“The world has lost a great champion. I will always remember Joe with respect and admiration. My sympathy goes out to his family and loved ones.”-Muhammad Ali

March 8, 1971 Frazier is directed to the ropes by referee Arthur Marcante after knocking down Muhammad Ali during the 15th round of the title bout at Madison Square Garden in New York. AP

One of the finest boxing legends of the modern era has passed away:

Joe Frazier, 67, the former heavyweight boxing champion who was known for his fighting spirit, powerful punch and intense rivalry with Muhammad Ali, died Monday night in a hospice in Philadelphia. He had been suffering from liver cancer.

As a heavyweight in all senses of the word, Mr. Frazier was one of the best known champions of the latter decades of the 20th century.

While at the top of the heavyweight ranks, the elite of boxing, in the late 1960s and early 1970s, Mr. Frazier, who went by the sobriquet of Smokin’ Joe, was known for his knockout punch.

In more than two dozen fights, Mr. Frazier’s ferocious, brawling, slugging style sent his foes to the canvas for the full count.

Among boxing fans, and connoisseurs of popular culture, his bouts with Ali have become enshrined in memory. He was the first to defeat Ali in the ring. It happened in New York’s Madison Square Garden, long the world’s capital of prizefighting.

The contest went the full 15 rounds, neither able to dispatch the other, in what was described in the hyperbole of the sports world as the Fight of the Century.

In all they had four fights, and in one of them, the “Thrilla in Manila,” they outdid their previous efforts for the title.

In that 1975 slugfest, Ali emerged the victor when Mr. Frazier could not answer the bell for the final round.

In addition to his legendary battles with Ali, Mr. Frazier was also known for two fights with George Foreman. In the first, Foreman took his title from him.

But the rivalry with Ali was what he was better known for, a kind of face-off in the ring and outside it, that emphasized the contrasting styles and personalities of both men.

With a less flamboyant and engaging image than Ali’s Mr. Frazier seemed far less expressive, possessed of a stolid ruggedness of a hard-working man who let his fists and his dedication speak for him.

Click here to view the embedded video.

More from the AP:

he also was the only American fighter to win a gold medal in the 1964 Olympics in Tokyo. He was the heavyweight champ from February 1970 to January 1973, an era when that crown truly meant something. He was beloved as an adopted son of Philadelphia, embodying the city’s blue-collar grit.

And when the last round of his final fight ended Monday night, reaction to Frazier’s death poured in from every corner of the sports world.

“Good night Joe Frazier. I love you dear friend,” former heavyweight champion George Foreman, who stopped Frazier to win the title, posted to his Twitter account.

WBO welterweight champion Manny Pacquiao said boxing lost “a great champion” and “a great ambassador.”

And it wasn’t only other boxers who were touched by Frazier. Tennis star Serena Williams called him an icon and a pioneer.

“Inspiring and loved. Your presence will be missed,” she tweeted.

Don King, who promoted the steamy fight in the Philippines that became known as the Thrilla in Manila, was described by a spokesman as too upset to talk about Frazier’s death.

WBC light heavyweight champion Bernard Hopkins, a fellow Philadelphia fighter, said Frazier was so big in the city that he should have his own statue, like the fictional Rocky character.

“There’s no way in the world you should come to Philadelphia and not recognize who Joe Frazier is. It’s the perfect time to build the biggest statue in appreciation for all the heart and love he gave to Philadelphia,” Hopkins said. “It’s just to say how we regret when it’s not there to touch and see. We didn’t realize we had a super special person amongst us that we all in a way took for granted. I said this when he was living, I say this now. That’s the only thing.”

Bob Arum, who once promoted Ali, said the famous bout in the Philippines was “the greatest fight in the history of boxing.”

“Joe Frazier should be remembered as one of the greatest fighters of all time and a real man. He’s a guy that stood up for himself. He didn’t compromise and always gave 100 percent in the ring. There was never a fight in the ring where Joe didn’t give 100 percent,” Arum said.

Vitali and Wladimir Klitschko, who hold all the major heavyweight belts, paid respect to Frazier on Tuesday.

“My brother and I are very sad about the death of Joe Frazier,” said Vitali Klitschko, the elder of the two brothers and the WBC champion. “He was one of the really great heavyweights. He was a great champion and Joe did a lot for the sport of boxing through his social engagements.”

Wladimir Klitschko is the WBA, IBF and WBO heavyweight champion.

Former German heavyweight Axel Schulz also praised Frazier.

“He marked the gigantic era of heavyweight in the 1970s. The news made me incredibly sad,” Schulz told the German news agency dapd. “I was shocked by how fast it all went.”

The heavyweight champion’s life and career: Joe Frazier, the former heavyweight champion who handed Muhammad Ali his first defeat, died Nov. 7 after a fight with liver cancer. He was 67.

The Merchant of Venice, Act IV, Sc. I
I am a tainted wether of the flock,
Meetest for death: the weakest kind of fruit
Drops earliest to the ground.

True Love Often Overlooks Previous Indiscretions,

Conservatives traditionally resist government intrusion into the home and personal lives of American citizens: Liberals tend to welcome the guiding hand of government into every facet of modern life. This is one of the fundamental differences between Liberalism and Conservatism. During the GOP Debate, Rep. Bachman called Governor Perry on his issuance of an executive order in 2007, requiring all girls in Texas to receive Gardasil, unless a waiver was signed by her parents. Gardasil by Merck, prevents infection of the more common strains of human papilloma virus. These particular viruses, once established, can initiate genital warts, as well as cervical, anal, vulvar, and vaginal cancers. The vaccine Gardasil prevents the infection and consequently prevents the associated diseases.

Texas lawmakers blocked the EO, arguing that the vaccine was too new to be considered safe, others argued that the order preempted parental rights and that the vaccine would encourage young girls to become sexually promiscuous at an early because of a false sense of security provided by the Gardasil.

The Flirtatious and Promiscuous Scarlet Has A Difficult Time Choosing From Her Many Suitors

Michelle Bachman provided an example of personal anecdotal evidence to stress the risk of injecting the vaccine into young girls. Apparently a young mother told her that her daughter suffered mental retardation after being injected with the vaccine. Thus this is more than enough proof for Bachman to refute the scientific studies of over 20,000 women and girls who were injected with the vaccine prior to FDA approval.

The studies concluded that the vaccine was 100% effective, an almost unprecedented result. The most serious side effect was redness, soreness, and swelling of the injection site.

Gardasil may be considered one of the most extraordinary risk-benefit ratios of all pharmaceuticals.

We have government intrusion in our lives; we are now required to wear seat belts and motorcycle helmets. People accept the fact that seat belts make crashes more survivable, as do motorcycle helmets, but the helmets interfere with the image of a bad ass on a motorcycle. Therein lies part of the conflict; much of our choice of transportation is based on an image. An image that we subscribe to and emulate within our own psyche and an image that we want to cultivate in the minds of those who view us. Yet the motorcycle road racer would never consider running down the track at speeds approaching two hundred miles an hour without a helmet, but if helmets save lives in motorcycle wrecks by lessening head trauma, how many lives could be saved if drivers and passengers of cars and trucks were required to wear a helmet. Surely head trauma is a major cause of death on the highway.

Since nearly all people engage in sexual activity, all of us are exposed to the papilloma virus. A rarely discussed fact is that certain men are carriers of the infection. Although they suffer no ill-effects, if they have multiple partners, they can spread the infection to many others, bringing misery and death as an unseemly gift of their sexual prowess.

The public would be enraged, Conservatives particularly, if these carriers of this often lethal infection were identified on the internet so that potential partners could have a choice in avoiding the infection of Don Juan types intent on serial infection of vulnerable maidens. Consequently, we allow carriers to continue to spread untold misery and death among females as a cost of our Constitutional freedoms.

A woman may only have one partner in her sexual life, but if that partner is a carrier of the infection, she will more than likely suffer through one or more of the associated diseases and death as a result.

Will we Conservatives be able to face our daughters and granddaughters if they have contracted one of the dreaded diseases and tell them that it is only collateral damage and a cost of our freedom; she may die secure in the knowledge that she contracted the disease as a free woman and she may now die a free woman, she can also take solace in the fact that the man who infected her will be free to infect many more women and their other partners as well, all in the name of freedom.

We may all rest assured that scientific minds like Michelle Bachman’s can recognize a potential problem when a woman complains that her twelve year old daughter suffered mental retardation after being injected with Gardasil.

As a Conservative, I realize that strict adherence to any ideology leads to fanaticism; common sense must be injected into the mix to keep the ideas and goals viable, but interposing uninformed personal opinions and ignorance into any situation is counter productive and nearly as offensive as falsifying data under the premise of science.

Hypnos and Thanatos (God of death) carrying dead Sarpedon, while Hermes watches.

First off, I’m not a golfing fan. My dad always tried to get me to golf, even making me a set of pint-sized clubs when I was a wee wordsmith. Was bored, bored, bored. Bored playing it; bored watching it.

Haven’t followed Tiger Woods’ career, either. Only know about him because people make such a big deal about him. Can’t escape news.

Don’t really care about his personal life, either; only reason I’m doing this post is because it’s news, it’s quick and easy, and I’m bored. And when I’m bored, I think of golf.

I thought I’d post some of his memorable commercials I’ve found interesting and likable.

My favorite:

This is the kind of talent I love watching. Plus it’s done in under 30 seconds rather than 3 hours of watching someone chase a ball for 18 holes while the grass grows.

Oh, wow….we’re all lion cheetahs, now:

Perhaps John Edwards and Jesse James can star in a new remake version?

“I’m Lion Woods….I’m Cheetah Woods”

And the new one; a little creepy but interesting and perhaps controversial:

Wow. Makes me want to go out and buy some Nikes!

Weird commercial. Seems to be a Nike ad to promote Tiger to keep him marketable to promoting Nike.

The floodgates on Tiger Woods news opened and cannot be closed, as he remains the biggest story in all media. Notoriety and cash seeking alleged girlfriends surface by the hour, and rare factual tidbits eek out, tantalizing our celebrity obsessions with a daily fix. Are we actually learning anything from the circus that has become Tiger’s life?

To fuel the frenzy, as if that was needed, Associated Press assigned Woods the title of Athlete Of The Decade. This may simply be an attempt to confuse us at to what constitutes either a “sport,” or an “athlete.” Did Lance Armstrong, Roger Federer, Ronaldinho and Michael Schumacher not demonstrate enough dominance in their “game,” or sufficient superiority of character? Probably, but this isn’t about athleticism.

Woods has dominated Golf, and that undeniable fact has brought him acclaim which in turn has imposed the weight of $100 million in annual endorsements onto his life. The current meaning of endorsement is, “pretend you like our products so that those who idolize you will believe you enough to buy them. Your brilliance on the golf course means you are an upstanding, honorable and respected character. Your word is gold.” Well-crafted endorsements are swarmed by expectations, and tinged by assumptions.

The public assumes that if you are supremely great on the golf course, you must also be gifted with other assets such as intelligence, grace, maybe even a little common sense. No chance that you might be narcissistic or self absorbed, and no chance that you believe your own press. Yet, your biggest challenge is your own ego. It is that Achilles heel that will be exploited by your handlers. Whether or not this is Tiger’s problem, his current state of affairs suggests that he should be more attentive to his hired help. Some of his handlers may not be in his camp and more than a few might truly not wish him well. It doesn’t take a genius to predict that the public will soon be pandered with the required dose of apologetic “addiction” treatment, and sorrowful wistfulness of divorce proceedings as we witness “damage” control. His family, his children, don’t deserve the kind of exposure they will have to endure as they prevail over their uncertain emotional road ahead.

So where does that leave his sponsors? Unfortunately, what we have so far witnessed is not terribly encouraging. Knight, of Nike, has said, “When his career is over, you’ll look back on these indiscretions as a minor blip, but the media is making a big deal out of it right now.” This is not what anyone should expect from the head of major company. No need to analyze the inanity of this perception since there is little ambiguity in the obvious.

We cannot assume that because someone is the CEO of a company, that the position automatically imbues the occupant with wisdom, principles, ethics, or morals. We can hope, but that would be foolish. The insecure egos running some of our Wall Street financial institutions are currently providing ample evidence that such assumptions can be misplaced – and therein lies a lesson on making assumptions about power, wealth and celebrity.

We are also being reminded that we are in charge of our perceptions. We are in control of what we accept, or normalize as appropriate behavior. While we may not be in absolute control of the appropriateness of everything our children are exposed to, we have influence on what we embrace as the mores that will colonize our own lives and theirs.

Regardless what our mainstream media, or the corporate landscape has decided “sells,” wealth and celebrity are not anointments of “right.” The implosion of Tiger’s familial career reminds us that we should be very discriminate in the broader conditioning to which we accede on our percepts. We should unambiguously guard the nature and the influences that we affirm on behaviors – ours and those of our children. The Nikes and Tigers we venerate cannot do that for us.

Cross posted from The Pacific Gate Post

Former President George W. Bush embraces President Barack Obama, the 44th President of the United States, after Obama’s inaugural address at the inauguration ceremony in Washington, January 20, 2009.
REUTERS/Jason Reed

Suck it up, liberals…What’s been good for the goose, is good for the gander.

Democrats have been licking Obama’s Copenhagen wounds by barking at conservatives for “cheering” the political Olympic-sized debacle as a rooting against America. Republicans are now being accused of “being unpatriotic“, because they want the president’s policies to fail.

Some of the Copenhagen criticism against conservatives has merit (I’m glad Obama suffered politically for this ill-conceived trip). Much of it is just plain warped, however, as there are also honest reasons why all Americans should be happy Chicago lost the Olympic bid to play host:

the U.S., dodged a bullet:

The common rejoinder to spiraling costs is that the Olympics make money for host cities. But the record is somewhat spottier than boosters admit. Athens and Beijing lost billions. Montreal, which hosted the games in 1976, took 30 years to pay off its loans. Los Angeles and Seoul made a tidy profit. Atlanta and Sydney broke even. It also depends on how you count: Is building a stadium factored into the cost? How about improving the subway? Expanding the housing stock? All this can leave a city with new and gleaming infrastructure — or a bunch of costly new houses no one wants to buy and stadiums no one wants to use.

Also read this from WaPo.

Chicago’s lucky it lost.

Democrats have been distorting the fierce opposition to their party’s push for healthcare reform (teabaggers and townhall protesters as uninformed scaremongers, birthers, conspiracists and racists…”the mob”…).

Democrats have been lamenting about how “Hope” and “Change” are being derailed because those “mean, racist Republicans” stand in the way as the “if he’s for it, we’re against it” Party.

Isn’t this what Democrats did to President Bush for 8 years of opposition? Personal as well as policy attacks? Distortions and smears?

Democrats are crying foul over the Hitler comparisons to President Obama. Where were they on this obscenity for the previous 8 years?

I agree, though: The Obama-Hitler comparisons are currently, unfair and inaccurate…

….At least Hitler got the Olympics to come to his city. (*Baddum bump!*)

When President Bush exercised, it was deemed “obsessive” and “creepy”:

the fact that Bush has an obsession with exercise that borders on the creepy.

Given the importance of his job, it is astonishing how much time Bush has to exercise.

~~~

Bush can bench press 185 pounds five times, and, before a recent knee injury, he ran three miles at a 6-minute, 45-second pace. That’s better than I could manage when I played two sports in high school. And I wasn’t holding the most powerful office on Earth. Which is sort of my point: Does the leader of the free world need to attain that level of physical achievement?

Maureen Dowd:

I like to exercise, but W. is psychopathic about it.

When President Obama exercises, it’s a source for inspiration and admiration:

the Washington Post delivered a front-page paean to Barack Obama’s workout habits. The 1,233-word ode to O’s physical fitness read more like a Harlequin romance novel than an A-1 news article.

Sighed smitten reporter Eli Zaslow, “The sun glinted off chiseled pectorals sculpted during four weightlifting sessions each week, and a body toned by regular treadmill runs and basketball games.” Drool cup to the newsroom, stat.

Zaslow imparted us with vital information about buff Bam’s regimen: “Obama has gone to the gym for about 90 minutes a day, for at least 48 days in a row.” The Washington Post enlightened us with more gushing commentary from Obama friends and associates, who explain how, as the subtitle of Zaslow’s opus put it, “Gym Workouts Help Obama Carry the Weight of His Position.”

“Progressives” were fuming over the financial costs of President Bush’s inaugural:

In the days and weeks leading up to the event, the press has largely treated inauguration criticism as partisan and silly, making sure to give Bush backers lots of time and room to defend the unmatched pomp and circumstance.

Yet according to a mostly underreported Washington Post poll this week, a strong majority of Americans — 66 percent, including 46 percent of Republicans — would have preferred a “smaller, more subdued” inauguration, given the ongoing war in Iraq. In other words, Bush’s overblown celebration ranks as one of the few political issues that most Americans agree on — a phenomenon the press ignored.

Gee…given the huge financial crisis our country is in, did Salon also think to criticize President Obama’s lavish inaugural spending? No. But their side rallied around the defense of it.

President Bush was criticized for travel expenses to taxpayers. So then, what’s wrong with applying the same to President Obama?

Bush supposedly “ignored” his generals. And now that it’s Obama in office, it’s now okay to criticize the generals he may disagree with? To the point of arguing what uniform dress McChrystal should have worn in his 25 minute meeting with the president?

When will President Obama get criticized for not attending military funerals?

Prior to President Obama’s “unprecedented” address to the Muslim world, President Bush said much the same, yet received nowhere near the accolades, let alone fawning gushes and swoons. Instead, he was accused of launching a crusade against Muslims because “God told him to”.

Democrats mercilessly hammered Bush on spending and the ballooning deficit; but now that it’s “their guy” in the Oval Office, suddenly, like children in a candy store, it’s cool once again to cheerlead “runaway spending” (note to American voters: The answer to spending control is never NEVER to put more Democrats into office)? If the size of the government spending under 2 terms of Bush was bad, that okays Obama’s quadrupling of it in his first year of office? Whaaa-?! Ok, so we’ll spend our way out of recession- so long as it’s Obama and not Bush. Remember: Democrats are going to own this one (not that they won’t still blame Bush for it, of course).

So much of the opposition to President Bush was about partisan politics over patriotic opposition. And now that the shoe is on the other foot, liberals can know what it’s been like on the receiving end of their hyperbole, their hysteria, shrillness, and partisanly deranged opposition to all things Bush.

Welcome to being in political power. Enjoy it while it lasts.

A sand sculpture in Brazil supports the candidacy of Rio de Janeiro for the 2016 Games, as opposed to the competing cities of Chicago, Madrid and Tokyo.
Natacha Pisarenko-AP

Rio is ecstatic:

Silva called the win a “sacred day” as he was interviewed in Portuguese by Brazilian reporters in Copenhagen.

“I confess to you if I die right now my life would have been worth it,” Silva said. “No one can now doubt the strength of Brazil’s economy, it’s social greatness, and our ability to present a plan.”

He said Brazil’s passion, heart and soul helped Rio win the Olympics against Madrid, Chicago and Tokyo. The Brazilian city had failed in attempts in 1936, 2004 and 2012.

“This is a day to commemorate because Brazil has left its status of a second-class nation,” Silva said. “Today we’re getting the respect that Brazil has been deserving.”

Kanye took time out of his busy schedule to kick over the Brazilian sand castle, by interrupting with the following:

“Hey, hey Rio, I’m really happy for you, I’mma let you finish, but I just want to say Chicago had one of the best bids of all time. OF ALL TIME.”

Brazil is relying on a strong economy to stand behind its $14.4 billion budget for the games — the largest among all bidding cities.

Chicagoans were stunned at the humiliating rebuke (check the update); however, they, along with the U.S., dodged a bullet:

The common rejoinder to spiraling costs is that the Olympics make money for host cities. But the record is somewhat spottier than boosters admit. Athens and Beijing lost billions. Montreal, which hosted the games in 1976, took 30 years to pay off its loans. Los Angeles and Seoul made a tidy profit. Atlanta and Sydney broke even. It also depends on how you count: Is building a stadium factored into the cost? How about improving the subway? Expanding the housing stock? All this can leave a city with new and gleaming infrastructure — or a bunch of costly new houses no one wants to buy and stadiums no one wants to use.

Also read this from WaPo.

Chicago’s lucky it lost.

Meanwhile, President Obama took the bullet well for the presidency, with sportsmanlike aplomb:

AP:

“You can play a great game and still not win,” Obama said at the White House, shortly after returning from Copenhagen where his in-person plea did not put Chicago over the top. “Although I wish that we had come back with better news from Copenhagen, I could not be prouder.”

Obama expressed no regret at putting so much on the line for the failed effort.

“I have no doubt that it was the strongest bid possible and I’m proud that I was able to come in and help make that case in person,” the president said.

His chief spokesman, Robert Gibbs, told reporters that Obama got the bad news aboard Air Force One as he and his wife, Michelle, flew back to Washington from the Danish capital. He was watching TV alone in his quarters on the presidential jet.

Mrs. Obama had gone to Copenhagen ahead of her husband and had lobbied hard for the Summer Games to be brought to her hometown and his adopted hometown.

Chicago’s early exit from finalist balloting represented a personal setback for Obama and a painful defeat for Chicago, America’s most prominent Midwestern city. The president put his personal prestige and political capital at risk when he decided late in the competition to go to Copenhagen and make a personal appeal.

“Absolutely,” Gibbs replied, when asked whether Obama was glad he had made such a large commitment to lobbying for the Games. He said the president “would never shy away from traveling anywhere, talking to anyone about this country.”

Oh, yes….we all know how well our charm offensive president loves to talk about the country.

Many people had assumed Chicago would be a finalist. But International Olympic Committee members eliminated it only hours after Obama and his wife urged them to send the Summer Games there.

A 7 hour trip, In Copenhagen for less than 5 hours, 25 minute photo-op with General McChrystal, how much did this debacle cost American taxpayers? Not as much as winning the bid, would have cost us.

I blame Republicans and George W. Bush.

Also check out:
Allahpundit
Ed Morrissey

Oh wait….you mean he’s not apologizing for America’s sins? Hope and Change has arrived, finally!

Not only is Canada one of our oldest allies, whose soldiers have done some of the heavy fighting in Afghanistan, but aren’t they America’s biggest supplier of oil? So why piss on them? Especially since, like majority Americans, Canadians were swept up by the siren song of “Hope” and “Change”. Well….“change” is certainly what they are getting:

Canada’s six NHL teams are scrambling to find alternative travel arrangements south of the border after the U.S. Department of Transportation banned Air Canada’s charter fleet from flying between U.S. cities.

In a furious exchange with the Obama administration over the mid-August ruling, Canada has launched its own investigation and will soon close its skies to U.S. sports team charters in retaliation, warns Transport Minister John Baird.

The sticking point is an eight-year-old exemption that had allowed sports and celebrity charters to make several pit stops in American cities. Under existing open skies agreements, regular Canadian airline flights can only visit one U.S. city before returning.

NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly warns the charter ban will create a complicated “patchwork” of travel that could “wreck havoc” with the oncoming hockey schedule, including early league games in Europe, as teams scramble to book flights under the new rules.

“It’s potentially a very significant impact,” Mr. Daly said Friday. “It’s crazy and very destabilizing to our business. We’re operating on a long-standing interpretation and for it to change overnight on the eve of our season is creating a huge problem for us.”

Air Canada executive vice president Duncan Dee predicted the ruling will create “chaos” for teams shuttling across the border. “It’s extremely messy for both American and Canadian teams,” he said. It was a unilateral action imposed without consultation or Air Canada being able to defend itself. It’s obvious the U.S. Department of Transportation doesn’t watch hockey.”

Does Team Obama simply enjoy pissing off our allies? Or is he exacting revenge upon hockey moms? I wonder if this would have happened if it were Hugo’s Venezuela sharing our northern border with us.