Marshawn Lynch: The Seattle Seahawk Who Is Crazy Like A Fox

What exactly is Marshawn Lynch trying to say?

I have come to discover that, with all of the amazing power of the spoken or written word, silence is golden. I don't exclude myself from the noise pollution that inundates our world, but I too appreciate it when certain people shut the hell up.  Awkward silences can be weird, but the sweet peace of quietness is often preferable to the more awkward questions that typically destroy the most awkward silence.

When we are talking- we fail to properly pontificate on the power of words. As we begin to properly measure the impact of the words we choose, our word choices bear more impact.
So how does this all relate to Marshawn Lynch? If we laud the power of the poet, how then shall we esteem the mime?

Typically as a fancy clown, but there is power in the unspoken message.  Lynch might appear to be the jester that his silence portraits, but in reality he is a quiet genius.  Marshawn Lynch is more than willing to play the game of football, but he refrains from playing the game of free story lines before or after the show.

If you watched the game then let the game write the story.

Journalist' already know the angle that they plan to take when compiling an article for public consumption, so the interview question is designed to either confirm or deny an angle that won't change the potential article one way or the other. Whether they got the quote directly from you, or heard in from others is the dividing line between everything we read about celebrities.  In the end, quotes from any celebrity immediately becomes journalistic fodder for those who desperately need it (ie.,lazy writers who depend on a few juicy bits), or bulletin board fodder for opponents who thrive on such things as well.  Either way, there is very little to gain from playing in the game and then playing the game of Q&A.

http://fam1stfamilyfoundation.org/

So Lynch say's no.

Better than no, he say's yes to the NFL request of his attendance but no to the mass media demand that he do their job for them.  Lynch say's yes to children via his Fam 1st Family Foundation  but he say's no to interviews and demands of his time that don't benefit him or his foundation.

As I write, MSNBC just  showed a report of Lynch doing an interview with Michelle Williams (Destiny's Child) for ET (Ent' Tonight).  Disregarding the fact that Marshawn's body language says he love him some Destiny's Child, Lynch conducted a normal interview despite his typical gag order towards the media. During the interview, Williams coaxes Lynch into a song and rewards him for it with a gift that Lynch proceeded to donate to his foundation.  Isn't it telling that the only recent words we've heard from the league's best running back were spoken about his foundation and to benefit his foundation?

When you are a big time celebrity, as is Marhshawn Lynch, almost every word you speak works to make money for somebody else other than you.  Many of those words could very well cost you money as with athletes who inadvertently motivate the opposing player who retaliates and injures them, or the angered post-game rant that costs you a sponsor or two.  If Lynch had it his way, he would simply not attend the media sessions at all.  Since he does not, it is his right and duty to protect his self interest and his brand.

What's the value of advertising during the Superbowl? Priceless.

His self interest is the foundation and his brand is Beast Mode  that he might be paying $100,000 for violating the rule against displaying such things during media day.  Without one word spoken by Lynch, the national media ran with the story of his infraction, providing Lynch with the equivalent of a million dollar advertising deal- for free.

Does anybody think he's concerned about the $100,000 fine that he might pay?  With proceeds from the extra clothing he will sell while advertising for free during the Superbowl media day, he can easily pay that fine plus an additional $100,000 to his foundation for kids. Does that mean he is exploiting the NFL?  Sure, but keep in mind that he would rather not be there or say anything if he had a choice.  Everyday there seems to be another leaked threat that Roger Goodell will fine Lynch for his tight lipped approach to the media.  Thanks to these Beast Mode gear ads (so to speak), Lynch is making a loud statement and he's making it with a marketing smile.  From my perspective, Lynch is the only player making this media mess worth his while.

So if Michelle Williams is the new Deion Sanders (the only media member he used to talk to), then she can endure some more flirting from Lynch just to allow him to announce his NFL fine and subsequent matching donation to Fam 1st Family Foundation.  After agonizing over Lynch's media madness,  we've now come to discover that there's a lot of cache (see; cash considerations) involved with being able to secure a real Marshawn Lynch interview.

Words have a price and silence is truly golden. Thanks for the lesson Marshawn.

Denver Nuggets Can Wound Any Team. Need To Develop Killer Instinct

Until George Karl proves that the Karl system is something that can win a title, then I don't want to hear any more conversation about Mr. 57 wins that can't get another job.

As for the merits of Brian Shaw?

Watching my Denver Nuggets compete and lose against the best and worst of the NBA has made me more convinced than ever that Brian Shaw is the right man for this team.  George Karl was clearly a little better at pushing the button called Ty Lawson, but even Karl depended upon a positive Lawson versus timid Ty and needed the maturity of Andre Miller or Chauncey Billups to offset the immaturity that inevitably becomes Ty Lawson from time to time. Avoiding firing Karl made the Denver Nuggets also avoid the youth movement that had to take place to pave way for our future after Carmelo Anthony. An argument could be made that Karl should have been fired a year earlier so that the transition could have started sooner. With or without Karl, this team would not be competitive if not for the positive impact of coaching.


SquareBiz! Karl could have maneuvered a couple of extra wins by virtue of a faster style and years of end game coaching experience.   Karl would have certainly added a few additional games to his legendary win total, but would he also buy into the front office marketing plan of winning with numbers?  Even Shaw, who tried the plan, has had to virtually abandon it given injuries and sporadic ticket sales- but would Karl be better at finding minutes for rookies and mediocre players returning from injury all at the same time?

Nobody in the world believes Karl could coach kids or cared to risk his career on their ability, especially Karl.  Kenneth Faried needed fan frenzy to force his way into more playing time, and only then did  Karl finally consider the merits of a youth movement- weeks before he was eventually fired. Had George been retained, stupidity and missed freethrows in the next season would have cured Karl of Kenneth quickly.

It has been miserably frustrating to watch my Denver Nuggets compete and lose against good and bad teams alike. But good coaches realize that you have to build upon the positives that you experience and learn from the negatives regardless of the final score.  Every time that I look at the Nuggets from a coaching perspective, I do not see a team with no opportunity to win games or a team that is competing strictly on the talent of the players.  These Nuggets defend, block out, run the floor and get fast breaks points(#7 in the league).  They run plays to absolute perfection and pummel all teams while getting shots EXACTLY where they expect those shots to come from.

And then suddenly they forget their own identity.

Sometimes the Denver Nugget identity shift is caused by tasting that bitter wine we call Galo (Danilo Galinari); who could be good if his legs were good, but they're not, so he's not- other times the shift happens from player/s that fail to step up on defense when teams make their run at the Nuggets.  Bench scoring is suppose to come from Galo (or Chandler when Galo gets right), but JJ Hickson, Dorrell Arthur and now Jameer Nelson have had to carry the back ups while waiting for the wine to ripen.

The real trick on every night is compiling a combination plate of back ups and starters that can actually secure the win down the stretch.  As it stands, the coach has rolled craps more often than not, but it has little to do with his coaching ability or his worthiness of remaining with this team. Nuggets fans send their message via attendance just like most smart fan bases.  Legitimate critics of Shaw have a legitimate concern about the ability of this coach to develop as fast or faster than the team he's tasked with developing himself. Shaw's growth must continue to outpace his team to remain the leader that we hoped could replace Karl.

Fans of Karl need to start a "hire my coach" campaign to keep the end of his era from being now. Moreover, they should stop using Karl as the primary reason why Shaw was a mistake.

My personal team building efforts could benefit if the Nuggets would suck a little bit more because getting a group rate on bulk tickets has not been as easy as I would hope for a team with the Nuggets record.  For whatever reason, Colorado basketball fans have not abandoned their desire to see if Shaw's team can win games, even if it means they might experience bitter defeats. The trained eye may not always appreciate the outcome, but they recognize the show.  This team can play, and it can play in SEVERAL different ways utilizing several different play options and several different styles of play.  They have not perfected Shaw's style of play, but they have shown glimpses of brilliant basketball that has the front office still maneuvering for wins (see; Jameer Nelson) both this season and in seasons to come. Every other team in a similar position would have scrapped this season while the Denver Nuggets are working to salvage the season- and the coach.

One and a half years into Brian Shaw,
have we seen enough?

If this team had one capable closer it could be in playoff contention.  Without that credible closer the Nuggets will be mostly a nuisance to the entire league throughout the entire season mostly because they have a coach who was that same kind of pest of a player himself.  Brian Shaw is reflecting his nature upon his team with every passing day, and for those who watched Shaw play, that is the most hopeful thing for all Nugget fans.  One serious aspect of the Shaw personality is the quiet ability to get you down and mysteriously slice your jugular vein until you bleed out.  He has taught his team how to wound its victims, but making your victim bleed out with minimal effort takes ninja like precision to perform.

It's not a skill that any team can master overnight.

Whose Problem Is It?: Credibility Of NFL Fan In Question, Not NFL

This issue has raced past cheating and is starting to bring about questions of credibility.

When similar stuff took place in the game of baseball, congressional hearings were held to insure the sanctity of America's first love.  Congress might not have the same nostalgic connection to the NFL as it did to Major League Baseball, but football is big.  Much bigger than baseball and more profitable than can be controlled it seems.


We know Richard Sherman is known for his controversial sound bites, but did he have a point when calling the Roger Goodell and Bob Kraft selfies a conflict of interest?  Does this picture serve as a way of formally approving of the 32 year old Kraft side piece that adorns the picture? Is there any easy way of regulating a man who has your future in the palm of his hands along with the side dish (40 years his junior) that he insists you connect with your wife (who's too old for her as well)?

What do you say when your boss invites you over for a playoff party?

Does this picture offer any answer as to why the NFL will NOT interview Tom Brady until after the Superbowl? 

The New England Patriots have not endured the trials that the NFL has faced over the past season, but their recent history of shenanigans and/or suspicions of them makes this recent episode a reason to compare these beleaguered organizations. In the NFL we have discovered a league that has likely been hiding domestic violence and the like for years.  When you take into consideration the unfair punishment that the NFL levied on its  drug using players you can imagine Richard Sherman describing this as the chickens coming home to roost.  Similarly, the Patriots have been guilty and/or accused of many misdeeds in their recent past as well.  Whether they are unfairly targeted because they are innocent and talented or because they are more guilty than we expected is the reason we haters all wish Goodell would interview Brady sooner than later.  After the Superbowl might be too late when it comes to getting stories in line. Already reports are surfacing of a ball boy who Brady will use as his patsy.

The sanctity of our love for the Superbowl must be preserved, so somebody has to take the fall before the NFL announces a new policy for handling game balls. Personally, I hope the league implodes (after the Superbowl of course) so that the faulty design of a commissioner who owes his job security to the teams he was hired to police can come to an end.  The credibility of every NFL judgement has now been reduced to questionable motives.  Correction. The motives are hardly questionable in that they are clearly cash driven. This league will only be as sensitive to social causes as their pocket books demand and we football fanatics had better recognize the truth as well as our role of enabling them to do it.

If cheating feels like a serious lack of credibility to you than boycott the Superbowl.  Don't watch it this year.  I can hear your answer, and therein lies the problem.

Serena Williams Rallies Down Under For Revenge Against Muguruza

Garbine Muguruza of Spain (but born in Venezuela) is an amazing tennis player with a bright future.

21 year old Garbine Muguruza of Spain

Remember her name (the z is pronounced with a th sound) because she just squeezed 18 major title victories worth of experience out of the legendary Serena Williams in the Australian Open.  After Serena lost the first set, I expected a repeat of last seasons failures.  Instead, Serena miraculously narrowed the match to one set apiece and then made a push for a 4-2 lead in the third set.  Immediately I reached for the laptop to tell one of America's greatest sports stories lately because one of the games greatest tennis players EVER had climbed a formidable hurdle that tripped her up several months prior.

There is a lot to describe when charting the constellation Serena, but in the end her serve will be the shining star.  Over her storied career, Serena's serve has served her well whenever she loses her way in a match- like the match she just won over a very difficult challenger in Muguruza.  The difficulty of Muguruza goes all the way back to the French Open last summer in which Muguruza ran Williams off of the clay courts of Roland Garros, 6-2, 6-2.

Clay is clay, but when Serena faced her again yesterday in the hard court rematch down under, she found herself down 6-2 again in the first set of their match at the Aussie Open- appearing to still have no answers for her able opponent.

Despite valid attempts, Serena could hardly get her kick serve past Muguruza who's height and powerful forehand transformed the mighty Williams' serve into a tool of her own. With a great weapon neutralized, Serena simply used every remaining tool that she had left in her toolbox.  One of them was telling herself, "at least I have won this five times", referring to her 5 previous Australian Open championship victories.  In part she was joking, but if you watched this match, you would be as confused as Serena was as to how this match turned in her favor.

Though her skills make her worthy of a number one ranking, her results of late would make you think that Serena is content with simply remaining competitive in the closing part of her career. Not only is she not content, Serena has every intention of finishing on top. The first game of the second set against Muguruza showed the intention of the legend and the mind of a champion performer.

At some point, the entire match began to resemble a Michael Chang or Andre Aggasi contest in which these baseline masters would wear down worthy opponents to win the battle.  Serena had to master the baseline just to stay alive- and suddenly her serve caught fire.  It usually does catch fire in the tournaments that she wins, but not always- and the hallmark of what makes Serena special is the ability to win tournaments with less than her best stuff.

Dominika Cibulkova (ranked #10), the next opponent for Serena, will push Serena in a similar fashion to Muguruza. Cibulkova's dismantling of  former #1 ranked Victoria Azarenka was beyond impressive- it was dominant.  Azarenka tapped into some of her former greatness but could not match the foot speed and shot making ability of Cibulkova who looks to be on her game for this tournament.  For the first time in some time, Serena and Venus both have reached the quarter-finals potentially creating a flashback Williams versus Williams clash in the semi-final round. Either way, Serena has found her serve and can smell the finish line.

18 major titles leaves Serena in a three-way tie for third place behind Stefi Graf who has 22 major titles and Margaret Court who sit on top with 24 majors. The divide between 18 and 24 is immense when you're trying to accomplish the goal in your mid 30's.  Serena is 33 right now and once again ranked number one in the world, but desperate want for the all-time major title record left her with only one major victory in 2014.  A new coach and a new way of thinking might be the key to solidifying her place in U.S. tennis and American sports lore because Serena has a real chance to finish her career as the best to EVER do it.  She already is the best woman to EVER serve the ball.  Her serve might even be worthy of comparison to the best men servers of all time as well.  Her exploits as the whiny tennis legend seems to be par for the tennis legend course as only a few great stars, male or female, survived a career without ever being seen as bitter in defeat.

19 year old Madison Keys- USA. Is the generation that
Serena inspired ready to be recognized?

Regardless of where she finishes her career on top of women's tennis, she has been a lot like Jordan; a global ambassador of the game who inspires a generation of Serena wanna-be's. Have you seen the serve of Madison Keys, an African American female tennis star who just advanced to the quarterfinals of the Australian Open?
Even Serena's attitudinal edge lends itself to comparisons with Michael Jordan, but her championship exploits are closer to Bill Russell. Serena was once just a really athletic player who could overwhelm her opponents with supreme athletic ability- and that serve.  Now Serena is a middle-aged tennis star nearing the waning years of a special career in which she learned and accomplished a lot.  Her accomplishments these days are partly from the accumulative impact of winning so much and an intense will to keep it going some more.  While she seems settled with accepting the results, she clearly expects great ones.  The fire to be great demands the mind to know what greatness looks like.  Finishing in a crowded group for second place or winning 6 more majors to move into second place with Stefi might be the results Serena has to live with, but its hardly her vision of greatness. All you need to see is Serena with her back against a wall to understand what burns inside of this great champion.

In reality, the number one player in the world plays flat more often than not these days.  She has won so many times utilizing as little as possible that she now wins that way most of the time.  Not a great formula when you turn 33 and the entire world of women's tennis gets up to make a win over you a part of their yearly resume, but is it the only way an aging tennis player can reserve enough energy to capture crowns?  Outside of the U.S. Open title of last season, Serena struggled to simply make quarterfinals last season.  She has the game to beat any player at any time, but there are plenty of great players who can send her home early if she doesn't bring that A-game to a given match.  As she walks towards the sunset, getting a win over Serena is like taking one of those bleacher seats out of the old Boston Garden.  Even losing to Serena is an historic experience to this age of new players, but actually beating Serena bears the kind of possibility that might even verge on the edge of hope these days.

Gracious in defeat.  Williams lost to Muguruza in France

Based upon the eye test alone, Cibulkova should beat Serena just as Muguruza should have beat her too.  Vegas might pick Serena to rise to the top down under, but the generation of players who grew up admiring or envying Serena have arrived and are ready and able to compete. Every so often they will overcome Serena's wisdom and errant serve with youth and vitality, but the drive within Serena to finish her career as the best women's tennis player ever will always be something to reckon with. It sends her into a realm of focus that is similar to auto pilot on a plane.  If she senses the need for gas, she presses on it.  When she must have a serve she finds it.  If she needs to extend a rally in order to press a strong opponent into mistakes, she locks her feet on the baseline and smashes balls left and right while her opponent chases after them.  Whenever she looks to be playing at her worse she is actually moments away from flipping a switch and being someone other than the person you had been watching moments before. Muguruza might have stopped the kick serve, but she froze on the slice and then had no clue which would come next.and eventually had to guess her way to the bitter end.

When it comes to 33 year old Serena Williams, its hard to know what to expect from set to set, but there simply is no way to count her out because her worse is often better than most players best.  Regardless of her age, if she is on the court I'm betting on Serena because she is the safest bet the game has ever seen. EVER!

Postscript: Venus Williams on her game is a welcomed sight as well

Patriots Use Squishy Balls. Have They Tainted Life In America?

If Belichick approved of cheating, has Brady
been a complicit or innocent participant?

What we know right now is that the New England Patriots were proven to have used 11 out of 12 game balls in the AFC Championship game against the Indianapolis Colts that were under inflated.  What we also know is that Tom Brady prefers a ball that is a little squishy, "so to speak", especially when throwing in the cold weather. What we don't know is who deflated these balls, and more importantly, who knew that it happened.

Love 'em or hate 'em, the Patriots are the most successful NFL franchise for the entirety of Tom Brady's stellar career that is quickly concluding its second decade.  The love or hate of this team is partially connected to its Hall of Fame coach Bill Belichick, but Belichick remains just another good coach absent the discovery of Brady as his Hall of Fame quarterback. Together, they are the kind of guys that only a mother or a New England Patriot fan can love. They not only beat you...a lot- they rub your face in it with touchdown spikes from the quarterback and pompous interviews from the coach.  As much as haters like myself would love to consider this team just another bunch of cheaters, we all know better.

That being said, these guys might be a bunch of cheaters.

Going into the AFC semi-final, there was a key controversy over the Patriots distorted use of a "fair" substitution rule in which they un-declare a lineman and then set him out wide to confuse the defense and disrupt the substitution response.  The move is entirely legal but it might be changed as a result of the way the Patriots have used it.  This is the team famous for Spygate and for the worse interpretation of the Tuck Rule in recent memory, so bending the lines on linemen substitutions while softening the balls in an AFC Championship game are typical and mind boggling infractions for a team that seems not to need the extra advantage.

On one level, there is an obvious understanding that every fierce competitor has towards Belichickian behaviors.  We created the saying- "if you ain't cheatin' you ain't tryin'"- for reasons that even champions understands clearly.  I too have coached my own basketball players to test rules under the guise that it is only illegal if the referee calls it.

Whether you only pull jerseys or you actually pinch private parts in pile-ups, cheating comes in lots of forms, but most of them are expected- and thus regulated. Cheating that bends the lines or occurs outside of them is like first degree murder of cheating and deserves the kind of punishment that we reserve for premeditated abusers of the public trust- especially when you have done things of the sort in the past, and particularly when you have forced a league of fans to question your righteous placement in the most important game in America.

Stephen A. Smith of ESPN FirstTake fame has declared it, and I will repeat it.  If Belichick has cheated the fans of America from an opportunity to love or hate the Patriots purely for their football brilliance, then he deserves to be suspended for a season just like Sean Payton received for his part in the New Orleans Saints BountyGate scandal that Payton was only found guilty of obstructing the investigation.

When the 9-11 massacre took our beloved twin towers away, we healed ourselves with football.  We heal ourselves every week with football and the Superbowl has become the biggest worldwide fellowship day outside of Easter Sunday- with no guilt or getting dressed up required. Tim Tebow, and now 5'11" Russell Wilson, have forced legitimate arguments over whether or not God cares about football too. Most people seem to answer MAYBE!

I don't personally care for the Patriots or the Dallas Cowboys who are supposedly closer to being America's Team than are my Denver Broncos, but when Detroit Lion Ndamukong Suh stepped on Aaron Rogers' ankle to try and injure him recently, I sensed that karma, or God, or whatever you want to call it, would come against the Lions because they allowed Suh to play in the playoffs despite his unsportsmanlike behavior and initial suspension. If you saw how Dallas beat Detroit, you probably think karma had some impact on the Lions just as it later impacted the Cowboys who beat Detroit in a questionable fashion themselves.

Has cheaters karma been the reason that a really excellent organization has not reached the highest peak of the mountain over the course of an entire decade?  Will it be the reason that Russell Wilson gets to do a Tim Tebow like interview at the end of another Superbowl? I'm praying against the Patriots, but I know that great teams can overcome stupid coaches and sometimes players hit freethrows even when nobody fouled them. In other words, the ball does lie. Are these freethrow shooters making good on previous missed calls, thus they are pure in karmic energy? Maybe, because the more I involve myself in sports on any level, the more it seems that forces greater than ourselves are regulating the thing called luck.  Luck has always leaned towards the team that is working the hardest, but is that just a human way of hoping that pushing yourself so hard provides some added benefit?  Does a losing team have just as many, or more lucky opportunities but discounts them due to the loss?

New England probably cheated and probably will still win the Superbowl, but the asterisk will live on Wikipedia until the end of time right along with Spygate, the Tuck Rule, the Substitution Rule (coming soon) and whatever else comes to the light when speaking of an organization that has now made this a part of their legacy.  If they lose, karma will get the credit and Belichick will get a reduced punishment like lost draft picks since losing the game will be part of his reward.

Goodell must remind the Patriots how important the NFL is to all of us. Even if Belichick loses a year of duty as opposed to just a couple of draft picks, he will not be able to take away the stink he's created of our beloved game.  We'll watch the game and the Patriot fans might even enjoy it as if the squishy ball scandal never happened.  Everybody else will watch it- or not- and hope the Patriots get what they deserve from taking away the purity of our favorite day of the year. The Colts don't deserve to be in the game, but the Patriots don't deserve to win it either. Hopefully God, or karma or Russell Wilson and the Seattle Seahawks will restore the balance of integrity that makes the NFL a reason life in America is so good.

Robust Economy Gives President Obama The Upper Hand In SOTU

Promising really cool social programs is an easy panacea for civil unrest- especially when world economies collapse, because it only increases the deficit, and deficits don't matter anymore. One might argue that even national debt is a necessary evil within a global economy, but addressing national debt is a lot more important to smart politicians than insuring we operate within a balanced budget.  When economic recovery reaches a peak, our impression of deficit spending changes dramatically and thoughts extend towards social investment and away from deficit fears.

Enter tonight's State of the Union address which will establish a credible argument for the need to balance our nations income disparity deficit by implementing "hard to argue with" social investment measures that most republicans are either quietly or vocally in favor of.  These items of middle class security have always been within the presidents vision for America and within the agreeable majority of congress, but the last remaining opposition to his tax code dreams are all of the past accomplishments of the Obama era.

Plainly put, Barack Obama is a victim of his own success.  At this stage in the chess match, Obama opponents are simply risking every piece on the board while trying to keep their king from being captured. The president is not after their king since his economic ideology is in lock step with their own.  Since democrats are blocking Obama's trade plans, the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership) will be quietly included into an address that will scream of a greater focus on the middle class family.  Trade expansion never finds uninterested GOP ears, but it will not view well on film if Obama and his new republican cohorts pretend to play nice on television.  Cuban normalization efforts are also a preparation for Obama trade dreams as well.

Obama will ultimately get everything that he wants in the end because he is dangling the cash carrot as a lure and republicans can't resist a bite.  What he will not get is the impression that he accomplished it without a fight. In other words, everybody will add stuff to the final bill/s and pretend they had no choice. Tonight's speech is nothing more then a prelude to the TPP hustle that will allow the Keystone XL pipeline to get approved and a couple of other cool social programs like free community college for middle class kids (poor kids already get Pell Grants) or a child tax credit that middle class people with kids can actually take advantage of.(poor people already have multiple child tax credits).


There has always been some false notion that American presidents can pull the strings of the world economy which is typically the key to America's economy.  Presidents can not pull any strings, but nonetheless, good economies are credited to them along with the bad ones. If Obama was indeed the cause of a sputtered recovery than he is singing Al Green tunes in the Oval office for the trend that he is enjoying now. What is the benefit of all of this?  Improved poll numbers for the president and increased power to grab the ear of the public at large.  43% of things spoken during the SOTU address get enacted into law, especially by presidents who've recaptured their moxie.

Congress might fight and kick, but there is always something to be said for the will of the people and of the power of the president to influence that will.  There is also something special about the power of the internet to take your message directly to the public and gauge their response to the details you provide.  In an unprecedented fashion, Barack Obama has basically laid his entire SOTU speech out for public consumption and republican response.  By doing so, he gets to place his winning hand on the table against a republican hand that can only beat him if it offers up a better alternative vision. The move also allows him to snuff out the republican response and prepare his counter in advance as well.

Joni Ernst (R- Iowa)

If the economy keeps blowing up- cheap gas and expanded trade says it will- the trickle down theory must show dividends or redistribution will happen by other means.  Like he did with healthcare, President Obama has stolen the tax code mechanism away from his republican opponents who typically find means of returning wealth to the American people by way of the tax code. Joni Ernst (Iowa), the republican assigned to play the impossible hand of republicans will give the response to tonight's SOTU address.  Ernst is the sacrificial lamb that has been cornered into saying that we must DO more, DO less, or DO nothing at all.  Neither will sound better than Obama's address.

Is it an accident that the upstart Ernst has to do this job and not one of the party elite?  I think not.

Mitt Romney Sounds Like Occupy Wall Street and Reaganomics Is Dead

The death of Reagan republicanism has now begun.

If you are older than forty or simply plugged into politics and economics, you realize the myriad of meanings that one might be trying to imply when using the term "Reagan Republican".  On one hand Reagan was popularized for his Hollywood flair that proved magnetically irresistible to a nation thirsty for a leader who knew how to play the part.  Add to his image the credit for defining republicanism behind the supply-side economic theory- Reaganomics, that spell check now recognizes just fine, and Ronald Reagan's name alone can help you win elections.

Upon deeper investigation, Reaganomics might be worse than Reagan's war on drugs.  In 2011, Adam Martin of The Wire.com reported on studies showing that Reagan's war on drugs had an adverse impact on the price of drugs overall. Studies revealed that Reagan era DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) efforts included poisoning the ground against future marijuana growth after a drug bust, forcing the transition to pesticide resistant harder drugs that were easier to grow, cheaper to distribute and vastly more profitable. Today, the need to mug grandma is less necessary when 30 minutes of pan handling will suffice. (thewire.com)  Petty crime has been drastically reduced nation wide- but mostly as a result of rampant expansion of  cheap drug use in addition to excessive  incarceration of criminal drug addicts as a result of mandatory sentencing.

No worries.  Studies have long since uncovered the truth about the war on drugs and the war on crime.  While these conservative constructs have soiled the reputation of the republican presidents that started them, Reaganomics has painted the party red as it offered republicans a unified message, even while it remained an untested theory.  In fact, the long standing theory of Reaganomics worked better for republicans in the form of a theory because no one could functionally dispute the darn thing either way. .

Gerrymandering and the great state of Kansas have fixed all of that.

In 2010, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback ran for office and won his job flying under the flag of Reaganomics.  Immediately, Kansas and Brownback had the majority, and the temerity to actually test the theory.

It hasn't worked yet- and even as the nation watches the stock market set new records every month, Kansas has not been able to reap the rewards that Reaganomics  and Brownback promised.

According to a  Washington Post article,

Brownback promised that the efforts would drive economic growth, create jobs and stabilize the Kansas budget. But the state is now reporting a more than $300 million revenue shortfall. The poverty rate increased. The state’s economy expanded a total of 2.3 percent in inflation-adjusted terms over the past two years, half the rate of its four neighbors. And Kansas’s credit rating has been downgraded. (Goldfarb, Zachary A., July 30, 2014, Washington Post) 

In order to curtail the shortfalls, Brownback is pursuing hefty sales taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, taxes that affluent smokers and drinkers will absorb easily, while poor people will suffer mightily. The expanding wealth of the wealthy and the expanding wage gap that feeds their wealth is finally something that even rich folks are concerned about as they are losing sight of their vital consumers while speeding off down America's economic highway.  Even Reaganomics recognizes the value of the consumer.

At some point in recent history, we've also seen a recognition that the trickle down can't work if rich people with stockpiles of water are afraid of drought. When the economy turned, the crisis reaction of corporations was to recession-proof themselves with a secondary damn slashing staff and wages while stashing enough profits to weather future droughts. America's recent storm of riches has flooded the primary damn so much that the water would not only trickle, it would flood were it not for that secondary damn imposed against staff and wages.

The failure of the trickle down theory is a rusty spout.  President Obama's State of the Union address will focus on redistribution efforts because in America, the bulk of wealth passes from family member to family member and never makes it way back into the mainstream.  With every economic downturn, the wealth capacity of the wealthy widens right along with the income disparity that drives it.  Absent the interruption of some redistribution effort, the trend can only exacerbate. Whether redistribution finds its way into the tax code or into federal minimum wage laws- or both- or neither is the only remaining question about economic recovery in America, because Reaganomics is dead even though the eyes appear open.

In an interview on his way to Dodge City — where he would sign legislation creating a “National Day of the Cowboy” — Brownback said he regretted referring to his plans as an experiment. But he defended his tenure, saying it represented a Ronald Reagan-style approach to governance that eventually would rebuild Kansas’s economy after a long slide. (Washington Post) 

Reaganomics may be dead, but the powerful impact of its namesake lives on. In the face of abject failure, the name Ronald Reagan can still save the day.

As for the non-Reagan approach to economics?  States that increased their minimum wage last year actually saw higher reductions in unemployment, a key indicator of economic vitality.  Despite an improved economy on a national level, low wages continue to challenge the feeling of a real recovery although data proves that the recovery is both real and sustainable. Not only is the trickly faucet not dripping, no one even knows how to force a trickle- outside of using progressive approaches towards economic disparity (see; redistribution).

Mitt Romney recently threatened to make his pursuit of the presidency a three-peat by declaring the importance of dealing with international affairs and income disparity as primary reasons that he's considering another run.  Since Mitt now realizes that little Russia is a nuisance compared to the big Soviet Union that was dismantled during the end of the Cold War, then this mega-rich republican's reference towards income disparity is curious for sure. If the trickle down theory officially does not trickle fast enough to drive economic recovery, what can any republican candidate do about income disparity that doesn't constitute redistribution (see; socialism) in the end?

Huh Mitt?  Take your time.  You've got roughly two years to come up with an answer.