been 4th and short, no one would have questioned Bill’s call. Not that it would have mattered, but it was satisfying to see the Patriots getting out-played and out-coached as well.
The Vindication of Tom Caughlin. At the beginning of the season, Tom Caughlin was on the hot seat. After the previous season and the Giants’ 0-2 start this year, speculation was that the Giants were ready to let him go. Last year, Coach Tony Dungy showed that a Christian man of reserved demeanor could be tough in a different way, and coach a team to win a Superbowl. To be clear, no one has ever accused Tom Caughlin of being reserved or soft spoken. This year, the proverbial screamer has been redeemed. Tom Caughlin has been known for his intensity, his demand that things be done his way…or else! But he had a plan that the team bought into and it worked. He focused on reducing mistakes and this year the Giants were the least penalized team in the NFL a year removed from being among the top five most penalized.
On any given Sunday, you could see the pronounced redness in Tom Caughlin’s cheeks and the steam coming out of his ears. It was most evident in this year’s NFC Championship game. At just 32 degrees in Lambo field and wind chill of -25 degrees, you could really see the redness in Tom’s cheeks when kicker, Lawrence Tynes, missed not one but two field goals that would have sent the Packers packing. Tom almost blew a head gasket! And it was not difficult to tell what was being said to his kicker from reading his lips. The old ball coach lightened up a bit after that game. Though tempted, he didn’t fire his kicker, and the Giants found inspiration in both their own play and in their coach. It’s interesting how history repeats itself, because this was the same type of chemistry that Bill Parcells had with his championship squad back in 1990. Now Tom Caughlin can lay claim to putting the kabosh on the greatest regular season run by another team in the modern NFL era. Redemption? Yes, indeed.
Peace,
+THINKER
“I only play when I wanna play.” This infamous line comes to you courtesy of Randy Moss during his tenure as an Oakland Raider. Randy Moss is the undisputed king of the NFL sound bite—beating out the likes of Terrell Owens and Chad Johnson. Sports writers love listening to this guy for his candor. On the other hand, Raider fans detest him because his performance as a Raider belied his obvious talent, and it has been crystal clear that Randy quit on the Raiders long before the Raiders traded him based on his lack of performance and insolence. I believe Randy has a good heart underneath those shoulder pads somewhere, but he frequently fails to use that soft membrane inside his helmet before he speaks which winds up with him having cleats in his mouth. Case in point: When Randy stated, “I only play when I wanna play,” he didn’t qualify it as result of his disgust with the organization. Consequently, to outsiders he appeared to be a malcontent that quit on the Raiders organization. The problem is Randy either didn’t understand (or didn’t care) that by quitting on the organization in Oakland, he quit on his teammates and fans as well. Playing football is a privilege, not a right. Pros that understand this edict and love the game play with honor. What Randy did is among the most unforgivable things a player can do. To exacerbate the issue, the Raiders effectively rewarded him by trading him to a title contending team. And Randy wasted no time showing he still has top flight skills. In fact, up until the last game, Randy had as good a season as a wideout has ever had in the NFL. He had even shown signs of having drunk the Belichick Kool-Aid and pronounced he was a “team first” guy. Say what? Was this the new Randy Moss? Not so fast. Randy had been limited to just two catches in the post season until he caught a touchdown pass in the fourth quarter to put the Patriots up 14-10. In an act of backsliding, Randy saw fit to gawk at the fans in the stands thinking the game was in the proverbial bag. He performed a motion with his arms that looked like he was force-opening imaginary elevator doors—It was either that or some form of Ghetto peak-a-boo. Suffice it to say, the game was NOT over and the results are now notable history. But sometimes you just have say “thank you” to those lovely ladies—Karma and Fate—for kicking certain people who need it squarely in the ass.
“We’re only going to score 17 points??? …okay” was the phrase of disbelief from Tom Brady during Superbowl Extra Large Deuce media day. Tom was referencing an earlier sound bite from Giants Wide Receiver, Plaxico Burress, who had indicated that the Giants would win with the score 24-17. “Is Plax playing defense?” asked Brady in the interview session. “At least give us some credit for scoring more points!” Admittedly, Burress’ prediction was bold—not quite as audacious as Joe Namath’s guarantee, but close. Fortunately, the Giants defense backed up the bold prediction with some pretty bold statements on the field. Tom Brady does not like getting hit, and the frequency of the pounding he took clearly rattled him in the latter part of the game. The Giants defense sacked Tom Brady five times and put him on the ground and additional eighteen times. Result? Patriots managed to score only 14 points. Three less than Plaxico’s prediction. It’s often said that “Defense wins championships,” and defending has long been a hallmark of the New York Giants. Chalk one up for the “G-men.”
Giant Vindication. The Giants started the season 0-2, were congratulated for their 35-33 loss to the Patriots at the close of the regular season, and were 14 point underdogs heading into the Superbowl. Can you say, “DIS+r-e-p-e-c-t?” Interestingly, the Giants—like the Patriots—never faltered on the road. They won every game away from Giants Stadium. That seems to be a footnote now, but was not a point that weighed very heavily with the ESPN and NFL network pundits. The Giants consistently believed in themselves, even though the media only reluctantly conceded they had “a shot” at winning the big game. The Patriots, on the other hand, were the team of destiny and chasing history. Well history has been made, and the Giants (and Eli and Tom Caughlin) have been vindicated in a very big weigh. The pursuit of perfection was stopped cold in its tracks.
18-1. No one ever remembers who loses the Superbowl; however, everyone will remember who lost Superbowl XLII because of the Patriots’ chase for perfection. One could argue they had already passed their mid-term exam, the regular season, with flying colors. Most touchdowns in a single season and most touchdowns by a wide receiver records were set and they had an 18-0 record going in. They were the clear favorites in the game and should have been. And frankly, some small part of me would just like to tell Mercury Morris from the ’72 Dolphins to pipe down already. To quote Hank Aaron, “Records are made to be broken.” But the Dolphins’ “Season of perfection” would not be broken for Superbowl XLII thanks to some outstanding plays by Eli Manning and the boys.
In the end, the drama that played out the way it always does: The ultimate thrill of victory and the agony of defeat. With the exception of their coach, the Patriots handled themselves with class before and after the Superbowl game. The Patriots players even gave credit to the Giants for “making plays.” That’s as close as most professional athletes ever get to saying, “They were better than us today.” The Giants were intent on not being a footnote. On this day, they would not be the team that the Patriots defeated to get to 19-0. The Giants refused to be satisfied with “just being in the Superbowl.” Yes, the Patriots were supposed to complete the perfect season. Unfortunately for them, the Giants didn’t read that version of the script.
“The Catch.” The Catch just got a sequel. When you think of The Catch, football purists envision Dwight Clark's winning touchdown reception off a Joe Montana pass in the January 10, 1982, NFC Championship football game. In retrospect, it really was a pretty good catch—no pun intended—but that play was not in a Superbowl. Let the record show that the grab by David Tyree is arguably the single best catch in Superbowl history. Better than The Catch. Better than the Immaculate Reception. It had all the elements of greatness. The play began with Eli Manning escaping the clutches of Jarvis Green and roughly a dozen other Patriots. Unexpectedly, he fought, scrambled, and pulled a “Brett Favre.” Eli proceed to sling the ball 32 yards downfield—an on target beeline, albeit a little high—to receiver, David Tryee. Tyree had broken off his blocking route, leaped in the air, beat all-pro cornerback, Asante Samuel, to the ball, pinned the ball against his helmet, and brought the ball down under control for a first down. The Giants would go on to score the winning touchdown with just 32 seconds left to play in the ball game. This is the same David Tyree whom Amani Toomer had been quoted as saying, “was dropping everything in practice on Friday.” Tyree would finish with 3catches for a total of 43 yards, but he won’t catch a more important ball in his career.
Going for it on 4th and 13??? The Patriots coach, Bill Belichick, is as brilliant and arrogant as they come. For a moment, forget everything you know or have heard about Spygate. Forget about the vindictive running up of the score during the first quarter of the 2008 season at Bill’s direction. Forget about Belichick’s lack of communication during press conferences. Forget about his lack of sportsmanship when it’s time to shake other coaches’ hands at the end of a game. Forget about his unwillingness to dress in something befitting a head coach in the NFL besides a ripped up sweatshirt. Bill Belichick is an aloof, crotchety, cantankerous, surly SOB. But if you really want to know how self-absorbed a man is, watch the decisions that he makes. Not that the Giants actually needed any bulletin board material, but Belichick showed his true arrogance when he ordered the Patriots to go for it on 4th and 13. 4th and 13? What was he thinking??? He thought what he always thinks: That his play calling and his team’s execution could overcome the statistically obvious. Belichick expected that his offensive unit would not be denied, and that arrogance cost him 3 points on that possession. Superbowl XLII came down to being a good old fashioned, field position controlling, limited possession having, “smash mouth” football game. Had it been 4th and short, no one would have questioned Bill’s call. Not that it would have mattered, but it was satisfying to see the Patriots getting out-played and out-coached as well.
The Vindication of Tom Caughlin. At the beginning of the season, Tom Caughlin was on the hot seat. After the previous season and the Giants’ 0-2 start this year, speculation was that the Giants were ready to let him go. Last year, Coach Tony Dungy showed that a Christian man of reserved demeanor could be tough in a different way, and coach a team to win a Superbowl. To be clear, no one has ever accused Tom Caughlin of being reserved or soft spoken. This year, the proverbial screamer has been redeemed. Tom Caughlin has been known for his intensity, his demand that things be done his way…or else! But he had a plan that the team bought into and it worked. He focused on reducing mistakes and this year the Giants were the least penalized team in the NFL a year removed from being among the top five most penalized.
On any given Sunday, you could see the pronounced redness in Tom Caughlin’s cheeks and the steam coming out of his ears. It was most evident in this year’s NFC Championship game. At just 32 degrees in Lambo field and wind chill of -25 degrees, you could really see the redness in Tom’s cheeks when kicker, Lawrence Tynes, missed not one but two field goals that would have sent the Packers packing. Tom almost blew a head gasket! And it was not difficult to tell what was being said to his kicker from reading his lips. The old ball coach lightened up a bit after that game. Though tempted, he didn’t fire his kicker, and the Giants found inspiration in both their own play and in their coach. It’s interesting how history repeats itself, because this was the same type of chemistry that Bill Parcells had with his championship squad back in 1990. Now Tom Caughlin can lay claim to putting the kabosh on the greatest regular season run by another team in the modern NFL era. Redemption? Yes, indeed.
Peace,
+THINKER
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
