Na Na Na Na, Na Na Na Na, Hey Hey Hey, Goodbye!

No, this isn't my second Hariet Miers post in a row. Rather it is to bid farewell to another baseball season and a begrudging salute to the Chicago White Sox, who traditionally sing the song to opponents when a pitcher is removed or the Sox are victorious. The White Sox had a magical year where everything went well. All their starting pitchers were healthy throughout the season, and other than a fading Frank Thomas, most of the position players were healthy. In addition to being healthy, most everyone on the squad put up numbers that were at or above expectations. Credit goes to GM Kenny Williams who assembled a squad that had all the elements of a good team: a deep, quality starting pitching staff; live arms in the bullpen blending youth and experience; speed at the top of the lineup; plenty of home run power; excellent defense; execution of the fundamentals of the game; and an overall high level of athleticism on the squad. As a Cubs fan I can only hope that perhaps next year is our turn (The Red Sox had the third longest drought and won last year, the White Sox and the second longest and won this year). However, I am not counting on it unless the team gets another starter, middle relief help, and (most importantly) a leadoff hitter and some hitters at the top of the lineup who will consistently get on base for Derrek Lee and Aramis Ramirez. Yep, I'm already waiting 'till next year.

Pragmatic Politicians

The nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court has once again shown that politicians, including this White House, are generally pragmatists when it comes to the means by which they attempt to reach their goals. Ms. Miers is being marketed to Christians as an opponent of Roe v. Wade (I hope that she is) while at the same time others supportive of abortion are told that what she believes or her personal position does not necessarily provide proof on how she would render judgment in an abortion case. This is at odds with the obvious implication to Christians--that Ms. Miers' beliefs are an indicator of how she will decide a case. What does this mean? Well, the obvious--that a person had better listen to all the pronouncements that a politician makes upon a subject in attempting to discern what that person's position is on a matter. A good rule of thumb is that if a person is willing to say something to a group that he knows those listening will disagree with him on, then you have found that person's true position. If the person is unwilling to make the statement in front of certain audiences, then it is not among that person's deepest principles or beliefs.

Additionally, a politician is generally willing to state his core goals in front of any audience. For instance, George W. Bush is willing to state his policies regarding the War on Terror in unambiguous terms at any time. This indicates that this is a primary focus for him personally and his beliefs are deeply held. If President Bush soft pedaled his presentation for certain audiences or circumstances, then it would show that his position is either subject to change, or that certain of his statements on the matter are a means to a different end. The fact that this administration provides contrary arguments regarding the abortion issue with Ms. Miers is a strategic decision to get her confirmed to the court. Which indicates to me that in the Administration's eyes the abortion issue is not the primary reason why Harriet Miers should be on the court. Which is why when I watch her confirmation hearings, I am going to be looking for exactly why the administration wants her on the bench.

Return of the Web Log

After a two month hiatus brought on by a busy time at work, my blog will again be active and hopefully worth reading. I can promise you plenty of posts in the upcoming weeks. Whether that is a promise or a threat probably depends on how you view this blog!