FOX: Making Sure Even The Sports Division Sucks

During the holiday season, sports networks always use the military as a prop to pretend that they give a shit about the troops. They air these 10- or 15-second bumpers where the troops say hello to their families at home, or people in the US read their admiration of the troops off of cue cards. Usually very little thought goes into these segments and they can produce hilarious results. I caught one today.

During the Giants-Redskins game on FOX (of course), they cut to a woman from Minneapolis who said (paraphrasing): "I want to thank all the troops for making it possible for us to enjoy the Christmas season."

Right. Because as we all know, Saddam Hussein planned to use his completed nuclear weapons program to attack Minnesota on Christmas Eve 2005. It's a good thing we spent $200 billion and sent 2,100 troops to their deaths in order to prevent that catastrophe. Enjoy your fuckin' eggnog, lady!

Beer vs. Jesus

"Man, I don't even wanna KNOW how much I drank last night."

I found this on some atheist's website. Pretty funny antidote to the few religious wackos who insist on ruining the celebration of the Winter Solstice.

TOP TEN REASONS WHY BEER IS BETTER THAN JESUS

10. No one will kill you for not drinking beer.
9. Beer doesn't tell you how to have sex.
8. Beer has never caused a major war.
7. They don't force beer on minors who can't think for themselves.
6. When you have beer, you don't knock on people's doors trying to give it away.
5. Nobody's ever been burned at the stake, hanged, or tortured to death over his brand of beer.
4. You don't have to wait 2,000+ years for a second beer.
3. There are laws saying that beer labels can't lie to you.
2. You can prove you have a beer.
1. If you have devoted your life to beer, there are groups to help you stop.

UPDATE: One of my friends correctly pointed out that I rarely drink beer. That's true, but I'd drink a beer before I would chew on a wafer and pretend it's some guy's body. NOT GAY.

Stand Clear of Closing Doors

"Look at me, I'm a regular guy!" -- Mayor Bloomberg

I was trying to hold off talking about the transit strike, but the cumulative effect of about a dozen infuriating discussions over the last several days has made venting a necessity. First of all, the strike had, I think, kind of a galvanizing effect on New Yorkers in general. Just like after 9/11 and again during the blackout in 2003, people got into the habit of starting conversations with random strangers.

The bad part is that a sizable chunk of the people I talked to have no fucking clue what labor disputes are about in general, much less this one in particular. The news media certainly didn't help in that regard, with wall to wall coverage of how fucked up and evil the Transit Worker's Union is. I swear I almost shit myself when I saw one of these dinky local newscasts covering Mike Bloomberg's morning walk over the bridge with 40 people follwing him as if he were Forrest Gump. From the press coverage, you would have thought Jesus was walking across the Brooklyn Bridge to start the End Times.

It's all a publicity stunt. Bloomberg wants to break up the union, like all good billionaire Republicans do, because he wants an influx of cheap labor (like all good billionaire Republicans do). Bloomberg's dream is for a corps of undocumented illegal aliens to be operating the "A" trains and driving the buses for below minimum wage. Quality of life for the employees or the people who ride the system is not important to him, although they spend a lot of time and money trying to convince us otherwise.

A lot of people I know, normally rational, liberal individuals, convinced themselves that Bloomberg wasn't so bad even though he was a Republican. But as with so many other issues, with regard to the transit strike, he falls right in line. What I don't understand is, why do regular people defend a billionaire against a bunch of lunchpail, blue collar workers? A common sentiment I heard from people was, "those motherfuckers make $50,000 a year. I have a college degree and I only make 30K. What do they need MORE money for?"

Well, for one thing, it's not like you'll find this in any of the three major rags, but at the very same time they are crying poverty, the MTA is sitting on a $1 billion surplus. They have been caught in "creative bookkeeping" before, most recently in 2002:

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) hid more than half a billion dollars from the public when it was asking for a fare increase by keeping two sets of financial plans, one public and one secret, according to a report issued today by State Comptroller Alan Hevesi.

Only after he subpoenaed the MTA and required testimony of officials did Hevesi's office learn of the internal plan, which showed that the MTA secretly moved funds to reduce its 2002 surplus and create a deficit in 2003. Hevesi announced a reform proposal to change the secretive culture of the MTA to make it more accountable.

Why any person on the street thinks that money should stay in the coffers of the MTA and go to high-ranking bueraucrats rather than the people who do the bulk of the system's work, I have no idea. I think most people don't confront the disconnect in the forefront of their minds, but if that money doesn't go to the guys who make 50K, it will go to the guys who make 500K for doing basically nothing. They must think the money sits there on a cloud.

It seems to me that regular working class people often seem to side against the strikers because they think the strikers are "ungrateful". When I hear that, I can't help thinking of the master/slave relationship. I usually respond (politely; always politely, even to the most slackjawed gawps) by asking, "if you think it's bad for someone who makes $50,000 a year to ask for more money, why don't you get upset about their managers making hundreds of thousands of dollars, refusing to give up that money?" Usually they get a dopey look on their face and start talking about something else really loudly.

Digby has a post where he talks about Republicans who live in constant fear of terrorism, and their craven need to hide behind and answer to an authority figure. I think he's right on with that observation and it applies in labor disputes as well. Some people have a need to invest all their time and energy into pleasing their massas in the managers' office, and when others rebel against poor working conditions, they immediately and reflexively take the side of management.

Secondly, these transit workers do what is, a lot of ways, a shit job. Yes, it pays well, but in order to attract qualified people to it, you have to keep the benefits very attractive. Skimping on the pension and the health benefits (and failing to address some of the more shitty policies of the MTA toward its workers) is not a good way to keep qualified employees, especially when the management tier gets the same benefits package and is not being asked to pay more into it the way the workers are. This is a good way to drive out reliable people from the system. Have you ever been in a serious bus accident? If you have, you're the first one I've heard of.

Where would our society be without strikes? Imagine a world where corporations are allowed to do whatever the fuck they want to do. Eight-year olds working 14-hour days. Asbestos in the workplace. No minimum wage. All these things were addressed because of labor walkouts; this is the only real power they have. Corporations cannot be left to their own devices to care about the human condition; history demostrates that they bend over backwards to try and circumvent the law in order to damage the human condition wherever possible, if it makes them money.

Luckily, every poll I have seen on the subject says that the citizens of New York overwhelmingly support the workers over the MTA. I wouldn't have guessed that from talking to the people I talked to in the street, but it is pretty hopeful, especially in the wake of Bloomberg's prefabricated media blitz to make the transit union look like ogres.

This strike was a major pain in the ass for everyone involved, myself included. But holding the workers responsible as the outlet for your anger is just stupid. Unless you're the heir to a billion-dollar corporation, their struggle is your struggle.

The Reason for the Season

Every year, people all across America travel thousands of miles to get together with their annoying families, in order to eat high-cholesterol food, give crappy gifts to each other, get piss-drunk, start violent shouting matches and inflict physical harm on one another.

Yes, it is a wonderful time of the year. But even as we allow ourselves to get swept up in the orgasmic tsunami of brainless consumerism, we should still remember the man who made all this possible; the reason why we celebrate, pray and reflect on December 25th. A man was born that day who brought joy to millions of people; a man who performed feats that defied physics and bent the human mind, making us all believe in a higher power. Of course I am talking about:

RICKEY HENDERSON!



Rickey Henderson, the all time leader in runs scored, the all time leader in stolen bases, the all time leader in leadoff home runs. Second only to Barry Bonds in bases on balls. A man who inspires us all with his resilience and fortitude. And occasional ability to speak in tongues.

Let us all bow our heads in silent prayer for Rickmas. AMEN.

Oh, you thought I was talking about that thing with the tree and the baby in the manger and the three wise men with the frankincense and myrrh? Yeah, I heard of that too. It's an urban legend, apparently.

Alfonso Soriano: Whiny-Ass Titty-Baby*

Smirking, overrated, defensive clusterfuck Alfonso Soriano has a problem playing the outfield:

"I don't want to change," Soriano said Monday night at a dinner held for major league players by Dominican Republic President Leonel Fernandez. "If I haven't done it before, I won't do it now."
Soriano said he had a greater comfort level in the AL, and he plans to become a free agent after next season and sign with an AL team.

"I knew the pitchers and batters of opposing teams and, therefore, where to place myself defensively. In the National that's going to take me a while," he said.

It's not like knowing how to place himself defensively actually helped him in any way comprehensible to man when he was in the AL; he is one of the worst defensive middle infielders in all of baseball. In his five years of playing second base, he had more balls bounce off his body than Jake Gyllenhall in Brokeback Mountain. Every defensive metric shows that Soriano is a God-awful liability at second base.

I think this talk of "adjustment" that he'll have to go through is more of a pre-emptive excuse for why Soriano's numbers will suck next year, when he moves from Arlington, the Coors Field of the AL which helped mask his offensive deficiencies, to the cavernous RFK in Washington, which will exacerbate them. That explains the unwillingness to play a corner outfield position, too. Deep down, he knows he sucks, and he's scared shitless of losing his value in his free agency walk year. He's a lot smarter than the idiotic GM of the Nationals, Jim Bowden, who actually wants to take his immobile ass and plunk him into the gigantic outfield of RFK Stadium.

Playing right field would put even his inflated Texas numbers below the league average; doing it in a pitchers' park would make him one of the worst-hitting outfielders in baseball. He wants to stay at second so that he can remain one of the top three or four second basemen in the league and sneak into another All-Star game (it's a shitty crop) and continue overinflating his worth in the yearbefore he hits paydirt.

The icing on the cake is the fact that he proudly declared his free agency for 2007 in December 2005. That is the ultimate in balls, hanging his team out to dry, and giving fans another reason not to get excited about what is likely to be a shit team. "I don't really care about Washington and I am going to leave at my first opportunity." Nice PR job, a-hole.

*(Titty-baby insult stolen from Atrios.)

RAW is WAR... No, Literally

I am trying to figure out if I just watched an episode of Monday Night RAW, or a two-hour infomercial for the U. S. Department of Defense. Not that Vince McMahon is a pillar of integrity, but still, you'd think he'd realize that every teenager that the Bush administration exposes to bodily harm and death in Iraq and Afghanistan, is one potential wrestler he can't sign and expose to bodily harm and death himself in the near future.

At the Torch website, Wade Keller says:

-Vince McMahon walked to the ring and told the troops that the "negative media types" back in the U.S. "have basically forgotten them." That's lame. That's Vince trying to babyface himself by portraying that the "media-types" or the "anti-war" people are forgetting about the troops.

Trying, yes. The question is why? Sixty percent of the US population now thinks it was a complete, balls-up, batshit-crazy mistake to go to war. Making pro-war statements in order to get over with a crowd in December 2005 would be like booking a show in Israel and having your top babyface start making "Sieg Heil" gestures. Most likely it is an instance of Vince displaying his not-so-occasional "tin ear" for pop culture. Not that wrestling fans are a particularly sophisticated audience in general, but to find someone who still thinks the war is a good idea you have to look so deep into the bowels of the human gene pool that the people you find would be unlikely to even be able to turn on the TV.

I think it's nice that the WWE does shows for the troops. They deserve a little entertainment in between dodging bullets and landmines for no good reason. What I don't need is Jerry Lawler and Joey Styles reading snippets to me off of a card about how wonderful life is in Afghanistan now thanks to King Bush. They must have mentioned the Taliban being removed from power about 37 times. I guess no one gave them the memo that the Taliban is still there.

I also wonder who Vince thinks are the "negative media types" who have "basically forgotten them"? Let's have some names. Every time I turn on the TV, I see some preening, manicured fuckwad bending over backwards to tell me why Bush isn't a criminal for spying on Americans, or a liar for taking us to war without justification, or a disastrous fuckup for losing an entire American city. Bush and his asslickers in the media don't ignore the troops; in fact they never miss an opportunity to stand on the troops as a prop, just like Vince.