text:
Matthews fined by league for hit on QB Kaepernick
Green Bay linebacker Clay Matthews was fined $15,000 for a hit on San Francisco quarterback Colin Kaepernick during the teams' season-opening game.
According to the NFL, Matthews was fined "for striking an opponent late."
Matthews drew a personal-foul penalty in the 49ers' 34-28 win Sunday after he tackled Kaepernick out of bounds deep in Green Bay territory in the second quarter.
A fracas between players from both teams followed on the sideline when Matthews and 49ers left tackle Joe Staley began pushing and shoving.
In his first meeting with reporters since Sunday's 34-28 loss in San Francisco, Matthews sidestepped a question on the fine following a late hit on quarterback Colin Kaepernick that preceded a sideline scrum with offensive lineman Joe Staley.
"Um, I'm not really going to discuss all that right now, but on to the next game," Matthews said at his locker after practice Thursday. The Redskins visit Lambeau Field in the Packers home opener Sunday.
Matthews didn't bite after being asked about Harbaugh's remarks earlier this week.
"If you're going to go to the face, come with some knuckles, not an open slap," Harbaugh said then. "I think if that young man works very hard on being a tough guy, he'll have some repairing to do to his image after the slap."
Anything, Clay?
"Nah, I don't have any reaction. I'm on to the next game," he said. "I'm not worried about it."
Matthews was asked if he considered himself a "dirty player."
"Next game!" he exclaimed with a smile, drawing laughs. "I'm an awesome player, not a dirty player."
Coach Mike McCarthy had his best defensive player's back this week. He even brought up Harbaugh's remarks in a team meeting.
"Clay Matthews is not a dirty player, by no means," McCarthy said Monday. "So I addressed Harbaugh's comments in the team meeting, and as always, we'll stay above it."
McCarthy has long moved on to preparing for Washington and the second game back from a right knee injury for quarterback Robert Griffin III. While Griffin may have looked a little rusty in Monday night's 33-27 loss to the Eagles, Matthews is paying him the utmost respect.
"Did you watch the second half of that game? Yeah, he looked pretty good," Matthews said. "He still possesses that big playmaking ability."
The Packers did limit San Francisco on the ground. Kaepernick and Frank Gore were held in check on the ground, for the most part. Kaepernick beat the Packers with his arm this time, throwing for 412 yards and three touchdowns.
Griffin didn't run a zone read once against the Eagles, though it doesn't mean the Packers aren't going to prepare for it.
"This week is no different. We let him sit back there in the pocket, we need to make sure we've got some pass rush after him as well as our DBs on the back end covering and tackling," Matthews said. "We need to make sure we're aggressive and we shut down that read-option right off the bat."
Aggressive to a point, of course. When asked, Matthews could remember only one time in his career when he was fined, for a face mask on Bears quarterback Jay Cutler in 2010.
Otherwise, the resume is clean - look it up, he told reporters.
"That's for you guys to dig up. I think I'm doing all right," Matthews said. "Come on, Washington questions, you guys bring 'em!"


text:
Privacy Policy
Rung Residence
(MAP) 222 E. Granada Avenue, Hershey, PA
*** 2012 Preservation Award Winner ***
This limestone home was built circa 1915, and is documented as still being owned by M.S. Hershey in 1919, according to the Derry Township tax rcords. The first owner, W.R. Espenshade, purchased the home from M.S. Hershey in 1922;
Today the home stands as a testament to the early industrial-driven architectural legacy established by the prospering chocolate corporation, which built many of the homes in this neighborhood for its executives and management. As with the Phillippy home, the Rung residence represents preservation in its most wholesome form.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Posted by Rich on July 20, 2015, 10:30 am, in reply to "Re: RECORD BREAKING LIFTERS...."
Thank You Fred.
There are no responses to this message.
« Back to index
Post a Response
Optional Image URL:
Optional Link Title:Optional Link URL:
Remember my name for the next time I post. Please enter the numbers above. This helps stop spam.By posting, you confirm that you have read and agree to the board's usage terms.
Your Name:
Remember my name for the next time I post.
Too Bad
No Copies Please


text:
The Same Ol' Fucken Political Story
This will get political, eventually; I promise. But just bear with me while I think with my typing fingers for a while.
To start with, I'd like once again to discuss, this time briefly, the word fuck here. Aside from the pleasurable physical sensation (which I described in this previous post) of saying it, there's something about fuck — the "outlaw" nature of it, maybe — that tickles me.
I'm going to give examples of (1) a person who was recently embarrassed (unjustifiably, I think) by fuck, and (2) a person who wasn't.
Example 1: Mojoey laments that he said fuck in the presence of a child, albeit one he didn't know was nearby. I think his ruefulness is wrong. Apart from in elementary school classrooms and at Disneyland, fuck should be perfectly acceptable. It's a signal from one adult to another that he or she is taboo-free and refuses to be a prisoner of prevailing social mores.
Example 2: I've always enjoyed listening to Cyndi Lauper. Any woman who can record an entire song about female masturbation rates pretty high in my book. On her latest album, Bring Ya to the Brink, there's a number called "Same Ol' Story." The powers-that-be have chosen to let the public know that the cut is "explicit." So, of course, I was curious. Well, it turns out that the title is not exactly a verbatim quote of what Lauper says over and over again in her lyric. Here's what she does say:
It's the same ol' fucken story.Don't you get a much better sense of what the song is about when I include the term omitted from the title? Am I wrong to find the singer's anti-conventional attitude appealing?
Enough about fuck. There's also Jesus Christ as an expletive, which many atheists, including myself, use freely. Again, we're talking about a societal proscription: It's bad to take the alleged lord's name in vain, particularly when you yell it after you've stubbed your toe. But shouting JC's name has no more to do with believing in him than saying "it's the same ol' fucken story" has to do with asserting that the previous speaker's tale was about sex.
I'm troubled by self-censorship. My attitude is: If people don't like the way I fucking write, then Jesus Christ, they can stay away from my blog. That goes especially for you, kids!
I also hate it when someone says fudge, or intones Jiminy Cricket or Jeepers Crow, instead of what he or she really means. We all know what you're thinking, pal; just come out with it.
There's something slightly dishonest about saying fudge or Jiminy Cricket. But, really, it's only mildly annoying, not terrible. What would be terrible would be to hear someone say, without a tone of irony, hooray when he dropped his ice cream cone, or fantastic when she banged her shin. Children, bereft of the power of expletives, cry when these things happen. Adults "curse." A person who speaks a positive phrase in the light of either of these happenings would immediately be branded as a lunatic, or, at best, a liar.
Which brings me to my political point. We used to be able to depend on Barack Obama to say fuck and Jesus Christ — maybe not in so many words, but we knew what he meant — if someone had accused him of:
- being untrue to his commitment to public campaign financing;
- accepting the passage of FISA without a built-in telecom-immunity provision;
- wanting to propagate George W. Bush's Faith-Based Initiatives;
- tolerating handguns;
- allowing anyone to take away a woman's right to obtain an abortion if her well-being, either physical or mental, is threatened;
- expanding the circumstances under which the death penalty can be applied;
- reneging on his vow that, if elected, he would set a timetable for the removal of all American troops from Iraq;
- practicing exclusionary politics by, say, banning from his photo ops any women who showed up in Muslim regalia.
He says hooray.


text:
'Dancing With the Stars': Zendaya continues to tear up the floor
Last week on "Dancing With the Stars, Zendaya and her pro partner, Val Chmerkovskiy, tackled a "stressful" Argentine tango and pretty much nailed it. In posting an overall score of 29, they were awarded the first 10s of the season.
It was yet another in a long line of jaw-dropping performances by Zendaya, an Oakland, Calif. native, who at 16, is the youngest contestant to ever appear on "DWTS."
Despite her youth -- or maybe because of it -- the lanky Disney Channel star is tearing up the dance floor and has established herself as a leading contender for that gaudy mirror-ball trophy. She recently took some time out to talk about her journey so far.
Q: When you talked to us before the season started, you we're kind of skeptical about how well you would do. Were you pulling the wool over our eyes?
A: No, I was definitely not trying to fool anyone. I had no clue that I'd be able to do as well as I am. Honestly! It was all so foreign to me. I'm lucky I caught on as well as I have.
Q: So does that mean you're surprised by you're success?
A: I am and I'm not. I am because it's so new and different -- something I've never done. But I'm not because we've worked so hard at it -- sometimes up to seven hours a day. And practice makes perfect.
Q: Speaking of perfect, how excited are you that you and Val posted the first 10s of the season?
A: That was amazing. I'm really proud of that. We're a team. We work together, and Val really set the bar high for that dance. I didn't know if I could pull it off.
Q: You were quoted as saying that the Argentine tango was really stressful for you. What made it so stressful?
A: Val really wanted a lot out of me for that dance. He showed me a video of a professional dancer executing a flip that he wanted me to do. I said, "That's really funny." He said, "No, you're going to do it." Then I said, "Are you crazy?!"
Q: It's almost as if he sees something in you that you don't.
A: Yeah, if I had my choice, I'd stay on the ground (no flips) at all times. But I guess that wouldn't be as cool looking. And we probably wouldn't get those 10s.
Q: You're the youngest dancer of the bunch. Has that made it a little tough to bond with fellow cast members?
A: I'm kind of beyond my years anyway. It's funny: On this show, the adults are the kids. They do goofy things and pull a lot of pranks. Sometimes, I'm the grown-up.
Q: You say you're beyond your years. And, at 16, you've accomplished a lot. Do you ever feel like you're growing up a little too fast?
A: I think I've always been a bit of an old soul. At the age of 4, I thought I was an adult. I act a little immature and like a kid when I want to be. But basically, this is my version of childhood and I'm enjoying it a lot.
Q: It's been fun watching your parents get all excited and cheer you on. Are they enjoying this as much as you?
A: My parents are amazing. They've been there every week, partially because I'm a minor and they have to be. But they also want to be. I love seeing them cheer and go crazy. It's really sweet.
Q: So which one of them do you get your dance talent from?
A: It depends on which one you talk to. I don't want to single one out because I rely on them to drive me places. So I'll plead the fifth on that one.
Q: OK, that's fair. But where do you get that height from?
A: That's definitely my mom. She's 6-4. (Zendaya is 5-11). ... Sometimes the height makes things harder for me and Val. We almost come eye-to-eye, and when I'm in heels, he's shorter than me. We have to figure out ways to work around that.
Q: You've said that one of the reasons you wanted to do this show is because your grandma Daphne in Danville is such a huge "Dancing With the Stars" fan. How has she handled all this?
A: My grandma is freaking out! She's extremely excited. Obviously, she'd be excited about anything I'm involved with because she's my grandma. But she's having so much fun doing her viewing parties and cute little grandma stuff.
Dancing with the Stars
When: 8 p.m. Monday
Where: ABC


text:
[This is a lightly edited transcript of my interview with Sam Gindin, first broadcast on June 14, 2012. The audio is here. Thanks a million to Andrew Loewen for doing the transcription.]
My next guest is the excellent Sam Gindin. Sam is an economist who spent more than 20 years in the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) Union, first as a researcher and then as an adviser to the president. He retired from the CAW in 2000 and has since been teaching in the wonderful political science department at York University, Toronto. He frequently collaborates with another Behind the News favorite, Leo Panitch.
The debacle in Wisconsin is deeply symptomatic of the crisis in American labor, and there's no smarter commentator on that topic than Sam, even though he lives north of the 49th parallel.
Welcome Sam. The defeat of the Walker recall in Wisconsin has prompted some reflections on the state of the labor movement. What are your initial thoughts on that? I know you're across the border in Canada, but it certainly has repercussions across North America.
Yeah, I'm interested for the same reasons everybody else is. It has repercussions here, and also my wife's family is in Wisconsin, so we've been in touch with them. The main thing is—and it's a point that you've made—that we have to take a look at what happened and ask ourselves some hard questions. I'm sympathetic to people who feel like "Walker won the election through the amount of money he put in; we have to try to defend the labor movement; we have to hope that people don't get demoralized."
But the real thing we have to do is be honest about what's happened. And being honest means talking about the real, serious crisis in the labor movement. And it's a crisis that's actually been there for at least a quarter of a century. And it was especially evident when the financial crisis happened. And instead of being able to go on the offensive, labor was on the defensive. And it was revealed again with Occupy, when the labor movement supported Occupy but what was really called for was a question of labor showing that it can occupy things and that it had the power to do things.
So this is a serious crisis. And I think we really have to be honest and step back and address the seriousness of the crisis. We have to stop talking about just the economic crisis and just how bad the rightwing is when it does all the things that we expected them to do—and actually have that kind of discussion about the labor movement.
How similar are things in Canada to things in the US? I mean a lot of people will say this is an American issue, an American problem—you've got American individualism, the brutality of American repression of labor activism throughout the course of the last century or so.
Of course there are differences in Canada. In some ways the attack hasn't been as aggressive. Canada doesn't play the same imperial role that the United States plays and that leads to some differences, but the fact of the matter is that the differences are not that great in Canada. If anything we've been kind of converging to that same notion: of limited options, and 'there's nothing you can do about this,' and lowering our expectations so that whatever happens 'it could have been worse,' or the Democrats—you know, 'you have to make a choice between whoever is worse and whoever is worser.'
So I don't think the differences are that great here and I'd even go further: I don't think the differences are that great generally in Europe, except for some places like Greece, where there's been a particular kind of resistance because of how much they've been attacked. But I think there's been a general crisis in the trade union movement everywhere. And I think we should talk more about 'what is it' exactly; but I think it's also wrapped up with a crisis on the left, which is an integral part of this.
Some of the criticisms I've gotten for the things I've written is that, first of all, not having been an organizer myself I don't understand how difficult things are. I think I do understand how difficult things are—but the other thing is that there's some people who seem to think what we need to do is keep doing the same thing with increased dedication and intensity. What do you think? Is that the way out of the crisis?
No. That's part of the problem. I respect everybody who's feeling like they're put upon. It is difficult, and workers have immediate struggles. But seeing this as a problem of "let's just plug on, let's just be a little bit more committed"—if there's anything we should learn it's that that doesn't get us anywhere.
This is a really serious, radical problem. Let me just say what I think it is, and what we have to talk about. There is a problem in unions, that in their very formation they were sectional organizations, that the essence of unions is that you're defending a group of workers. You're not actually thinking about the class as a whole, or about other dimensions of workers' lives. On occasion, in spite of that sectionalism, you see the potential of workers because they go beyond it, as they did when they were mobilizing in Madison. But the problem is that the structure of unions, and their culture and their logic, takes them back to returning to being very instrumental. The problem with being sectional and just thinking about yourself is you also tend to think instrumentally. You look to your leaders as—you pay some insurance for being in the union, you give them some dues, and they'll deliver. And the leaders think in terms of "well, we occasionally have to mobilize the workers but we shouldn't exaggerate that or really open the door to mass mobilization, because we just want to mobilize them enough to make a deal."
That problem is fundamental to what we're seeing in this crisis. After World War II, this wasn't obvious, because then you could in fact make gains by being sectional. And in fact some of those gains would spread to others. The defeat after the war was the defeat of the left inside unions, and part of that was promising people that "well, you can just win things within capitalism and just being instrumental, and you don't really need a left." And a lot of workers accepted that.
When neoliberalism came, in the absence of a wider vision, in the absence of a left, that sectionalism was dead. You just couldn't make gains when you're facing not just an employer but you're facing the state, and you're facing the employer in an entirely different context. I don't think the trade union movement ever came to grips with that fact. They stumbled on doing what you just raised: "well, we'll just have to try harder, this is cyclical, it'll get a little bit better, maybe we'll elect somebody else." They didn't realize that that whole era was over and unions really had to reinvent themselves.
And then came the financial crisis, the biggest crisis we've seen since the 1930s. In the 1930s, unions at least had recognized the limits of craft unionism and developed a new organizational form in terms of industrial unionism. The question that was being posed by the financial crisis is: okay, what are you going to do this time? What is the new organizational form that workers might come up with, given that the organizational form that that they have, sectional unionism, isn't capable of doing it. The public sector unions can say "we'll put up billboards to say we support the public sector," but nobody really believes them—they see it as opportunist.
So there's a real question of, what might a different unionism mean? I don't think that people who are trying to defend unions—by saying "they're okay, don't attack them, just plug along"—are actually doing the unions any favor. I think what really needs to be done is we have to challenge unions. And I think that was the excellent part of what you were writing about.
There's a perception in the broad public that unions are mostly interested in themselves. The leaders seem to be very interested in their own salaries and perks, too. But it seems that the leadership thinks it has a product to sell. That product is a contract and certain privileges in wages and benefits. That seems to foster a perception among the broad public that unions just don't care about the working class as a whole. Is that a fair perception on the part of the public?
Yes and no. If you tested the unions compared to the ruling class, to other sections of society, they might in fact be more progressive on these issues. But the reality is that it's not enough. It's not enough that unions might in general—that their members might in general vote more progressively, or they might care more about these things. Unions have to prove it. And you don't prove it by passing good resolutions, and even donating some money to good causes, or putting up billboards that say we support public services. Unions have to prove it. And to prove it they have to be radically different.
So, for example, they have to consider, when we're in bargaining maybe we actually have to put the quality and level and administration of services on the bargaining table. Unions don't do that. In other words, we would actually be ready to strike for something that we consider a fundamental right in society. Now when you start doing that you have to educate your members differently, you have to change all your structures, your research has to be different, how you mobilize and organize has to be different. But, you know, starting to think about that would mean a radical change and a chance to actually win the public over. And when I say win the public over I actually include other unions, who are also skeptical of this, who see this as "well they just want to raise their wages, and that means raising my taxes."
So you've got to win people over. And it means you have to develop a class perspective. You have to be driven by a class perspective. You can't say "we're organizing but the point of organizing is we want to just get more dues," because that effects what kind of commitment you have, what kind of energy you put into it, whether you're going to cooperate with other unions to organize people even if you don't get them. If you have a class perspective you'd have a different take on unionization—you have to deal with this question of, "Hey, wait a second, we're saying that we support the public but then we go on strike and take away the service, isn't that a contradiction?" You have to start thinking about, "Well, maybe we have to do other things, so that when we really go out on a full-scale strike people will get it."
And by other things I mean such as if it's a garbage strike, and they're asking you to drop the garbage off in a park while the strike is on, maybe you drop it off on Wall Street, because you want to make a connection between austerity and the strike. Maybe you actually think about—we're not going to pick up garbage in rich neighborhoods because we want to make that connection. We've had examples of workers coming up with that sporadically, but the problem is it's only sporadic. It has to get to what the organization is actually about.
I should say, I don't know that you can transform unions as they are to being more than that. But I've been trying to think through what it might mean to think about intermediate organizations. By an intermediate organization I mean something that would be a new form of working-class organization, that would see workers as joining them, linking them across unions. Having networks of activists across unions, so it isn't just a union with a sectional interest, but it's workers joining something because they see it as a class interest, and that it also expresses all the other dimensions of their lives. So it's linked to the community.
So it's not a political party but it is explicitly trying to take on the question of class and educate around the fact that unions face systemic problems that are more than facing a particular employer.
What do you make of the fact that something like a third of union members voted for Walker?
I think there's a division between the public and the private which is part of that, with people being won over to isolating the public sector. But it completely reflects the fact that if unions are only instrumental, sectionalist organizations, and then people are voting on the basis of "does this help me in particular, even if it screws other workers?," with no sense of if you're screwing other workers how that might come back to bite you in the longer term perspective. If you accept the fact that, well look, in practical terms I do want to support business because the only model we have for growth and therefore for financing public services is to support business, then workers can make a very sensible and rational decision that this is best for me given that there's actually no alternative. No one's talking about challenging business. No one's talking about an alternative way of creating jobs that isn't just some stimulus, but is actually thinking about questions of planning and conversion.
So I think that as long as people have a limited perspective on how you define the problem that shouldn't surprise us. And the reality is that unions don't see their role as developing that kind of a broader perspective, for the longer term. My argument would be that that kind of narrow perspective which worked in the past isn't even actually practical anymore. It's not that you can make an argument that "well it's practical to just be small." That's what we find out is impractical. You lose your own members. They see the solution not working. And we have to start thinking bigger and more radically, because that's the only thing that's practical right now.
That would a revolution inside unions—a massive cultural change. And I don't think this can happen without a left that is both inside and outside the unions, pushing this kind of thing and getting unions, even if you don't win them over, but getting them to at least put on their own agenda strategic questions about "how should we respond?"
If you think of the Wisconsin uprising, there should have been some structures formed as this was happening, like assemblies. Where people are actually discussing things. What do we do? How do we get neighbors on side? What do we when they say this? How do we answer these questions? How do we get into the high schools and develop people because is this is going to be, you know, we're talking about another generation that's going to be affected. When that was ignored, and everything just got channeled into an election—which at this point you're simply operating on their terrain—yeah, the end result isn't that surprising. And you're not really building things.
You can also ask the question well what would've happened if unions won? In these circumstances even if unions won, it would've been a very important victory in terms of bargaining, but the Democrats would've been there to make sure that you have bargaining but that you couldn't bargain over anything significant. They would've reinforced that image. I mean the main thing that the Democrats did in this election was run away from actually speaking about class, defending workers, defending unions, and thinking that you could win just by demonizing the other side. So there wasn't even that kind of education and buildup during the election.
When you say things like this a lot of union people say, "Yeah that'd be very nice but we operate under a very severe set of legal constraints. We can get fined, we can go to jail, we can be destroyed. So we just have to operate by some rules that are very much stacked against us." What do you say to that?
Part of the problem is people not knowing their own history. Unions didn't come out of people sitting down and practically saying, "what are the rules, what are the constraints, and how do we operate within them?" They figured out how you actually have to break rules, how you have to change them, how you have to mobilize broadly. When you look at these problems in very small ways, like workers saying, "If I just walk out of my workplace, I'll be fired"—yeah, you will be fired, so you shouldn't do that. But you should figure out what would we have to do so we actually have a mass base. How do we build that base?
They showed that in Wisconsin. They were sitting in on the legislature—a massive act of defiance. All the things that we cheer when they happen elsewhere are acts of defiance. Everything about our history was an act of defiance. That requires being sober about it. It's not just romantic. Let's do it—it actually means asking, 'If we can't do certain things now, how do we prepare so that we can do them?" It does mean saying that if you want to change things, these are the kind of risks you have to take. How do we prepare ourselves to take those risks and pull it off?
Because if you accept the status quo then the thing you have to remember is that you're not just protecting yourself right now. You're sending a signal to them that they can keep doing it to you. And that's what's been going on for the last quarter of a century. You know, first they lower expectations, then you have the crisis, so then now you have to pay for the crisis and bailing out the banks. Now you get defeated. What's going to come out of this Wisconsin thing is that there are going to be further attacks on workers in other states, and workers will be relieved because they weren't as bad as what Walker was promising.
This is going to keep going on; it's going to get worse. There's no future in it. There's no future in it for people's kids. People have to start thinking in terms of: you have to take a stand, you have to think about what this means, and you have to prepare for it. And it is going to be risky. Everything that you raise should be addressed, you know, right on, instead of pretending that if you do these things it'll be easy.
You've also said that the labor movement needs a left and the decay of the left has really damaged the labor movement. Could you elaborate on that?
It's really difficult for me to imagine unions being transformed completely through their own dynamic. We just haven't seen it happen. We've seen attacks on unions consistently now since the early eighties. And we haven't seen bad times leading to something new. People just lower their expectations and hope that if there's a crisis you just fix it so you can get back to what was normal before, even if that wasn't so great. The leadership have no pressure on them to change. In fact, a lot of them have learned that since nobody blames them, maybe it's more comfortable to be able to blame big money, or globalization, or neoliberalism. The leadership has gotten comfortable—and the membership finds it very hard to rebel when you're looking at the world from one particular workplace and you don't have connections to others. You know your leaders are worldly; they travel around; they know what's going on in other places. But the workers are overwhelmed in terms of time, so it's very hard for me to imagine that kind of rebellion.
What a left has to offer is making connections between people across workplaces, bringing in a class analysis so they seem it's not just them. They can never win if it's just a few of them against the state. They have to see there's actually a class involved here. Giving them some alternatives, you know, giving them some historical memory, so they see how workers did this—in fact in more difficult circumstances in the past. Giving them some comparative analysis of what's going on in Greece and elsewhere—how did people organize. So the left can play that role, in terms of bringing a class perspective, resources, memory into the picture. The truth is the left that we have now isn't capable of doing that. So I think one of the questions that comes out of Wisconsin is not just "what's wrong with unions?," but "what kind of a left could actually do that?"
And the answer to that isn't that we've got to convince workers that the politically right thing to do is to go into the Democratic Party. Because that will not develop capacities. In fact, it constrains the development of working-class capacities.
Some practical types would listen to what you just said and say, "well that's all very nice but, you know, it's too highfalutin'. We need some action on the ground. And all this stuff about making connections and international comparisons and class analysis is just over-intellectualizing what needs to be a much more activist approach to the problem." What do you say to that?
At one level of course they're right. The point of organizing isn't that you phone up a worker and you say, "Hello, I'm so-and-so. I think we need a revolution and we need a class analysis and can you come and join me?" That's not how people get organized. You do have to be on the ground. But you have to be on the ground in a way that has a class perspective behind it. If you're talking about organizing and you're thinking in terms of class, one of the questions is, "If there are so many people being laid off, what are unions doing about their members who're being laid off?" If they can't even organize people who were just recently their members, how would you expect them to organize anybody? And the reason they don't do that, is because there's no money in it.
There's money in getting new members but there's no money in helping your members once they stop paying dues. But if you have a class perspective it leads to something else. It leads to actively organizing the unemployed that were formerly your members. And if you don't do it that's where you get a lot of the rightwing populist response that you mentioned earlier. Workers say, "Well, they cared about me when I was paying dues; they don't give a shit anymore." And they don't end up being very sympathetic to labor. That's very on the ground.
If you're talking about making a breakthrough and organizing homecare workers, who do exactly the same thing as homecare workers in institutions that are unionized do but do it privately, you have to get cooperation among unions. It would be a massive project. And if you got cooperation, it'd be a very on-the-ground, hands-on response to organizing low-paid, immigrant women. It's very concrete. But to do that you'd need this cooperation among unions. And you'd actually have to talk about, "What kind of a union do you want, where does class fit in, why are you doing this?" And if you don't want to talk about that you won't do it. This notion of 'let's just go out and do it the old way and it's on-the-ground'—that's what I consider really idealist. It's not working! You do have to think bigger.
That's part of the role of the left: it's to be a bridge—responding to practical and immediate things, but putting them in that kind of a larger context. Because without that kind of larger context we're losing and we're going to continue to lose. What's really abstract is pretending that these kinds of questions don't matter.
Is there really any hope for a model in which the goal of union activity is organizing a group of workers to get a contract and then have them pay dues for union membership? This is the central model of American unionism. Could this survive another generation, or has this got to go?
I don't know if it has to go. But we need another kind of organization, which doesn't mean this one has to go. It might mean that if we in fact had workers' assemblies and spaces and places where workers were actually mobilizing and organizing around class, that might begin to have an impact on unions. Injecting that into unions might actually demonstrate to them that you actually need some kind of strategic thinking to even be effective at what you're trying to do. So it may be that there's a way of renewing unions—but only because you've actually responded to the times, and learned something, and said, "We need new forms of working-class organization."
I just got back from Montreal. It's fascinating because it's one of those moments where in retrospect you can say it was predictable—there was a lot of student organizing and mobilizing before. But they've had marches of around 300,000 people. They've been fighting around the cost of tuition. Quebec has the lowest cost of tuition in the country and yet they've been fighting around it because they think it should be a public good that's free. So what recently happened is they began to actually go into neighborhoods, banging pots, and what's happened is neighbors have come out to join them. Nobody would've predicted this. They would've thought they'd be, you know, isolated as spoiled university kids.
You begin to see that once people begin to see that something's possible, it opens everything. There are people on the streets supporting them. People in the bars run out and join the demo, There are all kinds of discussions taking place. People are actually talking about capitalism, because they're being forced to as they do this. And the students have been running assemblies—democratic spaces in every university, in different faculties, to make decisions about where to go and what to do and about tactics. And then this is now being imitated to some extent in some of the communities, where people are forming community assemblies to talk about broader issues. Not just tuition fees but the educational system or why there are cutbacks. As struggles take place, you get surprised and things emerge. Then the question is well what do you do next to sustain it?
If you're sober you have to be pessimistic. But there's a quote that's usually attributed to Gramsci—I don't know if he actually said it—that the challenge is to have no illusions but not get disillusioned. That's the trick. It's just one of those historical moments where we have to figure out how to do something. If you think of the periods since The Communist Manifesto it's always been as if there were some answers that somebody had: unionization, insurrection, forming communist parties, forming social-democratic parties.
Now we have to come up with our own answers because those answers weren't real answers. It's very difficult to live through this period because there's no answer on any shelf to take, and we don't have an example abroad to say why don't we just do it like so-and-so.
It's an incredibly difficult period, but I think capitalism has really been delegitimated. I don't have any trouble talking to workers, telling them that capitalism is a barrier to human development. They nod their heads. They're just not sure how to change it or have confidence in changing it; but it does mean that there's an opening if we can organize and figure out how to organize and take advantage of it. And that's a difficult challenge. It is crucial that we take our heads out of the sand, stop pretending that if we just keep trying, and defend workers, that things will change. That's actually becoming a barrier to change. I say that with real respect for the fact that while you're doing this of course all kinds of struggles are going to take place, and of course we should support them. But we should also be pointing to their limits.


text:
Experience a smarter drive
An intelligent car is a better car. That's why we've developed Sensus. Sensus is our philosophy that lies behind all our technologies. Each one designed to help you connect with your car and the world around you.
Volvo Cars Support
How can we help you?
Life always seems a lot simpler when there's someone around to help. So to make sure life with your Volvo is as simple and trouble-free as possible, we've developed a wide range of support options to offer help and reassurance whenever—and wherever—you may need them.
Connecting to your car or connecting to the Internet. Here you'll find the answers to all your questions and queries about Volvo and connectivity.
Volvo On Call
Whether you've forgotten your password or just need a little help getting started, you'll find the answers to your questions, plus all the advice and support you need.
Mobile manuals
Download the app and get your Volvo's Owner's Manual on your mobile or tablet, featuring user guides, instructional videos and a useful search function.


text:
It's all about right now, show me Rockies
Well that sucks. I went up to the cabin this weekend to do some maintenance.
When I left out Saturday morning the Rockies were up one game on the Padres.
I didn't have access to any of the scores so I was out of the loop for a day and a half.
I felt good though, because the Padres(53-83) are trailing the Rockies(64-74) and I didn't figure it would be an issue winning this set or even getting a sweep.
On the drive back home today I turned on the radio and caught the game three in the bottom of the ninth, tied.
Not only did we lose this one, I found out we lost the night before too..HUH ?
No way, not to the Padres, not now. Remember the wins in SF?
I must admit, after hearing that news I went a little squirrely.
Shot of Eldora Ski Resort
The place is no Keystone or Vail, but it's close to Denver.
It has a little something for everyone, and it's more reasonably priced than the big resorts.
Ever paid for a family of four to snowboard? If you have you feel me.
A view of Nederland Colorado
Population 1500??
8236 ft
Proof that hippies and yuppies can live in harmony.
C'mon Rockies.
24 games left in the Rockies regular season.
15 home games.
9 away games.
If you look in Elway's left eye you can see a glimmer of hope.
We need sweeps in the series against the Dodgers and the two series against the D-Backs.
If you think about it, everything is about right now.
<—Actual animal feces.(deer I think).
None of the stupid crap that happened earlier this season matters now.
Not the injuries, not the missed opportunities, not the road losses.
Winning is the only priority that matters from this moment forward.
I need to see the Rockies out there taking every second of these next home games seriously. All of it.
A really good start would be having batting practice tomorrow.
I need to see a team focused on one mission . Winning this Division and not EVER looking like a PUNK again in the World Series.
Please don't mistake my excitement for anger, as baseball is my release.
I figure if I don't give up, the Rockies shouldn't either.
Every single game matters from here on. Every game of the Rockies, every one of the Dodgers, every one of the D-Backs.
In the evenings now, I constantly have MLB.com up and I'm checking scores.
I really believe the Rockies are still in this (I've seen stranger things happen, we all have).
<—(Not me or my pot).
Count on me blowing smoke in your face until I know it's an impossibility for the Rockies to continue.
Lets see how much smoke is left after this homestretch with SF and Houston..
See you at the game tomorrow.


text:
Prep Q and A: Shooting the breeze with Lakeside's Austen Urness
On March 5, 2010, during her freshman year, Lakeside catcher Austen Urness clobbered the first pitch she ever saw for a home run against Redlands.
It was just the beginning of the Urness folklore that continued for four years.
Even though she was barely starting high school, Urness made a verbal commitment that year to the University of Nebraska. Major college programs had Urness on their radar when she was still in junior high.
Urness has more than justified Nebraska's conviction in her abilities. The backstop earned countless accolades during the next four years, which included the 2011 Sunbelt League MVP award.
Accustomed to winning with a 57-20 record and two league titles in her first three seasons, Urness' senior year has been a new experience as the Lancers have labored through a 4-12 campaign with younger players.
Nevertheless, Urness has taken the tribulations in stride, while leaving a legacy that will radiate among future Lakeside softball teams and their players.
"Austen works harder than any kid at anything I have ever seen," Lakeside coach Todd Naylor said. "She was out here yesterday for an hour after practice, just hitting off a tee by herself, going and getting the balls. The other kids go, 'What is she doing?' She's got one thing she is trying to fix or one thing she is focused on, and she's not going to be stopped."
Despite being pitched around constantly, Urness is hitting a blistering .634 with six home runs and a 1.927 OPS in 41 at-bats this season.
"She's fun," Naylor said. "She cracks everybody else. She is probably the heart and soul of Lakeside High School. She is just that special of a kid."
Question: What made you feel so comfortable about verbally committing to the University of Nebraska at such a young age?
Answer: I took a lot of unofficials (visits) when I was younger. I didn't want to make a commitment if I hadn't seen other schools and if I felt a different way about a different school. When I immediately stepped off the plane (in Lincoln), I just felt something different. When I stepped on campus, it's an atmosphere that is indescribable. When you step on there, you meet the coaches and you see the facilities. It left me speechless. That's why I chose where I chose.
Q: Did you ever get a chance to attend a football game in Lincoln?
A: I did. I went on my official (visit). We were on the field for about the first part of the game and we went up to the stands. Football is what they're known for out there. You can only imagine a sold out Nebraska game against rival Wisconsin. It was amazing. I couldn't even hear myself talk to be honest. It was crazy.
Q: When did you start playing softball?
A: I started playing when I was seven. I started playing here in Lake Elsinore for L.E.G.S. softball up in Tuscany Hills and then I moved on and started travel ball when I was about 10 and I was on the Norco Phillies for a year. Then I have been on the Corona Angels ever since.
Q: When did you really start to fall in love with softball?
A: About when I first started travel ball, maybe 10, nine years old. This is something I can make a career out of, pay for my school and get an education. That's something I figured out.
Q: How has it been different going from catching an experienced Division-I pitcher (Jasmine Smithson-Willett of Louisville) last year to catching a freshman (Cheyenne Alvarez) this year?
A: It was a change. It was really different, every situation you're faced with, there is always something you can take from it. Losing Jasmine last year was a huge impact on this team. But having a freshman come up, she is starting every game. She will learn at a very young age and it's been a lot of fun helping and teaching her and helping her a lot with her mental game. I'm kind of calling her pitches and telling her 'it's OK, you will be fine.' Especially with how young she is, she is going to grow a lot and she is doing a really good job.
Q: You're so used to competing here, how have you handled this rebuilding year as a senior?
A: Every situation has their challenges. What I really wanted to do is make sure this team just believes in themselves. I have had a lot of fun helping and leading this team, making sure they challenge themselves.
Q: Is it true an opposing pitcher tried to intentionally walk you the other day and you got a home run and a single off pitches out of the strike zone?
A: Yeah! It's one of those things, I know they are going to intentionally walk me, so I get up on the line and if I can see a pitch that can handle, take it and see if I can do something with it.
Q: I heard the Elsinore team went out of their way to shake your hand after you got injured after hitting 4-for-4 with two home runs and five RBIs versus them during an 11-8 loss on March 19. What happened?
A: I've had a lot of really good moments at this school, that was by far the best. I got hurt like three or four times in the game. I waited until the end, right when the game was over, I went out to the side. I was waiting for ice, and I was waiting to get taken down (to the hospital) because everything hurt. I was sitting out in the back of the cart and I just heard a bunch of footsteps come over and the whole team after they were done shaking our (team's) hands, came over and shook my hand on the back of a cart. It was really cool.
Q: What time do you usually wake up on workout day?
A: I usually wake up at 5 a.m. to get here around 5:15 to 5:30 so I can work out in the mornings. I have a college workout that I do in the mornings before school.
Q: It must tough to wake up when you hear your alarm ring?
A: It is a lot of time because I'm a teenager. You're up late doing homework and then you gotta get up early to work out. It's tough. If you manage your time very well, you kind of get used to it and the routine. I was doing it for three or four months and there was one week, we had Christmas break, the school wasn't open so I took that week off. It felt weird. I got up at 5 am. on my own and I am just sitting here, what do I do? It's just a routine after awhile.
Date of birth: November 8, 1994
Height: 5-6
Weight: 160
Awards: Two-time all-CIF, three-time first-team all-Sunbelt League, two-time All-Valley selection, two-time Lakeside athlete of the year.
Last movie I watched: Pitch Perfect
What are you listening to? Country music
Favorite sports team: Angels
Twitter or Facebook? Twitter
Favorite subject: Math
Least favorite subject: English
Hobby outside of softball: Spending time with my family
Biggest fear: Throwing up. "I hold it in if I can. I haven't thrown up since the fifth grade. It makes me shake talking about it."
Favorite TV show: America's Funniest Home Videos
Favorite color: Pink
Mountains or beach? Beach
Sign up for U-T Sports daily newsletter
The latest Padres, Chargers and Aztecs headlines along with the other top San Diego sports stories every morning.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the San Diego Union-Tribune.


text:
Born Rich: documentary by Jamie Johnson, released in 2003. It is about growing up as a child in one of the world's richest families. Its director, Jamie Johnson, is an heir to the Johnson & Johnson fortune.
Born Rich was purchased by HBO, and described as "a documentary on children of the insanely rich, directed by one of their own, Johnson & Johnson Inc. heir Jamie Johnson." It consists primarily of Johnson interviewing his friends and peers about the experience of living life free of financial constraints. These interviews are offset by Johnson's exploration of his own experience and family. Jamie's uncle is screenwriter and novelist Dirk Wittenborn, whom Jamie credits with encouraging him to make a documentary about the experience of wealthy children.
Born Rich: documentary by Jamie Johnson on YouTube
The documentary was nominated for two Emmy Awards including 'Outstanding Directing for Nonfiction Programming' for the director, Jamie Johnson. The other nomination was in the category 'Outstanding Nonfiction Special' for the producers: Sheila Nevins (executive producer), Dirk Wittenborn (produced by) and Jamie Johnson (producer).


text:
- Home
- Skins
- Skins For Popular Cases
- LifeProof Skins
- LifeProof Nuud iPhone Skins
We can't find products matching the selection.
LifeProof Nuud iPhone Skins
Personalize your LifeProof Nuud iPhone 6s Plus with decal skins made for your LifeProof Nuud iPhone 6s Plus. Shop all LifeProof Nuud iPhone 6s Plus skins online at Skinit and find the best case decal skin design for you.
Filter (6)
Filtering by
- Skinit Studios Remove This Item
- Animals Remove This Item
- Leo Remove This Item
- Travel Remove This Item
- Sharks Remove This Item
- Pandas Remove This Item
Design Style
Sub Category


text:
The Minetto United Methodist Church will host a free dinner on Sunday, March 23, serving from 4:30 to 6:30 P.M. The menu will be ziti and meatballs, vegetable and dessert. Donations are not expected but will be accepted.
A collection shed is available in the parking lot at the back of the church for usable clothing items that can be recycled. Acceptable items include: all clothing, shoes, sneakers, purses, blankets, sheets, pillowcases, drapes, and stuffed toys.
The building is fully accessible and is located at the corner of State Route 48 and County Route 8, one block south of the Stewarts Shop, midway between Oswego and Fulton, in the village of Minetto. For more information about programs and services call 343-0613.


text:
Topics :: books
1 thru 10 of 158 Stories
Controversial Book on Trump Released
"Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House" was released on Friday. It paints a disparaging picture of President Trump and his family. The President says it's filled with lies. One Washington bookstore opened overnight and quickly sold out.
Painting in Rainbow Colors :: A Growing Canon of LGBTQ-themed children's literature
Just in time for the holidays, a number of children's book writers have some thoughtful and entertaining contributions for gift giving for the younger set.
In the 'Zone,' and How, with 'The Twilight Zone Encyclopedia' Author Steven Jay Rubin
Movie producer and author Steven Jay Rubin has written a lovingly detailed reference work on Rod Serling's original series. To find out more, EDGE's resident "Twilight Zone" fanatic caught up to Rubin for a chat.
TV Cat Guy, Jackson Galaxy, Out with New Book
Cat whisperer Jackson Galaxy has a new book offering soup to nuts on the human-cat bond.
Guardian Journalist Has Book Coming on Trump and Russia
Vintage Books told The Associated Press on Monday that Luke Harding's "Collusion: Meetings, Dirty Money, and How Russia Helped Donald Trump Win" will be a detailed narrative on Trump's connections with the Russians.
Gay Australian Teen Lit Author Visits Bay Area
San Jose students got a chance to hear gay Australian teen literature author Will Kostakis during a recent private dinner hosted in the Willow Glen neighborhood.
The OutField: 'Jocks,' Yesterday and Today
Across America - in rural towns, faceless suburbs and large cities - teenagers and 20-something gay males are shooting hoops, kicking soccer balls, handling hockey sticks, running, swimming and biking. They are working hard, and working out.
Gay Photog Releases Book on SF
For more than 40 years, gay photographer Daniel Nicoletta has been a witness to, and a participant in, LGBT history, capturing iconic moments with his camera.
Finding Harry :: Novelist William Kuhn on His Royal Family Comic Novel
Boston-based author William Kuhn revisits the royal family with a new Harry-centered comic novel in which a fictionalized version of the famously hell-raising prince goes to Afghanistan. His secret weapon? Irrepressible insouciance!
Arizona's Flake Takes GOP to Task over Trump
Republican Sen. Jeff Flake has a message for his party: Get a spine and stand up to President Donald Trump. It's time for Congress to act as a brake on the president's erratic impulses.
1 thru 10 of 158 Stories


text:
Companies, fearing salmonella, recall powdered milk products
(CNN) The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has announced a series of recalls for powdered milk products that may be contaminated with salmonella.
Over the past four days, eight different food manufacturers have pulled a wide variety of products from dozens of different states, including kettle chips and cheddar mac and cheese, milk powder and cheese cups.
One Ohio company, Brand Castle LLC, had shipped 16 oz. red boxes of monkey bread mix to nearly 40 states in every corner of the country — from Arizona to Washington, Florida to Massachusetts — which are now being recalled.
Nearly all the companies, including Brand Castle's, made voluntarily recalls.
"The health and safety of our consumers is always our top priority," Jim Goldberg, founder of Deep River Snacks, said in a statement regarding its sour cream and onion kettle chips. "Although we haven't found any contaminants in either our seasonings or our finished products, we are taking great precautions to protect our customers."
The full list of companies who issued recalls include:
- Valley Milk Products – nonfat high heat milk powder and sweet cream buttermilk powder
- Shearer's Foods, LLC – kettle chips, potato chips, and nacho chips
- Deep River Snacks – kettle chips
- Boulder Brands, Inc. – macaroni and cheese
- TreeHouse Foods, Inc. – macaroni and cheese
- New Hope Mills – crepe mix
- Fourth Street Barbecue Inc. – macaroni and cheese
- Brand Castle, LLC – monkey bread mix
No one has reported getting sick from the products, but exposure to salmonella can result in diarrhea, abdominal cramps and fever.
However, most people who are exposed to the bacteria recover, even without treatment.
For those with compromised immune systems, HOfor example due to chemotherapy, this kind of infection can be much more serious and require hospitalization. The elderly and infants can also have a hard time fighting off these infections.
The announcements follow last week's decision from Publix Super Markets to recall three of its waffle and pancake mixes sold at stores in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee.


text:
It's important to think about all the expenses you are likely to incur while abroad so you and your family can plan ahead. Your program Fees section explains what your program fee does and does not cover, and will provide you with an overall estimate of expected expenses. For example, your airfare to Britain is not included in your program fee. It is important to note that the "Estimate of Additional Expenses" information is provided for planning purposes only, and may vary according to your own personal spending habits.
|Full program fee (including $500 deposit)
|Orientation expenses
|Meals (#program weeks _ x $ _ per wk)
|Special Courses Fee
|Local transport
|Personal expenses
|Vacation expenses
Total Expenses
|Family contribution
|Your savings
|Stafford Loan (deduct 5% for origination fees)
|Other financial aid
|Other resources
Total Resources


text:
Just when you think you've heard it all, a college basketball coach offers to give back a portion of his salary.
Georgia Tech coach Paul Hewitt said he'd do it if the NCAA would shorten the college basketball season. It starts Nov. 10 in the ACC with Presbyterian at Duke.Hewitt would prefer to start after Thanksgiving and play fewer games.
"You want to pro-rate my salary, go ahead," Hewitt said. "I would do it tomorrow. Because it just puts a lot of stress on our guys."
In 2006, the NCAA approved a 27-game regular-season schedule, plus an "exempt" tournament that can be up to four games. Teams that don't play an exempt tournament can play 29 regular-season games.
Previously, teams played a 26-game regular season and were limited to two exempt tournaments in a four-year period. Now teams can play 31 games every season.
Hewitt said the extra games increased pressure on young men who already are struggling to manage challenging academic and athletic responsibilities.
Hewitt said the extra games increased pressure on young men who already are struggling to manage challenging academic and athletic responsibilities.
"I do find it interesting that we talk out of both sides of our mouth about the need to graduate and the need to make sure the grades are good," Hewitt said. "And we keep increasing the standards, but we don't give the kids any more time to be successful."
Following Georgia Tech's run to the 2004 NCAA championship game, Hewitt emerged as one of college basketball's most passionate reformers. He is the only Division I coach on a coalition of experts from across the basketball landscape who have begun an initiative to improve youth basketball in the United States.
He is a member of the NCAA's Academic Enhancement Group, which is attempting to develop strategies to improve classroom performance in men's basketball.Shortening the schedule is one strategy that he believes makes sense.
"We're putting the kids in a very, very tough spot with the amount of class time we ask them to miss," Hewitt said. "We really infringe on their preparation time for first-semester final exams."


text:
No Mike Pelfrey Disease
With Mike Pelfrey following his three-balk night of the "Yips" with nothing more worrisome than forgetting to get off the rubber at Fenway before asking umpire Joe West if he could blow on his fingers, it appears the list of Major League victims of "Steve Blass Disease" and its related maladies will remain at 17.
20 Comments
When do you have time to do such great writing?
And speaking of Pat Jordan, when are you going to come out with your own "A False Spring"?
Hi Keith,
Interesting blog! I never made the connection before but it makes perfect sense. Also thank goodness Mike Pelfrey has gotten over his twitches! The Mets do not need more issues with their starters. Yikes!
Pretty cool to see you on Jimmy Fallon's show talking baseball cards.
It's amazing to see how the game of baseball is so ingrained into the American psyche – specifically the American male psyche – specifically between fathers & sons whether the father or son played or not. My father cannot bear to watch the movie FIELD OF DREAMS because my grandfather never threw a baseball around with my Dad, and that memory is driven into him every time he tries to watch the movie. Dad is also a huge sports fan; my grandfather really wasn't. When my Dad FINALLY got to see his Yankee heroes in Comisky Park (Mickey Mantle & company) in the mid – 60s, I can just imagine my grandfather wondering what all the excitement was about.
Keith you are absolutely the man when it comes to sports writing and reporting… ok got all of the sappy fan stuff out of the way. I wanted to ask a favor of you… I have grown to admire the story of Josh Hamilton and his life. I think the feel good stories of baseball and sports in general are lost in the mix to the "wow" stories of the sports world. Barry, Mannywood, Bloody sock, The rocket, Strawberry and all of the other sad truths to the games heros rule the stories head liners instead of the stuff that I want my kids to see and grow up learning. Dustin Pedroia (even though he is a hated red sox), Hamilton and all the other feel good stories deserve all the attention and more than the AROID stories that people are focus on. Baseball should be about good stories, teamwork, loyalty, hard work, faith and everything else Americans needs to stay positive during todays tough times. A lot of people use sports as a release from everyday life and the bad news in the daily media. I would hate to see my kids learning more about the bad in the game than the good that has carried the sport for so long. Thank you for this opportunity and keep up the great work
You can include Rex Barney to the mystery list.
Very interesting article. Bob Hewson Omaha>NE
You are an amazing writer and tv personality. I have enjoyed watching you from the time of Sportscenter. thank you for your continued coverage of baseball. I remember growing up in the 80's and hearing about Steve Trout and Shane Rawley issues. Where they also family issued related. It is amazing how each of the issues with these athletes goes back to a mom, dad or brother.
Continued success and Go Yankees,
is this a possible explanation for andruw jones' last year? i wondered if he needed glasses or something, everytime i watched him try to bat. but could this be the reason he went south so fast? did he miss the organization he grew up in when he went to LA?
Hey, Keith… Love your stuff… We were ready to dig Pelfrey's old mouth guard out and soak it in bourbon to calm him down… If you get a chance, check out our show – we're trying to do the Daily Show for sports, without a dime and ZERO marketing… It's http://www.MeetTheMatts.com THANKS.
I think Jimmy Piersall might fall into this category. I remember as a little kid growing up in Connecticut playing catch with him in my yard. All in all a nice guy. BTW love countdown.
Nice article…a focus on an often overlooked idiosyncrancy of the game AND no Barack Obama worship.
So, what is the impact of all the other players and their moms?
Big thanks for your outstanding analysis and reporting on politics and sports year in and year out.
And I'm fascinated by this hypothesis about players and their fathers or brothers, et al. But a simple question arises: what about the thousands of other baseball players who haven't had these kinds of breakdowns in skills. Surely a large percentage of those also lost their fathers or brothers, or had problems come up with them. So why these 17 and not hundreds of others?
My question doesn't totally discount your theory, of course. There are lots of psychological syndromes that afflict some people and not others with similar circumstances. But I just wanted to pose the question.
In Cincinnati, Joey Votto's breakout season has been derailed by an apparently psychological stress related problem. No one knows the who or what involved, but this article reminded me that his father passed very recently.
I've listened to Blass call the Pirate games for years, but I don't recall hearing him say what HE thought was the cause of HIS Steve Blass Disease, was it Clemente's untimely death? He's a pretty nifty guy, have you ever asked him about SBD? (Not Silent But Deadly, the other)
Baseball should be about good stories, teamwork, loyalty, hard work, faith and everything else Americans needs to stay positive during todays tough times. buy book report | custom Admission essay
Hello, you used to write fantastic, but the last few posts have been kinda boring… I miss your super writings. Past few posts are just a little bit out of track! come on!
Wonderful post, the content was excellent and the quality was outstanding. Thanks a lot for sharing such wonderful post with all of us. Tweedehands
I saw a lot of website but I think this one has got something special in it. "Our minds are lazier than our bodies." by La Rochefoucauld.