Thursday, November 15, 2012
Are you one of those people...
...who thinks that Mitt Romney, down deep, is really a classy guy who didn't believe half of the nonsense he spewed in the 2012 presidential campaign? Then get a load of what the former governor of Massachusetts said yesterday on a conference call with supporters, according to an article in the New York Times (my emphasis):
...Mr. Romney said Wednesday afternoon that the president had followed the “old playbook” of using targeted initiatives to woo specific interest groups — “especially the African-American community, the Hispanic community and young people.”
“In each case, they were very generous in what they gave to those groups,” Mr. Romney said, contrasting Mr. Obama’s strategy to his own of “talking about big issues for the whole country: military strategy, foreign policy, a strong economy, creating jobs and so forth.”
Does that sound a little bitter? There's more:
“With regards to the young people, for instance, a forgiveness of college loan interest was a big gift,” Mr. Romney said. “Free contraceptives were very big with young, college-aged women. And then, finally, Obamacare also made a difference for them, because as you know, anybody now 26 years of age and younger was now going to be part of their parents’ plan, and that was a big gift to young people. They turned out in large numbers, a larger share in this election even than in 2008.”
This last line doesn't explain how Romney received two million fewer votes than John McCain did in 2008.
But wait; there's also this from his running mate, Paul Ryan (again, my emphasis):
Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin on Monday blamed Democratic turnout in “urban areas” for the loss by the Republican presidential ticket last week, saying he was surprised that he and Mitt Romney did not do better in the nation’s big cities.
“The surprise was some of the turnout, some of the turnout especially in urban areas, which gave President Obama the big margin to win this race,” Mr. Ryan said in an interview with WISC-TV. “When we watched Virginia and Ohio coming in, and those ones coming in as tight as they were, and looking like we were going to lose them, that’s when it became clear we weren’t going to win.”
That highlighted sentence is meant for scared old white people like my mother, who is addicted to Fox News. For those of you who can't hear the dog whistle, Ryan is saying, "Obama stole this election by having a bunch of black people stuff the ballot boxes in the inner cities."
Ryan goes on to say:
...he did not think that the nation’s voters had rejected his long-standing ideas for how to restructure the nation’s budget and cut spending.
“I don’t think we lost it on those budget issues, especially on Medicare — we clearly didn’t lose it on those issues,” he said.
And this is why I think the GOP will be in the wilderness for quite some time. I expect them to nominate a far-right candidate like Ryan in 2016 and get just crushed. Only then will the Republicans take a good, honest look at their party and make the necessary changes to become credible again.
...Mr. Romney said Wednesday afternoon that the president had followed the “old playbook” of using targeted initiatives to woo specific interest groups — “especially the African-American community, the Hispanic community and young people.”
“In each case, they were very generous in what they gave to those groups,” Mr. Romney said, contrasting Mr. Obama’s strategy to his own of “talking about big issues for the whole country: military strategy, foreign policy, a strong economy, creating jobs and so forth.”
Does that sound a little bitter? There's more:
“With regards to the young people, for instance, a forgiveness of college loan interest was a big gift,” Mr. Romney said. “Free contraceptives were very big with young, college-aged women. And then, finally, Obamacare also made a difference for them, because as you know, anybody now 26 years of age and younger was now going to be part of their parents’ plan, and that was a big gift to young people. They turned out in large numbers, a larger share in this election even than in 2008.”
This last line doesn't explain how Romney received two million fewer votes than John McCain did in 2008.
But wait; there's also this from his running mate, Paul Ryan (again, my emphasis):
Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin on Monday blamed Democratic turnout in “urban areas” for the loss by the Republican presidential ticket last week, saying he was surprised that he and Mitt Romney did not do better in the nation’s big cities.
“The surprise was some of the turnout, some of the turnout especially in urban areas, which gave President Obama the big margin to win this race,” Mr. Ryan said in an interview with WISC-TV. “When we watched Virginia and Ohio coming in, and those ones coming in as tight as they were, and looking like we were going to lose them, that’s when it became clear we weren’t going to win.”
That highlighted sentence is meant for scared old white people like my mother, who is addicted to Fox News. For those of you who can't hear the dog whistle, Ryan is saying, "Obama stole this election by having a bunch of black people stuff the ballot boxes in the inner cities."
Ryan goes on to say:
...he did not think that the nation’s voters had rejected his long-standing ideas for how to restructure the nation’s budget and cut spending.
“I don’t think we lost it on those budget issues, especially on Medicare — we clearly didn’t lose it on those issues,” he said.
And this is why I think the GOP will be in the wilderness for quite some time. I expect them to nominate a far-right candidate like Ryan in 2016 and get just crushed. Only then will the Republicans take a good, honest look at their party and make the necessary changes to become credible again.
As far as I can tell, Mount Carmel...
...has only played Neuqua Valley once, in 2010. The Caravan was victorious that year, 21-14, at home.
On Saturday night, though, the game will be played in Naperville and feature the best running back I've seen this year, Joey Rhattigan, above. Mount Carmel hasn't seen anything like him all year (Loyola is mostly a passing team) and they may have their hands full. If they can stop Rhattigan -- a big IF -- the Caravan will advance to Champaign to take on the Ramblers (?) again. If not, it could be a long, quiet bus ride back to Woodlawn.
Mount Carmel (11-1) beat St. Patrick, Morgan Park, De La Salle, St. Joseph, Brother Rice, St. Laurence, St. Rita, Providence, Brother Rice (again), Simeon and Lyons by a combined score of 450-59. Wow! The Caravan only lost to Loyola in Week Six, 30-27, in overtime. (Of these teams, eight had winning records and four losing.)
Neuqua (12-0) defeated Naperville North, Naperville Central, South Elgin, St. Charles East, Aurora East, Metea Valley, Waubonsie Valley, Lake Park, Bartlett, Naperville North (again), Bolingbrook and Waubonsie (again) by a combined score of 520-244. 520 points? Double Wow! (Of these, only seven teams had winning records.)
A word of caution for Mount Carmel fans: everyone has known about Rhattigan all season and no one has been able to stop him.
When I went to the Bolingbrook game a few weeks ago, I found Rhattigan on the field right away. So, I thought to myself, if they just key on him it's all over. The senior running back then went on to score five touchdowns that night. And just when I thought Rhattigan was going to carry the ball on every play, quarterback Dylan Andrew lobbed a touchdown pass over everyone's head to receiver Mike Dudek.
So what about Saturday night? I think Neuqua can take the big, bad Caravan this time. And I'll be there -- if it isn't sold out.
(If it is, I'll high-tail it down the road to the Lincoln-Way East - Benet game. Gotta be resourceful!)
BOWG prediction: Neuqua 35, Mount Carmel 31.
On Saturday night, though, the game will be played in Naperville and feature the best running back I've seen this year, Joey Rhattigan, above. Mount Carmel hasn't seen anything like him all year (Loyola is mostly a passing team) and they may have their hands full. If they can stop Rhattigan -- a big IF -- the Caravan will advance to Champaign to take on the Ramblers (?) again. If not, it could be a long, quiet bus ride back to Woodlawn.
Mount Carmel (11-1) beat St. Patrick, Morgan Park, De La Salle, St. Joseph, Brother Rice, St. Laurence, St. Rita, Providence, Brother Rice (again), Simeon and Lyons by a combined score of 450-59. Wow! The Caravan only lost to Loyola in Week Six, 30-27, in overtime. (Of these teams, eight had winning records and four losing.)
Neuqua (12-0) defeated Naperville North, Naperville Central, South Elgin, St. Charles East, Aurora East, Metea Valley, Waubonsie Valley, Lake Park, Bartlett, Naperville North (again), Bolingbrook and Waubonsie (again) by a combined score of 520-244. 520 points? Double Wow! (Of these, only seven teams had winning records.)
A word of caution for Mount Carmel fans: everyone has known about Rhattigan all season and no one has been able to stop him.
When I went to the Bolingbrook game a few weeks ago, I found Rhattigan on the field right away. So, I thought to myself, if they just key on him it's all over. The senior running back then went on to score five touchdowns that night. And just when I thought Rhattigan was going to carry the ball on every play, quarterback Dylan Andrew lobbed a touchdown pass over everyone's head to receiver Mike Dudek.
So what about Saturday night? I think Neuqua can take the big, bad Caravan this time. And I'll be there -- if it isn't sold out.
(If it is, I'll high-tail it down the road to the Lincoln-Way East - Benet game. Gotta be resourceful!)
BOWG prediction: Neuqua 35, Mount Carmel 31.
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
I started following high school football...
...because it was easy. I live about two miles from Loyola Academy, above, and would ride my bike past the stadium once in a while on Saturday afternoons. I'd check out the scoreboard from the parking lot and if it was a game, I'd stroll in (for free) and watch the second half. It would only take about 45 minutes or so. (If the score was lopsided, I'd just continue on my way.) Either way, no big deal.
Those were the days.
Like any habit, I began following the Ramblers (where my brothers went) and Glenbrook South (which my sons later attended), and I'd watch the entire game.
Eventually, I'd see Loyola play someone like Gordon Tech (or Glenbrook South play Maine East) and see the home team win by some crazy score like 40-0. And I thought, Why bother? Meanwhile, there would be a good contest -- like Lincoln-Way East - Bolingbrook, or Wheaton Warrenville South - Maine South -- being played somewhere else. And I would think, Why not attend one of those games instead of this crummy one?
And that's when it started getting complicated.
I began driving all over the Chicago area: down to Frankfort and Bolingbrook, out to Naperville and even Maple Park (where?), and up to Algonquin and Crystal Lake. My friends and family would just shake their heads and say to each other, "Mike has a problem, you know." (I won't tell you what my wife said to me when I drove down to Champaign a couple of years ago to see the finals.)
Clearly, it was becoming a sickness.
Now, as we head into the semifinals, it turns out you need a ticket ahead of time to attend the games. Sheesh!
So this morning, I called my sister in Naperville and begged her to drive over to Neuqua Valley tomorrow and buy a ticket for Saturday's game against Mount Carmel.
"Come on, Joanne, I'll do anything! I'll even watch your grandchildren some time!" (And I hate kids.)
After she finally agreed, I hung up and took a look at Benet's Web site. I quickly called her back.
"Hey Jo, you gotta do me a solid. Go over to Benet and buy another ticket this afternoon in case Neuqua is sold out."
"Huh?"
"Come on, don't do it for me. Do it for Dad. He's looking down on us right now!" (I knew that would work.)
"But then you'll have two tickets."
"I don't care. I can't take the chance of getting shut out!"
"Oh, all right."
Looks like I've hit rock bottom.
As for my sister, she's a good sport, even if she is an enabler. (I wonder what she'll say when I ask her to sell the extra ticket I don't use?)
Oh well, it's off to Loyola to get a ticket for that game.
Those were the days.
Like any habit, I began following the Ramblers (where my brothers went) and Glenbrook South (which my sons later attended), and I'd watch the entire game.
Eventually, I'd see Loyola play someone like Gordon Tech (or Glenbrook South play Maine East) and see the home team win by some crazy score like 40-0. And I thought, Why bother? Meanwhile, there would be a good contest -- like Lincoln-Way East - Bolingbrook, or Wheaton Warrenville South - Maine South -- being played somewhere else. And I would think, Why not attend one of those games instead of this crummy one?
And that's when it started getting complicated.
I began driving all over the Chicago area: down to Frankfort and Bolingbrook, out to Naperville and even Maple Park (where?), and up to Algonquin and Crystal Lake. My friends and family would just shake their heads and say to each other, "Mike has a problem, you know." (I won't tell you what my wife said to me when I drove down to Champaign a couple of years ago to see the finals.)
Clearly, it was becoming a sickness.
Now, as we head into the semifinals, it turns out you need a ticket ahead of time to attend the games. Sheesh!
So this morning, I called my sister in Naperville and begged her to drive over to Neuqua Valley tomorrow and buy a ticket for Saturday's game against Mount Carmel.
"Come on, Joanne, I'll do anything! I'll even watch your grandchildren some time!" (And I hate kids.)
After she finally agreed, I hung up and took a look at Benet's Web site. I quickly called her back.
"Hey Jo, you gotta do me a solid. Go over to Benet and buy another ticket this afternoon in case Neuqua is sold out."
"Huh?"
"Come on, don't do it for me. Do it for Dad. He's looking down on us right now!" (I knew that would work.)
"But then you'll have two tickets."
"I don't care. I can't take the chance of getting shut out!"
"Oh, all right."
Looks like I've hit rock bottom.
As for my sister, she's a good sport, even if she is an enabler. (I wonder what she'll say when I ask her to sell the extra ticket I don't use?)
Oh well, it's off to Loyola to get a ticket for that game.
Loyola, under Coach John...
...Holecek, has beaten Glenbard North twice in recent years (that I know of).
2011: LOYOLA 28, Glenbard North 13
2008: LOYOLA 26, Glenbard North 14
Will this Saturday be any different? I doubt it. (Except this time I'll be there.)
But one thing is certain: no matter who wins, people will be saying afterward, "Of course, (fill in the blank) won. Everybody knows the (DuPage Valley or Catholic League) is the best conference in Illinois!"
Seriously, if defense wins championships (and Holecek is a defensive wizard) then Loyola should prevail. The Ramblers (11-1) beat Simeon, Lake Forest Academy, Providence (I was there), Gordon Tech, Mount Carmel (I watched it on TV), Fenwick, Brother Rice (I was there until the game went to a running clock), St. Rita, Evanston, Bartlett and Palatine by a combined score of 387-104. Their only loss was in Week Two to Dallas Jesuit, 30-29. (Of these opponents, only Lake Forest Academy, Gordon Tech and St. Rita had losing records.)
Glenbard North, also 11-1, defeated Carmel, West Chicago, Glenbard East, Aurora West, Naperville Central, Wheaton Warrenville South, Wheaton North (I was there; the Panthers struggled but won), Naperville North, Fremd, Stevenson and Maine South by a combined score of 334-162. The Panthers' only loss was to Batavia, 42-41, in Week One. (Of these teams, only the last six had winning records. "Yeah," I can almost hear someone say, "But it's the DVC!")
As I mentioned, I saw Glenbard North only once this year and they narrowly beat a good Wheaton North team at home. Running back Justin Jackson did not dazzle me in the way I expected. If the Ramblers can keep his numbers down on Saturday, they should be headed back to Champaign (and for a possible rematch with Mount Carmel).
BOWG prediction: LOYOLA 27, Glenbard North 14.
2011: LOYOLA 28, Glenbard North 13
2008: LOYOLA 26, Glenbard North 14
Will this Saturday be any different? I doubt it. (Except this time I'll be there.)
But one thing is certain: no matter who wins, people will be saying afterward, "Of course, (fill in the blank) won. Everybody knows the (DuPage Valley or Catholic League) is the best conference in Illinois!"
Seriously, if defense wins championships (and Holecek is a defensive wizard) then Loyola should prevail. The Ramblers (11-1) beat Simeon, Lake Forest Academy, Providence (I was there), Gordon Tech, Mount Carmel (I watched it on TV), Fenwick, Brother Rice (I was there until the game went to a running clock), St. Rita, Evanston, Bartlett and Palatine by a combined score of 387-104. Their only loss was in Week Two to Dallas Jesuit, 30-29. (Of these opponents, only Lake Forest Academy, Gordon Tech and St. Rita had losing records.)
Glenbard North, also 11-1, defeated Carmel, West Chicago, Glenbard East, Aurora West, Naperville Central, Wheaton Warrenville South, Wheaton North (I was there; the Panthers struggled but won), Naperville North, Fremd, Stevenson and Maine South by a combined score of 334-162. The Panthers' only loss was to Batavia, 42-41, in Week One. (Of these teams, only the last six had winning records. "Yeah," I can almost hear someone say, "But it's the DVC!")
As I mentioned, I saw Glenbard North only once this year and they narrowly beat a good Wheaton North team at home. Running back Justin Jackson did not dazzle me in the way I expected. If the Ramblers can keep his numbers down on Saturday, they should be headed back to Champaign (and for a possible rematch with Mount Carmel).
BOWG prediction: LOYOLA 27, Glenbard North 14.
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
A week ago, I voted for...
...Barack Obama for president of the United States. Surprised? (Actually, I voted on October 27 when my son was home from school.)
But for whom should I have voted? According to a piece in Sunday's Times, married college-educated white men of my age and income who live in the suburbs and consider themselves political "independents" voted for Mitt Romney.
(The only category in which I didn't fit was "Religion." While I would consider myself "none of the above," the graph didn't list that. "Catholics" -- how I was raised -- voted for Obama, 50-48 percent, although 59 percent of white Catholics backed Romney.)
To be fair, those with graduate degrees (I have an MBA -- somehow) voted for the president, as did self-described "Democrats," of which I am probably one. But I find it a little interesting how out of step I am with my "tribe."
But for whom should I have voted? According to a piece in Sunday's Times, married college-educated white men of my age and income who live in the suburbs and consider themselves political "independents" voted for Mitt Romney.
(The only category in which I didn't fit was "Religion." While I would consider myself "none of the above," the graph didn't list that. "Catholics" -- how I was raised -- voted for Obama, 50-48 percent, although 59 percent of white Catholics backed Romney.)
To be fair, those with graduate degrees (I have an MBA -- somehow) voted for the president, as did self-described "Democrats," of which I am probably one. But I find it a little interesting how out of step I am with my "tribe."
Darrell Royal, the famous...
...football coach of the University of Texas, died at age 88 while I was traveling. From his obit in the Times:
When Royal was named the Texas football coach in 1957, he took over a team that had won only one game the previous season. When he retired after 20 seasons, he had coached the Longhorns to 11 Southwest Conference championships and 16 bowl appearances, and he never had a losing team. He was named national coach of the year five times and was elected to the College Football Hall of Fame in 1983.
But what I found more interesting was this:
Texas had fine teams in the 1940s under Coach Dana X. Bible but never finished atop the national rankings.
Can you think of a better name for a Texas football coach than Dana X. Bible? (That's him in the picture above.)
When Royal was named the Texas football coach in 1957, he took over a team that had won only one game the previous season. When he retired after 20 seasons, he had coached the Longhorns to 11 Southwest Conference championships and 16 bowl appearances, and he never had a losing team. He was named national coach of the year five times and was elected to the College Football Hall of Fame in 1983.
But what I found more interesting was this:
Texas had fine teams in the 1940s under Coach Dana X. Bible but never finished atop the national rankings.
Can you think of a better name for a Texas football coach than Dana X. Bible? (That's him in the picture above.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)







