We have congratulated the Red Sox on their impressive World Series win and deserve it they did, but I found this article which speaks volumes about those who supported the Colorado Rockies.

While it can never feel good as a player to lose, it must be gratifying to come from an area where they appreciate your efforts, win or lose. Just look at what some of the Rockie fans had to say at the conclusion of last nights game:

“I’m broken-hearted,” said Lindy Saupe, Kelsie and Austin’s mother. “I’m a little numb, but how cool is that they brought the World Series to our town? It’s a once in a lifetime thing. Maybe the Rox will do it next year, who knows? They did well.

“They’re good guys, and they’re right in their heart,” Lindy said of the Rockies. “They’re good players. I’m proud of them. They have heart. I’m just proud of the character that they bring to this. They are absolutely righteous men.”

and this:

“It was such a magical last 30 days, it was unbelievable,” Weese said. “The kids woke up every morning looking at the paper, and went to bed every night wondering who was winning. And the Rockies won, night after night. It was like time just kind of stood still. It was amazing.”

Mike Zoellner Jr. was yet another longtime fan of the Rockies who hoped the team knew how much its fans thought of them Sunday night. Amidst a sea of Red Sox fans staying late at Coors Field to share the World Series championship with their team, the fifth-generation Denver native stood respectfully in his Rockies gear, hoping the Rockies were holding their heads high.

“It’s been a great story,” Zoellner said. “I can’t wait to come back next year and be a part of it. There’s probably a celebration going on right below us in the Rockies clubhouse. They should be, even though it’s kind of a somber celebration. It’s definitely something to be proud of.”

There’s much more in the article itself, but for me it was delightful to read of the fans who support their team even in defeat. Well done Rockies and to the fans, next year is right around the corner.

Many seem to feel indifferent toward all of the present Presidential candidates. I know I have wrestled with the current choices myself.

Perhaps Michael Barone hit the nail on the head with respect to this quandry in his latest piece at Real Clear Politics.

“Pray take away this pudding,” Winston Churchill commanded one night at dinner. “It has no theme.” Our two political parties, facing the first election in 80 years in which neither the incumbent president nor the incumbent vice president is running, are similarly bereft of themes. Or, to put it more precisely, neither has a convincing narrative of where we are in history and where we should be headed next.

He’s right, at least in my way of thinking. I have seen or heard very little which convinces me this will not be an election in which many of us make our selection based on who we believe is the lesser of two evils, not the one who will lead this nation in a manner one might expect.

Barone elaborates, first on the Democrats:

Today’s parties lack such narratives. The Democratic Party is all about, well, listen to its rhetoric. It’s all about opposing George W. Bush and all his works. But where to go from there?

Domestically, Democrats seem to be reviving the FDR narrative: Expand government to help the little guy. Some thoughtful Democratic strategists argue that although this view was discredited by the stagflation and gas lines of the 1970s, voters are once again ready for more government, and they can cite some poll results in support of that proposition. And it’s true that the median-age voter in 2008 will have no vivid memories of the 1970s.

And now, the Republicans:

The Republicans are no better. Many say the party must go back to Ronald Reagan, and the Reagan narrative is at least of recent vintage. Reagan taught that government had grown overlarge and must be cut back and that America must be the assertive champion of freedom and democracy. The problem is that none of the Republican presidential candidates occupy Reagan’s place on the political spectrum, and the problems we face are not those that confronted Reagan in 1980.

We no longer have 70 percent tax rates and oil price controls; we no longer face the symmetric threat of Soviet communism. The problem of overlarge government — the threat that entitlements will gobble up the government and the private economy — is real but remote. Our foreign adversaries are asymmetric, with a small but worrying potential of inflicting vast damage, and they are not entirely vulnerable to conventional military or diplomatic pressures.

History teaches many lessons, but we should not be content with candidates running on others laurels or the issues facing those who have served in the past.

What’s necessary is that one candidate have that defining moment which convinces voters they have the vision necessary to lead this nation..so far, for me at least, that moment has not arrived.

Kimsch from Musing Minds has dressed her little dog up as Dorothy and Toto too since she’s a little dog!

Follow the link and be prepared to smile!

An aide to Democratic Rep. Neil Abercrombie from Hawaii has criticized the message strategy of the Democrats, apparently to deaf ears.

Democrats are losing the battle for voters’ hearts because the party’s message lacks emotional appeal, according to a widely circulated critique of House Democratic communications strategy.

“Our message sounds like an audit report on defense logistics,” wrote Dave Helfert, a former Appropriations spokesman who now works for Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii). “Why are we defending [the State Children’s Health Insurance Program] instead of advocating a ‘Healthy Kids’ plan?”

Helfert sent the memo this week to an e-mail list of all Democratic press secretaries and communications directors after staffers met on Monday to discuss rolling out the Democrats’ latest message.

He said the meeting left him cold because it focused on what polling shows voters want rather than how to present persuasive messages. Republicans have done a better job by developing poll data into focus group-tested messages like “culture of life” and “defending marriage,” along with attacks like “cut and run” and “plan for surrender” in Iraq, he argued.

In particular, Helfert points to Republican pollster Frank Luntz, who helped develop the 1994 “Contract with America” and is credited with helping Republicans come up with terms for polices like “Healthy Forests” and “Death Tax.”

“Republicans have been kicking our rhetorical butt since about 1995,” Helfert wrote.

Democratic leadership aides were not impressed, and indicated that the memo did not have a vast and immediate impact.

Basically he’s saying to talk in terms regular people can understand rather than acronyms or the names of bills. People don’t necessarily understand them.

This is turning out to be an interesting election year. The Democrats have finally realized they can’t win on the Iraq war alone and need to talk about different issues, but they haven’t admitted they need to do it in plain English.

How sweet it is for all of their fans!

Congrats to the Sox on their World Series victory.

Remember when the new leadership took over the House we were promised a five day workweek from our Congressmen?

Well, things have changed.

Shortly after winning a majority last year, Democrats triumphantly declared that they would put Congress back to work, promising an “end to the two-day workweek.” And indeed, the House has clocked more time in Washington this year than in any other session since 1995, when Republicans, newly in control, sought to make a similar point.

But 10 months into the session, with their legislative agenda often in gridlock with the Bush administration and a big election year looming, the Democrats are now planning a lighter schedule when the 110th Congress begins its second year in mid-January.

The House majority leader, Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, told fellow Democrats this week that the House would not be in session next year on Fridays, except in June for work on appropriations bills.

Explaining that decision to reporters, Mr. Hoyer said, “I do intend to have more time for members to work in their districts and to be close to their families.”

His comments drew snickers from Republicans, who are quite happy to share their view that the American people did not get much value for all the extra time lawmakers spent in Washington.

“Is this a reward for our accomplishments in 2007?” asked Representative Roy Blunt of Missouri, the Republican whip.

And on Friday, President Bush once again hammered Congressional Democrats, accusing them of failing to meet basic responsibilities like approving annual budget bills and confirming his nominee for attorney general, Michael B. Mukasey.

“This is not what Congressional leaders promised when they took control of Congress earlier this year,” Mr. Bush said. “Congress needs to keep their promise, to stop wasting time, and get essential work done on behalf of the American people.”…

…On Wednesday, the House cast its one-thousandth roll-call vote of the year, the first time that it reached that mark since the Constitution was ratified. Democrats hailed the occasion, while Republicans sniped that only 106 of the votes were on bills ultimately signed into law, and that 45 of those bestowed names on post offices or other property.

“Unlike Congress, the American people do not mistake motion for progress,” said Representative Thaddeus G. McCotter, Republican of Michigan. “They want results. And given the approval ratings, they are certainly convinced they aren’t getting them.”

Mr. McCotter said changing the schedule was an example of Democrats’ breaking promises. “They said ‘five-day weeks,’ ” he said. And he scoffed at the notion that Mr. Hoyer was also responding to Republicans who wanted more time in their home districts.

“I wish he had that much concern and was as responsive to Republicans’ calls for input on major legislation,” Mr. McCotter said.

1,000 votes, of which 106 were on bills ultimately signed into law and 45 to bestow names on post offices and other property.

Once again I ask if you can name just one significant piece of legislation this Congress has passed, even with their long hours?

I do think it’s a good idea to make time for the Congresscritters to be with their constituents at least a couple of days a week.

As for those with small children, well they knew what time this job would take when they signed up for it. They made a conscious decision to be away from home most of the week, so I feel no pity for them but I do for their children.