Always good to see the Bucks fall to the Bulls. I believe this makes nine in a row. Bulls also have all time series lead.
Not really happy with the overall situation despite the late defensive surge, which is pretty much a staple. Turnovers still too high. Shooting percentage still too low, though Hamilton kept it from being too bad. Heinrich's scoring average is crap, which isn't helped by the few shots he takes. But those he does take are usually wide open misses. Luol Deng also seems to have lost that mid-range jumper that was pretty much automatic last year. They clearly, as a team, haven't yet found their identity and chemistry, though they seem to be showing flashes of what they could be. I'd like to see the rookie, Teague, out on the floor a bit more, but it seems that will take a blowout game, either losing by a ton OR winning by a ton.
The Bucks have some great guard play, and Brandon Jennings was killing us. For a while he seemed unable to miss and worse, able to always get separation for a clean look at the hoop. The high pick and roll was a winner for them until the Bulls finally realized the pick wasn't rolling. Too bad Jennings suffered that ankle injury in the last minute of the game, as I would have loved to see how they adjust for the Monday game at the UC. Of course, he might not be badly hurt, but they did carry him off the court. It would be a major tough break for the Bucks to lose this kid for even one game, even though it would mean a tenth straight win for the Bulls over this team. But I prefer to see the Bulls beat a team with the opponent's best on the floor. Far more satisfying as a fan.
Saturday, November 24, 2012
Wednesday, November 07, 2012
What Can I Say? I'm Shocked!!!
Yeah, shocked. Shocked that stupidity reigns supreme in this nation. I mean, really...the first time around, one could understand the emotion attached to the notion of electing our first black president (I could have sworn they said that was Bill Clinton). It was too much to ask to let that slip by without any sense of when another chance might come along. It might have been then or never, as if it was all that important to risk the following four years over it.
Yeah, that was shocking, too. Here was a guy with no track record, no accomplishments...at least none that anyone ever highlighted...and at least two clear examples of having far less than the brilliance so often attributed to him: his objection to the Born Alive Infant Protection proposals and his radio interview demonstrating his incredibly nutty views on the US Constitution. His associations were incredibly suspect and with all that and with all the rest not mentioned, he was a Chicago politician. So much to suggest that it would be stupid to even nominate such a man, say nothing of voting for him.
Yeah, that was stupid enough.
But now, after establishing just how impotent he is, just how poor a leader, just how bad a president, even after providing in his first campaign and shortly after what would justify a one term proposition and following through to deliver that very justification, he is actually re-elected? I'm ashamed at how stupid so many of my fellow Americans are.
The stupid came in three different flavors:
1. Those who bought into the Obama cult of personality, who never took the time to truly examine his actions and the effects of them. Some of these people are just mindless followers of the first black president and feel he can do no wrong, especially if he gives them stuff and sticks it to the rich guy they don't even know. These are the people who would vote for him because he's a Democrat and not a Republican and no other really substantive, thoughtful, reality-based reason.
2. These are the non-voters. They are those who like to say that voting makes no difference, that it's all rigged but in reality are just too freakin' lazy to really take any time out of their lives to pay attention. Their non-action is the most heinous action for daring to believe such nonsense and putting it forth as a valid reason for not voting. I know too many people like this. They guarantee that they make no difference.
3. Third party voters. I don't know what it would take for any third party to be a viable option that has more than an ice cube's chance in hell to win the presidency. That is, of course it would take at least fifty-one percent of the vote, but what I mean is, what would it take to muster up those kinds of numbers? As they never have more than a few percentage points at most, they aren't so very little better than non-existent and a vote for one of them makes no statement of any consequence, makes no noise anyone can hear and is completely wasteful. All it does is hurt the chances of the candidate for which one would have voted if none but the two major parties were allowed and one had to pick one of them. That is to say, most, if not all third party voters lean left or right. A lefty voting third party only hurt Obama and helped Romney by not voting for Obama. That's the only tangible effect of a third party vote. It is stupid to think that such votes have any other value but to screw candidate of the two major parties closest in ideology to the third party voter. In the case of this election, it got us Obama for another four years. The time for voting one's principles is the primaries. The time to vote to save the country from the worse scenario possible was just lost to that worse scenario. Thanks.
I know people of each group. I'm ashamed of and for all them. This was a no-brainer, but that expression does not mean one removes one's brain and then does something incredibly stupid. It's supposed to mean that one needn't have to use a brain to see just who the better choice was.
May God forgive everyone of them. I wonder if He can.
Yeah, that was shocking, too. Here was a guy with no track record, no accomplishments...at least none that anyone ever highlighted...and at least two clear examples of having far less than the brilliance so often attributed to him: his objection to the Born Alive Infant Protection proposals and his radio interview demonstrating his incredibly nutty views on the US Constitution. His associations were incredibly suspect and with all that and with all the rest not mentioned, he was a Chicago politician. So much to suggest that it would be stupid to even nominate such a man, say nothing of voting for him.
Yeah, that was stupid enough.
But now, after establishing just how impotent he is, just how poor a leader, just how bad a president, even after providing in his first campaign and shortly after what would justify a one term proposition and following through to deliver that very justification, he is actually re-elected? I'm ashamed at how stupid so many of my fellow Americans are.
The stupid came in three different flavors:
1. Those who bought into the Obama cult of personality, who never took the time to truly examine his actions and the effects of them. Some of these people are just mindless followers of the first black president and feel he can do no wrong, especially if he gives them stuff and sticks it to the rich guy they don't even know. These are the people who would vote for him because he's a Democrat and not a Republican and no other really substantive, thoughtful, reality-based reason.
2. These are the non-voters. They are those who like to say that voting makes no difference, that it's all rigged but in reality are just too freakin' lazy to really take any time out of their lives to pay attention. Their non-action is the most heinous action for daring to believe such nonsense and putting it forth as a valid reason for not voting. I know too many people like this. They guarantee that they make no difference.
3. Third party voters. I don't know what it would take for any third party to be a viable option that has more than an ice cube's chance in hell to win the presidency. That is, of course it would take at least fifty-one percent of the vote, but what I mean is, what would it take to muster up those kinds of numbers? As they never have more than a few percentage points at most, they aren't so very little better than non-existent and a vote for one of them makes no statement of any consequence, makes no noise anyone can hear and is completely wasteful. All it does is hurt the chances of the candidate for which one would have voted if none but the two major parties were allowed and one had to pick one of them. That is to say, most, if not all third party voters lean left or right. A lefty voting third party only hurt Obama and helped Romney by not voting for Obama. That's the only tangible effect of a third party vote. It is stupid to think that such votes have any other value but to screw candidate of the two major parties closest in ideology to the third party voter. In the case of this election, it got us Obama for another four years. The time for voting one's principles is the primaries. The time to vote to save the country from the worse scenario possible was just lost to that worse scenario. Thanks.
I know people of each group. I'm ashamed of and for all them. This was a no-brainer, but that expression does not mean one removes one's brain and then does something incredibly stupid. It's supposed to mean that one needn't have to use a brain to see just who the better choice was.
May God forgive everyone of them. I wonder if He can.
Thursday, November 01, 2012
More From The Cornucopia
Gentle readers,
As you know, I have a new series to which I will add new installments as the mood strikes me and time allows. It is called, in general, "From the Cornucopia" and features observations, critiques and commentaries based on what I have read at "What's Left In The Church" from my blog roll list of left-leaning blogs.
In this case, I encourage any who can stomach the thought, to visit this particular post and peruse it and the ensuing comments. I'm not sure what I find more fascinating: the wacky points made in the post, or the wacky response to comments I posted.
My comments, of course, are in reference to the post and the general point being made about "nincompoops" attempting to comment on matters of science. But there follows at least one blatantly goofy point regarding reproductive matters that is put forth as a serious response to pro-life arguments. It tends to make an incredible nincompoop of the host actually, but he still tries to defend the notion, along with his boy. Worse, they view my more logical understanding of the matter with no small measure of incredulity.
Now, I know my like-minded readers are not keen on the idea of spending another nano-second at this particular blog. I understand their reluctance and am saddened they do not derive the same joy I do in exposing the expressions of sophisticated thought so common there for the delusions of grandeur they are. But it really is a typical attitude of the leftist mind that is so commonly on display. That is to say, if one truly wishes to understand what a common leftist looks like, there can be few better examples than this particular blog.
At the same time, I have no issue with those visitors not of like mind to check it out and return with their impressions and explain one of two things (assuming agreement with the host of that blog):
1. Where a scientific point is discussed, what makes their argument correct and mine not?
2. What demonstrates a closed mind and how could that possibly be mine and not theirs (and specifically, Geoffrey's)?
All honest observations and comments are welcomed and hoped for from virtual friend and foe alike.
As you know, I have a new series to which I will add new installments as the mood strikes me and time allows. It is called, in general, "From the Cornucopia" and features observations, critiques and commentaries based on what I have read at "What's Left In The Church" from my blog roll list of left-leaning blogs.
In this case, I encourage any who can stomach the thought, to visit this particular post and peruse it and the ensuing comments. I'm not sure what I find more fascinating: the wacky points made in the post, or the wacky response to comments I posted.
My comments, of course, are in reference to the post and the general point being made about "nincompoops" attempting to comment on matters of science. But there follows at least one blatantly goofy point regarding reproductive matters that is put forth as a serious response to pro-life arguments. It tends to make an incredible nincompoop of the host actually, but he still tries to defend the notion, along with his boy. Worse, they view my more logical understanding of the matter with no small measure of incredulity.
Now, I know my like-minded readers are not keen on the idea of spending another nano-second at this particular blog. I understand their reluctance and am saddened they do not derive the same joy I do in exposing the expressions of sophisticated thought so common there for the delusions of grandeur they are. But it really is a typical attitude of the leftist mind that is so commonly on display. That is to say, if one truly wishes to understand what a common leftist looks like, there can be few better examples than this particular blog.
At the same time, I have no issue with those visitors not of like mind to check it out and return with their impressions and explain one of two things (assuming agreement with the host of that blog):
1. Where a scientific point is discussed, what makes their argument correct and mine not?
2. What demonstrates a closed mind and how could that possibly be mine and not theirs (and specifically, Geoffrey's)?
All honest observations and comments are welcomed and hoped for from virtual friend and foe alike.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)