NCAA, IRONICALLY, SHOWS COUNTRY WHOLE BULL, WITH KILLING BIG 12

The mighty have fallen (due to cheating), if there was ever ANY doubt about NCAA sports being about money (there is NONE now) and not the athletes/student athletes, and there is NO shred of actual allegiance to anything, in college athletics anymore (for players, coaches, athletic directors, or teams). There isn't anyone, unless not a sports fan, or they were living under a rock for the last week that hasn't heard about the disintegration of the NCAA's Big XII Conference, bulking of up the first "Super Conference" (what should be known as the PAC-16), and the fact USC received the death penalty, due to Reggie Bush (with family) and O. J. Mayo's taking money, housing and "extras" (to come and play at the University of Southern California). However, the biggest shot, for the American public to take a look at "the real side" of college sports, it's corruption, lack of integrity, and overall money bound principled staffing is the fiasco in the Big 12 and Pac-10 conferences. The fact Colorado has already signed with the Pac-10, Nebraska is all but in the Big 10, and all the southern schools (except Baylor, in the Big 12) are leaving the way of West Coast football, the land of the Pete Carroll's, countless allegations, felonies, thugs of players, and cheating (see Reggie Bush, OJ Mayo/O.J. Mayo, and Oregon's football team).

First things first, there was supposed to be a Nebraska and Missouri situation, both leaving for the Big X. However, MU was not the draw, which Nebraska was (at least money, television rights, and outright sales, merchandise and otherwise), so the University of Missouri is a college without a conference, right now. Yet, Nebraska is basically in, with the Big X, all top athletic people and dean's saying, "All that needs to be done, is for them to sign on the dotted line." Next is the University of Colorado, the first to make the exodus to the "Pac-10," on paper. Colorado is not the bastion of sports, but they have the third biggest television market (for NCAA sports) in the West Coast area, bring a huge basket of cash with them, and is the sixteenth team (in the future "Pac-16").

The wild cards in all of this are the Texas A&M Aggie's, Texas Tech Red Raiders, Oklahoma State Cowboys, and the two big time draws, the Oklahoma Sooner's and Texas Longhorns. These teams, with Colorado, will be the "Super Conference" (as it is being called on talk sports radio, ESPN and other sporting outlets), the "Pac-16." There are two HUGE problems lurking and showing a big light on the underbelly of college sports. Missouri getting the shaft, from the Big 10, as they were not good enough, couldn't draw away from KU, KSU, and Nebraska for the west half of Missouri (state), and they are just not good in any one sport, much less with any big tradition (in any one sport, like Texas Football, KU basketball, etc..etc..). They will either end in a weaker and less money conference, such as, the WAC (Western Athletic Conference), the Missouri Valley (which is probably to small), but likely they will (with no loss of irony, having UMKC being in this situation) an independent team. As the Notre Dame Fighting Irish would be FOOLS not to take the offer, that is definitely coming their way, via the Big 10 (imagine, UND, with the likes of Michigan, Ohio State, Iowa, etc... just in football alone.

The second big problem is the Kansas Jayhawks and the Baylor Bears are left fending for themselves. This is where KU will show, if the mass journey of Texas Teams, to the Pac-10 wasn't enough proof, the whole NCAA sports program, across the nation is corrupt, greedy and is full of holes in their systems. Of course, there will still be other teams without a conference, come the near future (Iowa State, Missouri, Kansas, Kansas State, and Baylor), but KU (especially) has been a household name brand, nationwide, thru their men's basketball alone for years, but they have also had big seasons in baseball, bowl games in football, and much success with lesser known sports. They will land on their feet, due to money and the television rights they can bring alone, and they will go to a BIG TIME conference, at the most premium price. The biggest loser and what shows/proves this theory of the ugly side of college sports and Baylor Bears, who has exploded onto the sports scene in men's and women's basketball, baseball, softball, and big bowl games in football, not counting the lesser known sports, like track where they have excelled. Out of all the schools, Baylor packs the biggest punch for their GPA's. Baylor, as a school (not just athletes, yet counting them) is the 51st highest ranked GPA undergrad program in the country (highest in the Big 12), and it has over 6 other specialty fields (education, science, and others). Yet, this counts little, if any, in the eyes of the boosters, television sponsors, and all standing to make a buck in this monstrosity of a shift, in the college landscape.

There is only one thing, which has been true for a long time, the dollar is king in NCAA Sports and schooling, period. From before the times of the "Nike Air" shoe and Michael Jordan (though it was NEVER this bad and blatant), it has been the same. The difference now is the coaches (Lane Kiffin, blazing Tennessee after one year, to USC), to athletic directors treating the athletes as cattle (instead of student athletes, where they HAVE TO go to class and make those grades, for longer than a year), to the top of the NCAA System and Chairpersons are not teaching our young people how to be ethical, break the rules as long as you get something out of it, at that time (taking barrels of cash, homes for their parents, Reggie Bush and O. J. Mayo, just to name the last two. As the "Rush Brothers" thru KU, came with a price tag and Roy Williams blazed for Tar Heels, of North Carolina), and they are not teaching them the fundamentals of being men and women, of strong minds, bodies and souls. Instead, they soak every cent off of their sweaty, salt laden bodies, and leave them to wolves. Most of these student/athletes, leave school without degrees, some not able to read and write properly, and the least of the crimes against our college youth is nothing is expected of them, as the example before them has been laid.

copyright. DMAN At "The Thought Spigot"
http://thethoughtspigot.com/

Notre Dame Smacks #7 Cornell, To Go To NCAA LaCrosse Finals

Notre Dame came out today and just handed the #7 team in the land, a smacking 12-7. Notre Dame who snuck into the field as a "Bubble Team," unranked, has beaten three power house lacrosse teams, to get to play on Memorial Day. Neil Hicks with four goals, the defense stiffling the Cornell power offense, and Scott Rogers (6'4'' 250 lbs.) with stellar play in goal, is what powered the Irish past "The Big (or not so big) Red."

They will play either Duke #5 (who they beat earlier in the year, dramatically, but lead by the number one scorer Ned Crotty and C. J. Crostefield), or the #1 team in the land (with the best player in the land, in Shamel Bratton). Bratton, if they do beat Duke, can single handedly beat a team, he is that good. However, Notre Dame has the bragging rights, as of now, going to the finals, as an unranked team (the first time since UMASS in 2006).

It would be nice for an Irish Title in something, since the NCAA Basketball team laid an egg, two years in a row. :)

Peace, God Bless, and Go IRISH!!!!!!

copyright. DMAN/Mike @ The Thought Spigot

http://thethoughtspigot.com/

The Acropolis, 24/7 News, Hollywood, & Individual Choice

All people, throughout time, have had many different platforms to state their cases. The Acropolis, Theatre of Dionysus, "The Temple" (of Biblical times, where all branches and theological statements/beliefs came from), to the more recent places (Shakespeare's ) Globe Theatre, and so on. Past the turn of the 20th century, came silent movies, television, color television, and then major theatrical theatre and big budget movies. In the beginning, these famous and infamous places were where people came from all around, to hear others speak and hear the thoughts, politics, and overall big ticket items of the day (including religion, war, and the world, as they/people thought they knew it).

Throughout history, there have always been places and people who utilized the opportunity of the day, to embark on what they believed in to change times and people. However, as technology and the world "advanced," in the early to mid-1920's, there was a huge switch in bringing information and a person's ideas, to the forefront. Instead, there became a wave of "a person not going to here the issues they wanted" to "the issues and whatever slant that came with them, coming to the person." The whistle of the "Andy Griffith Show" is unmistakable to the majority of the world, whether you have seen an episode, or not. As time has gone on, the "Family Ties," "Mary Tyler Moore Show," "The Cosby Show" with a bevy of other quality watching (quality meaning very few, if any, double innuendo television, yet still tackling issues of the day) shows, for families has gone by the way side. In their places, have come shows like "The Simpsons," "Family Guy," "Glee," "South Park" and "Lost" filling the airwaves with anti-family, pro-homosexual, and a general degradation of the family, conservative thought, and overall a filling of most episodes with Anti-Christian thought(s).

Same is for the news, or what actually acts as the news, today. "Time," "Life," "Walter Cronkite" and others in the 50's thru the late 1980's brought a close to balanced shot, to the people, in their homes, every night. While their has always been a pressure for political dominance of the minds of the people, in America and the world, there has never been such a revolt, as the last 15-20 years has shown. Where the "main stream media" was the place to go, for the actual facts, pictures and stories showing Vietnam (in a war time footage, not in a story about the war), not slamming and taking slant sides, and most of all not invading the homes of America with an agenda. Then came the 24 hour news cycle and the Net, which has changed the world and the way people look at the news forever. When a man/woman could have gone to work, come home and watched the news, read a newspaper, or the majority of top esteemed periodicals, they could work and get the news, raise a family and not try to be swayed into a liberal/conservative point of view. Yet, in today's world, the majority of people in the U. S. are saying, "I don't have time to look at multiple web sites, read multiple views and papers, I have a family to raise and a life to live." This is where the problem comes in, people are generally in a state of apathy, and they will ingest anything fed to them. Which is the point of what is coming out of the tube, the Net, and print in general.

This does not even count the "Hollywood Effect." Movies like "Lions for Lambs," "In the Valley of Ellah," and "Avatar," have come out with agendas, for the left. Of course there are far right/right/conservative movies, with the same agenda, to make more conservative voters, or to get a conservative point of view out. However, looking at Hollywood, aside from "Passion of the Christ" and Kirk Cameron's "Fireproof" how many "TRUE" right wing/far right movies are out, and if compared it is about 20 to 1 (far left movies to far right, coming out). Hollywood has transformed itself, over the years (just taking from the last 10 years) from bashing President Bush, the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, to making a concerted effort to "go green." Actually, making the "Go Green" (not talking about the people who do not want to pollute the earth, or do their parts in life to make the earth a better place) effort, into the new religion of the day. If we lived in the times of the "Jewish Temple" (around Christ's time), there would be a massive effort thru speak, story, and fable/falsehood to show (like in AVATAR) the "Green Effort," "Cap and Trade" and so on, is trying to replace God, and make the "Green Revolution" a Religion. The "Green Church" is not even proven science, but to look at the news, Net, papers, magazines, major "stars of television and movies," most would think we would be close to being under water. Coming from Al Gore's mouth, himself, (the man who said, "I created the Internet" and stands to gain close to $500 million, if "Cap and Trade" the "Green Church" is a success) said, 5-6 years ago, he felt as though within 15 years, we would have glaciers melting, causing the oceans to gain up to 4-5 feet of water (causing catastrophic problems, across the world). Well, as of now, we are only 4-8 years from Gore's prediction. What have we learned? The "hockey stick information/scale" on global warming, was false and there was countless emails, which were falsified and/or lost/shredded? The "Church of Green" has even been seeped into the actual church's of today, thru the E. P. A.. The E. P. A. has sent out countless memo's to churches of all stripes, leaders, and pastors to encorporate the "Eco-Friendly" message into their sermons, homilies, talks, and overall if they do, money will come their way. This is causing and fueling the Hollywood, Al Gore crowd to howl out, Earth first, God, Capitalism, America second.

Of course, there is two sides to every story, but in today's world we all live in, we are being manipulated thru these three venues, and have been for about 20 years now. If you do not see this, then you are blind, or just do not care to look. I am sure there will be those screaming out "I don't have time to find the facts, read this book, or research multiple sets of ideas." It is always easier to cry out, "I can't make a difference," than actually taking the time, whittling out something in your life, and going strong with belief, rather than just choking down the patented lines, in every paper, most news shows, television shows (killing the American family), and spending endless amounts of cash on movies, which are against what our forefathers taught and believed in. Like I said, there will always be a Marquis De Sade, Rush Limbaugh, MSNBC, and countless other entities, as we go thru life. It is up to every individual to decide for themselves, if they are going to stand on the steps of the Acropolis, the Temple, watch Fox News/MSNBC/CNN, go to see AVATAR, or read "The Turner Diaries." The bottom line, it is up to you, NOT to make excuses on what you can't do, that one person can't make a difference, or just stay ignorant. Then again, you might want to take 30-45 minutes a day to check all channels, get off YouTube and visit intelligent sites (for actual different views on one topic, or major topics we are faced with), and/or read "Time/Newsweek" and then pick up "The Washington Times/Wall Street Journal/The Drudge Report" to check things out for yourself. Ultimately, it is up to you.

Obama, "You have made enough money," How Much Is That?

Is this to much icing, for these cinnamon rolls? Maybe, maybe not, but it is for the person to decide, right? President Obama started the remark with, "I want to be clear, we are not 'pushing' financial reform', because we begrudge success that is 'fairly earned.' However, he then goes off script, or TelePrompTer (literally), saying, "I do think at a certain point, 'you have made enough money.' If you are providing a good product, or a good service." The only remark, not prepared in his speech ahead of time, he says, (repeating) "You have made enough money."

One can only compare this to some other things in real life, as this comment (I am sure it will be classified, as a 'joke', by the time this hits the news channels, or the mainstream media will classify it as so), is almost to unbelievable. How much it to much sun on a flower? To much sun on a flower, is when the flower dies, or starts to wilt. How much is to much rain? When it starts to flood, is usually when there is to much rain. However, when it is raining for two days, some people can't do construction work, lawn and outdoor work, and other kinds of work and things dealing with the weather. Yet, those same two days of rain, also allow the grass to grow, allow inside merchants, retail shops, and movie theatres to have more people attend, to stay out of the rain. Therefore, it may be "to much" for some, but not "to much" for others. Right? Therefore, how much is "to much money" and why do we have the President of the United States dictating it?

The answer should not surprise anyone. President Obama has been 100% honest, on this topic of "sharing the wealth," "bailing out, as companies are 'to big to fail'," and that he would "fundamentally transform America," but to much money to President Obama and most Dems. on Capitol Hill, is the extra money you do not need to live, in order to give it to those who are less fortunate, poor, in the lower middle to lower monetary class (poor). However, America did not start this cycle with President Obama, as President George W. Bush's last two years (backed by Democrat super majorities), was the start of stimulus and bailing out. Thinking back, President Bush allowed the "Obama transition team" into the White House early, to make a more "seamless transition," on the economy. However, back to the topic at hand, and "to much money?" In Russia, as early as the early to mid 1990's (some still say today, to a lesser degree, myself being one), they practiced the spreading of wealth, Socialist tenants, and trying to make a one class society. This is what Socialism is all about, spreading the wealth and making everyone "equal."

There is one major problem with this whole philosophy, and it is that the "Founding Fathers" never intended for the government to be this much in our business, telling us that we can't have a "day of prayer" (yet, we have a whole week dedicated to "clean earth week/earth week"), Socialized Health Care (which is what the Health Care Law/Bill is, when you are demanded by the government to buy a product, which happens to be health care. It is not reform.), and/or saying "how much money we can make, should make." Showing exactly, what is wrong with Washington, President Obama, and the "lefties" of the country. It flies in the face of our founders, of "The Constitution" and the American way of life for over 300 years (for the most part). President Obama is traveling around the country talking to "regular Americans," though there are strict measures in place to attend the speeches, making it a mainly democrat group, so there is not backlash. Actually, when he made the "to much money" comment, the crowd gave an uneasy, but none the less, acted as if it were a joke, laughing.

Spending is out of control in Washington (across the board), we have countless regimes against us (China holding our debt hostage, Iran with Nuclear aspirations, North Korea just being, well North Korea, etc), and an almost $13 trillion debt, as of now. This is all from the government spending to much money and making more entitlement programs (such as the 116 new bureaucracies, 16,000 IRS agents alone, just for the new Health Care Bill/Law). So let me ask two questions: If there is a "to much money" level for Americans, or that is what Obama and the Democrats want, when will they stop spending? Second, how much, is to much money for you and is this what we want for our country?

copyright. DMAN @ "The Thought Spigot"

http://thethoughtspigot.com/

Gates & Clinton, Get Hints Of Air Strikes From Israel

As time ticks by, over half the "Bush Years" and over a full year into President Obama's first tem, there is still nothing with any teeth on the board, to stop Iran from having nuclear weapons. Yet, the patented line, "we are working with our partners and the U.N.," comes from both Hillary Clinton and Robert Gates. After meeting with Israel's defense minister, Ehud Barak, Gates' response, to reporters was, "I am very satisfied with the planning process in the building and in the inner agency. We spend a lot of time on Iran, and will continue to do so." In contrary to his statement, he also said, "Hamas has more rockets and missiles, than most countries militaries." Hillary Clinton's, minimal words (after meeting with officials from the E. U.), "The United States is working with our partners with the United Nations and the European Union on tough new sanctions that will "further sharpen" the choices that Iran's leaders face." Really?

Of course, most people are not "geo-political experts" and nobody (unless deep in the governments) knows what classified material Israel and "allied nations" are looking at. However, anyone who does have any business experience, at all, knows that if there is a continuous problem, there must be actual actions taken to solve the problem. Therefore, why is it that either Gates and/or Clinton, all of the U. S., E. U., and "allied nations" leaders and delegates not locked in a room, for however long it takes to stop this out of control country? Of course, it is not that simple, nothing in government and world wide politics ever is, but the same principle still applies. If there is time for our "leaders" (world wide), who say they can "walk and chew gum at the same time," to banter about immigration, the economy, housing, and a plethora of other things, then why is there not time and a concerted effort to take a week, two, or a month (four hours a day, till it is done), to put sanctions on Iran (with "teeth" in the sanctions)? Answer, nobody can do anything about Iran, until Russia and China come on board.

The only thing that is going to make Iran stop it's nuclear options are either Iran doing it themselves (which isn't going to happen, by their own rhetoric), the whole free world and the U. N. and N. A. T. O. countries to stop all flow of natural and refined gasoline to Iran (by blocking the "Straight of Hormus," where Iran just got finished having "war games.") and an embargo/trade freeze with Iran across the board (which would definitely hurt the Iranian people and President Obama has said he would not do), or else Israel is going to "temporarily stop" Iran, by using it's superior air power to hit nuclear targets, inside Iran. The problem with the last option, which everyone in the world knows, once Israel starts the air raids (which Barak hinted at, in the press conference, with Gates), Hamas and Hezbollah will open up with massive air/missile strikes. When that happens, it will make the last "War Over Lebanon" look like a walk in the park. Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, and just about all of Israel will be in play, for rocket attacks, and NOBODY knows if they have the biological and/or chemical tips, for those rockets (for sure).

At a stand still for over 6 years, on this issue, it is now up to the United States, President Obama, and the rest of the world to: 1. get those severely tough sanctions in place (making sure that Russia, and China is either on board, or off, but continuing either way, with the majority of the countries backing this. 2. Israel will start the air raids, probably right after the U. S. summer and before elections in the U. S. (as the Prime Minister of Israel and Obama are at odds, and have been, since he has taken office. This proven by the 72% of Israel people stating that they feel President Barack Obama is an "Anti-Semite". (Their words, not mine)

President Obama and the U. S. will have to decide on whether to help, or not, Israel with the Hamas/Hezbollah problem (sure to come), and there is not guarantee on that. 3. Iran will go nuclear. Out of these three steps, the way the problem is being pushed to the back, politicians using nickel and dime tactics (in the U. S. and world wide) to try to stop Iran, and the bold in your face disregard, for world wide sentiment of Iran, it does not look good for the United States, the E. U., or the fact this will start an arms race in the Middle East. Only God knows, what will happen, but let's all not kid ourselves. At the moment, there looks to be NOTHING on the road, looking promising, in stopping Iran from going nuclear. Therefore, Gates, Clinton and ultimately President Obama have made the U. S. look even more weak, then it does economically and world wide, at present. Which is a tough task to do, much less accomplish it. However, tough times and tough questions/problems, deserve tough actions and decisive measures. If President Obama would look at the Iranian problem, like he did the Health Care problem, then the United States might be in another place. At least, he would have done more than President G. W. Bush did, who is still the whipping boy for the left.

Copyright. "TheThoughtSpigot.Com"

http://www.thethoughtspigot.com/