Why I’m Canceling My SI Subscription
Update: In response to suggestions made in the comments, I’ve sent a letter to the SI editors expressing my opinions and linking to this post. Thanks.
I am going to let my subscription to Sports Illustrated lapse when it runs out this year. I hope lots of other people will do the same. Like too many other publications, the magazine has become dishonest, dishonorable and even occasionally despicable in its conformist, lockstep left-wing bias. Republican politicians and conservative positions are routinely insulted in articles having nothing to do with either. Yawn-inducing left wing predictability is brought to the discussion of every issue. No SI writer is allowed to disagree with leftism ever. Despite its great photographs and occasionally good athlete profiles, the magazine has remade itself into crap in the name of political conformity.
For me, the Super Bowl issue with its smarmy and poorly reported article on religion in football was the last straw. The article was not an offense to God, it was an offense to journalism. Mark Oppenheimer, a left wing anti-religion writer for the left wing New York Times, among other left wing venues, does the left wing hit job on football players of faith. Not surprisingly, he is also the author of a hagiography of the Christian-bashing gay bully Dan Savage. (This blog has always supported gays and gay rights, but to my mind, Savage has no more place in serious debate than the Westboro Baptist gang.)
I could go through Oppenheimer’s lousy article “In the Fields of the Lord,” graph by graph to point out the unsupported conclusions, innuendoes, slanted use of quotes and flat-out untruths that would be unacceptable in any magazine attempting to report fairly, but I’d rather spend my time doing something more interesting, like twiddling my thumbs.
But here’s an example, chosen almost at random:
“It’s clear that for a substantial number of athletes and coaches, there is no tension between being a Christian and being an aggressive athlete. On the contrary, many of them argue that football builds character and thereby makes a man more of a Christian — a commingling of faith and football now accepted by fans.
But is that a mistake? Just 50 years ago such coziness between public Christianity and football would have seemed absurd. Athletes were nobody’s idea of good ambassadors for religion; they were more likely to be seen as dissolute drinkers and womanizers — more the roguish Joe Namath than the devout Roger Staubach.The aggressive, violent play preached by coaches of an earlier generation was accepted as natural precisely because sport was pagan, not Christian. Christianity was peaceful, charitable and pious. Sport was bloody, ruthless, impious.
In the 1950′s and 60′s that antagonism began to soften…”
Really? So 50 years ago — which would be 1963 — a cozy relationship between religion and football would’ve been “absurd,” but in the 1950s, more than sixty years ago, that began to change. Football used to be more about wild man Joe Namath, who played between ’65 and ’77, than pious Roger Staubach, who played roughly between ’69 and ’79.Uh, who says so? What made Namath more representative of football than Staubach? That he got more headlines? That says something about journalism, but not about religion. Sport was pagan? In what world? Gale Sayers’? Johnny Unitas’? Bear Bryant’s? Hogwash.
Preach it bro! Well done, Mr. Klavan. How ironic that this leftist publication becomes very Biblical when it lumps itself in with one of the most populous groups in the Bible–hypocrites! By all means SI, be leftist with all the other 51 issues each year, but then betray your allies, the feminists with publication of the Swimsuit issue!
“All you get here are leftists telling leftists how to think leftily about leftism.” Bravo!
Come to think of it, that’s the NYT to a “T” — all the slant that fits. And NPR, and pretty much the whole mainstream mediocrity. Broad generalization alert: The main problem is that most creative types (along with academics, particularly of the liberal-arts ilk) are emotionally stunted and therefore attracted to the infantilism (“The bad guys did it!”) that leftism represents. And it allows them to be morally superior at the same time, so it’s like crack to those with unresolved self-esteem issues.
“supports gays”
Why? Why would you ‘support’ someone because of what turns them on?
Do you support people who like to spank? Who like to BE spanked?
Do you ‘support’ those who like dirty talk during sex?
How about those who prefer animals?
Why would you support ANYONE for ANY reason to do with how they get their rocks off?
Good article, but for goodness’ sake, stop falling into the trap of the liberal paradigm.
For the record, I don’t SUPPORT ANYONE because of how they get their rocks off.
I’m fed up with the way that anybody who opposes the gay agenda – as I staunchly oppose it – is immediately demonized.
I heartily agree with Chris Culliver about gays in the locker room. He doesn’t want to feel violated in his own workplace, and I understand completely.
I’m a married woman and I would hate to have to be in a locker room with aggressive dykes staring at me, making remarks about me, or hitting on me. If they keep their proclivities to themselves, I won’t know about it and won’t feel as uncomfortable.
Because the Homofascism of the Left requires you to wave the flag of degeneracy “or else” you are a hater, racist, “homophobe” (whatever that means). You are instantly vilified if you oppose the Homofascist agenda against real Marriage, Real Families and the Real America.
Thanks for letting me know SI has a left lean. I will subscribe immediately.
I dropped my subscription to Scientific American for the same reason. It became more a political vehicle than a magazine about science.
In other words, you didn’t agree with the science. Join the (GOP) crowd.
PS – Too bad you couldn’t edit the articles like Cheney hand-edited the scientific reports received by the White House to make them conform to GOP dogma and its agenda.
You mean how the Obama administration suspended oil and gas drilling despite the recommendations of its own scientific commission which urged drilling to continue. Or how GE basically dictates Obama’s renewable energy policy.
No, that’s not the case. I want to read science articles that are apolitical. I don’t want to read science that’s spun to support any political agenda. Your inclusion of a comment about what Republicans might have done with science proves exactly the point I was making.
I infer from your comments that you prefer to have your science support your political beliefs. If that’s the case, Scientific American could use another subscriber.
Over the years, Scientific American had less and less science and technology, and more and more ideological preaching, until there was practically no worthwhile content left. I quit wasting my money on it.
Three or four decades ago, it was worth reading.
I had subscribed to Scientific American since I was a kid in the 1970s.
I had great respect for their hard-science articles. I learned about endogenous retroviruses in SciAm, some 12 years before anyone ever heard of HIV.
But when it came to the soft sciences, especially political science, SciAm’s articles always had a strong left-wing tilt. There are plenty of political scientists, sociologists, economists, and criminologists who disagree with liberals’ conclusions. Not a one of them was ever published in SciAm, not even just to provoke a debate. Evidently when it came to political science, sociology, economics, SciAm didn’t want a debate.
SciAm died for me soon after Martin Gardner retired. All I have to say about S.I. is that it was a tragedy that The National had died. And isn’t it strange that historically the best sportswriting in American magazines came from The New Yorker?
What killed SciAm for me was their despicable treatment of Bjørn Lomborg’s book, The Skeptical Environmentalist. And going beyond the review, their encouragement of attempts to silence him by an arm of Lomborg’s own (Danish) government.
That was unforgiveable.
SciAm also went on an unscientific jihad against missile defense in the eighties, and gave too much credibility to Sagan’s nuclear winter theories.
this dude or dudette posts on every conservative blog. he must get paid by ovimits lackies. it’s the same old talking points over and over. the lib-trash is getting scared that people aren’t buying the crap that’s coming out of the gov’t press so they’re getting out foot soldiers and goose stepping on over to these blogs.
Correct. Remember, “mobys” are alive and well. They appear as Letters to the Editors (“Dear Sir: I am a life-long conservative Republican who thinks Barack Obama is the new risen Lord”), as comments in conservative blogs, and in responses to magazines, TV website and the like.
The idea is always the same: trash the speaker. Trash the subject. Trash some other person. Try to drag down discourse. Impeach. Call names. Attack, attack, attack.
It’s all part of the on-going ‘Operation Demoralize’. HillelA is just a foot-soldier.
Our response is simple: call them out for what they are. Don’t try to debate them, just call them out.
Yo, HillelA: you are called out. You’re a moby. You either stumbled in here or you were sent here to do the usual. You may now go away.
Shh, little h0mo.
Actually, no. “Scientific American” stopped caring about science when the science conflicted with lefty group-think.
You really need to start reading for comprehension rather than letting your bigotry color everything.
I am troll hear me roar (nonsense)!
It’s sort of like someone calling themselves Christian but not practicing the religion. IOW, they are calling themselves scientists but not practicing science.
No, not even close.
But thx for playing!
Hahaha, yeah, like when the Muzlims go “Hitler was a Christian!” Yes, just like Jesus was a Muzlim.
Excuse me HillelA, but it is clearly the leftists who reject science and bitterly cling to the religion of man made global warming/climate change, “green energy” from wind, solar and corn despite the science that shows that they can never be practical on a large scale and that in fact they all consume as much energy as they sporadically produce,
or the junk science economics that believes that you can continue to tax “the rich”, give their money to the non productive, borrow money from future generations, never have to pay it back and continue to have a strong economy.
Oh yeah, you lefties are all about science alright.
Give us all a break.
Chuck, to say nothing of the Left’s refusal to recognize that abortion ends a life.
Also, who is responsible for the epidemics of measles, mumps, rubella, and pertussis in the United States?
You obviously didn’t read his comment and only wanted to insert something insulting.
Hey HillelA,
Do you Promote Gay marriage and the Gay Agenda? If so you are a Science Denier. As Gays can not NATURALLY create offspring they FAIL the Biological Fitness test. It has NOTHING to do with the GOD that makes you WET your bed so much. Democrats, proudly denying SCIENCE in Economics, Energy, Biology and Climate.
Your science is fudged numbers and cherry-picked data….and we’re the dumb ones?
You literally had to rewrite his words to attack your strawman. Typical lefty. Lies and more lies.
No, HillelA, it was not an issue of “disagreeing with science”, it was/is the incessant, growing leftward political slant of SA’s editorial position on every imaginable issue. Whether or not politics had anything much to do with the science ostensibly being covered.
I started reading SA during the early ’60s, when I was still in elementary school, fascinated by the wide range of topics covered. By the time I entered college, it had become too much effort to ignore the political slant for the science. And it’s worse now.
As for “GOP crowd”, I’ve been a registered Democrat for the better part of 40 years; SA has just become too near useless to be worth reading on a regular basis.
I also believe in Science science, but NOT in Political science which Scientific American became.
GOPers disagree with BAD science Hillel.
That is hardly new.
Back when I was a teenager in the 1970s, Scientific American had taken a strong peacenik antimilitary stand. They constantly published articles by dovish political scientists like Kosta Tsipis, articles which called for unilateral American disarmament. They said no to just about every program of military modernization, from aircraft to missile defenses to submarines to nuclear weapons.
They constantly rationalized Soviet military actions as defensive, caused by allegedly aggressive U.S. actions. Essentially the same nonsense that was published in PugWash and the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
I remember all the disarmament spin. Carl Sagans nuclear winter worksince then drastically watered down. SDI couldn’t possibly work. Or it might work but useless unless perfect. Supposedly destabilizing with USSR so bad– but could only cause that if it could work!
Etc
What I always found amusing about the “Star Wars” flap was the USSR being so upset over our spending ourselves into poverty (according to Sagan, et. al.) developing and deploying something that would never work.
????
Ditto: National Geographic when it quit informing us about faraway cultures and began reporting everything as a white-man-caused disaster.
Amen. I have 30 years of National Geographic mags sitting in my library. A wonderful, quality window on the world. Then, after several years of EVERY issue being “OMG! OMG! GLOBAL WARMING!” I canceled my subscription. Ack.
Typical republican! Can’t handle the truth…..
What truth? If we’re talking about science, we’re talking about hard facts. For truth you should find a priest. Which you’ve done, in environmentalism – just contrast how Brother Albert is treated for his palace, versus Rush the Arch-Imp for his similar estate. Contrast the treatment of Saint Rachel, whose masterwork led – directly – to the deaths of millions in Africa and India – with the treatment meted out to Demon Borlaug, whose GM rice saved many millions more from slow starvation.
The facts are staring you in the face, as even the UN’s IPCC panel admitted earlier this year that the warming trends they claimed to see in the previous decade have plateaued and started to fall. This was widely reported in the mainstream press. But you lack the humility to consider that you (and your priests) may be mistaken, and you have the gall to still consider yourself “scientific!”
The predictive models referenced in the Third IPCC Holy Writ have given no replication of the observed results – in many cases, being off by several hundred percent. Is that supposed to pass for science these days? And yet your prescriptions for how we are to be redeemed and saved are based on those faulty models. One should also ask: saved from what? A shoreline about a dozen feet higher than now? A marginally warmer (less than 10 degrees F) and slightly wetter world, with resulting expansion of the tropical and temperate zones? A longer growing season, allowing for more humans to live here?
Your “path to righteousness” that you lay out for us is the EXACT SAME one we heard 40 years ago, under the guise of “global cooling.” Now your priests are starting to pass it off as “climate change,” in the hope that our ignorance is as strong as your own. Their hope, their prayer, is that we don’t recognize a planet’s climate is in a state of constant flux – and that while organisms can change it (eg, plants), the process takes place on a geological time scale.
What you present us is a sermon, that we should all don the economic hair-shirt, surrender our souls to Mother Gaia (in the persons of her noble high priests), and profess our unworthiness to be led by such luminaries as the IPCC, the editorial board of Scientific American, the faculty of Penn State University and the University of East Anglia, etc.
Naturally of course, that sermon applies only to the peons. The princes of your green church flit from one exotic locale to the next in small, private jets, to spread awareness and preach the gospel according to Brother Albert, et al. If one of us calls you out on the base hypocrisy of it all, then they claim they’ve bought some indulgences – sorry, they’re called “carbon credits” these days, aren’t they? From the less sophisticated, we endure ad hominem attacks on such matters as our political philosophy, or who cuts our paycheck. Or whether we “believe” in science – as though science was somehow related to faith, instead of factual evidence!
Nevermind the fact that know-nothing actors and actresses – completely ignorant of the facts of the debate – get tax breaks for like-kind contributions: spreading the message on behalf of the Natural Resources Defense Council, or Greenpeace, etc; that the proceeds from “carbon credits” were often mis-spent on R&D into “green” energy” production – instead of planting trees, etc; that the patents on the techniques that would have been developed passed to the sponsors, ie the Green Priests, further enriching themselves as a direct result of the gullibiilty of fools such as yourself.
Nevermind the coercion involved, as mandates from Brussels forced Europe into a single crashing “stock market” for such credits, which had the direct effect of taking money from national treasuries and putting it into the hands of organized crime.
Nevermind the boondoggles in the US; where every month new headlines whisper of the closure of another “green” energy producer, propped up by Federal stimulus money, often run by a politically-connected person, and usually about 2 months before we see another headline – announcing the sale of said now-defunct company, to the mainland Chinese.
Nevermind the fact that the previous decade saw the Kyoto signatories consistently miss every target reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions, while their economies stagnated and their standard of living slipped (relative to the US). Nor the fact that while the US maintained and expanded its economy, its output of carbon-dioxide actually fell.
Nevermind that carbon dioxide is itself a trace gas, having a lagging effect with relation to atmospheric temperature (instead of a leading one). Nevermind the role water vapor plays in determining atmospheric temperatures (where it plays an enormous buffer effect). Nevermind the still-unexplained and largely unexplored effect of solar radiation on cloud formation.
Nevermind the urban heat island effect.
Argument to authority, ignoring contradictory evidence, basing theory on “normalized” computer models instead of raw data (HOW did you normalize the data – and HOW did you know to use any particular normalization method?) instead of raw data. Ignoring the First Rule of Mathematical Assumptions, which is Garbage In, Garbage Out… From a scientific standpoint, these are actions that border on the criminal, because the obvious lies of the Green Priesthood are making all the rest of the scientific community look like charlatans too.
The Green Church is not science, it’s a perversion of science. The overwhelming majority of “environmental” reporting since the Gospel of Saint Rachel has been nothing more than an attempt to paint a conformist authoritarian religion with a shiny technical-looking skin in an effort to fool the rubes.
I know it. You know it. Everyone reading this website knows it. Responsible scientists are calling you – yes, even YOU, as an enabler of the Green Priests – on it. Whether you’re just a useful idiot to the charlatans, or a true believer who’s acting on an elaborate power trip, we know what you’re asking for, even if you do not. And we want no part of it.
re: J. Aberburg
“Typical republican! Can’t handle the truth…..
February 5, 2013 – 12:03 am”
What Ranger Rick said.
And to dump onto your blistering wounds, I knew that the entire AGW was a scam the first time I heard about it, even before I knew who was promoting it. How? They were basing their pronouncements upon the results gleaned from computer models.
I’m not all that up on climate, but I AM an expert on computers, and I know for a fact that you can NOT make predictions about a dynamic system using linear tracking. All those cute graphs were just too two-dimensional to be for real. They were created to give a “Gee WHIZ!” touch to their pronouncements to impress ignorant Democrats.
Climate is a seriously dynamic process, butterfly in China stuff. It would not be possible for a computer to come up with a correct assessment using the kind of Mickey Mouse scripts they were using to produce those graphs. I took a look at the program scripts that were revealed when the Climategate files were hacked, and they looked to me like freekin’ Excel graph-drawing scripts, not some great dynamic program that would be needed to work with a dynamic system.
I can draw pretty pictures on a computer, too. That doesn’t make me da Vinci.
Isn’t that the truth….my father who drank the kool aid in the 70′s continues to send me the magazine…every once in a while there will be an article of intrigue but the “Western Heterosexual Christina Male” is the root of all that is wrong in the world…..
Unfortunately, they already possess public schools!
While I agree Sci Am 86′d science for emotional dogma (commenter ‘HIlleIA’ is but another Illiberal poo flinger using typical vitriol and stunted intellect in place of attempting lucidity), Scientific American Mind is somewhat less politicied and far more interesting. Jmo..
If you really want to witness some medieval anti-science hysteria, talk to a liberal about GMO foods or fracking. Makes the “earth is 6000 years old” crowd seem like Voltaire in comparison.
Jim, that was the best comment of the night. It made me laugh out loud.
I grew up in southern baptist household in Tennessee.
I’ve never met a single person who thinks the earth is 6,000 years old.
Two of my uncles are southern baptist ministers. Neither of them have ever thought the earth was 6,000 years old.
What we think is that MANKIND is 6,000 years old.
Stop repeating that lie.
200,000 years for our species.
I will posit that Religious Creationism and Evolutionary Theory are not mutually exclusive, nor are they incompatible. In Evolutionary terms, there may indeed have been Homo Sapiens around for 200,000 years. This can be a 100% true statement, and yet what we understand as the spiritual consciousness of man as the Creation of God, i.e. the Fall of Adam and the beginning of the Human Race in relation to God certainly happened around 6,000 years ago. The Bible AND the Fossil record are both incontrovertibly historical records. The Fossil record a physical one, the Bible a Spiritual and Moral one. Those who argue one and negate the other simply lack imagination and/or humility. None of us “knows it all” or much of anything really. It is all just surmisal, looking for the evidence to fit.
The big Biblical misunderstanding is the content and purpose of Hebrew Geneaologies (sp?). The Jewish religion never used the Torah to date Creation. They understood that the geneaology was a tool to track major events in their religious history, and that generations would be skipped within it where no important events or names happened. Naive literalist Christians do not seek to understand the Bible in the context that Jesus learned and taught it, instead they put their own preconcieved literalist spin on the creation dating process and look bufoonish in the process. And this is a Christian pastor writing this. You cannot separate the Genesis writing from its spiritual and historical context. It no more was intended to date creation, than the Mayan dating system was actually predictive of the end of the world in 2012. The truth is when you read Genesis in the context of the Torah and how the Jewish religion used and interpreted it historically you come the the conclusion that it is impossible to date when the events happened. I do believe in a young earth, just an undated one, and a lot older than 6000. I believe most adaptive theory is compatible until you get to the dating processes that say certain events must have happened billions of years ago, which is clearly untestable hypothesis.
Ditto for me with Discover magazine. The final straw was it’s first time ever endorsement of a presidential candidate in 2000. Guess who got the nod? – Mr. Gorebull Warming himself. As far as I could tell, the sole qualifying factor was how “green” the candidate was. When did being “scientific” automatically equate to being a non-questioning environut?
This was after the magazine had already decided that global warming skepticism was unthinkable. Yet, I remember a couple of articles questioning the Big Bang Theory and other proven theories. Like all the politics first, science second, media, skepticism and challenge are good things for some settled sciences. Just not the ones with a political agenda. Unfortunately those are becoming fewer each year.
Yes, Discover, Nat. Geo., Sci. Am, they all used to be great for learning about all sorts of things. I’m the sort of person who isn’t content not to know. I like to know. I can’t understand the sort of person who can look at something like a volcanic eruption and not wonder “How on earth does that work? Where does all that comes from? Will those eruptions keep on happening forever?” And a ton of other questions. And I further can’t understand people who have those questions and don’t go looking for the answers.
But how can you find the answers when the best sources have been steadily dumbing themselves down over the years? Have you seen Discover lately? It’s no more complex to read than those Weekly Reader pamphlets they used to hand out to us in grade school and junior high.
This is why I cancelled my Rolling Stone subscription. They became more interested in pandering to the political bias of their readers than providing mediocre coverage of the music scene.
You mean as it became the official mag for establishment baby boomer liberals and faux ex-hippies, who like to think that they really, really made a difference?
You know they jumped the shark when they start telling you the best vacation spots in Europe and why the Prius might just be the best car ever made.
“You mean as it became the official mag for establishment baby boomer liberals and faux ex-hippies, who like to think that they really, really made a difference?”
I know, yes, and that they are the only people in history who ever made a difference…. Such self-absorbed self righteousness.
They did make a difference. Their generation ruined the American dream.
Yes just as Hitler, Mao and Che Guevara all “made a difference.” Making a difference is over-rated. The Hippie Generation is a dirty, thieving, a-moral, drug-addled, hypocrisy-fest of pony-tailed wankers, hags and douche~bags. Please die already and take your insipid Woodstock recordings with you.
Great expression… “jumped the shark”. I am getting some of the meaning in context but can you give me your definition… ?
It comes from “Happy Days”, there was a show when they went to the beach, and Fonzie literally ski-jumped over a caged shark in his leather jacket.
That was generally agreed upon to be the end of the show effectively, they had gone too far and people tuned them out.
Same with myself in regard to Scientific. I had been a subscriber for almost 20 years. It went hard left, turning from science into political advocacy. Look at the report when scientists 4 or 5 years ago reported elsewhere that decaying fauna (through an entirely natural process)itself was causing 30 to 50% of carbon dioxide production on earth, yet SA waited an entire year to even address the issue in their magazine, which ended up a left wing pro AGW diatribe and scold never refuting or analyzing the core premises.
There is a scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming and only ignorant and stupid republicans keep denying it. You can’t handle the truth.
I love the anthropogenic global warming panicking that the leftist do. Someone needs to do a study on increased CO2 levels and their effect on plant growth, and the subsequent cooling of air temperatures. Wait I did that in 3rd grade. With all other factors equal. When you increase CO2 in an environment, there is a temporary warming. During that warming phase plant growth increases exponentially. This increased plant growth creates an overabundance of O2. This O2 increase in the environment cools the environment and slows plant growth. The plants without further interference die because of too much O2 and too cool of temparature. That is unless there is an abundance of Oxygen using or burning entities such as animals, humans, or fire, in the environment releasing CO2, in which case the increased O2 and the animal and human population thrive, releasing excess CO2, and the cycle continues. That is why we have Carter saying there was a Global Cooling epidemic that would destroy the world in the 70s and Gore saying we have a Global Warming epidemic that will destroy the world in 2010′s. Remember Gore and his publications are on the record that 2016 is the date, we have 3 years left now. If we get through 2016 without a catastrophe he and his followers are bald face liars and conmen. I know around here things are just about average in temparature this winter. SOme freezing cold, some warm, overall average.
“Scientific consensus”. If you only knew how stupid that phrase is. Only in liberalalala land is science conducted by vote. And by the way, the consensus thing was made about 15 years ago. The consensus has broken down considerably now that the computer models and predictions are off by a margin of 100% and the wealth redistribution scam has been exposed. The only people still buying the end of the world garbage are non-thinking political hacks like yourself and the socialist world order lefties who pull the strings on your puppet brain.
I bet you’ve haven’t had a science class since 8th grade. You throw out a term that tells everybody just how scientifically uneducated you are, and yet you think it gives your argument clout. Go back to Globalwarmingfacts (sic) where you don’t need your own reasoning skills, just groupthink, and you get a pat on the head for correct thinking. Try taking a class in chemistry or physics and find out how real science is conducted.
If Mr. Oppenheimer has a Ph.D. in American religious history, then he is clearly an example of someone educated beyond his ability.
Kipling said “…..then he is clearly an example of someone educated beyond his ability” (or intelligence) which would make Mr. (Dr.?) Oppenheimer an intellectual and thereby explaining the absurd premise and haughty tone.
Do you mean that he hit his Peter Principle point in the 11th grade?
He has done had all of the smarts educated outta him with alla that fancy book-learnin’ He shoulda stayed down on the farm and did sumpthin’ with his self.
Great piece, Drew.
One of the roots of the problem that you don’t mention – and one that always amuses me – is that sports writers desperately want to be seen as MORE than, well, sports writers. So they look for deeper (in this case non-existent) meanings in what are just games. My suggestion for those people is that if they want to write about religion, they really do that. But then they are up against writers who have something genuinely interesting to say about the subject and SI writers are not on the Reinhold Niebuhr level or anything close. So they write boring swill (translation: conventional leftist drivel.)
I blame Hunter Thompson, who started out- and continued- as a sports writer. Too many wannabe gonzo journalist try to ape his leftist advocacy but lack his talent.
How odd, and I was just thinking of Keith Olbermann.
Hopefully Olbermann will blow HIS brains out, too.
And soon.
If Hunter Thompson had blown his brains out far sooner, it is possible journalism wouldn’t be in the sad shape it is. Thanks to him, making it up became fashionable in the highest reaches of the trade. It became known as “having a voice.” Everybody in the state media aspires to have a voice, but it must be one that expresses politically correct thinking. No other kind is worth having, or is even legitimate let alone permitted. If the facts — “so-called facts,” as they would say — get in the way, well, they must be shaped to fit the narrative. “Narrative” used to be a word confined to fiction, but no longer. I, too, have decided to let my SI subscription lapse. I hadn’t read it for years, and when I subscribed to get the cheesy sweatshirt they were offering as an incentive, I was struck by how it had changed. It seemed every story was about victimhood. Sometimes it was overcome and sports glory followed, sometimes it wasn’t. Even when success and riches were achieved in spite of victimhood, in many cases they were pissed away on drugs, drink and on entourages and a return to victimhood status followed. The old running back or outfielder tells his story seated at a table in a rented home in a bad neighborhood. Society was to blame.
Ironically, the description you give fits FOX News to a tee.
The late Jim Murray, Pulitzer Prize winner of the Los Angeles Times, and for nearly 20 years won the Sports Writer of the Year award from his peers, set the gold standard for sportswriting and it has never been equaled. Certainly not the masturbating found these days in SI. He was a rock solid conservative and family friend and was the first to look at the outside influences on the athlete as key to his development. He started at Life Magazine, went to Sports Illustrated and when he died, still writing his widely syndicated column for the Times, he had little in common with the lefties who were there in the editorial department, and said so privately. He would only shake his head, as he would likely do now, at the strange course his trend-setting writing had taken. As to the likes of Hunter Thompson and every other sports writing wanna be in the 60′s and 70′s, they revered Murray who refused to be taken into their leftist social commentary mode or pal with them as one of the guys – and he was one of the guys, unassuming and always pro. You want to read a conservative who wrote about the wrongs in sports when he had to andt saw it clear – find ANY Jim Murray column. They still read as bright as the morning sun and are a great example to any in-training journalist.
I was naturally drawn to read everything Jim Murray wrote. Through him I learned about the world of professional sports and some truths about those who engaged in them. He left the hype and BS to others. Without him, we are given little but the hype and BS. As for SI, Andrew you are way behind the curve. SI has been like this for years. I had enough ten years ago.
You are right about Jim Murray. As a young man in the 70′s I was so impressed by one of his articles in Sports Illustrated that I cut it out and saved it. It still sits in a manila folder of memorabilia to this day. It’s hard to describe the combination of professionalism, truth, humor, insight and uplifting story-telling that seemed to always stand out in his writing.
He created some of the most memorable lines ever in sports writing history, as when writing about the Indy 500: “Gentlemen, start your coffins”. Or “[Rickey Henderson] has a strike zone the size of Hitler’s heart”. Or UCLA coach John Wooden was “so square, he was divisible by four”. And my favorite about when Merlin Olsen went swimming in Loch Ness: “The Monster got out.”
I was a subscriber to both SI and Time throughout most of my life – I always assumed I was one of the longest continuous subscribers to both. When I finally realized how infiltrated with leftist drivel they had both become, I dropped them and never looked back – not even for the swimsuit issue.
In 1990, I saw USC beat UCLA 45-42. Murray wrote that watching the game “was like watching two truck drivers fight over a waitress.”
The rerm “sports journalist” is an oxymoron.
Apparently, Sport Illustrated has never heard of “Dog bites man” in journalism. Of course, to the MSM, football 50 years ago seemed irreligious and full of debauchery. No one would right about religion in football 50 years ago because it wouldn’t be news or informative. Today, overt religion in football is a “man bites dog” story. Controversies swell over efforts to ban praying by teams or before games, at least those associated with schools. A player taking a moment to in religious thought is videoed for mocking and ridicule.
How many more of these morons, so called academics in religion, are going to speak of Christianity without even the basic idea of what Christianity is? You have to put in special effort to remain that ignorant.
I played football 50 years ago -we started every game with a public prayer.
Here is some more of the lack of religion in football 50 years ago
Gayle Sayers acceptance speech, as recreated in Brian’s Song
I remember Sayer’s autobiography was called “I Am Third.” God was first, family second, and I am third. Course he is a Bible pounding Kansas Jayhawk.
“Bible Pounding Kansas Jayhawk” is a vanishing breed you realize. These days, it’s called the People’s Republic of Lawrence for a reason.
Couldn’t agree any more…the newspapers lost me years ago and SI last year for the same reasons. It’s too easy to get my news from other sources.
A. Klavan —
And here you continue droning on as if your religion owns the GOP and anyone not a full on christian is obviously leftist. Complete nonsense. And you’re critical of THEIR articles… heh.
When the GOP finally tosses third rate intellects like yours to the side, it will once again be a relevant choice to the majority of the US (composed of moderates.) Currently the GOP is overrepresented in god bothering wingnuts (that would be you) and self annointed constitutional experts (tea partiers.)
Keep your worthless god to yourself and out of my political party. Don’t you have an appropriate god bothering wingnut site for you to post your drivel at?
Another hateful atheist heard from. The tolerant left. I am not a Christian, but I do not feel the need to spew hate towards them. Also, Andrew Klavan, Hope you let SI know why you dropped your sub. If more people would speak up about such things, maybe some businesses would get the message…..
Say whatever you’d like to SI, like CNN, they have an agenda to promulgate and subscribers (ratings) won’t get in the way.
… to be a Hateful Atheist.
And frankly, it does not matter one iota to me if a Hateful Atheist is from the Left or from the Right.
I dislike, thoroughly disagree, and do my best to disregard Hateful Atheists on the sole ground that they are Hateful Atheists.
Having established that Random Engineer is a hateful Atheist (and I have, and pity him or her for it, and pray that God is able to help he or she find the Peace & Salvation that comes from Reconciling & reuniting with God), why would I want to read another word Random Engineer has written for the superfluous purpose of discerning where he or she stands politically.
For that matter, why would you. Bart. Life is too short to waste on such trivialities.
Not atheist, h0m0s3xual.
Randomengineer -
Who are the ‘first-rate’ intellects to which the GOP should listen?
I’m with Bart. Random E, you’re a profoundly ignorant jerk and bigot.
“third rate intellects”
“god bothering wingnuts (that would be you)”
“self annointed [sic] constitutional experts (tea partiers.)”
“god bothering wingnut site”
“your drivel”
There you have it folks, another factual and well reasoned critique by him.
Just kidding. Actually, it consisted entirely of invective.
But don’t worry. Mr. Klavan isn’t going to bother your political party–or the POTUS you voted for.
Sir, I have been a (very well-paid) engineer for nearly 40 years, and I can say that of all the engineers, scientists, managers, executives, politicans, generals, admirals, or even salespeople I have known I have never known anyone, from any country, to be as intolerant or supercilious as you appear to be. You, sir, give engineering a bad name.
Random is no engineer. When he speaks about physics, he’s clueless. Random is a garden variety bigot and poseur, whose every comment is about bashing Christianity.
Random’s a one trick pony and whore – and obviously miserable.
Thanks for the heads-up. I don’t spend enough time around here to recognize the local trolls.
(I tried to comment, but it got eaten by the machine…if this is a duplicate, my apologies.) Thanks for the heads-up, Tex. I don’t spend enough time on PJM’s commentariat to recognize the local…uh…”whinelife”.
He calls himself an engineer because his Mommy bought him a box of Good’n'Plenty when he was a kid, so he thinks he’s Choo-choo Charly.
When he holds forth on AGW, he’s a REAL hoot!
“When he speaks, he’s clueless.”
FIFY. His unrestrained wilful ignorance isn’t restricted to just one field.
Hahaha.. another sanctimonious, imbalanced Illiberal poo-flinger. Meanwhile water’s wet and beavers make dams.
The POINT in providing a differing mindset is to have enough decorum, respect for the other party’s view(s) in the hopes, progress to come to an accord.
Your being an Illiberal has proven time and time again you lack the most basics in patience, respect and intellect to display as such.
I’m not a GOP’er, Tea Party member though recognize a thin-skinned, slef-hating, unrealized life down the tubes, blaming everyone else for their plight type.
An aside, ‘..Engineer’ – don’t you usually provide emotionally-led nonsense to AGW-related discussions?
I found those comments far more entertaining and less unhinged, cochise.
Well, most times.
Over the years I’ve read some dumb retorts. Yours takes the cake in my book.
Thank you for proving once again what I’ve known for a long time; never any substance nor example. Just straight up mock and ridicule. I’ll bet you don’t win too many arguments.
I sincerely hope you get a better life. You sound like a miserable simp.
I agree with this. It’s frustrating to be an atheist and not a liberal. You can’t even take people seriously when they inject god into everything. I just see them as completely insane.
Hmmm, this article has nothing to do with the GOP. It does have everything to do with people writing about a subject they know nothing about, so your comment is at least relevent in that it provides an excellent example of that.
Yes, just as soon as I run across one of those Atheist Hospitals, Atheist Charities, Atheist Universities, Atheist Soup Kitchens, Free Clinics, Troubled Youth Outreaches, Prison Chaplaincies, Battered Women’s Shelters, AIDS Hospices, Medical Missions to Africa, errrr, oh wait, yeah there ARE NONE. Why don;t you go on to one of those non-God-bothering websites, soulless, God-hating cypher of a human.
Well put, sir.
There are times when ‘random’ really nails it – like in ‘Random Richard Cranium’!
A reader can find a lot of snarky liberal throwaway lines in Men’s Journal and similar (macho?) mags as well.
Tom, you’re ABSOLUTELY right re: ‘Men’s Journal’.
I recall in ’08, Men’s Journal had TWO, 2 different covers with Barack Kardashian adorning the cover.
You may ask, ‘The skinny twerp was in gym clothes’? You know, like EVERY model/ athlete/ actor seen on their issues?
Nope.. Uhblame-O was in his out-of place, sleeves rolled-up button up shirt and slacks we’ve unfortunately seen ad nausea.
When I’d contacted, asking why the Men’s Journal would provide such attention to this flake when their readers are REAL physically fit enthusiasts, I received the bland, ‘Mr. Obama encourages the concept of fitness..’ shtick.
In essence, like Uhblame-O receiving his Nobel for ‘speaking’ of peace rather than exuding nor providing ANY action as such.. Men’s Journal (as well as other emotionally driven Illiberal mags, newspapers, people etc.,) gave this dude false accolades as well.
Men’s Journal lost a subscription at that time in me as well..
…which is precisely why I don’t purchase or read that shinola (sp?).
I’m with you, Andrew. I can’t point to exactly when, but “manliness” — or “regular-guy-ness” — disappeared from Sports Illustrated somewhere along the line. It’s a joke now, just as ESPN is a joke. These people are killing the joy of sports — killing the love of the game. First they turned Sports into a product — which was bad enough. Now they have turned it into a political product. I don’t watch professional sports anymore. What I like is women’s collegiate volley ball, because it still captures the love of the game, in and of itself.
Frank, I share your sentiment re: U.S. pro sports.
Might I recommend Rugby, Aussie League Football (soccer)?
The Aussie League players can’t really touch the EPL (the EPL and it’s players/ egos are as irritating as the National Felon’s League and HGH-laden MLB) talent-wise though they do score more often!
Aussie League Rugby? Hell yeah. Thank you.
I can’t only recommend Aussie Rugby ( though I believe it went kaput last year), my Kiwi buddies would plummet me!
Four Nations, NRL are thee go-to leagues!
“Might I recommend Rugby, Aussie League Football (soccer)?”
Might I ask for a clarification? Rugby, Aussie Rules football, and soccer are three different games with three distinct leagues.
The International Rugby Sevens and the Australian Rules Footy are AWESOME spectator sports. I have a secert plan to bring something like them to America, Shhhhh, don’t tell!
You might want to check out your state college or University.
Here in Indiana IU, Purdue, and Notre Dame all have in school (Austrailian rules) rugby leagues.
“The Bible is clear that [God] preferred the loser.”
I love that, cuz liberals worship failure and project it onto everything; probably even their cat.
They’re all Robin Hood’s, disadvantaged, decrepit merry men, even when they’re in the White House or riding around on battleship yachts that look like spaceships like Bill Gates.
24 “Then the man who had received the one talent came. ‘Master,’ he said, ‘I knew that you are a hard man, harvesting where you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed. 25 So I was afraid and went out and hid your talent in the ground. See, here is what belongs to you.’
26 “His master replied, ‘You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed? 27 Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest.
28 “‘Take the talent from him and give it to the one who has the ten talents. 29 For everyone who has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.
So much for the loser winning.
I dropped my subscription to Popular Science for the same reason. It has become Political “Science”. Lefties just can’t help themselves when it comes to the drumbeat criticism of reason and rationality.
I was a below average Major League Baseball player and can vouch that the overwhelming majority of the players I knew were not worth any time investment, much less monetary. I lament the culture of athlete worship that still lingers and I guess I just don’t understand spending more than a fleeting acknowledgement of unusual athletic prowess. Beyond that what is it exactly we are yearning for? To witness an adulterer the night before the next night be idolized by a son and his complicit father – that gets to the heart of the matter.
The son and father being autograph seekers unrelated to the serial adulterer.
Cicero, what position did you play?
We’ve been lucky in Detroit to have had a few athletes that acted with class, Al Kaline, Steve Yzerman, Joe Dumars, and Barry Sanders, among others. Most athletes are only role models in the sense that they’ve applied themselves to a task diligently, but I have no problem with my son and grandson emulating Mr. Yzerman.
I am also letting my SI subscription lapse. I had signed up this past year after not subscribing for over 10 years. I was very impressed with many of their articles, but as you write, at least 2-3 times per issue there was some sort of left-wing bias snarky throw-away line or two.
It is like nails on a chalkboard to me and this is the way they want to go, so they don’t get my subscription anymore.
Letting it lapse?
Both you and Klavan should “cancel”.
That sends a better message.
I was just wondering the same. Get active: call and cancel! Demand refund!
This is part of the problem. Too many just shrug and accept the latest irritation. After too much concession (or “bipartisanship”), there is nothing left to concede.
Here’s a quote the way it should’ve been written:
“It’s clear that for a substantial number of athletes and coaches, there is no tension between being a progressive liberal and having Beyonce invoke her science fiction-stripper-prostitute persona and also offend all people who like good music at half-time.”
Teach your children well, and to demand:
“Take off that tank top and pull off them drawers
The girls all pause, got them dripping down they sugar walls
Aw naw! Getting to the nappy root
Knocking boots and stilettos, damn I keep it ghetto!
A cool type of fellow, mellow got the gold medal
Never settle for less my rose petal
Tooey, tooey, tooey, tooey! Spit game!
Venom to get it up in ‘em, let me P pop that thang”
If her lyrics were any emptier you’d have to get Hawkings in there to prove they exist on some dimensional plane, along with her hair.
Man, that halftime gig was so bad, it was comical. That made Janet’s breast look good. And I watched it because Beyonce is so famous in my book, I don’t even know what she’s known for but gyration.
Was that to appease the quota, or to pacify the race hustlers? That simply couldn’t have been considered quality entertainment. That wasn’t even smokey bar on a Tuesday night good.
The game is bad enough. The commercials are rotten too.
Truly, Obama worthy.
There’s no doubt Beyonce is a talented and professional entertainer but the artistry is so missing in action you need to send Tarzan to a lost city to see if it’s been hidden away from civilization. There’s certainly more “La’s” in Opar than on that half-time stage.
I’ve been reading a lot of blogs/tweets about how conservatives need to “embrace the culture”…but I need a shower and a sonnet after just reading your transcription. I do not want my 7-year-old niece or 8-year-old nephew watching or listening to that garbage and thinking that’s how adults are supposed to act.
I won’t be embracing that sad culture any time soon, no matter how many smiles and “oohs” the crowd gives off.
In the 1950s there would’ve been senate sub-committee hearings over such smut being mainstreamed to children. There were adult expressions in contemporary film and plays back then, lots of them. I think of Cyd Charisse and Gene Kelly and the Li’l Abner play and film of the late ’50s off the top of my head.
But today the President himself is not only a fan of Beyonce but approves of his children watching such smut. It’s like Disney having strippers right after Daniel Boone. And her husband Jay-Z gave off a racist rant at the first inauguration ball.
When you celebrate vulgarity, sociopathic behaviors and empty artistry, that is exactly what you will emulate and produce as a culture as well. To put so much energy into a career that was expressed in such vapid choreography and music as in that half-time show is a joke. No wonder people are blowing each other away in Chicago. They value what a successful culture would actively avoid.
Last night’s Super Bowl was the first in a while that I honestly couldn’t find any interest in. I need some kind of local angle to keep in it, and with no college alum and Tony Gonzalez out, there were no athletes of interest on the field. And, honestly, the commercials have gotten less clever over the past few years.
So, we watched Puppy Bowl. You know you have arrived as a parent when that has become an event. Our 2-year-old thought it was totally awesome, and there was even some local appeal as the Siberian Husky pup came from a local shelter.
You know, I can remember a time when there was no halftime show at the Super Bowl at all. Then at some point, the parasitical popular culture latched on like a lamprey to the spectacle that the Super Bowl created.
Next thing you know, the bien piensants just “knew” that the Super Bowl would be incomplete without some over the hill pop celebrity who’s lost whatever talent they once had putting on a shallow, frenetic, rushed performance which takes 30 minutes and breaks up the flow of the game.
And like the big dopes that we all are, we’ve all bought into it.
I’m surprised many of you are only now dropping the S.I.. I did that back in ’88 and it was already taking a left, hardcore irreligious turn then. I can’t imagine how bad it is now. And I haven’t missed it, even when they kept sending it to me for free for a time.
But Andrew is exactly write about these inane sports journalists wanting to be something more than sports. Sports is the bottom of the barrel of journalism. And these wannabee superstars, hangers on to touch the athletes, are desperately requiring the attention.
Mike Lupica, Jeff Pearlman, Michael Silver, even Keith Olbermann – just a few of the most insidious pinkos that aren’t worth your time and insufferable as humans.
But they are to be mocked.
I am also surprised Klavin is just now getting around to this. It’s been quite obvious for well over a decade at least that SI, ESPN and the other players in the sports media complex lean far left. I can’t believe that this is even news any longer. So far, play by play at least, seems to still be a safe haven, but you never know how long that will last. It’s the media Jake…..
Lupica and Olberman – talk about weak sauce.
If Olberman read this page, he’d register and be spewing hate in minutes.
As for Lupica, his day has come and gone.
If anyone’s interested in more information on the misrepresentation of religious topics, see GetReligion.org: http://www.getreligion.org/ (“The press … just doesn’t get religion”). It’s full of examples and analyses showing why accurate reporting about any religion (not just Christianity) is very hard to get.
As a matter of fact, the Feb 3 posting also covers the SI Issue.
And the suppression of Tebow continues apace.
Oh, really, SI? How come Tim Tebow gets so much flak for being a goodie-goodie as a person and football player over his faith?
You left out the most important reason. It’s dull.
What’s as disturbing is the S I cover with Ray Lewis.
The same Ray Lewis who’d made a ‘miraculous recovery’ from a serious October injury. Whose also produced 6 illegitimate kids scattered throughout the country insofar.
I needn’t mention his involvement in a double homicide 13 years ago.
Though the English language-destroying Ray Lewis (sadly Ray Lewis is considered one of the more ‘intelligent’ speakers in the Felon’s League) pontificates grab bag Biblical quotes so ‘All’s well’.
The self induced ‘amnesia’ of the populace/ sports fan world is frightening.
Sure IS!! It is horrifying what people will overlook as long as a man is a “good player”, or a popular,”charismatic” one. IMHO, anyone who was ever convicted of a homicide should be barred for life from ANY position in professional sports.
Why on Earth should this surprise you? Pro Athletes are the most coddled, sheltered and aggressively, monomaniacally narcissistic personalities on the planet. Their every snot bubble is lovingly kleenexed, their skid marks cleansed, their pecadilloes studiously ignored, their sins forgotten, their misdemeanors papered over, their negligence excused, their felonies negotiated and plead-bargained, their sordid and bloody histories expensively P.R’ed, spun and re-invented in the media.
As long as they can deliver on Game Day.
Example No. 1, the probably most likely feloniously culpable in a double murder Ray Lewis.
What took so long. I had a subscription for close to twenty years, and cancelled it about that long ago. I got tired of every other issue “highlighting” race. I used to read Sports Illustrated for sports and escapism, not the drivel it became.
I still get the swimsuit edition every year…I tell my wide they’re collectables…
Why let it lapse?? Call them and tell them you want to cancel your subscription and why. They need to understand the whole cause and effect principle. We did it to our local newspaper. They called three separate times asking what they can do to get us back. We told them to actually report the news without bias and we’ll consider it. Waiting for hell to freeze over.
We did it to ourselves. We got lazy. We accepted as doctrine the “seperation between church and state”. Now we are getting surprised when that seperation is being pushed to almost all other public venues???
Pretty soon, religion will ONLY be allowed in a state approved church and then the preacher will only be allowed state approved sermons. But we will put on our shocked face and be surprised!!
Nope, can’t happen here you say. This is America you say. We have rights you say.
I say wake the hell up!! This stopped being “America” quite a while ago and no one stopped to notice. It isn’t going to come back on it’s own, just like it didn’t manifest on it’s own. It will take patriots with the force of will to bring our country back.
Lock and load.
WHAT? Sports Illustrated,TOO??!! They lost my interest years ago when they began their “Swimsuit Issue”.What a bunch of curvaceous,pretty young women in EXTREMELY scanty swimwear have even remotely to do with competitive sports was beyond me,and, being a woman, I found it offensive. But now it’s deteriorated into one more Leftist rag. How depressing.
Thanks for letting me know, Klavan! No gift subscriptions for ANYONE. EVER.
You would think…you would think that the publisher of SI, from a purely business point of view, would have a policy of avoiding religion/politics so as not to alienate half of their readership. Since they don’t have the sense to do that they deserve to lose half of their subscriptions.
It’s sad about SI, which used to be good light reading, but it’s part of a larger trend. It’s becoming quite difficult to find a printed periodical that hasn’t allowed politics — nearly always left-leaning politics — to pervade its handling of every subject under the Sun.
All by itself, that correlation between dead-tree publication and leftward political inclinations is worthy of some study. Did lefties infiltrate the dead-tree organs en masse, while we weren’t looking? Or does writing for a printed periodical gradually turn one into a left-liberal? Hmmm. Maybe I could get a federal grant…
The Left took over journalism by default.
Conservative parents don’t like their kids to go into journalism, or sociology, or social work, or drama, or acting, or writing, or painting, or teaching in public school. So, by and large conservative young people don’t go into the liberal arts. The Left has taken them over by default.
It’s the mirror image of the military officer corps. I’ve heard Democrats who are frustrated about how military officers consistently vote Republican and lean conservative. I told them, “That’s because your liberal children won’t consider a military career, and so they leave the field to the conservatives.”
Makes me think of the dilemma conservatives face in policy making..It’s the Liberals varsity squad versus our Junior Varsity…conservatives with high aptitude generally steer clear of government, but Liberals with high aptitude generally bend over backwards to get into government. So that’s the battlefield; our 2nd tier versus their All Stars.
You’re not paranoid. I read somewhere a few years ago that there has been a loosely organized leftist project to infiltrate “light reading” magazines of all kinds via free-lance submissions in order to subtly influence the culture via mags like “Redbook” and “Good-Housekeeping” etc., on topics ranging from financial planning to child-rearing. It’s propaganda/brain-washing by osmosis in order to frame the issues and define what is considered “normal.”
My Father was a charter subscriber (1954) to SI. I grew up in the 50s reading the mag and am enough of a geezer to remember when it ran really funny sports cartoons that reflected on both sports and society in its early years. I stopped reading SI so many years ago I can’t even remember when…
Lonely man of Faith keep your ground and not flee because this is about the True God increasing tour faith so don’t throw away your SI mag.The heavens open up to you, with all the angels right before they stone you figure of speech like Stephen and like Stephen you begin to feel sorry for them
Faith filled Tim Tebow moves to New York the most demon filled city in uSA besides Detroit and with God it is all about the tests can he hold on to his faith even as loser in chains to the demons.
Look at me become Traitor to my own New England Patriots after I read How Elijah was feed by the Ravens so the Ravens began to feed me my faith at the begining of the season and then at the super ball half time the Great Jezebel Beast whore began singing on the side of the gay city then the lights go out in the at the beginning of new half and demons released in darkness as the gay team look like they crush my Ravens draining my faith Ravens win the super bowl as i see again when Madonna do her business a few years ago and my beloved Patriots lost to the demon city
But the change is I pray little girl Madonna not eatten by the dogs and little girl Beyonce not feel bad she become loser but one day these little girls have their faith become strong and kiss little boy Tim Tebow on his cheek
Halo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXNQgdvtxmc
God wants you to increase your faith and stand firm so you see you are not lonely when your eyes are open to all the great angels and saints watching the game with you
Unite in faith read the SI mag and do your prayers and see the power of the Invisible begin to reflect your own faith one day is this great leap of faith not to hide it under a rock or in a cave
Sinz, my husband and I are Conservative parents of Conservative kids. We’re both professional artists; our daughter is getting her Ph.D. In Fine Art and our son is an actor. The Left musn’t be allowed to own the arts.
But the left really DOES own the arts — and the media, entertainment, education (particularly “higher”) and even a good deal of Wall Street and Silicon Valley. One of the problems is that in any of these areas reasoned dissent is treated as misanthropy. Many people in these areas may “think” differently, but few dare to come out with their thoughts. Case in point: a friend of mine is a Republican in a liberal-arts department at an “elite” private college in the Northeast. He’s VERY careful about what he says and to whom, even though in theory it couldn’t cost him his job because he’s tenured. But he’s not immune — nor is anyone — to the relentless hounding that would occur if he showed his hand. We’re already living in the land of the unfree; the political correctoids, like the pod people, have taken over.
You are so-o-o-o correct on not surrendering the arts to the left. They are worth fighting for.
Andy -
What took you so long?
The Arena
Causa Nostrae Laetitiae
(Dedicated to the University of Notre Dame, Indiana)
There uprose a golden giant
On the gilded house of Nero
Even his far-flung flaming shadow and his image swollen large
Looking down on the dry whirlpool
Of the round Arena spinning
As a chariot-wheel goes spinning; and the chariots at the charge.
And the molten monstrous visage
Saw the pageants, saw the torments,
Down the golden dust undazzled saw the gladiators go,
Heard the cry in the closed desert
Te salutant morituri,
As the slaves of doom went stumbling, shuddering, to the shades below.
“Lord of Life, of lyres and laughter,
Those about to die salute thee,
At thy godlike fancy feeding men with bread and beasts with men,
But for us the Fates point deathward
In a thousand thumbs thrust downward,
And the Dog of Hell is roaring through the lions in their den.”
I have seen, where a strange country
Opened its secret plains about me,
One great golden dome stand lonely with its golden image, one
Seen afar, in strange fulfillment,
Through the sunlit Indian summer
That Apocalyptic portent that has clothed her with the Sun.
She too looks on the Arena
Sees the gladiators grapple,
She whose names are Seven Sorrows and the Cause of All Our Joy,
Sees the pit that stank with slaughter
Scoured to make the courts of morning
For the cheers of jesting kindred and the scampering of a boy.
“Queen of Death and deadly weeping
Those about to live salute thee,
Youth untroubled; youth untutored; hateless war and harmless mirth
And the New Lord’s larger largesse
Holier bread and happier circus,
Since the Queen of Sevenfold Sorrow has brought joy upon the earth.”
Burns above the broad arena
Where the whirling centuries circle,
Burns the Sun-clothed on the summit, golden-sheeted, golden shod,
Like a sun-burst on the mountains,
Like the flames upon the forest
Of the sunbeams of the sword-blades of the Gladiators of God.
And I saw them shock the whirlwind
Of the World of dust and dazzle:
And thrice they stamped, a thunderclap; and thrice the sand-wheel swirled;
And thrice they cried like thunder
On Our Lady of the Victories,
The Mother of the Master of the Masterers of the World.
“Queen of Death and Life undying
Those about to live salute thee;
Not the crawlers with the cattle; looking deathward with the swine,
But the shout upon the mountains
Of the men that live for ever
Who are free of all things living but a Child; and He was thine.”
–G.K. Chesterton (1930)
I dropped my subscription to Communication Arts magazine, a pub for designers and illustrators, for the same reason.
Cheesus Mr. Klavan and all you other folks who are only just now cancelling your SI subscriptions. It’s like I left the planet and came back twenty years later and nothing’s changed. Where were you folks during the 80s when I and a bunch of other fed up subscribers were dumping SI due to the constant Bush/conservative bashing going on in the midst of supposedly sports-related articles? I mean totally out-of-the-blue mockery that had absolutely nothing to do with the topic.
I can understand how a bunch of you guys are twenty/thirty-somethings and missed the earlier rounds of left-wing dribble scribble at SI. But Mr. Klavan? Where were you?
I would submit that their isn’t a traditional institution around that hasn’t been infiltrated and contaminated by the Godless left, including once reliable Fox News, the military, the courts, and most sadly, the mainstream Churches–including that USCCB which donated millions to ACORN that helped elect Obama, the poster child for abortion.
Cancelled my subscription years ago. Final straws was the Mother Jones type story about Pat Tillman, including a negative quote from David Stern about Dick Cheney while traveling in Russia, which has what to do with international basketball expansion? The last and final straw was the cover story about how Global Warming will affect sports, utter garbage.
Again, If you are in business how does it serve you to insult 50% of your cusotmers?
HillelA
“In other words, you didn’t agree with the science. Join the (GOP) crowd.”
HillelA, the very definition of science is skepticism, without skepticism, there is no science. What you speak of is religious fanaticism.
I don’t believe you would recognize true scientific principal if it were a dog and it bit you on the backside.
Andrew,
I really don’t think you should let your subscription run out and then fail to resubscribe. I think you should cancel your subscription right now with issues still due you. SI will undoubted ask you why you’re cancelling and you can tell them why. I think what your article illustrates best is the Buckley doctrine: “Any institution, if not explicitly conservative, will, over time, become liberal.” This is primarily due to the left-wing slant of education in this country. If you ask me, it’s a great argument for homeschooling and eliminating about 95% of colleges from your child’s higher education plans.
About five years ago I cancelled our Gourmet subscription, which we had since the late 70s, for the same reason. I mean, it’s a cooking magazine for goodness sakes – why did they have to describe people who “sit around after dinner discussing progressive politics!” It was funny – they kept sending unpaid issues for about another two years and constantly sending cheaper and cheaper subscription offers. Then they went out of business.
Unexpectedly!
Of course.
During the lead to the Super Bowl, I really didn’t favor either and I’m sure that God was exactly the same. But as I was watching the pre-game cover just before kick off, CBS took shots of both teams’ locker rooms. In the Raven’s locker room, you saw many of the players with towels over their bowed heads in what appeared to be prayer. Even the CBS commentator, stated so much. The 49ers, not so much.
Now it didn’t matter as to exactly what the players were praying about—that they win the game, that they play to the best of their abilities, that there would be a minimum of injuries (the latter two would have been my choices), or were praying over more personal matters—the display left an impression on me that I leaned towards Baltimore’s favor throughout the rest of the game.
I dropped newspaper and magazine subsciprtions years ago. Military History mag is the only one I still take.
Centralization is bad for writing.
There is a single source for “serious” commentary in America-New York. Thus, the banal prejudice and bias of college-educated New Yorkers is slipped into places where it really doesn’t belong.
The conservative temper is always alert to the dangers of big business, but it’s important to recognize that the New York Media world exists as a parasite off of the S&P 500′s advertising needs.
Sad what has happened to some of the old publishing icons.
I was one of the original subscribers to Discover magazine:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discover_(magazine)
Sometime around the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings; they became very leftwing politically, and the quality of their articles declined.
Very sad!!!
I think it’s also time to boycott CBS, NBC & ABC by refusing to watch any of their entertainment offerings. Their news divisions have abandoned any pretense of adhering to journalistic standards to become house organs of America’s Progressivist/Academic complex. With the Internet we have access to enough quality entertainment that there is no need to tune into the mainstream media’s offerings until they return to some semblance of being honest information brokers.
Rather than get indignant when once again the Left dominated media slants Left, why don’t Conservatives get proactive? Why don’t Conservative journalists start a Right leaning sports magazine, a Right leaning fashion magazine, a Right leaning celebrity magazine like “People?” Why must we always react to their bias and agenda? Let’s create an alternative narrative. Surely that is an outreach to the low-info voters that gave us our current president. That was Breitbart’s vision and it is long overdue.
Enough Already is right – we have enough National Reviews and Weekly Standards; we need a conservative New Yorker, a conservative Sports Illustrated, a conservative Vogue.
Never read SI, but I have a whole list of magazines I used to read regularly (New Yorker, Atlantic, National Geographic, Foreign Affairs) that have been chucked. Wired has the virus, but it can be ignored most of the time; the only regular reads I can rely on not to insult my intelligence these days are Smithsonian Air & Space and Hot Rod.
Enough Already,
I write about cars and the auto industry for a few sites including PJM. One of the most popular car blogs is Jalopnik, owned by Gawker, so it’s no surprise that Jalopnik writers tend to tilt left and exhibit some of the drive-by attacks on the right that Andrew mentioned. I’ve discussed, with some car writers that tilt right or libertarian, that it’d be nice to have car site that reflects that worldview but the truth is that while I can write volumes about the faults of the left and statism, I’d rather be talking about cars and the people involved in making them. When there’s a political angle in a car story that I write, I don’t hide my political views but I also try hard to keep what I write factual and non-partisan and fair. Partly because I don’t like it when lefties use their other-than-political-soapbox to push leftism, I’m not going to act like them in regard to my own politics, but also because I want it to be about the cars and the people.
It’s not a fair fight because many on the right and in the libertarian camp have an aversion to how the left politicizes everything, while the left undoubtedly believes that the personal is political, so everything is politics.
I have my own site, Cars In Depth, http://www.carsindepth.com, and I can write about whatever I want to, without any editor telling me not to say this or that, and in two years I think I’ve posted only two or three pieces that were deliberately political.
If God wanted the Ravens to win, the power outage was certainly a questionable decision on His part.
Didn’t even read this article. Could tell from the cover what slant it would take. Interestingly enough, I came to the same conclusion a couple of months ago. I’ve reached a point where I no longer wish to ignore the overt leftist slant and snide comments toward anything G.O.P. or conservative. Since SI is probably the only division of Time, Inc. that makes money, I believe the best way to express my disapproval is to let my subscription lapse. After 34 years it will be tough, but I will join you in this action.
Amen to Mr. Klavan’s argument. The beauty of sports is that they play out—or ought to—on their own fields of excellence, blessedly free from the daily and tedious political maunderings of left or right. When I was a young (white) boy living in the country, our afternoon paper would bring me news of the exploits of one Willie Mays (black), who became my favorite baseball player. Willie could hit, hit for power, run, catch and throw like few others. He was the complete package, and I wanted to be like him. I never “knew” that he was black, or “realized” that his race was somehow supposed to matter, until I was much older. The relentless politicization of every aspect of our society is regrettable. It diminishes us.
Physician, heal thyself.
You “support gay rights” yet you claim to support Christianity?
You can’t have it both ways.
Just a suggestion. Has anybody followed the money to see who is paying who to print leftardism in SI?
Another example:
I gave up Rolling Stone magazine after subscribing since its beginning and for the same reason.
Time and Newsweek are other examples. The best approach I’ve seen for news magazines is The Week.
You know you can cancel immediately and get back a pro-rated refund for issues that haven’t been sent, right?
Last night was the NFL “has jumped the shark” moment for me when they trotted out the Sandy Hook Elementry School Choir for the opening ceremonies. Had not Adam Lanza gone on a shooting spree in that school they would not have appeared in the ceremonies. I’m not knocking their perfomance, and I’m sure they worked hard once they found out they’d be there, but they didn’t do anything to actually deserve to be there.
Who did they bump from that spot? Maybe no one, maybe some other school’s choir that worked really hard and won several competitions to get that spot.
I dumped SI 20 years ago for the same reasons expressed here. No article, no reporter on their staff could write about any sporting event without injecting some smarmy a**hole comment either confirming lefty dogma or ridiculing the right. Of course, Time-Warner owns the rag, so what can you expect? F*** ‘em; as long as there is toilet paper or dead leaves I will never again pick up that magazine.
By the way, the best way to influence these turds is to write to the companies that advertise on their pages. Send letters to their advertising and/or publicity departments or even to the CEO. Explain that you are cancelling your subscription and that you no longer intend to buy their products. A very little of that can go a very long way.
This is one gay guy who agrees woth you about Dan Savage. What a piece of human garbage.
The left-wing tilt to something as non-political as sports, plus the focus on “personal stories” caused me to do this 3 years ago. Talk about the sports, not how the athletes met their wives or how many kids they have.
Next up;
Why I’m cancelling my subscription to REDBOOK…REDS!
Popular Mechanics…they’re pro union!!!!!
People…Hollywood leftists!
Billboard…well, too many to list…
Talk about finding communists under the bed, looking for “leftist” thought in a sports magazine is going way, waaaayyy, out of your way to try to make a point.
That might be true if it weren’t for the fact that all these publications are screaming their left wing message at the top of their lungs — so you don’t have to look very far
Hatred and hostility of Christianity is a hallmark of leftist ideology. Here is a sports magazine that is going out of its way to bash Christianity. Twenty years ago, a cover like this appearing in Sports Illustrated would have been inconceivable. So how is it a stretch to say that SI is veering to the left?
Who knew SI was even still being published? Let it go the way of Newsweek, to the leftist grave yard of silly publications.
I cancelled Scientific American several years ago for the exact same reason.
In the age of the Internet, even Spurts Illustrated’s bikini issue is an tendentious anachronism and deserves disintermediation.
I have never seen an actual copy of Sports illustrated, other than the bathing suit edition. I won’t even bother with that one now … there is plenty of that stuff in the internet. Magazines are a thing of the past.
My goodness, our godless world is going to hell in a handbasket because of left-leaning, anti-religious sports media! Hmmmmm. Gee, I guess we’ll just have to ignore (a) FOX News, the most-watched — and most blatantly lying right-wing biased cable TV network in American history, (b) right-wing talk radio which fills the airwaves with trumped up racist and anti-liberal (and anti-moderate) venom and innuendo from coast-to-coast about an impending mongrelization of a fictitious White American majority via immigration reform, socialism and government expropriation, (c) think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and Cato Institute that purport to back fascist views with allegedly intelligent research, and (d) the NRA which spews more drivel of late than any common sense human being should ever have to tolerate. Hey, let us left-wing alleged God-hating pinkos have our media, and you can have yours. I’m so fed up with the sanctimoniousness of right-wing ideologues who preach about God while fomenting intolerance for all patriotic Americans like me who also choose to have their own beliefs. The bulk of this thread — randomengineer’s posting excepted — is nauseating.
Please get back to us when you figure out which side of the left-right continuum the fascist sit! I’ll give you a hint, it’s not side of less government.
Hey … consider that the only publication that is not heavily leftist is the bible and even that is preaching too much ‘help the less motivated’ and the hero dies half way through to boot. Not much left to read. Stick to cheesy reality shows.
Heck, even Adirondack Life is full of enviroleftism masquerading as tree-huggery. Bill McKibben — a prime lefty “we’re all gonna die” Gorist buffoon — is revered by its editrixies.
Add Rolling Stone and Playboy to the list for cancelling
I recently read a couple pages of Oppenheimer’s anti-religious screed in SI. If I had written such transparently biased spew in high school, Miss Marsh would have clipped me upside the head.
And that’s coming from an atheist.
Well Said.
Unfortunately the first paragraph about how SI distorts and tilts to the left when there is no real reason to applies to many mainstream magazines – National Geographic and Popular Science join Scientific American in their pro-liberal agenda in many pieces that have nothing to do with politics – they always find a way to add an anti-conservative jab in their writing.
Stop and consider this for one moment:
What would happen in the executive suites of Big Media if every conservative in America were to call up and indicate that we were pulling the plug, and tell them why? (Because we’re not interested in paying expensively for left-wing crap when we can get it for free.)
Cable/satellite TV? Gone. Dumped.
Netflix/Hulu? Gone. Dumped.
“Newsmagazines” and newspapers? Gone. Dumped.
Entertainment and sports magazines like SI? Gone. Dumped.
Saturday night at the movies? Gone. Dumped.
What would happen would be havoc. There are enough liberals in the country to continue to keep Big Media in business — but only at a dramatically reduced level of profitability and influence.
There are enough conservatives to be able to collectively damage Big Media’s business to where a bunch of liberal grand poohbahs in Manhattan and Hollyweird will be contemplating failure, disgrace and poverty.
And, our own cultural lives as honest conservatives will be the better off for not having this continual liberal nonsense pumped into our homes and ears.
Take the pledge. Starve the beast.
The worse is Vogue. I cancelled that years ago and if ESPN the magazine isn’t careful they will be next.
I think Cosmo’s worse. And sleazy……
[“The Bible is clear that [God] preferred the loser.”]
Probably got that idea from Goliath or Ramses.
Enough already,
I would go one step further and ask for fair and balanced. News and articles that answered the questions…who, what were and why.
Then we would have enough information to make up our own minds, instead of being presented with an agenda, right or left.
I have been looking for this kind of coverage for years in MSM and have yet to find it.
Any magazine that can manages to stay in business only through its annual soft-core porn issue is on shaky grounds discussing morality.
I quit reading Sports Illustrated years ago because it was mostly “puff” pieces- like reading celebrity mags. I switched to “Sporting News”, which was full of solid statistics.
I cancelled my Reader’s Digest subscription about a 8 years ago, when their liberal bias became so prominent that I found myself getting angry every month over the positions it supported.
The Smithsonian mag is the same way. All the stuff in the castle to talk about and all they do is force evolution in every magazine. And the Bible is nothing but a myth according to them. Typical left wing crap. I’m done when the subscription expires.
No one cares what magazines you subscribe to. Go on and cry.
what is a magazine? an artifact? people pay money for them?
I don’t remember Jesus having offered any opinions about football. I do recall “turn the other cheek,” but I’m not sure whether football players get offended by their opponents.
Jesus does recommend giving up everything (including, it’s fair to say, your job) in order to follow Jesus. but I don’t know a lot of people who pay much attention to that idea.
If you really feel as strongly as you suggest, why didn’t you just cancel your subscription outright. That’s what I did with mine.
ATTENTION MR. KLAVAN
Apparently Klavan doesn’t know that you don’t have to wait until the subscription runs out… you can call the magazine and cancel at anytime… and the magazine will send you a prorated refund on the remainder of the subscription. Usually you can find a subscription toll free number listed on the table of contents page or somewhere in the first few pages of a magazine..
This will be even more effective than waiting until the subscription runs out.
What took you so long to cancel your subscription? This mag has been terrible for years. If it weren’t for dentists and doctors, SI would be finished. I’m suprised anyone pays for it these days. Even the bathing suit issue has gone downhill.
Yawn. The culture war continues apace. I’m going to stop eating at a New York deli because some gentile played Yahtzee at another dude’s Bar Mitzvah. Ho hum.
SI & ESPN are very anti-Christian. Those who suggest the mixing of faith & religion, are somehow new, they are flat at wrong about the history of sports. What these anti-Christian zealots don’t get is that athletes have been thanking God from the beginning of time. The thing that has changed? We have more anti-Christian bigots posing as journalists who are trying to belittle & bash Christian athletes & the history of religion & sports. Conservatives need to stop buying super PAC ads, buy ESPN, SI, Cosmo & the Huffington Post & Time Magazine & take our culture back!
Bingo!
Instead of buying ads, buy media companies. Time to leave the kiddie pool.
Among my few mags worth reading:
“The Wilson Quarterly”
“Foreign Policy” and
“The American Interest.”
At least the non-left side gets some serious consideration
in these venues.
Two words: Notre Dame
SI, like so many other rags, has been struggling for readership longer than they would like to admit. I’m sure the swimsuit issues advent coincides with the expansion of other more current media outlets. That being said, the only way they maintain readership is to snag their claws into an ideology. So they love to attack conventional people like Tim Tebow, but fail to acknowledge the way they have allowed thugs and criminals to become stars simply because those individuals fit into their far left agenda. Ask anyone under 25 what magazines they subscribe to and wait for the blank stare. SI is a dinosaur in its own death throes. Maybe the kindest thing would be to simply walk away and let nature take its course.
Wow. You’re the type of monomaniacal idiot who would find liberalism to hate and rant about no matter where you looked, from a hot dog stand to the moons of Saturn. Get a life.
What fun it is to read and watch y’all stroking out.
Better late than never, Mr K. I noted the intolerable leftist slant in SI twenty years ago. I think the last straw for me was when SI ran a hagiographic sketch of soccer player Mia Hamm that was probably one of the longest articles ever written for SI. And the tone of the article was straight out of Ms magazine
And I was thinking “This is an American men’s sports magazine?”
You call this journalism? Really? You use the term “left-wing” three times in a single sentence and would not make it out of 12th grade with that crap. You clearly have a problem, Klavan, with anyone who is not “right wing”. Your single example of your complaint has zero substance to it, but I guess you’ll just label me a “left-winger” so it matters little because substance is not what you are about. Who cares if you have a subscription anyhow, because you are a loser. you simply don’t get it.
Mr. Neumerski,
You obviously do not read much of Andrew Klavan’s articles. What you are criticizing is actually sarcasm, done on purpose for effect. Andrew is more libertarian than conservative and in fact has stated he is supportive or neutral on most gay positions. (Some people are left handed and some are right handed; some people are heterosexual and some are gay. He loves them all).
The author of this column, along with the people commenting, lead a very sad existence if they are fired up about an SI article.
About the only wise piece of advice Alistair Campbell, the spin doctor of the then prime minister Tony Blair, imparted was: “We don’t do God.” That should apply to commentators [means you, Mr Klavan], sports journalists, sportsmen, ‘celebrities’, as well as politicians. It’s arguably irrational and offensive, but almost certainly tasteless.
I cancelled the one subscription that I had – Time Magazine, years ago, when it put the marines who raised the flag on Iwo Jima raising the tree threatened by “Global Warming.”
Greetings from Los angeles! I’m bored to tears at work so I decided to check out your site on my iphone during lunch break. I enjoy the info you provide here and can’t wait to take a look when I get
home. I’m amazed at how quick your blog loaded on my cell phone .. I’m not
even using WIFI, just 3G .. Anyways, wonderful blog!
“American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On America”
Chris Hedges’s book examines how Christian dominionists are seeking absolute power and a Christian state. This movement bears a strong resemblance to the young fascist movements in Italy and Germany in the 1920s and ’30s.
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/2/19/chris_hedges_on_american_fascists_the
http://www.amazon.com/American-Fascists-Christian-Right-America/dp/0743284437
”Fascism should rightly be called corporatism as it is the merger of state and corporate power.”
- Benito Mussolini
Possible Poe’s Law here…
It took a few minutes without googling, but I figured out when I gave SI the death penalty. Eleven years ago, the U.S. lost to Poland in the World Cup, but made the last 16 because of the Portugal-South Korea result. SI’s website led with something like this: “As if it wasn’t difficult enough to explain the intricacies of World Cup soccer to Americans…”
Decided to check back with PJ Media. Couldn’t remember why I stopped reading. Now I remember.
The anti-gay comments here are shocking. The ignorance and this whole “gay agenda” talk is unbelievable at a site that I thought leaned libertarian as I do.
PJMedia…how did you come to attract these people?
We gay horrors pay for your asinine SS benefits so after you depart this earth your spouse can collect at your rate; we would like the same. We pay for your kids to go to school. Instead, my spouse and I lost $20,000 of tax benefits because you are “afraid” of the “gay agenda”. Your descendants will shake their heads at you…They’ll say, “It was just the times.” But they will feel ashamed of you.
Suck it up people and if you’re so Christian, open your hearts. Get over your fears. How many people who are ignorant about AR15′s have an opinion and are against them? You scoff at that, as do I. Meanwhile, you spout your ignorance about gays and want to enjoy your little perks, take our money, and deny us the same.
“Conservative” meant “conserving liberty” once; now it it seems to mean “conserve MY way of life so I can know what to expect at all times”. But freedom means risk. It means not knowing what’s around the corner.
Until you pull your heads out of the sand, I will pull the lever for a liberal until this issue is settled (it will happen of course). In the meantime the country may descend into an economic abyss. I don’t care. Why? My relationship with my spouse is the most important part of my life, has been for 20 years.
We want federal benefits, just like you so that we can move around the country and still be able to visit each other in the hospital if a family member wants to be a jerk, or if we don’t have our health proxy in our hands at the time, or if that proxy is destroyed in a car accident and we only have a couple of hours to say goodbye. It’s called “love”. We want the same for you…in fact, please find it soon.
How could you have lost $20,000 of what you didn’t have?
@ Surprised2013 Politics/politicians are mainly to blame for gays not being able to get benefits.
Instead of focusing on and pushing for an agreement, politicians want to make it (and keep it) a political issue that will help get them elected. If gay proponents would push for (and not let their political party tell them what they ‘really’ want) civil unions that provide all the benefits of marriage instead of Gay Marriage they might find a compromise that wouldn’t offend people that believe marriage is a sacred union between man and woman.
It is ridiculous that EVERYTHING has become a political issue. Look past what they want you to see and fight for the common sense answer.
@cbenoistd – I’m sure you understood what I meant. Says a lot about you, I guess.
Anything else you’d like to add?
I seriously find it sad that a grown man actually cares about sports meant to be played by children.
I’d love to know what my 90-year-old stepfather (who played football WAY BACK THEN) and was a football team’s physician (a little less way back then) and is a Jesuit-educated, open-minded thinker (with questions both fair and troubling–like has football become too rough because of better equipment?) has to say about this article. I’m thinking he’d share Andrew’s sentiments with maybe one additional caveat. Those bathing suits are just way too skimpy. (Not that he looked.) Let a man enjoy a football game and shut up already.
PS – @ Suprised, there are always a few who do NOT speak for the many. The subject was Religion and Football.
The author wrote: “This blog has always supported [homosexuals] and [the homosexual normalization lobby].”
This is disappointing news. Homosexuals already have the same rights that any other person does. It’s sad when even Conservatives are bamboozled into becoming high-affect/low-information supporters of some oh-so-fashionable pose of the day.
To say nothing of the prior weeks picture of two 49er dudes lipped locked in celebration. Wonder how long it took the editors to find just the right gay imagery – perfect for San Fran.
Loved their article in the early 80s about tanks being obsolete.
Science!!
I, too, have noticed that “journalists” will interject pro-liberal and anti-conservative messages into virtually every article despite the article having nothing to do with politics. I read a restaurant review in Esquire a few years ago that said something to the effect of “The dining room is sleek and cool–like Michelle Obama.” WTF?
The only thing to do is cancel subscriptions, as I did with Esquire, and let these publications continue to whither and die.
I read an article this morning that newsstand sales of magazines has plummeted. Ya think? Too bad, so sad. Let them die.
My family subscribed to Reader’s Digest for years–it was a sad day when I cancelled my subscription, but it too was taken over by the leftists.
Can’t help but notice that when the left takes something over, customer service goes downs the tubes and deceitful marketing practices take over as well. Coincidence?
I’m with you Klavan! Also, Oppenheimer obviously NEVER read the Bible or he would see God always made HIS people victorious, not losers. The person struggling through hardship always came out the victor through God, who enabled the suffering to win. And Christ died a crucifixion death so mankind would be victorious over death through eternal life. That’s not favoring losers, but making champions! And the Bible states “we are more than conquerors,” so Oppenheimer needs a lesson in Biblical theology.
Your column nailed it Klavan! I agree with you. Read Hewitt’s interview with you. You rocked the boat and got attention to SI’s phoniness in this interview. Rock on!