Dear Corrupt Raleigh Political Machine,
I wanted to let you know that every week you lose revenue to individuals like me who have the opportunity to stop in various cities along the North Carolina/South Carolina border and purchase gasoline. You see, your $.30 per gallon sales tax (according to a recent story in the Charlotte Observer) assisted in making the gas I purchased today $.55 cheaper per gallon in Fort Mill, SC. Therefore, I purchased gas for $2.04 per gallon while the gas station right beside my office on the North Carolina side of the NC/SC border is selling it for $2.59. It's simple economics....if consumers can buy the same thing for substantially less with in a reasonable distance then they will do it 9 out of 10 times. So, because of your high tax on gasoline you are losing revenues. Take note......we border South Carolina from the Blue Ridge Mountains to the Atlantic Ocean. Your greed is costing you money. Cheers!
Thursday, October 30, 2008
A few thoughts.....
I watched Obama's infomercial last night. Honestly, I agree with a lot of what he had to say. Having personally dealt with a situation in which health care was unaffordable to someone who needed it I couldn't agree more that we need to make sure health care is available and affordable to everyone, not just people who have full time jobs. Also, being in a business in which I work with companies that compete with foreign companies for local business, I fully believe it should be more expensive for local companies to buy goods from foreign suppliers. The person who made it cheaper to do business with foreign companies is not interested in the best interest of this Country. Locally owned and operated companies have lost business to foreign companies because they can't compete on cost. Because of this, Americans have lost their jobs and local business owners have had to run lean and/or shut their doors. Now, this doesn't mean I'm going to go out and pull the lever for Obama. I still have a very fundamental concern with the idea of a more Socialised government. Nevertheless, if Obama does win this election, I will do nothing but wish him the very best and hope and pray that he does what is right and what is in the best interest of the people of this country. Personally, while I may not vote for the guy, I think the American thing to do is to be supportive of our leaders until they give us a reason not to support them (See Martha Alexander or Bev Perdue).
The follow is a few general concerns I have:
1. While I believe that politics should be controlled locally as much as possible, what do you do when your state government is noted for being one of the more corrupt state governments in the country?
2. At this pace, a college education may be too expensive for my children. That being said, at this rate I suspect college might be too expensive for more than half of our country. This would lead to less and less people having the opportunity to attending college. If this happens, we will head in the opposite direction of progress and we will get lapped by China and Japan. When I went to College my tuition each semester, for a State School, was right at $1,000.
3. While I agree with Obama in that companies like Exxon no longer need tax incentives to help their bottom-line, I wonder what the fallout will be if these incentives were removed. Would the crooks at Exxon layoff employees and/or try to relay their rising cost to their employees in an effort to not negatively affect their bottom line (Trickle-down Economics)?
4. I have good credit. With the interest rate dropping down to 1% why are my credit card interest rates and HELOC not decreasing. When I got my HELOC the rate was prime plus one. Now it's prime plus five. What gives, and who is going to blow the whistle on this? Further, while the intent of the Fed in lowering rates is to encourage lower interest rates in an effort to encourage more consumer spending, how can consumers spend more money if the lenders don't relay those lower rates to the consumers.
5. One politician I am without a doubt pulling against is Bev Perdue. She is trying to pit the State of North Carolina against Charlotte in an effort to win the Governor's race. Why, would any Charlottean in their right mind vote for a person who is clearly selling out Charlotte for their own personal gain? Amongst other things, Charlotte needs more funding for the Criminal Justice system. With someone like Bev Perdue in office I'm not confident that the next four years will pass and we will still not get the funding we need (Unfortunately, this is typical of the Raleigh Political Machine.). Personally, I think Charlotte might be much better off if we were on our own. There's no point in paying taxes to a state that doesn't support us but never misses a chance to boast about us.
The follow is a few general concerns I have:
1. While I believe that politics should be controlled locally as much as possible, what do you do when your state government is noted for being one of the more corrupt state governments in the country?
2. At this pace, a college education may be too expensive for my children. That being said, at this rate I suspect college might be too expensive for more than half of our country. This would lead to less and less people having the opportunity to attending college. If this happens, we will head in the opposite direction of progress and we will get lapped by China and Japan. When I went to College my tuition each semester, for a State School, was right at $1,000.
3. While I agree with Obama in that companies like Exxon no longer need tax incentives to help their bottom-line, I wonder what the fallout will be if these incentives were removed. Would the crooks at Exxon layoff employees and/or try to relay their rising cost to their employees in an effort to not negatively affect their bottom line (Trickle-down Economics)?
4. I have good credit. With the interest rate dropping down to 1% why are my credit card interest rates and HELOC not decreasing. When I got my HELOC the rate was prime plus one. Now it's prime plus five. What gives, and who is going to blow the whistle on this? Further, while the intent of the Fed in lowering rates is to encourage lower interest rates in an effort to encourage more consumer spending, how can consumers spend more money if the lenders don't relay those lower rates to the consumers.
5. One politician I am without a doubt pulling against is Bev Perdue. She is trying to pit the State of North Carolina against Charlotte in an effort to win the Governor's race. Why, would any Charlottean in their right mind vote for a person who is clearly selling out Charlotte for their own personal gain? Amongst other things, Charlotte needs more funding for the Criminal Justice system. With someone like Bev Perdue in office I'm not confident that the next four years will pass and we will still not get the funding we need (Unfortunately, this is typical of the Raleigh Political Machine.). Personally, I think Charlotte might be much better off if we were on our own. There's no point in paying taxes to a state that doesn't support us but never misses a chance to boast about us.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Obama's 30 Minute TV Spot
So Obama has bought up a 30 minute TV spot to promote his propoganda to the people. While the Obama camp is being very tight lipped about the content of this infomercial tonight, I think it's safe to say that the information will be very pro-Obama and do everything to paint him as this "saviour" with all the best ideas on how we can fix this country.
I'm not sure if I'll watch it or not. I think it's a good idea to be informed and to know what the people you don't really agree with have in mind. I'm definitely interested to learn more about him since all signs right now point to an Obama victory.
However, knowing Obama's background and his plan for Socialized Healthcare and the Redistribution of Wealth I can't help but see this as a "State-run TV" type deal where the liberal and conservative medias are cut out so that he can sell his propoganda without influence from outside sources.
I don't really have a problem with him buying up TV time to promote his best interest. If you have the money to do it then do it. Honestly, it'd be nice if John McCain would do the same thing. However, other than being one long 30 minute infomercial what useable purpose will this deal serve?
On a separate note, I talked to someone who has a brother in Alaska the other day. He said that they are have very mixed emotions about the possibility of Sarah Palin becoming VP. He said that Alaska does not want to lose her and that she is as good as gold up there. She stood up to the face of corrupt politics in Alaska and because of her efforts the common man in Alaska is now better off. With all due respect to the people of Alaska, someone who stands up to the corrupt politics of Washington is exactly what Washington needs. We need to get leaders in Washington who can relate to the common man and who actually serve the common man. I think we've learned over the these past few months that Sarah Palin is that person which is why the liberal media has tried so hard to discredit her. The liberal media sees Palin as a legitimate threat to their poster boy, Barrack Obama, and they know that if they had not immediately started to discredit her the liberals could have lost their edge. While Obama could still lose, I think it's a long shot. Nevertheless, I'm still voting in hopes that my one vote makes the difference.
I'm not sure if I'll watch it or not. I think it's a good idea to be informed and to know what the people you don't really agree with have in mind. I'm definitely interested to learn more about him since all signs right now point to an Obama victory.
However, knowing Obama's background and his plan for Socialized Healthcare and the Redistribution of Wealth I can't help but see this as a "State-run TV" type deal where the liberal and conservative medias are cut out so that he can sell his propoganda without influence from outside sources.
I don't really have a problem with him buying up TV time to promote his best interest. If you have the money to do it then do it. Honestly, it'd be nice if John McCain would do the same thing. However, other than being one long 30 minute infomercial what useable purpose will this deal serve?
On a separate note, I talked to someone who has a brother in Alaska the other day. He said that they are have very mixed emotions about the possibility of Sarah Palin becoming VP. He said that Alaska does not want to lose her and that she is as good as gold up there. She stood up to the face of corrupt politics in Alaska and because of her efforts the common man in Alaska is now better off. With all due respect to the people of Alaska, someone who stands up to the corrupt politics of Washington is exactly what Washington needs. We need to get leaders in Washington who can relate to the common man and who actually serve the common man. I think we've learned over the these past few months that Sarah Palin is that person which is why the liberal media has tried so hard to discredit her. The liberal media sees Palin as a legitimate threat to their poster boy, Barrack Obama, and they know that if they had not immediately started to discredit her the liberals could have lost their edge. While Obama could still lose, I think it's a long shot. Nevertheless, I'm still voting in hopes that my one vote makes the difference.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Campaign Contributions
I wonder what Obama and McCain are going to do with what's left of the approximate$1.514 billion they don't spend on their campaigns? Honestly, I'm not sure what the law is regarding the remaining totals, but it sure would be nice to redistribute the wealth to taxpaying citizens as part of a new stimulus plan.
One Year Later - OI7
It's now been almost one year since 7 students from USC and Clemson died in a tragic fire in Ocean Isle Beach, NC. Some of my bestfriends are SAEs from South Carolina and I know a lot of girls that are/were Tri-Delts at both Clemson and South Carolina which is why this story will always hit close to home.
It's worth your time to read these stories. Even in such a tragic loss the outpouring of good and the impact on those who knew the OI7 or even those who didn't ensures that their memories will last.
Ocean Isle fire: Action from ashes
Tri Delta sisters: Grace under pressure, love in motion
In safe haven of fraternity, brothers cherish memories
It's worth your time to read these stories. Even in such a tragic loss the outpouring of good and the impact on those who knew the OI7 or even those who didn't ensures that their memories will last.
Ocean Isle fire: Action from ashes
Tri Delta sisters: Grace under pressure, love in motion
In safe haven of fraternity, brothers cherish memories
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Nashville: The Great American Sellout
I have mixed emotions about Nashville. Nashville is a town of hope for so many. Dreams are realized there everyday, and dreams are crushed as well. In a way it's our Hollywood.
I love Country Music, the roots of the American soul. In a lot of ways Country Music goes as the country goes. It's the backbone of so many people's story, but in so many ways it's so unbelievable that it's borderline brutal to hear.
Today, on any of the "Mainstream" Country Music channels you'll be hard pressed to hear real country. Music Row sold out years ago and what you have now is nothing more than watered down Rock n' Roll. Somewhere, mixed in with all of that watered down lite rock junk is the remains of a dying sound.....pedal steel, fiddle, etc.
I have a love/hate affair with Nashville. The town calls me on occassion. The dream to realize musical fortitude appeals but at what cost? In the nooks and crannies, in the alley ways, side roads and living rooms all around Nashville country lives on, yet goes unnoticed. The guys in the suits say it's "too country." It's too real and it's got too much soul. Music Row does not want soul, Music Row wants guys like Billy Currington.....a guy who looks more like a model than a musician and whose music is anything but country. Putrid seems like a better description.
Out in Austin and all over Texas, Oklahoma and the rest of Americana the true sound and soul of Country Music lives on. However, unless you can stream Radio Free Texas or serve beer at Gruene Hall you may never hear it. It's still there in Nashville. It's just that you won't find it on the radio or on Music Row. By the time it gets to the front office it's so watered down that the soul and the heart of it was ripped out long ago.
Nashville is historic, it's haunted and it has all the ingredients to truly be great (and as a city and culture it is great). However, the rest of America won't buy the truth so the good goes unnoticed while the bad gets to play the game and pretend like they are something they aren't.
Some say the soul of Nashville died the day the Opry kicked out Hank Sr.. Who knows....maybe it did. Personally, I think it just took to the shadows and has been hiding there ever since. You can still walk down the alley in between the Blue Bird Cafe and the Ryman and feel that cold chill. They're always there in the shadows.....away from the street lights, but never far from the neon lights, the smokey old bars and the smell of whiskey.
One day, maybe Country will wear it's hat and boots again. In the meantime, we'll keep searching for the true sound and the true soul of Country Music. In the meantime you get Lite Rock.
I love Country Music, the roots of the American soul. In a lot of ways Country Music goes as the country goes. It's the backbone of so many people's story, but in so many ways it's so unbelievable that it's borderline brutal to hear.
Today, on any of the "Mainstream" Country Music channels you'll be hard pressed to hear real country. Music Row sold out years ago and what you have now is nothing more than watered down Rock n' Roll. Somewhere, mixed in with all of that watered down lite rock junk is the remains of a dying sound.....pedal steel, fiddle, etc.
I have a love/hate affair with Nashville. The town calls me on occassion. The dream to realize musical fortitude appeals but at what cost? In the nooks and crannies, in the alley ways, side roads and living rooms all around Nashville country lives on, yet goes unnoticed. The guys in the suits say it's "too country." It's too real and it's got too much soul. Music Row does not want soul, Music Row wants guys like Billy Currington.....a guy who looks more like a model than a musician and whose music is anything but country. Putrid seems like a better description.
Out in Austin and all over Texas, Oklahoma and the rest of Americana the true sound and soul of Country Music lives on. However, unless you can stream Radio Free Texas or serve beer at Gruene Hall you may never hear it. It's still there in Nashville. It's just that you won't find it on the radio or on Music Row. By the time it gets to the front office it's so watered down that the soul and the heart of it was ripped out long ago.
Nashville is historic, it's haunted and it has all the ingredients to truly be great (and as a city and culture it is great). However, the rest of America won't buy the truth so the good goes unnoticed while the bad gets to play the game and pretend like they are something they aren't.
Some say the soul of Nashville died the day the Opry kicked out Hank Sr.. Who knows....maybe it did. Personally, I think it just took to the shadows and has been hiding there ever since. You can still walk down the alley in between the Blue Bird Cafe and the Ryman and feel that cold chill. They're always there in the shadows.....away from the street lights, but never far from the neon lights, the smokey old bars and the smell of whiskey.
One day, maybe Country will wear it's hat and boots again. In the meantime, we'll keep searching for the true sound and the true soul of Country Music. In the meantime you get Lite Rock.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Keith Olbermann
I know everyone is entitled to their own opinion. This blog is my opinion. It's what I believe and what I'm thinking. People discount bloggers as uneducated and as a waste of time. Even so, everyone has an opinion and everyone has a right to voice their opinion. Some stay quiet, say nothing, hoping all along that someone will say what they're thinking. While I may only have one or two readers I do anything but stay quiet.
Politics is an interesting beast. Nothing can divide us more than when you put on your Democrat or Republican hats. You can be great friends one minute, but the second you start talking politics all bets are off and the gloves come off. The hatred and anger fueled by political opinions is a damn shame, but it's what our country is all about. Everyone has a voice and everyone's opinion, in theory, is respected.
I've said all that to say this. My opinion is that Keith Olbermann of MSNBC and Football Night in America is without a doubt one of the more clueless anchors in the liberal media. It's not his opinions that I have a problem with. I don't agree with him on much of anything, but again that doesn't bother me. What bothers me is his "shock-jock" delivery method and the hatred for all things that don't represent his opinion.
When he gets on a rant, the veins in his forehead start to swell and he progressively leans closer and closer to the camera as if he is about to fly through the TV and wrap his hands around your neck in hopes that you'll feel all the rage and anger he feels. It's really quite remarkable to watch him rant. The guy is without doubt certifiable. It's amazing that Keith Olbermann is the same guy that along with Dan Patrick make up one of the best sports tandems in TV history. His creativity and touch on the work he did at ESPN and now at NBC on Football Night in America is hard to duplicate.
Again, just my opinion, but I prefer Bill O'Reilly. For some reason the liberal media and political leaders appear to be threaten immensely by him. Aside from George W. Bush, John McCain and Sarah Palin he might be their favorite punching bag. He's obviously saying something they don't agree with and he's obviously making a pretty good point. Otherwise, why bother? He's objective, calm and fair. He asks tough questions of everyone and he willingly gives all opinions a chance to make their case against him. To his credit, Obama is the only one to take him up on this and again was one of the better interviews I've seen with Obama. Bill asked Obama tough, but fair questions, and Obama was very upfront with his answers and I honestly walked away from those segments with a lot of respect for the way Obama handled himself while talking to O'Reilly.
As for all the haters.....If you're so sure you're right and O'Reilly's so wrong then why not settle it one on one?
Politics is an interesting beast. Nothing can divide us more than when you put on your Democrat or Republican hats. You can be great friends one minute, but the second you start talking politics all bets are off and the gloves come off. The hatred and anger fueled by political opinions is a damn shame, but it's what our country is all about. Everyone has a voice and everyone's opinion, in theory, is respected.
I've said all that to say this. My opinion is that Keith Olbermann of MSNBC and Football Night in America is without a doubt one of the more clueless anchors in the liberal media. It's not his opinions that I have a problem with. I don't agree with him on much of anything, but again that doesn't bother me. What bothers me is his "shock-jock" delivery method and the hatred for all things that don't represent his opinion.
When he gets on a rant, the veins in his forehead start to swell and he progressively leans closer and closer to the camera as if he is about to fly through the TV and wrap his hands around your neck in hopes that you'll feel all the rage and anger he feels. It's really quite remarkable to watch him rant. The guy is without doubt certifiable. It's amazing that Keith Olbermann is the same guy that along with Dan Patrick make up one of the best sports tandems in TV history. His creativity and touch on the work he did at ESPN and now at NBC on Football Night in America is hard to duplicate.
Again, just my opinion, but I prefer Bill O'Reilly. For some reason the liberal media and political leaders appear to be threaten immensely by him. Aside from George W. Bush, John McCain and Sarah Palin he might be their favorite punching bag. He's obviously saying something they don't agree with and he's obviously making a pretty good point. Otherwise, why bother? He's objective, calm and fair. He asks tough questions of everyone and he willingly gives all opinions a chance to make their case against him. To his credit, Obama is the only one to take him up on this and again was one of the better interviews I've seen with Obama. Bill asked Obama tough, but fair questions, and Obama was very upfront with his answers and I honestly walked away from those segments with a lot of respect for the way Obama handled himself while talking to O'Reilly.
As for all the haters.....If you're so sure you're right and O'Reilly's so wrong then why not settle it one on one?
Monday, October 20, 2008
Socialism and the Redistribution of Wealth
Last week, during the final Presidential Debate, both McCain and Obama talked about Joe the Plumber and shortly thereafter the media went wild and Joe the Plumber became the most famous plumber in America.
A few days later I was emailed by a very staunch Democrat in an effort to downplay the importance of Joe the Plumber's concerns. This person who emailed me tried to discredit Joe the Plumber because he is not a licensed plumber......that's it, that was the emailer's argument against Joe the Plumber.
Well here's the deal, it's true, Joe the Plumber is not a licensed plumber. However, this is because he currently works for a licensed plumbing company, and because of that he is not required by law to be licensed himself. The email I got tells half of the truth and strategically leaves out the rest of the truth in order to discredit Joe the Plumber and his concerns over Obama's tax increase plan.
I checked with my Accountant about Obama's desire to raise the tax percentage on businesses making more that $250,000 per year. I was curious to find out how negative the impact would be on these businesses. Would it really make that much of a difference? Would it be enough that employers might have to scale back their workforce, pay rates and/or company paid benefits in order to offset an increase in operating costs due to increased taxation? Well, as it turns out, if you have a good accountant you should be able to take advantage of enough tax exemptions that the impact is relatively inelastic.
However, while the tax impact may be inelastic, the concern about the Redistribution of Wealth(RDW) is still very real. I understand the theory of taxing employers more in order to help employees have an opportunity to start their own business (if they so desire). Obama's argument to Joe was, couldn't you have used that tax advantage as an employee five years ago? Well, in theory, yes. However, the fundamental concern is over who is controlling this. Should the Government tax the "more forunate" and redistribute their monies to the less fortunate to provide them with an easier path to start their own business? The idea that the government takes from one to give to another is not a new idea. In fact, many Economist, notably Adam Smith, have labored over this idea for hundreds of years. The problem is that the RDW is one of the base arguments for Socialism.
As the election comes closer and closer you have to decide how you feel about the very real notion of the government having more and more say into your daily life and professional path. The RDW is what governments do to level the playing field and to allow everyone the opportunity at an equal share of the pie. Is it wrong? That's for you to decide. Is it a very Socialist mindset? Yes. Personally, I think the government should leave the RDW up to business owners and the employees. However, one of the problems with Capitalism is that a capitalistic economic model does not requlate greed.
While at this point I have no doubt that Obama will win the election, I have huge concerns over his economic policy. Is too much government control a good thing? It's up for debate.
A few days later I was emailed by a very staunch Democrat in an effort to downplay the importance of Joe the Plumber's concerns. This person who emailed me tried to discredit Joe the Plumber because he is not a licensed plumber......that's it, that was the emailer's argument against Joe the Plumber.
Well here's the deal, it's true, Joe the Plumber is not a licensed plumber. However, this is because he currently works for a licensed plumbing company, and because of that he is not required by law to be licensed himself. The email I got tells half of the truth and strategically leaves out the rest of the truth in order to discredit Joe the Plumber and his concerns over Obama's tax increase plan.
I checked with my Accountant about Obama's desire to raise the tax percentage on businesses making more that $250,000 per year. I was curious to find out how negative the impact would be on these businesses. Would it really make that much of a difference? Would it be enough that employers might have to scale back their workforce, pay rates and/or company paid benefits in order to offset an increase in operating costs due to increased taxation? Well, as it turns out, if you have a good accountant you should be able to take advantage of enough tax exemptions that the impact is relatively inelastic.
However, while the tax impact may be inelastic, the concern about the Redistribution of Wealth(RDW) is still very real. I understand the theory of taxing employers more in order to help employees have an opportunity to start their own business (if they so desire). Obama's argument to Joe was, couldn't you have used that tax advantage as an employee five years ago? Well, in theory, yes. However, the fundamental concern is over who is controlling this. Should the Government tax the "more forunate" and redistribute their monies to the less fortunate to provide them with an easier path to start their own business? The idea that the government takes from one to give to another is not a new idea. In fact, many Economist, notably Adam Smith, have labored over this idea for hundreds of years. The problem is that the RDW is one of the base arguments for Socialism.
As the election comes closer and closer you have to decide how you feel about the very real notion of the government having more and more say into your daily life and professional path. The RDW is what governments do to level the playing field and to allow everyone the opportunity at an equal share of the pie. Is it wrong? That's for you to decide. Is it a very Socialist mindset? Yes. Personally, I think the government should leave the RDW up to business owners and the employees. However, one of the problems with Capitalism is that a capitalistic economic model does not requlate greed.
While at this point I have no doubt that Obama will win the election, I have huge concerns over his economic policy. Is too much government control a good thing? It's up for debate.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Big Chance, Big Game!
Every 2 or 3 years a game comes along like the game this Saturday between USC and LSU. It's a game that two and a half weeks ago I wasn't really looking forward to given the play of our team. Granted, there's the ties between my father's fondness for LSU and the fact that LSU is one of the most talented teams in the country AND the defending National Champions. However, this year's LSU team is not the same team from last year and this year's South Carolina team is better than they were last year.
Two weeks ago this game was not a big game. Then, a funny thing happened on the way to a 4-3 record for South Carolina and a 7-0 record for LSU. South Carolina found a player in Jason Barnes, Kenny McKinley returned from injury and an expected split between Ole Miss and Kentucky turned into two victories and a 5-2 record. Carolina's offense started to move the ball. Carolina is now averaging one punt per game. 3rd down conversions are tops in the SEC. Had it not been for 4 costly turnovers against Kentucky, a team that only gave up 17 points against Alabama the previous week, Carolina could have beaten Kentucky by two or more touchdowns. Is the tide turning? Is our team starting to come together? Who knows.
Photo from The StateOne thing we've known all year is that our defense is as good as advertised. While they've slipped a little in the first halves against both Ole Miss and Kentucky, they've bucked down nicely, giving up a total of 3 points in the second halves of the past two games. Our defense is ranked 1st in the SEC. If our defense continues to play the way they've played through the first 7 games we will continue to be in every game with a shot to win.
LSU on the otherhand....well, they are LSU. They are who we think they are. However, this year's LSU team is not as good as once thought. They have struggled on offense and their defense was rudely exposed by Florida in a 51-21 beat down last weekend. Their defense ranks 9th in the SEC and in general I think LSU lacks leadership on both sides of the ball. They have talent....actually, they have more talent than most every other team in the country. However, talented or not, without sound leadership you're going to have an uphill battle each and every week.
Photo from NOLA
The big question is "How will LSU respond after such a big loss to Florida?" Well, at this point, check in with me late Saturday night. (Actually, you could probably check in with me about 9pm EST and I should know something.)
How will this thing play out? Will the ghost of Joe Morrison show up, roam the sidelines closely watching over the psyche of the Gamecocks? What does the greatest offensive mind in College Football have up his sleeves? Does he finally have the players to let his offense go? Can our defense rise up to the challenge and disrupt LSU's fragile offense?
Somewhere in Lousiana tomorrow night, on a farm out in the middle of nowhere, Billy Cannon may or may not turn on the TV and watch the game. Maybe he'll go out to his shed, listen on the radio for a while before retiring back into his solitude. Somewhere, Paul Dietzl will be watching. A man who coached both LSU and South Carolina. Dietzl coached LSU to a National Championship and Billy Cannon to a Heisman Trophy. At Carolina he removed us from the ACC. An often argued and sore subject for the ACC Big 3, Clemson and South Carolina. Depending on who you ask, you'll get a completely different response. Nevertheless, in my eyes corruption in the ACC's Big 3 was all too similar to the people of South Carolina and just like they did in 1861 they Seceded.
Tomorrow night is the game I've been waiting for. The build up this week reminds me of 2001 when USC went up against a talented Florida team, coached by the great Steve Spurrier, only to have our boys fall back to mediocrity. Will history repeat itself or will a new chapter be written. 2001 was a long time ago, we have more talent and better coaches now. Our schemes are better and the playing field has been leveled. Time'll tell. Tomorrow we'll know just how good we are or aren't. Tomorrow hopefully victory awaits.
Two weeks ago this game was not a big game. Then, a funny thing happened on the way to a 4-3 record for South Carolina and a 7-0 record for LSU. South Carolina found a player in Jason Barnes, Kenny McKinley returned from injury and an expected split between Ole Miss and Kentucky turned into two victories and a 5-2 record. Carolina's offense started to move the ball. Carolina is now averaging one punt per game. 3rd down conversions are tops in the SEC. Had it not been for 4 costly turnovers against Kentucky, a team that only gave up 17 points against Alabama the previous week, Carolina could have beaten Kentucky by two or more touchdowns. Is the tide turning? Is our team starting to come together? Who knows.
Photo from The StateOne thing we've known all year is that our defense is as good as advertised. While they've slipped a little in the first halves against both Ole Miss and Kentucky, they've bucked down nicely, giving up a total of 3 points in the second halves of the past two games. Our defense is ranked 1st in the SEC. If our defense continues to play the way they've played through the first 7 games we will continue to be in every game with a shot to win. LSU on the otherhand....well, they are LSU. They are who we think they are. However, this year's LSU team is not as good as once thought. They have struggled on offense and their defense was rudely exposed by Florida in a 51-21 beat down last weekend. Their defense ranks 9th in the SEC and in general I think LSU lacks leadership on both sides of the ball. They have talent....actually, they have more talent than most every other team in the country. However, talented or not, without sound leadership you're going to have an uphill battle each and every week.
Photo from NOLAThe big question is "How will LSU respond after such a big loss to Florida?" Well, at this point, check in with me late Saturday night. (Actually, you could probably check in with me about 9pm EST and I should know something.)
How will this thing play out? Will the ghost of Joe Morrison show up, roam the sidelines closely watching over the psyche of the Gamecocks? What does the greatest offensive mind in College Football have up his sleeves? Does he finally have the players to let his offense go? Can our defense rise up to the challenge and disrupt LSU's fragile offense?
Somewhere in Lousiana tomorrow night, on a farm out in the middle of nowhere, Billy Cannon may or may not turn on the TV and watch the game. Maybe he'll go out to his shed, listen on the radio for a while before retiring back into his solitude. Somewhere, Paul Dietzl will be watching. A man who coached both LSU and South Carolina. Dietzl coached LSU to a National Championship and Billy Cannon to a Heisman Trophy. At Carolina he removed us from the ACC. An often argued and sore subject for the ACC Big 3, Clemson and South Carolina. Depending on who you ask, you'll get a completely different response. Nevertheless, in my eyes corruption in the ACC's Big 3 was all too similar to the people of South Carolina and just like they did in 1861 they Seceded.
Tomorrow night is the game I've been waiting for. The build up this week reminds me of 2001 when USC went up against a talented Florida team, coached by the great Steve Spurrier, only to have our boys fall back to mediocrity. Will history repeat itself or will a new chapter be written. 2001 was a long time ago, we have more talent and better coaches now. Our schemes are better and the playing field has been leveled. Time'll tell. Tomorrow we'll know just how good we are or aren't. Tomorrow hopefully victory awaits.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Crazy day in Tigertown!
Wow! Didn't expect it to happen so soon. I thought the king of the quivering lip would get to finish the year out before getting the boot. However, it appears that the boot kicks quickly in Clemson, South Carolina these days. Terry Don Phillips laid it out last night apparently telling Tommy that unless he took his team to the ACC Championship in December he would not return. Both agreed that they would not get there and today Tommy begins cleaning out his office.
Couldn't have happened to a bigger jackass. I've heard stories about dirty recruiting where 17 and 18 year old kids were sold a bill of goods and pressured into committing to Clemson. I remember when Tremaine Billie, a long time Gamecock commitment, decommitted from Carolina to go to Clemson. Billie was a running back in high school. A good one! I saw him play a few times and he racked up 300 yards rushing both times. Anyway, Billie wanted a shot at RB in college; however, due to his build Lou Holtz told him he would not play RB at Carolina and would be better suited for the defensive secondary. Along comes Tommy Bowden.....he recruits Billie as a RB and tells him he'll get his shot. Billie decommits from Carolina and commits to Clemson. Billie never played a down on offense and was immediately inserted in the Clemson secondary where he had a solid college career (when healthy). A Bill of Goods.
What happens from here on out is anyone's guess. Apparently some of Clemson's bigtime recruits are jumping ship. The word is some of the players supposedly had a celebration dance at Howard's Rock this morning when told that Tommy was gone. Bowden was always the underachiever. He oversold and underdelivered.
I said it before and I'll say it again. I'm not a Clemson fan, but I have friends and family that are and I'm happy for them. They wanted him gone and they got their wish. In my opinion Clemson is loaded with talent and as a Gamecock fan, it's now a good time to start worrying. With that talent and a good coach a lot of good bounces could go their way.
Couldn't have happened to a bigger jackass. I've heard stories about dirty recruiting where 17 and 18 year old kids were sold a bill of goods and pressured into committing to Clemson. I remember when Tremaine Billie, a long time Gamecock commitment, decommitted from Carolina to go to Clemson. Billie was a running back in high school. A good one! I saw him play a few times and he racked up 300 yards rushing both times. Anyway, Billie wanted a shot at RB in college; however, due to his build Lou Holtz told him he would not play RB at Carolina and would be better suited for the defensive secondary. Along comes Tommy Bowden.....he recruits Billie as a RB and tells him he'll get his shot. Billie decommits from Carolina and commits to Clemson. Billie never played a down on offense and was immediately inserted in the Clemson secondary where he had a solid college career (when healthy). A Bill of Goods.
What happens from here on out is anyone's guess. Apparently some of Clemson's bigtime recruits are jumping ship. The word is some of the players supposedly had a celebration dance at Howard's Rock this morning when told that Tommy was gone. Bowden was always the underachiever. He oversold and underdelivered.
I said it before and I'll say it again. I'm not a Clemson fan, but I have friends and family that are and I'm happy for them. They wanted him gone and they got their wish. In my opinion Clemson is loaded with talent and as a Gamecock fan, it's now a good time to start worrying. With that talent and a good coach a lot of good bounces could go their way.
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Experiments in Socialism: Bailout Package
There's an interesting read in the Daily Telegraph today titled: "We're All Socialist Now, Comrade."
Financial Crisis: We're all socialist now, Comrade
While it's an opinion piece it's also along the lines of my very thoughts regarding so many country's governments bailing out their financial institutions. Just this morning George Bush and his posse notified the media that they're considering buying up stakes in U.S. banks to "help" them recover from financial turmoil.
Our country has never wanted this much government involvement in private or publicly traded businesses, yet due to the reckless actions of many CEOs government action seems unavoidable. As a matter of fact, a move along these lines is so UN-American that it's almost as if we're witnessing one of the most pivotal moments in the history of the United States of America.
I have mixed emotions about this. I studied Economics and I know that in theory Socialism is a much better economic model than Capitalism. However, when in history has a Socialist structure/Country ever turned out for the better? I know that right now China is thriving, but it hasn't always been that way and China politically is still a very unstable country.
I guess the upside to all of this is that if the banks want to buy the shares back from the government they can, essentially removing them from the equation. However, I can't help but wonder if the government, after buying a stake in these companies, will prance their holier than thou "gurus" into the Board Room and expect their voices to be louder and their opinions to be final.
"Viva Mother America!"
Financial Crisis: We're all socialist now, Comrade
While it's an opinion piece it's also along the lines of my very thoughts regarding so many country's governments bailing out their financial institutions. Just this morning George Bush and his posse notified the media that they're considering buying up stakes in U.S. banks to "help" them recover from financial turmoil.
Our country has never wanted this much government involvement in private or publicly traded businesses, yet due to the reckless actions of many CEOs government action seems unavoidable. As a matter of fact, a move along these lines is so UN-American that it's almost as if we're witnessing one of the most pivotal moments in the history of the United States of America.
I have mixed emotions about this. I studied Economics and I know that in theory Socialism is a much better economic model than Capitalism. However, when in history has a Socialist structure/Country ever turned out for the better? I know that right now China is thriving, but it hasn't always been that way and China politically is still a very unstable country.
I guess the upside to all of this is that if the banks want to buy the shares back from the government they can, essentially removing them from the equation. However, I can't help but wonder if the government, after buying a stake in these companies, will prance their holier than thou "gurus" into the Board Room and expect their voices to be louder and their opinions to be final.
"Viva Mother America!"
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Crossroads
Accord to Wikipedia the word Crossroads means: "an intersection of roads. This meaning is used metaphorically as a place where other things - both physical and abstract - meet."
Apparently Robert Johnson came to a crossroads near Dockery's Plantation in rural Mississippi and sold his soul to the devil in order to become a great blues musician. Crossroads.
When I think of coming to a crossroads I think of that rural setting in Mississippi. I picture a young Robert Johnson standing there in the black of night with nothing to accompany him but his guitar, the clothes on his back and the nightly, ghostly sounds of the Mississippi Delta. I picture fear and uncertainty.
Crossroads can mean many things and anything to anyone. In my mind, crossroads are where you decide to take the road less traveled, or to follow convention. At a crossroads one determines whether they have the courage to follow their dreams, or to follow expectations. No one knows how many times one comes to a crossroads. Yet, everyone comes to them and everyone has to decide what is in the best interest for them and/or if they have the courage to go against the grain.
Do you take the risk and set out on that uncharted course in hopes of finding something you've always longed for? Or do you stay the course, always wondering "what if?"
"What if?" haunts me.
Apparently Robert Johnson came to a crossroads near Dockery's Plantation in rural Mississippi and sold his soul to the devil in order to become a great blues musician. Crossroads.
When I think of coming to a crossroads I think of that rural setting in Mississippi. I picture a young Robert Johnson standing there in the black of night with nothing to accompany him but his guitar, the clothes on his back and the nightly, ghostly sounds of the Mississippi Delta. I picture fear and uncertainty.
Crossroads can mean many things and anything to anyone. In my mind, crossroads are where you decide to take the road less traveled, or to follow convention. At a crossroads one determines whether they have the courage to follow their dreams, or to follow expectations. No one knows how many times one comes to a crossroads. Yet, everyone comes to them and everyone has to decide what is in the best interest for them and/or if they have the courage to go against the grain.
Do you take the risk and set out on that uncharted course in hopes of finding something you've always longed for? Or do you stay the course, always wondering "what if?"
"What if?" haunts me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
