Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why The Difference Between Sports And Politics?
Free Republic | 9/30/2011 | Publius

Posted on 09/30/2011 8:30:19 AM PDT by Vintage Freeper

Where is the Instant Replay?
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

    Given that good people generally know the risk and potential result of doing nothing, and given the fact those same people commonly know where the socialists with "good intentions" are going to end up leading us, it is essential to understand why those same people which includes the "right people", almost invariably refuse to seek office. Key to learning how to recruit sufficient numbers of the right people is a thorough review that will allow us to understand the few instructive exceptions that have occurred in the recent past.

    Some of the most famous men in boxing-ring history weren't really "boxers" at all. They had real "knockout" punches that provided their victories as long as they could stay on their feet until they had the chance to use them. Babe Ruth's major league baseball career began as a pitcher, until someone realized how well he could hit. Golfers understandingly play to their strengths. Ben Crenshaw wants to get on the green; John Daly prefers the tee box. In sports, whenever a team or a competitor develops a winning play or strategy, they rerun it at every opportune chance they get as long as it keeps working. Even after it has apparently stopped working, they run it a few more times on different occasions or in different events just to be sure it doesn't really work anymore. In case anyone has any reservation or doubt, how often did Jim Brown run the ball for Cleveland? How many passes did Johnny Unitas throw in his career? How often did the Bulls work the ball to Michael Jordan?

    In 1994, a conservative political genius devised a strategy of listing ten issues that were near and dear to the hearts of all conservative Americans. Republicans swept the elections gaining control of both houses of Congress for the first time in the lives of most of the conservatives that voted that year. It was no different for the candidates. Precious few of the incumbents in either house, whether defeated or re-elected had ever held office when Republicans controlled either house let alone both.

    Was the election simply a backlash from Hillary's health care plan? Undoubtedly backlash was part of it, but the election could not have turned on the outcome of a pending health care vote because Hillary's plan had already been defeated in September before Congress adjourned to campaign for the November election. Americans are generally optimistic and forgiving; they normally prefer to vote for a candidate or an issue rather than voting for revenge. In choosing between the slate of Republican candidates or the Contract with America, who would be willing to dispute that more people voted for the Contract than were voting for the individual candidates?

    Could the Contract with America have been the political equivalent of a knockout punch? The forward pass? Having a Jim Brown on third and one? Most people would be inclined to recognize the possibility except for one small detail. We have been more than ten years, five congressional election cycles, and Republicans have not even mentioned the Contract in conjunction with an election. In each and every one of those elections, Republicans held their collective breaths and Democrats were cautiously optimistic about regaining one or both houses of Congress. Two elections later, and even after Democrats regained the Congress and were expecting to retake the Whitehouse, Republicans have never once seriously discussed another Contract with America. In the fourth quarter of a close play-off game, as the Chicago coach would you keep Michael Jordan on the bench? What would happen to the losing coach who had benched the team's super-star at the very time they were needed the most?

    Answering the question of why "professional" politicians have behaved differently from professional athletes is the first step toward understanding how to elect statesmen, patriots if you will, exactly analogous to the Founding Fathers.

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Politics/Elections
History says that hoping the Republican Party is going to lead the country in a more conservative direction could be wishful thinking.

History says that hoping a change in the leadership of the Republican Party will result in the Republican Party leading the country in a more conservative direction could also be wishful thinking.

In contrast, if FreeRepublic were to get behind our effort and help us call it to the attention of the Koch brothers, there is a real chance of getting the attention of both the Republican and Tea Parties who definitley have the potential to lead the entire country in a more conservative direction.

We the people need leaders who will keep running our political instant replay in every election until We have won our freedom back and not only restored the Constitution, but also improved it.

With FreeRepublic's help, your help, and the Koch's help, We can do this in less than a decade.

1 posted on 09/30/2011 8:30:26 AM PDT by Vintage Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Vintage Freeper; Jeff Head; Cen-Tejas; sport; MWS; seekthetruth; Liz; ForGod'sSake; DollyCali; ...


2 posted on 09/30/2011 8:31:36 AM PDT by Vintage Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson