HuffPo/AOL: "A Merger OF Visions"

A huge convergence of the blogosphere, media, and the Web with the announcement that AOL has purchased the Huffington Post.

(As a reminder, JackRabbit Café is priced to move!)

More here.

Tweet

Please Note: Talking On Your iPhone In The Check-Out Line Didn't Make The List.

(Click image to enlarge.)
H/T: HuffPo

Their Own Private Idaho.

I've always said this blog is a stream-of-consciousness mish-mash of helter-skelter random thoughts drawn from whatever is bombarding my mind. It's often been about what's happening in Washington, or it's been about what's said about what's happening in Washington by amplified idiots. I'm a political and news junkie. But lately I've been thinking about much better games, and this week I've been thinking a lot about baseball.

I'm a baseball junkie, too.

Maybe it was the football overdose. The pigskin has always ranked lower than the horsehide in my mind, and while I follow and watch that senseless, clock-driven violence, I don't love it. Such is not the case with the Perfect Game.

We've just turned the calendar on a brand-new year, but I'm dreaming of spring training. The annual Baseball Hall of Fame election announcement always does that to me.

Av Sinensky is an attorney, but that's about all I know about him. I came across his blog post today on the Huffington Post. His take on a possible solution to the on-going dilemma of cheaters and their fitness for enshrinement in the Hall of Fame isn't new to me; I've often thought similarly. But he took the time to write it down and flesh it out and I didn't.

I don't believe in heaven or hell--or purgatory. But I do believe in reality, and I think the idea of redemption is as secular as it is religious. So--Biblical metaphor notwithstanding--here's an excerpt. Maybe he's on to something:

Here's what I propose: a Hall of Fame purgatory. Create a room off to the side of the main plaque room, with a big sign that says: "In this room we honor the accomplishments of some of baseball's greatest players who because of off-the field wrongdoings were denied entry to the main Hall of Fame." Each player would have a plaque in the same way current Hall of Famers do. It would describe his career and achievements, but the plaque will also very noticeably detail the transgression that's keeping them out. On their ballots, writers will now be given three options: "yes", "no", and "yes if not for suspected steroid use or other off the field activity that renders the candidate ineligible."

Through this we can solve many of the arguments about whether these players should be in the Hall. "But they were only great because of steroids." Well, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens were clear Hall of Famers before steroids, so we know that they're good enough. The only reason to keep them out is to punish them for their crime and to send a message to deter others from making their mistakes. Well, we're still doing that. Players want to be in the room Babe Ruth is in, not the one Pete Rose is in. "But what about the children? What lesson does it teach them?" It teaches them that if you break the rules, you get punished. As of now, if you were to take your child to Cooperstown, there would be no mention of these players, essentially. As far as the Baseball Hall of Fame is concerned, they never existed. This is the type of sweeping under the rug that I expect from organized religion, not sports. Baseball can embrace its history, good and bad, and still come out looking good in the aggregate.

But there's an even greater lesson that we can teach: redemption. Remember, it's the Hall of Fame purgatory, not Hall of Fame hell. You can get out. And these players have a lot of pride, so they will desperately want to. You know what else they have? Money. And, after they retire, lots of time. So let's put that to use. Let's create a community service program that allows these players to give back to the game of baseball in order to redeem themselves for their mistakes. Make them sponsor, organize, and coach little leagues, particularly in inner cities and poor neighborhoods where baseball is dying. Let's force these guys to become the game of baseball's greatest ambassadors. Their reward: they get to be in the Hall of Fame. As for lessons, how about this: it teaches our children that even though baseball players are tremendously gifted athletes, they're not gods; they're human beings just like the rest of us. They can accomplish great things, but they can also make mistakes. Most importantly, by working hard to make up for the mistakes that they've made, they can be forgiven. Anyone have a problem telling that to their kids?

In the words of The Office's Michael Scott, this measure would be a win-win-win for everyone involved. For the players: they get to be in the Hall of Fame. For the league: they get to turn a bad situation into an opportunity for positive growth. And finally, for the fans: we all get to put all this drama and controversy behind us and we get to see our generation's great players where they belong. Because honestly, does anyone want to take their kids to a future Hall of Fame that doesn't have Barry Bonds in it? I know I don't.

Thanks, Av. Between the Steroid Era and your plan, the Hall could forever recognize infamy as well as greatness and put Cooperstown's construction guys back to work building that cheater's wing at the same time.

The Right Wing Is Trying To Scare Your Grandma.

Beware the snake-oil salesmen. Their products will make--and keep--you sick.

Some welcome perspective on the current role of the United States government in the health care of millions from Lincoln Mitchell, Assistant Professor in the Practice of International Politics at Columbia University, on HuffPo:

Old people, some poor people and veterans already have government supported health care through Medicare, Medicaid and various veterans benefits. These programs are, of course, far from perfect, but they are pretty good. While many seniors would like to see Medicare reformed, it is rare to see senior citizens, or organizations of senior citizens call for abolishing Medicare. Similarly, many veterans, some who served decades ago rely on veteran's hospitals for an important part of their health care. My father is a veteran who voices more than the occasional criticism of the US government, but I have never heard him say that he wishes veterans didn't get any health care or that the government should close the veterans hospitals.

Senior citizens and veterans are both well organized and powerful interest groups, representing tens of millions of Americans, but government involvement in the health care sector has hardly caused any pubic outrage among these two key constituent groups. On the contrary, both usually push very hard for the expansion of Medicare and veterans benefits. If the American people really wanted government out of the health care industry, or if the government was unable to play a useful and positive role in the delivery of health care, it is pretty likely that these groups would have made a lot of noise about this issue years ago, but they have not.

Medicaid recipients are not as well organized as either veterans or senior citizens, but recipients of Medicaid very rarely argue for weaker Medicaid programs or less involvement by the government in providing health care services. Again, the opposite is true. Recipients of Medicaid have often shown a preference for bigger programs with more government involvement.

Medicare, Medicaid and veterans' benefits have become an indispensible part of our health care system providing valuable services and benefits to people, many of whom would have very few health care options were it not for these government programs. This is something which should be kept in mind when scare tactics about government takeover of health care are used. These programs also demonstrate the inaccuracy, or perhaps nuttiness, of some of the more outlandish claims about Obama's proposed programs. For example, if the government were really going to ration health care or set up "death panels" as part of government health care programs, wouldn't the government have started by doing these things to the poor, the elderly or disabled veterans-precisely the people who rely on the government for health care today?

The right's "death panelists"--Sarah Palin, Chuck Grassley, John Kyl, Newt Gingrich and others--along with their megaphones at FOX News and talk radio continue to spread misinformation and blatant lies about health care reform. They have portrayed government involvement in health care--especially the public option--as a bogeyman. President Obama commented at a town hall meeting in late July, "I got a letter the other day from a woman. She said, 'I don't want government-run health care. I don't want socialized medicine. And don't touch my Medicare." Even a Republican--Representative Robert Inglis of South Carolina--told to "keep your government hands off my Medicare," said, "I had to politely explain that, 'Actually, sir, your health care is being provided by the government...(b)ut he wasn't having any of it."

The concerted effort on the right to spread false information about health care reform will not end. Many Americans get their information--or misinformation--from conservative talk radio entertainers and the "talk TV" that is FOX News. To this slice of the electorate, dissemblers such as Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are seers, and brave truth-tellers battling an encroaching tyranny that, of course, they are slickly packaging for their gullible public. For the rest of us, some welcome perspective such as Dr. Mitchell's is a necessary respite from the liars and snake-oil salesmen trying to sell their bad medicine.

The Revolution Is Being Twittered.

The events in Iran are unfolding at the speed of tweets and downloaded YouTube videos.

Nico Pitney on HuffPo is doing yeoman's work and live-blogging history in the making.

Be sure to check out Nico here.

More here.