It is my preference (and not my principle) to not swear. And it is so easy to substitute the Political mascot for the word, that I just had to do it. History shows my assertion to be true. And today’s half-time stats show it, as well. Kobe threw up (heh) 15 shot attempts, hitting 6. The second place and third place teammates of his threw up a combined 16 attempts, hitting 7. Kobe has always been a ball hog, and when it has previously been loudly pointed out to him, he went the other way, refusing to shoot and throwing the ball around, just to prove his detractors wrong in a stompy-foot way. Don’t get me wrong. Kobe is one of the most athletic ball scorers in the history of the game, but he is also one of the most selfish. And if he even tries to respond to this in-game (like my micro blog has any kind of sway in anything basketball related), he will prove my point by “shoving his ball passing in my face” instead of being a team player.
Archive for the ‘sports’ Category
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/11/12
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2014/08/30
And I would drop them, my lifetime favorite collegiate team, to 12. I didn’t watch the game, even though I’m on vacation, because it took place at 12:30 am. But upon reading ESPN’s recap, I don’t believe THE Ohio State University is Top Ten material… at least not right now. The redshirt freshman replacement quarterback is not ready for Prime Time. The nearly all new starting offense is not currently up for the task. The defensive backs were not tested at all, and a triple-option offense is an unusual creature to try to defend, but the defense is what kept the Buckeyes from losing.
It’s hard to determine the kicking game from just a few plays, but a 46 yard field goal and 2 50+ yard punts is promising. If the kicker can’t reach the uprights, the punter can flip the field. When the offense gets bogged down, and this offense will often, it’s good to have two feet on the team that can get the job done.
Time will tell, but I think Ohio State showed glaring weaknesses on offense and an untested defense.
Posted by Hube on 2012/12/03
It was bad enough when they had uber-loon Keith Olbermann sit in with them on the pre-game and halftime, and when they engaged in doltish PC antics. Now, Bob Costas (who I already can’t stand for his condescending delivery of practically everything) decides to lecture us all about gun control:
“Our current gun culture,” [sports writer Jason] Whitlock wrote, “ensures that more and more domestic disputes will end in the ultimate tragedy, and that more convenience-store confrontations over loud music coming from a car will leave more teenage boys bloodied and dead.”
“Handguns do not enhance our safety. They exacerbate our flaws, tempt us to escalate arguments, and bait us into embracing confrontation rather than avoiding it. In the coming days, Jovan Belcher’s actions, and their possible connection to football, will be analyzed. Who knows?”
“But here,” wrote Jason Whitlock, “is what I believe: If Jovan Belcher didn’t possess a gun, he and Kasandra Perkins would both be alive today.”
Because you’re an idiot, Whitlock. And you too, Costas. Belcher was obviously suffering from some severe mental and emotional issues. Thinking that because he may not have had access to a gun he wouldn’t have killed his girlfriend and himself is wishful thinking at best, and plain stupidity at worst. Not to mention that handguns enhance people’s safety every freakin’ day.
It’s bad enough I tuned in to see how my second favorite football team (Eagles) was faring against “America’s Team” (Cowboys) last evening. I certainly didn’t need this sanctimonious garbage on a football game yet again. It’s one thing for Costas to say “Looks like the gun control debate may resurface” or something to that effect, but don’t f’in lecture me.
I’ll never be tuning into Sunday Night Football henceforth. Who needs it. I’ll just scope the constantly updating ESPN.com game schematics.
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/11/02
On September 10, 1989, my second-born daughter Audréy Renée-Maree Hitchcock died. And life went on. For me, that meant I went to work on the day she died, after spending the night in a hospital basically waiting for her to die. I didn’t have a choice.
Back then, I had a sub-contractor job of stuffing and delivering 1,100 advertisement bags door-to-door. The bags got stuffed on Friday and delivered Saturday and Sunday. Half the bags got delivered Saturday, then Saturday night, Audréy went to the emergency room at Knox Community Hospital, then life-flighted to Children’s Hospital in Columbus, Ohio. Sunday, she died, all her organs failing. Sunday afternoon I was back in Mount Vernon, delivering those blasted MIDS bags.
Because people depended on those free bags, and the death of my daughter impacted their lives not at all. On the worst, most evil day of my life, I soldiered on. Because I had to.
Run the New Jerk City marathon as scheduled and quit crying that the police won’t be there for when New Yorkers do what New Yorkers do 365 days a year anyway.
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/06/09
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/04/21
If a very Boston crowd, a very New England crowd, a very Liberal crowd actively boos Barack Insane Obama, what do you think “fly-over country” feels about this radical Socialist race-baiting Tenth Commandment-violating gun-grabbing Catholic-hating Israel-hating Constitution-torching narcissistic false god?
The oceans began to recede.
He brought us out of darkness and into the light. (Micah, Matthew, and, according to Michelle, her husband Barack)
Posted in Constitution, Constitution Shredded, Elections, Global Warming, history, Liberal, media, Obama, Personal Responsibility, Philosophy, politically correct, Politically Incorrect, politics, society, sports, truth, We Won't Miss You | Tagged: Catholicism, Christianity, deceit, false gods, Idolatry, Israel, Second Amendment, Tenth Commandment | 3 Comments »
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/03/27
THE Ohio State University enters its 11th Final Four. As the Kentucky fanatic and esteemed co-blogger Dana Pico said, I went 3 for 4 in my Elite Eight predictions. I predicted Florida would beat Louisville, but I was wrong.
Ohio State lost to and beat Indiana, who beat and lost to Kentucky. Ohio State also lost to Kansas by double digits in Kansas while Jared Sullinger was sidelined with an injury. Had Sully been healthy and playing, the outcome would’ve been different. Would Ohio State have won? I don’t know, but the outcome still would’ve been different.
Now, we have the 2012 edition of the Final Four.
Kentucky faces Loisville in a Kentucky grudge match. It is highly unlikely that Kentucky mash will be involved, but since the game will be in New Orleans, it is a possibility, if you know what I mean.
Ohio State faces Kansas in a rematch. This time, outside of Kansas and with Sullinger playing.
My Final Four Predictions:
1 Kentucky beats 4 Louisville by double digits.
2 Ohio State beats 2 Kansas by 6.
And 2 Ohiio State beats 1 Kentucky by 3, possibly in overtime, to get their first Title since the early 1960s.
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/03/24
The Elite Eight is set, and boy was I wrong. This is why I’m not a sportscaster. Well, one of the reasons, anyway. It’s why I don’t enter any sports pools (other than the fact they are mostly “wink and nod” illegal). I’m not very good at it.
I predicted Ohio State would beat Cincinnati by 6. Ohio State lost a 12-point lead and trailed Cincinnati before getting their blue-collar work ethic back and winning going away, by 15.
I predicted North Carolina would rest their starters around mid-way through the second half against Ohio, and win in a laugher. Ohio took North Carolina into overtime before succumbing.
I predicted Xavier would beat Baylor in overtime. Baylor won by 5 in regulation.
I predicted North Carolina State would beat Kansas on a final shot. Kansas beat NC State by 3.
I predicted Kentucky would beat Indiana by 4. Kentucky won by 12.
I predicted Syracuse would be the most likely 1 seed to fall, and gave Wisconsin even odds of accomplishing it. Syracuse won by a single point. Not a bad prediction on its own, but…
I predicted meatchicken state would beat Louisville (my declared weakest 4 seed in the Sweet 16) by 8. Louisville won by 13.
I predicted Florida would beat Marquette by double digits. Florida won by … 10. (Hurray, me.)
So, my Elite Eight predictions. And this time, no victory margins.
1 Kentucky beats 3 Baylor.
7 Florida beats 4 Louisville.
2 Ohio State beats 1 Syracuse.
2 Kansas beats 1 North Carolina.
That would leave 2 SEC teams, a Big Ten team, and a Big Twelve team.
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/03/19
Day 1 of the field of 64 saw very few upsets, and those upsets were mild. Day 2 of the field of 64 saw major upsets, with two 2-seeds and a 4-seed falling. Then came the round of 32.
Day 1 of the round of 32 saw very few upsets, while Day 2 of the round of 32 once again saw the more major upsets.
And the Sweet Sixteen has been set.
Of the remaining 16 teams, four are from the Big Ten and four are from Ohio. That makes 7 of the 16 teams remaining from either the Big Ten or Ohio. In the case of THE Ohio State University, it is from both. And it’s guaranteed an Ohio team will be in the Elite Eight. It’s impossible not to be. Because THE Ohio State University faces Cincinnati in the Sweet Sixteen.
The 16 teams that remain:
Kentucky (number one overall, 1 seed in the South, SEC, 34-2, lost to Indiana by 1 and Vanderbilt by 7)
Indiana (4 seed in the South, Big Ten, 27-8, 11-7 in the Big Ten, defeated then-number 1 Kentucky and then-number 2 Ohio State)
Baylor (3 seed in the South, Big Twelve, 29-7, 12-6 in the Big Twelve, lost to Missouri by 1, 15, 15, lost to Kansas by 18, 14, beat Kansas by 9)
Xavier (10 seed in the South, an Ohio team, Atlantic 10, 23-12, 10-6 in the Atlantic 10, beat Vanderbilt by 12 in overtime, beat Cincinnati by 21, beat Purdue by 3)
Meatchicken State (1 seed in the West, Big Ten, 29-7, 13-5 in the Big Ten, Big Ten co-champs (with Ohio State and Meatchicken), Big Ten Tourney champs, lost to North Carolina by 12, lost to Duke by 5, beat Wisconsin by 3 (OT), 14, 13, beat Indiana by 15, lost to Indiana by 15, beat Ohio State by 10, lost to Ohio State by 2, beat Ohio State by 4)
Louisville (4 seed in the West, Big East, 28-9, 10-8 in the Big East, beat Vanderbilt by 2 (OT), lost to Kentucky by 7, lost to Marquette by 11, beat Marquette by 13, lost to Syracuse by 1, 9, lost to Cincinnati by 4, beat Cincinnati by 6, beat Ohio by 5)
Marquette (3 seed in the West, Big East, 27-7, 14-4 in the Big East, beat Wisconsin by 7, lost to Vanderbilt by 17, lost to Georgetown by 7, beat Georgetown by 14, lost to Syracuse by 7, beat Louisville by 11, lost to Louisville by 13, beat Cincinnati by 17, lost to Cincinnati by 11)
Florida (7 seed in the West, SEC, 25-10, 10-6 in the SEC, lost to Ohio State by 7, lost to Syracuse by 4, lost to Vanderbilt by 10, lost to Kentucky by 20, 15, 3)
Syracuse (1 seed in the East, Big East, 33-2, 17-1 in the Big East, beat Florida by 4, beat Marquette by 7, beat Georgetown by 3 (OT), beat Louisville by 1, 9, beat Cincinnati by 7, lost to Cincinnati by 3, beat 16-seed UNCA by 7)
Wisconsin (4 seed in the East, Big Ten, 26-9, 12-6 in the Big Ten, lost to North Carolina by 3, lost to Marquette by 7, lost to meatchicken state by 3 (OT), 14, 13, lost to Ohio State by 6, beat Ohio State by 3, beat Indiana by 7, 8, beat Vanderbilt by 3)
Cincinnati (6 seed in the East, Ohio team, Big East, 26-10, 12-6 in the Big East, lost to Xavier by 21, beat Georgetown by 4, 2 (2OT), beat Louisville by 4, lost to Louisville by 6, lost to Marquette by 17, beat Marquette by 11, beat Syracuse by 3)
THE Ohio State University (2 seed in the East, Ohio team, Big Ten co-champions (with meatchicken and meatchicken state), 29-7, 13-5 in the Big Ten, beat Florida by 7, beat Duke by 21, lost to Kansas by 11, lost to Indiana by 6, beat Indiana by 17, beat Wisconsin by 6, lost to Wisconsin by 3, lost to meatchicken state by 10, beat meatchicken state by 2, lost to meatchicken state by 4)
North Carolina (1 seed in the Mid-West, ACC, 31-5, 14-2 in the ACC, beat Wisconsin by 3, lost to Kentucky by 1, beat Florida State by 33 (yes, 33), lost to Florida State by 3, beat North Carolina State by 19, 12, 2, lost to Duke by 1, beat Duke by 18)
Ohio University (13 seed in the Mid-West, Ohio team (and my youngest brother is a tenured English professor there), MAC, 28-7, 11-5 in the MAC, lost to Louisville by 5, beat meatchicken by 5)
North Carolina State (11 seed in the Mid-West, ACC, 24-12, 9-7 in the ACC, lost to Vanderbilt by 7, lost to Indiana by 11, lost to Syracuse by 16, lost to North Carolina by 19, 12, 2, lost to Duke by 5, lost to Florida State by 14, beat Georgetown by 3)
Kansas (2 seed in the Mid-West, Big 12, 29-6, 16-2 in the Big 12, lost to Kentucky by 10, beat Georgetown by 4, lost to Duke by 7, beat Ohio State by 11, beat Baylor by 18, 14, lost to Baylor by 9, lost to Missouri by 3, beat Missouri by 1 (OT))
Having spent my first 44 years in central Ohio (with an exceedingly brief few months in Fort Wayne prior to reaching school age), I am a Buckeye through-and-through. That means I’m also a major fan of the Big Ten Conference (which has 12 teams; go figure). That also means that I know Ohio State’s loss to Kansas occurred at Kansas while Jared Sullinger, who is not long for college ball despite his sophomore status, was sidelined with injury.
Of the top seeds, Syracuse is absolutely the weakest and absolutely the most vulnerable. And they are going up against a Wisconsin team that is exceedingly dangerous. This is the most likely upset of a 1 seed in the Sweet 16. I’ll give even odds in this game.
Kentucky, the number 1 overall, faces an Indiana team that already beat Kentucky in Indiana. It is exceedingly difficult to defeat a strong team twice in one season, and this game will be on a neutral court. Kentucky by 4.
Louisville is, in my book, the weakest 4 seed remaining. Meatchicken state is a very strong team. Meatchicken state by 8.
North Carolina against Ohio? I predict North Carolina pulls its starters with 7 minutes remaining. Tarheels in a double-digit walk.
Having spent so many years living in Ohio, I know Xavier tends to be more powerful than its appearance. So, despite my daughter’s two step-sons rooting for Baylor, I’m calling Xavier an over-time win.
When Marquette is good, the team is very good. But when Marquette is bad, it stinks. It will be a double-digit victory for whoever wins. And I predict Florida will win.
Cincinnati and THE Ohio State University are both strong teams. Absolutely no team can match Ohio State’s starting five, but Ohio State always has an exceedingly shallow bench, due to the 1-and-out (this year, 2-and-out) players Ohio State gets, which is very detrimental to a deep run in the NCAA Championships. Ohio State by 6. (And there’s a strong likelihood in my book that at least one starter from each team will foul out.)
Kansas is the weakest 2 seed in the tournament, but has lucked out in facing a 10 seed. But NC State is a 10 seed that is peaking at just the right time. This game will come down to the final shot. The ghost of Jimmy V will once again run across the floor, desperately looking for someone to hug.
And there are my predictions for the Sweet 16.
March Madness, Round Of 64
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2012/03/17
So, the first day of March Madness had relatively few upsets, and those upsets were excessively mild according to their seeding. But the second day had some major upsets. Second-seeded and perennial ACC powerhouse Duke got ousted out of the South Regional in its first-round game by 15th-seeded Lehigh. Second-seeded and Big 12 powerhouse Mizzou got ousted out of the West Regional in the first round by Norfolk State. Fourth-seeded and Big 10 co-champion (along with Ohio State and Meatchicken State) Meatchicken got ousted out of the Mid-West Regional in its first round game by Ohio University (where my brother is a tenured professor).
So, how many of you have already had your brackets busted by those 2, 2, 4, losses in the first round?
Posted by DNW on 2011/11/14
The hunting of whitetail deer is considered a less than admirable pursuit by many people nowadays. And for various reasons. Some feel it’s just a bit gauche if not atavistic, while others more hostile to both man and his sport, claim to believe that the only real hunting that can be justified is the kind of hunting that makes man the hunter as likely to wind up prey, as the ostensible game.
And too, some arguments used by hunters to “defend” their activities are as emotional and ill thought out as the critcisms. Anyone who has actually spent days stalking deer only to wind up with a mere 70 lbs of dressed meat to be shared out amongst family and friends, has probably also had the thought cross his mind that insofar as producing a supply of meat goes, it would be much more efficient to just raise such things in a pen and …
And just about then you drive past a farm field with a herd of grazing beef cattle.
Oh yeah, someone has already thought of that.
Funny how that works though. Mankind spends thousands of years of energy in domesticating and breeding, say swine, and the beneficiaries of this effort can’t wait to release the product into the wild so they can then face the uncertain prospect of obtaining in the woods and swamps what could easily have been had from the pen.
And what, to get back on track, about overpopulation? From the point of view of logic, killing to reduce an animal population through unsportsmanlike culling practices is just as reasonable as culling through fair chase, IF your only “real” aim is to control the population and benefit from the product.
That said then, my own reasons are perhaps not too much better grounded, or bullet proof, so to speak. But they are my reasons, and I’ll try to lay them out.
Although the “deer camp” social experience has often appeared in outdoors writers’ works as a significant part of the hunting event, it ranks with me in importance somewhat above a run of the mill game of poker with friends, but well below a family holiday at home. The only thing that makes the collective aspect of it enjoyable on balance rather than annoying, is the outdoors context, and the companionship of people – in my case mostly relatives – whose company one already appreciates.
Now as far as primitive goes, we certainly don’t tent it. But on the other hand, the cabin has no running water, and no electricity, and the nearest paved road is miles away. So being there, for some days, with no radio, TV, or electricity, does constitute a different experience. One that given sufficient time, resets your internal clock, and reengages your mind with certain physical realities, from which we as adults have become distanced. For someone in good health, this re-acquaintance with the simple life can be a very satisfying experience. For someone physically weak, or fearful, I will grant you it’s not so much of an attraction.
This though, constitutes the outdoors experience available to most of us, whether or not we hunt.
What hunting really adds to it all, is this: It will, in a more concentrated way than any simple outdoorsy experience can, tell we “everyman” types some important things about ourselves. If, we are willing to listen.
And if we listen, and heed, then we may be able to make some of the corrections that it suggests to us.
To really learn the message however, it takes more than a few days afield, or a couple of lucky morning outings during the course of a lifetime. For what one is reminded of and forced to confront as a result of a sufficient period of time spent in the field, are the local and direct costs of petty sloth and indifferent ignorance, of lack of seriousness of purpose, of lack of focus, and lack of sustained, sustained, and well-directed effort. These are natural mini-lessons presented with just enough intensity and immediacy of feedback and effect to make a broader life point.
Thus, in chasing game, you learn in a very immediate and analogically applicable way the cost of pointless minor indulgences: the cost of a negligent shrug, twitch, kick or yawn; that of a slothful retreat into a reverie, when outward attention is due; that of the impatient step, or of yielding to an impulsive urge to lean up against, or to take an easier yet the noisier path.
The body and it’s habits and urges, which are felt as our psychological dispositions, can in everyday life be more or less allowed to sweep us along without harm – seemingly. In hunting however, no judgement is put off. Thus, welling impulses must be mindfully at first, and then habitually, controlled, in order for one to have an expectation of more than fitful or random success.
Hunting, still hunting, is not easy. It’s not even easy, I hear, to sit patiently in a blind for hours. But hours of alert, purposeful, and controlled passage across a forest floor covered at almost every step with fallen and entraping limbs, grabbing branches, crackling twigs, all while being buffetted by cold and and gusting winds can be psychologically as well as physically exhausting, no matter how unhurried the effort.
The meaning of the wood signs are not obvious to the beginner either, and remain uncertain for years for most of us who have only a limited amount of time to spend in the woods or fields. They take effort to learn. To take an almost comic example, no one who has never before seen a deer or read about one, would have any reason to know which way a set of deer tracks are pointing in the snow. There is no analogy with common household pets, and a young and untutored novice would just as likely imagine that the foot of a deer is streamlined so that the narrow part of the track pointed to the rear, as to correctly imagine the opposite. Don’t ask me how I know this. I just do.
Now that you are older and hopefully wiser, have you been paying attention to when that snow squall started and stopped while you sat there at the base of the tree resting? Or were you more than likely ( don’t ask me how I know this either) hunkered down in your parka, drowsily daydreaming about a hottub stuffed with girls in bikinis? Alertness to the cold world “out there” will tell you whether those tracks you eventually discover 20 yards on further, were laid down in the last 30 minutes, or date back hours.
And are you ready for the opportunity? It’s tiring to walk with your rifle at a semi-port or “patrol” arms for hours, even with the sling wrapped around your left wrist as you grip the fore-end of the stock. So, whew … what the hey, take a break; stop, adjust that burden and sling it over your shoulder.
Which proves just enough to undo that near hour of careful traversing, and to send that deer you hadn’t yet seen, but which you had moved to within 30 yards of, bounding away – before you could recover enough from the startle to unshoulder your rifle, disengage the safety, sight the target, and fire with control.
Aren’t you glad you yielded to that impulse to drop the pretense of stalking, step out of the hunter act, and unguardedly relieve the strain at just that moment? After all, you had been a good little woodsman for more than 45 minutes. Enough deliberation and deliberateness. Nature owed you this break; and a bite of that crackly wrapped candy bar in your pocket too. And since we are not taking this all that seriously – you know as a matter of life and death or something – why should our targets respond as if they are?
Well, I guess I don’t know why others hunt, when it comes right down to it. Nor maybe, did I even know when I began. But I do now, and I think that it provides a refresher course once a year in lessons, the objects of which, I need to keep in mind for the rest.
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2011/10/19
… Conservative blog-owners do like Liberal commenters on their blogs. In fact, Patterico’s Pontifications, a definitely Conservative blog (although it is California Conservative, a weaker version of Conservative than fly-over Conservative), has granted a known Liberal permission to post articles of his own choosing and making on its “The Jury Talks Back” side. Conservatives know the best way to sharpen steel is with more steel.
That is also why, if you read my “about” and my “comment policy” pages (found in tabs at the top, and strongly advised), you will not see “no Liberals allowed” in any form. I welcome Liberal comment. In fact, I used to have a Liberal “Matt” who commented here rather regularly prior to TBD’s dormant stage, and I wish he would return. But there’s something Conservatives do not like. And that malignant something oft-times confronts Conservatives where it matters most: How to keep a free and open debate alive (which is what Constitutional Conservatives want) without absolutely poisoning the site and destroying its outreach.
Dana Pico is far more “generous-naive” than I am in that matter, as he has not banned a single live person from his Common Sense Political Thought site as far as I know, while I have already banned at least one Leftist blow-hard (and have another targeted for certain banning if he ever shows up (unless I’ve already banned him)). And Dana Pico’s site has suffered the consequences, losing authors and readers alike. At least two of Dana’s lost readers have found their way here, with one becoming an author here (hooray for me), but the point is there is a form of Liberal that is respect-worthy and a form of Liberal that is disdain-worthy. And Phoenician in a Time of Romans, banned by multiple Conservative sites and disdained by multiple other sites, is definitely disdain-worthy. Perry Hood, disdained by multiple sites, Conservative and Libertarian, and even smacked down by Liberals, is another disdain-worthy Liberal. (I’ve written more than one article here discussing Perry Hood’s moronacity.)
The point is, Liberals who have integrity are welcome on most Conservative sites. Liberals with integrity and who are not seeking to troll are welcome on TBD (not to be confused with the site run by the Leftist Identity Thief and Character defamer who created a false TBD for such purposes). Liberals without integrity or who solely seek to troll or push their ID-theft defamatory sites can rot in Sheol for all I care.
What brought this out? I’ll quote my comment on CSPT (where I’m one of Dana’s authors, like he’s one of my authors here) and you can goto the thread or examine further details as you desire.
You see, New Zealand Socialist book putter backer, there’s a reason I respect Jeff. He disagrees with me 80 to 95 percent of the time, oft-times vehemently. If you check out his blog, which I visited sporadically when he was more active with it (before he got his “piled higher and deeper” degree), he is nearly completely in line with the Liberal agenda on fiscal and social matters (I have a dearth of information in my mind on his Defense positions). And most of his articles are written in a flame-worthy attitude, when considering the thoughts of Conservatives such as me. For example, he is very much down with homosexuals and their cause (while not being one himself) and I believe the Bible when it says homosexuality is an abomination and when it says homosexuality is unnatural and a sin and when it says people are in bondage to their sin. So, his positions are nearly all polar opposites of mine. Note: aphrael, who used to comment here weekly or more (to my mind’s remembrance), is most definitely a Liberal. He’s also most definitely homosexual and has a “husband” (that he doesn’t use scare quotes for). I disagree with him on nearly everything as well, but I also respect him as a foil.
So, Jeff and I are almost completely polar opposites. Jeff and Conservatives are almost completely polar opposites. Yet the long-term Conservatives and Libertarians here who have experienced the more blog-active Jeff will tell you they all respect Jeff, despite his being wrong on nearly everything. And there’s a reason for that. Unlike you, New Zealand Socialist book putter backer, and unlike the race-baiter, memory-loss champion of CSPT Perry, Jeff actually takes the time to try to understand the Conservative position and to research what Conservatives say. While Jeff disagrees with nearly everything Conservative, he does so honestly and with the intent of debating honestly and with understanding. Which is more than I can say for “The Two Ps in a Pod” (a phrase Dana coined).
A couple of examples of Jeff being honest and/or working to understand positions contrary to his own: I believe it was John Adams, however it may have been a different Founder/Framer, but Jeff thought he was a Theocracy advocate. I said he was absolutely not. Jeff researched and found out I was right and retracted his position regarding the Founder/Framer. But the bigger example is an article from his own decidedly and absolutely Liberal site, an article he wrote in January, 2010. It is that article where Jeff, being Jewish, states with clarity he understands millenarian Christian theology which in itself enrages a great many in the Jewish community. The fact Jeff is not Christian (and I have no idea whether he is a religiously practicing Jew or merely an ethnic Jew, nor is it all that important) would strongly suggest he disagrees with millenarian Christian theology. But he took the time to understand it, and understand the mentality of those who believe it.
Aphrael (who is blame fool enough to not capitalize his moniker) is much the same, but in a different vein. Both aphrael and Jeff are dead wrong on just about everything. But both aphrael and Jeff take the time to actually understand the Conservative position — while vehemently disagreeing with it — and debate honestly with that understanding they have acquired. That is why I have much respect for both aphrael and Jeff when it comes down to debating. That is also why I have absolutely zero tolerance or respect for Perry, mike g, Jeromy, that csbc or whatever it is clown, or the absolute worst of them: the downright liar and most blog-destroying of radical Leftist trolls: the New Zealand Socialist book putter backer.
Jeff and aphrael will likely never (short of a Saul of Tarsus miracle) come around to the Conservative position. But unlike those Leftists I mentioned above, Jeff and aphrael debate with integrity. And that is why Conservatives like me wish for more Jeffs and aphraels on Conservative sites and less trolls like “The Two Ps in a Pod”.
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2011/08/10
Just another day at the park.
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2011/05/21
Little Miss Attila, who is no “right-wing fanatic” (unlike me), has a very good article up with lots of informative links for women who want to dress modestly. As she says, many of the modest attire rules don’t necessarily apply to real sportswear for activities such as marathoning. I’ll add swimming, cycling, gymnastics, surfing and many more athletic activities.*
As an old-school Evangelical/Fundamentalist Christian, I am all for dressing modestly — for women and men. (It may be my bias but I do believe the modesty thing is an issue for women much more than for men, but there are still modesty issues for men as well.) A modestly dressed woman can still be very pleasant to the eye without advertising too much.
Here’s where Little Miss Attila may or may not have an issue with me, but if so, I believe it will be due to a communication gap and not a philosophical difference of opinion. (Or I hope, anyway.) “Locks are meant to keep honest people honest.” A modestly dressed woman will help keep honest, responsible, appropriately behaved men honest, responsible and appropriately behaved. And may help keep dishonest, irresponsible, inappropriately behaved men from targeting her (as they look for targets). Is it the woman’s responsibility? Yes. But it’s also the man’s responsibility in how he acts.
*While an old-school Evangelical/Fundamentalist Christian, I still support women’s wrestling (the real stuff and not the tittilating stuff), women’s bodybuilding, women’s boxing (again, the real stuff), etc, which would also have attire for those activities that does not fit in the modest casual realm. The athletic activity attire is perfectly acceptable for the athletic activity but not for “clubbing.”
Posted by John Hitchcock on 2010/01/13
So you wanna be a pirate? But you want to be a good pirate and not a bad pirate? Maybe you want to be a pirate who saves the world? Good luck with that. You never know when you might go swimming where you don’t want to be swimming. A bunch of pirates found out “today is a good day for a swim” in the Arctic Ocean.
Suburbanbanshee has the story.
January 6, 2010
“Maritime piracy, according to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982, consists of any criminal acts of violence, detention, or depredation committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or aircraft that is directed on the high seas against another ship, aircraft, or against persons or property on board a ship or aircraft.”
For years, anti-whale activists have been engaging in openly piratical actions on the high seas, by continually harassing boats which, whether the activists liked it or not, were performing legal activities. This is a form of extortion, in my view. Whaling ships thus harassed could, by the law of the sea, have taken violent action at any time; but they’ve refrained.
That’s only the build-up to the story but I don’t want to violate Fair Use so I’ll stop there. Read the rest of the story at the link. But it boils down to an anti-whaler that was trying to stop a whaling ship from doing what is legal got its bow knocked off in open seas and everyone on the anti-whaler went swimming and got rescued by the whaling ship.
And, of course, the anti-whaling fools had the audacity to cry foul! The whaling ship was well within its rights. In fact the whaler would’ve been within its rights to do any violent action against the anti-whaler, which was violating the law. The anti-whaler pirates can go trawl Crimea River for all I care. Just don’t expect me to break out my “poor widdle thing” anytime soon.
I didn’t do it with my daughter; I won’t do it with pirates.