The New Namath?

Many of you who visit this blog and live in the New York Metro area are probably too young to remember Joe Namath. At one time, Joe Namath was the biggest sports star in New York. You couldn't get away from this guy.

I never really saw what the fuss was about. I had zero interest in football, and while I was in early puberty by the time Namath hit the NFL, I never understood why any woman thought he was sexy, in much the same way I never understood why women thought John Travolta was sexy. Both had the same kind of heavy-featured Neanderthalism that has always struck me as extremely unattractive. From what I understand, and perhaps Jets fans will want to weigh in via comments, Namath's career was one of stellar moments more than consistent play. But Namath had the kind of cockiness, and more importantly, media presence that makes for stardom in New York. Other than the Yankees' Derek Jeter, who is a marketing agent's dream in that he is handsome and charismatic and has the on-fields goods to back it up, while still appearing humble -- the kind of boy you'd want your daughter to bring home; New York hasn't had a sports star of his ilk since.

Tom Seaver was a huge star in New York, but especially in the pre-cable era, baseball never transcended region the way football does. Reggie Jackson was a huge star, but he was never Namath. Because Namath was everywhere:

(Yes, that is a pre-Charlie's Angels Farrah Fawcett in the last one.)

After yesterday, which saw Jets rookie quarterback Mark Sanchez looking pitiful in the first half only to come back and make Tom Brady the All-American Boy look even more pitiful in the second, a skeptical New York sports audience that has been waiting a long time for its next Big Football Star may not be ready to believe yet, but you can bet the marketers are watching. Because whether it's fair or not, it's never the wide receiver who gets the glory, it's always the quarterback. And if the Jets continue to play the way they have been, Mark Sanchez will be the new face of New York sports and quite possibly the NFL. And why not? I mean, LOOK at him for crissakes:

This is a country in which Latinos count for half the growth in population in the last nine years. You'd have to be an idiot to think that "illegal immigrants" isn't a general code for Latino as much as it is concern over the "non-entitled" getting a piece of the dwindling American pie. About one in seven New Yorkers is Latino. In 2050, nearly one in three Americans nationwide will be Latino. Mark Sanchez is coming along at the beginning of a wave that demographically speaking is going to change the nature of this country dramatically by 2050. If he's smart, he'll be able to channel his looks and his on-field performance to transcend at least some of the fear and loathing of this Latino population growth reality that so frightens people like Rep. Joe Wilson and the teabaggers who agree with him.

But hey, no pressure, kid.

Why is MSNBC even giving Tom Tancredo a forum?

I realize that the ravings of a lunatic make good television. But I don't see David Shuster dragging into the studio some homeless guy ranting about how aliens are beaming death rays directly into his brain. So why on earth is Tom Tancredo, best known for being a failed long-shot presidential candidate and having a rabid hatred of immigrant Latinos, being given air time on the public airwaves that you and I own, to spew hatred and inaccurate bullshit? Tancredo makes it very clear here that what he's afraid of is that his world of white male privilege is changing, and there is nothing he can do about it, other than what is the subtext of the kind of vitriol he and Rush Limbaugh and the rest of their ilk -- the very same people who practically fellated in public the mediocrity that is Clarence Thomas -- lose their minds at the prospect of a highly accomplished Latina being appointed to the Supreme Court.

But this is what Republicans have done for decades now -- project their own hatred and their own bigotry onto others. It used to be that guys like Tom Tancredo would put on hoods and were regarded as fringe extremists. Now they are the mainstream of the Republican Party. One can only wonder the extent to which they are willing to go in order to preserve their white power world.

Augh! Your lawn care guy is going to to come after you with torches and pitchforks!!!

You know who I'm talking about. I'm talking about the guy from Guatemala or Mexico who silently weed-whacks your lawn every week; the one you don't think about how much he gets paid or IF he gets paid because it's just too uncomfortable. Well, not MY lawn guys, because the guy who owns MY lawn service charges five bucks more per mowing than his competition, and 65 bucks/man/hour for spring and fall cleanup, but he provides health insurance for HIS guys, who are actual employees instead of exploited day laborers.

These are the people Republicans fear even more than they fear gay marriage, Gitmo detainees with superpowers who can break out of supermax prisons when no one else ever has, Nancy Pelosi's scary genitalia, and liberals who kill babies for sport. They think Michael Steele gets them off the hook for their past Scary Negroes(sic) rhetoric, but Scary Brown People from South of the Border are still fair game:

Republican members of Congress have been trying to subtly raise questions about Sonia Sotomayor’s objectivity — simply because of her non-traditional race, gender, and upbringing. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) said today that he is concerned Sotomayor has shown “personal bias based on ethnicity and gender.” Similarly, Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) said in a statement today that Sotomayor may be subject to the “undue influence” of her race and gender:

Of primary concern to me is whether or not Judge Sotomayor follows the proper role of judges and refrains from legislating from the bench. Some of her recent comments on this matter have given me cause for great concern. In the months ahead, it will be important for those of us in the U.S. Senate to weigh her qualifications and character as well as her ability to rule fairly without undue influence from her own personal race, gender, or political preferences.

Responding to Inhofe, The American Prospect’s Dana Goldstein writes, “Yes. Because the worldviews of John Roberts, Sam Alito, John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, and Antonin Scalia are not impacted at all by their white male identities. White men are raceless and genderless, haven’t you heard?”

Sotomayor is a Bush Sr. appointee, in case you haven't heard that yet. Of course Bush Sr. is no longer regarded as a Republican by the Party of Psychopaths. But this is a stroke of genius by Barack Obama. Rake her over the coals and you not only piss off the Latino community, but also ensure that if you block this nomination, he'll give you a REAL liberal. Sort of like George W. Bush did when he imposed the activist Samuel Alito on us.