The Southern Male Democrat

Charlie Rose Must Own Stock In Borders Books

September 17, 2008 · 1 Comment

Because he’s been selling me some books this week! Being a bit of a night-owl, I catch Charlie Rose on PBS most weeknights. Though I do enjoy the show and the newsmakers he interviews, it’s also pretty good for making me sleepy! :)

This week he’s talked to Tom Friedman of The New York Times and the legendary Bob Woodward of the Washington Post. Both journalists have new books out and after seeing them discuss the books, they are at the top of my must get list.

First is Woodward’s new book: The War Within: A Secret White House History 2006-2008.

This is the fourth in a series of books that Woodward has written showing what goes on inside the White House during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As usual, the Post has excerpted the book in a series. Reading the excerpts and then hearing the Woodward interviews is heartbreaking. The sheer dysfunctionality of the Bush White House and the lives that were literally lost because of it will drive you to the point of anger. Even if you don’t go buy the book, take a couple of hours one night and read the excerpts linked above.

(And let me just head the obvious off at the pass. If anyone from the other side of the aisle wants to question Woodward’s reporting, when the White House cooperated with the book and President Bush himself  sat for interviews, go ahead, give us all a laugh! )

But we expect Woodward’s stuff to be compelling, after all, he’s Bob Woodward!! The story is powerful, but is not really anything new.

If you want something new, check out Tom Friedman’s Hot, Flat and Crowded; Why We Need a Green Revolution - And How It Can Renew America.

Friedman is an acquired taste and he’s definitely what anyone who attended the GOP Convention would call an elitist.

(Unrelated Sidebar - Bill Maher had one of the best points about the way that Republicans try to use the term “elitist”, as if that sides those people against the “rest” of America.  The Founding Fathers were far and away the elites of the elites in their day. They leaned wholly on reason and very much looked to Europe for influence in creating our government. John Adams would probably have his intellect trashed today for being too French.)

Anyway - though I am grudgingly coming around to Friedman’s previous views on globalization, his interview on Charlie Rose was nothing short of fascinating.  You can watch it here. The point of the book is this; The world’s population is growing at an amazing rate, and because of globalization, more and more people have the income to use non-renewable energy more frequently.

As much as innovation is needed, it can’t happen at the rate we need without governments shaping the market. Friedman gave a great comparison; The guy who invented the cell phone sells his buddy this great, life-changing invention. And as the technology improves, the price goes down and people innovate further. That DOESN’T happen with energy because it’s a resource we don’t see - it powers all the gadgets we need. People don’t care whether their light bulb is powered by the sun, as long as they have light. There’s no compelling reason to switch to a new, better form of energy because the one we have is relatively cheap. If government shapes those markets and passes along the true cost of energy, that kick starts the innovation market.

Now throw in the fact that China and India are going to be our competitors, wouldn’t we come out much farther ahead both economically and ecologically if we drove the global competition for the next great energy invention?

Again, I highly encourage you to watch the interview. I can’t wait to read the book.

Happy Wednesday!

→ 1 CommentCategories: National Politics
Tagged: , , , , ,

The Cost of Doing Nothing

September 15, 2008 · 3 Comments

It looks like we’re in for a wild ride during these last seven weeks before the election! As we enter the home stretch, one thought keeps recurring to me; there is a cost of doing nothing.

Before we can consider that point, we must first acknowledge one truth. The choice in the presidential election is not about individual competence (at least at the top of the ticket…  ). Arguing the red herring of “experience” between Senators McCain and Obama ignores the fact that both candidates, having won their parties’ primaries, have already been vetted by the millions and millions of people who voted in the primaries. Over the roughly 18 month primary process, these candidates have had to prove their mettle through countless debates, interviews, town halls and good ol’fashioned one-on-one voter contact. Candidates who aren’t ready for prime-time, don’t win their primaries - it’s sort of a natural selection process. You may be a die-hard Republican who’s not going to vote for Obama no matter what, but you’d have a tall order to argue that he would be incompetent. Likewise, I may disagree with nearly all of McCain’s policy positions, but at least I know he’s not a dummy who would be in over his head. Both men are equally suited to lead their party’s charge to convince people - “try it our way.”

And finally, we have arrived at my point - when you take personal qualities (which, as I’ve said a gazillion times, no one can accurately judge via mass media snippets) off the table and consider the debate for the direction of our country, there is a cost of doing nothing.

The general argument for conservativism is this - “Government is the problem. To try and use government to solve problems equates with socialism as it costs the taxpayers hard-earned money.” Granted, that’s a little broad, but is not too far off the mark. Regardless of the issue - education, healthcare, taxes, etc. it always boils down to arguing against burdens placed on the individual in solving our nation’s collective problems. Fair enough? As an admitted partisan Democrat, that line of thought just doesn’t seem very deep to me.

Sure, there’s an easy argument to say - “The Obama tax plan will give me less money in my pocket. “(Of course, the Republicans aren’t telling you that only 5% of Americans could feasibly say that.) Or - “National health insurance is “socialized medicine” and will cost all of us more in taxes.

But why don’t the people making those type of arguments take the NEXT step, and show us what the status quo is costing all of us right now? After all, these problems don’t go away just because the government doesn’t fund them. For example -

The number of Americans without health insurance increases every year. (Let me head some googling smart ass off at the pass. YES - that number decreased last year, but it was the result of more poor kids being covered by government programs.) But if any of these people are are injured, or fall seriously ill, they still receive treatment, right? And all of us with insurance pay for that in our premiums, and the number of people in the existing government programs rises, thus costing us more tax money.  So what’s the cost of what we do now versus trying a government solution?

The vaunted free-market has yet to come close to solving our energy problem.  Our economy (and our national security) is tied at the hip to a non-renewable resource. The ever-rising cost of oil ripples throughout the economy and makes everything cost more, in a time when most people have less. But mention increasing fuel effenciencies and you’re branded as Karl Marx for daring to compel a company to take action faster than the market may dictate. So what’s the cost of what we do now versus trying a government solution?

Every time there’s talk of raising the minimum wage, the old chestnut gets rolled about about how business can’t afford it, they’ll have to pass the costs along to the consumer and lay people off because they can’t afford it. Ummm….how about the savings business will see through decreased turnover? How about the increased effenciency they’ll get through a more motivated workforce? For a big business, if you’re worried about showing that extra quarter percent of profit, why not cut the salaries of CEOs and upper management, who make 364 times what the average worker makes. (a gap that has risen steadlily over the last 30 years…).

Now I am no policy wonk, so I am not going to get into debating each of these issues tit for tat in the comments section.  Again, my point is that there is a cost of doing nothing. Each of the examples above show different ways of looking at a given problem beyond cost to the individual in the short term.

And now for the grand finale. Anyone who knows the SMD figured I was setting up the “gotcha” so here it is. Under Democratic Administrations the government gets bigger and under Republican Administrations it gets smaller, right? (again, generally - for example, the cost of government grew under President Bush as the result of military spending - don’t quibble - work with me here…)

It turns out that there is indeed a cost of doing nothing. Consider this study from December 2007 by an economist at the University of Nevada, Reno. Eggheads can use that link. Here’s the synopsis.

Economic performance from 1949 (end of Truman administration) to 2005 was compared, which showed Real GDP Growth Rate (annual average) under Republican administrations now stood at 2.9% and Democratic administrations at 4.2%. Real GDP Growth Rate Per Capita was 1.7% for the Republicans and 2.9% for the Democrats. These results prompted Dr. Parker to conclude that “the economy has grown significantly faster under Democratic administrations, and more than twice as fast in per-capita terms.”

Unemployment Rate- Republicans 6.0%, Democrats 5.2%
Change In Unemployment Rate- Republicans +0.3%, Democrats -0.4%
Growth of Multifactor Productivity- Republicans 0.9%, Democrats 1.7%
Corporate Profits (share of GDP)- Republicans 8.8%, Democrats 10.2%
Real Value of Dow Jones Index- Republicans 4.3%, Democrats 5.4%
(in logarithmic growth rates)- Republicans 2.8%, Democrats 4.4%
Real Weekly Earnings- Republicans 0.3%, Democrats 1.0%
CPI Inflation Rate- Republicans 3.8%, Democrats 3.8%

Regarding the question of statistical significance, Parker noted:

The differences in growth, unemployment, and the corporate profit share are all statistically significant, and support the argument that the economy may actually perform better under Democrats. The differences in weekly earnings, stock market growth, inflation, and multifactor productivity all favor the Democrats as well, but these differences are not statistically significant.

I know that study isn’t the end all be all, but it illustrates my point as well as anything else. When you compare the candidate’s positions on issues (and you’re ALL doing that, right?? ) take a second to think a little deeper. Government is not inherently a problem and collective solutions can be better for everyone in the long run. At least think about it.

→ 3 CommentsCategories: National Politics
Tagged: , , ,

City Mice Vs. Country Mice

September 10, 2008 · 5 Comments

One of the great political divides in our country has always been between urban voters and rural voters. In a broad sense, people who live closer together in a city are more likely to think of government as a source of solutions to their problems. People who live in rural areas are more independent and see government as an intrusion.

Though the lines between urban and rural America get blurred with each passing year, these voting patterns still exist. Think about it - when was the last time that New York City, Los Angeles or Chicago voted Republican for President? Conversely, President Clinton only carried his native Arkansas and Vice-President Gore’s native Tennessee in the South. Besides those two, no Southern state has voted Democratic for President since 1976 with President Carter.

But the times are-a-changin’! :) Consider this study by North Carolina based Public Policy Polling. It shows that people who move in from out of state are bringing their Democratic voting preferences with them. Among native North Carolinians, McCain leads Obama by 48% to 40%. But among non-natives, Obama leads McCain by 46%-41%. As everyone knows, more and more people from the Northeast corridor are moving in to North Carolina every day.

We started to see this trend in Virginia in 2006 with the election of Jim Webb to the US Senate. Granted, Webb was helped tremendously by the verbal gaffes of George Allen, but the fact that Webb was even in a position to win was a direct result of the growth of the Washington, DC suburbs, which also grow more and more Democratic every year. Thanks to this trend, former Virginia Governor Mark Warner is a  virtual shoe-in for election to the US Senate this year, holding a lead of more than 20 percentage points in the polls.

Now the Democratic tide from the North is reaching down into North Carolina. We actually started to see this in 2006 as well. Consider first-term NC Representative Ty Harrell, whose district in Western Wake County was solidly Republican in terms of registration for years. But between 2003 and 2006, enough new voters moved in to the district to classify it as a “swing” district, with no one party having a clear advantage. Harrell ran on a bipartisan message of effectiveness and won the seat.

This year, the tide has the Democratic presidential nominee Obama in a statistical tie with his Republican counterpart McCain.  Every poll I’ve seen has the NC race within the statistical margin of error.

Though I will continue to bang my head against the wall and tell people to vote solely based on the issues, I know that’s not going to happen. While I am thankful that I managed to somehow escape the affliction, native white Southerners will continue to vote Republican because those traditions and political values were handed to them (just as voters in Connecticut do the same thing for the Democrats…).

But if I were a die-hard NC Republican, I would be wringing my hands looking at the long term view. John McCain may well win the Presidency and Liddy Dole may hold on to the Senate seat - but those holds are less and less firm every election cycle. New Democratic voter registration is swamping new Republican voter registration both in North Carolina and across the country.

As technology gives people the chance to live and work farther and farther from where they were born, these trends will only continue. As the population grows and areas that were once rural become more and more urban, these trends will only continue.

Year by year, city by city and block by block, the city mice are going to win out. In the words of the immortal Ric Flair - “Whether you like it, or you don’t like it, learn to love it, because it’s the best thing going today!” WHOO!  :)

(Post script - OK, I admit the Flair quote doesn’t totally work there, but I was just dying to use it!)

→ 5 CommentsCategories: NC Politics · National Politics
Tagged: , , ,

Dan Quayle In Drag

September 4, 2008 · 26 Comments

Last night a good friend had the most pertinent observation I’ve heard about Governor Sarah Palin — she’s Dan Quayle in drag! And the more I thought about it, the more I realized that his observation was dead on.

Misspellings of the word potato(e) aside, it is a bit of an urban legend that Dan Quayle was stupid. Rather, his bigger problem was being an ideological one trick pony. His role was to provide the red meat sound bites that were directed straight to the Republican base, without one bit of vision for any swing voters. Judging from last night’s speech by Governor Palin, I’d have to say she is carrying on Senator Quayle’s legacy quite nicely.

Don’t get me wrong. Though I vehemently disagree with Governor Palin, she gave a great political speech and presented herself very well. She came across as the neighbor that you might like to hang out with, but you just know not to talk politics. But beyond presentation - what did her speech contain? I just re-read it over again. She intros herself, makes some pretty good and memorable quips about Obama, makes the case for drilling and then says how great McCain is. Here’s the transcript.

And that’s it. Where is any mention of healthcare? the mortgage crisis? the economy? Afghanistan? Heck - I certainly don’t expect any agreement from the Republicans on those issues, but their party does have positions about each of those, so why not tell the American people what you’re going to do to solve those problems?

I vividly remember then Vice-President Dan Quayle getting absolutely slaughtered by then Senator Al Gore in their 1992 debate. Gore came in with his usual encyclopedic knowledge of policy and used it deftly. All that Quayle could do was laugh nervously, quip a few one-liners and then blame everything on the “liberal Democrats in control of Congress.”

Look for Governor Palin to do much of the same over the next two months. Which is why Senator McCain’s choice of Palin is such a head-scratcher. She’s a great pit bull who the right-wing base is going to absolutely love.  But if you’re rallying the base after Labor Day, you’ve got much bigger problems.

For a campaign that is trying to charge Obama with being all personality and little substance, the choice is strange indeed. But hey, I’m happy with it! I mean, it’s not like she attended a church with a whacko pastor or anything. Oh wait…..

→ 26 CommentsCategories: National Politics
Tagged: , , , , ,

The Sport of Politics

September 2, 2008 · 4 Comments

Thousands of fans began streaming into the stadium hours ahead of the main event, with wild-eyed anticipation of what was to come. As with most events of this magnitude, the atmosphere was electric. Sidewalk vendors hawked buttons, t-shirts, pennants, hats, calendars - every type of memorabilia imaginable was on display. For those who wanted to pay more money, the “official” merchandise was on sale inside of the stadium gates and the lines went eight people deep by each souvenir stand.

After having my ticket scanned and making my way through security, the next stop was for stadium junk food. Sadly, this venue didn’t offer anything particularly remarkable the way that Wrigley Field does. A processed hotdog or nachos just didn’t appeal to me, so I just got a soda and made my way to the field level seats. The seats were amazing, we were right by the field and could see the players close up. Pre-game warm ups were a treat as we to to see several of our favorite players getting both themselves and the crowd ready for the main event. As with any event of this size, the music was cranked up several times and the fans got on their feet and danced. Finally, it was time for the starting line ups and when the team captain took the field, 80,000 people went absolutely beserk. All I could see were flags and pennants waving everywhere and being on the field level, the wall of sound surrounded me. I could barely hear myself think. A friend who sat in the pressbox later told me that when the team captain walked out, he could feel the stadium literally shake from all the noise.

This may sound like I am describing another Saturday night in any number of college football stadiums across the country. In fact, I am describing the final night of the Democratic National Convention at Invesco Field in Denver.

The lack of blogging the last week was directly related to the fact that I was a delegate to the DNC. Mrs. SMD and I had the pleasure of attending and truly had a blast. Having been to a few of these conventions, I knew there would be little time for sharing my exploits on the web. Once the convention let out each night, it was on to the various after parties all over Denver. When you crawl in bed at 2am and then spend another half hour watching the coverage, that alarm clock going off at 7am is not exactly a welcomed awakening.

As to be expected, there was wall to wall coverage of last week all over the web. There’s no point in my blogging about how great Obama’s speech was, how overblown the “will the Clintons get onboard” question was, etc. What did strike me was how much the whole thing is like a sporting event and the partisans are there to cheer on our favorite “team.”

In terms of regular operating procedures, there is little difference in the fact that I am involved in the Democratic Party and that I am an NC State fan. I indulge in both activities by going to events featuring large masses of people. To attend these events, I have used money or time or relationships (and believe me, all three of those factors apply to both!) to get admission into these events. While attending them, the social norm is adorn yourself with paraphernalia in support of the team or candidate. There is even somewhat of a “uniform” expcted at each. For the ballgames - it’s a golf shirt, khakis and cap. For the political rally - it’s a dark suit, shirt and tie.

When the “game” begins, we cheer loudly for our team. Any reference to the other team is met with all wall of boos and hisses. We will cheer for anyone associated with our team. We especially love it when people from the other team come over to our side. Most NC State fans could care less than the Director of the Wolfpack Club is a UNC-CH graduate (No, I didn’t make that up.) just like the Republicans are going to give Sen. Joe Lieberman a raucous welcome when he addresses the Republican National Convention this week, even though he’s got a 90% liberal voting record and only agrees with them on Iraq.

Then, when the game is over, we go back home and engage our neighbors in good natured, but pointed taunting and teasing about how their team is doing. We defend our team to the death and will rarely admit to a flaw in our own team, without first making a comparison to a similiar flaw in the other team.

The only difference is that our children’s futures will not be affected by the outcome of the ballgame (though I suppose that more than a few children have been born as the result of post-game euphoria after a big win in sports).  Our children are affected by the political choices we make. It’s a little odd that we put the same type of energy into the two.

But you should’ve seen my jump up and high five my buddy Thursday night when Senator Obama walked on the field. You would have thought that I was watching Philip Rivers beat UNC-CH. Oh well, at least I had great seats!

→ 4 CommentsCategories: National Politics · Sports
Tagged: , , , , ,

Biden for Veep? The SMD Called It

August 23, 2008 · 2 Comments

Pardon me while I do a little victory lap. Just over three months ago, I said that Senator Obama should pick Senator Biden for Vice-President. I am glad that the Democratic nominee followed my sage advice. :)

Seriously though, this is a ticket that I can get genuinely excited about. I am probably very late to the party in being a Biden fan, but I have followed most of his appearances and interviews on the talking head shows over the last few years and his wisdom and blunt approach really impressed me. As I said in the original column, google Biden and Iraq - the man knows his stuff backwards and forwards. Most everything he said would happen in Iraq did in fact happen in Iraq.

While I certainly had no qualms about the so-called “experience gap” between Obama and McCain, I would have to be blind to not admit that the perception exists. Picking Biden shores that up, big time. I am also aware that no pick is perfect and this ticket is going to have some hurdles to overcome - namely the fact that Biden was fairly critical of Obama in the primaries and openly questioned his experience. Also, let’s start watching how often the echo chamber on the right tries to dredge up Biden’s plagarism from the 1988 race. Those red herrings are usually good to distract a few voters with.

I think it is likely that Biden serves as sort of a “co” Secretary of State with whoever gets that nod in an Obama administration. His relationships with various foreign dignitaries are too strong a tool to not use.

Of course, Mrs SMD would want me to make sure that I mention Biden’s work on the Violence Against Women Act. She worked on this issue for many years and saw his leadership first-hand.

This is a strong pick and the ticket will be formidable. Give’em hell Joe!

PS - I would also like to take a victory lap for correctly picking that Russell Wilson would be NC State’s starting Quarterback this season. With mad prognosticating skills like these, perhaps I should forgo Denver next week and go to Vegas!! :)

→ 2 CommentsCategories: Uncategorized

Stranger In A Strange Land

August 20, 2008 · 4 Comments

I’ve never been quite able to figure out the Western Piedmont region of North Carolina. Not only do these people in the foothills vote reliably Republican, they have this other odd notion that barbecue and slaw must somehow contain a tomato-based sauce. On my way back from a union event in Hickory, NC (what’s the over/under on how many times THAT phrase has ever been said or typed??) I decided to take the long way via Hwy 64 and stop in Lexington to sample the tomato-based cuisine. I figured if I couldn’t understand their politics, I could at least try and figure out their ‘cue.

This is not to say that I was a Lexington barbecue virgin. I have been to several of the Lexington area establishments, but my visits were years ago. Clearly my taste buds needed a refresher!

Of course, loving barbecue as I do, one stop at one restaurant would NOT suffice. I knew that my readers would want more insight and comparison than one restaurant could provide. So, purely in the interests of research, I planned my route to stop at two of the legendary establishments.

First up was Stamey’s Barbecue in the thriving metropolis of Tyro, NC. Right away, I noticed all of the different options for how they serve the barbecue. You can order it sliced, chopped or coarsely chopped. Ordering a chopped sandwich brought me this -

The meat was very tender and moist - but it didn’t really have the flavor of the sauce. They even bring you a little plastic cup of sauce for dipping. The sauce had a nice tomato-tangy flavor, but dipping or pouring after the meat is cooked is sort of cheating isn’t it? I was going to post a picture of the hush puppies, but they really weren’t anything to write home about. I mean, you can’t really screw up fried lumps of corn bread, so the puppies weren’t bad at all, they just didn’t make an impression.

In sum, Stamey’s is worth a visit the next time you find yourself in Tyro (and who among us doesn’t have that happen on a regular basis?) but don’t make a special trip.

Next up was Lexington Barbecue. Yes, the name of the restaurant is the same as the dish they serve. Lexington Barbecue is a legendary among barbecue aficionados and politicians. Now that I’ve reacquainted myself with the place, I can see why.

First, if your car windows are open even a crack, you’ll smell the restaurant long before you see it - that’s always a good sign. When you pull up in the parking lot, you can see the smoke rising from the pits out back - good sign number two. Check it out -

I walked in, sat down at the counter and immediately a plastic basket full of hush puppies appeared in front of me. Unlike their canine cousins in Tyro, these pups WERE worth writing home about. The flavor had a nice balance of sweet and savory - I could definitely taste the corn meal.

Having just consumed most (but note, Mrs SMD, not all…) of a barbecue sandwich at Stamey’s not an hour earlier, I didn’t really have the appetite to go as nuts as my taste buds wanted to. In the interests of my research, I ordered another “chopped sandwich.” Interestingly, chopped means something entirely different at this establishment. The sandwich came much like what I am used to eating in Eastern North Carolina. See -

This sandwich was much more yummy. Clearly, it had been basted with this tomato-based sauce for much longer than its competitor. The meat was lean but may have been a tad moist for my tastes. I liked it, but it was nowhere near as good as God’s barbecue in Ayden, NC.

And that ended my foray into the Western Piedmont of North Carolina. I am glad I went because I enjoy the chance to sample barbecue. While my heart and stomach are clearly aligned with the Eastern North Carolina, I always urge respect for all kinds of barbecue.

I mean, what kind of Democrat would I be if I wasn’t in favor of some pork-based diversity?? :)

→ 4 CommentsCategories: Fat Guy Food
Tagged: , , , ,

Hypocrisy of Olympic Proportions

August 17, 2008 · 2 Comments

It has been very easy to marvel at the Olympic Games thrown by the Chinese. From the opening ceremonies to the amazing performance by Chinese athletes - the country has used their time in the spotlight for maximum effect. Of course, the not-so-little dirty secret is that the whole thing is a carefully managed stage show. The Chinese literally rounded up all of their undesirables - the poor and the homeless - and kicked them out of Beijing. Factories were shut down to try and reduce the country’s enormous pollution. Dissidents were jailed and many newspapers were shut down for not toeing the party line. This is nothing new. China runs their country with an iron fist and the needs of the “state” come well before those of the people.

As bad as that is, you can’t deny that China is an economic super-power. Our annual trade deficit with the Chinese runs well over $100 million. According to the US Treasury, Chinese banks own $592 BILLION of OUR debt! Like it or not, we need the Chinese and they need us. When considering all of China’s human rights abuses and offenses against their own people, the company line here in the States has always been - “We’ll beat Communism by exporting our culture. Trade will eventually bring down the Communists.”

I’ve got no real qualms with that argument. Relatively speaking, the Chinese people are enjoying more freedom and free markets than ever before. When McDonald’s, Wal-Mart and Budweiser all become staples of Chinese life, it’s clear that the Communist regime will one day fall, somehow or another.

So, perhaps someone can explain to me why the same logic doesn’t apply to Cuba. This little island is nothing. Yet the US doesn’t trade with them and you can’t travel there without special permission. Yeah, I know, back when we were carving up the globe with the Russians, it was sort of a big deal to have a communist satellite 90 miles from Florida. But that’s not the case anymore is it?

Despite that, you will never hear a national US politician call for “opening” Cuba. Senator Obama would only go as far as loosening travel restrictions and allowing for larger transfers of money into the country from Cubans living in the US. Of course, Senator McCain had the typical blustery response to that idea and all but accused Obama of being soft to dictators. (Of course, the dictators in China are “different” - as long as they own our debt, right?)

The hypocrisy is nothing short of ridiculous. Let me be clear - BOTH parties are to blame - going back many years. And it shows the fundamental flaw of American politics; catering to perceptions matters much more than taking a principled stand. We can buy all the crappy, lead-painted toys that China wants to send us, but mention trying to open Cuba the same way and you’re labeled as a softy pinko.

Perhaps one day some politician from either party will end this lunacy. Until that time, I am stuck smuggling Cuban cigars back from Mexico! :)

→ 2 CommentsCategories: National Politics · Sports
Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Judging Through The Airwaves

August 9, 2008 · 5 Comments

OK, so yet another political figure has confessed to a moral failing. There’s no need to hash out the specifics, as a gazallion other blogs and message boards will pile on just fine. What is striking to me about any of these situations is the harsh judgement and reaction that occurs - mainly from the political opponents of the given offender - as if the moral failing somehow undercuts that person’s political positions, or vindicates the positions of their opponents.

Let me be clear - this happens on both sides of the political spectrum. There’s no need to run down the litany of idealogues on both sides who have been caught in compromising positions, you’ve got Google and can figure it out. Suffice to say that moral failings are not the sole provence of one political party or the other, but when they happen - the other side cackles with an eerie mix of condemnation and glee.

Why do we do this? Its as if our minds are already made up that Hillary is a b@$%# or that George Bush is stupid, merely because a given politician may hold different values or positions than our own. And then when the worst things happen to these people - usually a sexual infidelity of some sort - than these preconceived notions we’ve come up with are somehow vindicated. “Yup, I always knew that liberul SOB was no good, and now he proved it.”

I’d like to propose a rule of thumb for us all (myself included) to try and follow. That rule is - the more information we have - the more we can judge. The less information we have, the less we can judge. Simple isn’t it?

Think about it. Here’s a sample of things I can accurately judge; whether I can finally afford a boat (Mrs. SMD would say no… :) ), the strength of the Obama campaign in NC, the chance that my beloved Wolfpack will play in a BCS bowl this year (nil). I can judge all those things because I have studied up and know a lot of information first-hand.

What I can’t judge is whether or not a person in the public eye is “good”, because of a moral failing that happened before the world stage. I can’t judge or give an educated opinion on whether an athlete is guilty of a charged crime, because I am not sitting in the courtroom on the jury. And I can’t judge whether I “like” a politician if I haven’t met or spent any time with them.

Why can’t I judge these things? Because the internet and cable TV only give me one little piece of a very big pie. The amount of information that I receive from those sources gives me just enough information to say -

“Wow, that was a terrible thing about Senator Smithers. I hope the family can be healed,” or “Boy, the evidence I saw on that news story sure seems bad for the Quarterback. I hope he’s got a good lawyer.”

And that’s it. That’s about the extent of the judgement that I can provide, because I don’t have the anywhere near complete information. Beyond that, it’s really none of my business.

→ 5 CommentsCategories: NC Politics · National Politics
Tagged:

Take Me Out To The Ball…..FOOD!

August 4, 2008 · 6 Comments

I have to be honest. When it comes to baseball, there are many more knowledegable and rabid fans than I. Beyond the basic rules, there are many nuances of the game that after all these years, I have yet to pick up. However, what I have picked up is a passion for GOING to the baseball game and getting my eat and drink on! :)

Think about it - is there anything better than sitting in a ballpark on a nice summer day, beer in one hand and junk food in the other? This past weekend took me to Chicago for work and gee - as luck would have it, the Cubbies were at home on Saturday afternoon and I had nowhere to be until that evening. I hopped the Red Line to Wrigleyville and after giving the scalper a few of my hard-earned dollars, I was sitting right on the third base line.

I have been to many pro baseball stadiums, but would put Wrigley in my top two or three for the best food. You can smell it a block away - the italian beef mixes in with scent of the Chicago Dogs on the grill. Throw in the Old Style beer flowing from the gazillion taps around Wrigley and you’ve got a feast for the senses.

I got into my seat, checked out the scene for the first couple of innings (and got to see a double stolen base as the Cubs totally got one over on the Pirates pitcher with runners on first and second) and then excused myself past the people on my row as it was time to EAT!

Of course, I had to get the italian beef. I got hooked on these years ago when I first started traveling to Chicago. It’s top round beef that is cooked with italian spices and dressing and then shaved very thin. All of that is piled on to a hoagie roll with peppers and onions - THEN - the whole thing is dipped back into the italian au jus for a very wet, messy, yet wonderful sandwich. Sitting there with my food and beer was almost, but not quite, as close to heaven as Ayden, NC. Here’s a picture of an italian beef sandwich -

It got me to thinking about what other ballpark foods I really enjoy. These are in no particular order -

Oriole Park at Camden Yards - If you want a wide variety of stellar ballpark food, you can’t beat this place. They serve a massive hot dog that is so big it comes on a sub roll. And then there’s the crab cakes. You have to get the crab cakes.

Bank of America Stadium - Yeah, I know, the Panthers lair doesn’t have as storied a legacy as other venues. However, what they do have is BOJANGLES - in the stadium. Really, does it get any better? The day that NC State makes the same deal and allows Bojangles into our venues is the day I jump for joy.

Lane Stadium - The highlight of game day in Blacksburg is the smoked turkey legs. There is something so primitive about carrying around a big piece of meat, while watching modern day gladiators tear each other’s heads off.

Quick Sidebar Story - The last time that the ACC Tournament was in Washington, Mrs. SMD and I ran into Virginia Tech head football coach Frank Beamer on the metro train. We start making small talk and telling him what a great time we had in Blacksburg. Mrs. SMD says - “Coach - your fans were great to us and we really enjoyed ourselves, but I’ve got one nagging question. They serve these big smoked turkey legs at the game - doesn’t it bother anyone to be eating the team’s mascot?

Coach Beamer gets this really puzzled look on his face when Mrs. Beamer steps in - “Frank, you’re always on the sidelines, so I’ll bet you had no idea they serve turkey legs on the concourse.” Coach gets a concerned look on his face and says - “That IS troubling. We’ll have to look into that.”

The last we heard, they were still serving the turkey legs in Blacksburg, but for the longest time we were scared that the question had killed some poor turkey farmer’s extra income. :)

RBC Center - Whether you’re there for Wolfpack basketball or Canes’ hockey, there are three or four stands along the lower concourse that serve the best barbecue. They have the pork shoulder sitting right there and pull it in front of you. I was surprised at how good it is.

Kenan Stadium and the Dean Dome - The Brie De Maux is really flavorful. It goes well with the duck confit and a bottle of 2005 Ramonet Montrachet.

I could blog about ballgame food all day. Do any of our readers have ballgame food favorites or suggestions?

→ 6 CommentsCategories: Fat Guy Food · Sports
Tagged: , , , , , , , ,