Basketball Time Machine: 'NBA Legends Explain How Larry Bird Destroyed Everyone'

Source:Basketball Time Machine- Los Angeles Lakers defender Michael Cooper, talking about the great Larry Bird.

"In this Video NBA Legends explain why Larry Bird was Better than everybody

Larry Bird, larry Bird highlights, larry Bird Boston Celtics, Larry Bird Trash Talk,

Larry Bird funny Moments, 

Larry Bird 2022, nba legends on larry Bird, Larry Bird open court, michael jordan Larry Bird, Larry Bird Clutch Moments, NBA Legends explain Larry Bird, Larry Bird Full Game, Larry Bird documentary, Larry Bird dennis rodman,

NBA, Lebron James Michael Jordan, Kevin Mchale, Boston Gardon, NBA, Old School Nba." 

From Basketball Time Machine

I think Michael Jordan has the best quote that I've ever heard about Larry Bird. He said that he played against Larry Bird for 8 seasons and still to this day, doesn't know what position that Bird played, because Bird made so many plays and so many key plays. Bird would make the long range jump shot, get the key drive to the basket, get the key bucket in the post, make the great assist, lead and run the fast break, key rebound, key steal, etc. He would make all the plays that a point guard, off-guard, small forward, power forward, and center would make. So what position did Larry Bird play? And he could defend all 3 positions up front as well. 

For the sake of this post, I got Larry Bird down as the greatest forward of all-time and I also believe that. To me, Larry Bird and Julius Erving are the two greatest NBA forwards ever. If I had to put an all-time NBA team together, they would be my two starting forwards. But why is Bird the greatest forward and arguably the greatest player in NBA history? He wasn't fast, didn't jump very well, not overly bulky, but certainly strong. 

I think the best way to look at Larry Bird, is to look at him the way you would look at Wayne Gretzky in hockey or John Unitas in football. And if you don't know who those two other players are, this post is not going to help you that much and I'm not going to tell you who they are. Bird, Gretzky, and Unitas, all have the ability to see things happening that have haven't happened yet, simply by paying attention to the entire game and what's going on. 

The perfect example for Bird, is that great defensive play that he made against Isiah Thomas and the Detroit Pistons during game 5 of the 1987 Eastern Conference Finals. If Isiah just calls timeout or waits a second and passes the ball to his center Bill Laimbeer, game over and the Pistons win. They're already up 1 and either the time runs out or Laimbeer goes to the other side of the court and shoots 2 three throws even if he misses both of them, not enough time for the Celtics, even with Larry Bird, to come back and win the game. But as always, Bird can see exactly what was going on. 

All the Pistons had to do here was to successfully inbound the ball and the game is probably over. So Bird completely paying attention to what Isiah is doing and Isiah gives Bird a gift not even knowing that Bird is even in play, because he's rushing when he didn't need to and throws a lazy pass, that Bird picks off, Dennis Johnson is following the whole play the whole time as well, cuts to the basket, where Bird hits him with perfect pass, after making the perfect steal and the Celtics win the game. 

I think the greatest play that Larry Bird ever made, at least in the postseason, was a defensive play. And it wasn't even a great athletic play, Bird was simply completely aware of what was going on, could see what was developing, and had the perfect reaction and execution to what was going on. And was a play that I believe no other player whose ever played professional basketball before, could've made, certainly in that position and under those conditions.

I might be in the minority on this, but I think what separates Larry Bird and Magic Johnson, even from Michael Jordan, is that Legend and Magic could dominate the game, win the game, be the best player in the game, by not scoring, because they could do so many other things both offensively and defensively. And if you don't believe me, just a solid highlight package of all three of those great players will make my point for me. 

A typical highlight package of Larry Bird, you'll see a lot of great baskets, but also a lot of great rebounds, assists, and steals. Same thing with Earvin Johnson. With Michael Jordan, most of his highlights will be great baskets, with a lot of great athletic ability involved with those baskets. Larry Bird dominated by the NBA by doing everything and he did that by being smarter than everyone else on the court and whose ever played basketball.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

You can also see this follow piece to this post, on The New Democrat.

Committee For a Responsible Federal Budget: Reconciliation 101

Source:Committee For a Responsible Federal Budget- welcome to the U.S. Congress. Feel free to leave or escape at will, anytime you want. 

"Reconciliation is a special legislative process created as part of the Budget Act of 1974. It is intended to help lawmakers make the tax and mandatory spending changes necessary to meet the levels proposed in the Congressional budget resolution.

Reconciliation instructions are put forward as part of a concurrent budget resolution that is adopted by both chambers of Congress. These instructions set cost or savings targets for Congressional committees, with instructions covering mandatory spending, revenue, or debt limit changes. Following these instructions, committees of jurisdiction identify specific policies to meet these goals in the form of a reconciliation bill, which can be enacted on a fast-track basis.

A reconciliation bill is privileged in several ways, including a 20-hour limit on debate in the Senate, a non-debatable motion to proceed to the bill, and a strict germaneness test for amendments in a process known as “vote-a-rama” that occurs after regular debate has ended.

Most importantly, the limit on debate time and non-debatable motion to proceed means a reconciliation bill cannot be filibustered in the Senate – allowing the Senate to pass a reconciliation bill by a simple majority, with the Vice President able to cast a tie-breaking vote, rather than needing 60 votes to end debate." 

From the Committee For a Responsible Federal Budget 

"In February, Congress advanced a budget resolution allowing up to $1.9 trillion of additional spending or tax cuts through a process known as budget reconciliation. This powerful tool allows legislation to pass with a simple majority in the Senate, but includes many hurdles such as the famed Byrd rule.

 

A panel of experts (featuring two former staff members of the Senate Budget Committee) discussed how reconciliation works and what it might mean for potential COVID relief legislation. 

Panelists:

Marc Goldwein, Senior Vice President, Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Tori Gorman, Policy Director, The Concord Coalition

Zach Moller, Deputy Director of the Economics Program, Third Way" 

Source:Committee For a Responsible Federal Budget- with a look at U.S. Congressional reconciliation.

From the Committee For a Responsible Federal Budget

CRFB already lays out what reconciliation in Congress is. It allows for the Senate to act like the House, just as long as the bill that they are discussing, is related to the Federal budget and relates to government spending. 

And it put limits on how much the U.S. Government can borrow and it means that the Senate, can pass a reconciliation bill with just 51 votes, including the Vice President, but the minority party, as well as majority party members in the Senate, can offer and get up or down votes on their amendments to the reconciliation bills, just as long as their amendments are relevant to the reconciliation bill. 

What I really want to get into here is why we have reconciliation in Congress, (House and Senate) why it's necessary, and how it can be improved. 

As a Liberal, (or Classical Liberal, if you prefer) I believe in checks and balances and minority rights. But there's such a thing as too good of a good thing and too much of a bad thing. When you allow the Senate Minority Leader, to essentially block everything that's brought to the floor, especially when the Minority Leader has a large minority, like now with 49 seats in the U.S. Senate, under Mitch McConnell, you make the Minority Leader essentially as powerful as the Majority Leader, which means the elections from the last term, don't matter. 

So there needs to be a responsible way for the Majority Leader and his caucus to act, regardless of which party is in power in the Senate, as well as the House, which party is in The White House, especially when the Senate Minority Leader and his caucus, doesn't want to work with the majority party on anything, because they're only concern about the next elections and getting back into the majority.

If you call yourself a fiscal Conservative, or someone like myself who is a Liberal, who believes in fiscal responsibility, you should like Congressional reconciliation, when it's used in a responsible way. Not used to add a lot of pork to the Federal budget, that's all borrowed and where perhaps only the member of Congress who offered the pork, in the House or Senate, knows what's in their pork. Or in a way that meets and a lot of partisan and ideological demands and adds a lot of new social or military spending, or tax cuts that benefit very few people, that isn't paid for, or couldn't even be paid for, because of how expensive it is.

So, reconciliation yes, but it has to be done in a smart way. 

So imagine if I'm in charge of Congress (as big of a nightmare as that might be for anyone) and I get to write the rules for how both the House of Representatives and Senate should act, this is how I would reform reconciliation in Congress: 

All reconciliation in bills in Congress have to start in the House first. 

Be passed out by the committee of jurisdiction, as well as the House Budget Committee as well. 

Every reconciliation bill would have to be paid for, 

And the minority party, led by the House Minority Leader, similar to what's already going on in the Senate, would have the ability to offer and get up and down votes on all relevant amendments that they may have to the reconciliation bill and they would get 20 hours in the House as well, just like in the Senate.

Once the reconciliation bill is passed by the House, then it goes to the Senate, where their committee of jurisdiction, as well as their Budget Committee, would get the chance to amend and debate the bill as well. 

Once the two committees in the Senate passes the reconciliation bill, it then goes to the floor, where the Senate as a whole would take it up. 

And the Senate minority party, led by the Minority Leader, could offer relevant amendments to the bill, that would have to be paid for, just like in the House and they would get 20 hours as well to offer amendments. 

And once all amendments and time for debate have been offered and voted on, all time for debate is over, the Majority Leader could move for final passage of the bill. Just as long as the reconciliation bill is fully paid for and doesn't even add a penny to the deficit. 

Again, if you oppose Congressional gridlock, but also believe in fiscal responsibility, this would be a good way to get Congress moving (which party is in power or if there is a divided Congress) but also a good way to get national debt and deficit under control, because this would essentially make PAYGO (or pay as you go) the law of the land in the U.S. Government and there would be no more borrowing, except when we are in recession, or you could get a 3/5 vote both in the House and Senate, to lift this PAYGO rule.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

CNN: 'House Freedom Caucus Voted to Remove Marjorie Taylor Greene, Congressman Say'

Source:CNN- U.S. Representative Marjorie T. Greene (Christian Nationalist, Georgia) is more qualified to be Speaker of the Nuthouse (even though she would have some real competition there) than to even be a back-benching member of the U.S. House of Representatives.

"A majority of the House Freedom Caucus voted to remove Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) just before the current congressional recess on June 23, according to Republican Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland, though her ultimate fate in the group remains unclear." 

From CNN

When I first heard this story yesterday, my first gut reaction was that the so-called House Freedom Caucus (which is really just the House MAGA Caucus) was kicking out Representative Marjorie T. Greene, because she was too crazy, even for them. Perhaps House MAGA only has so much medication for their more mentally challenging members and they felt the need to ration their medication, by kicking out one of, if not their most mentally challenging members, in Representative Greene. 

But, apparently, at least according to CNN (so take it for what it's worth) Marjorie Taylor was kicked out, because she's not crazy enough for them. So maybe if she attempted to skydive from the U.S. Capitol, while the House was in session, they would've promoted her to Chairman of the Nuthouse, I mean MAGA Caucus (slip of the tongue) instead of kicking her out. Had she claimed she was the long lost love child of Jesus Christ and is having an affair with Donald Trump, then maybe that would get her a lifetime membership of the MAGA Caucus. 

But no, House MAGA kicks out one of their most interesting (to be too kind) members, because she's not insane enough. They kicked her out, because she helped get Kevin McCarthy elected as Speaker of the House, to prevent the U.S. Government from shutting down and not defaulting on it's debt, as well to help the government reduce it's deficit and try to get the national debt under control. You know, things that any sane, rational, intelligent, god fearing, American patriot would do. Which is considered sins by House MAGA. 

I guess if you are not at risk of being committed by the outside world to a real mental institution, (not the U.S. House of Representatives) House MAGA doesn't want you, even if you are also a crazy Republican, who has a tendency to shoot your toes off (with a real gun) every time you open your mouth. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Firing Line With Margaret Hoover: Maya MacGuineas & Robert Reich

Source:Firing Line With Margaret Hoover- left to right: Margaret Hoover, Maya MacGuineas, and Robert Reich.

"Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich and federal budget expert Maya MacGuineas discuss America's staggering national debt and what should be done about it." 

From Firing Line With Margaret Hoover 

"The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) is an American public broadcaster and non-commercial,[1][2][3][4][5] free-to-air television network based in Arlington, Virginia.[6][7][8][9] PBS is a publicly funded nonprofit organization and the most prominent provider of educational programs to public television stations in the United States,[10][11][12][13] distributing shows such as Frontline, Nova, PBS NewsHour, Arthur, Sesame Street, and This Old House.[14]

PBS is funded by a combination of member station dues, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, pledge drives, and donations from both private foundations and individual citizens. All proposed funding for programming is subject to a set of standards to ensure the program is free of influence from the funding source.[15] PBS has over 350 member television stations, many owned by educational institutions, nonprofit groups both independent or affiliated with one particular local public school district or collegiate educational institution, or entities owned by or related to state government.[4]

As of 2020, PBS has nearly 350 member stations around the United States." 

From Wikipedia

A few interesting points here: 

Maya MacGuineas (whose a real life fiscal Conservative, which is rare in Washington and perhaps in America as well) and left-wing economist Robert Reich (who I describe as a Democratic Socialist) agreeing that when the national debt and budget deficit, grows faster than the economy, (meaning economic growth) that is bad for the economy and the country as a whole.

Another interesting point being what Robert Reich said that it doesn't natter how much you borrow, just as long as that government borrowing is used for promote economic growth. And he said those government investments being things like infrastructure, job training, education, all things that I support, but I would disagree that you should borrow the money to pay for those investments. 

The other interesting point being that there's no set number as far as how large the national debt and deficit needs to be, even as a percentage of the economy. But with Maya MacGuineas with the great counterpoint being that we don't want to find out what that number is before out economy crashes because the American dollar is not worth anything and no one, including the U.S. Government can pay any of their bills.

My point for the Robert Reich's of the world: if deficits and debt doesn't matter (which is not what Reich said) then you don't need taxes. for anything that government actually does. Reich said in this interview that there is actually a limit to how much the U.S. Government can borrow before it's too much. But then he said that now is the time for more government borrowing, because the interest rates are now, which just begs a certain question and answer. 

Why are our interest rates so low? Because the Federal Reserve up until last year, kept them low. But then they started raising them last year to deal with high inflation and high borrowing, to deal with the rising national debt and deficit Part of President Biden's and the last Congress's social welfare package from last summer, was to deal with the national debt and deficit, the so-called Deficit Reduction Act.

Anyone who pays taxes and pays their own bills in general, knows that inflation, as well as the debt and deficit, have been major issues in the American economy the last two years. And the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 deals with inflation, as well as the national debt and deficit. 

Again, if deficit and debt doesn't matter, then government, including the U.S. Government doesn't need taxes for anything, because it now has unlimited borrowing authority. And no serious economist actually believes that even the Uncle Sam's government, has unlimited borrowing authority.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

CNN: 'Former Donald Trump Supporter Says She Was 'Brainwashed'

Source:CNN interviewing former Donald Trump supporter & 2021 insurrectionist Pam Hemphill.

"Pam Hemphill, who received a two-month sentence in federal prison for her involvement in the January 6 riot at the US Capitol, tells CNN’s Gary Tuchman she was “brainwashed.” 

From CNN

A lot of Democrats, perhaps especially partisan Democrats, talk about Donald Trump's supporters as if they are cult members and Donald Trump is their cult leader, their hero, their idle, etc, as someone whose never wrong or guilty about anything. A man who can do no wrong and is always right, there's always a good reason for why whose doing anything and justification for him doing that. And to be frank, I've done that myself and still do that because there are a lot of Donald Trump's supporters who talk and act like they are part of his national political cult known as Trumpism. 

But we're are all obviously human beings who are free to make mistakes and then to learn from them and try to correct our past mistakes and not repeat them. But sometimes it's that really big mistake, that really cost us, like our freedom and perhaps costs our family and friends as well, that gets people to (to be frank) wake up and smell the coffee, get that kick in the ass (again, to be frank) that gets our attention. 

I obviously don't know Pam Hemphill personally, just hearing about her and her story today. But perhaps it was a few months in a Federal prison, as well as Donald Trump calling for the Jan 6, 2021 insurrectionists to be pardoned, that finally woke her up to everything that she lost in the last 2 years, partially because of Donald Trump, but also because of her actions on that horrible January day in Washington.

I'm not a psychologist, not an astronaut either, (in case there's any doubt left about that) I'm obviously not an expert on what's called brainwash and brainwashing. But unless someone is actually on drugs that changes their behavior, similar to let's say the Manson Crime Family from the late 1960s, or The People's Temple that was led by Jim Jones in the 1970s, I don't believe in brainwashing. 

We're all human beings with the ability to act and think for ourselves, unless we're suffering from some type of brain damage or something. Pam Hemphill by most accounts is an intelligent and educated person. She was those things pre-Donald Trump. She went to prison for her role in the 2021 insurrection and now is apparently very ashamed of what she did. 

Donald Trump obviously had a major role in Jan. 6 as well and I would argue the biggest role. But if any of his co-defendants were brainwashed for their actions on that horrible day, they could probably plea not guilty by reason of insanity, which is a legitimate defense, if the defendant or defendants can prove they were mentally incompetent or insane at the time of their crimes. But you can't plead not guilty by reason of stupidity. All these Jan. 6, 2021 insurrectionists are personal responsible for their own actions and crimes on that horrible day, including Pam Hemphill.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Vanity Fair: Donald Liebenson: 'Courtney Thorne-Smith Loved Being Roasted by Norm'

Source:Vanity Fair- Late Night With Norm McDonald & Courtney Thorne Smith.

"It feels impossible to choose a favorite Norm Macdonald clip. The caustically deadpan comedian, who died Tuesday at the age of 61, had quite a canon: his epic telling of the “moth joke” on The Tonight Show With Conan O’Brien; his baffling set at the Comedy Central roast of Bob Saget (and his comeback to Jim Norton, who told Macdonald that watching his set was like watching Henry Fonda pick blueberries); and his recurring Weekend Update references to, you guessed it, Frank Stallone.

But the ultimate Macdonald performance just may be his May 15, 1997, Late Night With Conan O’Brien appearance opposite fellow guest Courtney Thorne-Smith. It’s a segment that belongs in the talk show pantheon along with Ed Ames and his tomahawk. A YouTube clip has generated nearly half a million views." 

From Vanity Fair

"(Original airdate: 05/15/97) Courtney Thorne-Smith and Norm Macdonald talk about her leaving "Melrose Place" and working with Carrot Top on "Chairman of the Board." 

Source:Conan O'Brien- Late Night With Norm MacDonald & Courtney Thorne Smith.

From Conan O'Brien

This is sort of a follow up piece that I wrote on The New Democrat, about this appearance that comedians Norm MacDonald and Courtney Thorne Smith had on Late Night With Conan O'Brien. But I'm giving you additional images and another look at the video. 

Courtney T. Smith was obviously one of the big stars from FOX's hit prime-time soap opera Melrose Place, from the 1990s. She at this point was on all 6 seasons and was looking to move on from that role, as she told Conan in this interview and was looking to get into movies. 

I guess Chairman of The Board, was the only film that Courtney T. could get at that point and took it like a fish that had been out of the water for 3 weeks and jumped back in the lake. (Was Melrose Place really bad enough to give up for Chairman of the Board?) 

Well, you know what they say about hindsight. But Norm MacDonald with perhaps better foresight than Courtney, knew that this at least sounded like a pretty bad film, to the point that it even had the wrong title and called it Chairman of The Bored, during this interview. 

This was a pretty bad interview before Norm jumped in, because Courtney and Conan were stuck trying to talk about this film and her time on Melrose and why she was leaving. But then Norm jumps in and saves the interview (as they say) that you can see for yourself right here. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

CNN: 'Lindsey Graham Booed At Donald Trump Rally in His Home State'

Source:CNN- U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican, South Carolina) never the most popular person in his own room, let alone state.

"Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) was booed during his remarks at a Trump rally in Pickens, South Carolina." 

From CNN

Lindsey Graham reminds me of a the guy in high school (if your memory goes back that far) whose the wannabe hipster. Not quite part of the hipster clique in school, but just on the outside looking in hoping that one day he'll be part of that elite clique in school. Doesn't get invited to the parties, but perhaps crashes them and perhaps even allowed to stay. Lindsey Graham is the American political version of the high school wannabe. 

You could say that Lindsey is the perfect example of why Americans say they hate politics and politicians, (even though they keep electing and reelecting the same politicians over and over) because he seems to do whatever he thinks he needs to do at any given moment, to help or save himself politically. 

When George W. Bush was President in the 2000s, Lindsey was the hardcore Neoconservative, who would could camp out for days like Millennials waiting for the opportunity to buy the latest smartphone, but Lindsey would be waiting for an opportunity to kiss President Bush on the face, because at that point, the President was very popular in the Republican Party. (But perhaps nowhere else) 

When the Neoconservatives go out-of-style in the Republican Party in the mid-2010s and the Christian Nationalists come in, all the sudden Lindsey is now a cultural warrior, who'll do everything that he can to preserve what they call traditional America, including getting line to kiss Donald Trump's (who goes against everything that Christian Nationalists claim to be in favor of, at least in his own personal life) face and act like they're now best friends. Even though when Lindsey was running for President in 2016, he said that The Donald would be bad for America as President.

My point is, South Carolina, which just happens to be Lindsey Graham's home state, a place where Lindsey can sound and act as down home and the biggest good ole boy in the history of the world, (or at least in South Carolina) a place that Lindsey has represented in Congress since 1995. sees right through him. They know he's not really one of the them, but the ultimate wannabe, outsider, looking in, hoping to be part of their clique, if he thinks that would help him politically. That's how you get booed at your own political rally, in your own state.

You can also see this post on WordPress.