Whaaa???

(Just so's ya know, this isn't a blog saying how evil the Republicans are and that you should vote Democrat. Its just a blog musing on the hilarity that's been going on at the Republican convention. )

The Republican's have lost it. Lost what? you might ask. Their minds apparently. Somehow, the party that has had power in this country for the last 8 years, six of those years controlling both the White House AND Congress, can position themselves as the outside reformers. Its bizarre. And, are the American people dumb enough to fall for it?

No, I'm not calling you dumb if you vote Republican. I'm calling you dumb if you vote Republican because you think they're outsiders and not part of the Washington elite. They are. The Presidential candidate? He's been in the Senate for 26 years. Sure, they picked Palin to be the VP, but admit it, that was a desperation move because who else could McCain pick that wasn't going to get SHREDDED in the media? (Not that Palin is getting a pass, but here's a note to the media, NO ONE CARES OR SHOULD CARE IF HER DAUGHTER IS PREGNANT YOU IDIOTS!) Sure Palin as a reformer is being questioned, but that is fine. Focus on her politics, NOT her family.

What's funny is watching people like Guiliani and Romney (both multi-millionaires) rail at the "Washington elite." Cause they can relate better to my life? Being rich in and of itself is not wrong, but please, don't pander to me. (Again, Obama is FAR from poor, but he also hasn't been rich NEARLY as long as these guys. And working as a community organizer keeps you a bit closer to reality than most of these other jobs.) And its also funny hearing Guiliani and Romney talk about conservative ideals, since last I checked, their conservative credentials were a wee bit lacking.

The Republicans have had the power. They still have the (very quiet) Presidency. So, people, don't be duped that the Republicans are outsiders who will come in to save the day. They are not. If you somehow think the last 8 years have been a good thing, or believe that McCain would do a better job than Bush (it would be tough to do worse) then vote your conscience, that's fine. But don't buy the hype. They've been having a chance. You can extend it if you want, that's up to you.

A brief look at the other side. I am VERY unhappy with the Democrats who have held power in Congress the past 2 years. They keep saying they don't have the numbers to override a veto, which is true. So why have they not been sending bill after bill to Bush and forcing him to veto it? Where is the paper trail of "we tried but Bush vetoed it." instead of a bunch of whining soundbites on how they can't override the veto. Who cares. Show us you're trying. Its been pathetic and if they lose, they'll have no one to blame but themselves.

Arbitrary Ages

Since there is a bit of a debate going on right now about what the legal drinking age should be, I figured I'd put my thoughts on it out there. Scary, I know.

A number of university presidents are informally petitioning to have laws changed so that states could make the drinking age whatever they wanted without any penalties from the Federal government. Right now, the states are free to change it, but at a cost in Federal highway dollars.

18. You can drive, you can vote, you can join the army to get sent off ot war, you can get married, you can do many things, but you can't buy alcohol. I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing. However, I do think the univeristy presidents have a point. People under the age of 21 are drinking, lots, and its pretty much an issue that isn't dealt with because its "illegal."

I think this is a valid point. How can you teach someone to be responsible with something that is illegal? Sort of self-defeating there. A couple of the ideas put forth were interesting. A "drinking license" much like a driver's license is one that intrigues me. A person would have to pass an alcohol awareness course to get their license to drink.

An idea I've been kicking around is to not let anyone under 21 buy packaged liquor. This doesn't solve all issues, but it does keep high school seniors from stocking up on beer for the next kegger. Not that they won't find other ways to do it, but at least it looks like their are restraints in place.

I suppose what it comes down to for me is this: people under 21 are going to drink. I would be most had their first drink either at home sneaking a drink of their parents booze, or at a friend's house sneaking their parents booze. While I think any changes in the drinking age should be carefully thought through, if we can send an 18 year old kid to die in some foreign country, shouldn't we at least be able to buy him a beer when he gets back? I don't know. Young people are going to be irresponsible with alcohol whether or not its legal. Why not make it legal so it can be supervised more easily?

School time..

Well, its official. My wife, Katrina, has started nursing school. Yup, she's gonna be a nurse. And she's got 22 months of school to get through to do it. (With a month or two here and there off.) Oh, did I mention she works full time too? Yeah. She's amazing.

I'm continually amazed by my wonderful wife and her myraid talents. She is simply one of the hardest working people I know. I love her for that. I love her for many reasons, but her sheer will is amazing and its great, because even for all of it, she still needs me.

What? Yes. She needs me to be not just a good husband, but a great husband for her so she doesn't go insane. That's sorta scary to me. I'm really good at being mediocre. Great at it actually. But mediocre isn't gonna cut it.

In a way, this should set me up to be a WONDERFUL husband down the road, but its gonna take work to get there. I love her so much, and she does so much for me and others, I gotta do this for her. I love you Katrina.

It's Ok, You don't have to like the Olympics.

Ahh, its that season again. The Olympics are in full swing and the lovers and the haters are out in full force. I don't get it. I really don't.

If you don't like the Olympics, that's fine. Lots of the "sports" in the Olympics aren't really interesting at all. Or so blindly subjective that to say you have a "winner" is a bit of a stretch. (Come on. Artistic? What the heck?)

If you do like the Olympics, that's fine too. I enjoy many of the sports because I never get to watch them any other time. Track cycling, track and field, swimming, lots of those are fun to get to watch, but again, IF YOU DON'T LIKE THEM THAT IS OK!!!

There are some people out there who for 2 weeks every 2 years go Olympic insane and believe if you don't follow the Olympics you hate freedom, Jesus, and kittens. I don't get them. I don't really care if you like them or not, I do. Likes and dislikes vary lots. That's life.

Then there are the backlash people. The "Why is everyone making me feel bad I don't like the Olympics?" people. I don't know why. And is it really everyone? Or is it just 1 or 2 of the people I mentioned above.

I was reading a column by one of The Sporting News writers where he was venting his dislike of the Olympics because it didn't have football. (Not just lacking football, but any sport an American might find interesting.) Well, seeing as how only a tiny percentage of the world's population plays or follows American Football, I can see why its not at the Olympics.

Baseball is though. But, apparently that didn't count for this writer. I don't care about Olympic baseball because I follow MLB so I get my fix that way.

I guess I'm just venting. You can like the Olympics. You can dislike the Olympics. You can hate NBC's coverage of the Olympics (though it is a bit better this time around). But please people, stop trying to convince each other why the Olympics are amazing or why they suck. Really. Its like trying to convince anyone except my DM that Spiderman 3 was a good movie. No one will budge on their opinion, so why not just leave it at that.

Politics, Politics, too confusing...

Well, the political season is (still) in full swing, and I just started reading God's Politics so, well, you'll probably be reading all that I see wrong with the world and politics and fait a lot here.

I'm only about 10 pages into the book and I think I've highlighted 2 pages worth of goodies. One of the biggest statements Wallis so far (among many) is we MUST get over mixing nationalism with our faith. There is nothing inherently wrong with being patriotic (whatever that means anymore.) But when we start mixing our patriotism with our faith too much, then we get problems. We get the belief America is special because that's how God wants it. We ask God to "bless" America. (Read the Old Testament...are we ready for what usually happens for God's blessings to come?)

I love my country even though it frequently saddens me. But I don't think we're special because of our faith. There are many nations around the world that have Christians in them. Yet I cannot think of a single "Christian" nation out there as nations (like people) cannot begin to hold to what is required to be "Christian." But nations don't fall under the "saved by grace" part either.

Also, Bush scolding China about human rights. I agree, China needs more freedom of religion, the press, and to stop illegally imprisoning people. So do we though. So do we.

Back to Blogger

Well, yeah, so nothing happened here for months. Because it was blocked at work. Now its not. So I'm back. Huh, funny how that works. The interim (for you who are REALLY bored) is over here but I like Blogger better than LJ. Sorry, I'm just not an online community type guy.

So, yeah, I'll be musing, whining, cringing, shouting and pontificating from here again. It will be fun.

Oh, first whine. Since when is a computer wallpaper or screensaver a "prize?" I signed up for the Dr. Pepper "1 in 6 wins" contest and have put the codes in. So far I've won a 22 oz soda at Burger King, 2 screensavers and a wallpaper. Ok, the soda is a prize. But wallpaper? Screensaver? Heck, most people don't even USE screensavers anymore! What sort of lame prize is this? Its worse than winning nothing! Because instead of winning nothing, you win something you don't want and they call it a prize. Sad.

Whine out.

What a Super Bowl!

Wow. Really, what else can you say but, WOW. The Giants beat the Patriots. And not just stole the game at the last second. But beat them for pretty much the whole game no matter what the score said. What the Patriots normally did to a team that competed with them, stayed close and beat them at the end (when they weren't running away with it already) the Giants did to the Pats!

Tom Brady got pounded, just pounded by the D-Line of the Giants. And Eli and the Giants offense just worked the clock and wore down the Pats defense. And I'll just say it now. Where were the Pats linebacking core? You know, that vaunted group of experienced veterans? They got OLD fast! The Giants moved the ball well. They just were the better team on Sunday. It was impressive.

Switching gears, I hope the Bears management and coaches saw what ALL Bears fans saw. What the Bears need was on the field in the form of the Giants. The Giants play, offensively especially, but defensively a bit too, what the Bears keep saying they want to do. But here's the difference, the Giants have the talent to do it.

Eli is a much better QB than the Bears have. Now, you don't have to have a HOF QB, but if you don't, you need HOF recievers and line, which the Bears don't have. The Giants actually have running backs. They have the big bruiser and the more finesse guy. The Bears have...well, they are paying people to fill that position. I'll leave it at that. They O-Line did a good job of protecting Eli. The Bears O-Line was a sieve. The Giants wide recievers made great catches and fought through coverage. The Bears also pay people to play wide reciever. Occasionally they get open and occasionally they make great catches. Occasionally. But Muhsin Muhammad says he's a bargain at the money he's making. Sure you are Moose. Keep saying that. Free agency is going to show you differently.

Defensively the Giants front 4 DOMINATED the O-line of the Pats. I mean just pushed them all over the place. The Bears, well, Tommy Harris is great if he's 100% (hopefully he will be this year!) and Adewale Ogunleye is darn good. Mark Anderson is a great pass-rusher. But he's undersized and got punished lots because Lovie tried to use him as a starting DE. Not smart! Our secondary is a disaster, I can't even start, and we're going to lose Lance Briggs at LB. Maybe Urlacher can rest his back enough over the summer to be healthy next year. So, yeah, our defense doesn't even compare.

And the Bears think they are "Almost there" as they keep saying. I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Maybe both.