Back to Blogging

It's been a long time since I've posted her regularly. Hopefully I will be able to get back on track. A few random thoughts that have been rolling around my brain......

******

This election cycle is shaping up to be the second straight presidential election in a row where I am seriously considering not voting. Much will depend on who Mitt Romney chooses as a running mate. John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin made me feel comfortable enough to cast a vote for him even though I still had serious reservations about him.

*****

Speaking of politics, it seems to me that politicians are more and more concerned with maintaining power than abiding by principles. This has always been true to a degree but seems to be more prevalent these days than ever before. Part of the reason I don't follow politics as closely as I used to as I find myself increasingly frustrated by members of both parties. The country seems poised for a major reformation in its politics but only if principled leaders will stand up and be counted upon to be agents of change.

*****

Most of my free time of late (what little there has been) has been devoted to baseball. Although my team, the Chicago Cubs, are having a typically frustrating season I still enjoy the sport. In fact, I became a fan of the game before I became devoted to my team. More on that in an upcoming post over at Eephus League. That's where I have been doing what little blogging that I have been involved in lately.

*****

Not long ago I ran across an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal suggesting that Wrigley Field be torn down. The author is, of course, wrong for a lot of reasons. One of his assertions is that the Cubs were a better team before moving to Wrigley than afterwards. That's true, however, he failed to look at the club's won-loss record at Wrigley. Through the 2011 season, the Cubs had a +435 win differential at the park. So clearly it's not the home park that's the problem.

*****

From the Useful Links Department: the Random P. G. Wodehouse Quote Generator.

*****

It was a really big deal at the time: it turns out Dan Quayle was right. And you read about it in the Washington Post of all places. Dan Quayle might not have been the brightest or most effective politician but at least he was willing to stand up and speak about what he believed.

*****

Quote to ponder: "It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather, we should thank God that such men lived." - George S. Patton

*****

Finally, I have held out as long as I possibly can but have given in and decided to join Twitter. I don't really plan on tweeting much (we'll see how that goes) but I've already found it's a great way to quickly check news sources that I like to follow. Feel free to follow me (for what it's worth).

Pro-Choice Columnist Calls Out Intolerant Left

Few things have caused as much controversy in recent days as Tim Tebow's upcoming pro-life Super Bowl Ad. Abortion advocates have been critical of Tebow and of CBS' decision to air the spot during the upcoming game.

But the most remarkable thing I've seen yet is this column from Washington Post writer Sally Jenkins. Ms. Jenkins takes the abortion advocates to task for their criticism of the young football star:

I'm pro-choice, and Tebow clearly is not. But based on what I've heard in the past week, I'll take his side against the group-think, elitism and condescension of the "National Organization of Fewer and Fewer Women All The Time." For one thing, Tebow seems smarter than they do.

Tebow's 30-second ad hasn't even run yet, but it already has provoked "The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us" to reveal something
important about themselves: They aren't actually "pro-choice" so much as they are pro-abortion. Pam Tebow has a genuine pro-choice story to tell. She got pregnant in 1987, post-Roe v. Wade, and while on a Christian mission in the Philippines, she contracted a tropical ailment. Doctors advised her the pregnancy could be dangerous, but she exercised her freedom of choice and now, 20-some years later, the outcome of that choice is her beauteous Heisman Trophy winner son, a chaste, proselytizing evangelical.

Pam Tebow and her son feel good enough about that choice to want to tell people about it. Only, NOW says they shouldn't be allowed to. Apparently NOW feels this commercial is an inappropriate message for America to see for 30 seconds, but women in bikinis selling beer is the right one. I would like to meet the genius at NOW who made that decision. On second thought, no, I wouldn't.

There's not enough space in the sports pages for the serious weighing of values that constitutes this debate, but surely everyone in both camps, pro-choice or pro-life, wishes the "need" for abortions wasn't so great. Which is precisely why NOW is so wrong to take aim at Tebow's ad.

Be sure to read the whole thing. Hats off to Ms. Jenkins for calling out the intolerant critics on the Left who wish to demonize the Tebows. Though we may not agree on whether abortion is wrong we can at least agree that we can respectfully disagree with each other.