Oketo was just saying the other day how many 'important' people from 'our time' had recently died.
Well, most of America might not know her, but the sharpest blow to me was the death today of Molly Ivins.
The single biggest crime of the mainstream media over the last decade was the mistaken, mythological halo they granted to George W. Bush. He, they said, was the 'uniter', not the 'divider'. He played well with others. He listened. He was his own man. He empathized with the common man.
As we now know, this was nothing BUT mythology. And to understand (and report) the truth, all the national political reporters and news anchors needed to do to was read Shrub by Molly Ivins. What Bush was when she covered him as Governor of Texas, he became as President of the United States. All the hours those reporters spent on press planes and at the media events and talking to each other...well, they simply needed to fill a couple of those hours by reading her book. Had they done that, America would not be in the miserable shape it is today. They would have understood what was about to happen.
Molly Ivins was there, testifying.
But not enough people listened.
diderot
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Media Sins: Too Much ESPN
We all know this is the worst week of the year to watch ESPN. Endless bloviators filling time between the endless commercials to build the endless hype for a football game.
I have a friend, Emma, who has to be one of the top five cutest four-year-olds in Seattle. Over the weekend her parents took her to the zoo. At one point she stopped, pointed into a cage, and asked her Daddy if those were the Chicago Bears.
This has to stop--we're ruining the youth of America!
diderot
I have a friend, Emma, who has to be one of the top five cutest four-year-olds in Seattle. Over the weekend her parents took her to the zoo. At one point she stopped, pointed into a cage, and asked her Daddy if those were the Chicago Bears.
This has to stop--we're ruining the youth of America!
diderot
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Super Bowl Trivia
A hearty toast from the Three Guys to anyone who can identify these Bear immortals...
Monday, January 29, 2007
Eva Cassidy...
...was a largely ignored vocalist before her death from bone cancer in the mid-90's. After that, she was 'discovered' by a larger following, mainly in the UK. But I think it's safe to say that she's still a virtual unknown among most mainstream music enthusiasts.
There's not much to find at the iTunes Store, but Amazon is a great resource for listening to samples. You won't regret it.
Pay particular attention to the album Songbird. I don't know how much is fact and how much lore, but there are those who say she chose and recorded the selections included on this album with the full knowledge that her end was near. Warning: that backstory, combined with the other-worldly nature of her voice, can elicit strong emotional responses.
diderot
There's not much to find at the iTunes Store, but Amazon is a great resource for listening to samples. You won't regret it.
Pay particular attention to the album Songbird. I don't know how much is fact and how much lore, but there are those who say she chose and recorded the selections included on this album with the full knowledge that her end was near. Warning: that backstory, combined with the other-worldly nature of her voice, can elicit strong emotional responses.
diderot
Ugh-- Not Ditka Again!
This is one of those weeks that makes me happy I don't live in Chicago
anymore. From what I'm hearing, the flood of empty words concerning the Bears is reaching Katrina levels. In fact, worst of all, once again the just-can't-kill-him spectre of Mike Ditka is back begging for headlines.
OK, I know you Bears fans believe he arrived in Chicago by walking across Lake Michigan from Gary. But the guy is human--really. And in my mind, not a very good one, at that.
1) Give Dracula his due: his record of division championships with the Bears is commendable. I say this: it should be, when you've got Walter Payton in your backfield and Buddy Ryan coaching your defense. You say, yeah, well they still won with Neal Anderson for a couple years and no Ryan. And I say, tell me about losing the last six in a row in '89...or eight of the last nine in '92.
When things went sideways, his teams quit on him. The guy was a true Hall of Famer in only two ways--claiming credit, and deflecting blame.
2) I see this week that if he recognized any personal failings, it was
because the guy he worked for in Chicago was 'a snake', and the one in
New Orleans was 'dumb'. Years after his firings, he still can't let go
of the fear that anyone might see through his persona. With the help of a fawning media, he's always been the 'blue collar/shoot from the
hip/man's man/standup guy'. The truth is, he's a sorry whiner.
3) He once traded an entire year's draft, and picks #1 and #3 from the
NEXT YEAR for Ricky Williams. His defense? Well, the GM and owner knew about it, too.
Like I said, world class whiner.
diderot
anymore. From what I'm hearing, the flood of empty words concerning the Bears is reaching Katrina levels. In fact, worst of all, once again the just-can't-kill-him spectre of Mike Ditka is back begging for headlines.
OK, I know you Bears fans believe he arrived in Chicago by walking across Lake Michigan from Gary. But the guy is human--really. And in my mind, not a very good one, at that.
1) Give Dracula his due: his record of division championships with the Bears is commendable. I say this: it should be, when you've got Walter Payton in your backfield and Buddy Ryan coaching your defense. You say, yeah, well they still won with Neal Anderson for a couple years and no Ryan. And I say, tell me about losing the last six in a row in '89...or eight of the last nine in '92.
When things went sideways, his teams quit on him. The guy was a true Hall of Famer in only two ways--claiming credit, and deflecting blame.
2) I see this week that if he recognized any personal failings, it was
because the guy he worked for in Chicago was 'a snake', and the one in
New Orleans was 'dumb'. Years after his firings, he still can't let go
of the fear that anyone might see through his persona. With the help of a fawning media, he's always been the 'blue collar/shoot from the
hip/man's man/standup guy'. The truth is, he's a sorry whiner.
3) He once traded an entire year's draft, and picks #1 and #3 from the
NEXT YEAR for Ricky Williams. His defense? Well, the GM and owner knew about it, too.
Like I said, world class whiner.
diderot
Friday, January 26, 2007
Media Sins: Whose 'Good Economy'?
Writing in the New York Times today, Paul Krugman makes the point that what underlies the savage partisanship of the current political climate is the growing polarization of the economy. Not since pre-FDR days has it been more true that 'the rich get rich and the poor get poorer'.
Which makes all the more baffling the media's mindless promotion of George Bush's 'good' or even 'booming' economy. The fact of the matter is that the Bush propaganda machine has persuaded our richest publishers, editors and news anchors that 'the economy' in the aggregate is the same thing as the economy that exists inside their own individual households. Aren't your stocks rising? Haven't my tax policies allowed you to send the kids to even more expensive private schools? Can you believe that the house you bought for three million is now worth three times that?
What this fails to take into account, of course, are simple facts like the flatlining of real wages for the working class, rising gasoline prices, and the rapid disappearance of little things like company pensions and health insurance and union wages. This is a classic example of the 'Couric factor'--my view of the world MUST BE the real world.
And if this sounds like a back door call to class warfare, so be it. That's Krugman's point. Unless we're willing to reverse economic polarization, the tone of politics isn't going to get any better.
diderot
Which makes all the more baffling the media's mindless promotion of George Bush's 'good' or even 'booming' economy. The fact of the matter is that the Bush propaganda machine has persuaded our richest publishers, editors and news anchors that 'the economy' in the aggregate is the same thing as the economy that exists inside their own individual households. Aren't your stocks rising? Haven't my tax policies allowed you to send the kids to even more expensive private schools? Can you believe that the house you bought for three million is now worth three times that?
What this fails to take into account, of course, are simple facts like the flatlining of real wages for the working class, rising gasoline prices, and the rapid disappearance of little things like company pensions and health insurance and union wages. This is a classic example of the 'Couric factor'--my view of the world MUST BE the real world.
And if this sounds like a back door call to class warfare, so be it. That's Krugman's point. Unless we're willing to reverse economic polarization, the tone of politics isn't going to get any better.
diderot
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
W and the Military
I had the opportunity last night to listen for a long time to a civilian friend who's had very close contact with the extreme top brass of the U.S. Army dating all the way back to the end of the Clinton administration. I asked him how the military now views W. after the mess in Iraq, and here's what he said.
Because, as a whole, the military despised Clinton so much, they would have welcomed almost anyone else. So the prospect of a Bush presidency was fine with them. But there was quick disappointment when both Cheney and Rumsfeld came on the scene. They were not trusted by the generals, and that dread only deepened when Rumsfeld announced his plans for a 'new military', which would have increased payments to high tech defense contractors but reduced the number of available troops.
Then 9/11 occurred, and for them, everything DID change. They all lined up solidly behind Bush because they both wanted and needed him to be a strong leader.
Of course there was individual disagreement about the wisdom and methods of the Iraq invasion, but the general reaction of the brass was, 'hey--not my decision--he's the Commander in Chief''. Guys like Gen. Shinseki, however, were not quiet enough about their reservations, and once the comments got back to the White House, he was doomed. No matter that he lost a foot to a land mine in Vietnam--while all those guys in the White House were avoiding service. No matter that he had envisioned a new method of warfare that was designed to attack the very nature of the insurgency that now defines Iraq. And no matter that he would ultimately be proved entirely right about his warnings of inadequate troop strength. Rumsfeld took the unprecedented step of announcing his replacement as Army Chief of Staff more than a year before Shinseki was supposed to retire.
Still, the rest of the generals didn't really get too riled up--after all, we were at 'war', and it was already clear to everyone what happened if you didn't pledge absolute allegience to Cheney and Rumsfeld.
But what initially broke the camel's back was Shinseki's retirement party. At his level, such a party ALWAYS commands the attendance of either the President or the Vice President, along with the Secretary of Defense and every other civilian of importance in the Pentagon. Free drinks, free nibbles, war stories, it's an easy call.
But instead, they all stiffed him. All of them. The 'party' was like 'a wake--it was embarrassing'. And when that word got out, the military finally started to turn on W and his gang. They had disrespected not just the man, but the uniform.
After that, the Iraqi mishaps began in earnest--dead soldiers, ruined families, botched missions, wasted billions, etc.--you would think that the everyday pall of war would cement a negative impression of Bush eventually. But my friend said that even all that was accepted stoically--after all, wars aren't pretty.
However, one more single incident sealed the deal against the Bush crowd. That was the shooting of Pat Tillman.
Although Tillman was not an officer, he was 'a born leader, but did everything he could to downplay his fame. He and his brother even secretly drove to Denver from Phoenix to enlist, so there was no danger of the media being around to report it'. In the field, he commanded almost unanimous respect--except for one guy in his unit who couldn't stand him. This guy, for whatever reason, gave Tillman a hard time constantly, and generally acted like an asshole every time he was in Tillman's presence. Why? Didn't matter. People just kept them apart.
The outline of the tragedy has now finally been reported. Patrol divided in a dangerous ravine in Afghanistan...communication is spotty...it's dark...some start to panic and open fire at a group of 'enemies' on a hill. But they're not enemies. Tillman is among them, he stands up, waves his arms, and starts yelling in his radio to stop. His call does get through to the driver of the vehicle from which the main machine gun rounds are coming. The driver screams to the gunner, 'Blue on Blue!!'--(stop firing--our guys!). Maybe it's too loud in there to hear. The guy keeps shooting. So the driver throws the vehicle into reverse to get his attention. The guy keeps shooting. The driver finally grabs his ankle and starts yanking, trying to pull him down. The guy keeps shooting.
And he blows Tillman to bits.
The shooter, of course, is that one guy who hates Tillman.
This, of course, is awful enough in its own right, but not by itself what finally pissed off the brass. It was (like Watergate) not the crime, but the coverup. The generals believe that the civilians in the Pentagon, by initially lying about the whole deal, tried to save their own reputations, and in the process cast doubt on the professionalism of ALL troops out there risking their lives. Our soldiers just shoot each other and try to lie about it?
Again, they trashed the uniform.
Finally, the one dynamic I did not fully appreciate. When George Sr. was working under Gerry Ford, he was one of three guys competitng for the role of 'favored son', i.e., maybe future V.P. nominee, then successor as President, etc. George the senior believes that Rumsfeld and Cheney joined forces and were trashing him behind his back while Bush was serving Ford as ambassador to China. And of course, they covered their tracks and lied about doing any such thing.
Sure enough, soon Ford names Cheney Chief of Staff, Rumsfeld goes to Defense the first time, but Bush is banished to the CIA at exactly the time that agency is facing intense Congressional scrutiny. The elder Bush is trashed in the press, and made to all-but-promise he has no further political ambitions in order to be confirmed. He's been had. He takes the job out of loyalty to Ford, but carries away an enduring hate for both Cheney and Rumsfeld.
So you can imagine what Sr. feels like when his kid allows both of his adversaries to essentially take control of the government--and in the process doom his son to failure on the world's largest stage. A failure so large, in fact, that this time even Daddy's friends can't bail him out.
You remember Sr.'s tearful meltdown at Jeb's soiree a couple months ago? It's not hard to imagine where that sorrow was really coming from. It's Shakespearean.
The military now refuses to admit that W even plays a role anymore. They're angry as hell, but mostly they pity him--he's clueless. They still despise Cheney--but they also still fear him. And even though Rumsfeld is 'retired', the situation hasn't changed.
The uniform is being disgraced by men (Cheney, Rumsfeld, even press flak Tony Snow) who all retire on weekends to their mansions close together on Maryland's Eastern Shore. I'm sure they bitch and smoke cigars and blame the evil left.
I hope they don't laugh anymore.
W. sits isolated in the White House, perhaps feeling the first small inklings of the degree to which history will scorn him.
And you can picture his old man crying himself to sleep at night, unable to extract any revenge on the people who did him; the people who did his son in; the same people who have so deeply scarred our country.
Only Shakespeare could truly appreciate this.
diderot
Because, as a whole, the military despised Clinton so much, they would have welcomed almost anyone else. So the prospect of a Bush presidency was fine with them. But there was quick disappointment when both Cheney and Rumsfeld came on the scene. They were not trusted by the generals, and that dread only deepened when Rumsfeld announced his plans for a 'new military', which would have increased payments to high tech defense contractors but reduced the number of available troops.
Then 9/11 occurred, and for them, everything DID change. They all lined up solidly behind Bush because they both wanted and needed him to be a strong leader.
Of course there was individual disagreement about the wisdom and methods of the Iraq invasion, but the general reaction of the brass was, 'hey--not my decision--he's the Commander in Chief''. Guys like Gen. Shinseki, however, were not quiet enough about their reservations, and once the comments got back to the White House, he was doomed. No matter that he lost a foot to a land mine in Vietnam--while all those guys in the White House were avoiding service. No matter that he had envisioned a new method of warfare that was designed to attack the very nature of the insurgency that now defines Iraq. And no matter that he would ultimately be proved entirely right about his warnings of inadequate troop strength. Rumsfeld took the unprecedented step of announcing his replacement as Army Chief of Staff more than a year before Shinseki was supposed to retire.
Still, the rest of the generals didn't really get too riled up--after all, we were at 'war', and it was already clear to everyone what happened if you didn't pledge absolute allegience to Cheney and Rumsfeld.
But what initially broke the camel's back was Shinseki's retirement party. At his level, such a party ALWAYS commands the attendance of either the President or the Vice President, along with the Secretary of Defense and every other civilian of importance in the Pentagon. Free drinks, free nibbles, war stories, it's an easy call.
But instead, they all stiffed him. All of them. The 'party' was like 'a wake--it was embarrassing'. And when that word got out, the military finally started to turn on W and his gang. They had disrespected not just the man, but the uniform.
After that, the Iraqi mishaps began in earnest--dead soldiers, ruined families, botched missions, wasted billions, etc.--you would think that the everyday pall of war would cement a negative impression of Bush eventually. But my friend said that even all that was accepted stoically--after all, wars aren't pretty.
However, one more single incident sealed the deal against the Bush crowd. That was the shooting of Pat Tillman.
Although Tillman was not an officer, he was 'a born leader, but did everything he could to downplay his fame. He and his brother even secretly drove to Denver from Phoenix to enlist, so there was no danger of the media being around to report it'. In the field, he commanded almost unanimous respect--except for one guy in his unit who couldn't stand him. This guy, for whatever reason, gave Tillman a hard time constantly, and generally acted like an asshole every time he was in Tillman's presence. Why? Didn't matter. People just kept them apart.
The outline of the tragedy has now finally been reported. Patrol divided in a dangerous ravine in Afghanistan...communication is spotty...it's dark...some start to panic and open fire at a group of 'enemies' on a hill. But they're not enemies. Tillman is among them, he stands up, waves his arms, and starts yelling in his radio to stop. His call does get through to the driver of the vehicle from which the main machine gun rounds are coming. The driver screams to the gunner, 'Blue on Blue!!'--(stop firing--our guys!). Maybe it's too loud in there to hear. The guy keeps shooting. So the driver throws the vehicle into reverse to get his attention. The guy keeps shooting. The driver finally grabs his ankle and starts yanking, trying to pull him down. The guy keeps shooting.
And he blows Tillman to bits.
The shooter, of course, is that one guy who hates Tillman.
This, of course, is awful enough in its own right, but not by itself what finally pissed off the brass. It was (like Watergate) not the crime, but the coverup. The generals believe that the civilians in the Pentagon, by initially lying about the whole deal, tried to save their own reputations, and in the process cast doubt on the professionalism of ALL troops out there risking their lives. Our soldiers just shoot each other and try to lie about it?
Again, they trashed the uniform.
Finally, the one dynamic I did not fully appreciate. When George Sr. was working under Gerry Ford, he was one of three guys competitng for the role of 'favored son', i.e., maybe future V.P. nominee, then successor as President, etc. George the senior believes that Rumsfeld and Cheney joined forces and were trashing him behind his back while Bush was serving Ford as ambassador to China. And of course, they covered their tracks and lied about doing any such thing.
Sure enough, soon Ford names Cheney Chief of Staff, Rumsfeld goes to Defense the first time, but Bush is banished to the CIA at exactly the time that agency is facing intense Congressional scrutiny. The elder Bush is trashed in the press, and made to all-but-promise he has no further political ambitions in order to be confirmed. He's been had. He takes the job out of loyalty to Ford, but carries away an enduring hate for both Cheney and Rumsfeld.
So you can imagine what Sr. feels like when his kid allows both of his adversaries to essentially take control of the government--and in the process doom his son to failure on the world's largest stage. A failure so large, in fact, that this time even Daddy's friends can't bail him out.
You remember Sr.'s tearful meltdown at Jeb's soiree a couple months ago? It's not hard to imagine where that sorrow was really coming from. It's Shakespearean.
The military now refuses to admit that W even plays a role anymore. They're angry as hell, but mostly they pity him--he's clueless. They still despise Cheney--but they also still fear him. And even though Rumsfeld is 'retired', the situation hasn't changed.
The uniform is being disgraced by men (Cheney, Rumsfeld, even press flak Tony Snow) who all retire on weekends to their mansions close together on Maryland's Eastern Shore. I'm sure they bitch and smoke cigars and blame the evil left.
I hope they don't laugh anymore.
W. sits isolated in the White House, perhaps feeling the first small inklings of the degree to which history will scorn him.
And you can picture his old man crying himself to sleep at night, unable to extract any revenge on the people who did him; the people who did his son in; the same people who have so deeply scarred our country.
Only Shakespeare could truly appreciate this.
diderot
Monday, January 22, 2007
The Trouble With Hillary
Even though she only took runner-up status to Lovee Smith in Chicago over the weekend, I think it's important to note that Hillary Clintion announced for President. That gives both top Dem candidates Chicago roots, which of course is good for the entire country.
The news organizations immediately rushed for the Hillary meme they love best--"cold, calculating", as the Today Show characterized many criticisms against her, implying the 'bitch' label that is as closely associated with her as 'clueless' is with Boy George. And sure enough, quickly following was the companion conclusion: "unelectable".
Well, on this count, the experts may have gotten the answer right, but predictably for exactly the wrong reasons.
The pundits believe there are enough Hillary-haters on the right wing to prevent her from ever winning a national election. But I believe the ultimate danger for her simmers at the other end of the spectrum. That's where liberals like me remain waiting for the explanation for her vote authorizing Bush to go to war--if he so desired.
Today, there are only three options left for her. First, she could say, "it was the right vote then and it's the right vote now." She tried that for a while, but 70% of the people whose votes she covets have declared that response null and void.
Second, she could say, "he fooled me! How was I supposed to know there were no weapons or nuke warheads or terrorists living in Saddam's basement?" Well, being married to the previous President might have given her some special insight, but even if she had been practicing law back in Park Ridge, how comforting is it to hear a prospective future President admitting she was outfoxed by the likes of George W. Bush?
The final answer...and the only one that passes the b.s. test...is that she voted the way she did for political reasons. It was the 'smart' vote...the one that coincided with the emotions of a post-9/11 nation...the one that seemed the best bet to keep her Presidential credentials in order.
But guess what. She was wrong. Especially in the minds of the millions of Americans who knew the war was a future tragedy from the moment its PR plans began to surface even before W. was (almost) elected.
The cold fact of the matter is that the blood of more than three thousand dead Americans will forever remain on the hands of George Bush. But unless she can magically erase the memories of would-be supporters who still resent her fatal miscalculation, the stain will also remain evident Hillary's ambitions.
diderot
The news organizations immediately rushed for the Hillary meme they love best--"cold, calculating", as the Today Show characterized many criticisms against her, implying the 'bitch' label that is as closely associated with her as 'clueless' is with Boy George. And sure enough, quickly following was the companion conclusion: "unelectable".
Well, on this count, the experts may have gotten the answer right, but predictably for exactly the wrong reasons.
The pundits believe there are enough Hillary-haters on the right wing to prevent her from ever winning a national election. But I believe the ultimate danger for her simmers at the other end of the spectrum. That's where liberals like me remain waiting for the explanation for her vote authorizing Bush to go to war--if he so desired.
Today, there are only three options left for her. First, she could say, "it was the right vote then and it's the right vote now." She tried that for a while, but 70% of the people whose votes she covets have declared that response null and void.
Second, she could say, "he fooled me! How was I supposed to know there were no weapons or nuke warheads or terrorists living in Saddam's basement?" Well, being married to the previous President might have given her some special insight, but even if she had been practicing law back in Park Ridge, how comforting is it to hear a prospective future President admitting she was outfoxed by the likes of George W. Bush?
The final answer...and the only one that passes the b.s. test...is that she voted the way she did for political reasons. It was the 'smart' vote...the one that coincided with the emotions of a post-9/11 nation...the one that seemed the best bet to keep her Presidential credentials in order.
But guess what. She was wrong. Especially in the minds of the millions of Americans who knew the war was a future tragedy from the moment its PR plans began to surface even before W. was (almost) elected.
The cold fact of the matter is that the blood of more than three thousand dead Americans will forever remain on the hands of George Bush. But unless she can magically erase the memories of would-be supporters who still resent her fatal miscalculation, the stain will also remain evident Hillary's ambitions.
diderot
Sunday, January 21, 2007
Postgame
OK, the Bears are in. To me, they did what they do best--use defense and special teams to get ahead, by creating turnovers. I admit I didn't expect them to get this far with Grossman. But I don't know that Indy will be able to get much pressure on him, so he may do allright.
Nice to see the Manning story come though since the New Orleans revival didn't, but I made the mistake of watching the postgame show to that game, and what do I hear? Both the owner and the coach giving profuse thanks to God for the win. Please, just shoot me. Are these guys really that stupid?
What is it about New England that made God change his mind? Obviously, he liked them plenty when he made them win those Super Bowls...but they must have done something pretty damned bad to make God suddenly change His mind. And since He's infallible, how come He didn't see whatever that transgression was coming?
Oh, well, that's another tangent. But I can give you a solid pick on the Super Bowl. Take the team that makes fewer turnovers. It's about a 90% lock. Every other prediction is b.s.
diderot
Nice to see the Manning story come though since the New Orleans revival didn't, but I made the mistake of watching the postgame show to that game, and what do I hear? Both the owner and the coach giving profuse thanks to God for the win. Please, just shoot me. Are these guys really that stupid?
What is it about New England that made God change his mind? Obviously, he liked them plenty when he made them win those Super Bowls...but they must have done something pretty damned bad to make God suddenly change His mind. And since He's infallible, how come He didn't see whatever that transgression was coming?
Oh, well, that's another tangent. But I can give you a solid pick on the Super Bowl. Take the team that makes fewer turnovers. It's about a 90% lock. Every other prediction is b.s.
diderot
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
bandwagon
Being as is my initial post I want to assure everyone that what is written here, by "three guys" is not just BS, but insight from 3 really diverse and interesting amigos.
Da' Bears - For those of you out there who lay claim to being Monster of the Midway fans true and blue, where the hell have you been. It's called jumping on the bandwagon. The 3 guys went to Bear games back when Brickhouse was teaming up with Kupcinet from Wrigley. Remember "Watch It Now" the catch phrase from Jack B. that was the equivalent of his "hey,hey" in baseball. This Bears team is average at best. Without their safety and Lb'er the defense has dropped off imensely and the offense has never been anything but "hot and cold". The Dolphins for God's sake, beat them in Chicago and Miami has one exactly 2 games in 5 years when the temp. is freezing. So how good are they really?
New Orleans by 10, take it to the bank, besides, it's a much better story.
Varstock
Da' Bears - For those of you out there who lay claim to being Monster of the Midway fans true and blue, where the hell have you been. It's called jumping on the bandwagon. The 3 guys went to Bear games back when Brickhouse was teaming up with Kupcinet from Wrigley. Remember "Watch It Now" the catch phrase from Jack B. that was the equivalent of his "hey,hey" in baseball. This Bears team is average at best. Without their safety and Lb'er the defense has dropped off imensely and the offense has never been anything but "hot and cold". The Dolphins for God's sake, beat them in Chicago and Miami has one exactly 2 games in 5 years when the temp. is freezing. So how good are they really?
New Orleans by 10, take it to the bank, besides, it's a much better story.
Varstock
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)