MLB American League Predictions

I realize that I am probably the only person who is interested in me writing my predictions, but this is something I have been looking forward to doing. I don't think I got the chance to do for the high school newspaper but no one an stop me now.  (cue the wicked laugh)

A.L.  EAST


1.) Boston Red Sox.-- The Sox probably have the best starting pitching in the AL (more on that when I get to Tampa). The additions of LF Carl Crawford and 1ST Adrian Gonzalez makes Boston better offensively and defensively. I am not crazy about Kevin Youkilis at 3RD for the whole season but that is the only weakness I see.If they can avoid all the injuries they had last year they will win the east easily.

2.) Tampa Bay Rays--  If P Wade Davis continues to be as effective as he was late last season and P Jeremy Hellickson lives up to the hype; the Rays might have the best starting rotation in the AL. Adding LF Johnnny Damon will hurt defensively but his bat is still good but I think his leadership is what will help the most. At first I hated the signing of DH Manny Ramirez. He made things terrible towards the ends of his time in Boston and LA. But that was an unmotivated Manny. My understanding is that his contact is for this season.If Manny wants another big contract he has be good this year and a motivated ManRam could be just what the Rays need. The bullpen is the only thing that worries me about picking the Rays to finish in second.

3.) New York Yankees--  When I look at the Yankees all I see is old. Most of their starting position players are over 30. The exceptions are LF Brett Gardner (29) 2ND Robinson Cano (28)and C Russell Martin (29).  After P CC Sabathia the starters don't look impressive.  Other than Mariano Rivera and Rafael Soriano the bullpen looks weak. Could this be Rivera's last season?

4.) Baltimore Orioles--The additions of 1ST Derrick Lee, 2ND J.J. Hardy, 3RD Mark Reynolds and DH Vlad Guerrero will greatly help what was already an improving team. New Closer Kevin Gregg is a questionable decision.  Buck Showalter may be the best manager in baseball but the O's are still a year or two away from being real contenders.

5.) Toronto Blue Jays--  Too young.  We'll see.

AL CENTRAL

1.) Chicago White Sox-- P Jake Peavy is the key to the White Sox season. If he is healthy and pitches as good as he once did Chicago will run away with the division. If  Peavy still has health issues the So will contend for the division title but.......?

2.) Detroit Tigers--  Honestly, this one is just a strong feeling.  I like their starting pitching, offense and the addition of DH/C/1ST Victor Martinez.

3.) Minnesota Twins-- It will not surprise me if I am wrong for picking the always consistent Twins to finish in 3rd.

4.) Kansas City Royals--  They will be good again someday....  right?

5.) Cleveland Indians-- I have heard that the city is a lot nicer than it used to be.  But something still stinks up there. And I am not just talking about the way Baby James left.

AL WEST

1.)  Texas Rangers-- If this team were in any other division I would predict a 3rd place finish. This is the worst division in baseball. Losing P Cliff Lee and adding 3RD Adrian (I'm only good when playing for a new contract) Beltre is never a good thing.

2. Oakland A's-- Young up and coming team. Are they on their way to San Jose?

3.) Angels-- I refuse to call them by the silly name they have now.  I wonder if that silly name is why they cant get any free agents to sign there?  I feel your pain Manager Mike Scioscia; I just hope one day you'll be a Dodger again.

4.) Seattle Mariners-- Are they worse than the Pirates?



AL WILD CARD:  Tampa Bay

AL CHAMPIONS: Boston

Hodgepodge

Do parents teach kids common courtesy these days?

I had just gotten in line at the grocery store when a young man and a young girl decided they had to get sodas (pop for you northerners); instead of saying "excuse me" or "can I get through please" they just gave me looks like I had no choice but to move.  That would have been bad enough but they couldn't decide which soda they wanted and cut through two more times without a word and I swear the girl even gave me a dirty look.

There are a lot of things that my parents tried to teach me that I unfortunately did not listen too but how to be courteous was something I did listen to. I try, for the most part, to treat others with respect. And it's not really a difficult thing to do.


Technology can be a really good thing. Especially for a sports nut like me. This is one of my favorite weeks of the year because Thursday is Major League Baseball's Opening day; and as an added bonus Australian Rules Football season started last weeks. Thanks to ESPN3.com I can watch three AFL games a week; MLBTV.com subscription allows me to see every game I want to see. As a kid I always wanted to watch every Dodgers baseball game that I could. Now I can watch every game. Plus, I get to watch most Tampa Bay Rays games on TV which is probably a lot better than watching them at the awful dome they are in.

By the way, my predictions are coming tomorrow and Thursday so you non sports people have been warned.

I don't understand why soccer, the most boring sport ever (sorry Tara, if you're reading this) is starting to catch on but Australian football  is largely ignored. AFL has non stop action, lots of scoring and very physical action. It's awesome.

Religion

It doesn't bother or surprise me that Victoria Jackson and others are offended by two men kissing on "Glee".

It doesn't bother me that she and others are speaking publicly about how wrong they think the kiss was.

It does bother me that there are people who think their religion, morality and thinking is the only right way.

I bring religion into this only because in the two interviews that I have seen Ms Jackson give this past week she showed the bible and talked about how "secular humanists are stealing our innocence".

I don't remember ever hearing that term before so I looked it up at dictionary.com; a secular humanist is: –noun

any set of beliefs that promotes human values without specific allusion to religious doctrines.

Well if nothing else I have found a clean that can be used to describe me.

I realize that what I am about to write may be offensive to some who read them. No curse words will be used but the content may offend. I want to apologize beforehand if you are bothered by what I write.

I do believe in God.  Churches, not so much.

I have never liked churches because the ones I have been to seem to have the belief that if you don't believe as they do your going to hell (ok, one curse word but it fits the context).

I won't say the majority of churchgoers I have met are so fervent in their belief that if they find out you don't wholeheartedly agree with them;they look down on you. I have even had many try to convert me and get very angry when I refuse. But I have met enough people like that that I am leery of anyone I meet who goes to church every Sunday.

None of that means I disrespect weekly churchgoers because I can respect anyone who believes that is the right thing to do and follow it.  I loose respect when they try to convert me no matter what I say.

And that it's a problem when Victoria Jackson, Pat Robertson, Jehovah Witnesses and others act as though the belief they have is the only path to God. I believe there are as many paths to God as there are people.

My morality and beliefs are between God and me. And that's they way it should be for everyone.  I just wish everyone would see that.  The world would be a better place.

Why weapons?

About a month ago I went to visit a friend of mine at her private office. As we were talking, she began cleaning out her purse and the second thing she took out was a pistol.  She looked at me, smiled and said, "I have me some protection". Literally, what she said and no she's not a hillbilly.

I didn't say anything because I knew whatever I said would be wasting my breath. But, I was thinking "what the f----  are you doing with that"?

Within the last week or so I have heard that there is a bill in the Florida legislature which will permit guns to be openly displayed by anyone owning a gun. My first thought was "are we going back to the old west"?

And late last week I went to the grocery store were I am a regular customer at; and one of the cashiers who I am friendly with told me that she heard a story about a disabled man who protected himself with a knife. She then said I should really consider getting a knife and putting it underneath me on my scooter. And she asks me about it every time I see her now.



I have never, will never, ever  consider getting a weapon. A.) My hand/eye coordination sucks. B.) My mind freezes up when I talk to some I don't know or other similar "stressful" (for me) situation comes up. C.) My body tenses up easily and in some cases freezes up (I believe that's part of my CP) D. I do have a temper but unless I'm mad I back way down from a confrontation.  When I add those facts together I come to the conclusion that having a weapon would be stupid for me.

Now if I were a regular adult with a sound mind and body (of which I have neither) I would hope I would think about a couple of things before getting protection.

Yes, there are criminals who have guns who aren't really willing to use them. I don't know if there are statistics to prove it or not but I would think that most criminals with guns are willing to use them. I do know that in my bad younger days I knew bad people with guns who weren't afraid to use them.

If I  were a regular adult considering gun ownership, I hope I would ask myself do I really think having a gun would really protect me against a violent criminal who is willing and prepared to use his weapon. Or would having a gun just tick the criminal off more and decrease my chances of surviving?

As for openly carrying guns; doesn't having them concealed increase the possibility of reconsidering using a gun before the act occurs?

Rob- I will confess that this post about your sister did disturb me a little. I want to tell you about some other relatives I have. I have relatives that are faithful watchers of FOX network’s news shows especially the pundits. I have noticed a change in them. They go through their day in a highly agitated state. They are quick to point their fingers at the “scapegoat du jour”. (This week I’m sure it was those greedy teachers and their unions that caused the recession. Not those noble Wall Street derivative traders that deserve every penny of their TARP bailout bonuses). They have accused yours truly and other relatives of being “RINO’s” “Socialists” and “liberals”. In fact, if you disagree on one issue with them, you may as well swim your un-American-ass back to Europe with a middle easterner under each arm. (Well maybe not but you get the point.) In their eyes, moderate equals liberal equals communist equals everything wrong with the world. I don’t know if they always had these views but their nonstop watching of FOX news has brought out an ugly side of them in recent years. Nowadays, I refuse to talk politics with them. I love them but you can’t talk with a Zealot about some things. It seems to me that you suffer from the same agitation they do. But I give you credit for this- you will at least switch on MSNBC to try to get a different perspective. I think underneath it all, you want a constructive dialogue the ends in results that everybody can live with and you strive to gain an understanding to that ends. The problem is that MSNBC does the same exact thing FOX does only from another angle. Thus faithful watchers of MSNBC can be just as preachy and bitter. The point is do not let political views get in the way of your family relationships. -Matt


While I agree that there are some harmful side effects to watching FOX and MSNBC on a regular basis, in fact I have reduced how much of it I watch.  I got the impression that you believe they are mainly at fault for the political battles that have been taking place in Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio, among other smaller battles like here in Florida.


If I misinterpreted you meaning I profusely apologize.


While I would agree that the cable "news" channels have a large part in the current political upheaval; they are not the only ones to blame. I don't think FOX/MSNBC had much to do with the Wisconsin democrats fleeing the state and not doing there jobs. Maybe the cable networks had a little to do with union workers storming the capitol building but I am sure there is a lot more to it.


But those incidents are basically just physical manifestations of what I believe is the major problem; a huge lack of honest, open, non-judgmental communication between our national leaders.


I had hoped that I was doing a decent job of getting that point across. But I am sure that what I wrote about my sister damaged what progress I may have been towards getting that point across.


At the same time, I wonder if my actions are an example of what is going  on with our policy makers.


Are Republicans and Democrats digging political foxholes too deep on issues like; health care, the economy, debt ceilings, unions, and other issues? Are both sides entrenched so far in their ideology and too emotionally invested in the issues that their abilities to be rational, communicate effectively and find compromises are too greatly hindered?


I am starting to think that the answers to those questions are yes. And that bothers me. A lot.


As for my family political differences are minor things. 

Government and gay marriage

 I began this posting before I got sick.  The timing is off in regards to  what Mr Huckabee said. But I believe there is never a bad time for the point I would like to make.

I have never understood why the government has a right to make laws banning gay marriage. I don't understand how gay people being married would be bad for the government. It just doesn't make sense.

And I understand it even less after watching former Arkansas (R) Governor Mike Huckabee being interviewed by MSNBC's Ed Schultz  three weeks ago.

During the interview Mr Huckabee  stated, "marriage should only be defined as a union between a man and a woman." When asked for his reasoning Mr Huckabee just recited bible verses.

He was then asked why the government had they write to ban gay marriages. Once again Mr Huckabee's basic response was gay marriage is immoral and cited the bible.  Mr Schulz tried to get Mr Huckabee to give a more concise answer but he didn't.

For the record I had a lot of respect for Mr Huckabee before the interview and I liked him. Since the interview my respect and liking have greatly diminished.

I do not understand being gay nor do I understand how a man can be attracted to another man.

But I do understand that the government has no right to dictate morals.  The way someone chooses to live their life and what their morals are is strictly up to that individual person.

However, I honestly don't understand why gay people need the government to officially recognize their marriage. My guess is that it has something to do with taxes and insurance.  If someone would like to enlighten me on this subject, I would greatly appreciate it.

Finally, Mr Huckabee and others like him seem to think that gay people are immoral. I have not known a lot of gay people but every one I have met have been very good and moral people. And I strongly suspect that most gay people are really good people.

I'm back and Libya

First , for anyone who has been a regular reader (and I hope there's more than two that I know of) I have not posted this week due to illness. Instead of getting colds I get bronchitics; I prefer colds but I don't have much say in the matter.  I am better but not 100% yet, it only feels like a monkey on my chest instead of a gorilla.

There was another posting that I was working on that I will finish and post  soon. And I got another thought provoking comment from Matt that I want to think about more before posting a response. Hopefully, I will be writing something daily this week because I feel like I get rusty when I don't.  (insert your own personal joke here).

But now: Did anyone else get a weird sense of Deja vu when President Obama had his press conference about Libya the other day? It really reminded me of when President Bush declared war on Saddam Hussein/Iraq.

The main difference that I heard was that President Obama stressed that the military actions would be a multi-nation coalition. And I really do think it says a lot that even France wants to be a part of it.

I do hope that one of the lessons learned from Iraq will be to remove Ghadaffi from power establish responsible Libyan leadership ASAP and get out.

The President Obama I saw the other day was the leader I think this country needs. And I think is time for him to step up his game and try to seal up the political divide that seems to grow every day. I think tat big the President of compromise and solutions that most people could agree with is just what is needed.

I truly hope President Obama will be that man.

President Obama

I did not catch the name of the guest on Foxnews's Hannity show who called President Obama "a coward". I have tried to look up the names of the guests but have been unable to so far.

--A side note: I am a bad researcher because of an extreme lack of patience.


As I have stated before the name calling has to stop. Instead of calling my sister what I did, I should have said: My sister posted something on Facebook which showed me that we have very different viewpoints.

It is inappropriate to call the President a coward. However, I believe it is appropriate to say the President is showing weakness in his leadership of this country.

The President is the one man who should be the trying  to at least slow down the insanity in this country. But he won't because its mainly unions (who he supports) and democrats who are creating  the chaos.

I don't see republicans fleeing their states in order to stop voting.  I haven't heard the President calling for civility and coming together as a country.

Union worker's and democrats comparing Wisconsin Governor Walker to Hitler and blocking Capitol doors?  Nothing I know of being said by the President.

Why was the President calling for calm in Egypt and yet not a word about Libya?

Seems like the President only speaks when things are threatening what he wants. Shouldn't he be unifying and calming and leading all Americans as one country? Does he not know how to disagree with republicans and calm things down at the same time?

Weak, Mr President, weak.

Why do we watch

Personally, I like the show "Two and a Half Men". I think it was (and hopefully will be) a funny show. I have always enjoyed Charlie Sheen's character on the show. But Mr Sheen's slow demise is none of my business.

Just like the details of what actually happened at Tiger Wood's house Thanksgiving 2009 is none of my business.  I don't care where the  Hollywood stars hang out. And what the stars are wearing at the award shows shouldn't matter to anyone.

But apparently a lot of people do care. How do I know this? Because there are lots of shows like "Entertainment Tonight", "Showbiz Tonight"  and whatever show that E! has with Joan and Melissa Rivers talking about fashion do's and don't's. By the way, is Joan Rivers talking fashion like me trying to teach someone to run?  I'm just saying...

Apparently, butting into the private lives of star, revealing their flaws and showing the negative side of fame makes money. Why else would there be so many shows about that stuff i money wasn't being made?

So why do people watch it? It it to come as close a possible as many will ever get to seeing what it's like to be rich and famous? Is it so people can feel better about themselves by seeing those with fame and fortune mess up? I suspect that it is both of those things.

But I also think there is another reason. And it's the reason why I look forward to the Major League Baseball season and three months of Big Brother n the summer: we all need breaks from life sometimes.

Because like my Mom said, "Life is not ways easy or fair."  My Mom gets smarter the older I get.

Life stuff

I would have written yesterday but I was recovering from a rough Monday. More on that momentarily.

First, I want to publicly apologize to my sister and anyone else who read my last posting and was offended by my use of the phrase "bleeding heart liberal".  If it isn't right for politicians to use derogatory words/terms; it shouldn't be right for me either.

 I think that what I did is another example of why politicians and the rest of us need to lesson the impact of emotions and discuss issues in as much of a rational manner as possible. From what I have seen on TV lately it looks like things are getting worse between the three parties.

With all the technology that there is now; it's a bit ironic that a little thing like a stamp can still affect life. Let me explain.  In February I received the highest electric bill I have ever seen in 20+ years since leaving my parents home. On my limited income there was no way I could pay the whole thing. I made the payment I could afford and was planning on sending the most I could afford on the first of this month. I don't know for sure, but I suspect, most people pay their bills now with credit cards. I have really bad credit and pay the old fashioned way I mailed in my payment. Which works OK with me except when I am out of stamps.

 Most of you who know me realize I am a little bit odd. One of my oddities is that I hate buying stamps. Unless there is an underlying reason I'm not aware of; I think I just don't like buying more than I need for something that I don't think of as necessary.

Most months that I need stamps I convince myself to get them in enough time to get the bill in quickly. This month I knew that I would be seeing a friend who would let me have a stamp on Thursday. It never occurred to me that I needed to make the payment ASAP.  Yes, I am an idiot sometimes. And I found that out at around 3 on Monday. I knew where to get help but felt it would best to wait until early Tuesday to do that.

Honestly, I was angry at myself and a bit ashamed. I don't think I had the conscious thought to punish myself by going a night without electric but I am sure on some level that was a part of it. The shocking thing was that it wasn't that bad. Reading by flashlight as a kid so my parents wouldn't know I was up late was easy; but as an older man with trifocals is difficult. But I am seriously thinking about getting a battery power lantern and using as little electricity as possible at least once every coupe of weeks.

Some good can come out of any bad.

Ramblins

I am not sure where this posting is going point wise today. I'm in an odd mood and this will probably just be venting.  Sorry.

For some reason today I am bothered by how different my  biological sister and I are from each other.  We lived   in the same house for, as near as I can figure, 16 years. With the exception of summer camp and a few separate trips to Grandma's we saw each other every day for all those years. And yet, I can't think of many similarities.

Other than we both have Mom's nose. (OK  mine is bigger) Other than that we are physically different; she's tall with lot's of hair, I am short, bald and, as you can tell from the blogs name, in a wheelchair. Temperament wise are probably somewhat alike because growing up I always thought she was too emotional; but I later on discovered I am a lot more emotional than I like to admit.

She is a driven person. I am....not as bad as I was but probably still a lazy bum.

As adults, I don't remember too many conversations were we agreeded on things. I will add the caveat that; for my own personal reasons, I did not talk to my family for over 10 years.

I was through Facebook that my sister and I reconnected and eventually that led to my talking to my parents. But its through Facebook that I was reminded  that she and I are very different.  She posted something tat reminded me that she is one of those bleeding heart liberals I have a difficult time tolerating.

Same parents, same houses; I guess those separate life experiences made a huge difference.  Oh well, you can't choose your family.....

Are there solutions

First, let me say that what I am about to write is not what I think will happen. But it is what I think should happen.

President Obama needs to be the leader for the whole country not just for his party.  Remember when Presidents would come on TV and talk to us from the Oval office? I used to find that annoying but I see it served a valuable purpose. I believe that when Presidents Reagan through Clinton did that it helped unify the country.

It seems like the last time I remember that being done was right after 9-11. I think we need that again as a country almost as badly as we did in 2001.

I could be wrong but I believe that speaking from the oval office would help the President to speak as neutrally as possible.  Obviously I don't know but I would guess that every President from Eisenhower up through Nixon would speak from the oval office on a regular basis; and I'm sure that that it had a little to do with assurance and neutrality.

President Obama needs to talk more strongly about civil discussions in these tough times. He needs  to urge   bipartisanship between state and national leaders. And he needs to urge the national media, and more specifically the cable news channels to be more responsible in what they air and to stop stirring things up.

At the same time, someone who is respected by everyone (if that is possible) needs to be spreading the message of the importance of responsible, adult discussion of the issues. The person I suggest for that role would be Colin Powell. I had hoped Mr Powell would run for President in the last elections and he is still the person I would like to see leading this country.

Finally, I wish there was a way to set up a committee of people from all parties; who would come together for a regular show to review the media's coverage of the issues. If possible, I would have the majority of this committee be made of people who do not appear regularly on network or cable news shows. This committee could serve as an unofficial watchdog of the media.

Like I said at the beginning of this post, I don't think this will happen but it would be a good thing.