Sobering Thoughts |
|
|
Comments on politics, the culture, economics and religion by Paul Tuns -- in short, everything about the human endeavour from a non-hyphenated conservative perspective.
I am Toronto-based writer and editor, whose articles, columns and reviews have appeared in more than 35 publications. I am editor-in-chief of The Interim, Canada's life and family newspaper, author of Jean Chretien: A Legacy of Scandal and a regular contributor to the book pages of the Halifax Herald.
Archives
|
Monday, April 30, 2007
Nasty little facts always ruin a good ideological argument Tim Worstall presents five facts that show, "the difference in average incomes between men and women is more to do with children and choices of career than it is to do with discrimination." I wish I could find an old column I wrote for the Hamilton Spectator in which I said that the gender wage gap in 2000 represented a victory for women because it reflected the choices they made rather than discrimination. I got a few nasty letters from women saying I'll never know the sacrifices they make to raise their children. I do know the economic sacrifices families make by having a spouse, usually the woman, stay home to have and take care of the children and I appreciate those financial sacrifices although there are other benefits from doing so. I admit those choices also have consequences in the job market: women self-removed from the workforce miss out on promotions, pay increases, etc... that men who have uninterrupted employment do not. These facts account for much of the so-called gender gap. This is neither good or bad, it just is. Or is economics sexist? Interesting question Over at Samizdata earlier this weekend, Johnathan Pearce raised the issue of his favourite passage from a novel. More than 50 responses so far and they are great fun to read through. I'd have to give this one some thought, but I'm partial to the beginning of The Hobbit, a book that I didn't much like but which is memorably opened. With some more thought I'd probably chose something else from Tolkein or more likely a passage from Anthony Powell, P.G. Wodehouse or Peter de Vries. So now liberals are concerned about the unborn But only if it helps them push their environmental agenda. According to the Montreal Gazette, the Liberal candidate for Papineau says: "[Justin] Trudeau spoke of the need to 'unblock' the riding and reject the Conservative party’s vision on social justice and the environment, saying their stand on the environment was threatening the future of children and of his unborn child." Sunday, April 29, 2007
NDP & Quebec The Montreal Gazette headline: "NDP plots Quebec breakthrough." Reality headline: "NDP leader outlines election strategy after smoking pot." While on the topic of British politics Writing in the (London) Times, Irwin Stelzer says that elections matter, especially when voters have a choice between distinct options (as they do in France presently). Of voters, Stelzer says: "In France, they must choose between Nicolas Sarkozy’s move to the right and freer markets, and Ségolène Royal’s socialist nostrums. In Britain, they will have to choose between Gordon Brown’s interventionist state and . . . policies to be determined." British Tories, PC but still helpful The Sunday Telegraph has a story on David Cameron's successful efforts to recruit "New Tories" -- that is candidates for safe Conservative seats that are not white middle class males. The photo looks like a shot of recent university grads. But aside from the focus on women, minorities, youth and non-traditional backgrounds, the story has a great tidbit near the end. Mark Clark, 29, is a candidate in Tooting. His (single) mother was mostly unemployed and lived in subsidized housing; a typical Labour supporter if there ever was one. Explaining to his mother and Telegraph readers why he is running as a Conservative candidate, Clark says: "I went to a private school on an assisted place, an example of Conservatives giving people routes out of poverty. All the opportunities in my life came from Conservatism." The opportunity agenda, espoused by Newt Gingrich, is a hopeful agenda that can do more to attract non-traditional candidates and voters than can all the identity politics pandering that seems to enthral modern conservative leaders. Saturday, April 28, 2007
Bye, bye Torre? The New York Yankees beat the Boston Red Sox 3-1, snapping a seven-game losing streak. A win is a win but I found it notable that the three runs is less than they scored in all but one of the seven games they lost. I'm just saying ... I'm not sure what I'm saying other than a win is a win but sometimes the problems persist. Now on to the skipper, Joe Torre. Yahoo! Sports blogger Tim Brown and the New York Post's George King both speculate that The Boss may be ready to fire Torre. It's about time although replacing the skipper will not be sufficient for the team to turn around its fortunes. I'll get back to this in a moment. But first a couple of observations about Brown's and King's pieces. Brown says: "Those four championships in five years, those nine consecutive AL East titles, a streak that happens to be current, and the dignity and resolve that have made him the ideal manager for the New York Yankees since 1996, they might not be enough to save Joe Torre. It would be a shame, and it would be wrong, but as one Yankees insider observed , 'George might be itching for some carnage'." Why would it be wrong? Yes, Joe Torre won four World Series in five years but despite managing a team that has by far the highest payroll in the sport he has not won a WS in seven years. Joe Torre was the ideal manager for the Yankees in the late 1990s but it should be obvious that he wasn't the ideal manager in the 2000s. To quote Janet Jackson, "What have you done for me lately." And I don't think that George Steinbrenner is itching for carnage as much as he's itching for a winning team. King asks: "Is Torre the reason the starting rotation has melted in the first month and put an alarming workload on the bullpen? Is it Torre's fault the lineup, so potent through 19 games, has gone 20 innings without an extra-base hit?" No Joe Torre is not responsible for those things but might there not be other reasons the Yankees are losing? Or perhaps he is responsible for those things: always substituting a pinch runner for DH Jason Giambi in the 6th or 7th inning means there are fewer bench options later in the game and the inferior hitter (to Giambi) is returning to bat in the 9th or extra innings; playing 1B Doug Mientkiewicz any more than one has to (such as once every ten games or so) is a mistake, as is starting Miguel Cairo in the place of SS Derek Jeter, etc... But I don't think that the injuries or the cold bats are the only reasons the Yankees are losing. The problems go deeper than that and these problems are the result of decisions made by general manager Brian Cashman and manager Joe Torre. Here they are: 1. 1B Doug Mientkiewicz. He should never have been signed and having been signed, should never have been played. His line of 140/232/220 gives away too many outs for an everyday player. He has played in 20 of the Yankees's 22 games and been given 50 ABs. The average AL first baseman would have had five more hits already. It doesn't seem much but given the close games and number of batters the Yanks have left stranded, it might have resulted in more wins. Blame: 70% Cashman for signing him, Torre 30% for playing him. 2. Starting rotation is hurt. At one point only one-fifth of the expected opening day rotation was actually starting. Who's at fault? Really no one. These things happen and the team had reasonable options that haven't quite worked out. But the problem became worse when Andy Petite was put in the role of relief pitcher twice; Joe Torre shouldn't have done that. Blame: Fate 95%, Torre 5%. 3. A bullpen that is giving up too many runs. Why? A bunch of reasons but two stand out: Mariano Rivera is having serious problems (as illustrated by his north of 10.00 ERA and two blown saves) and overwork. Rivera had solid outing today so perhaps he just had a bad stretch of three or four games. The workload of the bullpen in general, however, borders on abusive and the fault for that is not just the starting pitchers not doing their job but 1) Torre having a ridiculously quick hook (especially considering the bullpen usage patterns and rotation problems), 2) having Mike Myers, a typically one-batter lefty specialist, on the roster, and 3) not having any true long relief pitchers. Blame: Torre 80%, Cashman 20%. 4. A-Rod went cold. This is to be expected, but it doesn't help Alex Rodriguez that his bat went cold at the same time the team went through a seven-game losing streak. Blame: regression to the mean. 5. Wil Nieves as the backup catcher. Jorge Posada is getting old and last weekend against Boston he had to be rested in back-to-back games. Nieves is not really major-league material. In 2005 and 2006 he played in a total of nine major league games and had a line of 000/000/000. In 2007, he has played already played in seven games and has a line of 000/000/000. His minor league career has been unimpressive. As Steven Goldman wrote in the New York Sun last week: "Economizing means that instead of dining out at Per Se you go to Sizzler. You don't skip right past that to the Dumpster. Wil Nieves is not a major league player. Jorge Posada is one of the best. In the gap between those two points, the Yankees' pennant chances are suspended." There are alternatives. Blame: Cashman 100%. 6. Roster makeup and weak bench. Carrying one-batter reliever Mike Myers necessitates carrying an extra reliever. Having two 1B (Doug Mientkiewicz and Josh Phelps) and 1B/DH Jason Giambi, means having an even shorter bench. Phelps should be given the everyday 1B job. With a line of 292/393/458, whatever minimal difference there is in defensive capability will be made up at the plate. Team can't carry a fifth outfielder with the extra 1B and pitcher the team uses. Also, Miguel Cairo is a terrible bench player (2007: 000/182/000; career: 267/315/360). Blame: Cashman 100%. The Yankees need not worry too much. Their starters are returning from the DL, A-Rod will recapture his power, Mariano Rivera should recover. But having fallen behind so early, they can't afford to give away wins. Smarter use of the bullpen and better roster construction will go a long way to making them competitive when A-Rod or Jeter or Giambi aren't winning the game for them. Looking back at Torre's World Series winning-squads in the 1990s and 2000 can provide guidance: the Yankees could beat you ten different ways. Everyone contributed when they had to: relievers could be counted on getting important outs, the bottom of the order could move runners along (and 3B Scott Brosius has some power), the bench was diverse and (slightly) more useful. Another thing about those teams was that everyone worked hard. I'm not so sure about that now. They are a team full of superstars whose birthright as the Yankees is to win the World Series and they just don't hustle the way they used to. (For hustle, watch the New York Mets or last year's Detroit Tigers or any Minnesota Twins team.) It's a team that looks like winning will come to them rather than them having to chase it. Part of that is, as I said, the product of putting together an All-Star team as nine-tenths of the starting team (and ignoring the bench and bullpen). But part of that must how the Yankees are led; they need to be motivated or coached or whatever to work hard. That's Joe Torre's job and he's not doing it. He seems to be a little too layed back himself. And for that reason, Joe Torre should go. The sooner, the better. Give Joe Girardi or Don Mattingly the job and the Yankees will fight their back to the top of the American League East. Don't and they'll come up short. Daily Show slams green celebs A friend sent along this. Still laughing at this: Lewis Black points to Pimp My Ride Earth Day edition which promotes biodiesels and says: "It's a shame that cars don't run on cognitive dissonance." Thursday, April 26, 2007
Climate change pretzels The Financial Times reported on Tuesday: "Deaths and injuries from climate change are set to more than double in the next 25 years, according to estimates to be published soon. The World Health Organisation is finalising data forecasting that deaths linked to even a very narrow number of causes most closely connected to shifting weather patterns will reach more than 300,000 a year by 2030. The number of disease-adjusted life years (Dalys) lost – a measure of injury and earlier death – linked to warming will rise in the period to more than 11m." So quick, everyone use ethanol. Or maybe not. The Financial Times reported today: "Europe’s dash for biofuels could accelerate the destruction of tropical rainforests, the European Commission admitted on Thursday. The EU’s executive arm said that the 27-member bloc’s decision to increase tenfold its consumption of vehicle fuel made from crops by 2020 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would increase the pressure on virgin land, especially in Asia." Well, at least there is also the carbon credit market. Oh, wait. The Financial Times reported yesterday: "Companies and individuals rushing to go green have been spending millions on 'carbon credit' projects that yield few if any environmental benefits. A Financial Times investigation has uncovered widespread failings in the new markets for greenhouse gases, suggesting some organisations are paying for emissions reductions that do not take place. Others are meanwhile making big profits from carbon trading for very small expenditure and in some cases for clean-ups that they would have made anyway." Is your head spinning yet? But the science is settled so we must all rush to do our part even if it doesn't help. Three cheers for Toyota, Or why national 'champions' are dumb There has been a little bit hand-wringing over Toyota overtaking General Motors as the top car seller (in the latest quarter), so this Vancouver Sun editorial really hit the spot today: "[T]he primary back-story to Toyota overtaking GM is not about problems at GM, but what Toyota and other successful automakers are doing right." The beauty of the free market is that it may or not may benefit capitalists or labour but consumers should always win. "The world has changed, but the nature of the automotive business has not. It's is still about making customers happy. The fundamental difference from 50 years ago when Toyota shipped its first car to the U.S. is that today customers have a lot more choices." And for those economic nationalists, what does an American or Canadian automobile mean in the globalized world: "This is no longer a battle between domestics and imports in the United States, since more than half of all Toyotas sold in the U.S. last year were built in American plants. Others came from the Toyota plants in Cambridge, Ont., which have an annual capacity of 300,000 vehicles." Government banning things Pointing to guns, pit bulls, smoking and now certain kinds of light bulbs, Gerry Nicholls wonders, "Am I wrong, or does the sole business of government these days consist of banning things." No Gerry government doesn't just ban things, they also tax them -- but only that which they haven't banned. No government is that dumb. Prince Charles The New York Times has a friendly piece on Prince Charles, "Farmer, Cookie Maker, Ecologist and, Yes, the Future King." I guess there wasn't room for "and wannabe tampon." Big earthy mountains out of polling molehills Can't the Conservatives ignore environmental voters. The Toronto Star reported earlier this week: "The Tories are being advised to target their overhauled green plan at family decision-makers and committed environmentalists in the 'Suzuki nation.' A government report obtained by the Toronto Star identified three groups of Canadians said to be susceptible to changing their actions to improve the environment: * The 'Suzuki Nation,' making up one-fifth of the population, finds the negative state of the environment in conflict with their values, expresses high environmental concern and is motivated to take action. These are people who would be compelled to act even without offers of tax cuts and other economic incentives designed to change individual behaviour. * 'Invested Materialists' are the 28 per cent of people who do not find the current environmental state in conflict with their values and have low levels of concern. But these people will 'act if given the right reason' such as an economic incentive or enhanced social prestige. * The last category is 'Ambivalent Materialists' – the 15 per cent of Canadians who feel that a polluted environment is in conflict with their values, but are not concerned about current pollution levels. Under the right circumstances, such as a greater understanding about environmental risks and pollution levels, they, too, would act." Let's see: three groups, accounting for 63% of the vote, who are "susceptible to changing to their vote to improve the environment." That means, right of the top, that for more than one-third of voters, the environment does not register as an issue at all or they are so green, they are ideologically blinded and won't switch camps. "Suzuki nation" will likely never vote Tory. They are Green voters, NDP voters, even Stephane Dion voters. They might bounce among those three parties, but very, very few will ever mark their ballot for the Conservatives because the other parties will always out-green the Tories. So let us just take the latter two variations of materialists that make up 43% of people who might, under the right conditions, change their vote to lend a hand to Mother Nature. Considering the popularity of green politics, that's not that big a portion of the voting pie. About one-third of that 43% don't really care enough about the environment ("are not concerned about current pollution levels") to do anything about it. They might be "susceptible" to more green voting with tonnes more environmental scare-mongering, but rate now, they are content. That leaves the 28% of all voters who think the environment is an issue but don't want to do anything about it that will cost them money. Great. The Tories can attract their votes cheap gestures that appear to protect the environment as opposed to those costly gestures that appear to fulfill Kyoto that other parties are peddling. In short: don't worry too much about green politics if you are Conservative. And, lastly, "Suzuki Nation"? "Invested Materialists?" I can't believe that Michael Adams didn't do this research; rather it is some outfit called Phoenix Strategies. A-Rod's torrid pace Alex Rodriguez has hit 14 homers in 18 games, tying the April record for homers and on the cusp (1 RBI) of the month's record for runs batted in. A-Rod also just ended his 23-game hitting streak. Tyler Kepner has a great piece in the New York Times on how new hitting coach Kevin Long had the third baseman adjust his swing. (HT: Jay Jaffe at Baseball Prospectus's blog, although Jaffe also puts Rodriguez's accomplishment in perspective: the season starts earlier so he plays more April games.) Be sure to click on the "multimedia" graphic "Dissecting A-Rod's Swing," at the left of the Kepner article. All of it is excellent sports journalism. For those who don't have time to read the whole article, here's how Long improved A-Rod's swing: "When Long met with Rodriguez, they talked hitting philosophy. Rodriguez said he liked to take a pitch to measure the pitcher’s stuff. But he usually bats behind Bobby Abreu, who sees more pitches on average than any hitter in the majors. 'What are you doing on deck?' Long said he told Rodriguez. 'You’re the fourth hitter of the game, shouldn’t you have an understanding? I’m just asking. What do you think?' The message was to stay aggressive, to look for fastballs on every pitch, even when it seems obvious a pitcher will throw a breaking ball. That is a rule for many hitters, but now, Rodriguez is applying it... Long believed Rodriguez could be more consistent with a lower leg kick and a faster rotation of his hips. The result would be a more compact swing. Rodriguez made this easier on himself by losing 12 pounds. A leaner hitter is more flexible. 'That’s a huge factor,' Long said. In spring training, Long and Reggie Jackson, the Hall of Famer who is a special instructor for the Yankees, told Rodriguez, who bats right-handed, to treat his first at-bats as an experiment." America on the road to fascism? That is the argument that Naomi Wolf, erstwhile advisor to Al Gore, makes in The Guardian. The teaser at the beginning says: "From Hitler to Pinochet and beyond, history shows there are certain steps that any would-be dictator must take to destroy constitutional freedoms. And, argues Naomi Wolf, George Bush and his administration seem to be taking them all." Kinda predictable, huh? Is it worth reading on? And if you do, will you laugh or do you cry? (Horace Walpole: "The world is a tragedy to those who feel and a comedy to those who think.") Anyway, Wolf begins by looking at the military coup in Thailand last Fall, finding that: "The leaders of the coup took a number of steps, rather systematically, as if they had a shopping list. In a sense, they did. Within a matter of days, democracy had been closed down: the coup leaders declared martial law, sent armed soldiers into residential areas, took over radio and TV stations, issued restrictions on the press, tightened some limits on travel, and took certain activists into custody ... essentially a blueprint for turning an open society into a dictatorship ... As difficult as this is to contemplate, it is clear, if you are willing to look, that each of these 10 steps has already been initiated today in the United States by the Bush administration." Now, you have to look real hard and you have to view it in a way similar to Naomi Wolf. That means not believing the jihadists are a threat. It means believing that there is no difference between the Soviet Gulag and Guantánamo. Outsourced security "at home and abroad" is no different than the brownshirts in Nazi Germany. Seeing wire-tapping is a Stasi tactic. Excessive worrying about criminalizing opposition. Comparing the Reich Law for the Re-establishment of a Professional Civil Service to "Bush supporters in state legislatures in several states put[ting] pressure on regents at state universities to penalise or fire academics who have been critical of the administration." And on and on. I think that there are legitimate criticisms of the some of the zeal of security officials. There has been security measures improperly applied to a number of people. I think that unnecessary security measures could imperil some civil rights. The system is imperfect. But to equate these problems with the road to fascism indicates is juvenile. In Contentions, Commentary's blog, Gabriel Schoenfeld says: "[S]hould Americans accept such insults with equanimity? What choice do we have, except to point out that Naomi Wolf’s case demonstrates once again that the pursuit of writerly fame is a tough business and often requires one to say the most outlandish things? Even so, it would be difficult to imagine anything more reprehensible than Wolf’s latest foray. Her journey from The Beauty Myth to Promiscuities to The Porn Myth to Fascist America, in 10 Easy Steps has been a long way down, and it did not exactly begin in a high place." And shame on The Guardian for thinking this publishable. Wednesday, April 25, 2007
The movement is different than the party Adam Daifallah notes that the Harperites might not be pleased with a recent Western Standard cover story that says the Harper Conservatives are de-conservatizing themselves. Or put another way, the party is more Tory than Reform. In brief the Western Standard case against the Tories is this: big budget, recognizing Quebec as a nation, Kyoto-lite. Daifallah says: "While it won't make those around Harper happy, this is the kind of journalism that the Standard, as an organ of the Canadian conservative movement, ought to be doing." Exactly. The problem for conservatives in Canada is that for too long there was not really much of a conservative movement, only a conservative party (or, one might argue, parties). There is something of an growing conservative infrastructure and the Western Standard is (arguably) the largest conservative journalistic vehicle in the country. (As an aside, a prominent conservative once asked me about whether I "felt the weight of the [forgotten adjective] responsibility of editing one of the only two or three conservative publications (The Interim) in Canada." I had never thought of it before I was asked. I have taken that responsiblity to heart since then.) The movement is distinct from the party and it should be. Doing so has many advantages, and for both sides. The movement should be pure (but realistic), while the party necessarily makes some compromises. The movement, however, should call the party on those compromises. By doing so, the movement's purity gives cover to the party when it is necessary to move rightward, albeit not all the way. By doing so, a distinct movement helps keep the party purer than it might otherwise be. Remember how movement conservatives essentially vetoed Republican President George W. Bush's last Supreme Court nominee, the unqualified Harriet Miers? Doing so was good for the movement and, in the long-run, the president and the country. The Harperites would do well to remember that they lead a party and govern a country; the role of the various elements of the conservative movement is to continuously advance conservatism. If that lines up with the needs of the party, all the better; but the needs of the party are secondary for the movement. So repeat to yourself, Harperites, "The movement is different than the party. The movement is different than the party." Monday, April 23, 2007
Happy birthday Shakespeare? I've read a few places today that mentioned that it is William Shakespeare's birthday (1564). Maybe the actor William Shakspere -- who also died on this day in 1616, the only close to poetic thing that the man from Stratford-upon-Avon had ever done -- but the birthday of the author of Macbeth and King Lear and Hamlet is, in fact, April 12. Would an abortion doctor by any other name smell any sweeter? Stuart Buck examines the question of whether the phrase 'abortion doctor' is a pejorative term, as Justice Ginsberg claims it is in her dissent this week. Sunday, April 22, 2007
Some sobering thinking on the partial-birth abortion decision Two things worth reading at First Things: Fr. Richard John Neuhaus and Michael Uhlmann. Uhlmann says: "Kennedy’s opinion is a step in the right direction, albeit a modest one. The decision, along with last year’s ruling in Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood (rejecting a facial challenge to New Hampshire’s parental notification statute) will increase the burden on those who wish to strike down even modest restrictions on abortion. The majority (at least for the time being) is not going to roll over every time the spirit of Roe or Casey is invoked as a reason to strike down abortion regulations. Plaintiffs, who have had rather an easy time of it over the years when launching facial challenges, will have to work harder to overturn statutes they don’t like. As a practical matter, that is all one can say for sure about yesterday’s ruling. Proponents of abortion will, of course, scream to the heavens that Roe has been effectively eviscerated. Don’t believe it for a minute. It is very much alive and well, as is Casey. The Court, and the Court alone, remains the final judge of what may or may not constitute an undue burden. All the Court decided yesterday was (a) that there might be a valid legislative role in a very narrow category of late-term abortions; and (b) what constitutes an undue burden will have to await the specific application of the Act’s provisions to particular facts." And Fr. Neuhaus: "Justice Kennedy’s 5-4 majority opinion is notable for accenting the society’s legitimate, indeed imperative, interest in protecting innocent human life. That interest had received lip service in Roe and its judicial offspring, but this time it is an operative, albeit not a controlling, concern. President Bush hailed Carhart as bringing us closer to the goal of “a society in which every child is welcomed in life and protected in law.” A very little bit closer to a goal still painfully far away." ... but: "It seems to me that there is another question that should be pretty much settled now. Back in the 1990s, there was considerable argument among pro-life leaders about the wisdom of focusing on partial-birth abortion. It was a strategic decision. Pro-lifers opposed to it contended that partial-birth abortions accounted for only a few thousand abortions per year, and getting rid of that procedure would do nothing to protect the million and more other children killed by abortion each year. This was another instance of the familiar disagreement over the advocacy of incremental changes or frontal challenges to the abortion regime of Roe. Obviously, one would prefer a frontal challenge that would result in the overturning of that infamous 1973 decision. But it will not work, at least not now. Quite apart from specific decisions of the Court, the focus on partial-birth abortion has been a great success in educating the public to the reality of unborn life and the horror of abortion. In the dissent, Justice Ginsburg objects that the moral repugnance triggered by partial-birth abortion is true of all abortions. Precisely." There is another thing at First Things worth reading: Joseph Bottum. Among the points he makes is this warning: "A “chill wind is blowing from Rome,” announced one leftist site in a blog post titled “Catholics—5; The Rest of Us—Nothing.” The five Catholic justices on the Supreme Court formed—for the first time since Alito joined the Court—the complete majority on a decision. I think that we’re probably going to have to wait for the new fund-raising letters from NARAL and Planned Parenthood before we see the highest pitch of anti-Catholic rhetoric coming out of the Carhart decision." Not that pro-abortion anti-Catholicism will be anything new. Harper's successors The idea, pushed this weekend in the Toronto Star, that Stephen Harper must win a majority to retain the Conservative Party leadership is pure bunk. Successive minorities would still be an incredible accomplishment considering where the Conservative Party stood a mere 36 months ago. Expectations have been raised in the media but I'm sure that many within the party are much more realistic than are the political reporters who cover them. If anyone is guilty within the Conservative Party of believing all talk about a majority it is those close to Harper within the PMO and several close cabinet colleagues. I doubt that they are going to be the ones ready to stick a knife in their boss' back. There are models -- Conservative models -- for successful minority governance, so there is little need for a majority. Harper's job should be safe. But let's consider the Toronto Star's speculative list of possible Harper successors. 1. In a government where Harper allows possible competitors very little room to grow, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty is one of the few Conservative ministers to emerge as a formidable national figure in his own right. If Harper's personality is an issue -- according to Les Whittington and Richard Brennan of the Star, Harper supposedly doesn't 'connect' with Canadians -- the 57-year-old former Ontario minister is hardly the answer. Flaherty doesn't quite exude cuddliness, which the Star admits when they call him 'hard-nosed.' At one time Flaherty might have bridged the socon/fiscal con divide, but his two budgets that have brought federal program spending to $200 billion doesn't exactly buttress his fiscal conservative credentials. The recent family-friendly budget brought Flaherty closer to socons but otherwise did nothing to help him with the conservative base of the party. 2. Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice, 50. Way too liberal for the Conservative Party. One of a handful of Tories to vote against re-opening the same-sex 'marriage' debate, he'll go nowhere with the Indian affairs portfolio. He might be the person the Toronto Star would most like to see lead the Tories which is reason enough to believe he won't get that chance. 3. Industry Minister Maxime Bernier, 44. His English is poor and his connections to the Montreal Economic Institute might taint him a tad too libertarian to get elected, but by every account from people who've met him, he's impressive: personable, attractive, intelligent. And he really believes in making government smaller. He'd be my choice. And if I were prime minister, I'd make him my finance minister. He might be leader one day but not any time soon. 4. "Environment Minister John Baird, 37, is also a much-relied-on minister in the Harper fold, but it's unclear if he would want to be put under the spotlight of a leadership bid." Two words come to mind, two words that the Star reporter dare not print but are definitely thinking: sexual orientation. 5. MP Jason Kenney, 39, the Prime Minister's parliamentary secretary, is seen as a possible candidate for leader down the road, but he is likely to keep his ambitions well hidden as long as Harper is in charge. He's quite ambitious. Nothing wrong with that but there is plenty in being seen as such. He will definitely be the socon candidate and he's making connections to ethnic communities to not only bolster the Tories in upcoming elections but his own candidacy when he finally runs. But he can't be seen to be pushing Harper out the door and be his replacement. 6. Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay, 41, who won the leadership of the Progressive Conservatives in 2003, is always on the leadership radar but his performance in his portfolio has done little to polish his image. There are so many problems with MacKay where does one start: he is an intellectual lightweight, he has been unimpressive in cabinet, he's difficult to get along with, some old Tories may not trust him after merging the PCs with the CA after promising not to, he ticks off socons, he called his ex-girlfriend a bitch, etc... Looking back, one wonders how he ever won the Progressive Conservative leadership in 2003. Reading Paul Wells book one gets the impression that Harper viewed MacKay as a useful idiot in bringing the parties together. Now that they are one again, the idiot is not longer useful. There are no doubt others. Might Mike Harris, Ralph Klein or Bernard Lord be coaxed out of political retirement? Tony Clement is ridiculously ambitious. Maybe Danny Williams would like to take his whine-show to Ottawa. Where are the women candidates? The Liberals bribed Martha Hall Findlay into staying in the leadership race 'til the final ballot with a promise of a safe Toronto seat in the next federal election so perhaps the Tories could promise the same to some Conservative woman somewhere if either Rona Ambrose or Helena Guergis doesn't throw a hat into the ring. There will always be candidates no one considered until the race is underway. Stock Day perhaps. Maybe Ted Morton gets tired of Alberta's big government conservatism. Belinda could always return to politics. Silly suggestion? You bet, but no more than the speculation of replacing Harper at this stage. By the time Harper leaves the political arena, my guess is that one or two of the cabinet ministers the Star lists, despite their young age, might have already moved on themselves. This story is not really reporting. It might be wishful thinking, it might be trouble-making, it could even be indicative of a lack of other stories to file from Ottawa. Nothing to take seriously, no matter how fun playing make believe might be. This would be funny if it were fiction  But alas satire is no longer possible. From the Associated Press (HT: Small Dead Animals): "American commanders cite al-Qaida's severe brand of Islam, which is so extreme that in Baqouba, al-Qaida has warned street vendors not to place tomatoes beside cucumbers because the vegetables are different genders, Col. David Sutherland said." For more than one reason, then, Veggie Tales must be scandalous to a particular strain of the Muslim mind. Candidate Gore For more than a year I've been saying that former vice president Al Gore was probably the only candidate capable of stopping Hillary Clinton's nomination as Democratic presidential candidate in 2008 and that he would be a formidable candidate for president once he captured the Democratic nod. This violated my view that in the television age and era of 24-hour news, you don't get a second chance at high-level politics. Many people emailed to say I was nuts. Most said Gore could never run for precisely the reason that one does not get a second chance to make first impression. But that was before An Inconvenient Truth, an Oscar and a likely Nobel Peace Prize. Today the Sunday Telegraph reports that a Gore campaign team is quietly assembling. That's not quite correct once you get past the headline: "... former strategists are sounding out a shadow team that could run his campaign at short notice. In approaching former campaign staff, including political strategists and communications officials, they are making clear they are not acting on formal instructions from Mr Gore, 59, but have not been asked to stop." Numerous Clinton-Gore and Kerry-Edwards campaign staffers have yet to commit to other candidates fueling speculation that they are waiting for Gore to announce his candidacy, or at least deny he's running is something less ambiguous than he has "no plans" to run. Saturday, April 21, 2007
Manny Ramirez The combination of great writing and baseball -- a worthy topic for great writing -- is irresistible. Ben McGrath has a longish profile in the New Yorker on Manny Ramirez that is worth reading even if you are nothing more than a casual baseball fan: "Manny Ramirez is a deeply frustrating employee, the kind whose talents are so prodigious that he gets away with skipping meetings, falling asleep on the job, and fraternizing with the competition. He makes more money than everyone else at the company yet somehow escapes the usual class resentment, and even commands more respect from the wage slaves, who suspect he is secretly one of them, than from his colleagues in business class. It’s not that he is anti-establishment, exactly, but in his carefree way he’s just subversive enough — 'affably apathetic' is how one of his bosses put it recently — to create headaches for any manager who worries about precedent. Despite his generous compensation, he is sufficiently ungrateful to let it be known that he would be happier working elsewhere. He is also, for a man of stature, strangely sensitive, and although his brilliance is accompanied by sloppiness, one criticizes him, as with a wayward teen-ager, at the risk of losing him to bouts of brooding and inaccessibility... He is perhaps the closest thing in contemporary professional sports to a folk hero, an unpredictable public figure about whom relatively little is actually known but whose exploits, on and off the field, are recounted endlessly, with each addition punctuated by a shrug and the observation that it’s just 'Manny being Manny'." So he is a $22 million ingrate who habitually asks to be traded and who remains, year in and year out, the most important part of the BoSox lineup. He career stats: 313 batting average, 410 on-base percentage with 439 homers. He is a prodigious talent. Here is my favourite bit of journalism in a long time: "When I asked his teammate David Ortiz, himself a borderline folk hero, how he would describe Ramirez, he replied, 'As a crazy motherfucker.' Then he pointed at my notebook and said, 'You can write it down just like that: ‘David Ortiz says Manny is a crazy motherfucker'." There are fascinating details like the fact that Ramirez doesn't keep track of the count (which is why he seems to wait for the umpire to tell him to take a base on a fourth ball -- he is waiting); all he wants to know is when he has strikes. There's a great quote that Ramirez wants to go to China which he describes as a city he saw on the Discovery Channel. There's a possible explanation about why Ramirez's pants are so baggy (when he got started in Cleveland he had to borrow a team-mate's uniform pants). It's typical New Yorker fare: the hidden gem of anecdotes and quotes to paint a mostly complete picture. In the case of Paul Wolfowitz a few weeks it is ideology that prevents the full picture being given; in the case of Ramirez, it is a matter of Manny being Manny. I don't like Manny Ramirez probably for more reasons than that he wears a Boston Red Sox uniform but I do admire two things about him: his offensive skills (he is embarrassing in the outfield) and the way he plays (with everything he's got while enjoying playing the game). McGrath quotes a high school baseball coach of Ramirez's: "It's just that he didn't really care about anything other than playing. Even team pictures - it wasn't important to him. You had to drag him by the hair. But if you said we had a game at three o'clock he'd, like, want to sit out there at seven o'clock in the morning, waiting." Manny Ramirez makes baseball fun -- or more even fun than usual. McGrath captures it as much as that can be on paper. Is this really any business of the media? Alan Allnut, publisher of the Montreal Gazette, begins his column thusly: "The Gazette is a complex business. Every day, we conduct several distinct types of operations. We own and operate a manufacturing plant, where we're in the printing business. We rent space in the Dominion Square building, where we're in the business of gathering news, selling advertising and subscriptions, putting content online and doing all the office functions to support the others. We have our paper product delivered through contracts with independent distributors. And we're in the business of challenging people. We regularly challenge governments, companies, institutions and individuals to do better in whatever aspect of society they're involved in. Lately, the challenge to do better has had more and more to do with the environment and sustainable development. It's among the top items on everyone's list of concerns." What happened just reporting the story? Why is it the job of the media to 'challenge' people to do better? I imagine that I'm in the minority on this, that most people would say that journalists should make the world a better place and all that. And I agree with a degree of separation caveat: the world is made a better place when informed citizens act on what they know (see two posts below.) The job of newspapers is to make sure that individuals have information, not to push them into a particular course of action with that information. Is this even a political issue? The Ottawa Citizen reports this morning that, "The federal Liberals want the Conservative government to push for a lineup change to Team Canada at the upcoming world hockey championship because of ethnic slurs that were allegedly made by a player toward a francophone referee more than a year ago." I'm not sure if Shane Doan using a ethnic slur is reason enough to cut him from the national team. I am sure that it is none fo the business of the federal government. Marcel Proulx, deputy whip of the Liberal Party, admits that the Tories can't dictate who is on the team but that they can press Hockey Canada about the issue: "I'm saying that the government of Canada finances partly Hockey Canada, so if they agree that there shouldn't be racism in sports they should question Hockey Canada on how they can include him in their team." An argument against electoral reform The only election reform that matters is changing voter/politician behavior. That's the point of John Robson's Ottawa Citizen column yesterday which concludes: "There's nothing wrong with the way we elect politicians. What's wrong is whom we elect and why, and how little thought they, or we, give to basic issues in political economy." Friday, April 20, 2007
Just amazing I predicted that Alex Rodriguez would have an MVP-type year. Tonight against the Boston Red Sox, in the midst of the 15th game of the season, A-Rod has two homeruns bringing his major league-leading total to 12 and four RBIs, bringing his major-league leading total to 30. That's two RBIs every game. He also leads MLB in runs scored, slugging percentage and OPS, and is in the top five in batting average. Already twice this season, the Yankees have twice won the game with an A-Rod walk-off homer; that means that in one-quarter of the Yankees's wins are off must-hit homers from Rodriguez. No A-Rod, no win. In other games, his offense has been the difference between winning and losing. That's the definition of an MVP. He'll slow down, but those are amazing numbers. A little noticed bit from the SCOTUS partial-birth abortion decision Cass Sunstein noted in the Los Angeles Times that: "In the long run, the most important part of the Supreme Court's ruling on "partial-birth" abortions may not be Justice Anthony M. Kennedy's opinion for the majority. It might well be Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissent, which attempts, for the first time in the court's history, to justify the right to abortion squarely in terms of women's equality rather than privacy." While some commentators have noted Justice Anthony Kennedy's majority decision, in particular the fact he was, in the words of G. Tracy Mehan III in The American Spectator, "scrupulous in setting out the complete record documenting the existential realities of partial birth abortion," Sunstein recognizes the new jurisprudential arguments Ginsburg has made: "In 1985, Ginsburg, then a federal appeals court judge, argued in a law review article that the court should have emphasized 'a woman's autonomous charge of her full life's course.' Citing decisions on sex equality, she contended that Roe vs. Wade was "weakened … by the opinion's concentration on a medically approved autonomy idea, to the exclusion of a constitutionally based sex-equality perspective." In this week's case, Ginsburg, now the only woman on the court, attempted to re-conceive the foundations of the abortion right, basing it on well-established constitutional principles of equality. Borrowing from her 1985 argument, she said that legal challenges to restrictions on abortion procedures 'do not seek to vindicate some generalized notion of privacy; rather, they center on a woman's autonomy to determine her life's course, and thus to enjoy equal citizenship stature'." Sunstein is probably correct in find that this might make the legal arguments of pro-abortionists a little stronger in the future. Debating universal healthcare Over at The New Republic this week Jonathan Cohn and David Gratzer debate universal healthcare -- Part I (DG), Part II (JC), Part III (DG), Part IV(JC) -- and it is well worth reading. A couple noteworthy points from Dr. Gratzer. From the first instalment: "Yet after getting into medical school and training in Canada's hospitals and clinics, I discovered how chaotic the system was. And I realized how cruel it could be. Far from the nirvana of your essay, I found people struggling to get basic health care--since practically every surgical and diagnostic test required some type of waiting. The stories I encountered were moving: a man waiting two years for a referral to a pain clinic; a woman with sleep apnea forced to wait three years for a sleep study; a professor--barely able to walk because of a spinal condition--told to wait six months for an MRI. The professor, by the way, was my father. Government statistics detail other shortages: Some 1.4 million Canadians in Ontario alone who are actively looking can't find a family doctor. I concluded that government health care inevitably resulted in some type of rationing. With the "high tech, high expense" medical revolution changing health care across the West, governments decided to control costs by employing wage and price controls. Waiting and shortages were the inevitable result." Gratzer then relentlessly uses statistics to counter arguments that America's healthcare system is inferior to those in Canada and Europe. He might be cherry-picking his stats but no more than proponents of universal state-run systems or critics of America's (imperfect) system. In some cases he offers alternatives theories for why American lifespans, for example might be less; average life expectancy measures more than healthcare coverage. Gratzer concludes with a warning against ideology in the healthcare debate: "My central point: Don't measure a country's health care system by how well it promotes socialist goals or social engineering; judge a system by how well it serves people when they're ill." In the conclusion of Gratzer's second instalment, he reiterates the point of his book, The Cure: How Capitalism Can Save American Health Care: the American healthcare system suffers from a deficiency of American-ness -- at least that which is applicable to the non-healthcare part of the US economy: "Rather than looking at the failed experiments in other countries (government meddling) or revising a dismissed idea (managed care), I champion a third way: In five-sixths of the economy, Americans value choice and competition. That's the key to reforming American health care. In my book, I talk about ways to insure more uninsured, to increase quality and trim costs. A summary of my core ideas: Make health insurance more like other types of insurance, foster competition, reform Medicaid using welfare reform as a model, revisit Medicare, and address prescription drug costs by addressing the FDA's size and scope. So, no, I don't look to France for inspiration; I look to the United States." Thursday, April 19, 2007
China #1 The Financial Times reports that China is about to over-take the United States as the world's top carbon dioxide emitter: "A senior staff scientist at the U.S. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) last month estimated it was very likely that China would overtake the United States this year, estimating China’s CO2 emissions in 2005 at 5.3 billion tonnes versus the United States’ 5.9 billion, but with China growing much faster." In light of these numbers, what Europe is going to do (and Canada might do) is quite useless, as International Energy Agency chief economist Fatih Birol admits: "What we do in Europe may be with good intentions, may be very ethical... but if you put it in terms of numbers its meaning is very limited." But at least they'll feel better and sanctimonious. An argument against PR that is in fact an argument for PR I have never supported a move to proportional representation, but I find Adam Daifallah's argument against it almost reason enough to endorse a change in how we elect our representatives: "PR would end the (basically) two party system, create endless minority and coalition government situations, destabilize the legislature, create gridlock and force more frequent elections. And whatever legislation does managed to get passed will almost always be watered down." Considering how corrupt politics is and the never-ending expansion of government, isn't destabilization of the legislature and gridlock good things? George F. Will has long noted that gridlock was probably part of the founding fathers's plans in constructing the system of government the US has to obstruct needless law-making. The first-past-the-post parliamentary system does not usually have this brake on bad public policy initiatives. I'm not saying this is sufficient reason to support PR over the current system, but conservatives shouldn't dress up virtues (fewer laws and regulations) as problems. Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Everything downhill since 1968 The headline is hyperbole; I don't entirely blame the 1960s for our cultural and moral mess. (There is also the Enlightenment and The Fall of Man.) But there is much truth in these words from a March 18, 1993 Wall Street Journal editorial: As the saying goes, there was a time. And indeed there really was a time in the United States when life seemed more settled, when emotions, both private and public, didn't seem to run so continuously at breakneck speed, splattering one ungodly tragedy after another across the evening news. How did this happen to the United States? How, in T.S. Eliot's phrase, did so many become undone? We think it is possible to identify the date when the U.S., or more precisely when many people within it, began to tip off the emotional tracks. A lot of people won't like this date, because it makes their political culture culpable for what has happened. The date is August 1968, when the Democratic National Convention found itself sharing Chicago with the street fighters of the anti-Vietnam War movement. The real blame here does not lie with the mobs who fought bloody battles with the hysterical Chicago police. The larger responsibility falls on the intellectuals--university professors, politicians and journalistic commentators--who said then that the acts committed by the protesters were justified or explainable. That was the beginning. After Chicago, the justifications never really stopped. America had a new culture, for political action and personal living. With great rhetorical firepower, books, magazines, opinion columns and editorials defended each succeeding act of defiance--against the war, against university presidents, against corporate practices, against behavior codes, against dress codes, against virtually all agents of established authority." Tuesday, April 17, 2007
The punditocracy and Virginia Tech Not much too say. Prayers are with the victims. It's too bad that Cho Seung-hui isn't going to be executed. The talking (air) heads in the media, both Left and Right, have a lot to say about a tragedy that has few political (that is public policy) implications. The bodies were barely cold when each "expert" speculated about the reasons, invariably reflecting their own pet issues (guns, not enough guns, Muslims, therapeutic drugs, English majors, etc...) even though there was inadequate information at the time to make such judgements. The expression "lots of eat, little light" comes to mind. Sadly these shootings are not preventable -- see Fox News: "Security Experts: University Shootings Like Virginia Tech Massacre Aren't Totally Preventable." The good news is that they don't happen very often and are almost always the act of a lone evil-doer. So the only analysis of the news is that man is indeed capable of real evil. Monday, April 16, 2007
The law of unintended consequences II I had a thought while reading this Vancouver Sun editorial ("On the environmental issue, Greens play to the same audience that applauds Dion's emphasis on environmental issues. In ridings where there is no non-compete clause, vote-splitting between the Green and Liberal candidates might serve to elect a few more Conservatives.") Doesn't the Dion-May deal give license to voters with concerns about the environment to vote Green rather than Liberal in the next election? Our ever-increasingly political chief justice The Montreal Gazette editorializes: "Supreme Court of Canada Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin sailed close to the wind last week in her vigorous defence of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Speaking at a conference marking the 25th anniversary of the Charter, our top judge reportedly scoffed at the widely held view that courts treat criminals too lightly. She also said schools should be required to teach the Charter, and that failing to do this could undermine democracy. Those are incendiary assertions from the highest judge of the highest court at a time when one national political party persistently calls itself "the party of the Charter" and another is trying to crack down on crime." The law of unintended consequences Good for the environment, bad for municipalities: the bottle return deposit will cost cities an unknowable amount of revenue due to fewer recycled glass sales. AI and fatherlessness Kay S. Hymowitz writes in the Los Angeles Times about how artificial insemination is contributing to the problem of fatherlessness by delinking marriage, reproduction and child-rearing: "You'd think that we have enough problems keeping fathers around in this country, what with out-of-wedlock births and divorce. But these days, American fatherhood has yet another hostile force to contend with: artificial insemination, or AI. While the number of kids born as a result of the procedure (about 1 million so far in the United States) is still quite small, AI is having a disproportionate cultural and legal effect and is advancing a cause once celebrated only in the most obscure radical journals: the dad-free family." The numbers prove the point: "The California Cryobank, the country's largest sperm bank, estimates that about 40% of its customers are unmarried women. The Sperm Bank of California says that two-thirds of its clientele are lesbian couples." Hymowitz discusses what is known in legalese as "intentionality" which is replacing biology as the basis of parentage. But this leads to such legal inconsistencies and absurdities as sperm donors fathering dozens of children and bearing no responsibility for them while the drunken male who has a one night stand and fathering a child being on the hook for child support until his child is university. Fundamentally, the problem is that the technology permits the continuation of flawed (and dangerous) thinking: "There are multiple ironies in this unfolding revolution, not least that the technology that allows women to have a family without men reinforces the worst that women fear in men. Think of all the complaints you hear: Men can't commit, they're irresponsible, they don't take care of the kids. By going to a sperm bank, women are unwittingly paying men to be exactly what they object to. But why expect anything different? The very premise of AI is that, apart from their liquid DNA, we can will men out of children's lives." More on Pat Buckley The New York Times obituary for Patricia Buckley is available but you'll get a better sense of the person -- the perfect wife and hostess -- by reading Peter Robinson's remembrance. More Jackie Robinson For me, every George F. Will column is a must-read column because every column have several note-worthy tidbits as well as a deeper philosophical point or larger context than most analysis. On Sunday, he wrote about Jackie Robinson and has these tidbits: * Red Barber did Brooklyn Dodger radio broadcasts and considered resigning in protest of having a black player on the team. He had second thoughts, in part because he could present Robinson in a way that he could not be presented on TV: colourless. * The low-cost housing of Levittown contributed to the exodus of Dodger fans from the neighbourhood and eventually the Dodgers, too. * Will says: "Jack Roosevelt Robinson's middle name was homage to the president who said "speak softly and carry a big stick." Robinson's deeds spoke loudly. His stick weighed 34 ounces, which was enough." And the deeper meaning of it all, Will quotes from Jonathan Eig's Opening Day: The Story of Jackie Robinson's First Season: "Robinson showed black Americans what was possible. He showed white Americans what was inevitable." But it is notable that Will ended with the point about Robinson's 34-ounce bat, a bat that in ten seasons produced a 311/409/474 line with 137 HRs, 273 doubles, 54 triples, and 197 SBs. That is, his bat did a lot of the talking for him. Recall, too, that Robinson didn't play baseball until his mid-20s and didn't play in the Majors until the age of 28 -- the year many players reach their peak. What might his numbers been like if he played five years earlier or played 'ball as a teen? And still, he received MVP votes in eight of the 10 seasons he played and won the award in 1949, two years after winning the Rookie of the Year award. And while I do warn against forgetting that Robinson was a ballplayer and not just a black ballplayer, he was also a courageous, even heroic figure. I don't often quote Jesse Jackson favourably, but I have always been moved by his eulogy of Jackie Robinson, especially these words: "Jackie as a figure in history was a rock in the water, creating concentric circles and ripples of new possibility. He was medicine. He was immunized by God from catching the diseases that he fought. The Lord's arms of protection enabled him to go through dangers seen and unseen, and he had the capacity to wear glory with grace." And lastly, there's always the song (a great song, too) about Robinson the ballplayer, "Did You See Jackie Robinson Hit That Ball?" by Woodrow Buddy Johnson & Count Basie (1949): Did You See Jackie Robinson Hit That Ball? Did you see Jackie Robinson hit that ball? It went zoomin cross the left field wall. Yeah boy, yes, yes. Jackie hit that ball. And when he swung his bat, the crowd went wild, because he knocked that ball a solid mile. Yeah boy, yes, yes. Jackie hit that ball. Satchel Paige is mellow, so is Campanella, Newcombe and Doby, too. But it's a natural fact, when Jackie comes to bat, the other team is through. Did you see Jackie Robinson hit that ball? Did he hit it? Yeah, and that ain't all. He stole home. Yes, yes, Jackie's real gone. Did you see Jackie Robinson hit that ball? Did he hit it? Yeah, and that ain't all. He stole home. Yes, yes, Jackie's real gone. Jackie's is a real gone guy. Sunday, April 15, 2007
Telus & porn Read Rick McGinnis's Metro column on Vision TV's report on the recent flap over Telus and cell phone pornography, especially the conclusion. Heck, here it is: "Things get spicier when the Vision story features a former employee showing a video of an Idol-style talent show that happened during a Telus corporate retreat, and which featured judges and contestants making gratuitous sexual comments about each other. The show uses this an example of how the corporate culture of Telus has become degraded, though it's a bit of a stretch to connect this to the porn download issue, since this sort of verbal grab-ass happens at companies with no connection to porn, at conventions, retreats and Christmas parties, and usually in the presence of liquor. In a society where shame is considered unhealthy, it takes work to point out inappropriate behaviour, but taking a stand is unlikely to work when it begins by pretending to be shocked." There is another point similar to McGinnis's point that condemning Telus for offering porn services while ignoring the fact that cell phones with browsers on them can access pornography just as easily, but larger in scope: every cell phone company is involved in peddling this garbage (as one concerned customer informed me), so why single out Telus? There were practical reasons for the the archdiocese of Vancouver in doing so; they had their cell phone service with Telus and didn't want to marginalize their threat as a customer to move elsewhere. But socons in general need to realize that most telecommunications firms are up to their neck in pornography. Best. Car. Chase. Ever. Steve McQueen in Bullitt. (HT: San Francisco Chronicle) Or is it the mall chase in The Blues Brothers. 60 years ago today Jackie Robinson became the first black to play in Major League Baseball. It was an important moment for baseball. The colour barrier was broken and the game changed. Black players added an aggressiveness to the game both at the plate and on the basepaths, resulting in more power (homeruns) and speed (steals). It was an important moment, also, because it helped bring down colour barriers not only in baseball but in society in general. But this should be remembered, too; Robinson was not only symbolically important as the first black player, but he was one heck of baseball player. Tim Marchman wrote in the New York Sun last week: "He was an MVP-caliber player every year between 1948 and 1953, and in that time, he basically hit like Alex Rodriguez did in his prime; he also had an additional three All-Star caliber years. You don't really have to credit him for being a pioneer or even for his legendary mastery of the inside game to rank him among the 100 best to ever play the game." If you are at all a baseball fan, read Marchman's column to understand how great a player Robinson was. Sadly, the man who broke the colour barrier may mostly be remembered for the colour of his skin rather than his amazing skills and numbers. Celebrations to the contrary, that would not be a great thing for blacks, baseball or Robinson. Saturday, April 14, 2007
It's not easy being green Paul Wells is seldom funny but his post on Stephane Dion proving his green credentials is hilarious. Tres cool Roller coaster ride of housing prices since 1890. Really worth watching 'til the end. Neat, fun, informative although useless to explain what will happen in 2007 and beyond. (HT: The London Fog) The Doug Mientkiewicz experiment must come to an end For the second time in as many games, the New York Yankees scored few runs and lost late in the game (5-1 in Minnesota on Wednesday after the Twins scored four in the eighth and 5-4 in 11 innings in Oakland). While he shouldn't shoulder all the blame, 1B Doug Mientkiewicz's lack of ability to get on base has proven itself to be an extremely serious problem for the Yankees. He is hitless in 21 ABs and is 125/192/125 on the year. He has walked only twice and has just three hits -- all singles. He has next to zero ability to reach base and his glove is not what it was five years ago. With injuries to Hideki Matsui and Johnny Damon and an already shallow bench, there are not a lot of options. But as I suggested in my analysis of the season (echoing the New York Sun's Tim Marchman), that it would be better to let Jason Giambi, a defensive liability with a lively bat, play 1B and have the three regular outfielders (Matsui, Damon and Bobby Abreu) get a day off by playing DH with second-year Melky Cabrera rotating in the outfield: it takes Mientkiewicz's useless bat out of the lineup, gives the elderly outfielders a rest and gives Cabrera a chance to develop. But even if Joe Torre lacks the imagination for this scheme, they would be better off giving the everyday 1B job to Josh Phelps. Dumping Mientkiewicz completely would allow them to carry someone else on the bench, another outfielder or infielder with more upside than carrying two relatively similar 1Bs. The Yankees don't need to wait any longer to shake things up, not because of their 4-5 record (good for fourth in the AL East) is cause for great concern but because Mientkiewicz has provided all the data necessary to make the decision that he has to go. Thompson appeals to WSJ Republicans Not that that's a bad thing. Fred Thompson makes the case for tax cuts in the Wall Street Journal. Nothing new or overly persuasive in his argument. He notes that the Bush round of tax cuts did not lead to an increase in the deficit. He implies, by noting that tax revenues have increased, that tax cuts lead to growth. The column is actually quite pointless but for one fact. He sends a signal to supply siders that he's one of them. By the way, I saw a few minutes of Law and Order last night. Charlotte Ross played an Ann Coulter-type character (but worse!). From what I gather, she was shot at, an innocent by-stander was killed, and the Ross character was the bad guy, not the shooter. The shooter was suffering from Parkinsons and wanted to kill the Ross character, a critic of embryonic stem cell research. Friday, April 13, 2007
Global warming and coral reefs The IPCC noted (briefly on page 7 of its latest report) the damage done to coral reefs by global warming. Some scientists claim that coral reefs are extremely fragile and could only grow under very specific circumstances. But then again maybe not. As the Financial Times reported yesterday: "One of the greatest mass deaths of coral ever recorded occurred when islands were lifted more than a metre out of the water in the 8.7-magnitude earthquake of March 2005 off the west coast of Indonesia’s Sumatra island, scientists said on Thursday. The earthquake, which was linked to the December 26 2004 tremblor that triggered the massive Indian Ocean tsunami, uplifted Simeulue and Banyak by 1.2m, exposing up to 40,000 sq km of reefs, the report says. However, new reefs off Simeulue and Banyak islands had started to grow despite conditions being very different from before the quake that killed 638 people, the researchers from the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies (ARCCoERS) found. This demonstrates how coral is able to adapt relatively rapidly to changing circumstances, the report concludes." To repeat: "coral is able to adapt relatively rapidly to changing circumstances." To be fair, the ARCCoERS states in a press release this week that it does support the IPCC's warnings on climate change and coral reefs. Economist endorse Sarkozy It is not an unqualified endorsement but The Economist endorses Nicolas Sarkozy for president of France: "On the evidence of his career and his campaign, Mr Sarkozy is less a principled liberal than a brutal pragmatist. Yet he is the only candidate brave enough to advocate the 'rupture' with its past that France needs after so many gloomy years. It has been said that France advances by revolution from time to time but seldom, if ever, manages to reform. Mr Sarkozy offers at least a chance of proving this aphorism wrong." Sarkozy's two big problems in the eyes of the magazine: his opposition to Turkey joining the EU and his "traditional French politician's meddlesome economic instincts." On the plus side, unless he follows in the footsteps of Jacques Chirac and governs much less conservatively than he campaigns, Sarkozy's meddlesomeness will be much less than either of his (serious) opponents's. Liberal-Green deal I want to work out the reasons more thoroughly but the deal between the Liberals and Green Party to not run candidates against each other's leader, seems a terrible idea that could come back to haunt both parties. And Elizabeth May's ostensible endorsement of Stephane Dion for Prime Minister really underlines that even the leader of the Green Party doesn't consider the Greens a real political party. April 17 election call Yesterday, NationalNewsWatch reported that "insiders" say that Stephen Harper will call an election on April 17. Without commenting on what I think the Governor General should do (namely invite Stephan Dion to form the government because she need not entertain the PMO's hubris), here's my prediction: he calls three Quebec by-elections and perhaps one in Ontario. It will be a gage for how the Tories are doing in Quebec and whether a general election call in late 2007 or early 2008 might be wise. One big reason for that timing, as opposed to now, is that there will likely be fewer casualties in Afghanistan because the Taliban is not as militarily active in the winter months. Catching up with Gerry Calgary Herald interviews Gerry Nicholls who says that even in his post-NCC life he will continue pressing smaller government. Don Imus I haven't had much to say about the mess Don Imus got himself into because much that was needed to be said was being well said elsewhere: against the race hucksterism, political correctness and the phony 'gotcha' outrage that infects our public discourse. But something needs to be added -- or at least amplified because it has been said but not enough: Don Imus should be fired but not because he's a racist or sexist but because he's a jerk. And worse, a not very entertaining jerk. And stupid. He's a stupid jerk. I won't say this often but Joel Stein says it best in today's Los Angeles Times: "Don Imus is an idiot. I don't mean that what he said was idiotic, or that his racism makes him stupid. I mean that Don Imus is just not that bright. I know this because when I was in elementary school, Imus was my hero. He called people "weasels," and when something merited even more disapproval, he "nuked it," which meant that he used a bomb sound effect. These gimmicks were tremendously cool to an 11-year-old. Not only did I call everyone a weasel for all of sixth grade, but when I got in an argument with my seventh-grade teacher, I called in to 'Imus in the Morning' and got Miss Shimshack nuked. So Imus has the same sense of humor as a mildly bright seventh-grader." But it is not entirely Imus's fault. He has listeners. And guests. Again, Stein: "Senators and journalists happily suffered the fool. Imus asked people such as John McCain dumber questions than [Howard] Stern asked strippers, and they laughed it off." But why? you ask. Because Stern dealt with topics that the media formerly known as mainstream didn't want to handle whereas Imus brought his 'shock jock' sensibilities to what the media pooh-bahs considered news: politics. It has degraded politics, politicians and the audience much more than it has degraded Imus. He was already "simplistic and juvenile" which works for "simplistic and juvenile things" -- and politics might now qualify. Race (and gender) in America, though, is not simplistic or juvenile. One must never note that blacks and whites (or males and females) are different, unless it is to point to the disadvantages that plague blacks and whites. I think Imus's firing is a little bit unfair. He he has gotten away with such stupid things before, although not about race, so how was he supposed to know that he crossed a line he has certainly crossed in the past? The problem for Imus is that the term shock jock is so 1990s; in 2006, is there anything that is really shocking? Well, one thing: saying impolitic things about race. Commenting on the hair of blacks is a relatively small offense so it seems that Imus is likely a victim of the feigned shock of the race hucksters and the politically correct herd that buys into their professional outrage. But considering who Imus is -- the ease with which he was outraged by the non-outrageous and a man who made talk radio a less civilized place -- it is hard to feel sorry for him. Virgin births to come? The BBC reports that scientists have created sperm from adult stem cells taken from bone marrow. The sperm is 'immature' (as are half the jokes that I've come up with but will not post on this subject) sperm although it may only be a matter of time until scientists create reproductive sperm from bone marrow or other sources of adult stem cells. Right now, at least in the United Kingdom, use of such reproductive sperm would be illegal but as the past fifty years has illustrated, what was once prohibited can become legal. Thoughts: 1) Why? Why would scientists engage in this type of research? Is there a sperm shortage in the world? 2) One possible answer to why: although the bone marrow used in these initial experiments came from males, it might one day be possible to turn adult stem cells from women into sperm. That would permit two women involved in a lesbian partnership to become 'natural' parents although when you are turning bone marrow into sperm and conceive the child in a petri dish, the word 'natural' loses a lot of meaning. 3) If sperm can be created from the stem cells of women, it is possible that a woman could become both father and mother to her own offspring. I can barely resist a joke about the technological equivalent of the prospective mother effing herself. Should end it there. Thursday, April 12, 2007
EU considers raising roaming fees And Tim Worstall points out why it is a bad idea, especially for those with lower incomes. MoveOn madness TheHill.com reports that Hillary Clinton placed fifth in a Democratic presidential nomination straw poll of 42,882 MoveOn.org members. Senator Barack Obama, the 2007 version of John F. Kennedy, ran first at 27.87% followed by Senator John Edwards at 24.84%. As The Hill reports: "Clinton finished a distant fifth with 10.7 percent, also trailing Rep. Dennis Kucinich (Ohio) with 17.18 percent and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson with 12.26 percent." HRC is behind Dennis Kucinich, 2007's Jerry Brown, among MoveOn.org members. Think about that for moment. It says so much more about MoveOn.orgers than Obama, Clinton or even Kucinich. Polling data Two interesting facts from the Los Angeles Times-Bloomberg poll: 1a) 43% of Republicans think that the country is on the wrong track. 1b) 74% of Republicans approve of the job President George W. Bush is doing; 75% support his handling of the economy and 66% support his handling of Iraq. 2a) Fred Thompson has pulled ahead of Senator John McCain among Republican voters for 2nd place. 2b) Rudy Guiliani is a strong second (behind Thompson) among Religious Right Republican voters. 2c) Guiliani has an overwhelming lead among women (32% to Thompson's 12% and McCain's 8%). I guess that's really five points. Supergonorrheaexpialidocious, Or what the sexual revolution has unleashed From the Associated Press: "The sexually transmitted disease gonorrhea is now among the 'superbugs' resistant to common antibiotics, leading U.S. health officials to recommend wider use of a different class of drugs to avert a public health crisis." Things that make me laugh Sad Kermit does Hurt (HT: Hacks and Wonks) Saturday Night Live's TV Funhouse's Maraka -- a play on Dora the Explorer. A human rights issue? Last month, Human Rights Watch issued a report on access to condoms in American prisons and jails. Stupid One week after some fairly decent press in the form of a moderately fair profile in the New Yorker, World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz is combatting charges that he (in the words of the Financial Times) "personally directed the World Bank’s head of human resources to offer Shaha Riza, a bank official with whom he was romantically involved, a large pay rise and a promotion as part of an external secondment package." I generally agree with neoconservative foreign policy but what is it with the general incompetence of neocons. There are some things you just don't do. Wolfowitz should know better. Wednesday, April 11, 2007
She saw the hand-writing on the wall Blahlinda Stronach hangs it up. NationalNewsWatch reports that Blahlinda has said she will serve in public life, for now, in an unelected capacity, blah, blah, blah. I've been predicting this since it was clear that the Tories would win the 2006 election. It's no fun sitting in the opposition benches when you've tasted a cabinet seat. It's even less fun when a return to government is nowhere in sight. I'll refrain from commenting on how she'll be (presumably) joining Chrysler at an analogous crossroads moment as she joined the Liberal Party in 2005. Politician pay Vaughan Palmer's Vancouver Sun column says that when politicians examine their remuneration, a pay hike is inevitable. I've got an article on politican pay in the current Report magazine that examines the issues of total rumeneration (including accountability) and whether our elected representatives are worth it. There's a sidebar story at the end of the original article (that I also wrote) on Jack Layton, "working class hero." Big Bucks Are politicians paid too much? Paul Tuns April 2007 In December, Ontario Members of Provincial Parliament (MPPs) set off a firestorm of protest when they extended the session just before its scheduled Christmas break simply so they could vote themselves a 25 percent pay raise, increasing MPP's salaries from $86,860 to $110,775. It was quite the Christmas bonus. It is unclear whether Ontario voters and the media were more upset with the size of the salary increase or the fact that politicians were the ones who decided to hike their own pay. But aside from popular cynicism, the spectacle raised important issues about how politicians are paid, how their salaries are increased and whether their remuneration really needs to be at the level of private-sector executives to attract quality candidates. In Canada, it is difficult to compare the total remuneration paid to city councillors or members of provincial and federal legislatures because some cities and provinces exempt one-third of the salary from income taxes, and some have generous expense allowances (also one-third tax-free) while other provinces and the federal government do not; it is like comparing apples to oranges. But according to estimates included in a 2006 report by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation - Saskatchewan, Canadian politicians get paid from a low of nearly $57,000 in Prince Edward Island to $147,700 at the federal level. Many also get paid extra for additional duties such as holding cabinet posts or chairing committees. City councillors in big cities get paid mostly in the $70,000 to $90,000 range (Vancouver is a notable exception at $52,442), with mayors getting paid $140,000 to $160,000. So are they worth it? Gerry Nicholls, vice-president of the National Citizens Coalition, says federal and provincial leaders and cabinet ministers deserve their pay, but not backbenchers. "Premiers, the prime minister and cabinet ministers are not overpaid," he says, "They are executives and have important responsibilities. Their pay should reflect that." But backbenchers, he explained, "are essentially voting machines." Noting that they vote the way their leaders tell them to, Nicholls says, "paying somebody $147,000-plus is a lot of money for someone whose job description essentially entails putting up their hand whenever they are told." In 2006, the prime minister made $295,400, while federal cabinet ministers earned $217,500. Ontario s premier will make nearly $200,000 in 2007. ATTRACTING QUALITY CANDIDATES Mark Milke is a conservative columnist and author of three books, most recently A Nation of Serfs?: How Canada's Political Culture Corrupts Canadian Values. He takes a slightly different tack. Asked if politi-cians deserve their pay, he answers: "It depends." He points to former British Columbia NDP finance minister Glen Clark (who later became premier) and former Ontario NDP finance minister Floyd Laughren as undeserving of generous salaries. "My guess is that most voters would have paid a bit extra to have someone who wasn't economically illiterate and anti-wealth-creation in those positions." As for backbenchers, Milke says the pay is generally high enough to attract talented people to politics. If someone will not run because a "six-figure salary isn't enough, they need to learn the definition of 'public service'." Scott Hennig, Alberta director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF), is amused by the argument offered by politicians that exorbitant increases are necessary to convince talented people to run for public office. He points to the fact that there is seldom a shortage of candidates for elected office, and notes that when an incumbent does not face serious (or any) competition for his or her job, it is more often a reflection on the electoral strength of the sitting politician than the lack of financial reward. "If there was a shortage of serious candidates," Hennig concedes, "perhaps a good argument could be made to increase their salaries." As for the notion that politics cannot attract qualified people to run, Hennig simply points to the Edmonton city council. Among the current city councillors, five have master's degrees, three are former MLAs and one is a former school board trustee, while others are former nurses, teachers, newspaper editors and successful businessmen. It is obvious, Hennig says, that the "level of compensation must be adequate to attract quality candidates." He also points to intangible benefits of elected office: power, fame and civic-mindedness, to name a few. NEED FOR TRANSPARENCY Hennig says that his organization makes no judgment about whether the total remuneration for elected representatives is at an appropriate level, but instead focuses on whether salaries and the process to increase them are "fair, transparent and consistent." Hennig says that "citizens have a right to know what politicians are paid." Unfortunately, it is not always easy to determine what politicians earn, in part due to an arcane provision in the income tax law from the first half of the 20th century which permits any level of government to exempt up to one-third of salaries and allowances from federal and provincial income taxes. This makes comparisons between different juris-dictions difficult. For example, last year Edmonton city councillors were paid an advertised salary of $63,638, but if their salaries were adjusted for the tax-free allowance, their total comparable salary was $73,773. By comparison, Ottawa city councillors were paid $70,000 -- none of it tax-free. The advertised salary for Edmonton councillors is $6,362 less than their Ottawa counter-parts, but their effective salary, once adjusted for income-tax exemptions, is $3,773 more. Another reason salaries are not transparent and fair is that allowances are also provided on top of salaries, and not all provinces pay allowances. But there is something misleading in the term 'allowance.' Hennig notes that many voters probably think that allowances are the same as expenses: provide a receipt for a legitimate expense and get reimbursed for it. But that is not how it works. Allowances are paid on top of the salaries automatically, regardless of whether expenses were incurred or not. Plus many jurisdictions compensate for additional expenses. In Saskatchewan, members of the legislative assembly have an annual expense allowance of $5,426 -- more, if they have additional responsibilities such as holding the chair of a committee, leading a political party or sitting as a member of the provincial cabinet. But there are also dozens of other expenses for which MLAs are compensated on top of the expense allowance: office staff and constituency services, travel by both car and air, living expenses for MLAs from outside the capital city of Regina, and meal expenses. What is left to fall under the one-third expense allowance is hard to understand. RAISING THEIR OWN SALARIES What may well gall the public the most is not the amount of money their politicians make, but how pay increases are decided. There is a wide variety of methods that politicians use to increase their remuneration. Some tie automatic increases (or decreases) to changes in external, independent measures such as inflation, cost of living or average weekly earnings. Among the provinces and territories that follow this model are Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Ontario, Saskatch-ewan and the Yukon. On the other hand, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Northwest Territories, Nuna-vut, Quebec and Prince Edward Island rely on appointed commissions or changes in public-sector agreements that the politi-cians themselves are respon-sible for (or at least can influence). But in recent years, some cities and provinces have voted themselves additional increases on top of the automatic adjustments that are tied to changes in the provincial average weekly earnings or consumer price index (CPI). Despite an annual salary bump due to the increase in Alberta's average weekly earnings in the province (as determined by Statistics Canada), last year Edmonton city councillors voted themselves a 13 percent increase in base pay, a 30 percent jump in car allowance and an 87 percent increase in retirement savings plan contributions. The total increase was 21 percent -- on top of the adjustment reflecting the Calgary- and Fort McMurray-driven improvement in average weekly earnings. Hennig says that tying changes to the average weekly earnings is enough, and that additional increases were unneces-sary. He says that linking city council pay to changes in average weekly earnings maintains a connection between the elected and the electorate, and also says that (to a degree) reflects how well elected representatives are doing. If average weekly earnings decline, politicians do not deserve a pay increase because government policies may be hurting the economy. On the other hand, if the economy is booming, that reflects sound economic policies by the government. In Ontario, MPPs extended the length of the House calendar in order to vote on raising their salaries, despite CPI-linked increases after Integrity Commissioner Coulter Osborne released a report in early December calling for a 25-percent pay increase in remuneration to 'close the gap' between provincial and federal politicians. Osborne said this was needed to prevent MPPs from running for federal office. Cynics say Ontario politicians wanted to get the pay raise out of the way before Christmas because the Legislature was not scheduled to sit again until March -- seven months before a scheduled provincial election. Politicians, critics say, are counting on short memories by voters. Both Mark Milke and Gerry Nicholls say that arms-length panels are preferable to politicians being able to vote themselves a salary increase. Milke says simply that they "shouldn't be able to raise their own pay." And even better yet would be to make any changes to remuneration -- whether voted on by politicians or decided by an independent panel -- effective only after the next election. "That way, at least," Nicholls says, "voters would have a chance to pass some judgment. The bottom line is voters need a say in political pay. After all, they are supposed to work for us." In many jurisdictions, Hennig says, voters cannot make informed judgments and sound comparisons about the total compensation of elected officials because the advertised salary is not reflective of normal pay packages once allowances and tax-exemptions are taken into account. The CTF has called for remuneration that is fair (free of double standards that are not typically available in the private sector, including tax-free income and non-expensed allowances), transparent, and tied to changes in indices such as cost of living or average weekly earnings that are determined by independent bodies. Only then will Canadians know if they are getting their money's worth out of their municipal, provincial and federal politicians. Liberty for some? Janet at Liberty is Good wants to get a tattoo of ama-gi and that leads to some thoughts on getting a tattoo; being a libertarian she doesn't want to go to a regulated tattoo parlour. He's the rub: if tattoo parlours are regulated (I don't know if they are but don't think that they should be), wouldn't all tattoo parlours be regulated? How can you regulate an industry but not have all participants in the industry abide by the regulation? More on this in a moment. I agree with Janet: "It's important to me that where I go is being safe because they think it's important to be safe, and not because they're doing the absolute minimum the government says they have to do." That and the market will punish tattoo parlours that don't care about the safety of their clients. If Janet falls ill after getting her tattoo of ama-gi from Tetanus Tattoos, it is unlikely that any of her friends will go there for their tattoos. She might even blog about it, further hurting TT's business. My guess is that the tattoo business is quite reliant on 1) word-of-mouth advertising and 2) repeat customers. It also crosses my mind that considering some of the clientele of tattoo parlours, it would not be wise to cause them injury while plying one's trade. Give hepatitis to Bob the Biker and his fellow bikers might be coming by to parlour for a little visit. But back to regulating an industry but not all within the industry. Thinking about this has led me to a typically Canadian compromise: regulation that private enterprise agrees to. That is, the government proposes a set of standards that companies voluntarily can meet and by doing so are allowed to display the government seal of approval. People who think that this will protect them will have such establishments are their disposal while Janet can abide her principles are get a tattoo done at a liberty-loving parlour. I'm sure economists have developed this theory already and I don't really like the idea but it's worth some discussion. Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Calgary Herald blogs Two editorial board members from the Calgary Herald are now blogging at the paper's website: Doug Firby's Unfiltered (that purports to get past the spin) and Nigel Hannaford's Slings and Arrows (mostly cheeky take on current events). A comment about the Jays broadcast Before the Kansas City Royals widened their lead, when it was just 2-0 for the Royals in the fifth inning, one of the 'analysts' said that the longer the game remains close, the better it is for the Toronto Blue Jays. That is either completely inane or completely insane. Of course it is better for the Jays to be behind 2-0 rather than 4-0 or 10-0. That is obvious. But take the comment to its extreme: what if it is 'close' until the end of the ninth inning? Then the Jays lose. Baseball standings don't record the games you lose by 2 runs or 10 runs (although, granted most do record the win-loss record for 1-run games, although it doesn't matter in the standings). What bothers me about the comment is not that he -- and I'm sorry I didn't catch his name -- was stating something obvious (at least until it is further analyzed and taken to an extreme conclusion) but that he then explained that with the Jays bench and bullpen, a two-run lead is not insurmountable. Again, obvious. But to dress it up as a uniquely brilliant insight is one of the reasons I find it difficult to listen to the play-by-play and commentary during many baseball games, especially Jays games. When they are not offering the obvious as keen insight, they too often are completely off the mark. As Samuel Johnson said of a not very good book, the parts that are original are not that very good and the parts that are good are not that original. For the record, the Jays are now behind 7-1 and I'm waiting for Pat Tabler (or someone else) to say that if only the Jays could put a few runs on the board, they'd be closer to tying the game. Impressive  Manchester United beats Roma 4-0 to advance 7-1 aggregate in the Champion's League. My eldest son, who loves Roma and hates Man U is stunned by the ineptitude on display by the second-place Italian side. Chelsea beat Spanish squad Valencia 2-1 to advance 3-2 aggregate, setting up the distinct possibility of an all English final. Liverpool plays the second leg of its quarter-finals game tomorrow against PSV Eindhoven; it has a lead of 4-1 and returns home so they are a safe bet to join their fellow English squads in the semi-finals. (This will disappoint my eldest son again; he detests Liverpool and generally cheers for all Dutch teams although he prefers Ajax.) AC Milan needs to beat Bayern Munich or tie them 3-3 (or higher) to advance. I hope to see them squeak by 1-nil but doubt it. Mayor Gray vs. kids with toy guns London Fog destroys the silly idea coming out of Oshawa to ban children from 'using' (read: playing) 'replica' (read: toy) guns. The CBC reports: "Oshawa Mayor John Gray said imitation guns are being used by criminals and children trying to scare others. 'We want to avoid that situation where at some point a police officer may find him or herself faced off with someone brandishing a replica gun,' said Gray. 'That officer's not going to know that it's a replica'." The Fog: "Mayor Gray loves using red-herring arguments to justify this bylaw. Just as long he can make them sound good enough to a gullible public, he can convince them that any statist agenda is beneficial. Lets decipher shall we: 1. Children trying to scare others? Not too many people run in fear of a child with a $2 toy gun made of Taiwanese plastic. 2. Is it really difficult for an officer to distinguish a toy gun from a real one? The police already have the legal authority to reprimand a suspect if they feel they are being threatened by a real firearm." And furthermore, such bans hurt the effort to reduce the kind of crime that actually threaten people: "Anytime a new bylaw comes into effect, it needs the resources of the police to be enforceable. The police will be too busy trying to arrest adolescent hoodlums with fake guns, while real criminals with real guns are more likely to roam the street undaunted." I'd say this exemplifies the reason P.J. O'Rourke doesn't like politicians (as stated on TVO's The Agenda last Friday): power (unlike wealth) is a zero-sum pie, politics is about power, and if politicians have more power, we the people have less. As O'Rourke says, "Politicians are in the business of acquiring power ... and there is an element of oppression to it." Vimy, belatedly Burkean Canuck on Pierre Burton, Vimy and Old Canada, here. And Gods of the Copybook Headings excerpts from Canon Frederick George Scott's The Great War As I Saw which pertain to Vimy: "The flashes of guns in all directions made lightnings in the dawn. The swish of shells though the air was continuous, and far over on the German trenches I saw the bursts of flame and smoke in a long continuous line, and, above the smoke, the white, red and green lights, which were the S.O.S. signals from the terrified enemy. In an instant his artillery replied, and against the morning clouds the bursting shrapnel flashed. Now and then our shells would hit a German ammunition dump, and, for a moment, a dull red light behind the clouds of smoke, added to the grandeur of the scene. I knelt on the ground and prayed to the God of Battles to guard our noble men in that awful line of death and destruction, and to give them victory, and I am not ashamed to confess that it was with the greatest difficulty I kept back my tears. There was so much human suffering and sorrow, there were such tremendous issues involved in that fierce attack, there was such splendour of human character being manifested now in that 'far flung line,' where smoke and flame mocked the calm of the morning sky, that the watcher felt he was gazing upon eternal things." Your tax-dollars at work Blazing Cat Fur notes that Canadian International Development Agency has given $103,177 to Lingerie Claudel Inc., a Montreal company, for, er, lingerie. The listed date for the contribution is 2006-02-09 so it is unclear whether it was some leftover Liberal spending or whether the Tories are into this kind of thing, too. As BCF says, if CIDA didn't give money to the lingerie companies perhaps it wouldn't have to dole out $5 million to the International Planned Parenthood Federation. Or as Kathy Shaidle says, "What, do they design tiny French maid outfits for those kids the UN likes to molest? Are they made of mosquito netting or something?" (April 9) Monday, April 09, 2007
Perpetuating myths about abortion Writing in the Ottawa Sun, Carleton University political science grad Jordan Michael Smith jams a lot of wrong into one column: leaps of logic, cherry-picking polls, fallacious arguments. 1. Smith states, "[P]olitically, at a national level, the debate is dead. The pro-choicers won." Many people would argue that it was not a political win but a judicial win. In the 1980s, the pro-abortion side could not win the argument for unlimited abortion on demand -- abortion at any time up until the moment of birth, for any reason, almost always at taxpayer expense, without any limitation or regulation which is the situation today -- with the general public and their elected representatives so they challenged the constitutionality of (problematic and weak) anti-abortion laws before the courts. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the abortion law was an ill-conceived inconvenience to pregnant women seeking abortions but only one justice (Bertha Wilson) found there to be any constitutional right to abortion. The SCOC invited Parliament to write a new abortion law, there has been one attempt since then that failed and there has been what Jean Chretien has called social peace (read: silence on the part of politicians and the media) on abortion ever since. The pro-choicers never won the argument that abortion is a good thing or even that it should be legal; they won by judicial fiat, a parliamentary technicality and since then an enforced silence. Canada is pro-abortion by default. 2. As proof that the pro-abortion side as won, Smith says: "The most recent poll on the subject, a June 2006 Angus Reid survey, found that just one third of Canadians felt abortion was immoral, numbering behind blasphemy, pornography, and alcohol abuse. And that’s just the number who think it is immoral — some of these can be presumed to favour the decriminalization of abortion, even if they personally find it distasteful." It is not true that the last poll on the subject was last June's Angus Reid survey -- Environics had a poll last October -- but his point that some who think abortion is immoral but should not be illegal could could be true. But it could also be true that some people who do not find abortion immoral might still want it recriminalized, or at least regulated. More about polls and this point in a moment. 3. He wonders, "How did we reach something approaching a national consensus on abortion?" Have we? According to a LifeCanada-commissioned Environics poll (pdf) in 2006, the majority oppose the abortion status quo of abortion on demand (64%) and various degrees of majority support for regulations that limit abortion. Only 30% support an unlimited right to abortion -- the same number who oppose abortion from the moment of conception. The remaining third support restricting abortion after the first or second trimester. Furthermore, the polling trends (as reported by LifeSite) show that pro-life sentiment is increasing slightly. Reflecting on a similar poll in 2005, Toronto Sun Lorrie Goldstein, who is not a social conservative, said: "As for the so-called 'mainstream' view that there should be no protection until birth? That view was held by a mere 28%. Some 'mainstream'." There is simply no consensus of the issue of abortion. 4. Looking for reasons for this fictional consensus, Smith says: "The decline of organized religion has to be foremost on this list. It is no accident that the U.S., Ireland, Spain and Poland have the most restrictive abortion laws; these are the countries with the most religious citizenry and the strongest religious traditions." About the U.S.: it is more 'religious' but it permits abortion-on-demand in most jurisdictions; there are no enforced restrictions on partial-birth abortion (at least until until the United States Supreme Court rules on several state's statutes on the matter). Many states have restrictions such as parental notification or approval, informed consent, state-funding restrictions, etc... and effectively pro-life laws such as unborn-victims of violence, which as the Environics poll noted above finds, are supported by a majority of Canadians. There are restrictions on abortion in the U.S. but there are still about one million (surgical) abortions each year. 5. More non-sense from Smith about religion: "It is not the case, as the religious might like to think, that they have a regard for human life beyond that of the secular. Rather, it is that religious doctrine is clear that life begins at conception, while most of those who do not bow to scripture find this hard to concede." But life beginning at conception is not a religious belief but a scientific fact. As medical doctor and novelist Walker Percy said in the 1970s, we no longer live in the Dark Ages, it is no longer possible to say we don't know when life begins. More than 30 years ago we were aware that when the 23 chromosomes of the sperm and the 23 chromosomes of the ovum are combined, a new (and unique) living human being with 46 chromosomes is created. 6. More cherry-picking: "As church-going and liturgy (if not spirituality) have declined in this country, so has opposition to abortion." But as noted above, the polls indicate a slight uptick in pro-life sentiment. 7. He gets something partly right: "Finally, we have the women’s movement. The sexual revolution did more than free up dirty hippies to engage in orgies. It also left women with the idea that they would decide what was right and wrong for them — and only they would decide. After the pill, it was only a matter of time." Yes, the contraception mentality leads to abortion. And to note, according to those Environics and Leger Marketing polls sponsored by LifeCanada in recent years, the percentage of women who oppose abortion is often slightly higher than the percentage of men. Yes the sexual revolution permitted women to gain 'control' over their own bodies -- and many realize that abortion isn't such a great deal. 8. Intellectual debates don't matter, or so Smith implies: "The intellectual debate may never end, and individuals will always wrestle with their consciences. But as a political movement, as something that can move the masses out into the streets, abortion is done. And choice won." It is possible that there will be something that shifts public opinion to a critical mass that requires politicians not ignore the issue anymore -- perhaps the intellecutal debate will convince enough people to care about abortion or perhaps something else: the testimony of women who have been ravaged by abortion, the widespread repugnance of the philosophical argument of when life begins (vs. the scientific argument) that states that unborn life is meaningless, the quickening demographic shift that threaten our way of life, a religious revival. My guess is that if any incremental legislation is every passed, it will begin a more serious public discussion and political examination of the issue. Andrew Coyne has also pointed out ways to address abortion-related issues without addressing abortion head-on. It may be convenient for abortion supporters to misrepresent the facts about the abortion debate, but the public shouldn't be duped into an artificial silence (that damnable social peace) because politically the 'issue has been settled.' It is yet another example of the ruling classes and status quo being unrepresentative of the majority view that abortion on demand is not the right policy for Canada. Sunday, April 08, 2007
Happy Easter "Now on the first day of the week Mary Mag'dalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. So she ran, and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, 'They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.' Peter then came out with the other disciple, and they went toward the tomb. They both ran, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first; and stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb; he saw the linen cloths lying, and the napkin, which had been on his head, not lying with the linen cloths but rolled up in a place by itself. Then the other disciple, who reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; for as yet they did not know the scripture, that he must rise from the dead." -- John 20: 1-9 Saturday, April 07, 2007
Major League Baseball predictions (National League) My American league predictions can be found on my April 4 post here. National League East 1. New York Mets: 102-106 wins There are some skeptics that think the Mets have serious problems and won't repeat as the NL East leader because of its supposedly weak pitching. These people are idiots; they fail to notice that this is for the most part the same pitching staff that helped it win 97 games, the most in the majors in 2006 and in the ways that it is not the same rotation, it is better. Sure, they won't have Pedro Martinez until July or August (although both he and Victor Zambrano missed time last year, too). But neither will the Mets have a couple of bums that were net negatives for the team last season. When you subtract a negative, that's a positive, so even without a full season of Martinez, they are on the right path. Last year, the team used Jose Lima to start four games. It isn't so much that he put together a 9.87 ERA and 2.02 WHIP in that time than the fact the Mets had Lima on their roster at all. It is hard to believe that somewhere in the organization there wasn't someone else who could have started those four games. Lima is the worst pitcher of all-time. No exaggeration. In 13 seasons and 1567.2 IP, he had a career 5.26 ERA and recorded a WHIP of 1.40 or worse 9 times. More notably, he holds the record for worse ERA in both the American and National leagues of any pitcher who has thrown at least 162 innings (6.00 ERA over 168.2 IP with the 2005 KC Royals and a 6.65 ERA over 196 IP for the 2000 Houston Astros). It is unimaginable that the Mets will use anyone that bad in 2007. As an added bonus, the team doesn't have Steve Traschel as their third starter anymore (15-8 despite a 4.97 ERA and 1.60 WHIP in 164.2 IP) so assuming his replacement is only a average pitcher, the team has upgraded itself. In Tom Glavine they have a workhorse at the age of 40: 15-7, 3.82 in 198 IP. While not a true ace, Glavine serves the function well: in games Glavine started in 2006, the team went 24-8, the second best such winning percentage in the majors after the Twins and Johan Santana. In the second slot is Orlando Hernandez, a smart pitcher of indeterminable age whose stats don't quite capture his abilities: 4.66, 1.33 WHIP, 164 Ks in 162 IP. He was 11-11 but should do better this year. John Maine was 6-5, 3.60 ERA and 1.13 WHIP in 90 IP in his rookie year. In the off-season, some baseball pundits pointed to Maine as emblematic of the Mets's pitching problems. I don't see what they see. What I've seen is a pretty good pitcher with plus stuff who is improving. I wouldn't be surprised if he got Cy Young award votes in November because on this team he could win 18-20 games with an ERA under 3.50. Fourth starter Oliver Perez hasn't quite lived up to the promise he demonstrated early in his career (in 2004 he had a 2.98 ERA in 198 IP with the lowly Pittsburgh Pirates) but has recently struggled and been among the worst starters in the NL. He seems to have forgotten how to pitch effectively but coach Rick Peterson should be able to find his old self. He's got an electric arm when its on and as a back-of-the-rotation type, there is plenty of upside to giving him a chance. If he splits the difference between his potential and his recent performance and becomes merely an average starter, the Mets will be happy. At worst, he'll move to the bullpen (or elsewhere) when Pedro returns. An assortment of rookies and relievers will get a shot at the fifth spot; if whoever is picked doesn't work out, there are plenty of other options for the team including Mike Pelfrey. Some cynics say that the Mets won last year despite their rotation. But the facts don't support that: despite playing in spacious Shea Stadium, Mets starting pitching had an ERA of 4.67 compared to the league average of 4.66. It obviously wasn't that much of a liability. What about the other side of the pitching equation? The bullpen is depleted with the 50-game suspension of Guillermo Mota for steroid use, the departure of submariner Chad Bradford and nagging injuries to hard-throwing Duane Sanchez, but is still full of diverse and useful relievers. Aaron Heilman, who wants to be a starter, is too valuable in the pen: 3.62 ERA and 1.16 WHIP in 87 IP. The team added Scott Schoeneweis and Jon Adkins. Closer Billy Wagner (40 saves, 2.24 ERA, 94 Ks in 72.1 IP) will absolutely implode for two or three games a year but is otherwise an elite closer. The bullpen perfectly handled by manager Willie Randolph who used his relievers for 542/2 innings, third most in the NL, yet they showed no signs of fatigue (or abuse). Despite the carping of baseball writers, the pitching is a plus for any team. But the strength is its lineup and bench. The team has the best leadoff hitter in the game, developing superstar SS Jose Reyes (300/354/487, NL-leading 65 SBs, 19 HRs, superior defense). He is followed by catcher Paul Lo Duca who probably won't repeat his 2006 numbers (318/355/428) but is still nonetheless a top-tier catcher both offensively and defensively (despite not throwing out many base-stealers). A case could be made that LF Carlos Beltran (275/388/594, 41 HRs, 18 SBs, Gold Glove defense) deserved the MVP last year. He's followed by aging but not declining 1B Carlos Delgado (265/361/548, 38 HRs, 113 RBIs) and young and improving 3B David Wright (311/381/531, 26 HRs, 116 RBIs, 20 SBs, but erratic defense). LF Moises Alou hit 22 HRs while batting 301 at the age of 40 last year in San Fran. He's an improvement over the committee of left-fielders they used last year. Shawn Green (277/344/432, just 15 HRs, declining defense) is well past his prime and should be relegated to a platoon or bench role. With Green and Alou in the outfield, Lastings Millege should get lots of playing time, the much-needed opportunity to develop without the pressure of an everyday job on a playoff-bound team. OF Endy Chavez provides moderate speed and power off the bench. The biggest weakness is 2B Jose Valentin (271/330/490, 18 HRs in 284 ABs) who actually provided pop and above average defense. If he repeats, the team will be very happy after spending the first half of '06 figuring out their 2B situation. They have Damion Easley and Julio Franco on the bench and a number of decent minor league prospects that can play infield or outfield in a pinch. Top all that with the best manager in baseball, Willie Randolph, who gets the most out of his players by exploiting their strengths and not putting them in situations they are likely to fail, and you have the makings of a World Series winner. A lot has to go wrong for the Mets not to take the division -- they won it by 12 games last year and they are improving. The Mets have an excellent mix of established veterans, young talent and budding superstars, and prospects with lots of upside. The team should win the division easily, take the World Series, and threaten to do so for the next 3-5 years. 2. Philadelphia Phillies: 85-89 wins The Phillies are a popular choice to win the division because of superior hitting and an improved rotation. But the pitching isn't that improved. And the team has ineptitude in charge in the name of Charlie Manuel. The good news is that few teams have four hitters as good as the team's four best: 1B and MVP Ryan Howard (313/425/659, 58 HRs, 149 RBIs), 2B Chase Utley (309/379/527, 32 HRs, 102 RBIs, 132 runs, 15 SB), LF Pat Burrell (258/388/502, 29 HRs and 95 RBIs in 462 ABs) and SS Jimmy Rollins (277/334/478, 25 HRs, 36 SBs 127 runs, great defensive player who will win a Gold Glove after Omar Vizquel retires). Here's an interesting fact about their middle infielders: they became the first SS/2B combination to each hit 25 HRs. Another fact: Rollins had the longest hitting streak in 2005 (36 games) and Utley had the longest streak in 2006 (35 games). New full-time 3B Wes Helms is hoping to repeat his 2006 season: 329/390/575, all of which are unrepresentative of his career, 267/330/446. Which Helms shows up could make the difference between finishing a respectable second in the division or running away with the wild card. The team 'ace' is inning-eater Freddy Garcia (4.53 ERA in 216.1 IP with just 136 Ks). He's followed by two promising young pitchers, righty Brett Myers (12-7, 3.91 ERA, 1.30 WHIP, 189 Ks in 198 IP) and lefty Cole Hamels (9-8, 4.08, 1.25 WHIP, 145 Ks in 132.1 IP). They must keep pitching that way for the team to have any chance to contend; if either suffer any serious regression, the team could drop to third. LHP Jamie Moyer is 43 and his 277 opponents' batting average may portend a breakdown to come. Adam Eaton was injured for much of 2006, isn't that good when he's healthy, should not be pitching on any team that wants to contend and should not be paid $8 million per season over three years anywhere. Other than Geoff Geary (2.96 ERA in 91.1 IP over 81 games) the bullpen is suspect and one would expect a lot of tinkering: figuring out who to use when, lots of minor-league call-ups, possible trades and waiver pickups. Tom Gordon is the closer (3.34 ERA and 34 saves) but at 39, is feared to be ready to implode. The lineup is among the two best in the league but the pitching is simply not good enough (nor Manuel smart enough to squeeze every ounce of usefulness out his pitchers) to compete with the Mets. 3.Atlanta Braves: 81-85 wins The Braves are the Texas Rangers of the National League; I wouldn't be surprised if they won 90 or lost 90, but they'll fall somewhere in between. Whereas the Rangers will likely finish nearer their low estimate, the Braves are likely to finish nearer the high estimate. While they no longer have 1B Adam LaRouche and his 32 HRs, they did get Pittsburgh's closer Mike Gonzalez who has a career ERA of 2.40 in 168 games. They also have Bob Wickman (1.04 ERA, 1.00 WHIP, 19 saves between the Indians and Braves last year) and Rafael Soriano (2.25 ERA, 1.08 WHIP, 65 Ks in 60 IP) to combine for an pretty impressive bullpen. John Smoltz will turn 40 in May but still is a true ace, going 16-9, with a 3.49 ERA, 1.19 WHIP, and 211 Ks in 232.1 IP. Chuck James, the fourth starter, was a pleasant surprise: 11-4, 3.78 ERA, 1.24 WHIP, 91 Ks in 119 IP. If he maintains that level of pitching, the Braves will be in decent shape. But they really need more out of the 2-3 spots of Tim Hudson and Mike Hampton. Hampton didn't play in 2006 and Hudson was a disappointing 13-12, 4.86 ERA, 1.44 WHIP in 218.1 IP, indisputably his worst season. Both Hudson and Hampton need to regain their old form and if neither does, the Braves will struggle to play 500 ball because there are a lack of options to fix the rotation. The team has a pair of Joneses that are stars: 3B Chipper Jones (324/409/596, 26 HRs in 411 ABs but a declining range in the field) and CF Andruw Jones (262/363/531, 41 HRs, 129 RBIs and Gold Glove defense). The team has a good young catcher in Brian McCann (333/388/572, 24 HRs) who calls a great game but could use improvements in throwing out runners). Other than figuring out pitching, the key to future Braves success is for RF Jeff Francoeur to learn to walk once in a while. He has only done so only 34 times in 908 Major League at-bats over two seasons for a career OBP of 304 despite hitting 300 in his first season. This is probably Bobby Cox's last year as manager and they should do him proud. But they need everything to go their way and the Phillies to stumble to make a run for the playoffs. 4. Florida Marlins: 71-76 wins It is highly unlikely that all the rookie and second-year players who did wonderfully last year will repeat their performances. Normal regression rather than the loss of Manager of the Year Joe Girardi will be responsible for the Marlins winning fewer games in 2007 than 2006. 5. Washington Nationals: 57-61 wins The team is comprehensively awful. The Nats have precisely one-and-half brightspots: Third-year 3B Ryan Zimmerman 287/351/471, 20 HRs, 110 RBIs) and trade-baitable 1B Nick Johnson (290/428/520, 23 HRs). RF Austin Kearns saw his power numbers decline in spacious RFK Stadium (slugging percentage fell from 492 to 429). CF Nook Logan has a cool name and 300 BA but doesn't walk or hit for power. Their starting rotation consists of John Patterson, Joel Hanrahan, Matt Chico, Mike O'Connor, Shawn Hill. Impress you? Me neither. The team is not so much as rebuilding as preparing to rebuild once they get their new stadium in '08. National League Central 1. St. Louis Cardinals: 85-89 wins The Cardinals famously won the World Series last year after a barely winning season (83-78). But their record was more a reflection of being severely hampered by injuries in the second half when SS David Eckstein, CF Jim Edmonds and reliever Ricardo Rincon had extended stays on the DL. 1B and MVP candidate Albert Pujols, second starter Mark Mulder and closer Jason Isringhausen all spent time on the DL at some point and 3B Scott Rolen was playing with shoulder fatigue following a season in which he was limited to less than 200 ABs due to surgery. Although Edmonds is clearly on the decline, the Cards should expect an improvement over last year's record simply by virtue of having key components of their team healthy again. Mulder is a relatively safe bet to regain most of his past glories and the team boasts one of the most consistent aces in the majors, Chris Carpenter (three consecutive seasons with at least 15 wins, an ERA under 3.50 and WHIP under 1.14). Jeff Suppan had a brilliant World Series but is truthfully little better than an average pitcher; Jeff Weaver is inconsistent but flourished under the coaching of Dave Duncan and Jason Marquis is a decent inning-eating pitcher who had his worst season in 2006. All three left as free agents but the Cards only need Mulder to approach what he was in Oakland when he finally does return and for one of the two replacement pitchers, Kip Wells or Anthony Reyes to put up better-than-average numbers for a third starter for the team to compete. Pitching coach Duncan gets the most out of his starters, so they should be in good hands. Ditto for the experiment of using two former relievers, Adam Wainwright and Braden Looper to fill the fourth and fifth slot, at least until Mulder retuns, and Wainwright probably has the stuff to be a pretty good fourth starter. It's too bad they need to do it because as he demonstrated last October, he could legitimately replace closer Jason Isringhausen (33 saves, 1.46 ERA) but the team has a deep and usefully diverse bullpen so Wainwright and Looper shouldn't be missed. The lineup features the most fearsome hitter in baseball, Albert Pujols (331/431/671, 49 HRs, 137 RBIs despite missing a month). He has Jim Edmonds (257/350/471) and Scott Rolen (296/369/518) hitting behind him. The team has three other outfielders that could be starters: RF Juan Encarnacion (power but poor OBP), sophomore LF Chris Duncan (22 HRs in 280 ABs) and So Taguchi (career 281/330/398 but getting better). The infield defense is outstanding with the addition of 2B Adam Kennedy, who rejoins SS Eckstein; they won the World Series together in Anaheim in 2003. All the infield has (at least) above average OBPs and are Gold Glove winners or potential GG winners. The bench is deep. The one downside is catcher Yadier Molina who hit just 215, with an OBP of 274. Such numbers cannot be tolerated even though he is one of the best defensive catchers in the game, especially considering that backup Gary Bennett can't produce at the plate, either, boasting an identical OBP. The Cards will have a better 2007 regular season if they can remain healthy and a few of their rotation options work out. 2. Milwaukee Brewers: 83-87 wins A lot of sports writers say that the Brewers are the "trendy" choice to compete for the division title. It is also the smart choice. They have a strong offense and potentially one of the best rotations in baseball. Every indication is that more players will improve than will regress. The young talent has proved themselves. If only Ben Sheets can stay healthy. Sheets (3.82 ERA, 1.09 WHIP, 116 Ks in 106 IP, a 10:1 K to BB ratio) has shown that he can compete for the Cy Young (12-14, 2.70 ERA, 201 Ks, 0.98 WHIP in 2004) and while he doesn't have to be that good, he does have to be that healthy (34 starts). Southpaw Chris Capuano is an improving quality second starter (11-12, 4.03, 1.25 WHIP, 174 Ks in 221.1 IP) and Jeff Suppan brings his impressive World Series performance to Milwaukee; even as an average pitcher who throws 200 innings he'll make an important contribution. Dave Bush is one of the best fourth starters in the game (12-11, 4.41, 1.14 WHIP, 166 Ks in 210 IP, and a better than 4:1 K to BB ratio). I'm not convinced that inconsistent Francisco Cordero, acquired from Texas in the middle of 2006, is the kind of closer a top-tier team needs. The bullpen has no stand-outs and they need to improve in this area, especially Derrick Turnbow, the former closer who posted a 6.87 ERA in 64 games last year. The offense features young good (or better) players with plenty of potential to improve. 1B Prince Fielder 271/347/483, 28 HRs in his first full season) and LF Geoff Jenkins (271/357/434) are two prime candidates to build on their early success. Former infielder Bill Hall moves to CF, a risky move that could pay dividends. At the plate, he doesn't have the stats of a CF: 270/345/553, 35 HRs. Johnny Estrada (302 BA, 11 HRs), acquired from the Colorado Rockies, is an offensive upgrade at catchter, although he needs to walk more (13 BBs in 414 ABs). That said, there are a number of downsides. The rotation has a habit of not achieving its potential and Sheets is rarely healthy for 162 games. More worryingly, the young middle infield of SS J.J. Hardy and 2B Rickie Weeks are both coming off significant injuries and neither has put together a full good season and Hardy doesn't have the range that great shortstops do. The team could do better than Corey Koskie at 1B and OF Kevin Mench's Texas offense did not translate when he moved to Milwaukee last year (1 HR in 40 games). The team will use Mench as trade bait to fill holes that develop throughout the season. The Brewers have the makings of a division title contender but 2007 won't be their season unless the Cardinals are unlucky (read: unhealthy). 3. Chicago Cubs: 80-84 wins The Cubs would have improved even if they didn't sign $300 million worth of free agents. They underperformed last year. They'll have back power hitting 1B Derrek Lee, a Triple Crown threat in 2005, who was sidelined in mid-April last year with a wrist injury. They have arguably the best pitcher in the NL (Carlos Zambrano: 16-7, 1.29 WHIP, 3.41 ERA, 210 Ks in 214 IP). They fired awful manager Don Baylor who physically and psyhologically damaged his players by needlessly pitching them too much or needlessly insulting them. They could reverse the closer and setup roles between Ryan Dempster (24 saves but a 4.80 ERA, 1.51 WHIP and less than a K per inning) and Bob Howry (3.17 ERA, 1.13 WHIP, 71 Ks in 76.2 IP and a fastball that is consistently 6-8 mph faster than Dempster's) and they'd be a better team. But a team that signs Jason Marquis (6.02 ERA, 1.52 WHIP and a sub-500 record with the division winning St. Louis Cardinals) to bolster the starting rotation, pays $10 million for Ted Lilly (4.31 ERA & 1.43 WHIP) to hold down the number two spot, while signing Alfonso Soriano to an 8-year, $136 million contract without knowing where they were going to play him -- they settled on CF -- is in serious trouble. The fact that their second and third best pitchers (starter Mark Prior and forced to the bullpen Kerry Wood) are as fragile as bone china and starting the year on the DL is another ominous sign. As is the fact that SS Cesar Izturis doesn't get on base enough (295 OBP) and RF Jacques Jones strikes out too much (116 Ks). But the addition of Soriano (at least 40 HRs, 40 doubles, 40 SBs) helps as does keeping 3B Aramis Ramirez (291/352/561, 38 HRs, 119 RBIs) and getting back Lee. This is a team on the upswing but with a long way to go before they contend. Some of the money could have been better spent on pitchers with more upside than Lilly's servicable innings. 4. Houston Astros: 75-79 wins A good many people are looking at the loss of two-thirds of the top end of their rotation (Andy Petite to the Yankees and Roger Clemens who remains unsigned) and think that the team is in trouble. It is but not because of their pitching. The Astros acquired Jason Jennings (3.73 ERA in 212 IP for the Colorado Rockies) to become their number two starter behind Roy Oswalt (15-8, 1.17 WHIP, 2.98 ERA in 220.2 IP) making for an impressive 1-2 punch, probably better than Oswalt and Clemens. Woody Williams is a perfectly useful third starter with six usable pitches (12-5 with a 3.65 ERA in 145.1 IP last year in San Diego). The bullpen is good but the word on closer Brad Lidge is that he is finished (5.28 ERA, 1.40 WHIP in 2006) after his monumental breakdown on the mound in the 2005 post-season but he still struck out 104 in 75 IP which indicates he can get the job done. The real problem for the 'Stros is the lineup which has three everyday players with OBPs under 310. In fact, the team's 332 OBP was the second worse in baseball, ahead of only the Tampa Devil Rays. Houston is keeping 2B Craig Biggio and his 308 OBP around just so he can get his 3000 hits in an Astros uniform. Not only does the team not get on base, they don't hit the ball hard, as they have the second worst slugging percentage (409) in the majors. There is help on the way in the form of free agent LF Carlos Lee (300/355/540) and a full season of RF Luke Scott (336/426/621, 10 HRs in 214 ABs) to complement 1B and MVP candidate Lance Berkman (315/420/621, 45 HRs, 136 RBIs). But it won't be enough. 5. Cincinatti Reds: 70-74 wins The team boasted what might have been the best pair of NL starters in Aaron Harang (16-11, 3.76 ERA, 216 Ks in 234.1 IP) and Bronson Arroyo (14-11, 1.19 WHIP, 3.29 ERA, 184 Ks in 240.2 IP), finshed among the NL leaders in HRs and SBs, and still finished under 500. Want to know why? Let me count the ways. 1. All three other starters posted ERAs of 5.19 or worse. 2. They played Scott Hatteberg, a perfectly good bench player, at 1B all year. 3. They had Ken Griffey Jr., who has absolutely no range that the team had no choice but to move him to LF this year, patrolling CF all last season. 4. SS Alex Gonzalez and his 299 OBP. 5. RF Adam Dunn has had three consecutive seasons of 40 HRs and 100 BBs and yet remains a perfectly average player because he plays atrocious defense and flirts with striking out 200 times. I'll stop there. None of these problems were being corrected so expect the Reds to perform like the worse than average team they truly are. 6. Pittsburgh Pirates: 66-70 wins You'd think that a team that hasn't finished above 500 since 1993 and that hasn't signed any big name free agents would have taken advantage of their draft picks and collected a pretty decent array of talent. With the single exception of LF Jason Bay (286/396/532, 35 HRs, 109 RBIs), not so with the Pittsburgh Pirates. 3B Freddy Sanchez won the NL batting crown but his OBP was only 34 points higher than his 344 BA, nor does he have the power (6 HRs in 582 ABs, 473 SLG) that you want from a corner infielder. And this is a team that will run out three everyday starters (CF Chris Duffy, SS Jack Wilson, and 2B Jose Castillo) with OBPs under 318. Their pitching doesn't help. The rotations strikeout-walk ratio is about 25% worse than the league average and opponents hit 289 off the starters. Sophomore Zack Duke, a projected future superstar, regressed significantly, with a 1.50 WHIP and 4.47 ERA and just 117 Ks in 215 IP. Right-handed starter Ian Snell and left-handed starter Paul Maholm put up similar numbers, although Snell can strikeout out opponents (169 Ks in 186 IP). And then there is Shawn Chacon (1.72 WHIP, 6.36 ERA and a fastball that doesn't break 90 mph). The Pirates would be better off with a promotion that allows a random fan to start every fifth game than permit Chacon anywhere near the mound; it might sell tickets and they might find someone more useful than Chacon. The bullpen is decent but will miss closer Mike Gonzalez (2.17 ERA, 64 Ks in 54 IP and 24 saves) who was traded to Atlanta for 1B Adam LaRoche and his 32 homers to improve baseball's only sub-400 team slugging percentage (397). If all the young starters progress and Duke shows the stuff he had in 2005, the Pirates could climb to fourth. But the team is so comprehensively awful that even rebuilding looks like an unattainable dream. National League West 1. Los Angeles Dodgers: 83-88 wins Quite a few sports pundits are picking the Dodgers to not only win the NL West but to go to the World Series. With its excellent rotation, top-notch closer (Takashi Saito - 24 saves, 2.07 ERA and 107 Ks in 78.1 IP) and strong bullpen, and its above average to good players filling in the lineup, the Dodgers could win the NL West, but the lineup is not without its problems. Jeff Kent can't be expected to produce near All-Star numbers at 2B at the age of 39. How much longer will LF Luis Gonzalez continue to be useful at the age of 40? Juan Pierre's OBP (330) is simply too low to make him a legitimate leadoff hitter (and he has no power and below average defense in CF). Nomar Garciaparra cannot be expected to repeat his 2006 season (303/367/505, 20 HRs). The lineup lacks power; last year it was first in the NL in batting average and on-base percentage but 6th in slugging and 15th in homeruns. Garciaparra was the only player to hit at least 20 HRs last year. There is a lot that can go wrong and if even one piece of the puzzle doesn't work out, the Arizona Diamondbacks or San Diego Padres could topple the reigning NL West division champs. But a team with a starting rotation that has a fourth starter like Brad Penny (16-9, 4.33 ERA in 189 IP) and fifth starter like Chad Billingsley (3.80 ERA) and has Jason Schmidt (11-9, 3.52 ERA in 213.1 IP in SF) and Derek Lowe (16-8, 3.63 in 218 IP) at the front end is in good shape. 2. Arizona Diamondbacks: 81-85 wins The Diamondbacks have a solid rotation with four starters that threw at least 200 inning last year: 2006 NL Cy Young winner Brandon Webb, workhorse Livan Hernandez, ever-improving Doug Davis and former Cy Young winner Randy Johnson. If Johnson rebounds at all from last year's sub-par performance the team could win the division and there is some reason to believe that Johnson's high ERA (5.00) was partly the result of his bad back (on which he had surgery last October) rather than age (he's 42) and his WHIP (1.24) wasn't really that bad. The bullpen is a little suspect and the everyday players need some time to develop. But if the bullpen falls into place and the position players develop quickly, the D-Backs will be contending sooner, perhaps even in 2007, than many would otherwise suspect. And which players might develop into stars? Big things are expected from 3B Chad Tracy (290/348/467, 20 HRs) who begins his fourth season. The team is also counting on 1B Connor Jackson who had a good first full season (291/368/441, 15 HRs) and should get better with experience. That's a solid pair of corner infielders. Big things are expected from second-year SS Stephen Drew (316/357/517) as well as rookie CF Chris Young. I'm not sold on Young although it's not because of his poor performance (243/308/386) last year. He did that is just 70 ABs, just too few to make a judgement on. Rather it is his his high strike out, low walk total in the minors. The team might be able to afford his Gold Glove quality defense combined with moderate power, great on-base speed but pathetic OBP given the likely offensive output of numerous other players. But if they faulter, Young's defense and 'potential' is a luxury they cannot keep around as an everyday player, especially given that the team also carries LF Eric Byrnes. His power (26 HRs and 482 SLG) doesn't make up for his poor OBP last year(313) and over his career (323). LF Scott Hairston, on the roster but not starting, was 323/407/591 at Triple A Tuscon. He might earn an everyday job. What I most like about this team, though, is 2B Orlando Hudson (287/354/454 with Gold Glove defense), one of the most under-rated players in the game; his exemplar range makes the entire infield better by lessening the amount of real estate others have to cover and he is better offensively than the average 2B. The team has the ability, if everyone gets better quickly, to win the division and perhaps the penant, but there is little reason to count on that happening sooner rather than later. They are a year away from tearing up the NL West. 3. San Diego Padres: 80-84 wins The Padres have a good rotation and its young starters will benefit from second pitching coach and new team-mate Greg Maddux. Jake Peavy will rebound from a below average year for him (11-14, 4.09 ERA) and Chris Young (11-5, 3.46 ERA, 164 Ks in 179.1 IP) could reach star status this year. Clay Hensley is a phenomenonal fourth starter (3.71 ERA, 1.34 WHIP in 187 IP). David Wells is no slouch (4.42 ERA) as the fifth starter. A good bullpen anchored by the all-time saves leader, Trevor Hoffman, will preserve the leads the starters hand them. But there won't be enough leads to save because the lineup is weak. CF Mike Cameron (268/355/482, 22 HRs, 25 SBs, Gold Glove-calibre defense) and 1B Adrian Gonzalez (304/362/500, 24 HRs) are the only two sure bets to have good years (or better). There is no doubt that there are talented players who might have breakthrough years but the Padres will need three or four such unexpected seasons to contend and that is not realistic. 4. Colorado Rockies: 70-74 wins Some sports writers are picking the Rockies to win the division. I take this as evidence that some newspapers and magazines have liberal policies regarding smoking pot at work. The Rockies traded their best pitcher (Jason Jennings - 3.78 ERA, 1.37 WHIP) to the Houston Astros for CF Willy Taveras (278/333/338, 33 SBs). Taveras' stolen bases are what you want in a leadoff hitter but not his 333 OBP. The projected second hitter, 2B Kazuo Matsui had a 310 OBP last year, not far off his career OBP 318. That doesn't give the heart of the order many runners to bring home. 3B Garrett Atkins (329/409/556) is a budding star but Todd Helton is a declining one with a 2006 slugging percentage last year (476) more than 100 points under his career average. With Jennings gone, three-fifths of the starting rotation has an ERA of 5.5 runs a game or worse and WHIP of 1.55 or worse. The bullpen is not much better. Clint Hurdle is an inept manager. I just can't see how this is a winning team. 5. San Francisco Giants: 69-73 wins The Giants shelled out a ridiculous amount of money for Barry Zito, a quintessential number two starter: 200+ innings of good to near great pitching, year in and year out but who is not really a staff ace. He would be a great addition to the Boston Red Sox or either New York team -- the perfect missing piece to a near perfect puzzle -- but he doesn't add a lot to a team with more holes than a sieve. Other than Barry Bonds and his chase of the immortality of 756, there won't be much reason to watch this team of sub-mediocrities in 2007. While the team's outfield no longer resembles a nursing home with the oldest outfield in Major League history (last year Bonds, Steve Finley and Moises Alou were all over 40), their movement toward youth includes signing Dave Roberts (35 in May) and Randy Winn (33 in June). Their best defensive player is Omar Vizquel who turns 40 this month. There is no player who is good both defensively and offensively and the team signed 2B Rich Aurilia, 35, to become their everyday first baseman. As Street and Smith's Baseball says, the "outlandish" $16 million paid to Bonds to return for one more year by the Giants management sent "fans a strong signal that its team will be nothing more than a home-run sideshow." With a $90 million payroll, its one heckuva expensive sideshow. Divisional playoffs New York Mets beat the LA Dodgers Philadelphia Phillies beat the St. Louis Cardinals NL penant Mets beat the Phillies World Series Mets beat the Twins Cy Young Carlos Zambrano (Cubs) If not Zambrano, Brandon Webb (Diamondbacks) MVP Albert Pujols (Cardinals) If not Pujols, Carlos Beltran (Mets) Rookie of the Year Chris Iannetta (Rockies) If not Iannetta, Kevin Kouzmanoff (Padres) Manager of the Year Willie Randolph (Mets) If not Randolph, Bob Melvin (Diamondbacks) Homerun leader Albert Pujols (Cardinals) If not Pujols, Lance Berkman (Astros) Batting average Miguel Cabrera (Marlins) If not Cabrera, Garrett Atkins (Rockies) Wins Jason Schmidt (Dodgers) ties Chris Carpenter (Cardinals) If not Schmidt and Carpenter, Schmidt or Carpenter Friday, April 06, 2007
The Seven Last Words of Christ Father forgive them, for they know not what they do Today you will be with me in paradise Behold your son: behold your mother Eloi Eloi lama sabachthani ("My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?") I thirst It is finished Into your hands I commit my spirit In the spirit of ecumenicalism I have eschewed a Catholic source and invite you to read more on them at Wikipedia. Prayers for Good Friday Good Friday Prayer of Love for the Crucified Lord O Jesus, it is not the heavenly reward You have promised which impels me to love You; neither is it the threat of hell that keeps me from offending You. It is You O Lord, it is the sight of You affixed to the Cross and suffering insults; it is the sight of Your broken body, as well as Your pains and Your death. There is nothing You can give me to make me love You. For even if there were no heaven and no hell I would still love you as I do! Good Friday Prayer O Jesus, Who by reason of Thy burning love for us hast willed to be crucified and to shed Thy Most Precious Blood for the redemption and salvation of our souls, look down upon us here gathered together in remembrance of Thy most sorrowful Passion and Death, fully trusting in Thy mercy; cleanse us from sin by Thy grace, sanctify our toil, give unto us and unto all those who are dear to us our daily bread, sweeten our sufferings, bless our families, and to the nations so sorely afflicted, grant Thy peace, which is the only true peace, so that by obeying Thy commandments we may come at last to the glory of heaven. Thursday, April 05, 2007
Stalin was right Too tired to care? You might be numbed by numbers. So says Paul Slovic at foreignpolicy.com. Slovic says of 200,000 dead in Darfur and 2.5 million refugees, "our inability to comprehend numbers and relate them to mass human tragedy that stifles our ability to act. It’s not that we are insensitive to the suffering of our fellow human beings. In fact, the opposite is true." Slovic's research bears this out: "A recent study I conducted with Deborah Small of the University of Pennsylvania and George Loewenstein of Carnegie Mellon University found that donations to aid a starving 7-year-old child in Africa declined sharply when her image was accompanied by a statistical summary of the millions of needy children like her in other African countries. The numbers appeared to interfere with people’s feelings of compassion toward the young victim." One death is tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic. You don't donate to help or urge action from your elected representative to help a statistic. Gazette on Robillard & the federal Liberals in Quebec The Montreal Gazette says of retiring Liberal MP Lucienne Robillard: "Frankly, we've always been a little puzzled by Robillard's reputation as a precious part of the Liberal team." They do acknowledge that her credentials were "fine" but clearly Robillard was not a star within the party. The 'note' to the Liberal executive of Westmount-Ville Marie is meant to convey the paper's wish that the riding not ignore anglophones and allophones in deciding her replacement. It is such voters who kept the Liberal Party alive in Quebec in January 2006. What is left unsaid is even more important: there better be a strong local candidate because federalist Quebecers are not excited about Liberal leader Stephane Dion. Sometimes politics is still local. Great news from Poland The Economist has been dumping on Poland for the past year because of the perceived buffoonishness of its new(ish) leaders. They oppose same-sex marriage and abortion, want God recognized in the EU constitution, are skeptical of deeper European integration, etc..., all of which qualifies President Lech Kaczynski and his twin brother Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynkski as Polish rednecks in the eyes of The Economist. Well perhaps The Economist can shut the hell up for a while. As the Financial Times reported two weeks ago (sorry, but better late than never): "Jaroslaw Kaczynski, prime minister, said the government would cut from 31 days to three days the amount of time it takes to open a business and make it more difficult for government agents to undertake long and vaguely formulated inspections of private companies. 'We are going to move in the direction of greater economic freedom,' Mr Kaczynski said." This is sorely needed. As FT reported: "One of the leading constraints on the economy is an overgrown bureaucracy. According to the World Bank's Doing Business report, Poland was ranked 114th out of 175 economies for ease of opening a business. Its overall ranking was 75th, one of the lowest in the European Union." You can read about cutting red tape in the Netherlands in a report (pdf), Review of the Dutch Administrative Burden Reduction Program, from Doing Business, that demonstrates how to reduce bureaucracy and the benefits of doing so. Wednesday, April 04, 2007
Major League Baseball predictions (American League) The American League East 1. New York Yankees: 96-102 wins The New York Yankees have the talent to finish first in MLB. Other than 1B experiment Doug 'No bat, declining-glove' Mientkiewicz, every position player and the DH is among the top two three in the league at his position. The worst hitter other than Mientkiewicz is probably Johnny Damon (285/359/482, 24 HRs, 25 SBs). If the team is smart, they'll release Mientkiewicz, move the human pilon Jason Giambi to 1B and let bench outfielder Melky Cabrera play DH and spot outfield and rotate the regular outfielders into the DH position for some rest. The Yankees won 97 games last year with two-thirds of their starting outfield on the disabled list, their 2B (Robinson Cano) out of action for a month and their CF (Damon) and SS (Derek Jeter) playing through injuries. With a full season of Bobby Abreu (roughly a 300 hitter with a 400 OBP), this is a fearsome lineup. The starting rotation is not as bad as many believe: Chien-Ming Wang and Mike Mussina were both among the top ten in AL ERA last year, Andy Petite is a big upgrade over Randy Johnson, Kei Igawa is a decent enough fourth starter who has shown great adjustment throughout the pre-season and the team has options for the fifth starter if Carl Pavano does not work out: call up Phil Hughes or Jeff Karstens or Humberto Sanchez or sign Roger Clemens or trade prospects for a quality starter. In fact there are enough options here even if Pavano isn't the only problem in the rotation. The bullpen is the best its been since the Bronx Bombers won a bunch of World Series in the late-90's. My biggest worry is Mariano Rivera breaking down or the Jeter-Alex Rodriguez mess blowing up. And speaking of A-Rod: expect great things from him in what could be a walk year. I'm seeing MVP contention. 2. Boston Red Sox: 87-92 wins The Red Sox have the potential to challenge for the division title or to scrape by with 500 ball, there are so many questions: Is Dice-K the real thing (it doesn't matter -- he'll be a good pitcher at the very least and anything else is bonus); when will J.D. Drew implode (later rather than sooner, I predict); is Julio Lugo the SS they are looking for (for now he is); is Jason Varitek still an elite catcher (he appears headed for decline); can the starting rotation hold up (they are tempting fate with Curt Schilling's age though Josh Beckett should cut back on HRs allowed and have a better year -- count this as a wash); will they work out the bullpen situation (they have begun doing so by returning Jon Papelbon to the closer role, but they did sign Seattle Mariners reliever Joel Pineiro and his 6+ ERA over the past two seasons to help so they are in serious trouble in this department); etc, etc, etc... If enough question marks resolve themselves favourably, the Red Sox are a strong challenger to the Yankees and they can win the title if the Bronx Bombers slide a little. You can never count out a team that has David Ortiz and Manny Ramirez (a combined 89 homeruns but that understates their contribution) in the three-four slots in the lineup. If Drew is healthy -- a big if considering he has only had 500 ABs in a season once in his career -- and hitting in the fifth spot, the Red Sox win the Wild Card. 3. Toronto Blue Jays 82-86 wins Let me tick off Jays fans: they will not match last year's 87 wins. They have the second best starter in the AL (Roy Halladay) and one of the best five closers in the game but not a heck of lot more. When you take into account ballpark effects, Vernon Wells' output per at bat is almost identical to Rocco Baldelli of the Tampa bay Devil Rays. Would you build a team on a foundation of Baldelli? A.J. Burnett is among the most over-rated starters and certainly not a second starter. It speaks volumes that Gustavo Chacin (5.05 ERA, 1.47 WHIP) is the third starter followed by a bucket-full of interchangeable mediocrities. Not the stuff of which division winners or 87-game winners are made. Lyle Overbay is an under-appreciated talent (312/372/508) with a good glove. But Overbay is the only player I would confidently predict maintaining or improving over his 2006 season: Reed Johnson might really be a 390 OBP player but his lifetime 348 OBP contradicts such optimism (nor does he have the power of a corner outfielder or speed of a leadoff hitter), Alex Rios looks like someone who will never quite live up to his potential, Gregg Zaun is a useful catcher but he'll probably experience some decline after posting his career best season at the age of 35, Troy Glaus and Frank Thomas should be expected to begin to taper off, too. The sooner the Jays find a place for Adam Lind (never worse than 310 at any minor league level), the better. The Jays can play competitive, sometimes exciting baseball, but they'd do better to develop some pitching talent, a young SS and Lind than try to contend prematurely. Especially with John Gibbons as manager. He deserves to be fired but will likely last until the end of the year unless the Jays fall well below 500 during the season. A more talented manager might be able to squeeze an extra 2-3 wins out of this team. 4. Tampa Bay Devil Rays: 69-73 wins They lost 101 games last year in part because they blew the lead 60 times -- the highest total in the majors. So perhaps there is potential. There is a lot of young but wasted talent on the D-Rays team. Scott Kazmir is the only starter that induces fear among opponents rather than the team's fans and a case could be made that the outfield (CF Rocco Baldelli, LF Carl Crawford, RF Delmon Young) is one of the best five best in baseball. But after that, there ain't much but 'prospects' and 'potential' -- prospects that haven't worked out and potential that doesn't seem likely to be realized. On the plus side, they should only get better but considering they had only 61 wins last year that isn't saying much. They finished last in the majors last year in BA with runners-in-scoring position (240) and OBP (314) and yet hitting was not their biggest problem. Their pitching is worse. And they didn't try to fix it. The D-Rays should trade some of their young talent/prospects for starting pitching and they could set their sights on 500 ball for the first time in franchise history as early as 2008. If they have more than 70 wins, it will be the most in franchise history. That should be the goal this year and they should reach it. 5. Baltimore Orioles: 65-70 wins How bad are the Orioles? They traded for Jaret 'I have only 5 innings in me' Wright (1.52 WHIP, 4.49 ERA) and signed Steve Trachsel (1.60 WHIP, 4.97 ERA) to be their third and fourth starters. Left-handed starter Erik Bedard could be something truly special but he and SS Miguel Tejada are by far the only players of note on this truly horrid team. They signed mediocrity 1B Aubrey Huff (267/344/469, 21 HRs) and sub-mediocrity RF Jay Payton (296/325/418) to buttress a very average lineup. The team spent money to improve the bullpen with the likes of Chad Bradford (2.90 ERA) and Jamie Walker (2.81 ERA). I'm not sure there will be enough leads to hold to make this move make any sense. Does a team have to try to be this awful? It's not like the Orioles haven't spent money in recent years, yet they don't even have a third place showing in the past 13 years to show for it. American League Central 1. Minnesota Twins: 90-95 wins Probably the most talented team outside of New York in the majors. They have the best pitcher in the game (Johan Santana), the reigning MVP (1B Justin Morneau), the reigning batting champ (C Joe Mauer), one of the best two closers in the game (Joe Nathan) and an incredible supporting crew. The knock against the Twins is that they don't have Francisco Liriano, a starter who in his rookie season showed that is was every bit as good as Santana but who is out of the 2007 season following surgery, or Brad Radke, an above average pitcher who eats up innings, who retired. But most of the pitching options they have to replace these two all have great stuff even if their 2006 numbers don't reflect that and you only need one starter to shine and two to have average seasons for this team to go far (the teams scores five runs a game). The Twins should get that out of some combination of Matt Garza, Carlos Silva, Boof Bosner and Ramon Ortiz. Sidney Ponson is a decent fifth starter/insurance policy as long as the Twins don't need to rely on him. The bullpen is great-to-excellent so the Twins don't need miracles out of their starters. RF Michael Cuddyer (284/362/504), CF Torii Hunter (278/336/490), 2B Luis Castillo (296/358/370) make a great supporting cast. If 3B Nick Punto develops and DH Jason Kubell returns to the form he showed in the minors, the team has the potential to be the best team overall -- both during the regular season and in the World Series. 2. Cleveland Indians: 86-90 wins How does a talented team that won more than 90 games and nearly won the division in 2005 end up with only 78 wins in 2006? Clearly this team underperformed last year. DH Travis Hafner is one of the best hitters in 'ball (308/439/659, 42 HRs while missing the last few weeks of the season). Grady Sizemore is one of the best CFers (290/375/533, 28 HRs, 22 SBs) in the game. SS Jhonny Peralta should improve (2006: 257/323/385; 2005: 292/366/520) and had laser eye surgery to improve his performance both at the plate and in the field. Victor Martinez is an elite catcher (316/391/465). If Pertalta improves, the team has a clear advantage over other teams up the middle -- the same way the Yankees won in the late '90s with Derek Jeter (SS), Chuck Knoblauch (2B), Jorge Posada (C) and Bernie Williams (CF). When you get a lot of offence from these four positions (the middle defense) you win a lot of games. I expect 2B Josh Barfield (280/318/423 in pitcher friendly Petco Stadium in San Diego) to improve; he has 20-30 homerun capabilities which would make up for his lack of walks. C.C. Sabathia is the ace (3.22 ERA, 1.17 WHIP, 172 K in 192.7 IP) of an above average rotation (only one starter had an ERA above 4.40 last year). If there is a question mark, it is the bullpen. Last year they had a major league low 24 saves while blowing 23 of them. Cut that number in half and the Indians would have been a contender. The Tribe picked up a lot of relievers but only time will tell if Joe Borowski and Roberto Hernandez are the answers to the team's prayers. 3. Detroit Tigers: 83-87 wins The Tigers were sub-500 in the second half of last year; they lost the World Series not because of pitcher errors but an inability for 7/9ths of their lineup to get on base or for anyone to hit with runners in scoring position. There are questions about whether the young rotation pitched too much in 2006 and the effects that will have on their arms. That is less an issue for me than the fact that everyone developed faster than should normally be expected and that a number of players can be expected to regress slightly. That and the fact that the team seldom walked (430) means that if opposing pitchers figure out how to throw to some of the budding young players (Craig Monroe, Brandon Inge) there are few other ways for the team to get runners on base. Also, the sooner the team closes games with Joel Zumaya and his 100 mph fastball rather than Todd Jones (less than a strikeout every other inning), the better. Bullpen will miss Jamie Walker who bolted for the Orioles. 1B Sean Casey isn't that great (272/336/388) and RF/DH Gary Sheffield is coming off an injury. Their leadoff hitter Curtis Granderson had a miserable 335 OBP in 2006 and that is a serious problem. It is unlikely that the Tigers will have everything go their way two years in a row but the team is deep enough to remain a 500 club and to capture the Wild Card if the Indians and Red Sox slip a little. 4. Chicago White Sox: 81-84 wins The much vaunted rotation is not nearly what it was in 2005. Some are gone (Freddy Garcia) and some are declining (Mark Buehrle, 4.99 ERA, and Jon Garland, 4.51 ERA). They traded young talent (Brandon McCarthy) for younger prospects. New York Sun columnist Tim Marchman got it right: the Sox won't admit it, but they are rebuilding, gearing up for 2008. Jermaine Dye (315/385/622) and Jim Thome (288/416/598) both performed above their career averages and are likely not going to be as good as they were last year. The lineup is still solid. SS Juan Uribe hit 21 HRS and 2B Tadahito Iguchi smacked 18. Joe Crede is a very good 3B both in the field and at the plate. 1B Paul Konerko was one of four players to belt 30 or more homers on the team. They may not repeat their 2006 performance but neither are Dye and Thome simply going to disappear. This remains a team that will score runs. The bullpen is better than most other team's. But the rotation looks really horrible. Too much talent to finish under 500, but unless several key starters rebound significantly, the pitching is not good enough to compete. 5. Kansas City Royals: 59-66 wins There are only two questions: will the team lose 100 games for the fifth time in six years (answer: quite possibly> and will it lose but do so less horribly (answer: if 3B Alex Gordon lives up to the hype). American League West 1. Los Angeles Angels: 87-90 wins The best starting rotation in baseball anchored by John Lackey (3.56 ERA) and Jered Weaver (2.56 ERA in his rookie season), four starters have WHIPs under 1.30. They won't even miss ostensible 'ace' Bartolo Colon who is once again injured. The team possesses probably the best closer in the game in Francisco Rodriguez (98 Ks in 73 IP, 1.73 ERA) and the best bullpen in the AL (Scott Shields - 2.87 ERA, 1.07 WHIP; Justin Speier - 2.98 ERA, 1.32 WHIP). RF Vladimir Guerrero makes things happen at the plate, LF/CF/RF/1B/3B/2B/SS Chone Figgins is a versatile and useful player, and everyone thinks that 2B Howie Kendrick could begin winning the first of many batting titles as early as this year (in his first full season). Gary Matthews is over-priced and over-rated and likely won't bat 313 or hit 19 homers like his did in Texas last year but he should provide slightly above average offense and great defense. The Angels pitching feasts on a lackluster division on their way to the post-season where their dominant pitching could take them far. 2. Oakland A's: 80-83 wins At some point, Billy Beane won't be able to deliver a post-season appearance despite the annual exodus of talent. Still, the A's have a lot of talent. However, much of it is injury prone. At least five major contributors are coming off injury years: newly annointed ace Rich Harden, 3B Eric Chavez, SS Bobby Crosby, CF Mark Kotsay, RF/CF Milton Bradley. The season hasn't started off so well with Kotsay already out for the year. If Chavez (241/351/435) is healthy the team will upgrade its production and defense. If new manager Bob Geren can find a way to put the bat into new DH Mike Piazza's hands 500 times (332/372/564 away from Petco Stadium last year), the team won't miss Frank Thomas's bat so much. If Nick Swisher continues on his merry path (254/372/493, 35 HRs), he'll be one of the league's most feared hitters despite striking out 152 times. Despite a lot of players with a lot of upside and the reasonable expectation that they'll do well if healthy, the team's Achille's Heal is a middle infield gives up too many outs at the plate; SS Crosby's 298 OBP and 2B Mark Ellis's 319 OBP are unacceptably low. But the pitching staff will determine this team's success. Harden (4-0, 1.22 WHIP, 4.24 ERA, 191 opponent's batting average, 49 Ks in 46.2 IP) has to be healthy and perform like a star to be the rotation's ace and anchor. Dan Haren (1.21 WHIP, 4.12 ERA, 223 IP) is improving and has the potential to be a very good second starter. Esteban Loaiza is capable of great games but his 1.42 WHIP and 288 opponent's batting average betray the fact that he shouldn't be their third starter. Joe Blanton has to allow fewer than 1.5 baserunners per inning to be effective so he might want to lower the 309 BA that opponents hit off him. Southpaw Joe Kennedy was 4-1 with a 2.31 ERA in 39 relief appearances for the A's last year. But before 2006 he was a starter who seldom kept his ERA under 4.50 and twice saw it soar above 6 runs per 9 innings. They won't have 200+ very good innings from Barry Zito and Frank Thomas's big bat to pull them through this year. And little chance to adequately replacing them. And even if they do, there are too many flaws and too many question marks to compete for the AL West. 3. Texas Rangers: 74-78 wins If the rotation works out and the everyday lineup is as good as they are billed and the team finds a way to replace Gary Matthews' inflated 300-average in CF, the Texas Rangers could win 90 games in the weakening AL West. If the rotation is uniformly below average (is Kevin Millwood really a team's ace? will second starter Brandon McCarthy develop or melt in the Arlington heat?) or four-ninths of the lineup not produce in any significant fashion, the team will struggle to reach 70 wins. That's quite a range, but the Rangers have an unusual number of players with possible upsides (DH Sammy Sosa and reliever Greg Gagne) but few that are likely to attain the most of which they are capable. In all likelihood, McCarthy will develop into a budding pitching star. It is also likely that CF Kenny Lofton, 39, will become a liability. Gagne could regain the form (after two years worth of injuries) to once again save 97% of his chances, but then again he might be a bum. Sosa could recapture the pop that made him the fifth best homerun hitter in the history of MLB or he could demonstrate why he had to take a year off from baseball after allegations of steroid use. And while they do this little experiment/sideshow, he will take away bats from more productive players and -- and! -- be a distraction in the club house. Frank Catalanotto (300/376/439) lacks the pop a DH should have. (And why does Texas have two DHs?) Brad Wilkerson hit a measly 222 in Texas -- in Texas! -- last year after a decent season in Washington in 2005. 1B Mark Teixeira and 3B Hank Blalock's numbers are inflated because of their home bandbox, er, ballpark. But SS Michael Young (314/356/459) is something special. Still, this team looks less impressive than last year's squad that won only 80 games. 4. Seattle Mariners: 70-74 wins The Seattle Mariners have not gotten the production out of two recent high-priced free agents (3B Adrian Beltre and 1B Richie Sexson) that they expected nor did rookie starter (and team ace) Felix Hernandez have the sensational season everyone expected from him. Hernandez had a better second half and there are reasons to believe that either Beltre or Sexson can have a monster offensive year. The team also has Japanese singles machine Ichiro Suzuki who is being moved to CF. Still, this team has serious shortcomings. The Mariners were 13th in the AL in OBP (325) and last in walks (404). Only the lowly Tampa Bay Devil Rays scored fewer runs. Nearly half of the team sports OBPs that would be qualify as good batting averages but which just give away too many outs; over the course of a full season, there is a big difference between a 330 OBP and a 350 OBP. The rotation after Hernandez is suspect (Jarrod Washburn, Miguel Batista could prove to be good pitchers but are more likely bets to produce 180 slightly above average innings). The bullpen is mostly uninspiring but if closer J.J. Putz every gets the lead, he is good for the save: 36 saves, 104 Ks and 2.30 ERA in 78.1 IP and a WHIP under 1.00. Still, this is a pathetic team that doesn't do what winning teams need to do: get runners on base and bring them in. They haven't had a winning team since 2003 (after three seasons of at least 93 wins) and despite a weakened division, 2007 doesn't look like their year either. Divisional playoffs New York Yankees defeat the LA Angels Minnesota Twins defeat the Boston Red Sox AL penant Twins defeat Yankees Cy Young Johann Santana (Twins) If not Santana, C.C. Sabathia (Indians) MVP Grady Sizemore (Indians) If not Sizemore, Alex Rodriguez (Yankees) Rookie of the Year Daisuke Matsuzaka (Red Sox) If not Dice-K, Alex Gordon (Royals) Manager of the Year Mike Scioscia (Angels) If not Scioscia, Eric Wedge (Indians) Homerun leader Alex Rodriguez (Yankees) If not A-Rod, David Ortiz (Red Sox) Batting average Justin Morneau (Twins) If not Morneau, Robinson Cano (Yankees) Wins Johann Santana (Twins) If not Santana, John Lackey (Angels) The NL will be up by the weekend. Gerry Nicholls no longer at NCC Gerry Nicholls is a friend of mine, a fellow baseball fan, a brilliant wit and a principled conservative. He was also vice president of the National Citizens Coalition, but no more. As he notes on his blog, he "no longer works" for the NCC, and in the comments section he says it was not his choice to leave. I hope he lands on his feet and I'm sure he will. Perhaps if the Detroit Tigers get off to a slow start, he can replace manager Jim Leyland. More likely (but not much more likely) a newspaper that wants irreverent political analysis will give him a regular column. The NCC has lost one of Canada's best voices for populist conservatism. I wish them no ill will, though, and hope they find someone to fill Gerry's shoes to ensure the organization's continued effectiveness; the country needs the NCC to be a strong voice for freedom. Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Meandering thoughts on 'conservatism in Canada' Joel Johannesen calls the Tories The Liberal Party Too. In a post last week, Johannesen says: "Liberal Party Too may say the right things on some law and order matters and on the international stage (and by the way, this Harper government has been an object lesson in this regard, in effective national leadership and in demonstrating just how effective it can be—how easy it is—to do the most important thing: to convince Canadians to think like actual conservatives on the basis that we’re right). But in honesty, the “real” Liberals could do that too, given the right leader and the right polling, for as we know only too well they love their polling and they bend and flex like rubber bands that way. What gets missed by the Team Not Liberal is that if the foundational principles of the parties are essentially the same, the outcome for our nation will very likely be nearly exactly the same. The main path our country is on will remain the current beaten path—the path to abject Godless post-modern 'progressive' Euro-liberalism —and so then what’s the point of it all, really? Just to employ teams for sport as a sort of hobby for fun?" One foundational principle being Big Government Spending. CTF's John Williamson: "The Finance Minister dismisses any criticism that he has become a big spender even when his two-year binge will total $24.4-billion. As National Post columnist Andrew Coyne calculates, Mr. Flaherty is now “the biggest-spending finance minister in the history of Canada.” It’s a sad achievement but well-earned since Canada’s New Government is now 14% bigger after two Flaherty budgets... The 2007 Budget was a missed opportunity to use the government’s massive surpluses to lower personal income taxes. Instead of seizing it, Mr. Flaherty went on a wild, George W. Bush-style, big government spending spree. Although Ottawa is not running annual deficits, large surpluses are not the hallmark of a responsible government either." Things need to change. But probably won't. Kathy Shaidle last week: "Do 'conservative' bloggers really care that kids are learning about the wonders of homosexuality in school or that recycling is a joke or that sharia is creeping up on the country? Maybe. But they still shrug "Well, what people do behind closed doors" and 'well, who am I to say, it's awful but...' and dutifully take out the Blue Bag. Because what they REALLY care about is watching little numbers go up and down, hoping their team's number is bigger than the other team's on a certain time on a certain day. When you cheer for the Brazilian soccer team, you aren't cheering for "Brazil the country, a real place with real trees and houses and people and problems", but for "a bunch of guys with the word 'BRAZIL' on their shirts." And the Conservative Party is just that bunch of guys with BRAZIL on their shirts. 'Getting elected' means nothing unless we change the culture." Why do Conservatives want to get elected? To hold power, right? So why do they want to hold power? To do something, something presumably conservative or at least different than the Liberals. Or at least a chance to hold a cabinet minister's job and get the limo that goes with the job title. So here's my question for Canadian conservatives that don't work in Ottawa: why do you want 'Conservatives' in government? Do you actually think that government spending would be much more than $200 billion? March issue of Interim online The Interim website has not been updated for a ridiculous amount of time but finally it is featuring relatively current (the next-to-last issue) with the March issue available for your reading pleasure. Other 2007 issues will be up soon, followed by the final six months of 2006. Slowly but surely. From the March issue are some noteworthy stories. My analysis, "Media, the left have fits over Tory changes to judge appointments." Tony Gosgnach's interview with Pat Boone and his interview with new Toronto Archbishop Thomas Collins. You should also read Tony's story on the dismissal of a judicial complaint against Ontario Justice Roy McMurtry. Suzanne Fortin says its time for socons to blog. And last, but certainly not least, Family and Society Reporter Theresa Smyth on Stephane Dion's support of 'safe injection sites' and a backgrounder on 'harm reduction.' |