Tejada Gone

Finally, something to be happy about. Miguel Tejada has been traded to the astros for a whole bunch of young guys. Don't listen to Roch, this is a great trade. Tejada is only going to get worse as he ages. It will be error central in Houston at SS, and the Stros will be lucky if Tejada bests his 18 HR from 2007. Both Camden and Minute Maid Park (hahahah, formerly ENRON park) are hitter's parks, but the fact remains that Tejada has been in decline for the past two years.

While Luke Scott and Troy Patton are the "names" being focused on, check this kid out:

Dennis Sarfate, RHP
Age: 26

• Career numbers: 1-0, 2.70 ERA in 16 2/3 innings as a reliever. He's struck out 25 and walked five.

• Appeared in seven games last season, going 1-0 with a 1.08 ERA. He struck out 14 and walked one in 8 1/3 innings.

• Was drafted in the ninth round of the 2001 amateur draft by the Milwaukee Brewers.
I like the look of those numbers, and our bullpen needs all the help it can get. This trade follows McPhail's plan of making the team younger and cheaper. If he can move Mora for some more prospects like this, and then Bedard for a solid bat or two, I will be thoroughly impressed.


Brian Griffith's Bravado has Reached Epic Levels

Are we in Jr. High Brian? Are you going to give a me purple-nurple and take my lunch money? Maybe give me a wedgie or throw some spitballs? While debating a conservative parody might be interesting, I think I will take a pass.

I mean, you got what you wanted already, right? You got to humiliate several people you have never met. Readers of this blog are familiar with conservative wet dreams of liberal humiliation. I would appreciate if you would LEAVE ME OUT OF YOURS in the future.


Rock vs. Powder

A baby step towards undoing decades of horrible drug policy.

GOP: The Party for the "Working Class"

A ridiculous claim to be sure. As an Urban Liberal who makes less than $30,000 a year (part of the "working class" I suppose) I disagree. And seeing as the argument on both sides of this issue is purely semantic and drawn from partisan interpretations of what "the working class wants/needs", I suppose my argument and the "proof" is as good as any.

So, which party has helped the working man more? The right answer is neither. Both parties play to the interests of the rich first, the middle class next, and the poor in the end. This is a Democrat saying this.

So when a Democrat like Hillary of Dodd (Mr. Big Banking) says they are for the working class, I roll my eyes. But when Romney tries to say the same, its hard to keep from laughing.

Basically, no one has a claim to the votes of the working class. Democrats have a tenuous one, one that could be strengthened if they would stand up to their backers. Republicans have a much longer road to travel to win back workers. Of course, Republicans will always attract the racists, the gun nuts, the fag-bashers, etc. and be able to claim a large amount of white, male, working class votes. But believe me, it ain't for economics.

Ok Mark & Brian, commence the jiggling.