Could Winning Be Worse Than Losing For Denver?

I could use this moment to reinforce my contention that Trevor Siemian is the best of a mediocre stable of quarterbacks, but I must concede that choosing between mediocrity is highly subjective when talking QB's.

All of you Broncos fans who are still debating the value of this stable of quarterbacks should stop it, that ship has sailed. Brock Osweiler and Siemian are, at best, career backups while Paxton Lynch is fighting like hell to overcome that ankle injury (wink, wink) and prove he even belongs in the NFL.

I totally understand Lynch's fears given the toxic combination of our offensive line, crappy play-calling and over-inflated expectations of every quarterback. But even with one eye, you can see that the pirate Paxton is headed back out to sea soon. In other words, unless we commit to a full rebuild and wait for him improvement plan, that ship has sailed too.

Deciding to play Lynch in an inconsequential game because Kansas City has secured the AFC West title doesn't lessen the dangers of playing any NFL player who isn't desperately angling to display his skill and will to win. Unlike Lynch, Siemian is tough as nails and eager to play with pain as needed. If the Chiefs aren't okay with losing prior to the playoffs, this game could send Lynch back to hijacking forever, assuming our offensive line and play-calling jump ship again.

Nonetheless, if there remains any debate in the Denver quarterback conversation and you'd like to flip a coin between Siemian and Osweiler, I will save you the trouble and give you Osweiler on an ounce of durability Siemian hasn't proven to possess.

It's not really important that the Broncos fans or the coaching staff have finally sort of accepted the mediocrity of their quarterbacks even if it has helped them to start calling more of the kind of plays that gives NFL QB mediocrity a chance in hell. CJ Anderson looking like CJ Anderson should have been our primary quarterback plan from day one, but too much conversation about Jamal Charles, Devontae Booker and bringing the "juice' confused all of that.

While a fair amount of losing has shined a light, exposed our weaknesses and shown us a direction for winning, recent games still point to a coaching staff hell-bent on proving to Elway that they can bring that juice he hired them for, despite every attempt to do so leading to turnovers, losing and a bunch of excuses why they have no choice but to juice it up when down one or two scores early, as if the smart fans of Denver forgot who hired you and what he asked you to bring.

At least Vance is no longer sprinkling this rancid tasting juice he and John concocted with that excuse of no identity anymore. Someone in the GM office must have informed him the two guys that are responsible for establishing such things.

Though we seem reluctant to embrace it, the identity of this team is the identity of winning in this league. We should know it by now because Seattle set the tone when they destroyed us with it in Superbowl 48, and every team since (Denver in Superbowl 50, the Patriots in 49 & 51) either mimicked the same formula or they don't have a ring on their fingers.

Tom Brady and the New England Patriots may have been forced to abandon it when coming back to win the crown last year, but even Brady and Belichick employ the run the ball and play defense approach until you make them change it. No name after no name has proven effective running for New England, and the Atlanta Falcons were clearly the team trying to win with the offense during last years Superbowl defeat to the Patriots.

Like Floyd Little and The Orange Crush D, are Terrell
Davis and great defense more symbolic of the Broncos
identity than a scrambling Elway and his rocket arm?

Despite minimal rushing attempts in way too many games this season, Denver fans have consistently watched Broncos running backs maintain a solid statistical standing (3rd in the NFL)  along with a consistent defense that tries to overcome every attempt by our juicy offense to give games away.

Interceptions dating back to our championship season two years ago have created a collective longing for the days of the No Limit Soldiers. Now, you can virtually hear a collective exclamation all across Broncos Country of "run the damn ball....please", each time the team goes three and out.

When the Broncos have won in recent years they have primarily committed to a single back approach and to running the ball twice as much as they pass. When they lose, no particular running back get's enough attempts to find a rhythm and the run to pass numbers reverse themselves. It's that simple. Elway desired something juicier than Tebow from the moment he first acquired Peyton Manning and he continues to look for better and juicier stuff like he enjoyed from his younger years when he was a young stud Californian turned Bronco trying to cheat the process with a rocket arm and coming up short in the end.

In a search for something juicier, Elway lets go of an older John Fox in a move that was mutually desired. Friendship or not, the exact same thing could be said of the Kubiak departure. Elway's current marriage to Vance Joseph came with a couple of years of courting him and with a prenuptial expectation of something that sounded to fans like a return to the run-first approach in Denver that was famous for a salute and for making household names out of anybody who took to the Broncos backfield. Why John isn't a bit wiser about the dangers of the juice only John, and maybe his ex-wife Janet, understands.

If that last paragraph was too outdated or double entendre-filled for some to follow, you can trace Denver's commitment to an identity to very recent history when we begrudgingly ran the ball behind the legendary Peyton Manning en route to a Superbowl victory. The more this team attempts to win in a way diametrically opposed to methods of a recent past, our Superbowl 50 magic starts to look more and more like the wisdom of Elway's former love, Gary Kubiak, who decided to salvage their friendship by ending the coaching relationship.

Kubiak and tons of smart fans might have left that championship season feeling towards Elway the same way the rest of us are starting to feel now. Even in victory, those skeptical fans were right to question Elway's general ability to manage tough situations, much less to be the full-fledged General Manager and VP of Operations over a proud and accomplished organization.

From my personal Kharma-inspired view of life and sports, much of the bad luck is the byproduct of Elway's  Tim Tebow mistake, when he ironically had no choice but to manage around someone else's mediocre first-round QB pick who was also learning to play but was actually winning while doing it, unlike now. That also worked way more than Elway anticipated and Tebow earned a chance to stay in this league, at the least, to learn the game behind Manning.

With Tebow and Kubiak, Elway shunned the hoopla and results to prove he could do better.

On the surface, Superbowl 50 appeared to be Elway's fulfillment on that promise, but once again, it's beginning to feel more and more an accident with every passing day. Well, not an accident, but certainly not as much of an Elway creation as we thought at the time.

Since that Superbowl victory, a few of the players Elway determined expendable (Malik Jackson, Danny Trevathan, TJ Ward) have left some to wonder if he even recognized the elements that stirred our defense into greatness. Some of the same concern applies to his drafting of quarterbacks.When you look at his quarterbacks on paper, they all have "the look" though none have shown the 'it' factor that makes Russell Wilson or Drew Brees not need the statuesque look that Elway seems to covet.

The slight against Elway and his current coaching staff is for their passionate departure from an identity that won a ring, and for possibly putting politics over championships by rejecting Colin Kaepernick. Kharma is a ghost. Letting go of Tim Tebow and head coaches more capable than Vance Elway while deciding Kaepernick didn't deserve the same cup of coffee you gave Mark Sanchez are coming back to haunt Dove Valley and everyone who works there.

TIn fact, it might be the ghosts at Dove Valley that have apparently forced some folks on the Broncos coaching staff to start accepting their identity and return to the Tim Tebow formula for winning games, making winning much more likely regardless the competition. Control the ball and limit turnovers and Denver still has a defense able to dominate teams like the Indianapolis Colts,  the New York Jets or even a Kansas City Chiefs team that has little to nothing to play for this today. Turn the ball over and the Broncos make pathetic teams with pathetic names like the Washington Redskins look special.

If the juice John covets is actually just creative play-calling, he's actually on the right track. Denver will need something juicier than Vance Elway and his staff could muster this season if he is fortunate enough to find his voice and return to introduce himself to fans who still don't know much about him.

Assuming he is not retained, Vance at least can start trying to recapture whatever remains of his own forgotten name and reputation. If I were Vance Elway, I would take solace from the reality that this team has looked virtually the same no matter who has coached it in recent years, so it might not be the head coach causing this.

Hindsight and the tape say had they given CJ the ball another 15 times for 88 yards versus the Washington Redskins, they probably would have eliminated the passing game turnovers that turned a very winnable game against them.

From my view of things, what the Broncos are scrambling to accomplish on the field to close out this season is only solidifying how utterly incompetent they are in the front office.

Ovussly, the recent championship history did not make this
job the jewel Joseph hoped it would be.

After months of watching our new coach take to the podium and aw-shucks us into thinking he is either too nice or can't coach football, we still don't really know if he can coach when he keeps going for it on fourth down in the second quarter like a battered wife afraid any point deficit speaks to an imminent beat down.

I would call Vance Elway a wife who needed a better prenuptial lawyer, but that five-year deal doesn't kiss ass even if Vance clearly does. If he stays or goes, he'll be like Tiger Woods ex-wife, just fine.

There's really no way Vance is the main reason we have switched quarterbacks like underwear from preseason on anyway. His devotion to Elway created that mess. My biggest problem with Vance Elway comes when he is questioned about his quarterbacks. He almost never says 'I", preferring instead to describe every decision that is made as "We decided", which means "Elway made me do it" to us smart Broncos fans.

When addressing the brilliant media of a smart fan base, Kubiak often had to differentiate between decisions where he made the final call versus decisions when Elway might have felt differently. Kubiak demanded freedom from front office intrusion when he took the job and regularly shot back at reporters with the words "John understands that I have a team to coach".

In hindsight, did John understand or did he have an issue with the previous coaches he couldn't intrude upon?  Ovussly, Vance Elway and a five-year commitment to a company man coach who tows the company line kinda answers that question fo' us, doesn't it? Reports say John will announce his future with Vance after the final game ends, so we'll soon see.

Warning, Vance Elway!!!

Simply towing the company line might appear to be in the best interest of your career, but not necessarily in a town like Denver where fans are just too smart and too engaged to even endure HOF coaches for a minute too long when it's time for them to go. It's also not so smart if you are building a future resume of coaching style expectations for other teams to examine. Eventually, Vance will need to divorce himself from being John's newest love interest just to establish his own name as an NFL head coach, especially since John is treading water at GM and seems more focused on becoming an owner someday so he can do his intruding like Jerry Jones does it.

Vance would also do well to realize that John's history with coaches thus far has not been any better than his quarterback drafting skills. Smart fans of Denver are willing to give John and Vance Elway time to grow with the rebuild, but we haven't forgotten the kind of coaches John already let go of. A coach with any less a spine than our last three runs the risk of becoming like Jason Garrett or whoever is the next Jerry Jones puppet in Dallas.

John and Vance need to immediately take a knee and pray together. Partially to stay together beyond one year- which will look terribly bad on both men- and partially that Kyle Sloter never turns into much of anything so Broncos fans don't have to burn John and Vance in effigy as we continue searching for a future at quarterback that isn't currently in-house.

Instead of squeezing through impossible Superbowl windows, I'm all in favor of drafting and developing offensive players who can catch a punt return or play with pain to open a Superbowl door in the near future instead of just beating these two frightened ponies called Isaiah McKenzie and Paxton Lynch to death.

Even if they finally play every player we need to know about on today, John and Vance Elway should both be held accountable for this team's lack of player development, the unwillingness to play players you trusted enough to keep after preseason, and for an overall directional stalemate.

If you follow the talk radio circuit, you realize that Elway is catching heat for sure. Yet, crap notoriously runs downhill where Vance and the coaching staff that Elway gave him currently reside.   

A GM who recognizes his own mess-ups, and isn't pressing his new coach to clean up poop he inherited would have already forced Paxton to play, bad ankle (wink, wink) or not. The accountable GM would also take to the same talk radio circuit that is lambasting him and his new coach to explain the team's direction just as he readily did when dumping Tebow for Manning or stealing coach Kubiak's Superbowl 50 credit.


Any GM who DOES NOT care to clean his own mess and chart a comforting path towards correction for his very smart fans to follow would also readily allow a coach he signed for five years to continue to play mostly veterans players, and to try and save a lost season against teams that stink and are a lot more experienced with tanking than the Broncos.

It's as if Elway doesn't realize our team stinks too and will need major free agency luck or a major draft and wait overhaul, not just another aging quarterback who will struggle mightily behind our crappy offensive line just as Peyton and everybody else has.

And for certain, we do not need another rookie quarterback unless John and Vance Elway now understand what waiting on a rookie quarterback entails. Any team unwilling to develop and wait for its young talent needs to be like the Patriots and reconsider the draft as a primary building component beyond stashing trade-bait like Jimmy Garapolo for some other desperate team.

You also will need to have Tom Brady playing quarterback for a few decades if you want drafting not to matter nearly as much. We will all soon see if Belichick can coach without a legend playing quarterback or will the Patriots be forced like so many others to accept the 'tank and rebuild' approach after Brady hangs it up?

Is Von Miller A Denver Bronco For Life? Should He Be?

I realize fellow Broncos fans might appreciate the break that winning for a couple of games had given us from those Broncos haters who love to razz us when we are down, but those teams haven't won in a long time and are enviously staring at our Superbowl 50 ring when they talk. Their emotions are not to be treated as genuine or as a reason to see winning as terribly necessary right now. The time it will take to build this back up might take longer than our most expensive players have to wait. We run a dangerous risk that emotion might slow our willingness to release, and thus acquire key assets at crucial moments.

Who we have coaching our team isn't quite as important as the question of who that coach will be asked to keep or discard going forward. Yet, if John is truly evaluating the same coach he's on the hook to pay for the next five years instead of simply evaluating his young talent and letting his coach learn, prepare yourself Broncos Country, for the fourth Broncos coach in 5 years as Elway tries to alleviate the pressure smart fans are presently mounting against him.

On the other hand, even if Vance is still John's main squeeze after he hyphenate's his name next year in a liberation statement, Vance Joseph-Elway cannot be expected to develop long-term confidence in his on-going relationship with John or in any of these players if John is forcing him to play certain guys while also looking for a new coach to love. Whenever an NFL coach has doubt about his players or questions his own job, every mistake feeds into those existing doubts and questions.

While I realize that an agile quarterback and a slot receiver are just what the doctor ordered for this busted season and team, this conversation is not about needs as much as it is about beliefs. When you believe or are very hopeful in a player, they get the number of tries that McKenzie and Lynch keep getting, which is why it is vital to give Vance a team he believes in versus a roster and a coaching staff of John's preferred people. Kenneth Faried being exiled from playing time with the much improved Denver Nuggets is a great example of what it takes at times to win.

Or just let Vance go.

Instead of finding a coach who you trust to develop your drafted players, John seems hell-bent on chasing the trophy with a couple veteran stop-gaps that can become our next Neil Smith or DeMarcus Ware. Although he passed on making Calais Campbell into that guy when he came free, Domata Peko was a home run hit for John. TJ Ward was too before he got away.

The problem with great stop gaps is that few of them play offensive line, and the wealth of edge rushers is forcing every team to draft and groom their own offensive front while they hope like hell for the right quarterback to make that draft commitment pay off. Meanwhile, GM's are often forced to change coaches when frequent stop-gap measures are employed just to make any failures in the approach point towards coaching and not the approach.

What Does Rebuilding Look Like?

For reasons that I'm not impressed with, this team is trying to save a coach with a five-year contract from getting fired. Maybe playing to win is always a better scenario than playing to gain draft positioning, but I can't help but wonder just how many of these veteran players we are currently committing to chasing wins do we already know are gone at years end?

Including our desperate fight to actually come back and beat the Washington Redskins, I've felt a certain kind of way as I watched teams like the Indianapolis Colts and the New York Jets leave the field as the draft winners while my Broncos walked off celebrating the score. Those teams have bottom-dwelled long enough to understand the impact of one or two wins in actual or potential selections- assuming you decide to trade back for additional picks- while the Broncos are more worried that losing too much could tick off Aqib Talib and have him slapping people upside the head like he did when last season soured.

When Talib himself is on the record saying he doubts he'll be retained, it leads me to feel like Denver might be proving a lot of things by focusing on winning to close out the season, but forward thinking is not one of them. Could winning actually be worse than losing for the Denver Broncos? Winning without finding out what you have for the future is a loss of a different kind if you ask me.

I could create a list of all the young players on the ship has sailed list versus the guys who can't get off the bench to find out, but Kyle Sloter is gone and I've already talked too much about Lynch and McKenzie. The rest of the rookies have been on the bench for so long I would need Google to remind me of their names. But that's the problem with every regime change. The blossoming talents like Jordan Taylor get's lost in the shuffle of a new coach trying to determine his established talent first.

If the same five-year contract coach who decided to make Trevor Siemian fight for a job he had already earned is now fighting for his own job, it's because Elway has made it that way. In doing so, John has also accidentally forced his coaching staff into benefitting from the lack of intrusion that Kubiak demanded and should be inherent to their job description, not just a by-product of a busted year.

Broncos Country is still curious about DeAngelo Henderson, Jake Butt and a few other young players that I'm Googling right now. Simply announcing Lynch as the starter proves to me that John realizes our curiosity too. He might also realize that now is NOT the time to totally step away from desperately needed analysis of future players even if he failed to see that then (upon the hiring of a first-year head coach) was NOT the time to get overly involved. On either note, Elway has played it wrong. The same bad mistakes that started during the Superbowl 50 season linger but are no longer being drowned out by the cheers of a fanbase who used to have a lot to cheer about. Now they are selling off their tickets fast and cheap.

Winning when your season is an utter bust is a feel-good bonus that makes players and fans of bad teams sleep a bit easier at night. Beyond that, several former bottom dwellers have risen to the top of the current NFL mountain by embracing the reality that winning can be initially counter-productive to the rebuilding process, a process that most winning organizations struggle to embrace.   I am not saying that our rookies and younger players shouldn't fight like hell to try to win the game if given a chance to show their value. I am saying that at some point amidst a busted season they should be asked to try.

WE DON'T REBUILD, WE RELOAD? BLAH, BLAH, BLAH!!!!

Not every organization seeks when to tank the season and rebuild, however, every organization that needs to do it had better find an opportune moment to capitalize on its arrival as opportunities to tank and rebuild can be fleeting and hard to recognize, especially for teams like the Broncos who appear unaccustomed to the practice and will probably retain the bulk of this team and reload it instead of using key pieces to acquire the pieces they need to rebuild it.

I get it. Winning is almost always better than losing, and no brand new coach wants to learn about their team while losing games. But timing in life is everything, and there really is only one thing to learn from reacting too late. It's called hindsight. Armchair quarterbacks and opinionated pundits like myself rely on hindsight, regularly. NFL coaches and former quarterbacks who become GM/VP's should avoid it like the plague.

Tax Plan Will Put Icing On GOP Identity Crisis Cake

In a search for fair and balanced political criticism, it's increasingly difficult for many of my Republican voting friends to read anything I have to say as it relates to politics. Maybe they DO NOT find my strong support of Donna Brazile as enough of a rebuke on Barack Obama, the guy who caused most of this mess to begin with.

Yes, Barack Obama did bankrupt- in more ways than one- the entire DNC leaving it in a situation where Hillary Clinton had to save it or go it alone. Clinton sort of did both if we take Brazile at her word. Obama hasn't opened his mouth once in defense of himself and most people who dislike the decision of Donna describe her book as a money grab, not a lie.

I quickly echoed the concern about Hillary long before she announced she'd run, just as I've acknowledged how Obama left the DNC in a position to do very little work down ticket, forcing Clinton to trust that black people would simply obey the Obama's and fear Trump way more than we eventually did. I voiced concerns during the DNC succession war that left boring Tom Perez as the head while forward thinking Keith Ellison (the first man to predict Trump btw) was designated co-chair as a white-flag concession. And I've written, on several occasions, my concern with progressive messaging. ( I'm A Socialist Who Doesn't Believe In $15, Warning!! Trump's Guilt Is Not A Campaign Message )

And then Virginia and Alabama happened.

Despite the apparent possibility of this moment, I am still of the mindset that it's vital for Democrats to recognize their own identity crisis and not misread what happened in Alabama as probable anywhere else in America while forgetting that black people apathy in the 2016 presidential election might have lead to a p***y grabbing nincompoop of a president. We blacks don't openly take blame for Donald, yet we indirectly accepted blame when we refused to worry about it being our fault with that pedophile in Alabama. In record numbers, black people came out to vote in Alabama overcoming major impediments- intentional or not- that typically thwart our participation.

While I would love to see this black voter participation trend continue, I don't blame black folks for our apathy all alone. Once again, I blame Obama for disappointing the lazy black voters who wanted him to deliver 40 acres and/or a mule.

I certainly blame him for bankrupting the DNC.

But, I also blame him for scaring the shit out of way too many white people with that smile and charismatic way of his. I thank him immensely for living a virtuous life with a virtuous wife and kids, but that doesn't take away the blame we have to give Obama for passing a healthcare plan designed to placate Republicans, who mostly found the whole idea of universal healthcare objectionable back in those days anyway.

I blame Barack Hussein Obama for having the audacity to become our glorious 44th president with such a Muslim'y name. I don't blame him for racial intolerance and stuff like that, but I have no option but to blame Barack Obama for not having the courage, or the core principles, to demand single-payer healthcare when he had the chance to do it.

Does Little Marco actually have big hands
and big courage, or is he just igniting a trend
that can only explode the deficit further?

As a result of Obama's willingness to concede to the Republican plan, despite obstructionism from day one, we are now at a place where progressive voters are described as such because calling yourself a Republican or a Democrat has no value when each party's ideas, policies and plans all end up leaving regular people in the same spot WE started.

Black Democrats in America, and in Alabama, have very little reason to expect Hillary Clinton, Doug Jones or any other so-called Democrat to fix the issue with wages. In fact, despite what will inevitably add more to the overall deficit scoring of their tax plan, it is a Republican that is fighting to retain that same old Child Tax Credit that occasionally makes you wish you were Mormon (Thanks Marco Rubio).

Rubio's rescue, combined with doubling the standard deduction, never amounts to more than an extra few bucks or so that you will only see during tax season, and doesn't actually apply to the 44 million people who itemize their deductions anyway. So, if you are poor without children, you had better pray the GOP wage increase promise pans out because their tax plan has nothing at all in it for you.

Someone should remind Rubio and the Republicans that Child Tax Credits, doubling the standard deductions and things like that used to be a dangling carrot that only Democrats used. In reality, Democrats or Republicans could offer to quadruple the standard deduction and it wouldn't dramatically change the way tax liability or tax return checks work. Unless you are still willing to game the system by illegally claiming charitable donations as a way to squeeze out a tax return check, the GOP tax plan does little to truly benefit the average Joe or Josephine.

In fact, the corporate tax cuts don't expire but Josephine's and Joe's cuts will expire sooner, not later. It's as if congressional Republicans can't truly forecast a vibrant future economy their tax plan depends on and understand the long-term deficit risk of giving cuts to everybody based on potential growth. The problem they have is that they also can't begin to pretend they are helping everyone fairly without shining too much light on the fact that they are not. So, the message becomes, " ignore your expiring tax cuts, Joe and Josephine, and trust that bad companies will finally be good to you after WE give them lots more money to be good to you with"

Also, try to forget about the fact that the corporations will see their benefits starting this February, but WE will have to wait until 2019 tax time to get our one-time $1,000 Christmas present. In the long run, the tax cuts that they insist are for us might afford you a couple of cool family nights at the football game, so long as your car is already in good shape and you live in a city like Atlanta where the Mercedes Benz stadium has foot long hot dogs that are only $2.50, and the inexpensive soft drinks ($2-$4) come with free refill stations all over the stadium.

Everywhere else in America, the average game ticket starts at $150. Car repairs can be ten times that amount.

The truth about both parties are that neither has fixed inflation's deflation of our income and savings. Way too many of us already put off those car repairs waiting for the Republicans and Democrats to throw us an inflation sensitive bone each spring. Yet, no matter how many different ways they attempt to throw those tax time bones, it is never hard to recognize how little meat remains for the immense amount of ravenous dogs attempting to scavenge for their share.

So yes, Obama is to blame for the skepticism of a voting block that was already too skeptical for him to concede as much as he did. Assuming he conceded at all?

Maybe Obama has overtaken Russia and is controlling
Putin as a devious plot against Trump and America?

I am still of the mindset that me, Hillary and Obama are way too conservative for the taste of many progressive voters who hate the flavor from the last 8 years and demand entitlement sharing much more than empowerment plans. Aside from his single payer mistake, which is actually more or less a mistake when viewed from hindsight than an actual mistake, I generally supported Obama's pseudo-liberalism. Whether the policies of Obama were concessions of a much too kind demon or true ideology might be resolved one day in his own version of Revelations. He might even snap back at Brazile and create an East Coast, West Coast type political battle of biblical proportions, like we had with rap music in the 90's? Or he will concede that she was right.

As for my personal concession? 

My Obama rebuke is all that I can offer to my Republican friends who accuse me of not being even handed when sharing too many comical postings against Trump and his team. If you try to Google something funny and fair about Barack, Hillary and Democrats, the pictures of demonic horns don't seem funny enough, even the few that have a smiling face attached to them.


No matter how easy a target Donald's ducklings are, Democrats can't rest on Huckabee humor, pedophile hatred or whatever a laurel might be. They need to replicate the ground game that swept through Virginia and Alabama even if it was a pedophile that motivated them to press harder in Alabama, a place Democrats rarely waste money. Now, the DNC is forced to find enough money to throw at every Southern wall just to see where their message actually sticks.

Oh yeah, they also need a believable economic message to avoid the risk of relying on their own Grand Old Philosophies that no one cares to believe anymore. Hopefully, they are fashioning a message of economic hope that sounds a lot better than "Trump Sucks".

Whether this guy who is proving to be politically toxic to his own party actually survives Mueller and wants to give this horrendous job of his a second go, has little to do with the necessity for each party to clean up from the Trump-era fallout and establish a firmer identity in an era beset with identity politics.

Despite an image of desperately wanting to help people, the results of Democrat policies have done no more than Republican policies at closing the widening gap between rich and poor. In the end, both parties can only tinker with wage minimums or give you a small check each spring.


What Is Identity Politics?

If you are raised to see Democrats as much more reprehensible than pedophile's, it isn't difficult to confuse one man's reprehensible behaviors as a political assassination attempt.The sad but true reality of identity politics is that Roy Moore had way more support than any civilized human should be comfortable with (I did not say deplorable). Identity politics made it absolutely necessary for 97% of black women, and 92% of black men (eligible voters), to show up in Alabama.

Thanks to identity politics, black people were begged to assume their identity of Democrat in numbers never seen before in Alabama. While it saved their state from being culpable in pedophilia, the stench of those who laid down with the skunk, and the p***y grabbing president who endorsed pedophilia, will be smelled for years to come. As we reminisce on this, WE the People will also recall the visuals and imagine the smell of body sweat and oppression left behind in those Democrat precincts where budget cuts killed voting locations and lengthened lines in Alabama, but only stiffened the resolve of those identified as US.

For a party that is currently making folks question their identification of Christian and Republican, the Roy Moore debacle might be the largest relinquishment of a party's identity save for the one they are proposing to do next week.

Assuming the Republican Tax plan moves forward without another Marco Rubio hero stunt- which only further inflates the cost of doing the entire thing- the GOP will be on the hook to prove that adding 2 trillion dollars (and rising) to the deficit can be deficit neutral, or deficit reducing from increased incomes and consumer spending that increases tax revenues.

"Have I got a gift for you!"

Disregard the blind eye Republicans have turned towards our Soviet sympathizer-in-chief, or the desperate desire to take your healthcare away just because they promised to. If the GOP was interested in you and I, or interested in keeping their image as the fiscally conservative party, they would all get behind Paul Ryan's proposed cuts of entitlements, a move that will surely get them all sent packing but would at least retain the last remnant of a party identity that they are essentially scrapping by adding 2 trillion (plus) to our deficit.

The blurred lines between the two parties will grow even blurrier after tomorrow when every Republican Senator and his mama will seek to do the Rubio and get their last minute pork barrel add-on's at the stage when the pressure of the holiday season conspires to make another legislative failure the first present the GOP opens.

Assuming they get so lucky.

Much like Roy Moore, losing will be a special form of winning for the GOP who can actually avoid some of the public backlash of this terribly unpopular president and tax plan if they are fortunate enough for it- and Trump indirectly- to go down in legislative flames just as Repeal and Replace did. As for the average Joe or Josephine? Aside from remembering who passed it, there's just not enough in it for most of US to worry about it passing or failing.


 
     

Profit Demands Make Minimum Wages Inevitable

As we watch the GOP pretend to politically pursue an answer to poor wages, we could use some honest conversation about this problem. Both parties in Washington seem to agree that WE all feed off the land and the yields from a record harvest should be shared, just as Native Americans suggested. What we can't  figure out is how to pry open the hands of those who have it to fairly share it with those who produce it.

As a means to that end, one political party in America hopes to legislatively force fair wages through mandatory minimum laws, while the other party insists more vibrancy in the market combined with an ample tax break will magically cure our confounding wage issues. Although this game we are playing seems complex, it can be explained quite simply.

Profit demands something. 

At times, the pursuit of profit demands production growth, while other times, raising prices to increase demand gets it done. In either scenario, the size of the apple farm and the market price of apples have constraints.

When the long, arduous hours of apple picking became a significant time and cost detriment to the harvest, technology intervened with machines that harvest apples- because profit demanded it. Inflation makes growth a mandate, so eventually, every farmer must increase production and efficiency to take customers away from the competition- because profit demands it. Nearly every company in America places this intense focus on increased profit and market share just to avoid predatory behaviors inherent to a game in which competition looms.

If the free market was a big muddy pond, WE average workers are its plankton. Our sense of power and our bank accounts remain depleted because plankton is plentiful and often too small to see the collective power of also being the primary consumers. As inflation grew the free market pond, CEO's in America demanded their share. WE, the plankton, did not and thus cannot expect to repair our bleak realities or our fractured bank accounts until WE, like CEO's, learn to alter the demand we place on wages.

Our orange colored president may struggle to say words like regulation, but he does not struggle with eliminating any Obama imposed regulation. Trump's blind Obama hatred intervened to allow America's corporate farms (Monsanto and Dupont primarily) to move full steam ahead with the use of controversial pesticides that they produce all while seizing a 40% hold of the world seed market. Apparently, the same orange president had no clue that his Obama hatred and Big Wall love could subvert Monsanto's GMO seed use in Mexico thanks to Donald Trump's stand against  Mexico and the NAFTA deal.

Monsanto is but one of America's predatory fish, and even they could defensively reply- don't hate the players, hate the game. There are plenty of others who've used global expansion to improve their standing in America's free-market pond. The globalization of American corporations and the growth of American corporate wealth are conjoined to this chase for the cheapest labor sources possible. Globalization's benefits are now global news, however, it was the science of data that pointed American corporations towards utter disregard for our domestic job market long before most of us saw it coming.

Big Data or Big Brother?

Trump isn't only subverting NAFTA, he is subverting the #metoo campaign,  America's greatness and standing in the world, our recognition of media lies as well as the sense of decency we used to expect from our leaders. What Trump can not subvert is Roy Moore's dating history, video evidence of locker room talk, Billy Bush or the power and impact of Big Data, the newest way science and technology are being used to grow market share, pursue profits and steal presidential elections as well.

Beyond the use of poisonous pesticides banned in 5 countries, science continually searches to improve our lives or exploit opportunities for profit- depending on your perspective. If Trump does go down in provable shame, it will be from the science of investigative research and from a preponderance of incriminating data accumulated in a world full of it. Or it will be his own big mouth.

Our Twit-In-Chief is just one glaring example. Everything WE all do becomes a data point for profit. Whether we happily accept the potential societal improvements from Big Data, or we unwittingly or begrudgingly participate in its collection through our computers, phones, traffic cameras, television viewing patterns, etc.  We've become data points for more than just Vladimir Putin's political stature in the world.



America's overriding respect for turning a buck makes us eager for big data improvements and conveniences that appear to make sense but leave us willfully vulnerable to the pervasive ways data gets used against us. It's as if the Big Brother we feared all along is Big Data  and analytics, driven by our own incessant profit pursuits.

We've allowed the way we pursue profit to make decisions for us, including the limits we'll put on our own privacy. Consequently, Google asks you to review restaurants you never told Google you were eating at, and banks like Wells Fargo shamelessly create fraudulent accounts for 3.5 million of their own customers.

With a little help from a young person who understands location tracking, one can easily cure the Google restaurant problem. As for Wells Fargo? Consumers depend on government protection to uncover and punish criminal corporate actions like Wells Fargo's.

Instead of keeping consumers safe, Trump attacks consumer protection regulations and the Consumer Protection Bureau- the same bureau that uncovered the Wells Fargo scam- by appointing a person to oversee it who thinks the Bureau should go away.

All because profit demands it.

Because profit demands it, shady companies  similar to the Trump organization confidently ignore laws, assuming that elected city officials won't risk losing campaign funding by actually charging them with the laws they break. Shady CEO's use the stockholder applause for their profit accomplishments to drown out the contempt for their methods.  Whenever profit dares to threaten dividends, wages get slashed and profits are cannibalized from the producers themselves. After our recent collapse of the economy, most CEO's fear increased wages as a detriment to their dividend promises.

When you think about it, because of promised dividends, saying companies DO NOT increase wages to generate profit is not fully accurate. Spiffs have a long-standing history of use, even though the modern-day spiff is too stiff the workers and give all that money to the CEO's in exchange for squeezing more for less out of the wage frozen masses.

Smart companies actually give some of that money and the benefits to the front line workers so they'll become invested like CEO's.  But not enough American companies are "smart" when it comes to maintaining a happy workforce.

Instead, most companies follow the trend of paying the minimum and doing the least possible with hopes of uncovering the kind of people who work to justify a standard, not an income.

As a consequence of stingy wages and benefits, stingy employers corner themselves into few options but to bleed the life out of their underappreciated workers who swiftly leave for the next unhappy workplace that at least pays a little more than the last. Although our unemployment rate is at a relatively low number, can we call ourselves at full employment when so many people have to work more than one job to make ends meet?

It's not terribly hard to point out these perverse influences of profit or how WE the People are helpless to stop the depravity because- aside from ObamaCare- WE are United in name alone. In fact, we commoners envy the rich and divide our collective power into political and racial lines, to our own demise.

Profit sharks who are bad corporate neighbors need to be delivered an economic message. Like blood in the water, identifying and channeling our consumerism towards good corporate neighbors would create an immediate data point in the profit pond for all the fish to take note of- especially those bloodthirsty sharks.

Like the sharks in higher education for example.

An advanced degree can counter harsh realities. Yet, some of the worse sharks in the higher education profit game are also the last ones to remind you that many industries in America don't currently have enough domestic jobs for all of the people who studied and gained less than a graduate degree to work in that industry, rendering that degree they are overcharging you for obsolete before you earn it. At the cost of a degree, good neighboring colleges and universities fight to limit your debt upon graduating or work hard to get you a job. The awesome neighboring colleges and universities do both.

I mention the depravity in higher education to make a point about the depravity of our profit pursuits, not as an attempt to make an excuse for the educated poor. Whether the college-educated dreamers of America changed their dream or it was changed for them is simply life's evolution. Persistence overrides good fortune every time, and no person intent on reverie can blame the market for their wistful hopes or lack of drive to make them real.

We can blame the free market for dramatically narrowing our chances of enjoying the kind of dreams America promised when these truths were first held to be self-evident. The market should also be blamed for so many noble job dreams being nightmares etched on a glass that shattered before the pursuit began. This is not to say that the potential for great dreams doesn't still exist, but that the dream is broken when too many American companies refuse to offer the American workers their cut of the harvest.
.
The current GOP tax plans prove this point.

Demanding a tax reduction bill to increase wages is sort of a declaration that the free market pond needs government assistance to achieve the fair wages that a record stock market and record corporate profits could not. As we watch Republicans push an immensely unpopular plan (75% disapprove), we have to sincerely ask ourselves if the GOP was more dangerous as obstructionists or as a party desperate to finally prove they can do something?

Republicans will insist they can govern and that the free market only needs government to "get out of the way". What neither chamber in Congress can really tell you is how much "out of the way" will be necessary to deal with North Korea, finish off ISIS, maintain our military footprint across the globe in addition to confronting domestic needs including our decaying infrastructure, fixing healthcare and education disparities for every human on our soil, all while lowering the deficit. Republicans in Congress nor God can explain why corporations would want to fairly share the harvest NOW when they never have before?

Cheap labor and corporate profits seem to be baked in the cake 

As we dividedly clamor for increased wages, we should take a moment to seriously consider our cheap labor hunger and how many organizations are just like the Trump organization and depend on an ample access to cheap labor. People who are desperate for work eagerly migrate to any jobs. As it relates to need and hope, cheap labor is not necessarily the problem. Hiring any human for long-term, low-wage work but not educating them, ensuring they are healthy and eventually self-sufficient is a formula for a mass epidemic of sickness, social decay and societal discord that can only feed into the Department of Corrections.

Aside from further expansion of the widespread use of prison labor (which deserves its own conversation), building a wall and getting rid of immigrants in massive numbers hardly comports with the GOP tax plan of increasing investment and production to raise wages and stimulate consumerism. Stated more clearly, America needs more good paying jobs, not just more jobs.

Thanks to those who left the job market altogether, wages have already been forced to rise a bit. Yet, traditionally low-wage employers seem to me to be stashing cash and preparing for the next market collapse instead of positioning themselves for the decades of growth that the GOP tax plan promises.

Some of the best jobs are in America are in higher education and healthcare, two industries with zero incentive to eliminate human ignorance or sickness. In both cases, their profit models depend on customers, not outcomes. Consequently, there are many horrible hospitals and crappy schools.

Unless I am missing something about this profit debate, none of your dreams or my economic disparities become conversation worthy without more corporate profit and lots of it. Because the demand for profit (dividends) makes most corporate decisions for them, we live with the necessity of corporate and personal welfare safety nets to catch the fallout caused by failed profit pursuits.

Wages seem to be a constant part of our focus and conversation, but inflation worthy wages are far from being a part of our current paradigm, and simply raising the minimum wage will only elevate the least of these, it can't repair the overall breach from years of stagnant wages. As companies insist they can't pay us more, have you noticed how much time and free stuff they throw your way to avoid the cost of bad publicity when you give them a bad review online? Is there a chance they could redirect a portion of CEO's wages as well as their damage control budgets towards higher wages and better service on the front side? Not if we don't make them.

I worry if WE will ever realize our fair share of the harvest absent a focused wages and benefits war against corporations, a war that can probably only be achieved through year-round Small Business Saturday type efforts to funnel our spending to companies who directly compete against the large corporations that currently get our money whether they choose to be good neighbors or not.

Republicans who truly wished to change the way WE view their tax plans should join this cause and direct their proposed tax breaks to the companies that actually allow it to trickle it down- but after the promises trickle, not before. For the House of Representatives and the Senate Republicans to square their disparate versions of tax reform and get it signed into law by the president, such a promise could be useful.

Call it the trickle-down promise plan if you wish since that theory is becoming as mythical as the Lochness monster. Even a forced appearance could keep the myth from dying and Republicans from failing again at major legislative change. The wealthy Republican political donors who are demanding this tax break will reject this idea, but I'd expect quite a few Democrats to support a trickle-down plan if it actually came with a promise.

Of course, this could all be the hopeful me rising to the surface again. Aside from ObamaCare repair, Democrats don't really seem encouraged to save Republicans from themselves by authoring sensible legislation or anything else that Trump could get credit for as a result of their help. In essence, they have no reason to be any better to Trump and the Republicans than Trump and the Republicans were to Barack Obama, who came to the table with plenty of negotiation worthy ideas- some created by Republicans- but to no avail.

Because Congress has been way too busy chasing Trump and politically biting off its nose to spite its face with obstructionist behaviors, it took the bipartisan voice of voters from all across America to save ObamaCare from the repeal and replace promise of Republicans who still have nothing stopping them from doing it except the United voice of bipartisan America. If our collective voices can neutralize a repeal and replace promise, the unity of our collective dollars has the power to force the wages we deserve using the same conscientious consumerism we employ during Cyber Mondays or Small Business Saturdays.

Small Business Saturday Should Be Every Day.

Small businesses have long since been the glue of our economy, but they could also become a trend-setting aspect of our economy with a concerted effort to funnel more spending towards them, strengthening the quality of our glue and simultaneously encouraging more people to take an entrepreneurial risk. Conscientious consumerism of good neighbor companies could boost stagnant wages, but most importantly, it could ignite an overdue conversation about what healthy capitalism looks like.

WalMart has almost 5,000 U.S. locations, and close to 7,000 international retail centers of various sorts. While they have increased wages in recent years, can you imagine how many of those 60 checkout counters at WalMart would actually open if they were made to value our visit instead of sort of disregard us as insignificant discount chasers like they do now? Would WalMart simply shut 5,000 domestic locations before opening their coffers to more inflation worthy job positions? Imagine if their profits depended on such a choice?


Whether we see the analytics on our growing power over corporations or not doesn't mean corporations haven't seen the data and analyzed their risk factors. The end of Net Neutrality is likely a reflection of corporate fears of our emerging political and economic power, not a way to reduce your bill as they claim.

Obama, his expansion of health care and a focus on small business brought renewed hope for the entrepreneur's of America who suffered immensely when our economy flopped. Any tax relief would help them, but not if it ends up primarily in the hands of the one percent who hardly need it right now.  Now is the time to invest everything we have in the small business market, in good corporate neighbors and into a declaration of our power and a demand for our cut of the harvest before we are cornered out of entrepreneurial pursuits and into low-wage realities forever.

The choice is ours to make. 

America Accepts Pedophiles And Pussy Grabbers

The problem with guys who win elections despite being known as pedophiles or pussy grabbers is that WE elect them, they do not elect themselves.

I could end this post there and add a background to make it a meme, but Alabama has an opportunity to be better than America was. Alabama, the unofficial ambassador state of racial division, is now expected to do something that the rest of us in America failed or succeeded at, depending on the side you stand.

No matter which side you stand, the truth is that WE allow sexual depravity from men so pervasively that women start "me too" campaigns to try to shine a light on just how pervasive this problem really is. I call it a problem realizing that way too many people decided that it didn't matter enough to vote for a Democrat or a woman instead of against the problem, so maybe it isn't a problem at all. In essence, some voted for "more of the same" instead of  "me too" as it relates to where their sympathy lies. The recent stories of Congressional lawmakers molesting and paying off women are staggering to the point of investigation worthy, Jeff Sessions.

Hopefully, former Senator and current Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, was able to fill America's justice department that he leads with the most race and gender-sensitive white men in America because white men represent 81% of what you will find in a group photo of Jeff Session's staff.

 Blacks represent zero.

I do credit Sessions, however, for being very reluctant to investigate Hillary Clinton. In part, because I am fatigued from the women bashing of late, but mostly because it would speak poorly of our post-election politics if retribution became a norm. On the other hand, Sessions is just as shaky as the rest of the GOP on calling out the pedophile from his home state of Alabama.

This is not to say that some Republicans haven't treated potential victims with the reverence of innocent until proven guilty like we tend to do for their abusers only, but the Republican party in Alabama continues to fund their pedophile Senate candidate, Roy Moore. Win or lose, Moore's deeds become reflective of the character of every person who finds his actions acceptable enough to elect him. But they also reflect on those of us who didn't fight hard enough to stop him just as Donald Trump reflects on every American that couldn't figure out a way to stop him from becoming our national shame.

While we tend to hold Trump to task for so many failures, we have to take a moment a think about the wave of opposition we've seen against him, and the diversity we've gained in politics across the board by virtue of our passions to stop Trump in his tracks.

Virginia's recent election results might be a great sign of the voice of that opposition, but Virginia ain't Alabama. For Alabama to either elect a Democrat or mobilize to elect a write-in not named Roy Moore would be, in both cases, unlikely. Moore is mostly reticent to step away because he understands the divided state he represents and believes that Alabama is Moore in favor of a Republican pedophile over any Democrat. He is mobilizing to put that catchy phrase on a yard sign as we speak.

This is that moment of integrity for Alabama that comes on the heels of electing our last ass grabbing accident. Alabama has an opportunity to do what Moore wants or place principle over politics and send a resounding message to their daughters.

It would be a nice message to their sons as well.

Does Beating The Patriots Justify That Superbowl Window Or Is John Elway Just Making Us Sick?

I might be tired of caring about the good fortunes of my own team. No, I am not like those who wrote off the Broncos for firing Art Shell and currently rep the Raiders, but potentially like that, because Elway seems to hate Colin Kaepernick and Kaep's cause more than he likes winning. Soon, John will be forced to quick-chop another black head off just to avoid the loss of his own.

I would like to make this article about some concern for the impending premature scapegoat removal of a first-year black coach because I am truly concerned that Vance Joseph never had a chance in hell to pull off the El-way that sucks, versus the Kubiak way that won a crown. But, to be honest, actually giving a damn about Vance would require knowing for certain that he can actually coach.

I do not.

Besides, I am a Broncos fan first and foremost. I understand how touchy criticism of my Orange and Blue can get. This is not my Donna Brazile denunciation of the Democrats, however, my malaise with my own ballclub made me unconcerned with uncovering a reason why the Denver Broncos could beat the Philadelphia Eagles a week ago, even if I was hoping like hell desperation would be that reason.

Now, the Broncos are truly desperate enough to beat every team except that Philly club, which includes the New England Patriots on Sunday,  although they must overcome the best quarterback to ever lace them up if they are to get it done.

Yes, I said it. I don't care who your favorite quarterback of all-time is. I don't really care that Brady's not my favorite or that he's a long time nemesis of my beloved Broncos.


He's the best to do it, and he's still doing it the best.

This week, however, Brady's resume is beside the point. Denver fans may find comfort that Brady hasn't won much in Denver, but that too should be of little consolation to a struggling team that shouldn't be counting on history to fix their problems. The hope to win is quickly clouding the view of who we really are and where we are heading if we don't look introspectively.

As we fans force feed this team down our own throats simply because we love them too much to leave them when times get tough, the truth is simply the truth. To viewing eyes and opposing defenses, these Broncos taste like a recognizably predictable flavor. You can't quite say what it is, but it is super sour and kind of bitter, and several coaching changes has yet to sweeten the flavor of this offense, even the year when they won it all.

If we are honest and don't just assume Donna and I are doing this for the money, we'd admit that more than half of Broncos nation exited a Superbowl 50 victory with a happy smirk because they were upset with the decision to return to a putridly playing Peyton Manning over bumbling Brock Osweiler.  When a Brock loving John Elway lost his last coach, and when Denver lost Brock, I believe it was seeded in that moment of decision.

While most of that remains a rumor, it was proven the moment Elway brought in Vance Joseph and the new coach's first declaration to the world was that he could put some more JUICE into this offense- a code word for Kubiak's juice wasn't either plentiful or sweet enough even if it proved to be the right flavor for success.

Other than the Offensive coordinator, Mike McCoy and former Offensive coordinator turned QB coach, Bill Musgrave, most of the coaches beneath Joseph are carry-overs that were already in the fold. How a former defensive coordinator could be expected to sweeten the juice on offense as a first-year coach seemed odd until you realized the plethora of offensive coaches that Elway would provide- or force-feed- to compensate for the inexperience of his head guy.

As I look at my own beloved team, I can't help but wonder does Joseph really have control of the offense with McCoy, Musgrave, and Elway in the building? Does Elway ever call McCoy to share his own view of things or is Joseph always the go-between as he deserves to be? Most importantly, who makes the final call on plays now with so many offensive minds and a head coach who questions his own team's identity?

Half the season is over, and it appears that not allowing the new head coach to put his fingerprint on the offense has him describing his own team as identity-free as if we are a juice without sugar.  It also seems that Elway's hand-picking of Joseph was a weird move intended to fulfill Elway's own  Superbowl windowed view of things instead of hiring a coach he trusted enough to bring an outsiders view of things and chart a way forward on his own merit and ability.

Elway wears his own championship rings thanks to the "do whatever it takes" mantra of Pat Bowlen. But he is not Pat Bowlen even if he wants to buy our team one day and pretend to be Pat while interfering like Jerry. I am not saying that Elway can never become another Pat Bowlen, but even Bowlen came to be through the trials and errors of trying and failing to get it done amidst the constant internal tug-o-war of when to be hands-on or hands-off. In essence, Bowlen needed the exact same thing that Elway and our young'ish quarterbacks require. Time to develop.

Nothing.  I repeat. NOTHING is more unhealthy to the development of a young quarterback, a young coach or a rebuilding organization than the draft of an open Superbowl Window.

It should go without saying that every team is fighting to be the best they can be every year. Undoubtedly, each team hopes their best equals Superbowl championships when the season is done, whether they say it through unspoken drive or display it through Superbowl window mistakes.

As a folk hero among Broncos nation, we might have taken more comfort in the presence of Elway than we had any right to do. Afterall, he is nearly as unproven as an executive himself, evidenced by these mediocre quarterbacks he hired to help push the Broncos through that Superbowl window of his. At the risk of sounding like a revisionist, I am more and more inclined to agree with those who consider our Superbowl 50 success somewhat lucky, including Elway himself who encouraged Kubiak to do it in a juicier way. Whether that Superbowl victory meant Elway deserved a new contract and a bigger role within the organization is a subject under official review right now. In hindsight, Elway might have only had a toe on the line while Kubiak had his entire foot in that game and gameplan.

Now, the Broncos appear to be stuck with a former legendary quarterback GM who displays a ravenous view of the future and a short view of the past, a past that included Elway himself being doubted by the Broncos faithful as a young player, and ridiculed as a seasoned veteran who never won the big one by himself. To this day, some believe John's HOF friend and former teammate, Terrell Davis, deserves more credit for the rings on John's fingers than John does.

The hiring of a first-year coach to juice an offense beyond that of a Superbowl winning, well-tenured coach and friend in Gary Kubiak, was the first sign I needed that Vance Joseph was merely a hole-filler with the specific assignment of making Elway look right instead of looking interested in saving his own job or building on the salvage worthy parts and pieces of this team to create a new and improved Superbowl winning model. I doubt that Joseph felt as confident as he sounded about the idea of picking a quarterback mid-way through the preseason instead of appointing the previous starter and making the other quarterbacks beat him out like you do at every other position on the football field.

Is Osweiler just another sign that Elway thinks his team can still
win it all? Is John missing on a chance to play Pax?

If I was Elway, I would have made the mediocre first-round draft pick, Paxton Lynch play so that we know by now instead of forcing last year's mediocre starter and team captain, Trevor Siemian to publicly prove himself better than Lynch. To put either of these mediocre quarterbacks through a process that questions your trust of them leaves you, in the end, with a couple of mediocre quarterbacks absent the trust of the coach and GM to help their confidence a bit. John was clearly forcing his new coach to not act in his own best interest, all the while making savvy Broncos fans question the intelligence and integrity of the new head coach.


This article is not about beating a dead bronco or kicking the horse when it's down because my Broncos are not deceased yet, just on life support, and nobody kicks hospitalized animals. But I will remind everyone that the GM and VP of Operations- who I called a Bitch in a preseason article- has chosen to pretend himself Bowlen and verbally commit to chasing after the crown each and every year instead of closing that Superbowl window and his mouth and Just Win Baby before we lose another wave of fans to the Raiders, rebuilding or his politics which we shouldn't even know about since we never knew Pat's.

What we do need to know is how Elway intends to make this team better. Spending millions on diva receivers and then trying to justify those millions- as if the opposing defense can't diagnose your plan based on payroll alone- is a formula for success that doesn't comport with the reality of the NFL in which teams rarely win the crown with so much money dedicated to wide-outs.

Check the history books. If a big name receiver does have a ring, it is almost never when they also had the high-end paycheck too. The truth is, receivers take pay cuts to play for champions or they get cut from champions for the sake of more depth on the roster. Soon enough- which I hope soon means now- the Broncos will not be able to justify the money they are spending on Demarius Thomas,
Emmanual Sanders or maybe even Von Miller if they are being realistic about what it will take to win again. Soon enough, they too will admit that just one of these valued players could be the additional draft pick- or 10- that fixes this problem.

I said all of that to say this.

I'm concerned that beating the Patriots will only make Broncos nation think we are actually still in the hunt. I get it. Making the playoffs and exiting early could still be a dream for a season that started great but looks to be headed towards something much worse than even last year's near miss of the playoffs. In the wildest dreams of  John Elway, these players and many fans, this season remains wide open, just like our Superbowl window. 

Sure, dreams do come true. But so do nightmares if you stay asleep too long. Wake up Elway and Broncos fans. It's time to shut that damn window.

Does Anybody Know WTF A Republican Is Anymore?

Forgive me for the salacious headline. The Twitterverse won't read any further, so you gotta stick and move these days. Nonetheless, WTF is a Republican?

No really.

In the post-mortem of Tuesday's election, the Ed Gillespie story is as telling as any story there is. Gillespie was never known as an alt-right Republican prior to being pegged for Virginia's governor race but left looking more alt-right than Trump himself. While we may never really know if Gillespie was more of a victim of his embrace of Trump or of his disdain towards him since the race he ran seemed to involve a fair dose of both, we know the exit poll data and it isn't positive for the GOP.

While Trump himself criticized Gillespie for not being Trumpian enough and losing as a result, I am left to wonder what sign should we look towards as it relates to identity politics if we hope to consider the Republican candidate in 2018 and moving forward? This is not a question for the Republicans that vote (R) because that is all they know to do. I'm referring to those (R)'s that really appreciate their new-found access to healthcare and don't really wish to risk their lives on a party loyalty line.

As it turns out, most of the people around the nation were inspired on Tuesday by the need to save their own healthcare against the wiles of the (R)'s who are destroying it only because they don't really know what else to do. If you predict healthcare's implosion, sometimes you must also be willing to pour a little gas on the sparks to speed things along. Despite Trump's slashing of the budget to market ACA enrollment, record numbers of Americans are enrolling anyway.

Now the (R)'s are trying like crazy to scratch the back of rich people while making average Americans think it is their back being scratched. Two things that can no longer be confused is the feeling of a political back rubbing or the efficacy of a bill not scored by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). America never knew what those letters meant prior to the Trumpian takeover. Now, they don't stop to listen to your idea until the CBO can delineate what is in it for them.

It is not impossible to imagine the GOP accomplishing some form of a tax bill, but it is close to impossible to see it achieving anything substantive for average Americans. Trickle down never really has fulfilled its promise, and ObamaCare is more hopeful than whatever existed before. The best I can tell, the GOP is mostly stuck with the idea of building a wall because even a ban on assault weapons is supported by the majority of America, gun owners included.

In fact, doing something about our broken immigration system has had majority appeal in America from way back when Eric Cantor was still the Speaker of the House. The Obama era push and catastrophic weather events have most Americans waiting on a far-reaching infrastructure bill that seems to need a huge wave of collapsed bridge deaths to finally get approved for some odd reason.

By virtue of identity, the only elements that uniquely come to mind when thinking of today's Republican party are titled tax plans, Muslim hatred, "blood and soil" and tiki torches. I know a lot of really good people who still consider themselves Republican have never considered marching with a tiki torch and are upset that they are now being connected to such evil, hatred and our twit of a president. Yet, what else is there to help us identify a modern day Republican?

What the Twitter-in Chief has made abundantly clear is that the GOP has lost its way enough to be easily taken over by a twit. Surprisingly, plenty of twit love remains despite enduring a highly embattled presidency, but it seems there was not enough to have made a difference this past Tuesday.

The best I can tell, the GOP will soon need to adopt progressive policies as their own in order to offer ideas that reasonable people consider reasonable. Walls and rolling back healthcare, and tax cuts for rich people and unresolved immigration questions, and climate denial or broken accords and partnerships, or LGBTQ bans, Muslim bans but repeal of the ban on the mentally ill getting guns, is simply not reasonable anymore.

Democrats Fight Gerrymandering. Is It Too Late?

Keep your eyes open for this big time push from the DGA (Democratic Governors Association) and the NDRC (National Democratic Redistricting Committee), founded and lead by former President Barack Obama and former AG Eric Holder. This issue represents a major reason I no longer register as a Democrat.
              ________________________

https://unrigthemap.com/

....this is a lot like that Colin Kaepernick issue and the NFL.

..a curse you bring on yourself.
            
            ___________________  



I won't claim to already know who started with this gerrymandering nonsense, though I could probably Google it. I feel utter disappointment, however, when I discovered how often both parties have misused it over the years. The fact that the Republicans have taken our national shame called gerrymandering to a new level of shamefulness makes me mad at the system and ALL of those who proliferated it, not just the current beneficiaries and better players of the game.


I actually started registering independent when Al Gore helped us to discover the electoral college hustle that can override wilful votes and lawful recounts if it so chooses.


Upon backing a non-inspiring guy like Gore against George W. Bush, I found myself indignant and more inspired to caucus for stronger candidates that I support. I discovered, however, that I potentially need to choose these candidates before I even know them if I want to take part in supporting said candidate via caucuses or primaries, as both parties block you out of the process unless you register well in advance of the caucus or primary for a candidate who interests you.


I get more and more convinced of my decision to NOT tout either of these two party labels with every passing day. Did either party realize how dangerous opening the pandora's box of gerrymandering would be? Did they care?

Furthermore, doesn't either party have interest in pulling voters who don't already agree with them via label? Don't Republicans and Democrats practice political segregation and fear of the corrupted caucus or primary to their own demise? How hard could it be to send out a caucus voucher that allows each voter into one caucus per election season? Do we really fear political corruption and outsider inclusion over desiring political involvement which is severely lacking? In this current version of our two-party system, each party is only interested in you if they think you support them already.


With that in mind, I support this effort by the Democrats to fix something that needed fixing long ago. I'll admit though, that this is a lot like that Colin Kaepernick issue and the NFL. I find no sympathy for any losing team that is currently playing a QB worse than Kaep', even my own team. Gerrymandering (and hiring collusion too) has always been like dabbling with black magic; a curse you bring on yourself. 

Independence Must Be More Than Another Political Label

The recent book release announcement of former DNC chair, Donna Brazile, has ignited a firestorm of debate verging on a Civil war that the Republicans have to be enjoying, even if only for its diversion from their own problems. I, unlike Brazile, am no longer a registered Democrat but an Independent, which I realize is somewhat a joke even though I (independent voters) might be the reason Brazile wrote the book in the first place, not reliably voting Democrats.

If you are someone truly open to the notion of change in America, you realize that more of the same is unlikely to garner the change WE seek. Sure, we’ve accomplished much in our history as a nation, but seldom with a bi-partisan accord.  When the Senate voted 98-2 to sanction Trump and Putin for disrupting the sanctity of our overly partisan attempt at democracy, it felt like the beginning of change. Those two Senate hold-outs, however, must be confused about the seriousness of this moment, or maybe I am confused about the change.

An article about a poltical change in America is tough because our partisan reality typically means getting the other side to finally see how they are flawed as the change most of us seek. Afterall, who really wants to take another chance at trickle down economics?

People who have a reasonable excess of resources but want more, that’s who still believes in trickle down.

Conversely, hand-outs that barely keep poor people above water seem to drown more people than they teach to swim. The conservatives who read that last sentence applauded while the progressives frowned at the notion that our collected taxes can also be considered a handout.

My view is, who cares what you call it, it simply is not working well enough. No plan that lacked sufficient agreement at inception ever really does achieve its purpose in general perception or reality, which are invariably the same.

In other words, political change WE seek is never going to be achieved absent bi-partisan agreement because the other side will nitpick the bad to prove a point they already believed. Each of our perceptions becomes our collective bi-partisan political reality....facts be damned.

My knee-jerk reaction to the Brazile indictments against Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and the DNC is to defend Brazile- who just so happens to be echoing criticisms I made long before she did, so take my view with that disclaimer in mind. Those currently defending Clinton have mostly done the same as me, which amounts to the challenge WE face in politics and society overall.

How do we achieve lasting change when we’ve made partisan decisions on what change looks like?

Brazile might be seemingly the starter of a fight, but reasonable people think that fight started with the progressive movement led by Bernie Sanders during the campaign and Brazile is simply pointing it out. This problem amongst progressives is much deeper than how we vote and what labels we allow ourselves to be connected with. In many ways, the intense effort for independence as voters- and people- has inspired the massive effort to toss each of us in a bucket whether we want to be there or not.

Search engines and website cookies leave crumbs of evidence about who we are and how we might vote even when we choose to not use our face on Facebook, or log into social media at all.

Today, simple GPS tracking can decide who we are, how we vote, purchase products and everything else. We have to turn ourselves off altogether to hide what we do because everything we do speaks- in part- to how we are likely to vote.

Unfortunately, whether we choose to carry party labels or not, our partisanship is predictable, even for those who think they don't care one way or the other. Our ability to challenge the GPS tracker of our lives and frequent the untracked street vendor versus the retail outlet that speaks to our tendencies is just as difficult as telling the people we support they are wrong and probably need to see things another way. Disrupting the grid and challenging our own orthodoxy are both needed practices for political and societal change.

Was Brazile declaring an intention to join Bernie or become an independent if the Democrats don’t figure things out? She says she considered Joe Biden, who wasn’t running, over Bernie who was as a replacement for a potential health stricken Hillary, so I doubt that Brazile's book is a threat of secession.

As for me?

I am not a Democrat. I’m THE Conservative Socialist who registers independently.I don’t care to be predictable to the unseen trackers in life or politics if I can help it because there is very little hope for change in that approach. I love street vendors and yet to be discovered entrepreneurs. I also hate political labels even though I realize my political voice labels me just as all of our thoughts, opinions, shared memes and websites visited tell a story we wish could remain unknown at times. 

          If change is what we seek, being a truly independent thinker and not just another predictable partisan can help, but it must involve real examination of issues including self-examinations and incriminations in the face of failures.

More of the same is unlikely to work.