Is Iowa a good place to start the election season?
It is a complete farce that we let IOWA set the tone for the Presidential elections, IOWA!!! IOWA with a 91.7% white population, far from a microcosm of the country. IOWA, where if every citizen voted for one candidate, would be less than the number of the metropolitan Detroit population. IOWA, that doesn't even have a primary, but uses the caucus system which is easily dominated by small factions of a party in any state, let alone one as small as IOWA.
Is it any wonder that we get candidates leading in the polls whose views target such a narrow audience that the Republican party can not win a general election. We get VP candidates like Sarah Palin, who can only muster fervent support from those who will already be a lock to vote Republican. Presidential candidates like Michele Bachmann who is skilled at looking good, and using sound bite slogans to give the illusion of substance, but has really done nothing in actual deeds to distinguish herself as someone that should be president. Newt Gingrich, who courts the family values voter, but divorced his wife in favor of a staffer he was having an affair with. Oh did I mention that he did this TWICE. Now apart from my feelings on divorce and cheating on a spouse, it is the hypocrisy of his stance on family values that I take issue with. He basically gave any opponent in any election ammunition to use against him. Why should the Republicans waste a nomination on someone that has such a slim chance of overcoming his own past.
The Republican party needs to have a less myopic view to have a real chance of effecting change that is needed in this country. When the Reagan revolution hit the country in the 1980's was it because of the republican voters? No. If that were the case then the term "Reagan democrats" would not have worked its way into our American lexicon.
I think that the Republican party, and it's candidates will do well to remember this during a presidential election season that holds so much importance to the future of this country.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Monday, August 04, 2008
Why throw at a batter when you failed to do your job?
Over the weekend the White Sox's D.J. Carrasco takes four attempts to hit Kansas City’s Miguel Olivo, and a brawl erupts. In the aftermath manager Ozzie Guillen explains that Olivo wasn't hit on purpose, and he should know because he has ordered player hit before, and there was no reason to hi Olivo. I'll by that, but his further explanation is what really gets me going.
Quoting Mr. Guillen: "When Teahen bunts up by six runs, I didn’t even hit him. I should’ve,” Guillen said. “To teach him a lesson how to play baseball. And I didn’t. That’s why I want Major League Baseball to look at this thing the right way. … Everybody knows in the dugout Teahen did the wrong thing.”
Is that right? In 30% of their games this year the White Sox have scored over 6 runs in a game. Just the day before they scored 4 runs in the 8th inning, eventually coming up short. They were down 5 runs at the time. Would Ozzie have told his players to stop scoring runs in the 8th of that game if the Royals had started coasting with a big lead? OF COURSE NOT!!! It was up to the Royals to stop them. Baseball is the only major sport that doesn't have a clock. Teams have scored 5, 6, 7, even more runs in the 9th inning to come from behind to win a game. Given Guillen's logic, should a team stop scoring when they reach 6 runs in an inning? Is that rubbing it in? OF COURSE NOT!! It is up to the pitcher and defense to keep the opposing team from scoring, every inning every batter. If they can't do that, then they have no right to complain.
In my opinion viewing the video, Olivo wasn't thrown at. Carrasco was just pitching terribly. If a batter charged a pitcher every time he threw a lousy pitch, the Detroit Tiger relief pitchers would have to be wearing a boxing glove instead of a fielders mitt when they took the mound. Bad pitches happen. Even the suppossed soft stuff is coming at the batter at better than 80 mph so its going to hurt, but its no reason to rush the mound if its not done intentionally. On the other hand, I don't agree that only throwing at the head is wrong. A career can be ended by a broken wrist, ankle, elbow, or knee too.
It may be my imagination, but most of these bean ball incidents happen in the American League. The safety of not coming to the plate insulates pitchers from any sort of retribution short of rushing the mound. Now, if a batter hits a home run, and poses or makes a spectacle of himself rounding the bases, he should expect a shot in the ribs his next at bat, and umpires should let it go. That is, of course except in the case of a game ending ( I hate the ESPN made up "walk off" designation) hit. If a pitcher doesn't want to be shown up, DON'T THROW A BALL IN THE BATTERS WHEEL HOUSE!! Pitchers need to worry more about keeping batters from getting the hit in the first place, and less about retaliating after the fact.
Over the weekend the White Sox's D.J. Carrasco takes four attempts to hit Kansas City’s Miguel Olivo, and a brawl erupts. In the aftermath manager Ozzie Guillen explains that Olivo wasn't hit on purpose, and he should know because he has ordered player hit before, and there was no reason to hi Olivo. I'll by that, but his further explanation is what really gets me going.
Quoting Mr. Guillen: "When Teahen bunts up by six runs, I didn’t even hit him. I should’ve,” Guillen said. “To teach him a lesson how to play baseball. And I didn’t. That’s why I want Major League Baseball to look at this thing the right way. … Everybody knows in the dugout Teahen did the wrong thing.”
Is that right? In 30% of their games this year the White Sox have scored over 6 runs in a game. Just the day before they scored 4 runs in the 8th inning, eventually coming up short. They were down 5 runs at the time. Would Ozzie have told his players to stop scoring runs in the 8th of that game if the Royals had started coasting with a big lead? OF COURSE NOT!!! It was up to the Royals to stop them. Baseball is the only major sport that doesn't have a clock. Teams have scored 5, 6, 7, even more runs in the 9th inning to come from behind to win a game. Given Guillen's logic, should a team stop scoring when they reach 6 runs in an inning? Is that rubbing it in? OF COURSE NOT!! It is up to the pitcher and defense to keep the opposing team from scoring, every inning every batter. If they can't do that, then they have no right to complain.
In my opinion viewing the video, Olivo wasn't thrown at. Carrasco was just pitching terribly. If a batter charged a pitcher every time he threw a lousy pitch, the Detroit Tiger relief pitchers would have to be wearing a boxing glove instead of a fielders mitt when they took the mound. Bad pitches happen. Even the suppossed soft stuff is coming at the batter at better than 80 mph so its going to hurt, but its no reason to rush the mound if its not done intentionally. On the other hand, I don't agree that only throwing at the head is wrong. A career can be ended by a broken wrist, ankle, elbow, or knee too.
It may be my imagination, but most of these bean ball incidents happen in the American League. The safety of not coming to the plate insulates pitchers from any sort of retribution short of rushing the mound. Now, if a batter hits a home run, and poses or makes a spectacle of himself rounding the bases, he should expect a shot in the ribs his next at bat, and umpires should let it go. That is, of course except in the case of a game ending ( I hate the ESPN made up "walk off" designation) hit. If a pitcher doesn't want to be shown up, DON'T THROW A BALL IN THE BATTERS WHEEL HOUSE!! Pitchers need to worry more about keeping batters from getting the hit in the first place, and less about retaliating after the fact.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)