An Open Letter to my Bad Bitches and Nasty Women

To All the Bad Bitches and Nasty Women in my life and Nationwide,

It's been a long fucking week, huh? I don't think any of us thought the outcome of this election was actually a possibility. I mean obviously it was but who actually had the room in their brain to think that it could really, actually, happen? It has been a trying time filled with despondency and tears, questions about what happened and what exactly the way forward is. I hope there is not, but suspect that there is, an undercurrent to that despondency that says "What is even the point if I must continue to face this sort of sexism and misogyny? What shot do I have if a plurality of America voted for a categorically unqualified, uninformed, idiotic white male buffoon over one of the most uniquely qualified candidates in the history of the Republic and many did so just because the latter candidate is a woman? A woman who has been working to better this nation and our world for over 30 years?"

I have no real answers for you and understand the feeling completely. I have been despairing the past week as well. How could we possibly be here? I just want to be clear that I am in no way, shape or form trying to do some "mansplaining" and was, in fact, somewhat worried that is how this may come off. I had it vetted a bit so I hope no one reads it that way as I mean well. In my various readings and in the mental gymnastics I have expended trying to process all of this, however, I have found and come up with a couple of facts (maybe "fact" is more appropriate here, I'm kind of winging it) that I hope you will find as somewhat helpful/hopeful as I did...

• 46.9% of those who were eligible to vote did not vote (the final numbers are still a bit fluid and still developing from when I saw these numbers last Friday, but these will be close enough I think). Of those who did vote, 25.6% voted for Hillary Clinton and 25.5% voted for a racist and misogynistic orange. Of that roughly 1/4 of the country that voted for walking hot bag of wind painted Home Depot orange, (as pointed out by HRC in her "deplorable gaffe" that was taken out of context) half probably voted based on economic/social concerns and thus are only complicit in the racism and misogyny rather than active participants. This leaves us with about 13% of the country who voted in this election and who are just truly terrible.
• One must suspect, due to the voting demographics (and yes I realize this is rather morbid but, also, on the other hand fuck them) many of this 13% is going to die off in the next 4 years.
• Along with this development, the next four years will bring another generation of nasty women who do not want to be told what to do with their bodies, what sort of contraception is acceptable and do not feel like being judged by their looks rather than their intelligence and accomplishments. These young women will, hopefully, be particularly motivated to kindly show the president-elect where the door is while less kindly mentioning where he can stick his vile views.
• The changing demographics will be beneficial but, as was seen this year, they are not enough. I cannot stress enough that nearly 47% of eligible voters could not be bothered to vote. Without getting into how despicable I think this is because I may give myself a fucking aneurysm, that means that we all (I say "we" as I feel like a nasty woman in spirit) must do better at motivating these people and turning them out. This stuff matters. You do not get to sit it out and not worry about the consequences. People will now suffer. The unfortunate fact of the matter are that the voters most reliable to turn out are the old, white and scared. That means that many of that 90 Million people or so (as not all ~330 Million in the country are eligible to vote) were likely to have been voting for not the orange guy. Everyone needs to try to motivate this section of the electorate going forward.
• Hillary Rodham Clinton went through A LOT of shit to get here. Like Andy Dufresne escaping Shawshank State Penitentiary amounts of shit. To borrow from HRC who was borrowing from Hova, Susan B. Anthony prodded at the glass ceiling so that Geraldine Ferraro could punch it. Ferraro punched the glass ceiling so Hillary could spider web it with a sledgehammer. Hillary swung that sledgehammer so that all of you (and all of us who believe in you) could stomp on that mother fucker until every last fucking one of us is dancing on broken glass with tears of joy running down our faces.

Wednesday morning was supposed to be when those tears of joy started welling up and it didn't go down like that. It fucking sucks. I, personally, was gutted. I felt the flutters of nervousness coming around 9:30 PM Tuesday night and the writing was on the wall early Wednesday morning. I went to bed sick. I, literally, puked on Wednesday morning and then I sobbed while sitting on my shower floor. I know my post-election experience was a lot of yours, although I am sure yours was 10x, as well. But I guess what I am ultimately saying, is that despondency and despair must give way to anger and action. HRC may not be the President-elect right now, but Elizabeth Warren may be in 4 years (speaking of, this is great... http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/11/elizabeth-warren-we-stand-up-and-we-fight-back.html). One of you may even be in the upcoming decades. Even if Hillary was elected, the fight wouldn't have been over. Just look at our current "post-racial world" in the days (DAYS!) after Obama's successor was elected. All this tangerine colored fucking clown shoes means is that all of us need to fight harder to get where we need to be. 

I know I am preaching to a very capable, committed, intelligent and resourceful choir, but this is as much about me needing to organize and express my thoughts as it is about reaching out to y'all. I stood with and still stand with her. And I will always stand with all of you. Wednesday's stumble is nothing but a stutter step on the sprint to eventual victory.

Much love and respect, always.

Image Credit: Scoopnest.com (Don't know what that is but BMurr always makes me feel better)

Ruminations on the Pledge of Allegiance

                                                   Image Credit: iFunny.co

This weird little blog has been dormant for quite awhile now. No real reason why. Not that much I found interesting to write about, life happens, etcetera, etcetera. In the meantime, a man that I, and many others, consider to be a completely unqualified and rather dangerous authoritarian demagogue had been elected the President of the United States. Now that I'm trapped in a glass cage of emotion with sadness, despair, helplessness and anger sweeping around me, I guess I found a few interesting things to write about again.

We Americans, I assume, are all familiar with the Pledge of Allegiance. Many of us grew up mindlessly reciting the pledge every morning with the rest of our snotty little elementary school class. Interestingly enough, it was originally published in 1892 by a socialist (I bet that would freak out a lot of people who push for it's recitation) named Francis Bellamy in The Youth's Companion and read "I pledge allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." Beautiful right? This was of course eventually changed in the 1950's to the more familiar to the school kids "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." Still pretty beautiful sentiment right? I know I thought so, even as a snotty little kid. Considering our current political circumstances, however, let's unpack the pledge a little bit.

One nation...

I think it's pretty clear to everyone in both parties that we are not one nation. I literally do not know what close to 50% of the country are thinking. I cannot wrap my head around their thought process. I cannot see how they could vote a dangerous, authoritarian, demagogic clown as the leader of the free world. It is almost as if half the country just wants to see the world burn. Yet, vote they did. The man legitimately won despite all he has said and done, both in his cruel and vile campaign and earlier in his life. And I guarantee they do not understand why I am so fearful and why I find this so dangerous. "Let's mix it up because what have the other politicians done for me anyway. He at least tells it like it is." When the constituencies of the two parties look across the metaphorical "aisle" with confusion and concern on their respective faces, we are not one nation.

Under God...

Well I guess to large swathes of the nation, that would depend what god you are praying to. The President-elect proposed a ban of all Muslims entering the country (although that has been recently scrubbed from his website now that he has actually been elected) and encouraged Muslims to spy on their fellow believers in order to "keep America safe." I guess it is all gravy as long as you believe in a Judeo-Christian god. Kind of takes away from the one nation again doesn't it?

Indivisible...

See points 1 and 2 above. I'm relatively young (shut up, I am!) but I do not think I have ever witnessed a more divisive time in my life. When the conservative leaning faction of this country thought they were losing the election, they obliquely threatened armed insurrection, possible refusal to accept the "rigged results" of the election and cried for the imprisonment of their chosen leader's political opponent for some undefined offenses. Now that their candidate has won, they still cry for their political opponent's imprisonment in the cozy confines of the President-elect's victory party. Are you f*&%ing kidding me? On the other side, the more liberal and progressive leaners, myself included, were overconfident and under-prepared for this result. Now shock, anger, confusion and a deep, deep sadness have set in. People are unsure of how to deal with the unfathomable. Thankfully many have chosen to express their confusion and rage in a non-violent insurrection with protests and marches across the country but it is still striking how clear the division currently is. Add in Black Lives/Blue Lives Matter with the racial undertones that are baked in there and I, for one, do not see it getting better in the near future.

With liberty and justice for all...

Speaking of those racial undertones, clearly many people in this country do no feel like there is liberty and justice for all. It is not just race-centric either. Part of the reason for the results in this election was the class based resentment in a large number of post-industrial areas in this country where things just have not felt like they have been getting better. People became scared for their future, angry that their circumstances have not changed, and decided to vote for a change in whatever form it came. Unfortunately for all of us, the standard bearer of that "change" is someone who has espoused normalizing the usage of "stop and frisk" procedures that lead to the targeting of people of color by police forces and the underlying resentment of police that then brews in minority communities. Someone who has proposed the violation of the Geneva Conventions, the institution of torture by our federal agencies (CIA/FBI) by utilizing waterboarding and "much worse." Someone who, as was previously mentioned, wants racial profiling by religion to be the norm. It is hard to see how this election leads to anything but the retreat from liberty and justice for all.

If you bake in the fact that Russian officials, despite previous denials, now explicitly met that they've been in contact with many members of the President-elects team throughout the election, I feel like I am living in a scary time. I do not understand how we got here. I do not see how we appropriately move forward these next four years in a unified country. I do not see how the leader of this country could possibly represent me, my views and my ideals. I'm a great believer in and admirer of our Constitution. It is one of the greatest documents this country, and possibly this world, has produced. It is the reason why this country is great yet all I can see is a man who seems ready and willing to trample on the rights that we hold so dear by threatening the freedom of press and religion. I am sickened. I am sad. I'm scared. I'm terrified.

But I am also willing, ready and able to fight to protect those rights and I hope you are too. Small minded men and women can only take this country from us if we let them. We cannot. We will not. Be vigilant. Be wary. Be vocal.

Legaliiiize It (well at least medicinally anyway...)

I apologize in advance for the length of this post, but it has been long in the works. And there MAY be a prize for you at the endthereisnot. At this point, the fact that there is still a near total prohibition against marijuana, and even medical marijuana is still under attack despite even wider support, is disgraceful. The post-election polls on public support of legalization of marijuana show a large amount of support for legalization. Even with this support, especially by those who likely voted for Obama, the administration is still discussing ways to combat legalization in Washington and Colorado, including amongst "Senior White House and Justice Department officials." Not to put too fine of a point on it, but this is essentially spitting in the faces of many of the "hopey changey" generation of Obama voters, as well as the voters in Washington and Colorado. The problem is even larger for medical marijuana as the public widely finds it to be acceptable but the industry that has grown in states where medical marijuana has been legalized continues to be under attack by the feds. The fact that this such things are still being prosecuted by the DEA is ludicrously awful.

The Washington Post's Dylan Matthews argues, in a version of what I have been meaning to write for a long time (this post has been in my draft for a bit), for the changing of the classification of marijuana for medicinal use. The easiest way to alleviate much of this federal pre-emption talk, as marijuana remains illegal under federal law due to the Control Substance At, in regards to medical marijuana is to reclassify so that it is no longer a Schedule I drug. Which makes a ton of sense as the fact that marijuana is still a Schedule I drug in the first place is borderline scandalous. According to the current scheduling, Heroin, other opiates, and cocaine have more of a medical use and less of a potential for abuse and addiction than marijuana does. To most people, this should come off as patently ridiculous. Aside from old timey laughers like Reefer Madness, you do not have Requiem for a Dream or Trainspotting type depictions of the horrors of marijuana. Not that a drug's depiction in mass culture is the end all and be all, but it does give you a dramatized idea of most of our reality. The scandalous nature really takes route when you read the takes of people like John Schwartz, a theoretical physicist at Caltech and one time MacArthur "genius" Fellow, who is of the opinion that the DEA and National Institute on Drug Abuse ("NIDA") are working in tandem to maintain the prohibition on marijuana. As NIDA determines who receives legal marijuana for research purposes, they can thus withhold it to prevent research on the positive effects of medical marijuana allowing the DEA to refuse to reconsidered the schedulization of marijuana as there has been insufficient research to allow for such a change. What's a little epistemic closure amongst friends? According to physicist and foundation labeled genius rather than some rando pot head Schwartz,

As a physicist, I can assure you that this not how physics works. … We are all expected to act like grownups and accept it gracefully as experiments prove our favorite theories are false. In physics, unlike marijuana policy, we consider the right message to send to be the message that’s true. […]

Consider what American science might look like if all research were run like marijuana research is being run now. Suppose the Institute for Creation Science were put in charge of approving paleontology digs and the science of human evolution. Imagine what would happen to the environment if we gave coal and oil companies the power to block any climate research they didn’t like. (emphasis in the original).

This is the type of atmosphere that those against the federal prohibition of medical marijuana are operating against and it is beyond ridiculous. The issue is not helped by the fact, as pointed out by Rolling Stone magazine, that the current head of the DEA, Michele Leonhart, remains in the position after becoming acting head of the DEA during the Bush administration. In a pointed example of the DEA's backwardness on the benefits of medical marijuana, Ms. Leonheart refused to concede that heroin may be more dangerous than marijuana in a Congressional hearing, ignoring reality as most of us know it. These anti-drug hardliners, up to and including vice president and originator of the term "drug czar" Joe Biden, will ensure that there is no movement on moderating the failed "War on Drugs" despite popular opinion and medical research.

Further, the basis for the Drug War, at least in regards to marijuana, stands on shakier and shakier ground while having seriously detrimental effects that few will acknowledge. In addition to the fact that the continued prohibition of marijuana somewhat indirectly fills the coffers of cartels south of the border, financing the very horrific violence that talking heads in the US love to rail against, arrests for marijuana possession have outpaced arrests for violent crimes since the mid-2000s. Though there is not a one to one correlation since there are likely many more people prone to smoking weed than those prone to committing violent acts, the numbers still seem to present a shocking misuse of resources. There should not be prisons filled to the brim when many of the offenders are there for possession of marijuana.

Hope springs eternal for your author (a Knicks and Mets fan after all), however, and it does seem like the winds of change may be beginning to blow he said hopefully and unsuredly. Patrick Leahy, Chariman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has already requested guidance in regards to legalization of marijuana in Colorado and Washington. President Obama, after his re-election, did state that prosecuting recreational marijuana smokers in states that had legalized marijuana would not be high on his administrations list of priorities while not formally, or expressly, addressing Senator Leahy's request for clarification. This is interesting because he is explicitly stating that officers in the War on Drugs would not go after users while still not supporting legalization and not mentioning anything about the companies and shops that would form the infrastructure of legal marijuana in those states. The situation was similar in California where the DEA did not go after users but would still harass the growers and distributors, the affects of which would then trickle down to the users. Further, his comment "I just want to discourage drug use" seems remarkably similar to DEA chief Leonhart's position of a drug is a drug when pressed to admit that marijuana was a lesser drug than heroin. Congress, however, could still make an end run around the President, as POTUS admits when stating that he must enforce the laws as is, by changing the current federal laws.

Progress has been made on that front, albeit haltingly. The Ending Federal Marijuana Prohibition Act, introduced by representative Jared Polis, would decriminalize marijuana on the federal level and then take allow the various states decide how they would like to approach marijuana. Taking the states rights approach would deal with the pre-emption problem but would, admittedly, cause additional issues between states that legalized being adjacent to those that had not. This, however, could seemingly be addressed on the state level as well with related laws and regulations. Moreover, and probably more importantly, the D.C. US Court of Appeals recently ruled against moving marijuana from a Schedule 1 drug in Americans for Safe Access', a medical marijuana advocacy group, case against the DEA. The court deferred to the DEA's claim that there was a dearth of proper scientific studies stating that marijuana could be used for medicinal purposes and stated that Americans for Safe Access ("ASA") did not have standing as they did not really "suffer an injury-in-fact;" a.k.a. were not, directly, adversely affected by the regulation. The ASA, however, plans to file an appeal in conjunction with the Veterans for Medical Marijuana, who can show a more directly show the adverse effect the regulation is having on members of their group with the hope of taking the issue before the Supreme Court. Although there are no guarantees the Supreme Court would even hear such a case, an appeal to the highest Court in the land could at least give the issue more press than it is currently. Finally, in an indication of just how far the issues has moved in the past decade, recent articles in reputable publications, and I do not mean High Times, have begin to discuss the logistics of legalization of marijuana. A Bloomberg View op-ed last week advocated for clearer warnings on marijuana to be sold so that there is a properly informed consumer. Such labels would offer warnings on operating machinery after consumption, that it is only to be sold to those of a legal age, and a gradation on the potency of the strain similar to the proofing of alcohol. In the same vein, Time magazine considered what the proper level of taxation would be for legal marijuana with the balancing test being that a new income stream through taxation has been offered by proponents of legalization as why it should occur in certain states but too high a level of taxation will foster a black market that will undercut some of the benefits of legalization. These are important questions to consider for Colorado and Washington as they move forward as those two states are currently, whether they like it or not, operating as test cases for the rest of the nation. If the experiments are successful, other states will most likely jump into the legalization fray. And, much like gay marriage, the more states that legalize the more likely that things are to change on the federal level.

Before we get there though, can we all just agree that this classification of marijuana as a schedule 1 drug is absolute bullshit? As a nation, lets collectively see how Washington and Colorado make out and then the 48 remaining states can make a decision on full legalization. But cracking down on medical marijuana, with all the good it does, is insane. As great as it would be if President Obama was true to his word and backed off enforcement, the reclassification of medical marijuana needs to happen now so that this is an issue that neither he nor the rest of us have to worry about. Make medical marijuana, at least, legally on the federal level and the enforcement part will work itself out.


VIDEO: Bob Marley's "Legalize it" from da YouTube.com

Welcome to your Future Lakers Fans...

Now, I know you, as a collective, have recently suffered tragedy with the passing of Dr. Buss and I apologize in advance if I am being overly harsh or insensitive. But, with that being said, please look at the image above and gaze into your future. Speaking from vast and horrifying experience, there is nothing worse than having someone who was born on third thinking they hit as triple as your owner. Especially when they think they are qualified to make basketball decisions. Especially when they also have too big of an ego to learn from previous mistake and take criticism from the press as personal challenges. The bad news for you, Lakers faithful, is that Jim Buss bears much more than a passing resemblance to Jimmy Dolan. In fact, they are bi coastal brothers from different mothers. Both were handed the reins to seminal sports franchises from their fathers and will do what they want with their toys. I am sad to report, however, that your situation may even be more dire. See, all I have ever really known is the horrors of Dolan and, therefore, things can only look up. I feel particularly bad for you, Jack Q. LakerFan, because you have been to the promised land. Dr. Buss was one of the best owners in the league and, thus and much to my chagrin, LA has consistently put on of the best products out on the hardwood year in and year out. Not very surprisingly, as Dr. Buss got sick and, I assume as I can claim no direct knowledge, more of the team operations fell to Jim (on the team side) and Jeanie (on the business side), the on the court product began to deteriorate. I respect the fact that Jim has, at the request of his father, been trying to train on the job under the wings of Jerry West, Mitch Kupchak, et al., for about 15 years but the fact is his previous sports related endeavor was as trainer of thoroughbred horses. Hopefully (for you, not me... I wouldn't mind the Lakers tasting some of my pain for awhile), Jim gets his act together, stops feuding with his sister (reportedly), and not make decisions on coaches for selfish reasons (as suggested by talking heads) but I wouldn't necessarily count on it.

A word to the wise from a man who's been there, if he starts a band as a side gig... get out. Just get the hell outta there right away. I hear there is another nice team in LA and you wouldn't even have to move stadiums. Trust me on this.


IMAGE: BusinessInsider.com via Google Images

Preventing the Grand Old Party Name from Becoming TOO Literal: A Guide to Winning Coastal Millennials

Andrew Sullivan (who we congratulate on his new business model, btw) recently posted his take on House of Commons approving gay marriage, by a very wide margin, opening the door for legalization once it passes the House of Lords. He quoted a Tory MP (equivalent of a House Republican... sorry Brits not meant as an insult) taking a slight dig at the GOP:

“I believe my party should never flinch from the requirement that we must continue this progression, otherwise we may end up like the Republican party who lost an election last year that they could have won were it not for their socially conservative agenda.”

This warning rings true and should act as a red flag for the Republican party over here. As pointed out by John Stewart last night (I'm too busy/lazy to get the link right now, so just check it out), the GOP's growing demographic problem, despite GOP operator's protestations, is not really due to a problem with "messaging." The issue is that for most people under the age of, say, 40, the policy views and prescriptions behind the messages are terrible. The ill advised concentration on social issues and the general refusal to get on the right side of history, which is partially illustrated by the above quote, is a large part of the problem.

Many coastal millennials mentioned in the title would be amenable to the GOP's economic messaging (I personally think that Reagonomics/supply side economics is demonstrably bullshit but perhaps the government could use a bit of shrinking), especially since those from NYC, San Fran, Boston, Portland, Seattle, DC, etc., are more likely to have a higher income and thus higher taxes. The problem is that most also do not give a rat's ass about or are vehemently against preventing gay marriage, limiting access to birth control, outlawing abortions, the necessity of prayer in the public square or making sure religious associated institutions do not have to pay for health care that gives out the pill for free, preventing immigration, the sacrosanct nature of the right to bear any and all guns, no matter what, praise be the Christian god, and the prohibition of marijuana, even for medicinal purposes. Retaining negative positions on many of these social issues will ensure that the GOP is not considered by younger generations of voters. 

This, of course, can be discounted as unimportant by many in the GOP as making changes on social issues will alienate current, older voters, thus harming the party brand in the short term for an unsure outcome in the long term. Although undoubtedly true, it is hard to see what other options they have. The older guard are and will continue to die out and, unless they can replenish the ranks from younger generations, so will the party itself. Further, the millennials in the Republican thought incubators today will be the future intellectual leaders going forward. At the very least, Republicans should be hoping for a small schism in the party so that there is a group that they can discount in the near term while quietly encouraging them for the long term. Y'know... like the Tea Party but the exact opposite (more akin to CMB and YM as YMCMB with Young Money now not so slowly taking over).

A legit multi-party system is more interesting and is what the founders intended for this country; here's to hoping the GOP can re-establish more of the Grandeur by losing some of the Old.

IMAGE: James O'Keefe, Republican operative, from politicsafter50.blogspot.com via Google Images (he's clearly not a millennial I am talking about).

Legal Jargon on the Targeted Killing of US Citizens Abroad

Not the most eye catching or inventive of post titles, but what are you going to do? NBC news published a Department of Justice memo on the killing of US citizens who are in leadership roles in Al Qa'ida (sic) and associated groups. The memo does contain some limitations on when such an act can take place; the most limiting of which is the fact that seemingly only high ranking members of Al Qa'ida actively engaged in the planning of imminent terrorist attacks against the United States of America. The memo, however, uses a rather tortured (definitely no pun intended) explanation on the definition of imminent. Essentially, because Al Qa'ida can attack at any moment, if you qualify as an operation leader engaged in the planning of attacks then it is assumed that the attacks you are planning are imminent. Further, if you have renounced your ways as an operational leader actively planning terrorist attacks against the United States which will automatically assumed to be imminent, you better do so publicly or the U.S. government will continue to consider you as a threat that can be Constitutionally eliminated without evidence to the contrary.

The memo disposed of the 4th and 5th Amendment concerns with balancing the 4th Amendment intrusion v. the reasonableness of the government action and a Matthews v. Eldridge balancing, where the required due process is determined by weighing the importance of the interest at stake and the benefits of additional safeguards through due process against the government's interest, respectively. The memo quickly argues for the government's side of the scale on the balance because of the interest in preventing an "imminent" terrorist attack that could lead to the loss of many American lives. The ole take out one to save many logic. I have no problems with such drone attacks against citizens who decide to join Al Qa'ida and are involved in the planning of attacks, but the legal reasoning seems to be a bit iffy. The definition of imminent certainly seems overly broad and although the government interest in both the 4th and 5th Amendment balances is incredibly strong, so is the concern in the intrusion brought by the loss of life and the interest in staying alive that is at stake. The Due Process argument seems particularly weak as one could easily see a situation where additional due process considerations, such as a private hearing with a military judge in a FISA Court type setting, could be beneficial in making sure everything is kosher.

Lastly, because it is only addressed in passing, determinations on the acceptable amount of collateral damage (i.e., deaths of civilians near the target) are still opaque and this is, of course, also worrisome. While few have too many issues with how the targeted drone strikes have been used so far when it comes to American citizens, the general opacity with how these decisions will be made in the future (since the DoJ deems such actions legal) is disconcerting in general. Considering the last administration's refusal to re-evaluate any of it's actions, including the disastrous war in Iraq and the culture of torture that stained this country, there is no telling how a future administration would use the green light this memo presents. The decisions of who is a proper target for a strike, what an acceptable amount of collateral damage is (Homeland anyone?) and what is considered imminent will all be concentrated amongst a limited amount of people set in an insular group with little threat of second guessing by any other authorities. Recent history suggests that such a setting can lead to disaster. I understand the DoJ's memo and hope for the best, but I will hardly be surprised by the worst if and when it occurs in the future.

IMAGE: scrapetv.com via Google Images

The Curious Case of Kobe the Facilitator

There are few things more hilarious to me in the world of sports than analysts and commentators heaping praise on a player/coach/owner/general sports figure for doing something they should have been doing for a long, long time. The most recent case, these past few days, has been the overabundance of acclaim that Kobe "Bean Black Mamba (self-given TM)" Bryant has been given for actually dropping some dimes and acting like a facilitator in the Lakers current 3 game winning streak.

Kobe is an all time great, but passing has never really been his forte. Unlike the innumerable horde of KobeKoolaide (trademark pending) drinkers, I always thought this to be a flaw in his game and, especially when he was younger, indicative of a selfish, I will get my numbers regardless, mindset. I applaud the fact that he is now looking to get his team more involved and is shooting less attempts per game, but why are people acting like this is some great revelation that he should be praised for. One would think that Kobe would have been taught in his second grade rec league that a double or triple team means that there is at least one player wide open and the ball should be passed to such an unmarked man. The math here is not all that hard. When Kobe has less than 20 shot attempts in a game, the Lakers tend to win and that has been the trend in the last 3 games where Kobe has had over 10 assists and less than 15 field goal attempts in each. This trend, however, has been present for the entire season. Of the 20 Lakers wins, 14 have come when he has shot less than 20 times per game (70% of their wins) and only 6 have come when he has attempted 20+ field goals. Considering the starting depth of their team with Steve Nash, Pau Gasol and Dwight Howard, this is not at all surprising. Kobe should absolutely not be shooting over 20 attempts a game with all the other all-star caliber players requiring touches.

While it's great that Kobe is coming around to a team first mentality, and considering the Lakers current sub-.500 record, perhaps analysts should probably be screaming "FINALLY" rather than throwing acclaim at the new and improved Facilitator Model Kobe.


IMAGE: via BleacherReport.com