Waiting For The Next Step

For thirty-five years, I lived about ten miles from Kraft Stadium in Foxboro, Massachusetts. New England sports fans are dedicated–even when their team is losing. I learned to appreciate the New England Patriots (actually I am a Jets fan, but I learned to appreciate the talent of the Patriots). I wasn’t really surprised to hear today that Tom Brady will be leaving the New England team. It has been an amazing 20 years for Tom Brady and the New England Patriots.

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted an article today about Tom Brady’s announcement that he is leaving the New England Patriots.

The article includes an Instagram post by Tom Brady:

The article concludes:

That era has finally closed out, and what an era it was. It was the kind of dominance that free-agency and the draft were designed to prevent by providing parity to the NFL. It seems unlikely that we’ll ever see it again, but that’s part of the fun of playing the games. At the very least, Brady earned that Greatest of All Time title, and we had fun watching him do it — even if many of us were wailing and gnashing our teeth while he did. No matter where he lands, it’s a long shot that Brady can generate that kind of dominance in the time he has left, but he might have enough to take a more complete team to the Super Bowl. Never count him out.

I will miss watching Tom Brady play. He made the game look easy.

 

 

The Lesson Of History

The Daily Signal posted an article today about the legislative battle currently waging regarding abortion.

The article reports:

A Democratic senator blocked on Monday night the “Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act,” which would have ensured children who survived abortions were given medical care.

Unfortunately, this shouldn’t be a complete shock. In the years since Roe v. Wade, our culture has continued its downward trend to supporting death, not life.

The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act was sponsored by Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., and came on the heels of comments last week from Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam of Virginia insinuating that he supports infanticide in some instances.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., objected to the bill, arguing that the legislation is unnecessary, and thus preventing the bill from receiving unanimous consent.

The article cites an interesting contrast:

Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., pointed out that the Senate unanimously confirmed legislation congratulating New England Patriots on winning the Super Bowl but, sadly, couldn’t unify on behalf of a resolution condemning infanticide.

Freshman Sen. Mike Braun, R-Ind., called upon American citizens to speak out against infanticide and added that he was surprised to encounter pro-infanticide sentiment so soon in his tenure.

Braun is right to be horrified by the situation and he is right to ask citizens to speak out.

That is a sad commentary on the relevancy of the Senate.

The article continues:

Roe v. Wade legalized abortion by implicitly categorizing an unborn baby as the “personalty” (a legal term referring to one’s private property). Thus, ironically, merely a few years after America’s affirmation of the Civil Rights movement, the Supreme Court majority in Roe declared that there was, after all, an entire class of human beings—unborn babies—for whom there would be no guarantee of justice and equality.

Regrettably, left-leaning jurists such as Justice John Paul Stevens supported the perverse logic of Roe by arguing that an unborn baby does not become a human being until the moment of birth.

But such an argument is deeply incoherent; a being’s nature is not determined by its location.

Furthermore, as Valparaiso University law professor Richard Stith argued 20 years ago, the incoherence of this progressive argument—that the moment of birth is a “bright line” at which an infant becomes a human being—may very well lead to the embrace of infanticide.

In other words, since medical science makes clear that there is very little difference between a baby the day before birth and the day after birth, Stith speculated that progressive thought leaders would increasingly argue for the legalization of post-birth abortion.

And that is exactly what has happened in ensuing years.

The article concludes:

Since the Netherlands legalized euthanasia nearly 20 years ago, doctors have taken the lives of thousands of elderly citizens annually. In the Netherlands’ culture of death, it is therefore not surprising that thousands of citizens carry cards prohibiting doctors from euthanizing them, and some elderly citizens express fear about going in for basic medical care because of the possibility of euthanasia.

Recently, The Telegraph and the Daily Mail reported that a Dutch family had to hold down their mother, as she fought against being euthanized by her doctor. The patient, who was not named in the reports, suffered from dementia and had reportedly told medical officials that she wished to be euthanized when “the time was right.”

And yet, even though she reportedly said “I don’t want to die” several times in the days leading up to the killing, the doctor, who was also not named, determined that the time was right, slipped a sedative into her coffee to relax her, and then tried to administer the lethal injection. The patient awoke and resisted the doctor, causing the physician to ask the family for help in holding down the patient down while he finished her off, per the reports.

Northam’s support for infanticide and Murray’s objection to anti-infanticide legislation should not be viewed as insignificant. However, they should likewise not be seen as entirely surprising.

Anti-life legislation is arguably the most consistent consequence of the culture of death enshrined in our legal code since Roe v. Wade. Northam and Murray represent a powerful movement to stay true to the ethic undergirding pro-abortion activism, and they are gaining support day by day.

This unashamed movement to undermine the sanctity of human life must be resisted, not only by Congress but by the citizens of our great nation. If the United States Congress can unify to support a football team, then surely they can unify to defeat any movement that threatens the sanctity of human life.

The generation that first made it legal to kill their children will be the first generation to be killed by their children.

Having A Sense Of Humor At The Super Bowl

I like football. I haven’t watched a lot of it for the past two years because I am disgusted with the fact that the game has become political. I watch it for the sport–not for the politics. However, I did watch the Super Bowl last night and thoroughly enjoyed the game. It was a well-played game with incredible defense from both teams.

However, there was one really endearing moment for those of us who sit on the political right.

Yesterday The State posted the following:

Did Tom Brady just shout Reagan?

A microphone caught the New England Patriots quarterback saying “Reagan” during the third quarter of Super Bowl LIII, played at Mercedes-Benz Stadium in Atlanta.

Brady is known to be friendly with President Donald Trump, so was it an ode to another Republican Commander in Chief?

Here are two of the tweets shown in the article:

I love creativity and humor!

Caught Lying Again

The problem with The New York Times is that you don’t know whether they are simply misinformed or are deliberately lying.

Yesterday The New York Times article posted an article about the New England Patriots visit to the White House. The headline of the article is “Tom Brady Skips Patriots’ White House Visit Along With Numerous Teammates.”

At the end of the article is a correction:

Correction: April 19, 2017

An earlier version of this article included photos comparing the size of the Patriots’ gathering at the White House in 2015 and the gathering on Wednesday. The photo from Wednesday only showed players and coaches; the 2015 photo showed players, coaches and support staff and has been removed.

So what is this all about? It’s about The New York Times politicizing a visit by the winning Super Bowl team to the White House. The headline states that ‘numerous teammates’ skipped the visit to the White House. That headline is totally misleading, even the facts given in the article do not fit the headline.

The New York Times article states:

A Patriots spokesman, Stacey James, said Wednesday night that 34 players had attended, similar to the turnout when President George W. Bush hosted them in 2004 and 2005. He said that more than 45 players attended the ceremonies in 2002, after the franchise’s first Super Bowl, and that in 2015, when Barack Obama was president, the number of players approached 50.

James said that one reason substantially fewer players showed up this time as compared to 2015 was that some veteran players did not see the need to go twice in three years.

I realize that this is trivial pursuit, but I lived in Massachusetts about five miles from the Patriots’ stadium for thirty-five years and although I am not a Patriots fan (Jets fan), I hate to see the team being used for political purposes when there should be no politics involved. The Super Bowl win in January was spectacular, and the team should be honored for the effort involved in that comeback. Period. This is not the time for The New York Times to make political points, and the New England Patriots office has called them on their fake news.

Sometimes I Just Miss New England

ESPN is reporting that the Eagle Brook Saloon in Norfolk, Massachusetts, (a great place to eat or drink) now features the Free Brady Blonde IPA on its menu.

The story reports:

As a die-hard New England Patriots fan and season-ticket holder, Chuck Horne needed to do something to support his favorite quarterback, Tom Brady.

So the man who owns a bar less than three miles from Gillette Stadium, where the Patriots play, called up the microbrewery that makes some of his bar’s beers and asked them if they could supply him with a blonde IPA.

…Despite the $6.75 price point — most of its microbrews cost $5.25 — many patrons haven’t flinched. In six days, Horne said, the bar has sold more than 500 glasses of the beer.

“We just feel like the NFL is taking a shot at the big guy on the block to make a statement,” Horne said. “It’s ridiculous.”

Sometimes I just miss New England.

What Does This Say About Our Values?

Boston.com is reporting today that New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady will be suspended for four games as punishment for whatever role he may have played in the deflated footballs in the AFC playoff game. Just to provide some food for thought, Ray Rice was initially suspended for two games for assault on his fiancee. Does the punishment fit the crime?

If You Ever Wondered About The Media, Keep Wondering

Breitbart.com posted an article today pointing out that the media is holding New England Patriot‘s quarterback Tom Brady to a higher transparency standard than they have set for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The article reports:

“If he had nothing to hide, then why not give Wells and his investigative team access to records that might help resolve the issue?” reacts a Newsday writer. “The fact that Brady would not surrender texts, phone records or emails suggests that there was plenty to hide.” If only Newsday’s reporters, op-ed writers, and editorial board applied the logic to the former Secretary of State.

The Wells Report validated Brady’s caution by publicizing salacious private emails extraneous to their investigation. What purpose, other than to embarrass him publicly and harm him professionally, did Ted Wells release emails between John Jastremski and his mother suggesting that the Patriots employee absconded with a ball of historic import earlier in the season as ownership believed it possessed the genuine article? “Funny…go to patriots.com,” Jastremski tells his mom. “They have an article about the 50,000 yard ball…if they only knew :).”

The media has forgotten its responsibility to expose corruption in government. Instead they have replaced that mission with political activism and celebrity sensationalism.

A Waste Of A Talented Athlete

WCVB.com (Boston) is reporting today that former New England Patriots player Aaron Hernandez has been found guilty of first-degree murder in the death of Odin Lloyd. Hernandez will spend the rest of his life in prison without the chance of parole. He will serve his time in MCI Cedar Junction in Walpole, less than two miles from Gillette Stadium.

The article reports:

He was also found guilty of charges of illegal possession of firearm and illegal possession of ammunition.

In Massachusetts, a first-degree murder conviction carries an automatic sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. He will serve his time at MCI Cedar Junction in Walpole.

“Odin was the backbone of the family. Odin was the man of the house.  Odin was his sisters’ keepers,” his mother, Ursula Ward, said in a victim impact statement.

Through tears, Ward said she has forgiven those involved in her son’s death.

“I forgive the hands of the people who had a hand in my son’s murder — both before and after. And I hope and pray that someday everyone out there will forgive them also,” she said.

Hernandez had a bright future in the National Football League. It is a shame that his lack of moral fiber will mean that he spends the rest of his life behind bars.

Another Voice On ‘Deflategate’

The American Thinker posted an article today about the recent controversy regarding the footballs at the recent playoff game in Foxboro, Massachusetts. First of all, I would like to mention that one of my daughters will tell you when asked what she learned from her mother will say, “Denver wins at home.” A realize that for some reason that is no longer the case, but in the early days of mile high stadium, that was generally the case. It is also the case when New England or Green Bay play a southern team outside in the winter in New England or Green Bay, the home team generally wins. That may be due to a loss of pressure in the footballs (which incidentally happens to both teams) or that may be due to the other team wanting to get out of the cold and go home. At any rate, cold weather and an outdoor stadium do affect football games.

The article at the American Thinker explains:

Assume Tom Brady‘s footballs were all inflated to the maximum allowable, 13.5 psi gauge. We need to convert gauge pressure to absolute pressure. At sea level we add the atmospheric pressure (14.7 psia) to the gauge pressure (13.5 psi), we discover the initial absolute pressure was 13.5 + 14.7 = 28.2 psia).

Multiplying the initial absolute pressure at 75 F (28.2 pia) by the ratio of absolute temperatures (510/535 = 0.95327) we find the absolute pressure on the field is (28.2 x 0.95327 = 26.88 psia). Converting absolute pressure back to gauge pressure we need to subtract the atmospheric pressure of 14.7 psia. The field gauge pressure then becomes (26.88 -14.7 = 12.18 psig).

I am one of the least scientific (and sometimes least logical) people I know, but this makes sense to me. It’s time for all of us to conclude that this whole discussion is made up by the media, buy the nachos and wings, and enjoy the game tomorrow!