joyfulchristian

Yup

I'm pretty sure this picture shows the President doing exaclty what you think he's doing. And yes, Sarkozy is laughing about it.

4th of July

Happy Birthday America!

Bummer

3 1/2 years ago when I started my new job, one of the side benefits happened to be the sports tickets our firm would occasionally get. The first time we got hockey tickets my daughter was absolutely hooked on the Oklahoma City Blazers.  She had an absolute blast. Since then my wife and I have taken her to several games each season (sometimes with a friend).

2 years ago we even sprung for a box seat for her birthday party. It was expensive and it made things pretty tight that month, but my daughter absolutely loved it; it was a joy to see the girls all get up and dance around the room after every goal.

As of yesterday, however, if you visit the Blazer's website, you get this:

Due to the current economic downturn, the OKC Blazers are regrettably closing their doors effective July 1. Despite attempts to re-organize and streamline the operation, the substantial losses from running the team have led to this business decision.

"We have the most loyal fans of any team, anywhere, and we appreciate the unwavering support they have given the team for many years," said Bob Funk Sr. "The Blazers organization has maintained its commitment to the fans for nine years. We've tried everything to make this model work and explored every available option. If there had been any other choice, we would not have made this decision."

The OKC Blazers thank everyone for their support during their 17 seasons of play in the Central Hockey League.

Ironically, the Blazer's success is probably one of the factors that convinced the NBA that we could support a major league franchise. The city's subsequent bowing to everything that is OKC Thunder related is probably what helped doom the Blazers. The economy certainly didn't help though.

We're hearing that the City is hoping to convince the Edmonton Oilers to locate their new AAA AHL team to our city; there's even talk of the new team being run by the same people.  If that happens, it should be a step up in terms of quality of play. However, with farm teams the odds are that about the time a player shows real promise he'll be off to the majors.  That makes it a lot harder to really connect with the players over the long-term.

I really hope we do get a new franchise. Even if we do, though, it will never be the same. Also, nothing can change the fact that for the first time in 17 years, and in the entire time my daughter has been aware of hockey, our area won't have a team. 

It seeems a small and trivial thing, perhaps. The memories of all the good times my family have had, however, makes it a sad day for us.

Life goes on.

Another thought on Palin

I've seen various people comment that Palin's resignation from the governorship has ended her political career because she's shown herself to be a quitter.

I can see some validity to this question, however it raises a question.  An awful lot of people who've run for President during my lifetime were sitting governors or senators who were running for office while they were currently serving in another office.  Everyone knew that if they won, they'd be required to resign from this other job. (Bentsen even ran for re-election to his Senate seat WHILE running for the VP slot in 88.)

I do remember hearing criticism of some of these politicians because they were failing to fulfill a commitment to their constituents (Clinton ran for the Presidency during his second term as governor of Arkansas even though one of his campaign promises when running for re-election was that he WOULDN'T run for President while in office.), I don't remember anyone ever hearing that this decision had doomed their shot at the presidency.

Objectively, what makes you less of a "quitter" and less "doomed" when you're quitting you're current job without telling us what you're doing next then if you already have a new job lined up?

I don't really see a difference.

There is another possibility

Melissa Clouthier has a big roundup of opinions about what Palin's resignation may or may not mean. I notice a lot of people speculating that she's either resigning to focus on running for president and others claiming that this means she's lost any shot of winning the presidency.

I've noticed a couple of things about all this hooplah.  One is that almost everyone seems to assume she intended to run for president; while I admit it seems likely, I never heard that she'd said anything like this and I think it's rather sad that we assume that any popular and energetic politician MUST want to be president.

The second thing I've noticed is that while a few people admit this might be for personal or health reasons, an awful lot of people are critiquiqing her decision from a purely political standpoint as if this decision HAD to be based solely on political considerations. That seems terribly myopic.

Some of us were concerned about these things before the election

I have no patience for this man:

Colin Powell, one of President Obama's most prominent Republican supporters, expressed concern Friday that the president's ambitious blitz of costly initiatives may be enlarging the size of government and the federal debt too much.

"I'm concerned at the number of programs that are being presented, the bills associated with these programs and the additional government that will be needed to execute them," Mr. Powell said in an excerpt of an interview with CNN's John King, released by the network Friday morning.

All of this was perfectly obvious to anyone paying attention before the election. Powell supported Obama anyway. It's a little late to be complaining about the bill now.

On the other hand

... while Congress wasting time debating the BCS is, of course, absurd, perhaps we should be grateful.  While they're doing this, they're not busy working on something truly damaging. Like Cap and Trade, raising taxes, passing another (non) stimulus, etc.

Link via Instapundit.

Curious

Bill Quick on Michael Jackson:

But there is a line - somewhere around preying on barely pubescent sick kids who are the weakest and most vulnerable members of our society - that should not be crossed. And when it is, society should shun those who cross it. They should lose whatever else they have obtained, and forfeit their good name for their depravity.

Now,  I happen to agree with every word of this.  The curious thing, however, is who said it.  Bill Quick is an avowed atheist (sometimes bordering on militantly atheist).  On what basis, I wonder, did he come to the conclusion that this behavior is depraved?

Moral ineptitude

Our president is apparently unable to tell the good guys from the bad guys.  Suspending all military relations with Honduras? Seriously?

The military removed a president who was breaking the law with the sanction of the Supreme Court and Congress.  While I'm no expert, it appears that this was done in accordance with Honduran law.

You'd hope the mere fact that he's on the same side as Chavez would tip him off that he was on the wrong side. Apparently not.

I'd like to say I'm surprised by all this

But I'm not.
* Unable to parse the but i%27m not from wiktionary.org