Saturday, December 6, 2008

"The Insidious Corruption of Beats," Wasserman 1/8/07

By Edward Wasserman

"If you deliberately set out to invent an arrangement
  • it would be hard to beat beats.
And indeed, bird-dogging the powerful wasn’t the reason the beat system arose in the late 19th century. Instead, beats solved two problems:
  • Ensuring reliable conduits for official information to flow from leading institutions of government and business, and establishing low-cost sources of raw news for the burgeoning, mass-circulation press. Under the beat system,
Note that as a justification for beats, the notion that good coverage required specialized expertise came only later. What came first was the wish for a stable network of cooperative relationships, which would work to the advantage of the subjects of coverage, news organizations and, to some degree, the public.
  • the beat system.
The wisdom of beats rests on the idea that journalism can flourish in a setting where a journalist’s professional success utterly depends on the continuing cooperation of the same people that the journalist is supposed to badger, provoke, expose and, in sum, hold accountable on the public’s behalf. And that is totally illogical.
  • ************
  • "The reporter had a question. A colleague on the police beat had learned of minor wrongdoing involving town cops. But publishing a story on it would come at the cost of the reporter’s continued access to valuable sources within the police department. Worse, she said, her state’s law allows police to withhold practically all information about investigations that haven’t brought arrests.
“This means that reporters have to keep up a good relationship with officers in order to get anything on unsolved crimes, no matter how small or how serious,” she said in her posting to the online ethics site I participate in.
So the reporter faced a choice: She could sit on a perfectly newsworthy story that would embarrass the sources she relies on, or she could write it and sacrifice her future effectiveness as a police reporter.

It’s a conundrum, but it’s more than an occasional problem for a small-town paper. In fact, this conflict has been institutionalized into a routine reality traditional journalists face, thanks to the near-universal adoption of a particular way of organizing newsrooms.
  • Here I’m talking about beats.
Under the beat system, reporters are assigned specific subject areas and, more to the point, responsibility to cover the public or private institutions that dominate them.
  • The upside of the beat system is clear. It encourages journalists to develop pockets of expertise so they can report knowledgeably on topics that require focus and specialization to understand.
But the beat system also requires reporters to get to know the people who control the information their coverage depends on, so they can call on those sources and rely on them.

And here’s where the problems begin. The reporter’s success in covering his or her beat depends on the cooperation of the people being covered and not just their cooperation, but their good will.
  • If you deliberately set out to invent an arrangement less conducive to tough, adversarial reporting, it would be hard to beat beats.
And indeed,bird-dogging the powerful wasn’t the reason the beat system arose in the late 19th century.
  • Instead, beats solved two problems: Ensuring reliable conduits for official information to flow from leading institutions of government and business, and establishing low-cost sources of raw news for the burgeoning, mass-circulation press.
Under the beat system,
Note that as a justification for beats, the notion that good coverage required specialized expertise came only later. What came first was the wish for a stable network of cooperative relationships, which would work to the advantage of the subjects of coverage, news organizations and, to some degree, the public.

I may be alone in saying this, but of all the improper influences on the flow of publicly significant news
  • from commercialism to deliberate disinformation the one that is
  • the beat system.
The wisdom of beats rests on the idea that journalism can flourish in a setting where a journalist’s professional success utterly depends on the continuing cooperation of the same people that the journalist is supposed to badger, provoke, expose and, in sum, hold accountable on the public’s behalf. And that is totally illogical.
the miracle is that journalists are ever tough and courageous, that beat reporters do defy their sources. But that’s a mark of their own guts and ethical maturity,
Would journalism suffer if beats were abandoned? Running a staff would be harder, but life could get interesting. Time and again great stories have been broken by outsiders with clear eyes, who owe nothing to those who feed and water the beat reporters. Watergate didn’t come out of the Washington Post’s political staff, the My Lai massacre wasn’t uncovered by a Pentagon correspondent, and the White House press corps was complicit in the disinformation campaign leading up the Iraq invasion.
  • Beats have got to go.
Fortunately, they are going, and while Internet scribes have areas of interest and expertise, they have so far resisted institutionalizing themselves in the sclerotic fashion of traditional news media. Reporters can be smart and informed,

Monday, November 24, 2008

Is liberal media about to be balanced? Not likely.

"Wouldn't the Fairness Doctrine bring greater balance to a broadcast media that is heavily dominated

  • Not likely.

commentators who have an overt point of view. Worst of all, the doctrine would be applied on a case-by-case basis, giving Obama's FCC the power to determine which speech should be suppressed.

The doctrine is even more blatantly unconstitutional today than it was when the FCC repealed it 21 years ago. Whatever the vitality of the Red Lion rationale in 1969, the advent of the Internet along with other technological advances have rendered the notion of spectrum scarcity utterly obsolete.

A president-elect who owes his record-breaking fundraising and electoral victory in large measure to new forms of communication cannot plausibly justify censorship of traditional media outlets." via Radio Daily News

  • ('Localism' is another avenue Oby could explore). sm

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

MLB Green Advisory from NRDC recommending 'carbon offset' purchases

  • "NY Mets/ Transportation/ Carbon offsets for transportation

Your team may want to consider reducing the net carbon emissions associated with its transportation needs by purchasing carbon offsets.

  • When your team buys a carbon offset, it is investing in a project – such as new renewable energy projects –
  • that will yield a measurable reduction in future greenhouse gas emissions.

You may also wish to suggest similar programs to the bus, truck, car, and rental companies with which you do business.

However, carbon offsets should not be the first option when attempting to improve the environmental profile of your transportation. Before purchasing offsets, consider implementing other initiatives to promote environmentally superior forms of transportation such as walking, bicycling, public transportation, car pools, and the use of high fuel-efficiency vehicles.

Green-e and the California Climate Action Registry have recently launched certification programs to ensure the environmental quality of carbon offsets. We recommend offsets that meet the Green-e Climate Protocol for Renewable Energy and any of the Climate Action Reserve protocols. However, it is still useful to ask providers what type of projects they invest in, how they ensure that these investments deliver additional environmental benefits, and whether the projects have negative environmental impacts.

Calculate your carbon emissions

What are Carbon Offsets?

Greenhouse gas offsets are investments in projects that avoid, capture or sequester emissions of greenhouse gasses.

  • renewable energy projects, such as solar and wind power, and the capture of methane at agricultural or waste facilities.
Environmental Benefits

It is sometimes not possible to bike to work or ride public transportation every day. And while hybrid cars are more fuel efficient than the average car, they still run partially on gasoline and therefore emit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

"Additional Resources
Green-e Climate standard
EPA's Carbon Calculator
Clean Air, Cool Planet: Consumer’s Guide to Retail Carbon Offset Providers

The NRDC Greening Advisor™ for Major League Baseball © 2008. All rights reserved.

Questions or comments?
Contact "

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

TV station said to tailor news programs for sponsors

(LA Times) "A television news director who was fired by Univision Communications Inc. last year for allegedly slanting the news fired back Monday, contending in a lawsuit that company executives shaped stories to woo advertisers.
  • Jorge Mettey served for five years as the influential news director of Univision's flagship KMEX-TV Channel 34, which is Los Angeles' top-rated station. He was ousted in April 2007 after the company determined that he breached ethics policies in directing news coverage.
The suit, filed in federal court in Santa Ana,claims that Mettey was fired after he refused to go along with Univision's alleged practice of tailoring news coverage for some advertising sponsors.

"During his employment, Mettey encountered problems with Univision's desired method of conducting business, specifically the sale of news content
  • An advertiser's logo sometimes would be displayed during an interview,
  • or a company's name might be mentioned "to millions of television viewers even though the story may not have been newsworthy," the suit contends. The suit does not cite specific examples.
  • The situation intensified in early 2007, after a group of investors acquired Univision in a $12.3-billion leveraged buyout, said Federico Sayre, an attorney for Mettey. "The pressure was on to increase advertising revenue in short fashion," Sayre said.
Univision dismissed Mettey's claims. "The suit has absolutely no merit," said general counsel Douglas Kranwinkle."

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Judge a person by his actions, not his words

"Veteran Sun-Sentinel reporter Mark Hollis is leaving the newspaper at the end of the month to take a job as communications director for

Before being transferred to the Sentinel's Palm Beach County office last year, Hollis had covered state politics in Tallahassee since 1994. He will begin his new job with the Democrats on December 1. He said he was approached by Barry Kling, staff director for the House Democratic Office, about the job and only formalized the hiring yesterday. During the process, he interviewed with House Minority Leader designate Franklin Sands, a rep from Weston. His salary will be $75,000."

Among comments to article:

"Sam the Sham says:

Big D says:
  • Anyone who couldn't recognize the Dem slant to this guys writing would have to be blind. He was already working for the Dems... the real news is that he will no longer have a paid job with the SS.

Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Today's media environment is not for cowards or girly-men, so just move along

"In a grim media-cultural environment, the temptation for American conservatism is to be seduced into becoming one of those We should have the fight about conservatism's future vigorously and openly — perhaps at Bud's Roadhouse out on Route 137 in lieu of All-Girl Mud-Wrestling Night."...

Saturday, November 1, 2008

US media sits on story of Obama letting his aunt live illegally off Boston taxpayers

  • Boston area slum director termed the aunt an 'exemplary' resident. In the Obama photo gallery she is next to his brother who lives in a hut for $12/ year. photo from
The Aunt has lived there for several years, yet
  • no one in the US media dared mention her.
  • Her story was uncovered by the London Times.

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Obama's Global Poverty Act- turns over American sweat to the UNITED NATIONS. IT'S NOT OBAMA THEY LIKE, it's your slave labor

This should be common knowledge by now, but somehow the media seems to have missed it.

  • "Obama's Global Poverty Act"

(May 20, 2008): "Even as a junior Senator, Obama has already tried to break the back of our economy by putting the entire planet on American welfare:

The Global Poverty Act (S.2433) would require the United States to spend $845 billion ($845,000,000,000.00) on welfare to third-world countries.
  • The foreign aid budget now stands at $300 billion; the Act would add the additional expenditure to the already huge amount allocated to assist the world.

From there it would grow, like all government programs.

As we have learned the hard way, welfare does not alleviate poverty; it subsidizes it. But the point isn't to give money to barefoot peasants,

The act also undermines American sovereignty by controlling how money expropriated from American taxpayers will be spent:

The bill requires the President: "acting through the Secretary of State, and in consultation with the heads of other appropriate departments and agencies of the United States Government,
United States and international nongovernmental organizations, civil society organizations, and other appropriate entities, shall develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further… the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal".
  • The "international organizations" and "international nongovernmental organizations" and "other appropriate entities" are of course
  • the United Nations; the same institution that has a record of
  • corruption, bad judgment and anti-Americanism.

The "Millennium Development Goal" is a communist doctrine — basically a blueprint for the

If control of this country is offered over to those who hate it, America will not survive. Our soldiers throughout the generations will have fought and died in vain if we let our enemies conquer us from within."

Sunday, October 26, 2008

Newspapers in the tank for fully realized, feminized, democrat

NEW YORK (Updated Sunday) "The Obama-Biden ticket maintains its strong lead in the race for daily newspaper endorsements, by
  • 160 to 59, an almost 3-1 margin
and an even wider spread in the circulation of those papers (see full tally below).
  • Obama's lopsided margin, including most of the major papers that have decided so far, is in stark contrast to John Kerry barely edging George W. Bush in endorsements in 2004 by 213 to 205."...
Here is proof, but no, no don't pay attention to it. These people are not to be questioned under any circumstances. By all means, resume your passivity. (sm)

Sunday, October 19, 2008

The hubris of politicians and back room deals. NY Mayor Michael Bloomberg must be stopped.

  • Bloomberg should be arrested for this and related acts in my opinion:

NEW YORK -- "Mayor Michael Bloomberg is strong-arming City Council members to support his plan to change the city's term-limits law so he can run again, the city comptroller said Sunday.

Comptroller William Thompson said some council members had been threatened with losing perks such as committee chairmanships or funding for programs in their districts. He did not say who they were.

"Undue pressure has been placed on them," Thompson said.

Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser said no inappropriate pressure was being applied.

"We're certainly making our case to members of the council and asking for their votes, but those allegations are untrue," Loeser said.

Bloomberg, a Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-independent, announced this month that he would aim to modify the city charter so he could seek a third term. Existing law limits city officeholders to two consecutive four-year terms, and he is set to leave office at the end of 2009.

The billionaire founder of the financial information company Bloomberg LP said he decided to pursue a third term because he believes his financial expertise is crucial during the economic crisis.

The City Council could vote on the term-limits proposal as early as this week.

Thompson, a Democrat who had been considered a likely mayoral candidate, said two public hearings last week were not enough to give New Yorkers a chance to air their views on the issue.

  • "This rush to judgment in a 2 1/2-week period of time is wrong," Thompson said.

The New York Times reported Friday that organizations that receive both city funds and grants from Bloomberg's personal giving have been asked to call undecided City Council members to make the case for a third term. Loeser told the newspaper the mayor was careful to keep his philanthropic giving separate from his management of the city."

Sunday, October 5, 2008

Intolerance for Republicans is socially acceptable prejudice

  • When I saw this article I thought of Neil Best-sadly:

"Before we sprain our shoulders patting ourselves on the back for our color-blind, bias-free selves, let's acknowledge that

  • certain prejudices are far from taboo. In fact, in some quarters
  • they are ascendant and celebrated.

I'm thinking of the overt, outrageous prejudice that infuses some of the contempt on the left for Palin. Scrape away the surface excuses and much of it is because she is a Republican. And an anti-abortion one at that. How dare she!

A celebrated retired journalist, a man I've long admired, was surprised when I told him I hadn't decided whom to vote for. "You're too smart to vote for John McCain," he said, thereby insulting 50 million Americans.

A well-to-do, middle-aged professional woman who identifies herself as very liberal casually declared at a recent social gathering that Palin was unqualified to be vice president. "Look at all those children; she would be neglecting them," the woman said, before adding she herself has five grown daughters.

I could hardly contain myself. "How," I managed to say relatively calmly, "would you feel if a man just said what you said?"

"Oh, I didn't mean anything; I was just thinking of the children," she said sheepishly.

Of course she was thinking of the children. And Jimmy the Greek was just talking history when he discussed slavery and black anatomy and Al Campanis was misunderstood when he said blacks lacked the "necessities" to be baseball executives.

George W. Bush appointed the first two black secretaries of state, but does anyone on the left regard him as a racial trailblazer? When I raised that question to another liberal, she dismissed the idea, saying Bush "never thought about race."

That exchange took place three years ago, but I still can't grasp her logic. How does she know what Bush thought? Why would it be more important than

  • what he does?

A similar blind spot toward the political "other" explains much of the contempt for Palin.

  • If she were a Democrat, her unusual life would be spun into a compelling narrative that would make her
  • the darling of the coastal elite.

How she's raising that lovely brood of kids, her care for that severely handicapped baby, her relationship with that rugged hubby who often cares for the kids and is part native, her unlikely rise through the political minefields, her tough knocks and gutsy performance on the national stage -

all would be testament to a breakthrough of historic proportions we would be ordered to celebrate in the name of

  • diversity and equality.

Yes, I know there are many legitimate reasons to vote against her and McCain. And I am not arguing for a second they should be supported, least of all because of her gender.

But couldn't we all at least acknowledge Palin's moment and what it means for America?

Apparently not. She must lose, the liberal narrative goes,

  • because she is unqualified, case closed.

Some day, we will look back with disgust at the abuse Palin has taken and wonder how it could happen in this great nation, circa 2008.


Friday, September 19, 2008

New York Daily News publisher hosts lunch for Fidel Castro with media elites

Thursday, September 18, 2008, the Publisher of the NY Daily News, Mortimer Zuckerman, hosted a luncheon in New York for brutal Cuban dictator Fidel Castro. Invited guests included numerous media elites. Zuckerman has pursued and spent hundreds of hours with the totalitarian ruler as he detailed in a 2006 article. Rush Limbaugh has an acquaintance who attended yesterday's luncheon which is how Limbaugh was able to mention its occasion on his radio program today.
  • Every person in Cuba is held prisoner by Castro, literally.
  • Having Fidel Castro as a personal hero would be fine if Zuckerman were in another line of work. It's not fine to idolize a pillar of state controlled media and censorship as a US major daily publisher.
  • The idea that any news or sports coverage in the paper is 'journalism' is imaginary.
  • Why are former Nazi supporters any worse than present day Fidel Castro supporters? (sm)

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Bankrupt Lehman Brothers lead alleged global warming deals

2/6/08 Reuters
Lehman Climate Policy Based on Erroneous Information Says Free Enterprise
Action Fund
(Ticker: FEAOX)

WASHINGTON, Feb. 6 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission denied a bid by Lehman Brothers to block shareholders from voting
on a global warming-related shareholder proposal from the Free Enterprise
Action Fund (Ticker: FEAOX).
"When a $34 billion company is touting misinformation as a basis for its
actions, it makes you wonder about the soundness of its business plan," Milloy
But the hockey stick graph was scientifically discredited long before Lehman
issued its February 2007 report.(2)

  • "As shareholders, we expect that management will undertake reasonable due diligence before undertaking action with corporate assets," said AFM's Tom Borelli. "Corporate action and statements based on erroneous information may
not be 'sustainable' for shareholders or the environment," Borelli added.
  • "Lehman Brothers should also be concerned about potential legal liability for false and misleading statements," said Milloy.
Based on the 2003 California case of Nike v. Kasky, citizens may sue
businesses over false or misleading statements.(3) The California Supreme
Court ruled that statements made on company websites are considered commercial
speech and therefore subjected to legal challenge.

"We think that Lehman is in way over its head when it comes to global warming
and that management is recklessly risking shareholder value," said Milloy.
"Shareholders will be looking for an explanation from CEO Richard Fuld at the
shareholders meeting."...


1. See Lehman's "The Business of Climate Change: Challenges and
Opportunities," p.6 (February 2007).

2. See e.g., U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, "Inhofe
Says NAS Report Reaffirms 'Hockey Stick' Is Broken" (June 22, 2006),

3. Kasky v. Nike, Inc., 27 Cal.4th 939, 947, 45 P.3d 243, 248, 119 Cal.Rptr.2d
296, 302 (Cal. 2002)

Friday, September 12, 2008


Tim Marchman, NY Sun, adds some context: 9/12/08: "What really matters, though, is that...this value derives from context, which is very different
  • from value deriving from innate excellence.
(Francisco) Rodriguez may have been wonderful in the clutch so far this year, but playing well in the clutch isn't really an inherent skill. Even if it were, it would be of dubious use —
  • without save chances to give him this October, for instance, even magic Rodriguez talents would do the Angels no good.
This last would be most worth keeping in mind for the Mets, or any other team tempted to solve a bullpen problem quickly this fall
  • as the best-paid reliever in baseball.
When a player's value depends on what happens around him, it's hard to say just what he's worth at all."
  • (Just as post season opportunities "penalize" those who don't have them (as the mafia pushes), regular season opportunities are
  • just as 'injurious' to players who simply
  • aren't lucky). sm

Sunday, September 7, 2008

Mayor Bloomberg secret meetings with media to 'clear a path' for third term- NY Times

NY Times, 8/22/08: "Even as he publicly remains coy about his political future, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has quietly approached some of the city’s most powerful media figures to assess
  • whether their publications would endorse a bid to overturn New York City’s term limits,
  • which could clear a path for him to run for re-election next year.
Over the last several weeks, Mr. Bloomberg has held confidential conversations with
  • Rupert Murdoch, chairman of the News Corporation, which owns The New York Post;
to gauge their views on the issue, according to people familiar with the talks.

Such a move would upend New York’s political world and be a dramatic reversal for the mayor.

  • He has voiced intense opposition in the past to making any changes to the term limits law, which restricts citywide elected officials and members of the City Council to two consecutive terms in office.

Given his popularity, a third-term campaign by Mr. Bloomberg could force mayoral hopefuls, like Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn, Representative Anthony D. Weiner and Comptroller William C. Thompson Jr., to rethink their plans.

New York voters passed term limits in 1993, and polls show they remain strongly in favor of them,

  • a major obstacle for any campaign by the mayor.

Mr. Bloomberg is trying to appeal to influential business leaders, especially in the news media,

  • to sway public opinion in his favor,
  • people familiar with the matter said.

Many of the city’s top business executives have privately said they are dissatisfied with the field of candidates who are likely to run for mayor next year, and are seeking a way to keep Mr. Bloomberg in office.

Mr. Bloomberg is hoping that

will back a campaign to ease the limits, giving him

  • some political cover in what would certainly be a contentious battle.

About a month ago, Mr. Bloomberg sounded out Mr. Murdoch at a dinner at a restaurant in downtown Manhattan about whether The Post might support an effort to overturn the city’s term limits law.

A person close to Mr. Zuckerman said he was open to the idea of a third term for Mr. Bloomberg, and suspected The Post and The Times would be, too.

Representatives of Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Sulzberger declined to comment, and a spokesman for Mr. Zuckerman could not be reached by phone.

  • A spokesman for the mayor, Stu Loeser, also declined to comment.

“We don’t discuss personal conversations the mayor may or may not have with people,” Mr. Loeser said in an e-mail message....

The mayor could pursue several avenues to overturn term limits, but the most likely is through the City Council, which can pass legislation permitting a third term with or without a public referendum, said Randy M. Mastro, the former deputy mayor for operations under Rudolph W. Giuliani and a lawyer who has tried cases dealing with term limits.

  • “That may have a certain political appeal to the mayor and City Council speaker,” Mr. Mastro said, “given that both face term limits.”

Of course a move by the City Council to ease or undo term limits — without ratification by voters

  • would be potentially politically explosive, and members of the Council could face a backlash if they supported it.

Another option for the mayor — a ballot initiative overturning term limits — would have to be completed in the next two weeks to be considered during this November’s election,

  • which Mr. Mastro said “cannot be accomplished” because of the time needed to collect signatures and overcome various legal hurdles.

Those familiar with the mayor’s overtures to the publishers said

  • that characterized his last push to revise the city’s election rules.

In 2003, the mayor tried to institute nonpartisan elections, spending millions of his own fortune to overturn the century-old system of Democratic- and Republican-dominated politics.

  • But editorials in The Times, The Post and Newsday urged people to vote against the plan, which they did, overwhelmingly,

in a stinging defeat for the mayor.

  • “He does not want to repeat that,” said a person familiar with the mayor’s thinking, who spoke on condition of anonymity....

The idea that Mr. Bloomberg may be seeking a way to serve another term has set off intense chatter among the city’s leading politicians. Asked by reporters on Friday, Gov. David A. Paterson enthusiastically endorsed it, saying the mayor had expertly handled the city’s economic challenges.

  • “So Mayor Bloomberg, if he wants to run for mayor a third time I think it’s a great idea,” said Mr. Paterson, a Harlem Democrat.

Of course, if the mayor decided to run again, it would eliminate him as a potential challenger

  • to Mr. Paterson for governor in 2010."

NY Times, 8/22/08, "Bloomberg said to test a term-limit reversal," by Michael Barbaro and Tim Arango

Sunday, August 24, 2008

Still selling the 'save' stat without context and meaning, 8/24/08

  • Remember this the next time a BBWAA voter says he thinks the save stat is overhyped. The following little statistical excision tells you next to nothing about the ability of the pitcher, in fact makes him sound a bit of a dingbat, but leaves one thinking the save stat (alone) must be completely autonomous and revelatory. They can't deny it--here are the words:
(N.J. Star-Ledger): "The first five Yankees pitchers allowed 14 hits, three homers and four walks before Mariano Rivera got the final four outs
So what? This little grouping of regular season total save stats alone is meaningless. It fails to mention crucial 'save opportunities,' inherited runners, multiple inning appearances, ERA, WHIP, K/BB, appearances where through no fault of his own the pitcher may have been given a "Win" or a no decision. And of course did the reliever enter with a 1, 2, or 3 run lead. The only possible point of this part of the article is to inflate the value of the isolated 'save stat' for a political view held by the writer.
  • In fact, only one day ago, the same writer extolled another meaningless excision of the "total save stat." Meaning, it meant nothing and was just an excuse to place an entirely different pitcher's name in the same sentence as Mariano Rivera and failed to mention post season appearances and numerous other variables. A favorite pastime of certain flawed individuals:
8/23/08, Ed Price, Star-Ledger:
  • (Note the popular reference to "all-time" as opposed to "national league all time," which in this context still doesn't convey an accurate image. Unless you're trying to elevate Hoffman and deflate Rivera):
(Price, Star-Ledger, 8/23/08): "Bruney, Jose Veras and Mariano Rivera finished up."
Again, so what? You're telling us nothing except a superficial excision that at best is misleading as to the accomplishment and ability of 2 pitchers. Their names should never appear in the same sentence.
  • No one cares about Hoffman except bullies, wimps, BBWAA voters, anyone working at ESPN/MLB and anyone aspiring to do so.
Update: In reference to Ed Price's amplified late report on the 8/24 game:
  • First for the record on Ivan Rodriguez' bad throw in the 9th inning allowing Brian Roberts to go from 1st to 3rd,
  • The throw was officially charged as an error to Rodriguez.
  • The NY Times described it as having been thrown both late and wildly,
  • making no mention of Derek Jeter's glove.
This is how Ed Price described it:
  • "After Rivera walked Brian Roberts with two out in the ninth,
  • Roberts stole second and went to third when the throw from catcher Ivan Rodriguez
  • But Rivera struck out Nick Markakis to end the game."...
Price leaves out the important fact that there was an error on the throw.
Price leaves out any reference to the throw being bad and that it was charged an error.
  • That's not all Price does. He says the runner went to third WHEN the throw from Rodriguez
Anyone relying on Ed Price would have no choice but to blame Jeter, and would have no idea Rodriguez made a late and wild throw judged an error.
  • Can you think of any reason a BBWAA voter would do something like this? As a point of information since we all like information, Ed Price has already achieved immortality via the name of Derek Jeter.
  • When Jeter was up for MVP in 2006, Ed Price was tapped as one of the 2 New York area voters.
  • Price did not give his #1 for Jeter.

Saturday, August 9, 2008

Postseason record must be included in Baseball Hall of Fame consideration

Failure to do so ignores the stated rules and begs the question, why would you want to cheat someone out of his career?
"Voting — Voting shall be based upon the
  • playing ability,
  • integrity,
  • sportsmanship,
  • character, and

As of 8/9/08, BBWAA website employee on Hall of Fame committee, 2007

(From National Baseball Hall of Fame press release, 11/8/07): "On the way to another Hall of Fame category, more BBWAA
  • entwinement with enshrinement.
The BBWAA Board of Directors appointed 11 of its members to what is called the "Historical Overview Committee." These 11 decided the 10 managers and umpires who would appear on the 2007 HOF ballot for that catergory.
Of the the 11 guys named in 2007 Jack O'Connell from is the one name on both the Historical Review committee and the final voting committee:
  • Dave Van Dyck (Chicago Tribune); Bob Elliott (Toronto Sun); Rick Hummel (St. Louis Post-Dispatch); Steve Hirdt (Elias Sports Bureau); Moss Klein (Newark Star-Ledger); Bill Madden (New York Daily News); Ken Nigro, (formerly Baltimore Sun);
  • Jack O'Connell (;
  • Nick Peters (Sacramento Bee); Tracy Ringolsby (Rocky Mountain News); and Mark Whicker (Orange County Register)."
With an employee on the committee, proof that MLB is involved with Hall of Fame voting procedures. And that the Hall of Fame is more than just a museum.
  • *Note on Tracy Ringolsby statement in 12/26/07 Baseball Analysts interview:
"The vote a year ago would have included on the grounds that the writers are representing the official websites of the teams."...
  • writers are appointed by MLB. The websites are controlled by MLB, not the teams.This is only of interest to the non-braindead., ESPN, and SI reps among 16 who vote for HOF Managers, Umpires, 2007

11/08/07, from National Baseball Hall of Fame Press Release: "The 16-member electorate charged with reviewing the Managers/Umpires ballot features Hall of Famers Hank Aaron, Jim Bunning, Bob Gibson, Fergie Jenkins, Al Kaline, Tom Lasorda, Phil Niekro, Tony Perez, Earl Weaver and Billy Williams; former executive Jim Frey; current executives Roland Hemond (Diamondbacks) and Bob Watson (Major League Baseball);
  • Jack O'Connell (,
  • Tim Kurkjian (ESPN) and
  • Tom Verducci (Sports Illustrated)."
Proving the "Hall of Fame" is not separate from MLB and is not "just a Museum."

Thursday, August 7, 2008

You will love your servitude--Aldous Huxley 1962

""It seems to me that the nature of the ultimate revolution with which we are now faced is precisely this: That we are in process of developing a whole series of techniques which will enable the controlling oligarchy who have always existed and presumably will always exist to get people to

Monday, February 11, 2008

Eco-economic Warfare and the Planned Collapse of Western Civilization

By Matthew D. Jarvie

Recently, when New World Orderly Bill Clinton was campaigning for his wife in Denver, he remarked that "we just have to

  • slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse gas emissions ’cause we have to save the planet for our grandchildren.”

(Of course it's always about "the children" with these people.) This is not simply Clinton's opinion, but that of

  • his globalist handlers, who have for many years been using the issue of the environment and climate change as the pretext

to grab private land and deindustrialize the West, sending US jobs over to third world countries such as the UN's "Most Favored Nation" of China.

  • To some of us who haven't swallowed the environ-mental lies being peddled by these criminal psychopaths, it's painfully clear to see that this
  • has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with ushering in a
  • fourth world system of socialistic, fascistic control"....

Monday, August 4, 2008

Complicit media in Global Warming-Climate Change Scam--Virgin Airways Case

August 3, 2008 By Stephen Price, the Sunday Business Post online, Irish Business News
In September 2006, Virgin boss Richard Branson pledged €1.9 billion towards tackling global warming. For the next ten years, he announced, the profits from his aviation and rail businesses would go towards combating the biggest, most complex problem that mankind has ever faced.
Adults, Branson solemnly told the assembled media, had a duty to pass a ‘‘pristine’’ planet on to the next generation. Politicians and campaigners were effusive in their praise for his imagination and generosity.

However, a look at the not-very-small print revealed that this amazing gesture would
  • not be a matter of taking the profits from Branson’s polluting industries and using
them to protect vast tracts of the Amazon.
  • In fact, the money would go to a new division of the Virgin conglomerate, called Virgin Fuel.
  • Branson was simply gearing himself up to make more money. But as always, the
  • PR spin was that he’d be doing the rest of us a favour in the process.
Branson has built an empire on this perception. His first two business ventures - both failed - were growing Christmas trees and selling budgerigars, so he obviously understood from an early stage that
  • nature is there to be exploited.
  • His reputation as a rebel underdog took off when he was arrested in 1971 for selling records in Virgin stores that had been declared export stock. Because he also sold ‘‘cut-outs’’ (remaindered LPs at discounted prices), the perception took root that he was being persecuted by the authorities for challenging a rip-off establishment. In fact, he was doing nothing of the sort - he paid the taxes and fines owing from the case.
Branson’s anti-establishment persona was cemented in 1977 when Virgin Records signed the Sex Pistols; the band had already been dropped by two labels, EMI and A&M. He was also on board the boat the band played on when they sailed down the Thames during Queen Elizabeth’s silver jubilee celebrations. In a blaze of publicity, it was pulled in by police and a few punters were arrested.
  • When British Airways engaged in a ‘‘dirty tricks’’ campaign against Virgin Atlantic in the early1990s,this was grist to Branson’s mill. Whether it’s flights, records, mobile phones, cola, radio, television, hotels, trains or holidays, sticking the word ‘‘Virgin’’ in front of something supposedly makes it cheaper yet cooler, with the bearded, grinning boss fronting many of his own ad campaigns. Because if a hippy says it’s all right, then it must be. Mustn’t it?
Since Virgin Fuel was set up in 2006, the tide has very much turned against bio-fuels with the realisation that far too much agricultural land could be eaten up by fuel crops. Palm oil, one of the major biofuels, is contributing to global warming as virgin (no pun intended) rainforests in countries such as Malaysia and Indonesia are decimated to make way for palm plantations.
  • Still, in February of this year Branson was on the tarmac toying with a coconut for the inevitable photocall when one of his 747s flew - empty- from London to Amsterdam on a 20 per cent bio-fuel mixture. Two years on from his ‘‘profits’’ gesture, slightly wiser green campaigners dismissed the flight as a stunt.
But onwards and upwards. While Branson has done little to save the planet and a hell of a lot to pollute it, he can arrange for you to look down upon it. This week he unveiled an aircraft for flying tourists into space. Virgin Galactic (yes, space can be branded too) has built a four-engine, twin-fuselage jet that will carrya spaceship with six passengers up to 50,000 feet to release it for sub-orbital flight.
  • The actual space ship is not yet complete, but apparently2 50 punters have already paid $200,000 up front for the experience, among them Ireland’s own leading car salesman, Bill Cullen. The plane is called White Knight II, lest we forget what a favour Branson is doing for us.
Hippies are often credited with being the first to bring green issues to the fore, but the 1960s also legitimised the ascent of personal selfishness over social responsibility. Of course, Branson is no more of a hippy than I am, just a good businessman.

Sunday, July 27, 2008

The children of Greenpeace--Calgary Sun

Future Greenpeace envisions isn't pretty picture

By IAN ROBINSON, Calgary Sun, 7/27/08

How many Greenpeace activists does it take to change a light bulb?


They'd rather sit around in the dark feeling morally superior.

Nearly 40 years I've been watching the people who belong to Greenpeace annoy the grownups.

The persistence of bad ideas always amazes.

Here they are again, performing one of their patented stunts at Syncrude, trespassing, gaining access to a tailings pond where 500 ducks came to an unfortunate and accidental end this year, and unveiling a banner reading: "World's Dirtiest Oil. Stop the Tarsands."

Like Greenpeace, I basically came of age in the 1970s.

It was a goofy decade.

I believed in love and non-violence.

I actually paid attention to the lyrics of Beatles songs and my two greatest heroes were both named Marx ... Harpo and Karl.

Unlike Greenpeace, I grew up and jettisoned a world-view that kids my son's age dismiss sneeringly as "tree-hugging, hippie crap."

Thanks, South Park.

The only thing from that period that has stood me in good stead is that at parties, I can manufacture a field-expedient water bong in about 20 minutes.

A roll of duct tape and a pocket knife and I'm good to go.

The photos Greenpeace released show your typical industrial mining operation.

It is not a pretty thing.

Industry isn't generally pretty.

Coal mines, gold mines, steel mills, paper plants ... all the stuff that civilization rests on?

Not pretty.

On the other hand, the things Greenpeace wants for us aren't pretty either.

Oh, their intentions are good, I suppose.

They're like Marxists that way.

Hell, a lot of them are Marxists. And not the good kind, like Harpo.

The Marxist ideal was a fair economy.

The Marxist reality was the world's largest concentration camps, a slaughter of humanity that made Hitler look like he wasn't really trying.

It led to widespread famine and poverty, environmental disasters, lineups to buy soap, and the world's crappiest automobiles -- the Lada, the Trabant and the Dacia.

Greenpeace, in addition to wanting economies to be fair and for us to quit using limited resources ("No, I can't go to work today. I have to line up six hours to buy a bar of Lifebuoy,")

also wants "an energy revolution" to stop climate change, disarmament (I know, that one's always good for a giggle) and to change farming practices that actually feed people to "socially and ecologically responsible" farming.

Say hello to the $10 loaf of bread.

These people are children who have learned that if you throw a tantrum in the right way and document it,

the news media will help you embarrass the grownup -- in this case, Syncrude and any Albertan who hasn't imbibed the purple Kool-Aid of extreme environmentalism.

Extremists in the environmental movement have been gnawing away at public perceptions for decades.

It's now gotten to the point where throwing away a pop can into the garbage is a social crime that elicits the kind of horror that used to greet bestiality.

The Greenpeace folk and their ilk are actually more frightening than a lot of the totalitarian movements -- and this is a totalitarian movement that wants to change every facet of your life, make no mistake -- that have come before them.

If you check out the aims of Greenpeace and then think them through, something becomes clear.

Nothing that walks on two legs and talks is going to come out a winner.

At least Stalin wanted his people to be able to buy cheap bread.

And even Hitler thought ordinary Aryans should be able to own and operate a car. "

Wednesday, July 9, 2008

"A Fatal Delusion Over Climate Change," Australia Herald Sun

Andrew Bolt

July 09, 2008 12:00am

"PSYCHIATRISTS have detected the first case of "climate change delusion" -

Writing in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, Joshua Wolf and Robert Salo of our Royal Children's Hospital say this delusion was a "previously unreported phenomenon".

"A 17-year-old man was referred to the inpatient psychiatric unit at Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne with an eight-month history of depressed mood . . . He also . . . had visions of apocalyptic events."

(So have Alarmist of the Year Tim Flannery, Profit of Doom Al Gore and Sir Richard Brazen, but I digress.)

"The patient had also developed the belief that, due to climate change, his own water consumption could lead within days to the deaths of millions of people through exhaustion of water supplies."

But never mind the poor boy, who became too terrified even to drink. What's scarier is that people in charge of our Government seem to suffer from this "climate change delusion", too.

Here is Prime Minister Kevin Rudd yesterday, with his own apocalyptic vision: "If we do not begin reducing the nation's levels of carbon pollution, Australia's economy will face more frequent and severe droughts, less water, reduced food production and devastation of areas such as the Great Barrier Reef and Kakadu wetlands."

And here is a senior Sydney Morning Herald journalist aghast at the horrors described in the report on global warming released on Friday by Rudd's guru, Professor Ross Garnaut: "Australians must pay more for petrol, food and energy or ultimately face a rising death toll . . ."

Wow. Pay more for food or die. Is that Rudd's next campaign slogan?

Of course, we can laugh at this -- and must -- but the price for such folly may soon be your job, or at least your cash.

Rudd and Garnaut want to scare you into backing their plan to force people who produce everything from petrol to coal-fired electricity, from steel to soft drinks, to pay for licences to emit carbon dioxide -- the gas they think is heating the world to hell.

The cost of those licences, totalling in the billions, will then be passed on to you through higher bills for petrol, power, food, housing, air travel and anything else that uses lots of gassy power. In some countries they're even planning to tax farting cows, so there's no end to the ways you can be stung.

Rudd hopes this pain will make you switch to expensive but less gassy alternatives, and -- hey presto -- the world's temperature will then fall, just like it's actually done since the day Al Gore released An Inconvenient Truth.

But you'll have spotted already the big flaw in Rudd's mad plan -- one that confirms he and Garnaut really do have delusions.

The truth is Australia on its own emits less than 1.5 per cent of the world's carbon dioxide. Any savings we make will make no real difference, given that China (now the biggest emitter) and India (the fourth) are booming so fast that they alone will pump out 42 per cent of the world's greenhouse gases by 2030.

Indeed, so fast are the world's emissions growing -- by 3.1 per cent a year thanks mostly to these two giants -- that the 20 per cent cuts Rudd demands of Australians by 2020 would be swallowed up in just 28 days. That's how little our multi-billions of dollars in sacrifices will matter.

And that's why Rudd's claim that we'll be ruined if we don't cut Australia's gases is a lie. To be blunt.

Ask Rudd's guru. Garnaut on Friday admitted any cuts we make will be useless unless they inspire other countries to do the same -- especially China and India: "Only a global agreement has any prospect of reducing risks of dangerous climate change to acceptable levels."

So almost everything depends on China and India copying us. But the chances of that? A big, round zero.

A year ago China released its own global warming strategy -- its own Garnaut report -- which bluntly refused to cut its total emissions.

Said Ma Kai, head of China's powerful State Council: "China does not commit to any quantified emissions-reduction commitments . . . our efforts to fight climate change must not come at the expense of economic growth."

In fact, we had to get used to more gas from China, not less: "It is quite inevitable that during this (industrialisation) stage, China's energy consumption and CO2 emissions will be quite high."

Last month, India likewise issued its National Action Plan on Climate Change, and also rejected Rudd-style cuts.

The plan's authors, the Prime Minister's Council on Climate Change, said India would rather save its people from poverty than global warming, and would not cut growth to cut gases.

"It is obvious that India needs to substantially increase its per capita energy consumption to provide a minimally acceptable level of wellbeing to its people."

The plan's only real promise was in fact a threat: "India is determined that its per capita greenhouse gas emissions will at no point exceed that of developed countries."

Gee, thanks. That, of course, means India won't stop its per capita emissions (now at 1.02 tonnes) from growing until they match those of countries such as the US (now 20 tonnes). Given it has one billion people, that's a promise to gas the world like it's never been gassed before.

So is this our death warrant? Should this news have you seeing apocalyptic visions, too?

Well, no. What makes the Indian report so interesting is that unlike our Ross Garnaut, who just accepted the word of those scientists wailing we faced doom, the Indian experts went to the trouble to check what the climate was actually doing and why.

Their conclusion? They couldn't actually find anything bad in India that was caused by man-made warming: "No firm link between the documented (climate) changes described below and warming due to anthropogenic climate change has yet been established."

In fact, they couldn't find much change in the climate at all.

Yes, India's surface temperature over a century had inched up by 0.4 degrees, but there had been no change in trends for large-scale droughts and floods, or rain: "The observed monsoon rainfall at the all-India level does not show any significant trend . . ."

It even dismissed the panic Al Gore helped to whip up about melting Himalayan glaciers: "While recession of some glaciers has occurred in some Himalayan regions in recent years, the trend is not consistent across the entire mountain chain. It is, accordingly, too early to establish long-term trends, or their causation, in respect of which there are several hypotheses."

Nor was that the only sign that India's Council on Climate Change had kept its cool while our Rudd and Garnaut lost theirs.

For example, the Indians rightly insisted nuclear power had to be part of any real plan to cut emissions. Rudd and Garnaut won't even discuss it.

The Indians also pointed out that no feasible technology to trap and bury the gasses of coal-fired power stations had yet been developed "and there are serious questions about the cost as well (as) permanence of the CO2 storage repositories".

Rudd and Garnaut, however, keep offering this dream to make us think our power stations can survive their emissions trading scheme, when state governments warn they may not.

In every case the Indians are pragmatic where Rudd and Garnaut are having delusions -- delusions about an apocalypse, about cutting gases without going nuclear, about saving power stations they'll instead drive broke.

And there's that delusion on which their whole plan is built -- that India and China will follow our sacrifice by cutting their throats, too.

So psychiatrists are treating a 17-year-old tipped over the edge by global warming fearmongers?

Pray that their next patients will be two men whose own delusions threaten to drive our whole economy over the edge as well."

Thursday, July 3, 2008

Mcnamee called by feds 5/07, Mitchell in August 2007

from, 1/7/08:
"Exclusive: McNamee Stands Behind Story," 1/7/08, by Jon Heyman

Sunday, June 1, 2008

NY Times posts jaunty video about Scott Schoeneweis

Cheery, sanitizing treatment by the NY Times at the top of their website includes no reference to the fact that Schoeneweis had documented evidence of having purchased steroids. Schoeneweis was not forced to speak to George Mitchell and was given a pass by Selig's office before the Mitchell Report came out. The Times presents Schoeneweis as just a regular guy, not a guy who bought steroids.

Sunday, May 18, 2008

Robert Redford, MLB in business

  • The power of distraction...and the popularity of meaningless self-flagellation.
(By Filip Bondy, NY Daily News, 4/21-4/22/08): "Tonight at Fenway, ...a public service video,

(Bondy): "It was at a 2003 meeting of the NRDC board at Sundance that actor and conservationist Robert Redford first devised this new strategy.

He told members in attendance that sports was the new opiate of the people, that it was a prime reason masses weren't revolting in the street. At the same time, sports provided a unique opportunity to connect to nontraditional allies, who might adopt a greener attitude."

  • (Blog note re Robert Redford from IMDB: "Mid-1950s:

(Redford) Was a pitcher on the University of Colorado baseball team."

"It's difficult to compete, because $1 trillion, four percent of our GNP, subsidizes global warming - the coal plants, the mines, the virgin paper mills, pesticides based on petroleum. But we ask, 'How can we get you rich while advancing environmental efforts?' And these are changes that can't be rolled back by an uncooperative administration or president."

  • Selig embraced the alliance.

Recycling bins were set up in ballparks around the country. Programs were printed with recycled paper. Soon companies such as Coke and Aramark were making adjustments - like turning off vending machines for several hours per day whenever there was no game in progress.

  • ...Athletes infamous for their big cars and substantial lifestyles are being recruited to the cause of environmentalism, which is

Tonight at Fenway, the president of NRDC, John Adams, will throw out the first pitch.

  • A public service video, narrated by Redford and co-sponsored by MLB, will be shown.

It is a night game, however, and the lights will glare....Five or six dozen baseballs will be used. Bats from precious ash trees will be smashed into shards. At 10 p.m. or so, thousands will drive home in gas-guzzling cars to the distant Boston suburbs."

  • (Oh, the "eco-ignorant masses").
  • (Earlier in the same article):

(Bondy): "It is an ecological horror show, and the one good thing that can be said about our favorite pastimes is that these sports are becoming fresh laboratories for reform. People in high and visible places - from Robert Redford to Bud Selig - have come to understand* that America's

  • games can spur change among corporate partners and

"We're not going to get rid of night games," said Dr. Allen Hershkowitz, senior scientist at the National Resources Defense Council. "We're not going to change how the business works. This is going to take a long time. But getting baseball to embrace ecology allows us to take all politics out of the discussion of climate change, and it allows us to reach out to nontraditional allies."

  • (Right). sm

From NY Daily News article by Filip Bondy, "Shea, Meadowlands Among Facilities Helping Spread Green Message," 4/22/08

  • *This presumes it's something Bondy "understands."