Yesterday: The Jon Gruden Era at UM

Lyrics from a melancholy acoustic guitar ballad about a break-up:

Yesterday,
All my troubles seemed so far away,
Now it looks as though they're here to stay,
Oh, I believe in yesterday.

Jon Gruden turned down the opportunity to coach the University of Miami's football team. Here's one perspective on why the megalomaniacal albino's no, while clearly not the act of a friend, may not be a bad thing.

Gruden made his mark in winning the Super Bowl in his first year as coach of the Tampa Bay Bucs in 2002. Gruden won [altogether now Cane fans] with Tony Dungy's players and a great defense built by Lane Kiffin. If that seems harsh, consider that Gruden never won another playoff game at Tampa Bay and his teams lost home wild-card playoff games in the two years they did make the playoffs. His final season there featured a team which collapsed after the same Kiffin announced he would be leaving when the season ended. Like Randy Shannon, Gruden was fired from his last coaching job in a year which began with a contract extension.

All in all, Gruden produced a .507 winning percentage in his seven year stint as a NFL head coach with Tampa Bay. I guess the genius bar is much lower in the post-Shula era, but even Trinidadians would blush at this level of limbo.

If, like me, you thought it odd that the negotiations with UM involved his brother. We shouldn't have. Coaching is apparently the most family of businesses. Gruden himself is the son of a coach and the 2nd generation names which have crossed his path in his career include; Griese, Kiffin, McKay, Shula, Simms. The theme from Deliverance would seem a nice fit for this degree of inbreeding.

However, given that Gruden is a fellow Roman Catholic, we shall put the above speculation aside and spare him the Saban treatment [eternal sports (i.e. unactionable) hatred]. But the Gruden era was instructive. As we get ready to watch the Heat travel to Cleveland tonight, if Gruden annoyed us this much in just 24 hours, imagine if they had televised his decision after dragging it out all summer.

Read more!

Liberal Catholics, Transubstantiation and Boise St

Index of Liberal Catholic Warriors for the Faith:

• Under Construction. See Episcopalian.

C'mon guys, don't ever lose your sense of humor. I mean your faith, well.... But never lose your sense of humor. Think of it as the only true historically peer-reviewed commandment.

I used to feel bad for liberal Catholics during the past score-ish years. Clearly discouraged by John Paul II's longevity and succession, their liberalism seemed to represent the 10th step in a 12-step program to leave the Church. Their main concerns have always struck me as more political than spiritual. The list is familiar:

• Female priests
• Nuanced stance on abortion
• Acceptance of homosexuality

One thought bothered me about that list. Transubstantiation. How could they keep transubstantiation off the list for so many years. I mean granted their main issues were literally sexy or sexual, but theologically speaking, they couldn't hold a jock strap [or panty] to transubstantiation in terms of the difficulty of true acceptance of Catholic teaching. That's why transubstantiation is the Boise State of Catholic theology. Think of the scandal if Boise State were kept out of the the BCS title game after 1,863 undefeated years.

Then one day it hit me like as if I was staring at Marcee in a Beautiful Mind. It's not real. Their list is not real. It's interesting and focus-grouped, but it doesn't represent the main concerns of adult Catholics, even liberal ones. A list of real concerns about the difficulty in accepting Catholic teaching would be more varied and less aligned with politically correct issues of the day.

Ever since that day, I'm the jaded guy in the crowd on the ground seemingly unaffected by the threats of 'jumping' from liberal Catholics on the ledge. If asked, my advice would be to go ahead and jump. Who knows, the distance they fall may not be as far as their oscillation would suggest.

If you think that opinion is judgmental, then you need to brush up on the difference between having an opinion on issues in the public domain and the type of judgment we are admonished not to engage in in the scriptures. One involves forming an opinion to the best of our abilities and the other presumes to know God's will. As an example, while I would prefer, if asked, that liberal Catholics jump, that is not judgmental. If I presumed to know where they would land when they jumped, now that's judgmental.

I recommend Fr Barron's take on the issue, although I doubt he would reciprocate.

Read more!

Three Pages into Three Thousand Years

Three pages into Three Thousand Years and I have an issue. A new low.

Advent is a good reminder to attempt to deepen the faith. So when I read great things about Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years, I bought the used book and began to read with little expectations of finishing the 1,016 page book, but expecting to gain a better historical perspective in specific areas which interested me. The author, Diarmaid MacCulloch, was apparently a lapsed Anglican who was raised in the faith and treated his subject with respect.

Using my Mortimer Adler training, I began with the part of the book which most interested me, Chapter 3: A Crucified Messiah. Just three pages in I came across my first bomb:

Luke's birth narrative, the more elaborate [Matthew is the other] explains that Jesus's parents traveled from Nazareth to Bethlehem at the time of Jesus's birth because they had to comply with the residence terms of a Roman imperial census for tax purposes .... This does not ring true ... Roman authorities would not have held a census in a client kingdom of the empire such as Herod's, and in any case there is no record elsewhere of such an empire-wide census, which would certainly have left traces around the Mediterranean. The story seems to embody a confusion with a well-attested Roman imperial census which certainly did happen, but in 6 CE, far too late for the birth of Jesus [the birth is estimated between 7 and 4 BE], and long remembered as a traumatic event because it was the first real taste of what direct Roman rule meant for Judea. The suspicion therefore arises that someone writing a good deal later, rather hazy about the chronology of decades before, has been fairly cavalier with the story of Jesus's birth, for reasons other than retrieving events as they actually happened.

In a thousand page book, I expected to read a lot of hedging about conflicting accounts. But here MacCulloch calls Luke a liar [naturally using testosterone-deficient language, i.e. cavalier], with no attempt to reconcile the dates giving Luke the benefit of the doubt. What a prick.

In didn't take much research to discover that there are plenty of explanations for the discrepancy. The most complete explanation was provided by a blog post by J. Hampton Keathley, III titled, Acclamations of the Birth of Christ (Luke 2:1-20). Keathley summarizes the issue:

Critics have challenged Luke's statement because they claim Josephus, a Jewish historian, placed this [census] at least ten years later [6 CE] after Archelaus had been deposed and Quirenius had been sent as a Syrian magistrate in charge of this registration. Their point is Quirinius did not govern here until several years later.

Keathley then offers three possible solutions for the historical discrepancies:

1. There were two registrations. There is evidence that such registrations happened periodically about every 14 years and that Quirinius could have been twice in charge of these registrations. Luke shows us from Acts 5:37 that he was aware of the later registration or census of Quirinius, the one reported by Josephus. In other words, Luke shows us from Luke 2:1-2 and Acts 5:37 that there very well could have been two registrations conducted by Quirinius and this fits with archaeological findings as well as with Josephus’ account.
2. An eminent archaeologist named Jerry Vardaman has done a great deal of work in this regard. He has found a coin with the name of Quirinius on it in very small writing, or what we call ‘micrographic’ letters. This places him as proconsul of Syria and Cilicia from 11 B.C. until after the death of Herod. It means that there were apparently two Quiriniuses. It’s not uncommon to have lots of people with the same Roman names, so there’s no reason to doubt that there were two people by the name of Quirinius. The census would have taken place under the reign of the earlier Quirinius. Given the cycle of a census every fourteen years, that would work out quite well.
3. Quirinius had a government assignment in Syria at this time and conducted a census in his official capacity. Details of this census may have been common knowledge in Luke’s time but are now lost to us. An incomplete MS describes the career of an officer whose name is not preserved but whose actions sound as if he might have been Quirinius. He became imperial “legate of Syria” for the “second time.” While this is ambiguous, it may be a clue that Quirinius served both at the time of Jesus’ birth and a few years later.

The complete explanation by J. Hampton Keathley, III is copied at end of the post.

Onward, Christian soldiers, page four beckons.

----------------------------------------------------
Acclamations of the Birth of Christ (Luke 2:1-20)
By: J. Hampton Keathley, III
http://bible.org/article/acclamations-birth-christ-luke-21-20#P69_15704

...

This brings us back to our passage where we want to observe another historical detail in the account of Christ’s birth—the census to be taken. Again, remember Galatians 4:4 which says, “but when the fulness of time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman …”

“That a decree went out … a census …” The word “census” here is apographo, which means “the taking of a census, registration, or enrollment.” The KJV has “taxed,” but the word actually referred to a census (though a taxing often followed based on the census or registration.) It was a registration for taxing purposes.

Critics have challenged this statement by Luke because they claim Josephus, a Jewish historian, placed this at least ten years later after Archelaus had been deposed and Quirenius had been sent as a Syrian magistrate in charge of this registration. Their point is Quirinius did not govern here until several years later.

Several years ago a writer for Life Magazine, Robert Coughlan used this along with some other things to claim the whole story of Jesus Christ was without historicity and should not be relied upon. But this assumes that we have all the information of this time and know more than Luke could have possibly known.

How do we deal with this apparent historical discrepancy? There is evidence that such registrations happened periodically about every 14 years and that Quirinius could have been twice in charge of these registrations. Luke shows us from Acts 5:37 that he was aware of the later registration or census of Quirinius, the one reported by Josephus. In other words, Luke shows us from Luke 2:1-2 and Acts 5:37 that there very well could have been two registrations conducted by Quirinius and this fits with archaeological findings as well as with Josephus’ account.

There is also another solution proposed by some archaeologists. In discussing the problem of this census with John McRay, a well known archaeologist, Lee Strobel describes part of the conversation with McRay who said in the interview, “An eminent archaeologist named Jerry Vardaman has done a great deal of work in this regard. He has found a coin with the name of Quirinius on it in very small writing, or what we call ‘micrographic’ letters. This places him as proconsul of Syria and Cilicia from 11 B.C. until after the death of Herod.”4

Being somewhat confused by this reply, he asked, “What does this mean?” McRay replied:

It means that there were apparently two Quiriniuses. It’s not uncommon to have lots of people with the same Roman names, so there’s no reason to doubt that there were two people by the name of Quirinius. The census would have taken place under the reign of the earlier Quirinius. Given the cycle of a census every fourteen years, that would work out quite well.5

Walter Liefeld in The Expositors Bible Commentary points out another possible solution.

Quirinius had a government assignment in Syria at this time and conducted a census in his official capacity. Details of this census may have been common knowledge in Luke’s time but are now lost to us (cf. E.M. Blaiklock, “Quirinius,” ZPEB, 5:56). An incomplete MS describes the career of an officer whose name is not preserved but whose actions sound as if he might have been Quirinius. He became imperial “legate of Syria” for the “second time.” While this is ambiguous, it may be a clue that Quirinius served both at the time of Jesus’ birth and a few years later (cf. F.F. Bruce, “Quirinius,” NBD, p. 9).6

Regardless of the view one takes to solve this seeming discrepancy, over and over again archaeology has demonstrated the trustworthiness of the Bible on one supposed discrepancy after another. Luke was a painstakingly accurate historian who carefully investigated everything from the beginning regarding the life of Christ (Luke 1:1-4). In all fairness, we must assume that Luke knew something that we do not and wait for the evidence to come in. Earlier, when Strobel questioned McRay about Luke as a historian, McRay replied:

The general consensus of both liberal and conservative scholars is that Luke is very accurate as a historian, … He’s erudite, he’s eloquent, his Greek approaches classical quality, he writes as an educated man, and archaeological discoveries are showing over and over again that Luke is accurate in what he has to say.”7

In view of these facts, we need to give Luke, who lived then, the benefit of the doubt and wait for more evidence to surface.
----------------------------------------------

Read more!

When Bad BCS Football Happens To Good People

Among the unfortunate by-products spawned by the justified firing of Randy Shannon is that fans actually suffering from Mad COW [Coaching Obsessed Whiners] disease will now go undetected for a longer period of time. Far from a victim-less disease, these volume-rich, content-poor purveyors of sports ignorance in Miami have actually been emboldened. The horror. In their heart of hearts, COWers think ... no, they KNOW ... that Kurtz should have switched to a pro set once Marlow was dispatched.

See the type of people who have been calling for Shannon's firing have been doing so since 09/08/07. So God help us, these maggots of misinformation have actually been proven to be prescient for once. Sadly, various clinical experiments have confirmed that Mad COWers don't -- not unlike some of the college football programs they obsess over -- regroup, they reload.

What can uninfected fans do? To paraphrase Jerry McGuire, we can help them by helping ourselves. Identifying the COWers is the first step. Fortunately this will be easy. Any mention of the word Heat, even from a meteorological perspective, will elicit a Dionysian spewing of invectives towards a Mr. Spoelstra [the Filipino-American NBA head coach, not the folk and blues guitarist].

If you are a liberal and feel a need to confirm the obvious before 'Baker-acting' the poor bastard, go ahead and ask a follow-up question. See some sample questions below. Warning - questioner should be prepared to respond with a Zombieland [Rule #2 double tap] lack of emotion should the specimen have a violent reaction:

• Did the U wait too long to fire Shannon?
• Could Jimmy Johnson [pronounced as one word] have done a better job?
• Name any player [ever] Butch Davis could not have recruited? Trick question, does not exist.

Here's what I think about the firing. UM players who have gotten to know Shannon will never forget that their besieged coach acted with class throughout his time here. That he didn't seem to turn on them or throw others under the bus for the failures in his program. They will remember that the guy they most respected in the game, was dismissed with three years left on a guaranteed contract.

So among the lessons Shannon's players could draw from their experience is to use your skills in the game to eventually get paid and never confuse the people who casually state that "it's all about the U" with someone who has lived it by example. There are people who we have to deal with in life and people we respect. They are not mutually exclusive by rule, but overlap only if we are fortunate. If they learn that, that's a pretty good education. Maybe not the type of education they discussed when being recruited, but no less useful. Godspeed with that guaranteed contract Randy Shannon.

Read more!

Faith: Best Defense is a Good Heart

Recently I watched Bill Maher's 2008 comedy/documentary film, Religulous, a play on the words religion and ridiculous. As the title suggests, the the film is not subtle about its intent or treatment of the believers it mocks [think Borat Gone God]. Although I am a believer, I found the film useful in that it catalogs the typical attacks on people of faith. Given Maher's well know adversarial views towards faith, it was surprising to see someone like Francis Collins put himself in a position of having to trust the line of questioning and editing by those hostile to his beliefs.

It was unsurprising to see many every day people -- believers unprepared to defend those beliefs in coherent sound bites, let alone after editing for comedic effect -- made to look foolish as they struggled to explain their beliefs under mostly playful taunting by Maher. It reminded me of the Grouch Marx line about not wanting to be part of any club which would have me as a member. To paraphrase, the last people you want defending the faith on film are those who don't see how a Borat-like interview might make them look bad.

There was one pleasant surprise. I heard an obvious inconsistency in Maher's attacks. When told that the New Testament does not contradict the Old Testament, but rather fulfills it, Maher's reaction was that he was unimpressed given that the New Testament writers had the advantage of tailoring their work to fit Old Testament narratives they were familiar with. The problem with that assertion was that Maher immediately then proceeded to make an issue of how the virgin birth is only mentioned in two Gospels [Matthew & Luke] as a reason to doubt its accuracy. So in the first example, the Bible's consistency is seen as contrived and in the second example, a lack of consistency is evidence of its unreliability.

Predictably, this Sunday's ethernet homily by Fr Vallee sheds wisdom on how to think about and possibly defend the Good News:

The Gospel tonight presents us with a frightening and apocalyptic vision. Does it not strike you that passages like these have an oddly surreal and dreamlike character to them? There is a priest I once knew, not a terribly intelligent or well-educated priest, who insisted on interpreting these passages literally, as if Jesus were coming down to our parking lot any second now in a fiery chariot so that he could beat up the bad people and carry the good people to heaven. This interpretation is not only idiotic, it is heretical. All the way back to Augustine, the basic sense of Scripture has been understood as allegorical, not literal.

The key to understanding passages like this passage is to understand its dream-like quality. God speaks through human instruments and He speaks human words, in a human way. ... The Apocalyptic passages from Luke are very much like Christian opera. They present us with beautiful and dramatic symbols which help us to understand what it means to be Christian in a sinful world. But they do not predict the end of the world, as if God were some sort of divine fortune teller.

To have faith is to learn to dream the dreams of God. The Gospel gives us a vision or a symbol of what life can be. To believe is to learn to live within that symbol and dream the dreams of God....

If you cannot grasp the beauty of that image with your heart, you will never understand what it means with your head. The apocalyptic passages of Luke, like the startling visions of John in Revelation, are not descriptions of how the world will end; they are extraordinary and operatic symbols that tell us what in means to be a Christian here and now in a world full of disgrace -- and even more full of grace.

The email address to request to be put on Vallee's email distribution list is Cioran262@aol.com. To see the entire homily click on 'read more.' Search for other Fr Vallee homilies in this blog by entering 'Vallee' in the search box in the upper left hand corner or look for Fr Vallee in the Labels.

----------------------------------------------------
Fr Vallee Homily on Luke Prophecy -- November 14 2010

I. Apocalypse
In today’s Gospel we are given a strange and scary vision of the end. We will be getting a lot of this as Luke’s Jesus approaches Jerusalem. Fire on the earth, wars, famines and plagues are predicted. Seems like some things never change! Remember before 2000, all of our computers were going to blow up at the same time. The comet was going to bring about the Apocalypse. Right until the present day, if the Tea Party people are to be believed, we are on the verge of socio-economic and moral meltdown. Jesus could not be more clear: “Yes, times are tough they always have been and always will be. But if you walk by faith and not by fear, not a hair on your head will be harmed.” There is always a good reason to panic and a better reason to have faith, which is why I was not a member of the moral majority and cannot join the Tea Party.

II. Philosopher
When I am not here at St. MT/Kevin’s, I teach in a seminary. I have one of the strangest of all jobs: I am a philosopher. It is my job to ask annoying and unanswerable questions, which doesn’t make me a lot of fun at parties. Anyway, here goes with the annoying questions: What do these strange and scary words from the St Luke’s Gospel mean? Do they literally predict a Second Coming or is there some deeper meaning?

III. The Gospel
The Gospel tonight presents us with a frightening and apocalyptic vision. Does it not strike you that passages like these have an oddly surreal and dreamlike character to them? There is a priest I once knew, not a terribly intelligent or well-educated priest, who insisted on interpreting these passages literally, as if Jesus were coming down to our parking lot any second now in a fiery chariot so that he could beat up the bad people and carry the good people to heaven. This interpretation is not only idiotic, it is heretical. All the way back to Augustine, the basic sense of Scripture has been understood as allegorical, not literal.

IV. The Key
The key to understanding passages like this passage is to understand its dream-like quality. God speaks through human instruments and He speaks human words, in a human way. Imagine if you went to the opera and saw Hansel and Gretel. In order to understand the opera, you must understand the literary form of the fable. If you do not, then you will completely misunderstand the work and think that there really are old witches who cook and eat lost children in the forest. My priest friend has made the same mistake with the words of Scripture. The Apocalyptic passages from Luke are very much like Christian opera. They present us with beautiful and dramatic symbols which help us to understand what it means to be Christian in a sinful world. But they do not predict the end of the world, as if God were some sort of divine fortune teller.

V. To believe is to dream the dreams of God
To have faith is to learn to dream the dreams of God. The Gospel gives us a vision or a symbol of what life can be. To believe is to learn to live within that symbol and dream the dreams of God. Our Lord Jesus is daily becoming present in our lives. He comes with all the power and glory of heaven made manifest on earth. His is the King of kings and Lord of Lords and we are washed clean in his blood. Most importantly, if we walk by faith, not fear, not a hair on our heads will be harmed.

If you cannot grasp the beauty of that image with your heart, you will never understand what it means with your head. The apocalyptic passages of Luke, like the startling visions of John in Revelation, are not descriptions of how the world will end; they are extraordinary and operatic symbols that tell us what in means to be a Christian here and now in a world full of disgrace -- and even more full of grace.
----------------------------------------------

Read more!

Delayed Response to Presidential Query

In Miami on Tax Day, April 15th 2010, President Obama had some fun at the expense of his critics. From an ABC News website:

Speaking at a Democratic fundraiser tonight, President Obama touted his administration’s tax cuts and said that the recent tea party rallies across the nation have “amused” him.

“You would think they should be saying thank you,” the president said to applause.

Members of the audience shouted, “Thank you.”

An exuberant Obama appeared at a fundraiser for the DNC at the Arsht Center for the Performing Arts in Miami. The event raised $2.5 million for the party.

Clearly lacking a sense of humor, 202 days [or 17,366,400 seconds, not that I was counting, just sayin ...] later, the unamused responded. A recap from the WSJ:

Lost amid the GOP’s takeover of the House was a series of wins in much smaller races that could collectively have a broader impact on whether the party controls Congress for the next decade: Republicans won control of 17 statehouse chambers on Tuesday; Democrats didn’t win a majority in a single state-level chamber currently controlled by Republicans.

The statehouse sweep gives Republicans a much stronger hand in drawing new congressional districts beginning next year.

As a result of the once-a-decade Census, some states lose some representation in Congress — and others gain seats — based on their populations. After the most recent Census, states such as Illinois, Ohio and Pennsylvania are expected to lose one of their seats in the U.S. House, while Texas, North Carolina, Florida and others will gain seats.

In all, Republicans captured majorities in 17 state-level chambers previously controlled by Democrats, including in the key states of Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Ohio. Republicans also blocked Democrats from taking any of their statehouses, including Texas, which was a top Democratic priority.

Wow, Obama was right after all. Thank you sir.

Read more!

Neocortical Man to the Construe

Look up into the taupe Oval Office. Is it an Iman? No. Is it a Marxist? No. I meant the brother Zeppo. Still no. Is he even a brother? More Hyde Park than Morningside, no bro. Like the majority of the American electorate, do you give up?

It's Neocortical Man!

Allow Michael Gerson to dissect:

Obama clearly believes that his brand of politics represents "facts and science and argument." His opponents, in disturbing contrast, are using the more fearful, primitive portion of their brains. Obama views himself as the neocortical leader -- the defender, not just of the stimulus package and health-care reform but also of cognitive reasoning. His critics rely on their lizard brains -- the location of reptilian ritual and aggression. Some, presumably Democrats, rise above their evolutionary hard-wiring in times of social stress; others, sadly, do not.

Now any columnist when handed this type of spectacularly tone-death material by the President of the United States is going to have a very good day. But what Gerson does next, makes it syndication-worthy. He points out how Obama even got the science wrong.

It is ironic that the great defender of "science" should be in the thrall of pseudoscience. Human beings under stress are not hard-wired for stupidity, which would be a distinct evolutionary disadvantage. The calculation of risk and a preference for proven practices are the conservative contributions to the survival of the species.

By now, even scared bloggers can tell you that this column will not end well for Teleprompter Boy. But frankly, even I was amazed at the ego splatter distance generated by the ending.

... Interpreting Obama does not require psychoanalysis or the reading of mystic Chicago runes. He is an intellectual snob.

Not that there is anything wrong with this. Some of my best friends are intellectual snobs. But they don't make very good politicians....

What must Democrats trying to compete in Pennsylvania or Ohio think when they hear Obama make arguments such as these? Do they realize the tremendous mistake they have made, tying their political fortunes to a leader who makes Michael Dukakis, Al Gore and John Kerry look like prairie populists in comparison?

The complete Michael Gerson column is copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------------
Obama the snob - By Michael Gerson
Tuesday, October 19, 2010

After a series of ineffective public messages -- leaving the political landscape dotted with dry rhetorical wells -- President Obama has hit upon a closing argument.

"Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now," he recently told a group of Democratic donors in Massachusetts, "and facts and science and argument [do] not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we're hard-wired not to always think clearly when we're scared. And the country is scared."

Let's unpack these remarks.

Obama clearly believes that his brand of politics represents "facts and science and argument." His opponents, in disturbing contrast, are using the more fearful, primitive portion of their brains. Obama views himself as the neocortical leader -- the defender, not just of the stimulus package and health-care reform but also of cognitive reasoning. His critics rely on their lizard brains -- the location of reptilian ritual and aggression. Some, presumably Democrats, rise above their evolutionary hard-wiring in times of social stress; others, sadly, do not.

Though there is plenty of competition, these are some of the most arrogant words ever uttered by an American president.

The neocortical presidency destroys the possibility of political dialogue. What could Obama possibly learn from voters who are embittered, confused and dominated by subconscious evolutionary fears? They have nothing to teach, nothing to offer to the superior mind. Instead of engaging in debate, Obama resorts to reductionism, explaining his opponents away.

It is ironic that the great defender of "science" should be in the thrall of pseudoscience. Human beings under stress are not hard-wired for stupidity, which would be a distinct evolutionary disadvantage. The calculation of risk and a preference for proven practices are the conservative contributions to the survival of the species. Whatever neuroscience may explain about political behavior, it does not mean that the fears of massive debt and intrusive government are irrational.

There have been several recent attempts to explain Obama's worldview as the result of his post-colonial father or his early socialist mentors -- Gnostic attempts to produce the hidden key that unlocks the man. The reality is simpler. In April 2008, Obama described small-town voters to wealthy donors in San Francisco: "It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them." Now, to wealthy donors in Massachusetts, opponents are "hard-wired not to always think clearly." Interpreting Obama does not require psychoanalysis or the reading of mystic Chicago runes. He is an intellectual snob.

Not that there is anything wrong with this. Some of my best friends are intellectual snobs. But they don't make very good politicians. Somehow, an aristocrat such as Franklin Roosevelt was able to convince millions of average Americans that he was firmly on their side. But the old social aristocracy could have been taught a thing or two about snobbery by the intellectual upper class -- conditioned to believe their superiority is founded not on wealth or lineage but on "facts and science and argument."

What must Democrats trying to compete in Pennsylvania or Ohio think when they hear Obama make arguments such as these? Do they realize the tremendous mistake they have made, tying their political fortunes to a leader who makes Michael Dukakis, Al Gore and John Kerry look like prairie populists in comparison?

This is not just a political problem; it is a governing challenge. There is fear out there in America -- not because of the lizard brain but because of objective economic conditions. And a reactionary populism can be disturbing when it targets minorities, immigrants and intellectuals. But intellectual disdain among elites feeds this destructive populism rather than directing or defusing it. Obama is helping to cause what he criticizes.

It is among the nobler callings of a leader to understand public fears and then place them in the context of national commitments. Yes, the American dream is fragile, but it won't be recovered by abandoning American ideals. Yes, the borders must be controlled and terrorism is a mortal threat -- but we can't give in to stereotyping and hatred.

One response to social stress doesn't help at all: telling people their fears result from primitive irrationality. Obama may think that many of his fellow citizens can't reason. But they can still vote.

michaelgerson@washpost.com

----------------------------------------------

Read more!

Fable Si, Prescient No: How Legend Becomes Fact

Robert Wuhl had an interesting program a few years back called Assume the Position. The premise was to separate myth from fact regarding people and events in U.S. history and pop culture. The main point was a line made famous in a movie which starred Jimmy Stewart, The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance; "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."

So how does a legend become a fact locally? Last Sunday's Miami Herald article about Norman Braman by Linda Robertson gives us a clue. In a story about Braman and his recall petition efforts against Miami-Dade County Mayor Carlos Alvarez - a recall I support - there is the following:

Two years ago, Braman sued to stop a $3 billion city-county public works plan that he called a "shell game" for its use of anti-poverty money to help build a Marlins baseball stadium, museums, a port tunnel and to aid the performing arts center.

Braman's suit was rejected in court, but last month his warning that Marlins ownership was bamboozling the public and commissioners about team finances proved prescient. While the Marlins were negotiating the deal, claiming they needed public money to stay afloat, the franchise's income made it among the most profitable in baseball, leaked documents revealed.

One little problem. While Braman did claim that the Marlins were misleading the public, his public arguments were that the Marlins financial position was so poor that they would not be able to fund their portion of the stadium costs. The exact opposite of what the leaked financials eventually revealed.

Well, you're thinking, maybe that wasn't really clear, y'know, a matter of emphasis. Sorry, this from a Miami Herald article by Charles Rabin on the trial on July 15, 2008 - Miami Herald links expire so my link is to my blog post at the time:

That didn't stop Braman from going to the heart of his argument -- which brought a string of objections and triggered something of a disjointed appearance by the wealthy businessman in the crowded, stately Miami courtroom.

''I know as a matter of fact that the Marlins do not have the financial capacity,'' was all the 75-year-old former owner of the Philadelphia Eagles could utter before he was cut off by Marlins attorney Sandy Bohrer, who also represents The Miami Herald in unrelated matters.

The court battle between Braman and Loria could make a nice morality play in the hands of a good writer, but it will be a play without heroes. On one side, you had Jeffrey Loria pocketing revenue sharing monies intended for player salaries and lying about the Marlins profitability to ensure the team received public financing. On the other, you had Braman, who surely was aware that the Marlins were profitable since their strategy was hidden in plain sight -- low player salaries combined with increased revenue sharing monies -- yet basing his arguments in court on the position that the Marlins were not profitable so as to box the Marlins in with their own false claims.

In addition to his cynical position taken at the trial, part of Braman's fortune is derived from selling the Philadelphia Eagles [with partner Ed Leibowitz] for almost three times more than what they had paid for the team nine years earlier. The Eagles played at Veterans stadium, a 100% taxpayer-funded facility. After Braman purchased the team, the city of Philadelphia agreed to spend $65 million to upgrade Veterans Stadium. Adding insult to injury for us Miami sports fans with a memory, around that same time Braman was successfully blocking various efforts in Miami to upgrade the Orange Bowl.

I read once that a principle was not a principle until it cost you something. Since Braman's aversion to publicly financed sports facilities was not evident when he stood to profit, I'll have to pass on the great man Kool-Aid being passed around. My view of Braman is more in line with people from Philadelphia. He is not remembered fondly. My favorite Philadelphia-based view on Braman:

... he owned the team to torture us [fans]. Mr Braman was a soulless, cold-blooded auto salesman who could have easily stood in for Lionel Barrymore in the role of "It's A Wonderful Life"s' Mr Potter.

The reason I support the recall petition has nothing to do with Mayor Alvarez's vote for the Marlins stadium - which I support - or Norman Braman's character, of whom I am clearly no fan. Speaking of which, I envision Braman's charitable donations to be in a foot race with his business practices over the years for the mantle of his 'character.' There is one sure winner in that race, 501(c)3's!

I support the recall petition because I want people in government who vote to raise taxes rather that cutting government, especially public pensions, to lose their jobs. I want that to be a clear and unambiguous message to those who intend to hold elective office in the future.

Finally in the Robertson article, we get this:

Braman's appeal as a self-made man with no political or financial aspirations has enabled him to reach across socioeconomic and ethnic boundaries, said Tony Alfieri ... "It's almost fable-like in its historical resonance," Alfieri said.

Fable si, prescient [as in Marlins and Madoff] no.

The Miami Herald article referenced is copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------------
It's the mogul (Braman) vs. the mayor (Alvarez)

BY LINDA ROBERTSON - lrobertson@MiamiHerald.com

Posted on Sat, Oct. 02, 2010

While Norman Braman spoke on a WQBA radio show, supporters gathered outside the station on Calle Ocho in an impromptu rally. Even in a downpour, they came. They wanted to shake Braman's hand or volunteer for his petition drive.

Braman -- billionaire, luxury auto dealer, art collector, philanthropist and Philadelphia native -- had taken his campaign to recall Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez into a neighborhood far removed from his Indian Creek mansion.

In Little Havana, he was received as a kind of savior.

Braman doesn't speak Spanish, but inside the Hispanic community that has long been an Alvarez stronghold, he speaks the words frustrated citizens are longing to hear.

``It's all about saying, `Stop,' '' said Braman, 78, who has used his personal wealth to bankroll three previous challenges of government tax hikes and spending plans. ``People are suffering and our leaders aren't listening. I see the misery and I feel the anger everywhere I go.''

At 3:20 a.m. on Sept. 24, Miami-Dade commissioners voted 8-5 in favor of Alvarez's budget, increasing property taxes for 60 percent of homesteaded property owners and giving pay raises to most county workers.

FUMIGATOR

On Wednesday, Braman chose the Cuban airwaves to announce he had launched the process for a recall vote. The grandfatherly instigator of a populist revolt had a translator.

``Senor Braman, gracias,'' one caller said when Braman was a guest on the ``Prohibido Callarse'' (Silence Banned) show. ``Thank God for you.''

Others told Braman how they had lost their jobs and were struggling to pay their mortgages. A woman on a fixed income wanted to contribute $20.

Some asked him to also recall the two Cuban-American commissioners who voted for the increase, Bruno Barreiro and Natacha Seijas.

``The house needs to be fumigated!'' one caller said.

Others compared Alvarez to Fidel Castro and Hugo Chávez.

``Braman has made people feel empowered,'' said Helen Aguirre Ferre, co-host of the show and a journalist at Diario Las Americas. ``There is a terrible disconnect between politicians and their constituents.''

Braman's message -- combined with 12 percent unemployment, one of the highest foreclosure rates in the nation, construction cost overruns at Miami International Airport, budget woes at Jackson Memorial Hospital, a highly paid county bureaucracy, a generous car allowance for the mayor and double-digit raises for his aides -- has spurred Hispanic voters to focus on local issues, said program host Roberto Rodriguez Tejera.

``It used to be, `Let's talk about Cuba over a cafecito at Versailles,' '' Rodriguez Tejera said. ``We'd talk about Nicaragua or Venezuela but not much about our own politics right here.

``This is a game changer. The days of blindly following politicians out of loyalty are over.''

MAYOR'S RETORT

Braman said he has been ``deluged'' by e-mails, letters and phone calls from people who want to help him collect signatures he needs from 4 percent of registered voters.

``Eighty percent of the names are Hispanic,'' he said. ``Maybe they feel betrayed more than anybody else.''

Alvarez is confident he has plenty of support for a budget that sustained social services and cultural programs despite the deficit caused by plunging property values, his spokeswoman said.

``The Hispanic community is not a homogenous community,'' said spokeswoman Victoria Mallette.

Alvarez called Braman's effort ``a campaign of misinformation and opportunism'' and has formed a political action committee to derail it. The mayor may claim that the recall is illegal because it's the second attempt to oust him in a year. The county charter limits recall petitions to one per 12 months.

Braman, who lost a court fight against the county to prevent public funding of the new Marlins stadium, said he is not nursing a grudge against Alvarez.

``I never dwell, nor do I take pleasure in saying, `I told you so,' '' Braman said. ``Until someone figures out a way to turn back the clock, I've got to move forward.''

Braman said there is nothing personal in his targeting of Alvarez, and that the recall campaign is a first step in making county commissioners accountable, too.

``The mayor is well-meaning and he honestly believes what he says, which I find incredible,'' Braman said. ``He is not corrupt. I just think he is unfit for the job.''

But Merrett Stierheim, former county and city manager and schools superintendent and a keen observer of the civic landscape, questions why Braman is going after a mayor with two years left in his term.

``It makes you wonder if the stadium defeat is part of his motivation: Is this payback?'' Stierheim said. ``Norman says it's not personal, but it's personal for Carlos. How do you depersonalize it?''

Stierheim said Alvarez's budget is flawed, yet Braman's attempt to unseat him is ``ill-timed.''

``I respect Norman but this is going to tear the community apart,'' he said.

A ROBUST 78

The recall campaign is more important than his three previous challenges of the political establishment, Braman said.

``None involved removing an individual from government,'' he said. ``None were as essential to quality of life. None occurred during the greatest economic downturn since the Depression.''

Braman, who underwent spinal surgery in 1991, is a little stooped but still trim and robust thanks to his 60-minute regimen on a recumbent stationary bicycle every morning. He relishes another battle to uphold the fiscal and moral principles he espouses. ``I have to admit it's fun and it energizes me,'' he said.

``Maybe we can make a breakthrough in this county where so much of the business and legal community has sat on the sideline, where so many people have a habit of accepting government as is.''

State Rep. Carlos Lopez-Cantera, R-Miami, said Braman's channeling of citizens' frustration is ``Dade County's tea party moment.''

Braman, No. 269 on Forbes' 2010 list of the world's richest people with a fortune of $1.5 billion, might seem to be an unlikely hero in the Hispanic community. He and his wife Irma are on ARTnews list of the world's ``200 Top Collectors.'' They have raised and donated millions for the arts, the underprivileged, a breast cancer treatment center and Jewish charities. Braman, who owned the Philadelphia Eagles for nine years, spends summers in the south of France.

Yet Braman's roots reveal that he has much in common with blue-collar immigrants. His father was born in Poland, fought for the United States in World War I, owned a barbershop and never drove a car. His mother, born in Romania, began working in a sewing factory at age 12 so she could send money home. DEPRESSION DAYS

``I talk to students at Miami Dade College, and when I ask who is a first-generation American, I raise my hand along with them,'' Braman said. ``I remember walking a mile with my mother during the Depression to save one penny on a dozen eggs.''

Braman worked his way through Temple University, then made his first fortune by selling his shares in a discount drugstore chain. At 36 he ``retired'' to South Florida with Irma and their two daughters, intending to spend more time with the family he had neglected during seven-day workweeks. Before long, he started building his auto empire.

In 1980, Braman considered running for office ``but allowed too many people to talk me out of it,'' he said. ``I should not have listened to them.''

President Ronald Reagan asked Braman to be Immigration and Naturalization Service commissioner in 1981, but Irma didn't want to move to Washington.

Instead, Braman organized his first anti-tax crusade in Miami. His friend Joe Robbie wanted to move the Dolphins out of the Orange Bowl into a stadium Robbie would build with his own money. When voters rejected a one-cent sales tax increase for a new stadium, Miami Mayor Maurice Ferre pushed a tax plan to renovate the Orange Bowl. Braman paid for a $125,000 ad campaign -- and the proposal was defeated by a 4-1 margin.

Ferre doesn't think Braman's current strategy is the right one for reforming government.

``If I was mayor I would not have approved those salaries, but a recall is a disruptive and destabilizing action,'' Ferre said. ``Where was the activism during the electoral cycle, when we need to get good people elected? A recall is the negative way when we have the perfect storm of a bad economy and a country divided to a frightening degree.''

PAST BATTLES

In 1999, Braman flew home from France to bankroll a campaign against County Mayor Alex Penelas' mid-summer proposal for a one-cent sales tax increase for transit improvements. Voters defeated it by a 2-1 margin.

Two years ago, Braman sued to stop a $3 billion city-county public works plan that he called a ``shell game'' for its use of anti-poverty money to help build a Marlins baseball stadium, museums, a port tunnel and to aid the performing arts center.

Braman's suit was rejected in court, but last month his warning that Marlins ownership was bamboozling the public and commissioners about team finances proved prescient. While the Marlins were negotiating the deal, claiming they needed public money to stay afloat, the franchise's income made it among the most profitable in baseball, leaked documents revealed.

Braman's appeal as a self-made man with no political or financial aspirations has enabled him to reach across socioeconomic and ethnic boundaries, said Tony Alfieri, director of the University of Miami law school's Center for Ethics and Public Service.

``It's almost fable-like in its historical resonance,'' Alfieri said. ``Here is a private figure stepping into the public light to speak to widespread disgust. Economic distress is the great leveler.''

For the recall campaign, Braman will post bilingual updates on Facebook and Twitter.

``We'd like to get young people involved since they're the ones who have to bear the horrors of the future when the county has to pay off all the debt it has assumed,'' he said.

Though Braman said he has not cut any of the 1,000 employees at Braman Motors, he feels obligated to stand up for others losing their jobs and homes. He is adamant that the raises and arts funding in Alvarez's budget could have been postponed until the economy recovers.

``LeBron James said he was coming to South Beach,'' Braman said. ``Well, South Beach is not Miami, at least for the people who live here. We live in one of the poorest places in the country.''

Braman sipped cappucino and talked in his office just before going out to dinner with Irma to celebrate their 54th anniversary. In addition to art, he collects historical memorabilia, such as letters from George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. A 13-starred American flag that dates from the Revolutionary War hangs on one wall.

``I look at that flag and it inspires me,'' he said. ``The American revolution began because of unjust taxation.''

Miami Herald staff writer Patricia Mazzei contributed to this report.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/10/02/v-print/1854694/its-the-mogul-braman-vs-the-mayor.html#ixzz11rn6oaJm
----------------------------------------------

Read more!

Castro Brothers To Sue Over H.R. 4645 Debacle

The news Tuesday from the House Foreign Affairs Committee was just too much to bear. Yesterday, the Castro brothers, on behalf of the Cuban government, filed suit in the United States Federal District Court of Connecticut yesterday alleging gross negligence on the part of its apologists working out of the United States.

"We have done 50 years, and could do another 20 more, when it comes to depriving the people of Cuba the basic necessities of life, no problem. [There was a brief interruption in the news conference as Jeffrey Goldberg turned to ask Julia Sweig what that could mean]. But we do have limits as to the effectiveness of the revolution's so-called apologists," Raul Castro was quoted as saying. He then added, "Since promises were made, they should know that only the Revolution gets to determine which promises are broken. Men in our position cannot be made to look ridiculous [beyond the whole sub-third world economy-thing]. We were counting on those dollars. Now what?"

Committee chairman Howard Berman (D-CA) appeared to add insult to injury when he noted in his statement postponing consideration of H.R. 4645 that, "when we debate and vote on the merits of this legislation, and I intend for it to be soon...." The Castro brothers and apologists, in unison perhaps for the last time, openly mocked the notion that progress could be made after the Tea Party wave expected in November. After all, they basically had two years to bring this issue to a vote in a Democratic controlled Congress, with a Democratic President and they came up as empty as actual food derived from Cuban ration cards.

Named as defendant's in the lawsuit are as follows:
Berman, Howard (D-CA)
Booth, William
Clemons, Steve
Calderon, Felipe
Cuba Study Group
Del Toro Sanchez, Benicio Monserrate Rafael
Dodd, Christopher (D-CT) - Emeritus
Davidow, Jeffrey
Juanes
Lee, Barbara (D-CA)
Match.com
Myers, Gwendolyn and Walter
New York Times Editorial page
Orbitz
Peters, Philip
Perry, James DeWolf VI
Rothkopf, David
Saladrigas, Carlos
Stephens, Sarah
Sweig, Julia
Tennant, Don
Thompson, Ginger
Watson, Allison L. - Microsoft

Read more!

Tell The Boys I Am Waiting For Them In Heaven

"Tell the boys I am waiting for them in Heaven," was one of the last thoughts Don Bosco spoke.

This weekend the relics of Saint John Bosco will be among us in Miami. More specifically, his remains will come to the church which bears his name and that I have attended [off and on, now on] since the mid-1960's. It is a time of great joy and anticipation. Last night, a meeting led by Father Juan Carlos Paguaga, the pastor at St. John Bosco Catholic Church, was attended by over 100 people. Each person there had committed to serving in some way. If you get a chance to see the relics, please notice those whose guests you are for that brief time. They will not soon forget the experience.

Pivotal moment in Don Bosco's life

When he was nine years old, he had a dream that was prophetic.

He seemed to be in the middle of a crowd of children at play, some of whom were cursing. Suddenly, the young John threw himself at them, hitting and kicking them to make them be quiet. But a man appeared before him who said: “Don’t hit them, with kindness and love you must win over these your friends. I shall give you a Teacher under whose guidance you will be able to become wise, and without whom, all wisdom becomes nonsense”. That person was Jesus, and the Teacher would be the Virgin Mary, under whose guidance he placed his whole life.

Who dies for a lie?

In one of my favorite book of apologetic's, Lee Strobel's The Case for Christ presents the following arguments about the validity of the Resurrection:

J. P. Moreland's circumstantial evidence added final documentation for the Resurrection. First, the disciples were in a unique position to know whether the resurrection happened, and they went to their graves confirming it was true. Nobody knowingly and willingly dies for a lie. Second, apart from the Resurrection, there's no good reason why Paul and James would have been converted and would have died for their faith. Third, within weeks of the Crucifixion, thousands of Jews began abandoning key social practices that had critical sociological and religious importance for centuries. They believed they risked damnation if they were wrong. Fourth, the early sacraments of communion and baptism affirmed Jesus' resurrection and deity. And fifth, the miraculous emergence of the church in the face of brutal Roman persecution "rips a hole in history, a hole the size and shape of Resurrection," as C. F. D. Moule put it.

So to those with doubts [so this is self-directed part of the time], the question is;

Who dedicates their life over just a dream at the age of nine?

Read more!

Mike González - In The Game

Mike González died about when I was graduating from the great Miami Senior High. His name was familiar to me growing up because my father would mention his accomplishments as a Cuban in MLB with pride, along with his namesake, Adolfo Luque. One of the best pieces of advise I have heard and learned in life is about the need to 'get in the game.' Meaning, whatever it is you want to do, get involved in any capacity and then work your way up [or out, not all our initial ideas are good ones]. So while I have no idea how much González earned from baseball along the way, I am sure he was a success.

On September 24, 1890, Miguel Angel González (Cordero) was born in Havana, Cuba. He would die there 87 years later. Here are some of the things he accomplished in baseball along the way:

• 1910 - Began playing winter baseball in the Cuban League
• 1911 - Played "Negro baseball" with integrated teams from Cuba
• 1912 - MLB debut for Boston Braves
• 1929 - World Series appearance with the Chicago Cubs
• 1932 - Appeared in last MLB game
• 1934 - Joined the St. Louis Cardinals coaching staff under manager Frankie Frisch
• 1938 - Became the first Cuban-born (and Latino) manager in Major League Baseball history
• 1946 - Was the 3rd base coach when Enos "Country" Slaughter made his "Mad Dash" to win the World Series for the St. Louis Cardinals
• 1950's - González is credited with contributing a lasting piece of baseball terminology. Asked by the Cardinals to scout a winter league player, González judged that the player was outstanding defensively but a liability as a batter. He wired back a four-word scouting report: "Good field, no hit." That phrase is still in use today.
• 1955 - Elected to Cuban Baseball Hall of Fame

Please also see the Encyclopedia of Baseball entry for Gonzalez.

Read more!

Miami Herald Editorial Board vs Sarah Stephens

The Miami Herald is no apologist for the Castro regime, Sarah Stephens is.

For a while now, I find myself in complete agreement with the Miami Herald editorials about Cuba. Here is what they wrote today about the recent pronouncements coming out of Cuba:

Now the Cuban people, having been told that their ration cards are losing value and their free meals at work will no longer be served, have to look toward private employment without having the materials necessary to start up their own businesses. Where does a seamstress buy fabrics in Cuba that aren't price-prohibitive? Where would a furniture maker get the wood to craft a table and chairs?

For decades, Cubans have been resolviendo, taking care of things, buying goods on the black market pilfered from government warehouses. That won't change under this new plan until the Castros are gone.

Contrast that with Castro apologist Sarah Stephens writing in the Huffington Post:

As recently as Friday, Cuba's Catholic Church revealed the names of four more political prisoners to be released, under the agreement it made with the government this spring, which will bring to 36 the number of dissidents freed. The agreement calls for all 52 of the remaining prisoners from Cuba's 2003 round up to be let go. This agreement is not uncontroversial among hardliners in the government or the Cuban communist party, but it is being honored nonetheless.

This past week, Cuba's government also announced that it would lay off 500,000 Cuban citizens on state payrolls, and take steps to help the private sector economy absorb them, which sounds an awful lot like they will be less dependent on the government.

These changes, along with others already made, are redefining, as many analysts have written, Cuba's social contract with its own people, and represent extraordinarily difficult decisions taken even in the context of a one-party state.

Defending tyrants is not a job for the feint of heart. If you're keeping score at home; Stephens not only seeks credit for a regime which releases 70% of prisoners illegally detained for 7 years, she implies that the Castro brothers also deserve credit for acting against the wishes of a secret, albeit powerful, new opposition, the much-feared non-Castro hardliners.

Stephens last sentence I underline is a sycophantic tour de force. You see the very reason for "one-party" regimes is that decisions become much less "extraordinarily difficult," since the regimes do whatever they want to whoever they want whenever they want [with apologies to M&M].

Want to hear it from someone outside Miami? OK, how about a Washington Post editorial from Sept 20, 2010:

Predictably, apologists for the Castros and for U.S. corporate agriculture greeted the half step with renewed calls for the lifting of what remains of the embargo on trade with Cuba, or at least the end of all restrictions on travel. This, too, is part of the Castros' strategy. The regime has begun slowly releasing political prisoners into exile -- another limited concession that it has made before -- in the expectation that the Obama administration will respond and that a wave of American tourists will arrive with desperately needed dollars. In fact, the administration reportedly is planning a liberalization of travel restrictions, though not a lifting of the tourism ban.

Castro apologists have one thing in common, they object to being referred to as Castro apologists. But how else to describe people who write what Ms Stephens is writing at this stage of the regime. Shame on her and shame on those of us who forget how those like her have acted and what they have defended during the next chapter of Cuba's history. On the flip side, I am thankful for the views of my hometown newspaper, who gets it and does not allow domestic ideological differences to alter its view of an evil regime.

The Miami Herald editorial referenced is copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------------
Miami Herald Editorial 09/21/10
Cuba's tailspin into the `free' market - Castro's latest desperation move won't work

As Cuba's failed economy struggles after a half century of quashing individual creativity and entrepreneurship, the regime has come up with a plan to lay off a half-million workers -- 10 percent of its workforce. They are being encouraged to open small businesses, instead.

Sounds like ``capitalism-lite'' to us.

Not so, says Fidel Castro, who has been making speeches to university students. The octogenarian says he was misunderstood when he told a reporter for The Atlantic magazine recently that the Fidelista economic model no longer works. It's capitalism that doesn't work, he corrected. Whatever.

It's no secret that Cuba is broke and has been for years, even before the Soviet Union's subsidies ended two decades ago.

Raúl Castro has been hinting about changes since his brother Fidel became sick, and Raúl was put in charge. ``We have to erase forever the notion that Cuba is the only country in the world where one can live without working,'' Raúl told Cuba's National Assembly recently.

And no wonder many Cubans don't seem to want to work. They long ago lost hope that a college education or specialized training would reward them with better earnings, much less let them move to a better home or buy a used car. Cuban youth have grown weary of a dictatorship that seeks to monitor their music, limit their use of the Internet and keep them focused on their next meal by standing in line with their ration cards for steadily declining goods.

Truth is, most Cubans work hard. They just don't work that hard for the government jobs that pay on average $20 a month. To survive they have had to turn to the black market for work or depend on family remittances from abroad if they're so lucky.

Over the years, doctors, lawyers and military officials, among others with ``revolutionary'' clout in Cuba, have been allowed to open paladares (home restaurants), to try to offset their lousy earnings.

But the Cuban government imposed so many rules on those restaurants -- from the number of chairs allowed to the types of meals that can be served (no lobster!) -- and hit them with burdensome taxes of 50 percent or more that the wannabe entrepreneurs had no choice but to close or do their business in hiding. This has meant paying off government overseers so they can sell ``illegal'' lobster meals to European tourists with a wink and a nod.

Farmers markets were another attempt for Havana to survive after the Soviet Union's collapse, but there, too, the regime came down hard so that profits were cut to the bone.

Now the Cuban people, having been told that their ration cards are losing value and their free meals at work will no longer be served, have to look toward private employment without having the materials necessary to start up their own businesses. Where does a seamstress buy fabrics in Cuba that aren't price-prohibitive? Where would a furniture maker get the wood to craft a table and chairs?

For decades, Cubans have been resolviendo, taking care of things, buying goods on the black market pilfered from government warehouses. That won't change under this new plan until the Castros are gone.
----------------------------------------------

Read more!

Ideological Post for Christine O'Donnell

If I had ever heard of Christine O'Donnell before three days ago, I couldn't remember. But now the type of people I intensely dislike are attacking her, so it is time to head back to my the typically-dormant ideological post and be ready to do politics with the next O'Donnell-bashing lefty whom I may encounter between now and November.

I truly look forward to any such encounters since they have proven to be a source of great pleasure in the past. Here's why; Typically, lefty-attackers are just regurgitating who-could-possibly-disagree-with-this Katie Couric-ish pablum. They're not really looking or prepared for an argument, they're just trying to let others know that they get it, they are part of secular mainstream thought.

Aside from financial difficulties [she'll be fine if elected as we know], O'Donnell's main sin to date is a video taped program where she discusses with other young adults why masturbation is not healthy. From a tactical view, the video tells me that Christine O'Donnell is no Elena Kagan. Kagan's confirmation process revealed that she spent her life avoiding doing or saying anything which would cause discomfort in confirmation hearings or as described by man-card-penalized-into-the-next-century George Stephanopoulos [I am sure that testosterone-testing is part of his ABC contract. I just can't figure out if they want him above or below the line].

Turns out that libertarian David Friedman, at best an agnostic, while not necessarily a fan of Ms O'Donnell, is much less of a fan of the type of weak logic exhibited by those who are currently ripping Ms O'Donnell. How lucky can I get. It's like I had a scheduled fight after-school and an MMA fighter begged me to let him take my place.

The great David Friedman on what qualifies as nutty:

Getting curious, I followed up on some of the other evidence offered that she was a nut. One repeated claim was that she was, in Moynihan's words, "opposed to the sinister habit of masturbation," which makes it sound as though she had been campaigning against it. Another story describes her as the "masturbation hating candidate" and links to another informing us that "One of the most notable things on her political résumé is her well-publicized position against masturbation."

All of this seems, as far as I can tell, to be based on a single comment made in the course of an MTV program on sex in the nineties. O'Donnell asserted that the bible says that lust in your heart is to commit adultery, and that you cannot masturbate without lust—both, I think, correct statements. As best I can tell, that is the sole basis for the claims of "well publicized position" and "masturbation hating candidate."

I don't take the bible as a source of truth, but quite a lot of people do, and the fact that O'Donnell does, or at least did at one time, isn't evidence that she is a nut.

...
Running through much of the criticism of O'Donnell is the implications that she is committed to fundamentalist Christianity. It is surely at least worth mentioning that a large part of the reason she sued her employer was, by her own account, the fact that they were.

Finally, it's worth noting that a good deal of the material used to make O'Donnell look nutty is coming from her activities in the nineties, when she was a twenty-something crusading for sexual purity. It would be interesting to see a similar selection for left of center candidates.

Finally, in a later post, Friedman provides a link to an O'Donnell talk on the women in The Lord of the Rings - see C-SPAN 2003 video - a decidedly un-nutty performance. Odds that talk will come up on the networks? Zero. A fight over Christine O'Donnell? I'm in with the blog and a few nutty bucks. Here's the O'Donnell campaign web site.

Please check out a fellow local blogger -- Robert Molleda's Searching for Signs -- who also reacts to the attacks on O'Donnell. Robert spells out in more detail some of O'Donnell's flaws as a candidate, but ultimately believes that the attacks on her are rooted in her social and religious conservative views as opposed to those flaws.

Read more!

Luca Brasi's Twitter Account

1. Brasiscode

Great, everybody's gonna think it was me "@DEATHbyGUIDO: See the thing about masculine children is sometimes you gotta let them grow up. Though I guess you don't have to ... or at least I have 1 friend who didn't."
2 minutes ago via Twitter from pay phone on Bleeker Street near the bakery with the thing out front.
* Reply
* Retweet

2. Brasiscode

@Backtothewall: Thanks for the heads up. Just saw the promo. Hey me watching Boardwalk Empire is like Beldar Conehead reading the bible.
4 days ago via Twitter
* Reply
* Retweet

3. Brasiscode

Like I'se told Lenny when he got into the method thing -- man did Francis hate that and me btw -- 'a verbis ad verbera.' Words to live by, the latter, not the former.
14 days ago via Twitter
* Reply
* Retweet

My bad, I thought you were giving the points.

Read more!

Hubris On Display

This blog post has two purposes. One is to document the continuing attempts -- see Jeff Passan's and Sarah Talalay's columns -- by the Florida Marlins president David Samson to mislead the public about the Florida Marlins profitability and how Jeffrey Loria has benefited from that profitability. The other purpose is to give future auditors a good example of how someone can attempt to mislead by using pretentious language. This latest example came on Samson's radio show with Dan LeBatard on 9/1.

The exchange came with 18 minutes left in the program. My clarifications will be in brackets and my comments will be bolded in brackets. See the text below:

LeBatard: Given your claim that "not a dollar has gone to Loria," what's the explanation for the payments which went to Double Play, a company run by you and Jeffrey Loria?

Samson: Yeah you have to look a little deeper though into the statements and understand they are ... Double Play is the Managing General Partner of a partnership [Marlins] and ... God we're getting so technical it's such bad radio, I'd rather talk about other things [JC: No doubt.] but I will always answer your questions ... Daniel.

Samson: Ugh ... it is a ... it's [Double Play] the Managing General Partner of a partnership [Marlins]. Any limited partnership [type of partnership the Marlins are] has a [Managing] General Partner ... and what Double Play is ... in the books ... is that Managing General Partner ... and the Partnership [Marlins] gives money to the [Managing] General Partner, in the form ... we call it a ... it's a management fee, for its expenses in running the Partnership [Marlins].
[JC: Important to note that Samson has said nothing yet to answer the actual question. He merely stated that Double Play is the Managing General Partner of the Florida Marlins, but he did so in a very confusing manner. For example he never mentions the Marlins, always calls them the partnership, and Double Play is alternately referred to as the 'Managing General Partner' and the abbreviated 'General Partner.' They are one and the same in Samson's explanations.

The question was; Why did the Marlins pay Double Play? Double Play's role in relation to the Marlins is clearly spelled out in statements. So he has merely reiterated facts which were not asked or in dispute, and done so in an attempt to create confusion.]

LeBatard: [clearly baffled] What?
[JC: So it worked, for now.
Where's Jo-Ellan Dimitrius when you need her.]

Samson: What you don't understand or what you want a different answer?

LeBatard: Is that how owners get paid?

Samson: [cough] I, I, ... In terms of getting paid, I don't know what that means.
[JC: He does.]

Samson: In terms of W-2 income ... [cough] ...
[JC: W-2's reflect salaries paid to employees. There is no reason to refer to a 'W-2' when discussing the fees paid by the Marlins to Double Play. Clearly an attempt to confuse in the hopes non-business people associate getting paid with an employee salary, as opposed to a management fee from one company to another.]

Samson: ... it's [Management Fees] expenses that are paid [to Double Play] in the running of the partnership [Marlins].
[JC: So he raised the issue of W-2's and then just ignored it. The question was not whether the monies paid to Double Play were expenses to the Marlins, the question was whether that is how Loria gets paid. Since it is how Loria gets paid, we get his nonsensical answer.]

LeBatard: Like?

Samson: Travel
[JC: Remember, Double Play was paid $5.4 million over two years and is scheduled to earn $3.2 million this year. Samson has tried to imply that Loria does not benefit from those monies because the company which he controls, Double Play, had expenses which would have eaten up the $5.4 million received from the Marlins.

Here, he can't even think of anything significant which would be an expense to Double Play, further evidence that the monies paid were exactly what the question implied, fees paid to the owner. Fees which obviously put a lie to the claim that "not a dollar has gone to Loria."]

LeBatard: Like?

Samson: I could go on and on.
[JC: If he could have, he would have.]

Samson: It's a complicated thing to run a partnership.
[JC: Misleading people about items on audited financial statements is even more complicated.]

LeBatard: And it [costs] millions of dollars right?
[JC: Key question. Without putting a dollar amount on Double Play's expenses, Samson could continue to allude to different expense line items -- for example the "travel" he noted earlier in the interview or the "architects and engineers" he had told the Miami Herald last week -- which don't alter the main point here.

Whatever expenses Double Play may have, they would never approach the $5.4 million paid to them by the Marlins. Because the main reason for setting up a [related party] company like Double Play -- an arrangement which involves two companies with the same owner -- is to pay the owner [Loria] in an indirect manner.]

Samson: Ugh ... it is millions ...
[JC: Careful David, this lie would be really hard to walk back.]

Samson: ... it is millions of dollars [the $5.4 million management fee] that is awarded to the Managing General Partner [Double Play] ...
[JC: No David, we know $5.4 million was paid [awarded?] to Double Play. But what were Double Play's expenses? That's the question now being asked.]

Samson: ... that they [Double Play] then use, it [Double Play] then uses, it's not a they, which it [Double Play] then uses to do it's job.
[JC: But David, the question was how much of the $5.4 million it uses to do that job. Because even if travel amounted to $400,000, that means that Loria personally benefited by $5 million from the team in fees alone over the two exposed years.

To be clear, if Double Play's expenses were millions of dollars, the answer could have been a simple yes. It does not cost millions of dollars to run Double Play. It is how Loria gets his money from the Florida Marlins and simultaneously reduces the Marlins net income. Samson ends the interview how he began it, reiterating facts which were not being asked in such a way as to confuse non-business people.]

LeBatard: We come back with your questions for David Samson....

Some people would argue that this attempt at obfuscation is just part of Samson's job. I believe that if he can't be truthful, Samson should just avoid these type of public comments. Far from revealing any type of financial acumen -- the things I pointed out could spotted by most 1st year accounting students -- they reveal a contempt for the listeners; Marlins fans, people concerned about public monies committed to private projects and the actual hosts of the radio show.

Of the hosts, only Dan LeBatard would claim any type of journalist role, but not necessarily, or perhaps explicitly, not on the radio. But at what point does someone who earns a living at least part of the time as a journalist, have a responsibility not to appear to be complicit in the public dissembling of the Florida Marlins?

To me the complicity comes not in the actual interview, during which it would have been difficult for someone unfamiliar with financial language to spot -- I had the luxury of replaying the broadcast -- but in the lack of a serious follow up, even if it means bringing up the topic on the next show. The irony is that the LeBatard questions I noted in this interview was one of the few times [I'm a regular listener] that there was a follow up to something Samson had said on a previous show.

But what's the point if the follow up is met meet with yet more of the same unchallenged nonsense? Samson has been making these type of misleading comments for years on his shows. It's just too convenient for LeBatard to write that the truth is a matter of perspective when most of Samson's lies have been spoken on his radio program.

This latest radio interview was just another example of the hubris of Jeffrey Loria and David Samson.

Read more!

Griese: Miami Legend Honored

I have written before about how much I admire Bob Griese. As a kid, he was almost a default hero as the Miami Dolphins quarterback. But as the years passed, when things beyond sports matter more in how you think about people, Griese, a fellow Catholic, remained admirable.

His alma mater, Purdue University, also finds much to admire about the man:

The Davey O'Brien Foundation announced Boilermaker icon Bob Griese as the recipient of the 2010 Davey O'Brien Legends Award, which recognizes a college or professional quarterback who has made a significant contribution to the game of football, distinguished himself as an extraordinary leader and demonstrated exemplary conduct on and off the football field.
...
The legendary broadcaster is also very committed to giving back to the community. He serves as Chairman of the Board of Advisors of the Moffitt Cancer Center, is a Board member of the Don Shula Foundation, and is a senior member of the Orange Bowl Committee. He is a devoted supporter of Judi's House, and he has endowed a football scholarship at his alma mater, Purdue University.

Article referenced is copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------
Bob Griese To Receive Davey O'Brien Legends Award

Boilermaker icon recognized as a quarterback who has made a significant contribution to the game of football, distinguished himself as an extraordinary leader and demonstrated exemplary conduct on and off the football field.

Sept. 2, 2010

FORT WORTH, Texas - The Davey O'Brien Foundation announced Boilermaker icon Bob Griese as the recipient of the 2010 Davey O'Brien Legends Award, which recognizes a college or professional quarterback who has made a significant contribution to the game of football, distinguished himself as an extraordinary leader and demonstrated exemplary conduct on and off the football field.

"We are extremely proud to add Bob Griese to the esteemed list of Legends Award recipients," said Scott Murray, Chair of the Legends Committee for the Davey O'Brien Foundation. "It is only appropriate that he is honored for his dedication, leadership and commitment to the game of football."

The award will be presented at the 34th Annual Davey O'Brien Awards Dinner on Feb. 21, 2011 at The Fort Worth Club in Fort Worth, Texas. Griese joins a prestigious list of recipients which includes Dan Fouts (2009), Joe Theismann (2008), Steve Spurrier (2007), Paul Hornung (2006), Len Dawson (2005), Archie Manning (2004), Terry Bradshaw (2003), Bart Starr (2002) and Roger Staubach (2001).

"I am honored to receive the Legends Award and to be mentioned with some of football's greatest quarterbacks," said Griese.

The standout quarterback from Evansville, Ind. earned All-American honors at Purdue where he threw for 4,541 yards and 28 touchdowns. Griese led the Boilermakers to three consecutive winning seasons from 1964 to 1966, including the 1966 Big Ten championship and the school's first appearance in the Rose Bowl, where they defeated USC 14-13.

Griese, known as the "Thinking Man's Quarterback," was drafted by the American Football League's (AFL) Miami Dolphins in 1967. He went on to help lead them to three consecutive Super Bowl appearances, including back-to-back championships in 1972 and 1973.

An AFL All-Star during his first two years, Griese was named consensus All-Pro quarterback in 1971 and 1977, made six appearances in the Pro Bowl and was voted the Dolphin's Most Valuable Player six times by South Florida media.

During his 14 pro seasons with the Dolphins, he threw for 25,092 yards and 192 touchdowns. He also rushed for 994 yards and seven scores. Griese's accomplishments were celebrated with his induction into the College Football Hall of Fame and Indiana Football Hall of Fame in 1984 and into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in 1990. His No. 12 jersey became the first in Dolphins' history to be retired.

After retiring from the NFL, Griese began his career in broadcasting in 1982 as a NFL analyst for NBC Sports. In 1987, he was hired as a television commentator for college football on ABC and ESPN.

The legendary broadcaster is also very committed to giving back to the community. He serves as Chairman of the Board of Advisors of the Moffitt Cancer Center, is a Board member of the Don Shula Foundation, and is a senior member of the Orange Bowl Committee. He is a devoted supporter of Judi's House, and he has endowed a football scholarship at his alma mater, Purdue University.

Griese has three sons, and he and his wife, Shay, live in Jupiter, Florida.

About The Davey O'Brien Foundation The Davey O'Brien Foundation (the Foundation) was founded in 1977 to honor and remember the strong character and leadership of football great, Davey O'Brien. Widely known for its Davey O'Brien National Quarterback Award®, the Foundation recognizes champions on and off the field through national awards programs encouraging academic and career success. The Foundation has given away more than $800,000 in scholarships and university grants to help high school and college athletes transform leadership on the field to leadership in life. More information about the Foundation can be found at www.DaveyOBrien.org.
----------------------------------------------

Read more!

How Loria Took Money For Personal Use

The Miami Herald on Sunday, in an article by Charles Rabin and Adam Beasley, did a good job of summarizing the issues surrounding the web site Deadspin's release of the financial statements for various MLB teams. In addition, they got the Florida Marlins team president David Samson to admit the following:

• "Some" of the money [5.4 million over 2 years] reported as a 'Management Fee - Related Party' to the company Double Play, covered expenses for architects and engineers. This also then means that "some" of the monies represented actual management fees paid to Loria. This is in direct contrast to Samson's assertion earlier in the week - see Jeff Passan's column - 'that not $1 had gone into Loria's pocket.' What are the odds that if the portion of the $5.4 million which had gone to expenses represented all or most of the $5.4 million, that Samson would have failed to note that?
• That Loria collected $16 million from the team in the past 2 years in repayment of loans [interest was not noted, but probably should have been]. My own attempt to quantify the monies which Loria had collected from the Marlins through Double Play came to $14.2 million -- see my earlier blog post.
• Samson refined his 'not $1 in Loria's pocket' defense to "Loria has never taken money from the team for personal use."

Given Samson's track record, it would not be unreasonable to try and analyze that assertion. Other than having enough money to donate $20 million to Yale in March 2007, not much is know of Loria's wealth as far as I can tell.

Why Management Fees = Taking Money For Personal Use

We don't need any special insight to know that any monies paid to a company Loria controls, like Double Play, should be considered funds that are at his disposal, net of any expenses. As such, almost by definition, whatever amount "some" of the $5.4 million in management fees paid to Double Play which were not being used to cover expenses [architects and engineers] amounted to, those funds would end up at Loria's disposal, or for his personal use.

Left unexplored is why any necessary stadium related expenditures would be handled through an owner controlled company instead of the Florida Marlins themselves. Lack of transparency is not some unfortunate by-product here, it is likely the main purpose of involving Double Play.

Here is how the Marlins will respond. When Samson said "taken" he did not mean to include Loria's management fees [payments to an owner], which likely is most of the $5.4 million. Neither did he mean to include the $16 million of loan repayments and interest earned on those loans. He only meant the net earnings [or surplus in the case of a partnership] from the Marlins themselves.

Then let Samson and the Marlins say that -- with all the caveats which that entails -- rather than making cynical statements which imply that their owner has not benefited [income and cash flow well into eight figures] personally from the team's finances during the two years exposed. The truth is that one of the purposes of a company like Double Play is that it allows owners to take monies from the main business, without appearing to be taking the money directly.

More left unexplored is how many owners of franchises preparing to build stadiums can use that time to pull monies out of their team instead of having to invest in a project which will substantially increase the value of their investment. Loria's behavior is especially egregious when you factor in that the franchise increased in value by about $70 million during the two years covered, as per Forbes valuations, which have an excellent track record. No wonder respected MLB writer Buster Olney has called for a government investigation of the Marlins.

One of Miami's best know journalists remains neutral on this issue. Elsewhere in the Sunday Miami Herald, it took Dan LeBatard about 1,300 words to conclude that this issue is really complicated. As evidence, he noted that he received unsolicited input from CPA's which defended Samson. One was quoted as writing:

Few people understood then, and understand now, how poorly capitalized Loria is.

Unless that CPA was privy to Loria's personal financial statements and or those of his company Double Play, the released Florida Marlins financials would not tell you how well or poorly capitalized Loria was or is. They tell us how leveraged the Florida Marlins were, not Jeffrey Loria, an important distinction. The fact that Double Play lends the Florida Marlins money, is evidence that Loria keeps his money elsewhere. The one concrete observation about Jeffrey Loria's personal finances which can be made after reading the Florida Marlins financials [and the Rabin and Beasley article], is that his cash flow increased by at least $16 million [plus "some" management fees] during the two exposed years. Maybe it's time for some solicited opinions?

Even more left unexplored. How does a team with operating income of $134 million [according to Forbes - hey, we're done with the whole Forbes just makes it up spin no?] since Loria purchased the team in 2002, end up in debt with a partners' deficit? Just think of it this way, if 2008 and 2009 resulted in a total of $52 million in operating income, what would make 2006 and 2007 any different in terms of profitability? What makes 2010 that much different [in terms of baseball operations]? Same bottom of the league payroll and same revenue sharing agreements in place since 2006. Where did all the operating income go? The amount of management fees paid to Loria during that time is probably a good place to start. At least we know the profits are not in the bullpen.

This whole issue reminds me of Malcom Gladwell's observation on the need for journalists to be smarter [about accounting and statistics]. I would add that a willingness to go outside comfort zones could easily compensate for any industry specific or technical issues.

The Rabin and Beasley article referenced is copied in full at end of post.

----------------------------------------------------
Marlins saved millions in revenue-sharing deal
BY CHARLES RABIN AND ADAM H. BEASLEY
crabin@MiamiHerald.com

The Florida Marlins reaped more from Major League Baseball's revenue sharing than the team paid for player salaries the last two years -- a disparity fueling the $52 million in operating income the franchise pocketed in that time, previously secret financial records show.

The team secured its profit -- which exceeded that of five other franchises whose books have also been leaked -- as it won hundreds of millions of dollars in public money for its new stadium, the records show.

Critics chide the team for lobbying for $487 million in public money for its $642 million stadium as its own financial health was robust. The Marlins tell a different story: That the bottom line represents sound financial footing allowing the team to contribute $155 million to the structure rising in Little Havana.

Either way, there's no disputing the bottom line:

``The Marlins are running a shoestring budget so they can turn a profit,'' said Neil deMause, a Brooklyn-based journalist who co-authored the 1999 book Field of Schemes: How the Great Stadium Swindle Turns Public Money into Private Profit.

The previously confidential information came to light last week when the sports website Deadspin.com released the private financial statements of the Marlins and five other teams: the Tampa Bay Rays, Pittsburgh Pirates, Seattle Mariners, Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim and the Texas Rangers.

The documents covered the 2007 and 2008 seasons for the Pirates, Rays and Mariners, and 2008 and 2009 for the Marlins, Rangers and Angels.

While that makes it impossible for an apples to apples comparison, the records provide the first comprehensive look at MLB's financial doings.

And, they show how the Marlins separated from the pack in the amount of money it collected from revenue sharing and income it earned:

• The Marlins reported the largest operating income over a two-year period, at $52 million. Next came the Pirates at $38 million, the Rays at $36 million, the Angels at $23 million and Mariners at $6 million. The Rangers were the only team to record a net operating loss, of $8 million.

• The Marlins also collected the most net income, at $33 million, followed by the Pirates at $29 million, Angels at $18 million, Rays at $15 million and Mariners at $13 million. The Rangers, meanwhile, were $23 million in the red.

• The team secured its largest financial advantage in revenue sharing, in which big-market teams share their wealth with smaller franchises.

In the two years, the Marlins received $92 million in revenue sharing, enough to cover the team payroll in that time with close to $20 million left over to go toward ballpark construction or other costs. Earlier this year, MLB called into question the team's payroll practices.

The Rays collected $75 million from revenue sharing, the Pirates $69 million, and the Rangers $29 million. The other two franchises paid more than they pocketed, with the Mariners reporting a loss of $24 million and Angels $31 million.

The numbers also show the Marlins were last in concession sales and next to the bottom in television and radio revenue, ahead of Tampa.

On the flip side, the Marlins -- who have remained competitive on the field despite being at or near the bottom of payroll in baseball -- devoted the largest share for player development, at $60 million, according to the sports business website BizOfBaseball.com. The Pirates were next closest at $44 million.

Ultimately, the records reveal a franchise turning a healthy profit.

``It should come as no surprise -- and, in fact, a great comfort -- that the team's balance sheet reflects the wherewithal to honor its commitments,'' County Manager George Burgess wrote Friday.

Of the Marlins' share of stadium costs, $120 million will be a direct contribution and $35 million a loan the team will repay the county through yearly rent. Bond deals are bankrolling the public end of financing, and interest costs could ultimately send the tab above $2 billion.

``The deal is so one-sided, it's really sad to see this community obligated for 30 years,'' said art collector Marty Margulies, who campaigned against the use of public money for a stadium set to open in 2012. ``At the end of the day, the people who voted for this . . . are to blame.''

In March 2009 the Marlins won a decades-long battle to secure financing for the stadium now reaching skyward and visible miles away.

Team owner Jeffrey Loria landed the deal through commission votes in Miami and Miami-Dade, beating back a lawsuit from billionaire auto magnate Norman Braman and a legal effort to show the public its books.

Loria and Marlins President David Samson said the information was proprietary, convincing a judge local government didn't need to see the records to award the money.

Though the team never released its financial records, Samson said it allowed elected leaders to speak with the Marlins' bankers.

Some county and city commissioners are trying to reopen negotiations over the stadium and parking contracts, citing the franchise's bottom line.

``Now, Mr. Samson on the record says that at the time, city officials in Miami knew everything about their finances -- and yet on the record before the city commission they refused to disclose their records,'' said Miami Mayor Tomás Regalado, who voted against the stadium as a commissioner and is trying to get the parking deal restructured.

Whether that will happen is yet to be seen, but Samson said city and county leaders were aware of the team's financial shape. ``You may disagree on how we run the team. But I didn't lie. The documents are right there,'' he said.

The president also said Loria has never taken money from the team for personal use.

That may be so, but in 2008 and 2009, the Marlins paid $5.4 million to Double Play Company, whose partners are Loria and Samson. Samson said some of that money covered expenses like the hiring of architects and engineers.

Also, the documents show Loria collected $16 million from the team the past two years. Samson said that represented repayment of a loan Loria provided the team to help with stadium costs.

``The team needed money,'' Samson said. ``Jeffrey lent the team money and the team has to pay him back.''

Samson said the ballclub used revenue sharing to shore up its bottom line so lenders would feel more comfortable that the franchise could cover its end of the stadium cost.

When the revenue-sharing system was adopted in 1996, broad language was written into the collective bargaining agreement between the union and baseball owners that allowed a team to use the proceeds ``to improve its performance on the field.''

The Marlins received a public slap on the wrist earlier this year from Major League Baseball and the players' union. Though the league never said why, it's been reported the team wasn't spending enough on payroll. The team later signed All-Star pitcher Josh Johnson to a multi-year contract.

Still, the position of MLB Commissioner Bud Selig is that, over time, the franchise has been in compliance with the use of revenue-sharing.

``It is always possible to take a club's financial statements in a given year and make an argument that they spent less on payroll than they could have,'' said MLB executive vice president for labor relations Rob Manfred.

``But with a lower-revenue club, you have to look at it over a number of years.

``When you think about the revenue sharing system, you have to focus on the system as a whole, and it has been very successful in improving the level of competitive balance.''

The Marlins have won two World Series, most recently in 2003 when the club toppled the big budget Yankees -- ironically, a team contributing a share of Miami's payroll.

Since then, the ballclub has jettisoned accomplished players, including Miguel Cabrera, Dontrelle Willis and, this year,Jorge Cantu and Cody Ross.

Opening the 37,000-seat, retractable-roof stadium will strengthen the Marlins' long-term financial health, said MLB's Manfred. The roof is sure to draw fans wary of rain or scorching heat.

And, the Marlins will reap more from concessions as the contracts stipulate the team collects almost all the revenue from a new ballpark.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/08/28/v-print/1797179/marlins-saved-millions-in-revenue.html#ixzz0y1J5HAsl
----------------------------------------------

Read more!