Skip to main content

Obama's State of the Union vs. the GOP's Rebuttal (Mitch Daniels)

After watching President Obama's State of the Union Address and hearing Republican Mitch Daniels' rebuttal, I have to say, I think the Republicans better think of a different strategy if they want to capture the White House in November's election.

President Obama, for the most part, was illustrating that there's reason for hope and optimism in this country. All things considering, it was a rather positive speech, which I have to believe is how he will campaign in the run-up to the election. Daniels, meanwhile, painted a picture of doom and gloom for this country. It was a "Vote-for-us-or-face-Armageddon" type of picture.

Let's see here...which strategy, which outlook will be more attractive to voters? One of hope and optimism or one of doom and gloom? If Republicans continue with this negative strategy, Obama and the Democrats will likely be sitting pretty come November.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...