Will McNabb defend Shanahan against racism talk?

Will quarterback Donovan McNabb step forward and squash the preposterous suggestion that his white coach benched him because he is black?

Or will he say nothing and let race infect this overblown drama and sully the reputation of Mike Shanahan?

History points to McNabb saying nothing. Years ago, early in McNabb’s career, Rush Limbaugh said the quarterback’s skills were overrated by many sports media. He was accused of racism and fired by ESPN. Limbaugh is not a racist, but McNabb – to my knowledge – let the insidious charge fester.

Shanahan benched McNabb with about two minutes left in the Lions game. McNabb was not playing well and had just thrown an interception. Shanahan, a good coach with a solid reputation and two Super Bowl rings, was hired to win games. He said he thought back-up Rex Grossman might run the hurry-up offense better than McNabb. Whether Shanahan’s judgment was right or wrong, his rationale was to win the game.

Shanahan has been second-guessed and berated for two weeks. It was inevitable that the chatter among some talk show blowhards and sports columnists would descend to race. Columnist Mike Wise wrote that although Shanahan’s decision to bench McNabb was “most likely” to help the team, the coach should be more sensitive to the Redskins alleged dubious history with some black players. He rambles on about Doug Williams, Jason Campbell, Bobby Mitchell – all black players for the Redskins – but gives no concrete examples of racism. Wise appears to have chosen just another angle to milk the story, to gain more readers and listeners.

Mike Shanahan has played with and coached black players for decades. To my knowledge he has never expressed nor demonstrated racism. It’s not his job to be preoccupied with the racial history of the Redskins or any franchise – his job is to win football games.

I am a New York Giants fan. When McNabb played for the Philadelphia Eagles and the Eagles and Giants played twice a year and often in the playoffs, I saw many of these games. At best, McNabb is a good quarterback. He has never been a great quarterback, never among the game’s top tier: Montana, Elway, Aikman, Brady and many others.

With the Redskins, McNabb has not even been good. His stats and rating this season are not impressive. But he is well-liked and Redskins fans have invested much faith in him. They were crestfallen when he was benched, but he was benched for performance reasons, not because he is black.

Will McNabb defend his coach against this baseless, unfair charge? It’s the right thing to do, but history does not encourage optimism.

Be the first to post a comment about this entry! Billions wasted in earmarks as debt grows

Another reason why incumbents are in trouble:

Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS) has sponsored earmarks totaling $497,591,000 this year, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense. Earmarks are a senator’s “gifts” to key constituencies in his or her home state. Earmarks buy votes, which help get incumbents re-elected, which leads to more earmarks.

Earmarks are an abuse of power and a waste of taxpayer money. While some are cheap and harmless (expanding a library), many are costly and wrong (a bridge to no where). Cochran leads all senators in earmarks this year, followed by:

Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-HI): $392,432,850.
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS): $368,039,000.
Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV): $292,014,000.
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA): $267,589,200.

All figures come from Taxpayers for Common Sense.

“Everybody does it,” is the excuse to justify earmarks. And in the Senate, that’s pretty much true: 84 senators have each spent more than $50,000,000 in earmarks this year and among those, 49 have each exceeded $100,000,000, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.

But not every senator does it – eight senators have zero earmarks in 2010: Bayh (D-IN), Coburn (R-OK), DeMint (R-SC), Feingold (D-WI), Johanns (R-NE), LeMieux (R-FL), McCain (R-AZ) and McCaskill (D-MO), according to Taxpayers for Common Sense. In the House, only 43 representatives (too many to list here) out of 435 have zero earmarks so far in 2010.

Only these 51 incumbents (less than 10 percent of Congress) are not hypocrites – at least this year – since both Democrats and Republicans en masse decry earmarks while they perpetuate the practice. Both parties are guilty. Both parties shamelessly abuse their power.

Worse, the billions wasted is mostly borrowed money. Our national debt skyrockets as these reckless incumbents – seeking re-election above all else – add to the debt with earmarks. Our children are stuck with the bill – “generational theft” as Sen. McCain calls it.

Many Congressional incumbents deservedly will fall on election day. Let’s hope others are defeated next November. We can’t fire 500 members of Congress quickly, but they can all be fired in time. Their replacements had better heed the message: Show fiscal responsibility, or you too are out the door.

2 comments posted about this entry. Blame “environmentalists” for the Gulf disaster

Who’s most at fault for the sad disaster in the Gulf? Environmentalists.

A busted pipe is gushing oil 5,023 feet below the surface of the Gulf. Why? Common sense alone urges don’t drill this deep unless a quick solution to a possible seafloor breakdown is proven and in place.

Clearly there was no such plan. So this beautiful body of water is being despoiled, and all whose livelihoods, lifestyles and leisure activities it affects are hurting.

BP and federal government regulators are responsible for no reliable plan to quickly stem the oil flow from a mile-deep broken pipe. But environmentalists are to blame for the idiocy that leads to deep water drilling.

They also share blame for offshore drilling in the first place. Why do we drill for oil in the ocean? Isn’t it far less risky to drill for oil on land? But we can’t drill in much of Alaska and the West – where there is abundant oil and natural gas – because short-sighted environmentalists convince their foolish elected soul mates it’s not good for the environment.

They also stop us from drilling in the ocean closer to shore, even though these shallower waters allow for easier and faster calamity resolution. So BP and others are forced to drill deep, and we cross our fingers. And now the entire Gulf – and who knows what else – is in jeopardy.

Too bad the term “environmentalist” doesn’t refer to sensible people whose affection and respect for oceans and air and trees are as strong (or stronger) than anybody’s. Many of these people, and I count myself among them, don’t even think we should drill for oil in oceans until every possible opportunity to extract it far more safely from land is exhausted. And yes, the more isolated and barren and unpopulated those land operations, the better.

But unfortunately “environmentalist” connotes partisan, impractical, sometimes militant zealotry. And this stupidity tragically set the stage for what’s now happening deep in the Gulf: predictable bewildering failure responding to a predictable senseless accident resulting in widespread and unending pollution and heartache.

4 comments posted about this entry. Wrong again: Obama objects to Arizona’s immigration self-defense After the health care fiasco: Throw them all out $12,547,283,135,818: Where’s the outrage over our national debt? Unpresidential Obama shows unhealthy attitude toward Americans Does record snowfall prove humans are causing the earth to cool? The sticking accelerator pedal in Congress is far worse than Toyota’s Scott Brown beat Obama, Reid, Pelosi, big spending…and Coakley This time Haiti: Exceptional America to the rescue, again