Updates, again

Well, so many of the things touched on have developed further since last I wrote. Let's recap:

Politics

Our Ohio primary was yesterday. I voted Dem (obviously) and chose Barack. I don't necessarily think Hillary would be a bad President, but I am SO OVER her method of choice to try and get there. I disagree with my pal Steve when he says that: "She's got Rhode Island wrapped up, and she really needs to at worst split with Obama today, so why not help deliver her Ohio and keep this very exciting (and young-voter-energizing) primary going for a bit longer?"

I think it's time to move on, unite the party, and focus on mopping the floor with Gramps McCain. All of the in-fighting does more harm than good, in my opinion, and both candidates have already shown they excel at getting people out/interested/participating. That's well and good, but at some point, the proverbial Greater Good has to be considered.

It is my opinion that Hillary--despite her good showing yesterday in winning both Ohio and Texas, though the latter by an insignificant margin (see Jonathan Alter's math for reference)--can't win the nomination outright without some seriously shady doings (see: superdelegates, for example, from the Plain Dealer: Congresswoman Stephanie Tubbs Jones of Cleveland, a national co-chair of Clinton's campaign, is a super delegate. Asked Tuesday night whether she would back Obama even if he won in her home district, as appeared likely, Tubbs Jones emphatically said no. "As I've said over and over again, I am committed to Hillary Clinton." [emphasis mine] - yep, sounds about right) and without going super-de-duper negative the rest of the way against Barack. What good does that do?

She's insinuating he is and/or has been a Muslim (he's not, and never has been).

She's insinuating that she somehow demonstrably has the experience to be the one answering the "3 AM phone call" about the terrorists coming for our children. Based on what? Living in the White House for 8 years and knowing where the phone is? She VOTED FOR A POINTLESS WAR, and he has been opposed to it from the start. How does that make her more qualified?

Then, of course, there's the whole Texas Caucus thing (Barack has continually done very well in the caucus setting, and 33% of the Texas Delegates were up for the grabbing in those post-primary caucuses). So, what's Hillary to do? Well, nothing like--after 8 years of screaming about the GOP [possibly] rigging elections--trying to rig the caucuses in your favor, just in case you lose the primary:

Hillary Clinton and her campaign is pushing for precinct captains for Texas' 8,000 Democratic polling places. They need to train folks to lead the caucus sessions that will determine more than 60 delegates after the primary voting is over.In training materials being handed out by the Clinton campaign, it is clear that they want to control those caucus sessions.The materials say in part, "DO NOT allow the supporter of another candidate to serve in leadership roles."It goes on to say, "If our supporters are outnumbered, ask the Temporary Chair if one of our supporters can serves as the Secretary, in the interest of fairness."The control of the sign-in sheets and the announcement of the delegates allotted to each candidate are the critical functions of the Chair and Secretary. This is why it is so important that Hillary supporters hold these positions."
http://trailblazers.beloblog.com/archives/2008/03/caucus-strategy.html

http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/story.aspx?id=NEWEN20080043115&ch=3/5/2008%2010:13:00%20AM

They were crying "FOUL!" when it looked like they were losing, all while trying to stack the caucuses with their own people. It smacks of Republican tactics so much that it makes me want to puke. She wants the nomination so badly that she's willing to employ the Joseph Stalin "scorching of one's own earth" tactics to get it. She's becoming the Larry Hughes of the democratic party (see below).

It's time for that shit to stop. Cutting off your nose to spite your face is a great way to win a general election. To wit, Lars says: I'm really not voting for HRC if she keeps going negative. I can't. If she had won the nomination without the insinuation of barack being a weak canadian muslim, then fine... but forget that. Bah. I'm just going to write in Terry Schiavo in the GE if Clinton is the nominee." Good job, Hillary.


Sports

Wow!

The Browns and Cavs have both been busy since I last wrote. Let's recap/address:

My musings in italics:

The Browns have some issues going into the 2008 draft and season:
1) Their defense was HORRIBLE. They won 10 games in spite of it. They are in dire need of defensive linemen.
Wow. The Browns traded their second round pick to Green Bay for Corey Williams, and their third round pick and Leigh Bodden to Detroit for Shaun Rogers. Some reactions:

Williams, 6-4 and 320 pounds, would probably play left end in the Browns' 3-4 defense. He played tackle in Green Bay's 4-3 alignment and was known for his quickness in getting to the quarterback. He had 14 sacks the last two years.
Cleveland Plain Dealer

Rogers no doubt will take over as the Browns' nose tackle. Williams, 6-4 and 313 pounds, joins Robaire Smith and Shaun Smith in a three-man rotation at the two defensive end spots. Shaun Smith also would spell Rogers at nose.
In dealing Bodden, the Browns give up on a rags-to-riches player who some in the organization felt slipped measurably last season. The move secures one starting cornerback job for Eric Wright and sets up a battle for the other one between Daven Holly and Brandon McDonald.
"I think [Williams will] be a really valuable addition to us, not only because of his rush ability on the inside but also his ability to play the run," Savage said. "We think he'll give us some legitimacy on the defensive front."
Cleveland Plain Dealer

2) They have no first round pick, having traded it for Quinn last year. However...
3) They have a restricted free agent quarterback in Derek Anderson, who may be worth a first round pick. They are actively trying to sign him to a three year deal, and possibly then work a sign-and-trade for someone willing to part with a first round pick.
Well, the Browns re-signed Derek Anderson for three years, and as we noted above, the Browns NOW no longer have their first, second, OR third round picks. DA doesn't appear to be going anywhere now. But, as Phil Savage notes:

Prior to completing the deal for Rogers, Savage said there was no defensive lineman in the draft worthy of selecting with the second-round pick, No. 56 overall.
"I knew there was going to be some sacrifice involved in trying to obtain a player we wanted, but in my mind, in our estimation, a legitimate veteran defensive lineman who's still got a lot of upside potential seemed to be a good fit for us," Savage said.
Cleveland Plain Dealer

Trading for defensive tackles Corey Williams of Green Bay and Shaun Rogers of Detroit left the Browns without a pick in the first three rounds of the April 26-27 draft.
Cleveland surrendered its No. 1 to Dallas last year on draft day to select quarterback Brady Quinn. Then Friday it gave up a second-rounder for Williams and a third-rounder for Rogers.
But general manager Phil Savage and coach Romeo Crennel didn't seem concerned.
"Brady Quinn is the first-round draft choice, Corey Williams is the second-round draft choice and Shaun Rogers is the third-round draft choice. We've jumped out in front and had our draft early," Crennel said. "As a result of having an early draft we were able to get experienced players who have been productive in the NFL."
Akron Beacon Journal

Free agency starts next Saturday. It will be interesting.
The Browns also signed New England's Donte' Stallworth to be their #2 receiver, a decent move that opens up more of the field, as the defenses aren't going to be able to double everybody. They've also had visits from some linebackers as well, which would only help a here-to-fore lousy defense.

Most importantly, the Browns (according to most pundits) got noticeably better, while no one else in the division has really done anything of note. The Browns tied the Steelers in record at 10-6, losing the head-to-head matchups and thus the division as well. One would hope these moves help to close that now infinitesimal gap even more.

***

Half of the Cavs players have been hurt at some point this year. They're hovering around 4th in the East, and there are rumors of a trade in the works. My hunch is that nothing will happen. Like usual. The Cavs will make the playoffs and lose in the second round to either Boston or Detroit.

Wow again! The Cavs pulled off a certified BLOCKBUSTER trade just before the deadline. I'll let Brian Windhorst break it down for y'all:

The deal is done. The details are here. Basically, Cavs get Ben Wallace, Joe Smith, Wally Szczerbiak, Delonte West and a second-round draft pick for Larry Hughes, Drew Gooden, Ira Newble, Donyell Marshall, Shannon Brown, and Cedric Simmons. Pretty crazy. And, I think, qualifies as the blockbuster. In full disclosure, the deal I was talking about last night was Hughes for Wallace and then the Cavs would be able to move Gooden for a shooting guard. It obviously got a lot more complex today.
Here is the instant reaction, one of the things being talked about within the Cavs front office over the last few days was the need to get someone in here to deal with potential matchups with the Celtics in the playoffs. Wallace could be that guy. He also gives them an edge in dealing with the Pistons as well. Szczerbiak is guy who is the type of player that works well with LeBron, he’s a shooter, although he’s had injury problems. Cavs are taking on some huge salary here, but they are not really extending their commitments. Wallace is signed for two more years (like Hughes) and Smith and Szczerbiak will have expiring contracts next season. West will be a restricted free agent.
To me the key here is just what Wallace brings. He’s not the player he was in Detroit, I think most people agree with that. But can he be a major defensive presence, especially come the playoffs. To me that will define this deal. Maybe he will, maybe he won’t. Lots of people are down on him and he’s not having a good year. He is the key in my mind.
ohio.com

ESPN's Bill Simmons--who is harder on most NBA teams and GMs than any sportswriter I know of--praised the deal:

As for the other big trade this week, kudos to Danny Ferry for somehow getting four of the best five players in an 11-player trade. That has to be some sort of record, right? I already made the case for Wally Szczerbiak and Delonte West helping the Cavs in my Trade Machine piece Wednesday (scroll down to trade 4A), but the Chicago guys pushed the deal over the top for me. First, Drew Gooden needed to go--he was too inconsistent and too much of a bonehead, and we neared the point when a fed-up LeBron might punch him in the face during a game about three months ago--and Joe Smith gives the Cavs steadier minutes and reliable production with those minutes. (Maybe Smith's ceiling isn't as high as Gooden's from game to game, but when you have LeBron you need consistency from the rest of the guys more than anything else.) Second, the fact Ferry was able to trade an overpaid guard who actually drove a frustrated Cavs fan to create a site called http://www.heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com/ and update it every day ... I mean, even if you got back a dead body for Larry Hughes, it would have been a moral victory.
Instead, the Cavs got back the Artist Formerly Known As Ben Wallace, someone who stopped being an elite rebounder and shot-blocker about three years ago, but someone with playoff experience and the ability to defend bigger guys like KG, Shaq or Duncan. He certainly makes more sense for the 2008 Cavs than Larry Hughes did. Anyway, I thought the Cavs could win the East before this trade, simply because none of the Eastern teams have someone who can match baskets with LeBron in a close game. Now? They're the favorites. Look, I love the Celtics, I watch them every game, it has been the most enjoyable season in 15 years. ... But a playoff series almost always comes down to one question as long as both sides are relatively equal:
Which team has the best guy?
Well, LeBron is better than anyone else in the East. So if you were beating Cleveland this spring, it was happening because your supporting cast was significantly better than LeBron's supporting cast. That's why this trade was so dangerous for Boston and Detroit; it shortened the sizable gap between guys 2 through 12 on Cleveland and guys 2 through 12 on Boston and Detroit. Now LeBron has four shooters who have shot 40-plus from 3-point range at least once in their career (Wally, Delonte, Boobie Gibson and Sasha Pavlovic), three seasoned rebounders (Wallace, Smith and Anderson Varejao), a scoring center (Zydrunas Ilgauskas) and, best of all, no Larry Hughes screwing up everything. LeBron is in a much better place than he was last year, and what's even more frightening is that he has been playing out of his mind since last April. I know the Celtics are 41-11, and I know the Pistons have been there a million times ... but still, how could you bet against LeBron in the East when he's playing like this?
espn.com

And finally, to hammer the Larry Hughes point home--as well as close the loop I opened above when I called Hillary Clinton the "Larry Hughes of the Democratic Party," let's check with Larry and with Patrick McManamon:

You remember Hughes. He's the former Cavs player who signed for a boatload of money a few years ago and then was unhappy playing on the same team as LeBron James, a team that a year ago played in the NBA Finals. Which is bizarre enough in itself.
Anyway, Hughes was traded to the Chicago Bulls recently for Ben Wallace and Joe Smith, and on Sunday, Hughes revealed why he plays the game. ''I play to enjoy myself,'' he said. Note the word ''myself.''
''Some people take this the wrong way, but winning a championship is not what I base everything on,'' he said. Sure hate to take that the wrong way.
''I was given an opportunity to play basketball, travel around and have fun doing it, and that's what I want to do,'' he said. ''I wouldn't take being unhappy and not being myself and winning. I would rather enjoy myself with 18,000 to 20,000 people watching the game and the people sending fan mail and those things, and be happy.''
There are times when a direct question is required. So it is here. And that question would be: Is this guy nuts? Are we to understand that personal fan mail is more important than winning, that it would be ideal to score 25 points every game and lose? At this point, it might be wise to smack yourself on the side of the head with the bottom of the palm to try to make this clear. And, of course, not take these words the wrong way.
Hughes couldn't stop there. He said he did not come to Cleveland to play point guard, that he came to run the wing a la James. ''I was asked to sacrifice for the team to win and for everybody, I guess, (to) get paid,'' he said. ''That is what was told to me, and I wasn't happy with that.'' Well, we'd sure hate to take that the wrong way.
But let's make this clear: In one fell swoop, Hughes made clear why the Cavs made all those last-second, trade-deadline moves. Hughes was simply not going to try to make things work with the Cavs, never mind the $12 million he was earning this year, and never mind the $4 million he made in bonuses the past two years because the team won, and never mind the fact that he was playing with the BEST PLAYER ON THE PLANET.
Rest assured, though, Hughes' ''issues'' go well beyond playing point guard. They might actually go to some kind of childhood trauma. Hughes was not happy, period, and he made his feelings known to the team all the way back to last season — when the Cavs went to the NBA Finals. Which apparently wasn't good for Hughes, because he thinks people sacrifice to ''get paid'' rather than to win.
The Cavs had to do what they could with Hughes, though. He was an unhappy player, but he was their unhappy player. So they put a lot of energy and work into trying to get what they could from him, given the difficulties of trading his contract. At some points this season, they actually got good minutes from him.
But it came to a point where things simply were not going to work. Now we know why.
Hughes' words are almost so mind-boggling as to be inexplicable. His assessments mean that he liked the loss Sunday because he got 23 points, even if he was shut down by James in the fourth quarter. Gotta love going 21-61 if you average 22, right? This sounds like a guy who would appreciate his own hemorrhoids.
Yes, it's easy to take shots at a guy who's leaving town, and the Cavs, to their credit, have only said thanks and best of luck. But it's near impossible not to notice Hughes revealing to the world what he's all about.
Whether he wanted to or not, Hughes has portrayed himself as a selfish doofus who doesn't care whether the team wins as long as he's getting his.
[emphasis mine]
ohio.com

Wow, what a couple of weeks it has been!