McCain At Sturgis

Yahoo News has an article that covers McCain's visit to Sturgis in SD. Saying that he got 'an approving roar' in the heartland. I think this is the silly season in the extreme- we haven't had the conventions yet and we don't know who the running mates are and so yeah, I think we're going to see some ups and downs for the Obama Campaign and for the McCain Campaign- they've both had their share of crappy weeks this summer and I think this one is no exception.

Lefties need to take a deep breath though: McCain was in South Dakota. Hardly the candidate for an important swing state and in fact, I'm willing to bet that the Democrats don't exactly carry a lot of bench strength there. But lefties also need to beware- Obama's shift on offshore oil means (and yes, I'd call it a shift. McCain also has a mixed voting record on offshore oil) that he too has realized that this election is about gas. The 'where's the beano?' election, so to speak. The economy is in the crapper, times are hard and the most visible sign of economic hardship is the price of gas. Let me repeat this again: whomever has the fastest plan to cheaper gas wins this election. I'd put money on it.

But the Left is blowing the play (at least until Obama's willingness to shift a bit on offshore oil) and Nancy Pelosi ain't helping much. She's holding firm on not having a vote on lifting the offshore drilling moratorium (but she's also telling her rank and file to vote for it if they don't want too.) But there's the flip side to the equation: the strength of the dollar. Make the dollar stronger and the price should go down some. I'm floating that notion on the back of a very weak knowledge of economics, mind you, so if that's wildly wrong, call me on it, ok? But it seems to make sense to me- the dollar is weak. Gas prices high. Make dollar stronger what effect does that have on gas prices? And if it does have an effect, why isn't the Left tacking to that side of the equation? Their insistent on holding to the environmental side of the argument won't win them the argument. The cold hard truth about it is that people want the environment protected, but they don't want to pay at the pump for it. Not when they're working crap middle class jobs and struggling to get by.

Change the debate. And do it fast, because this is worrying me. Obama is taking some hits in the polls and needs to break out fast. The right VP choice could do that, but if they can't shift the tone on oil, then it could be the wedge McCain needs to tighten the race and take the White House.

The Never-Ending Story

I'm sort of live-blogging the McCarthy press conference at Green Bay here...

We might be approaching the end of the Brett Favre saga here soon. I say 'might' because every time I say that, there's another twist and another turn and another week in the saga begins. But Green Bay Coach Mike McCarthy is speaking to the press right now on the television in front of me and it seems like the marriage, so to speak is over. Favre is not going back to Green Bay.

This raises the question- if not Green Bay, then where? ESPN is saying Tampa Bay is under consideration, but John Gruden seemed to downplay that a bit. But hey, it's Brett Favre- I can't imagine there'd be a team that wouldn't want to at least considering acquiring him for a couple of seasons. Favre still wants to be traded within the division to Minnesota or possibly Chicago (no one ever mentions Detroit though... I wonder why? Apart from the obvious reason of the Lions being somewhere near the ass end of the NFC North) but it appears that Green Bay is holding firm on not doing that. But I don't know. If Tampa is the best they can come up with and Favre isn't hot on it, Green Bay may just deal him out to get rid of him so they can actually gather some focus for the season.

Mike Golic from Mike and Mike in the morning was somewhat incredulous that Green Bay would not sign him right away. Aaron Rogers would probably be screwed over a little by that move, but you have to wonder if Golic has a point. The Pack went 13-3 and to the NFC Championship last season and it was on the shoulders of Favre. Rogers is young and not yet a proven quantity. The guy you know is better than the guy you don't.

But I think: they need a deal with Tampa fast. If they don't get it by the end of this week, then I think just getting rid of Favre as fast as possible to a team in the NFC North even could become more of a possibility.

***Oooooooooh, that was a dodge. Someone just asked McCarthy if Favre had mentioned specifically wanting to play for Minnesota. McCarthy dodged that. And dodged another one about trade talks with the Vikings. I think reading between the lines, that means Favre really, really, really wants to go to Minnesota.

I Want My NBC!

With three days to go until the Olympics start, it's suddenly dawned on me that we're going through one of our periodic outages of NBC at our apartment complex. We get free cable- a random selection of channels that includes several shots of HBO, but NBC vanishes every now and again.

And you know what- I want to watch the Olympics. Gonna have to talk to someone about this. I'll keep you posted.

**One maintenance request later and NBC is BACK. Hot.

No Play?

So after a month of useless, pointless drama, it appears that Brett Favre having gone to all the trouble of getting back on the Green Bay Packers active roster may not even play with them at all.

Gee, thanks for wasting everyone's summer with this crap Brett. The good thing is that it doesn't appear that a trade to Minnesota is imminent. I still think it'd make sense if they found a deal they liked for him, the Vikings would snap him up like that. But in the meantime, they have 4 quarterbacks, a division that's potentially wide open and Head Coach Brad Childress may let his team talk for him and win some stuff to get some leverage on stadium funding. With or without Favre this season if they go deep into the playoffs, I think the legislature will probably pony up some cash. We'll see.

There's No School Like the Old School

For those of you out there who like their beer classic and old school, take heart: Schlitz is coming back. PBR (who I guess owns the rights or whatever) has done extensive research and has managed to reconstruct the old formula of Schlitz-y goodness to put back on the shelves and has apparently had some success with it.

It's not available many places yet, but it's slowly creeping back out there. Stay tuned and keep watching your local beer shelf.

The End of the Favre-a-mania?

The Packers are taking him back, apparently. They're making him compete with Aaron Rogers for the position of starter but they're taking him back. Apparently they couldn't swallow their bile at the thought of Favre being in a Vikings jersey to let him go- no word on what Favre thinks of all of this- or whether he's willing to play second fiddle to Aaron Rogers, but we'll see. This could be the end of the affair, so to speak. Or it might not.

**UPDATE: Call it a 'not.' Per the Star Tribune this morning the Packers are taking him back, but they've also got sources saying they've contacted the Vikings to let them know that Favre is available for a trade. The greatest show in the sports world has a few more rounds in it yet.

$0.36

I saw the coolest technical glitch EVER today. Ali's Mom came up from Worthington to give us a couch for the apartment (pictures coming soon, I promise) and naturally, she brought the couch up in the heavy-duty truck which has about a 25 gallon tank and takes a butt-load to fill up.

She had noticed that the Clark Station out near Le Hillier had the cheapest gas in town- at $3.59 a gallon, so we drove out there to get some gas and there was a glitch on the premium pumps they hadn't fixed yet. Instead of $3.59 a gallon it was 36 cents a gallon! The cheapest gas that I have ever seen. Ali's Mom filled up her entire pick-up truck for the low, low price of $8.75.

Of course, the employees came out after that and shut down all the Premium Pumps. But it was a cool discount while it lasted.

Veepage III

Hm. Well, there's no indication about when exactly an announcement from either candidate is coming, but the general thinking is that it'll be before the Olympics start next Friday. There's a bit of a timing issue because the Olympics run from the 8th-24th and the Democratic Convention starts on the 25th, which means in order to get as much good press as he can from his VP pick, Obama will have to make a move in the next week or so- that's the general thinking out there.

There's been no new stuff that I've found on possibilities for Obama, just the timing of it all- so stay tuned for that. Interestingly though, it seems like Hillary Clinton won't even asked to be nominated at the Convention- even though there's no indication of where she might stand on the list of possible VP candidates (pretty low, last I heard).

The latest from the McCain VP speculation has turned (from the Washington Times) to Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and former HP CEO Carly Fiorina as possible picks. That would interesting to say the least. I know that this isn't a good week to be a politician in Alaska right now- Senator Ted Stevens was indicted and now Sarah Palin herself has a controversy to deal with- something that could tarnish her shiny reputation with Conservatives:

Allegations have surfaced that she fired the Public Safety Commissioner after he refused to fire a State Trooper who was going through a very messy divorce with her sister. The Alaska Legislature is up in arms about this and is toying with the idea of hearings.

So does this effectively kill her chances? Hmmm... hard to say. If they can move past it quickly, it might, and if there's no truth to the allegations, sure- but... if there is truth to them, then having her on the ticket with that hanging around her neck would be one heckuva dead weight on McCain's ticket. But who knows- it's worth looking at, for sure- and it could generate some excitement on the GOP side of things.

Whither Favre?

Nothing really new to report- but the latest:

Favre's Agent says he's ready for a media frenzy at camp.

There are apparently discussions with the Jets for a trade.

The $20 Million 'offer' (hmmm... bribe?) to stay retired is under consideration.

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell isn't moving on reinstatement, preferring to give at least one more day before reinstatement.

The Vikings and the Bears are acting surprised at a potential 'last-ditch' trade within the NFC North to get rid of Favre.

But is this whole situation playing out in Favre's advantage? There's speculation that this could indeed be so- and it makes a certain amount of sense to me. I think the Vikings would take Favre- the column linked above thinks they could snag him for a second round draft pick at the very least. Some might point out the obvious: with 4 quarterbacks right now, what does Minnesota need with a fifth one?

What indeed? Well, apart from the obvious fact: (he's Brett Favre) we have to consider what the Vikings are going to be up against in the next legislative session. While the Vikings went to River Falls to practice with the Chiefs, owner Zygi Wilf stayed behind to meet with state Senators here in Mankato to discuss potential funding for a stadium upgrade (or new stadium) by the time their lease ends on the Metrodome in 2011. The Vikings have, wisely, I think, decided to stick with the current Metrodome site, since the infrastructure is already in place and a shiny new stadium could re-vitalize the area in a big way- it also saves boatloads of cash, which, given the economic situation is a good thing to do.

But they desperately want an upgrade for the Metrodome. And there was a column some weeks ago that pointed out that Favre could be the guy to give it to them. The team needs a QB that can generate excitement and public support. And if Minnesota can land Favre, then every Vikings fan from here to the Canadian border is gonna want to rub it in the faces of every Cheesehead they can find. And they'll want a shiny new place fo r their newest hero to play.

Sports wise, getting Favre would make a QB mess (temporarily), but it could also be what the Vikings need to complete a slowly coalescing picture to make them a legitimate playoff contender, if not outright Super Bowl Contender. Favre has 3 seasons left in him if he's lucky and that could generate excitement, results, and enough public support for a new stadium.

Everyone wins.

The Lost Art of Subtlety

Reports surfaced today that in 'mandatory meetings' for department heads and store managers Wal-Mart is pressuring employees to vote against Democrats in November, fearing that new Democratic administrations in the White House and an increased majority in Congress might pass laws to make it easier for workers to unionize.

The measure, called the Employee Free Choice Act, would allow labor organizations to unionize workplaces without secret ballot elections. It was co-sponsored by Barack Obama, the presumed Democratic presidential candidate, and opposed by John McCain, the presumed Republican nominee.

I'm a little torn by this- I'm for unions, but only up to a point. My family's personal experience (not to mention the somewhat complicated story about how we ended up in Iowa when we started out in the UK) makes me somewhat wary of unions. Britain in the late 70s was in a total mess because the unions had too much power. You can have too much of a good thing and Margaret Thatcher had to do some fairly brutal things to the British economy to right the imbalance. Unions can be useful, but they can also be a gigantic pain in the ass. I'm glad there's been more a de-centralizing move in the Labor Movement lately, because I think the more localized and regional a union is, the more aware they're going to be of the needs of their workers.

But unionization without secret ballot elections? Um... doesn't sound very fair to me- and it opens the possibility of abuse on either side of the equation. We're talking about employees and their jobs here. Pro-Union types shouldn't be able to target people for pressure and anti-union type shouldn't be able to do that either. At the end of the day, whether you're a union organizer or a boss, the rights of the employees have to come first.

As for Wal-Mart... well, once upon a time, I did in fact work at a Wal-Mart for about a month or so. It was an interesting experience made more interesting by the fact on Day 1 of Orientation everyone sits through a 20 minute video which explains very earnestly why exactly unions are a bad, bad, bad thing- and what to do if a union organizer approaches you. That, combined with the framed pictures of Sam Walton on the wall in a manner not unlike those pictures of Mao or Lenin you'd see in the Soviet Union or China made the experience a little spooky.

That said: Wal-Mart might, maybe just have a point- not in pressuring people to vote a certain way (gee, whatever happened to subtlety?) but in the fact the unions may muck up their structure. On paper (I never availed myself of the process) there's an 'open door' policy for any and all associates to pass up ideas, make complaints and take concerns to managers and other people higher up the food chain. Cynics may question the effectiveness of the system or whether or not it's a reality to begin with, but it's worth noting that they trip over themselves to point out that Wal-Mart wouldn't have people greeters if some random associate hadn't pushed the idea up the food chain, so to speak. The structure is not as monolithic and 'evil-empire-y' as the clichés would indicate. Plus, name a company where employees get quarterly bonus checks from corporate profits. Every single quarter. OK, it's not much, but it's something- and Wal-Mart could (and should) treat its employees better, but there are worse places to work out there.

But: This ain't cool at all:

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is mobilizing its store managers and department supervisors around the country to warn that if Democrats win power in November, they'll likely change federal law to make it easier for workers to unionize companies -- including Wal-Mart.

In recent weeks, thousands of Wal-Mart store managers and department heads have been summoned to mandatory meetings at which the retailer stresses the downside for workers if stores were to be unionized.

According to about a dozen Wal-Mart employees who attended such meetings in seven states, Wal-Mart executives claim that employees at unionized stores would have to pay hefty union dues while getting nothing in return, and may have to go on strike without compensation. Also, unionization could mean fewer jobs as labor costs rise ...

The Wal-Mart human-resources managers who run the meetings don't specifically tell attendees how to vote in November's election, but make it clear that voting for Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama would be tantamount to inviting unions in, according to Wal-Mart employees who attended gatherings in Maryland, Missouri and other states.

"The meeting leader said, 'I am not telling you how to vote, but if the Democrats win, this bill will pass and you won't have a vote on whether you want a union,'" said a Wal-Mart customer-service supervisor from Missouri. "I am not a stupid person. They were telling me how to vote," she said.

Not cool and just plain stupid. This has all the subtlety of a brick to the back of a head and it's a slip-shod move to boot. And despite denials by the company, that employee quoted above was right. They are trying to tell their employees how to vote in a not-so-subtle way and it's going to backfire on them in a huge way. It's bad enough they throw 'UNIONS ARE BAD' propaganda at their employees in a major way on Day 1, but pressuring them on who to vote for? Naughty, naughty, naughty!