October 4, 2008
Red Sox Take 2-0 Series Lead...11th Straight Postseason Win Over Angels
By now, it's a given By Dan Shaughnessy Globe Columnist / October 4, 2008
ANAHEIM, Calif. - Long ball, small ball, hard ball, soft ball, Wiffle ball, monster ball, disco ball, cotillion ball. If it's the Red Sox and Angels in October, the Red Sox will win.
Fenway, Big A, Jamaica Way, Blue Jay Way, Sittin'-on-the-dock-of-the-bay Way. If it's the Red Sox and Angels in October, the Red Sox will win.
The Angels lost to their Boston Daddies at home again last night. This time it was Red Sox 7, Halos 5, in what was easily the best game of the postseason anywhere yet this year. J.D. Drew won it for the Sox with a ninth-inning, two-run homer off Francisco Rodriguez while most of New England slept (the game ended at 1:28 a.m. EDT).
The best-of-five series moves to Fenway tomorrow, and the Sox should be drenched in champagne well before midnight. There might even be a closer with a cardboard box on his head step-dancing on the Fenway lawn. Make sure the bases are bolted down.
Regarding Red Sox vs. Angels, we have moved well past the arena of standard athletic competition. We have wandered into Rod Serling's space "between the pit of a man's fear and the summit of his knowledge."
When the Red Sox play the Angels in October, the Sox take a choke hold on the series. The Angels just take the choke. Eleven in a row. Eleven.
"What happened in '04 or 1986 does not matter to us," said Sox manager Terry Francona. "We set out to win today's game and we did it."
Game 2 felt like it was over before Angels starter Ervin Santana got the third out of the first inning. Jason Bay, the Anti-Manny, crushed a three-run homer to cap a four-run Boston first and sucked the air from the house of air kisses. The Angels (11 runners left on base) staged multiple rallies over nine innings. But nothing matters when the Red Sox and Angels play in October. We just know that the Sox will win. Every time.
The Red Sox have scored 11 runs in two games, 10 coming from extra-base hits. The Angels have 20 hits in the series, and 19 of them are singles. They've stranded 20 runners in two games. Poor Howie Kendrick (four punchouts last night) has stranded 12 all by himself in just two games.
The Angels loaded the bases with none out in the fifth. Daisuke Matsuzaka was on the ropes, staggering through a 36-pitch inning. But Los Angeles came away with only one run. The Angels juiced the sacks again in the seventh and scored only once. Juan Rivera, Kendrick, and Erick Aybar all struck out with the bases loaded.
Excruciating.
They even think the umps are against them. Just before Drew's killer homer off K-Rod in the ninth, Rodriguez appeared to pick off Coco Crisp with a throw to second. Crisp was ruled safe, then Drew struck.
It's not about the Rally Monkey when the Angels play the Red Sox in the playoffs. It's about the two-ton monkey on their backs.
And now they have to face Josh Beckett, the Bob Gibson of the 21st century.
Uncle Bud Selig can't be too happy looking at four 2-0 series after three days of tournament play. Both League Championship Series appear set. It's going to be the Phillies against destiny's Dodgers in the Senior Circuit and the Tampa Rays against the Red Sox in the American League.
The Phillies and Rays figured to be in good shape at this juncture. Both played the first two games at home against teams with strapped pitching staffs, teams that staggered just to get into the playoffs. Some might say the Cubs' collapse was predictable, but nothing is as certain as the Angels taking the apple against the Red Sox.
I have to admit, the Halos tricked me again. I fell for Mike Scioscia's 100-win team. I signed on to the theory that this year was going to be different. The Angels added Mark Teixeira and Torii Hunter and came into the playoffs much healthier than last year. They beat the Sox eight out of nine during the regular season. They were finally ready to beat the Red Sox in the playoffs.
What was I thinking? Neglected to check the calendar, I guess. I forgot that it's October. Picking the Angels over the Sox in October is like picking the Republicans over the Democrats in Massachusetts in November. Not going to happen, Sparky.
"We have a challenge," said Scioscia. "This game ain't over until somebody wins three . . . we go to Boston and win a game, the pressure's back on them."
If you missed this one live, find a way to see it on replay. It was an Instant Classic. It was also textbook Red Sox-Angels, with the Sox making all the plays and the Angels wallowing in frustration.
October 3, 2008
Stooge for the new Century
As a woman, I was embarrassed that a sister would have so little self-awareness that she would consent to be part of some things for which she is so very very woefully unqualified - being a candidate and participating in this debate.
As a voter, my decision to vote for Obama was more firmly supported when I pondered McCain's unfathomable reasons for choosing Palin who is, simply, the worst candidate for anything that I have ever seen. That is going some as Kay "Baby" Hutchison previously held that position in my regard. Kay "Baby", however, at least can present herself as a more serious person than this twit. When I consider all the choices McCain had, I am simply amazed. Yep - sure makes ME feel better to think that McCain's reasoning skills as evidenced by this VP candidate choice would also be the skill set used to deal with the economy, Iraq, and, OMG, "bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran".
As a citizen, I am even more disgusted with MSM who rated Palin's performance so well with the acknowledged reason that she didn't f**k up as badly as predicted. For pete's sake, the woman said and did nothing - NOTHING - that in any way at all demonstrated that she understands enough about anything that would qualify her to be a cashier in Wal Mart much less hold the 2nd most important position in the whole frickin' world.
I am an independent with conservative leanings and I just cannot understand how anyone with a straight face can support the McCain/Palin ticket. I voted for McCain when he ran against Bush for the R nomination but that McCain no longer exists (if he ever did.)
I have reservations about Obama but I have absolutely NO reservations in saying that he is a far far superior choice for President.
sheesh,
Independent, TX
October 2, 2008
October 1, 2008
September 30, 2008
September 29, 2008
'Stockton (CA) Record' Endorses Obama...First Democrat It Has Backed Since FDR
Barack Obama is our choice for president of the United States.He has demonstrated time and again he can think on his feet. More importantly, he has demonstrated he will think things through, seek advice and actually listen to it.
Obama is a gifted speaker. But in addition to his smarts and energy, possibly his greatest gift is his ability to inspire.
For eight years, American politics has been marked by smears, fears and greed. For too long, we've practiced partisanship in Washington, not politics. The result is a cynicism every bit as deep as that which infected the nation when Richard Nixon was shamed from office and when Bill Clinton brought shame to the office.
This must end, but John McCain can't do it. He can't inspire, nor can he really break from a past that is breaking this nation.
McCain is an American hero, and he has served this country in the Senate with determination. He has gone against his party, but the fact is his ties to the Bush administration and its policies are deep. Americans know we cannot keep going down this path.
McCain, who has voted consistently for deregulation, started off two weeks ago declaring the U.S. economy fundamentally sound but ended the week sounding like a populist. Who is he really?
He tends to shoot from the hip and go on gut instinct. The nation cannot go through four more years of literally and figuratively shooting now and asking questions later.
But the fact is, we worry he won't have four years. If elected, at 72, he would be the oldest incoming president in U.S. history. He's in good health now, we're told, although he has withheld most of his medical records. That means Gov. Sarah Palin could very well become president.And that brings us to McCain's most troubling trait: his judgment.
While praiseworthy for putting the first woman on a major-party presidential ticket since Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, his selection of Palin as a running mate was appalling. The first-term governor is clearly not experienced enough to serve as vice president or president if required. Her lack of knowledge is being covered up by keeping her away from questioning reporters and doing interviews only with those considered friendly to her views.
We're not suggesting Obama is without faults. He, like McCain, has demonstrated a marked lack of knowledge in recent days about the financial mess facing this nation.
But unlike McCain, who is trying to position himself as a born-again regulator, Obama would increase the oversight of our markets and demand accountability. He would actually put regulators in the oversight agencies that were systematically dismantled by the Bush administration.
While the blame doesn't all accrue to the Bush administration, the past eight years have been marked by looking the other way. McCain aided and abetted that behavior.
Republicans have tried repeatedly to paint Obama as an elitist. Hardly. He grew up in a single-parent home and, by the sheer force of his desire and cerebral horsepower, ended up at Harvard Law School, where he became the first African-American president of the Harvard Law Review.
He could have gone for the money. He didn't. He went to Chicago, where he worked to give a voice to those who didn't have one.
That's hardly the mark of an elitist.
He hasn't lost touch with regular people, whereas McCain doesn't even know how many homes he owns.
Obama rose quickly through the Illinois Legislature and propelled himself into the U.S. Senate.
After winning the Democratic nomination against a large and highly experienced field of candidates, Obama picked one of them, Joe Biden, as his running mate. Biden brings to the ticket the vast foreign affairs experience and knowledge that Obama lacks.
Obama has been accused of being an empty suit, all talk and no action. There's no "there" there, his detractors say.
The charge is no more credible than that of him being an elitist.
Obama can inspire, and our nation desperately needs an inspirational leader. And he does not carry the deep scars of Vietnam, as do many of McCain's generation.
He offers hope. A new way of doing business. And a belief that our system of government can be made to work.
He's the clear choice.
The 'Real' Bill/Hil Clinton
Watch these recent videos featuring Bill Clinton - the first from Saturday Night Live, the second from Meet the Press this Sunday past. They reveal the dripping insincerity that has become the operative Clintonian legacy - political opportunism with regard for nothing but political survival.For all of the talking that Bill and Hillary have done to 'support' Barack Obama, it
has been tepid, delivered out of one side of 'their' mouth. While saying what they have to say to 'support Obama' and protect themselves, their objective remains seeing that Hil' is elected president in 2012.So, if you are still one of those still undecided voters who needs a little more incentive to vote for Obama (other than the obvious reason that he is the best leader for our times) - add to your list the side benefit of keeping the Clintons out of the white house for good. - zjm
September 28, 2008
Debating to lead the tarnished States of America
This is, perhaps, the single most important opinion column I've read during this presidential campaign. I've often extolled the uniquely brilliant perspective and insight found in Lisa Van Dusen's writings - but today, Ms. Van Dusen has pierced the heart of what is wrong with American politics and contemporary American society.PLEASE pass this along to your families, friends, and co-workers. Now is the time for all of us to embrace our indignation, passion, and outrage - and lay claim to the hope of a restored America marked by values of justice and moral leadership.
That... is what is at stake in this election. - zjm
By LISA VAN DUSEN | Sunday, 28 September 2008Given the frenzy of anticipation whipped up ahead of the first McCain-Obama debate Friday night, the event itself was a bit of a shrug.
With the U.S. economy in its biggest meltdown since the Great Depression, last week's bail-out freak-out on Capitol Hill and John McCain's will-he-or-won't-he pre-debate tease, Americans were on the edge of their Lay-Z-Boys, waiting for some sense that somebody feels not just their pain but their outrage.As it was, most of the tension was between the two men on stage and not about the anger of the mob outside.
On the economy, Barack Obama and John McCain laid out their mixed feelings about Congress's reworking of the three-page carte blanche package from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, a back-and-forth that was not helped by McCain's weirdly flaccid maverick turn Thursday.
(The thing about guys who make a career of ticking off their own party is that when they turn up in the middle of a campaign trolling for a consensus photo-op, scores get settled).
Though the two men clashed again on the wisdom of coming out against the invasion of Iraq versus the wisdom of coming out in favour of the surge, most of what was said on foreign policy reinforced what we already knew: McCain has been to places Sarah Palin's never even heard of and Obama is a bigger fan of diplomacy than of swagger.
More than anything, the dynamic between the candidates revealed just how much hostility can develop between two men caught in the vortex of a dysfunctional campaign week. There was a great pot/kettle joke when McCain, who's been running a chaotically id-driven, purely tactical game, accused Obama of not knowing the difference between tactics and strategy.
The format outlined by moderator Jim Lehrer of PBS actually allowed for McCain and Obama to address each other directly at regular intervals but McCain wouldn't look at Obama, much less address him, which was an excellent example of a tactic as opposed to a strategy.
The debate that almost wasn't came at the end of a Washington week so crazy that it was a triumph of polls over personality (85 per cent of Americans wanted the debate to go ahead) just for McCain and Obama to spend their Friday night on the same stage.
There was the disaster of the economic meltdown followed by a bailout package that landed on Capitol Hill like a gigantic radioactive meteorite nobody would touch without a very long pole and a hazmat suit.
Then there was the tactical disaster of McCain suspending his campaign without really suspending it and riding into town to create the illusion of an intervention nobody wanted.
Meanwhile, both Main Street and Wall Street now look like downtown Grozny, circa 1995, and America's standing internationally has been devalued to the point where its moral, strategic and economic leverage is receding by the day.
In foreign policy terms, the next president will be taking the tiller of a garbage barge piled with an illegal war, flaunted contempt for international law and the collapse of the latest WTO round, among other policy refuse.
Add to that an economic meltdown that will undermine America's authority with international financial institutions and a bailout that could seriously impede both the deficit cutting and priority implementing abilities of whoever wins, and the political discourse takes on a whole new sense of urgency.
In this context, the most important differences between the candidates Friday night were the stylistic ones. These days, McCain's 20th century posture that America is always right because America is America sounds downright reckless.
There's an advantage to being the new guy in a race against the party of an incompetent and unpopular regime. No matter how hard your opponent tries to disown the record, you get to stand as the advocate for and surrogate of the voters who can't be in the room.
For Obama, there's an added value in reminding people that McCain doesn't really have much right to be angry, given where he's spent the past 26 years, the past eight in particular.
That indignation should come from the guy who wasn't part of the problem, didn't endorse the policies and doesn't have 13 cars and nine houses.
