Politics and Pucks

Tonight I will be in attendance as the Columbus Blue Jackets take on the Nashville Predators at Nationwide Arena. If there was a must win game in December, this would be it. Not just because I'm going to be there, but for the implications it has. The Jackets need to start the New Year on a new note. They need to carry over the excitement of the game against Detroit into tonight's game, and pick up 2 points. The Jackets aren't that far out of a playoff spot, and will make it easier on themselves if they win tonight. They will need the heart to win this one, and end a shaky month on the right footing. I'll have recap and photos up sometime in the next few days when I return.

On another note, I'll be in Section 101 Row Y, if you'd like to come out and see me. I'll have my Jackets Jersey, like my picture in the bio section!

Also, since this is likely my last post of 2009, I'd like to say thank you. 2009 has been a great year and I have had a lot of fun putting this blog together! Thanks for reading this year, and I look forward to hearing from you all in 2010!

Today, Canada picked their Olympic hockey team. If you haven't seen the team roster yet, it will make you want to cry if you're not Canadian. Martin Brodeur will be in net, and in front of him are top players in the NHL. Rick Nash, Jarome Iginla, Sidney Crosby, and other exciting players will be representing the Maple Leaf.

So what do I think? I think this team is honestly a front runner for gold. Knowing that not all of the Olympic teams have been announced, it's probably the strongest next to Russia's that I have seen.

Even if Canada's roster is strong, it is missing a variety of great players. Vincent Lecalvier, Dion Phaneuf, Mike Green, Shane Doan, Martin St. Louis, et al. all did not make the roster. The reason I imagine is due to their physical game. They tend to be players that bring an overtly phyiscal dimension to a game that is essential in the NHL, but not quite for the Olympics. I think these players don't fit what Canada wants to accomplish.

I think that Canada will bring home some hardware, and we'll see what the US has to offer, when the roster is announced on Friday.

As we are nearing the end of the decade, I thought it would be interesting to take a look at 10 films that regard history and/or politics. By looking at these films, we may be able to see what our attitudes were toward current issues, as well as what some may call revisionism. They're in no particular order.

1. Thirteen Days (2000)
Thirteen Days, is one of two Aaron Sorkin Films on this list. This film chronicles the Kennedy Administration during the 13 days of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. It is an interesting telling of this story, and very well done. Many shots that incorporate famous photos and press conferences of the time. I think this is one that many have forgotten already, mostly because of the event's significance. Many believe this was JFK's finest hour, others feel it was over-glorified. This film is a great political thriller.

2. Persepolis (French) (2007)
Based on a graphic novel, this film is a cartoon that chronicles Marjane Satrapi's childhood. She grew up in revolutionary Iran in the late 1970s and early 1980s when Khomeni was coming to power. This film does two extraordinary things. It exemplifies the fact that the Iranians are people too, and also exemplifies the Iranian youth's view of this important world event. Check out Marjane Satrapi's interview with Stephen Colbert to learn about this great film!

3.Live From Baghdad (2002)
This was an HBO film about CNN's coverage of the first Gulf War in the early 1990s. This event put CNN on the map as a legitimate news source. It is a very interesting film about how the CNN crew was broadcasting live in Baghdad during the air strikes, while all the other news networks fled the scene. It's one of a few solid HBO films this decade. Here's a trailer for the film

4.Miracle (2004)
American hockey fans, know exactly why this one made this list. Arguably, the 1980 American defeat of the USSR in hockey is one of the greatest sporting achievements in American history. It was a foreshadow to the end of the Cold War, as well as a glimmer of hope in a time when Americans needed something to cheer for. It is a great telling of a great story. Herb Brooks, the coach of the team passed away in the middle of production, and was played very accurately by Kurt Russel. I will likely be blogging about this in the upcoming months, since the 30th anniversary will occur in February 2010.

5.Head of State (2003)
This movie is a great comedy, and really can be seen as a precursor of things to come later in the decade. However, the 2008 election went very differently. Chris Rock plays a no-name community organizer who puts his hat in the ring for a presidential election. I like this movie because it is a fun movie, and it's very telling about how divisive the political system has been during the 2000s.

6.300 (2007)
Everyone has heard the epic calls of the 300 Spartans. This adaptation of Frank Miller's graphic novel by the same name, was great! It was a telling of an old story of 300 spartans who made their last stand against the Persians. Although this story has been told many times before, this telling was done in a graphically appealing manner. It is a great retelling, and is worth a second, third, etc. watch.

7.Waltz with Bashir (Hebrew) (2008)
Nominated for an Oscar, Waltz with Bashir is a very interesting war story from Israel. It follows a soldier who served in the Lebanon war in the early 1980s, but cannot remember it. It is another film based on a graphic novel. This movie exemplifies internal conflict, views on conscription, and the views of war. This is also a film with a stunning animation style, and a great soundtrack. A very moving film, that makes you think critically about Israel. A movie, anyone with any interest in the Middle East should see.

8.Charlie Wilson's War (2007)
Here's the other Aaron Sorkin film on this list. Tom Hanks plays infamous Texas Representative Charlie Wilson, who was very unconventional in his methods, to put it nicely. Rep. Wilson was doing things that Congressmen could never do openly. The reason why Charlie Wilson is important, is that he is a very big reason why the US is involved in Afghanistan and the Middle East. This movie uncovers this. I think this is a very important movie for everyone to see, because it gives people the understanding of why there is such an importance in Afghanistan.

9.Frost/Nixon (2008)
This is a great film about the infamous 1977 interview between David Frost and Richard Nixon. The film revisited this chess match of an interview in such a manner that it was recognized by the Oscars. This film was such a great film about Richard Nixon. It is interesting what the making of this movie means about the legacy of Nixon. Not only was the identity of "Deep Throat" revealed, and new tapes released, Nixon's legacy is changing.

10.V for Vendetta (2006)
This is probably the most intriguing movie of the decade for politics. This film is based on Alan Moore's graphic novel by the same name about a futuristic world where a terrorist unties a country to take action against a corrupt government. V however would wear a mask of the infamous Guy Fawkes, an Englishman who attempted to destroy Parliament. A lot of curious parallels to classic literature, and English history. Now the interesting thing is I've seen both right and left wing groups use this film. Tea Partiers use it, and those who protested the Bush Administration used it too.


Other notables: Milk (2008), Recount (2007), An Inconvenient Truth (2006), The Counterfeiters (German) (2007),

Today I read about Governor Mitch Daniels' "candid talk of faith". I am not shocked that a Republican would take a harsh view on atheism. What he said are not new criticisms of atheism:

People who reject the idea of a God -who think that we're just accidental protoplasm- have always been with us. What bothers me is the implications -which not all such folks have thought through- because really, if we are just accidental, if this life is all there is, if there is no eternal standard of right and wrong, then all that matters is power.

Ok, so what Gov. Daniels is implying is: if you don't believe in God, you're obviously corrupt? Obviously this has its truths and falsehoods. Anyone can be corrupt, even the religious. Okay, what else does he have to say about atheism?

And atheism leads to brutality. All the horrific crimes of the last century were committed by atheists -Stalin and Hitler and Mao and so forth- because it flows very naturally from an idea that there is no judgment and there is nothing other than the brief time we spend on this Earth.

Everyone's certainly entitled in our country to equal treatment regardless of their opinion. But yes, I think that folks who believe they've come to that opinion ought to think very carefully, first of all, about how different it is from the American tradition; how it leads to a very different set of outcomes in the real world.

So obviously atheists are violent and want to see everyone die. First off, yes Stalin, Hitler, and Mao, are all evil people. Secondly, they don't represent every atheist. Same instance where Usama bin Laden does not represent every Muslim. Just because you don't believe in God, does it mean that you are evil. People are increasingly losing faith, and leaving religion. When the Republican Party and other right wing groups decide to make these people the villain, they aren't going to vote for you. What's scary is this is not new GOP rhetoric, and there's much evil done in the name of God. All you have to do is turn on BET around 11pm on Sunday nights.

So what about the religious individuals who have fallen for the "prosperity gospel" and televangelism? We aren't going to call these individuals evil? Oral Roberts was the master of fundraising by bastardizing faith. He made televangelism into a pyramid scheme, where people buy into a ministry in hopes to obtain divine miracles. It's disgusting what these preachers do, and they have been exposed before on major news shows.

Mitch Daniels is right now a front runner for the GOP Nomination for 2012. I don't think this is a gaffe that he will regret, but it's enough to make atheists angry. However he is winning votes with the highly religious. In order to end this, all non-theists need to continue to be proactive, and not vote for those who say these things. Eventually, non-theists will be enough of a minority to sway elections. I think it is absolutely disgusting that candidates can flaunt their faith in this manner, and it's disrespectful to those who do not share, nor want to share his faith.

UPDATE 10:14 PM The Blag Hag, also posted on this topic here.

The 2009-10 season is a great time to be a hockey fan. The Olympics in February, the Stanley Cup in May and June, as well as an increase in the occurrence of games. Wait a second, an increase in the occurrence of games? That means the season will end on time, and the Olympics can go on, without worry that the NHL playoffs will go on into August.

Well, there's some advantages and disadvantages to this schedule. The problem can really be seen with the Columbus Blue Jackets. They have a schedule that has not allowed them more than 2 days off throughout the season (EDIT 3:23PM). From talking to other fans of other teams, this is the case with their teams too. The Jackets, I think, are suffering from this scheduling issue. The Blue Jackets will play 17 games in the month of December. That's a lot of games. Not to mention the 4 times they played games on consecutive nights. They have had a break of more than 2 days once since mid-November. This team should not be this bad. I really think this team is getting slaughtered at the hands of an accelerated schedule. In any other year this team would not be struggling this much at the hands of the schedule.

Also, let's look at the last 10 games of the season for the Jackets. In the final 5 games, the Jackets play the Red Wings 3 times (2 away, 1 home). The NHL really needs to find a way to balance the schedule for all 30 teams. Why do the Maple Leafs get a week off in late October, when the Blue Jackets' only break of more than 3 days occurs at the Olympic Break. I understand that making the playoffs, means that the schedule will increase in difficulty, but I think it's a little too imbalanced. Why should certain teams get increased time off, and not all 30? (EDIT 3:25PM)

Maybe the solution is to do away with 15-20 games. Maybe the season should start earlier to take in account for the two weeks off. I mean, even the World Cup for soccer doesn't do this damage, but they play it in the off-season (if you can call it that). I think that the NHL needs to really reconsider their scheduling if they want to participate in the Olympics. Obviously, it is impossible for the NHL to compete against the Olympics, but the league's seasonal schedule should not take the complete burden.

I think starting earlier on an Olympic year is best, because it doesn't screw over every other team, when trying to play a full season with a two week break. The schedule isn't accelerated and the season is also played at the same pace as any other season. Don't get me wrong, I love Olympic Hockey, but I don't want to see club teams suffer as a result. It is not exactly the clubs' fault that the Olympics occur every 4th year.

This New Year's Eve, I am planning a trip to Columbus, OH to see the Blue Jackets take on the Predators. Knowing that many Twitter users I follow or follow me, are in fact blue jackets fans in Columbus, I figured I'd tell you that I want to meet you all, or those who can be there. This is the first Jackets game I will have attended since Roman Cechmanek was an NHL goalie (The year before the lockout to be precise). Hope to see you there.

This morning I read an Op-Ed in the Cincinnati Enquirer this morning, that I would like to comment on. Today's Op-ed was about the Democrats planning a vote on Christmas Eve. The reader, Edmund Adams, was very angry that the Christians in Congress had to vote on Christmas Eve.

Did it ever occur to Harry Reid that Christmas is the holiest day of the Christian year and that many Christians begin the celebration of Christ's Birth on Christmas Eve through the celebration of a Mass or service?

Actually, I think it probably did occur to him. Here's the issue though, it was something that the Senate should vote on going into this break, so they can begin work on it when they get back to Washington after the holiday. Also, don't most masses and services for Christmas Eve begin later in the day? The vote took place early this morning. I don't see how much that would hinder a schedule to drive/fly home during the day. They'll be home in time to go to church and be with family on Christmas. Adams continues here:

in addition to being a holy time Christmas Eve for many people is a family time that his fellow senators will be drawn away from their families for a vote that is anything but urgent? It says a lot that his fellow senators did not rise up and demand that Reid schedule the vote for another date.

Ok, so I think what he is suggesting is that all people should be with their families on Christmas Eve AND Christmas. Little to Adams' surprise, businesses are open on Christmas Eve for a half day. There shouldn't be a problem then with Congress voting on Christmas Eve. Consider it a half-day. They will all have time to get home anyway. So if Congress should do this, then businesses should follow suit. So by your logic, grocery stores, malls, all should shut their doors on Dec. 23 and reopen Dec. 26. Unfortunately, the economy is driven on consumption and closing the doors to stores on Dec. 23 brings the shopping season to 1 day less. Christmas is the largest economic activity of the year, and businesses would be furious, to not be able to take full advantage.

Imagine the uproar if Reid had scheduled it for Kwanza or Hanukkah.

Firstly, there was no uproar for votes during Hanukkah. Secondly, there were votes all throughout Hanukkah. And what about other holidays that are holy? Ramadan is a month, maybe we should close all food establishments during the day so Muslims can openly practice their traditions and spiritual requirements. Maybe during Passover, no one can sell bread or anything with grains, so Jews can openly practice their spiritual requirements.

We are not a Christian Nation, nor should we ever be. As Hemant Mehta at the Friendly Atheist mentioned, it should be all or nothing with issues of the holiday season. In this way, no one is left out, and no feels alienated for having different beliefs.

As for standing up, I'm sure that the Senators are all aware that the jobs they have are important. Do you go to work on Christmas Eve thinking: "I won't be able to make it to an 8pm mass if the boss made me work 10 extra minutes when I was supposed to be off at 4pm?" That's pretty much what happened here.

Last night I had an opportunity to see Avatar in 3-D, after realizing the Blue Jackets game was a lost cause. It was probably the best movie-going experience I have ever had. It is hard to describe this movie, because it is very complex and I feel that if I give many details, I would be giving it away. Yes it looks like "Fern Gully in Space", or as a friend of mine on AIM said: "Dances with Smurfs", but give it a chance. Frankly, I thought it would be over-hyped and that the hype itself would ruin the film, but honestly I was surprised. The visuals and camera angles are something else.

The biggest thing I noticed that I really appreciated, was the fact that the film tastefully expanded upon elements and themes of other science fiction movies. Elemetns from the Matrix, Starship Troopers, and Star Wars are all seen here. This film didn't steal the ideas, but rather made these ideas look a bit different. If you're a sci-fi fan of any sort, you will appreciate this movie. I'll buy into the Avatar hype!

My hat's off to Martin Brodeur who achieved the all-time career shutout record last night. It was once believed to be an untouchable record set by Terry Sawchuk. Now an interesting question I did hear earlier today is: will this new record set by Brodeur be regarded as untouchable?

My answer is yes and no.

This record will be considered untouchable because of the sheer number of games that goalies play anymore. Your best NHL starting goalies don't play more than 70 games tops. Even Roberto Luongo and Marty Turco, get days off. Also the nature of the game has gotten to a point, where it is very difficult to play to a shutout anymore. Shutouts are just harder to come by. Goals are not a rarity they may have once been. The number of goals a team scores in a game has gone up drastically since Sawchuk's last game.

This record, on the otherhand, could very well be broken. In my life I have seen too many records that were considered to be untouchable broken. For example, baseball writers claimed Maris' 61 home runs in a season would never be beat, and I've seen that done 4 or more times. Granted baseball has their steroid issue, but there are no records that cannot be broken. In hockey, everyone said, Gordie Howe's 801 goals would never be beat, and Wayne Gretzky rolled right over it. Players are bigger and faster, and not all because of steroids. Training methods have improved, and players are shattering records due to this.

Back to Brodeur for a moment. I think Martin Brodeur is a goalie that we will be telling our kids about. He is one of those goalies that comes to mind when I think of greatest NHL goalies. Plus, he has played his whole career with the Devils, a rarity in this day and age. Love him or hate him, he will be in the Hockey Hall of Fame as soon as he is eligible.

This morning I read an Op-ed in the Cincinnati Enquierer about the Creation Museum. For those who've never been there, its very close to Cincinnati (about 45 minutes at most from where I am writing this), located in Northern Kentucky. Supposedly on Christmas Eve, they would like to invite everyone to their establishment for free. Ken Ham must be feeling fairly charitable, or think that the atheists, and other non-Christians, might be swayed by free entrance (EDIT 1:47PM). Looy states in the Op-ed:

In the spirit of giving at Christmas, and especially recognizing Christ's free gift of salvation, the museum will be opn Thursday 10am-3pm at no charge as our gift to the community.

(EDIT 1:50pm) If you remember back in August, a large group of atheists attended the museum, led by PZ Myers (unfortunately, I couldn't go, due to work at Purdue), and they paid. However I can imagine going to the museum in a large number, at this time of year, would result in an even larger negative reaction.

Plus, the Cincinnati Atheists have been struggling this year with a number of theist/non-theist issues. From a billboard removal to newspaper op-eds, this has been a rough few months for the non-religious in the Cincinnati area. I think that getting the issue out is good, but it's going to take more than just talk from the local atheists to get this issue to be taken seriously.

Being someone from this area, I'm not surprised things like this happen. We have a highly religious city, and at times it hurts progress for this city. So what do non-theists do after the holiday season? It is hard to tell, but they need some help, from an outsider's perspective (I'm not overly involved here in Cincinnati). Just like I see at Purdue, this battle is sometimes a losing battle. However, we all need to stick with it because if the envelope is never pushed, then society will never change. However in the case of Cincinnati, this might take more of a fight. There's a famous Mark Twain quote that comes to mind, that I'll leave you with:

When the end of the world comes, I want to be in Cincinnati because it's always twenty years behind the times.

Every year around this time, we tend to reflect on the passing year. As we get to the end of 2009, we will be ending a decade of hockey that will be memorable for very good and very bad reasons. However, what about remember the better moments of the decade. Here are my 5 favorite teams of the past 10 years.

5. 2008-09 Boston Bruins
A hockey Renaissance in Boston has made being a Bruins fan attractive again. This team was my favorite to watch all season. They were exciting! They scored lots of goals! They had great defense. Who knew the season would end on a flukey OT goal? This team was really fun to watch!

4. 2005-06 Buffalo Sabres
Hockey had that awful work stoppage in 2004-05, but it came back in full force, with a great Eastern Conference Finals series between Buffalo and Carolina. What a series, with two teams with 4 deep lines! It was maybe my favorite playoff series of the decade. The suspense, the skill, and the greatness! Buffalo and Carolina were 2 completely even teams in that series.

3. 2005-06 Edmonton Oilers
There was a theme this decade of Canadian NHL teams who were low ranked in the playoffs, that made Stanley Cup runs. All of them would lose, but the Oilers did something amazing. They are the first 8-seed in any professional sport to make it to the final round. That is something to be proud of. Plus this team was stacked with talent that has been more or less dispersed around the league these days.

2. 2006-07 Anaheim Ducks
In this decade, Anaheim finally called themselves the Ducks. Disney sold them, and you know what, they got better. Since their Stanley Cup win in this season, you can't ever count the Ducks out. They were a physical, brute force team, that forced teams to become very uncomfortable and play a style of game that was more running scared than anything that made any hockey sense. What a team!

1. 2001-02 Detroit Red Wings
This team was stacked. Love or hate the Red Wings, you have to respect the hall of fame caliber this team had. Even if they bought all of the talent up off of Free Agency. This was the only season I could remember where the Stanley Cup winner pretty much seemed determined from Day 1 of the season. Again, this team just lit up everyone, even Carolina in the Stanley Cup Finals. This makes them the best of the past decade.


What are your top 5 favorite teams of the past decade?

Hey everyone!

I'm done with that semester, and it's about time (I'm not dead!). Thought I'd post one more funny video I saw today. Real blog entries will start again as soon as I have something to write about.

Here's Billy Dee Williams' take on the recent Tiger Woods situation!

I'm still alive. I'll be back to doing more blogging once finals are over. I thought I would take a study break and tell you what I have left:

- Take Home final (I've written 1 of 6-10 pages) due Friday
- History paper (I've written 1 of 5 pages) due Friday
- History final (Haven't started) due Friday
- Research Project (About 70% done) due Saturday

And now to the clip. Phil Hartman as the Anal Retentive Chef on Saturday Night Live! Enjoy!

If there's something really cool about my family it's that the guys in my family are a group of differing sports fans. I tend to be a die-hard hockey fan, my dad a die-hard baseball fan, and my brother a die-hard American football fan. So last night I went to Cafe Royal on Stadium Ave. and I had a very interesting conversation with the barista and a few other customers about sports fans. The question was, what is the difference between a baseball fan and a hockey fan?

Obviously I'm a die-hard hockey fan. The best example of a die-hard baseball fan I have is my dad. So I base this on my observations of him and other die-hard baseball fans. I notice that both fans are very knowledgeable of their game and players. They both know who is in the farm system beyond AAA. Both are also able to rattle off the history of the game at the drop of a hat. The big difference I notice is that there's a lot of casual baseball fans, and fewer die-hard fans. In hockey, there are a large number of die-hard hockey fans, when there are fewer casual fans. So what's the difference? Is it the statistics? Is it the atmosphere? Baseball and Hockey unique games in their own right, and they seem to have similar fans.

What do you think?

Why do people like Sarah Palin? Many people will tell you that she is just appealing. You even hear this from liberal commentators like James Carville. However, I'm not seeing it rationally, why she is so appealing. Christopher Hitchens identifies that Sarah Palin is living on another planet to put it nicely.

So who is she popular with? It is hard to say. It's easy to understand why her media blitz for her book didn't go to many major media markets. Why would her book signings take place in rural places? It's telling. She is not popular in metropolitan areas where the populations are. If she tries to stump in rural areas, she gets supportive crowds and little protest. She will never win a Presidential election if this is how she will campaign. It might win elections in a state like Alaska mostly because the area is mostly rural, or what she calls "real America".

Hitchens said something else I'd like to highlight:

She has inarticulately said that her gubernatorial work would be hampered "if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with god." Her local shout-and-holler tabernacle apparently believes that Jews can be converted to Jesus and homosexuals can be "cured."

This means that she really believes in the Christian nation ideals that get tossed around in Republican and Conservative circles. Hitchens has identified two ideas that make her completely unelectable. If she were to say that Jews can be led to Jesus in a mainstream outlet she would be labeled as anti-semetic, and lead to a political death. If Palin were to mention that being gay was a disease, she may get the same treatment that Bert Chapman received here at Purdue. So now non-Evangelist citizens (which I would say is a majority) are alienated by Sarah Palin. She has also supported a movement that looks for the secession of Alaska.

If the Republican party wants to be a threat in 2010, they need to disassociate themselves with Sarah Palin. She frankly is bringing more divisive political positions. Even when Palin gets involved in elections, it's doing nothing. Sarah Palin also splits the party more, because of her tendency to endorse non-Republican candidates. How can Republicans really put their faith in someone's governing abilities if they are going to endorse non-Republican campaigns? With how bad the Republican party looks now, it can only get worse if Sarah Palin is a front runner in 2012.

In the past week, Tim Tebow's pinetar bible verses have been getting a lot of attention. I wanted to make a quick comment about it. I really think overall people are kind of ambivalent overall to it, because the casual fan expects this from Tim Tebow. At the same time, there are a number of people who are upset because it shows a sense of Christian double standards. I only know that once Tebow makes to the NFL he will be hit with a lot of fines if he even tries to promote the word of Jesus while in a game. Remember Jon Kitna's Cross Hat?

Tim Tebow, who is an Evangelist, does a lot of mission work in the Philippenes and is highly praised for it. Let's think for a moment if Tebow was Muslim, Atheist, or Jewish. Firstly, there would be uproar if he was writing Quranic verses, or messages of his faith (or lack thereof) on his pine tar. It would be possibly one of the larger scandals that NCAA football had ever seen, because it would likely become a politically devisive issue. I think this is a very minor possibility of why the NCAA has not challenged Tebow on his pine tar verses.

The other thing is Tim Tebow gets top coverage on ESPN regarding college football. I don't watch a lot of it outside Purdue, and I only can name 2 players outside Purdue's roster: Tim Tebow and Colt McCoy (Texas). So Tebow has a very captive audience, and is using his platform to preach. Let's think about the last time we heard about a great devoted Muslim or Jewish athlete who does great work for their faith. What about an atheist who does great community service? Because we don't hear about these individuals, doesn't mean they aren't out there. This does prove that being an Evangelist Christian in the United States is far from the oppressed imagery they give those who criticize them.

Let's not kid ourselves, the Blue Jackets are good, but not great. They give up way too many goals per game, and it's not really not something I can blame on Steve Mason nor Matthieu Garon. I think we need to think about our defense. I keep thinking to myself, what is going to happen if Jan Hejda and Mike Commodore are out for more than 1 game, because it's likely to happen. We seem to just fall apart without them in the lineup, and I think it is for a variety of reasons. For one they're veterans Hejda is 31 and Commodore is 30. They're in their primes, but the bulk of the guys on their team aren't quite at their prime yet. Not to say they are bad players, but let's face it the Jackets aren't a deep defensive team.

Last night, I watched a good chunk of a 6-3 loss to the Toronto Maple Leafs. This was a game that we should have been much more competitive in. We gave up 6 goals against Toronto, 8 against the Rangers last week, and 9 against Detroit in mid-November. That's 23 goals in 3 games, that's completely unacceptable by any league (NHL included) standards. Now the logical fan choice is to just blame Mason for a Sophomore slump. I think it's not his fault, his team in front of him isn't protecting him. If Mason was playing bad, the defense would be playing well, and Mason is giving up soft goals. Instead, Mason is standing on his head, and eventually some of those shots go in.

So who should we move for then? That's a good question. I firmly believe that Dennis Seidenberg would be a good fit. I also think that we could use a veteran defenseman. How about Matthieu Schneider. There's two viable defensemen that are attainable. The Jackets have a lot of cap space to play with, and Vancouver is well over the Cap right now; making a $2 million salary dump attractive. Florida, without Volkoun, might have a lot of trouble. Scott Clemensen is a great goalie, but Florida just doesn't look like they're going anywhere this year. They're still in the hunt, but I can't imagine a 2010 UFA like Seidenberg to stay in Florida.

I really don't think the Jackets are that bad of a team. They just need a little help in their own end. I'm not convinced the goalies are the problem. We have great young players on defense, but we need to add at least one more defenseman. Adding said defenseman is the difference between losing by 8 goals to the Rangers and winning games against teams like Chicago.

As I continue to be stressed out, and many other college students the same. I'm taking a break and I thought I'd find a good stress reliever for everyone. Here's another fun sketch from SNL to keep us all entertained as finals, papers, and other "fun" things college students must do this time of year.



I love this. Now what if Barack Obama could use the "People's Elbow" to threaten Republicans who stall Congressional bills? Discuss.

On Tuesday evening the Blackhawks beat the Blue Jackets 4-3 in a skills competition. For games against the Blackhawks I have a friendly bet with Dieter Kurtenbach, the Blackhawks blogger at the Examiner. For those who follow me on Twitter have already seen the embarassment that I have had to undergo. The terms of the bet are that I have to post a picture of the winner's choice on my Twitter account for 48 hours. I also have decided that I will post the picture on the blog (good or bad). Well here's my embarassment and shameful picture:



Well two things in my defense. 1) The Jackets stole a point from the Blackhawks that you can't take away from us! 2) Dieter better watch out when the Jackets win on January 14!

I was reading Why Evolution is True's take on Andrew Sullivan. Over the past year or so, I have become a big fan of Andrew Sullivan. Between his appearances on the Colbert Report and using his book Virtually Normal to write a paper about the ideas of same-sex marriage, I have become a great fan. I think someone who identifies as conservative, and can articulate ideas in a professional manner is indeed admirable.

Yesterday Sullivan wrote this entry. He is indicating something that makes complete sense. He is very fed up with the way the Republican Party conducts itself for mostly the same reasons I cannot stand it. It is catering to a small minority of Americans and acts completely opposite of what it promises. It is a party that has moved so far to the right that it is disgusting.

I believe that everyone regardless of who you support, should read Sullivan's post. He is telling us something that we don't want to hear, but we need to hear it. By the way, Michelle Malkin has already labeled Sullivan as a liberal. The American Right is becoming a "secret handshake club" that doesn't care if it outs its members. Even if you don't like President Obama, I think you should reconsider who you support. The Repuiblicans are representing the opposition less and less, yet no one seems to notice. Maybe Americans are not mature enough to notice.