Just read that Lane Kiffin was fired from the Raiders. Everyone was saying it was inevitable, not a surprise, etc. What I do find surprising is this little tidbit I read on ESPN:
"ESPN's Chris Mortensen reported that according to sources, Kiffin was fired via the telephone and without pay....Linehan [the Rams coach who got fired] was allowed to speak briefly with his players on Monday. Kiffin will not be afforded the same opportunity, a source said."
It seems to me if the Raiders are looking to hire a new, good, strong applicant for the position, they should set a good example by treating the former coach with a little more respect than that. The more I see the way the Raiders franchise is run, the more I don't like that team. They're impatient, unsympathetic and most of all mean. The way it's looking now, I'm guessing they only way they'll get anyone good is by throwing a LOT of money into it.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Life and Politics
Okay, so I actually wrote this a while ago, but completely forgot to post it. So I'm sorry if you no longer care but I'm gonna post it anyways.....
I couldn't stop laughing when I heard that Palin's 17-year-old daughter was knocked-up out of wedlock and the response of several people was that it wasn't Palin's fault. After all, no one can control a 17-year-old.
Excuse me?
I'm not sure how that could possibly be considered a good response. I'm not a fan of the word "control" myself, particularly when discussing another human being, but I'm hearing the gist of the message and couldn't disagree more.
Sure, you can't "control" your daughter, but you'd at least hope that in the 17 years prior to the pregnancy both parents would have had some influence over what their daughter's standards and ethics are going to be. Even if by 17 parents don't think they have any influence over their child's decisions, they really should.
I'm not saying that pregnant at 17 is the worst thing in the world, or is in some way "unethical." But I'm pretty sure that the people who are saying that it's not Palin's fault think so.
Anyways, I think one of the most interesting things about this whole scenario is the way politicians handle other politicians' children. It's generally accepted to be a topic that they don't mess with. In a profession where everything tends to be criticized and put under the microscope I find this a nice standard for them to have. At least politics has some boundaries, right? But when I hear people say that this teenage pregnancy news shouldn't even be discussed since it's about Palin's personal life, I start to get upset. After all, it was the Republicans who brought it up in the first place. And it has a very real impact on Palin's message and image.
Palin believes that sex ed in high schools should be limited teaching them only about abstinence. I'm assuming that this was her message in the home as well. And we know what a success that ended up being. Shouldn't this be very real proof that this tactic does not work? And as a woman who has tried to deliver that message and failed, she should say, "Listen, it's a nice idea in theory, I know, but in reality it just isn't effective. So let's move on to something that might actually work." But it appears that she's going to stick to her guns, even though the guns have no bullets. And I can only believe that this sort of behavior would continue, if she became VP.
I couldn't stop laughing when I heard that Palin's 17-year-old daughter was knocked-up out of wedlock and the response of several people was that it wasn't Palin's fault. After all, no one can control a 17-year-old.
Excuse me?
I'm not sure how that could possibly be considered a good response. I'm not a fan of the word "control" myself, particularly when discussing another human being, but I'm hearing the gist of the message and couldn't disagree more.
Sure, you can't "control" your daughter, but you'd at least hope that in the 17 years prior to the pregnancy both parents would have had some influence over what their daughter's standards and ethics are going to be. Even if by 17 parents don't think they have any influence over their child's decisions, they really should.
I'm not saying that pregnant at 17 is the worst thing in the world, or is in some way "unethical." But I'm pretty sure that the people who are saying that it's not Palin's fault think so.
Anyways, I think one of the most interesting things about this whole scenario is the way politicians handle other politicians' children. It's generally accepted to be a topic that they don't mess with. In a profession where everything tends to be criticized and put under the microscope I find this a nice standard for them to have. At least politics has some boundaries, right? But when I hear people say that this teenage pregnancy news shouldn't even be discussed since it's about Palin's personal life, I start to get upset. After all, it was the Republicans who brought it up in the first place. And it has a very real impact on Palin's message and image.
Palin believes that sex ed in high schools should be limited teaching them only about abstinence. I'm assuming that this was her message in the home as well. And we know what a success that ended up being. Shouldn't this be very real proof that this tactic does not work? And as a woman who has tried to deliver that message and failed, she should say, "Listen, it's a nice idea in theory, I know, but in reality it just isn't effective. So let's move on to something that might actually work." But it appears that she's going to stick to her guns, even though the guns have no bullets. And I can only believe that this sort of behavior would continue, if she became VP.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)