This is absolutely amazing. John Kerry believes that it is better for US troops to die for a mission that has international support, regardless of its connection to US interest, than to protect the US from terrorism. What other spin can you put on this:
Kerry's belief in working with allies runs so deep that he has maintained that the loss of American life can be better justified if it occurs in the course of a mission with international support. In 1994, discussing the possibility of U.S. troops being killed in Bosnia, he said, "If you mean dying in the course of the United Nations effort, yes, it is worth that. If you mean dying American troops unilaterally going in with some false presumption that we can affect the outcome, the answer is unequivocally no."
There is no question that Clinton did the right thing in ultimately lifting the arms embargo to Bosnia in the early 90s. But saying that the US should spend the blood of its sons and daughters on a UN mission, under the UN's command (which has been proven to have been a colossal failure in Bosnia and now in Kosovo -- Bosnia only improved after NATO started bombing the sh-t out of the Serbs) is just plain senseless. That Kerry could fetishize the UN to the point that he can justify sending American soldiers to their deaths for an undefined UN mission but cannot pull the trigger in favor of the US defending itself (pre-emptively or not) from terrorist states is startling. This just further proves Kerry is not qualified to be commander-in-chief.
HT: Beldar.
UPDATE: And if John Kerry listens to himself, or anyone else, check out how Kerry, Edwards, the press and the Republicans all damn Kerry's ability to be president in this quote compilation.
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
The giant sucking sound near the Harlem River
In the top of the second inning in game 5, I emailed Wongdoer and said that the RedSux would win in 7. Pedro was ok, the Yanks' hitters looked off, and the Ratden was electric -- just the way it had not been from innings 6-8 in game 4. The Yanks were THREE OUTS AWAY in game 4 and they've honked their way into a do or die situation with a shell of a starter toeing the rubber tonight, regardless of whether that's Brown (90% likely) or Vazquez. Some comments, and some history:
(1) Last year game 4 was postponed for a day for rain. Thus, instead of being four days after game 1 as scheduled, game 4 was five days later. When that happened, Torre switched Mooooooooooooose (the Yanks' game 1 starter) and Wells to have Mooooooooooooose pitch game 4, now on four days' rest, in an attempt to put a stranglehold on the '03 ALCS with the Yanks up 2-1. It didn't work because Wakefield was great, Mooooooooooooooose merely good. But the kill 'em now thought process is what's missing this year. Three days later, Mooooooooooooooooose had two days' rest and enough gas to pitch three strong innings and bail Clemens a-s out of trouble in game 7. Mooooooooooooooose's performance, and Giambi's two dingers, were the two most important factors in putting the Yanks in a position to mount a comeback in the 8th.
This year, with an opportunity to kill the Sawx in four and to pitch Moooooooooooooooooooose on regular four days' rest after rain had pushed games 3-5 back a day, Torre opted to have Moooooooooooooose pitch game 5 on five days' rest. Three problems: (a) a shaky El Duque, who did little to win game 4; (b) Torre pulled Mooooooooooooose too early in game 5 despite the extra rest and the bullpen honked; (c) now we have another all-hands-on-deck game 7 and Mooooooooose had only one day to recuperate if he is needed . . .
(2) The Yankee hitters have no clue anymore. How else to explain Matsui's first-pitch pop with 1st and 2nd, none out in the 4th? How does Tony Clark take that FAT 88 mph right-down-the-pipe 2-0 pitch from Foulke in the bottom of the ninth? That pitch had three-run bomb (and Tony F---ing Clark to Bawstin fans) written all over it.
(3) That 3-0 series lead was the worst thing to happen to the Yanks in this series. They became complacent while Francona (who has done a GREAT job in games 4-6) instilled the pulloutallstops ethic in his team.
(4) I cannot understand how Foulke baffles Yankees hitters so much when he had only a decent season in general. Foulke is not a hard thrower -- 91-92 tops. The Yanks can't hit him but other, lesser, teams certainly can and did.
(5) Give Schilling tremendous credit. He did not have his "A" game and still kept the Yanks quiet for 7. Unlike the RedSawx who worked counts against Lieber, the Yanks' hitters failed to work Schilling hard at all just as they failed to do so against Josh Beckett last year in Game 6. Lieber pitched well again and only got bit on the butt with that cheap 325' homer by Bellhorn; then again, the Yanks have lived off those in the past (see: game 3, 1999 WS).
(6) APB for: Sheffield, Matsui. They've done squat in the last 2+ games. An Arod re-emergence would also be nice.
(7) Imagine how bad this series would be for the Yanks if Damon were hitting and Manny had RBI.
(1) Last year game 4 was postponed for a day for rain. Thus, instead of being four days after game 1 as scheduled, game 4 was five days later. When that happened, Torre switched Mooooooooooooose (the Yanks' game 1 starter) and Wells to have Mooooooooooooose pitch game 4, now on four days' rest, in an attempt to put a stranglehold on the '03 ALCS with the Yanks up 2-1. It didn't work because Wakefield was great, Mooooooooooooooose merely good. But the kill 'em now thought process is what's missing this year. Three days later, Mooooooooooooooooose had two days' rest and enough gas to pitch three strong innings and bail Clemens a-s out of trouble in game 7. Mooooooooooooooose's performance, and Giambi's two dingers, were the two most important factors in putting the Yanks in a position to mount a comeback in the 8th.
This year, with an opportunity to kill the Sawx in four and to pitch Moooooooooooooooooooose on regular four days' rest after rain had pushed games 3-5 back a day, Torre opted to have Moooooooooooooose pitch game 5 on five days' rest. Three problems: (a) a shaky El Duque, who did little to win game 4; (b) Torre pulled Mooooooooooooose too early in game 5 despite the extra rest and the bullpen honked; (c) now we have another all-hands-on-deck game 7 and Mooooooooose had only one day to recuperate if he is needed . . .
(2) The Yankee hitters have no clue anymore. How else to explain Matsui's first-pitch pop with 1st and 2nd, none out in the 4th? How does Tony Clark take that FAT 88 mph right-down-the-pipe 2-0 pitch from Foulke in the bottom of the ninth? That pitch had three-run bomb (and Tony F---ing Clark to Bawstin fans) written all over it.
(3) That 3-0 series lead was the worst thing to happen to the Yanks in this series. They became complacent while Francona (who has done a GREAT job in games 4-6) instilled the pulloutallstops ethic in his team.
(4) I cannot understand how Foulke baffles Yankees hitters so much when he had only a decent season in general. Foulke is not a hard thrower -- 91-92 tops. The Yanks can't hit him but other, lesser, teams certainly can and did.
(5) Give Schilling tremendous credit. He did not have his "A" game and still kept the Yanks quiet for 7. Unlike the RedSawx who worked counts against Lieber, the Yanks' hitters failed to work Schilling hard at all just as they failed to do so against Josh Beckett last year in Game 6. Lieber pitched well again and only got bit on the butt with that cheap 325' homer by Bellhorn; then again, the Yanks have lived off those in the past (see: game 3, 1999 WS).
(6) APB for: Sheffield, Matsui. They've done squat in the last 2+ games. An Arod re-emergence would also be nice.
(7) Imagine how bad this series would be for the Yanks if Damon were hitting and Manny had RBI.
The situation is parlous and the hour is late...
for the Yankees and their fans.
Two awful blown saves by the bullpen and the mighty bats have gone to sleep for three nights. Boston has all the momentum and are really in a no-lose situation. The Monk sounds prophetic now. Tonight we find out whether the Yanks are real professionals or the worse chokers in baseball history.
As for Game 6:
1. I guess Olerud must be dead or injured worse than Schilling. Tony Clark is a class act and a good defender but his bat is a black hole. (excepting the ground rule double in the 9th in Game 5). Torre showed his faith by letting him hit in the 9th but honestly he should have been pulled for Kenny Lofton or Bubba Crosby. Enrique Wilson could have played first.
2. A-Rod should have just run the charging Arroyo down. It really wasn't a bad play- it ultimately cost a base. A-rod should have been much more aggressive in that at-bat
3. Aside from that third of an inning Lieber pitched about as well as you could expect.
Expect more pithy analysis from the Monk
Two awful blown saves by the bullpen and the mighty bats have gone to sleep for three nights. Boston has all the momentum and are really in a no-lose situation. The Monk sounds prophetic now. Tonight we find out whether the Yanks are real professionals or the worse chokers in baseball history.
As for Game 6:
1. I guess Olerud must be dead or injured worse than Schilling. Tony Clark is a class act and a good defender but his bat is a black hole. (excepting the ground rule double in the 9th in Game 5). Torre showed his faith by letting him hit in the 9th but honestly he should have been pulled for Kenny Lofton or Bubba Crosby. Enrique Wilson could have played first.
2. A-Rod should have just run the charging Arroyo down. It really wasn't a bad play- it ultimately cost a base. A-rod should have been much more aggressive in that at-bat
3. Aside from that third of an inning Lieber pitched about as well as you could expect.
Expect more pithy analysis from the Monk
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
Lost his MoJoe
This is my conclusion about Torre in the past two seasons' playoffs -- he's lost his way. Why? Check out the failed moves in last night's game, add to that the Jeff Weaver fiasco from Game 4 of the WS and Torre's made enough bad moves in recent playoff series to make Phil Garner and Tony LaRussa feel comfortable if the Yankees get to the Series.
Failure #1 = Top 5th. ARod walks against the infamouslybadatholdingrunners Pedro. Arod does not steal. Sheffield hits into DP; Yanks still trail 2-1.
Failure #2 = Bottom 7th -- Yanking Moooooooooooooooosina. The Mooooooooooose had thrown only 105 pitches when he was pulled after allowing Bellhorn's leadoff double. Yanks led 4-2 and were nine outs away from the Series with Damon and an iffy Cabrera next, and fatboy1 after that. That means: LEAVE IN THE MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSE. Torre's mistakes here are twofold: (1) he yanks Moose when the 'pen is more tired than Moose because FlashMo both threw 2+ innings the night before; (2) Torre brings in Sturtze, which means he will HAVE to bring in another pitcher to face fatboy1 because Manny has 8 HR off Sturtze, and an average over .350, in less than 40 AB. Sure 'nuff, Gordon has to finish off fatboy1.
Failure #3 = Bottom 8th -- again two failures. If Mo CAN go two innings here, he should. Two-run lead, get us home. If not, then leave Gordon in AFTER he had f----d up the inning by allowing a solo homer (4-3), walk and single (first-and-third, none out). Why? Bringing Rivera in at that point is an easy blown save for Mo -- further piercing the veil of invincibility Mo had prior to this postseason (he's 2/5 in saves this postseason and two of the blows were inheriting snafus by Gordon) and just gives the Sawx more confidence.
Failure #4 = Top 13th -- not running for Sheffield. Did Torre learn NOTHING from the bottom of the 8th in game 5 and the bottom of the ninth in game 4 about how a speedy basestealer can f--- with pitchers' heads? Run Lofton for Sheffield with Wakefield on the hill and Varitek catching. Varitek is not Wake's regular valet, as his 3! passed balls this inning attested. If Lofton steals second, the latter two PBs get him home.
Torre had the golden touch from 1996-2001 and never made this many foulups in one POSTSEASON. His first big one was game 2 of the '02 ALDS where he left El Duque in two batters too long instead of bringing in Rivera for the 2-inning save. The Yanks lost game 2 and went out in 4; since then, Torre's touch has been bronze, at best. That must change if the Yanks hope to get to the Series.
Failure #1 = Top 5th. ARod walks against the infamouslybadatholdingrunners Pedro. Arod does not steal. Sheffield hits into DP; Yanks still trail 2-1.
Failure #2 = Bottom 7th -- Yanking Moooooooooooooooosina. The Mooooooooooose had thrown only 105 pitches when he was pulled after allowing Bellhorn's leadoff double. Yanks led 4-2 and were nine outs away from the Series with Damon and an iffy Cabrera next, and fatboy1 after that. That means: LEAVE IN THE MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSE. Torre's mistakes here are twofold: (1) he yanks Moose when the 'pen is more tired than Moose because FlashMo both threw 2+ innings the night before; (2) Torre brings in Sturtze, which means he will HAVE to bring in another pitcher to face fatboy1 because Manny has 8 HR off Sturtze, and an average over .350, in less than 40 AB. Sure 'nuff, Gordon has to finish off fatboy1.
Failure #3 = Bottom 8th -- again two failures. If Mo CAN go two innings here, he should. Two-run lead, get us home. If not, then leave Gordon in AFTER he had f----d up the inning by allowing a solo homer (4-3), walk and single (first-and-third, none out). Why? Bringing Rivera in at that point is an easy blown save for Mo -- further piercing the veil of invincibility Mo had prior to this postseason (he's 2/5 in saves this postseason and two of the blows were inheriting snafus by Gordon) and just gives the Sawx more confidence.
Failure #4 = Top 13th -- not running for Sheffield. Did Torre learn NOTHING from the bottom of the 8th in game 5 and the bottom of the ninth in game 4 about how a speedy basestealer can f--- with pitchers' heads? Run Lofton for Sheffield with Wakefield on the hill and Varitek catching. Varitek is not Wake's regular valet, as his 3! passed balls this inning attested. If Lofton steals second, the latter two PBs get him home.
Torre had the golden touch from 1996-2001 and never made this many foulups in one POSTSEASON. His first big one was game 2 of the '02 ALDS where he left El Duque in two batters too long instead of bringing in Rivera for the 2-inning save. The Yanks lost game 2 and went out in 4; since then, Torre's touch has been bronze, at best. That must change if the Yanks hope to get to the Series.
Equal and opposite reaction
Thankfully, there are people who are anti-George Soros and anti-Turayzuh Heinz Kerry. Two such folks are Alex Spanos (who owns the San Diego Chargers and made his fortune in real estate development) and Dawn Arnall, the wife of the chairman of Ameriquest Mortgage Co.
They are two of the financial backers of the Progress for America Voter Fund, which is mobilizing a huge advertising buy in the swing states centered around George Bush the compassionate man and father who impulsively embraced Ashley Faulkner at a rally in Lebanon, Ohio earlier this year. Wendy Faulkner, Ashley's mom, was killed in the 9-11-01 attack. The link above will send you to the website to see the ad.
Here is a picture of the embrace:
They are two of the financial backers of the Progress for America Voter Fund, which is mobilizing a huge advertising buy in the swing states centered around George Bush the compassionate man and father who impulsively embraced Ashley Faulkner at a rally in Lebanon, Ohio earlier this year. Wendy Faulkner, Ashley's mom, was killed in the 9-11-01 attack. The link above will send you to the website to see the ad.
Here is a picture of the embrace:
Voter Registration disgrace
The Democrats and their fellow travelers plumb new lows every day. According to the Drudge Report:
Chad Staton by hired by:
- Georgianne Pitts, 41, who admitted she paid Staton with crack cocaine, was recruited by:
- Thaddeus J Jackson II, of Cleveland, to obtain voter registrations.
A business card provided by Pitts identifies Thaddeus Jackson as the Assistant NVF Ohio Director of the NAACP Voter Fund.
Thaddeus Jackson has a long history of voter registration shenanigans. Read the Cleveland Plain Dealer's piece here.
The Defiance County Sheriff's Office arrested Chad Staton, age 22, of Stratton Ave., Defiance, on a charge of False Registration, in Violation of Section 3599.11 of the Ohio Revised Code, a felony of the fifth degree.
The Sheriff's Office alleges that Staton filled out over 100 voter registration forms that were fictitious. Staton was to be paid for each registration form that he could get citizens to fill out. However, Staton himself filled out the registrations and returned them to the woman who hired him from Toledo, Ohio. Deputies allege that Staton was paid crack cocaine for the falsified registrations.
Chad Staton by hired by:
- Georgianne Pitts, 41, who admitted she paid Staton with crack cocaine, was recruited by:
- Thaddeus J Jackson II, of Cleveland, to obtain voter registrations.
A business card provided by Pitts identifies Thaddeus Jackson as the Assistant NVF Ohio Director of the NAACP Voter Fund.
Thaddeus Jackson has a long history of voter registration shenanigans. Read the Cleveland Plain Dealer's piece here.
Auld Reekie and modernity
Interesting essay on Edinburgh's contribution to modern society. The subtitle of David Denby's article is "How modern life emerged from eighteenth-century Edinburgh." The Monk was in Auld Reekie five weeks ago and liked it immensely. His only regret = not bringing home more juice of the (malted) barley.
The Guardian v. America
Mark Steyn weighs in on The Guardian's attempts to influence the Presidential election, which I wrote about here.
The crux of his opinion? Here it is:
This is excellent news for the President, who in recent days had been looking a little wobbly in Ohio. But there's nothing like a barrage of mail from condescending Guardian readers to send the locals stampeding into the Bush camp. If the editor of the Guardian's up for it, fifty quid says Bush will win a higher proportion of the vote in Clark County on November 2 than he did last time.
The crux of his opinion? Here it is:
This is excellent news for the President, who in recent days had been looking a little wobbly in Ohio. But there's nothing like a barrage of mail from condescending Guardian readers to send the locals stampeding into the Bush camp. If the editor of the Guardian's up for it, fifty quid says Bush will win a higher proportion of the vote in Clark County on November 2 than he did last time.
Kerry gets a new one ripped
In today's NY Times Opinion section, Gen. Tommy Franks dispells the Tora Bora outsourcing myth that Kerry is perpetuating on the stump.
Two key points from the general:
Contrary to Senator Kerry, President Bush never "took his eye off the ball" when it came to Osama bin Laden. The war on terrorism has a global focus. It cannot be divided into separate and unrelated wars, one in Afghanistan and another in Iraq.
* * *
Today we are asking our servicemen and women to do more, in more places, than we have in decades. They deserve honest, consistent, no-spin leadership that respects them, their families and their sacrifices. The war against terrorism is the right war at the right time for the right reasons. And Iraq is one of the places that war must be fought and won. George W. Bush has his eye on that ball and Senator John Kerry does not.
Nice.
Two key points from the general:
Contrary to Senator Kerry, President Bush never "took his eye off the ball" when it came to Osama bin Laden. The war on terrorism has a global focus. It cannot be divided into separate and unrelated wars, one in Afghanistan and another in Iraq.
* * *
Today we are asking our servicemen and women to do more, in more places, than we have in decades. They deserve honest, consistent, no-spin leadership that respects them, their families and their sacrifices. The war against terrorism is the right war at the right time for the right reasons. And Iraq is one of the places that war must be fought and won. George W. Bush has his eye on that ball and Senator John Kerry does not.
Nice.
Arafat for Kerry
From WorldNet Daily:
If you support Israel and vote for John Kerry, you are voting with Yasser Arafat.
HT: LGF
Arafat deputy and chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat told WND in an exclusive interview that while “we do not involve ourselves in internal American politics,” at the same time “our region has been sliding deeper and deeper into chaos because of certain policies over the past few years, and this needs to change.”
While he would not directly endorse Kerry, it was clear Erekat was implying the PA wants a change in White House leadership: “If things continue the way they are, if certain policies toward our region are maintained in the years to come, there is going to be a lot of violence on both sides.”
A prominent Arafat aide who asked that his name be withheld spoke to WorldNetDaily from Arafat’s battered Ramallah compound.
“The president [Arafat] is frustrated with Bush’s policies,” he said. “The president [Arafat] thinks Kerry will be much better for the Palestinian cause and for the establishment of a Palestinian state.”
If you support Israel and vote for John Kerry, you are voting with Yasser Arafat.
HT: LGF
Monday, October 18, 2004
Mahathir & Nabil Sha'ath for Kerry
The Monk and I have been beating this drum for months because folks just don't bloody get it.
Aside from the murdering terrorists who are actively campaigning for a Kerry win (see TKM's Osama for Kerry post), there are loads of unsavory folks who are exhorting for a Kerry presidency.
Former Prime Minister of Malaysia Mahathir Mohamed who is legendary for his anti-Semitic and anti-American rants and 'mainstream' Palestinian politician Nabil Sha'ath express their preference for Kerry here.
HT: LGF
Aside from the murdering terrorists who are actively campaigning for a Kerry win (see TKM's Osama for Kerry post), there are loads of unsavory folks who are exhorting for a Kerry presidency.
Former Prime Minister of Malaysia Mahathir Mohamed who is legendary for his anti-Semitic and anti-American rants and 'mainstream' Palestinian politician Nabil Sha'ath express their preference for Kerry here.
HT: LGF
The coming disaster?
If and when the history of TheGreatestComebackInTeamSportsTM is written about the 2004 RedSux, it will begin and end with the fact that Mariano Rivera had the ball with three outs to go to a Yankees sweep and failed to hold a lead nine pitches later. Of Mo's four blown saves in the playoffs, this is far and away the worst because there is no mitigation: he walked Millar on five pitches and gave up a hit to Mueller on pitch #4 that tied the score.
In '97 Sandy Alomar made an adjustment, got a flyball in the wind heading out and it turned into a homer off Mo to turn the series.
In '01, Mo walked the first batter in the 9th on four pitches, fielded a crappy bunt, threw to Jeter to start a DP. Jeter stretched from the wrong foot, missed the ball and the otherwise easy DP and the Yanks honked another fielding play before losing.
In game 2 of the ALDS, Mo came on to clean up a pre-existing mess.
But in game 4 of the ALCS, he did the unforgiveable -- allowed a rally to start and end on his watch with a lead-off walk.
I don't want to hear about this series anymore on Thursday. I don't even want to hear about it on Wednesday. But I feel ill about the Yanks' prospects because they HAD THIS THING WON, and gave it back.
In '97 Sandy Alomar made an adjustment, got a flyball in the wind heading out and it turned into a homer off Mo to turn the series.
In '01, Mo walked the first batter in the 9th on four pitches, fielded a crappy bunt, threw to Jeter to start a DP. Jeter stretched from the wrong foot, missed the ball and the otherwise easy DP and the Yanks honked another fielding play before losing.
In game 2 of the ALDS, Mo came on to clean up a pre-existing mess.
But in game 4 of the ALCS, he did the unforgiveable -- allowed a rally to start and end on his watch with a lead-off walk.
I don't want to hear about this series anymore on Thursday. I don't even want to hear about it on Wednesday. But I feel ill about the Yanks' prospects because they HAD THIS THING WON, and gave it back.
Dog Bites Man in US
The NY Times, which has been shilling for Kerry and against Bush for months, came out with its highly-influential-to-Upper-West-Side-Manhattanites endorsement yesterday and, SHOCK, endorsed the haughty French-lookin' Longface from the People's Republic of Taxachusetts.
In actual news, The Chicago Tribune endorsed Bush.
In actual news, The Chicago Tribune endorsed Bush.
The Low Blow
William Safire exposes the Kerry campaign strategy to bring Mary Cheney into the spotlight and how it backfired.
These people are disgraceful -- dragging a candidate's daughter into the national spotlight for partisan purposes, lying about the reinstitution of the draft, lying about social security plans, lying, lying, lying. This country cannot afford four years of Kerry as president. The man is a disgrace and so is his party.
These people are disgraceful -- dragging a candidate's daughter into the national spotlight for partisan purposes, lying about the reinstitution of the draft, lying about social security plans, lying, lying, lying. This country cannot afford four years of Kerry as president. The man is a disgrace and so is his party.
Kabul today
Courtesy INDC Journal, a sign that the efforts of our President and our servicemen and -women are well-appreciated from a theater in a California town where the nation's largest Afghanistani ex-patriate community lives:
For more good news from Afghanistan, read Arthur Chrenkoff's article on Opinion Journal.
For more good news from Afghanistan, read Arthur Chrenkoff's article on Opinion Journal.
Dog bites man in Spain
The WaPo notes that Spanish investigators have concluded that the Islamists intended to influence Spain's elections in March with the timing of their bombing of the Spanish trains that killed over 300 people. Of course, the Spanish Socialists deny any connection between the attacks, the Socialists' demagoguing of those attacks to play upon the fears of the Spaniards before the election, and their electoral victory:
The current Socialist government has insisted the attacks were not intended to change the outcome of the election and has accused opponents of using such inferences to question its victory. "There is no evidence to indicate the intention of the terrorists was really to change the Spanish government," said a Socialist Party spokesman, who spoke only on condition of anonymity.
If that's true, then there is no evidence to indicate that the intention of the WTC attackers had anything to do with hating America. Some statements are so moronic that they almost HAVE to be made anonymously just to protect the speaker from ridicule.
HT, the Cap'n.
The current Socialist government has insisted the attacks were not intended to change the outcome of the election and has accused opponents of using such inferences to question its victory. "There is no evidence to indicate the intention of the terrorists was really to change the Spanish government," said a Socialist Party spokesman, who spoke only on condition of anonymity.
If that's true, then there is no evidence to indicate that the intention of the WTC attackers had anything to do with hating America. Some statements are so moronic that they almost HAVE to be made anonymously just to protect the speaker from ridicule.
HT, the Cap'n.
Sunday, October 17, 2004
Kerry = Clueless
For some unknown and ineffable reason, American Jews vote 4-1 in favor of Democratic presidential candidates. This is ridiculous on so many levels it boggles the mind. Most importantly, because American Jews feel a strong attachment to and kinship with Israel, it is preposterous that they would choose to vote for men who do their best to weaken Israel both in the eyes of the world and in comparison with its neighbors: Carter, Clinton, Gore.
It is clear that Bush is one of the better friends Israel has had in the US executive office. Indeed, only Reagan and Nixon were stronger allies. Nonetheless, US Jews will vote 75% for Kerry even though the weak, unprincipled, unthinking, and morally equivocating Senator is no friend to the Jewish state. Martin Peretz, publisher of The New Republic, explains (click link above) why Kerry will be bad for Israel.
It is clear that Bush is one of the better friends Israel has had in the US executive office. Indeed, only Reagan and Nixon were stronger allies. Nonetheless, US Jews will vote 75% for Kerry even though the weak, unprincipled, unthinking, and morally equivocating Senator is no friend to the Jewish state. Martin Peretz, publisher of The New Republic, explains (click link above) why Kerry will be bad for Israel.
And one to go
What can you say after this display: 19 runs, 22 hits, 4 HR, and the 2-5 hitters in the lineup went 16-22, 15 RBI, 14 runs?
Wow.
Some more thoughts from game 3 of the ALCS:
(1) Johnny Damon is not a Gold Glove caliber centerfielder; ditto Trawt Nixon and fatboy1.
(2) I still don't understand why Javy Vazquez can go lights-out for 2-3 innings and stink to high heaven for the next one.
(3) That Varitek is having a nice series. Good thing for the Yanks that he's going wild in games the RedSawx lose.
(4) Quantrill looked better tonight than he has in about 4 months.
(5) Matsui is a quick study. Not only has he figured out the two-seam fastball (an unknown pitch in Japan) to reduce his double plays from 25 (2003) to 11 (2004, so much for that "Groundzilla" crap), but he's learned the Wall well enough to make a pair of nice plays that held Blosox to long singles.
(6) Wakefield is not nearly as lights-out against the Yanks in 2004 as he was in 2003. I may regret saying that if the Bosawx start a miracle comeback, but right now, he's been shaky in this series.
(7) Derek Jeter has two hits in the Series and the Yanks have scored 32 runs.
(8) ESPN's RedSux boosterism is ridiculous: the headline on their baseball page said "'Evil' Thrashing." Enough with the Evil Empire BS. The Yanks keep about 4-5 teams afloat thanks to revenue sharing and the socialist distribution of MLB sportswear revenue so stop crying.
The Yanks need to wrap this up.
Wow.
Some more thoughts from game 3 of the ALCS:
(1) Johnny Damon is not a Gold Glove caliber centerfielder; ditto Trawt Nixon and fatboy1.
(2) I still don't understand why Javy Vazquez can go lights-out for 2-3 innings and stink to high heaven for the next one.
(3) That Varitek is having a nice series. Good thing for the Yanks that he's going wild in games the RedSawx lose.
(4) Quantrill looked better tonight than he has in about 4 months.
(5) Matsui is a quick study. Not only has he figured out the two-seam fastball (an unknown pitch in Japan) to reduce his double plays from 25 (2003) to 11 (2004, so much for that "Groundzilla" crap), but he's learned the Wall well enough to make a pair of nice plays that held Blosox to long singles.
(6) Wakefield is not nearly as lights-out against the Yanks in 2004 as he was in 2003. I may regret saying that if the Bosawx start a miracle comeback, but right now, he's been shaky in this series.
(7) Derek Jeter has two hits in the Series and the Yanks have scored 32 runs.
(8) ESPN's RedSux boosterism is ridiculous: the headline on their baseball page said "'Evil' Thrashing." Enough with the Evil Empire BS. The Yanks keep about 4-5 teams afloat thanks to revenue sharing and the socialist distribution of MLB sportswear revenue so stop crying.
The Yanks need to wrap this up.
Saturday, October 16, 2004
Useful idiot alert
Powerline shows a bunch of dopes from St. Paul, Minnesota who are apologizing to the Iraqis for the Coalition freeing Iraq from Saddam.
Friday, October 15, 2004
The Clemens moment
Tonight is Kevin Brown's Clemens moment. The same one Roger faced in 1999 and in 2003 when Rocket was tapped to start game 3 of the ALCS against the Blosox.
In 1999, the matchup was Pedro v. Rocket, Sawx down 0-2, the man who'd left the Sawx and won the next two Cy Youngs before going to their most hated rival vs. the Sawx new pitching savior and the shoo-in 1999 Cy Young Award winner. Result: Sawx 13, Yanks 1 -- an arse-whipping that Bostonians still revel in despite losing that series 4-1. Think about the nearest equivalent beating by the Yanks over the Sawx that resulted in nothing -- the 22-1 win in Ratway in 2000 when the Yanks won only two games of a four-game set. And much as I admire Clemens, I never had complete trust in him after that complete collapse (even with his awesome outings in the '99 WS, '00 ALCS, '00 WS, etc.).
In 2003, the teams were tied 1-1 in the ALCS and Rocket v. Pedro II was on in game 3 at Fenway. Rocket wobbled early and the Yanks were down 2-0 before they scratched back with a run in the second, a Jeter bomb in the third (only dinger by a righty that Pedro allowed in 2003), and Clemens settled down. Rocket settled down ('tho the benches never did -- this was the Zim-Pedro game), Mo cleaned up and the Yanks won.
In his first game back from his punch-the-wall stupidity, Brown tossed BP to the RedSax in 2/3 of an inning as the Yanks got whacked, 11-4. Last week, Brown pitched his best game in three months by holding Minnesota underwater for 6. Tonight, will be Brown's Clemens moment to see how tough Kevin is. Too bad the RedSawx aren't the Braves -- Brown seems to like facing the TomahawkChokers in the playoffs.
UPDATE: Uh, rainout tonight = Clemens moment tomorrow.
In 1999, the matchup was Pedro v. Rocket, Sawx down 0-2, the man who'd left the Sawx and won the next two Cy Youngs before going to their most hated rival vs. the Sawx new pitching savior and the shoo-in 1999 Cy Young Award winner. Result: Sawx 13, Yanks 1 -- an arse-whipping that Bostonians still revel in despite losing that series 4-1. Think about the nearest equivalent beating by the Yanks over the Sawx that resulted in nothing -- the 22-1 win in Ratway in 2000 when the Yanks won only two games of a four-game set. And much as I admire Clemens, I never had complete trust in him after that complete collapse (even with his awesome outings in the '99 WS, '00 ALCS, '00 WS, etc.).
In 2003, the teams were tied 1-1 in the ALCS and Rocket v. Pedro II was on in game 3 at Fenway. Rocket wobbled early and the Yanks were down 2-0 before they scratched back with a run in the second, a Jeter bomb in the third (only dinger by a righty that Pedro allowed in 2003), and Clemens settled down. Rocket settled down ('tho the benches never did -- this was the Zim-Pedro game), Mo cleaned up and the Yanks won.
In his first game back from his punch-the-wall stupidity, Brown tossed BP to the RedSax in 2/3 of an inning as the Yanks got whacked, 11-4. Last week, Brown pitched his best game in three months by holding Minnesota underwater for 6. Tonight, will be Brown's Clemens moment to see how tough Kevin is. Too bad the RedSawx aren't the Braves -- Brown seems to like facing the TomahawkChokers in the playoffs.
UPDATE: Uh, rainout tonight = Clemens moment tomorrow.
Lawyers ante up $97 million for Kerry
John Edwards' brethren overwhelmingly donate to Kerry. Click link for other interesting observations from George Will on the impact of the election.
hat-tip: neal boortz
hat-tip: neal boortz
Taking Edwards to task
Charles Krauthammer is a member of the board of the President's Council on Bioethics, a licensed psychiatrist (read: medical doctor, unlike psychologists) and has been partially paralyzed since a car accident (I think) in the mid-1970s. Therefore he knows whereof he speaks both as to medical issues affecting spinal cord injuries and the evils of false hope.
Today he takes John Edwards behind the woodshed (for you Northerners, that means "to task") for Edwards' lunatic preacher proclamation that if John Kerry is elected, folks like the late Christopher Reeve will be able to walk.
Krauthammer discusses the state of spinal cord repair research and the stem cell shibboleth, but also excoriates Edwards for his preposterous claims. Here are two key points:
In my 25 years in Washington, I have never seen a more loathsome display of demagoguery. Hope is good. False hope is bad. Deliberately, for personal gain, raising false hope in the catastrophically afflicted is despicable.
* * *
Politicians have long promised a chicken in every pot. It is part of the game. It is one thing to promise ethanol subsidies here, dairy price controls there. But to exploit the desperate hopes of desperate people with the promise of Christ-like cures is beyond the pale.
Indeed.
Today he takes John Edwards behind the woodshed (for you Northerners, that means "to task") for Edwards' lunatic preacher proclamation that if John Kerry is elected, folks like the late Christopher Reeve will be able to walk.
Krauthammer discusses the state of spinal cord repair research and the stem cell shibboleth, but also excoriates Edwards for his preposterous claims. Here are two key points:
In my 25 years in Washington, I have never seen a more loathsome display of demagoguery. Hope is good. False hope is bad. Deliberately, for personal gain, raising false hope in the catastrophically afflicted is despicable.
* * *
Politicians have long promised a chicken in every pot. It is part of the game. It is one thing to promise ethanol subsidies here, dairy price controls there. But to exploit the desperate hopes of desperate people with the promise of Christ-like cures is beyond the pale.
Indeed.
Lieberman for Bush?
Former Presidential candidate Joe Lieberman, in a campaign stop for Kerry in Florida strongly praises President Bush on Israel:
It beggars belief that Jewish voters, the vast majority of whom support Israel, can still vote 4-to-1 for Kerry who, at best, is an uncertain ally and, at worse, will determine that support for Israel doesn't pass the 'global test'. As we reported earlier, Ed Koch is voting for Bush. Joe Lieberman, by all accounts, is a man of strong personal integrity and loyalty- hence he stumps for the Democrats.
But on Election Day, alone in the booth with his conscience and his God, who is he going to vote for?
"We are dealing with a president who's had a record of strong, consistent support for Israel. You can't say otherwise,” Lieberman told an audience of 600 near Delray Beach, Fla, the Palm Beach Post reported in editions Thursday.
Lieberman also added that any criticism of Bush vis-Ã -vis Israel would be “unjustified.”
After the speech, the paper said Lieberman spoke to reporters and suggested that “Bush appears to have made inroads with Jewish voters, who voted Democratic by an estimated 4-to-1 margin in 2000.”
It beggars belief that Jewish voters, the vast majority of whom support Israel, can still vote 4-to-1 for Kerry who, at best, is an uncertain ally and, at worse, will determine that support for Israel doesn't pass the 'global test'. As we reported earlier, Ed Koch is voting for Bush. Joe Lieberman, by all accounts, is a man of strong personal integrity and loyalty- hence he stumps for the Democrats.
But on Election Day, alone in the booth with his conscience and his God, who is he going to vote for?
French doesn't translate to Japanese
John Kerry's claim of foreign leaders who prefer that he win the election shrinks by one (to the extent such people exist who aren't US enemies). Here's proof:
Asked by reporters about the U.S. election, [Japanese PM] Koizumi said on Thursday: "I am very close to President Bush. So I want him to do his best."
This came before the "No. 2 official in Japan's ruling party sharply criticized U.S. Democratic challenger John Kerry's North Korea policy."
Considering that Japan is one of our best allies in both the war on terror and the isolation of North Korea, Koizumi's preference speaks volumes.
One correction to the Reuters story that is linked in the title of this post, it states "Bush has ruled out bilateral talks with reclusive communist Pyongyang, but Kerry has said this could be possible." That statemens is misleading. Kerry has said he will make bilateral talks with North Korea one of the first initiatives of a Kerry Administration.
HT: CapEd
Asked by reporters about the U.S. election, [Japanese PM] Koizumi said on Thursday: "I am very close to President Bush. So I want him to do his best."
This came before the "No. 2 official in Japan's ruling party sharply criticized U.S. Democratic challenger John Kerry's North Korea policy."
Considering that Japan is one of our best allies in both the war on terror and the isolation of North Korea, Koizumi's preference speaks volumes.
One correction to the Reuters story that is linked in the title of this post, it states "Bush has ruled out bilateral talks with reclusive communist Pyongyang, but Kerry has said this could be possible." That statemens is misleading. Kerry has said he will make bilateral talks with North Korea one of the first initiatives of a Kerry Administration.
HT: CapEd
Thursday, October 14, 2004
DNC: "Lie, Cheat & Steal..."
That's a bit of a paraphrase but sadly, its not far from the truth. Matt Drudge is reporting that the Democratic National Committee is planning to distribute an Election Day Manual which tells its operatives to launch "a pre-emptive strike" and charge voter intimidation even if none exists.
Drudge reproduces a .jpg of the page of the manual here. (It's a bit grainy but you can read it.)
This is a disgrace. This is a party which has allowed its rabid hatred of the President to override any sense of integrity, honor and decorum. How ironic that Kerry closed the debate last night with a story of his mother admonishing him that in his run for President to remember "Integrity, Integrity, Integrity".
Drudge reproduces a .jpg of the page of the manual here. (It's a bit grainy but you can read it.)
This is a disgrace. This is a party which has allowed its rabid hatred of the President to override any sense of integrity, honor and decorum. How ironic that Kerry closed the debate last night with a story of his mother admonishing him that in his run for President to remember "Integrity, Integrity, Integrity".
Best debate liveblogging
Neo-libertarian stopspendingmyfarkingtaxesonstupidprograms man Dale Franks live-blogged the debate over at QandO. Obviously, his priorities are screwy 'coz there was a Yankee game on. Nonetheless, this is among the best of the live-blogging of the debates that I've seen.
For more laughs, and insight into why Bob Schieffer is a dolt, check out Vodkapundit's two main debate posts.
For more laughs, and insight into why Bob Schieffer is a dolt, check out Vodkapundit's two main debate posts.
Aussie media is also incompetent
See, it's universal. The media "intelligentsia" is just as wrong when the season's are reversed. That's what Greg Sheridan says in today's (tomorrow's?) issue of The Australian.
John Kerry, full of s---
Kerry continually complains about the US "outsourcing" its OBL attack in Tora Bora. Melanie Kirkpatrick calls him to task on that lie.
And check this out from Tom Maguire on what John Kerry said about the Tora Bora operation in 2001. Hint: he liked it a lot better when he wasn't running for president.
And check this out from Tom Maguire on what John Kerry said about the Tora Bora operation in 2001. Hint: he liked it a lot better when he wasn't running for president.
ALCS Game 2 Observations
I chose the agita of going the game over the agita of watching the debate live.
1. Mariano was magnificent. Aside from the one-out double to Manny (after what should have been a called third strike) he just blew away Boston's finest. He was throwing gas, hitting 94-95 consistently on the gun which he doesn't do as much anymore. Monk and I have debated about Gordon vs. Mo. I like Gordon for the K's and the gaudy WHIP (0.88 vs. 1.08) but when push comes to shove in the playoffs he just doesn't quite deliver.
2. Olerud's dinger on a high and inside fastball reminded me of Mattingly tomahawking pitches in the glory years before his back betrayed him.
3. 'Round the fifth inning a deep stentorian rumble seemed to emanate from the bowels of the stadium. Seconds later it manifested itself as "Who's Your Daddy?" You could feel the stadium vibrate. Amazing.
4. The smattering of Red Sox fans in the stadium hardly got any harassment. Wonder if the reverse would be true in Beantown.
5. There needs to be a Metro-North station at the stadium. Getting to and fro is second only to going to JFK airport in terms of hassle.
6. Finally Torre should pull out all the stops to win Game 3. We need to embalm, cremate and bury the Sox. Then park a dump truck over the grave. Take no chances.
1. Mariano was magnificent. Aside from the one-out double to Manny (after what should have been a called third strike) he just blew away Boston's finest. He was throwing gas, hitting 94-95 consistently on the gun which he doesn't do as much anymore. Monk and I have debated about Gordon vs. Mo. I like Gordon for the K's and the gaudy WHIP (0.88 vs. 1.08) but when push comes to shove in the playoffs he just doesn't quite deliver.
2. Olerud's dinger on a high and inside fastball reminded me of Mattingly tomahawking pitches in the glory years before his back betrayed him.
3. 'Round the fifth inning a deep stentorian rumble seemed to emanate from the bowels of the stadium. Seconds later it manifested itself as "Who's Your Daddy?" You could feel the stadium vibrate. Amazing.
4. The smattering of Red Sox fans in the stadium hardly got any harassment. Wonder if the reverse would be true in Beantown.
5. There needs to be a Metro-North station at the stadium. Getting to and fro is second only to going to JFK airport in terms of hassle.
6. Finally Torre should pull out all the stops to win Game 3. We need to embalm, cremate and bury the Sox. Then park a dump truck over the grave. Take no chances.
Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice
Because The Monk has his priorities straight, he watched game 2 of the ALCS, not debate 3. The Wongdoer seemed to have his priorities straight too, he went to the game, and may even have stayed for the finish, unlike last week. The key thought here is that I like Jon-John better than John-John. That is, Lieberud more than Kedwards. Now, some thoughts from game 2.
(1) When he's on, Lieber is great to watch. Get ball, throw ball, P-O hitter, repeat, and all with dispatch. Yesterday's game took 3:15 but that's not Jon L's fault: the Yanks' 7-4 home win over the Angels in May when Lieber was perfect for 7 of his 8 innings took 2:23. Pedro and Varitek had more conference calls than IBM. If you measured time of possession for the hitting team, the Yanks would've more than doubled the RedSawx last night.
(2) I won't complain, but I don't understand Johnny Damon so far. He went from clueless to having a great 16-pitch at bat against Lieber -- more pitches in one at bat than Lieber had in any other full inning. Then Damon took a clear strike 3 from Mo in the eighth. This year, Damon became the hitter that the Blosax thought they would get when they plucked him from KC as a free agent. But his work in games 1 and 2 has been odd, at the least.
(3) Johnny Damon has a lot of hair. That's distracting. It is also not shampoo-commercial quality. That's foul.
(4) Biggest match-up of the night = Mo v. fatboy2 with fatboy1 on second and one out up 3-1 in the 9th. When Mo whiffed fatboy2, The Monk did a silent power dance on his couch. I also liked that Mo blew away fatboywannabe (Millar) right after he burned fatboy2.
(5) I still liked Varitek better when he was 0-for-the-Stadium.
(6) I wanna know what that thing on fatboywannabe's face eats. I think small children should stay away from it.
(7) As brilliant as Lieber was, the fact is that Pedro was very good AND had his #1 fastball. That's probably the best heat he's thrown at the Yanks in two years. If he had located his offspeed stuff better, he wouldn't have had those two walks (Jeter, Posada) that burned him.
(8) Give Johnny O lots of credit. Forget the scrap-heap crap, he got around on a 93 mph high-hard-one against Pedro for that 2-run bomb. Olerud's bat has been rumored to be slowing for years. Not that slow, I guess.
(9) No rest for the victorious -- with Brown and Vazquez/Duque, the Yanks have bigger question marks pitching in games 3 and 4 than the RedSawx, and the Yanks have sucked at the Ratden this year.
(10) Memo to Flash Gordon: don't be so surprised when Joe yanks your sorry arse in the 8th after you've put the Bosux in a position to tie the game with one swing. This isn't the regular season where Joe can afford for you to fark up the game (the Yanks' "8th inning closer" had six blown saves). And Mo's given up 8 ER in > 100 postseason innings, you're still trying to get your postseason ERA out of the Kenny Rogers vicinity.
Now, on to Boston for more agita.
(1) When he's on, Lieber is great to watch. Get ball, throw ball, P-O hitter, repeat, and all with dispatch. Yesterday's game took 3:15 but that's not Jon L's fault: the Yanks' 7-4 home win over the Angels in May when Lieber was perfect for 7 of his 8 innings took 2:23. Pedro and Varitek had more conference calls than IBM. If you measured time of possession for the hitting team, the Yanks would've more than doubled the RedSawx last night.
(2) I won't complain, but I don't understand Johnny Damon so far. He went from clueless to having a great 16-pitch at bat against Lieber -- more pitches in one at bat than Lieber had in any other full inning. Then Damon took a clear strike 3 from Mo in the eighth. This year, Damon became the hitter that the Blosax thought they would get when they plucked him from KC as a free agent. But his work in games 1 and 2 has been odd, at the least.
(3) Johnny Damon has a lot of hair. That's distracting. It is also not shampoo-commercial quality. That's foul.
(4) Biggest match-up of the night = Mo v. fatboy2 with fatboy1 on second and one out up 3-1 in the 9th. When Mo whiffed fatboy2, The Monk did a silent power dance on his couch. I also liked that Mo blew away fatboywannabe (Millar) right after he burned fatboy2.
(5) I still liked Varitek better when he was 0-for-the-Stadium.
(6) I wanna know what that thing on fatboywannabe's face eats. I think small children should stay away from it.
(7) As brilliant as Lieber was, the fact is that Pedro was very good AND had his #1 fastball. That's probably the best heat he's thrown at the Yanks in two years. If he had located his offspeed stuff better, he wouldn't have had those two walks (Jeter, Posada) that burned him.
(8) Give Johnny O lots of credit. Forget the scrap-heap crap, he got around on a 93 mph high-hard-one against Pedro for that 2-run bomb. Olerud's bat has been rumored to be slowing for years. Not that slow, I guess.
(9) No rest for the victorious -- with Brown and Vazquez/Duque, the Yanks have bigger question marks pitching in games 3 and 4 than the RedSawx, and the Yanks have sucked at the Ratden this year.
(10) Memo to Flash Gordon: don't be so surprised when Joe yanks your sorry arse in the 8th after you've put the Bosux in a position to tie the game with one swing. This isn't the regular season where Joe can afford for you to fark up the game (the Yanks' "8th inning closer" had six blown saves). And Mo's given up 8 ER in > 100 postseason innings, you're still trying to get your postseason ERA out of the Kenny Rogers vicinity.
Now, on to Boston for more agita.
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
First-guessing the NLCS
Here's a quick take on Phil Garner's pitching staff mishandling in the NLDS -- this is where the [pick flightless avian] should come home to roost: games 1 and 2 of the NLCS, using Brandon Backe and Pete Munro against the Cards. I say SHOULD because baseball is the sport where anything DOES happen -- the 2003 Tigers pulled off a win against both the Yanks and Blosax last year and that team was putrid. Worse yet for the 'Stros: the realization that the only way the Astros can get 4 starts out of Clemens/Oswalt in this series is to pitch them again on three days rest in games 6 and 7.
I've already noted that Garner fouled up by pitching Clemens on three-day rest in game 4, especially with a 2-1 series lead because he then HAD to pitch Oswalt. Go back to Clemens in Game 5 on full rest and you get Oswalt on six-day rest for game 1 of the NLCS and Clemens on four-day rest for Game 3 (then Oswalt again on four for game 5, Clemens on four for game 7).
That said, it'd be surprising for the Astros to actually go up 2-0, and potentially devastating for the Cards if that happened.
Nonetheless, this series should be a bullpen-buster. The Cards have only so-so starters, the Astros' 'pen is frayed and iffy; advantage Redbirds. Then again, in 2000, the Mariners had their rotation set, rested and ready for the Yanks while the Yanks had to reverse their pitching rotation (#4, #3, #2, #1 starters in games 1, 2, 3, 4, respectively) after a five-game war with Oakland . . . and the M's lost in 6.
I've already noted that Garner fouled up by pitching Clemens on three-day rest in game 4, especially with a 2-1 series lead because he then HAD to pitch Oswalt. Go back to Clemens in Game 5 on full rest and you get Oswalt on six-day rest for game 1 of the NLCS and Clemens on four-day rest for Game 3 (then Oswalt again on four for game 5, Clemens on four for game 7).
That said, it'd be surprising for the Astros to actually go up 2-0, and potentially devastating for the Cards if that happened.
Nonetheless, this series should be a bullpen-buster. The Cards have only so-so starters, the Astros' 'pen is frayed and iffy; advantage Redbirds. Then again, in 2000, the Mariners had their rotation set, rested and ready for the Yanks while the Yanks had to reverse their pitching rotation (#4, #3, #2, #1 starters in games 1, 2, 3, 4, respectively) after a five-game war with Oakland . . . and the M's lost in 6.
Bugger off from our elections
Look, I like the Brits as much as anyone. Especially some of them who have (had) their priorities straight: Churchill, Thatcher, Blair (to a good degree). But the British polity is a bit loopy -- Brits who have a preference prefer Kerry to Bush 47% to 16%; the British public is anti-Iraq War despite a relative sanity (compared to say, France, Spain, Germany, Belgium) and pro-UN. But some things are ridiculous.
One of those things is the second-most influential paper in Britain agitating for Brits to call or write voters in Ohio to offer their unsolicited (and unwanted) opinions. Other states highlighted in The Guardian's series are Michigan, Wisconsin, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Florida and Nevada. The Guardian also gives the websites of the most influential newspapers in those states and encourages readers to write the papers.
The Monk put his email into The Guardian's voter generator and came up with a name, and an address. The woman's information (redacted) is:
ANDREA [surname deleted]
APT [deleted]
[building deleted]
SPRINGFIELD
OH 45---
USA
The Guardian is being all-too-coy in its suggestions by not telling or hinting at what its readers should say, but here's the reality: The Guardian knows its readership is predominantly left-of-center to complete left-wingers. It is far to the left of Tony Blair, which means it is far to the left of mainstream US voters. This is really an invidious attempt to influence US voters and it ought to fail miserably. Quite honestly, 85% of the time that Bush upsets the Europeans, I approve of his position (most notable disagreement I had = stupid steel tariffs). I see it as a virtue that this country is stronger, more dynamic, economically more powerful and retains its individualism to degrees that are unheard of in Europe. So do many Europeans, that's why so many come to the US for jobs, education and will weather our long and inefficient naturalization process to become citizens.
The Guardian should remember that British involvement in American domestic affairs has been disdained for about 229 years. We love the Brits; they should be pleased that American might is and has been fighting for and supporting the same freedom that the Brits have enjoyed for centuries. Neutering American power only makes the world less safe and less stable. The Guardian needs to smarten up.
HT: Little Green Footies; Spoonman has it too.
One of those things is the second-most influential paper in Britain agitating for Brits to call or write voters in Ohio to offer their unsolicited (and unwanted) opinions. Other states highlighted in The Guardian's series are Michigan, Wisconsin, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Florida and Nevada. The Guardian also gives the websites of the most influential newspapers in those states and encourages readers to write the papers.
The Monk put his email into The Guardian's voter generator and came up with a name, and an address. The woman's information (redacted) is:
ANDREA [surname deleted]
APT [deleted]
[building deleted]
SPRINGFIELD
OH 45---
USA
The Guardian is being all-too-coy in its suggestions by not telling or hinting at what its readers should say, but here's the reality: The Guardian knows its readership is predominantly left-of-center to complete left-wingers. It is far to the left of Tony Blair, which means it is far to the left of mainstream US voters. This is really an invidious attempt to influence US voters and it ought to fail miserably. Quite honestly, 85% of the time that Bush upsets the Europeans, I approve of his position (most notable disagreement I had = stupid steel tariffs). I see it as a virtue that this country is stronger, more dynamic, economically more powerful and retains its individualism to degrees that are unheard of in Europe. So do many Europeans, that's why so many come to the US for jobs, education and will weather our long and inefficient naturalization process to become citizens.
The Guardian should remember that British involvement in American domestic affairs has been disdained for about 229 years. We love the Brits; they should be pleased that American might is and has been fighting for and supporting the same freedom that the Brits have enjoyed for centuries. Neutering American power only makes the world less safe and less stable. The Guardian needs to smarten up.
HT: Little Green Footies; Spoonman has it too.
Krugman Lies
Lunatic leftist Paul Krugman went off on yet another rant against Bush in his semiweekly column yesterday. In "Checking the Facts, in Advance" Krugman details seven lies he expects Bush to 'tell' in tonight's debate.
After I read the column yesterday I had every intention of putting together a post to de-bunk his claims.
Thankfully, Donald Luskin at National Review saved me the trouble with his fisking of Krugman. Read it here.
It's hard to believe that Krugman actually won the John Bates Clark medal--a prize given every two years to an economist under forty who is adjudged to have made a significant contribution to economic knowledge--because his baseless rants today involve very little scholarship.
After I read the column yesterday I had every intention of putting together a post to de-bunk his claims.
Thankfully, Donald Luskin at National Review saved me the trouble with his fisking of Krugman. Read it here.
It's hard to believe that Krugman actually won the John Bates Clark medal--a prize given every two years to an economist under forty who is adjudged to have made a significant contribution to economic knowledge--because his baseless rants today involve very little scholarship.
Dishonorable Discharge??
The good folks at Powerline picked up Thomas Lipscomb's article in the New York Sun today. It raises some very interesting questions about the manner in which Senator Kerry was discharged from the Navy--specifically why his 'discharge' was subject to a review by a "board of officers" -- apparently a highly unusual circumstance.
The folks at Powerline were among the first to break Rathergate.
The folks at Powerline were among the first to break Rathergate.
Steyn Spiked
Mark Steyn had this column 'spiked' aka pulled from publication. He castigates the Blair government for their handling of the Kenneth Bigley kidnap situation. If Mark Steyn has something pulled dollars to donuts it's worth reading.
Btw, I had no idea that Fabrizio Quattrocchi died heroically. Maybe the mainstream media felt it wasn't worth reporting.
Btw, I had no idea that Fabrizio Quattrocchi died heroically. Maybe the mainstream media felt it wasn't worth reporting.
The Scotsman makes the case
Seems that a relatively unknown newspaper from a small country is doing more and better reporting on Saddam's evil, UN corruption and the case for liberating Iraq than any internationally known broadsheet from America.
In 2002, the UK showed its intelligence dossier on Iraq's WMD programs to Euro-dove weapons inspector Hans Blix. Today, The Scotsman notes that documents released by the UK Foreign Office, written in 2002, contradict the public statements that Blix has made about Iraq's WMD program:
The papers released by the FO show that British officials at the United Nations in New York showed a draft of the dossier to Dr Blix in September 2002, two weeks before the final version was published.
A note from one official, Adam Bye, said that Dr Blix had liked the section on chemical, biological and nuclear weapons as he believed that it did not exaggerate the facts. According to the note, Dr Blix said that the dossier even risked understating Iraq’s ability to produce weapons of mass destruction – particularly the lethal anthrax virus.
He also described the claim that even if Iraq was able to acquire fissile material from abroad, it would still take at least two years to build a working nuclear bomb as “modest”.
Is there any real wonder why the US media won't cover this? Scour the NYT and WaPo in the next few days, either you will find no mention of this story or it will be buried deep in the news section.
HT: Cap'n Ed.
In 2002, the UK showed its intelligence dossier on Iraq's WMD programs to Euro-dove weapons inspector Hans Blix. Today, The Scotsman notes that documents released by the UK Foreign Office, written in 2002, contradict the public statements that Blix has made about Iraq's WMD program:
The papers released by the FO show that British officials at the United Nations in New York showed a draft of the dossier to Dr Blix in September 2002, two weeks before the final version was published.
A note from one official, Adam Bye, said that Dr Blix had liked the section on chemical, biological and nuclear weapons as he believed that it did not exaggerate the facts. According to the note, Dr Blix said that the dossier even risked understating Iraq’s ability to produce weapons of mass destruction – particularly the lethal anthrax virus.
He also described the claim that even if Iraq was able to acquire fissile material from abroad, it would still take at least two years to build a working nuclear bomb as “modest”.
Is there any real wonder why the US media won't cover this? Scour the NYT and WaPo in the next few days, either you will find no mention of this story or it will be buried deep in the news section.
HT: Cap'n Ed.
Andy McCarthy vitamin du jour
After the triple suicide bombing in Taba at an Egyptian resort frequented by Israelis, Andy McCarthy notes the potential for a new front in the terror wars: Egypt. The Islamofascist nutters have hated the secular regime for decades and various Islamowacko groups come from Egypt. McCarthy notes that Hosni Mubarak, semi-benign dictator of Egypt for the past 25 years, is reportedly in poor health.
And here's the ultimate issue:
There has for many years, and particularly since 9/11, been a tendency in the American media, the European press, and the Muslim world to distinguish militant Islam's anti-American terrorism from its assiduous efforts to annihilate Israel — as if Hamas suicide bombers were somehow rationally severable from al Qaeda suicide bombers even though they all draw from the same well. It was inevitable that the dynamic of this war would make a mockery of this delusion. Egypt is a logical place for that light to dawn.
And here's the ultimate issue:
There has for many years, and particularly since 9/11, been a tendency in the American media, the European press, and the Muslim world to distinguish militant Islam's anti-American terrorism from its assiduous efforts to annihilate Israel — as if Hamas suicide bombers were somehow rationally severable from al Qaeda suicide bombers even though they all draw from the same well. It was inevitable that the dynamic of this war would make a mockery of this delusion. Egypt is a logical place for that light to dawn.
Ed Koch for Bush
Former NYC mayor Ed Koch, a feisty Democrat, who's never voted for a Republican for President, is voting for George Bush.
In a word, its about priorities.
The masses of retired East Coast Jews who support Israel but feel married to the Democratic Party of the New Deal PLEASE TAKE NOTE.
HT- Neal Boortz
In a word, its about priorities.
The masses of retired East Coast Jews who support Israel but feel married to the Democratic Party of the New Deal PLEASE TAKE NOTE.
HT- Neal Boortz
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
BIG sigh of relief
OK. Here's The Monk sitting contentedly on his ample arse with the Yanks up 8-0 top 7 thinking maybe he should hit the TiVo equivalent if the Mooooooooooose gets another coupla outs . . . then comes Bellhorn's double, notsobad b/c Moooooooose got 19/27 of the way to a perfect game. Then with two out fatboy2, who's 3-for-35+ against Moooooooose gets a hit. Uck. Then Millar, the guy with the raccoon's butt on his chin, whacks a double, Trawt Nixon gets a single and all heck is breaking loose. By the time the blasted satellite goes out with fatboy2 up in the 8th as the tying run -- the TYING run at the plate after Moooooooose whacked the first 19 guys he faced and the Yanks had run up an 8-0 lead.
WTF.
Thank goodness for Rivera.
Some thoughts and observations from the game:
(1) I liked Varitek better when he was 0-for-the-Stadium, I feared that he'd hit the bomb off Sturtze that he did because Varitek was WAY overdue and Sturtze will give up his share of bombs.
(2) Jeter, Arod, Sheffield combined for 0 RBI, Matsui, Williams and Posada had 9.
(3) Why does Millar only kill the Yankees? I liked him better when he was on the Marlins.
(4) If I'm Francona, Schilling starts game 5, regardless of the game count as of game 4. Why? The Yanks allowed 74 runs in 10 games at Fenway this year. Do the math, the Yanks can't pitch there. Therefore Schilling is a luxury. Plus, the Yanks usually cannot hit Wakefield, just look at last year's ALCS before the Boone at bat. If the RedSawx lead 2-1, they're better off with him going in game 5 so they can count on at least a 3-2 lead; if they trail 2-1, it's no big deal b/c the Yankee chucker will be Vazquez or Duque -- a stiff or a rust bucket -- against Wakefield, who got some work tonight.
(5) Rivera is awesome. The rest of the Yanks' bullpen cannot get the RedSawx out. Tom Gordon has given up 11 ER in about 11.1 postseason innings in his career; Rivera has allowed 8 ER in about 102 innings in postseason play.
(6) The RedSawx scored more runs in the 7th than they had in 8 of 9 games at the Stadium this year.
(7) I've been a critic of Bernie Williams since his awful ALDS against Cleveland in '97 (yeah, I can hold my grudges), but he's been very good in the last three games -- 6 RBI and clutch hits.
(8) Matsui should have caught that triple Ortiz hit in the 8th; he makes some nice plays but he also honks some flyballs when the centerfielder is near him. But Gordon should not be giving up those kinds of hits.
WTF.
Thank goodness for Rivera.
Some thoughts and observations from the game:
(1) I liked Varitek better when he was 0-for-the-Stadium, I feared that he'd hit the bomb off Sturtze that he did because Varitek was WAY overdue and Sturtze will give up his share of bombs.
(2) Jeter, Arod, Sheffield combined for 0 RBI, Matsui, Williams and Posada had 9.
(3) Why does Millar only kill the Yankees? I liked him better when he was on the Marlins.
(4) If I'm Francona, Schilling starts game 5, regardless of the game count as of game 4. Why? The Yanks allowed 74 runs in 10 games at Fenway this year. Do the math, the Yanks can't pitch there. Therefore Schilling is a luxury. Plus, the Yanks usually cannot hit Wakefield, just look at last year's ALCS before the Boone at bat. If the RedSawx lead 2-1, they're better off with him going in game 5 so they can count on at least a 3-2 lead; if they trail 2-1, it's no big deal b/c the Yankee chucker will be Vazquez or Duque -- a stiff or a rust bucket -- against Wakefield, who got some work tonight.
(5) Rivera is awesome. The rest of the Yanks' bullpen cannot get the RedSawx out. Tom Gordon has given up 11 ER in about 11.1 postseason innings in his career; Rivera has allowed 8 ER in about 102 innings in postseason play.
(6) The RedSawx scored more runs in the 7th than they had in 8 of 9 games at the Stadium this year.
(7) I've been a critic of Bernie Williams since his awful ALDS against Cleveland in '97 (yeah, I can hold my grudges), but he's been very good in the last three games -- 6 RBI and clutch hits.
(8) Matsui should have caught that triple Ortiz hit in the 8th; he makes some nice plays but he also honks some flyballs when the centerfielder is near him. But Gordon should not be giving up those kinds of hits.
Best and worst from the Torre years
There's been little to cry about for Yankees fans in general in the past 8 years and lots to cheer. Here now some quick lists and hopefully those high points will have additions in the next couple of weeks.
Top Playoff Wins by Series:
1. The 1999 WS Sweep over Atlanta -- one NY Times prognosticator got this right by picking the Yanks in four (either Jack Curry or Buster Olney) when everyone thought this would be a close series between the two best teams in baseball. This series was outstanding. Whacking the Braves for the second time in four years and this one was not close. This series determined who was the team of the decade on the field, not on the side of a 1995-vintage ring. Plus The Monk and Wongdoer went to game 4 and saw Clemens shut down the little Braves from the bleachers.
2. The 1998 WS Sweep over San Diego -- culmination of the season for the Best Team Ever. Tom Verducci had a great article in SI after the series discussing why the '98 Yankees were right up there with the '39 and '27 Yanks among the best teams assembled; better yet, Verducci dismissed the '75/'76 Reds completely out of hand and with good reason -- no pitching. (Like you'd pick Rawley Eastwick over Rivera? Get real).
3. The 1996 WS win over the Braves -- the one that started the 1996-2000 dynasty. I was so shocked and happy I didn't know what to do with myself. I also loved this because some git from the Atlanta Journal Constitution wrote after Games 1 and 2 that the Yanks didn't belong on the same playing field as the Braves and the Braves were a dynasty in the making along the lines of the '27 and '36-'39 Yanks. HAH.
4. The 2003 ALCS win over the RedSawx -- what a series and what a game 7. Games 3-7 are all classics. And the result meant that the earth continues to revolve around the sun.
5. The 2001 ALCS win over the Mariners -- spanking the 116-win Mariners who had pretensions of being better than the '98 Yanks was great, especially because the Ms looked so feeble throughout that series and the Stadium was electric. Baseball was the ultimate escape that season for New Yorkers and NYC ex-pats like me after the 9-11-01 attacks.
___
Top moments:
1. Aaron Boone's dinger.
2. Jim Leyritz's homer to tie game 4 of the '96 WS after the Yanks trailed 6-0; they won and won the next two games.
3. Tino Martinez's grand slam in the '98 WS -- I love it when the Stadium explodes for those upper deck jobs.
4. Tino's homer in game 4, 2001 WS to tie the Dbacks.
5. Brosius' homer in game 5, 2001 WS to tie the Dbacks.
6. Derek Jeter, THE FLIP.
7. Curtis' homer in game 3, '99 WS to put the Yanks up 3-0.
8. Charlie Hayes catching Mark Lemke's series-ending pop-up, game 6, 1996 WS.
9. Brosius' three-run bomb to beat Trevor Hoffman in game 3, 1998 WS.
10. Justice's homer in game 6, '00 ALCS to put the Ms away.
__
And for the Yankee-haters, the worst moments:
1. Luis Gonzalez's ducksnort single.
2. Aaron Boone whiffs against Braden Looper with bases loaded, one out, game 4 WS. That's why he's Aaron "f---ing" Boone to us, too.
3. Sandy Alomar's bomb in game 4, 1997 ALDS.
4. David Wells' helplessness as the Yankee defense fails on a popup in game 4, 2002 ALDS -- Soriano can't field and he honked that whole series.
5. Fred McGriff's gong-of-doom homer off the foul pole in game 1, 1996 WS. I still get ill when I see and hear the replay.
Top Playoff Wins by Series:
1. The 1999 WS Sweep over Atlanta -- one NY Times prognosticator got this right by picking the Yanks in four (either Jack Curry or Buster Olney) when everyone thought this would be a close series between the two best teams in baseball. This series was outstanding. Whacking the Braves for the second time in four years and this one was not close. This series determined who was the team of the decade on the field, not on the side of a 1995-vintage ring. Plus The Monk and Wongdoer went to game 4 and saw Clemens shut down the little Braves from the bleachers.
2. The 1998 WS Sweep over San Diego -- culmination of the season for the Best Team Ever. Tom Verducci had a great article in SI after the series discussing why the '98 Yankees were right up there with the '39 and '27 Yanks among the best teams assembled; better yet, Verducci dismissed the '75/'76 Reds completely out of hand and with good reason -- no pitching. (Like you'd pick Rawley Eastwick over Rivera? Get real).
3. The 1996 WS win over the Braves -- the one that started the 1996-2000 dynasty. I was so shocked and happy I didn't know what to do with myself. I also loved this because some git from the Atlanta Journal Constitution wrote after Games 1 and 2 that the Yanks didn't belong on the same playing field as the Braves and the Braves were a dynasty in the making along the lines of the '27 and '36-'39 Yanks. HAH.
4. The 2003 ALCS win over the RedSawx -- what a series and what a game 7. Games 3-7 are all classics. And the result meant that the earth continues to revolve around the sun.
5. The 2001 ALCS win over the Mariners -- spanking the 116-win Mariners who had pretensions of being better than the '98 Yanks was great, especially because the Ms looked so feeble throughout that series and the Stadium was electric. Baseball was the ultimate escape that season for New Yorkers and NYC ex-pats like me after the 9-11-01 attacks.
___
Top moments:
1. Aaron Boone's dinger.
2. Jim Leyritz's homer to tie game 4 of the '96 WS after the Yanks trailed 6-0; they won and won the next two games.
3. Tino Martinez's grand slam in the '98 WS -- I love it when the Stadium explodes for those upper deck jobs.
4. Tino's homer in game 4, 2001 WS to tie the Dbacks.
5. Brosius' homer in game 5, 2001 WS to tie the Dbacks.
6. Derek Jeter, THE FLIP.
7. Curtis' homer in game 3, '99 WS to put the Yanks up 3-0.
8. Charlie Hayes catching Mark Lemke's series-ending pop-up, game 6, 1996 WS.
9. Brosius' three-run bomb to beat Trevor Hoffman in game 3, 1998 WS.
10. Justice's homer in game 6, '00 ALCS to put the Ms away.
__
And for the Yankee-haters, the worst moments:
1. Luis Gonzalez's ducksnort single.
2. Aaron Boone whiffs against Braden Looper with bases loaded, one out, game 4 WS. That's why he's Aaron "f---ing" Boone to us, too.
3. Sandy Alomar's bomb in game 4, 1997 ALDS.
4. David Wells' helplessness as the Yankee defense fails on a popup in game 4, 2002 ALDS -- Soriano can't field and he honked that whole series.
5. Fred McGriff's gong-of-doom homer off the foul pole in game 1, 1996 WS. I still get ill when I see and hear the replay.
Yellow Card
I haven't seen any transcripts but at face value this is pretty low, even by Kerry standards:
Burgeoning demand from China, interrupted supplies from the Gulf of Mexico...all affected by the Bush energy policy...
Kerry looks patrician, sounds reasoned and mellifluous -- so why do I keep thinking of Dorian Gray?
``When it comes to developing a real energy policy, George Bush has run out of gas,'' Kerry said. ``The money that you're paying at the pump is going directly from your wallets straight into the hands of the oil companies and the oil producers.''
Burgeoning demand from China, interrupted supplies from the Gulf of Mexico...all affected by the Bush energy policy...
Kerry looks patrician, sounds reasoned and mellifluous -- so why do I keep thinking of Dorian Gray?
Baseball Armageddon
It begins again tonight, Yankees-RedSawx, ALCS, beginning at the Stadium. And this time, the RedSux have to think they have the Yanks solved: Schilling-Pedro-Wakefield-Arroyo against Mussina-Lieber-Brown-???, an 11-8 win in the season series, an improved defense with Cabrera and Doug Mintcabbage, a team average over .300 at home, and the fatboy combo of Ramirez-Ortiz hitting everything.
Not so fast. The Monk is an honest man and there is little doubt that the Yanks, Cards and crimsonfootcoverings are the three best teams in baseball. And The Monk is the last man to underestimate the estimable RedSawx. But let's get a few things straight:
First, the Yankees posted the best record in the AL with a rotation that relied upon retreads, rookies and hope: Moooooooosina was injured, Brown got hurt and hurt himself, Vazquez turned into a BP pitcher in the second half, Lieber was an added bonus, El Duque is the king of the retreads, Contreras was awful and dealt for the equally putrid Loaiza, etc. Throughout a whole season of a patchwork rotation, the Yanks kept their heads above water. After falling into an 8-11 record (1-6 against Bawstun), the Yanks turned their season around, won 7 of the next ten against the Redstiffs (and it should've been 9/10 but Rivera honked two saves) and won the division even though Boston's pitchers were HEALTHY ALL SEASON.
Second, all this nonsense about the RedSawx winning the season series is meaningless. The RedSawx didn't fear the Yanks last year either as shown by Boston's 109-94 scoring advantage in their regular season matchups and wins at the Stadium of 8-4, 10-3, 10-2, 9-3 and 11-0. The RedSawx haven't feared the Yanks since 2001 (maybe) when the Yanks won the season series 13-5.
Third, until the RedSawx won the last two games (and big) in Bawstin last month, the Yanks had dominated the post-April meetings between the teams -- winning 7 of 10 and losing two of those only because Rivera screwed up. Got that? The team with no rotation beat the team with a healthy rotation time and again. Worse yet for RedSawx fans: the Yanks do not go quietly -- witness the two beatings they gave the Sux after the redfooties closed to within 2.5 games after Rivera blew one at the Stadium.
Finally, in last year's ALCS, the Yanks starters had the following ERAs: 4.11 (Moooooooooose), 4.69 (Pettitte), 5.00 (Clemens) and 2.35 (Wells). In the 1999 ALCS win for the Yanks over the Sux, the starters ERAs (other than Clemens' beating in Rathole Park) were 1.80 (Duque), 2.57 (Cone), 2.45 (Pettitte).
All that considered, here are some more interesting facts:
Start with starters. Here are the personal records and team records (i.e., how the Sawx did) of the Redsax starters against the Yanks: Schilling 2-0 (2-1), Pedro 1-2 (1-3), Arroyo 0-0 (4-0), Wakefield 1-0 (2-1), Lowe 2-3 (2-3). Weirder yet about Arroyo and his four no decisions: he was very good at the Stadium against the Yanks but notsogood at Fenway.
Here are the Yankees starters: Moooooooosina 2-1 (2-1), Lieber 1-0 (3-0), Brown 0-1 (0-3), Duque 0-0 (0-1), Vazquez 1-2 (1-3). Others who started = Contreras 0-2 (1-2), Sturze 0-0 (0-1) and Halsey 0-0 (1-0).
And here's a strange note -- the RedSawx scored less than 5 runs in each of their last eight games at the Stadium this season; this is the same team that averaged nearly 6 runs per game and has nearly the same lineup as the team that hit 7 HR in one game at the Stadium last year. The Yanks only held the RedSux under 5 runs in Ratway twice.
Keys to the Series: (1) if the Yank starters can basically match the RedStiffs starters -- this isn't a question of outpitching, just match zeros. The model for this is the 1997 Indians when their stiffs (Ogea, 8-9, 4.99; Nagy 15-11, 4.28; Hershiser, 14-6, 4.47; Wright 8-3, 4.39) went pitch for pitch with the vastly superior Orioles' staff (Moooooooosina 15-8, 3.20, 15 IP, 1 ER, 25K in the ALCS and no wins; Erickson 16-7, 3.69; Key, 16-10, 3.43; Kamienicki (10-6, 4.02, 8 IP, 0 ER in the ALCS). Indians won that series 4-2. (2) Relief pitching: in 10 IP in the 2003 ALCS, Timlin and Embree gave up 0 ER; Gordon, Quantrill and crew were routinely lit up by the Sawx hitters, especially at Fenway. (3) Can the Yanks neutralize Schilling? (4) Will Francona regret not using Wakefield more -- he's a Yankee killer but currently slotted for game 4 and not 3-and-7 as you might expect.
Not so fast. The Monk is an honest man and there is little doubt that the Yanks, Cards and crimsonfootcoverings are the three best teams in baseball. And The Monk is the last man to underestimate the estimable RedSawx. But let's get a few things straight:
First, the Yankees posted the best record in the AL with a rotation that relied upon retreads, rookies and hope: Moooooooosina was injured, Brown got hurt and hurt himself, Vazquez turned into a BP pitcher in the second half, Lieber was an added bonus, El Duque is the king of the retreads, Contreras was awful and dealt for the equally putrid Loaiza, etc. Throughout a whole season of a patchwork rotation, the Yanks kept their heads above water. After falling into an 8-11 record (1-6 against Bawstun), the Yanks turned their season around, won 7 of the next ten against the Redstiffs (and it should've been 9/10 but Rivera honked two saves) and won the division even though Boston's pitchers were HEALTHY ALL SEASON.
Second, all this nonsense about the RedSawx winning the season series is meaningless. The RedSawx didn't fear the Yanks last year either as shown by Boston's 109-94 scoring advantage in their regular season matchups and wins at the Stadium of 8-4, 10-3, 10-2, 9-3 and 11-0. The RedSawx haven't feared the Yanks since 2001 (maybe) when the Yanks won the season series 13-5.
Third, until the RedSawx won the last two games (and big) in Bawstin last month, the Yanks had dominated the post-April meetings between the teams -- winning 7 of 10 and losing two of those only because Rivera screwed up. Got that? The team with no rotation beat the team with a healthy rotation time and again. Worse yet for RedSawx fans: the Yanks do not go quietly -- witness the two beatings they gave the Sux after the redfooties closed to within 2.5 games after Rivera blew one at the Stadium.
Finally, in last year's ALCS, the Yanks starters had the following ERAs: 4.11 (Moooooooooose), 4.69 (Pettitte), 5.00 (Clemens) and 2.35 (Wells). In the 1999 ALCS win for the Yanks over the Sux, the starters ERAs (other than Clemens' beating in Rathole Park) were 1.80 (Duque), 2.57 (Cone), 2.45 (Pettitte).
All that considered, here are some more interesting facts:
Start with starters. Here are the personal records and team records (i.e., how the Sawx did) of the Redsax starters against the Yanks: Schilling 2-0 (2-1), Pedro 1-2 (1-3), Arroyo 0-0 (4-0), Wakefield 1-0 (2-1), Lowe 2-3 (2-3). Weirder yet about Arroyo and his four no decisions: he was very good at the Stadium against the Yanks but notsogood at Fenway.
Here are the Yankees starters: Moooooooosina 2-1 (2-1), Lieber 1-0 (3-0), Brown 0-1 (0-3), Duque 0-0 (0-1), Vazquez 1-2 (1-3). Others who started = Contreras 0-2 (1-2), Sturze 0-0 (0-1) and Halsey 0-0 (1-0).
And here's a strange note -- the RedSawx scored less than 5 runs in each of their last eight games at the Stadium this season; this is the same team that averaged nearly 6 runs per game and has nearly the same lineup as the team that hit 7 HR in one game at the Stadium last year. The Yanks only held the RedSux under 5 runs in Ratway twice.
Keys to the Series: (1) if the Yank starters can basically match the RedStiffs starters -- this isn't a question of outpitching, just match zeros. The model for this is the 1997 Indians when their stiffs (Ogea, 8-9, 4.99; Nagy 15-11, 4.28; Hershiser, 14-6, 4.47; Wright 8-3, 4.39) went pitch for pitch with the vastly superior Orioles' staff (Moooooooosina 15-8, 3.20, 15 IP, 1 ER, 25K in the ALCS and no wins; Erickson 16-7, 3.69; Key, 16-10, 3.43; Kamienicki (10-6, 4.02, 8 IP, 0 ER in the ALCS). Indians won that series 4-2. (2) Relief pitching: in 10 IP in the 2003 ALCS, Timlin and Embree gave up 0 ER; Gordon, Quantrill and crew were routinely lit up by the Sawx hitters, especially at Fenway. (3) Can the Yanks neutralize Schilling? (4) Will Francona regret not using Wakefield more -- he's a Yankee killer but currently slotted for game 4 and not 3-and-7 as you might expect.
Apologize yourself
Norway has fallen far from its brave-yet-futile defense against the Nazis in World War II and the courageous acts Norwegians took in the face of the Hitler menace (most notable: Norwegian children strapping gold bricks to the undersides of their sleds, sliding past Nazi guards and down to the fjords where hidden ships took the gold for safekeeping to the US).
The proof? The ad referenced in the title link, which appears in the WaPo, that calls on the President to apologize to the Iraqis for invading Iraq! Next, should Britain apologize to Norway for helping free it from the Nazis? Should Australia apologize to East Timor for helping that country come into existence? Should the US and UK apologize to France for liberating it in 1944? Should the UN apologize to South Korea for approving the US-led action that kept it from becoming part of Kimland?
The notion that the US should apologize for overthrowing Saddam, liberating Iraq and ridding the world of Saddam's evil is just stupid. Worse yet, the Norwegian group that took out the ad wants the UN to run the place! I'm thinking all that socialized health care in Norway isn't helping the mental acuity of the populace. Some people need to get whacked in the head with a reality stick.
HT - The Captain.
The proof? The ad referenced in the title link, which appears in the WaPo, that calls on the President to apologize to the Iraqis for invading Iraq! Next, should Britain apologize to Norway for helping free it from the Nazis? Should Australia apologize to East Timor for helping that country come into existence? Should the US and UK apologize to France for liberating it in 1944? Should the UN apologize to South Korea for approving the US-led action that kept it from becoming part of Kimland?
The notion that the US should apologize for overthrowing Saddam, liberating Iraq and ridding the world of Saddam's evil is just stupid. Worse yet, the Norwegian group that took out the ad wants the UN to run the place! I'm thinking all that socialized health care in Norway isn't helping the mental acuity of the populace. Some people need to get whacked in the head with a reality stick.
HT - The Captain.
If Iraq had no nuke program, why is the IAEA worried?
A report in CNN indicates that the IAEA is concerned that high-level equipment that could make nuclear bombs is not present in Iraq where the IAEA expected it to be and that the buildings that housed the equipment have been dismantled. The US did not plant the equipment nor erect the buildings, therefore it seems to the uninitiated that Iraq DID have either the capacity or desire (or both) to go nuclear. Combine this story with the satellite photos of massive cargo trucks crossing west from Iraq to Syria just before the Coalition invasion and it seems that the US needs to start leaning HARD on Boy Assad.
Political Humor
PJ O'Rourke, in caustic fashion, proffers 16 points that the President should make in Debate #3. One nice point here about Iraq's stability under past dictatorships:
(7) You say that we won the war, but we're losing the peace because Iraq is so unstable. When Iraq was stable, it attacked Israel in the 1967 and 1973 wars. It attacked Iran. It attacked Kuwait. It gassed the Kurds. It butchered the Shiites. It fostered terrorism in the Middle East. Who wants a stable Iraq?
Read it all.
(7) You say that we won the war, but we're losing the peace because Iraq is so unstable. When Iraq was stable, it attacked Israel in the 1967 and 1973 wars. It attacked Iran. It attacked Kuwait. It gassed the Kurds. It butchered the Shiites. It fostered terrorism in the Middle East. Who wants a stable Iraq?
Read it all.
Monday, October 11, 2004
Giuliani's proper priorities
These remarks by former NYC mayor Rudy Giuliani are highly notable. HT Instapundit. Here are some highlights:
For some time, and including when I spoke at the Republican Convention, I’ve wondered exactly what John Kerry’s approach would be to terrorism and I’ve wondered whether he had the conviction, the determination, and the focus, and the correct worldview to conduct a successful war against terrorism. And his quotations in the New York Times yesterday make it clear that he lacks that kind of committed view of the world. In fact, his comments are kind of extraordinary, particularly since he thinks we used to before September 11 live in a relatively safe world. He says we have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they’re a nuisance.
I’m wondering exactly when Senator Kerry thought they were just a nuisance. Maybe when they attacked the USS Cole? Or when they attacked the World Trade Center in 1993? Or when they slaughtered the Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972? Or killed Leon Klinghoffer by throwing him overboard? Or the innumerable number of terrorist acts that they committed in the 70s, the 80s and the 90s, leading up to September 11?
* * *
As a former law enforcement person, he says ‘I know we’re never going to end prostitution. We’re never going to end illegal gambling. But we’re going to reduce it.’ This is not illegal gambling; this isn’t prostitution. Having been a former law enforcement person for a lot longer than John Kerry ever was, I don’t understand his confusion. Even when he says ‘organized crime to a level where it isn’t not on the rise,’ it was not the goal of the Justice Department to just reduce organized crime. It was the goal of the Justice Department to eliminate organized crime. Was there some acceptable level of organized crime: two families, instead of five, or they can control one union but not the other?
The idea that you can have an acceptable level of terrorism is frightening. How do you explain that to the people who are beheaded or the innocent people that are killed, that we’re going to tolerate a certain acceptable [level] of terrorism, and that acceptable level will exist and then we’ll stop thinking about it? This is an extraordinary statement. I think it is not a statement that in any way is ancillary. I think this is the core of John Kerry’s thinking. This does create some consistency in his thinking.
It is consistent with his views on Vietnam: that we should have left and abandoned Vietnam. It is consistent with his view of Nicaragua and the Sandinistas. It is consistent with his view of opposing Ronald Reagan at every step of the way in the arms buildup that was necessary to destroy communism. It is consistent with his view of not supporting the Persian Gulf War, which was another extraordinary step. Whatever John Kerry’s global test is, the Persian Gulf War certainly would pass anyone’s global test. If it were up to John Kerry, Saddam Hussein would not only still be in power, but he’d still be controlling Kuwait.
Giuliani is great. If he were still mayor, I might even consider moving back to New York.
For some time, and including when I spoke at the Republican Convention, I’ve wondered exactly what John Kerry’s approach would be to terrorism and I’ve wondered whether he had the conviction, the determination, and the focus, and the correct worldview to conduct a successful war against terrorism. And his quotations in the New York Times yesterday make it clear that he lacks that kind of committed view of the world. In fact, his comments are kind of extraordinary, particularly since he thinks we used to before September 11 live in a relatively safe world. He says we have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they’re a nuisance.
I’m wondering exactly when Senator Kerry thought they were just a nuisance. Maybe when they attacked the USS Cole? Or when they attacked the World Trade Center in 1993? Or when they slaughtered the Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972? Or killed Leon Klinghoffer by throwing him overboard? Or the innumerable number of terrorist acts that they committed in the 70s, the 80s and the 90s, leading up to September 11?
* * *
As a former law enforcement person, he says ‘I know we’re never going to end prostitution. We’re never going to end illegal gambling. But we’re going to reduce it.’ This is not illegal gambling; this isn’t prostitution. Having been a former law enforcement person for a lot longer than John Kerry ever was, I don’t understand his confusion. Even when he says ‘organized crime to a level where it isn’t not on the rise,’ it was not the goal of the Justice Department to just reduce organized crime. It was the goal of the Justice Department to eliminate organized crime. Was there some acceptable level of organized crime: two families, instead of five, or they can control one union but not the other?
The idea that you can have an acceptable level of terrorism is frightening. How do you explain that to the people who are beheaded or the innocent people that are killed, that we’re going to tolerate a certain acceptable [level] of terrorism, and that acceptable level will exist and then we’ll stop thinking about it? This is an extraordinary statement. I think it is not a statement that in any way is ancillary. I think this is the core of John Kerry’s thinking. This does create some consistency in his thinking.
It is consistent with his views on Vietnam: that we should have left and abandoned Vietnam. It is consistent with his view of Nicaragua and the Sandinistas. It is consistent with his view of opposing Ronald Reagan at every step of the way in the arms buildup that was necessary to destroy communism. It is consistent with his view of not supporting the Persian Gulf War, which was another extraordinary step. Whatever John Kerry’s global test is, the Persian Gulf War certainly would pass anyone’s global test. If it were up to John Kerry, Saddam Hussein would not only still be in power, but he’d still be controlling Kuwait.
Giuliani is great. If he were still mayor, I might even consider moving back to New York.
Soak these rich!
For all you liberal nanny-staters who believe government cures all ills, assuages all hurts, and will provide us lovely pastures with flowers and bunnies and butterflies if only the capitalist pigs didn't own everything, chew on this:
Teresa Heinz Kerry's effective income tax rate (based on the information they actually have released) is under 13% -- $725K on $6.8M. The Monk doesn't quite make that coin, but he pays a much higher effective income tax rate. Then again, The Monk can't afford all those offshore investments Longface has where he hides his money.
Kerry is the richest man to run for president. The richest Senator after Kerry (see here) is Jon Corzine, D-NJ, followed by the anonymous Herb Kohl (D-Wisc.) and socialist healthcare planner Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) [oops, originally said Rockhead was from Delaware and the Blue Hen Staters are good people; sorry].
I'm not a soak-the-rich believer because most of the rich get soaked. The wealthiest 5% of Americans pay nearly 1/2 of all income taxes. But the top marginal tax rate on earned income is 35%, the top rate on long-term dividends is 15%. Something is not right about Kerry and THK paying 12.8%.
Teresa Heinz Kerry's effective income tax rate (based on the information they actually have released) is under 13% -- $725K on $6.8M. The Monk doesn't quite make that coin, but he pays a much higher effective income tax rate. Then again, The Monk can't afford all those offshore investments Longface has where he hides his money.
Kerry is the richest man to run for president. The richest Senator after Kerry (see here) is Jon Corzine, D-NJ, followed by the anonymous Herb Kohl (D-Wisc.) and socialist healthcare planner Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) [oops, originally said Rockhead was from Delaware and the Blue Hen Staters are good people; sorry].
I'm not a soak-the-rich believer because most of the rich get soaked. The wealthiest 5% of Americans pay nearly 1/2 of all income taxes. But the top marginal tax rate on earned income is 35%, the top rate on long-term dividends is 15%. Something is not right about Kerry and THK paying 12.8%.
Diamond Wars
Baseball Armageddon begins again Tuesday night in the greatest venue in the greatest city at the home of the greatest team in baseball as the RedSux go to the Stadium for the ALCS against the Yankees. And this time most of the so-called experts will pick the RedSawx to win. BFD. Most of them (albeit a bare majority) picked the Twins to beat the Yanks. Here's a keeper from ESPN's Jim (I write stupid opinions and get paid for it) Caple on the Twins-Yankees series after game 1 (scroll down if you click here):
The Yankees are done. Sure, they rallied from a Game 1 loss to Santana and the Twins last year but the big difference is this time they don't have Roger Clemens, Andy Pettitte and David Wells waiting. And if you want to second-guess anyone, how about Steinbrenner for trading for a player they didn't need (no matter how good A-Rod is) while letting three-fifths of his rotation walk.
Nice call Jim. It's that level of prognosticating we've come to expect from the stiffs on ESPN. Too bad you never noted that the Yanks were 4-0 in previous ALDS when they'd lost game 1 (now 5-0) and 2-3 when they'd won game 1. Dope.
As for baseball in general this weekend, some observations:
(1) Jose Lima is a good big ballpark pitcher. He would be perfect for the Mariners. And his home/road splits are ridiculous: 10-1, sub-3.00 ERA at home, 4-4 and 5.56 ERA on the road (including yesterday's masterpiece). That's why the Dodgers pitch him at home. Without home-field advantage, the Dodgers couldn't pitch Lima twice in LA and his road numbers are so awful, they'd have been stupid to start him in games 1 or 2. That's the disadvantage of relying on Lima. The Dodgers needed more than Lima's heart, they needed some heart and skill from Odalis Perez. Instead, Perez honked twice. I'd touted Perez for the Yanks, now I'd take him off their list. They'd be way better off with Oliver Perez, but the Pirates wouldn't trade him. As for the Dodgers, all those underwhelming starting pitchers (Perez, Weaver, Lima, Ishii, Nomo) were no match for St. Louis on paper and, even though they kept Pujols and Rolen quiet, were no match for St. Louis on the field.
(2) The Twins, Astros, and Dodgers really screwed themselves into corners by going to three-man rotations. In the Dodgers' case it is defensible: Ishii has been awful, Penny is hurt, Alvarez had been better out of the 'pen, Perez only threw about 60 pitches in game 1. But today's pitchers are not trained to pitch on three days' rest, hence the 11-29 team record (7-20 for the pitchers themselves) and high ERA for starters working on short rest since the 1999 playoffs. [Note that the radar readings are irrelevant, Larry Rothschild, the Cubs pitching coach, says location control is worse on three days' rest but velocity is about normal -- fat 93 mph fastballs are usually turned into souveniers]. And it sends a bad message to the team to rely that heavily on an ace (or in LA's case, an "ace") on short rest because it shows a lack of faith in anyone else.
The Astros have no excuse. Yes, they lost Wade Miller and Andy Pettitte but they still had Tim Redding and Pete Munro available to start and go 5 innings, just as they used Clemens. They also had a 2-1 series lead. So instead of pitching a first-ballot Hall of Famer on full rest Monday night if they lost game 4, they chose to use him on short rest despite Clemens' complete failure in 2000 (four years younger and still the Rocket) to provide the Yanks a clincher at home against Oakland (an 11-1 loss). Clemens pitched fairly well Sunday (5 IP, 2 ER) but short rest and his battle with the flu earlier in the week (75% rest and 80% health means about 60% of the pitcher's effectiveness, right?) meant early removal -- instead of stretching him to 6 or 7 innings, the Astros gave him the hook and were burned the very next inning by a game-tying three-run bomb off reliever #1 of the trade-weakened Houston 'pen. Later, the Astros lost. Now they're setting up another starter to go on three days' rest. Why not pitch Munro or Redding? Not only would Clemens go after four days, Oswalt would be a go for game 1 of the NLCS if the Astros make it. Now they'll be stuck putting Brandon Backe on the hump if he's not hitting golf balls with his buddies after Monday night.
The Twins could claim they wanted to give themselves the best chance to beat the Yanks -- down 2-1, use the best two starters they had even if it's on short rest. But Santana is no Schilling. Big Curt went 7 innings or more in his two starts on three days' rest in the '01 World Series; Santana was winded after 5. So what was the point? After that, the Yanks had 12 outs to tie the game against the Twins' 'pen, which they did. So if the Twins had won, their 'pen would have been nearly shot for game 5 with another three-day-rest starter on the hill (who had been knocked around in game 2). What's the other option? How about Kyle Lohse and a panoply of relievers if he gets in trouble, then the Twins could start Santana on full rest in game 5 and not have to worry. Think Lohse was a sure bet to get beat? Two words: Bob Walk. That's the journeyman the '92 Pirates pulled out of their collective ear and who pitched a beaut against the Braves with his team facing elimination. That's not an isolated incident -- lots of random stiffs have taken the hill with their teams facing season-ending defeat and performed well: Jim Rooker in the '79 WS, Moose Haas in the '82 ALCS, Jim Stuper (against Don Sutton) in the '82 WS, Chad Ogea (against a healthy Kevin Brown) in the '97 WS. And note also that the Yanks saw fit to start Javy Vazquez -- master of the two-strike hanging breaking ball. As for Gardenhire going to Rincon in the 8th -- that was fine because Rincon was his 8th-inning guy all year, but he should have switched when Rincon allowed the hit to Bernie that made it a 5-2 game. Oh yeah, he was saving Nathan for a one-inning stint because big Joe flipped 50+ pitches three nights before -- that was the gamble that did not pay off.
(3) Peter Gammons called the incessant left-right switching of pitchers to get a lefty-lefty/righty-righty matchup "creeping LaRussaism" after the way Tony LaRussa used his bullpen on the '88-'90 A's. That phenomenon bit the Angels in their collective arse Friday when Scioscia went to Kiefer Sutherland's lookalike Jarrod Washburn to pitch to David Ortiz Friday night. Yeah, Wash had good numbers against lefties, Ortiz dropped off against lefties, blah blah blah. But Wash is a homerun pitcher, Frankie ("K-Rod") Rodriguez (whom Wash replaced) is not and the Sawx only had a runner on first with two out. Ortiz is also a reverse-from-norm hitter -- he likes the ball up and in or low and away and the natural trajectory for a lefty pitcher is to put the ball low and away from lefty hitters. Scioscia said he worried about wearing out K-Rod, but he had been out there for 38 pitches after heaving 44 two days earlier. What's another 3-5 tosses against Ortiz? And why was Percival on the pine for the whole series? The same Scioscia who was a genius in 2002 turned into a moron this year.
Later tonight or tomorrow, look for The Monk's ALCS preview.
The Yankees are done. Sure, they rallied from a Game 1 loss to Santana and the Twins last year but the big difference is this time they don't have Roger Clemens, Andy Pettitte and David Wells waiting. And if you want to second-guess anyone, how about Steinbrenner for trading for a player they didn't need (no matter how good A-Rod is) while letting three-fifths of his rotation walk.
Nice call Jim. It's that level of prognosticating we've come to expect from the stiffs on ESPN. Too bad you never noted that the Yanks were 4-0 in previous ALDS when they'd lost game 1 (now 5-0) and 2-3 when they'd won game 1. Dope.
As for baseball in general this weekend, some observations:
(1) Jose Lima is a good big ballpark pitcher. He would be perfect for the Mariners. And his home/road splits are ridiculous: 10-1, sub-3.00 ERA at home, 4-4 and 5.56 ERA on the road (including yesterday's masterpiece). That's why the Dodgers pitch him at home. Without home-field advantage, the Dodgers couldn't pitch Lima twice in LA and his road numbers are so awful, they'd have been stupid to start him in games 1 or 2. That's the disadvantage of relying on Lima. The Dodgers needed more than Lima's heart, they needed some heart and skill from Odalis Perez. Instead, Perez honked twice. I'd touted Perez for the Yanks, now I'd take him off their list. They'd be way better off with Oliver Perez, but the Pirates wouldn't trade him. As for the Dodgers, all those underwhelming starting pitchers (Perez, Weaver, Lima, Ishii, Nomo) were no match for St. Louis on paper and, even though they kept Pujols and Rolen quiet, were no match for St. Louis on the field.
(2) The Twins, Astros, and Dodgers really screwed themselves into corners by going to three-man rotations. In the Dodgers' case it is defensible: Ishii has been awful, Penny is hurt, Alvarez had been better out of the 'pen, Perez only threw about 60 pitches in game 1. But today's pitchers are not trained to pitch on three days' rest, hence the 11-29 team record (7-20 for the pitchers themselves) and high ERA for starters working on short rest since the 1999 playoffs. [Note that the radar readings are irrelevant, Larry Rothschild, the Cubs pitching coach, says location control is worse on three days' rest but velocity is about normal -- fat 93 mph fastballs are usually turned into souveniers]. And it sends a bad message to the team to rely that heavily on an ace (or in LA's case, an "ace") on short rest because it shows a lack of faith in anyone else.
The Astros have no excuse. Yes, they lost Wade Miller and Andy Pettitte but they still had Tim Redding and Pete Munro available to start and go 5 innings, just as they used Clemens. They also had a 2-1 series lead. So instead of pitching a first-ballot Hall of Famer on full rest Monday night if they lost game 4, they chose to use him on short rest despite Clemens' complete failure in 2000 (four years younger and still the Rocket) to provide the Yanks a clincher at home against Oakland (an 11-1 loss). Clemens pitched fairly well Sunday (5 IP, 2 ER) but short rest and his battle with the flu earlier in the week (75% rest and 80% health means about 60% of the pitcher's effectiveness, right?) meant early removal -- instead of stretching him to 6 or 7 innings, the Astros gave him the hook and were burned the very next inning by a game-tying three-run bomb off reliever #1 of the trade-weakened Houston 'pen. Later, the Astros lost. Now they're setting up another starter to go on three days' rest. Why not pitch Munro or Redding? Not only would Clemens go after four days, Oswalt would be a go for game 1 of the NLCS if the Astros make it. Now they'll be stuck putting Brandon Backe on the hump if he's not hitting golf balls with his buddies after Monday night.
The Twins could claim they wanted to give themselves the best chance to beat the Yanks -- down 2-1, use the best two starters they had even if it's on short rest. But Santana is no Schilling. Big Curt went 7 innings or more in his two starts on three days' rest in the '01 World Series; Santana was winded after 5. So what was the point? After that, the Yanks had 12 outs to tie the game against the Twins' 'pen, which they did. So if the Twins had won, their 'pen would have been nearly shot for game 5 with another three-day-rest starter on the hill (who had been knocked around in game 2). What's the other option? How about Kyle Lohse and a panoply of relievers if he gets in trouble, then the Twins could start Santana on full rest in game 5 and not have to worry. Think Lohse was a sure bet to get beat? Two words: Bob Walk. That's the journeyman the '92 Pirates pulled out of their collective ear and who pitched a beaut against the Braves with his team facing elimination. That's not an isolated incident -- lots of random stiffs have taken the hill with their teams facing season-ending defeat and performed well: Jim Rooker in the '79 WS, Moose Haas in the '82 ALCS, Jim Stuper (against Don Sutton) in the '82 WS, Chad Ogea (against a healthy Kevin Brown) in the '97 WS. And note also that the Yanks saw fit to start Javy Vazquez -- master of the two-strike hanging breaking ball. As for Gardenhire going to Rincon in the 8th -- that was fine because Rincon was his 8th-inning guy all year, but he should have switched when Rincon allowed the hit to Bernie that made it a 5-2 game. Oh yeah, he was saving Nathan for a one-inning stint because big Joe flipped 50+ pitches three nights before -- that was the gamble that did not pay off.
(3) Peter Gammons called the incessant left-right switching of pitchers to get a lefty-lefty/righty-righty matchup "creeping LaRussaism" after the way Tony LaRussa used his bullpen on the '88-'90 A's. That phenomenon bit the Angels in their collective arse Friday when Scioscia went to Kiefer Sutherland's lookalike Jarrod Washburn to pitch to David Ortiz Friday night. Yeah, Wash had good numbers against lefties, Ortiz dropped off against lefties, blah blah blah. But Wash is a homerun pitcher, Frankie ("K-Rod") Rodriguez (whom Wash replaced) is not and the Sawx only had a runner on first with two out. Ortiz is also a reverse-from-norm hitter -- he likes the ball up and in or low and away and the natural trajectory for a lefty pitcher is to put the ball low and away from lefty hitters. Scioscia said he worried about wearing out K-Rod, but he had been out there for 38 pitches after heaving 44 two days earlier. What's another 3-5 tosses against Ortiz? And why was Percival on the pine for the whole series? The same Scioscia who was a genius in 2002 turned into a moron this year.
Later tonight or tomorrow, look for The Monk's ALCS preview.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)