30 April, 2007

Baseball needs to re-think its scheduling practice

I meant to write this a while back but I didn't want to over shadow the events that lead to my last two posts.

Now that the baseball season (both Major and Minor leagues) are starting earlier and earlier, they need to rethink the idea of having cities in the northeast host games in the early season.

Those of us who live in the northeast (I'm in Rochester, NY) know that weather is, at best, unpredictable.

It doesn't seem to be as much of a problem for the majors, since they have larger travel budgets and multiple trips to each city (except for the inter-league games, which don't occur in early April).

Why is it that the southern and western teams consistently travel to the colder climbs to open the season. Who was the brainiac who sent the L.A. Angels of Anaheim to open the season in Cleveland, OH? With several feet of snow on the field, the games were moved to Milwaukee, WI, into their domed stadium. (did anyone else notice that the games were moved to the home stadium of the team owned by the sister of the commissioner?)

Now I understand that the southern teams don't want to lose home game dates in the summer when more people are likely to attend, as opposed to the days that schools are still in session.

What becomes unfair, is now that the Rochester Red Wings of the International League (an AAA League) will lose 3 home games this year because of bad weather. Since the teams involved, aren't scheduled to make another trip to the Flower City, the games will be made up when the Red Wings travel south later this summer.

To make matters worse, in the make-up games, the Wings won't even get the benefit of last ups in these games.

Now is the time to make the change. If the season isn't going to start later in the year, than have the first 2 weeks take place in southern and western cities, or cities that have domed stadiums. Would you rather sit at the stands of a game in August in South Carolina, or in Rochester?

Or, here's a novel idea.. how about going back to playing more double-headers? That would allow the season to start later, but not shorten the number of games (which might not be a bad idea either..).

Play ball!

19 April, 2007

More gun laws are not the answer

Given the recent events in Blacksburg, VA this week, one might be quick to say that we need more laws to control the possession and use of firearms in this country.

Without turning this into a 2nd Amendment discussion, I would have to whole-heartedly disagree.

Anyone who says otherwise either hasn't thought it through, is just plain ignorant.

First of all, do you think that Cho Seung-Hui was concerned with the law when he gunned down 30+ people on campus Monday?

Would another law have prevented the tragedy? In a word, 'No'.

Sure, it may have slowed him down, but as hell-bent on destruction as he was, he would have found a way to secure weapons to fulfill his manifesto.

If the gun dealer had not legally sold him guns, he could have gone to many urban street corners to pick up a Saturday night special, or he could have gone into a garden center, and picked up a bag of ammonium nitrate and a Ryder truck like Timothy McVeigh did 12 years ago today.

Despite your stand on the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, the more restrictions the government places on it's law-abiding citizens, the less protected the citizens become.

One thing that I don't hear being mentioned is the comparison to the shooting in Trolley Square in Salt Lake City two months ago. No one has stopped to say how much worse that tragedy could or would have been, had Kenneth Hammond (an off duty police officer) not been there with his legally registered hand gun, how many more innocent lives would have Sulejman Talovic taken if he wasn't stopped by a citizen with a gun?

Let's apply that hypothetical to the Va. Tech. scenario. If one of the students in the engineering building (or in the dorm for that matter) had been allowed to carry a gun, how many of those 30 people killed would still be alive? Given this, one could hypothesize that gun laws exaggerated the casualties.

In full disclosure, I am a member of the NRA, and a gun owner.

As always, I welcome, and invite your thoughts and comments.

13 April, 2007

Imus got a raw deal

Don't get me wrong.. he is an idiot for what he said on the air, but was it grounds for the wrath of Sharpton?

Was anyone really surprised that he was capable of saying something so stupid on the air? He's been saying stupid, ignorant, controversial things on the air for nearly 40 years now. He invented the profession of shock-jock. Was he over the top this time? Perhaps.

Here's a novel idea, if you don't like what someone says on the radio or TV, change the channel. Let's all be serious... it's 2007, we have more choices for media than ever before. How many people actually heard what Imus said live? He's not even on the air in my market, and if he was, I wouldn't be a listener (well, I guess he was on MSNBC, but I'm not one of the 4 people that watch that network).

It is one of the biggest double standard in today's society. And before you play the oppressed slave card, lets really take a look at it. First of all, who do you think sold the slaves to the slave traders? That's right, other black Africans. And if they hadn't, how likely is it that Al Sharpton would even be in this country? He is a descendant of slaves (ironically, descended from a slave owned by the ancestors of former Senator Thurman). If slavery hadn't happened, would he be here to cry out against the devastation caused by some idiot on the radio? If I were one of the players, I don't know who I would be more upset at. No, I do know. Imus is some ignorant radio shock jock, Sharpton is arrogant enough to think that I need his protection. He thinks that the players aren't tough enough to let it go.

Why is it that Kramer gets lambasted for his moronic tirade, Imus gets fired for saying less, yet Chris Rock and Richard Pryor's routines are full of 'cracker' references and N-bombs, and audiences are in hysterics.

And have you heard the lyrics for Snoop Dogg, or Jay-Z, or countless other rap/hip hop artist. How many times do they talk down to black women, and all they get is the 'parental warning' label on the CD and sell countless albums.

The scariest part about this whole thing is that I agree with that fat slob on The View, if they can take down an icon like Imus, who is next? Rush? Beck? Savage? Hannity?

Another racially motivated story in the news that seemed to disappear recently. Those 3 lacrosse players that raped the stripper last year (oh yea, that's right, they didn't). The story that forced the pre-season number one ranked college lacrosse team to sit out the season. The story that got the coach fired, the story that blacklisted those 3 boys. Oh yea, the story that will likely get the Durham County DA disbarred for trying to grab headlines and kowtowing to Jackson and Sharpton about the 3 evil, privileged, white boys that were less than civil to the black stripper, who couldn't keep her story straight.

Bottom line, we have taken this whole politically correct thing way to far. We all need to take a step back. We need to be more sensitive to the thoughts and feelings of other. Thumper's mother had it right when she said "if you can't say something nice, don't say nuttin' at all."

But we also need to be less sensitive and not be so quick to take offense to the things that others say, you know the whole sticks and stones thing.

Let the flame war begin.