Critically Important Legislation Introduced in Congress!

Saw this gem in the new today -

Bill proposed to end BCS system

Story Highlights A Congressman is planning on introducing anti-BCS, pro-playoff legislation Rep. Joe Barton did not specify a playoff set-up, only that the BCS must go Only a playoff game could be marketed as a "national championship" game

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Taking aim at a BCS system he said "consistently misfires," a member of Congress planned to introduce legislation Wednesday that would force college football to adopt a playoff to determine the national champion.

Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, the ranking Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, didn't specify what sort of playoff he wants -- only that the BCS should go.

"In some years the sport's national championship winner was left unsettled, and at least one school was left out of the many millions of dollars in revenue that accompany the title," Barton said in a statement released ahead of the bill's introduction. "Despite repeated efforts to improve the system, the controversy rages on."

He said the bill -- being co-sponsored by Reps. Bobby Rush, an Illinois Democrat, and Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican -- "will prohibit the marketing, promotion, and advertising of a postseason game as a 'national championship' football game, unless it is the result of a playoff system. Violations of the prohibition will be treated as violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act as an unfair or deceptive act or practice."

The BCS was created in 1998 by the six most powerful conferences. Since then, the system has been tweaked to make it easier for teams from smaller conferences to qualify for the top games. The sites for the four BCS bowls -- the Rose, Orange, Sugar and Fiesta -- take turns hosting a championship game between the top two teams in the BCS standings, which are based on two human polls and six computer ratings.

This season, Florida (12-1) and Oklahoma (12-1) will meet in the BCS title game Jan. 8 in Miami.

Barton cited Southern California in 2003 and undefeated Auburn in 2004 as examples of worthy teams left out of the BCS national championship game.

"This year, we again have two teams with one loss each playing for the 'championship,' while two undefeated teams and four additional teams with only one loss will play in bowl games, but none can become 'champion,"' he said.

When an Energy and Commerce subcommittee held a hearing about the BCS in 2005, lawmakers said they weren't going to pursue legislation.

"The BCS method of determining who is No. 1 consistently misfires," Barton said Wednesday. "Simply exposing the flaws and subjecting them to discussion ... hasn't led to improvement by those who run the system."

Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Wow, I'm glad the Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee is focused on this! There certainly isn't much else in the areas of energy or commerce that would require his focus. I mean, our country has such a tight energy policy, and commerce is going very well these days.....

The Presidential Bio Project

In 1999, I began a reading project - to read biographies on all of the US Presidents, in order. Yes, I am a history geek! I've read quite a bit of history, US and otherwise, but felt that the best way to really understand the history of our country is to understand the men that achieved the highest office in the land. It's been a fun project. To date, I am up to Gerald Ford (he will be the next President I read about). I will probably stop after Ronald Reagan for some period of time, so I can wait for some perspective and books to come out on Bush #41 and on. Ok, so it's really a ploy to put off reading about Clinton as long as possible! But in actuallity, I don't believe there are any good books out on Bush yet, and as far as Clinton is concerned, the only books out there are either fawning tributes or right-wing drivel - no middle ground yet. And frankly, he's young enough that he could still do something decent with his life ;-) And who knows what sort of job Obama will give him (in charge of hiring White House interns?). So his life remains to be seen.

Okay, so when I tell people that I am doing this little project, after they stop the 'We are not worthy' chants, they typically ask me several questions, some of which I can repeat here (this IS a family blog, ya know).....

1) What have you learned?

2) Who is your favorite President?

3) Who is your least favorite President?

In no particular order (strange, since I numbered them!), and across several posts, I'll provide answers!

My favorite President is John Adams. He had an amazing career - being both 'present at the Creation' and very involved in foreign affairs in the early years of the country, so he had a chance to see the new country both through the eyes of new Americans but also from the vantage point of England and France, the two dominant powers in the world at the time. He also left an amazing amount of correspondance behind, as he constantly wrote to his wife Abigail. They had a very close relationship and she provided him with a lot of political advice and news from home. They also both had great humor and were constantly displaying it in their letters. Adams was also one of the first to try to separate himself, as President, from political parties (which sunk his attempt for a second term). He could also be quite tart with people and, in the way of the times, was very good at insulting people while seeming to compliment them. He was also very attached to his home in Braintree (which is now in Quincy) and his farm. He was very much a man of the earth and the people.

Second place would have to be a tie between Lincoln and Truman. Lincoln probably has a slight edge, probably because he had a wonderful sense of humor (mostly self-deprecating) and he used it to great effect during the Civil War. He obviously had one of, if not THE most, difficult Presidencies of any of the 43 men (to date) that have held the job. Talk about the right guy at the right time (more about that later).

Truman is 2A probably because he again, had a great - if coarse - sense of humor and also had a very difficult job - following someone who was an icon, FDR, President for 12 years, who was so entrenched in the White House. Truman also had about zero preparation. FDR, in one of the most amazing - and selfish - acts ever seen in the White House, told Truman basically nothng about how the war was going and the existence of the Manhattan Project, the effort to build the atomic bomb. FDR knew he was dying yet purposefully chose to spend almost no time with Truman, prepping him for the job. Amazing. Truman had his ups and downs in the Presidency, but is one of my favorites because of the hurdles he successfully overcame and his 'Buck Stops Here' attitude towards the job.

Now the REALLY Important Stuff

What are the Sox gonna do this off-season??

Ok, so as the baseball winter meetings start in Las Vegas, some musings on the Sox. My wife and I were talking about the 2004 World Series at dinner Saturday night (not exactly sure how we got into that), so I've been thinking and reading (as I do every day) the latest baseball writings on si.com and boston.com/redsox. The main hole the Sox have is at catcher. My view is that they need to either:

1) Sign Jason Varitek to a 2-year deal (assuming his agent, Scott Bora$, will accept
that) and then you have 2 years to determine whether or not the Sox have a good
prospect in the farm system - they have several young cathchers there - or whether
they will need to get one from outside.

2) Trade with Texas for Jarrod Saltalamacchia. Texas has 3 catchers (they had 4 but
traded Gerald laird to Detroit this past week-end). Salty seems to be the best
combination of youth (he's 23), ability (he batted .253 in 61 games last year) and
potential. He's also been working on catching the knuckleball in winter ball,
which, if he could do it, would eliminate the need for the Sox to have a personal
catcher for Tim Wakefield. The problem is, what would the Sox have to give up?
Probably Clay Buchholtz, which seems like s pretty steep price to pay.

The Sox could do both 1 and 2, which might not be a bad idea. Sign Varitek and let him start for 110 - 120 games and if he still can't hit, you have a guy you can put in to pinch hit and then catch in key spots late in the games. Salty could learn about game-calling from one of the best. Might be the best of both worlds.

Pitching should be fine, with Beckett/Matsuzaka/Lester/Wakefield set and some combination of Buchholtz/Masterson/Bowden/Tazawa (and maybe Paul Byrd?) in the 5th spot. The bullpen will be good, too.

What else do the Sox need to do? Well, they probably need some balls for spring training, so they should trade Julio Lugo for the proverbial bag of balls. Eat the contract, whetever. Just dump him. Let Jed Lowrie have a full season at short, and assuming he isn't hurt again, he'll produce. They also need another outfielder, with Coco Crisp being gone. They were looking at Rocco Baldelli, formerly of the Rays, but that's kind of a risky move, as he can't play a lot of games and if JD Drew gets hurt (or any other outfielder, for that matter) that could be problematic. I wouldn't mind them signing Baldelli and then another guy that can play outfield as well as infield. I'd also like to see them pick up another starter, although that could be a number 4 or 5 guy. How about taking a flyer on Ben Sheets, if he'd sign for 2 years?

So that's what they NEED to do.

As far as Mark Teixiera, I have real mixed feelings. Signing Tex means that either Kevin Youkilis or Mike Lowell would probably be traded, and I would hate to see that. Push comes to shove, I'd rather see them trade Lowell, but coming off a hip injury and surgery, his value is lower than Youkilis. Youk would bring a lot right now, but I just can't see the Sox doing that deal, not even the Nomar-traders. But Texis such a great player, and a really good guy, according to what I've read, that it's hard to say, we're not going to sign him because Mike Lowell has 2 years remaining on his contract... I mean, Tex is going to command a 6 - 8 year deal, so to NOT do that because it might cost you a player that is at the end of his career (albeit still very productive, a great defender a wonderful clubhouse guy)... This is a guy that will be your middle-of-the-order hitter, protecting Big Papi, for years to come, and is a Gold Glover at first. Seems hard to pass that up, if 'all' it is going to cost you is money (versus prospects). So, on balance, if that deal can be done, then I say do it.

When Will Doonesbury Move Ahead?

Ok, first off, let's set the scene - I have been an avid reader of Doonesbury since it started back in the early '70's. I love the comic and the characters - when BD was shown without a helmet of some sort for the first time a couple of years ago - he was always seen with either a football, police or soldier's helmet throughout his entire 'life' - it was amazing and a major moment in the strip. I don't always agree with Gary Trudeau's politics - well, that's not true, it's more like I hardly EVER agree - but the characters are great and he has a wonderful wit and sense of irony. He has had some memorable politician symbols - of course, we know about George W Bush and his beaten-up ancient Roman-style helmet. Of course, before that, he was the asterisk. Dan Quayle was the feather. Bill Clinton was a waffle; Arnold Schwarezenegger a 'groping hand'. Good stuff.

But lately, Trudeau has been irritating me by devoting a full week to Sarah Palin, for no apparent reason. I mean, the election is over and she really hasn't been in the news much, certainly not enough to rate a week of focus. So I started thinking about what he might do with Obama, if he actually has the guts to use a 'symbol' for him.
The question becomes, what will Trudeau pick for him?? Hopefully he won't take the easy way out and simply have him speaking from out of the frame. So I have a few suggestions on that can be used to represent him.

1) Dictionary - since he is all about 'words', what better to represent him than a bunch
of words?!

2) A passport (American, of course) - because of all of the Internet chat about his
country of birth, this might be an appropriate symbol. Or should it be a Kenyan
passport? ;-)

3) 27 cents - 'Change' we can believe in! It would be 2 dimes, a nickel and 2 pennies.
And maybe within the 'circle with red line through it'.

4) A red, white and blue depiction of the Hoover Dam - in honor of the Rev.
Jeremiah Wright ('G-- damn America'). Ok, this is a stretch for sure, but I like
the imagery.

5) A tire - to symbolize the 'retreads' that Obama is appointing - Gates, Clinton,
Emanuel, Holder.

Dan