I was at last week's Lions win over the Redskins. That game was a first on many fronts: the Lions finally beat the Redskins. Their last win against Washington was during the Pleistocene. It was the first NFL game I ever attended, and they finally(!) broke their losing streak.
I don't expect the Lions to roll over the Bears. I just want to see a game where if Chicago makes a mistake; Detroit can take advantage of it, and/or stays competitive. For a growing team that is constantly "rebuilding", I don't expect miracles, I just want a competitve game.
The Lions' 2nd half performances have been worse than spotty. They held up and prevailed against Washington, but they got a ways to go against the many great NFL teams to be contending in any way.
If they win, that is a plus.
An Aside: Since this was the first NFL game I ever attended, and having 20+ years of NFL television programming to undo; I did not take my eyes off the field after each play. Instead, I was expecting any replay to just materialize in front of me (like on TV), it took about 20 minutes to get used to looking to the giant TV screens at either end-zone to watch the replays.Comment Posted By P. Aaron On 4.10.2009 @ 13:01
What I think many on the left fail to recognize is that Obama put himself on the line here. Sure, he brought some fellow Chicagoans along to sell the idea but, he decided, that he would make the pitch on behalf of Chicago and America HIMSELF. It's not something a US President typically does.
Observe how this appears to that very same world Obama indulged in lots of public apologizing of America to.
It's like saying my GM car sucks! Then exclaiming excitedly minutes later: "I want a new Camaro!"
Obama went for it, and failed. Whether Obama thought his power of personality would win the bid or not, Obama chose to put HIMSELF out there.
It's his failure.
I had no problem with the left being critical of Bush regarding policy. But the; "miserable failure", "war is lost" devolving into "where's Lee Harvey Oslwald when we need him" remarks were just a few of the comments that went well beyond policy disagreements. With hardly a critical comment from those posting here now.
Obama, and the Democrat party have a thin skin when it comes to being criticized about even their policies.
Hey, you guys won the necessary elections; stand up & take it, provide better ideas or just quit yer whinin' already.Comment Posted By P. Aaron On 4.10.2009 @ 13:47
P.S. Hello Rick! Your contact form doesn't seem to want to boot a comment box or a place to enter text to type you a message.Comment Posted By P. Aaron On 24.09.2009 @ 14:42
Charles Johnson at LGF goes out of his way to trash Beck and lately, Limbaugh amongst others on the right. Johnson's posts remind me of Dr. Strangeleove's General Jack D. Ripper and his obsession with O.P.E. Our Purity of Essence.
Political arguments are often messy. It is rare that absolute eloquence of stance, words and deed sway many voters. They elevate the conversation, but don't always give rise to TV ratings, or change many minds. Just look at any legislation; it hardly ever resembles a kinship with liberty. even when it is often titled that way. In practice, most legislation affects liberty negatively.
America likes its info fast. Glenn Beck provides little if any of it. But folks watch him because he is a slightly more logical reactionary than the MSNBC types that flail away out there. The MSM had all types of Beck's before Glenn Beck came along. Once in a while, they'd snag a corrupt or scheming official. Since the press resembles a state-run advocacy organization these days, Beck's novelty is all the more glaring.
The arguments regarding liberty are necessary, their result is rarley ever as pure as the idea. But the very freedoms we worry about need to be protected, even if it results in a few more Glenn Becks, or God Forbid; Rachel Maddows. A cursory glance at the agenda over at the FCC these is enough to scare anybody into wishing there were more Glenn Beck's out there exposing the tyranny going on in the cabinet level posts of this country.Comment Posted By P. Aaron On 24.09.2009 @ 14:05
Rick, you are a thoughtful person. I do not however, think the current president is as thoughtful about any issue(s) as you are.
Obama is merely cursoring the list of liberal-sophomoric bromides that are coming off of the teleprompter.Comment Posted By P. Aaron On 6.04.2009 @ 19:56
We have this double standard thing going:
Conservatives, regardless of their outrage at any issue or defamation of their character must...at all times(?) act or react with calm and provide a thoughtful answer (that usually gets shouted over or edited out from most broadcasts)or else the unflattering footage may be televised as the definition of a conservative? Thus, dragging the whole party down into an irreparable abyss. Yeah, right. That's blackmail!
The lefties ned to feel pain for the harm they cause. Words seem to be largely ineffective against them when they can edit it all out. When confronted by a bully...you should push, or hit back-HARDTrying to make one's case in their arena is akin to crying to the teacher about the bully.
Meanwhile the Huff-Po, Kos Kids, the G-20 protesters, the Bill Ayers', the Reverend Wrights, the Al Sharptons, the Harry Reid's, the Bill Maher's, the Nancy Pelosi's, the Obama's...the REAL representatives of liberal thought can hang out and continue to be as destructive as always because they have many of the broadcast outlets tied up?
This is war! We will not start winning until the left backs off. Being PC in their world is a losing proposition. Being thoughtful in their illogical world ain't workin' out so hot either.Comment Posted By P. Aaron On 6.04.2009 @ 20:22
I like '24' but there's nothing about the show that disturbs me nearly as much as the real life Obama Adminstration daily antics.Comment Posted By P. Aaron On 4.03.2009 @ 15:12
Nature abhors a vacumm and the Republican leadership has provided one. Until they fill it to the satisfaction of their supporters and voters alike, fill it with leaders who can articulate conservative positions and effectively define the opposition, we will always appreciate a glib and pointed response to our critics.
Be mad at the GOP, they're the one's who need to change their tactics, they're the one's with whom you are stuck with. You can tune Rush out...if you chose to.Comment Posted By P. Aaron On 4.03.2009 @ 15:18
Prominent business people who screw up get their names & reputations tarnished in public. Congress-people who screw up and cost the taxpayers pensions, real estate equity, increased taxes, and sleepless nights figuring out how to pay fo it all get re-elected to regulate more.Comment Posted By P. Aaron On 27.02.2009 @ 13:28
Rick, you are helping Obama's work to marginalize Rush, Hannity and Coulter by saying they represent "the wrong way" to send the conservative message.
Sadly right now, there are no others effectively sending a constructive & instructive conservative message on any public level. Most 'other' ostensible conservative voices these days are; "willing to work with the President"; or they just want their proposals to receive and 'up or down' vote on the floor.
Liberals won power largely through mischaracterizing the opposition along with a lot of media help parroting their message. Nothing new there. Republicans didn't preserve & adhere to the conservative base priciples that got them to the mountaintop in '94. They could not defend their positions publicly because they failed to defend them in practice. The principles aren't the problem. It's the lack of adherence & articulation by those that want to serve in congress, etc.
Thus into the vaccumm the successful adherents of those principles flowed: Rush, Hannity, Coulter, etc.
Republicans are failing to articulate that the individual should rule themselves first, and vote wisely...electing representatives that will work to protect the individual's interests. That's a difficult idea to sell when the other party is selling: free healthcare, free gas, "what ever's troubling you, don't worry about it" and an affordable mortgage, on someone else's dime. The dificult reality is: we only develope real self-esteem through 'personal-best' accomplishments. Oh yeah, and life's not fair.
The percieved "arrogance" of Rush, Hannity, etc. stems from an accurate premise: being a democrat today: a modern liberal, IS a gutless, cinchy and lazy choice. Being a conservative and practicing conservatism is an ongoing task.
Why is American Idol so popular to no-talent performers? They're trying to fast-track their success instead of earning it by breaking their balls on the road. Like Rush, Hannity and Coulter have done! These AI marginally talented wanna-be's beg or righteously DEMAND to be 'voted through'. Yet they're willing to royalty their future to the Devil: Simon. The man who represents the 'bad-guy' meanie conservative type that doesn't buy into their pleas for a charitable vote because: "they need this so bad! Thus he is always disliked because his message is deemed 'insensitive' to these poor "struggling" performers. Those marginal contestants prove the 'evil' Simon correct by being booted sooner rather than later. So much for 'charity'.Comment Posted By P. Aaron On 26.02.2009 @ 16:12