Lineup contends for mediocrity: Opening day post, No. 1

They just announced the Mets lineup for opening day, and it is not a pretty one:

  1. Alex Cora, SS
  2. Luis Castillo, 2B
  3. David Wright, 3B
  4. Mike Jacobs, 1B
  5. Jason Bay, LF
  6. Garry Matthews, CF
  7. Jeff Francouer, RF
  8. Rod Barajas, C
  9. Johan Santana, P

I know Cora and Matthews are supposed to be temporary fixes, but the fact that both are in the opening day lineup should dispel any optimism those of us rooting for this might have had. Cora is a career backup and Matthews — his lone good year in the big leagues came under the influence of performance-enhancing drugs. Throw in Jacobs, Barajas and Catillo, and you can see why I think this team will be lucky to compete for third.

Division prediction: Phillies, Braves, Marlins, Mets, National. And that is sad, indeed.

Employment numbers are more a blip than a surge

I don’t mean to be a downer, but the 163,000 jobs created last month — which includes people working for the Census Bureau — barely covers what is needed to offset the number of new workers entering the work force. That’s just not good enough, given that we’ve lost about half a million jobs a month for the last 15 months.

We need a far more aggressive jobs plan, one that will create 750,000 to 1 million jobs a month for the next year to 18 months.

Anything less will leave too many people out of the economy.

Letter to liberales

Another day, another disappointment for progressives (this time, oil drilling), another reason to stop pretending that the Obama administration is something that it’s not.

 

Consider this an open letter to my liberal comrades, those who still believe that Barack Obama offers the kind of hope he promised during his campaign. He is better than the alternatives were, at least the major party candidates, but he is proving not to be a transformational president. In fact, he is nothing more than a milder, more liberal version of Bill Clinton, a member of the corporate status quo interested only in tinkering around the edge.

 

Liberal friends, as yourself these questions. Would you support a candidate who:

  • expanded health coverage nominally by funnelling money to the insurance industry?
  • signed an executive order endorsing a ban on the use of federal funds for abortions?
  • expanded the war in Afghanistan and left much of the war in Iraq in place?
  • opened off-shore areas to oil drilling?:
  • supports the foolish notion that coal, one of the dirtiest fuels on the planet, can be made clean and green?
  • defens the state secrets act, warrantless wiretapping, extraordinary rendition and other dubious, constitutionally suspect practices used in the war on terror?
  • focused on budget cutting and deficit reduction when job creation demands a bigger stimulus?

 Would you support a candidate who, at nearly every turn, thumbs his nose at your core beliefs, who views your support as a given and takes you for granted? Should you?

 

You want to say “no,” but you would be lying to yourself, your continued, unquestioning loyalty to the president regardless of his actions is proof of the lie. Yes, Obama is better than McCain, Palin, even Hillary Clinton, but that is not enough, should not be enough.

 

Core principles matter. We have to show the president and Congress what our core principles are and make it clear they have to respect them, take them seriously and start building policy based on our core principles and not those of the corporate order.