Cheaters Never Prosper

So if you saw this evening’s Super Bowl, you saw that the 1970’s-era Pittsburgh Steelers were voted — by the fans of the League — as the greatest dynasty in professional football history.  That was entirely too sweet.  And rightfully deserved.  And of course, the fact that former Steeler Plaxico Burress caught the game-winning touchdown was completely awesome as well.  Of course, the game itself was absolutely spectacular… and truly the stuff that makes the Super Bowl perhaps the world’s greatest sporting event… EVER (eat that, World Cup).

But then things tonight got even better when New England Patriots head coach Bill Belichik showed what a sore loser he is by walking off the field before the game was over.  After it became clear that no one would remember him for going all the way this season — despite the fact that the rest of his team knew they needed to stay on the field to finish the game — he just took off and never looked back… as if somehow, that would help cleanse him from being associated with anything short of absolute perfection.  My personal hope is that the NFL fines him for such an unsportsman-like show of conduct and lack of class / tact / etc.  And that people stop paying attention to the ridiculousness of the New England Patriots.

All things said though, I’m glad to see the Patriots lose tonight…. if only because it reminds me that the lessons from childhood are true: “Cheaters never prosper.”

That truth has to be sitting heavy in Bill Belichik’s throat right about now…

For The Record…

… I have THE coolest girlfriend around. 

I started feeling pretty crummy and sick today, and she brought over an entire kit of stuff (tea, meds, the “Forrest Gump” dvd, and etc.) to help me get better.  Putting her own personal well-being and health aside, she made me some great green tea and even pulled out the cotton from the pill container to help me get at the first dosage of the evening.

Needless to say, I’m more than looking forward to bringing her home to meet my family over the Easter holiday weekend.  Family and friends who’ll be around the Chicago area then are more than welcome to give me a buzz… and we’d be more than happy to try and tag-up.

Now, to go dose myself one more time before hitting the sack.

More on my meeting and photo op this morning with Secretary (of Homeland Security) Michael Chertoff sometime later…

Live Blogging Thoughts On Tonight’s State Of The Union Address — Back To Regularly Scheduled Programming

10:13 p.m. (Eastern) — With the POTUS having left the House chamber and the fine journalists of the media (most of whom only know politics from watching it in the news, but have little experience — either in a formal degree, or having actually ever worked on a campaign — in actual politics beyond their own news-writing; seriously… who are these people to even try and analyze things political???), it’s time to switch channels and go back to watching “Family Guy” on TBS.

I mean, seriously… I’ve seen the clips from the Democratic primary debates, and I read the WaPo.  So, I’m guessing I really don’t need to watch the Democratic response to the SOTU.

I’m guessing it’s all been said before.

As for POTUS’s speech tonight… it was a hallmark speech if only because he went all out and pulled no punches in taking aim at Congress and “pulling rank” on them with a number of direct, unmitigated veto threats and other threats.  He went back to holding the traditional conservative line of lower taxes, greater compassion, and a respect for the sanctity of human life. 

Now, I just wish that his domestic record had been as strong these past seven years as his words were this evening.  If it had of been, tonight’s speech could have been HUGE… because it would have had a lot of backing in legislative success.

But alas, the era of the “compassionate conservative” ideal has now started to enter its final few months (not that Bush was one, per se, but a few of us still held to those words as pointers for who we hoped we would have been during this time)… and we wait with bated breath to see what fate will now befall us.

Live Blogging Thoughts On Tonight’s State Of The Union Address — Like A Rock Star

10:06 p.m. (Eastern) — Sorry… but low poll numbers or not, the President is leaving the chamber like he’s a rock star, and he’s getting treated like one from folks on both sides of the aisle!

With all of these autographs, will we see current presidential candidates who are in the audience throwing undergarments up on stage?

Live Blogging Thoughts On Tonight’s State Of The Union Address — Trust The People

10:01 p.m. (Eastern) — I think that’s a good way to end it: “trust the people”.

Also, the Bush twins are in the gallery.  I’m definitely not going to complain about that one.

Live Blogging Thoughts On Tonight’s State Of The Union Address — The Token Cuba Mention

9:56 p.m. (Eastern) — The token mention of Cuba.  Question: will he “go there” and stick it to Castro before the old geezer croaks his last down in Havana?

Live Blogging Thoughts On Tonight’s State Of The Union Address — DICK LUGAR!!

9:49 p.m. (Eastern) — DICK LUGAR!!!  Seriously… NBC just panned to a shot of the man who by far has the greatest depth on foreign policy of anyone in the U.S. Government, and who will be dearly missed when he departs the Senate.

Oh yeah, and he’s from Indiana.  I think that for us (native Hoosiers), that’s a much better claim to fame than California gets with Pelosi sitting behind the dais.  He’s well-respected among all within the Senate (on both sides of the aisle), and has global clout unlike anyone else in Washington these past 20 years.

Live Blogging Thoughts On Tonight’s State Of The Union Address — Who Was The Heckler

9:44 p.m. (Eastern) — Did anyone catch who the dude was that shouted really loud (and perhaps in a heckling manner) during that last applause?

Live Blogging Thoughts On Tonight’s State Of The Union Address — Fiscal Responsibility

9:17 p.m. (Eastern) — Bush is going to go down swinging tonight.  He is pulling no punches, and I predict that this speech tonight could easily rank as one of the hallmark speeches of the Bush presidency.

So far, his line about the IRS taking checks and money orders from those willing to pay higher taxes was priceless.

And issuing an Executive Order instructing all federal agencies to ignore earmarks that have not been directly debated and passed by the U.S. Congress (and instead were slipped in as part of a committee report)?

That’s gutsy.  Really, really gutsy.

I just wish that NBC had shot the reaction on the faces of the justices of the Supreme Court when Bush said that, because I smell a legal fight brewing over that one….

Has The World Gone MAD?

And not crazy mad, but back to the old Cold War policy of believing in the idea of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD)? 

It’s hard to tell.  But one key document recently cobbled together by strategists at NATO hints at a remnant of the old Cold War thinking in the West’s approach to dealing with the proliferation problems risks from non-state or rogue nation actors.  If you thought that idea of the preemptive nuclear strike was generally less of a threat now that the Soviet Union has dissolved and the world is safer and the tensions of the two nuclear superpowers is greatly decreased, you’d best reconsider that notion after reading this piece (which oddly received not as much play in the mainstream media, even though strategically it is a pretty big deal).

The question remains in my mind (and even though I have a few strong ideas, I won’t share them): under what scenarios do analysts who wrote this tome consider the preemptive use of nuclear weapons a viable option for stopping proliferation?  Are we talking about “proliferation” in the sense of a missile preparing to be launched by a rogue power, just before lift-off (and ergo we preemptively nuke the launch site to stop it; this particular idea implies an immediate, last-ditch measure as the guiding decision to launch or not)?  Or are we talking about “proliferation” in the more traditional sense… with infrastructure creation, materials shipments, and knowledge transfers (which implies something that could be better handled through a diplomatic or other, conventional means)?

The difference — both in my mind and in how situations should be handled from a global perspective — between the potential ways of defining proliferation for the purposes of arriving at the end goal of your analysis on this issue makes all the difference in the world. 

Of course, part of me also has to wonder if NATO isn’t saber-rattling some with this document, perhaps feeling a little spooked by developments within the Russian power structures and all? 

It’s hard to tell.  All we do know for the time being is that preemptive nuclear strike is on the top pick-list of ideas for dealing with proliferation… and that — all other things aside — is a pretty big freaking deal.