« January 25, 2006 | Main | January 27, 2006 »

January 26, 2006

Seahawks Roundup

Anybody can go to the Seattle P-U or The Slimes sports pages to get the local view of the Boys in Blue, or as ElegantDistractions likes to call them, the Maul Rats.

On the other hand, it's not espcially easy to find articles on the Seahawks in the national press, in spite of that Super Bowl thingie you may have heard about. Nevertheless, I've tracked down some good pieces.

Let's start with a pretty good article on Holmgren.

USA Today has provided the most coverage so far, more than even the NFL itself, with writings on Jerramy Stevens, Big Walt, and Matt Hasselbeck. They also have two write-ups on the defense here and here.

The numbers geeks at Football Outsiders gave Lofa a nice review prior to the Panthers game.

Somebody even wrote about the owner and his contributions to the team, besides the fat wallet.

Dr. Cheeks explains the silliness around the fight for the underdog position. Best line:

You also have to think that other NFL teams' marketing departments curse when they see the flag raised in Seattle before every game -- "#@$%, why didn't we think of that?!"

Team updates can be found on an irregular basis at Fox Sports.

TMQ provides a nice review of the Panthers game in his unique style, saying "Finally someone had a game plan for Steve Smith!"

Finally, here is a video trying to explain why the Seahawks are the underdogs in the Big Fight.


For Once I Agree With Sheets

I am normally diametrically opposed to everything Sheets Byrd has to say but I find myself agreeing with him for once. Apparently he got an earful from his constituents because he has come out 1) for Alito and 2) against the Democratic tactics.

Here are some choice quotes:

http://bench.nationalreview.com/archives/088390.asp
All of these issues should be debated but the battle line should not be drawn on the Judiciary. It should be debated by the peoples' representatives right here in the legislative branch. However, too many Americans apparently believe that if they cannot get Congress to address an issue then they must take it to the Court. As the saying goes: "if you can't change the law, change the judge."
This kind of thinking represents a gross misinterpretation of the separation of powers. It is the role of the Congress, the role of the legislative branch to make and change the laws. Supreme Court justices exist to interpret laws and be sure that they square with the Constitution and with law.

-Godshatter

Bush Lied! Not?

The idea that Iraq didn't have WMD before the war has been pretty much accepted as fact. Is it though? Saddam's #2 air force official says it isn't:

The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein's air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.


-Godshatter