I'm not sure if the NYTIMES publishes different letters in the hard copy than they do online, but I'm amazed that there are no letters directed at Henry Blodgett, the former Wall Street analyst who trumped up stuck prices (Amazon, among others), and railroaded many small investors, while being very rich. Mr. Blodgett is no longer allowed to work on Wall St anymore, so he's writing books. In addition, he's also writing Op-Eds for publications like the New York Times. In other words the times is giving him some space so he can promote his new book and make some more money, after becoming famous as a crook. I guess they were HOPING for some letters, afterall, they are a business too.
The liberal NYTIMES, allowing Henry Blodgett a big forum to tell the world why it's okay that the employees at Goldman Sachs receive a bonus on average of $600,000 this year. Afterall, next year they may only get $200,000 on average. The horror.
If you want to read Blodgett's take, it's right here. I'm not about to go through it and say how it's right, or wrong. I'm just disgusted that the Times would allow this guy to be the defender of it!
Maybe no letters were written to the NYTIMES with regards to what Blodgett wrote, but I'm going to write the letter I would have liked to have them post, rigt here:
Re: The Bonus Army
I find it appalling the Times would use Henry Blodgett to defend Wall St since he's no longer allowed to even practice because of SEC violations. I think the Times clearly could have found someone of higher standing to do it, such as Robert Rubin, Henry Paulson, or countless others.
Mr. Blodgett goes on to say that Wall St employees pay millions of dollars in taxes to the city, state, and federal governments, which is true. I do not take issue with that. Where I take issue is the fact that a majority of the wealthy Wall St bankers are registered Republicans who actually fight against paying higher taxes. I commend the Buffets, Gateses, and Corzines of the worlds. Not the Blodgetts, and others, who do not think they get to keep enough of their "hard earned" millions.
Sincerely,
Weinish
Jersey City, NJ
Thursday, December 21, 2006
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
So...
I just get an email from my (former) friend (I assume) whose father I said such kind words about a few weeks ago.
He cleared things up for me by telling me not only was his grandfather "not a rabbi..." but he was actually someone who abandoned his children. That is pretty low. I guess his grandfather would also have to make the list of "Jews I Wish Weren't..."
My bad!
I was told as a child he was a Rabbi, and by I believe, this friend. These aren't the types of things you imagine. In fact, I remember where I was when I was told. I was in a department store called Alexander's, I believe in Woodbridge, NJ. I remember weird things. Nevertheless, we were children, and story telling was what kids did. I've told some stories too (too bad many are true)...
Nevertheless, that doesn't give this uncomfortable Reagan-loving prick the right to be a total douche, which he is/was.
He cleared things up for me by telling me not only was his grandfather "not a rabbi..." but he was actually someone who abandoned his children. That is pretty low. I guess his grandfather would also have to make the list of "Jews I Wish Weren't..."
My bad!
I was told as a child he was a Rabbi, and by I believe, this friend. These aren't the types of things you imagine. In fact, I remember where I was when I was told. I was in a department store called Alexander's, I believe in Woodbridge, NJ. I remember weird things. Nevertheless, we were children, and story telling was what kids did. I've told some stories too (too bad many are true)...
Nevertheless, that doesn't give this uncomfortable Reagan-loving prick the right to be a total douche, which he is/was.
Putting Aside the Fact...
That Virgil Goode is probably a racist...
And putting aisde the fact that the Representative he speaks of is not Middle Eastern, but black, yet Muslim...
Putting aside the fact that while the Koran does advocate death to infidels, and everyone else who doesn't believe in Mohammad...
Part of me doesn't disagree with THIS JACKASS,Congressman Virgil Goode from the 6th District in Virginia. This being a letter to his constituent:
Do you not think for a second that Rep. Goode does not believe that Christianity is far superior to Islam, and/or Judaism? Seriously, put this guy in a room with some friends, and aside from like Former Senator Allen, you'll not only hear the word 'nigger' bandied about, but you'll definitely hear some discussion about how wonderful Christians are, and how bad all the rest be.
Of course, Goode really thinks he is doing God's work, hence what probably motivated him for public office. So this is really an issue of America's conservative instinct to actually fight a religious war. People like this have their hands on the controls, and it's oh-so-obvious that they'd raise a gun to kill a Muslim in order to defend Jesus.
These people are not more civilized than the holy-bombers. They just have more things to do during the day to occupy their lives. They've got more distractions. But if the roles were reversed, you could be sure people like CONGRESSMAN VIRGIL GOODE would be killing in the name of Jesus. And quite frankly, his votes defending the President are really just that.
Good times.
And putting aisde the fact that the Representative he speaks of is not Middle Eastern, but black, yet Muslim...
Putting aside the fact that while the Koran does advocate death to infidels, and everyone else who doesn't believe in Mohammad...
Part of me doesn't disagree with THIS JACKASS,Congressman Virgil Goode from the 6th District in Virginia. This being a letter to his constituent:
Thank you for your recent communication. When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand. I do not subscribe to using the Koran in any way. The Muslim Representative from Minnesota was elected by the voters of that district and if American citizens don’t wake up and adopt the Virgil Goode position on immigration there will likely be many more Muslims elected to office and demanding the use of the Koran. We need to stop illegal immigration totally and reduce legal immigration and end the diversity visas policy pushed hard by President Clinton and allowing many persons from the Middle East to come to this country. I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America and to prevent our resources from being swamped.Putting aside this absurd letter one has to focus on the problem in general: RELIGION!
The Ten Commandments and “In God We Trust” are on the wall in my office. A Muslim student came by the office and asked why I did not have anything on my wall about the Koran. My response was clear, “As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office.” Thank you again for your email and thoughts.
Do you not think for a second that Rep. Goode does not believe that Christianity is far superior to Islam, and/or Judaism? Seriously, put this guy in a room with some friends, and aside from like Former Senator Allen, you'll not only hear the word 'nigger' bandied about, but you'll definitely hear some discussion about how wonderful Christians are, and how bad all the rest be.
Of course, Goode really thinks he is doing God's work, hence what probably motivated him for public office. So this is really an issue of America's conservative instinct to actually fight a religious war. People like this have their hands on the controls, and it's oh-so-obvious that they'd raise a gun to kill a Muslim in order to defend Jesus.
These people are not more civilized than the holy-bombers. They just have more things to do during the day to occupy their lives. They've got more distractions. But if the roles were reversed, you could be sure people like CONGRESSMAN VIRGIL GOODE would be killing in the name of Jesus. And quite frankly, his votes defending the President are really just that.
Good times.
Monday, December 18, 2006
Iraq is Incredible
I really cannot get over what has transpired in Iraq. Every day, even though the news is the same as the day before, it seems I have new thoughts, all having to do with how dumb our leaders are, and how pointless "staying the course" has been and still is. Say what you will, Mr. Bush, but just because you changed the wording, we are STILL STAYING THE SAME COURSE.
I'm watching CNN earlier this evening and the discussion is about new Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and his take on the war. Accoring to Gates, if we don't win this thing it's going to "haunt" us. Well, people, get prepared for a lifetime of HALLOWEENS! We are going to be haunted, I assure you. Wait, wait, I take that back, I definitely take that back. I do not assure you because if someone in the Bush White House said we will be haunted it's almost certain to be wrong. History has to guide us. Prepare for the OPPOSITE of Halloween, which would be, uhh, I don't know, maybe PASSOVER? Who knows...
(wow, nice run by Rudi Johnson)
So CNN has a discussion of the war, and then they put up one of their polls about what the people are thinking across this oh-so-great, yet 30% retarded nation. Here's the gist of the poll:
One might think the ordering represents how strongly you align yourself with Bush, but in truth, the only one of the four alligned with Bush is the dumbest one: c) stay for as long as it takes. (d) has nothing to do with Bush, and everything to do with McCain. I don't have a real issue with (d) compared with (c), but I do have an issue with 5% of those polled who agree with McCain, but I'll get to that in a second.
The (c) camp is the same camp that tends to stick with Bush regardless of the topic. We like to call them "fucking morons." They are the thoughtless goose-steppers who an elected leader in Germany could probably rally to kill any minority group. We try to overlook them, but they vote, and that's a bad thing.
As for (d), I myself have mentioned the need to increase the troops, but this should not be (d). It should be (c), and (c) should be placed in the (d) column because the current (d) option is not necessarily supportive of Bush's War in Iraq, which unfortunately is a war for all of us. Again, (d) is still anti-Bush because it's going about the problem in a way Bush completely rejected when he dismissed General Shinseki's idea of 200,000 + troops. In other words, only 32% agrees with the President, and those people are proven idiots.
As for the McCain option, somewhat supported by me right here, I am surprised that 11% support it now compared with 6% this summer. I wonder if it's because McCain supports, or if people realize how half-assed this way from the get go, and the importance of getting it right now. I'd bet there are many former Bush supporters, who supported the war, heard McCain, and now like talking about that option. I want to believe that people have analyzed this themselves, and think that (d) is an option they believe, and not just one they have puppetted from McCain.
Regardless, pulling out is the only realistic option, and that's the one that should be supported most. Forget an arbitray 12 months; nothing is going to change. Just begin the drawdown now. Too bad this won't happen either because the guy calling the shots has little to lose, except his own selfish desire to be right. Which, of course, is more important to him than anyone's opinion will ever be.
I'm watching CNN earlier this evening and the discussion is about new Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and his take on the war. Accoring to Gates, if we don't win this thing it's going to "haunt" us. Well, people, get prepared for a lifetime of HALLOWEENS! We are going to be haunted, I assure you. Wait, wait, I take that back, I definitely take that back. I do not assure you because if someone in the Bush White House said we will be haunted it's almost certain to be wrong. History has to guide us. Prepare for the OPPOSITE of Halloween, which would be, uhh, I don't know, maybe PASSOVER? Who knows...
(wow, nice run by Rudi Johnson)
So CNN has a discussion of the war, and then they put up one of their polls about what the people are thinking across this oh-so-great, yet 30% retarded nation. Here's the gist of the poll:
Support for the conflict fell to a new low of 31 percent in the poll, conducted Friday through Sunday by Opinion Research Corporation, while a record 67 percent expressed opposition to the nearly 4-year-old war.Wha stuck out to me when I saw their poll results on the tube was the ordering of the responses. The question was asked "which plan do you favor in Iraq?" and the responses were: a) pullout now b) pullout in 12 months c) stay for as long as it takes d) send more troops.
Nearly three-quarters said Bush administration policy needs a complete overhaul or major changes. But only 11 percent of those polled backed calls to send more American troops to Iraq, as President Bush is said to be considering.
One might think the ordering represents how strongly you align yourself with Bush, but in truth, the only one of the four alligned with Bush is the dumbest one: c) stay for as long as it takes. (d) has nothing to do with Bush, and everything to do with McCain. I don't have a real issue with (d) compared with (c), but I do have an issue with 5% of those polled who agree with McCain, but I'll get to that in a second.
The (c) camp is the same camp that tends to stick with Bush regardless of the topic. We like to call them "fucking morons." They are the thoughtless goose-steppers who an elected leader in Germany could probably rally to kill any minority group. We try to overlook them, but they vote, and that's a bad thing.
As for (d), I myself have mentioned the need to increase the troops, but this should not be (d). It should be (c), and (c) should be placed in the (d) column because the current (d) option is not necessarily supportive of Bush's War in Iraq, which unfortunately is a war for all of us. Again, (d) is still anti-Bush because it's going about the problem in a way Bush completely rejected when he dismissed General Shinseki's idea of 200,000 + troops. In other words, only 32% agrees with the President, and those people are proven idiots.
As for the McCain option, somewhat supported by me right here, I am surprised that 11% support it now compared with 6% this summer. I wonder if it's because McCain supports, or if people realize how half-assed this way from the get go, and the importance of getting it right now. I'd bet there are many former Bush supporters, who supported the war, heard McCain, and now like talking about that option. I want to believe that people have analyzed this themselves, and think that (d) is an option they believe, and not just one they have puppetted from McCain.
Regardless, pulling out is the only realistic option, and that's the one that should be supported most. Forget an arbitray 12 months; nothing is going to change. Just begin the drawdown now. Too bad this won't happen either because the guy calling the shots has little to lose, except his own selfish desire to be right. Which, of course, is more important to him than anyone's opinion will ever be.
What a Bust...
I'm sorta tired of the NY media saying that Eli Manning is "a bust" and that he's "not good...terrible..." etc. I think this whole QB thing needs to be put in perspective for a second.
First off, Manning has sucked this season, no question. The first half was clearly better than the second, but overall, he has been nervous in the pocket, and it has showed. This Giants team is not great, but they're clearly better than how they've played. Is that Manning's fault? Somewhat. But it's equally the fault of the coaches, and the players who continue to make bonehead plays.
Ever since Amani Toomer injured himself the Giants have gone downhill. Not only on the field, but in the media too. It didn't help that Michael Strahan, another team leader, got hurt as well. Plus, Tiki Barber's self-agrandizing retirement had an affect on this team as well. These guys were celebrating his career as if he was Emmitt Smith, and the Giants were on their way to giving him a title. It was embarrassing. But with regards to Eli, he has not been good.
What, or who, are we comparing Eli to? Is he being compared to Peyton Manning? Philip Rivers? Ben Roethlisberger? Last season? Whatever it is, the comparisons have been overstated, and unfair.
Unfortunately for Eli, he raised the bar last year, orchestrating many comebacks, which led fans to think this year was going to be even better. Remember, last year people (like me) were saying he's better than Peyton! Sure, Peyton had gaudier stats, but never seemed to win a big game. It seemed Eli was going to be the big game winner. But again, he has fallen on hard times.
So you want to compare him to his brother? That's ridiculous. His brother is obviously great, confident, and his team is LOADED. Plus, Peyton started in Indianapolis, not New York City. Hardly a pressure cooker.
Maybe you want to compare him to Rivers. Has Rivers been better than him? This season, at times. And he has had 2 full seasons to learn the game. Sure, the argument could be made that hurts, but the opposite argument could also be made.
If you watched Rivers last night, or even in recent weeks, you'd have to say the guy has been average. He has the best RB in the league, a great line, the best fullback, the best TE, and yet he has been average. Similar to Big Ben, Rivers' job is to not lose the game. Tomlinson wins the games. Compared to Eli, he has not been great, playing in another pressure cooker: San Diego. Rivers will be very good, but he has not been better than Eli over 2 seasons.
So we'll compare him to Big Ben, the guy who won the Superbowl. Once again, a guy asked to not lose the game for Pittsburgh, playing behind a great line, defense, and running game. Pittsburgh didn't win the Superbowl because of Big Ben. He just made sure they didn't lose it. Not saying that's easy, but Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson both did that. This season, while the Steelers have been down, and at times injured, Roethlisberger has been terrible. His passer ratings is in the 70s, and he's never had a season over 100, even the season he won his first 11 games. Do I think he'll be good? I sure do. But has he been that much better than Eli in the pressure cooker known has Pittsburgh? Better yes, that much? Not really.
Go back in history and remember the Cowboys. Remember Troy Aikman. His first 3-4 seasons were absolutely HORRIBLE. His numbers do not compare to any of these players. Yet he turned out to be pretty good. He too was the product of a great surrounding cast, but was also one of the most accurate passers you'll ever seen. Regardless, he sucked bigtime in the beginning.
Now to the Giants, they have been a joke. Their best WR is lazy, and doesn't run routes well at all, which to me seems to explain some of Eli's woes. His TE, he too has attitude problems. His RB, he hasn't showed up every game, and when he doesn't get the ball he takes it straight to the media. Toomer, well he got hurt. But when he played Eli was a lot better. He's a professional who ran his routes well. Currently that does not exist on the Giants. Get this guy a fast, sharp, route-runner like a Harrison, Wayne, Glenn, Holt, Galloway, Jackson, Johnson, Johnson. Not some guy who makes plays by jumping in the air, and that's it.
I'm not going to sit here and say Eli Manning is amazing right now, but I still maintain that he's going to be damn good. He needs a different cast than the one he has right now. Every Giants game shouldn't be a comeback, or come from behind. This team never wins with defense. This guy needs a different cast. But if the Giants choose to let him go, it will be a mistake. If he goes somewhere else he will have a big future. I just hope the Giants, in the year of Ernie Acorsi's departure, decide this guy is worth it, cause he is.
Fire Coughlin now. You should be investing in the player, not the coach who has never proven that much.
First off, Manning has sucked this season, no question. The first half was clearly better than the second, but overall, he has been nervous in the pocket, and it has showed. This Giants team is not great, but they're clearly better than how they've played. Is that Manning's fault? Somewhat. But it's equally the fault of the coaches, and the players who continue to make bonehead plays.
Ever since Amani Toomer injured himself the Giants have gone downhill. Not only on the field, but in the media too. It didn't help that Michael Strahan, another team leader, got hurt as well. Plus, Tiki Barber's self-agrandizing retirement had an affect on this team as well. These guys were celebrating his career as if he was Emmitt Smith, and the Giants were on their way to giving him a title. It was embarrassing. But with regards to Eli, he has not been good.
What, or who, are we comparing Eli to? Is he being compared to Peyton Manning? Philip Rivers? Ben Roethlisberger? Last season? Whatever it is, the comparisons have been overstated, and unfair.
Unfortunately for Eli, he raised the bar last year, orchestrating many comebacks, which led fans to think this year was going to be even better. Remember, last year people (like me) were saying he's better than Peyton! Sure, Peyton had gaudier stats, but never seemed to win a big game. It seemed Eli was going to be the big game winner. But again, he has fallen on hard times.
So you want to compare him to his brother? That's ridiculous. His brother is obviously great, confident, and his team is LOADED. Plus, Peyton started in Indianapolis, not New York City. Hardly a pressure cooker.
Maybe you want to compare him to Rivers. Has Rivers been better than him? This season, at times. And he has had 2 full seasons to learn the game. Sure, the argument could be made that hurts, but the opposite argument could also be made.
If you watched Rivers last night, or even in recent weeks, you'd have to say the guy has been average. He has the best RB in the league, a great line, the best fullback, the best TE, and yet he has been average. Similar to Big Ben, Rivers' job is to not lose the game. Tomlinson wins the games. Compared to Eli, he has not been great, playing in another pressure cooker: San Diego. Rivers will be very good, but he has not been better than Eli over 2 seasons.
So we'll compare him to Big Ben, the guy who won the Superbowl. Once again, a guy asked to not lose the game for Pittsburgh, playing behind a great line, defense, and running game. Pittsburgh didn't win the Superbowl because of Big Ben. He just made sure they didn't lose it. Not saying that's easy, but Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson both did that. This season, while the Steelers have been down, and at times injured, Roethlisberger has been terrible. His passer ratings is in the 70s, and he's never had a season over 100, even the season he won his first 11 games. Do I think he'll be good? I sure do. But has he been that much better than Eli in the pressure cooker known has Pittsburgh? Better yes, that much? Not really.
Go back in history and remember the Cowboys. Remember Troy Aikman. His first 3-4 seasons were absolutely HORRIBLE. His numbers do not compare to any of these players. Yet he turned out to be pretty good. He too was the product of a great surrounding cast, but was also one of the most accurate passers you'll ever seen. Regardless, he sucked bigtime in the beginning.
Now to the Giants, they have been a joke. Their best WR is lazy, and doesn't run routes well at all, which to me seems to explain some of Eli's woes. His TE, he too has attitude problems. His RB, he hasn't showed up every game, and when he doesn't get the ball he takes it straight to the media. Toomer, well he got hurt. But when he played Eli was a lot better. He's a professional who ran his routes well. Currently that does not exist on the Giants. Get this guy a fast, sharp, route-runner like a Harrison, Wayne, Glenn, Holt, Galloway, Jackson, Johnson, Johnson. Not some guy who makes plays by jumping in the air, and that's it.
I'm not going to sit here and say Eli Manning is amazing right now, but I still maintain that he's going to be damn good. He needs a different cast than the one he has right now. Every Giants game shouldn't be a comeback, or come from behind. This team never wins with defense. This guy needs a different cast. But if the Giants choose to let him go, it will be a mistake. If he goes somewhere else he will have a big future. I just hope the Giants, in the year of Ernie Acorsi's departure, decide this guy is worth it, cause he is.
Fire Coughlin now. You should be investing in the player, not the coach who has never proven that much.
Hey, Check This Out
Dear World,
Please stop sending YouTube links to all your friends, and please stop posting them on countless message boards without a description of what the hilarious, unreal, unbelievable, funny, ridiculous and crazy link is. Please.
Below Me
Please stop sending YouTube links to all your friends, and please stop posting them on countless message boards without a description of what the hilarious, unreal, unbelievable, funny, ridiculous and crazy link is. Please.
Below Me
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
