Another one Bites the Dust

My beloved Hoosiers are falling flat on their collective face. They have played a total of four quality opponents this season. Their record against those teams is 1-4, and the more the season goes on the less convinced I am of Southern Illinois’ quality. In consecutive games against UCONN and Wisconsin the Hoosiers have been outed. They are an overrated team with talented players who do not know how to respond to being punched in the mouth. Had Wisconsin not fallen asleep for five minutes tonight and allowed the 17-2 run that gave IU some life, this game would have been even more embarrassing from a final score point of view.

Eric Gordon needs to be more consistent from the opening tip to the final whistle. Terry Hutchens writes:

The freshman finished with 16 points in Thursday’s 62-49 loss at Wisconsin, but 12 came in the final 13 minutes after the Badgers had built a 20-point lead. In the first 28 minutes, Gordon missed 5-of-7 shots, including four 3-pointers. Coupled with Saturday’s performance against Connecticut, Gordon had a stretch of 64 minutes in which he made 7-of-23 shots, including 1-of-9 3-pointers.

 I hope this team get its act together soon. This IU fan is badly in need of a conference title – regular season and tournament. It’s been a long drought!

Do You Wonder How They’re Doing?

My beloved Hoosiers are enjoying a decent season; even though they were humbled on Saturday by Connecticut, and earlier in the season by Xavier. The encouraging aspect of the 2008 team is the depth and breadth of talent. The talent is headlined by freshman Eric Gordon and senior DJ White, but the talent pool goes well beyond them this year.

Still, do you ever find yourself wondering how the team would be doing if ________ was still wearing the Crimson & Cream?

Hoosier Insider Terry Hutchens has posted an update on the whereabouts and goings-on of six former Hoosiers who could still be warming up in the candy-striped pants if they had stayed. The post’s title is Whatever Happened to…?; here is the list of players:

1. Joey Shaw
2. Xavier Keeling
3. Ben Allen
4. Robert Vaden
5. Patrick Ewing, Jr
6. Cem Dinc

It’s an interesting and brief post, which any IU fan would find worthwhile. Of the above six names the only two I miss are Joey Shaw and Patrick Ewing, Jr. They are both tall, athletic players who would bring diversity and balance to the team. I especially miss Ewing, and I have always believed that one of Davis’ biggest mistakes was not using that young man more often.

Still Under Construction

In November of last year I published a post concerning IU’s basketball squad to this blog entitled “Under Construction”. As Saturday’s poor showing would indicate this team is still under construction. IU was out-played, out-hustled, and out-muscled on their home floor in front of a capacity crowd and a national audience. The Huskies were without two players, including a starting guard. One of the most telling stats from the game is this: the Huskies had a 34-16 scoring edge in the paint and a 44-28 advantage in rebounds. The final score of 68-63 is misleading. This game wasn’t close after halftime. The Hoosiers abysmal strength of schedule ranking – 159- was in evidence as the Big East battle tested Huskies slapped down the Hoosiers  in their own house. Scheduling the Longwood Lancers and teams of that caliber may help Sampson accrure an easy 20 win season, but it doesn’t help prepare the team for NCAA play; especially given the weakness of the Big Ten.

EJ and DJ have had fine seasons thus far, but that has been at the expense of inferior opponents. Both will be gone to the NBA next season, but neither, especially Gordon, has been consistently dominant. You expect consistent dominance from players of their caliber.

IU has proven that they are not a top 10 team. They have defeated one quality opponent – Southern Illinois – and this is a down year for the Salukis. Hopefully the team will continue to mature and gain some toughness before the Big 10  and NCAA Tournaments.

Terry Hutchens has written an accurate and articulate article on IU’s season thus far. If you’re interested in my beloved Hoosiers click here.

Cartoons for Your Weekend

Today I begin a new weekend feature. I’ll post several of my favorite political cartoons from the past week. As far as I’m concerned the top political cartoonist is the Indy Star’s own Gary Varvel. I also enjoy Michael Ramirez’ work quite a bit. Their cartoons will dominate this new series, but you will find other gems as well.

Noonan Nails it Again

Peggy Noonan is one of my favorite political observers and commentators. I also enjoyed her book on Ronald Reagan – When Character Was King – and I gladly recommend it to you, dear reader. Noonan’s Wall Street Journal column is a must read of mine, and today’s was another stellar piece of journalism.

Breaking Up is Hard to Do succinctly dissects the fissures in the Democratic party and in the Grand Ole Party. The Clinton political machine is in full throttle. In fact, former Presdent Clinton is attempting to throttle anyone – Obama, journalists, anyone – who dares criticize his wife. I waxed nostalgic this week when I read of Mr. Clinton accused Senator Obama of “put[ting] a hit job on me.” Didn’t he say something similar to Chris Wallace on a Fox News Sunday broadcast? I believe he said, “So you did Fox’s bidding on this show. You did your nice little conservative hit job on me.” (click here if you want to read the transcript of that show).

I guess everyone wants to do “a hit job” on the Clintons; conservatives and liberals alike. Or maybe, just maybe, everyone is accurately calling in to question lame policies and/or proposals by the Clintons, and instead of answering the questions in a manner befitting a former President of the United States Mr. Clinton resorts to playground banter.

In her column Noonan quotes William Greider of the liberal magazine The Nation:

The Clintons are “high minded” on the surface but “smarmily duplicitous underneath, meanwhile jabbing hard at the groin area. They are a slippery pair and come as a package. The nation is at fair risk of getting them back in the White House for four years.”

That, again, is from one of the premier liberal journals in the United States. It is exactly what conservatives have been saying for a decade. This may mark a certain coming together of the thoughtful on both sides. The Clintons, uniters at last.

What about the GOP? Noonan speaks to the lack of unity within the Grand Ole Party. She rightly labeled Rush Limbaugh’s assertion that “if either of these two guys [Mr. McCain or Mike Huckabee] get the nomination, it’s going to destroy the Republican Party. It’s going to change it forever, be the end of it!” as “absurd”. (Of course, in my opinion much of Rush’s comments are absurd.) She had more stinging, but truthful, comments for conservatives.

Noonan flatly states that

George W. Bush destroyed the Republican Party, by which I mean he sundered it, broke its constituent pieces apart and set them against each other. He did this on spending, the size of government, war, the ability to prosecute war, immigration and other issues.

I’m afraid that she is right. There is much that I admire about President Bush, and his years of leadership have been some of the most difficult since the second World War. Still, the lack of cohesion in the GOP is due to his Presidency, and it is not surprising that the GOP candidates rarely identify with the sitting President.

European Court More Liberal than France?!

I was surprised by this report from the BBC today…

France chided over gay adoption The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that France discriminated against a lesbian nursery school teacher by refusing to let her adopt a child.

I was surprised that judicial bodies exist which are more liberal than those in France. My astonishment, I must admit, is borne out of an ignorance of French court rulings and procedures. I neither follow or know how French courts actually rule on any case. I assume that France is far to the left of the United States; as scary as that thought is. That assumption is a fair one.

By a 10 – 7 vote the European court ruled that the lesbian’s…

right to family life under the European Convention on Human Rights had been infringed

France was directed to pay damages – $14, 522 (10,000 Euros) and costs $21, 062 (14,528 euros). According to the BBC report, the European court…

criticised the French judiciary’s emphasis on “the lack of a paternal referent in the household”

Everyone knows that a father is not necessary for the healthy nurture and rearing of a child!

Seriously, I’m not sure what leaves me scratching my head the most.

1. The fact that France can actually be conservative on  some issues.
2. The fact that France has abrogated its sovereignty to a European court system.
3. The fact that this court finds the assertion that a “paternal referent”in a household is not necessary for the raising of children.
4. The fact that the US economy is bad. (That $ to euro exchange rate is awful!)

Typical Krap…er…I Mean Kravitz

Tony Dungy is a hypocrite. At least Indianapolis Star sports columnist Bob Kravitz thinks he is. As everyone who follows sports is well aware, Tony Dungy has spent the past week deciding whether or not he would return for a seventh season as coach of the Indianapolis Colts. The waiting is over, and Dungy has decided to lead the Colts in 2008. According to Bob Kravitz that decision clearly indicates Dungy’s hypocrisy. Kravitz writes:

I think that by returning to the Colts, and doing so after his entire family moved out of Indianapolis and back to Tampa, Fla., for reasons he prefers remain private, Dungy has revealed himself as something of a hypocrite.

Tony Dungy is a man who has earned universal respect from all quarters during his professional career. I do not personally know the man, but I have read about him, read his book Quiet Strength, and I do personally know people who have been impacted by this man of faith and integrity. Kravitz is much more aware of Dungy’s integrity than I, because he is in a position to observe and interact with Dungy. In spite of six years of close contact with Dungy, Kravitz still believes that this one decision provides enough ammunition to label the man a hypocrite.

Kravitz continues:

Again, I’m uncomfortable. I’m uncomfortable about passing judgment on anybody or anything deeper than a decision to punt on fourth-and-2. I’m especially loath to pass judgment on the way another man handles his personal business. But…

…I’m going to anyway. That’s not what he said, but just what he did.

Evidently Kravitz is much more comfortable calling Dungy a hypocrite than he would have us believe. Kravtiz could have easily written a column in which he expressed his confusion of Dungy’s decision, and he could have done so without impugning the man’s character. I’ll admit that I would not want to live in separate cities from Dianna and the boys, but I also don’t know what’s like to commute back and forth on the Irsay private jet. Here is what I do know: Dungy has earned the benefit of the doubt.

Dungy has also earned more respect that Kravitz has given. Before the start of the 2006 season Kravitz wrote that Dungy should be securely strapped into the hot seat; that is the Colts failed to win the Super Bowl he should be fired. He also predicted that Dungy’s book – Quiet Strength – would be a flop. And he prophesied that Dungy would retire after his son’s suicide.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

Kravitz’ article was a hatchet job.  Read this article by ESPN’s Len Pasquarelli or this article by AP sports writer Michael Marot for a less falacious commentary on Dungy’s decision.

Support Huckabee

I know.

I have not posted anything since the middle of December. There are times when i just am unable to devote time to the blogosphere; at least to writing in the blogosphere. Honestly, right now is also such a time, but I need to post something. After all, it’s January 17.

This brief post will provide some supplemental support as to why I endorse Mike Huckabee. Philip duBarry, my good friend, fellow blogger, and brother in the faith, has repeatedly written at his blog – Doses of Huckabee Criticism…er…I mean Doses of Reality – that Huckabee is a pro-life liberal. (You may be thinking, “Isn’t that what Fred Thompson has been saying?” The answer is yes, and Philip – being a Tennessean – is a Fred Head.) Philip cannot fathom why…

perfectly normal people, people who I respect and admire, be suddenly ditching their core conservative principles (or what I thought were their core conservative principles) to support a silver-tongued populist

As if only the abnormal should endorse Mike Huckabee. That post addresses Rush Limbaugh’s criticism of Huckabee’s conservative credentials. Of course, that only solidifies my support for Huck. I am never one to publicly admit that I agree with Rush, Coulter, Hannity, or Cunningham (those not from the Cincinnati area are asking “Who?”). Those four and their many clones are annoying, egomaniacal talking heads. It’s embarrassing that there are so many of their ilk who are conservatives. When I initially agree with their positions I always take a hard second and third look.

Joe Carter of Evangelical Outpost responded to the Rush rant, and you can read it here. You will also find a host of posts that defend Huckabee’s conservative status. This is the first of the supplemental supports that I mentioned.

The second comes from one of my favorite preachers – Hershael York. I have never met Dr. York, but I have listened to him preach via the SBTS website, and I read his blog. He posts more sporadically than do I, but he did post twice yesterday; both had a political bent. Dr. York was a guest on NPR’s program Tell Me More and in that piece he announced his support of Mike Huckabee and gave solid reasons why. Reasons which I share as well. Follow this link to listen to the NPR segment. (I am an NPR listener as opposed to Limbaugh, Hannity, G. Gordon Liddy, etc.)

Please read and listen to the linked material if you want to engage in any dialogue. I will quickly comment on a couple of questions and answers from the NPR piece.

The host, Michel Martin, asked Dr. York “When did low taxes become an evangelical issue? Why theologically has that been an evangelical issue?” (beginning at 4:42 of the interview) I believe that is a fair question, and I really appreciate how Dr. York answered. He said that if you begin with a “pro-family outlook…a family needs what it earns in order to make it…you will want to protect that family’s capital”. That is true, but his answer only gets better. He said, “The issue [to me] is not how much taxes we pay but what are our taxes going to accomplish?” Taxes are not going away; regardless of who is in the White House. How many billions of dollars has Republican President Bush spent?

I loathe taxes, but I appreciate (most) of the services that my tax dollars fund. I understand that taxes will ever and always be a part of my existence, but I would rather have those tax dollars used in an intelligent and meaningful manner.

There is much more than can, and perhaps will be, said on this topic, but I have used all the time that I’ve allotted myself this morning.

Go ahead and read/listen to the linked material. It’ll do you good.