Categorized | Mark Timmons

The Dodgers Welcome 2011

The Dodgers Welcome 2011

We can cuss and dis-cuss what happened in 2011, but the fact of the matter is that the Dodgers stank up the joint. Russ Martin (who is now a Yankee) saw his career continue in a downward spiral for the third consecutive year and ended his season with a busted hip (bad for a catcher). Then he was miffed that the Dodgers didn’t want to pay him more than he got from the Yankees. My Favorite Martin is no longer around. Andre Ethier looked to all the world like he was a Triple Crown Candidate for the first five or six weeks of the season, and Matt Kemp started out like a budding superstar. However, both players proceeded to take a dive for the rest of the season.

James Loney had his fourth consecutive year in which his batting average declined (.331, .289. 281, .267) which is troubling. It looked like he had righted his ship early in the season, when he hit .307 before the All-Star Game, only to hit .211 after that! Rafael Furcal was hitting .383 at the break and barely played the rest of the way. When he played, he was easily the Dodger’s MVP, but he clearly didn’t play much! The Dodgers Superstar (who I repeatedly said it would be a huge mistake to sign) was a total non-factor in his post-steroid era.

Here’s something to think about: Every Dodger Starting Position Player (I said EVERY) declined in batting average after the All-Star Game. In fact, Jon Broxton totally imploded after the All-Star Game, much to Dodger Fans dismay. If just half of the starters had declined, the season would have been different. If Manny was just 70% of himself, the season would have been different… but it wasn’t!

That’s why I have trouble listening to people say “I told you the Dodgers would be a .500 club!” So, you knew that Loney, Theriot, Carroll, Blake, Belliard, Ethier, Manny, Kemp, Podsednik and Martin would all swoon after the All-Star break? EVERYONE OF THEM! You knew that Manny and Raffy would be injured most of the season? You knew that the major league’s best bullpen in 2009 would be one of the worst bullpen’s in 2010? You just knew all that? Because it took every bit of that to derail the Dodgers season.

It was a season derailed shortly after the All-Star break, but the fact of the matter is that nearly everything that happened to the Dodgers in 2010 (outside of starting pitching) was bad. I don’t predict “career years” every year for Dodger players (no matter how many times you say it), but out of nine starters of the caliber the Dodgers had last year, it should have been expected that 2, 3 or 4 might have good years. They have shown they were capable. If you say you saw this coming, I think you are out of touch with the reality of the situation. They all had off years!

However, just because the Dodgers tanked in 2010, there is no reason to assume that it will be “more of the same” in 2011. Let’s take a quick look at possible starters for the 2011 season:

CATCHER – This is an interesting bunch: Barajas will try and win the job based upon his power. Ellis will try and show he’s a major league hitter after showing that defensively he is solid, and Navarro will try and win the job by putting up a high batting average and good defense. It should be an interesting competition. I won’t anoint anyone the favorite. Overall, we should be no worse at catcher than in 2010, probably better.

FIRST BASE – Can James Loney realize his promise or will he continue his decline? Or, is it somewhere in-between? 2011 will determine his future.

SECOND BASE – Can young Ivan De Jesus, Jr. step up and force the Dodgers to play him at 2B or will he head to AAA and 2B be the domain of Juan Uribe? Either way, I think the Dodgers are better for it.

SHORT STOP – Perhaps no player is as important as Raffy. IF – BIG IF’s here. Promise or Pain? I have no clue, but when healthy, he’s one of the best in the game. Whether he can stay healthy is the most important question surrounding the Dodgers.

THIRD BASE – What happens here depends to some degree what happens at 2B, because Juan Uribe is a solid 3B, but I am not as down on Casey Blake as some of you are. He is a pro. He’s good defensively and if he plays 130 games, he can have a nice season. Never bet against a hard worker with character! I have also seen him in the outfield, and if he were to platoon with Gibbons there, he would not be a liability.

LEFT FIELD – As it stands right now, LF could belong to Gibbons/Blake, Paul, Robinson, Sands or maybe even Dye (who is not a good outfielder). This will be an important competition as it now stands.

CENTER FIELD – Losing a girlfriend doesn’t make for a good or bad season. It’s solely up to Matt to become the player he is capable of becoming. Interestingly, the player it was suggested the Yankees would have traded for Kemp (Robinson Cano) had a “down” year after a couple of good ones (he’s much older than Kemp), before breaking out. 50% of the game is 80% mental with Matt. Can he seize the day?

RIGHT FIELD – Simply put, is Andre Ethier a moody streak hitter or can he evolve into that Triple-Crown threat we saw early last season?

The starting pitching and bullpen should be strengths of the Dodgers. There are lots of options. Clayton Kershaw and Chad Billingsley could be one of the elite 1-2 punches in baseball. The Dodgers also have four more solid starters to couple with Clayton and C-Bill. Clayton is married and more mature. He’s ready to be THAT guy. Chad is too. Will they?

For the Dodgers to succeed in 2011, some of the players have to step up. There’s a lot of talent on this team. Can they play up to their talent? Can they improve? Can they be hungry enough to return to the playoffs they tasted? Lots of questions, but lots of answers are available. The Giants had players unexpectedly step-up (Huff and others). The Reds had a guy named Votto step-up “big time.” It would be nice to have Adrian Beltre, but I don’t plan on it. It has to make sense for the Dodgers. I get that!

Know this: In 2011, the Dodgers will have the highest payroll of any team which does not have a TV contract! Does that put things in perspective? The Dodgers can be contenders for the Division and the Pennant. Like every year, lots of good things have to happen before ANY team can win it. I do not like the divorce BS. I do not like the McCourt lifestyle. I do love the Dodgers, and will support them regardless of who owns them, especially if they continue to be a first-class organization that is in the upper echelon of payroll. They are not perfect. They have warts, but they are better (much better) than the naysayers predict. You can do what you want, but when the bell rings, I will be there… because I am a Dodger at heart! I bleed blue. If you don’t, then you just don’t know….

About Mark Timmons

When you see the invisible, you can do the impossible!

44 Responses to “The Dodgers Welcome 2011”

  1. SpokaneBob says:

    Happy New Year to you Mark and to all the true Dodger fans who post here. Thanks for providing this site and all the information we enjoy. The best thing about a new year is that it is just that, a new year. This is true more so in baseball than in life. 2010 is history and no one really knows what will happen in 2011. Your take is reasonable and I would much rather look forward with a positive and hopeful attitude than bitch about how bad things are.

  2. My screen name says it all!!!!

  3. Ken says:

    Catcher – Ellis will be insurance at AAA for one more year.

    1B – Loney needs a new batting coach and a manager who will let him be himself. Just look at old films and take batting pracice against Loggys.

    2B – Budget limitations will cause DJ to start at 2B.

    SS- Limit Raffy to 5 games a week. Go JC.

    3B – Uribe unless Gibbons is an AllStar

    LF – Gibbons/Blake until the fans revolt.

    CF – Kemp and new contact lenses.

    RF – Ethier and a platoon with Robinson/Hoffmann unless he spends the entire off season hitting against a Loggy

    Starters – 2nd best in the NL West and 3rd in the NL

    Relievers – 4th best in the NL West and 6th in the NL. Trade Broxton for a real LF

  4. Badger says:

    Mark, everything you said is true.

    Except for those things that aren’t.

    Ken, I got issues with that lineup. Maybe, just maybe, this is the year all the Dodgers play up to Mark’s expectations. I got a wait and see attitude. If Furcal is his old self, we have a good SS. If Ethier, Loney and Kemp rebound, we have a solid middle of the order. No matter how you slice the bottom of the order, we have a lot of outs there. The pitching could be amongst the top in the league, unless it isn’t. We still have weak ownership.

    Rams play a significant, nationally televised game Sunday nite. Been waiting a long time for that.

    Happy New Year everyone.

  5. Bobby says:

    happy new year kids! look forward to more squabbling on here the next 2 months until we all meet in glendale for beers and baseball and (hopefully) babes.

  6. Roger Dodger says:

    Mark, on your opening blog — last year in Spring Training, sitting with you in the press box, I said, “These guys (the key Dodger lineup players) play so far this spring like they are mailing it in.” The other teams they played, did not play like that.

    I turned around in my chair and said that to Tony Jackson sitting in the row behind us. I believe, Tony used those words in his next article online, that the guys were . . .

    I saw them as preparing in the spring, as just another season. Nothing special.
    The results speak for themselves. So — I did see then!!! I knew.

    You also said:

    “Here’s something to think about: Every Dodger Starting Position Player (I said EVERY) declined in batting average after the All-Star Game.”

    The other day, Home Plate on XM Radio was interviewing a relief pitcher from the Baltimore club. He brought up that after the Orioles changed managers late in the season to Buck — the team started playing better. The skill level went up. They starting doing the small things to win games, or at least be in games longer. They all knew they were playing better, under Buck,.

    I believe now, that having Joe as manager, hurt these particular Dodgers. Under his leadership, he did not have the where-with-all to pull these guys together to play the baseball they were capable of —– for a full season.

    And I go back to the beginning of my post — some of these Dodgers just could not get excited about playing winning baseball under Joe last season. I sure hope they can under Donnie.

    If not, Ned will be forced to break up the club. And this will mean trades. Not sure the Dodgers really have budding stars in AA or AAA ready to take over in the middle of 2011.

    And all of this has been going on since the days of Garvey, Lopes, Russell, and Cey . . . that is sure a lot of games. ’88 was a fluke, Oakland should have won that World Series. Only 1 AB by Gibson and the pitching of the Bulldog made the difference.

    Please do not tell me that the ’88 Dodgers were a great team with: Jose Gonzalez, Alfredo Griffin, Jeff Hamilton, Mickey hatcher, Danny Heep, Mike Marshall, Steve Sax, Mike Scioscia, John Shelby, Franklin Stubbs, Tracy Woodson, Rick Dempsey, Mike Davis, Dave Anderson, and finally Kirk Gibson

    But, they did know how to pull all of their resources together and WIN games.

  7. chucky says:

    mark well put, i agree with every word

    go dodgers

  8. Badger says:

    “Know this: In 2011, the Dodgers will have the highest payroll of any team which does not have a TV contract!”

    They have a t.v. contract Mark. It’s with FSN Prime. Remember the terms? No independent cable deal for 10 years. It was part of highly leveraged deal McBorrow struck with the evil empire.

    Rookie manager trained under Torre, new coaches, holes at more than one position, and several key players that need to rebound from their decline to have any chance at all. At this point in their careers, it is about putting up numbers. Big contracts await Kemp, Ethier, Loney and Billingsley. For that reason alone, I think they will improve. Team players? You mean, play hard for the Los Angeles Dodgers? I have my doubts about that.

    The odds say this team will finish out of the running. So, what the heck, put a $100 down at 30-1.

    Roger, I don’t see any minor league player in our system that will be ready to step in and make a significant contribution next year. Maybe Robinson, Sands and Gordon will get a call up, but since none of them have really torn up the minors, how are we to believe they are confident enough to tear up the Majors? We have no Posey, that is – a top 10 prospect – but we do have a few players that could conceivably contribute something.

  9. Bill Russell says:

    Happy New Year to all the Dodger fans who make this site very entertaining. BE SAFE

  10. lawdog says:

    Say hat you will Mark, (and I’m sure that you will), Roger and I as well s another poster or two I can’t now recall predicted the Dogs would be a .500 club before the season started. And that’s fact unlike the speculation you filled this article with about how no one could have known unless they were morons. Take a break from the name calling please. Years ago you were above that. Now you’ve become what you used to accuse others who posted crap like this–your stuff is getting weak. And the louder you scream about it, or the more sweeping your snide comments become–the weaker your posts are as well.

    I’m getting tired of it although I’m sure that doesn’t make any difference to you.

    Sometimes a person just gets a gut feeling for where a team is going to finish based on what they’ve seen. I also predicted the 88 Dodgers would win the series before the season started as well as predicted the 99 Rams would win the Super Bowl before the 99 preseason ended. Last season I predicted the Giants would win the series before the playoffs started although I’m not sure I mentioned it here. I di on other boards.

    A lot of it is intuition and following the history of the team and the players who come to the new roster. For many reasons already stated, most of which you’ve called crap without addressing each point specifically (which is WEAK my friend),

    I’ve predicted that the team as it is now composed will be lucky to be a .500 team. That’s my gut feeling. I hope I’m wrong, but I doubt that I am. The new Dodger team should change it’s name to “McGoo’s Geezers and Wannabes”.

    Protest all you want, but going into the season with one truly quality starter, a second who might get there with better control (who will be coached by Tricky Ricky Honeycutt), two geezers and a guy who’s probably blown out his shoulder already are not going to give you a division winner. Especially when you see all the holes in the lineup and the lack of a third power bat, one of your to power hitters having twinkies for brains, the other power hitter who can’t seem to hit anymore since he hurt his pinkie, a closer who blew out his arm throwing too many pitchers, no 3rd baseman and no left fielder. Even the ss is questionable.

    A good college team could probably beat our guys in a seven game series after August. The “educated” gut feeling is more powerful than a bunch of stats and fantasy spun by someone with blue colored glasses. A lot of what you are writing now reminds of the trades you used to suggest where you’d have us give up a bunch of scrubs and overpaid Mendozas for another teams rising stars. Enough already! Keep it real and you’ll regain my respect.

    Those of you expecting a happy new year concerning our Dogs and our country are in for a disappointment.

  11. Ken says:

    Siskels prospect projections

    A – NONE
    B – 9
    C- 11

    Oh well wait until next decasde

    • Badger says:

      Yeah, I read that too.

      And here is my problem with these lists…

      just last year Sickels had Withrow at #2 B+, Martin #3 B, A. Miller at #4 B, Lindblom at #5 B, Elbert #6 B- and Lambo #7 B-. All of them have fallen in their grade, Lindblom isn’t even on the chart this year, Lambo was traded for a bag of beans and everyone else in the top 7 after Gordon has been replaced.

      In one year things changed that much, but something remains the same….. with the exception of Jansen, who is already on the team, the Dodgers have no A prospects and no one close enough, or good enough, to step in and help out anytime soon.

      But hey, they are “Organization of the Year.” Yippee……

  12. Roger Dodger says:

    OKAY, what we might all agree to is this — with some of the coaching staff last season including the manager — they were probably in front-and-hind-sight — not what many of the 2010 players needed guiding them.

    Now, that a shift in focus and some new blood, and MORE ON THE WAY — the 2011 Dodgers could be in a much better position to go and let it all hang out.

    By the way, our son, 31, just graduated with his 4th higher eduction degree, lives in Austin and is now dating a gal he really likes, but she is a Giants fan. He tried to get her a Lincecum jersey for Christmas, but where ever he looked, they were out — sales were up for them’en.

    Happy New Year folks. Be safe today and tomorrow.

  13. lawdog says:

    Wow Roger! 4 higher education degrees! I’m just glad my kids got through with their Bachelors. You’d think that boy of yours would be too smart to get serious about a Giant fan, even if she was otherwise a perfect woman… :mrgreen:

    Sorry about all the negativity this morning. I’m usually a glass half empty kind of person, but this morning the glass was 1/4 empty wherever I looked.

    Happy New Year everybody!

    And may the Dodgers surprise the hell out of me in 2011 and win it all despite the changes made by the Phils.

    As far as the rest of the world, all I can do is quote an old Chinese curse:

    “May you live in interesting times.” :shock:

  14. Roger Dodger says:

    Lawdog, degrees in: biology, history, public health, and then a 4 year degree in alternative medicine (Oriental). Like 12 year or so in higher education.

    But, he is a Dodger fan. His hero growing up was D. Strawberry. And he cornered the BB card market on Glavine cards.

  15. Mark Timmons says:

    Lawdog,

    I will only respond that what you just wrote will most likely never be found in the Dewey Decimal System, unless it would be in 398 or 813.

  16. SpokaneBob says:

    Ken,

    Ellis started to hit better late in the season and if he has a good spring with the bat he could be our everyday guy with the vets fighting it out for back up.

    Loney must have caught Martin’s weak stick virus. The answer could be a platoon with Blake. I really doubt we see Casey in left field and James does hit righthanders better than lefties. Perhaps this would help to elevate his trade value while providing Casey more rest.

  17. Roger Dodger says:

    Mark, it really upsets me — so far this year — McCourt has done NOTHING to make the Dodgers better.

    It is the same old roster as yesterday. See, he really is, is not for we fans.

  18. lawdog says:

    I figured you do that again Mark. Ignore the specific issues and dismiss the totality of what I’ve said with a wave of your hand and an insult. Fine. You’re even weaker than I thought.

    I used to have respect for you because you wouldn’t tolerate weak posts without calling the poster on his fuzzy thinking and showing why it was fuzzy. Now you’re the fuzziest of them all. It doesn’t get weaker than to simply ridicule someone for saying something you don’t like and then smugly declaring you’ve won the argument.

    It’s like if you were in a debate and had to respond to a well reasoned argument, you’d stand up, glare at the opponent and simply say: “Fuck you!” Then you’d sit down and wonder why you didn’t win the debate since you’d clearly won the argument on the issues.

    Ridicule is the lowest form of argument and resorted to only by losers who think they’re winning by doing so.

    It’s going to be a tense and painful New Year as our world descends into the nether regions. Whether we like it or not, we’re all living in “interesting times” as the Chinese curse goes. That’s nothing to celebrate.

  19. Dodger Dude says:

    Mark, I am going to have to leave after reading that stuff. You have a couple of psychos in here. Why don’t you just block them?

  20. Badger says:

    Dodger Dude…. you are leaving??? I didn’t even realize you were here. Why don’t you post an opinion? I mean other than you think there are psychos here – and by the way, they are everywhere you look these days.

    I thought Mark’s post was clever… I had to look up what he was talking about, so did he I would imagine… who has the Dewey Decimal Systam memorized? I do know that 093 is Incanabula, and you won’t find anything we write in there either.

    Dodger fans, like United States citizens in general, are a frustrated lot. The only say we have in getting anything done right is the vote (buying tickets) and since our team (like our country) is the only game in town, we will probably stick with what we have because that is what is. I make my voice heard by speaking out, and doing my best to speak to truth (truth is hard to find these days, but if you refuse to swallow the kool-aid, and are willing to do some digging you can find it). I won’t support what I know is failed policy. Those who have known me for the last decade know that is true. I view McCourt’s current situation as a failure. He borrowed his way right into a sweet deal and now is in debt past his pectorals. Yeah, we got into the play-offs with him as owner, but I am not so sure how much he had to do with it. As crazy as ldog sounds some times, I still say he is closer to the truth than is our fearless leader Mark. However, I could be wrong about that. If McCourt can hang on until the horrible t.v. deal he had to sign with Fox is expired, and he can get the Dodgers their own, much needed and long overdue cable deal, he could very well survive this mess.

    In the mean time, I look for continued mediocrity.

  21. Mark Timmons says:

    DD,

    I say what I want (within reason, and contrary to reports, don’t call them morons) and they can give their opinions, no matter how erroneous. Sorry if that’s offensive.

    Lawdog has had his optic nerve intersect with a nerve in his a$$ and he has developed a $hitty outlook on life. He’s get over it by spring!

  22. Robert says:

    How do you see the batting order? Who is hitting 2nd? Cleanup etc?

  23. SpokaneBob says:

    Ken, I realize that Ned has a preference for veteran players and I believe that Torre was even more so. Many managers hold this philosophy, especially those who played in the major leagues. I thought Davey Johnson was very much this way and Walt Alston was as well. We will see about Donny Baseball. The point is that Ellis can probably handle the daily grind of catching almost everyday better than the older guys and if he has a better spring with the bat than the other two he could win the job. I accept that the vets have more experience in “handleing a staff” but Ellis has been around long enough to have established a relationship with our pitchers. One more thought….With the improvement he showed with the bat in the last 6 weeks of the season when he got to play more offten, it makes me think that we don’t know the extent of his potential and the only way were are going to find out is for him to play.

    You may be right and we end up playing the two vets, but I think this is a posibility and will probably be Donny’s call.

  24. Badger says:

    Bob, Barajas is the starting catcher, now, in ST and when the season starts. I don’t think it matters what Ellis does in ST games, as most of them are against pitchers trying to get their arms in shape. He’s the back-up, as it should be.

    Robert, this is how I see the starting lineup:

    Furcal leads off.

    Nobody hits second.

    Ethier third.

    Kemp clean-up.

    Loney 5th.

    Uribe.

    Gibbons.Blake.Barajas. Each day pick these names out of your hat cuz it won’t matter. We got 75% outs in this bunch.

  25. SpokaneBob says:

    Ridicule is the lowest form of argument and resorted to only by losers who think they’re winning by doing so.

    Lawdog,
    I thought this was an interesting statement coming from someone with your political views.

    From Sol Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals…tactics

    5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”

    A prime example is how the left has and continues to attack Sarah Palin instead of debateing specific issues.

  26. SpokaneBob says:

    Badger, You and Ken are probably right. I was surprised to see that Ellis will turn 30 this year and that Navarro is the youngest of the three. It may be Barajas’s job to lose but is well within the realm of posibility that he could lose it.

    • lawdog says:

      For SpokyBob (and others who seem to think ridicule is a winning form or argument.)

      Read it and weep:

      Techniques for Prevailing in a Debate

      Oct 22, 2008 Anthony Vultaggio

      Debates Balance Both Sides of an Argument – MorgueFile.com

      Debates were created as an opportunity to educate and be educated. Originally intended to elevate the collective psyche, effective debating is an art-form worthy of study

      While debates have been a hot topic during the past several months, the truth is that the importance of debating issues is rapidly falling by the wayside. Having become a forum for personal attacks, snide comments and ridicule, today’s debates hold none of the dignity of the discourses they were intended to be. Constructive debating, that is debating with the goal of educating and being educated on issues in order to elevate all involved is an art. With all this in mind, the following suggestions are offered for effective debating:

      Reference Facts Accurately During the Debate

      Facts support your points. They should be well-researched and correctly stated and they should come from irrefutable sources. Don’t quote an individual and expect those in opposition to automatically take your word on this matter. Better to incorporate statistics and generally accepted facts than to use anecdotal evidence which can be easily dismissed.

      Harvard Debate Council Summer Workshops L-D, Public Forum, Congress http://www.hdcworkshops.org

      Make Your Points in the Debate Clearly

      Don’t use terms that are ambiguous, open to interpretation or that require specialized knowledge to understand. When speaking to like-minded people you can assume with relative comfort that they will understand your meaning. In an open forum, however, this is not always the case. Use of vernacular sets you up to be misunderstood and that is precisely the opposite of your goal in any debate.

      Set Aside Your Ego and Emotion During the Debate

      Emotionally charged words may knock your opponent off his or her game, but that type of rhetoric will only backfire as cooler heads see through the flash and find no substance. Racial, ethnic, or religious slurs have no place in a rational debate, nor do personal attacks. Attention should be focused instead on the problem or problems in question.

      Read on:

      Sarah Palin, the Worst VP Candidate

      Competitive Debate Teams

      Do Your Homework Before the Debate

      Before entering into any debate there are two things you should understand: your position and that of your opponent. If you don’t have a thorough understanding of your position you’ll never be able to explain it to anyone else. The same goes with the holes you are attempting to poke in your opponent’s logic. If you don’t thoroughly understand all aspects (and subtle nuances) of his argument, you stand a good chance of proving his point instead of your own. One technique is to take the position with which you do not agree during a discussion with a colleague or friend as a way to grasp all sides of he issue. Its been said that if you can defend it you can break it down in a debate.

      In addition avoid these common traps:

      Attacking the arguer, not the argument.

      Assuming an answer with the phraseology of the question.

      Misunderstanding and/or misrepresenting statistics.

      Confusing cause and effect.

      Creating a caricature rather than presenting reality.

      Following these simple, logical guidelines may not make for tantalizing discourse but it will empower you to hold your own in an intellectual debate with just about anyone.

      Copyright Anthony Vultaggio. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.

      Read more at Suite101: How to Debate Effectively: Techniques for Prevailing in a Debate

      http://www.suite101.com/content/how-to-debate-effectively-a74703#ixzz19oRZAyhA

    • Badger says:

      Sure he could lose it. He blows a seal and Ellis is the guy. We go from a .239 hitter to a .238 hitter. And that would really hurt.

      I am not expecting much offense from either of these guys. Whatever we get from the catcher bats is gravy as far as I am concerned. Whoever is catching on any given night is probably hitting 8th. They are both legitimate defensive players.

    • Badger says:

      sorry… response is below….

  27. Badger says:

    Checkmate.

    Sarah Palin debate the issues? I really doubt that will ever happen. Her goal is to make money and she is riding a wave of ignorance right to the bank. Good for her, I guess.

    From Politicusa:

    “Sarah Palin is a shameless, jingoistic dingbat. Aggressive with her stupidity, she nevertheless is no more qualified than Howdy Doody to comment on U.S. politics and world affairs. Shame on anybody who attributes any positive value to the opinions of John McCain’s political Frankenstein monster. Shame on HarperCollins for processing through a celebrity author’s “book” packed full of junk and nonsense that nobody else would have been permitted to publish with HarperCollins. Shame on Sarah Palin for promulgating such droolingly idiotic horsefeathers.”

    I agree with that except for the shame on her ending. Hey, if people are dumb enough to buy into that schtick… good for her. Wish I could make money without bringing anything relevant to the party.

  28. Badger says:

    The “reply” buttons are not working properly in here.

  29. lawdog says:

    I already posted the specific link for the article i cited for SpokyBob and Marvelous Mark, but somehow it disappeared from the thread. Some censor I suppose. Here it is again for anyone who really wants to know the rules for an effective debate, or conversation involving differing viewpoints:

    http://www.suite101.com/content/how-to-debate-effectively-a74703

  30. lawdog says:

    More for SpokyBob and others whop think Palin is being ridiculed rather spewing ridicule herself:

    Sarah Palin, the Worst VP Candidate
    The Lack of Foreign Policy Knowledge Should Disqualify Palin

    Oct 2, 2008 Trunkos Judit

    Governor Sarah Palin –

    http://www.gov.state.ak.us/photos/Gov-Palin-2006_O

    Governor Sarah Palin’s TV interviews suggest that the young Governor from Alaska does not have a clear understanding of American foreign policy.

    Senator McCain surprised most Americans when he decided to select Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska to be his VP candidate. Not only most of us never even heard of her, but ever since her appearance in the campaign the stewardess/Barbie-esque governor seems to hurt the Conservative presidential nominee almost every single time she opens her mouth without having a previously written speech.

    McCain Campaign Strategy

    Senator McCain’s campaign knew very well the advantages and disadvantages of selecting Sarah Palin as the running mate. Even though the latest developments suggest that Palin’s only true advantage is her attractive appearance, her history shows that she is, indeed, on the “right” side of the political spectrum. She was chosen to join the Conservative campaign because of her pro-gun and anti-abortion history, which usually appeals to the Neo-conservative voters. On top of that, she is a rare political commodity: she is an attractive female politician. Whoever believed that the American voters will be satisfied with only that was making a big mistake.

    The McCain campaign was well-aware of Palin’s foreign policy limitations and decided to put her on the ticket anyways. In order to protect the McCain campaign from Palin’s shortcomings, they decided not to let the media approach her with any unrehearsed questions. This short-term strategy only worked until Palin appeared in Katie Couric’s interview and confirmed, again, that the she is lacking the fundamentals of foreign policy and international affairs. Palin’s interview with Couric on CBS hit the bottom when Palin was asked a question regarding the planned economic bailout. Palin panicked and came up with an answer similarly confusing and pointless as the poor Ms. Teen USA from South Carolina last year when she was asked to explain why many Americans cannot locate America on the world map. Both ladies proved that they are unable to think under pressure and answer simple unrehearsed questions. Even though Governor Palin was not asked (yet) to locate America on the world map, she made it clear for most viewers that she cannot defend her previous claim that she has foreign policy experience (or knowledge for that matter). The sad fact is that the McCain campaign does not see foreign policy as a critical issue and thus continues to supports Palin as the VP candidate.

    Vice Presidential Debate

    The first big test for Palin will be on Thursday, when she will have to debate senior Senator Joe Biden on issues such as foreign policy. Senator Biden has been a long-time member and currently the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and possesses the foreign policy knowledge needed for such a debate, however, Governor Palin needs to prepare very well since Senator McCain will not be able to hold her hands and repeat the debate for damage-control purposes as they did with the Katie Couric interview. There is only one Vice Presidential debate before the elections in November, and Governor Palin must prove herself there.

    Read on

    Sarah Palin Joins John McCain Presidential Bid
    Who is Alaska Governor Sarah Palin?
    Who Is Republican Sarah Louise Heath Palin?
    Political strategists have been talking about the fact that Senator Biden has to be careful on Thursday about how much he is going to attack Governor Palin simply because the Obama campaign cannot afford to lose the female vote. Using double-standards, on the other hand, will prevent the American people to see for themselves if the Republican VP nominee is capable or incapable of discussing key issue under pressure, which is precisely what the position will require the person to do, regardless of gender.

    Following the VP debate, the McCain campaign will need to make a decision about Governor Palin. Unless she proves that she understands basic foreign policy issues, the Conservatives will be wise to recommend Governor Palin to resign and look for a more educated candidate who will be able to discuss issues with the media and with other politicians.

    Copyright Trunkos Judit. Contact the author to obtain permission for republication.

    Read more at Suite101:

    Sarah Palin, the Worst VP Candidate: The Lack of Foreign Policy Knowledge Should Disqualify Palin

    http://www.suite101.com/content/sarah-palin-the-worst-vp-candidate-a71378#ixzz19oevroZH

  31. Badger says:

    Anyone who would actually choose to debate with Sarah Palin is making a huge mistake. Ignore her! She isn’t running for anything. In fact, she ran away from her last political job. Now she is just cashing in. I’ll take the same position with her that I am taking with McCourt…. neither will get a dime out of me.

  32. SpokaneBob says:

    Lawdog,

    You tatally missed my point.

    I am not trying to start a political argument or even a discussion of Sarah Palin. You said that ridicule is the lowest form of argument and is used by losers. I was simlpy pointing out the it is one of the lefts favorite weapons in political discourse. Another example, calling the Tea Party members “Tea Baggers”, a term you yourself have used here. Both you and Badger make my point.

    Sorry Mark, I didn’t mean to start a political dust up. But Lawdog when you post something that is such an obvious contradiction, you shouldn’t be offended when your called on it.

    Iam done with this topic.

  33. lawdog says:

    Bob–The Tea Party itself started out calling itself “the teabaggers”. How am I ridiculing them if I use their own label to discss something they’ve done?

    And you didn’t call me on anything Bob. Did you even read the article or go back and look at the exchanges I’ve had to put up with from Mr. Timmons these past months where he ignores my arguments completely and dismisses them with some snide comment about my having my head up my ass or the like? He’s doing this constantly for the last year and I’m sick of having to put up with it. It’s juvenile and has no place on an intelligent blog.

    Go read my posts again. I do not use ridicule. If someone flames me I might flame them back, but it’s an emotional reaction when i do so and I don’t make any real intellectual points when I allow myself to stoop to that level. Fortunately I have enough self control to only lose it like that once in a blue moon and I always regret having stooped the attackers same level.

    Anyone who responds to a position set forth with reasons therefore cheapens the discussion and reduces the thread to a childish tantrum. When two get involved it really gets vile and ugly and for no good reason. Such flaming basically is a very loud admission that the one flaming is wrong.

    Notice that unlike Mr. Timmons, I’ll never aggressively attack another poster for an argument mad or a point of view put forth. That’s just silly juvenile stuff for children.

    Bob, I never intended to fight with you on this. But I have not make any contradictory statements on the issues here. I’d suggest you read the article carefully, then go and review the exchanges between Timmons and myself, take a deep breath and then try again–making sure you understand the argument and know what you are talking about before you put fingers to the keyboard.

  34. lawdog says:

    To put it in a nutshell for you Bob. Ridiculing another poster on a blog as a form of responsive argument has absolutely nothing to do with liberal or right wing politics.

    Think about it for a minute and i think you’ll see my point.

    Liberals and Right wingers may use ridicule as well in a different context, but one’s politics has nothing to do with refuting a sports argument in a sports discussion by ridiculing the blogger you happen to disagree with and want to beat in a debate on the issue the other raised.

    Palen and other righties use ridicule more often to attack the left than vice versa in my opinion, but that could just be my perceptions being influenced a little by my own political views. But, be that as it may, Palen’s use of ridicule or a left wingers use of ridicule when each attacks the other is totally and completely irrelevant to the point I’m making here at this time on this board..

  35. Badger says:

    How good would 68 stolen bases and 96 runs scored look in lf now?

    Heck, we are still paying him, bring him back!

  36. Dodgerbin03 says:

    What are the chances of manny coming back on a contract under $5 million with incentives, and would this be a good idea? I see more positives then negatives.

  37. lawdog says:

    Bringing Duke Snider back would be better than going with what we have now “in house” and he’s 87 years old.

  38. lawdog says:

    Bringing Duke Snider back would be better than going with what we have now “in house” and he’s 87 years old.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. [...] The Dodgers Welcome 2011 | LADodgerTalk.com – Daily Dodger Talk … [...]


Leave a Reply

Mandatory Daily Dodger Reading