Thursday, October 19, 2006

Middle Class America

The middle class is a purposeful construct, a buffer keeping the poor from the throats of the rich. The continued destruction of the middle class will result in class warfare, social strife, social revolution in our country, if the trend is not reversed

My thoughts in regards to the above quote:

The quote is right on the money, no pun intended, because the middle class is becoming obsolete. The poor get to be supported by government funding and or get government breaks all the while the rich just keep raking in money. I am not going to throw out the "it's not fair" card because life isn't about fairness or a level playing field, but in this case it really isn't fair. It almost seems more worthwhile to become poor to gain access to all of those wonderful programs that assist low-income families.

A classless society would not be the utopia that everyone desires, but the problem is that our social system is headed towards a serious backlash similar to what happened to the USSR in the late 80's/early 90's; so we are looking at a pretty terrible situation anyway. This may not happen tomorrow, I am not saying that, but I do think that it will happen eventually.

A great point that proves that the middle class is being essentially "squished" by the two other classes is the rising costs of colleges and universities. I know I use this as an example often, but the reason I do is because the rich will always be able to pay for college and the poor will always be able to qualify for government aid and financial aid. However, a vast majority of the middle class falls within that range where they don't really qualify for much at all, but they don't really have the money to outright pay for college either. The problem is that college and universities plug you and your parents into an equation with minimal factors involved and quite literally compute you into a number and if that number is above their minimal financial aid number then you wont qualify for aid; maybe a little, but certainly not enough.

Another example would be the rise of inflated costs vs. the average wage. The wages do not increase with inflation, which makes your money deteriorate more and more with each percent of inflation.

The middle class will eventually cease.

There are things that can be done, but the government is all composed of the rich, so they dont care and arent going to jump to their feet to do anything.

Monday, October 16, 2006

If They Dont Want To Play, GET RID OF THEM!

I dont know what the deal is with most teams in the NFL today, but it amazes me that these teams feel the need to hang onto players who obviously don't want to be there. Now, I am all for players owning up to the contract that they signed, but I do think that the players deserve the option to leave if they feel that they need to; especially because in the NFL, 99% of the contracts are not guaranteed to any player. How do you think most teams can afford such high payrolls?

I dont think that players should just be able to opt out of playing for a team if the team is no good because I am a believer in that old school leadership. You don't see Brett Favre requesting to be traded from Green Bay and he has hardly ANY team around him whatsoever. He had the worst year of his career last year, but he still went out there every week and gave it his all and I believe that he (as well as Green Bay) are better for it.

Deion Branch was a special case this summer because he wanted to re-work his contract and New England didnt want to re-work his contract, so he chose to opt out until they traded him or re-worked the contract. The squeaky wheel gets the oil and shortly after the season started Branch was traded to Seattle.

My reason for writing this piece is because of the situation in Oakland right now with receivers Jerry Porter and Randy Moss. Let me first start off by saying that Al Davis is a terrible owner and whoever is in charge of player personell and offensive play calling needs to be shot. Why in the world you would bring in Aaron Brooks and expect his inability to make good decisions EVER to make your team better? In fact, Brook's only consistent aspect of being a QB in the NFL is his ability to make ridiculous decisions when pressured that usually ends up in the hands of the opposing defense or if he's lucky, an incomplete pass.

Jerry Porter hasn't played a down all season and now is suspended by Art Shell indefinitely. Jerry Porter requested a trade at the beginning of the season and nothing has come of it yet. So, what does he do? He becomes a problem and causes drama because he wants out! He doesn't want to play in Oakland anymore. What does Oakland do? Nothing. They keep him there and let him become a problem and then fine him and suspend him.

Randy Moss will still play for this team, but they have got to involve him in the game more. Whoever is calling the plays should have three sets of plays.

1. Run plays for Lamont Jordan
2. Pass plays to Randy Moss
3. Run/pass plays to everyone else if need be

That is how they would win ball games, but unfortunately they aren't doing that at all so why should one of the best receivers in the game not be frustrated?

Here is what I think should happen and why.

First of all Randy Moss has been in the league for 9 years and Jerry Porter has been in the league for 7 years. That is a significant piece of their NFL career that they cannot get back and neither of them has won a championship and it doesn't look like the Raiders are going to make a run for the Super Bowl any time soon. If they are lucky they will have 5-6 more years left in the league and that is not a lot of time for an NFL player because they could suffer a career ending injury at any point in practice or in a game.


They could absolutely get at the minimum a 1st round pick for both of those receivers and there are a lot of teams right now that could use a big play receiver (New England, Miami, New Orleans, San Francisco, San Diego, Kansas City, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, Tennesee, Jacksonville, Baltimore, etc). Out of those teams I mentioned 7 of them are serious playoff contenders and 4 of them are Super Bowl contenders.

The main reason I say trade them both is because you need team unity above all else. Losing game after game is hard enough on a team, but having two of your best players being disruptive and causing preventable drama just brings the team down even more (Look at Philly last year with TO). I am not saying that Porter or Moss are as bad as TO, he is on a level by himself, but I am saying that trading these two guys for two top picks in the draft or maybe another top guy that you can use to replace them is not a bad idea if it will help your stagnate team mesh better. Any team that gets to the playoffs and goes to the Super Bowl is a team that plays well together and has a bond and a unity that is unlike any other. That is when teams can start to really shine and that is what I think one of the biggest problems in Oakland is.

Get rid of Jerry Porter and then get rid of Randy Moss if he wants out. Something has to be done there and there are a lot of other teams out there who are just waiting for someone of their caliber.

Thursday, October 05, 2006

New One Soon

I am in the process of working on a new blog. Please stay tuned...have a few drinks and chill out.

In the meantime, check out The Rev. Fred Phelps here at

He is, unintentionally, one of the funniest people that I have ever seen/heard/or read about.

What a fucking loon!