Vick Would Have Been Better Off...

Lester Munson nicely summed up what I’ve been feeling and attempting to get across over the past few days. He was on WSCR on Saturday around 2:00pm central and said something along the lines of this:
Mike Vick would have been better off beating his girlfriend, in front of the Georgia Dome, fifteen minutes before kickoff.

It’s a sad state of affairs if that is the case in this country. It takes a sick man to do what Vick did to those dogs. But where are the protesters whenever Jason Kidd takes the court? Or Brett Myers takes the mound? Or when ever Leonard Little steps onto the football field?

Just look at how we view Pacman Jones and Vick differently during their legal issues. Vick is the second coming of the Devil. Pacman borders on being a ‘thug’, jerk, and joke. Pacman (or his people) nearly killed a man.

While I can’t justify either Vick or Pacman’s actions; in my eyes I have no sympathy for Pacman (or Myers or Kidd or Little for that matter). Those would be the ones who I would protest. They are the ones who upset me.

Vick:Dogs::Favre:Deer

Dear Blogs,

Excuse me while I dig up some information about Brett Favre, everyone’s favorite quarterback, hunting deer. Maybe I can find a picture. Here are a few quotes. How nice. Brett Favre is a big fan of killing deer:

PK: What are you hunting?

Favre: Deer.

Meanwhile, Mike Vick is getting raked over the coals for training dogs how to fight and killing dogs.

Killing dogs isn’t cool, don’t get us wrong. But killing deer doesn’t seem very cool either. Anyone honestly believe that Favre brings the deer back and use all of the deer for daily household needs?

We also fully understand that killing dogs is against the law. And for that Vick should be prosecuted. No argument there.

But how about you bloggers get off your ‘holier than-thou’ horse and think long and hard about those hunting laws. Think about how minks are raised in small, cages for the single purpose of making fur coats. Think about that hamburger, hot dog, steak, chicken, or ham sandwich next time it enters your mouth. Think about that veal that you had (or have always wanted to have) and how that’s raised.

We’re no PETA members. We enjoy our hamburgers and hot dogs. And we understand the difference between a deer and a dog (a domesticated animal). But we also realize that reason why bloggers are going off on Vick is because like many people, they are probably dog owners. And they love their dogs. And to see someone treat dogs that way is a cold, harsh reflection on something happening to their dog. How could someone treat dogs as if they were ants or spider?

Mike Vick may have killed dogs. That’s not cool. But athletes who harm other humans? We detest them much more than Michael Vick.

But where were you when Brett Meyers beat his wife last year? And have you blogged against Leonard Little, let alone cheer for him, after he killed someone because he was driving drunk? If anyone should be kicked out of the NFL, it's Little. And least us forget Pacman Jones, who appears to have a connection to a shooting which left a man paralyzed. Yet the blogging world treats Pacman as as if he's the punchline.

All these crimes, in our eyes, are much more damning and actually deserve our detest. No hurting dogs isn't cool. But harming, or killing, humans is much, much worse.

If Vick had been involved in cockfights, would anyone care? I mean, that's illegal too.

As for Favre, he's just an example. And he didn't break the law, which Vick may have done. No, we don't think less of Favre because he likes to shoot deer. We don't think it's cool, but let's all realize that if we're going to go all nuts about athletes killing animals, where is the Favre outrage?

Because Sometimes Life Isn't Made To Order...

A few months ago, That's On Point pointed out the trailer for "Because I Said So" a chick-flick that promised not only to be cliche, but also so brutal, in a weird way we sort of wanted to see it for the unintentional comedy factor.

In fact, we almost did... after finals second quarter, we were oh so close to going to see this flick with two or three drunk peers. We wanted to enjoy the brutality. But another round of drinks at Jimmy's got in the way.

But we still have hope. Move over Because I Said So, there is a new brutal chick flick in town. Because sometimes life isn't made to order:

The Wire Is Robbed

We have hinted here and other places that The Wire is the greatest show on TV and in TV history. True, we haven't seen every show ever made, but we'd put it up against anything and everything ever produced.

So when we saw that it wasn't nominated for any Emmy's, again, today we weren't all that surprised. I just assumed that the Emmy committee decided not to allow The Wire in the competition because they would win everything. Best song, best show, best acting, best writing, best everything... the show is simply amazing. So, we figure that the Emmy's will be shown this year with a banner on the bottom of your TV saying something like "The Emmy committee decided that The Wire was not eligible for this year awards because it is simply too good to compare to anything else on TV over the last year. Therefore the awards you see being awarded are for second best. Thanks for watching."

I mean the only reason The Wire wasn't nominated for anything was because it would win everything right? That's the only possible explanation.

Over the last three seasons we have watched a decent amount TV - and nothing, I mean nothing, comes close to The Wire. And weren't not here saying that other shows aren't good. Lost is good to great. Seasons 4 and 5 of 24 were good. The Gilmore Girls featured some of the best writing and acting on TV (not so much this year). By all accounts Friday Night Lights and Heroes are very good. And least I forget The Sopranos, probably the greatest drama on TV that most people have seen.

But The Wire blows all these shows out of the water. Maybe it's too smart. Maybe it is too gritty, too realistic. Maybe it focuses on those areas of urban life that we all pretend don't exist. Maybe it has too many lairs. Maybe the characters are too flawed and too interesting. Maybe the show is too deep. Maybe it is forgotten because it doesn't take place in New York City or a cute or down-to-Earth rural town. Maybe it is just too good. [I would hate to think that it's too black, but it's wroth bringing up.]

I honestly don't get it. It's a shame. The best show on TV, a show that will literally forget that the rest of the world exists, is forgotten by the so called critics.

I guess the Emmy's are turning into the Grammy's. That's too bad.

What a joke - Boston Legal and Grey's Anatomy got nominations for best drama. We're not fans of either and find it hard to see the 'greatness' of those two shows. While Lost had one of the most uneven seasons for a TV show, well ever, it should have received a nod over one of those two (The Wire being the other if you couldn't guess). Many critics think that Friday Night Lights was robbed, we just haven't seen it to say.

But as far as Lost goes... it wasn't as good as it's first season. And let's not forget that despite its strong finish, the first half of the season was pretty weak. Lost did get a nom for writing... so I don't feel half as bad for it as, say, The Wire.

I can't see how Two and a half Men or Entourage are better than My Name is Earl, but apparently they are. And I should say, Earl isn't even that 'great' of a show. But it's enjoyable, makes us laugh, and worthy of leading off on Thursday nights. And can everyone end their crush on Entourage? It isn't that good of a show and most episodes lack any sort of meaningful conflict. It isn't all that funny. The acting is sub-par - Jeremy Piven is good because everyone else isn't so good. He's like a AAAA ballplayer playing rookie ball on that show. And finally it pretty much perfectly sums up everything that is wrong with this country right now: rich white people can have fun, sex, do drugs, drink too much, take on little to no responsibility, and not have pay the consequences of their actions. There is a reason why frat boys love the show - because it's their life. So why do we glorify this culture and life - which appears to be so empty and shallow once you start to analyze it?

Random Thoughts

So let me get this right. It's okay for NFL players to shoot deer. But it's not okay for NFL players to fight dogs. Okay, I understand, training dogs to fight isn't cool. But shooting deer isn't cool either. I guess my problem is that this all seems a little ridiculous. It's dog fighting. Yes it's not a good thing, but a slap on the wrist would have been more than enough in our fair opinion. If Vick had shoot the dog with a gun, he wouldn't be in trouble right now correct?

But I think what's even more hypocritical of this entire Vick mess is that Vick didn't harm any human beings. While we don't want to get in a pissing contest of what is worse, we think it is important to point out that Vick didn't harm any humans by training dogs to fight. In our eyes, athletes who drive drunk, are charged with domestic abuse, any sort of sexual abuse, or physical abuse are the bigger 'villains'. These athletes put other human beings in harms way - directly or indirectly - and that's a much greater threat to society. Yes, we can all agree, training dogs to fight isn't cool. But driving while drunk, for example, can lead to much graver and tragic consequences.

Speaking of guns, a fantastic idea from Jason Roeder over at McSweeney's: Iraqi Free Gun.

"I suppose some of the weapons we provide could be used against us. But we all know that guns don't kill people, people kill people. All a semiautomatic does is discharge 75 poor choices per minute. Remember that so-called assault-weapons ban we had? What happened there? Thugs merely adapted and replaced drive-by shootings with drive-by pillow smotherings, and no one was any safer."

The fact that we can name 10 NASCAR drivers makes us want to puke all over those big dishes at ESPN.

Don't look now, but Goldman Sachs is saying that oil could hit $95 a barrel this year. That's like $4 or more at the pump. This would be very bad for many reasons; pretty much no matter what, commodity prices will rise, which means you'll be spending more at the pump and the grocery store (and the inefficient but politically popular corn ethanol becomes even more popular; raising prices even further). Maybe most important is the impacts to inflation - which is probably higher than anyone at the Fed would like and probably will go higher if oil prices continue to rise. As inflation rises, the Fed may have to hike up interest rates, if they do so, the economy, which is already some what delicate and iffy, will slow down. The other shitty thing about inflation is that with real wages stuck in neutral, most Americans will feel it in their pocket books. Seeing that spending by your every day American has kept the economy moving during the last five years, consumer spending really can't decrease.

And for those who say the economy is doing well... look a little deeper. Yes, unemployment is low. But interest rates could go up. Inflation looks like it will continue to be a bit of a worry. Real wages are stuck in neutral. The sub-prime mortgage crisis is hurting a lot of Americans. And we have a negative savings rate two years running. The negative savings rate is really scary because long term, this will be a problem. As people spend more than they earn, it is giving the economy a false 'perception'. At some point people are going to have to stop spending so much. The US economy isn't as 'hot' as some like to point out. No, this isn't Japan and there is no need to panic. Yet, let's not all start patting each other on the back and saying everything alright. Changes are needed in various areas. (And we freely admit that there have been very few times in history when one hasn't needed to worry somewhat about the economy. But this isn't the late 1990s. Corporations are getting richer while most people are left behind. In the 90s, both corporations and your average Joe was doing better).

Let me make sure I've got this right too: Part of the reason we invaded Iraq was to fight the terrorists there instead of here. But now the National Intelligence Agency is telling me that there's a good chance the terrorists will strike the USA. So it appears to us here at VFLOAB that fighting the terrorists on their turf has back fired. And if that's gone wrong too, has ANYTHING gone right in Iraq? As the NIA reports concludes that al-Qaeda "has protected or regenerated key elements of its Homeland attack capability" by creating a safe-haven in Pakistan. So while we toil in Iraq with over 120,000 troops; under 20,000 troops are in Afghanistan and near the Pakistan border fighting al-Qaeda. The very same al-Qaeda who were the enemy all along. Great job, George and Dick! (It being Wednesday, the sarcasm is free).

Soccer Just Might Make It Here...

Last Wednesday, on the day that David Beckham in an LA Galaxy kit appeared on the cover of the leading sports weekly in the United States (Sports Illustrated for those reading in Bristol, CT) a funny thing happened.

DC United lost to the Harrisburg City Islanders 1-0 in the US Open Cup.

Who are the Harrisburg City Islanders?

Beats me. But according to the Washington Post they are "a team on the third tier of the U.S. pro system" playing in the "the gentle hills of Amish country."

Is this the biggest upset in US soccer history? Depending on where you stand on the US upset of England in the 1950 World Cup it probably is, though I'm not well versed in the steep history of the US Open Cup. Think of it this way - imagine if a D-III school like the University of Chicago or the Catholic University of America defeated USC in football. Think Hoosiers. Think Mystery, Alaska. Think of something totally insane like that. Think something America can get behind.

Sure the US Open Cup isn't the FA Cup. But it's upsets like this that make (made) the FA Cup one of the, if not the most, important trophies in sports. It's upsets that make the NCAA tournament so great (remember nothing gets people bitching like the lack of upsets on the first few days of the tourney). Sports fans live for upsets. We live to root for the underdog. Those moments come along only a few times every few years, and when they do we can't wait to make a movie about it (see: State, Boise).

We are a country that loves the underdog (save foreign policy). After all part of the mystique (good and bad) of the American Dream is the underdog raising his/herself by ones own bootstraps, by beating the odds and building that house with a white picket fence and walk in closet.

And for a night somewhere in Pennsylvania, that happened. The underdog won. An upset occurred.

But at the same time here in lies the problem - the upset already happened. The game wasn't on national TV, so a nation didn't tune in to see a scrappy bunch of guys from the Harrisburg City Islanders defeat the mighty DC United. And if you're the MLS how do you promote something like this? A catch-22 eh, because the four morons on Around the Horn will bash the 'quality' of US club soccer. "IF A BUNCH OF SCRUBS FROM THE MIDDLE OF NO WHERE CAN BEAT AN mls TEAM, WHY WOULD I EVER WANT TO WATCH SUCH A PRODUCT?" - Big Ugly Head. "I couldn't agree more, Big Ugly Head! If that's how bad the 'professionals' are in America, I'm not going to tune in!" - Small Ugly Head... anyway you get the idea. The media will miss the point in all this.

Which is all a shame, because I'm sure this would have been a thrilling match to watch on TV. Early in the second half, Harrisburg City scored - imagine watching the next 40 minutes, with all the tension and delight that only a potential upset can bring. Could the Islanders hold off United?

For all the awareness David Beckham is going to bring to the MLS and soccer, the question remains how many people will actually become fans. Some will, there is no doubt about that, and the soccer community and support will continue to grow here in this country. But a match like last Wednesday night would probably have turned more people on to the game than David Beckham.

Pitchfork

We attended the Pitchfork Music Festival this weekend. Let's just say it was an uneven weekend. The two main stages were set up well and you could pretty much hear everything that was going on at those stages. But let's totally rip the second stage, the "B" or Balance Stage which had shitty sound and was nearly impossible to see or move around. The area around the stage was far too narrow making it uncomfortable - basically the Balance Stage was a cage. The front and two sides were caged in by fence and forced anyone who wanted to see an act on the stage to act more like cattle than human beings. On top of that, if you weren't within 40 feet of the stage, it was nearly impossible to hear anything. The sound system was worse than your run of the mill high school. The Balance Stage was the biggest disappointment of a longer than should be list of disappointments.

Saturday:

We'll admit it, we didn't get there until around 6pm... but apparently we didn't miss much. As one person we talked to said, "If you ever want to kill a festival, have Iron and Wine play." Over all, we thought the line up on Saturday was pretty week, and we weren't far off with that thinking. While it would have been nice to see Califone or Voxtrot we weren't able to, therefore that left Oxford Collapse and Dan Deacon as the two acts that we wanted to see on Saturday. Overall, let's just say Saturday sucked.

Mastodom - We arrived as they hit the stage having never heard anything by these guys. Seeing that metal isn't our bag, we didn't listen too closely. They sounded fine... I guess.

Oxford Collapse - Seeing that they were at the "B" stage, they were doomed from the get go. Over the last year, they have risen up to become of one my favorite current bands and "The Boys Go Home" is one of my favorite songs. As a live band they didn't seem to have the explosiveness that I was expecting them to have. While the packed some punch, they didn't hit hard. Part of this was probably because the background vocals were louder than the lead vocals (nice job sound guys!) and the lead guitar was uneven in sound... sometimes loud, sometimes not easily audible. In my opinion, I would rather them have taken the main stage than pretty much anyone else who played on Saturday. And if I really wanted to see them preform, I should have gone to the Hideout that night. Let's just say this: IT IS NEVER A GOOD SIGN FOR A FESTIVAL WHEN ONE IS SAYING TO ONESELF... MAN I SHOULD DITCH THIS AND SEE THIS BAND AT THE HIDEOUT. That is how shitty Saturday was.

Clipse - While adding some much needed energy to a fairly subdued and at times lame crowd of hipsters, I didn't think they were anything all that special in the 15 minutes I stuck around to hear them. They weren't bad and did seem like fun for the first ten minutes. But by no means did they suck me in.

Dan Deacon - I downloaded a few Deacon tracks a few months ago and fell in love with them. So I was pumped to go see him. One problem, actually two, I could not hear or see Dan Deacon because the Balance Stage sucked. A shame because he seemed like he could totally have taken over the festival if he had been given the main stage.

Cat Power - We were tired by this point and the idea of getting a case and a few burgers sounded a whole lot cooler than seeing if Cat Power would break down on stage. And no one, I repeat no one, wanted to see Yoko.

Sunday

Sea and Cake - While it would have been cool to see The Ponys, we didn't feel like getting there at 1:30. Therefore we arrived to see Sea & Cake at 4pm. Without too much effort, they became better than any band that we saw/heard on Saturday. While they at times got a little too sleepy, they picked it up and threw in enough poppy tunes to not only hold my attention, but to be sure to check them out another time.

Jamie Liddell - The most uneven performance that we saw, Liddell rocked at times and lost me at others. Wearing what appeared to be a headpiece that George Clinton had given him, Liddell nailed every 70s inspired soul song that he did. But when he went behind his tables and did some more experimental stuff, he lost the crowd at the same time. The looping was aiight but he is no Andrew Bird. No matter, one of the better acts of the weekend.

Stephen Malkmus - While we loved the fact that he played "Spit on a Stranger" he was underwhelming, lacked presence, and Malkmus needed a band behind him. A man and his guitar can be lovely... but not at an outdoor festival with 17,000 people. I won't call him a disappointment, but he would have been a lot better if he had some supporting musicians with him.

Of Montreal - Easily the weirdest group of the day, they came on stage wearing bizarre outfits. While people seemed excited to see them, I wasn't too impressed. A few songs lagged on for too long and didn't really go any where. The guy in wearing a lobster arm and another guy dressed as a tree stump on stage were not only weird, but actually took away from everything... what was their point? Or better yet, why should I care?

The New Pornographers - No Neko Case... a disappointment. But the band still delivered in what was probably my favorite act. They were fun, interesting, and solid. They came out and just played music - no side shows or over the top costumes.

The Bad:

- The Balance Stage - I can't tell you how much it sucked.

- Saturday's Line up - Yoko? Seriously? I'm sure I'm not being open minded enough, but it's sort of like inviting Christopher Hitches to be the key speaker at a Liberal Conference in Madison at this point. Let's just say the guys at Pitchfork are trying too hard.

- The Crowd - Hipsters aren't the loudest bunch. They don't have problems with consumerism or commercialism so you won't get cries for revolution or change. It's a crowd were image matters more than thirst. And when it comes to musical festivals, they aren't the best crowd to see shows with. They lack energy and passion, which hurt some acts. Dancing was kept to the minimum (as was any sort of sign of one showing that he/she may actually like the band that was preforming).

- Wannabe Hipsters - Where does one draw the line between irony and stupidity? And if there is still such a line, I feel as if we've passed it. Those who are hip don't try to be hip (if that makes any sense). There were far too many wannabe hipsters and people trying too hard to be hip. Too many people were trying to be cool, thus they ended up being lamer than most frat boys on Clark or Lincoln Ave. Note to male hipster wannabes: do no wear short shorts. These are not hip. Just because it happened in the 80s doesn't make it cool now.

The Good:

- $1 water and drinking fountains were great.

- The food was surprisingly good.

- $4 Goose Island and short lines for the beer... not bad at all considering I'd pay that or more at pretty much any bar in Chicago for a 312 or Honkers Ale.

- Sunday's line up

- When ever Jamie Lidell was singing soul.

- Sea and Cake's more pop inspired stuff.

- The New Pornographers

- Union Park

- The fact that the festival wasn't over crowded. In fact, I could see them expanding the number of people by a few thousand next year (provided they created a bit more space). But thankfully, one could move and breath easily.

- The Event Promoters, Staffers, and Planners... fantastic job by all them. The festival was the perfect size, it was comfortable, and the price was just right. Even though I didn't have a good time on Saturday, the price didn't make me feel ripped off (or angry). And Sunday was a nice time.

GRADE: B

If the "B" Stage was even remotely better, this would have been a higher grade. Saturday's line up didn't really catch my eye, but part of that was because I couldn't get there until 6pm (I think Voxtrot and Battles would have been cool). The price was A+, Sunday was a solid A-/B+, and the main stages were done right; good sound and nice sightlines from pretty much anywhere. Just do something about that second stage and remember to ditch those bands that sound great in small venues.

As Jim DeRogotis correctly points out: "In the end, with the third Pitchfork fest standing as an unqualified artistic success as well as a profitable business venture (according to the promoters, who declined to say exactly how much money they made), the question it raised was not how it could offer so much for so little ($50 for a three-day pass), but how larger, much better-funded and more heavily hyped fests -- chief among them the reinvented Lollapalooza -- can justify charging so much while delivering far inferior sound and sight lines, milking concertgoers with overpriced amenities and assaulting them with corporate promotional hucksterism at the expense of what mattered most in Union Park: the music."

Thoughts on Syriana

We recently watched Syriana, a good but very confusing film, but we were able to take a few ideas away from the movie.

One of the problems in the Middle East and Islam isn't only religion in itself, it's the lack of economic opportunity for the people in many Middle Eastern nations. Seeing the billions/trillions of dollars that can be made in oil, many leaders years ago sold their people down the river in the name of oil. This is probably why in places like Jordan and Israel religious extremism isn't as 'ripe'. These countries have been forced to create a more diverse economy (with a degree of success). Meanwhile, in places like Iran and Saudi Arabia, oil so dominates and these economies that there is little investment into other sectors or areas of the economy. There are only so many jobs that oil can provide and on top of that many of them are occupied by foreigners. The lack of other industries and options leads to many to extremism - in this case religious fanaticism. Just take a look at those who were part of the 9/11 plot - most of them were Saudi Arabian (as is bin Laden) and the remaining few were from the UAE. This isn't a coincidence. The best policy the US could take in the Middle East is to invest in developing dynamic and diverse economies that aren't completely based upon oil.

Also it's easy to see the parallel to this in Africa were we, the West, exploits the natural resources (diamonds, gold, oil, etc) creating economies of havenots. In Africa this has lead to far too many civil wars.

The CIA and the US government will do whatever they can to put the governments that are most friendly to the US in place. I think this comes as no surprise. How successful this policy has been can be debated... it's mos def more gray than black and white. There are pros and cons to such policy.

Big Oil controls this country, they may not run it directly, but they have a lot of people's ear and the corruption is ripe. There is a reason why Big Oil always seems to get the biggest and best tax breaks.

The ESPY Award They Should Be Giving Out...

It's our first ever mailbag! We received an e-mail from the Polish Jesus and figure, if the Jesuit educated males of the East Coast can do it... what's to stop us hard working, Jesuit educated Midwesterns from having Mailbags? Away we go:

I think you/we should create an ESPY Award for "Hippest Sports Phrase of the Year" Potential nominees:

- "I did not watch a minute of the NBA Finals!" (this, to me, should be the overwhelming favorite)
- "The Yankees are the best team money can buy" (grandfather clause here, as it is a 6-time champion)
- "Was there an all-star game last night?" (Could refer to NBA or MLB)
- "They still play hockey???"
- "I don't watch Sportscenter anymore!" (no offense, but WIP makes this point quite a bit)
- "I'm a big [NFL team] fan" (generally stated by a female)

Mike from Bryn Mawr

I'll add a few more:
- "He just loves to play football." (This is rarely said by fans, but I'm not sure announcers can go more than five plays without saying it during a Packers game).
- "The Spurs are just so boring."
- "Simmons isn't as good as he used to be." (Anyone else notice that he's been pretty fantastic the last four or five months?)
- "Woody Page is an idiot" or "I can't stand Around the Horn" (Look people, if you don't like it, don't watch it).

Chicago Specific Nominees:
- "If they trade Buehrle I'm never going to see the White Sox play ever again." (White Sox fans: More fickel than a female with no self-confidence! Seriously, who were these people? Why are they Sox fans? Why can't they go away?)
- "Rex is our quarterback." (To really appreciate this one, you have to hear it about 100 times to really get the full effect of Lovie's drawl).
- "The Cubs have the best starting rotation in the majors." (Don't get me started on the Cubs and Cub fans...)
- "Put in Griese!" (Every Bear fan that started watching in Week 10 or later).
- "I don't see how this makes the Bulls better" or "I just don't like Noah." (A favorite of the morons on the WSCR, 670AM, the Score. To hear them say it, the Bulls should have traded the #9 for Kobe and Garnett).

And while we're at it... why not introduce a Hall'o'Fame of Hip Sports Phrases:
- "I haven't gone to a baseball game since the Strike."
- "Cal Ripken saved baseball."
- "I don't watch the NBA because it's just a bunch of thugs."

If you want to see Sicko for free, you can do so here:
http://insanefilms.com/?p=413
It's about as balanced as Soviet propaganda, but it is pretty interesting.

For Soviet propaganda, peep dis:
http://www.englishrussia.com/?p=312
For some reason I LOVE propaganda.

Matt (Chicago)

Umm, okay Matt. I do like how the Soviets couldn't find a qualified 10 year old to draw half of those posters.

If Mexico is 2-0 in Copa America shouldn't the US be 13 and -2 after two games?
- Rodrigo (Mexico)

Uncle, Rodrigo. Uncle.

Look we sent a shitty team to Copa America. Our goalie is older than Father Time, our back line features one starter, our midfield features only two guys with long term futures with the national team, and we still don't have a striker (mainly because Vick, Iverson, and Reggie Bush don't play soccer). I know, excuses are like assholes, but 'dem the facts.

No matter, you guys haven't won in the US since Clinton and Zedillo were presidents. I'd call that one sided. If it wasn't for the Azteca, this may be a Red Sox/Yankees type situation.

I am sort of disappointed in the US Soccer Federation, their goal this summer was to win the Gold Cup. They could careless about Copa America, probably because they know we can't win it. But if we're ever going to reach that point where we face off with Brazil in every World Cup Final, we should place more empathises on competitions where there is more than one quality team. But that would be too risky. Not like it matters, I'm sure Landon will disappear for about a year or so since he's actually been worth a damn over the past few months. No one dominates El Salvador and Honduras like Landon Donovan. No one disappears faster than Landon Donovan come time to play a team with actual quality. I hope he has fun cutting Beckham's hair this summer.

Apparently I'm being dragged there tonight. So if anyone's
interested, that's where I'll be (drunk, as usual)
-Ben (Chicago)

Yup, these are my friends.

The iPhone came out about 10 days ago to rave reviews. People stood in line over night to get their hands on the phone, a phone!, which was going to revolutionize the industry. From the sound of it, not only does this phone rock, it can, as Jewel said, save your soul. Something like that.

We got our hands on the iPhone a few days ago. And it is cool. There is no doubt about that. The screen is pretty awesome. The graphics are nice. It's a bit smaller than a 'normal' iPod. But we couldn't help but notice one thing.

It's a phone.

Strange but true, it's only a phone. It does everything you'd expect a phone to do. But the difference is it looks really effing cool in the process. We do have some concerns about the potential durability of the iPhone since the iPod isn't the most sturdy thing ever made... will everyone have to get big old ugly cases for the iPhone to ensure that the screen doesn't crack? And if you drop it, will it break into a thousand pieces, because it looks like it will? Cell phones are dropped all the time, but they're tough (for the most part). They can handle the drops. But can an iPhone? It sure doesn't look that way.

The one feature that the iPhone has that most other phones do not is that it uses an actual, easy to use, full web browser. This alone makes the phone awesome.

But there's one problem... the AT&T network stinks. And because of that, we couldn't even load the web page that we requested.

So, we have this to ask... why spend 500 bucks on a phone that looks cool? I know this is a silly question since we live in a society/culture that spends hundreds of dollars on jeans and plastic surgery is not only common but accepted. Therefore, the idea of people spending Five-Hundred dollars on a phone isn't quite insane. But until the iPhone has a quick and actually working Internet connection, we say save your money. Invest that money, wait a year, and then buy the iPhone. By them I'm sure either AT&T will have a better network and/or the iPhone will be carried by another network. Because without a solid, consistent, good Internet connection you're spending 10 times what you need to on a phone. Unless you're shallow, hold out for a while.

The iPhone is the future, there's no doubt about that... but the future can wait a year or two.

A very good piece by EJ Dionne today in the Post. And not just because he's right, but because the GOP should take what he's said to heart.

Back in 2002 and 2003 and even 2004 when W was about as popular as a President can be, the GOP apparently thought that they would forever be the most popular and only party in America. They were the New Party of the 21st Century. The Democrats were also rans, out of ideas and politically a mess. They were somewhat right about the Democrats, they were (and maybe still are) out of ideas and they were a political mess.

But the GOP were way off on their own position in American politics. It was almost as if they totally forgot they barely won the 2000 election (and in fact, Bush lost the popular vote). They didn't have a mandate like the Democrats did in 1932 or Labour did in 1997 or that they even had in 1994 in Congress. They were a party that won by the skin of their teeth (or better yet, because of the voting system in this country).

When they were going around in 2002 and 2003 as if they were the Forever Party, it didn't make sense. Bush, who came to power as a 'compassionate conservative' was anything but during this time. He surrounded himself with political hacks and talked up partisan politics - all this during a time of change, concern, and uncertainty in the US as we felt our way though the effects of 9/11. He built a huge house of cards, and looked as if and believed that he was The Man and no one was ever going to touch him until he had to step down in 2008.

Of course that house of cards fell and Bush is probably looking at approval ratings of 35% until he leaves office... I wouldn't be surprised if he was the first President not to get a boost in his ratings when he's about to leave. I'm getting ahead of myself, because that's still 18 months away.

Bush will be president until Jan. 20, 2009. Are we doomed to 18 months of drift? Instead of sounding like a Republican political consultant, Bush might try to sound like a president who understands that power in Washington -- and opinion in the country -- shifted after the 2006 elections.

That, my friends, is a long ass time. And going by the last six months, Bush seems some what contempt to just ride out these 18th months. Besides the 'Surge' and his failed, somewhat half ass, attempt to get the immigration bill though Congress (which showed how weak he is), Bush hasn't done much over the last few months besides talk about what he always talks about... nonsense and no one is buying it anymore.

Bush and company would be smart to take some of Dionne and Sarkozy's advise. No, he doesn't have to make peace with Al Gore or any other Democrat - American politics doesn't work that way. But he could try to work with the Democrats and attempt to do something; it might just boost his image and help his, what appears to be already tarnished, legacy. Because after all, 18 months is a decent amount of time to waste.

The AL At the Half Way Point

With most teams (okay the White Sox) at the half way point, let's take a quick look at all 30 teams half way though the season... and their chances in the second half. I'm going to use 92 wins as the playoff benchmark. Right now, the Tigers who are in the Wild Card slot, are on pace to win 95 games.

American League:
DONE (All these teams would have to play over .700 baseball to win 95 games):
Tampa Bay Devil Rays - Are they just the Rays now? Anyone? I did learn that they have actual Devil Rays/Sting Rays at the stadium in a big tank last week.
Baltimore Orioles - The most depressing team in sports?
Chicago White Sox - 2007 Winners of the Murphy's Law Award. On the plus side, they'll probably go 45-36 in the second half.
Kansas City Royals - The sad thing is after all these years I still don't see any progress.
Texas Rangers - They stink and things will only get worse once they trade away that bullpen.

Life Support:
New York Yankees - Everyone realizes that the Yankees have to 52-28 just to really even have an outside shot at making the playoffs right? And I don't see where those 52 wins are going to come from. This is an 85 win team when healthy, they score a lot of runs but other than that winning steak in June, I can't see them putting together a run for the playoffs. And anytime a team fights to get to .500 then goes under .500, that's a sign that we're talking about a .500 team anyway.

Toronto Blue Jays - Like the Yankees, they have to go 52-28 just to smell a playoff race. But unlike the Yankees things are coming together a bit for them. The pitching is there, the hitting is coming around... if you're looking for that team to catch fire in the second half, this is where I'd put my money since they play in a bad division and things just may come together.

Oakland A's - Their problem is more that they're in a tougher than expected division and they refuse to score runs. They have gotten great pitching, and have an impressive run differential. But until they acquire a bat, I just don't see it happening. But if they do catch fire and find themselves in the playoffs, watch out. The A's pitching is fantastic.

With a Break Here...
Minnesota Twins - I but them here because they always seem to catch fire in the second half. And while they are chasing two teams in their division, both of those teams are flawed. Of course they're going to have to play really good baseball, but they have a lot of games left with the Tigers and Indians. They have to go 50-28 to really have a chance, but if they use those games wisely (in other words, if they win those games against the Tigers and Indians) maybe, just maybe.

Seattle Mariners - They need to play as well in the second half as they did in the first half, in other words go go 46-35 again. They could do it, but this team doesn't feel right. They need another arm in the rotation and could use a bat on top of it. Right now they're getting it done and should be in the Wild Card race into August and probably beyond. But I'm not that confident in them because the pitching just isn't there at the moment.

Should Be In, But...
Detroit Tigers - This is a good baseball team, but there is something about that them that I don't like. Maybe it's because they don't match up well with the White Sox, and therefore I don't think they're as good as they are. But I think what is more interesting is how many runs they've scored this year. This is the best offense in baseball, but on paper, this doesn't seem like the mostdynamic offense. Just as I have a hard time believing that the White Sox will hit as poorly in the second half as they did in the first, I have a hard time believing that the Tigers will be scoring almost six runs again in the second half of the season. But if they go 46-33, they'll end up with 95 wins and probably in the playoffs.

Cleveland Indians - If the Indians do make the playoffs, they're not going to go that far. The pitching isn't there to get them to the World Series. Sabathia is solid and Carmona has been a pleasant surprise , but Byrd, Lee, and who ever ends up being their #5 starter aren't getting it done. Sure if they go 44-33 the rest of the way, they'll have 95 wins and besittin' pretty. But Borowski is barely getting the job done as their closer, and that really is probably going to come back to haunt them... the question is, will it be in late September or in October?

What I'm getting at is don't be shocked if either the Tigers or Indians get caught. It's unlikely that the Twins with catch both teams and the M's or A's win enough games to win the Wild Card, but the Tigers and Indians are flawed teams. At the moment things keep going right for the Tigers, how long with that luck last? Did anyone thinkMaggs would be the best hitter not named A-Rod in the AL this year? And as far as the Tribe, they are a good to great regular season team, but with their lack of pitching, they will struggle against good teams, sort of like the Yankees between 2002-2007.

Put Aside Money for Playoff Tickets:
Boston Red Sox - Unlike last year they have starting pitching and their bullpen is pretty good. Sure they need to fix a few problems in the infield and probably could use another starter. But they're still the favorites in the American League. The question is does Theo trade away a few of their higher ended prospects for a MarkBuehrle (assuming the Sox don't resign him)? Does the present over ride the future? It isn't 2003 or 2004 any more... they won the World Series. Should they go all in still? Or should they play their hand and hope these prospects come in and make them even better over the next few years?

Los Angeles Angles of Anaheim in Orange County - As long as they play .500 baseball, they should be in good shape. Honestly, I'm not sure what they should do. They are a playoff team. Sure they could use a bat... but the Angles do things their way and it's worked for them over the last five years. The key really is to make sure that Vlad doesn't suck as much as he did during the playoffs in 2005 when he made A-Rod look awesome.