John McCain's campaign almost died last year because of one word: Immigration. Being from a border state, Sen. McCain understands that building a fence or becoming more bellicose does not stop illegal immigration, it just forces it even further underground. And he understands that the US economy will not continue to grow without inexpensive labor from overseas. Or at least he understood it up until he got the nomination.

However, we baseball fans are in a particularly excellent position to understand immigration and its positive effects. Without immigration (illegal or otherwise), we would not see the game the way that it is played today.

Seriously, can you imagine basbeball without Johan Santana, Miguel Cabrera, Victor Martinez and Carlos Zambrano? Well, with current immigration policy towards Venezuela, you might have to. We're lucky that these players made it in to the US before the clampdown but who knows what future A-Rod or K-Rod is being held up because they don't have their papers together in exactly the order required or because they can't get an interview due to new regulations.

Now, you'd have to be daft to say that immigration is not a very real issue that demands tough solutions. But you'd have to be just as daft to say that shutting down the border and scaling back immigration even further will improve the situation or help the US in general.

This is an idea still in its infancy but if the US can use baseball to help with its diplomatic relations, sending big league baseball stars to other countries to talk about the US, why can't it use baseball in the other direction, to help the American people understand the positive effects of immigration?

-A

Mr. Lung,

It was with dismay that I read your last couple entries on our shared blog. So, now we're critiquing based on typos? See, I was under the (obviously misguided) impression that this was supposed to be a substantive debate about baseball, politics and how the two relate.

However, despite my sorrow and confusion, I refuse to yield to the divisive forces that seek to tear us apart. Instead, I take a lesson from our good friend and future president, Barack Obama, and say that what draws us together is stronger than what pulls us apart. That instead of being drawn into the blogging of yesterday, I yearn for a new blogging, a blogging of unity.

Mr. Lung, I reject and denounce your efforts to tear us apart. I reject and denounce your pointing out of my typo. And I reject and denounce future uses of similarly divisive techniques. I say to you: Mr Lung, Tear Down This Wall!

Sincerely,

Mr. Krause

P.S. The Cardinals suck.

By Noah Fence, Associated Press

CHICAGO/WASHINGTON D.C. -- In a surprise Red State Blue State revelation, a campaign aide (a guy named Madelyn) says Allen Krause lent himself $6.40 in the past month.

Politically wounded and financially strapped, Krause recently plunged back into the RSBS debate against his longtime foe: the superiorly intelligent, charismatic, rising baseball-blogger-star Jeffery Lung.  This surge comes after a long hiatus where Krause did nothing but sit back and take a vicious verbal beating.  Facing tough decisions like whether he should pay the rent or pay a ghost writer for his questionable posts, Krause decided it was finally time to dip into the old savings account for the much needed six dollars and forty cents.

The loan more than doubles what he has contributed thus far.

And it's not really working.

Though his affiliation with the Detroit Tigers is unwavering, his dignity and reputation haven't been so lucky.  Outsmarted, outwitted and outwritten in his public arguments against Jeff Lung, it is evident that not only does Lung carry the baseball message of hope into the streets, he carries it around the globe.

"Wo hen xihuan Long Jiefu.  Ta hao bang, hen congming.  Yinwei you ta, suoyi wo ai kan bangqiu a!" said Chinese Minister of Defense General Liang Guanglie after reading every single RSBS post after a busy morning of war games.

"Lung's is a message of hope - of striving to be better, of caring for your fellow man.  It's a message that made me say 'forget pitching, let me hit and patrol centerfield'" said St. Louis Cardinal Rick Ankiel after a star-studded performance of his own on Tuesday night.

Meanwhile, Krause's lack of determination and point of view remain hindering no matter how much money he loans himself.

"Right now, that guy [Krause] gives us a bad name.  We got a monkey on our backs.  We can't win.  We can't hit.  And that guy [Krause] ain't helpin' the cause here.  Get that **** outta my face," said Tigers manager Jim Leyland.

Though we tried to contact Krause headquarters for comment, that guy named Madelyn said he was locked in a bathroom busy putting his foot in his mouth.  

Let me try to understand this hifalutin statement:

"When it comes down to it, sports exist to entertain the masses and it is the masses that decide what they want. This leads to inevitable conflict between the strict constructionists (people like you) and the reformers (people who wear pink hats)."
--Allen Krause, The Filibuster, May 4, 2008

When Allen says, "people like you", he's referring to people like me -- smart, charming, extremely good-looking, etc.  Apparently, I must remind everyone that I am the brains of Red State Blue State, strict constructionist or not, and this statement is just the sort of blatant, pretentious animosity that gets slung around Washington in order to hide an individual's own errant shortcomings.  

Allen's mishaps, misspeaks and misappropriations are far too many to document here; I will save you from another verbal sparring match and just inform you that, in his last post, he both favored and opposed the DH rule, thus proving his inability to lead and his tendency to flip-flop.  It's not the first time this has happened.  Click here to see when he became a Nats fan and click here to read my story of how he was once a Cubs fan.

And while these bouncy sentiments are disturbing, nothing is more disturbing than Mr. Krause's hinting that a game requiring more thinking skills and more management fineness (ie NL style baseball) would be less entertaining than the alternative: a slimy attempt to make more money (ie AL style baseball).  In defending his argument, Allen used the analogy of basketball by contemplating how boring it would be if it hadn't changed from Dr. Naismith's original rules (which did not include a shot-clock, three pointers, etc.). 

Well, Al, I don't know.  Are you belittling the intelligence of the masses by saying we can't appreciate a thinking man's sport?  That we have to see non-stop scoring throughout to be entertained, to be drawn in, to be a fan? 

Let's analyze this from the point of view of the world's most popular sport: soccer (football for you non-US Americans).  Do you think soccer has suffered much from being a low scoring, highly intellectualized sport of refined athletic ability?  Though I can't call myself a huge soccer fan, I can attest to being extremely entertained and very involved even during nil-nil matches.  And the masses seem to be liking it just fine the way it is.  In fact, the masses would sooner beat you to do death than allow you to instigate a Designated Striker rule: every time the regular striker crosses midfield, the well-rested Designated Striker sprints in and attacks without abandon, thus creating a better chance to score.  Yeah, I'd like to see you try it. 

And don't forget, the masses had nothing to do with implementing the DH rule in the first place.  No, it was a decision made by 8 crusty, old rich men (spearheaded by Charlie O. Finley) who wanted to put more money in their pockets.  Well, they did, and in the process they also took away a fundamental right of all baseball players -- the right to hit.  If you ever want to know how devastating that decision was on American League pitchers, read Spaceman Bill Lee's book.  It forced him to do drugs and get traded to Montreal, which was so bad that he had to do more drugs until he just settled for barnstorming the globe... and doing drugs.

Is the American League more entertaining than the National League?  Calculating for my natural bias, the answer is still no.  It's not.  It's a different game and I don't like it as much as I do the alternative, purer form.

But what do I know?  According to you, Al, I'm just a "strict constructionist", which would either make me a supreme court justice or just a simple legal philosopher.  I'm not quite sure which of those career paths suits me best, but I know one thing for sure: you shouldn't be a spelling teacher:

"If you aren't convinced, maybe you should take a look at what Scalia, Cheney and their merry band of strict constructionists have done to the Consitution." [my emphasis]
--Allen Krause, The Filibuster, May 4, 2008

As a liberal, free-thinking man with myriad bounties, it's hard for me to swallow you comparing me to the Milo Minderbinder of our time, Dick Cheney, but it's even harder for me to accept that you don't know how to spell "constitution".

Don't hate me 'cuz I'm right.

Peace,

Jeffy

PS, Don't hate me cuz I was right in my Cardinals/Cubs prediction either.  Better get used to it.

"As much as you dislike the National League, its purer rules have provided an abundance of drama this week as pitchers have been coming through at the plate: Micah Owings' game-tying homerun versus the Astros, Carlos Zambrano's opposite field shot at Wrigley and the Cincinnati Reds couldn't get former pitcher Rick Ankiel out to save their lives.  It's late in the game, your bench is empty, but you need a clutch at-bat from one of your pitchers.  Who do you send to the dish and why?"

--Jeff
                                                                                        

I actually think that this is a great question and it's something I was thinking about earlier this week while I was looking at the recap of Owings' heroics. As much as I talk about the American League being superior to the NL, I do like the analytical aspect of having the pitcher bat. It makes the role of the manager much more important and allows for more creativity.

However, I think this question also leads to some other interesting facets of the game because it's interesting to see how pitchers react when they switch leagues. For instance, Johan Santana is not someone you think of as a hitter but that's because he's spent his entire career until now in the AL. But, when you look at his numbers in the few games he played interleague, he didn't acquit himself all that terribly. So, the Mets, in addition to getting one of the best pitchers in the game, also picked up a guy who's not a total liability in the nine-hole. That's a huge advantage to any team.

Now, I'm not saying that I'd send Santana up to bat at the end of the game when I need some clutch hitting but it's nice to get a little more than you bargained for. And let's be honest here, at this point in the season, I'd say it's a pretty easy decision that the guy you'd love to have available is Micah Owings. I mean, the guy is just a hell of a good hitter no matter how you look at it. Zambrano has his upsides and Rick Ankiel is a good story but Ankiel is a position player now so he doesn't really count. And I'd say that Zambrano and Owings are the only two pitchers I'd ever feel comfortable sending to the plate when I really need to get something going.

Having said all that, I have to take exception to your initial premise that the NL is more pure. Like all sports, baseball has evolved over time and the DH is merely one more step in that evolution. You could easily argue that basketball is much less pure because they introduced the three point line and the shot clock. I mean, if it was still the same way Naismith wanted it, games would end 12-6 and you'd be bored out of your head. When it comes down to it, sports exist to entertain the masses and it is the masses that decide what they want. This leads to inevitable conflict between the strict constructionists (people like you) and the reformers (people who wear pink hats). So, perhaps "pure" is the correct term after all but pure does not always equate to "better."  If you aren't convinced, maybe you should take a look at what Scalia, Cheney and their merry band of strict constructionists have done to the Consitution.

-A

In case you missed Skip Schumaker's walk-off homerun to beat the Cubbies in Game 1 last night, you can see that here.

In case you missed the last 100 years of baseball on the Northside, please enjoy this musical interlude below.  It pretty much sums it all up.

Don't hate me 'cuz I'm right.

Peace,

Jeffy

Yesterday Barbara Walters came out and admitted to having a long-time affair with former U.S. Senator Edward Brooke.  It only took her 30 years to disclose, which makes the story that less exciting, but hey, she had a reputation to uphold.  Now that no one cares about her anymore, I see her confession as a very smart move.  There is no such thing as bad press...

Unless you're Roger Clemens.  As if using performance-enhancing drugs to get an edge and then lying to a federal grand jury wasn't enough, it has now become known that Clemens probably had a predatory affair with a 15-year-old girl.  But wait, there's more: infamous golfer John Daly's ex-wife, Paulette, is now accused of have having an affair with Roger too!  Yikes!  Drunks, cheaters and hot-heads, boy, that Paulette sure knows how to pick 'em!  Coincidentally, my mother called me this afternoon to report that she too had an affair with Roger Clemens; but she was quick to point out that she ended the relationship shortly after he said "Your son throws like a girl.  Let's shoot him up."

Thanks, Mom.

So all this truth-telling has moved me to disclose my dirty little secret too.  I'm not proud of it; but it's time to come clean.  A few years ago, when I was at very low point in my life, I had a promiscuous relationship with a mouse.  Yes, a mouse.  We had a love child, and though I haven't seen him since he was born, I keep track of all of his accomplishments through the newspaper.  Here's the only picture I have of him.  No matter what distance is between us, I will always love him.  He's so cute.  I think he has my ear.



And if this isn't enough honest drama for you, the Cardinals v. Cubs series kicks off tonight.  Though the managerial matchup of LaRussa v. Piniella is not as fiery and bound for mischief as LaRussa v. Baker, remember, LaRussa and Piniella have some history too.  Who doesn't remember the 1990 World Series?

Oh.  No one remembers it.  That's right.

Nevermind.

In any case, the Cards win this series AND the respect of ESPN.  Okay, maybe only the first part is true, but you know what I mean.

Just don't hate me 'cuz I'm right.

Peace,

Jeffy

Yes, the sky is falling.  Pitcher Micah Owings pinch-hit a dramatic, game-tying homerun; Reverend Wright seems determined to ruin his own agenda and the agenda of Hope politicians en masse; Ronny Cedeno joined Ryan Dempster in predicting a World Series appearance for the sCrUBS; Hillary is still in the race; Roger Clemens can't get away from his tainted past; Bill O'Reilly is still on the air; the Cardinals -- winners of an NL best 10 World Series championships -- have won more games in April (18) than they have in any season previous and the media still ignores them; I have watched An Inconvenient Truth five times this week; Albert Pujols has reached base in every game so far this season -- every game; and my MLBlog partner Allen Krause -- a future ambassador for US Americans to the world -- wrote something that the most seasoned grammarian could not even begin to understand: 

"The closest thing I could come up with is that the enemy of the enemy of my friend is my friend. But, that's a pretty tenuous connection."
-- The Enemy of the Enemy of My Friend? April 29, 2008

Tenuous?  Maybe, if we could understand it.  Enemy of the enemy of my friend?  You were watching a Cubs/Nats game.  There was only one enemy (Cubs) of your friend (Me).  The enemy of the enemy of your friend would be the Cardinals?  But they weren't even playing.  The enemy of the enemy of your friend is your friend?  Is this the type of head-spinning verbal ping-pongy misspeak my taxes are paying to teach you?  Just for that, they should give me a $600 refund every year.

So since you brought it up, Al (or at least it I think you did), let me talk about the Cubs for a second.  Please know that my purpose is not to turn Red State Blue State into an all-out Cub-bashing forum.  I am smart enough (see Fulbright Scholar for more info) to realize that the Cubs have put together a solid team this year.  But for Sports Illustrated editors to plaster "It's Gonna Happen" on the cover and a tag line that says: "Fukudome can end the 100-year wait"? 

Excuse me while I go puke.

Fukudome can do it?  Really?  All by himself?  He's the key?  Really?  What about shoddy defense and crappy pitching?  That's what usually loses it for the Cubs.  They've been fielding big bats for a long time.  Lee, Ramirez, Soriano.  How is Fukudome going to come in and save a bullpen infamous for choking late in the game?  How is Fukudome going to stop some guy in the left field line seats from going for a foul-ball?  How will he then stop the lynching by drunken crazies?  Fukudome isn't the answer and he never has been. 

And oh yeah, we're only at the end of April, and the Cubs aren't the best team in baseball right now so let's start talking about them winning a World Series already.  Yeah, that'd be prudent.  Put it on the front page of a sports authority magazine and PRINT IT! 

Unbelievable.

Even more unbelievable is the fact that Chicago Tribune writer Rick Morrissey finally acknowledged that Cub fans might just be as obnoxious as everyone knows they are in this titillating article.  My favorite part is where Morrissey says: "It's not always the family atmosphere the organization says it seeks."

Really?  You mean cornering a guy wearing the opposing team's jersey in the bathroom and bashing his head on a urinal isn't what the organization seeks?  You mean Cub fans jumping the wall to attack their own pitchers isn't desirable?  What about throwing beer bottles at right fielders?  Is that conducive to a family environment?  Thank the gods someone in Chicago (other than me -- who can admittedly be a bit overbearing at times) recognizes the ridiculous frat party that Wrigleyville becomes during games.  I mean, these are the same family-focussed folks who brought us the "Cuck the Fardinals" t-shirts that show a Cubby bear performing sodomy on a redbird as well as the more recent Fukudome shirts that present a slant eyed Cubby bear donning Haray Caray glasses shouting "Horry Kow".  Wow.  What a nice way to welcome the man who you say is going to "end the 100-year wait". 

Yes.  Nothing says 'I love you' like racism. 

Don't hate me 'cuz I'm right.  Especially on this one.

Peace,

Jeffy

Sunday afternoon I had my first opportunity to hit the ballpark, soak up some rays, drink a few beers and enjoy watching the Nats as they entertained the visiting Cubs. However, as they say, sometimes the best laid plans of mice and men.....

Turns out that after a week of ridiculous heat and asthma inducing humidity, the weather gods decided to turn things on their head a little bit and go more for the mid-50's with mist sort of atmosphere. And I'm not going to lie. When you're sitting in the upper upper deck, way out in left field and that wind starts to blow off the Potomac, it ain't pretty. And it wasn't. But, I'm a trooper so I got decked out in my Sunday finest and headed for Nationals Park.

What can I say? It's a new-fangled ballpark. They serve mixed drinks, they have Ben's Chili Bowl and the seats aren't too nasty yet. The game was a close-fought contest and the Nats prevailed. There were a couple of spectacular plays by Reed Johnson of the Cubs in centerfield and Ryan Zimmerman of the Nats at third.

But in the end, although I love visiting new parks, there's really only one place that I consider home when it comes to watching baseball: Comerica Park. And yes, I know it's new and I know it replaced Tiger's Stadium which was a classic old ballpark. But you know what? When it comes to the Tigers, I don't think they can do any wrong. This is a team that made me accept Gary Sheffield as one of our own despite the fact that I still picture him in Yankee pinstripes. And I just don't have anything close to that affinity for either the Cubs or the Nats. The closest thing I could come up with is that the enemy of the enemy of my friend is my friend. But, that's a pretty tenuous connection.

So, as it stands, I'm just going to have to sit tight and enjoy baseball as I can. But don't worry. The Tigers come to Baltimore in July and I haven't been to Camden Yards yet. The Olde English "D" will be flying free in the Chesapeake Bay breezes. Of that you can be sure.

-A

Poor Barry Zito.  People are really tearing him apart -- as is expected because he has been awful -- but sometimes the human in me can't help but empathize.  Despite my sympathies, Bochy's plan is to yank him from the rotation and send him to the bullpen so he can 'work things out'.

If I'm Barry Zito, I'm loving this. 

How great would it be if I went to work tomorrow and my boss said: "Jeff, you're doing a lousy job, so we're going to allow you to not work so hard, lighten your stress, workload, etc. so you only have to work every couple of days or so in non-pressure situations.  Oh, and don't worry, we'll still pay you the salary you get paid now."

Eureka!  Sign me up, Boss!  I'll show up and sit on my ^ss for the first two thirds of the work day, practice making shaving cream pies and chew on sunflower seeds.  Just holler when you need me and make sure that the money is still in the bank. 

Yes, I'm being silly.  I know that Zito probably hates Zito's performance more than anyone else ever could.  But honestly, I wish things were so "awful" in my life that I got a guaranteed 100 million dollars coming my way whether I do good work ever again or not. 

Though I previously alluded to a theory that Zito's poor performance is perhaps rooted in his propensity for courting high-profile, high-maintenance divas, I am beginning to wonder if this isn't just another deserved consequence of dealing with the Devil himself (in this case, the Devil is Scott Boras, not Ann Coulter, though she is still the Devil too).  Seven years and $126 million?  That's a lot of dough.  Yet Major League teams are still willing to take on (and pay for) the inherent risks associated with any Scott Boras deal.  The J.D. Drews, Adrian Beltres and Carlos Beltrans of the world have been laughing all the way to the bank while not really living up to expectations, or their contracts.  So it seems that Zito may just be another chapter in this ongoing saga of moral quandaries teams face when dealing with the Devil.  I wonder if Boras represents Chinese speaking white dudes with an affinity for Asian antiquities?

On a lighter note, to quell the idea that I am a blatant misogynist proposed by a recent nameless commenter on a previous post, let me just say that, for me, it was hard not to notice that Zito's troubles started shortly after his frolic with Lizzie McGuire.  I'm a guy.  I analyze.  That's what I do.  And, generally speaking, I'm arrogant, but not rude.  I love my mother and enjoy spraying women's perfume in department stores when no one is looking.  So sue me.    

To prove that I am indeed a fun-filled philogynist at heart, I have included some lovely pictures of Barry's most famously attractive paramours.  It's hard to argue with beauty -- or attitude.
















While it's great fun and all, looking at these pretty ladies forces me to face a moral quandary of my own; therefore, I will say goodbye, for now, so I can come to terms with the situation.  In the meantime, please don't hate me 'cuz I'm right.

Peace,

Jeffy