Another Year Begins...

Wow - I didn't realize that it had been a whole month since I'd posted.  With this sort of performance I'm liable to lose my readership - all six of them!  Seriously, Merry Christmastide and Happy Hew Year!

it's been about a year since I started this little adventure and I'm wondering whether to wrap it up or continue a bit longer.  It's not that I haven't got anything to say - perish the thought - but I have so little free time that I don't feel that I am able to do justice to the subjects which matter to me. 

No, I'm not trolling for someone to beg me to keep blogging, just sharing what's on my mind.  That's sort of the purpose of this whole enterprise.  Anyway, I'm not one for "New Year's Resolutions" but if I'm going to continue I should "resolve" to post at least once a week to make it worthwhile.  But it's not a "New Year's Resolution"!!!

OK, if you've read this far you deserve some content.  So here goes:

1.) Tucson - MSM Frenzy - Obama's speech:

The events in Tucson were horrible, terrible, acts.  Acts of a deranged individual who actually wasn't a charter member of the "Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy", the hyperventilations of the left and the MSM notwithstanding.  It is a lamentable shame that some leftist politicians and their allies in the MSM have sought to gain political advantage from it.  Fortunately the American people seem to be seeing through it.  The "alternative media" of the blogosphere has much to do with that.  The President gave easily the best speech of his term, probably his best since his single previous lifetime achievement, the speech at the 2004 Democrat Convention which nominated J.F. "Reporting-for-Duty" Kerry.

2.) Palin and Mania (not Palin-mania!):

It's astounding to me how the same folks in the MSM who've vilified Governor Palin in the most personal manner have been trying to claim the moral high ground in attempting to blame her for "inciting" the Tucson shooter.  Her response was quite good, but she shouldn't have had to make it.  Undoubtedly she'll be further pilloried for bothering to respond, at least one leftist pundit was castigating her on the air yesterday for "politicizing" the shootings  What is perhaps the most amazing is how commentators who otherwise strive to be taken seriously completely lose it at the mere mention of Mrs. Palin's name.  Personally I like her style but I question whether she's the right candidate for the G.O.P. in 2012, however I'd certainly vote for her if only to stick a finger in the eye of the MSM.  Which leads us to an interesting question:

3.) Obama and Palin (no Tucson):

According to their political opponents neither of them had sufficient experience to be president or vice president (repsectively).  Each has celebrity "star power" but they've both proven to be polarizing figures.  Has anyone else wondered whether things would be better or worse had the other become president?  Let's say McCain had been elected, pulled a "Harrison" (as in William Henry) and caught pneumonia during his inaugural address, and passed from this vale of tears in short order.  As of 1 February 2009 we'd have had an inexperienced, untested president thoroughly distrusted by the opposing party.  OK, that happened anyway.  But could things have been worse?  Or would they have been better?  I believe that three positive things would have happened: first, we wouldn't now have the albatross of "Obamacare" around our national neck, secondly the business community wouldn't have had to endure two years of uncertainty as to what direction the gevernment would take to try to influence the economy; and thirdly there would have been a real public debate about the judicial philosphies of type of justices nominated to the Sopreme Court (and neither of them would have been Sotomayer or Kagan!)

4.) Double-standard for quarterbacks?

Just thinking about the recent and not-so-recent travails of a couple of NFL QBs from the Deep South.  What if their trangressions - or their skin color - were reversed?  What if Brett Favre had been guilty of dogfighting and killing dogs, would he have been jailed?  Would he have even been suspended?  And what if Michael Vick had been guilty of "sexting" pictures of his nether regions to a female sports reporter?  How quickly would he have been suspended?  And for how long?  You know I'm not a grievance-monger but I couldn't help contrasting these two cases and wondering.  Sports is a great meritocracy, and there is probably less racism on the field and at the contract table than in any other sphere of American life.  And we've made enormous progress since the 1960's, to the point where most accusations of racism in today's world would be laughable to our forebears.  But again, I look at these two cases and wonder...