Framing The Debate
Changing over to politics, for a little bit. I've been struck about how Democrats are dealing with Republicans. Look, I'm all for bipartisanship. I think conservatives have some great ideas. Problem is, Republicans don't want to engage. Democrats call them hypocrites--rightly so--but then invite them to the table for discussions.
If Democrats want to do anything, the best thing to do is to ignore the Republicans. Liberal shows like Keith Olbermann's spent almost all of their time on Republicans. By doing this, the Republicans win.
Instead, ignore the Republicans. They aren't going to offer anything policy-wise, so go about it your own way. You're not losing anything. You're putting the focus on you, the Democrats, the solution party, the party that cares. You're the good guys.
And, about the filibuster, make the Republicans filibuster. Who cares if they "intend" to filibuster? Make them! Make Jim Demint read the phone book, the Bible whatever. You can only filibuster for so long. Civil rights legislation was filibustered. Make them stand up there. Make them make a fool out of themselves. It'll be worth it.
I know this rant is kind of unorganized, so forgive me. The central thesis is this: Spend less time pointing out the pitfalls of the Republicans, and more time pointing out the successes of the Democrats. Frame the debate in your favor. Frame it so Americans are focused on you, not the antics of the Republicans. The Republicans are winning because the focus is on them. Ignore them, and put the focus on you.
Thanks for returning to The Blog of Champions!
Balloon Boy And Our Sad Social Commentary
I realize I am late with this. I realize that this isn't the first time you've read about something like this. I'm not sure why I didn't post about it. Maybe because I thought it wasn't necessary. Maybe because I just wrote it off as another fame crazy story. Maybe because I only cared that the kid was safe. Maybe. But, it still burns at me in a way I never expected. You see, I've always thought that our society is focused on the wrong things. We care more about Jessica Simpson sometimes than we do about the war in Afghanistan. And sometimes, that's okay. We need a diversion. But, it shouldn't be our main focus. We should never have round the clock coverage of Anna Nicole Smith. It's just not right.
Balloon Boy, when the story first came out, was understandably captivating. Here you have a boy, stuck in a balloon. You care for his safety. You care for his life. You're engrossed. But then, you find out it was a hoax, that it was done to get a TV show. It should've been then that we stopped. It should've been then that we moved on, that we didn't give these fame seeking whores the time they wanted. Instead, we ramped up our coverage. By doing that, we've become an enabler. An enabler of this bad behavior. An enabler of families risking their kids to get money, to get fame. An enabler of young celebrities going out all the time, hurting themselves. We're the problem.
I've always wondered how our political system would be different if more time and energy was focused on it. Imagine round the clock coverage of the health care proceedings. There could be real time conversation about aspects of the bill. Folks from all around the country could weigh in. We could spend time on this meaningful debate. Imagine round the clock coverage of families who have been hit hard by the economy. There would be a mass springing into action, people helping out their fellow countrymen. It would be amazing.
But instead, we're focused on Balloon Boy, on Lindsay Lohan, on Britney Spears. And while it's fine to use them as a diversion, they should NEVER be the top story of the night. Balloon Boy shouldn't get more than five minutes of coverage. It's an update, and then we move on. But, it doesn't work that way. People don't want to face the news of the day. They don't want to hear about foreclosures. They don't want to hear about health care. They don't want to hear about wars. So we watch Dancing With The Stars, and American Idol. We care more about the winner of those shows. We vote more. We're active. And we do it because it's easy. It doesn't require you to think. It doesn't require you to face the facts. It's a phone call.
I can't change the way our media works. I can't change the way society thinks. What I can do is try and bring us all down to earth. As painful as it is, we have to realize that almost 10% of our country is unemployed. We have to realize that there are two wars going on, and thousands of lives have been lost, and many more will be lost. We have to realize that almost 50 million people do not have health insurance. We have to realize that global climate change is real and upon us. We have to realize our Congress is as bitter and partisan as ever. Until we realize this, until our media realizes this, we'll have Balloon Boy every day of the week. We'll have stories, that seemingly have no importance, dominate the news cycle. We'll spend more time on the new cast of Dancing With The Stars. Let's move on from this. As painful as it is, let's focus on what really matters. Because until we do, we're going to get nowhere.
They Shouldn’t Be Dancing, Yeah!
Dancing With The Stars came out with its new cast list today. Take a look:
Hopefuls include entertainer Donny Osmond; singers Mya, Macy Gray and Aaron Carter; actors Melissa Joan Hart, Debi Mazar and Ashley Hamilton (son of George); models Joanna Krupa and Kathy Ireland; reality stars Kelly Osbourne and Mark Dacascos ("the Chairman" on Food Network's "Iron Chef America"); mixed martial artist Chuck Liddell; professional snowboarder Louie Vito; Olympic swimmer Natalie Coughlin; former Dallas Cowboys wide receiver Michael Irvin and the 62-year-old former congressman from Texas (Tom DeLay).
Are any of those people stars? Who is Mark Dacscos? Who is Louie Vito? And Tom DeLay? Tom DeLay? Are you kidding me?
I could go on and on. I know people who are addicted to this show. I don't know why, but they are. If they could somehow get Tom Hanks, I would be interested. If they could somehow get Julia Roberts, I would be interested. But, Dancing With the Stars is just another tabloid, much like US Weekly. They are making people begging for fame famous. They are enablers. Because of them, we have reality shows with people I've never heard of. And they get famous because of it! Not people who are actually actors, or musicians, who deserve fame. I don't get it. Until someone stops this madness, this enabling of fame hungry whores, this country will suffer. Instead of focusing on real issues, the cast list of Dancing With The Stars is the front page on Yahoo!. No one cares! This whole country would be 10 times smarter if the actual issues were on the front page all the time. These enablers don't realize they are actually hurting us. And until they do, they are going to continue to hurt, because they are making a ton of money doing it. What a shame.
Raul Ibanez Fires Back at Blogger Over Rumored PED Use/The Blogger Journalist Handbook
Phillies outfielder, Raul Ibanez, is up in arms over a blogger's suggestion that Ibanez's great stats thus far are due to the use of performance enhancing drugs. I don't know if Ibanez has used steroids, nor do I wish to opine on the subject. Here's what he had to say:
"I'll come after people who defame or slander me," he said Tuesday night before the Phillies played the New York Mets, according to the report. "It's pathetic and disgusting. There should be some accountability for people who put that out there."
"Make them accountable. There should be more credibility than some 42-year-old blogger typing in his mother's basement. It demeans everything you've done with one stroke of the pen."
As a blogger, I don't try to take the place of a journalist. I don't try to pretend I am one. Because I am not. I don't have nearly the training, access, or discretion that journalists do. I am merely someone providing thoughts on the world at large. And there have been times I've been controversial. But where is the line, between blogger and journalist? How can we set up guidelines, so that bloggers don't step their way into the journalistic realm? How do we, as bloggers, differentiate between a factual, sourced, reported story, rather than something from our own mind? Because, in essence, the blogger in the Raul Ibanez case did not probe sources, did not try to cultivate information. He just looked at stats and created a conclusion.
I believe that there is a place for bloggers and journalists to share a happy medium. While the journalists have the experience, access, and discretion, the blogging field should not be diminished, just because we don't write for a newspaper. At the same time, bloggers shouldn't feel entitled just because we have a space to share our thoughts. I'm going to list sort of a Blogger-Journalist handbook. It will outline what I believe is necessary for blogs and newspapers to coexist.
1. Journalists have to acknowledge that we exist.
Yes, we're here, and not going anywhere. The 'citizen' journalist will be here to stay. With the advent of instant technology, Twitter, Facebook and more like them, anyone can write anything. And while we don't have the experience, we have opinions, and a lot of them are valid and worthy for discussion.
2. Bloggers should not feel entitled
I have a blog. I pay a hosting company to host it. But I, and others like me, cannot feel that we have the ability to sway the masses just because we have a blog. We have to learn nuance, when to blast someone, when to keep our commentaries reserved, when to accuse someone of cheating and when not to. The best solution? A boot camp for bloggers, where we learn about reporting stories, sourcing, discretion. I've had to learn on the job, and it's hard. It's hard to decide what's appropriate for posting, how it should be written. If we could take a boot camp, our ability to convey a story will be much improved.
3. Understand our boundaries: work together
Let's face it: Newspapers are dying. With the current economic climate, the advent of free newspapers on the Internet, not as many people are buying a paper. It's likely that all newspapers at some point will be digital. And, in essence, journalists become bloggers. They have a forum online to speak. Yet, what they have that we don't, is a reporter's ability. And while we have to work together, we can't blur the lines. I'm not going to report facts on a story. Bloggers should write what they feel, write about issues, write deep, probing commentaries on what they think is important. And while reporters can do the same, that have to be reporters first and foremost, not commentators. While they report facts, we make our opinions known. While they dig for sources, we react. There is a fine line, and it should not be crossed. If you are a commentator, a Jason Whitlock or a Dan Wetzel, you can speak your mind on stories. There is a line between reporting and commentating. Bloggers are on the commentary side. And we should stay there.
If there is anything to learn from this Ibanez case, is that bloggers have to understand where we fit. We may be the majority, but right now, we have to play by the minority's rule. And that's not to say we don't have a voice. We do. And it should be recognized. We have amazing bloggers who provide the world with great content. Hopefully this site does the same. If we are ever to be respected as a field, if we are ever to recognized as a voice in the world of journalism, we have to know our place. We can't speculate that Raul Ibanez used steroids, just because his numbers are inflated. If a reporter talks to sources and backs it up with factual information, it can be reported. And until we have that access, we can just talk about it. It's frustrating, because I want to dig deeper into my stories, talk to people in the know. But I can't. So unless I have hard, concrete information, I'm left to my opinions, and bloggers cannot be in the field of defamation. We can talk about the Magic winning Game 3, but we should not talk about Raul Ibanez potentially using steroids. I know there will be bloggers who disagree. They'll say that we have every right to conjecture about personal lives. I don't think we do. We wouldn't want people conjecturing about our personal lives, and since we don't have that access, those sources, we can't just guess. And if we want to be respected, we have to lay off. For now.
Super Bowl and Other Thoughts
I don't think I realized how long it has been since I last posted, but sure enough, it's been a while. I think we'll all agree to start with the Super Bowl.
It was a great game--dramatic, fun, the works. But the greatest? No way. It couldn't be. Not when compared to last year's, or the Patriots Rams game. Or even the Ice Bowl. It was a great game. But not the greatest. By the way--Larry Fitzgerald is one of the greatest receivers I have ever seen. On his second touchdown, he might've been flying. Some commercials were funny--especially the Doritos ones.
Lots of spirited debate on Capitol Hill with regards to Obama's Stimulus. Crazy. Nonsense. People are losing their jobs every day. And Congress and the Senate have the balls to debate this? No more time can be wasted. Get it passed as quickly as possible. It's been shown in the past that public works and government intervention work. Tax cuts and supply side economics don't .Doesn't make sense to me. Now, I'm not smart enough to figure out the best way to fix the economy. But, I am smart enough to know that something has to be done. I thought Obama made a great statment when he talked about the voters voting against tax cuts of the past eight years.
Unfortunately, even if the stimulus gets passed, this same partisan rancor will continue. As an American, it annoys the hell out of me. Congressional and Senate members are concerned with one thing: getting re-elected. So they're going to anything and everything in their power to make that happen. Whether it's porking up a bill to get something for their constitutions, or not voting for something that is needed, because it's risky politically (i.e. bailout, stimulus), ,they're going to do it. So this is what I propose: Senate and Congressional Term Limits. This can't be a career. Have Senators serve one 6 year term; Have Congressmen and women serve one 4 year terms. That way, they can get it, serve the public good, and leave. Call me an ideologist , but I really think this will work. It cannot be a career, that is built upon getting re-elected. Washington has to 'uncorrupt' itself. They have to get rid of lobbyists, and get the people more involved. After all, it is a government OF the people, BY the people, and FOR the people. Not for a select few.
Now that that rant is over, I want to share some pictures from Adam Graves Night. It was an unbelievable night, that showcased the best that hockey has to offer. Adam Graves is a truly a great person-- watching walking onto the ice, stopping to hug each and every person that he works with The Garden of Dreams foundation brought me to tears.
In other comedic news, Joe the Plumber was in Washington today--to give Republicans his thoughts on the stimulus. You're kidding, right? It's almost insulting. He's the one who's talking to our lawmakers. Crazy. Just. Wow.
Before I leave, I have a couple of TV shows that are addicting: Trust Me, and Life on Mars. Check them out.
Defending Obama’s Stimulus
We've heard a ton of banter from congressional members about Obama's stimulus package. Will it be enough? Will the tax breaks be effective? My answer to it is this: we need it. Enough of the petty arguments to further yourself politically (I'm talking to you Congress), but, for once, putting away your interests for the country's interests. Yes, a massive stimulus package will not only get people back to work, it will inject cash flow into the consumer market, which is something that is sorely needed, as it makes up 2/3 of our economy. So Congress, fight all you want. But don't let the stimulus fall to the wayside. I've said it for awhile, that one of the main problems this country faces is the divide between Democrats and Republicans, right wing and left wing. It's so bad, that we have trouble passing legislation sorely needed. Get it together. Get your act together. For our country.
Parker Resigns
Remember Rob Parker? The volatile journalist who asked Rod Marinelli about his son-in-law, and his daughter's choice in men? Well, he resigned. Just an idiot. A grade-A idiot. Someone who lost all respect for the journalistic code, someone who lost their sense of right and wrong. I'm glad he resigned. I would've rather seen him fired. But, this is enough. Rob Parker shouldn't get another job. He shouldn't. He should work somewhere out of the public eye, where he doesn't have to deal with people. It was a despicable thing to say, and his apology was even worse. Crazy world we live in.
Gill-Chizik
I haven't written one of these inflammatory posts in a while, so forgive me if my tone seems off-key. But know what is really 'off-key'? Auburn hiring Gene Chizik as head coach, and, more importantly, not hiring Turner Gill as head coach. Readers know I love Turner Gill; I've been promoting him for the Syracuse, Auburn, and Tennessee Head coaching jobs--all jobs that went to white men. Let me rephrase that. All jobs that went to unqualified white men. Lane Kiffin in Tennessee? Yeah, because his stint in Oakland went really well. Doug Marrone in Syracuse? Yeah, an NFL offensive coordinator really translates well to being the coach of a football team in college. And Gene Chizik at Auburn? Yeah, because going 5-19 at Iowa State really makes you an attractive option. I wouldn't have a problem with this if they were qualified. No problem at all. If they were right for the job, fine. So be it. But they're not. Turner Gill is. Turner Gill not only turned around a terrible Buffalo program into MAC contenders, he also just knocked off the (at the time) Number 12 ranked team in the country, in Ball State. So you want to tell me that Turner Gill is not qualified? Please. Gill coached at Buffalo. Imagine what he could do at Auburn, or Tennessee, with the resources they have. Not only is this flat-out racism (yes I said it) it's a bad football move. When Auburn fires Chizik in a year, and come calling for Gill, he better turn it down. Go to a school that really wants you. That wants you based on your qualifications. So Auburn, Tennessee, Syracuse, I hope you fall flat on your face. Fall straight down. Because you deserve it. If Turner Gill isn't qualified, I don't know who is. If Turner Gill was white, wouldn't we be having this conversation. I hate that I have to talk about race. It's not something that I want to do. It's, in fact, the last thing I want to do. And what do I know? I grew up in a predominantly white, affluent suburban neighborhood, with, 5 or 6 black kids in my high school. So I'm no expert. But, if this doesn't scream racism, I don't know what does. If this doesn't get your blood boiling, I don't know what will. If this doesn't make you angry, upset, frustrated, I don't know what will. If this doesn't make you speak out, I don't know what will. I hope you are as angry as I am. I pray that you feel this same anger that I do, this same urgency that I do. We just elected a black man to serve in the highest office in the world. And we can't even hire a black football coach, a qualified black football coach? Wow. And I thought our economy was screwed up.
Weird Baby Names
Yahoo! has an interesting list of baby names from celebrities. Here's a nugget:
SUNDAY ROSE: Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban welcomed their baby girl on a Monday, then named her for the day before. Kidman has said Sunday is the couple's favorite day of the week because it can be both lonely and happy depending on whether "you've got your family" around. They also found inspiration in Aussie art collector Sunday Reed, whose first name Kidman's father suggested as a possibility. The baby's second name is a tribute to Urban's grandmother, Rose.
Jesus. Can't they name their kids 'John'? 'Michael'? Never ceases to amaze me.
Avery Suspended
Sean Avery, ever the pot-stirrer, was suspended for his 'offensive remarks'. See for yourself
I don't understand. What good comes from suspending him? Is it protecting him? The league? Sure, it's an offensive remark, and there should have been some sort of punishment- a fine or something. But to suspend him? You might as well take him out of the league. If you're so tired of his act (yes, I'm talking to you Gary Bettman) banish him forever. I'm tiring of his act-- believe me, as a Ranger fan, I should know. I've had heated arguments of the merit Avery brought to the team, and while he was a good player, his presence off the ice was to much to handle. Case in point: Dallas went to the Western Conference Finals a year ago. Now? Worst team in the league. Sure, injuries play a role. But not that much, considering he was their only major offseason addition. Sean Avery is a pest. Plain and simple. His job is to make trouble. But, since when did the NHL control what he says? Are you sending him a signal? The first strike of three? Make it clearer. Don't let Avery off the hook. There's a reason no one on his team likes him. What's the right thing to do? Let him off the hook, and make him Dion Phaneuf's sloppy seconds (sorry, I couldn't resist)? Or, suspend him indefinitely for speaking his 'mind'? I say the former.
